/

Alf,

The bullet on the left penetrates deeper than the bullet in the middle although velocity of the bullet in the middle is more than 200 fps greater than the bullet on the left, and SD is simiilar.

The bullet on the right is intended to be a Keith SWC made out of brass on the theory that the shoulder cuts a nice hole for good bleeding. It does, but is no more effective than the bullets in the middle and on the left, and does not seem to penetrate as well.

quote:

Originally posted by Canuck:
What does Bridger call their solid?

Btw, first release...here's one (a .475 500gr) that came a couple inches shy of fully penetrating a cape buff lengthwise...



Canuck

Hey,
that sure is a nice radius on the nose to meplat!!!

jeffe

Canuck, with a couple of exceptions, I have found that my bolt rifles will not feed truncated cone shaped FNs reliably.

I don't think that mine are unique in this respect, but I'm glad for you that yours will feed them.

I have found that pre and post 64 model 70's, FN commercial mausers that have not been altered, Kimbers, factory CZ550's in 416 rigby, Blasers and well made custom guns tend to feed FN solids quite well. Some of my custom mausers feed them well and some do not.

quote:

Originally posted by 500grains:
I have found that pre and post 64 model 70's, FN commercial mausers that have not been altered, Kimbers, factory CZ550's in 416 rigby, Blasers and well made custom guns tend to feed FN solids quite well. Some of my custom mausers feed them well and some do not.

odd, in that the reports here on AR are that most CZ, Wins, and Rugers need a gunsmith to "Breathe" on them a little ro feed perfectly.

Could be a difference in measurement between what good feeding is.

jeffe

/

Alf,

How many of the test projectiles were flat nosed?

JPK

/

Attaboy Alf! Gerard is coming around! He is allowing a .311 SD for the new .395 bullets.

Now, was the medium ordnance gelatin that the steel spheres were tested in?

I found that velocity was no substitute for mass when it came to penetration of the Iron Water Buffalo (IWB), which is mostly water with some plywood partitions.

With .375 caliber FN bullets, the 300 grainer was reliably/repeatably a better penetrator at 2500 fps and 2700 fps than the 270 grainer at 2900 fps.

In the range of 2100 fps to 2500 fps with .475 caliber FN's of the same 500 grain weight, the penetration was the same.

There is an asymptotic depth of penetration in the IWB for a given bullet weight or SD. Greater bullet weight gave better penetration.
Greater velocity gave better wounding violence, and no decrease in penetration for a fixed bullet weight and caliber (SD constant), just rapidly diminishing returns on penetration with increased velocity seeming to start somewhere below 2100 fps.

Mostly water in the IWB, but ordnance gelatin and flesh show similar exponential increase of drag with velocity, as you say.

quote:

That is why you cannot substitute mass for velocity, it does not work.

I can agree with you on that, Alf, but only if you refer to mass substitution for velocity in a scenario where only one type of bullet is applicable. Being it a GSCHV or a lead core jacketed (lcj) bullet, if you refer to either the one type only or the other type only.

Hence my reply to you on another thread:

quote:

The comparison is between a lcj bullet and a GSCHV bullet and not between different sizes of GSCHV bullets.

The moment you substitute mass for velocity between a GSCHV and a lead core jacketed bullet being used in your comparison, the bigger SD figure is no longer a determinant factor in penetration depth in target.
That both you and myself have experienced with the use of GSCHV bullets.

That leads me to the conclusion that one can only substitute mass with velocity + a bullet of far better design and construction in order to achieve the same, or as we have seen with GSCHV, better penetration in target, irrespective of the lower mass!

/

We've been joking forever about the "square bullet" defined by the standard shorthand definition of sectional density, but admitting that it has a numerical proportionality to reality, though the units are "imaginary."

Integral calculus and impossibly complex functions are required for dealing with any "dynamic sectional density" of a deforming or tumbling bullet.

We are back to common sense in simply choosing a tougher bullet for high velocity expanding bullet work.

But back to the original question, it seems no one can disprove that the FN with large enough truncated cone meplat is for practical purposes asleep at the muzzle and shoulder stabilized.

quote:

So yes absolutely as you state, best quality and construction all the way but with one more addition, use the correct bullet for it's intended application based on this knowledge.

quote:

It even applies to Gerard's HV's cause if shot at very high impact velocities they cause huge wounds, the energy transfer of a 130 gr 7mm HV going at 3800 fps is massive and should bullet placement put the timing of the second phase of bullet motion in target at a point where you want to use the meat, you can forget about it or if the target is small you will be picking your trophy parts off the thorn bushes around behind the shot animal. I have been there and done that.

Alf, the manufacturer of GSCHV bullets clearly says maximum load speed at muzzle for 130gr HV 7mm RM bullet is 3400fps.
Your 3800fps is being naughty - so expect to get your trophy parts to be hanging on the thorn bushes.

I haven't had that when sticking to the rules.

Merry Christmas to you, RIP and everybody else!

/

Jagter,
Your HV pitch from the other thread bled over to this one, so allow me to admit this as a shameless and truthful promotion of the FN and HV as the best available, state-of-the-art projectiles.

To All:
Don't eat the meat salted with lead.
Don't eat any yellow snow.
And have a Merry Christmas and a Happy New year.

The first 500 grain bullets I received from Bridger had a .375 meplate. I talked with John and he made me up some 540 grain bullets with a .400 meplate and these bullets at 2400 fps out of my 470 Mbogo penetrate and shoot very well. The good thing is they group with the 500 Swift A-Frames and all the bullets feed perfectly. I would really like to try out the 540's length wiase on a Buffalo. It seems Chris's bullet would have exited were it not for all the spinal contact.
Merry Christmas to all,
Dave

Alf,
I too am somewhat of an SD freak... though John, Gerard, and Barnes have brought me around to understand that SD matters MOST with lead cores.(we are talking about .02 here, not throwing the baby out with the dishwater)

So, IMHO, if a monometal were the same length as X sd with a lead bullet, i'll be happy to shoot it, assuming more or less the same shape, as, after all, pointy bullets skew the SD formula.

Merry Christmas!!

jeffe

RIP, my apologies for hijacking your FN thread, but it is actually Alf, the self nominated "SD freak", who is to be blamed for doing that!
He tried to pull both me and Gerard into it, but Gerard was wise enough to stay out of it .

However, thanks for your contribution to the unasked for promotion when you say -

quote:

..... so allow me to admit this as a shameless and truthful promotion of the FN and HV as the best available, state-of-the-art projectiles.

I promise not to hijack a thread again, but also note that where the truth about something is not revealed in any discussion, this same promise will not be binding on me.

I would guess the best nose shape or profile of a solid type bullet for skull bone penetration would be profiled after an armor piercing "anti tank" solid.
I figure the American military has spent tens of million of dollars on scientifically and imperically testing to find the very best nose shape to deliver the best odds of penitrating an intended hardend target from a wide range of angles.

/

Alf,
I have given a Remington R&D engineer a copy of Gerard's .395 caliber bullet drawings with a request to see if The Big Green could chamber the .395 GSC in the 798 and 700's.

They might as well pay royalties to GSC as to Rick jamison for the SAUM and WSM cartridges.

Who knows? Maybe even a .395 RUM?

They could at least start loading some GSC HV, FN, and SP bullets in the standard calibers.

If they can work out a deal with Swift, they can surely do the same with GSC.

Don't hold your breath waiting for the bean counters to work on that one. The Big Green needs more green, as always, of course.

I predict Remington will go down the toilet if they do not jump at the chance to load some GSC bullets.

/

Alf, please see your PMs.