The Accurate Reloading Forums THE ACCURATE RELOADING.COM FORUMS Rifles Big Bores Ongoing discussion - 380 gr RhinoGo | New | Find | Notify | Tools | Reply | |
| One of Us |
Gerard, You stated that a close 2.44 does not qualify as we need in EXCESS of 2.5 in a 375 H&H, right? This created the impression that you have some very precise experimental test data to support your theory, but you admitted that you do not have such precise calculations, right? Just a wild guess to support your notion. Then you throw at me the bullet that must be so stable in AIR (we know that), but in excess of 2.5 SF (your thumb-suck) and that the bullet must go to sleep before striking. 'Going to sleep' is mostly distance related, provided the bullet is at least stable in air. I ask again .... would a bullet with a stability factor of more than 1.0 but less than 2.44 tumble on impact at normal shooting distances at which buffalo and elephant are encountered? Why is it then that .375/300 grainers in solids (Barnes, Rhino & Dzombo) provide stable and straight-line penetration in elephant with values far below 2.5? Chris Bekker | |||
|
| One of Us |
Gerard, You cannot expect us to do the homework for you !!! Just tell us in English or Kantonese what the differences are and how fastly different their terminal performance is.  If the Lutz Moller version of this genre of bullet is mediocre then you should warn me and 500 Grains to throw them in the bin before we use them on game - I have 25 odd bullets that Lutz sent me, but I have not had a chance to try them out on game. Chris Bekker. | |||
|
| one of us |
Chris, You are confused this evening! Squirming out of that mistake leads you to another.
Realising your blunder, you then blunder on:
The Barnes 300gr alloyed solid (Cat# 37525) SF is greater than 3.0. Your Bekker Not Turned By Bekker 9.3 solid is stable with a SF of 1.7 or so (if we can believe your efforts at working WinGyro), but you say the Barnes solid is unstable at more than 3.0!!!!??? You lose again because you did not research properly and you do not have a grip on the principles involved.   This is fun, lets do some more.  Chris, You posted some more while I was answering, good! I will just ad it here. See, your entire argument is based on the wrong assumptions. I have an idea what it says, but unlike you who would accept an approximate thumb suck, I would prefer someone with the skills in both languages to give an accurate translation. The famous TSS again! Why do you assume they are mediocre? How are they odd? Do they look wrong or are they colored green or something? Tell us more. | |||
|
| one of us |
. | |||
|
| one of us |
. | |||
|
| one of us |
Alf, You are correct. Stable is stable and overstabilisation is a misnomer as are hydrostatic shock and some other terms we see used frequently. One fact is clear though: Higher stability factors (faster twist barrel for the same bullet or shorter bullet for the same barrel) will dampen out both fast and slow precession cyles faster. "For a normal bullet shape the rate at which the coning motion damps with range is only dependent on gyroscopic stability." - Rifle Accuracy Facts p222. High SF numbers puts the bullet "to sleep" faster. It is why shorter solid bullets from a given barrel are less prone to tumbling on impact at close range than longer ones. There is much that we do not know about stability when a bullet transitions fom one medium to another. Just going from supersonic to subsonic in air causes a major wobble and it is neccessary to start with SF values much higher than 1 to achieve stable transonic flight. Some bullet shapes simply will not make that transition without absurdly high stability and that causes another set of flight trajectory problems that are unaceptable. Transonic flight is influenced by bullet shape and construction as much as by the gyroscopic stability. Would the same not be true for transition from air to a denser medium? Not being able to calculate so many parameters reliably (some people probably could, I can't), observation of bullet behaviour while transitioning from air to another medium, leads me to believe that, once transitioned, matters are simpler and, if the transition is made successfully, half the terminal ballistics battle is won and initial SF is key here. Within the medium, the key is no doubt to reduce the factors that lead to the overturning moment exceeding the ability of the bullet to resist that moment. Post impact bullet shape is probably the most important one of these as it determines the distribution of the retardation force acting on the bullet surface and where the new COG will be located. I will ask Gina to put extra 9.3 HVs on the production schedule. | |||
|
| one of us |
. | |||
|
| One of Us |
Gerard, Before I answer you more specifically on the SF values, I remind you that you have again not answered my 2 questions to you ... wonder why? I actually numbered my questions for you so you could not lose sight of them.  I do not trust your calculations, as I have been cheated before with BC calculations, and it took me numerous e-mails to convince you.  The .375/300 gr Barnes Solid cannot have a SF greater than 3.0 - it is 35.05 mm long and brass has a specific gravity of 8.4 - so please recalculate and use the 'conical' nose shape option. I am waiting for Mauritz to phone the measurements through to me, otherwise I would have given you the answer now.  In order to validate my figures, I have asked the owner of Rhino Bullets to measure the bullets for me and based on what he gave me I have recalculated the SF values for their Solids. Just like the Barnes Solid, the Rhinos are also made from brass (SG = 8.4). The results are as follows: Cal/Bullet --- Twist -- SF ----- MV 9,3/286 gr -- 14.0" -- 1.39 -- 2,300 fps .375/300 gr - 12.0" -- 2.06 -- 2,500 fps .416/400 gr - 16.5" -- 1.44 -- 2,400 fps All the above Rhino Solids provide straight-line penetration (as confirmed by various PH's) despite the fact of their much 'lower' SF values than your magical 2.5, and I am compelled to reject your notion that a solid in a 375 H&H must have a SF in excess of 2.5 for stable straight-line penetration, and that it varies according to stagnation pressure for each caliber. The onus is on you to conclusively prove your bogus theory. My 9,3/286 gr Custom Bronze solid (SG = 8.78) provides a SF value of 1.76 at a MV = 2,300 fps. I tested this bullet in a wetpack and they do go straight. No amount of rousing of suspicion can change that.  The reason I brought in the .375 JDJ was simply to illustrate that at lower velocity of between 1700 and 1900 fps the bullet still gives straight-line penetration, just as if a 375 H&H was downloaded. It has nothing to do with being a great caliber or a lethal killer. Fact remains that JD Jones shot 3 elephant with it and naturally shotplacement is vital with elephant. Sure, with a 600 fps velocity differential between the 2 cartridges, one can expect a marked difference in Mo/Xsa. The discussion is about bullet stability in animals vis-a-vis SF values and whether or not stagnation pressure plays a vital role in the stability equation. You are now on notice to declare that the above Rhino Solids will fail the stability test in the face of all the field results. If you can't make that statement, you can fuck-off and masturbate intellectually with someone else.  Chris Bekker | |||
|
| One of Us |
Alf, It makes sense to me that the overturning moment is a crucial factor. The overturning moment has everything to do with the overall shape of the bullet, as it captures the points COG and COP, length of the bullet and its nose shape. Clearly a GS-FN will behave differently to an Impala solid that features a long sharp secant ogive with its COG positioned closer to the rear end of the bullet. In test mediums, we know that a RN bullet will tumble sooner, as the bullet loses forward and rotational velocity through drag the lack of a flat meplat makes it easier to veer to one side. However, RN bullets have given mostly straight shoot-throughs on elephant and buffalo countless times. What is not exactly clear is what amount of twist is needed in flesh, and as such, the SF stability in air versus the stability in flesh needs further controlled experimentation, before conclusive answers can be given. The question you asked ... "The "rules" regarding gyroscopic stability of a symmtrical spinning projectile in flight asks one value only a SF > 1.0 making it 2.5 or whatever does not make it more stable. As long as the SF = 1.0 criterium is met the projectile is stable. Is this applicable outside of the air scenario?" begs the question ... Chris Bekker | |||
|
| One of Us |
Gerard, When I said ... "Katte Katzke, just like me, prefers CEBs like Rhino Softs." .... you replied .... "I thought that he is so amazingly impressed with the Dzombo and the Stewart. But of course, one's own product must get first mention." You must really be jealous. I said like Rhino Softs for instance. Please notice the plural form of CEBs ... they include inter alia Rhino Softs, Stewart Softs, Swift A-Frame Softs, etc. Then you mix in Dzombo, which is a Solid, when in fact I am talking about Softs. You have to talk shit like this to derail the discussions - this is your sly trait that you have demonstrated a 1000 times. Shifting the focus to obscure the real issues. Gerard you do not have to write as if you do not know ... "I thought that he is so amazingly impressed with the Dzombo and the Stewart." ... Katte phoned you and told you so himself, but you have to regurgitate it here as if it is news to you. Since you have mentioned solids ... Katte does like the Dzombo bullet very much and the results between the Dzombo and the Rhino is not even noticeable in his tests so far. He will shortly give us a report on your solids, which I expect to be positive as well - no pun intended. What I resent is your continual and stubborn accusation of .... "one's own product must get mention first." I do not own Rhino Bullets. All I own is the bullets I have bought from them - it seems to get this through your thick scull I need a 5-lb hammer. Truth be told, I like my custom turned solid (your ref. the Bekker Solid) even better than the Rhino Solid and I make no excuse for this confession. What I like and what is better or very similar remains in the eye of the beholder - like BMW or Merc ! Trusting I do not have to explain this to you again in public. I heard a Rhino bird (those that eat ticks) chirping, but will wait till the bird sings its melody. Chris Bekker. | |||
|
| one of us |
. | |||
|
| One of Us |
Gerard, Are you losing your head? For one, I have maintained all the while that you can download the 375 H&H and still achieve straight-line penetration in animals. For another, give me the parameters that you have used that gave you an SF value of more than 3. You stated that a close 2.44 does not qualify as we need in EXCESS of 2.5 in a 375 H&H with a FN Solid. I have taken issue with this and the test will be to change the barrel to a slower twist, say to 1 in 14" instead of the standard 1 in 12", fill the case and plug your 300 gr FN bullet and shoot at around 2500 fps. Will the bullet tumble in flesh .... yes or no? If I must bet my money, I would say yes it would penetrate straight, just like a 9,3 x 62 mm with a 1 in 14" twist would do, at an even lower muzzle velocity. Think about it !!!  Chris Bekker | |||
|
| one of us |
Alf, Would a bullet fired in a vacuum and into gelatin be making a transition worth mentioning? Difficult to imagine what forces are acting on the bullet prior to impact with the gelatin. There is something to the transition from one medium to another that causes instability in the bullet. It is observed when going subsonic (effectively to a less dense medium) and on impact from air to denser media. The only place that seems logical to scrutinise is the momentary differences in forces acting on the surfaces of the bullet at the instant of transition. The paradox you mention is further complicated by the fact that, in air, the FN "penetrates" less effectively than a RN, spitser or truncated cone and is slowed down faster. In the denser medium of tissue it penetrates better. It raises more questions at every turn. Chris, I stated that I specify certain stability factors for GSC FN bullets. Note that it is for GSC FN bullets. Not Barnes round nose solids, Rhino, Dzombo or Bekker (non custom) truncated round nose solids. So why are you fretting about comparing the specs I place on GSC FN bullets to the others? I also specify a weight conformity of less than 0.25% variance and ovality and size conformity within 0.005mm. Do you have a problem with it if other makes do not measure up to those specs? You are arguing for the sake of arguing and because I have shown you up for the Ballistic Buffoon that you are. Paper Tiger comes to mind. You make so many mistakes that it is difficult to keep track of them as you blunder on. Since the four-in-one-sentence mistake, you have managed these as well. Brass is a variable alloy and the sg could be as high as 8.7. You would not know what a bullet is made of unless the sg is measured. I have measured the Barnes alloy and you are wrong again. Who cares what you reject? I don't. Who are you to tell me what spec to place on a GSC product when you know squat about the product? My spec is based on more than twelve hundred samples over a period of several years and your opinion is based on a hearsay sample of what, three? Ballistic Buffoon indeed. Coming from you, that statement is laughably pathetic. Look at just the two mistakes you made below (#40 and 41, if I recall correctly) and then tell me why anyone should take you seriously. So you think this bullet has a secant ogive?  Why on earth would anyone calculate the SF of the bullet below using the conical nose option in WinGyro.  You know not whereof you speak and you cannot be taken seriously as you have proven to be unteachable. I have noticed - there is very little logical thought behind your opinions. | |||
|
| one of us |
. | |||
|
| One of Us |
Gerard, You have cheated me before and you have done it again with the 300 gr Barnes Solid. I have asked you to state your parameters so the answer can be checked - you have opted not to do this - why ??? Very enterprising ... the SF value is now only applicable to FN Solids and not RN Solids - absolutely fantastic, congratulations. You must be a close relative of Rasputin or his spirit is re-incarnated in you. Bearing in mind that RN's tumble quicker than FN's - brilliant !!! The SG of brass varies from 8.2 to 8.6 with an average of 8.4 grams per cubic cm. I use 8.4 in my calculations, but even if you use 8.7 you still cannot achieve a SF value of more than 3. I do not have a Barnes bullet so I cannot determine it specific weight, but I will write to Barnes and see if you have lied to me again about the 8.7. Looking at the spec sheets published on the Internet, it suggests that you have lied, as you stretched it beyond the maximum value. I also tried to lure you into it by even opting for the "conical' option in Wingyro, as it typically yields a higher value than the 'Tangent' option of around 0.16 for RN bullets - still a far cry to move you from around 2.0 to more than 3 !!! Even if you combine your outside SG spec and the conical option, you still cannot get to a value higher than 3. Stretching the truth is convenient, but it looks so much better to blame me for having an old program or that my program is affected by terrestrial movements in orbit and the phase of the moon. I had hoped that you would see/realise the impossibility of getting to a value of more than 3 - why say more than 3 - just state the damn figure. The Barnes Solid is essentially a RN design and the round nose bullet is usually specified by the length of the ogive in calibers. A .400 caliber bullet with a one-caliber ogive would have an ogive length of .400 inches. A one-half caliber long ogive in the same caliber would be .200 inches long or would be a half-ball. Round nose bullets are usually a modified elliptical curve but many round nose designs are simply what the die maker filed the cutter to look like and are not possible to describe mathematically. So, we should actually use the 'tangent' option that will yield a smaller answer. Instead of answering the question (calculation of the SF value) you publish a diagram of a RN bullet .... huh? You have one more chance to state your parameters and SF value. If you made an inadvertent error, just say so - it is really no problem, but cheating cannot stand. You have not responded to .... "You stated that a close 2.44 does not qualify as we need in EXCESS of 2.5 in a 375 H&H with a FN Solid. I have taken issue with this and the test will be to change the barrel to a slower twist, say to 1 in 14" instead of the standard 1 in 12", fill the case and plug your 300 gr FN bullet and shoot at around 2500 fps. Will the bullet tumble in flesh .... yes or no? If I must bet my money, I would say yes it would penetrate straight, just like a 9,3 x 62 mm with a 1 in 14" twist would do, at an even lower muzzle velocity."  Chris Bekker | |||
|
| one of us |
Because I am done spending time educating you and will henceforth only deal with your mistakes for some light relief/fun. Answering your questions in good faith is a futile excercise as you are not prepared to learn and resort only to crass behaviour.
Ah! Another new bullet: The SF Solid. Is it designed by Bekka or by Brigadier, perhaps? Tell us more.
They do? Tell us how you calculated or measured the RPM of a tumbling RN and FN. Was it done in wetpack or did you shoot a herd of Bushy Whacked Gnus? So many questions. I had no idea you were researching in this new direction. I have a very nice tumblerometer for sale, never been used. Would you be interested in buying it?
Who said a Barnes bullet is sg 8.7, not me, or was it you making assumptions and mistakes again? Write to them anyway or, beter still phone them as you are phoning every man woman child and their dog at the moment to drum up support.
Too funny, tooo funny. You are getting so glib at covering up your blunders. Pity it is so transparent.
Is that why your results are so wierd? There is this program on Channel Three TV called Free Spirit. The TV Guide says it features a lot of astrology, vegetarians, strange Eastern religions and wierd healing stuff with crystals. Sounds like you will find it interesting.
No! You know this? Utterly amazing, when did you discover that, Wednesday last week?
There is another type of half-ball. It is when only 50% of the invited guests rock up at your party. That one is easily solved by going to the closest biker bar and insulting the main man. Then run for home. The half-ball soon becomes a ball and degenerates to crass behaviour. You will fit right in.
Where do you get these things from? All these years we all thought the bullet manufacturers made drawings and that the die makers worked dilligently from those. Now you reveal the earth shattering news that most round nose bullets are designed by chance by okes in blue overalls wielding files indiscriminately! Amazing!
Oh, good. I will not be using it so you can use it for something else, like donating it to your Flabbergasted Support Group for a fund raising auction. Somebody there is bound to need another chance so you can do some good with it. The easy way to change the twist is to clamp a barrel vise to the muzzle and hold the action securely with a good quality action vice. Beat on the barrel vice with a four pound hammer until the barrel assumes the desired twist rate. Some straightening may be required. This only works with left hand twist barrels. If you have a right hand twist barrel, it has to be stretched. This will unwind the twist thus slowing it. (You will have to shorten the barrel afterwards by cutting a section off the muzzle.) This is more difficult to do and sometimes tears the barrel from the action. Arc welding it back in place is then the best option and ensures trouble free stretching in future. If stretched too far, see above and follow the slowing procedure for left hand barrels to retighten the ecxcessively unwound right hand twist barrel. | |||
|
| one of us |
Dang an eleven page pi$$in contest!!  I hope you children are having fun. Just remember that you should not get into pi$$in contests with a skunk.Although cartridge selection is important there is nothing that will substitute for proper first shot placement. Good hunting, "D" | |||
|
| One of Us |
Gerard, Congratulations with your reply Gerard - you must have a Masters in talking shit. What is the SG of a Barnes bullet? Even at 8.7 we do not get your SF of more than 3.0 !!!! State your parameters - as simple as that. Do I hear the thunder rumble in the background? Chris Bekker | |||
|
| One of Us |
Since the circumference speed on the same twist (1 in 14") is higher for the larger caliber my bet is that it will perform equally well as the smaller caliber ... yes ... no? Chris Bekker | |||
|
| One of Us |
RIP revealed in his tests ... "A Barnes brass round nose solid (.474/500gr) at 2300 fps went less than half as far as the FN's and (North Fork) FP's before tumbling and veering off course. Similar shabby performance was seen from a Woodleigh .423/400gr FMJ round nose solid at 2400 fps." Can we really argue any further Gerard. Same gun ... same twist. FN's do have the edge - at least in the Iron Buffalo. RIP really tried to check it out. But also introduced a few inconsistencies with Mo/Xsa ... damn. Chris Bekker | |||
|
| one of us |
Chris, Thank you, you are too kind. I am not as good as you are at it. You are much better at disguising your writing to seem serious when all along it is not. Easy to answer that one. You will need a buret, water, a fairly accurate scale and any bullet that you want to substitute for the bullet you want to measure (just to be sure of not getting the right result). Read the instructions given for the correct use of the buret, water, scale and bullet. The instructions for the bullet will not be the correct ones but that should not worry you. I forgot, you cannot follow instructions and comprehension of reading material is a problem to you as well. Forget it, just call Barnes and ask. The new discoveries are coming thick and fast now. Circumference speed determines stability in flesh ...wow!!! How do you express it, inches/sec, furlongs/fortnight or is there some other way? I am ready to roll when you are. Just keep those statements that make no sense coming. We have been trying to explain them to you but you won't listen. Now you have blown your chance. | |||
|
| One of Us |
[/color]
Gerard just answer the question ... yes or no? Remember the same debacle we had when you told me the 7mm/175 gr Barnes-X would not stabilize due to the SF value that was too low according to you ... then I reminded you that it all changes on impact when the bullet mushrooms. They all stayed point-on in my wetpack when I retrieved them. On kudu they go straight through, but one day I will be lucky and retrieve one on an angled shot at extended range. I will write to Barnes to get the value - publish your measurement so long. Hint ... As you are so elevated above us poor mortals, change the sg value of the .375/300 gr Barnes Solid in steps of 1.0 .... from 8.4 to 9.4 to 10.4 to 11.4 to 12.4 and tell me when you hit an SF value greater than 3.0 This should be fun. Chris Bekker | |||
|
| one of us |
Chris, I cannot. You used the Last Chance several posts ago so logically there are no chances left and the question does not exist. On the subject of retrieving bullets from kudu: I recall that you went to great lengths to explain to us how Dr. Ashby proved that high velocity resulted in less penetration with the same bullets. The experiments were done with faster and slower cartridges of the same calibre. The point being that close shots were less likely to exit compared to longer shots where speed has dropped off. Now you say regarding your 7x57 and 175gr bullets.
What happened to the reams of irrefutable proof that longer ranges produce better penetration due to the lower impact speed? If you are not recovering them at close range, you are even less likely to recover them on long range shots. You are not clear on these concepts, are you?  | |||
|
| One of Us |
Gerard, You must be suffering from memory loss. There is a velocity window. Dr Asby showed the 30-06 comparison differential between around 2650 vs 2400 fps. The 175 gr Barnes-X bullet does 2390 fps (MV) and at 200 yds it will be down to 2077 fps. When you drop so much you will lose penetration again, as you are outside the ideal band. Actually very simple to figure it out. You just need to shoot more to understand. Still no answer on how you wanted to cheat me with the .375/300 gr Barnes Solid. Chris Bekker | |||
|
| one of us |
Let us know when you recover one from a 200m shot. This is an experiment I have done extensively over an impact velocity range from 4500fps down to 2900fps with the same bullet. If you shoot through at muzzle poking distance, you may start recovering them at around 400m or more. | |||
|
| One of Us |
Gerard, With your superior knowledge of WinGyro this should be easy, but it would be hard to admit your lie. When the smoke dies down, one and all can see how you avoided all the questions. Hendrik contacted me & Mauritz for a test with your 230 gr HV to contrast them against the 235 gr Rhino and the 250 gr Barnes-X bullets. Better that I leave it to Mauritz and I will get Pieter Olivier to stand in for me, as I do not wish to get further embroiled with you. I will rather book another hunt or do some of my own projects. You should be pleased that Mauritz is involved and not me - I will just read about it in Wild en Jag. Chris Bekker | |||
|
| one of us |
Chris, This is my opinion and I would appreciate it if you would not take umbrage. I do not mean this as an insult in any way, it is just how I see matters right now. This reveals the reason why I steadfastly refuse that you be involved in any test where GSC products are included. Your attitude of the last several years has been one of "us against them". I believe that you are not capable of objective evaluation with such subjective involvement. Until that changes, I will do my utmost to prevent you from evaluation of GSC products. This is a pity as it consumes time and effort that could be better spent constructively. Please do not get me wrong here. We do not want to avoid criticism and we have never shied away from comparative evaluation. We have confidence in our products. Where we encounter problems, we do our utmost to rectify the matter as fast as possible. This is the advantage of a smaller manufacturer when it comes to technical matters. We only ask for fair evaluation without the constant hostile attitude you exhibit. Above all, when we state the parameters for use of a product, a sure way of raising ire is to then not follow the guidelines and criticise the product when it fails to do what you expected. If it fails when used as directed, by all means say your say, otherwise, you have no right. No one has. I am off this thread now. | |||
|
| One of Us |
Gerard, You understanding is indeed bizzar. The discocery is only in your head or was it planned twisted logic to ridicule your opponent as always. Stability calculations in air is still best calculated with gyroscopic stability or SF values. Both the 375 and the 9,3 with 14" twist barrels will stabilize solid bullets - go do the math please and then publish the SF values. I suggest you take Rhino brass solids as they have the lowest spesific gravity value of readily available solids. If you get answers not to your liking, then simply blame the damn program of being partial to me. Chris Bekker | |||
|
one of us |
Hey, Guys... I just read in another thread that there's a "...don't give a shit..." clause in this Forum! I did, really! ____________________________________________ Did I mention, "I REALLY LIKE GUNS"? "...I don't care what you decide or how much you pay for it..." Former FFL Dealer NAHC Life Member NRA Endowment/Life Member Remington Society of America Member Hunter in Training | |||
|
| One of Us |
THOUGHT FOR THE DAY When one remains silent when he is being told the most obvious lie, he loses once and for all his sense of probity. That is why I could not assent to Gerard's statement about the SF value of of the .375/300 gr Barnes Solid, just like was the case with the BC-debacle some time back. Chris Bekker | |||
|
| one of us |
007  There is nothing as permanent as a good temporary repair. | |||
|
| One of Us |
Katte, Can I make you a member of the SD club. Shooting 430 gr Rhino bullets as a matter of preference will certainly qualify you to belong to our elitetist club. We are dieing to get your report on the various bullets you tested on dangerous big game, including those .423/330 gr HV's. I would already wager anybody that their petals came off at shallow penetration. Let the truth be known ... you had a wonderful opportunity to test various bullets on live game! Now the penny must fall where it wants to be ... Take care Chris Bekker PS: One convinced man is already a majority | |||
|
One of Us |
"Buy land they have stopped making it"- Mark Twain | |||
|
| One of Us |
SO BEK MOET JAM KRY GOED GESE JOU PUNTE IS TOPS
"Buy land they have stopped making it"- Mark Twain | |||
|
| One of Us |
Can you point to my post that you are referring to? | |||
|
| One of Us |
375 Fanatic, Please share with us some of your experiences and how you have come to like the Rhino bullet. Thanks Warrior | |||
|
| One of Us |
I have not read much of the posts but I do want to relate my own experiences with Rhino bullets. The 380 gr Rhino bullets mushrooms much easier than any other Rhino bullet at lower velocities. I guess this is because of the thinner walls of the bullets. I have found that 300gr rhino bullets do not have the same effect on the same animals because i have found that at the velocities that I shoot they do not expand that easily or not at all. The 380gr bullets do penetrate just as well as 300gr bullets even though it expands more. The visual affect when a animal is shot with a 380gr Rhino tells the whole story! It is quite a different sight!!! I must add all my experiences are on Blue wildebeest and Kudu sized game and no dangerous game. To my humble opinion these are the best bullets available on the market! My opinion is due to experience with these bullets. | |||
|
| One of Us |
I use rhino bullets in my 243 and 375 and i have not lost one animal yet.My favaourite is the 300gr at 2350 feet/sec and i shoot anything with it. i have used the 380gr and it worked well on a eland bull(it was the only one i managed to recover)it expanded 2 1/2 times with a 98% weight retention but its a bit of an over kill on smaller animals. i will definately use it on my buffalo before i use federal for instance . we nearly lost a buffalo in october that was shot with a 416 rigby useing federal ammunition. The client gave it a frontal chest shot we only finished him off late the next day the bullet only penetrated about 6" and didn't break the spine My friend shot a kudubull at 230m with the 100gr in his 243 thrue shoulders it ran 40m. the bullet expanded nearly 3 times with 100%weight retention. I think its exeptional for any 243 bullet. that is more than enough prove for me and every night when i eat my biltong and watch my photos i dont have to think of the one that got away but rather look at the memories.Hunting is never a perfect world and there is always something that influence the outcome. but my rhinos have never and i mean never let me down i shoot a 40mm group with my 375 but that is still good enough for me.
"Buy land they have stopped making it"- Mark Twain | |||
|
| One of Us |
That was in essence the same point I made in the other thread where we discussed the accuracy of the Rhino bullets and how they perform on game. One person claims the .243 Rhino bullet does not open, and you say they do open fairly wide. I would expect so, as they are loaded between 2900 and 3000 fps. I am also a happy Rhino user. Warrior | |||
|
One of Us |
...Must be something about south of the Equator and argueing....,.If someone could clarify ,,Isn,t Biltong dried kind of like jerky...Do you eat it for supper .,.,Ya,ll must have some pretty strong chompers .If it can,t be grown , its gotta be mined .... | |||
|
| Powered by Social Strata | Page 1 ... 8 9 10 11 12 13 |
 | Please Wait. Your request is being processed... |
|
The Accurate Reloading Forums THE ACCURATE RELOADING.COM FORUMS Rifles Big Bores Ongoing discussion - 380 gr Rhino
Visit our on-line store for AR Memorabilia