Posting for Chris Bekker:

Hello 500 Grains,

Thanks for a nice collection of FN bullets.
Which caliber?
Retrieved from animals?
If so what animal?
Average depth of penetration?
How come they did not exit?
Tell us about the wound Channel?

Regards
Chris

380 Rhino article by Doctari:









The 380 grain, .375 caliber Rhino’s Performance on Buffalo.

Doctari.

During the 2002 hunting season my safari clients used hand-loaded 380 grain Rhino bullets in .375 H&H caliber to take 6 Zambezi Valley buffalo and a number of the other game animal species which also occur there. These included zebra, waterbuck, bushbuck, impala, baboon, hyena and even a large Tom leopard.
A duplex load of 31.5 grains of both S 335 & S 365 propelled the 380 grainers at 2200 fps of muzzle velocity from the 26 inch long barrel of my Browning A-Bolt Medallion rifle. I found this load to be particularly accurate, with these longer than normal bullets stabilizing well in the Browning’s 1:12 twist rate barrel. One inch groups at 100 paces were common.
My initial impression of the 380 grain Rhino’s performance on all the species shot, was one of amazement, particularly in the size of the permanent wound channels they created. I was also impressed with their penetration. From side-on, these bullets shot right through the chest cavities of all the small game species mentioned above, even the zebra and waterbuck. Only those from buffalo were recovered, the rest all exited.
When used on buffalo, from side-on, the Rhino’s were invariably found under the skin on the opposite shoulder, and my visual impression was that these buffalo’s reaction to the shot was similar to that which occurs when one of the .40 calibers is used.
I had an interesting experience with the first buffalo I saw being shot with a 380 grain Rhino. We were hunting in the Nyakasanga Safari Area and found a nice old mud encrusted old Dagha Boy late in the afternoon. As the bull stood facing us with his nose uplifted, my client shot him squarely in the centre of the chest with a 380 grain Rhino. The shot lifted the bull’s forequarters right off the ground. He staggered backwards, turned and ran off. A backing shot was put in by the client, but as it would later transpire, it wasn’t necessary. We heard the bull fall shortly thereafter and by the time we walked up to him, he was dead. He died too quickly to even give a death bellow. ( Photo 1 )
It was dark by the time we had collected the Landcruiser. So as to lighten the bull for loading we removed all his abdominal organs. The thoracic organs were left in place so I could perform an autopsy to see the Rhino’s effect. ( Photo 2 ) This I did the following morning and I was disappointed to discover that the Rhino had, after cutting a huge hole through the bull’s heart, penetrated on to pierce the diaphragm. From the angle with which it did so, it looked to me as if it had then lodged in the rumen – which we had abandoned, many miles away in the veld.
Three months later, on another hunt, we just happened to be in the vicinity of where the first bull had been shot. When I realized this, I asked my tracker, if he thought he could find the place where we had gutted the bull. With a nod of his head he walked straight to the spot. The rumen, liver and intestines had long been eaten by scavengers but we did find a dried out pile of rumen content and after scratching around in it for a while I was extremely pleased to find the perfectly mushroomed Rhino! ( Photo 3 )
A bullet in flight contains both energy and momentum. [A bullets momentum value (MM) = bullet weight in pounds x velocity in feet per second.]
It is well-known that the more momentum a moving object contains, the harder it will be for that object to stop. When it comes to bullets and hunting, the more momentum a bullet contains, the better and deeper it will penetrate. This has been proven many times.
What many do not realize is that different bullets can contain the same amount of energy yet different amounts of momentum. How they will perform and penetrate will vary tremendously.
Take the following example.
.404 Jeffery. 400 grain bullet @ 2150 fps = 4000 ft lbs of Muzzle Energy ( ME ) & 123 lb fps of Momentum ( MM )
.375 H&H. 300 gain bullet @ 2450 fps = 4000 ft lbs of ME & 105 lb fps of MM
.300 Weatherby Mag. 180 grain bullet @ 3200 fps = 4000 ft lbs of ME & 82 lb fps of MM
For example purposes, if it were possible to propel a 40 grain ‘Asprin’ at 6800 fps, it too would contain 4000 ft lbs of energy, but only 39 ft lbs of MM.

A 380 grain .375 Rhino @ 2200 fps produces 4085 ft lbs of ME and 119 lb fps of MM.
A regular 300 grain .375 bullet @ 2550 fps will have 4330 ft lbs of ME and 109 lb fps on MM
A 265 grain HV GS .375 bullet @ 2750 fps will have 4450 ft lbs of ME and 104 lb fps of MM.

The 380 grain Rhino penetrates well because it contains more momentum than other .375 cal bullets. More momentum, when combined with a lower impact velocity results in slower, more gradual bullet set-up, and deeper penetration. When one also considers the fact that permanent wound channel size increases to the cube root of a bullet’s expanded diameter, it’s no real surprise to me why these super heavyweight Rhino’s are so effective on buffalo. ( Photo 4 )
The 380 grain Rhino has the ability to expand to a larger diameter than other premium quality expanding bullets in .375 caliber. This is why they create larger permanent wound channels. Given similar shot placement (through the heart/lung area), the larger the permanent wound channel, the more rapid the onset of the inevitable – it’s as simple as that.
In my opinion, 380 grain Rhino’s are without a doubt, the best .375 caliber bullets to use for buffalo.

Photo 1
This old mud encrusted Dagha Boy was the first buffalo I saw shot with a 380 grain Rhino. The rifle is my Browning A- Bolt Medallion.

Photo 2
The old Dagha Boy’s heart after a 380 grain Rhino passed through it. With that size of permanent wound channel, it’s no wonder he died so quickly.

Photo 3
All these 380 grain Rhino’s were recovered from buffalo. The one second from the left lay out in the veld for three months. That is why it looks tarnished.

Photo 4
All these .375 caliber bullets were recovered from buffalo. L to R
300 grn Swift A-Frame, 300 grn Barnes X-Bullet, 380 grn Rhino, 300 grn Nosler Partition, 300 grn Stewart ‘Hi-Performer’.
Permanent wound channel size is in proportion to the cube root of a bullets final expanded diameter.

Very interesting... thanks for posting the info and the pics are excellent.

Elmer always said modest velocity and heavy is the way to go...

Posting for Chris Bekker:

Koos,


Rhino only uses Tungsten drills. It is nearly impossible to drill a hole off centre with this system they use. I suspect GS is using the same system as Rhino as it is a sensible system. When drilling the hole in the bullet, the drill is actually stationary whilst the bar turns. A tungsten drill, as you may know, does not 'give' lateral movement - it brakes like glass if you attempt to bend it. The copper bar turns at about 4,500 rpm. The turning bar will pull the drill to the centre and when the drill is off centre it will brake. This is one of the reasons why turned bullets are so accurate as the hole is always dead centre. You have to go out of your way to drill a hole off centre, without braking a drill. If you want me to show you a 15 mm grouping, please be my guest, and once when you witness this, I will push the target down your throat as a bonus, as you stick your neck out about these apparently terrible skewed bullets according to your demented logic that takes you on wild imaginative trips. I will also expect you to section a bullet better than me (if I am so stupid), and if you can't, I am going to push that bullet in your ass as a repository.

Now regarding your big mouth ... I repeat the challenge to you to come and address the Big Bore hunters and if you do not have the balls, please meet alone so we can settle our differences to your satisfaction - do not take cheap shots at me in the safety of your home where you enjoy the luxury of distance. You can contact myself and Mauritz at Leef & Werk (you have the number) and provide me with 3 dates that suit you and I will oblige anywhere in Pretoria. And don't let me wait too long ...

So long
Chris Bekker

quote:

A 380 grain .375 Rhino @ 2200 fps produces 4085 ft-lb and 119 lb-f/s
A regular 300 grain .375 bullet @ 2550 fps will have 4333 ft-lb and 109 lb-f/s
A 265 grain HV GS .375 bullet @ 2750 fps will have 4450 ft-lbs and 104 lb-f/s

The numbers above reflect normal loads with the 300 and 380gr bullets while the 265gr HV bullet is downloaded by 200fps. Strange.

Loading the 265gr HV to full potential of 2950 fps, it has 5122 ft-lbs and 112 lb-f/s. All the preceding numbers are at the muzzle.

As we seldom have the misfortune to have to shove the muzzle up a buff or ele's nose, the numbers should rather be considered at 50 metres or so. So, put into perspective at 50 metres and, with the 265gr HV loaded to full potential, we have:

A 380 grain .375 Rhino @ 2053 fps produces 3557 ft-lb and 111 lb-f/s
A regular 300 grain .375 bullet @ 2359 fps will have 3708 ft-lbs and 101 lb-f/s
A 265 grain HV GS .375 bullet @ 2888 fps will have 4909 ft-lbs and 109 lb-f/s

Will I trade a difference of 2 lb-f/s of momentum for an extra 1352 ft-lb of energy? In a heartbeat.

quote:

When one also considers the fact that permanent wound channel size increases to the cube root of a bullet’s expanded diameter

Could someone please explain this to me? Isn't the cube root much smaller than the number ie.: If a bullet expanded to 27mm (1.06"), the cube root is 3mm (0.12")? Or is the meaning that the final expanded diameter is the cube root of the permanent wound channel? (27mm x 27mm x 27mm = 19683mm = 775" = 64.5 ft = exploded buffalo) I respect Kevin's opinion, what am I missing here?


Chris,

quote:

I suspect GS is using the same system as Rhino

Actually we do not. We use carbide drills.

quote:

The turning bar will pull the drill to the centre...

As for the rest of your post, Koos said it well with: "Funny how small minds repeatedly turns to bad behaviour when painted into a corner by their own doing."

quote:

Originally posted by Gerard:
"Funny how small minds repeatedly turns to bad behaviour when painted into a corner by their own doing."

tff

jeffe

Hi Jeffe

.

Chris,

In Afrikaans we have a saying that says: "Meng jou met die semels, dan vreet die varke jou."

Now you will understand why I will never accept your invitation or challenge.

However, what I've said so far to you and Mauritz and in particularly the last post re your ultimate ignorance as to how much damage you've caused to the so-called badly sectioned Rhino bullet due to your own

quote:

imprecise cutting

, remain facts and truths that both you and Mauritz can't sweep under the carpet and in trying to get rid of these facts as hard as you can, hope that nobody sees the hump of junk you two are spreading around.

I would therefor like to challenge both you and Mauritz to send RIP 10, preferably 20 380gr .375 Rhino bullets to test together with many other makes of bullets in his Steel Mistress.
That should solve this whole problem satisfactorily and every member of the AR forum will at last know what each bullet is capable of doing.

By doing it this way no one will be able to blame the other for any possible tricks or cheating that took place.

Once we have got the final results we all would know how to end this fruitless ongoing discussion.

(afrikaans should have been with a capital A - my apologies.)

Whew! OK I will also get technical...Ya'll have done got et up with theoritical BS...

Any bullet of 270, 300, 350 and 380 grs. from a .375 is a decent enough killer of buffalo..so take your pick, use them until can't shoot another one, but don't expect the seas to part or the heavens to open, it just ain't going to happen no matter how many pages we fill on AR... and the .375 will still be a .375 in the end, it will never be a 404 or a 416, just ain't in the cards..nor will the 404 and 416 ever be a 458 Lott, I have allready proved that to myself, just couldn't get it done.

I suppose that it is too late to ask the question.. ."Is this a long story?"

Carry on!

Hi Gerard,
sorted by mo and then secondary by penetration. Data from your website, which you have now acknowledged the author

Seems, from your web site, the more MO goes up, the more penetration... well, doesn't track to it...


Kinda hard to look at.. the lowest MO and the highest MO (153.6 vs 205.7) have within 10% of the same penetration

Sort them by velocity and again, my original charts are accurate... there's this basic thing about math.. what you do to one side of an equation, you must do to the other... So, since MO is a function of velocity, sorting by velocity then arranges them in a logical pattern.



This is pretty tiring... but the "Funny how small minds repeatedly turns to bad behaviour when painted into a corner by their own doing."

just cracked me up.

Sorry you feel that not accepting your line of reasoning and retorting in kind is unbecoming behaviour for a member or a mod... Just replying in kind. Treat a fella the way you expect to be treated, or be treated as you deserve. Just facts of life. That you don't care or respect my opinions, well, then they should bother or rile you up in the least then, as they are beneath your care or respect. Kinda sharp on both ends there G... decide which end you would like to grab

Ya'll have a nice day

jeffe

Chris,

Those recovered GS Custom FNs are described here:

http://forums.nitroexpress.com/showflat.php?Cat=&Board=...psed&sb=5&o=&fpart=1

Jeffe,

quote:

sorted by mo and then secondary by penetration.

Why would you do that? Momentum does not indicate probable penetration when comparing across calibre and bullet construction.

quote:

Seems, from your web site, the more MO goes up, the more penetration... well, doesn't track to it...

You are mistaken. The text directly above the table where you found the penetration data states: "If the results are aranged in order of lowest penetration to highest, the results become somewhat confusing. No single factor seems to be linked to the depth of penetration." Nowhere do I state that momentum can be linked directly to penetration when comparing across calibres so why insist that my website leaves that impression?

quote:

Kinda hard to look at.. the lowest MO and the highest MO (153.6 vs 205.7) have within 10% of the same penetration

Another mistake here. Lowest momentum in the table is 137.1 and the penetration depth of the lowest and highest momentum are less than 3% apart. Sd is just as impossible to link to penetration depth as lowest Sd (.288) and highest Sd (.341) differ by around 16% yet penetration varies from 60" to 92" (>50%) or from 62" to 66" (<7%) depending which bullets you choose to compare.

If you believe Sd is the greatest influencing factor in penetration, how do you explain the charts below? Bear in mind that one to eight are the results obtained with one particular brand and construction while nine and ten are of an entirely different type.

Gerard and Koos,

It is not often that one bullet maker is indebted to another bullet maker, but this is one of those rear occasions. Since the speculative accusations against my .375/380gr. Rhino bullet you guys have given my bullet much more publicity - just look at all the photos on the AR forum from various users coming in to back the bullet with proven performance, especially on buffalo.

Bill Isenbarger has since emailed me and notified me that the .375/380gr. is his biggest seller in the U.S. of the Rhino bullets. Its sales are bigger than the .308/180gr. Rhino bullet at the moment.

I have had a large number of Americans buying my 380gr. Bullets when they are on Safari in South Africa. As I understand from the PH’s these hunters have had great success with my bullets. I won’t be surprise if some of them are members of the AR forum and hope to hear from them in the near future.

Having looked at 500 Grain’s posting about your FN bullets, I am intrigued that your Solids won’t penetrate through at all angles, as you indicated a bullet should do. (You own words) I have also heard that they give feeding problems in some guns. This of course won’t do in big game hunting in life-frightening situations.

Just for the record, to date not one writer who has used the 380gr. bullet has come forward stating that the bullet does not penetrate adequately. On the contrary the forum is full of one-shot kills and the bullet penetrates as required. Only you and Jagter, the two people who have never used the bullet or have ever hunted big game, are trying to cast doubt and thereby convince the readers that there is a lack of penetration.

Alas the publicity you and Jagter gave me and my .375/380gr. bullet is worth more than any advertisement in hunting magazines could have achieved, and as such I am indebted to you and Jagter. Please don’t be surprised if you and Jagter find a bottle of Black Label Johnny Walker Scotch or a brown envelop in your postboxes with a couple of $ in it, my way of thanking you and Jagter. As you always try to make out that anyone that is pro using/advocating my bullets is on Rhino’s payroll, all I can say is let us keep the tradition going by giving gratuities/rewards.

Only because I am indebted to you.

Regards,

.375/380gr. (Owner Rhino Bullets cc.)

.

Posting for Dr Mauritz Coetzee:

TO GERARD AND KOOS

I refer to your rather meek feedback on my last e-mail. Firstly, Gerard, I deal with the implications of the Gun Control Act on a daily basis. I see the despair and anger on gun-owners faces every day, and like any other gun shop, we all try to survive. Your remark about my contribution is therefore misguided as were you friend’s remark about my job. Personally, I do not believe the altruistic motive behind the printing of registers by you. Why don’t you show your commitment to the gun-trade in South Africa by opening-up a gun shop and therefore spend less time on your factory maintenance items, spot-welding etc.

As to this whole thing about going-away shots and shallow penetration, your strategy is very clear. Simply discard the evidence under a casual reference to Robbie Gurthie, etc. Quite frankly it is not that easy to deliberately misinterpret or ignore information about the performance of a bullet.

Allow me to refer you and Koos to an e-mail he posted on 24/05/05- again referring to me, Koos states the following: Quote : In my mind he misinterpreted, and still does, the bullet’s success with his theory of high sectional density. If Koos understands the bullet (380/375) success, why can’t you do the same? Is Koos a painter by profession, Gerard? (Just asking, you know)

Your reference to the query by Jon A and observation on the 380/375 being geared-up into the next caliber class is typical of your semantic jugglery which typifies your communication with others. Does Jon A understand that this observation comes from Kevin Robertson? How did you develop this type of communication skills, Gerard, was this part of your upbringing?
Gerard you also make the following statement … Quote: If you, as a designer of bullets, think that Canuck’s experience is expansion related, it says something about your powers of observation and ability to analyze the problem.
Sadly Gerard, and also in an ironical manner, your statement fully explains your muddled and biased powers of observations. Let’s look at Canuck’s remarks.

Quote:
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 further than I am accustomed to seeing and blood trails were not that good in spite of having entry and exit wounds …. Does bullet expansion (or the lack thereof) fit into the description giving by Canuck here, Gerard?

Proper bullet expansion is of vital importance, and this also ties up with my next question. You show a picture of a perfectly expanded Rhino bullet on this forum and at the same time, refer to the “off- centre†jackets. And then ask if we are going to replace this photo- quite frankly no. The expanded bullet speaks for it self.

Lastly, if sectional density serves no purpose, why do the professional hunters, especially of Zimbabwe, insist on a SD factor of at least .300? This fact has been widely published in the African Hunter magazine. Given their belief in the value in sectional density, I have to reject the Marula-analogy for what it is. I still maintain that sectional density plays a vital part in the performance of big game bullets, and also that wound channel size with the 380/375 Rhino bullet is impressive. This is the reason why Kevin Robertson typifies this bullet as a superb choice on buffalo, and all the other mentioned hunters who have used this bullet with deadly effect.

As to your accusation that I am trading on an undeserved reputation please note that I am quite willing to discuss this with you face to face. Your reputation, however, for drawing up straw-man arguments and the proceeding right to the preposterous speaks quite clearly from your last posting. First you try to compare the one-shot kills of 380/375(soft point) with unsuitable calibers and one-shot kills achieved with a 7X57 and the 303 with solids. Then you claim 52 one-shot kills with a 200 grain- 338 GS bullet, consecutively. Where were these buffalo shot, in Jurassic Park? Yet you bellow like a bull on this forum in spite of silly statements as mentioned. Can you tell us exactly how many gun-shops in South Africa actually stock your bullets?

Yours truly,
Dr. Mauritz Coetzee
13/07/05

Hi Kobus,
Thanks for asking about the FN bullets posted by 500grains. To answer your question:

quote:

Having looked at 500 Grain’s posting about your FN bullets, I am intrigued that your Solids won’t penetrate through at all angles, as you indicated a bullet should do. (You own words)

Firstly these are not me own words. Here is the exact quote: "Ray has often said that a bullet/calibre combination is adequate for a particular specie if full penetration can be assured from any angle." To a large extent I agree with Ray on this though and would go as far as to say that, a bullet incapable of reliably perforating an animal on a broadside shot, puts the hunter on thin ice.

500grains posted this picture on another forum and the words that go with it are below.

From left (all GS Custom):

(1) unfired 570 grain 500 Nitro Express bullet
(2) 570 grain 500 NE bullet fired into elephant (frontal brain) - penetrated 74 inches, but missed neck vertebrae
(3) 570 grain 500 NE bullet fired into elephant (frontal brain) - penetrated 31 inches and stuck in neck vertebrae
(4) 570 grain bullet fired into buffalo (body shot) - penetrated 60 inches
(5) unfired 500 grain .470 Capstick bullet
(6) 500 grain .474" bullet fired into buffalo (body shot) - penetrated 56"
(7) 500 grain .474" bullet fired into giraffe (body shot) - penetrated 40"

These were the bullets he recovered from an extended experiment he did while in Africa. There were also a number of shots fired that perforated the carcasses and bullets were therefore not recovered. His articles in African Hunter have all the information. Many shots were fired on downed elephant and Cape Buff with the carcasses aligned for maximum penetration and, considering that the 470 Capstick and 500NE are not the worlds top penetrating cartridges, you must admit that the numbers above are impressive. Do you think your 375/380 will go 60" on a Cape Buff? I doubt it. Both our 265gr HV and 270gr FN in 375H7H will exceed that and will often exit on lengthwise shots on Cape Buff, but then the 375 is the minimum calibre allowed and there are better tools for the job. If a 375 bullet I designed is never reported to exit on broadside shots on buff, I would not put it into the marketplace.

quote:

I have also heard that they give feeding problems in some guns. This of course won’t do in big game hunting in life-frightening situations.

I have been building custom rifles since 1980 and as you know, most of the time my waiting list was in the order of 2 to 3 years. I have built my share of DG rifles and I am well aware of what is required in order to stay alive in such "frightening" situations. My advice as a gunsmith to those who have feeding problems with FN bullets is: Get that rifle fixed. It is marginal and will hang up with any type of ammunition when you least expect it. At a big bore shoot last year some time, comment was made about the number of rifles that would not feed factory round nose solids reliably. Nine times out of ten, feeding problems indicate a rifle problem or out of spec reloads.

I am often asked to assist with rifles that will not produce good groups. Often the grouping problem is with the rifle/scope combination and sometimes it is a reloading technique problem that needs fixing. Sometimes we chase it down to the components used in reloading. I also help reloaders with load development and not just with our bullets, we handle all makes. There are very few bullets I have not personally used on game, like Bridger, Ferrobul and KJG. Don't kid yourself about us being ignorant about your products.

Some cases come to mind. I was asked to help one reloader who had accuracy problems with all three his rifles. After thoroughly checking the rifles and finding nothing wrong with them, I asked him to bring me some loaded ammo, his dies, powder measure and all his components.

These were the .224 bullets he was trying to use in his 22-250. Some were tumbling and the best groups were around 4" at 100. All the bullets in the picture below were from the same sealed box. Anyone want to take a guess at why they would not group?


These were the 7x57 bullets and we managed to develop passable (sort of) 1.5" to 2" groups.


We gave up on the 375H&H (check the cannelures) and he started using our 265gr HV and eventually switched all his rifles to HVs.


A customer brought in a .458 Win Mag that would not feed and, when it did, he could not hit the side of a barn from inside the barn. The solids he had were brass or bronze (I do not know what you use to make them) and the lead cores were as you see in the picture below. Some had blowholes three millimetres deep and some were overfilled and had lead spilling over the bases. We fixed the feeding problem but, short of turning all the bullet bases down 3mm, there was little I could do about the accuracy. He now loads 450gr FNs.


You could have prevented this exchange from developing years ago by simply telling your associates to promote your products without continuously sniping at imaginary flaws in ours. You were happy for them to do so while I bit my tongue and replied by pointing out their lack of technical accuracy and leaving your products out of the discussion. Now that I follow your tactics and point out actual flaws that exist in your products, you seem to have a problem.

We can call it a day and return to sensibility or we can continue, I have lots more where these came from.

Mauritz,

quote:

Personally, I do not believe the altruistic motive behind the printing of registers by you. Why don’t you show your commitment to the gun-trade in South Africa by opening-up a gun shop and therefore spend less time on your factory maintenance items, spot-welding etc.

I do not care what you believe about my supplying registers to the trade. The facts speak for themselves: My registers are less than one third of the price of the competition. As for opening a gun shop, I am the oldest firearms dealer trading in Port Elizabeth. Been in the same premises for the last 19 years. I have seen more than 18 gunshops and gunsmiths open and close in this town. You should get out more and broaden your horizons a bit before flapping your mouth like that.

Posting for Chris Bekker:

Gerard,

I know it is difficult for you to follow the logic if I do not take you step by step. You always prefer to veer off by trying to pick a non-event and make it into something. Let me say it simply this time:

- the .510 lead ball weighs 200 grains
- if made from copper it will weigh 157 grains
- if made from tin it will weigh even lighter
- and so we can go on

With this trend in mind, I hinted that pure tin could be used to make the lead ball lighter and so lower the SD. May be we could use other lighter materials as well - preferably as light as possible, understand. If we can find a material that yields a weight of only 100 grains, then we can achieve the level of a 243 Win - just much much worse, understand. This exercise should prove whether or not SD is really so utterly useless. That was the actual theme of my explanation that you missed.

Just before you think I have gone dilly .... SD is not everything nor absolute (it is a descriptive ratio), but it is usefull in the context of Mo/Xsa, considering the present ballistic model. When softs are involved the construction and strength of materials also come into play and the combination of lower velocity and a higher SD will emerge as the superior choice to avoid undesirable weight loss and shattering. As illustrated with the lead ball versus the bullet we can see that shape also plays a role when we are more extreme. We should guard against doing cross caliber comparisons with SD as it is a ratio - so please when you do these comparisons save yourself the effort to graph them - stick to one caliber as I have done in my experiment.

Koos,

It would be much better if we give the bullets to Doctari or Ganyana to use them on buffalo - 380gr/.375 Rhino bullets vs 265gr HV bullets - that is the real/ultimate test to pick the superior bullet after at least 10 buffalo's each. One of the criteria will be after how many seconds we can drop a buffalo and another will be how far he runs - we can draw up a criteria chart with 10 points or so. (Steel Mistress would be immune to this). I do not doubt that the 265gr HV bullet can kill a buffalo - it has been done with a FN 7.62 mm many a time. We talk about the more effective option which is somewhat elusive to describe.

That is to say if we can find HV bullets somewhere. Did you miss it when Doctari said that the 380gr/.375 Rhino bullet is the best buffalo bullet. I really believe you guys should argue/attack him for his uninformed opinions and debate all the shortcomings of the Rhino bullet. Koos you behaved like a pig with Mauritz so you must be used to rolling in the mud, and if we are pigs, then you will be in familiar company.

Regards
Chris Bekker

.

Chris,

quote:

That was the actual theme of my explanation that you missed.

It was so easy to miss!! You hid it away behind a box full of incoherence and under a bag full of bad logic. Now explain away how a lighter bullet of the same size as a heavier bullet makes more space available in the case. That should be interesting.

quote:

lower velocity and a higher SD will emerge as the superior choice to avoid undesirable weight loss and shattering.

Perfectly true when dealing with jacketed lead bullets that are prone to undesirable weight loss and shattering. Fortunately these problems have been overcome with much more reliable mono metal bullets. One can now take advantage of all the good stuff that comes with more speed: More momentum and energy after impact, flatter trajectories, less wind drift and shorter time of flight. To boot, one saves on meat lost due to meat damage from this undesirable weight loss and shattering.

quote:

stick to one caliber as I have done in my experiment.

OK, I put the results of your experiment into graph form and as an indicator of penetration, Sd still loses. It is almost as bad an indicator of penetration as energy. See below.

quote:

We should guard against doing cross caliber comparisons with SD

So it is your opinion that Sd is not worth much when comparing across calibres. I agree fully. Given the clear difficulty with using Sd as a comparator across construction types, it is also not usable there. We have seen in the data above, from your own experiments, that Sd is not even a good comparator when same construction type bullets of the same calibre are compared. It seems the only worth of Sd is to keep discussions like this going round and round and round.

Alf,

quote:

I must say this SD arguement is actually insane as SD is a basic ballistic fact, no matter how we spin it, it cannot be negated or ignored; Exactly how it interlinks with momentum or other measurables can be argued but to say it does not exist, or is not important is BS.

No doubt that Sd exists. I wrote an entire article around the subject, so it must exist. Now about importance, I would like to see one example of where Sd is used logically, to accurately calculate or predict anything in ballistics where a simpler or more direct mechanism cannot be used to better effect. Please show me an example.

Does anyone have recovered HV and recovered Rhino bullets dug out of buffalo that they could post?

quote:

Originally posted by Gerard:

No doubt that Sd exists. I wrote an entire article around the subject, so it must exist.

Now about importance, I would like to see one example of where Sd is used logically, to accurately calculate or predict anything in ballistics where a simpler or more direct mechanism cannot be used to better effect. Please show me an example.

Sure there G... Now, before you puff up to start blowing hard on this, read the post first, and PRETEND it's from someone you "respect"

Firstly,
here's a perfect instance of the same bullet penetrating LESS with a higher MO...

https://forums.accuratereloading.com/eve/forums/a/tpc/f/4711043/m/966102603

I'll do you one better, as the examples below, the higher SD bullet has a higher retained weight.


recall that both these coming bullets are the remington core lock HUNTING BULLETS, which has an EXCELLENT field reputation (and the 30 caliber bullet experiment shows corelocks have a higher retain weight that ANY conventional softnosed lead/jacket bullet /// don't bother arguing that, we've all read it and seen the pictures of results)

load a 358 win with 150 rem sp (sd .167) and some 200 gr SP (sd .223)... same bullet.. ONLY difference in construction is length.


Don't have any .358 150 gr corelocks? I'll be happy to send you some, as they fail on game, at even 35 rem velocities... and are designed for the 350 rem MAG, as this was a factory loading for that round. No point is saying "oh, it's a lesser bullet".. nope... sorry, factory loadings


Load them to whatever you want, from 2000 to 2400 fps with the 200, and say 2400-3000 fps with the 150, just to give you "room" to make the MO the same...

hmmm, wonder which one penetrates further?

hmm, which bullets blows up on contact with a hog, or a deer, or even a rabbit? (red mist on an east texas jack is interesting)

Which bullet (usually)exits the same game?

repeat the same experiment with a 308 with 130s and 180s... load em to the same MO... which one goes in FURTHER??

The one with the higher SD, and, d'cord, the higher retained weight (single piece)

Do the same thing with hornady 350gr RNsp .458 bullets and their 500 gr.458 rnsp...

In short, you can play all the games you like with MO... but the cold hard facts (or, in this case, cooling lead) is that the higher SD bullet, as a rule, penetrates deeper and retains weight.

Gerard,
You make a fine product, but a magic bullet it aint. As I have said REPEATEDLY, a monometal bullet should have an arbirary .03 added to it's SD... which, funny enough, is about how it penetrates.

jeffe

Chris,

quote:

Koos you behaved like a pig with Mauritz so you must be used to rolling in the mud, and if we are pigs, then you will be in familiar company.

It is exactly the opposite way round, your friend Mauritz and yourself turned to bad behaviour many a time, refer the following:

quote:

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

(Posting on this forum.)

And much more humiliating things were said by him in an e-mail to me in November 2004 already, of which I have a hard copy in my possession.

Yourself:

quote:

I am going to push that bullet in your ass as a repository.

This is just the latest one as I don't have time to waste on the huge humps of junk ideas, bran and chaff you two are pushing around and displaying your bad manners all along.

If you just had a tiny little ability to interpret what you read correctly, you wouldn't have labelled yourselves as pigs, because this is not what the Afrikaans saying said.
Read it once again and let me know what part of it you don't understand.

quote:

In Afrikaans we have a saying that says: "Meng jou met die semels, dan vreet die varke jou."

For our English speaking readers a direct translation would be more or less the following: 'Mix yourself with the bran and the pigs will eat you.'

Let's not dig into more stupidities coming from you, but this last one is really a classic:

quote:

The turning bar will pull the drill to the centre and when the drill is off centre it will brake.

Once again, how on earth can anybody believe anything you say or write in future?

quote:

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

Posting for Chris Bekker:

Gerard,

Quote:

"Now explain away how a lighter bullet of the same size as a heavier bullet makes more space available in the case. That should be interesting."

Answer:

I always thought that intelligent people need half a word to understand, but you are just willful. The answer is quite simple ... my explanation about bullets (with higher SD's) in comparison with round balls (with lower SD's) frees up more space in the cartridge case .. for more powder ... not baby powder ... propellent .... how is that? Enough said.

I have already showed that in my 7 x 57 mm, with a full cartridge case (S365), that the higher higher SD bullet out penetrates the lower SD bullet, using a Barnes-X bullet. Even if I changed to a faster powder the incremetal difference in velocity or penetration would still have surfaced. Whilst the answer lies in Mo/Xsa, the SD is inherently there and when we pick the bullet with the better penetration it comes down to picking the higher SD bullet within the framework of the constraints of the ballistic model. It is that simple.

Chris Bekker

Posting for Chris Bekker:

Koos,

Please write something for the forum that we can all gain from. Nobody on the Forum is any longer interested in your senseless comments of mud throwing that leads nowhere. You do not want to meet with us and nor are you prepared to share your experience with the Big Bore Assn for the greater good of mankind.

Rather share with us some original work that you have done - tests, experiments or valuable experience that you have gained. Please write articles for Wild & Jag or SA Hunter and make a contribution even if you have totally different ideas to Mauritz or myself. We will defend your right to differ with us. So you really do not have to run a campaign to say who will believe us in future, and as such please don't break your head over it - leave it to the readers; they will reject what they don't agree with, and naturally the same applies to you when you publish an article one day in one of our outdoor magazines.

Regards
Chris Bekker

Posting for Rhino Bullets:

[QUOTE]Originally posted by mehulkamdar:

Posting for Rhino Bullets:



Gerry,

It is very funny that I have to date never had a call from any of my Customers in Port Elizabeth claiming that they cannot get accuracy from my bullets, to the contrary as you can see a number of writers claiming that my bullets are very accurate. As Far as I know all the gun shops in Port Elizabeth stock my product.

How come I have 5 gun shops in and around Port Elizabeth alone on my books? You still have not answered how many shops stock your bullets in South Africa. It is rather strange that my sales increased so much in Port Elizabeth this year where you are based. What do your stats show for the PE region?

You stated on Sporting Rifles some time back that your Company has had some 800% growth in annual sales (sic) If before the 800% growth rate you were producing only 1,000 bullets per day, working 230 days per year, you must be producing 14.7 million bullets per annum after only 2 years later ( and it is probably 3 years ago).

Years Per Day Days p.a. Per Annum
Year 0 - 2002 1,000 230 230,000
Year 1 – 2003 8,000 230 1,840,000
Year 2 – 2004 64,000 230 14,720,000

Yet despite these phenomenal production figures we keep on hearing that you take people’s moneys but do not deliver your bullets as promised. Do I miss something? Please clarify and state your production figures for the last 3 years to clear up this issue. The 6 months of 2005 probably amount to a silly figure as you were out of production most of the time (so we can ignore it). I will also publish my figures as I have nothing to hide. My gut feeling tells me you must be off by a mile from the above projected figures and would really be surprised if you exceeded the 1.0 m mark!

When hunters praise my product you normally claim they are my associates. You must admit that the list of my so-called associates is the cream of the crop in the hunting fraternity in South Africa and the best you can come up with is Jagter on his farm counting Aero planes as a hobby. Let’s look whom you have attacked on this forum:

1. Myself - a bullet maker.
2. Chris Bekker – a well known writer and avid hunter.
3. Dr. Mauritz Coetzee – a well know editor of an outdoor magazine.
4. Dr. Kevin Robinson (Doctari) – a well known International author of books.
5. Gregor Wood’s – a gun editor of Man Magnum magazine.
6. A number of fellow members on the AR Forum.

Where were those 52 one-shot Buffalo kills? Please publish the details with your next posting. I want to check this information out as you have the habit of dreaming and believing it to be the truth. Were these all shot with a 338 Win Mag and HV bullets or were some shot with FN solids. If so, also explain where on earth it is legal to shoot buffalos with a .338 caliber?

Your comments about my solids you refer to are the first generation, which are no longer in production for the last 2.5 years. I have developed a more economical version to save some labour costs by eliminating the drilling and the filling up with lead. However the older version was just as effective even though some bullets were not filled up evenly at the back end.

As I make custom bullets many customers have there own specs as to where and how deep they want their canalures cut. It looks as though you have some mixed batches of bullets. It is well known that when a new client buys bullets from me, I will offer to give him some reject bullets at no charge to help him get his loads sorted out before he starts loading my bullets. This I have been doing for more than 3 years. So please Gerry there is 100’s of rejects floating around. Try something more original – I am only interested when a bullet failed or did not work as expected. That way I can render a better service to hunters. I only take notice if the complaint is from a client and not from a desperate individual who has lied himself into such a tight corner that he has run out of moves, and to top it all has a very big interest in harming my company.

I see in this month’s Man Magnum there is a good article on the 9,3 by Doctari. All the premium bullets makers are mentioned, Rhino included, it is very conspicuous that there is no mention of G.S. custom bullets - how come?

I see on your webpage you only have 4 dealers in South Africa Rhino has about 85. This year’s new shops have not been added and shops that closed last year have not been taken off as yet. Am I right in assuming that you have very limited sales in South Africa were I have a much larger following than you. Am I right to assume that your idea of conducting business has been largely rejected (taking monies before the bullets are being made and your dogmatic way of handling people who disagree with you.) Or have S.A. Hunters seen through your spin stories and know that your bullets that should mushroom at times shoot through with out opening and the bullets that should shoot through seem to lack penetration. It is also conspicuous that you do not attend the aim shows any more. What went wrong no sales? Or is it no production.

You know of course you have just lost your bottle of Scotch and the brown envelope - Jagter is still in the running so far.

PS. Please find photo of my new solid attached ( Been in the market more than 2 years)

Congratulations Chris,

You've surpassed yourself in your post dated 27 July 2005 21:14, no bad language and no humiliating ways of saying things to other people.
Let your own words:

quote:

Nobody on the Forum is any longer interested in your senseless comments of mud throwing that leads nowhere,

be applicable on yourself in future. Stick to it no matter what - it is really not so difficult!

quote:

Rather share with us some original work that you have done - tests, experiments or valuable experience that you have gained.

I already have, also invited you in my post dated 19 July 2005 16:53 to follow the link and learn something. Follow this link as well to see more on it.

As you will see from my posts my interests are widely spread and not based on big bores only - it is a much more balanced outlook on the world.

I can assure you that the experience that I have gained by using a 130gr GS Custom HV, performing excellent as usual, to hunt kudu with, requires much more hunting and shot placement skills than you could ever dream of. And this is for real, no magic carpet travelling as your friend called it at one stage.

Só, some more sense in future from yourself will also be appreciated by everyone on this forum.

Jeffe,

quote:

here's a perfect instance of the same bullet penetrating LESS with a higher MO

And here are two examples of the same bullet in your example penetrating better with increased momentum (check the numbers for the .470 500gr bullets in the last table). So what does that prove? Neither Sd nor momentum, on their own, can be used as indicators of probable penetration. We have said this at least three or four times now, why are you stuck on these simple concepts? By way of illustration one could ask, why do the .470" 500gr bullets in both our examples, all with the same Sd, penetrate to different depths?

Your jacketed lead bullet examples make an excellent case for choosing the appropriate bullet construction for the speed range at which it will be used. The various penetration examples have nothing to do with Sd and has everything to do with bullet construction. The fact that the heavier bullets penetrate better is due to better retained weight and lesser expansion that comes from lower speed. This increases the Mo/XSA and results in deeper penetration. The proof of my statement above is this: Take the "winners" in your examples and compare them to bullets of lower Sd/higher Sd/same Sd but tougher construction and at the same momentum levels. The tougher bullets will then penetrate deeper regardless of Sd, not so?

Chris,
You underestimate the members here. Originally you said: "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"

I noticed that you used "bullets" and "balls" interchangably in the above paragraph which is probably correct. The weights you give for the various metals indicate that you are discussing only balls and not "bullets" as in an elongated projectile.

Now you say: "The answer is quite simple ... my explanation about bullets (with higher SD's) in comparison with round balls (with lower SD's) frees up more space in the cartridge case"

Not the same thing, is it?

By the way, you said earlier: "Rhino only uses Tungsten drills. It is nearly impossible to drill a hole off centre with this system they use." Check the hole in the sectioned bullet below. How did that happen?


Kobus,

True colours from you at last.

1. The pictures I posted of your bullets are of bullets purchased over the counter, the boxes were sealed and it is representative of production you are letting out of the door. No rejects, no special orders or free bullets, just regular stock. Only the .458 solids were bought in Port Elizabeth. So you have changed the design now. Does that change the fact that you sold junk to turn a quick profit and then discontinued the product? The money spent on load development by the customer should have been spent by you on R&D before releasing an inferior product. The other bullets were mail ordered and probably came from a dealer in Johannesburg.

2. Your thumb suck figures of our production numbers are a laugh. Obviously you sell more bullets than we do. We have never claimed to be as big a manufacturer as you are. The 800% growth came when we started sales to the global market 5 years ago and caused us a lot of trouble. It was entirely unexpected and we paid a heavy price for our ignorance.

3. You say: "we keep on hearing that you take people’s moneys but do not deliver your bullets as promised" All here are aware of the fact that we were caught completely flat footed by the demand when we went global and that topic was flogged to death long ago. The bottom line is that everyone who paid for product has been supplied and we have more than made up for mistakes on our part with extra product. We even supplied product to people who never paid for anything and we had complaints from people who never even placed orders. For more than four years we have been running a "pay when we ship" system so your information is outdated to say the least.

4. One fact remains paramount: We have never sacrificed quality for quantity, no matter how tough it got. You do not seem to care about this much, as is evidenced by my photographs. This does not surprise me. Do you recall a talk I gave at a club in East London? Afterwards you came over and introduced yourself. You looked at the didgital mic I had with me and asked how much an instrument like that costs, as you would like to buy one. You were making bullets for a couple of years already and did not have the means to accurately measure what you are doing? Here is a link to a page of our site.
Here is the corresponding page on your website.
It tells quite a story about qualities such as concentricity and consistency of manufacture.

5. You say: "When hunters praise my product you normally claim they are my associates." Get your facts right. I have claimed that Chris and Mauritz are associated with your company and no one else. In case you are thinking of denying this, here is what you and Chris have admitted to and quotes from your website:

18 April 2005 19:06 Chris Bekker says:
I continually test a wide range of Rhino bullets and provide Kobus with feedback

19 April 2005 20:17 Statement from the owner of Rhino Bullets:
5. In the past Mr. Bekker have done a number of tests for me on a number of calibers. The facts are ... He tested:

.243 in 100 gr
7mm in 160 and 170 gr
.308 in 200 gr
.270 in 150 gr
.303 in 215 gr with Pieter Olivier
9.3 in 286 gr and 300 gr
.375 in 300 and 350 gr
404 Jeff in 400 gr with Hubert Saayman

This feedback is combined with tests done by other hunters to develop or improve my bullets. Mr. Bekker worked out a chart to determine the maximum length my bullets can be at a given weight. This chart has been very useful to me when designing new heavy weight bullets.

10 June 2005 21:10 Chris says:
Then lastly, regarding your comment that I should stay out of bullet design ... my comments about improving some of Rhino's bullets have been well received by Kobus - if you want to write again to Kobus, please just ask me, and I will provide you with the proves that should make the verification process much easier.

From your website:
Mauritz writes:
In my discussions with Kobus, we decided to use....
I received the first 380 grain bullets early in April and proceeded with the testing...
Within a week I had a second generation 380 grain bullet to test....
Together we went through 7 generations of the 380 grain bullet in 4 weeks.....
In the later generation bullets, The mouth of the bullets was enlarged because I felt that....
Early in year 2002 Kobus and I had a discussion and decided that........
Kobus and I would like to thank everybody who had a helping hand in......

6. You say: "Let’s look whom you have attacked on this forum:" The first three on your list are you and your associates. This is self defence, not attack. Kevin I have not attacked, I respect the work he has done and I asked questions about his article to which there has been no reply. Gregor I have disagreed with and we have corresponded at length. You may have noticed that people often disagree on a variety of subjects. As for other members on the forum, only Jeffe comes to mind and to that end, if someone insults me, he should expect to get as good as he gives. If you are affronted by heated discussion, you should not come here.

7. You say: "I only take notice if the complaint is from a client and not from a desperate individual who has lied himself into such a tight corner that he has run out of moves, and to top it all has a very big interest in harming my company."

By what twisted logic would I have an interest in harming your busines? To gain market share? We could not stay ahead of what we have on our plate, how would we deal with an increase in demand at your cost? On the contrary, the observation from the public is that, for five years you have condoned efforts by your associates to run down our products. Your statement above is contemptable. I have not mentioned your products on my website, as you have done with mine on yours. I have not mentioned your product in open forum, as your associates have been doing for years with mine, until I decided to call a stop to your tactics recently.

8. You ask: "Were these all shot with a 338 Win Mag and HV bullets or were some shot with FN solids. If so, also explain where on earth it is legal to shoot buffalos with a .338 caliber?" All were shot with 200gr HVs, that is what I said. I also said it was a culling operation. It was done with permit, mostly at night. I would have thought you knew that culling is exempt from certain laws regulating hunting done by the public. In Kruger they have culled elephant with .308 solids. Done from a chopper with a semi-auto and, at one stage, with 145gr GS FN solids. They now make their own. Will they admit to it openly? Of course not and you would be a fool if you pushed the issue. I mention this because, contrary to your remarks, the FN's worked very reliably in the rifles.

9. You ask: "I see in this month’s Man Magnum there is a good article on the 9,3 by Doctari. All the premium bullets makers are mentioned, Rhino included, it is very conspicuous that there is no mention of G.S. custom bullets - how come?" Two years ago we specifically asked Magnum not to include our products in articles. It stimulated demand that we could not handle. This might change in the future.

10. You say: "I see on your webpage you only have 4 dealers in South Africa Rhino has about 85" You have a list of 85 names on your site, including duplicates and grossly misspelled names. I have a list of all the dealers who have ordered from us in SA as well, but I do not put it on my website. Once you have weeded out the ones who don't actually carry stock, you will have a very thin list. No use listing everyone who has ever ordered, you embarrass yourself when a customer walks into a shop and asks to see product.

11. You ask: "Am I right in assuming that you have very limited sales in South Africa were I have a much larger following than you" Quite so, see this for an overview. Then go here.

12. You ask: "It is also conspicuous that you do not attend the aim shows any more. What went wrong no sales? Or is it no production." You are right, it is demand overrunning our production capability. That is fixed now and we may be at the next Aim Show. I am told you were caught by the organisers selling bullets from your car in the parking lot. Is that true and is that why you do not go there as an exhibitor?

13. You say: "You know of course you have just lost your bottle of Scotch" That is OK, I do not drink so there is more for you. It seems that you are quite fond of the stuff so enjoy.

14. Thank you for posting a picture of your new solid (which is not illustrated anywhere on your website). I will forward it to our attorneys to see if it infringes our SA Patent.

Double post deleted.

quote:

Originally posted by Gerard:

quote:

Originally posted by Gerard:
Jeffe,
[QUOTE]here's a perfect instance of the same bullet penetrating LESS with a higher MO

And here are two examples of the same bullet in your example penetrating better with increased momentum (check the numbers for the .470 500gr bullets in the last table). So what does that prove? Neither Sd nor momentum, on their own, can be used as indicators of probable penetration.

Yes, G... wow, let's see how many time have I told YOU that it's Bullet construction (including shape) SD, and MV??

I just don't understand why you keep spouting that an artifact of MO matters, when those primary facts are there?

quote:

Originally posted by Gerard:

We have said this at least three or four times now, why are you stuck on these simple concepts?

You work with an artifact, and I work with primary facts. Your call on what's "stuck"

quote:

Originally posted by Gerard:

Your jacketed lead bullet examples make an excellent case for choosing the appropriate bullet construction for the speed range at which it will be used. The various penetration examples have nothing to do with Sd and has everything to do with bullet construction.

So, now you realize it's partly bullet construction.. good... but as soon as your MO position is untenable, you certainly do find neato ways to avoid going "damn, he was right"

Especially with then MIXING the bullet construction.

Sir, I answered your challenge. You have results you admit. Your theory has been measured and found lacking. Please continuing braying if you like.

gerard, I realize you mind is made up, and you wont let facts change it

jeffe

So after this nonsense reply are you going to cut and run like you have done several times before when cornered?

quote:

Originally posted by Gerard:
So after this nonsense reply are you going to cut and run like you have done several times before when cornered?

too funny... bray on

Sir, you again completly attempt to dodge the issues raised, that your challenge met, and your points proven to be without foundation.

Nice of you to so aptly provide the audience with your position, that discussing the challenge you raised is pointless to your position, and you resort attempting to cloud to issues.

No, gerard, not once have I "cut and run".. however, I did discover that your repeated bad behavior, when presented with facts to the contrary of your stipuation, that you resort to insulting, name calling, and generally being a "stinker" (childish name, but if it fits...) recall you FIRST communication to me, insulting of my heritage, discounting of an opposing view point, and completely in the wrong.

Sir, you demanded a "test" that used "logic"... then you proceeded to mix all the possible elements of that test, once it was presented, to make any measurement of any event, save perhaps the temp of the air (and that subject to increasing) a mixed result at best.

no G. your challenges are met and bested.. please continue to bray on. I assume you enjoy that, as you continue to bleat and bray

jeffe

Just a note about solids here. In 9.3 caliber, the best I have been able to do with the new Rhino solids is 1.75 to 2 inch groups at 100 yards. With GS bullets I have been able to get half inch groups in the same caliber. For dangerous game hunting, that difference in accuracy may not matter. But accuracy gives me confidence.

Jeffe,
Every reply on this thread from you to me has contained several personal insults. Check my replies and you will find none; only disagreement and an effort to discuss. You exhibit all the hallmarks of a

I ask a pair of straightforward questions:

quote:

By way of illustration one could ask, why do the .470" 500gr bullets in both our examples, all with the same Sd, penetrate to different depths?

Take the "winners" in your examples and compare them to bullets of lower Sd/higher Sd/same Sd but tougher construction and at the same momentum levels. The tougher bullets will then penetrate deeper regardless of Sd, not so?

And you answer with insults and nonsense. You are a

and a disgrace to the rest of the moderators here. The communists have a tactic whereby they will hide something in full view, where it is least expected. You shine at this but there comes a time when you are unmasked.

So answer with nonsense and sling your insults, the members are taking note.

quote:

Originally posted by Gerard:
Chris,
No doubt that Sd exists. I wrote an entire article around the subject, so it must exist. Now about importance, I would like to see one example of where Sd is used logically, to accurately calculate or predict anything in ballistics where a simpler or more direct mechanism cannot be used to better effect. Please show me an example.

It says I can throw a baseball farther than a taped-over wiffle ball. It is correct.

Now here's where you say the baseball goes farther not because of higher SD but because of a higher BC--and refuse to acknowledge the reason for the latter is the former.

You can always come up with a "simpler or more direct mechanism" by jumping to the final answer. What you cannot do is come up with a "simpler or more direct mechanism" which does not have SD as one of its fundamental building blocks. The foundation upon which any of your "mechanisms" is built contains a block called SD whether you acknowledge it or not. Pull it out and the whole thing falls down.

It's complete silliness to cheerlead a "mechanism" but dismiss one of the mechanisms behind that mechanism as "meaningless." Your final answer could not exist without it. It obviously doesn't mean everything by itself—but none of the other components do either.

I've broken tablets of Exterior Ballistic Knowledge over your head in the past until my arms hurt and I think your knowledge has probably improved. But I don't think any re-hashing will get you to acknowledge any more in a public forum where it's in your best financial interests to not. So enough with that. How about this "mechanism?"

quote:

The closest one could probably come to a single factor for gauging terminal performance, is Momentum/Cross Sectional Area (Mo/XSA)

So you do agree on the importance of SD! Thank you! Confused? Let me explain....

Do you know what Mo/XSA is? What is it really? I'll tell you.

It is Sectional Density X Velocity under a different name. Nothing more, nothing less. That’s right, every time you tout its importance or meaningfulness, you are simply stating Sectional Density and Muzzle Velocity are what matter. Since I’d hate to put you through the Algebraic contortions you’d need to endure to do the following, I’ll do it for you:

Momentum = (Bullet Weight, grains)(Velocity)/7000.

Momentum/Cross Sectional Area = [(W)(V)/7000]/[(pi)(D^2)/4]

This reduces down to (W)(V)/[(D^2)(7000)](4/pi) = (W)(V)/[(D^2)(7000)](1.27)

Now, the other way:

Sectional Density = (Bullet Weight, grains)/[(D^2)(7000)]

(Sectional Density)(Velocity) = (Bullet Weight, grains)(Velocity)/[(D^2)(7000)]

This reduces down to (W)(V)/[(D^2)(7000)]

You can see, this is identical to (W)(V)/[(D^2)(7000)](1.27) except the latter is multiplied by a constant of 1.27 which will change the scale but not the comparison results (much the same as both meters and yards are valid units of length, if something measures more yards than another thing it’s going to measure more meters as well).

Now the idea of SD times Velocity is certainly nothing new. It sure has some validity in some contexts, but like anything else it too can be proven wrong (as RIP’s test shows).

I won’t argue its importance. All I’m pointing out is that whenever Gerard dismisses SD as meaningless and touts something else as meaningful, whatever he is touting directly depends upon SD whether he’ll admit it or not. Anybody who can think for himself can see that. It's his way of:

quote:

Originally posted by Gerard:
The communists have a tactic whereby they will hide something in full view, where it is least expected.

Unmasked?

Gerard
I see you are making a public display of further clouding the issue. Interesting tactic. I am certain you will escalate this bad behavor. Prove me wrong.

I added numbers to "items" to be certain we might stay on track.

quote:

Originally posted by Gerard:
Jeffe,
1 Every reply on this thread from you to me has contained several personal insults.
...
2 I ask a pair of straightforward questions:
...
3 And you answer with insults and nonsense.
...

1: G, you are confusing me not holding you in high respect with insults. your frequent statement in regards to respect might bring focus to this. Insults? of, perhaps the braying bit could be confused with one, but you didn't have to go off and do it.

However, for the sake of public peace, I appologise if you feelings are hurt.

2: You ask two simple questions, I answered them with factual examples. In fact,

3:You said this, a couple pages back

quote:

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.

you have an issue, and need to pick a point and stay to it

quote:

Originally posted by Jon A:
So you do agree on the importance of SD! Thank you! Confused? Let me explain....

Do you know what Mo/XSA is? What is it really? I'll tell you.

It is Sectional Density X Velocity under a different name. Nothing more, nothing less. That’s right, every time you tout its importance or meaningfulness, you are simply stating Sectional Density and Muzzle Velocity are what matter.

Jon,
Fantastic post. well said. Through bullet construction into that, and we have all the parameters covered

jeffe

Jon A,

Quote:

"You can always come up with a "simpler or more direct mechanism" by jumping to the final answer. What you cannot do is come up with a "simpler or more direct mechanism" which does not have SD as one of its fundamental building blocks. The foundation upon which any of your "mechanisms" is built contains a block called SD whether you acknowledge it or not. Pull it out and the whole thing falls down."

Answer:

Hey man, you seem to agree with me that the marula pip analogy ain't going down well. We can discard the inedible pip of the marula but we cannot discard a bullet's SD. SD will always be there. Even if we ban the word SD and we buy 180 grainers instead of 130 grainers in .308 caliber, then SD is still there implicitly. When someone asks for 180 grainers instead of lighter bullets (over the counter) they are actually showing their preference for higher SD bullets. SD albeit a ratio only, does form an inextricable part of the greater whole, as it contains mass and diameter in a disguised form.

Both SD and momentum on its own does not tell the full story, as I have explained before. We can never make one variable an absolute indicator. The sum of the parts add up to a greater picture to yield a synergistic effect when we consider the other elements of XSA, velocity, weight pretension, construction of the bullet (meaning we must not exceed the threshold strength of the bullet, which necessitates that velocity be curtailed.) Then we still have to recognize the experience of Dr Ashby that higher velocity (as shown with his Barnes-X experiment) will impair penetration in game (live flesh). Water becomes harder when you dive into it from a higher distance - say 300 meters versus 3 meters.

After my death there will come other people that will still recognize the benefit of heavier bullets and perhaps they will continue this discussion in three thousand and five (3005).

I do need to bow out now as I am preparing to leave for my next hunt.

Regards
Chris Bekker