quote:

Originally posted by MTM:
Don't know how this thread got going sideways, As I said in my opening post this was just an observation. I was a little shocked the the all penetrating heavy hard cast bullet wouldn't shoot through a fairly thin tree. Totally unscientific and meaningless test. I like the 4570 for what it is, sorry if feathers are being ruffled when I say its a short range Deer gun. If you like it for long range or heavy animals fine, I have better guns for those perposes.

MTM, do you know how hard (or soft) the bullets were?

quote:

Originally posted by Bill/Oregon:
Rich: Three one-shot kills on buff with hard-loaded .45-70s? That's not possible with anything less than 5,000 foot pounds of mathematically computed kinetic energy. It says it somewhere right here on this here forum ...

LOL! Precisely!

quote:

Originally posted by Whitworth:

quote:

Originally posted by MTM:
Don't know how this thread got going sideways, As I said in my opening post this was just an observation. I was a little shocked the the all penetrating heavy hard cast bullet wouldn't shoot through a fairly thin tree. Totally unscientific and meaningless test. I like the 4570 for what it is, sorry if feathers are being ruffled when I say its a short range Deer gun. If you like it for long range or heavy animals fine, I have better guns for those perposes.

MTM, do you know how hard (or soft) the bullets were?

Don't know in numbers but they were supposed to be very hard. I've been thinking I should go back out there and dig a couple out. I'll make a point of doing that and put them on here when I do. There'll be 405 Rems and 300 Hollow point Barnes in there too. Probably won't be right away as our season is speeding past and my weekends should be used for hunting live stuff.

It has been pointed out by several on this thread that the RIGHT bullet is the key in killing any game animal. That holds true for the 45-70 as well as for the 458WM.

Brian Pearce (hunting and gun writer with Wolfe Publications)killed a big old Cape buff using his Marlin 45-70 loaded with a 400gr FMJ. It completely penetrated both shoulders and killed an unseen cow buffalo on the far side!

I've used the fast magnums for killing big game from Northern whitetail to moose, but from experience I believe the Marlin 45-70 to be a better option when the range is 200 yds or less. That is, with the RIGHT loads (which includes the bullets).

Barnes is now offering the "Barnes Buster" for the Marlin 45-70. It's a 400gr promoted for game up to DG, including Cape buff.

Interestingly, the Marlin in 22" to 24" will fire a 400gr at up to 2100 fps, safely... that's getting into the shoes of the original 404 Jeff load used successfully on all of Africa's DG! The key for the 404 was the Kynoch 400gr solid at a "suggested" 2125 fps. It probably was making a little over 2000 fps if truth be known!

There's nothing wrong with the Marlin in 45-70 (or the 450 Marlin) using the RIGHT load for the intended game at reasonable range. Personally, I'd take on a buff with it loaded correctly, but for ele I'd choose my 458WM.

BTW, I did use one of my Marlins in 45-70 about 10 years ago to shoot a 405gr Remington at point-blank-range completely through a 16-inch tamarac and the bullet plowed a 4 ft furrow at about 8 feet on the offside of the tree before losing itself in the turf. I never found it. It wounded the tree, dead-center, doing 2000 + fps, making a neat 1/2" hole, and exited leaving about a 3/4". The tree still stands, but isn't too happy with my imposition of this indignity!

But it will NOT shoot through a Rock Maple that's more than 10"... but neither will a 458WM!

If you want, you can read more about my views and adventures with Marlins in 45-70 at:

www.bigbores.ca

Bob

.458 Only,

I find this interesting.

quote:

But it will NOT shoot through a Rock Maple that's more than 10"... but neither will a 458WM!

I have had both a 458 Win mag and a 416 Rigby easily shoot through over 16" of rock maple. Both shooting Woodleigh solids. The Winnie at 2070 fps with a 500 gr pill and the Rigby with a 410gr pill at 2580 fps. The Rigby not only punched through said tree but a dirt enbankment ~ 35 yards beyond that was about 3 feet thick.

Maybe the 45/70 ain't the super penetrator everyone thinks it is.

For quite some years, I had both a Marlin 336-1895, '70s vintage and my Miroku SRC 1886, both of which I bought NIB, unfired. In the Marlin, I could NEVER get more than an average ot 1850 fps-mv with ANY 400 gr. bullet, Rem 405, Kodiak 405, Swift A-Frame 400 or HC 400s, with ANY powder I tried as the cartridge must be loaded so "short" due to the action length and serious pressure signs developed at any greater velocities.

The Miroku WILL do quite a bit better, with AA2230, but, it's BEST loads will NOT equal a .404J, loaded to anywhere close to it's max. potential. It also falls FAR short of even "soft" loads in my original .458WM- Browning Safari '64 vintage FN and anything faster would simply "peen" the locking lugs, stretch the action and ruin a beautiful rifle.

I wish Barnes would make some "Barnes Busters" for the .444 Marlin. I don't own a .45/70, but if I did, I would have no worries taking on anything in NA with properly constructed bullets

Always over looked in these 450/400 - 404J vs. 45/70 threads is that sectional density.

For the 450/400's it is .344 for the .408" bores, .388 for the .411" bores; for the 404J it is .319.

Lagging well behind, and well below the tried and true formula of ~2100fps and SD > .300 is the 400gr .458" bore at ,272. About equal to the midlin' weight 180gr .308" bullet, which is .271.

The 450gr .458" bullet has sectiona density of .305, the 500 grainers .341. Very substantial difference. Even if you can push a lever 45/70 to 2000-2100fps safely, which is in doubt.

JPK

Sectional density will only come into play with bullets that have the same nose profile, same construction for reasonable comparison. Nose profile and construction out weighs sectional density by a large margin.
Michael

quote:

Originally posted by michael458:
Sectional density will only come into play with bullets that have the same nose profile, same construction for reasonable comparison. Nose profile and construction out weighs sectional density by a large margin.
Michael

Michael is correct in his statement. This is a fact that most everyone overlooks. Because of the wide array of nose shape and design, it can be nearly impossible to calculate all the variables involved. Simple calc's are only accurate IF they are all solids with the same nose shape.
Bravo Michael!

quote:

Originally posted by michael458:
Sectional density will only come into play with bullets that have the same nose profile, same construction for reasonable comparison. Nose profile and construction out weighs sectional density by a large margin.
Michael

Amen to that, Michael!

quote:

Originally posted by michael458:
Sectional density will only come into play with bullets that have the same nose profile, same construction for reasonable comparison. Nose profile and construction out weighs sectional density by a large margin.
Michael

Yes with respect to nose shape only and only to a degree, but so long as they are solids SD will still be a significant predictor of peformance. A flat nose SD .300 bullet will outpenetrate a round nose SD .300 bullet at the same velocity. That is the extent of limitations on SD comparisons.

Solid bullet construction is all but immaterial.

JPK

No, sorry you are very wrong. SD is NOT a significant prediction of performance, there are far more important factors to consider that far out weight SD. Maybe 50 yrs ago---but not today.

FN Solids of far less SD will out penetrate RN solids of significantly higher SD--In cases where diameters are larger bore-416+. Some recent work done suggests that some proper RN bullets in smaller diameters, 9.3 to be exact will out penetrate and out perform FN bullets of the same diameter. Now it would appear that CALIBER is a contributing factor, along with nose profile, and most likely too small of a flat meplat on the FN bullets tested! If you are talking expanding bullets then velocity and construction of said projectile is far more important than SD. SD is a VERY LIMITED FACTOR in todays projectiles. SD only has bearing with the exact SAME nose profile and or construction, and then other factors out weigh it's importance by a long shot.

Now for any comparisons to be made one must define exactly what is being discussed, solids, fmjs, solid copper expanding, standard expanding, what? Solid bullet construction is also a consideration, do you consider a FMJ a solid? And so forth, some definitions required. No blanket statements can apply here.

I really can't think that anyone would think the construction and materials that solids are made of are "immaterial"??? This is an all important factor, recently a thread on AR there was a chap that had several Woodleigh FMJ's that bent during penetration of elephant as I recall, another instance in the early days of the Barnes solids they were prone to breakage, in the case of some GS solids they actually expand some in the nose, I have also heard recently that some of the new Noslers have been prone to breaking. So Solid Bullet construction is all but immaterial? Hardly! Cast Performance bullets are solids, so I think I would reconsider that, and for my part solid construction and design are very important, more so than SD. In addition some materials that solids are made may weigh in less or more, in the instance of the solids we designed for my .500 caliber rifles I chose a copper alloy instead of solid brass, I gain about 6% in weight with the exact same bullet. The copper alloy is also sufficiently hard not to break, or deform when hitting heavy bone. So construction and materials used to make solid bullets are extremely important!

Michael

quote:

Originally posted by JPK:

quote:

Originally posted by michael458:
Sectional density will only come into play with bullets that have the same nose profile, same construction for reasonable comparison. Nose profile and construction out weighs sectional density by a large margin.
Michael

Yes with respect to nose shape only and only to a degree, but so long as they are solids SD will still be a significant predictor of peformance. A flat nose SD .300 bullet will outpenetrate a round nose SD .300 bullet at the same velocity. That is the extent of limitations on SD comparisons.

Solid bullet construction is all but immaterial.

JPK

Your just funnin us right?
I'm sure you have to understand that all solids are not created equal?
Ya, I'm sure you are just funnin us.
A solid may look about like a solid while it's in the box, but while they go thru game they can act much differently. I found this out myself while testing all manners of bullets for years, back before starting my own bullet business. I ended up settling on cast for myself as the jacketed and solid copper and bronze were just to expensive and time consumming to make with my schedule and financial resources. But in the mean while I learned a few things about what bullets will & won't do.
Before the advent of all the different bullets now available you may have been just a little more correct, but then come to think of it, nope, even then there was quite a difference in the terminal performance of solids as well. It's that terminal performance that makes the difference.
There's not much I could add to Michaels comments. He appears to have some serious real world experience, and I think pretty much has it nailed. I would say he knows very well of what he speaks. I agree with him that you are very wrong!
No shame in learning from a gentleman like him with this experience. We could all use a little more of that. I know I could.
Cheers!

quote:

Originally posted by ScottS:
.458 Only,

I find this interesting.

quote:

But it will NOT shoot through a Rock Maple that's more than 10"... but neither will a 458WM!

I have had both a 458 Win mag and a 416 Rigby easily shoot through over 16" of rock maple. Both shooting Woodleigh solids. The Winnie at 2070 fps with a 500 gr pill and the Rigby with a 410gr pill at 2580 fps. The Rigby not only punched through said tree but a dirt enbankment ~ 35 yards beyond that was about 3 feet thick.

Maybe the 45/70 ain't the super penetrator everyone thinks it is.

I pointed out that the bullet was a 405gr Remington! NOT a "solid". Neither did a 500gr Hornady RNSP in .458" completely penetrate a 9" white birch at over 2000 fps!

You're comparing apples with oranges... The load used by the poster was a hardcast -- which he admits he didn't know the exact hardness.Regardless, a hardcast is NOT a "solid".

Go to my last blog where I complain that there is a lack of a "solid" for the Marlin! Don't compare hardcasts or 405 Remingtons with your solids! Brian Pearce shot a 400-grain FMJ flat-nose completely through both shoulders of a big old Cape buff, which also killed an unseen cow on the far side. The bullet left the muzzle of his 1895 Marlin at about 1800 fps!

Bob

www.bigbores.ca

quote:

Originally posted by Dewey:
For quite some years, I had both a Marlin 336-1895, '70s vintage and my Miroku SRC 1886, both of which I bought NIB, unfired. In the Marlin, I could NEVER get more than an average ot 1850 fps-mv with ANY 400 gr. bullet, Rem 405, Kodiak 405, Swift A-Frame 400 or HC 400s, with ANY powder I tried as the cartridge must be loaded so "short" due to the action length and serious pressure signs developed at any greater velocities.

That sounds (and smells) very strange to me. I've owned 4 Marlins in 45-70 (first in 1989 and last in 2005)and any of them would easily make over 1900 fps with 400 - 405's, and the last three over 2000 fps with the same slugs!
And over 1900 fps from 465gr hardcasts! And that's not my experience only... read Brian Pearce's material! Elmer Keith, back in the '50's, made mention that 2000 fps from 400's was possible from lever-actions at 40,000 psi! In my Marlin I load to a COL of 2.6" with ease, and use a Lee crimp die and a lightly compressed load. Never a problem with bullet movement under substantial recoil, or extraction problems.

Bob

www.bigbores.ca

quote:

Even if you can push a lever 45/70 to 2000-2100fps safely, which is in doubt.

JPK

No doubt in my sustantial experience, or that of Brian Pearce, or several manuals.

And that's in the Marlin, not even to mention the Ruger No.1 which will shoot a 400gr at 2200 fps with ease. NOT a monometal 400gr, but a FMJ of SP.

Bob

www.bigbores.ca

Speaking of shooting thru trees with a 45/70 (which is the start of this thread) I shot a moose thru a tree once with a 1885 single shot in 45/70 once! Yep, shot right thru a 3" diameter alder tree, didn't even realize it at the moment. My eyes were a little better than now (maybe not) and I was using irons, at 40 yds I lined up on the moose shoulder and let loose! My guide and friend Gary Gray told me I had hit a tree, so I knew immediately I had not hit the moose and took off running, loading as I ran the moose stopped and I hit him in the shoulders and down he goes. I was using a 350 Hornady at 2100 fps at the time. So we did the photo thing and proceeded to get the moose sorted out. Skinning the off shoulder I found a perfectly mushroomed Hornady, jacket and core intact, perfect performance! I was rather pleased with it. Then I skinned on up another 2 inches and there was another bullet???? This one had no jacket, just a nice shiny lead core? This one was from the first bullet, that went thru the tree!! I went back to the area where the first shot was taken, and there pretty as could be was a 3" alder, bullet hole dead center of the tree, exit the far side! I suppose that going thru it must have shed the jacket somewhere and the core hit the moose. I cut that section of alder out and brought it home with me! This is ONE time that a bullet truly bucked the brush and kept on going to do a proper or close to proper job! But that is not something to be counted on, just pure luck I think! Several other times, once deliberate, others not, shooting thru even lighter brush that have been very ugly failures! I never even saw the 3" alder at all, so maybe my eyesight was not as good as I thought?

In 2002 I was playing with a Marlin Guide in 45/70 in Zimbabwe. Shooting a 420 Cast Performance at just a tad over 1900 fps with a healthy dose of RL 7. Most of my work on that trip was done with one of my Win M70s in 458 Lott, but at the urging of my PH, he wanted me to shoot a buffalo with it. I agreed, knew I had the penetration, so off we went. Long story short (if possible) he urged me to take a shot I did not agree with, and in the end I was correct, but my dumb ass took the shot anyway. Well as it worked out I could not see the same shot as what he saw, so it ended up being exactly as I thought, very angled shot, glancing off the shoulder. Not hitting the vitals!! Big trouble! I knew instantly I did not have a stopping rifle, stopping cartridge, or stopping bullet in hand! The 458 Lott was too far away to go back for.

Fortunately for me the herd had only gone a short distance and was milling about for what seemed forever. Another good fortune was that my ph was patient which was out of character for him. But smart none the less we waited until they started to depart the area. My bull was last out, the ph spotted him, got me on him and I quickly put another round behind the shoulders thru both lungs, he ran about 30 yds and piled up! Upon close examination I was correct from the start, the bullet had glanced off the shoulder, penetrated to the far side of the neck, not hitting anything vital along the way. Second bullet had penetrated both lungs and was found in the hide on the far side! It all had worked out ok, but I have to say, 45/70 is not a top line cape buffalo cartridge. Yes, it will do, but if the chips are down please give me something with a little more umph to it! Of course bullets designed for 45/70 these days are far better than they were in 2002. But I am playing with some things that are a little better and bigger these days.

Michael

Awesome story!!!!
Please post pics of the moose and tree if possible.

Thanks for sharing!

quote:

Originally posted by michael458:
Speaking of shooting thru trees with a 45/70 (which is the start of this thread) I shot a moose thru a tree once with a 1885 single shot in 45/70 once! Yep, shot right thru a 3" diameter alder tree, didn't even realize it at the moment. My eyes were a little better than now (maybe not) and I was using irons, at 40 yds I lined up on the moose shoulder and let loose! My guide and friend Gary Gray told me I had hit a tree, so I knew immediately I had not hit the moose and took off running, loading as I ran the moose stopped and I hit him in the shoulders and down he goes. I was using a 350 Hornady at 2100 fps at the time. So we did the photo thing and proceeded to get the moose sorted out. Skinning the off shoulder I found a perfectly mushroomed Hornady, jacket and core intact, perfect performance! I was rather pleased with it. Then I skinned on up another 2 inches and there was another bullet???? This one had no jacket, just a nice shiny lead core? This one was from the first bullet, that went thru the tree!! I went back to the area where the first shot was taken, and there pretty as could be was a 3" alder, bullet hole dead center of the tree, exit the far side! I suppose that going thru it must have shed the jacket somewhere and the core hit the moose. I cut that section of alder out and brought it home with me! This is ONE time that a bullet truly bucked the brush and kept on going to do a proper or close to proper job! But that is not something to be counted on, just pure luck I think! Several other times, once deliberate, others not, shooting thru even lighter brush that have been very ugly failures! I never even saw the 3" alder at all, so maybe my eyesight was not as good as I thought?

In 2002 I was playing with a Marlin Guide in 45/70 in Zimbabwe. Shooting a 420 Cast Performance at just a tad over 1900 fps with a healthy dose of RL 7. Most of my work on that trip was done with one of my Win M70s in 458 Lott, but at the urging of my PH, he wanted me to shoot a buffalo with it. I agreed, knew I had the penetration, so off we went. Long story short (if possible) he urged me to take a shot I did not agree with, and in the end I was correct, but my dumb ass took the shot anyway. Well as it worked out I could not see the same shot as what he saw, so it ended up being exactly as I thought, very angled shot, glancing off the shoulder. Not hitting the vitals!! Big trouble! I knew instantly I did not have a stopping rifle, stopping cartridge, or stopping bullet in hand! The 458 Lott was too far away to go back for.

Fortunately for me the herd had only gone a short distance and was milling about for what seemed forever. Another good fortune was that my ph was patient which was out of character for him. But smart none the less we waited until they started to depart the area. My bull was last out, the ph spotted him, got me on him and I quickly put another round behind the shoulders thru both lungs, he ran about 30 yds and piled up! Upon close examination I was correct from the start, the bullet had glanced off the shoulder, penetrated to the far side of the neck, not hitting anything vital along the way. Second bullet had penetrated both lungs and was found in the hide on the far side! It all had worked out ok, but I have to say, 45/70 is not a top line cape buffalo cartridge. Yes, it will do, but if the chips are down please give me something with a little more umph to it! Of course bullets designed for 45/70 these days are far better than they were in 2002. But I am playing with some things that are a little better and bigger these days.

Michael

Hey Boomy
Yeah ok--first some pics of the tree--Which I just took because I have it here at home! I know I have photos of the tree, but where I don't know, but this is the shot section that I brought with me.
This is the entry side



The next two are the exit side



The end result


Michael

You pissed off some eco nazi's, killed a tree and a moose all in one shot!
Bravo!

That shot is worthy of an article

Nice moose BTW!

FYI Boomy these are the bullets that hit the moose!


Michael

Great moose, Michael!

Is that a trophy tree?

Whitworth

Well the tree was of good girth, but a little short on length, not much of a curl, and a little stubby, and the bullet shattered the center, and lost some weight. Have not had it scored, but I suspect it would have some subtractions from it!

LOL
Michael

quote:

Originally posted by michael458:
No, sorry you are very wrong. SD is NOT a significant prediction of performance, there are far more important factors to consider that far out weight SD. Maybe 50 yrs ago---but not today.

FN Solids of far less SD will out penetrate RN solids of significantly higher SD--In cases where diameters are larger bore-416+. Some recent work done suggests that some proper RN bullets in smaller diameters, 9.3 to be exact will out penetrate and out perform FN bullets of the same diameter. Now it would appear that CALIBER is a contributing factor, along with nose profile, and most likely too small of a flat meplat on the FN bullets tested! If you are talking expanding bullets then velocity and construction of said projectile is far more important than SD. SD is a VERY LIMITED FACTOR in todays projectiles. SD only has bearing with the exact SAME nose profile and or construction, and then other factors out weigh it's importance by a long shot.

Now for any comparisons to be made one must define exactly what is being discussed, solids, fmjs, solid copper expanding, standard expanding, what? Solid bullet construction is also a consideration, do you consider a FMJ a solid? And so forth, some definitions required. No blanket statements can apply here.

I really can't think that anyone would think the construction and materials that solids are made of are "immaterial"??? This is an all important factor, recently a thread on AR there was a chap that had several Woodleigh FMJ's that bent during penetration of elephant as I recall, another instance in the early days of the Barnes solids they were prone to breakage, in the case of some GS solids they actually expand some in the nose, I have also heard recently that some of the new Noslers have been prone to breaking. So Solid Bullet construction is all but immaterial? Hardly! Cast Performance bullets are solids, so I think I would reconsider that, and for my part solid construction and design are very important, more so than SD. In addition some materials that solids are made may weigh in less or more, in the instance of the solids we designed for my .500 caliber rifles I chose a copper alloy instead of solid brass, I gain about 6% in weight with the exact same bullet. The copper alloy is also sufficiently hard not to break, or deform when hitting heavy bone. So construction and materials used to make solid bullets are extremely important!

Michael

Michael,

Speaking solids only since we're discussing penetration and assuming that the bullet does as it is supposed to do, either maintain shape (Barnes, Woodleigh, Hornaday, hard cast) or pattern deform (GS Custom), and assuming that the shape were the same, I blieve that material or construction is immaterial.

In addition:
1. Two bullets of whatever construction, same SD, some FPS, one RN one FN, the FN will out penetrate the RN.
2. Two bullets, both either RN or FN - but the same shape, of whatever construction, one higher SD, equal velocity, the higher SD bullets will out penetrate the lower SD - assuming appropriate spin rates for both bullets.
3. Two bullets, both either RN or FN - but the same shape, of whatever construction, pushed to the same pressure, the higher SD bullet will outpenetrate the lower SD bullet - assuming appropriate spin rates for both bullets.

Your comment about the 9.3 would contadict No 1 above. I would like to hear details.

As far as the actual in field performance of the various bullets by various manufacturers, we've already gone round and round. I'm speaking theory above. As for the bullets to use, you like your Barnes and other brass bulets and have had good experience with them, I like my Woodleighs and North Forks and have had good experiences with them, eh?

JPK

JPK

OK then, we will discuss solids, one of my favorite subjects! I will try and discuss word for word concerning the exact subject you have listed.

First

JPK---Speaking solids only since we're discussing penetration and assuming that the bullet does as it is supposed to do, either maintain shape (Barnes, Woodleigh, Hornaday, hard cast) or pattern deform (GS Custom), and assuming that the shape were the same, I blieve that material or construction is immaterial.

Michael---If in fact the solid maintains it's shape, does not break, or deform, bend or shear then you are correct, material/construction is not relevant. However, since in some cases BECAUSE of the material and construction some solids MAY bend, break, deform or not maintain it's original form, then material and construction is of great importance, as there are proven instances in which many of our various solids have in fact bent, broke, or deformed in some manner then I in turn do place a good bit of relevance to materials and construction. Especially in comparison from one bullet of said material/construction to a different bullet of another material/construction. Now with both bullets of equal and same material or construction then it is irrelevant. So I agree somewhat with you statement, with qualifiers I have added.


Second

JPK---In addition:
1. Two bullets of whatever construction, same SD, some FPS, one RN one FN, the FN will out penetrate the RN.

Michael---Well thanks! You are in agreement with my original statement concerning nose profile. This is where I state that Nose Profile is far more important than SD. As you state same SD--FN will out penetrate RN.

Well, almost right, but not 100% of the time as I have been learning too! Just like FN bullets--not all round nose bullets are created equal either. I have in a recent case had the RN Woodleigh in 9.3 caliber far exceed a FN Barnes design in 9.3 caliber, and to such an extent that SD has zero effect on it. So there are cases where RN will out penetrate FN bullets--fact. There are lot's of times that FN will out penetrate RN--Fact. In general what I am finding is that 416 caliber and up I see the FN win out each and every time. But when caliber drops down to 9.3--358 I am seeing a change over, and I intend to do some test work soon in 338 caliber to help confirm some of this. One of the factors involved is the actual shape of the round nose, a little different than some of the larger calibers. And of course the flat meplat on the smaller calibers being very small, and nearly insignificant.

I think a more clear definition of your statement concerning SD is this: Two bullets-same material-same construction, same caliber, same nose profile then the higher SD will penetrate deeper! All else being equal this is very true, but there has to be equality on every count, other than SD. Example: Below you see two .500 Caliber bullets-same material, construction, nose profile, same meplat--one weighs 510 grs with an SD of .291--the other one weighs 550 grs with an SD of .314--The higher SD bullet that weighs 550 grs will out penetrate the 510 gr bullet every single test and every single test material--Every Time!



Third

JPK---2. Two bullets, both either RN or FN - but the same shape, of whatever construction, one higher SD, equal velocity, the higher SD bullets will out penetrate the lower SD - assuming appropriate spin rates for both bullets.

Michael---I had to read this one at least twice before getting it exactly, but this says exactly what I said above with two bullets being exactly the same, then SD will win out! I agree with this no exceptions. As shown and stated in my above example and statement! You are correct!


Fourth

JPK---3. Two bullets, both either RN or FN - but the same shape, of whatever construction, pushed to the same pressure, the higher SD bullet will outpenetrate the lower SD bullet - assuming appropriate spin rates for both bullets.


Michael---OK I think you are saying the same thing in #3 as in #2 except adding pressure to the equation. I see no argument here as before. However I do see you trying to place a value on pressure, and I have not seen or experienced that when concerning penetration, or maybe I am misunderstanding the statement somehow? Also in my experience if proper twist rates are used for any particular bullet I have not seen velocity a major contributor especially with RN bullet penetration, more so in FN bullet penetration. However in FN it must be a substantial difference in velocity, and in all cases I have found that penetration is really sweet between 2000 fps and 2400 fps. I contend that once over or under these thresholds that penetration begins to suffer with FN bullets. Most of the higher velocity tests I doubt that penetration would suffer to the point of being an issue unless bullet construction becomes a point, but getting down on the low end of velocity very well may become an issue in some cases.


Fifth

JPK---Your comment about the 9.3 would contadict No 1 above. I would like to hear details.

Michael---You are 100% correct! It does contradict your #1 and coming from all people that it could have come from, ME! Do you believe that crap!

Well it's true! Recently have been playing 9.3 in several cartridges, but most in particular my very own 9.3 B&M, my medium for my B&M series cartridges. I have zero experience with 9.3 so I have been testing a good bit. I do not ever intend to carry a 9.3 for serious dangerous game, but I like to always know what a bullet is capable of regardless! So I have been testing briefly some of the FMJ and solids. In a friends rifle, 9.3X62 we tested the 286 Barnes FN Banded Solid at 2223 fps in my standard wet print/catalogue mix. It went a mere 25 inches before becoming unstable, veering off course, and found backwards in the mix. Not very impressive at all. Another test just a couple of weeks ago conducted in the 9.3 B&M with the 320 gr Woodleigh FMJ RN at two velocities--One at 2203 fps and the other purposely low at 1870 fps. Both bullets passed completely thru the box, out the back which is treated 2X6 and the 2200 fps bullet stuck in the concrete block retaining wall at the back of the range, 21 yds away. Both bullets gave 100% dead straight penetration!



I had never had anything but the bigger bore FN solids completely penetrate the box, ever! In another test recently with this same friend, we tested some military 6.5 caliber 155 gr FMJ RN bullets , these were tested between 2061 fps up to 2338 fps and all passed completely thru the test medium and exited the box also. So you see, all Round Nose bullets are not created equal! It does seem that the RN designs in medium and smaller calibers do penetrate extremely well. I have a couple of boxes of the 320 gr Woodleighs in 9.3 being delivered today from Midway! I will try and include later a photo of the nose design as compared to larger calibers, and to the Barnes 9.3 bullet. You will see that there is a difference in the nose shape, but I also suspect that caliber is an issue of some sort that is involved with the performance. However in comparing a 458 caliber Woodleigh and the 9.3 320 gr Woodleigh they are very near the same length, which at first I thought the 9.3 was very long for caliber and that might have something to do with keeping on track, but I don't believe that to be the case now, so nose profile is all I can come up with until I conduct a more thorough test.

Speaking of nose profile, the worst solid I have ever tested is the 500 gr Woodleigh FMJ that is supposed to be .474 caliber, for the 470s. It penetrates the same mix to a max of 26 inches and is found backwards if it stays in the box, which most of the time it exits the top or the sides and goes everywhere! Starts to veer off course at 20 inches. It is undersized also at .4725 if that has something to do with it. The barnes RN is not much if any better either. The 500 gr 458 Caliber bullet fairs much better and I think it is nose profile and the less diameter of the 470 caliber bullet, see below: I think you can see the difference in the two bullets, with the 458 caliber bullet being the better RN profile in my opinion.




A case where NOSE PROFILE far exceeds SD you can see below. This is the generations of design I went thru with my .500 caliber rifles to get to a winning combination. You will see from left to right the various progression. The two FN bullets were prototypes and somewhere in the mix lost 1/10th inch off the base. They should have been much heavier, however I tested anyway and got some big surprises. The heavy RN bullet is 512 gr .500 caliber with an SD of .294---the two flat nose designs on the right are 440 grs .500 caliber SD of .251 and 467 grs .500 caliber SD of .267. The two LIGHTER FN Designed bullets would out penetrate the heavy 512 RN bullet CONSISTENTLY by 35% or better time after time. The later two designs were adopted to the family and added weight to them, and are now respectively 485 grs and 510 grs. With the addition of the 500 MDM to the family I again added weight to the 510 and this bullet comes to 550 grs, both seen above in a photo.


JPK----As for the bullets to use, you like your Barnes and other brass bulets and have had good experience with them, I like my Woodleighs and North Forks and have had good experiences with them, eh?

Michael----Yes you are correct on both points, and I have no issue at all with either, we have both done well and suspect we will continue to progress and learn on all counts!


Michael

Michael... you are having WAY too much fun.

Boomy

Some people like gemstones, some like gold, me I get off on bullets! Plain old copper, lead, brass and even bronze!

M

An unfired bullet or cartridge is full of promise and hope of exotic locations, good times and adventures... the stuff of dreams. Recovered bullets are little bits of dreams come true.

Michael,

By speaking of pressure, I was speaking of velocity potential. Meaning that with two similar shaped bullets, either RN or FN, one with higher SD, both pushed to max potential or the same pressure in the same case, the higher SD bullet will penetrate more. For example, a, say, 450gr RN pushed to, say 60k psi out of a 458wm will be beat by a 500gr RN with the same shape when that bullet is pushed to the same pressure - assuming both appropriate twist and powder choice. {Energy of the lighter bullet will be greater, but penetration of the heavier bullet will be better anyway.}

I was going to mention round nose shape to you, but you have already noted the difference. The "pointier" 470 Woodleigh has the traditional shape for the 470NE and that shape has a long history of being less than ideal. Historical reports of increased tendency to tumble and veer.

On the smaller Woodleigh round noses, they begin to approach flat nose shape, as the nose becomes bluffer and bluffer. The 375H&H is also a very bluff round nose. It has an excellent reputation for penetration in ele and other DG, but my own elephant head test reveal similar penetration from the 300gr 375 Woodleigh at ~2500fps to my 500gr Woodleigh 458 RN's at 2145fps.

I think to draw an adequate comparison for 9.3 bullets you need to control for fps. Try two 286gr bullets at the same speed. I am confident that the FN will outpenetrate - so long as it has adequate meplat and spin.

The Barnes ogive deprives the smaller Barnes of meplat, I think. The GS Custom and North Fork, true truncated cone designs, don't give up so much, I believe.

Your two 500 bullets seem to confirm my assertion that SD will win the day and is much more important than you let on. But you did not give velocity, so the information is incomplete for a direct inference.

On solid deformation, yes and no. The GS Customs have phenominal penetration and yet they are designed to pattern deform. Most recovered bullets show mild deformation when retrieved after elephant head shots, but they still penetrate like wild fire. The deformation retains a pretty flat nose shape.

You know that I am a fan of flat nose bullets, but penetration isn't everything. That is why I shoot Woodleigh RN's for the first shot on eles, but FN's for the second, etc, shots, if required.

JPK

Don't forget the utterly important length to diameter ratio! Otherwise continue on with this highly enlightening discussion.

I did receive new 320 9.3 Woodleighs today. However I intend to retire for the evening, but will pick this up again in the morning. I will take some quick photos for comparison but JPK hits on a couple of points concerning the different shape of the RN on these smaller caliber FMJs, they are more flattened than the conventional RN design. Thus I think doing a better and straighter job of penetrating. I have the same experience with the 310 gr Woodleigh 358 caliber FMJ.

As for the Barnes 9.3 in my opinion the meplat is very very tiny, I do not believe it can ever compete with the Woodleigh FMJ 320, or even an equal Woodleigh 286! Meplat is just too small.

Can't say anything about 375 caliber, don't mess with that.

The GS Customs in 9.3 and smaller calibers may have larger meplats in comparison with the Barnes. If so, then they would certainly do well, but I don't have any of those either.

At any rate I have some more test work to do in the coming weeks, 9.3 will be a component of that.

Don't miss the point concerning nose profile and much differing SDs--where the lighter lower SD of the FN .500s out penetrated the heavier, higher SD of the RN bullet by 35% plus! Thus SD is over ridden by nose profile. Once again I assert that SD only has bearing where two bullets are dead equal in nose profile, construction/material as shown with the two .500 caliber bullets.

At velocities I have run with my bullets--velocity is not a real factor. I have tested the 510 Solid at 2000 fps up to 2350 fps and there is no real difference in penetration. I have also tested 458 and 416 caliber FN bullets at velocity from 2000 up to 2450 fps and found very little practical difference. I do see much more damage and trauma inflicted up front with the higher velocity solids. Now I imagine that if velocities were increased you would see some differences however what I have seen is actually LESS penetration with higher velocity because so much energy is expended up front. I doubt that you would reach the point to where penetration with high velocity would be a real issue. You can lower velocity to the point where penetration could be an issue with some types of solids. But if one stays within that 2000--2400 fps range then velocity is of little importance in stability, depth of penetration, and performance. My velocity tests have been mostly with FN solids.

A solid has 3 missions to complete for me---PENETRATE---PENETRATE---PENETRATE!!!! Dead Straight penetration, crunch dead straight thru bone, muscle, organs, hide, flesh, crap, trees, rocks, cars and trucks and anything else I need to get thru to solve the problem! That's it's job and it's only job as far as I am concerned! For me Penetration of Solids IS EVERYTHING and I will accept nothing less, but that's just me, I am a rather unconventional sort. I expect a lot and nothing but the best.

I will get some photos up of those wonderful ROUND NOSE WOODLEIGH 9.3s tomorrow---God I can't believe I just said that????

Michael

I almost forgot, and might be the most important part of the 9.3 and smaller diameter penetration phenomena and as ScottS so aptly put

The UTTERLY IMPORTANT LENGTH TO DIAMETER RATIO!

EXCELLENT and extremely important point as far as I am concerned! I think this point, and the nose shape of the bullets is why they do so well, and why the tiny 155 gr 6.5s FMJ did the same. This also explains past tests I have done with the same woodleighs in 358.

Thanks Scott--a very important point and part of this equation!

Michael

quote:

Originally posted by michael458:

The UTTERLY IMPORTANT LENGTH TO DIAMETER RATIO!

Michael

Oh, MM, you mean SD?, which one "gives" .02 to copper monometals?

No Jeffe not SD

SD---Is the expression used to describe the "Diameter" of a bullet as compared to its "Weight". It is the mathematical procedure that associates the mass of a projectile to its cross-sectional area. I don't see a damn thing in that about "Length"!


Ok a little more thought process--burning cells I don't have! Take two 458 caliber solid/fmj---500 gr Barnes FN Banded at 1.53 inches long--500 gr Woodleigh FMJ RN at 1.395 inches long--both exact same SD of .341? Length is not a bearing on SD. Example two--Woodleigh 500 gr .458 is 1.395 inches long with an SD of .341. Woodleigh 320 gr 9.3 caliber is 1.400 inches long and same SD of .341, but 20% less diameter?? So length to diameter is important to stability during terminal penetration, but with nose profile still the most important factor involved.

Consider we made a bullet out of even lighter material than copper, or brass, something that took twice the length in caliber to equal the same weight and SD as say copper? A bullet 3 inches long in lighter material--as opposed to 1.5 inches in copper? Now if we can stabilize this bullet for terminal penetration--both equal nose profile, equal SD, how would this perform? Obviously "length to Diameter Ratio" is vastly different in the two bullets. I don't believe it would penetrate deeper per say, but I believe that the extra length "MAY" assist in keeping the bullet stable for a longer period, with extra pressure coming in along this extra length? Does this sound about right? Or am I full of it?

Another thought too is that the extra length of the lighter weight material could cause friction and extra pressure along the added surface of the bullet to add drag, causing it to slow faster, causing in effect LESS PENETRATION over all?? This could and would happen at some point, a point of diminishing returns. However, before that point I think it would add stability.


Now I can't say that length to diameter is that important, I don't have the experience to say so, but it could very well be an additional factor to consider, especially as we go down in caliber to the mediums and small bores?????

OK you lost me on the .02 copper thing???

M

Hmmm, this is
getting good. . . . . . . .

I'd say Michael has made a pretty compelling argument, and his comments make total sense. Seems to be far ahead with some 'solid' facts.

Sorry, but could not control myself with that pun!

wow after all this you could go out and test it on a tree

Lost you on the .02 given to copper bullets? but you SAID it ..

same LENGTH bullets, mono or coventional, tend to penetrate about the same .. a 450 gr barnes solids is ABOUT the same as if you FN a conventional bullet .. at the same velocity..

MM, remember, the same construction bullets, at the same SD, have the same "length to diameter" ratio, regardless of caliber ...

So, you take SD, a well known primary fact, and give a copper bullet +.02, at the same length, and you can expect simular results as a HEAVIER lead+copper bullets ...

it takes a second .. a given SD bullet has a ratio of length to diameter .. and it works out about the same .. i forget if it was oconner or ackley that wrote it, but it sticks in my mind...
NO, they aren't the same LENGTH, but tend to be the same NUMBER of units in length, as expressed in diameters...

or, frankly, an sd of .250 is about the same X*diameters, of the same nose and contruction .. and an copper bullet of the same length is lower in SD ...

so, give copper .02 more "SD" and it all works out, close enough

IF a bullet is very much longer than "normal" for a particular heavy-weight to caliber ratio (a very high SD), it will tend to not be stable when it leaves the muzzle unless the twist-rate is adjusted to compensate - as in a very long-for-caliber, low density 160gr, 6.5mm. In other words, bullet length and design for rate-of-twist in a particular caliber is an important factor in bullet stability.

Bob

www.bigbores.ca