570gn Solid for 500 Nitro

The new solids from Woodleigh have just arrived.Phone conversation with Woodleigh suggested loads suitable to same weight softs of traditional construction could be used.
These are very long projecties.They weigh 570gn,same as the old solids and the body runs less than bore diameter.Only with significant load compression could I produce a loaded round using my usual load of 94gn R15 that would provide about 2mm clearance to the engagement of the rifling.I used a small 6mm slice of foam wad over the load to try and prevent powder grains blistering the walls of the case.
I pulled a load apart and found these compress to next to nothing.The rounds did chamber effortlessly in my 500 double when finished.OAL at 88mm.
Have yet to fire any.
Any advice from those who have used them?

Should be a good bullet for 500A2 and 500 Mbogo bolt action mono-barrel.

Looks like a bad design for double rifle use.
Brass, bronze, copper, gilding metal, whatever alloy it is made of with that huge driving surface,
if it is sub-groove-diameter enough to prevent stressing the rifling-joinery-delicacy inevitable in a double-barrel rifle,
and especially an antique,
then it will allow a lot of gas cutting of the throat and rifling.

I do not understand what you mean by "powder grains blistering the walls of the case."
You don't need any filler or nitro card with that kind of compression.

Since this bullet is not supposed to expand like a North Fork Cup Point, it must be hard alloy, eh?

And does it really get "hydrostatic" (or hydrodynamic) stabilization, or is it just shoulder stabilized, and aided in penetration by a sort of cutting or hole punching by the edges of that cup point?

DRG says: "Kiss my liberal grits!"

wombat,
Sorry I can't help you, but call Woodleigh again and see if there's a lighter weight version. What they advertised in Guns & Game is mearly the tip of the iceberg regarding what they are being supplied with. For example, in 45cal there are 325gr, 400gr and 450gr. I've just sent micheal458 some of the 400gr pills for testing in his penetration box.

RIP,
What they're made of (brass) is not particularly hard, supposedly they also run fairly soft on barrels hence are recommended by Woodleigh as double safe.
Cheers...
Con

Con,
A lighter weight bullet screws the double-pooch,
which requires that you use the weight of bullet it was regulated with, if a double rifle.
Of course a lighter bullet may be found to shoot close enough, but usually that requires a lower velocity with the lighter bullet to give longer barrel time with the lesser muzzle rise effect of the lighter load.
Less powerful plinkers are possible however.

If this is for a single shot, single barreled rifle, O.K.

You will never convince me that a brass bullet with that much under-sized bearing surface is good in a double rifle, unless it is for a Blaser S2.

I would use it in a bolt action or single shot, but only if it was close to groove diameter there.

DRG says: "Kiss my liberal grits!"

Wombat,

In lieu of the good word from Woodleigh, could you give me a short description of hydrodynamically stabilized? Or hydrostatically anyway?

I'm assuming this means that the bullet will tend to create a bigger cavitation volume and maybe correct itself toward its original path if disturbed, presumably by hitting bone, or some such. Maybe the cup front on that bullet is just a better flat point solid?

Hope all that turns out to be true. Surely Woodleigh knows more about it than I, well maybe!

I think Mike at North Fork got the mono solid design right in that there was very little groove bearing surface on the relatively soft copper bullet, which would be very easy on barrels. On a harder brass bullet which it SEEMS to be from Woodleigh, it has a lot of groove bearing surface which implies to me greater barrel wear and higher (peak) pressure.

If the bullet is undersized, i.e., significantly smaller than the barrel groove diameter, it would not seem to be a good idea in order to obtain velocity and minimize throat erosion.

The Woodleigh bullet needs a groove diameter smaller than the barrel land diameter. And a bunch more bands. Yeah, like a North Fork.

The redeeming grace of those big monos is that they should fit in most double cartridges. If you can't get them in a 500, they must be huge. Maybe have to go go back to a (relatively) bigger case, like a 470.

Please see below from Woodleigh home page.
http://www.woodleighbullets.co...Monos%20page%201.pdf
http://www.woodleighbullets.co...Monos%20page%202.pdf

I rang Woodleigh as stated and they specifically cleared them for use in my rifle-a 500 Searcy double.
I have had problems with compressed loads in the past with straight walled cases where the powder grains dimple the case and can prevent it chambering.The wad was an attempt to prevent this.It appeared to work as intended but I did not try without it.
Would welcome any comments from those who have
loaded these projectiles differently with success.

.

quote:

Originally posted by ALF:
Benjamin Disreali 1904:

" lies, damned lies and statitistics"

Douglas Lindsay, M.D., Ph.D., JTrauma, 20(12): 1068-1069, 1980.

"lies, damned lies and ballistics "

The use of big words such as "Hydrostatic stability" by companies to sell pseudosceince to the public should be avoided especially if they do not even know or understand what the terms mean or in what context it is used or applied! makes them look like fools !

No $hit - I thought the damn thing was upside down when I first saw the pic!

Whether it is baloney or not is yet to be seen. Really not sure what I am looking at, as the tip looks like steel or aluminum or something and the sides look like copper or copper plated steel or something.

Maybe copper plated steel. That might make sense.

quote:

Originally posted by RIP:
Con,
A lighter weight bullet screws the double-pooch,
which requires that you use the weight of bullet it was regulated with, if a double rifle.

Forgot it was for a double.

Will,
Trawl through here and on NitroExpress and the guy doing the machining has answered why they're called what they are and how they work to some degree. The thread of michael458's on terminal performance should soon have his results from the 400gr (45cal) so at least we can see how penetration goes against like monolithics.


What got me interested however is the claim of wound channels (gelatin and field trials) that seemed to mimic what we'd consider 'tough' soft points.
Cheers...
Con

Con

Have them as first priority to test this week I hope. It won't be today, but depending on work schedule, and damn phone calls, maybe Tuesday. They are interesting! I have been placing witness cards every 10 inches for solids, I will bring a few extra up front to see how the wound channels do.

Michael

Those solids look like they will do the job.

quote:

the body runs less than bore diameter

I dont like the sound of this - undersized? I suppose it might upset just enough to fill the grooves, could be ok. Like to hear more.

The maker says it safe. Hmmm... was that what GM said about the Corvair?

Based on the other thread regarding barrel wear, I would think pure copper (or almost pure) was a better choice for 500NE velocity in a double. Then with copper the trick nose would deform. A traditional blunt shape nose in pure copper might be a simple safer solution.

4B --
cast bullets with driving bands are undersized bodies.. only the bands are caliber(ish)

barnes X bullets where way high pressure, as compared to a jacked bullet, due to bearing surface.

reusing cast bullet technology, grooves came out (cuz they didn't want to call it bands?) which means the bands are caliberish, and the body aint - greatly reducing friction, and thereby pressure

IMHO, the bands should be 15% of the possible surface area and the bullet should be about .280 to .320 SD, in a monometal (not lead) bullet ... this means that they can be shot at same or higher speed, not be destroyed on impact, and have better results than longer-than-a-pitch grooved monometal bullets

It seems from my limited understanding that on most solids there is overkill on the bearing surface.

Am I wrong in thinking that the only reason to have more bearing surface is to add weight?

North fork seems to do great on accuracy and rifling engagement with it's "minimal" bands.

Why are not all solids Bore Riders?

The 458cal I have are .4575 to .458 with a minor diameter of .4475 to .448.
Cheers...
Con

I can't tell from the picture if the sides of the point are straight like a truncated cone or slightly concave like the point.

I think it will be great fun reading the straight line penetration arguments for concave point vs flat point vs round nose.

Let me fire the fist shot.
I think this silver solid will mushroom!
Bad news for werewolves.

greenjoy,
Concave. The shape in profile is quite interesting. These are 458s (450gr and 400gr). Pictures elsewhere where they've been driven hard through bone indicate that the concave nose flattens somewhat. There are plans and I believe they have already been tested for a steel fronted version.
Cheers...
Con

Michael458 tested the 400gr Woodleigh Mono Solid in his 458 B&M today; report and photos are contained in the following thread:

http://forums.accuratereloadin...043/m/2861098911/p/9

More info.

Hi Shaun,

Thank you for your enquiry re the Hydroststatic Stabilized projectiles. These solids have been designed and are manufactured here in Australia. The original design was by John Marozzi with manufacturing and practical input from Geoff McDonald and I. The design of the solid is based on sound principles from the extrusion industry as you have read in the flyer, with further finetuning of the ability of the projectile to penetrate and retain its course. We have been testing it’s abilities on all types of game from Elephant to Deer, I have recently been informed of a feral cat being taken in the US (although this is a bit of an overkill for a 375 H&H).

The projectile is currently being tested by a few authors both in Australia and Overseas and will have further testing done on elephants. We have shot many Asiatic Buffalo with these now and have been able to gather good evidence of the performance of these projectiles. We are also in the final stages of developing a steep tipped version which was tested by Steve Saunders on a pair of elephants from his H&H double in 465.

Due to the design of Hydroststatic Stabilized projectiles and the type of brass that we use, pressures have been similar to those of gilding metal clad projectiles, therefore allowing good regulation from doubles.

If you require any further specific information please let me know and I will get back to you.





Best Regards,

Frank Gogol.



Laser Bullet

P.O. Box 95

Mt Evelyn, VIC., 3796

Australia

Phone (613) 8761 6364

Fax (613) 9761 5770

Email sales@laserbullet.com.au

Web www.laserbullet.com.au