Most of you know how I sit on this subject.

Recently I got a PM from one of our AR Members, about his rifle that was built by AHR would not feed BBW#13 Solids, and a few other bullets! What to Do?

A Dangerous Game Rifle, in my opinion, is a system. The rifle does not stand alone. The Cartridge does not stand alone. Neither Rifle, nor Cartridge, is worth a damn, without a PROPER DESIGNED DANGEROUS GAME BULLET! One that will accomplish the mission in which you set upon, whether that is elephant, buffalo, hippo, croc, lion or leopard, bears what have you! You MUST have all three of these components working together to increase your chances of success.

You are spending $1000s of dollars on your big trip. Let's assume you already chose a cartridge that is capable of accomplishing your mission, and of course it's considered a Big Bore cartridge. Now you have chosen your rifle, we will assume in this case it's a Bolt Gun. Let's also assume you are knowledgeable enough to do some research into the proper bullet. So you choose a bullet, let's say a BBW#13 or a North Fork, or even a OLD--Barnes Banded Solid Flat Nose. All good bullets, all very capable of doing what a solid needs to do.

Now your rifle won't feed this bullet? DAMN! What do I do? Go to a less desirable bullet? Well that would be the easy way out would it not? Oh, my rifle will feed round nose bullets, so I will just do that! Now you have taken away from your best chances of success, you have removed 1/3 of your proper system. Now all you have is a platform and a cartridge. What did I say in the beginning? Rifle and Cartridge without a proper designed bullet is of very little consequence. The bullet does ALL THE WORK. Why choose a lesser bullet? Cheaper! Easier! Least troublesome path of less resistance.

The hell with that! Send your Platform either back where it was built, or if factory, send it to a proper gunsmith that can get it feeding. Regardless of make or model, it must be able to feed and function with proper Dangerous Game designed bullets. If not, then you do not have a Dangerous Game Rifle.

After spending many 1000s of dollars on your big trip, you are not willing to spend another couple of hundred dollars or so on your rifle to get it tuned properly, you don't need to be going on that trip to begin with!


Since I have not asked permission to post comments by the individual that asked for my advice, I will keep that to myself, but here are some of the comments, and at the end the outcome of.

quote:

I was wondering if you had any experience getting the CEB's to feed from a bolt action magazine. I have an AHR 404 Jeffery and can't get either the solid or non con to feed. Tried various seating depths, the shorter the overall length the less they jam but they still jam.

Of course below was my END of the reply, and yes it was much longer than that, but the jest of the matter came down to sending the rifle back, with some dummy rounds and that AHR would sort it out for him, I was sure of it.

quote:

Send your rifle to AHR, with dummy rounds, and let them get you up and running properly.
Hope this helps some, I know it's not the EASY answer to your problem, but believe me it is the best solution.

quote:

Thanks so very much for your reply. It was extremely helpful. I will get with Wayne and ask him to work on it. I will let you know how it works out.

Of course my reply below!

quote:

Excellent! That sounds like a proper plan, and you will be happy in the long run, and I promise you this, it is worth the effort to get this done and whatever money it costs to get it done.
Yes, please do keep me posted on this.

And here was the final result of the entire affair!

quote:

Michael, I wanted to again thank you for your help. I just received my 404 back from Wayne and it now feeds the CEB'S and everything else I tried perfectly. I can't tell you how much better I feel now that I can use the CEB's. The customer service at AHR could not have been better.

Now what in the world about that cannot be understood? Why in the name of GOD would anyone redesign a proper bullet so that it would feed, and not get the rifle to where it was reliable with anything?

Read those last words carefully and pay particular attention to this;

it now feeds the CEB'S and everything else I tried perfectly

I can't tell you how much better I feel now


I would not take to the field with a rifle that would not feed and function with proper designed bullets! I would not do it! Why would I make that sort of sacrifice when it is an easy matter to sort out. I promise you that a damned rifle that won't feed a proper bullet is likely at some point to screw up with an improper bullet! It is totally ASS BACKWARDS to do anything else or to approach the issue any other way!

Michael

The most important lesson here, IMHO is that you should always test the ammo you intend to use in the manner in which you intend to use it before ever going into the field with it. Fully loaded magazine, partially loaded mag, empty mag with single cartridge, etc.

Then if there is a problem it can be sorted out as in this case. We all know folk who practice (or don't) with something and head to he field with something else, never having actually tried it.

And I agree - don't settle for less than you expect or the best. It's a machine, it can be made to function properly ...

All the more reason to have a DOUBLE!!!!!!!!!!!!

If you have to put a good bullet put it up the spout and then put those other RN things in the mag if you have to. First shot is the most important anyway.

quote:

Originally posted by srose:
All the more reason to have a DOUBLE!!!!!!!!!!!!

Now you just "Doubled" your troubles!

Michael:

Your solution works great if you have a gun from a custom maker such as AHR but not so well if you have an off-the-rack gun such as a Winchester, Ruger, or CZ. Me, I am not so ambitious. I would just use a Woodleigh and forget it.

quote:

Originally posted by michael458:
I promise you that a damned rifle that won't feed a proper bullet is likely at some point to screw up with an improper bullet!
Michael

That, my friend, is a profound statement!

Profound indeed but not really correct

quote:

Originally posted by Todd Williams:

quote:

Originally posted by michael458:
I promise you that a damned rifle that won't feed a proper bullet is likely at some point to screw up with an improper bullet!
Michael

That, my friend, is a profound statement!

That one stuck with me too. If CEB's and the like are the worst to get feeding and you want to shoot them then the smith should have dummies to work with. If a CEB tuned gun will shoot every other type of bullet then that should be the best thing to tune with.

DAVE BUSH----


I refuse to be your weekend ENTERTAINMENT!

I know exactly what you are doing----

I ain't biting!

HEH........

Michael

quote:

Originally posted by Todd Williams:

quote:

Originally posted by michael458:
I promise you that a damned rifle that won't feed a proper bullet is likely at some point to screw up with an improper bullet!
Michael

That, my friend, is a profound statement!

That was such a big word, I had to look it up!

quote:

(of a person or statement) having or showing great knowledge or insight : a profound philosopher.
• (of a subject or thought) demanding deep study or thought : expressing profound truths in simple language.

That's a hell of a compliment, thank you! I had no idea I was being, "Profound"!
LOL.......

Thanks Todd!
Michael

I guess I just got lucky with my off-the-shelf Winchester mod 70.

It feeds BBW#13s with no problems!

It is one of Michaels favorite micro bore calibers........anyone care to guess which caliber that would be

Andy

375 RAT

quote:

Originally posted by Dave Bush:
Michael:

Your solution works great if you have a gun from a custom maker such as AHR but not so well if you have an off-the-rack gun such as a Winchester, Ruger, or CZ.

Well - exactly as M said very clearly - send it to a gunmaker who know what he is doing and he will make it feed.. No big deal..

quote:

I guess I just got lucky with my off-the-shelf Winchester mod 70.

Should not be luck feeding BBW13 profile. It is a good flat nose feeding design IMHO. If a gun did not feed them it would be the guns feeding issue not a bullet design issue.
A gun that does not feed is not a gun but a club. Gun is is gun does. I fire therefore I am a gun.

I'm really glad my hunting life came to an end before all these magic funny shaped bullets were required to kill dangerous game. My plain old Woodleigh's and Nosler Partitions were so poor that the last Elephant I killed was probably embarrassed to die from the 416 Woodleigh that hit him. And I take this opportunity to apologize to him.

quote:

Originally posted by zimbabwe:
I'm really glad my hunting life came to an end before all these magic funny shaped bullets were required to kill dangerous game. My plain old Woodleigh's and Nosler Partitions were so poor that the last Elephant I killed was probably embarrassed to die from the 416 Woodleigh that hit him. And I take this opportunity to apologize to him.

Zimbabwe,

At the end of your hunting life, as you put it, why were you using Woodleighs and Nosler Partitions instead of a round ball out of muzzle loaders?

Because as far as I know Woodleigh and Nosler don't make round balls. But then again my Merkel 470 was not a muzzle loader as also my CZ550 416 Rigby was also a breechloader. I really don't understand the question but I'm pretty dense.

Michael and I have discussed this issue more than a few times and he knows it is one of my absolutes, perhaps due in large part to my background, which mandated my carrying a loaded firearm everyday since I was 18 years old (1965).

I don't care who made the rifle (or handgun or shotgun or grenade launcher or sub-machinegun etc.) nor how beautiful it is. Engraving and XXXX Turkish walnut are pretty but have nothing even remotely to do with functionality or reliability, and that's what is ultimately important in any firearm. That's what will save your life when a routine incident goes critical, be it hunting DG or an armed enemy/felon.

I have, for many years, been a collector of U.S. military firearms, both primary and secondary handguns and long arms. I currently have examples of all primary individual firearms from the SAW thru RVN, as well as many of the secondary weapons. I have shot almost all of my collectibles and may get thru all of them someday. One of the things I find attractive about these weapons is that they are all virtually 100% reliable and will function correctly always. I personally work on all of them when needed.

I have owned hunting rifles, mostly DG models, from the Remington and Winchester Custom Shops as well as Remington, Ruger and Browning production DG rifles. The only ones that have never needed work were the Brownings. All the others, including the Custom Shop rifles, had function problems that needed to be corrected. In most instances this required more than one return trip to Winchester or Remington to fix. One of the Remingtons was truly problematic and Remington seemed not to give a damn, but I forced the issue until the proper corrective action was taken on a production Mdl 700 .375RUM, but by that point I had invested more than a few hundred dollars and lots of time and effort to get it to shoot and so sold the rifle. In some cases I was willing and able to make the corrections myself. My most recent incident was with my RSM .458Lott last year when I decided to use the CEB BBW #13 for Ele. The rifle had a feeding problem with the second round from the magazine. I managed to get it fixed by using a series of fine files, emery paper and high grade dry lubricants so that it
was 100% reliable or it would not have gone to africa.

I am always amazed at the number of hunters and LEOs who do not understand the concept of 100% reliability in their firearms. I never found this to be the case with Marines or special operations personnel.

All of this is a long way of saying that Michael has nailed it. If a rifle won't function with the bullet you choose, either fix it or have it fixed. Otherwise, all it's good for is an ungainly doorstop. Anyone who hunts DG with a rifle/bullet combination that is anything less than 100% reliable is a danger to himself and others and should be kept away from sharp instruments.

The 7 Functional Steps of a Bolt Action Rifle:
Feeding
Chambering
Locking
Firing
Unlocking
Extraction
Ejection

Just as a note, during my extensive non-professional gunsmithing career, I've fixed the feeding (for members of this site )on more guns from the great custom gunmakers than I have from "out of the box" Wins, CZ's, Remingtons, Dakota etc. Thus, I hold so many of them in such high esteem(not)! The real answer is find someone who has half a brain and understands how Bolt guns feed( and owns a file and/or has a clue about when and where to use or not use a dremel tool(oops)). Just about anything can be made to work and work really well in the hands of a competent person.-Rob

quote:

Originally posted by zimbabwe:
Because as far as I know Woodleigh and Nosler don't make round balls. But then again my Merkel 470 was not a muzzle loader as also my CZ550 416 Rigby was also a breechloader. I really don't understand the question but I'm pretty dense.

Zim, the point being that you are belittling the development of improved bullet designs as being unnecessary due to the bullet designs of the past working for you.

I'm pointing out, in an extreme example, that round ball ammo from muzzle loaders worked prior to the development of the then "New Fangled" designs such as the Nosler Partition.

The Partition design caught your interest at some point because of some perceived improvement over standard projectiles of the day. CEB's, NF, TSX, and others offer improvements over Partitions and other "standards of the day" now.

Since I've been using Partitions since 1952 and since I have no idea when they were invented I don't know whether I selected them as 'leading edge ' or not. When I was in college I worked in the Aeronautical Engineering lab and the head of the dept was a close friend. He used to say one of the easiest things to do with the leading edge was to get cut. I don't search for the newest and most modern in hardly anything. I'm not experimental by nature or disposition. I just look for what I would call reasonable reliability. Someone was talking about how remarkably reliable Military weapons are. I have been in the military and the one singular thing that stuck me was the absolute standard design of bullets and the total lack of any style of bullet differences. As far as I know the modern automatic rifles of the world are all designed to shoot a single design of bullet. Certainly almost any rifle can me made to feed any bullet but at what expense in both cost and effort. I can assure you had these 'magic' flat nosed style bullets been the most popular of the day when for example the 98 Mauser was designed it would have a very different magazine shape,rails,and loading ramp than they have today. Since the standard bullet of the day had a certain shape the action was designed to feed that particular round reliabily. I only was able to afford 8 safaris in both money and health and never could afford but one Trophy Elephant,the other 2 I shot were non-trophy at considerably less money. So I used what was adequate at the time as by all reliable sources and was completely sucessful with it. Even to day I would not really be compelled to change by anything I have read here. I have no idea whether my CZ550 416Rigby will feed these magic bullets or not since I have never even seen one except in pictures. I know it feeds Woodliegh Solids slick as snot everytime. And the only modification I have made to it is I modified the follower so it would feed the last round smoothly. I do most of my work on my own guns so I could quite easily MAKE it feed anything for no cost. I just have no pressing reason to do so even if I were still hunting.

Lionhunter,

Good list

I would add 2 more steps.......Loading & Unloading.

I think a rifle should be designed to allow for easy and quick loading/reloading which is sometime needed for follow up shots or under pressure situations.

IMHO it also needs to be designed for easy unloading in case of a jam or debris in the magazine.

quote:

The 9 Functional Steps of a Bolt Action Rifle:

Loading
Feeding
Chambering
Locking
Firing
Unlocking
Extraction
Ejection
Unloading

Best,
Dave

Todd:

Nobody is "belittling the development of improved bullet designs as being unnecessary". I too think the BBW#13 solid is a hell of a bullet. However, if it won't feed in your gun, I just don't see the need to send your gun off to a smith if it will feed with a Hornady, Barnes, or Woodleigh solid. There are many excellent bullets. Pick the one that works in your gun and go hunting.

quote:

Originally posted by Dave Bush:
Todd:

Nobody is "belittling the development of improved bullet designs as being unnecessary". I too think the BBW#13 solid is a hell of a bullet. However, if it won't feed in your gun, I just don't see the need to send your gun off to a smith if it will feed with a Hornady, Barnes, or Woodleigh solid. There are many excellent bullets. Pick the one that works in your gun and go hunting.

Dave,

We agree on a lot. We disagree on a few. Elephant hunting, Woodleigh, and Hornady is all I know we differ on. Well, maybe old Zim's comments.

I happen to be in the camp of making your rifle do what you want it to do, not the other way round. After all, getting the bullets of choice to feed is really not a major issue. Usually just a few small tweaks here and there.

But hey, you and I are double gun guys. Why are we debating bolt trash!!! Doubles are so much more interesting!! eh?

If a gun only feeds round nose bullets that's a red flag on the gun. The BBW 13 is not a just a flat nose but a 13 degree nose with a radius so not too much different than some blunt nose semi rounds out there. I would want my gun to feed more conventional truncated nose bullets like north forks to spitzers. I have to say this again. BBW13s feed great. If they don't than the problem is not the bullet. Why would you want to use a gun that was limited to inferior nose profile for solids? Yes I said it and I'll say it a million times. Flat nose bullets are better solids for penetration. Most pride themselves on guns that fire in all conditions at any angle ect. Why not a gun that could feel all kinds of bullets? Would you want a glass that only worked with miller light and not a good whiskey? Whiskey tastes better and gets the job done better.

I have plenty of rifles that won't feed hardly any sort of Flat Nose solid proper. All of them box stock Rugers. I am quite sure that with just a minor bit of proper gunsmith work they would should I choose to have it done. I don't choose to do so, what guns of those do get shot are used as test rifles on the range, for example my really nice 510 Wells, that weighs 11.5 lbs and is long as a musket. No way it will ever see field use, it's too big, I am not messing with it, so I could care less if it feeds or not. But rest assured, should I ever decide to loose my mind and take it, I would send dummies and have it feeding.

Now I personally have no gunsmith talent at all. I would not attempt to sort a feeding issue out by any stretch. I am very sure that I would destroy the rifle in no time flat. So I leave that sort of thing to the experts that have talent in that arena.

Any rifle I have that will not feed my BBW#13s or My North Forks goes to Brian at SSK with Dummies and it's back in a week feeding and functioning 100% of the time! It's not a big hairy deal. It's extremely cost effective, and gives peace of mind. I use Winchester M70s exclusively, I won't carry anything else, I also carry and use 45 ACP daily, all 1911s, Kimbers, old commercial or series 70 Colts, I won't carry anything else. My company buys Ford F350s, I won't use anything else. So I am rather set in my ways, this is how it's going to be, for me. All of these will feed, function, work properly or it costs in the end. If one does not for some reason, it goes to the shop before going back out to the field.

Now if you are just shooting dirt clods in the back yard, it does not matter, it's of little consequence if the rifle feed real Dangerous Game designed bullets or not. If it's delegated to range duty and test duty only, it's of little consequence, don't worry about it.

But remember, Like I said, a rifle that won't feed a proper designed Dangerous Game Bullet is very likely at some point not to feed an improper designed bullet or inferior bullet. One that has been tuned to feed proper bullets, will now most likely work with ALL bullets! Why on earth would you not option for that sort of reliability, especially with a rifle you intend to use in the field, for Dangerous Game? It's beyond me, it's too simple of a process not to attend to! Lazy, cheap, and stupid in my opinion to opt out of such a simple operation.

Zim

quote:

these 'magic' flat nosed style bullets

Sort of a smart ass remark I take it. I assure you there is nothing "Magical" about any of them. It took many hours of shooting, loading, designing, and loads of work testing them to get them where they are now. No f*****G "Magic", just lot's of hard and tough WORK. Which if you want to know, I did a lot of it myself, and with the assistance of SRose which made prototypes by the hundreds and we tested most all of them daily and weekly to come up with the right formulas. No Sir, No F******G Magic, just loads and loads of hard, dirty work, tiresome work.

Those that choose not to have a rifle that feeds and functions with proper bullets and are willing to accept less, fine with me, do as you please, as I know what I am going to do, and most Dangerous Game Hunters will choose the same. You do your best before getting there, that way once you are there, your chances of success have increased substantially.

There is every reason to do so, and no reason not to!

Enjoy your day boys, I have to get in the lab, I have a couple of hundred 500 MDM cases to trim and load today! BORING--I hate trimming brass, but here again, it's the extra steps involved in getting things RIGHT, that counts in the end!

Later
Michael

quote:

Originally posted by Todd Williams:

But hey, you and I are double gun guys. Why are we debating bolt trash!!! Doubles are so much more interesting!! eh?

Right on brother!

Exactly!
Well said.
No "magic" but lots of investment and hard work like you said. There were some magic moments of discovery through testing and theory all well documented. Some enjoy the lazy path of good enough and some dare to chase excellence. I know what camp Michael is in. And it has better company and booze
Practice swinging a baseball batt because that may be your last defense if your gun decides to be finicky and stop feeding. I say if your gun does not feed all kinds of bullets in every condition you could put your life and a PH's life in danger. Same goes for bullets. Use the best because if you don't kill it someones ass may be on the line. Why try to save a couple hundred bucks in getting a smith to feed any type of bullet? No sane reason.

quote:

Sort of a smart ass remark I take it. I assure you there is nothing "Magical" about any of them. It took many hours of shooting, loading, designing, and loads of work testing them to get them where they are now. No f*****G "Magic", just lot's of hard and tough WORK. Which if you want to know, I did a lot of it myself, and with the assistance of SRose which made prototypes by the hundreds and we tested most all of them daily and weekly to come up with the right formulas. No Sir, No F******G Magic, just loads and loads of hard, dirty work, tiresome work.

I have to honestly say that when I work on my own guns and for select friends, the standard I use is that it will FEED and EJECT an EMPTY CASE 100% reliably( even upside down). For the big buck custom rifle maker supporters and unfortunately as a result, doubters here, sorry dudes, but yes, it can be done! In almost every case, I've ever seen, if a gun feeds like that, it will feed just about anything! Thats my standard and it works. Its not even that hard to do actually. Thus, I don't really worry about what bullets I use.( I like BIG holes that go straight through though). I check the gun with every round before I go to Africa and if there are any issues the gun gets fixed or doesn't go. No big deal!-Rob

I bought some BB-13s for my 500 Jeffery but haven't tried them yet. My rifle does feed and function flawlessly with the Barnes 570g TSX, 570g Banded Solid and the 535g Woodleigh Soft Point so at this point if it doesn't feed BB 13s I'm just going to sell them lol... Every rifle doesn't have to work with every bullet.

I would really prefer to call it sarcasm but that is actually how it was meant. I have no doubt your bullets or whoevers they are are in fact wonderful to use and the results are just short of miraculous. I just had no real need for them when I was hunting and was quite sucessful as were and are many,many other huunters. And all the claims and research that I'm sure you have so painstakingly done ,probably at great expense are undoubtly true in every detail. If you truley want something to absolutely feed every possible style bullet then I would imagine you would require straight line feeding, probably with a detachable clip. Other than that I would imagine you will continue to have to tinker with the feed each time some great advancement is made in bullet design. Making a rifle feed empty cases to me is definitely NOT the way to assure proper feeding. To feed an empty case in most cases means NOTHING contacts the feed ramp ,which is in most cases where the feed problem exists. This generally means you have modified the rails so the round comes up under the extractor quicker ,thereby approxoimating straight line feeding. I agree in most cases this is desirable also, but also makes it easier for the loaded rounds to eject from the magazine prematurely. We do totally agree on one single point,however, whatever bullet you decide to use should feed with TOTAL reliability in a DGR. I emphatically do not agree that this bullet design is the absolute mandatory bullet to be used on dangerous game. In point of fact as I see it the ONLY game it has distinct advantage on is Elephant and then ONLY because of the probable straight line penetration. Those are my PERSONAL opinions and in no way should be considered to be anything else. I have no studies or research to back them up other than 60 years of tinkering with guns and reloading.

Zimbabwe- Obviously you really don't understand how guns feed do you? Just making shit up huh! Have you ever done it YOURSELF. I really doubt it from your ramblings. Are you just having a bad day and want to stir some shit up? Oh well. no use arguing with you, you'll just drag us down to your level and overwhelm us with bullshit. Have a nice day!

quote:

In almost every case, I've ever seen, if a gun feeds like that, it will feed just about anything! Thats my standard and it works. Its not even that hard to do actually. Thus, I don't really worry about what bullets I use. ( I like BIG holes that go straight through though) . I check the gun with every round before I go to Africa and if there are any issues the gun gets fixed or doesn't go. No big deal!-Rob

Absolutely Spot On----

Rob has this skill, I do not, so I have to send mine out, which I GLADLY DO to achieve reliable feed and function.

Now there has been a lot of talk about the BBW#13s, here, this discussion while does include that bullet is not Inclusive to the BBW#13. There are what I call the BIG 3 Nose Profiles, proper ones! This includes North Fork, and triple especially the new design that has a 68% meplat, the Barnes Banded FN, and the BBW#13. There are other good bullets, GSC and S&H, both with similar nose profiles as the North Fork, the older version anyway. Of great import is the new BBW#13 NonCons, the North Fork CPS-Cup Points. And probably a few more. Whatever the Proper Design bullet you choose, it must be 100%. Any of the above fit that category. Robs bullets that he makes for the 600 OK are in that category as well, and they feed and function dandy through Docs rifle that was here for some time last year.

Point of Fact, your gunsmith don't have a clue as to what you might be thinking, North Fork, BBW#13s or NonCons, or GSC, what have you--Send dummies to him, and let him wear them out before sending your rifle back. As Rob states, it is not a terrible job and not a great expense.

Sorry Dave, have to use you as a guinea hog for a bit, but its shooters like Dave, that does not want his rifle to be too expensive and is willing to settle for less that got us to where we are with our factory rifles today! The factory cannot afford to put that extra $200 expense, or $100 expense or even $50 expense into the gun to make sure it feeds proper bullets. Shooters are too cheap to pay that extra, especially if there is Brand F that is $20 cheaper! Most do not understand the factory can't spend extra money on the rifle, you won't pay for it! Too Cheap! But yet, for a real Dangerous Game Rifle, most any of them, they have to be tweaked a bit. But you see how happy my guy is right in the first post? He is happy he did that, gives him Peace Of Mind now, not that it now feeds the BBW#13s, but that it feeds EVERYTHING Proper! Everything! Now that is exactly the right attitude in my opinion!

Thank You Rob! For MANY Things you bring to the table!

Michael

I've been building big bore rifles since 1952 when I attended Trinidad State. I have a cursory understanding of how a rifle feeds and have never built one that didn't. It must be misunderstood by more people than myself as it is probably one of the most frequent topics on these forums. Duane Weibe has a good tretise on the subject that he put on this forum to help others. If he feels it needs explaining in detail maybe others should take note. I'm probably one of the 'BOZOs' that Rob is always trying to expose. I'm afraid I'm probably in good company.

MICHAEL----


I refuse to be your weekend ENTERTAINMENT!

I know exactly what you are doing----

I ain't biting!

HEH........

DAVE

EXCELLENT!

Michael- thank you! I have to say that it's a rare day indeed where we ever disagree on literally anything DGRS related. That's because you have demonstrated real world experience and share it selflessly! Few have done as much for this forum.
Zimbabwe- trust me I know what it takes to make guns feed and eject flawlessly. I'm not even going to discuss the way I learned to do this, but let's just say it took years and involved military training. Trotting out Duane wiebe is nice, just realize some of us just might know as much or even more. I have also built bolt actions from blocks of steel just like Duane. To be honest, my shop might just have better equipment than his too. I'm not trying to be a jerk about it either. Your certainly entitled to your opinions too, just realize we are far from stupid ignorant newby's . Michael just makes damn good bullets and so do I. They were designed to feed well and perform well and they do. They are not magic but are truly way better designs then the old noslers. Ive shot ele with my bullets with complete pass theoughs and damn big holes and had total confidence in the guns feeding. What more can anyone ask for? I don't think your a Bozo, just try to be a bit more open to those who have worked hard to bring bullets to a new level.-Rob

Rob and Michael...
My hat is off to you both.. Both extremely passionate and knowledgeable.. Great that you contribute to this forum... I am gratefull...

I love this forum. Every now and again we get into great discussions just like this one.

Michael, I can tell you that I am not a cheapskate as you suggest but I am a bit of a traditionalist. I love double rifles and am truly fascinated by guys like Taylor who hunted with them in the golden age of African hunting. I truly love those big, cigar shaped cartridges and I am a huge fan of Woodleigh bullets, both softs and solids. My reloading table is replete with bullets from the likes of Hornady, Speer, Nosler, Woodleigh, Belt Mountain, Swift, Sierra, Barnes and CEB. I love the #13 CEB solids as well as the Woodleigh Hydros and two of my favorite rifles are my Blaser R93 and S2 Luxus so you can't really accuse me of being a luddite either. One of the great things about these newer bullets is that they will greatly enhance the killing power of even marginal calibers like my 450 Marlin, 45-70 as well as the .375 and various 9.3s. Kudos to you and Sam. However, I have never been to Africa and because of some pretty significant health concerns, I probably will never see the sunset on the African plain. I don't really need any solid bullets and thus, it may seem to you that at times I have a pretty cavalier attitude about them. However, I take great pleasure in loading, shooting and testing all kinds of bullets, including the solids. My hunting experience is not nearly as extensive as most of the guys here. I have taken pigs, deer, elk, bison and such and the only remotely dangerous game I have taken is black bear. Like you, I am not a gunsmith. If something breaks or doesn't work, I take it to my gunsmith to fix. I have owned many factory rifles over the years and still do. I must have been lucky because I can honestly say that while I have had a number of problems with over-the-counter rifles, I never had a feeding problem with any of them but then again, I was mostly shooting bullets of conventional shape and construction. Feed and function was perfect. In guns that were designed to feed flat nose bullets like my 450 Marlin or 45-70, the flat nose solids and even the Woodliegh Hydros feed without a hitch.

I think that we often forget that AR is a pretty cloistered community, especially on the big bore and double rifle forums. Most of the guys who post here are hunters, reloaders, and some, like Rob, are even accomplished gunsmiths. Over the past several months, I have seen you criticize Barnes pretty harshly for their decision to bring back the round nose solid. Frankly, I understood that decision perfectly. Barnes does not make bullets just for guys here on AR. They make bullets and ammunition for everyone. My guess is that they were getting a lot of complaints from the field or perhaps from a number of gunmakers that they were having feeding issues with their flat nose solids. Barnes can't fix the guns so they had no choice but to go back to the round nose solids in the bolt rifle calibers. However, they are still available in the double rifle calibers and Barnes has suggested that for those that want the flat nose solids they will still be available in the future. Maybe it's just me but I am willing to give them the benefit of the doubt.

This will sound shocking to you but most shooters who have a gun that will not feed a certain shape of bullet will simply select a bullet of a different shape rather than send their gun off to be "fixed". I guess I am one of those guys. It's not because I am cheap as you suggest. It's because unlike you, I have every confidence in the other shape. Do flat nose bullets work "better"? I think that you and Sam have shown that with all your hard work and it is appreciated. Does that mean I will use them in every instance? No! For example, I have used the flat nosed Barnes solid in my 500 Jeffery and they seem to work but I wouldn't hunt dangerous game with them. I am sticking with the Woodleighs because I know they will feed every time. Since I have every confidence in the Woodlieghs, I don't think my gun needs to be "fixed" because I don't think it is "broken".

You are a great guy Michael. As much as anyone here, I appreciate all your hard work. We just have a difference of opinion but rest assured, I have the utmost respect for your views.