Application is in my mind a key word. I would like to do a Buff and Eland hunt next and my 400H&H will probably come with me. I had great success with the 370gr NC CEBs on Buff and definitely would use them again on Buff, but I think that the distances that you might have to shoot an eland might stretch the 370s BC a bit so I am looking very hard at North Fork's 360gr SP as an all round bullet with a 400gr CEB solid as a back up. Remember the 400H&H has a .411 dia so bullets choices are slim Barnes make a 300gr TSX only for my caliber which by the way is hell on elk.
I agree with Sam it all ways amazes me with all the money that can be spent on a hunt that folks bring a bullet that is not made for the job at hand.
The posts on this forum are usually filled with advice born from first hand experience, debates such as these are wonderfully informative and quite often entertaining.
Have a Very Merry

The real question, gentlemen, is shootability in a particular rifle.

As mentioned above, many of the 416's have 14" and 16.5" twists. The CZ 550 Safari in .416Rigby uses the traditional 16.5" twist. The 350 grain TTSX bullet, 350 grain TSX bullet, and the CEB bullets with the talon tips installed must all be tested in a particular rifle before a decision can be made.

The CEB bullets with the long plastic tips would be a fantastic load as long as "flyers" are not part of the group patterns. I did some testing over the past months with CEB's in a 338 WinMag. I couldn't get the 175 grain Raptors (180 grain with tip) to shoot consistent, tight groups. So I loaded up the sub-MOA 225 grain TTSX bullets at 2838 fps to accompany the rifle to Africa.

In .416" I haven't had the opportunities yet to test the CEB's, but I look forward to the chance. In the meantime, I can testify that the .416" 350 grain TTSX are great bullets in the 416 Rigby. when sighted in 2" high at 100 yards they are -7" down at 300 yards. That is as flat as you will ever need in Africa. And they work on buffalo.
Here is a picture of a bullet recovered from this year's buff:



The muzzle velocity was 2825 fps, and impact velocity was about 2610 fps. The four petals blew off, but the remaining 74% bullet weight continued on and formed a secondary mushroom. Pretty amazing. The two cases on the left show the compfortable primers with such a load (101.5 grains Rl-17, Fed 215match primers, Hornady cases). So if the CEB doesn't stablize or shoot in your rifle, try the TTSX and TSX. They are all excellent bullets.

If there was any test that showed that CEB bullets worked better than TSX or any other of the premium bullets all these other bullet companies would shut down.The material they are made out of is also harder than copper so that doesnt help too,IMO.

quote:

Like I said, we will agree to disagree.

I doubt seriously that you will find me all that "agreeable"........



Mike, you still owe me that damned beer you promised over 12 months ago!!!!!!!!! December 1, 2012 2:05 PM

quote:

Originally posted by michael458:
Mike, you still owe me that damned beer you promised over 12 months ago!!!!!!!!!

That is a debt I promise to discharge in full in a couple of weeks. My view, by the way, is that it is perfectly fine for folks to disagree, what is not fine is for folks to be disagreeable.

There are predominantly two kinds of hunter - Those who shoot trophys and those who shoot for meat. Trophy hunters pay for what they shoot and, in some regions, those who shoot for meat, also pay for what they shoot. Indirectly, those who do not pay for the meat they shoot, also pay because they have to get to and from the hunt, sometimes they have to pay an outfitter and they have to pay for their gear.

A trophy hunter wants the animal on the ground as fast as possible to prevent the animal from suffering and to prevent the animal from taking umbrage and to come looking for the hunter. One must decide what price this carries in gear, type of cartridge, caliber of firearm, the quality of the PH and so on.

When hunting for meat, using a bullet that saves on wasted meat is a no brainer. Crunch the numbers and you are ahead on money and effort with a premium bullet and especially with monometal bullets.

Cheaper is not always cheapest.

quote:

Originally posted by Gerard:
Cheaper is not always cheapest.

At the risk of thoroughly flogging a dead horse, I appreciate that. One of the real truisms in life is that you often get what you pay for. My point was not that cheaper is better, my point was at some point the incremental difference in performance between two bullets is such that shelling out more money makes no sense given.

Mike,
What you say is true and every man must decide for himself what price he pays for the features he gets. To some, paying an extra amount makes sense and, to others it does not. They do not see any extra benefit that justifies the extra cost. I do not think that one always gets what one pays for. Sometimes we get ripped off.

Precisely, and I chose not to pay 60% more for a bullet that I believe does not give me a meaningful performance boost over the Barnes TSX on buffalo in a .416 caliber bullet. But everyone has to draw their own line.

I'll add my dos centavos should anyone care to hear. I've shot several buff with the TSX bullets, from the 375 H&H, 416 Rigby, and 500NE. All were devastatingly effective. No complaints, zero, nada, zilch. I've shot exactly one buff with the CEB Safari Raptor using the 700gr CEB Safari Raptor. Again, no complaints, but I did hit that old bull a bit too far back resulting in a single lung hit and an exciting follow up. Not a poor reflection on the bullet in any way, in fact, just the opposite as it did enough damage that he wasn't able to head for the hills.

I've also shot more game than I can easily recall, ranging from the tiny steenbuck to the eland with TSX bullets of various calibers, as well as a male lion with the 416 TSX, leopard with the 375 TSX and another with the TTSX in 300 H&H. Even with this "tough" bullets, both leopards were dead under the tree. I've also taken a male lion with the 255gr CEB Safari Raptor with devastating results. Lots of American game with the TSX and TTSX as well as Tahr, Chamios, Red Stag, etc. Most have been one shot kills, many dead in their tracks. My experience with the CEB Safari Raptors on plains game is more limited but a couple of Kudu, warthogs, as well as some of the smaller stuff all resulted in 1 shot kills, absolutely DRT. I did have an impala this year shot with the 250gr CEB Safari Raptor that ran about 75 yards, but I hit him just a little low so again, my fault, not the bullet. Two other impala shot with the same bullet were DRT. Killed a couple of brown bears with the TSX (416 and 375) and a black bear with the CEB Safari Raptor.

All of this is a long way around to say that to date, with my personal experience, I have no issues with using either bullet on any game not requiring a solid (meaning other than elephant or perhaps hippo), regardless of how "hard" or "soft" a target. Personally, I just don't think there is a meaningful difference in terms of performance here. I won't say that about "just any old bullet as long as the beast is killed" as I'll never shoot anything that can turn the tables with a non-bonded cup and core bullet, up to and including the Partition. I'd have no issue with the Swift A-Frame as it's a drastic improvement over the Partition, but I've never had reason to use the Swifts due to being completely satisfied with the TSX!

Where DO I see a difference worthy of switching bullets from the TSX? Double rifles! I'm no believer in OSR, not in the least bit, but I do prefer to shoot a bullet in my doubles that produce the least amount of barrel strain, assuming terminal performance does not suffer. I really have no issues shooting the TSX in my doubles, and did so for years, but I now prefer the CEB for those guns. You can throw the North Fork in the mix as well but what it really comes down to between the three makes for me and double guns is which bullet shoots best in a particular rifle. I consider all three bullets' terminal performance to be exceptional so whichever give the best groups gets the nod now days.

Currently, my bullet selection is the TSX or TTSX in anything other than my doubles. The main reason for that however is that the CEBs with tips are too long to run through the magazines of bolt guns and I'm not willing to run a tipped CEB in the chamber with non tipped CEBs in the mag. Too much trouble IMO. In the VC 500NE, what shoots best is the North Fork 570gr solid and the CEB 475gr tipped CEB Safari Raptor (at non-standard high velocity) for an expanding bullet. In the 9.3x74R, it's the 255gr Safari Raptor without tips and the CEB 285gr BBW#13 solid.

Again, a really long way around to say that what shoots best in my particular rifle gets the nod between TSX and CEB but I really haven't noticed any appreciable difference in terminal performance between them. I will admit however that I haven't shot as many buffalo as Michael or even Sam, but I've been happy with what I've used to date. I also will say that I believe solids still have a place in buffalo hunting as the TSX may not make it to the vitals on the Texas heart shot. Will the CEB Safari Raptor? Maybe, probably better odds than the TSX, and perhaps that is the one area where I'd give the nod to CEB, but I'd still prefer a solid for that application.

Cheers.

I agree with Todd W's take on the TSX or TTSX.
It will not fully penetrate/exit on a broadside shoulder/chest/heart-lung shot on buffalo,
That is a good thing, and as it should be for herd shooting.
It certainly cannot be relied upon for a "Texas Heart Shot" on a departing buffalo.
Yes, there is still a place for solids in buffalo hunting.

I killed my first cape buffalo in 2001 with a .416 Rigby using a GSC .416/380-grain FN solid.
That bullet went through on-side shoulder bone (humerus) and through heart and lungs and out the other side.

A GSC .510/570-grain FN from a 500A2 exited on a Texas Heart Shot 1632-pound bull bison, more than a cape buffalo in mass.
He hit the ground with that shot.
After he was dead I repeated that shot as he lay on the ground just to see if it would exit again.
It did. Seems reliable.
Tail-end to throat and out.
The GSC .416/380gr FN would do the same thing from a .416 Rigby.
So will a North Fork FP.
So will a CEB Brass BBW#13 FN solid.

I expect the North Fork Cup Point or CEB Brass Hollow points of heavy enough weight could be relied upon to get to the heart on a Texas Heart Shot,
and that means they will more likely than not exit on a broadside shot on buffalo chest.
The latter two might be the best compromise for a single bullet for buffalo.
But they have to be good feeders in a bolt action, though that does not matter in a double or single shot.
Egg nog to y'all.

RIP, that is a good analysis on all the possibilities.

Still, the first part needs at least a minor tweek:

quote:

It will not fully penetrate/exit on a broadside shoulder/chest/heart-lung shot on buffalo,
That is a good thing, and as it should be for herd shooting.
It certainly cannot be relied upon for a "Texas Heart Shot" on a departing buffalo.
Yes, there is still a place for solids in buffalo hunting.

"It will not fully and reliably penetrate/exit on a broadside shoulder/chest/heart-lung shot on buffalo"
We may need a little more testing on this point, should Michael want a reason for some more shooting.

Three years ago my son shot a buffalo with a .416" TSX.
The 350 grain TSX exited the buffalo
from a broadside lung shot taken at 220 yards (200 meters).
Later, a 275 yard quartering shot was stopped by a rear hip. That second bullet is the one that was posted on this site.
That 220 yard broadside exit is pretty fantastic penetration for an expanding bullet.


Apologies for the poor focus. However, this is the SECOND shot, diagonal at 275 yards, where recovery would be expected.

And again as a vertical pic

The point of these is the reminder that a 350 grain TSX, 220 yard broadside, exited.


As I mentioned in this year's hunt, I am rather surprised that TSX and TTSX have been recovered in the last three buffalo.
One of them (last year) makes sense, since it was a face-on face shot recovered where the neck met the shoulder.
Perhaps this year's also resulted from too much diagonal.

But three buffalo ago (2011) the shot was broadside and found sticking out the skin on the far broadside. That is the one bullet that remains a surprise for me.


And the bullet:

The recovered broadside was the bullet on left. Bullet on right was 20-yard sternum to top of neck, blown petals from estimated impact of 2760 fps.

This is where Michael's testing in a reasonably repeatable medium is important.
Buffalo bullets could be rated, based on an average of three shots in the medium. For 350 gn. TTSX .416" bullets I would like to see a 2600-2700fps impact velocity rating.
Would it do a consistent 18" or 20"? Possibly 20+?
Is it really a safe 'herd' bullet?

Finally--
blessings to all
"And you shall call his name Yešuaʕ (Yeshua`) for he will save [y.š.ʕ: yoshia`] his people from their sins."Mt 1.21.

Kwaheri, na mwaka mpya mwema.

For these blessings we need a fine wine 'smiley'
Last night we shared a 1999 Yarden (world-class gold medal) Cabernet -- in DAR. Exquisite, smooth, and still complex, and chilled a bit to counter the ambient room temp. Now a shared memory.

quote:

The 350 grain TSX exited the buffalo
from a broadside lung shot taken at 220 yards

quote:

As I mentioned in this year's hunt, I am rather surprised that TSX and TTSX have been recovered in the last three buffalo. But three buffalo ago (2011) the shot was broadside and found sticking out the skin on the far broadside. That is the one bullet that remains a surprise for me.

Tanz....... Do you recall our extensive 338 caliber tests with the TSX bullets? If you don't, we tested in 338 WSM, 338 Winchester and 338 Ultra, with different impact velocities. All conventional bullets, including TSX, the higher the impact velocity, the less penetration you get. Very easy explains your recovery of the TSX bullets that hit at higher impact velocity. The exit at 220 yards, the impact velocity was much lower, less expansion, less resistance in the medium, or tissue in this case.

Two ways to increase penetration with these bullets, lower impact velocity, or extremely high impact velocity in which the petals break off..... Such as the one you recovered from impact of 2760 fps. This one sternum to top of neck, I imagine broadside it would have exited as well.......

The TSX's are rather predictable, in 416 a 300 at impact velocity of 2653 fps drives to 15 inches, at 2500 fps impacts to 18 inches. 350 TSX at 2387 fps impact to 18 inches, 400 TSX at 2421 fps impact to 22 inches..... With more impact velocity, less penetration, and as stated nearly in all cases this is true with any conventional expanding bullet, with one major exception, the North Fork soft points. The more velocity, the deeper the penetration with those in every case. Has to do with the expanding portion of the bullet rolling over on itself at higher impacts... Typical penetration for the 325-370 CEB Raptors at 2450 fps is 27-31 inches....

Michael

Michael, great info as always. It would then seem that for the 416 solids, penetration would increase with increasing velocity. Is this in fact the case or does something else come into play with solids (assuming flat nose CEB or NF)

Thanks,
Dave

You can get experiences like this with any of the premium bullets.

quote:

Originally posted by Adamsdjr:
Michael, great info as always. It would then seem that for the 416 solids, penetration would increase with increasing velocity. Is this in fact the case or does something else come into play with solids (assuming flat nose CEB or NF)

Thanks,
Dave

Dave

Nose profile, and of course meplat size does effect penetration/velocity. The Barnes FN Solids penetrate deeper with velocity, but only incrementally, as we have seen this term quite a bit the last few days.. HEH HEH..... The "OLD NORTH FORK" nose profile was about equal, only
small amounts more penetration with added velocity. The #13 Nose profile, 67% meplat reacted extremely well with added velocity, and now the New North Fork Profile does the same, add velocity, add penetration. Both #13 and North Fork are the extreme in Nose Profile, and provide incredible deep and straight line penetration. Velocity with the #13 will start to tapper off at impacts of 3000 fps or more, the nose starts to become fluid and deforms, and I imagine the copper in the North Fork would do the same at that extreme velocity. However, in our big bores, we are not very concerned with that.

Michael

quote:

Originally posted by michael458:

quote:

The 350 grain TSX exited the buffalo
from a broadside lung shot taken at 220 yards

quote:

As I mentioned in this year's hunt, I am rather surprised that TSX and TTSX have been recovered in the last three buffalo. But three buffalo ago (2011) the shot was broadside and found sticking out the skin on the far broadside. That is the one bullet that remains a surprise for me.

Tanz....... Do you recall our extensive 338 caliber tests with the TSX bullets? If you don't, we tested in 338 WSM, 338 Winchester and 338 Ultra, with different impact velocities. All conventional bullets, including TSX, the higher the impact velocity, the less penetration you get. Very easy explains your recovery of the TSX bullets that hit at higher impact velocity. The exit at 220 yards, the impact velocity was much lower, less expansion, less resistance in the medium, or tissue in this case.

Two ways to increase penetration with these bullets, lower impact velocity, or extremely high impact velocity in which the petals break off..... Such as the one you recovered from impact of 2760 fps. This one sternum to top of neck, I imagine broadside it would have exited as well.......

The TSX's are rather predictable, in 416 a 300 at impact velocity of 2653 fps drives to 15 inches, at 2500 fps impacts to 18 inches. 350 TSX at 2387 fps impact to 18 inches, 400 TSX at 2421 fps impact to 22 inches..... With more impact velocity, less penetration, and as stated nearly in all cases this is true with any conventional expanding bullet, with one major exception, the North Fork soft points. The more velocity, the deeper the penetration with those in every case. Has to do with the expanding portion of the bullet rolling over on itself at higher impacts... Typical penetration for the 325-370 CEB Raptors at 2450 fps is 27-31 inches....

Michael

Yes, Michael, I remember the 338RUM coming up shorter than expected in one test but deeper in another. Some of the variation will proably correlate to the diameter of frontal expansion, potentially reducing expansion, and the dropping of petals, potentially increasing penetration due to a reduced frontal area, and also potentially reducing penetration due to a reduced momentum from a reduced retained bullet weight.

Your note on the 350 grain .416"s and the 400 grain both show impressive penetration at about 2400 fps. The 400 grainer is more impressive, though, with 22 inches.

However, the solids suggest that when the weight and diameter remain the same, then the penetration will increase with added momentum/velocity. Consequently, part of the equation for TTSX's and TSX's would suggest that as long as the integrity of the bullet remains the same, velocity would increase penetration. If I am remembering correctly, the results that more velocity reduced penetration were often based on single bullet examples and sometimes with extenuating circumstances.

Another famous set of tests online, Rathcoombe's "Shooting Holes in Wounding Theories" Methods and Penetration Tests , also had some occasional aberrations (like a .338" 200gn. Speer cup&core outperforming many premium bullets when souped up to 340 Weatherby velocities, equalling the penetration of the 275 gn Speer). His conclusion wasn't that the 200 gn. Speer was a magic bullet, but that more testing was in order to figure out what exactly had happened in the tests. More specifically for our issues today, he noted that premium bullets (like Barnes X, Nosler Part) tended to increase in penetration from about 2200fps to 2800fps impact velocities.

Hopefully, I'll get a chance to do some more accuracy testing with various weights and velocities sometime in 2014. But right now, I don't have any fixed windows of opportunity.

One idea for my testing in .416" is the 400 gn. TSX and 370 CEB non-cons and 400 gn. solids.

The CEB solid ought to be close in POI to the 400 TSX, as would the the 370 non-con. I might not have a magazine problem with some of the tips in non-con because of the massive CZ magazine. Or one could single load a first bullet, with solids as back-up. They would be a distinctive buffalo load, and the 350 TTSX would be an all-around non-buffalo round. As always, accuracy in a particular configuration with a 16.5" twist will probably be the decisive item. That is what kept me down at 350 grains to begin with. The 350 grain Barnes flatnose was more stable for 16.5" twist than the 400 grainer.

PS: On third thought, maybe this won't work. The CEB site said that a minimum twist of 14" is necessary for shooting the 300 grain raptor with tip, so it won't be working with the longer 350 grain+tip. But I can at least check out the POI of 350 grain FN solids versus the 400 grain TSX. I would cut back my velocity on 400 grain TSX to 2600-2650 fps, with corresponding impact velocities down closer to 'normal levels'.

I will also add in response to RIP and Tanz's commentary, that using the TSX bullet on broadside shots for buffalo, I've had about 50% penetrate fully and exit.

I've had two .375, 300gr TSX exit on broadside shots, however both were cows (hang on, hang on now! We were hunting cows, not cows shot by negligence in the case of shithispants! ). One .416, 350gr TSX exit and one recovered. One 570gr TSX in the 500NE exit from a diagonal shot entering from just behind the rib cage, exit the lower neck between the shoulders.

From that, I would NOT be comfortable shooting into a herd with a TSX bullet.

Buff Cow shot at about 100 yards, broadside, with 300gr TSX in .375H&H. You can clearly see the exit hole in this pic just to the left of the left horn tip:




350gr TSX from .416 Rigby recovered from buffalo bull, shot at about 30 yards, point of the shoulder, recovered on opposite side, under the skin over the hind quarter. Follow up shot on same bull shot with the same rifle / bullet combo, broadside at about 50 yards DID exit.

The GSC way of doing and design differs from the CEB and new Northfork designs because, at GSC, we think that our FN and HV bullets strike a good balance between penetration depth and wound shape and volume. When one increases penetration, wound volume stays similar but wound shape changes. To put it in simple terms, we prefer a larger hole in the animal and, when shooting through, that the bullet only penetrates one thorn tree, not two or three.

If we consider penetration ability, this indeed increases as the bullet slows down (as distance increases). So we design our HV expanding bullets so that, at close range, where energy and momentum is high but stagnation pressure causes less penetration, the bullet expands and then throws the petals. This gives the usual damage as the bullet expands but then reduces the frontal area when it throws the petals and penetration depth remains at a good level.

At extended distances, where penetration increases anyway, velocity drops to the extent that the bullet opens up, causing enough damage in the wound channel but then hangs together, maximising the retained energy and momentum. There is no need to slow up speeds for this scenario and to speed it up for that scenario. Develop loads for good speed and let the bullet take care of distance.

Stable flight is any stability factor (Sg) above 1.0 and accuracy is a given if all else is concentric and in good order with the rifle. An Sg of just more than 1.0 does not give good terminal performance, though, unless one shoots at extreme range. Remember that Sg increases as distance increases. So, especially for dangerous game and good penetration at closer distances, it is of value to increase Sg as much as is possible. There are two ways to increase Sg, (one could increase the twist rate of the barrel but that is not easy): a) Use a shorter bullet and b) increase the speed. This only works if the bullets do not break up in uncontrolled manner.

With GSC bullets and the intelligent design that that retains petals at low impacts but sheds petals at high impact speeds, this becomes a practical way to do things. As a matter of interest, GSC designs for expansion, in any aqueous medium, to give about a double caliber mushroom from 1600fps.

At a 1:16.5" twist, the GSC 330gr 416 Rigby soft gives an Sg of 1.5 at the muzzle.

quote:

The CEB site said that a minimum twist of 14" is necessary for shooting the 300 grain raptor with tip, so it won't be working with the longer 350 grain+tip

YOU CANNOT take twist rate info on ANY of the ESP Raptors, and apply that to any other bullet. That 300 ESP Raptor may not work in the 16.5 twist, but that don't mean the 325 or even 370 will not. The ESP Raptors are severely abnormal in this regard, and DO NOT adhere to normal twist standards...... I suppose it has to do with the extreme deep seating and having a #13 Solid Nose profile on its ass end. The Safari Raptors are FLAT BASE.... I guarantee that the 370 Raptor will stabilize in 16.5.... But with a tip???? Same with the 325 Safari Raptor.... Tip?? Have to try??
They do stabilize for 100% sure at 1:14 as I have done them....With Tips.

I quit using the 400 grain TSX after one turned 90 degrees in a buff. That was the same trip where two of them stayed in the same broadside wildebeest. Since Barnes doesn't pay for my trips I don't owe them another chance.

I used to load Barnes flat nose solids in the magazine, but quit after my fourth buffalo. A-Frames all the way now, and I've killed my share. I'd like to give CEBs a try, but finding them here is like searching for 4 point unicorns.

Dogleg,
Which cartridge are you using - 416 Rigby, 416 Remington Mag or 404?

quote:

Originally posted by Gerard:
Dogleg,
Which cartridge are you using - 416 Rigby, 416 Remington Mag or 404?

Rigby, though it mostly sits now. I've moved on to the .458 for buffalo specific hunting, and back down to the .375 when a bit more versatility is desired.

Thanks Dogleg, the Rigby is less tolerant of longer bullets than the 416 Remington Magnum because of the twist spec of the cartridges. As you found with the Rigby, a 400gr bullet does not give terminal reliability and the only TTSX available for the .416" is 350gr. This bullet is even longer than the 400gr TSX, at 1.60", because of the plastic tip and the boat tail.

For a Rigby, as long as you keep bullets at or under 1.49", if the bullet has a boat tail and around 1.50" if it is a flat base, terminal reliability should be good. With tough bullets one need not be hesitant to drive them faster so shorter (lighter) is not a bad thing. Problem is that one deals with the laws of physics here and that is a pretty rigid set of parameters.

Of course the same applies to other cartridges as well.

quote:

The GSC way of doing and design differs from the CEB and new Northfork designs because, at GSC, we think that our FN and HV bullets strike a good balance between penetration depth and wound shape and volume. When one increases penetration, wound volume stays similar but wound shape changes. To put it in simple terms, we prefer a larger hole in the animal and, when shooting through, that the bullet only penetrates one thorn tree, not two or three.

North Fork offers a 370 gr Soft in .416 cal that would be ideal for buffalo and is a tough bonded bullet that expands real well. Cannot think of any bullet being more appropriate for buff.

Santa Claus

Santa Claus,

It sounds like a good bullet. Do you know what the length is?

Y'all:
Right. Everybody is correct here, regarding this:
The TSX/TTSX is not to be relied upon for "Texas Heart Shooting" cape buffalo.


Santa Claus must be recuperating right now.
Until he gets back to reply to Gerard, I will add this:

Mike Brady made the NF bullet and Gerard Schultz made the GSC bullet pictured/measured here:



My calipers:

North Fork .416/370gr SS (Semi-Spitzer Soft Point) length = 1.440" exactly as claimed here:
http://www.northforkbullets.co...ets/416-370-ss.html/

GSC .416/380gr FN length = 1.388" in line with website claim of 35.3mm or 1.39" to the same number of significant digits:
http://www.gsgroup.co.za/416380FN053.html



Gerard's analysis/comments are always appreciated.
I do know that the GSC .416/380gr FN is very accurate in my 1:14" Ruger RSM .416 Rigby, and was a 1-shot cape buffalo killer first time out.

Photos related to both bullets:

North Fork .416/370gr SS:



The first 3 GSC bullets I ever fired, resulting target here, I stopped experimenting with 10 different bullets and one powder charge.
Zeroed the scope for this load:



The first GSC bullet I ever fired at game resulted in this:



I fired one more shot into the dead animal.
Then a certain PH was happy to relieve me of the rest of my .416 Rigby ammo for use in his rifle, for elephant hunt guiding.

I was sold on the GSC solid.
I added the North Fork soft as its mate for soft performance.
Not being so sophisticated as to accept the much lighter GSC HV (330-grainer) as its mate,
I wanted my soft and solid closer to same POI and same muzzle velocity.
My thinking might be different now.
But since then, the North Fork .416/370gr FPS and CPS have been evolving,
and there are CEB bullets to complicate the choices now too.

Gerard,

It seems that the JBM ballistics site gives slightly different stability figures than a generic warning on 1.6" bullets in .416".

For example, the 400 grain TSX in .416" with 16.5" twist and 2625 fps muzzle, gets a 1.79 stability factor. One would think that that would be more than sufficient for stable flight and stable terminals with an expanding bullet.

Thanks RIP.

Tanzan, the JBM calculator is based on the Miller method and Don Miller said in an article that the system has limitations. It works reasonably well with standard bullets with a tangent ogive, flat base and jacketed lead core.

It was never designed to deal with monometal bullets, drive bands or grooves, hollow points, boat tails, FN meplats and long ogives and so on.

The system devised by Bob McCoy is much better but requires more input.

It can be downloaded to a PC as well, one does not have to be online to use it. Take the link to our Useful Stuff page, 7 items down in the left row. It used to be available online at the Border Barrels site but I see they are rebuilding.

quote:

Originally posted by Gerard:
Thanks RIP.

Tanzan, the JBM calculator is based on the Miller method and Don Miller said in an article that the system has limitations. It works reasonably well with standard bullets with a tangent ogive, flat base and jacketed lead core.

It was never designed to deal with monometal bullets, drive bands or grooves, hollow points, boat tails, FN meplats and long ogives and so on.

The system devised by Bob McCoy is much better but requires more input.

It can be downloaded to a PC as well, one does not have to be online to use it. Take the link to our Useful Stuff page, 7 items down in the left row. It used to be available online at the Border Barrels site but I see they are rebuilding.

Thanks.

1. I downloaded the program, but it won't run on Windows 8. It seems to think it needs Windows 98. Is there an easy workaround?

2. The JBM program includes a plastic tip entry for the calculation of stabilty in its drift trajectory calculator, plus bullet length and twist.

PS:

With the plastic tip data included, it might be that the JBM calculation is using an updated post-McCoy formulation based on Litz and Miller updates and corrections:
http://jbmballistics.com/balli...ller_stability_2.pdf

Thanks RIP for your detailed posting.
Both are nice bullets - 370 Gr NF and 330 gr GS-HV.

And seriously dangerous.

Santa Claus

On my buffalo hunt, I used a 500 NF SS soft (470) and it did a great job. Shot through him broad side, about knocked him off his feet, ran 20 yards and began bellowing immediately.
That being said my backup and plains game rifle was a 416 Remington loaded with 370 NF SS softs and CEB 13 as solids.
The reason I would select this NF projectile or a TSX over a CEB Raptor is the ballistic
coefficient. As all of us know that have been there, that there is a great chance you might run into something else while buffalo hunting that you may want to take. In my case it was a Kudu at 250 yards running away. The 370 NG SS @ 2530 FPS gave me the confidence to make those shots. I would not have had the confidence with the hollow point Raptors (low BC).
If you have just one rifle, you might want to consider versatility. In that respect the TSX or NF might be something to consider.
CEB products are well thought out. I used the solids as a sold option on both my rifles.
My PH suggested TSX's. He had never seen NF's but was extremely impressed with their performance and did not mind taking my left over 470's when I departed. He shot a K gun 470.

EZ

quote:

Originally posted by 416Tanzan:
PS:

With the plastic tip data included, it might be that the JBM calculation is using an updated post-McCoy formulation based on Litz and Miller updates and corrections:
http://jbmballistics.com/balli...ller_stability_2.pdf

Interesting reading. Thanks Tanz...

To All,

The 370gr bullet used to be our "heavy" weight. It can do everything a 400gr bullet can and somewhat better. By better I mean, it gives you a little more speed and a slightly improved flight as far as drop goes. For the Remington and the new Ruger, it is probably the best choice especially since it has matching solids.

In fact, this was the bullet that we bought the company for. We still have our original box we made when we were training with Mike 6 years ago.

For up close DG hunting and the Rigby, I like shooting the 430gr at speeds of 2200fps, but I always have a couple 370gr in the belt for the 250yrd shot.

In the day of larger caliber, I think the .416 no longer gets the attention it deserves. It is a very close second right behind the .375 H&H as one of the best all around cartridge. I think its downfall has been that gun makers make them too heavy and should slim them down like the .375. Then it would be a very hard choice.

Merry Christmas

Regards,
John

quote:

In the day of larger caliber, I think the .416 no longer gets the attention it deserves. It is a very close second right behind the .375 H&H as one of the best all around cartridge. I think its downfall has been that gun makers make them too heavy and should slim them down like the .375. Then it would be a very hard choice.

Actually, I like the CZ's weight though would enjoy something light as well. However, if anything diminishes the attention of the 416 Rigby, it is the underloading of the mammoth case. SAAMI and others need to have a "+P loading"//"58-60k loading" for the 416Rigby. That will put the 416 Rigby in a class of its own for all-around, up-close and dangerous, and longer range.

Hi Guys,

Some really interesting discussions in the previous posts and some good info to base decisions on.

Sounds like the main choices are the TSX, the CEB's or the North Forks. The latter two being quite different to the TSX.

My original desire to change from a 450gr Woodleigh (which has worked well) was to drive something a bit faster and flatter shooting for the odd long shot that presented a couple of times this year.

Being in Australia, availability of CEB's and North Forks is very limited and would likely be very expensive and have long delays. Once I work up a load I just want to stick to it. The TSX's are available but the solids I'm told are still months away... By the way o box of 50 400gr TSX are about $85 here...

If I did move away from the TSX I'd probably look at trying Woodleigh Hydrostatically Stabilised projectiles. .416 is 400gr and 1.514" long. I think these come with plastic tips now too. Mainly as being Aus manufacture availability should be better.

It was interesting that these didn't come up in the discussion? Maybe hard to get in the US?

Do these style of rounds feed OK though the magazine?

I'm sure the TSX would be more than adequate and I agree with Mikes view on chasing diminishing returns. However, it is fun fiddling with new things also, sometimes just for the sake of it!...

Cheers

Nice buff too RIP and a great old bugger Todd.

DK1--

I've never considered the hydro-Woodleigh because they cost too much, at least in the US ($4.10 plus shipping at Midway). Maybe the new version with round tip will lower the price significantly? I'm willing to pay $3/bullet for a GSC hollowpoint in .510" 450 grain HV, because they are the most reliable and best bullet in their class. But the 416 has a lot of great bullets, including the TTSX as an allround far-shooter and up-close thumper.