Gerard,

I have 3 loaded rounds of 260 gr HV's, loaded with 59 grains of S335 - are you happy that they are loaded hot enough?" What load do you recommend Gerard?

Chris Bekker

Alf,

quote:

Water unfortunately does not fit the bill as a sumilant as the physical parameters of penetration of water differs widely and fundamentally from that of solid or semi solid materials. Page 77 Mc Pherson. also refer to page 69.

You are right. Water is not a tissue simulant. It serves well only as a means by which to judge bullet integrity and deformation characteristics, as MacPherson says on page 77.

It is futile, I think, to try and get to absolutes with wound ballistics as would be required by a legal proceeding. If we went that far, every shot fired would be viewed and analysed in isolation and collective data would not exist, only hordes of individual cases, each applicable only to itself. The famous sample of one that CB is so fond of.


Chris,

quote:

I have 3 loaded rounds of 260 gr HV's, loaded with 59 grains of S335

What is the muzzle velocity and the twist rate of the rifle?

Gerard,

You say ... "With FN bullets we recommend a stability factor in excess of 2.5 for reliable linear penetration. The 300gr FN has a stability factor of 2.39 to 2.44 from 2000fps to 3000fps. Again not ideal."

If a SF=2.44 at the muzzle is not ideal for a 300 grainer traveling at 3,000 fps then we can surely give it up Ouboet. The COG of your FN design is as close in the middle as one can hope for and it is not too long. In addition with its wide flat faced front the overturning moment should be better than anything within a 1,000 sea miles.

Yet, you conclude ... "a stability factor in EXCESS of 2.5 for RELIABLE linear penetration" is needed. Where do you get this from? Has this been empirically derived or scientifically calculated? It has to be, because you say a SF value of 2.44, which is awefully close, is not reliable for solids !!!

Well Gerard I am flabbergasted. How many of your bullets do not meet this criteria of 2.5? Could it be that this 2.5 value is just one of your pre-conceived pet ideas or did you get it in a ballistic handbook?

I herewith invite ballistic expert opinion on experimental work that has been done regarding the minimum SF value required for RELIABLE straight-line penetration.

How come my custom turned bronze 286-gr FN solid bullet (meplat = 4.4 mm) with a SF value of only 1.75 gives reliable straight-line penetration? In a wetpack/hardboard combo test it stayed head-on at a MV of only 2,250 fps !!!

Chris Bekker

quote:

quote:
"I have 3 loaded rounds of 260 gr HV's, loaded with 59 grains of S335" ... What is the muzzle velocity and the twist rate of the rifle?

I cannot say what the MV will be, as I have not shot it. I suspect it is a very HOT load with 59 grains of S335. Twist rate is the standard 1 in 14.

What is your recommended load?

Thanks
Chris Bekker

.

Alf,

The kind of effort that you have put in to trace, read and research wounding effects caused by bullets is commendable. Even medical opinions of yesterday have been flawed today as you pointed out. We as laymen make even more mistakes in trying to explain sometimes, but we are progressing with the collective knowledge that we share. An opinion does not have to be a final one and can be swapped when new facts come on the table.

quote:

The science clearly shows that a deep penetrating solid is way more deadly than a shallow penetrating soft.

The above statement is exactly why the 375 H&H and the 9,3 x 64 mm got a bad name with thin-jacketed conventional lead-core bullets as their velocities, which is a mere 250 fps faster than the 9.3 x 62 mm, exceeded the threshold strength of the bullets that was on offer at the time.

Koos Barnard reported in Man Magnum that the PMP conventional 300 gr .375 bullet only retains about 36% of its original weight on Impala at a MV of 2,428 fps ... a mere 108 grains of terminal mass and the rest just shatters away in oblivion. Not good and yes penetration is so shallow that one can hardly contemplate using it on buffalo/elephant for which this cartridge was intended.

We can confidently say that today's bullets caused much more of a bullet revolution than we have a ballistic improvement in rifles. The CEB greatly remedied the weaknesses of the conventional bullet that dates back more than a century ago. Likewise, today's Solids are better engineered than the old FMJ 'solids' that Pondoro Taylor had to use.

The Barnes-X bullet was a ground-breaking invention and increased the lethality of our rifles greatly, especially the smaller calibers at higher velocity so prone to shatter the softs. A 7 x 57 mm with a Barnes-X is just something else ... many people take Moose and Eland successfully with it. In the same vain the all copper, high-BC HV bullet is innovative and has its own niche for long-distance hunting in my opinion.

We still differ on terminal effect, what actually happens and how we interpret the results. I do not believe though that we can eliminate bias completely as this subject is somewhat elusive. And that is where I appreciate your input that we can relate to our own experiences and prejudices.

Chris Bekker

Gerard,

Nols Thiart got 2,500 fps with your 260 gr HV bullet, being only 26 grains lighter than the standard/traditional bullet weight. Take into account that his velocity is a bit lower than otherwise expected from your bullet as his old Suhl Mauser only got a 22-inch barrel and maybe even not so tight as one can wish for. These old Suhl Mausers featured the traditional twist of 1 turn in 14" as can be expected.

Somchem suggests a load from 50.5 gr to a max of 56.5 gr S335 for standard bullets. Nols load your HV bullets to 59 grains of S335 and his AOL = 83.7 mm. Seems like a stiff load as I would expect it to yield close to 2,650 fps in a std 24-inch quality barrel.

Nols shot a Black Wildebeest at 80 meters, so the impact velocity was probably around 2,400 fps. Modest impact velocity more in line with what I have in mind for strongly constructed mono-metal bullets as opposed to striking velocities exceeding the threshold strength of the bullet that would cause it to shed all its petals and thereby lose its expanded cross sectional area, which I attach great value to. He shot the animal at a front angle in the neck whilst its head was lowered, it broke the spine and ended up under the skin on the opposite side of the shoulder blade in a straight line. As expected a spine shot is like a brain shot an the animal fell instantly.

Needless to say Nols is very happy with this combination. He showed me the bullet that opened nicely, as I like them, thanks to the modest striking velocity, and weight loss is minimal - perhaps a few percent, but text book performance in my opinion. Nols also told me that he has not experienced any instability or any tumbling so far. Even if the SF value is not high enough (1.4), the shortening of the bullet seems to ensure stability inside the animal

You may not see this as ideal, as it does not fit your philosophy, but I think it is a good report and so does Nols.

Chris Bekker

The real answer to all this garbage is buy a 458 Lott, and use it with flat nosed solids.

G

GS

quote:

Originally posted by GS:
The real answer to all this garbage is buy a 458 Lott, and use it with flat nosed solids.

G

Whilst the 458 Lott is a devastating round, it is a high-pressure round and I thought you did not like high-pressure guns. Then a 500 Jeffery is surely better - more punch at far lower pressure.

I did tests at the SABS lab with the 500 Jeff and the pressure was far lower than the CIP P-Max of 46k, here it is:

535 gr Wdl SN ----115.0 gr S365 ----2,309 fps ---- 33,205 psi
535 gr Wdl SN ----126.5 gr S365 ----2,561 fps ---- 42,268 psi

S365 provides the desired velocity at low pressure in this cartridge.

Does one need more than 2,300 fps with a 535 grainer ... nope!
And at a pressure of 33k - that is just out of this world!
Now that is a great cartridge!

Regards
Chris Bekker

The problem, in the US, becomes avaliable mult- stage presses to reload ammunition at a reasonable rate, not to mention brass. Between RCBS and Dillon it appears the multi-stage presses are designed for 2.85 inch cartridges, but, the longer 416 based cartridges are too long, at least according to my last email with Dillon. Haven't checked with RCBS. Much as I like .50 caliber bullets, we have two communist/socialist Senators in Kalifornia, Barbara Boxer and Diane Fienstein, that are writing laws to ban the .50 BMG,for the ENTIRE US, but, in the process,they are banning over .50 caliber hunting rifles. Plus, 458 bullets are much more common, and give many more options. My pick would be the 450 Rigby, but again, it's not common enough, and, it doesn't give the option to shoot 458 Win mag in a pinch.

Plus, I can't find a multi-stage press that works with 450 rigby. Maybe RCBS, but haven't checked, yet.

The CZ rifles in 450 rigby size cartridges are 3 times the cost of a used, not shot, thanks to recoil, 458 Lott.

The cost difference keeps adding up to get a Lott, one press that reloads 375 and 458 Lott, or ditch the 375, and use a heavy rifle, that soaks up the Lotts recoil.

I could rebarrel to 458 Lott from 375 H&H, as well.


G

PS I TOTALLY AGREE THAT IF I WAS A PRINCE, OR KING OF THE UAE, THE JEFF 500, OR THE 505 GIBBS, OTHER THEN MAGAZINE CAPACITY, ARE MY ROUNDS. Low pressure, big caliber bullets, yes, they are the King's rounds. However, unless I start using my Juris Doctrate degree, I'm still a lowly teacher, and, it doesn't even pay the bills in the US, and, I'm over the top of the pay scales...

Food for thought, for me.

Hunters,

quote:

Originally posted by truvelloshooter:
Gerard,
Yet, you conclude ... "a stability factor in EXCESS of 2.5 for RELIABLE linear penetration" is needed. (And this for FN's !!! ) Where do you get this from? Has this been empirically derived or scientifically calculated? It has to be, because you say a SF value of 2.44, which is awefully close, is not reliable for solids !!!
Chris Bekker

I need to know if any value could be placed on the above statement of achieving a SF value in excess of 2.5 for reliable straight-line penetration with non-expanding solids?

I herewith invite ballistic expert opinion on experimental work that has been done or any academic work that punts this theory. Furthermore, do we look at the same number (SF=2.5) for RN Solids as for FN Solids? Or Should the RN SF value be even higher, more like 5.0 when we consider Norbert Hansens statement ... "On shots through the resin bonded hard board, which is melting on impact, SP bullets with smaller diameter show a penetration 50 % more than the FMJs." If so, we will need to contemplate a drastic revision of twist rates in those calibers where we use Solids, and/or make shorter/lighter bullets.

On second thoughts, if we want to maximise the 'stability' we should perhaps drive this figure up to more than 5.0

But we may just lose that precious bullet mass and momentum and then minimize Mo/Xsa !!!

I repeat ... How come my custom-turned bronze 9,3/286-gr FN solid bullet (meplat = 4.4 mm) with a SF value of only 1.75 gives reliable straight-line penetration? In a wetpack/hardboard combo test it stayed head-on at a MV of only 2,250 fps !!!

The Woodleigh Steel FMJ with a RN shoot straight through an elephant's head .... and the SF ??? The point I make is if we need and SF value greater than 2.5 for the more effective FN design then the WDL FMJ RN should have failed horribly, but they go straight through.

The 286 gr Wdl Steel FMJ bullet is 32.33 mm long
The 320 gr Wdl Steel FMJ bullet is 35.86 mm long

These Wdl bullets have been extensively tetsed in Zimbabwe on buffalo. The SF of the longer 320 gr is way below 2.5 and it is a RN design on top.

Are there perhaps other factors that assist with terminal stability apart from those that are coming from the bullet itself?

Can anyone solve this riddle for us ???

Chris Bekkker

.

Chris,

quote:

The 260 gr HV bullet is not light for caliber, and is thus driven slower than most of your other very light bullets. Could that be the reason why it kept its petals?

quote:

Gerard I am glad that you throw your hands up in the air in desparation about the tricky calculation of stability after impact, and now join hands with me about the usefullness of anecdotal evidence, which can be accepted as the university of life.

You have such a pompous opinion of yourself. I have been saying this for years and you never noticed.

quote:

Gerard your light-for-caliber HV bullet loses petals at high velocity at shorter ranges ranges, where the heavy-for-caliber Rhinos at lower velocities keep teir petals at modest hunting ranges.

How would you know? You have never used any HVs. You speak with such authority about matters with which you have no experience, one could almost believe you.

quote:

When your bullet loses its petals at close range when the velocity is still high, it cannot perform like a Rhino bullet with wide intact petals. That is the point I am making, as the small flat-faced cylinder CANNOT make the same size wound channel. Do you still dispute this?

You are going to have to convince this man as well as hundreds of others that, what they saw with their own eyes, did not happen. The full story of this one is here.
"The exit side of the neck shot. The HV bullet expanded fully within a couple of inches of impact and caused a substantial primary wound channel with massive bleeding."

quote:

I have no doubt that we will see excellent accuracy from your precision lathe-turned HV bullet at long ranges in comparison with most other bullets that are not lathe turned.

The worst accuracy destroying culprits, lack of consistency from bullet to bullet, non concentricity and bullet distortion under pressure have indeed been licked.

quote:

quote:
"Wound channels from the FN bullets resembled those of soft nosed premium bullets that expand to double calibre and more."

You have said this before so it beats me why you are repeating it but possibly the quotes I supplied from other sources were too long for you to read to the end. I will condense them down as much as possible and repeat them for you as well. Hope this helps.

Others say:
"For dealing with a charge they remove the dilemma of soft or solid. - Dr. Don Heath in African Hunter Magazine Vol. 7 No.2"

"I have found the GS Solid to leave a longer bigger hole than a soft that makes the one big early terminal cavity then peters out to the off side hide.

500 grs used it on an elephant and got complete penitration of an elephants head with a larger than normal exit hole....

------------------
Ray Atkinson"

Pursuant to Ray's opinion above, I ask for about the fourth time: Do you recommend the 380 gr 375 for use on a full going away shot on a Cape Buffalo or Elephant?

quote:

I have 3 loaded rounds of 260 gr HV's, loaded with 59 grains of S335 - are you happy that they are loaded hot enough?

The start load is 57gr of S335. Use a magnum primer and do not exceed 2600fps in a 24" barrel. The bullet is not suitable for use in a 1:14" twist.

quote:

With FN bullets we recommend a stability factor in excess of 2.5 for reliable linear penetration. The 300gr FN has a stability factor of 2.39 to 2.44 from 2000fps to 3000fps. Again not ideal

I answered this question before you even asked it. You are becoming more and more predictable. See the second post from the bottom on the previous page.

quote:

Well Gerard I am flabbergasted

It is OK Chris. Some people flabbergast easily. I am sure you will find a flabbergasted support group somewhere. Good luck.

quote:

How come my custom turned bronze 286-gr FN solid bullet (meplat = 4.4 mm) with a SF value of only 1.75 gives reliable straight-line penetration?

Is this another sample of one?

quote:

I need to know if any value could be placed on the above statement of achieving a SF value in excess of 2.5 for reliable straight-line penetration with non-expanding solids?

See the second post from the bottom on the previous page, from there, scroll up to my short post 5 above that. Then four easy steps: Left click on gscustom.co.za, hold the button down, drag up to the smiley, read.

Gerard,

Your answer was so predictable; you always try to bullshit your way through it.

REGARDING YOUR VIEWS ABOUT SF-VALUES:

1) How did you arrive at the SF-value of 2.5, perhaps a thumb-suck?

2) How many of your FN bullets do not provide a SF-value of 2.5?

3) Given the fact that you are so pedantic about the 2.5, why do you offer these bullets for sale?

4) If 2.5 is so vitally important, why do my custom solids stabilize so well at 1.75?

5) You have elected to ignore the good performance of the Wdl Steel FMJ's in 9,3 caliber.

Gerard you were the one that raised this fascinating ballistic issue, as a sort of MINIMUM requirement for FN Solids. The hell knows what the SF value should be for a RN Solid. So, please address the above questions for us poor mortals - it will go down for the greater good of mankind, Gerard.

REGARDING GOING-AWAY SHOTS ON BUFFALO:

I have actually expressed my opinion on this before, and you have quoted me on this, but you pretend that I have not answered you on this issue. It is on record that many different bullets, including mono-metals, have not made it through a FULLY grassed-filled guts of a buffalo. Clearly we must distinguish between the level of varying conditions of the stomach and the height of the shot placement. I have told you that this shot remains a RISKY shot for the casual buffalo hunter and is best left for the more experienced PH. Clear enough?

Let me summarize:

1) PH's generally do not like to follow up on wounded buffalo
2) Therefore they normally nominate when his client must shoot
3) That means he will give his client the best shot under the circumstances
4) A going-away shot is not one of them
5) A going- away shot is best left for the PH with a Solid
5) When a buffalo gallops away, chances are great you will miss the heart
6) because of the angle that may change your line of shooting
7) and a fully grass-filled guts may stop an expanding bullet short

However my recommendation not to take a Maverick shot from behind, has nothing to do with the hunter's decision who pays for the buffalo, as my decision is based on the fact that it is the duty of my PH to back me up if I mess my first shot up. I only offer my opinion on what I regard as sensible advice. It is on record that in certain circumstances (size of buffalo, fullness of guts, closeness of shot, actual shot placement,etc) even solids have failed to fully penetrate a buffalo from behind,still go through the heart. Shot placement can vary and so does penetration. Katte from Katzke Safaris can give you the detail on this.

On another thread that discussed the preference/use of 'Solids' or 'Softs' on buffalo, as well as Alf's pertinent question on this thread, it is perhaps interesting to repeat what Jorge wrote. "Conventional wisdom said your first shot should be a soft, followed by solids. PH, John Sharp said use ALL Softs, the Swifts are ALL the bullet you'll ever need." Let us just put this in perspective again - a PH talking to his client. In the same vain other people have applauded the use of CEB (Controlled Expansion Bullets) such as Stewart Hi-Performance (Ganyana & Katte Katzke) and Rhino (Doctari, Rob Duffield & many others). Subject closed.

Chris Bekker

So if I show up with all my ammo loaded with GS Custom FN solids, does that mean John Sharp will not hunt with me?

Nope.

Also we must keep in mind that most professional hunters are not experts on ballistics. They have seen some things work in the field, and they have seen some things fail. And other things they have not seen and know nothing about. I wonder if Mr. Sharp has compared the performance of a FN solid to a Swift soft on buffalo. Or the performance of an HV to a Swift soft on a buffalo. Or the performance of Nork Fork vs. Swift. Unless he has mace such a comparison, how can he aver that Swift is best?

___________

Now on to another topic.

Chris, I have purchased some of the new Rhino flat nose solids. But their meplat is small, and their shape is generally flattened hemispherical round nose instead of frusto-conical (GS Custom). Which would penetrate deeper on a lengthwise shot on a buffalo, and why?

500 Grains,

John Sharp did not say it was the best ... he said that was all you need. I think we must read CEB (as I hinted) as a genre of bullets rather than specifically and only Swift.

I would guess that was what he was trying to say to his client who could readily place his hands on Swift A-Frames rather than to suggest the use of a bullet that suffered supply problems as reported by various other people right here on the forum, including yourself. Hopefully it will soon be a historical problem.

I agree with you that I don't think John will turn you away with a FN Solid, but he only gave his opinion that is applicable for the CLIENT and not the PH.

In fact, I do believe a 270 gr FN, that is 'understabilized' (not suitable according to the maker of the bullet), will work well on buffalo, given good shot placement. However, in line with the discussion on this thread many people seem to prefer the .375/380 gr Rhino, known for its massive wound creating properties.

I hope it is possible that John Sharp can come in himself and add his 2 cents, which might be worth far more than the proverbial 2 cents.

Regarding your last question, I think Katte Katzke is better able to answer your question. I believe Gerard is sending him some bullets to test and I think we should get it from the horses mouth, if you could live with it.

Take care
Chris Bekker

Chris,
Either you cannot follow the simple directions to the answer I gave, before you asked the question, or you have a comprehension problem again. So I have fetched the answer from the previous page and put it below.


Chris,
Predictably you are going claim I contradict myself because I said the .375 bullet should be in excess of 2.5. It has to do with stagnation pressure that rises as the square of velocity and the fact that a 375H&H will get up to 2900fps with HV and FN bullets and a 378 Weatherby, and some others, will get a 300gr HV or FN bullet on the high side of 3000fps with ease. Now I am done educating you about bullet design.

To this I will add, as all has to be spelled out for you: Therefore some bullets are good with less SF than 2.5 (like the 9.3x62) and some actually need more.

Now you can replace your unhinged top jaw and start thinking again.

Where is your price list?

Gerard,

quote:

Originally posted by Gerard:
Chris,
Therefore some bullets are good with less SF than 2.5 (like the 9.3x62) and some actually need more.

Reply:

Another ballistic summersault !!! Give us the calculations as that magic point of 2.5 is so precise that it cannot be an estimate. Even at 2.44 you say the SF is not ideal - this is a miniscule difference of a mere 2.4% under that magic figure. If it is based on anecdotal experience the gun world would sincerely like to learn about it more as it seems you are in a teaching mode.

Also critically discuss for another 10 marks how different stagnation levels influence the stability of a bullet when it makes contact with flesh. I suspect it is another one of your Rasputin things that you mesmerize the ignorant with.

When you say less SF is needed at 9,3 velocities, does that mean you actually agree with me that my custom-turned 9,3 bullet will stabilize at 1.75 or do you still hold the believe that it was an isolated case with just one bullet? (Even though I shot 3 bullets into the wetpack) You see you will always twists things and think you can get away with. This makes you look like an asshole Gerard.

Do you really want me to publish a price comparison between your HV bullets and Rhino Bullets. The short answer is that the HV bullet is more expensive and there is no compelling reason to compare your old HP bullet that has no reason to exist when the HV is of much better design. When last did you produce an HP bullet .... 1998? Are they more reliable than the HV? I really think it is a futile exercise to show the readers that your HV's are more expensive as I believe people will generally buy what they like regarding of price differentials !!! However if you insist, I will do you the favour. One more thing ... not my price list ... the price list of Kobus van der Westhuizen of Rhino Bullets ... have you forgotten Gerard? Wake-upppppp Boetie !!!



Chris Bekker

Alf,

quote:

Originally posted by ALF:
Chris: This is a very valid question you pose.

So how does SF as a numeric entity exactly play in the penetration equation? is it of any consequence at all and if so what is the relative contribution.

You seem to agree that we have a ballistic conundrum here that we do not have full grips on. Stabilization in air and flesh differ and traditionally it was held, as an estimate that one should aim for a Stability Factor (SF) of between 1.3 and 1.5. for hunting purpose. I guess it is a best estimate due to the absence of studies in this regard.

Who is to say 1.2 for example is not good enough or for that matter that we need an excess of 2.5 for a FN design like Gerard's ... and as he now qualifies - only for the fast .375 Magnum family (sic)! Where does it leave us for RN designs? And that is why I posed the question of why the round nosed Wdl FMJ bullet served buffalo and elephant hunters so well both in the faster .375 H&H and the slower 9,3 x 62 mm. Do we have a mystery here?

Does Gerard's theory revolve more around 'Supercavitaion' as hinted on his web-site or does he in fact support the concept of 'Shoulder Sabilisation' or both? What is the contribution from the flat nose and what is the contribution from the twist? Should we not theoretically need less twist for the FN vs the RN design inside the animal or is it actually irrelevant? That is why I asked Gerard, who punted this theory, to explain it to us.

Can you relate stability to stagnation pressure by virtue of the square of differential velocities? Thus will the same Solid bullet out of a 375 H&H, shot at 2,500 fps be less stable or more prone to tumbling than one shot at 2,900 fps? If so theoretically, how about practical observable differences. Is there a crossing point or does gyroscopic stability not matter anymore once the bullet is inside the animal?

What is the relative contribution of each of the following items to stabilization inside the animal:

1. Centre of Gravity (more to the back or more centre) point
2. Nose configuration (FN, RN, SP)
3. Twist rate (Fast, medium or slow) or rotational speed
4. Forward speed

Could this be the subject of a doctoral thesis in mechanical engineering with reference to the application of hunting rifles in the new millennium?

Chris Bekker

Chris,

quote:

REGARDING GOING-AWAY SHOTS ON BUFFALO: Yadda yadda yadda 421 words.

Can I take it that you do not recommend the 380gr .375 bullet for straight going away shots on Cape Buffalo because you feel it falls short on penitration in that application? This is simple, yes or no.

quote:

In fact, I do believe a 270 gr FN, that is 'understabilized' (not suitable according to the maker of the bullet), will work well on buffalo, given good shot placement.

Which 270gr FN bullet are you referring to? Is it the same one that, according to you and Pieter, failed on the black wildebeest? You are performing such acrobatics here, it is difficult to keep track of all the flip flops.

quote:

Regarding your last question, I think Katte Katzke is better able to answer your question. I believe Gerard is sending him some bullets to test and I think we should get it from the horses mouth, if you could live with it

Go easy 500grains, he did not understand the question and is probably still reeling from the acrobatics performed around the previous questions.

Chris, as I have said, I am done educating you so, for fun, I will concentrate on your mistakes and your unwillingness to accept that you have blundered again.

quote:

Reply:

Another ballistic summersault"

Only a somersault in your head. I knew you would not realise that the 2.5 SF applies to the 375 that 500grains asked about and to which I confined my answer. (Highlight the section from here to the smiley) Here is your opportunity to make your "Now you read minds" comment. Answering your question in advance was quite a laugh and one of the girls here bet me you could not be that dense unobservant. In retrospect, it was too easy but it is fun to see you squirm now that you realise you have once again put your foot in it.

quote:

Give us the calculations

In your dreams. Some things are not divulged to competitors like you. What planet are you from again?

quote:

as that magic point of 2.5 is so precise that it cannot be an estimate.

It is not a magic point as in a precise point not to be exceeded or not reached (three step swindle all in one sentence), it is a cut off point. I said "In excess of..." You know, as in "we do not go below that point." Your poor grasp of specification and set parameters is showing again.

quote:

Also critically discuss for another 10 marks how different stagnation levels influence the stability of a bullet when it makes contact with flesh. I suspect it is another one of your Rasputin things that you mesmerize the ignorant with.

You should try to suppress the urge to make fun of that which you do not understand. It makes it very difficult to accept the idea when it is fully explained to you later. Go have a look at those tables that are generated in WinGyro and check out that SF wobble around 1200fps. (I am feeling generous - This is a Clue!)

quote:

Even though I shot 3 bullets into the wetpack

Oh wow! A sample of three!! My sample of 1200 plus and climbing, carries more weight. You lose.

quote:

Do you really want me to publish a price comparison between your HV bullets and Rhino Bullets

Smokescreen!!! You have been caught in another blunder. You are the one who is insisting that HVs and Rhinos cannot be compared, because in your mind they serve completely different purposes. Now you want to compare them on price. The HP bullets (we made some 168gr 308s last week, now that you ask) are quite popular because they are very good value for money. Only your stubborn refusal to admit your mistake prevents you from acknowledging that you should compare HP bullets to Rhinos because they are closer in application. Both are smooth bullets that lack several qualities found in HV bullets, both are expanding bullets and both are classed as premium bullets. These are your own observations, made and reported over time. Conveniently, price is now no longer an issue. You lose again but it is fun to watch you contort to get out of the challenge you laid down.

"stagnation levels? stagnation force?" - The concept is indeed strange to you.

quote:

You seem to agree that we have a ballistic conundrum here that we do not have full grips on. Should we not theoretically need less twist for the FN vs the RN design? Can you relate stability to stagnation force by virtue of the square of differential velocities? Could this be the subject of a doctoral thesis in mechanical engineering with reference to the application of hunting rifles in the new millennium?

You are hyperventilating Chris, it is not that complicated a subject. Where did I put those brown paper bags, you are cracking us up??!!! Reminds me of a short story assignment handed in by a schoolgirl that contained: "He dashed from the house, jumped onto his horse and rode off madly in four directions at once."

Gerard,

Quote:

"With FN bullets we recommend a stability factor in EXCESS of 2.5 for reliable linear penetration. The 300gr FN has a stability factor of 2.39 to 2.44 from 2000fps to 3000fps. Again not ideal." .... Gerard Schultz.[/color]

Reply:

I think you are the one that is hyperventilating instead of me. Let me tell you straight ... YOUR THEORY ABOUT THE 2.5 SF IS BULLSHIT !!! Please dish it up for the kids at your local kindergarten. The above bullet will be stable at the low velocity of 2,000 fps at an SF value of 2.39. If we need a value in EXCESS of 2.5 on a FLAT NOSE, then we should have seen great chaos over the last hundred years with big game hunters using RN FMJs - but we did not !!!

What is the RELATIVE contribution of each of the following items to stabilization inside the animal? ...

1. Centre of Gravity (more to the back or more centre) point
2. Nose configuration (FN, RN, SP)
3. Twist rate (Fast, medium or slow) or rotational speed
4. Forward speed

You have NOT explained your theory at all to the readers on AR. Explain to us, given the 4 factors above as a guide, how stagnation levels influence stability of a bullet inside an animal. Contrast for us the 9,3 and the 375 please. (Keep your magic calculations for yourself (sic) and just give us the 'break-points' and the logic). If you can't explain it properly, then blame all on the square of differential velocity (stagnation level).

When I ask you how come my custom turned bronze 286-gr FN solid bullet (meplat = 4.4 mm), with a SF value of only 1.75, gives reliable straight-line penetration at a MV of only 2,250 fps, you make it off because I have shot only 3 bullets into the target medium. DO YOU WANT ME TO SHOOT 1200 bullets then? Gerard, you are a real DICKHEAD to think you can wiggle yourself out with all the smoke you create.

Phone Katte about the .375/380 gr Rhino bullet and discuss penetration and shot placement with him, I have already given you my ideas. Ask him also how the various bullets (Danie Joubert's Solid, Rhinos, Stewart, GS-HP) he tested performed on his latest hunt about a week ago. Ask him about penetration through a buffalo's stomach - which bullets make it and which don't.

Also phone Doctari and ask him why he regards the .375/380 gr Rhino bullet so highly. Then lastly, read my own explanation slowly again when you wake up in the morning when all the CRAP in your head has vanished after a good night's sleep.

Your STUBBORN refusal to explain your theory once again will be noted. Gerard use your own brown paper bags, you are cracking us up here on AR!!!



Chris Bekker

PS: We have a Big Bore meeting on Saturday. Will we see you there? You have Katte's invitation, and we would love to hear you explaining your theories to us. You could also explain to 375 H&H users who use the Rhino Solid at 9.3 velocities (down loaded), how unstable they are and that they can't expect straight-line penetration, ha ha ha !!! With the quotation above (your gibberish) in the beginning of my post, I am now more than convinced that you beat ol' Rasputin hands-down.

quote:

Which 270gr FN bullet are you referring to? Is it the same one that, according to you and Pieter, failed on the black wildebeest? You are performing such acrobatics here, it is difficult to keep track of all the flip flops.

Gerard,

Interesting to see how you flip-flop and deceive - from a small wound channel issue you jump to a stability issue !!!

You cannot con and deceive the people all the the time, Gerard. The 270 FN bullet with a low SF of 2.09 at 220 yards traveling at a low 1,700 fps still provided straight-line penetration. (bullet is probably still traveling against the odds of gravity). This is stability Boetie.

The bullet never failed but now you mix things up the way you please. So your theory is fucked !!! Give me the stability of this bullet at 1,700 fps and then we compare your theory against what happens in real life.

You are forever twisting things, and you are the one who performs the acrobatics and then swindle things in full face like the communists do to obscure the real issues.

Chris Bekker

quote:

Chris,
I have purchased some of the new Rhino flat nose solids. But their meplat is small, and their shape is generally flattened hemispherical round nose instead of frusto-conical (GS Custom).

Which would penetrate deeper on a lengthwise shot on a buffalo, and why?

500 Grains,

If you have both bullets (Rhino and GS-FN), may I ask that you do a test for us in any media that you feel happy with - your own or even if you send it to RIP for his Iron Mistress. I can guess the answer for you, but perhaps it is better if we do not speculate.

By the way do you believe this shit from Schultz that when you download a FN Solid in a 375 H&H to say 9,3 velocities, that one would not get straight-line penetration? (Based on the 'Rasputin' theory that it aught to be in EXCESS of 2.5 SF value). Why do some buffalo hunters use the .375/300 gr Federal Trophy Sledgehammer bullet (like Colin Angelo) at down-loaded velocities .... because they tumble?

The concept of how stagnation pressure relates to twist rate is truly something that we need to explore further. Perhaps Gerard should couch us trough this for now and then do an article for the hunting fraternity, as they might not even know how unstable their bullets are ... this may just be a new revolution that deserves a Nobel Prize award.

Take care
Chris Bekker

Chris,
First, allow me to educate you about the correct use of the term "(sic)". From the Oxford dictionary: sic [sik] adv. (Lat.) thus (placed in brackets to indicate that the preceding word, statement, etc. is correctly quoted, etc. even though this seems unlikely.)

This means that you cannot paraphrase something someone else said, adding your own words and embellishments and then use "(sic)". In this quotation from your post, it is therefore used incorrectly: "Keep your magic calculations for yourself (sic) and just give us the 'break-points' and the logic". The correct use is demonstrated in these quotations from your posts above:
" how stagnation levels (sic) influence stability"
" The concept of how stagnation (sic) relates to twist rate"
" Perhaps Gerard should couch (sic) us trough (sic) this."

Now to your tirade above.

quote:

DO YOU WANT ME TO SHOOT 1200 bullets then?

Until you have, your sample of three is much lighter than mine and you still lose.

quote:

We have a Big Bore meeting on Saturday. Will we see you there?

Katte has not given me a date yet, we will discuss that at a later stage. Do you seriously think I will consider driving/flying 2000 kilomtres to a routine get together on a Saturday when you tell me about it on the preceding Friday? What planet are you from?

quote:

Chris says:
Let me tell you straight ... YOUR THEORY ABOUT THE 2.5 SF IS BULLSHIT !!! Please dish it up for the kids at your local kindergarten. With the quotation above (your gibberish) in the beginning of my post, I am now more than convinced that you beat ol' Rasputin hands-down.

Ray says:
"I don't see how anyone can discredit Gerard when it comes to bullet making knowledge... I have used his bullets on game,( not boxes of parafin, silt, wood or whatever,) for about 5 years now and I have never used a better performing bullet, a few others are as good, most are not as good...I would think to have a dog in this fight someone would/should have used them in the field, or be in the bullet making business..Take note that many bullet making companies are following his design as time goes on...Just my opinnion, not taking sides..."

Ross Seyfried says:
"Perfection comes from South Africa, where GS Custom is turning out true wide flatnoses. These bullets are favored by really experienced and knowledgeable professional hunters. The one you see in the picture went the full length of a six-ton bull elephant." - Handloader Magazine, Feb 2004.

And a host of others say:

"Premium grade bullets are here to stay and one of the best is the locally produced GS Custom." - Koos Barnard - Magnum Magazine

"Something of interest. I bought GS bullets for my safari operation and the preliminary hunting results were fantastic." - Marius van Rensburg, Afrika Nkwe Safaris

"Since I started using the 250 gr HP in my 9.3x62 CZ rifle, I had all one shot on the spot kills." - Andrea Sandri-Boriani

"I do love and use the old German 9.3x62 a lot. With either 286gr or 293gr solids it really performs well. I have used some of GS Custom's (Port Elizabeth, South Africa) 270gr FN Solids with devastating results on buffalo." - Willie Vermaak

"I've only been using your .404 and .308 bullets for a short time, but I must admit that I'm very happy with what I've seen until now. The only type of "failure" that I've noted is that the bullets fail to remain within the animals. This is highly frustrating to an avid bullet retriever, but then again total penetration is what I regard as the ideal." - Riaan Niemand

Despite our differences from time to time, Alf says:
"I tested eleven different bullets in the 7mm STW. Gerard Schultz's GS Custom 130gr HV monometal hollow point was, however, the eventual winner."

Now how about attacking all these guys like you have attacked Jagter and RIP when they expressed their satisfaction with GSC products.

Is it possible that these highly respected individuals are wrong and only you are right?

Give it up Chris, you look more like a fool with every post you make and, true to type you degrade into profanity and bad behaviour when your intellect runs dry.

quote:

The concept of how stagnation relates to twist rate is truly something that we need to explore further.

PS. Be warned: Check all the blank spaces in my posts. I reserve the right to answer questions from you in advance at any time!

quote:

Originally posted by truvelloshooter:

quote:

Chris,
I have purchased some of the new Rhino flat nose solids. But their meplat is small, and their shape is generally flattened hemispherical round nose instead of frusto-conical (GS Custom).

Which would penetrate deeper on a lengthwise shot on a buffalo, and why?

500 Grains,

If you have both bullets (Rhino and GS-FN), may I ask that you do a test for us in any media that you feel happy with - your own or even if you send it to RIP for his Iron Mistress. I can guess the answer for you, but perhaps it is better if we do not speculate.

Chris,

I was hoping for a prediction/explanation. In the future I hope to try this experiment, but you live closer to cape buffalo than I do.

Gerard,

You have NOT explained your theory to us at all. You veered off again with quotations that has nothing to do with the questions asked. I actually expected something like that - old tactic of yours, but obviously not effective, as it does not make the questions go away. Gerard, you look more like a fool with every post you make when you do not want to answer the real questions. True to type, you degrade into profanity with your silly answers when your intellect runs dry.

So, here we go again ....

A) What is the RELATIVE contribution of each of the following items to stabilization inside the animal?

1. Centre of Gravity (more to the back or more centre) point
2. Nose configuration (FN, RN, SP)
3. Twist rate (Fast, medium or slow) or rotational speed
4. Forward speed

B) Explain how STAGNATION levels influence the stability of a bullet inside an animal?

C) Could 375 H&H users that down-load 300 grain Solids to 9.3 velocities expect straight-line penetration?

How can we appreciate your theory, if we do not get an explanation?

Chris Bekker

Chris,

quote:

You have NOT explained your theory to us at all.

As I have said, I am done educating you so, for fun, I will concentrate on your mistakes and your unwillingness to accept that you have blundered again. Incidentally, it is not my theory, the link between stagnation pressure and penetration is well discussed amongst others from p122 to 148 in Bullet Penetration. (Calling it "stagnation" is like talking about "kinetic" or "sectional", every time you open your mouth, you put your foot in it. I get the impression you are truly ambidextrous; both feet fit equally well.)

quote:

You veered off again with quotations that has nothing to do with the questions asked.

Three step swindle again. I dealt with your statement very precisely and asked a question at the end of it and the question remains unanswered. Here it is again: "Is it possible that these highly respected individuals are wrong and only you are right?"

quote:

A) What is the RELATIVE contribution of each of the following items to stabilization inside the animal?

Your list of four items is not complete but if you read the SD threads, all these points you mention, were dealt with. No point in repeating the stuff ad nauseum, that is your speciality.

quote:

B) Explain how STAGNATION levels influence the stability of a bullet inside an animal?

You should get a grip on stagnation pressure first. The discussion you ask for is as meaningless as discussing English grammar with someone who only speaks Kantonese.

quote:

C)Could 375 H&H users that down-load 300 grain Solids to 9.3 velocities expect straight-line penetration?

If they use a New Custom Designed and Turned Bekker Solid that looks exactly like four other "new" designs, thoroughly tested with a sample of three, you insist that they would, so why ask me?

Gerard,

I guess this is the end of the road then ....

quote:

Quote:

"With FN bullets we recommend a stability factor in EXCESS of 2.5 for reliable linear penetration. The 300gr FN has a stability factor of 2.39 to 2.44 from 2000fps to 3000fps. Again not ideal." .... Gerard Schultz.

Reply,

All I can say I do not buy your Rasputin

I never claimed that my list of 4 was all encompassing (your sly trick of delusion), please add to my list for the greater good of mankind, but more importantly, discuss their relative importance !!!

Colin Angelo was using .375/300 gr Throphy Sledgehammer bullets on buffalo in Mosambique with great success and I do not believe he is the only one in the world that has had success.

On second thoughts I have a gut feeling that the people at Federal may just have the same feeling that their bullet actually works without you pre-condition of having a SF value in EXCESS of 2.5 !!!!

Also, all people that are using the 300 gr Rhino solid in .375 caliber are satisfied users. Also the reputation of the Barnes Solid is well known throughout Africa on buffalo and elephant.

I rest my case with this and the sum total of these users surely add up to more than 3 shots, so your theory can continue to exist as demented logic in your head.



Clearly Alf is also in doubt about the role of twist in flesh when he said ... "I have reams of papers on the properties of living tissue as well as stuff on the penetration of solids. I have gone as far as ordering textbooks to read on cavitation theory and hydrodynmaics but what I need to explained to is how stability in solids or semi solids work. What are the physics behind this?" Now Gerard perhaps you can explain this to Alf with the aid of your Mc Pherson book and as in the past I would suspect that you and Alf would draw different conclusions from the same book and that is why I will never trust you.



Chris Bekker

.

Alf,

Thanks for sharing your observation with us. Some points to consider ... why do a relatively slow bullet from a 45-70 Government with a slow twist rate such as 1 turn in 20" penetrate so straight on big game - read the amazing writings of Garrett on the net.

Now a 45-70 has the same bore as .458 Win, .458 Lott or .458 Express - only difference being cases get bigger and so velocity is driven up and their CIP twist is 1 in 14. I am sure that Gerard will even argue with Garrett that he is shooting unstable bullets in the face of all the evidence to the contrary !!!

I need this question answered in relation to this bogus theory of having an SF value in excess of 2.5. My first observation has to do with the Flat Point bullets that are being used in the 45-70 as opposed to the rest of the traditional bullets used in the rest of the .458 family, and the second thing is the COG of the bullets of Garrett is almost exactly in the middle.

Question ... are they the prime and dominant factors iro stability inside an animal? To a greater extent than twist perhaps, but that they all play a greater or lesser role, complicating the whole issue to give definitive answers? For argument sake, let us assume something that looks as follows:

Contribution from COG = 45%
Contribution from Nose shape = 35%
Contribution from twist rate = 20%

Or any other multitude of combination, perhaps with another few factors not even listed?

The search continues ...

Take care
Chris Bekker

Alf,

Have you also had a similar experience of GS-HP bullets not opening up. They are supposed to be so reliable that they open up at very very low velocities (sic) ... you could almost blow them open with your mouth.

What HP bullet (caliber & weight) tumbled? Lo and behold, the Guru will ask you the velocity. 9 out of 10 he is bound to blame you for shooting the bullet at too low a velocity, like he has done in many other cases.

Chris Bekker

The Editor
Accurate Reloading.Com

Dear Sir,

I do have the following remarks for Jerry.

Surely we have made some progress since Jerry actually gave some answers on this whole thing surrounding penetration. He also makes the following statement:

Quote …One would expect differing performance parameters for different types of bullets construction and thus one would choose an appropriate bullet for a given task.
He also asked : Do you recommend your 380 soft for direct going away shots on Cape Buffalo, Hippo, or Elephant?

Why, Jerry, would you ask the same question to the manufacturers of bullets like Swift A-Frame or Bear Claw with specific reference to a soft nose bullet. The answer is clear- the 380/375 Rhino was specifically designed for buffalo and has also given sterling performance on lion and leopard and animals like eland, giraffe, blue wildebeest etc. including going away shots on buffalo, granted they may be risky shots as far as actual shot placement.

Jerry also refer to Ross Seyfried and the full length penetration on a bull elephant. Can he explain the 40-inch penetration on a giraffe. (all things being equal) He also says the following about the Dzombo and Rhino solids. Quote Cutting a flat meplat on a round nose solid is not enough Morrie. You are so wrong, Gerries, so wrong. The Rhino and Dzombo solids have again, this past season, performed to perfection in one of the largest hippo culling operations in Zambia (Lupande area). The reputation of these solids go far beyond of what is being said on this forum.

As to the 380/375 Rhino (specifically) failing to expand please supply the details and e-mail addresses. Please note jerry that I am not complaining or being uncomfortable in any way, just pointing out that, as noted before on this forum, you are heavily biased.

Jerry also says the following Quote Your 380 soft is pronounced “best†on the basis of anecdotal evidence. This remark is a classic. The next time you phone Katte, please ask him about the performance of the bullet. As mentioned in my e-mail previously on this forum Jack Krieger, Earl Liebentraube and Dudley Adam all used this is bullet on eland, giraffe, leopard and buffalo- with great success, whilst hunting with Katte. This is our methodology, Jerry- practical field results.

You have already received a phone-call from Katte on the performance of your 380 HP/416 bullet. Two stayed within a buffalo, which was propped-up after the hunt and they did not expand. The Rhino 430/416 gave equal penetration with full expansion as did the Stewart soft point. This test was witnessed by three PH’s from Swainson’s Safaris in the Dande area.

Jerry also relates the following statement made by Chris Quote: This is in fact the general case that is being made for a controlled expansion bullet over a solid for the hunting of game and where extreme penetration is not required. Jerry responded with the following on Chris’s statement: Would such a bullet then have limited application compared to a bullet that delivers an adequate wound channel diameter and also gives extreme penetration? Just asking…..

You asked, and now you will get an answer right from the African bush. The July 2003 edition of Man Magnum contained an article on the 460 Weatherby Magnum by Wilhelm Marx. This man hunts in the Mwambesi, an area between Tanzania and Mozambique. He refers to your 450 grain HV bullet and praises the penetration of your bullet. Yet, he also says the following: Quote But be careful of others in the herd- these bullets exit readily. This ties up with your extreme penetration, Jerry. But this man also says the following (same article): Quote For buffalo in herds, a very good general purpose load is the SA-made Rhino solids shank 500 grain soft nose….. The initial violent expantion of the Rhino softs, coupled with deep penetration seems to be a magical combination with rapid terminal results.

Wilhelm Marx also hunts with the well-known elephant hunter, José Fitas. As to the photo of the Rhino bullets in your possession, I would like to thank you for showing it again. I remain unconvinced of your “arrangement†of the bullets. This matter will be settled in another manner, at a later date.

I have been away for five days and could therefore not respond on Jagters posting on the solid bullet article. A complete response will follow.

Kind regards
Dr. Mauritz Coetzee

quote:

You have already received a phone-call from Katte on the performance of your 380 HP/416 bullet. Two stayed within a buffalo, which was propped-up after the hunt and they did not expand. The Rhino 430/416 gave equal penetration with full expansion as did the Stewart soft point. This test was witnessed by three PH’s from Swainson’s Safaris in the Dandy area.

Mauritz,

Mauritz is it possible that you could take some pictures for us of the bullets that were retrieved?

Would love to see those Stewart Hi-Performers.

I supose it would not hurt to show the bullets that failed as well - all in a row, the whole damn lot.

I guess we will have a new round of excuses coming ... velocity too low, twist rate not right, there was a bone or stone in the stomach of the buffalo or it was not full moon, etc.

Chris Bekker

500 Grains,

Ok you want a prediction .... here it is then .... On pure mechanics I suspect the Rhino Solid will out-penetrate the GS Solid, with its much bigger meplat, but I do not believe that it is important, as excess penetration is just wasted unless we want to shoot 2 buffalos with one bullet. The FN bullets do their job as intended.

In fact I would wager that more elephants and buffalo have been shot in the last decade with 300 grain Solids in .375 caliber, as the most popular and economical African caliber than all other calibers combined. Funny thing though is that it was done with 'unstable' bullets (SF below 2.5) according to Gerard Schultz (Guru Supreme). What is your view on this issue, Dan? I am curious to know.

Katte Katzke has done some testing with various Solids including the new Dzombo as well as GS-HP bullets, but I do not have all the details. I do know that Katte is raving about the new Dzombo bullet and I hope that he will share it with us at some stage.

Take care
Chris Bekker

.

Bas Alf,

Aikona die bas hy prat hom nou diee anner deng. Die HV koeel hy mak hom die tlein gaatjie by die bokk se anner kant!!! Mar die annner bas hy praat van die beeg exit hole. Nou ek verstan nie daai deng.



My nam hyyy es Jonas

Alf,

quote:

I do not wish to get into the Gerard / Chris fight

There is always the risk.

Pardon me, I have to talk to Chris first. So many mistakes to point out with him, so little time.

Chris,
It is difficult to deal with all your errors in one go so I will take one at a time.

quote:

Colin Angelo was using .375/300 gr Throphy Sledgehammer bullets on buffalo in Mosambique (sic) with great success.

Also, all people that are using the 300 gr Rhino solid in .375 caliber are satisfied users. Also the reputation of the Barnes Solid is well known throughout Africa on buffalo and elephant.

why do (sic) a relatively slow bullet from a 45-70 Government with a slow twist rate such as 1 turn in 20" penetrate so straight on big game

I need this question answered in relation to this bogus theory of having an SF value in excess of 2.5.

So you do not believe that a SF of greater than 2.5 is a reasonable requirement and that my design requirement is wrong? In your opinion, the successful manufacturers you mention, do not require such a high value. Kindly supply us with the SF of the bullets below, at the speeds at which they would typically be applied and with the appropriate twist rates:

1. .375/300 gr Throphy Sledgehammer = SF > 2.8
2. 300 gr Rhino solid in .375 caliber = SF > 2.5
3. Whichever Barnes solid you refer to above. Banded solid 300gr = SF > 2.5
4. Garret 540gr hard cast .45 bullet = SF > 2.6
5. Garret 420gr hard cast .45 bullet = SF > 4.5!!

Take your time and be thorough in your research and calculation. Tip: Use WinGyro.

Gerard,

There is really only one question to answer and that is ....

How does the stagnation pressure influence stability inside an animal?

Then you can proceed to explain how you arrived at the conclusion/discovery that the value of SF must be in excess of 2.5 !

Then you can explain why .375/300 gr Rhino Solids penetrate straight through buffalo and elephant at downloaded velocities between 2,300 and 2,400 fps.

The SF value of the .375/300 gr Rhino Solid is 2.10 at 2,000 fps going up almost by an insignificant fraction to 2.13 at 3,000 fps. At 2300/2400 fps the value is 2.11, which does not fit your criteria of the magical in "EXCESS of 2.5".

Let us keep it simple and the onus is now on you to prove that the empirical evidence need to be rejected.

Chris Bekker

Gerard,

Remember Pieter Olivier's hunt ... the Blue Wildebeest:

The 9,3/270 GS-FN bullet loaded to a MV of 2,500 fps with a low SF of 2.09 striking at 220 yards at a low 1,700 fps, still provided straight-line penetration. No tumbling, only straight-line penetration with a small exit hole.

There is no better evidence of stability than this - and at what SF value? Then we compare your theory against what happens in real life.

Chris Bekker