Posting for Chris Bekker:

Gerard,

1) Just give me the damn measurements, they are not state secrets. I can ask the guy who gave me the bullets to measure an unloaded bullet for me. Your statement to refuse the info is totally absurd "(There is some information one does not supply to competitors.)" Gerard you are behaving like a jibbing donkey again (sorry man you are actually just being consistent with your default personality) - all can see the silliness of your answer.

2) As I have only loaded 260 gr rounds, I could not tell the length - piecemeal I am gathering the info, but it is like pulling teeth. I just want to calculate the SF value to make sure, as you have a reputation to deceive people with info or to create so much smoke that people walk away with burning eyes.

You have elected to ignore my previous question (or was it simply lack of concentration), but no problem I can repeat it for you again" .... "Furthermore, please state the MINIMUM SF value that we need for stabilization in flesh? Then an adjusted for the shortening effect? Then to what extent does shoulder stabilization assist a marginal twist rate situation, if at all? If shoulder stabilization is indeed a serious factor that we cannot lose sight off what weight does it carry to assist a deficient twist rate? These are serious ballistic questions that we need to understand. Please answer in detail without wonder off the point. I am sure AR readers would welcome a well researched dissertation on let us call it these misunderstood items."

Your reply to Collani is prove of how you will clutch at straw and your confirmation is quite indicative. (there is no inaccuracy - only in your mind). Focus on the pinciple Boet!

Chris Bekker

Posting for Chris Bekker:

What follows is an advertisement for the HV bullet. It is rather strange that the bullet or bullets did not open up due to the large cavity in the nose section and also the high velocity that the bullets were shot with. Perhaps a metallurgical problem? Perhaps a twist rate problem? Perhaps what Alf said about the "interaction between bullet and target" or perhaps 500 Grains reference to unexplainable situations of erratic behaviour where we have either wonderful performance or miserable failure with the same bullet (3 rd force)

"Hey Pete,

I really don't have the time to do a complete shot by shot breakdown yet, but I did get a picture of the bullet. Since you asked for it, I'll post it up for discussion.

It was the only GSC bullet we recovered. The rest were complete pass thru's. It is a .375 265gr GSC HV (mv = 2750 fps). I shot a Waterbuck with it at 60 yards. It was quartering towards me and I hit it on the point of the shoulder. As you can see, it obviously did not open up. Near as I can tell, the bullet swerved off line and did not fully penetrate the vitals. The bullet was found against the hide on the near side (found by the skinner). We followed up on the waterbuck and caught up to it after about 200m's (fortunately we could hear it staggering, and falling...the blood trail was very poor). I ran up to where I could get a clear shot and dropped it for good with a shot through both shoulders.

Here is the bullet....



As I mentioned, all other shots taken were complete pass thru's. At least one other shot had strange results though. This one was at an impala, quarting toward me at 80 yards. It was also shot with the .375, as I was hunting zebra at the time. I hit it in the near shoulder. Based on the angle, I expected the bullet to come out behind the far shoulder. It actually swerved inside the impala and came out of the paunch just before the hind leg on the far side. It then entered the rear leg, shattered the femur and excited the rear of the leg. Phenomenal penetration for sure, but not very straight penetration.

It seemed to me that most of the game shot with these bullets reacted as though I had shot them with solids. With the exception of the impala with the broken femur, they all ran off further than I am accustomed to seeing and blood trails were not that good in spite of having entry and exit wounds. In my previous experience in RSA, all but two of the animals I shot with Swift A-frames literally dropped in their tracks.

I can't say that the HV performance was bad (other than the bullet in the picture above), but I think I will go back to the premium softs I am more familiar and comfortable with (Swift A-frames)."

Cheers,
Canuck"

The Bekker Hole

quote:

Originally posted by 500grains:
If all of the participants in this discussion will agree to go to a pub and punch each other until the issue is resolved, I will pay for the beer.

name the bar and date...

SD doesn't change with velocity.. wow, a FACT...



jeffe

quote:

Originally posted by mehulkamdar:
Posting for Chris Bekker:

"Furthermore, please state the MINIMUM SF value that we need for stabilization in flesh? Then an adjusted for the shortening effect? Then to what extent does shoulder stabilization assist a marginal twist rate situation, if at all? If shoulder stabilization is indeed a serious factor that we cannot lose sight off what weight does it carry to assist a deficient twist rate? These are serious ballistic questions that we need to understand.
Chris Bekker

Indeed, most twist rates have been "engineered" in the past for maximum accuracy paper punching which is a totally different subject that meat punching! So increasing the twist rate is a proven fact to terminate head-on in all my testing as well as field experience. Shortening of the bullet due to deformation and shoulder stabilization do come into play as well as the bullet's center of gravity both initially and then until termination!

The Nosler partition will lose its front core most of the time and become base heavy.... I find they terminate base first a lot?..... Probably so what;..... as they are always deep and dependable. I have killed more game with them than any other without a failure and still recommend them whenever asked. But it has made me drift more to bonded bullets....... as well as looking at center of gravity......

A Foster-type shotgun slug will stay point-on with no twist at all! Hence I think the NorthFork, Rhinos, Bearclaws, are probably the absolute best at staying point-on, especially if one insists on archaic twist rates because of the center of gravity being forward because of the less dense back half.

A lot still needs to be explored when we talk of stabilization in flesh......

"You can't lead without lead."

BigRx

BigRx,
You are right on the COG theory. This is the reason why bad results are often reported with Failsafes. The problem is not so much with the bullet as with the choice of bullet. If Failsafes of 20% less weight than standard lead core bullets are used, results will invariably be good. The higher speed will improve reliability of expansion and the shorter bullet will stabilise well enough for decent linear penetration. Using Failsafes (or monometallic bullets) at the same weight as lead core bullets is a recipe for disaster but the bullet cannot be blamed.

Posting for Chris Bekker:

Gerard,

The way that you write, one will swear that you smell like roses and that I am so dumb and that I understand nothing - I always thought that everything was in the explanation. (Bad explanation = bad understanding)

When a well stabilized bullet hits point on and it does not open at 2,750 fps, then there is surely a problem in that it does not meet the hunter's expectation. 2,750 fps is most definitely high velocity in my books for a .375 caliber !!!! Bearing in mind that the HV bullet has a much wider cavity than the Barnes-X, it is indeed strange that the bullet did not open up. Expansion problems are likely to be related to insufficient annealing most of the time or the lack thereof.

Strangely enough, it seems that most all Canuck's HV bullets either tumbled, did not expand or did not give straight-line penetration. May be a third force or an evil intervention of some sort or the phase of the moon. I would rather like to think it is related some physical phenomenon that can be explained. Please put Canuck's bullet under a microscope and then 'throw dem bones'. Burn some incense in the background before you cast your spell.

Anyway I would not break my head over failed HV bullets. I have been scared off a long time ago by Mauritz Coetzee's experience with your bullets and I heeded his call. It seems that the same bad experience is just repeating it all over again. None of the Barnes-X bullets that I have ever used in my calibers failed to expand. So far so good and it does not mean that it could not. However, I am realistic enough to accept that it could happen. The point is that your "MOST VERSATILE" bullet can also fail and that is a revelation.

I use Rhino Softs mostly, but when expansion is viewed as important, one just cannot do better - just take another look at this 9.3 expanded bullet. (Gerard, please visualize the hemorrhage that it could cause in an animal, and may be you can entertain the idea privately, without confessing publicly that it is in fact superior to your HV bullet). The new generation of Rhino bullets are all guided at the tip to aid initial expansion from 9.3 caliber and up.

If you refuse to give me all the measurements of your bullet, then stick it in your ass (gently so it does not mushroom). Plain simple measurements, Boet !!! I am glad that we are in agreement when you say .... "Bear in mind that, as the bullet strikes and penetrates, it shortens, expands radially and the spin required for stability reduces radically." The word 'radically' is of particular importance, and explains why we get straight-line penetration most of the time with expanding bullets. I would like to assume then that this might just be the reason why straight-line penetration was achieved with your 260 gr HV bullet at a mere 2,500 fps MV, impacting much lower down range in a standard twist of 1 in 14". (All contrary to your rantings)

Gerard if you do decide to come to the bar, please bring your paper bag with you. (If you behave contrary to your default personality, i.e. in a jovial fashion, I will donate some Rhino bullets to you, so we can put it nicely in the paper bag for you)

Chris Bekker

Posting for Chris Bekker:

Gerard,

GS: "Imagine the damage at slow speeds similar to that of your favourite bullets"

CB: I do agree and prefer when the petals open up wide and stay intact. The Barnes-X bullet just exhibit stronger petals. Personally I do not like it when the petals come off in the first inch or two.

GS: "One of the issues we have solved with our GS Custom bullets is that of bullet concentricity."

CB: Absolutely, lathe turned bullets are very precise by default and has to be accurate. The concentricity of a HV bullet will beat a Barnes-X bullet, as the Barnes bullet is not lathe turned.

Your bullets are indeed well made (please do not see this as me knocking your bullets) and the driving band concept is indeed innovative - I have said so already 5 years ago. We just prefer different velocities and to kill differently. Each to his own.

So I am closing this debate now and hope your machine shop is up and running soon.

Best of luck.
Chris Bekker

Posting for Dr Mauritz Coetzee:

The Editor
Accurate Reloading.com

Dear Sir

I will be brief in answering Koos Geldenhuys’s mumbo jumbo.

Firstly, as usual Koos does not answer my question on his perceptions regarding the 370/375 Rhino bullet not having enough momentum and consequently penetration. Is this question simply to complicated for him and his friend? Koos Geldenhuys’ dear friend Gerard further states that Koos’ terminology is less than precise but conveys the idea anyway. So if both of them understand the idea why don’t they respond on the 380/375 not having enough momentum and penetration, due to a large frontal diameter according to an idea by Koos? Are they both now confused by Koos’ terminology or is it a question of both being perplexed by their own ideas, especially after being confronted with real field results?

Incredibily enough Koos actually thanks Gerard for these observations about himself. Imagine what these two Laurel and Hardy personalities will produce, idea wise, in the future. By the way, can Gerard please explain the following idea that Koos expressed: quote … “Sectional density is there and will always be, it’s like a freshly picked Marula fruit with a pip in the middle- never without it.â€

Secondly, his versions of the two buffalo hunts are still incredible. Again I ask the question. On the first buffalo hunt the Rhino 540 grain bullet destroyed the lungs and the Swift-A-frame made a large hole through the heart. In all sincerity, Koos, is this bad shot placement. Since the buffalo died within seconds after being hit this cannot be seen as bullet failure either. How does Koos tie this up with Jaco’s e-mail and us not knowing where the vitals are located?

The second buffalo due to extremely short shooting distance and thick bush, as acknowledged, resulted in a bad and hastily first shot. As to Hanke interfering, I already gave the reasons for this. Koos has also observed that the Rhino bullets (or most of them) did not exit from the buffalo. This is the reason why I asked if Koos knew where the vitals are located. Simply put how much penetration does a hunter need to cleanly kill big-game animals.

Thirdly, the dislike Koos has expressed in me and Chris is fully mutual. As to the debate before an audience, he is confused again. I have no desire to really meet Koos in his full plumage. In spite of this, we really had a golden opportunity to discuss penetration, momentum and especially his perception on adequate and non-adequate momentum.

Fourthly I can only congratulate him on moving his focus, hunting wise, away from his family farm to Kwa-Zulu Natal. I have done a lot of hunting there with overseas clients. Just watch out for the little red ticks- their bites burn quite badly. Again as to how many buffalo I have personally shot; the following question. What aspect of the term back-up does Koos not understand? As to the magical figure of one, none, 140 or 139 buffalo, Koos can do us all a favor. He so willingly translated the introductory paragraph in buffalo hunt story nr. 1 and the mention of 139 buffalo killed. He can now again translate the second paragraph following on the introductory paragraph and enlighten us all on how many buffalo I have shot.

Lastly, Koos refers to my observation frame work and him actually watching ±1,500 Boeings passing over his house from the east, banking left towards the South-West and preparing to land at Jhb. Int. Airport. It is, again, preposterous statements like this coming from Koos that nullifies my belief in his ballistic beliefs and experience.

Was I right in my assumptions of him spending too much time on his front porch and traveling to the entrance of the game farm? What can be the motivation for a grown-man to watch the planes, flying over his house, on a yearly basis? Personally I do not think he will ever become a Boeing-pilot in this way. I do think he is highly bored and also, from a psychological point of view, that something is wrong here. At least we can declare Koos Geldenhuys to be a highly compulsive observer of Boeings banking left, coming from the east, over Witbank, and landing at Jhb.Int. airport.

I am eagerly awaiting his next confused reply.
Yours truly,
Dr. Mauritz Coetzee.

quote:

I will be brief in answering Koos Geldenhuys’s mumbo jumbo.

And then Mauritz sprouts 706 words and 8 paragraphs to be brief. I would hate to see what happens when he really goes into detail.


Let me be brief :
1. All the reports posted by Chris stated that 380gr .375gr Rhino bullets rarely exit a buff.
2. This indicates that it penetrates less deeply than lighter weight .375 bullets which tend to exit more frequently.
3. I asked the question whether one can then take a raking or complete going away shot with this bullet, with the same confidence as a bullet that is likely to penetrate deeper.
4. Ray has often said that a bullet/calibre combination is adequate for a particular specie if full penetration can be assured from any angle. That is good advice from someone with more experience in his little finger than most of us will accumulate in a lifetime, including you Mauritz.

quote:

Originally posted by Gerard:
2. This indicates that it penetrates less deeply than lighter weight .375 bullets which tend to exit more frequently.

bollucks

that means it opens more and has less velocity..

again, bullet construction and the variable of velocity.

shesh, gerard..
you make a product.. sell it.. and ship it when you say.. don't get mired down in this

jeffe

Ummm, if one bullet exits and another does not, on the same shot, then the one that exited penetrated more deeply. It seems fairly simple. Greater expansion or less velocity may be the REASON for more shallow penetration, but more shallow penetration would seem to be the reality in that circumstance.

quote:

that means it opens more and has less velocity..

Thank you Jeffe, my point exactly. We agree that this bullet penetrates less than lighter bullets of similar construction or monometal expanding bullets despite your pretending that we do not.

Thank you 500grains for the further explanation. This still begs the question: Why does Mauritz tout the superior penetration of this bullet when it is not reliable for going away shots and, in fact does not have similar or superior penetration to other bullets available in .375"? He says penetration is "adequate" and fails to mention that this is on frontal, broadside and quartering shots. He is the designer and purveyor of these bullets, has been asked some tough questions and is now dancing around the subject of reduced penetration at the expense of other products.

It would be interesting to hear from those who have used this bullet on smaller game and experienced no expansion at all. Mauritz praises the great versatility of his product while all reports indicate a limited application: Frontal and quartering shots on very heavy game only.

I percieve this to be Koos's query to Mauritz and Mauritz prefers to be evasive and answer with ridicule and profanity.

quote:

Originally posted by Gerard:
this bullet penetrates less than lighter bullets of similar construction

It does? Could you provide an example of a lighter bullet that expands that big and still penetrates farther?

Jon A,
Expansion is not under discussion here. Penetration is. There are any number of premium bullets ranging from 350gr down to 250gr that will penetrate deeper and thus ensure that the vitals are hit on a going away shot on a big cape buffalo.

If you have a problem with "This indicates that it penetrates less deeply than lighter weight .375 bullets which tend to exit more frequently." then let us discuss that.

Sometimes people who primarly hunt light game, like deer, become overly concerned about expansion and do not fully realize the importance of penetration to ensure that the bullet reaches the vitals on a marginal shot on a large animal.

quote:

Originally posted by Gerard:

If you have a problem with "This indicates that it penetrates less deeply than lighter weight .375 bullets which tend to exit more frequently." then let us discuss that.

The only problem I had was with the implication of your "of similar construction" addition as it was decieving.

quote:

Expansion is not under discussion here.

Maybe you aren't, but the person who started this thread was:

quote:

Posting for Dr Mauritz Coetzee:

...the bullet provided more than enough penetration and impressive wound channels....

"In fact, I believe these bullets effectively shift the .375 H & H up a gear and into the next calibre class...the usual impact of them hitting buffalo was similar to that which occurs when one of the 416's is used.

It's his thread. He brought it up, not me. And of course:

quote:

Posting for Chris Bekker:

....those hunters that used the 380-gr Rhino bullet will all tell you that it puts buffalo down much quicker.This is due to the bigger hole through the vitals as this bullet mushrooms to a bigger diameter.

That's the whole idea behind the design of these bullets so it certainly is "under discussion" in this thread about them.

Now, people can disagree about how usefull or useless it is (as they are) and can argue about it (as they are) but it's most certainly part of the discussion.

So don't pretend I'm the one who brought it into the discussion. All I did was point out that you were ragging on penetration of the bullet and implying there was no flip side to that.

Again, I'm not saying one way or the other how important that flip side is in this application. Just pointing out that it's there in case you forgot about it.

Jon A,
Thank you for the explanation.

I stand by the similar construction comment. It is a given that a lighter bullet will have a shorter nose section (creating a smaller mushroom), less Sd (for what it is worth), higher Mv (for what it is worth), different momentum, energy, momentum/xsa, weight, BC, Cd and so forth for what they are worth. Should I have pointed all of this out?

Your comment of deliberate deception on my part is uncalled for and I take exception to it. It implies sinister intent on my part where the fact is that I am no longer allowing thinly veiled attacks from another manufacturer on our products to pass unchallenged. If the manufacturer does not like this, it is a simple matter for him to tell his designer and one of his advisors to cease the tactic.

The point I am making is that the first requirement for a DG bullet/calibre is sufficient penetration. All the "evidence" presented thus far shows inadequate penetration for a going away shot with a 380gr .375 bullet. I would however not be surprised if incidents are now found where successful going away shots were taken with it, even though it would still not explain the shallow penetration (relative) already reported, would it?

Are you of the opinion that the size of the wound channel is determined only by the size of the mushroom?

quote:

Originally posted by Gerard:
I stand by the similar construction comment. It is a given that a lighter bullet will have a shorter nose section (creating a smaller mushroom),....

OK, I guess it could be interpreted different ways. It could also mean the same nose section placed upon a longer, heavier shank as it does with some other brands. I'll give you a pass on that now that you've clarified it.

quote:

Your comment of deliberate deception on my part is uncalled for and I take exception to it. It implies sinister intent on my part....

It's not the first time and I'm sure it won't be the last. But I apologize if you took it as implication of sinister intent. I really don't think you're evil, Gerard. Really, I don't.

A little biased, sure. You do make your living selling relatively light-for-caliber bullets that follow "new rules" after all. Of course you're biased. But there's nothing wrong with that. I expect you to be. If you don't truly believe in your products and the philosophies they follow, why would you make them? If you didn't believe in them but hawked them anyway, then you would really deserve no respect. So that's to be expected and I don't fault you for it.

All I try to do is keep the facts straight. Sometimes your bias does result in unfair/misleading comparisons. Even if you don't do it on purpose, it can happen. So, please don't fault me when I point it out if I have the tech to back it up.

quote:

The point I am making is that the first requirement for a DG bullet/calibre is sufficient penetration. All the "evidence" presented thus far shows inadequate penetration for a going away shot with a 380gr .375 bullet. I would however not be surprised if incidents are now found where successful going away shots were taken with it, even though it would still not explain the shallow penetration (relative) already reported, would it?

I can't fault much there. I wasn't there and it's hard to make sense of the facts through all the riff-raff. But it does cut both ways. He could point to the pic of your bullet above as failure of proper penetration. He could quote the guy who shot it as an example of penetration/wound channel size with your bullets, even excluding the above failure:

quote:

Originally posted by Canuck:
Phenomenal penetration for sure, but not very straight penetration....It seemed to me that most of the game shot with these bullets reacted as though I had shot them with solids....they all ran off further than I am accustomed to seeing and blood trails were not that good in spite of having entry and exit wounds....I think I will go back to the premium softs I am more familiar and comfortable with (Swift A-frames).

And that wasn’t even on DG…. And even assuming straight penetration, this is a subject where people will disagree and argue. If penetration is all that matters, a 7X57 or 30-06 with a well built solid will penetrate quite far. But at some point more bullet mass, momentum, energy, and wound channel size apparently do make a difference or we wouldn’t have a section on “Big Bores†because nobody would feel the need to use them. Where one feels the line needs to be drawn, etc, is why not everybody hunts with the same thing—opinions differ.

quote:

Are you of the opinion that the size of the wound channel is determined only by the size of the mushroom?

Of course not. If I was, my “go-to†rifle would be a 30-30 instead of a 300 RUM. But I certainly do think it’s part of the equation when other variables are held relatively constant.

Anyway, this subject is quite intriguing to me. I’d like to learn more. Hear mature debate. See more test/game results, etc. I guess the juvenile bickering and circular arguments just got to me.

And refusal to answer simple questions just for the sake of being obstinate—Chris, the length of the .375, 265 GS Custom HV according to Neco is 1.496â€. Sorry to give away your "trade secret" that also happens to be so available to the public, Gerard. Sorry to actually answer a question....

You’re quite a proponent of momentum. I agree with you on that. So, until somebody invents a powder that will allow the 375 to send a 265 out the muzzle at 3200 fps or so, you’ve got to admit the cartridge has the capability for a shitload of momentum with the 380’s. Since all else is not equal, that doesn’t equate to the penetration gains one would expect. But it has to be going somewhere. It has to be doing something. That’s why I’d like to see more test results—How big a hole do they really make? How far do they really penetrate relative to other bullets in a controlled environment?

That’s what’s interesting to me and what I think many could learn a great deal from. The personal pissing match is not.

Jon A,

What you think is the best cape buffalo bullet currently manufactured?

quote:

And refusal to answer simple questions just for the sake of being obstinate—Chris, the length of the .375, 265 GS Custom HV according to Neco is 1.496â€. Sorry to give away your "trade secret" that also happens to be so available to the public, Gerard. Sorry to actually answer a question....

It would behoove you to drop the smart alec attitude. The "trade secret" you gave out above is available here on our website for all our bullets. The dimensions I refused to give out was something else entirely and was for a 260gr 9.3mm bullet.

quote:

So, until somebody invents a powder that will allow the 375 to send a 265 out the muzzle at 3200 fps or so, you’ve got to admit the cartridge has the capability for a shitload of momentum with the 380’s.

A 380gr bullet at 2200fps develops 119 lb-f/s at the muzzle and a 265gr bullet at 2950fps, 111 lb-f/s. The difference is not significant and as we do not poke the muzzle up a buff's nose, a comparison at 50m is more realistic and then the difference is a mere 4 lb-f/s. Looking at the energy developed by the two bullets at 50m, the 265gr bullet develops 4909 ft-lb and a 380gr bullet is at 3684 ft-lb.

As increased energy equates to more wound channel volume and the momentum / cross section of the 265 is less than the 380, this may explain why the 265 tends to shoot through on broadside shots and is capable of shooting to the vitals on a going away shot.

Mauritz knows this as a customer of ours (PH from Pretoria) showed him a 265gr HV bullet recovered at 100% weight retention from the haunch of a frontally shot Cape Buff, when Mauritz was still working at VLT Arms.

The cherry on top is the fact that the 265gr HV is also a viable plains game bullet, eliminating the need for two loads, one for buff and one for plains game. Proven by the same PH on a kudu at 300m two days after the buff.

Mauritz, you again, still whining from behind your salesman counter at L&W? I would have done the same if I had such a frustrating job, day in and day out!

Anyhow, thanks for the warning against the little red ticks. Hunted there before and they didn't bother me then at all. Must have something to do with the following that your friend Chris picked up in one of his brighter moments:

quote:

Koos is a nice guy or perhaps from royal descent.

Let's start with your last two paragraphs this time.
Are you really so ridiculously foolish not realising that you are being fooled around with on your so-called observation framework's ludicrousness and then still try to use it to your own benefit?
You have proved much more than I have hoped for!

My understanding of the term back-up is that there is a vast difference between being the back-up (in other words having a chance to place your shot/s after the first shot/s was/were placed, disorientating the animal already) and being the person supposed to shoot the animal first time round. It is a 'second hand' experience and you can't count those animals as being shot by yourself - never!
From all these posts and your unwillingness to tell how many buffaloes you have shot, I gather that you will soil your pants should you be the first person to shoot! Hence your continuous back-up work, not done to perfection yet, and no promotion to become experienced, first shooting, one-shot-kill-buffalo-hunter like Jaco Marais' status either.
Get somebody to explain this to you if you don't understand it, which I have no doubt about that it would be the case once again, but please don't come up with your own inane ideas on this like you have done on all the previous occasions when my replies are exceeding your extremely low level of interpretation ability.

As to the two articles you wrote, it seems to be a continuous lead-pumping action into buffaloes where you are involved as opposed to Jaco Marais' 6 out of 7 ONE shot kills. Why would that be?
Worried about and testing your bullet's penetration abilities compared to other makes of bullets?

Go back to the question I originally asked you in November 2004, repeated on this forum and also other posters' views like the following:

quote:

Ummm, if one bullet exits and another does not, on the same shot, then the one that exited penetrated more deeply. It seems fairly simple. Greater expansion or less velocity may be the REASON for more shallow penetration, but more shallow penetration would seem to be the reality in that circumstance

and you will hopefully see why you are worried.

Once again, and it is by now really getting boring to repeat everything over and over to you, do you agree with this fact:

quote:

Momentum is bullet weight multiplied by bullet velocity.

Now with that in mind, if a .375" bore diameter bullet changes on impact or very, very shortly thereafter into an object of 24/25mm diameter (25.4mm = 1 inch), (now having a 2.67 times bigger resistance area to overcome than the original bore size), PLUS the fact that the velocity is after travelling some distance towards the target - even before impact - already lower than it was at the muzzle, then obviously - even with a possible 100% weight retention - and whatever sectional density you can come up with, the result namely MOMENTUM must be lower than at the muzzle and much lower on impact or very, very shortly thereafter. There is absolutely no doubt about this fact.

BTW, this is what I asked you in November 2004 and I still haven't received a straight answer from you to date.

By answering this honestly, you will hopefully be able to answer your own first question in your post dated 24 June 2005 01:42 above.

Mauritz, I must apologise, I really thought the one about SD and the freshly picked Marula fruit was simple enough for you to get. I have totally overestimated your linguistic competency level once again and since you have asked Gerard to explain that to you, I will leave it to him to do so.
Thanks in advance, Gerard.

Lastly, I really think it is time to move on since you can offer nothing to this forum's members that they don't know already or haven't heard before and your famous petitio principii leaves us all light-headed.

Enjoy your journey in your own wonderland!

quote:

Originally posted by Jagter:

quote:

Momentum is bullet weight multiplied by bullet velocity.

Now with that in mind, if a .375" bore diameter bullet changes on impact or very, very shortly thereafter into an object of 24/25mm diameter (25.4mm = 1 inch), (now having a 2.67 ??? times bigger resistance area ??? to overcome than the original bore size),

Enjoy your journey in your own wonderland!

Unless one is shooting short sections of razor blades edge-on, then an expanding bullet's resistance is related to its frontal area differental which in the case above is 7.1 times..... not 2.67!

I have said before there is much to be learned on the dynamics of expanding bullets.

We need adequate penetration plus some insurance, not all that we can get.... A trap easy to fall into.

If not we start "crowding" the job of a solid and lose a lot of the benefit the expanding bullet gives us... We are taking away from what it was designed to do in the first place.

Think of it like watering down your whiskey...... It will "go" farther (as in penetration) but will lose a lot of its "kick" along the way! (as in trauma)

BigRx

quote:

Originally posted by 500grains:
Jon A,

What you think is the best cape buffalo bullet currently manufactured?

I really have no idea. I would just like to see some actual data to justify the rabid hatred shown toward this bullet and Rhino bullets in general by some of the members here.

Fascinating discourse guys, and I agree with 500 100%, go to a bar, break out the beer and have a nice gentlemanly discussion! After all, your argument is not a new one. I believe it all began in Pre World War I days when people discovered how effective the 6.5x54mm and 7x57mm could be against heavy game with their long FMJ slugs. Velocity and sectional density do tend to work together. Hope everyone has fun. Pass the beer

LLS

Boy this thread went South, and I'm not about to read the many pages I missed or toss my dog in the fight...

I can honestly say that I have used a lot of GS Custom bullets on a lot of plainsgame, dangerous game as well as most American animals available in Idaho, and have yet to have one fail, either the HV HPs or the flatnose solids...for what its worth...

quote:

Originally posted by Jon A:

quote:

Originally posted by 500grains:
Jon A,

What you think is the best cape buffalo bullet currently manufactured?

I really have no idea. I would just like to see some actual data to justify the rabid hatred shown toward this bullet and Rhino bullets in general by some of the members here.

I have about 500 GS Custom bullets in various calibers and weights, both FN and HV, in my reloading room. But I only have about 150 Rhino bullets in stock.

You're not one of those to which I was refering. I agree with your observations:

quote:

Originally posted by 500grains:
Actually the Rhino looks quite similar to the old Bitterroot bullet, which was very well respected in the field.

If a heavy bullet, launched at moderate velocity that expands nicely and retains nearly all its weight is so horrible, that would apply to many well respected bullets other than Rhinos.

Posting for Chris Bekker:

To whom it may concern,

Bullet selection for buffalo is a specialized field. Unlike the days of yesteryear we have now premium grade bonded bullets with controlled expansion that is far superior to softs and they provide bigger wound channels than solids. Bullets for buff should be dependable and so most factory softs do not qualify. Solids have their role for extreme penetration and back-up shots on a runaway buffalo - typically used by a PH. All purpose bullets from duiker to elephant seldom exit and if it does, then it is likely to be a compromise bullet.

Angled shots are notoriously more risky, even with solids. Angling away shots by occasional hunters invariably will miss the heart - a buffalo is a huge target. You need to give a buffalo a heart shot to drop him. Lung shots can take a while before the beast will expire, and chances are that he could still charge and hurt you. The single most important factor to drop a buffalo quickly is the size of the hole through the heart. And that is the reason why an expansion of at least twice diameter is preferred. Most Rhino bullets typically yields between 2.2 and 2.4 times expansion, but with the .375/380 grainer it is more like 2.6 times. Will I feel under-gunned with my 9.3 x 62 with 286 gr Rhino bullets @ a mere 2,250 FPS .... no, never, as I know it is a proven bullet/load combination. It gives an expanded diameter of 21.5 mm (2.31 times). We don't need 2,400 fps. Will I argue with those hunters that prefer a bigger and heavier bullet... no, it is their choice.

The following items will count in the buffalo hunters favour :

- high bullet mass retention to provide enough punch (momentum) to keep the bullet moving.
- the widest expansion when the bullet moves through the heart (construction), even if it does not exit the animal.
- Adequate Mo/Xsa to ensure penetration through the vitals (depends of type of shot)
- Not taking stupid/risky shots at a buffalo and wound him - make sure it is a heart shot.
- a reliable DG rifle that feeds and extracts flawlessly every time under pressure.

For the first shot I would recommend the client using a premium expanding bullet that remains together. Which is the best bullet ... that remains a matter of opinion. The weight is also a matter of preference. A 250 gr Barnes-X bullet in 9.3 caliber is renowned for excellent results on buffalo. So anything heavier up to 500 grains for bigger calibers will be more than adequate, provided a good shot is administered. We know of many instances where a buffalo still ran having taken a lung-shot with a 500 gr Hornady RN FMJ bullet. Ganyana writes in "Frontal shots on buffalo" about the effectiveness of Ken Stewart's custom bonded bullets over solid RN bullets as the bigger hole torn through the heart makes that the muzzles cannot seal when they are contracted. Also frontal chest shots that are dead centre will not hit a lung, slightly off to one side will only puncture one lung. That is why a shot from the side is better when placed in the vital triangle when you can shoot through both lungs and the heart. An angled shot that misses the heart may only go through one lung at best, or even miss it entirely.



I am not for a high velocity bullet that causes the loss of petals within the first 2 inches, and then behaves like a solid for the rest of its journey. The fragments veer off and do not reach the vitals. Sure, such a bullet will still kill, but we talk about what is most effective and it may just remain a nebulous concept for most, unless extensive comparative field testing is done on the most dangerous Southern Buffalo (Syncerus Caffer Caffer) - I think this is what Jon A is getting at, and rightly so.

Marginal shots seldom do,place the bullet where it counts most. SA bullets such as Rhino an Stewart bullets have prove themselves in the buffalo arena and many foreigners have had success with Swift A-Frames. I would like to share a sectioned Swift A-Frame bullet with you all, as it shows the design and construction of the bullet very well. The front core is bonded, the jackets get progressively thicker towards the middle, the very thick partition protects the rear core and finally arrests the expansion of petals.



Interestingly enough, Swift does not offer a 286 gr bullet in the 9,3 caliber, but a 300 grainer.
I guess we all see the cherries on the cake in a different/subjective light and that makes life more interesting.

Chris Bekker

Posting for Dr Mauritz Coetzee:

Dear Sir

REGARDING KOOS GELDENHUYS’S COMMENTS

I fully expected the total Koos to emerge on this Forum, and his last e-mail certainly lived up to the ‘blue-blooded’, bloated Koos I have experienced in the past.

However, Koos can rest assured that I am thoroughly enjoying my job, selling guns and gun-related items and still doing a lot of hunting – a real dreamland situation, to be quite honest. Since he chose to touch on the subject of my job and gun shops, I do have the following question for him. GS Custom has sent out countless faxes to gun shops in South Africa, advertising gun and ammunition registers, manufactured by them, to the gun shops. Should I deduce from this that Gerard is tired of bullet making, or frustrated to such a degree that stationary has become his primary source of business?

As to the numbers thing, can I expect a translation from Koos of the paragraphs I have mentioned and asked for, or will this make a mockery of Koos’ counting process? As the back-up being a second-hand experience, Koos is quite correct. Being a very real second-hand experience, will he accept an offer from anybody to participate in such a second-hand experience?

And now to the momentum question, Koos emphatically stated that the 380/375 Rhino will lose momentum totally, with resultant bad penetration. We have to ask ourselves how or why the buffalo shot by Rob Duffield and Kevin (Doctari) Robertson died, for example. As to the query by ‘Jon A’ on wound channels and the observation that the 380/375 effectively gears the 375 H & H Magnum into the next caliber class, the following. This remark was made by Kevin Robertson (Doctari) in an article that appeared in “The Accurate Rifle – March 2004â€. Apart from what I have already mentioned on his perception on this bullet, he also made the following remarks: “Now I fully realize that these 380 grains are specialized bullets, and when it is all said and done, it is important to remember that the Three-Seven-Five’s popularity lies in it being an all rounder …….When used with the 380 grains, it is an absolutely superb choice for buffalo, lion and the larger antelope like elandâ€.

Yet Gerald Schultz makes a statement that this bullet will probably not expand on smaller game. Was this bullet originally designed for impala-sized game in the first place? How does he know that this bullet is not suitable for going-away shots? Fact of the matter is that this bullet has performed flawlessly on such shots. Robert Guthrie, of Guthrie Safaris has used this bullet on buffalo, eland and giraffe from all angles with total satisfaction.

Jack Krieger, of Krieger-barrels, again used this bullet on buffalo with great success. Earl Liebentraube, of Wisconsin, used the 380/375 for three kills on buffalo. Dudley Adam, also from Wisconsin again had a one-shot kill on buffalo. Rob Duffield is a totally satisfied used.

Kevin Robertson had 5 one-shot kills on buffalo during 2003. As mentioned the 380/375 Rhino penetrated the full length of charging lions with exit wounds.

Rob Martin, from Florida, is also a firm believer in the penetrating ability of this bullet.

Kevin Robertson being a seasoned buffalo hunter and veterinary surgeon, has been actively busy with an empirical study on wound channel forming with different bullets on dangerous game, and with special emphasis on the 380/275 Rhino. These results will be published in the near future.

In this contest I have to ask what segment of Koos Gendenhuys’s mental faculties is actually preventing him from grasping the success of this bullet. As far as the comparison between SD and a freshly picked Marula fruit, I just have to ask the question – how did the analogy between the Marula fruit and SD actually start? Did Koos come to this type of crap or bullshit comparison whilst he was over-indulging himself on the spoils of the Marula tree, with some other friends? Furthermore, is shallow penetration the reality of the situation in the examples mentioned? Since we have some very dead buffalo out there shot with the 380/375 Rhino, Koos himself must be light-headed by his unjustified statements about this bullet.

Anyway, I am not worried at all about the performance of this bullet. Koos in contrast, should really take note of Canuk’s observations on the lack of straight-line penetration of GS bullets. From a terminal point of view it seems as if a lot more expansion is needed here.

Lastly, it is appropriate to judge Koos on his own statements on this forum. In his reference to Hennie Boshoff’s two buffalo hunts, posted 28 May 2005, Koos makes the following statement.

QUOTE
“Hennie must have realized by now that the Rhino bullets used in his 500 Jeffrey are not capable of putting a buffalo bull down with the first shotâ€. Looks as if he should rather switch over to Swift A-frame bullets for future buffalo hunts.

Jaco Marais responded to these typical unfounded statements from Koos by detailing his success and one-shot kills with Rhino bullets in his 500 Jeffrey. Yet in his last e-mail, dated 26 June 2005 Koos, unbelievably refers to Jaco Marais and his success with the .510 Rhino softs, exactly the same bullets Hennie has used. Referring to myself, and trying to take a cheap shot, Koos makes the following statement

QUOTE
“………….. and no promotion to become (an) experienced, first shooting, one-shot-kill-buffalo-hunter like Jaco Marais status eitherâ€

Can one take Koos Geldenhuis seriously after contradicting statements like these? Where is the recommendation for Jaco to change to Swift A frame bullets for example, for one-shot kills, since according to him in Hennie’s case these Rhino bullets were not capable of one-shot kills.

May I remind Koos of the following indictment he himself posted on this forum
(24 May2005)

QUOTE
“…………. Cowboys don’t cry, but don’t swear at me once you are in a corner due to your own stupidity (and) inability to admit it.

Wise – words – indeed – Koos – especially – coming – from you!

Yours sincerely



Dr Mauritz Coetzee

IS this for real?? Or merely a three-page long spoof of some kind??

(Gives new meaning to the term BIG BORE!)

El Deguello,
I am sorry for the behaviour of certain of my countrymen. I have taken this garbage here but they do not seem to be able to take the hint.

Could someone pass me some popcorn and some more beer

Those that are + 50 years of age should watch their blood preasure.

Very good and informative thread

Cheers,

André

Brief reply to Mauritz's post dated 8 July 2005 22:20 -

quote:

Gerard:
I see the picture of your bullets, that was in a post above, with the off centre jackets and asymetrical nose has been pulled. I suppose you never noticed those flaws before. What are you going to do now, replace the picture with a better one or just pretend it was not there?

Not so easy Mauritz, here it is again, with the off centre jackets and asymetrical nose and all!



In comparison with the next picture, you must admit your design is not even in the slightest way a match with the following GS HV bullets:

quote:

Mauritz:
Did Koos come to this type of crap or bullshit comparison etc.

Gerard:
This type of language is indicative of an inadequate vocabulary or a bad upbringing or both. You typecast yourself.

Funny how small minds repeatedly turns to bad behaviour when painted into a corner by their own doing.

For the more detailed answer by Gerard, click here

Once again, enjoy your journey in your own wonderland!

Posting for Chris Bekker:

Gerard and Koos,

Quote: "I see the picture of your bullets, that was in a post above, with the off centre jackets and asymetrical nose has been pulled. I suppose you never noticed those flaws before. What are you going to do now, replace the picture with a better one or just pretend it was not there?"

Please do not show your ignorance like this. The unevenness is due to my cutting and filing. The holes get drilled - there is no material unevenness - the proof - I shoot a 15 mm grouping at 100 yards with Rhino 9.3 bullets. Please do not clutch at straw, it makes you nasty. No need to pretend or replace pictures - the proof is in using the bullets (in eating the pudding). You only look stupid if you take cheap shots like this. Please blame me for imprecise cutting and not the bullet. Please recognize the excellent terminal effect - that is what we have been taking about along. It is a hunting bullet and a damn good one at that. Koos, please try something valuable to this thread.

Cheers

Chris.

Hunters,

Quote: "Let me help you out here so that you can stop digging. Any bullet has SD. Any freshly picked marula has a pip. After noting these facts, both can be discarded as they both serve little purpose." Unquote.

The above statement/comparison is the same as me saying that we can discard the lead core of the bullet, as it is housed by the copper jacket, just like the pip of the marula is encapsulated by edible fruity flesh. Inference being that the pip is useless, as it is not edible. The inner lead core of the bullet, which forms an integral part of the bullet, is now compared with the pip that is thrown away. So the parallel is drawn that the bullet's SD is useless (utterly insignificant) even though the animal is shot with the full mass. (Lead core should be ejected whilst in flight and make a soft landing with a parashoot). If SD is useless then we should as a matter of default always pick the lightest bullet for a specific caliber and maximize velocity. To achieve the above (i.e. the lowest SD) we should return to shooting balls like in the days of the smooth bore rifles. To shoot the lower SD balls we should shoot copper balls as they are lighter than lead balls. Perhaps we can even go with a lower SD and use tin or titanium balls, as SD is just a silly joke.

Let me illustrate - we can make 35 lead balls out of a pound of lead (1 lb = 7000 gr) and fit them precisely into a .510 bore (500 Jeffery) - that makes each bullet weigh 200 grains. Now we have a light weight projectile for a big bore rifle that we can shoot faster. Making the bullet out of copper (Sg = 8.93) instead out of lead (Sg = 11.35), making the bullet only 157 grains. Fantastic, as even more powder can be fitted into the case to launch the lighter ball (made from tin) faster, as SD does not really count, Boet. By now we have downscaled the 500 Jeffery to the level of a 30-30 Win as far as bullet weight is concerned, but the speadfreaks will rejoice in the accomplishment of maximizing the velocity.

We will also ignore that a better SD divided by the form factor yields a better BC. It is a damn pitty that SD must feature in the BC formula, as the value of SD is equal to naught (utterly useless).

Now we go buffalo hunting with a 570 gr Solid bullet and a 157 gr Solid ball, using the same material - say copper. You can imagine the different results. If you feel limited with a round ball, I will make a concession that you may use a longish bullet, but you have to cut it in half so we can reduce the SD value, since it is of no consequence or it has little value if at all.

Chris Bekker

For those who have seen this pic before, my apologies for not running new material. However, I just wanted to mention that I have been very happy with the performance of GS Custom FN solid bullets. Some of those I have recovered are below. (At present I have no experience with the HV bullets on game.)

Ultimate ignorance -

The perfect and know-all you?

quote:

....... blame me for imprecise cutting .......

In coming up with such stupid excuses,

quote:

...... it makes you nasty,

and a bit more than just that!
I certainly don't believe your explanation for one second, simply because you with all your 'ballistic knowledge' should have realised right from the beginning that such a poor picture (if it really is due to your own doing) would do the bullet's image no good at all.
Sorry mate, try again!

quote:

- the proof is in using the bullets (in eating the pudding).

Something we agree upon!

quote:

Koos, please try something valuable to this thread.

Follow this link and see what it really means when you say the proof is in using the bullets - click here to learn something valuable once in your lifetime.

Finally, I think you should join Mauritz in his journey through now your mutually owned and created wonderland!

PS Tell your friend not a single red pepper tick or any other tick bite were experienced by any one in our hunting group.