I submit that the faster you shoot a solid the more devastating effect it'll have on the buffalo - that is, a 300 gr. .375 Barnes banded solid with an impact velocity of 3000 fps will be much more effective at killing than the same solid with an impact velocity of 2500 fps. Why? More hydrostatic shock and greater penetration. Remember, solids essentially do not deform. Your thoughts? Regards, AIU

Please read the Terminal Bullet Performance thread.
Full data, performance charts, experiments, inovative design are all there.
Including live hunting data with pics.

Cheers, John

quote:

Originally posted by Phatman:
Please read the Terminal Bullet Performance thread.
Full data, performance charts, experiments, inovative design are all there.
Including live hunting data with pics.

Cheers, John

Phatman, one can "pick your data" to support whatever view you want.

Let me present data I like. Indeed, there are data showing that once you can get the bullet to hold together, the faster the impact velocity the more penetration, hydrostatic shock, and killing power.

William Steiger - who developed and sold the first available bonded bullet, the Bitterroot bullet - developed a concept he called "relative stopping power." RSP = INITIAL WEIGHT (grs), times IMPACT VELOCITY divided by 7000, times the FRONTAL AREA of the recovered bullet in square inches, times the RETAINED WEIGHT of the bullet divided by 7000, times its PENETRATION in inches.

Thus, RSP is roughly proportional to INITIAL WEIGHT, IMPACT VELOCITY, FRONTAL AREA of recovered bullet, and PENETRATION.

William Steiger, not only made a first-rate bullet, but he was responsible for much of reloading data in the first 5 or 6 Speer reloading manuals - that is, as an ballistician for Speer. He was alos quite good friends with Jack O'Connor.

His bullets held together very well, and his research showed that the faster you drove them, the more penetration and hydrostatic shock; and, thus, greater RSP.

William has also shown that the greater the rotational velocity, the more stable a bullet is as it tracks through tissue. A bullet fired from a gun with a 1 in 12" twist at 3000 fps is more stable going through tissue than one fired at 2500 fps. Remember, as a bullet slows down the rotational velocity will essentially stay the same.

For a solid bullet that does not deform, all the RNP factors increase with increasing speed, including penetration - that is, except initial wt, retained wt, and frontal area that remain constant.

He has verbally encouraged me to shoot his bullets as fast possible.

Regards, AIU

Ackley,
You didn't read the Terminal thread.
It also supports the faster is better for solids.
There is no use in waving you arms around and yelling when people are agreeing with you.

Take a pill

Phatman,

I'm not yelling, just presenting my views. (North Fork bullet makers concur with the Steiger view.)

Nonetheless, I apologize. I assumed falsely that you were disagreeing, and moreover, I assumed on a very long thread that one could find support for whatever position one wanted. I tend to tune out excessively long threads, since a cogent position should be presentable precisely. I present this thread as an example.

Regards, AIU

AI man
The TBP thread covers a lot of issues. Worth reading. I learned a lot and so did the thousands who read it. It will either entertain you or educate you. Flat nose solids have been proven te best penetrators especially what was discovered here and come to fruition was the bullets from Cutting Edge Bullets that out perform all others on the market. It's worth the read and check out www.cuttingedgebullets.com
I think that above 3,700 FPS penetration will begin to suffer due to bullet deformation but yes. Solids love velocity.

Even brass FN solids begin to expand in the nose on impact with water at 2800 fps.
I have observed this in the Iron WaterBoard Buffalo.
Hard to detect expansion below that velocity.

At high velocity water is a very hard medium, resistance increases exponentially with velocity.

The physical chemistry of blood is such that resistance to penetration decreases exponentially in it as velocity increases.

Other nonaqueous media have linear or constant functions for resistance versus velocity,
and the game critter, a complex composite medium,
must be somewhere between the two extremes above.

I agree that more velocity is better, with the new FN brass solids, for penetrating game.
But I will stop at 2800 fps, instead of the tired, old 2150 fps, or even the more daring 2400 fps of late.

2700 to 2800 fps is plenty fast enough with big bore bullets.
Mo' faster is mo' better up to that point for sure.

Heck, I can only drive my 750 gr. .620 FN solid brass bullets to 2750 fps or so in the .600 Overkill. Does this mean I'm Penetration deficient? Oh No the shame! The shame! If only I could reach 3000fps. Then I could shoot through two maybe three Buff at a time. -Rob

Rob,
I would say that your 600 Overkill's .620/750-grainer at 2750 fps is optimized for penetration, including blue whale,
BUT, only if you use a brass FN solid with meplat diameter of 67.5% of the bullet diameter.

quote:

Originally posted by Ackley Improved User:

quote:

Originally posted by Phatman:
Please read the Terminal Bullet Performance thread.
Full data, performance charts, experiments, inovative design are all there.
Including live hunting data with pics.

Cheers, John

Phatman, one can "pick your data" to support whatever view you want.

Let me present data I like. Indeed, there are data showing that once you can get the bullet to hold together, the faster the impact velocity the more penetration, hydrostatic shock, and killing power.

William Steiger - who developed and sold the first available bonded bullet, the Bitterroot bullet - developed a concept he called "relative stopping power." RSP = INITIAL WEIGHT (grs), times IMPACT VELOCITY divided by 7000, times the FRONTAL AREA of the recovered bullet in square inches, times the RETAINED WEIGHT of the bullet divided by 7000, times its PENETRATION in inches.

Thus, RSP is roughly proportional to INITIAL WEIGHT, IMPACT VELOCITY, FRONTAL AREA of recovered bullet, and PENETRATION.

William Steiger, not only made a first-rate bullet, but he was responsible for much of reloading data in the first 5 or 6 Speer reloading manuals - that is, as an ballistician for Speer. He was alos quite good friends with Jack O'Connor.

His bullets held together very well, and his research showed that the faster you drove them, the more penetration and hydrostatic shock; and, thus, greater RSP.

William has also shown that the greater the rotational velocity, the more stable a bullet is as it tracks through tissue. A bullet fired from a gun with a 1 in 12" twist at 3000 fps is more stable going through tissue than one fired at 2500 fps. Remember, as a bullet slows down the rotational velocity will essentially stay the same.

For a solid bullet that does not deform, all the RNP factors increase with increasing speed, including penetration - that is, except initial wt, retained wt, and frontal area that remain constant.

He has verbally encouraged me to shoot his bullets as fast possible.

Regards, AIU

Theroretical arguments like this don't interest me much. A 300 grain .375 bullet at 2500 fps can penetrate a big elephant side to side with no problem, whether or not there are bones in the way. All that can be gained by boosting the velocity to 3000 fps is to worsen one's flinch, increase the practical offhand group size, and expend more energy on bushes on the off side of the elephant.

Same goes for .458 Winchester solid loads.

Oh yeah. What's an elephant? An animal that weighs about 7 times as much as a Cape buffalo, that's what.

Deleted.

I can't tell any difference in a solid at 2400 FPS and one at 2800 FPS if the fast one works, as that is as fast as I have used a solid on a buffalo..IMO a solid is a solid and 2400 is about ideal, I prefer less to more velocity, and that is my opine.

What I am sure of is all kinds of things can happen with solids when pushed too fast and I have seen most of them take place. In fact one needs to be carefull with both softs and solid at high velocity, be sure you choose one tough bullet at high speed, and then cross your fingers.

Here's what BARNES is posting on their website regarding RN vs. FN solids...guess it's not a clear-cut as some posting here would suggest.

(http://www.barnesbullets.com/p...rifle/banded-solids/)

"For 2011, Barnes added the RN design back into the Banded Solids lineup. Why? It’s simple: feed and function in bolt action rifles. Hunters use these Banded Solids in larger calibers for dangerous game. The RN is a proven design that works in bolt guns, a very important consideration for this type of hunting. While the Banded Solid FN product is still available, they can only be ordered from the Barnes website.

“If you can’t chamber it, penetration is meaningless.” Brian Bingham, D’Arcy Echols & Co. www.echolsrifles.com.

“My feeling is that the flat nose solids currently in vogue is marketing hype. There are all kinds of supposed technical advantages touted for the flat nose, i.e. that it maintains direction better while penetrating, and greater tissue damage. The flat nose does reduce penetration to a degree.

“Over the many years since the advent of jacketed round-nose solids, who knows how many large beasts have been shot with satisfactory results. If the jacket had the integrity to withstand deformation forces, they worked very well (not all did – such as Kynoch and RWS). The flat nose creates more work for the gun maker, at least for those that ensure their product cycles rounds flawlessly.

“An interesting subject one could discuss endlessly.” Roy Vincent, Professional Hunter & Gunsmith

“I have never noticed any advantage in penetration or holding a straight course with the ‘flat meplat’.

“I first encountered that design early on in my career in the late nineteen forties loaded in Winchester’s 300 gr.375 solid. I had numerous discussions on the subject when I accompanied John Wootters and Jack Carter on safari in Botswana as Jack’s ‘Sledghammer’ solid had a ‘flat meplat’.

“Quite frankly I think the tendency for the ‘flat meplat’ to hold a truer course is mostly ‘theory’. It does undoubtedly have some feeding problems in some rifles.”

Harry Selby, Professional Hunter

“While my experience with flat nosed solids is limited, I have never noticed the difference between them and the round nose. What is more important is the fact that the round nose construction feeds reliably always, and that the construction is sound as your Barnes Banded Solid is.”

Athol Frylinck, Professional Hunter

When I contacted BARNES themselves (just recently) asking when the FN design would be available, they told me the government was investigating because solids are banned in pistols, and their rifle bullets can be adapted to pistols. I don't know how long they plan to stop production.

You don't need solids for buffalo. Just use a good bonded soft point and put it in the right place. If you do that you will be fine.

AIU

I would say it's a very clear cut situation. Barnes was recently sold and the new marketing folks are targeting the masses. There are many more big bore rifles owned by folks who like to shoot them at the range or just have them in the safe than there are rifles and guys who actually take them to Africa to hunt with. Fewer still hunt Elephant which is the real domain of the solid, with a few exceptions. They are trying to sell to "everyone" so that they can enjoy their big bore. The RN bullets are more likely to feed in the lower quality rifles without modification. The guys who take them to Africa to hunt Elephant usually have some amount of tuning done to their weapon.

Read the Terminal thread. You don't have to agree with the findings there but it contains an enormous amount of information on different bullet designs, construction, shape, size, weight, etc. Just about anything you want to research. For me, and I think the majority of folks on this forum, the FN is the hands down winner in terms of straight line penetration. Does that mean the RN will not get the job done. Probably not but it might.

Have you watched many elephant hunting videos? How many times have you seen an experienced hunter take a frontal brain shot on a big Ele Bull only to have the bull shake his head and turn tail and run? Seems to happen quite often. Did they put the bullet in the wrong place. Possibly. What bullet were they using, a RN? And did it just veer off of straight line penetration before reaching the brain? I don't know.

Lot's of questions. But I find the data on the Terminal thread to be fascinating as many of the things we "knew" about bullets, velocity, construction, etc have been challenged and many disproved!

I just ordered some FN bullets from Barnes recently and they all arrived without incident. These may very well be my last order however as I'm quickly converting to the CEB line up in medium and large bores.

Bottom line regarding your post is this, IMO. Your are letting the "MARKETING" guys influence your opinion on what works and doesn't, concerning the RN vs FN. Short of setting up and performing numerous expensive and time consuming experiments with several different calibers, the Terminal thread would be a much better source of data from which to draw input for forming your opinions, than a bunch of marketing guys who might not even be into the shooting sports!

Todd,

Thanks again for you input, I appreciate it. I'm not quibling with the FN vs. RN findings. It's that I've got a bunch .375 300 RN Barnes bullets. At least they'll be good for working up a load. But, when I head to Africa I'll use the FN CEBs or Noslers I've ordered. I'm not sure I'll ever get some .375 300 gr. FN Barnes solids, unless someone wants to sell.

Actually, I've been to Africa twice and killed two Cape buffalo and an elephant - all dead with one shot using 300 gr. Fail Safes at ~2900 fps. The elephant was dead before it hit the ground - it never twitched.

Regards, AIU

So the real story via the BATFE is related only to Elite Ammunitions LOADED ammunitionusing Trident bullets ONLY in calibers .223, 6.5 Grendel and 6.8 SPC.

BATFE classifed .223, 6.5 Grendel and 6.8 SPC loaded ammunition as "pistol rounds" and the Elite Ammunitions stuff loaded with their Trident bullet (only Elite Ammunition and only their Trident bullet) was ruled by BATFE as armor piercing pistol ammunition.

Only their loaded ammunition using their Trident bullet. Nothing else.

Nothing to do with Barnes except that Elite Ammunition legal team is asking why the ruling applied only to their loaded ammunition (again ONLY in 223, 6.8 Grendel and 6.8 SPC loaded ammunition with Trident bullets).

I have a call into a friend at Barnes as well as an email. Everyone is away for Thanskgiving.

I should have kept the email from Barnes in response to my question - but I deleted it. They mentioned BATFE as the investigating body.

Go to your "trash" file and see if that email
Is still there. You didn't empty it recently did you? So convenient! The issue is some crappy rifles won't feed FN bullets. thats really why they still make em. Half an hour with a dremel tool and they will. Yes sorry but that's true! Sorry dude but FNs Out penetrate RNs period. End of discussion. Period!how do I know, because I actually make bullets and test them. Mine are just as accurate and precise as anything that comes out of Barnes and years ago I saw FNs out perform RNs and yes I've hunted buff and Ele with them. You don't believe me,well that's your option but the facts are the facts. Nothing on the Terminal bullet performance thread contradicts my experience.-Rob

Feb 2002:

quote:

A cylinder shape with a vertical face, cuts a more disruptive permanent wound channel than any other shape. Further to that, even a 100 fps increase will significantly increase the temporary wound channel, causing it to contribute to the final size of the permanent wound channel."

http://forums.accuratereloadin...?r=48010337#48010337

Gerard, I love your post - it makes a lot of sense. (I've ordered some of your bullets). Obviously, velocity is very important - round nose or flat nose. But, the velocity that's most important is the velocity of bullet as it enters the heart lung cavity - where the tissue damage needs to be done. There may be significant differences in the cavity entrance velocity of a RN vs FN, all other variables being equal such bullet diameter, bullet wt., impact velocity, etc. Do you have any information on the body cavity entrance velocity.

"Kent,

It depends entirely on the shapes achieved and the speeds involved when penetrating the body. The following is well described in "Bullet Penetration" by Duncan McPherson. Don't shoot me, I am only the messenger
1. Stagnation pressure at the nose of the bullet causes deformation of the bullet and tissue.
2. Stagnation pressure develops only at areas that are at a right angle to the direction of travel and drops off quickly on any surface angled away from the direction of travel.
3. Stagnation pressure increases disproporsionally to increases in speed. At 2200 fps it is 32600 psi and at 2600 fps it is 45500 psi.
4. A cup shape at the nose of the bullet delivers the same stagnation pressure as a vertical face.
5. Stagnation pressure is what snaps the tissue away from the centerline of the bullet and peripherally away from the bullet path.

Bearing the above in mind, it supports what we have seen in the shooting of animals with various shapes of bullet: A cylinder shape with a vertical face, cuts a more disruptive permanent wound channel than any other shape. Further to that, even a 100 fps increase will significantly increase the temporary wound channel, causing it to contribute to the final size of the permanent wound channel. In practise we have seen that a 270 gr flat nose 375 at 2900 fps bullet will deliver a similar size wound channel to a 500 gr jacketed soft from a 458 Lott at 2350 fps and go deeper. Even a 265 gr HV from a 378 Weatherby, that loses the petals entirely and deforms to a nice cylinder weighing 220 gr, will do more damage than a standard soft from a Lott. The reason, purely and simply, is the shape presented to the direction of travel through the body. Consider also that the reliability of a flat nosed bullet, or a bullet that reliably changes to a flat nosed bullet, is higher because it is a less complex mechanism. The variables involved in deforming to complex shapes, with multi-metal bullets, introduces unpredictability into the results and that is what makes these discussions so interesting.

Fixed my spelling.
------------------
Gerard Schultz
GS Custom Bullets

"The stagnation pressure is the pressure that results from the complete transfer of the velocity of the bullet into pressure. Strictly speaking the stagnation pressure is only seen at an infinitessimal point at the exact centerpoint of the bullet nose and has absolutely nothing to do with the shape of the bullet, either in terms of its magnitude or extent. It depends only on the velocity of the bullet and is given by P = density / 2 x velocity^2, where the density is that of the fluid body.
Now the pressure flow field generated by the passage of the bullet obviously extends far away from the centerpoint of the nose and pressure falls off exponentially (cube law) as the energy of motion is distributed over a larger and larger volume. The shape of the bullet is vital to the way in which this flow field is expressed. A broad flat nose will create a sharp angle of departure from the bullet, whereas a (stable) pointed shape will allow a much more graceful angle of departure from the stagnation point. This also drives the near field pressures. A flat point shape will result in higher near field pressures and more likelihood of flow stresses in tissues that exceed the elastic limits."

That is why I have been shooting buffalo, Hippo elephant, and a heck of alot of plainsgame from Duiker to Eland with Gerards GS Custom flat nose solids for years, and I love his HV HPs also, they are great bullets and they work..I'm sure my shipping bill from RSA and the gas used up delivering bullets to my clients in Africa bring back bullets to me in the states was in the Anus book of world records!, Thank God his daughter is now in the USA and geared up to sell those wonderfull bullets. My bank acct will love that girl.

As to increasing the velocity I'm not sure and don't really care, what I do know is the FPs work at any velocity from 2000 FPS to 2400 FPS, in all calibers from the 338 to the 458 Lott and I think I loaed up some boxes for Pierre van Tonders 500 Jefferys. I can't tell any difference in my 450-400 with a FN at 2150 or Jans 416 Wby at 2800 FPS on buffalo and I have seen a lot of both at work on buffalo.

IMO a larger wound channal only seems to tear up stacks of magazines and bullet test boxes..The length of time a buff remains standing is up the the Red Gods of Huntingdome..it varies based on too many other things.

As for Barnes' comments, I've always thought Randy was one hell of a salesman and a good businessman.

AIU

Good Morning, I have been absent, but have enjoyed greatly reading these two threads of yours concerning solids and performance. Many good points made in both threads, and follow right along with our very intensive study of solid behavior over the last couple of years. Seems in this particular thread, you have accepted, or already knew, the fact that FN does in fact perform in all ways superior than the standard round nose configuration. This is a fact, it is not theory, based not only on extensive, and intensive test work here in my test medium, but in any "aqueous" test medium made. It must be "aqueous" to have an idea, animal tissue is "aqueous", as is my test medium I use. Dry does not cut it.

Now I not only test in the "lab", but in the field as well, on buffalo, elephant, hippo, thin skinned animals, blah blah blah. What works in the test medium I use, works in the field as well, proven over and over the last 15 yrs of research, not only by my own observations, but by many others as well, many of which are on this forum and thread as well. With this stated, let's continue on to answer some of your questions, or statements, and give good discussion.

quote:

I submit that the faster you shoot a solid the more devastating effect it'll have on the buffalo - that is, a 300 gr. .375 Barnes banded solid with an impact velocity of 3000 fps will be much more effective at killing than the same solid with an impact velocity of 2500 fps. Why? More hydrostatic shock and greater penetration. Remember, solids essentially do not deform.

First, I am not much of a 375 fan for this sort of work. But in effect your statement is true. Absolutely, velocity with most Flat Nose solids hit very hard up front. Velocity also gives you deeper penetration, with most solid FN bullets--but, to what degree does reflect upon the "Nose Profile" Some, do better with velocity than others. To summarize the main factors involved with Solid Terminal Penetration;

Nose Profile
Meplat Size
Velocity
Twist Rate
Radius
Nose To Mouth
SD

These are the main true factors in FN Solid Terminal Performance.

Several different "Nose Profiles", let's look at 3-4 of these.

Barnes Banded--Excellent nose profile, I have tested and used in the field extensively. It was my first FN solid used back in 2005 on 3 buffalo and a hippo. A 500 gr 458 caliber from a 458 Lott at 2275 fps. Jesus Christ, it was a hammer on buffalo, a very very noticeable effect when it hit. I have shot numerous buffalo with round nose solids, no effect, buffalo seemed to take no notice of it, but hammer then with a FN and you very easy see the effect of the buffalo taking the bullet.

North Fork/GSC--Close Nose Profiles, not enough real difference I think to separate them. An excellent solid, and has proven themselves for many years now. Hit hard, drive deep.

BBW#13 Nose Profile--This is the new kid on the block, one that I honestly am rather proud to have been involved with. It is an amazing nose profile, it works from .224 caliber right on up to .620 that has been tested here, and everything you can imagine in between. It's so consistent, it gets boring in every caliber. It does the same thing over and over, drives deep and straight, boringly so!

Barnes Banded Solid, North Fork, and GSC react well to velocity. There are gains in depth of penetration, along with added trauma up front.

The BBW#13 Nose Profile tends to gain a bit more depth of penetration with added velocity, than do the other nose profiles. Trauma inflicted I can't really see a difference there.

So with the most popular Nose Profiles, absolutely, velocity gains depth of penetration and trauma inflicted up front. This of course is all in the "Terminal Performance Thread".

Velocity does indeed gain you "Stability" in some cases as well. For instance, should you be shooting a bullet, such as the Barnes Buster, in which it has a less than optimum meplat size of 55% of caliber, then added velocity will gain stability and depth of penetration. It will never be as stable as a 65%--70% meplat of caliber, but velocity does increase a less than optimum meplat size, or twist rate. So velocity is indeed a factor for not only depth of penetration, trauma inflicted up front, and also stability.

None of my big bore cartridges can actually get enough velocity to show what optimum velocity would be. But, by working with smaller calibers and higher velocity, I think that we can see a point of "diminishing returns" with too much velocity, such in this test with a .224 caliber bullet.

If you look at this particular test you see a 7 inch spread in the two bullets. This is an extreme amount in my test medium. 1-2 inches, yes, but 7 inches? Very uncommon. An impact velocity of 3295 fps.




Now, as our impact velocity drops down to 3120 fps we start to see a "Coming Together" of the two bullets as stability is increased, by a lower impact velocity.



And last, at even a lower impact velocity we see the two bullets come dead straight together as stability is increased substantially. This impact at 2911 fps.



Now all the while, we have stated that "Velocity increases Stability"--But clearly here this is not the case? Why?

Our impact velocity, more, has increased the amount of damage to the nose of the bullet, movement of metal and displacement of metal has decreased the stability of the bullet. So, we know that one can in fact have too much velocity and reach a point of diminishing returns.



All this of course depending on the hardness of the metal used in any various bullet design or type metal used for said bullet.



I have shot a hell of a lot of solids the last few years, test work, and lot's of them in animal tissue, from thin skinned critters to elephants. All the same, hit hard, noticeably so in every case.

Most noticeable and one very important shot to me was this one I am going to show you that happened with an elephant at close range with a 500 gr .500 caliber BBW#13 Solid at 2400 fps impact. I guess somewhat at 2400 fps, as on my chronograph in the lab it actually ran 2380 fps, but this elephant was much closer than what my chronograph is stationed here on the range, so 2400 fps impact is a close guess I think.

This Solid entered the heart from the bottom left side, exited the upper right side of the heart.




Here, you can very easily see the trauma inflicted to the heart from the 67% meplat of caliber, and it's impact velocity.



That is a fair amount of trauma inflicted from a solid in my opinion. At this shot I believe this elephant thought so as well, he turned immediately at the shot, and fell over. My good luck.


As for the "Barnes" BS--REPEAT---Huge BS Rob is 100% spot on in my opinion and from what information I have gathered on this subject;

quote:

The issue is some crappy rifles won't feed FN bullets. thats really why they still make em. Half an hour with a dremel tool and they will.

Both Rob and Todd have an extremely good handle on all of this, in many ways far better than I, but I concur with both 100% down the line.

Another one, Ray has a good handle from years of field experience with solids as well.

Personally I am very pleased with the performance of these solids anything from 2000 fps lower end up to and around 2400-2500 fps, and most of the work I do in the field I am at 2200-2400 fps, and it's always enough. In the calibers, cartridges, rifles I work with, that's about all I want, or need and can handle well in the field.

All this is in the Terminal Thread, and it really all goes right along with what you are saying, except we prove it in the thread both in test work, and in the field. No theories there.

Hope that helps put some things in perspective.

Enjoy your day guys!

Michael

Thanks Michael, that's helpful. You wouldn't have some 300 gr. .375 banded solids flat nose you'd be willing to sell? Regards,AIU

AIU

Pal, if I had any 375 banded solids, you would be welcome to them, I would give them to you, not sell! But I don't have anything in .375 at all other than a good supply of 375 HH Brass and 375 RUM brass. Brass? The 375 HH I used to make 458 Lott and 470 Capstick out of, and the 375 RUM brass I make 500 MDM, and all the B&Ms out of, with the exception of the Super Shorts. Of course I can use any RUM case for the B&Ms, but only 375 RUM for the 500 MDM. But I would gladly give you all the .375 banded I had, if I had any.

I can promise you this however, you will be as happy, even more so as you use them, with the 300 BBW#13 Solid. So I think you will learn this as time moves forward.

Regards
Michael

Another point that I thought of while in the shower--Yeah, great moments and thoughts occur in the wildest places eh?

Caliber! While AIU wants to increase his effectiveness of his solids in 375 caliber by velocity, which he most certainly can, one can also get that same, equal or more effectiveness by increasing caliber! Fact, I have seen it and even at times been surprised by it in the field, in particular the amount of increased effectiveness by caliber alone.

It works in each step upwards in caliber. One can take a 375 caliber at 2500 fps, and I believe a 416 at 2350-2400 is more effective! A 458 caliber at 2250 is more effective than the 416s, a .500 at 2150-2250 is more effective than 458, and god knows in Robs case, and Docs case, I think .620 is beyond or would be beyond effective. I have shot in the field only from 416-.500 caliber, but tested .620 fairly extensively and JHC--One of Robs bullets, or the 900 BBW#13 is awesome to say the least. Now that is way more RIFLE than I am going to carry in the field these days, but that thing has to be incredible on buffalo, hippo and elephant with the right bullet. So effectiveness increases as does caliber, in my opinion as well, and from what I have seen in the field, and in the test work.

Within caliber, then you increase effectiveness of the cartridge by bullet choice, and in the case of the solids by velocity, to a point.

Not to get off point, but there are ways to increase effectiveness without going to velocity, and of course going to velocity with expanding bullets is entirely another subject, so won't go there, too far off point for this discussion.

Michael

Michael, thanks again for the info. I have a quesion - do you hunt Cape buffalo with softs or do you use only FN solids, even for the first shot? Regards, AIU

quote:

Originally posted by Ackley Improved User:
Michael, thanks again for the info. I have a quesion - do you hunt Cape buffalo with softs or do you use only FN solids, even for the first shot? Regards, AIU

I have almost always used a "Soft" up front, followed by solids. With intent to cause as much trauma as possible, first shot, followed by solids to back up. This has also been a very successful method with most other critters as well, plains game and such. This last trip this year was heavy to the new BBW#13 NonCons and North Fork CPS, first time in many years that my second shot was a "Soft--Or more accurately, NonCon". The new BBW#13 NonCons and North Fork CPS give a lot of penetration, so second shots were with NOnCons, followed by a BBW#13 Solid. Very successful. Elephant Solids only.

Michael

Michael, which soft do you use for that first shot? Regards, AIU

quote:

Originally posted by Ackley Improved User:
Michael, which soft do you use for that first shot? Regards, AIU

Soft, or NonCon, which is not really, SOFT, or more well defined as a "Trauma Inflicting" up front bullet I suppose? At any rate....

BBW#13 HP NonCon up front. Or, North Fork CPS--Cup Point--but Expanding Solid. North Fork worked hard on a bullet for our .500 and .474 caliber rifles, these are expanding solids, not the "Limited Penetration" Cup Point Solids. These are the two I work with now and of late.

Michael

quote:

Originally posted by Ackley Improved User:
Thanks Michael, that's helpful. You wouldn't have some 300 gr. .375 banded solids flat nose you'd be willing to sell? Regards,AIU

PM me your address and I will send you some BBW Non Cons and Barnes banded Solids to try. I do not have any BBW solids as I have either loaded or shot all the ones I have.

I would (do) use the BBW solids when going to Africa.

AIU.....below is where we are all buying the bullets that Michael is discussing if you did not have the location. And yes they have both the BBW #13 solids and Non-cons for the 375 in stock. I just bought some last week.
Mac

https://cuttingedgebullets.com

Most of a solids fantastic penetration lands in Dar Es Salaam. Any good solid will penetrate a buffao full length and sizzle out the other side on a broadside shot..Speed has little to do with a solid terminal destruction..You will not see any difference in killing or effect unless your mentally defecient and et up with techknowledgy...

Packing a soft on top is old hat, as Finn Aagard once told me you spend too much time getting it out to shoot a buff in the arse on looking at you..You never know when you leave camp what shot you will be offered, in a 375 or less just use solids...

I settled that arguement long ago with myself, I shoot North Fork Cup Points, they expand a little, penetrate like a solid, and do the damage of a soft point on buff. They are excellent killers with any shot you get.

Bullets like GS Customs HP are excellent and they really penetrate. I have seen excellent penetration with Barnes X bullets..Many of the young PH prefer the GS and Barnes to a solid..I agree with them up to a point and that is with the 40 calibers and up...With the 375 and down I want cup points and flat nose solids and the 350 gr. PP Woodleigh has suited me in the .375 and the 40 calibers, its one hell of a bullet IMO..

Disagree or agree, its a personal choice for each of us.

To whom it may concern,

Some the above posters accused me of being a liar. Well, I asked Barnes Bullets again about when the flat nose variety of their banded solids would be available, and Josh responded as follows:

"The BATFE (ATF) has deemed our Banded Solids as armor piercing bullets. We have appealed their decision and are awaiting a final answer but until further notice we are on a manufacturing hold with all brass bullets.

Thanks, Josh"

Josh Springer | Consumer Service
Barnes Bullets, LLC

38 North Frontage Road, PO Box 620, Mona, UT 84645. Phone 435-856-1111 | Fax 435-856-1040 | joshs@barnesbullets.com

Freedom Group Family of Companies: Remington | Marlin | Bushmaster Firearms | DPMS / Panther Arms | H&R | Barnes Bullets | Advanced Armament Corp | Mountain Khakis | EOTAC | Dakota Arms | Parker Gun


This is very serious infringement on our rights and it will affect not just Barnes bullets but other manufacturers as well.

The OBAMA threat to our hobby is VERY REAL. GET THE VOTE OUT FOR THE NEXT ELECTION - YOUR HOBBY MAY BE IN THE BALANCE.

Regards, AIU

quote:

Originally posted by Atkinson:
Msst of a solids fantastic penetration lands in Dar Es Salaam. Any good solid will penetrate a buffao full length and sizzle out the other side on a broadside shot..Speed has little to do with a solid terminal destruction..You will not see any difference in killing or effect unless your mentally defecient and et up with techknowledgy...

Packing a soft on top is old hat, as Finn Aagard once told me you spend too much time getting it out to shoot a buff in the arse on looking at you..You never know when you leave camp what shot you will be offered, in a 375 or less just use solids...

I settled that arguement long ago with myself, I shoot North Fork Cup Points, they expand a little, penetrate like a solid, and do the damage of a soft point on buff. They are excellent killers with any shot you get.

Bullets like GS Customs HP are excellent and they really penetrate. I have seen excellent penetration with Barnes X bullets..Many of the young PH prefer the GS and Barnes to a solid..I agree with them up to a point and that is with the 40 calibers and up...With the 375 and down I want cup points and flat nose solids and the 350 gr. PP Woodleigh has suited me in the .375 and the 40 calibers, its one hell of a bullet IMO..

Disagree or agree, its a personal choice for each of us.

Ray:

Your post and a post by MeplatFS in the Terminal Bullet Performance thread really got me to thinking.

The holy grail here on AR is penetration, penetration, and more penetration. With todays super bullets, it's entirely possible to penetrate a buffalo from stem to stern. However, buffalo are herd animals and maybe complete penetration should not always be the goal. What about the buff of a lifetime who gives you the perfect broadside shot but has three cows standing behind him? Even fired from a .375 H&H, your cup point solid will probably sail through that buffalo and wound one or more of the cows. Even North Fork says that cup point solids "Should not be used in a herd situation as the CPS may exit." It's pretty difficult to make generalizations and that is why I think that in a magazine rifle, a soft on top with solids in the magazine is still a pretty good idea.

In my mind there is still a place for the Woodleigh soft, PPs where you expect impact velocity to be above 2200 fps and RN SN where you expect velocity to be below 2200 fps. However, even with Woodleighs, you have to be cautious. A Woodleigh RN SN fired from a 500 Jeffery will probably sail through a buffalo on a broadside shot. I know it will through a bison.

In this context, a double gives you a bit more flexibility. You can load a soft in one barrel and a solid in the other. I agree with you that the solid probably works better on heavy game in the sub 40 calibers but these decisions tend to be situation specific. Caliber, velocity, game, distance all come into play. Just my two cents.

Dave,
Of course you are correct, there are instances where penetration is not desirable..but consider this. If a bull is surrounded by cows or other bulls you should not shoot until he is clear, even a Woodleigh or other soft many times will whistle thru a buffalo broadside and I guarentee you a 400 gr. Nolser in a .416 will make two holes in a bull broadsid..

I like solids only in the 9.3x62 or 375 as I have seen them fail on frontal shots and going away shots, and sometimes those shots need to be taken, you have no other choice..

With the 40 calibers on buffalo either a soft of solid suits me fine, I'm going to kill the bull with either..

I believe the cup point is the best of the litter however, and no bullet is perfect for all situation, perfection comes from the shooter and his maturity to perform the correct option he has at the time.

That said the poster thinks faster is better with a solid and that is not the case at all, that much I am sure off, within reason.