I find it hilarious that there is one person that keeps on going on about the Swift A-Frames not being good because they mushroom all smooth like an ice cream cone. Everything I've ever shot with them has fallen down dead with awesome penetration and destruction. They are a great bullet as are most of the others mentioned. I also like the TSX due to the lack of meat damage and great penetration. Don't ever pass up on a Swift A-Frame thinking the flavor of the cone isn't good.
Take good care,
Dave

quote:

Originally posted by Atkinson:
....the Swift, its too smooth and round and doesn't do the damage the Woodleighs do.

I think that is a bunch of hooey. Everyone's entitled to their opinion and/or preferences but I do not believe the "smoothness" of the expanded Swift has any negative effect on its performance.

I've killed a fair bit of game with Swift A-frames and have never seen a situation where I felt any other soft would have done a better job. They penetrate better than almost any other soft and hold up when hitting bone at high velocity. I think they are the most versatile soft point out there.

Cheers,
Canuck

Ray is full of great information. Most of which needs to be taken with a grain of salt.

Well if some here disagree with my opinnion of the Swift bullets, many of which I have recovered, then I have no problem with that, if they have worked for them then by all means they should use them.

I see no reason to get uptight about the fact that I choose not to use them, nor to get ignorant and insulting.

Ray, you know there's still a contingent who dislike you for whatever reason. I don't think you should get riled over what they say. At the end of day, you've still done what you think is right.

quote:

That is my problem with the Swift, its too smooth and round and doesn't do the damage the Woodleighs do.

That is the same conclusion that Ross Seyfried came to, when shooting Donkeys in Australia, He used different bullets in a 300 Win Mag and tried to use the same shot placement on each. In his opion and observations the Swift put themm on the ground slower than some of the other bullets used.He stated that he believed that the smoothness of the mushroom worked against the AFrame Swift...........

Just to clear it up I'm have no part of any contigency for Ray. I kind of like the guy and he has a lot of experience to pass on but this one just hits a funny bone. I can seperate the information from the BS on my own. It's just every time the Swift A-Frame is mentioned it appears like news. The Swift A-Frame is probably one of the top four soft point bullets made so why would you (Ray) make some new person asking for good advice think that they are inferior? Is that really helping out the new member from Russia? I don't really think that it is ignorant to point out and I'm not uptight about your choices.
jwp 475
Every animal has a different tenacity for life and no two shots are exactly the same so I would read that as more of an assumption as you stated than a conclusion.
Take good care,
Dave

I think the assertion/assumption/theory that the smoothness of the A-frame causes it to be less effective is hooey...no matter who says it. That is MHPO, based on my own field experience with the bullet in question.

Ray, I don't know if you were referring to 470 Mbogo, me or surestrike with your comments, but so that we are clear, I ain't uptight with your choices, and I don't believe I was ignorant or insulting.

I offered my personal opine on the A-frame, which happens to be in direct contradiction with yours. Don't see how that is an issue with you or your choices... Like 470 Mbogo, I only did so to ensure that the readers of this thread know that there are at least two sides to the story. I made it pretty clear that it was my opinion....as far as I am concerned none of us are the final word on any subject. The beauty of the forums is that one gets exposed to a lot of different opinions and experience.

Cheers,
Canuck

quote:

Originally posted by Canuck:
but I do not believe the "smoothness" of the expanded Swift has any negative effect on its performance.

have never seen a situation where I felt any other soft would have done a better job.

Cheers,
Canuck

Although I love the A Frame for big game, I must agree with Mr Atkinson in that they do finish off very smooth and I much prefer the softer and aggressive Woodleigh and RWS bullets for lighter game such as Lion, Leopard, small plains game and deer as I have seen light game almost lost due to the minimum damage of the A Frame.
But for big heavy game such as Eland and Buffalo the A Frame is my favorite, with the virtues of a solid and soft all in one.

The retart was at the snide remark made by Surestrike, not to Mbogo or Cunnuck, whose opinnions I respect.

I am sorry if some disagree with me on Swift, but I have shot many head of game with them and they kill a little slow IMO, several on this board and Ross Seyfried agree with that for the same reason. I suppose it depends on your experiences with them, thats what makes a horse race I suppose.

I know a lot of folks that I respect immensly that swear by Barnes X, including my good friend and partner 458 Win. and we argue all the time about that bullet. He has had wonderful luck with them. I have found them excellent on Cape Buffalo but have had about 4 terrible experiences on lighter game with them in my 300 H&H. By the same same token I have had wonderful luck with the GS Custom monolithic??? I suppose we roll the dice and take what comes, its a crapshoot!

Just use North Fork softs and be happy.

www.northforkbullets.com

Dan
The funny thing is the bullet on their homepage looks as smooth as an A-Frame.
Dave

quote:

Originally posted by 470 Mbogo:
Dan
The funny thing is the bullet on their homepage looks as smooth as an A-Frame.
Dave

FWIW, I really like the NF's too. If they were easier to get in Canada, I'd probably use them more often.

Canuck

For comparison purposes, here are some .375 270gr A-frames recovered from an impala and Blue Wildebeeste I shot in 2002.



Cheers,
Canuck

Canuck, I find NF much better.

And a .475 500gr A-frame recovered from a penetration test on a cape buffalo in 2006...



And another recovered from another cape buffalo earlier in the hunt in 2006..


Canuck

And here's a .416 370gr NF recovered from a kongoni (Don_G was the shooter) on the same trip in '06....



I don't feel there is a significant difference in performance between the two bullets (Swift A-frame NF soft). If I had to choose which was actually the tougher bullet though, based on my limited experience, I would give an edge to the A-frame. I have shot through some tough bone with that bullet and have never seen one blow up.

Cheers,
Canuck

quote:

Originally posted by Roman BGH:
Canuck, I find NF much better.

Hi Roman,

Can you cite some examples or explain why you find the NF much better? I am not advocating one over the other, just curious.

Cheers,
Canuck

quote:

Originally posted by Scott King:
Last year I used a 300g Barnes TSX on moose and although the meat damage was non existant the vital organs looked like red egg salad.

Pretty much sums up my thoughts since time of introduction. The "X" wound channel is different. The quantity of material blown out the nasal passages is often great, while the average particle size is small. I believe the sharp cutting edges are indeed a factor. It's like being shot with a high-speed blender, set on "frappe'". Hope this ain't too high-tech for my Canadian friends.

BTW - I've shot game with none of the other bullets mentioned but I'm certain they are all you say they are. Simply put, I am well satisfied with the Barnes as my heavy game softpoint.

HI Nick
Good to hear from you. The Barnes is definitely the best penetrater and with the new TSX's they seem to shoot better in my guns than the regular X bullets did. Just had my 300 Weatherby and my 375 Weatherby down to the range and the TSX's grouped surprisingly well. I didn't have the same results with the the original X bullets though. They are a eat right up to the bullet hole kind of bullet.
Take good care,
Dave

General comments.

1. THe NF will open up at lower velocity (longer range) than the SAF due to a nicely thinned copper nose portion of the NF.

2. The NF has less bearing surface due to its driving bands which means less friction, pressure, heat buildup and fouling.

3. In my experience the NF is more accurate.

This is not to say the SAF is a bad bullet; it's just some reasons why I like the NF better.

As for smoothness, I can't say one way or the other.

quote:

Originally posted by 470 Mbogo:
HI Nick
Good to hear from you. The Barnes is definitely the best penetrater and with the new TSX's they seem to shoot better in my guns than the regular X bullets did. Just had my 300 Weatherby and my 375 Weatherby down to the range and the TSX's grouped surprisingly well. I didn't have the same results with the the original X bullets though. They are a eat right up to the bullet hole kind of bullet.
Take good care,
Dave

Hi Dave! When I open the loading cabinets I find stuff ready to go from 5 and 6 years ago!
I haven't even tried the TSX yet! Slowin' down some I suppose. I'd better get crackin' or you guys will be leaving me in the dust. Too many new bullets!!

quote:

It's like being shot with a high-speed blender, set on "frappe'". Hope this ain't too high-tech for my Canadian friends.

It may be cold here, but we do understand blenders, especially when it comes to icy drinks.

Yah, there are no flies on the X-bullet either, at least when it comes to terminal performance. I am not sure that the difference in internal damage is THAT substantial but the videos of the X penetrating the ordnance gelatin are pretty impressive.

I haven't tried the TSX yet either Nick, but intend to. The old X-bullets wouldn't shoot worth squat in my rifles, except the coated X bullet in my Mbogo, which shoots them fine.

Cheers,
Canuck

Between the SAF, the NF and the TSX all are fantastic premium bullets. Any arguments as to which is the best are purely semantics.

They will all get the job done quite nicely.

surestrike ----- I think you hit the nail square on the head, all three are tough enough to get the job done nicely. The only thing I can add to the debate is the amazing accuracy of the North Fork bullets in my rifles. I thrive on pin point accuracy and know when I do my part on the shooting end the North Forks do their part on the killing end. Good shooting.

The speed of the 375 HH does not clearly require premium bullets. Not that you cannot use them, just that they are not critical.

For example I have used 300 grain silvertips (reloads) in my traveling 375 since last century (1997 ) without complaint on the subject animal as well as a couple others . I only have a limited amount left which I plan to use up on a couple Cameroun trips in the next two years. After that who knows, it will depend on reasonable bullet construction and accuracy.

I do use premiums (tsx) in several rifles including another 375 HH. But I use the silvertip rifle the most by far.

Just my 2 cents, and probably worth that much to my learned friends.

Not intending to slag on the TSXs at all, but thought others on this thread might find montero's post on Medium Bores interesting...see here...TSX failure

The bullets look like that .375 GSC HV I had the problem with in 2005.

I think these are anomolies, but it is one reason I lean more to the lead cored softs like A-frames and Northforks.

Cheers,
Canuck

quote:

Originally posted by Canuck:
I think these are anomolies,

I don't. All too common....
----------------------------------------------
"Serious rifles have two barrels, everything else just burns gunpowder."

You cannot go wrong with the Swift-aframe, I've used them exclusively for twenty years and never had one fail. The most bullet weight that I have ever lost on a recovered bullet is 11%. I once did a Texas heart shot (375 cal., 300g Swift, 2550 fps, 80 yd shot) on a very large eland and it ended up at the diaphram enough shock to put him down for a finish shot.
On the other hand there are times I would not use a Swift. For example, I would not shoot a leopard with a Swift, I would a bullet that would open up more, disperse more energy in the animal. But then again, SHOT PLACEMENT IS EVERYTHING.

Not as experienced as some of you but results I've witnessed with A-frames was super. Great expansion,penetration and tissue destruction.

Placed correctly Swift A-Frames will reliably kill big bears. So will North Forks, Nosler Partitions, Barnes TSX, Kodiaks, Woodleighs, GS soft points, Hornady Interbonds and Speer Grand Slams - and if I missed your favorite bullet -it probably will too.
It's time to go hunting and quit all this ballistic masturbation. See you in the fall.

i like phil's list of good bullets. anyone one of them is a winner. especially, since he left off the highly overrated trophy bonded bear claw.

a good premium bullet, proper shot placement=dead big bear....

quote:

Originally posted by 458Win:

It's time to go hunting and quit all this ballistic masturbation. See you in the fall.

Yes! I agree, however, what about the BEER?!?!??? You can't just dangle a challenge to find the best tasting beer and forget about it!!



PS Good luck this year! I hope one your hunters gets the record!!

quote:

Hi Roman,Can you cite some examples or explain why you find the NF much better? I am not advocating one over the other, just curious. Cheers,Canuck

I told only about pictures. I have tried only RWS TUG in .375. Bear took 2 bullets and walked 500 meters. I think it is not good. That is why I asked for help

Roman - RWS TUG is a good bullet but 2400 fps or 740 m/s at barrel as it achieves in 9,3x62 is just as fast as it can go before breaking up - 2600 in 9,3x64 or .375 H&H is too fast for the TUG - below is a 9,3x62 TUG that passed impala from rear to front (usually those metal petals fall off) if it would go any faster, the harder rear lead begins to deform and shed the remaining jacket just to break up completely...

Thank you, mouse93. I understand that TUG is very good bullet for african hunting, but the african animals mostly are more rigid than bears. My friend shot a bear by TUG from 9,3x62 - there was no expansion too.

Roman impala is not a rigid critter (guys down there shoot impalas with .223's) - IMO the only reason the TUG above expanded to its max. is that it shattered the thigh bone - actually I use it for all my hunting here in EU (roes, chamois, reds, boars, bears) and it works nice (in 9,3x62 that is). Did your friend recovered the bullet or he is just guessing according to exit wound?. Fact is that usually even after full expansion (it usually hapens on heavier game from boar or red deer up) there is only a caliber diameter exit wound even after full expansion.
However in your case of .375 H&H IMO you should stay away from TUG - if you dont like TSX or GSHV (I actually do) - to stay on a "safe side" listen to the guys that proposed A frame or NF

When I referred to a Bear as "soft" I meant that you do not need solids to shoot him, wereas you do on Buffalo on ocassions, the buff has a tougher thicker hide and heavier bone, I believe the buff will weigh aboubt 600 or so more pounds than a bear.

I'm under the impression the buff may be harder to kill as I have seen them take 13 and 9 shots from .470s and 500s on two ocassions.

I doubt that there is much difference in pure meaness if mad, both can be a source to deal with, and can certainly kill you.

I think you will notice that some expanding bullets like the NOrthfork, Woodleigh have wings that are folded under in the above photographs of comparison..These wings are like knives and splay out during the pass through IMO, whereas the Swift just roll back and meet the swollen base.

You can agree or disagree, and you may very well be right, but that is my opinnion after shooting about 40 head of plainsgame with the Swift bullets. I have some pretty set opinnions on bullets based on using them, right or wrong, but I respect your opinnions, and if your haveing good luck with them, then there is no reason to change.

For brown bear bear ( only having shot a black ) I'd use the Woodleighs. Nice and jagged and the animal is not as tough as a Cape Buff etc........

I do agree that the jagged versus smooth expansion is a bunch of hooey.

My only gripe with Swift A-Frames is the undeniable fact that the bases upset and bulge so much, and this happens going down the bore of the rifle, and can cause pressure spikes.

That may be why Remington had to slow their factory ammo down to about 2430 fps instead of 2530 fps with the .375/300gr A-Frame, though they move them along at 2800 fps in the .375 RUM. That makes me wonder about possibly more variation in the vast number of .375 H&H barrels (possibly some tighter than others) versus the more likely consistent .375 RUM of late.

Somehow Noslers are not prone to this, and there is no way it could happen to a North Fork or a GSC with their solid copper bases.

Must be very soft/ductile copper jacket and soft lead in the Swift, but it is very well bonded together, and the partition is very thick, and never fails there. They do seem to be very accurate, more so now than they were when they first came out in the mid 1980's.

I loaded them in a .375 Wby for a self guided Kodiak bear hunt, long ago, but only got to cut Kodiak deer in half with them, it turned out.