It seems to be the general consensus that flat nose solids outperform round nose solids. Does that mean round nose solids don't work. Of course not. However, the evidence seems to be pretty well settled that flat nose solids drive deeper and straighter then their round nose counterparts.

Similarly, we now seem to have several bullets especially designed to take the place of traditional expanding bullets. The first is the Woodleigh Hydro. It doesn't expand but creates a large permanent wound channel and penetrates like a solid. The second is North Fork cup point solid, a controlled expansion solid. Then there is the absolutely marvelous BBW#13 from CEB, a true solid that will drive through heavy bone and muscle and leave a gaping wound channel. Any one of these bullets fired at 2,000 fps from most any .458 caliber rifle will put a half inch to an inch hole in the biggest lion or any soft skinned game and put that game down quickly. Are the conventional soft nose bullets that were commonly used on thin skinned game and for the first shot on buffalo becoming obsolete?

The've been obsolete for me since the mid 90's. First switching from the Partition to the Barnes "X", later TSX, then TTSX. Now for my doubles, it's the CEB BBW#13 and Non-Con!

Dave,
I don't think that they are going to be obsolete. There is a large percentage of the hunters that don't handload so they are stuck with whatever the ammo manufacturers provide them with. Those of us that load our own are always willing to try the latest, greatest in hopes of finding the holy grail of new fodder to kill stuff with. For me, it is all about accuracy and performance. In my .375, I wouldn't consider using anything but the Barnes TSX in whatever weight I wanted to use. It just Kills Stuff. The 235 gr TSX is absolutely a Killing machine. In my .416, I feel the same about the 350 gr TSX and the 400 gr solid, banded solid. Haven't tried the CEB's in the .416 yet but will soon. I have experience with the woodleigh in the .470 Nitro but will be taking the CEB's for the .470 Next June when I go to Zim for buffalo. If it performs for me like it does for Todd and the rest of the posters here, It doesn't make sense to spend 20,000. on a hunt and scrimp on a less than satisfactory bullet.

The RN bullets make paper punching and practice a bit cheaper as well.

Conventional soft point bullets have been killing thin skined game for years, and will continue to do so for years to come.

Dave

No, people will still use RN SN and RN Solids.

Why ?

Factory ammo, reload / don't reload, happy with
what they use, people don't like change !

The North Fork Cup Point expanding Solid (CPS) was first chronologically.
The Woodleigh second if you are talking about only those two.
Oom John Buhmiller was experimenting with cup point solids in the 1940s and 1950s.

Only the legal restriction of lead content by the greenies will eliminate cup and core bullets.
Still plenty of good ones for plenty of jobs.

quote:

Originally posted by RIP:
The North Fork Cup Point expanding Solid (CPS) was first chronologically.
The Woodleigh second if you are talking about only those two.
Oom John Buhmiller was experimenting with cup point solids in the 1940s and 1950s.

Only the legal restriction of lead content by the greenies will eliminate cup and core bullets.
Still plenty of good ones for plenty of jobs.

+1 I type too slow. It will be the Greens and the city Brains who want to save the World and the Blue Planet Earth.

Pyzda

quote:

Originally posted by Pyzda:

quote:

Originally posted by RIP:
The North Fork Cup Point expanding Solid (CPS) was first chronologically.
The Woodleigh second if you are talking about only those two.
Oom John Buhmiller was experimenting with cup point solids in the 1940s and 1950s.

Only the legal restriction of lead content by the greenies will eliminate cup and core bullets.
Still plenty of good ones for plenty of jobs.

+1 I type too slow. It will be the Greens and the city Brains who want to save the World and the Blue Planet Earth.

Pyzda

With some minor improvements in the A-Frames
like seal the base a with solid copper boattail and give its nose a bit more of a spitzer the bullet would be pretty much perfect. More reliable expansion than a TSX , and still lots of penetration. A 600g A-Frame for the 500 Jeffery would have me pretty happy.

If you use a M98 action then Mono solids can be an issue for feeding and fitting within the action due to their shape and size. I have had no joy with Hydros due to this and have found even the lighter 450grn 458 Nothforks too long to fit in Action without over compressing the 458Win load IMO too much.
SO, for me I will still use conventional RN's for a good portion of my use.
However I am trying the "CUP POINTS" in my 470NS and 375Flanged.

high stress application=copper monometal(180gr@3000fps;500gr@2600fps)

low stress application=bonded,jacketed soft(500gr@2250fps)

quote:

Are the conventional soft nose bullets that were commonly used on thin skinned game and for the first shot on buffalo becoming obsolete?

Place them on the "Endangered Species List"

For the sake of discussion perhaps over- penetration should be an issue with Buff. If Dagga Boys are getting harder to find and more and more herd bulls are being shot at someone will be paying for the animal on the other side that gets nicked.

Hell no! Not for me and the buffalo I hunt! I love Hydros, but for the most part I use Woodleigh round nose softs - or Woodleigh round nose solids.

They look the part, and work.

I'm a Luddite, I still prefer Swift A-Frames driven at 2700 fps in my 375 Weatherby.

Todd makes an excellent point regarding the TSX, which is also and expanding solid, and the CEB non cons which are in a category all of their own. I still use conventional bullets for punching paper but for hunting, I rarely use a conventional expanding cup and core bullet in my bolt guns anymore. Do you need a TSX to shoot deer? Probably not but they perform so well and allow you to drop down in bullet weight for a faster, flatter trajectory.

For us lever gun guys, I would like to add the Barnes Busters to the list. While they are of conventional construction, they are designed not to expand or perhaps expand very little and provide deep, straight penetration on heavy game.

Pago, the 350 grain and 450 grain TSX make my .416 Rigby and 450 Dakota sing!

Cost is a a factor, as copper is more expensive than lead.

But the brass and copper monometal bullets are definitely the way to go these days.

Good Day, Gents:

As a traditional minded bloke I prefer the traditional bullets for the looks and what the rifles were made to shoot. No doubt the newer bullets may be better as far as construction and penetration but are they really needed? Lots of folks write that this and that is needed for dangerous game but most will never hunt DG all that much. It is like the discussion in the vintage years of the .577 vs. the .600. Yes, the .577 will penetrate deeper but the .600 penetrates deep enough.

We must remember,fellas, most firearms and related accessories do not have an obsolescence to them. They work fine for decades, well into the next century. It is up to the makers to convince us something more is needed. I mean look at all the calibers, both commercial and wildcat, that do the same thing. Most caliber development (in my opinion ) could have ceased in 1950, and, except for scopes, things would have been going along fine.

No doubt the new bullets work well and flat nose and hydros are the rave until the next development that someone says, “This one is better--buy it.” I guess that’s why I shoot Woodleighs--they do the job and look like they belong in the cartridge. I have experimented with Barnes Banded Solids just to see for myself about OSR but it was a one-time affair.

In closing, I understand the thought behind the new bullet styles. It’s the same thought process that sees hunters buy the latest camo, barrel vibration reducers, scent blocking clothes and chewing gum, fluted barrels, and argue endlessly that a .270 short is better than a .270 WCF. Nothing, absolutely nothing, will take the importance away from a well placed bullet after a good and quiet stalk.

I guess that is why my newest double rifle was made in 1920.
Be gentle. It’s just my opinion.
Cheers, all.
Cal

quote:

The first is the Woodleigh Hydro. It doesn't expand but creates a large permanent wound channel and penetrates like a solid. The second is North Fork cup point solid, a controlled expansion solid. Then there is the absolutely marvelous BBW#13 from CEB, a true solid that will drive through heavy bone and muscle and leave a gaping wound channel.

Dave


Re your description above, the description for the BBW applies equally to the Woodleigh Hydro from what I have seen - drives through heavy bone and muscle and leaves a gaping wound channel.

With no petals needed to do the job of which I am not that much of a fan of (petals I mean).



.

No petals for me. I prefer good expansion, maximum retained weight and maximum striking velocity limited only by the construction of the bullet.

From the jacketed bullets I've never used nothing other than .458"/500gr. Hornadys RN FMJ/ SP loaded to 2600-2700fps.

The funniest thing is that not once in 31 years of hunting I've wished that I had or needed a better bullet.

Soft FN copper solid or Woodleigh Hydro may be the next thing for me to have a good look at.

I'm now getting quiet convinced that at maximum velocity they very well could be exactly what I like.

Pyzda

I agree, Cal.

To answer the original question: Not in my lifetime!

Dave,
in the .416 Rem, the 350 TSX and the 400 gr banded solid shoot to the same exact point of aim at 50 and 100. .57" accuracy out of my remington. Don't know if I can change or not.

We are truly shooting in the very best of times ever. Our bullets have made tremendous strides over the last 25 years or so. Why this took so long I can't figure. Best I can tell is that most folks still think that its either the rifle that is most important, or the cartridge that is most important, but neither is true!

It is the "Bullet" that does the work for both the rifle and the cartridge! Without a proper bullet, neither rifle nor cartridge can survive, as their reputation will be damaged beyond repair, and they will find themselves out of the loop!

The "Bullet" spells success, or failure, when taken to the field.

First one has to identify the mission at hand! This is YOU. You must define your goals, you must understand your limits of Bullet Performance, and you must Choose Wisely, if not, you may fail in your mission. If you choose wisely, then your chances of success are much higher.

We have many good bullets today to choose from, if we do so wisely.

Many will not choose wisely, and many will fail because of it. Most will "Get By", and this will cause them to believe they were as successful as they could be, and why change after that? Dead is dead, right? Hmmmmmmm? But what if the next time, things are just a bit off, and you do not just "Get By", and what if there was the possibility that you made a better choice, you would have been successful, just by that choice alone? I have seen it happen. Hell, I have had it happen! So it can be so.

Most of you may know I have been in search of better bullets for many years, and I am quite satisfied that I have found better bullets, and very satisfied that I know the difference.

Mission? Plinking, don't matter, shoots well and is cheap to do! Deer sized herbivores, most anything does well enough. Larger herbivores, maybe a good premium bullet should take the place of traditional non premiums, more is at stake. Dangerous Game? You better identify the best for the mission at hand, and use it, there is much at stake here, and in fact, lives can be endangered. Oh I know, that sounds so "F*****G" cliche heh? But fact of the matter is, bad things can happen, and the bullet you choose can in fact save lives. How do I know? I have seen it so, several times in fact. In the last few cases I have been involved in, I absolutely know for a fact, the bullets did their job, and did in fact save lives by doing so, I was there, I watched it, and it's "No Shit BuckWheat" its real.

Yep, most of the time, one can just "Get By", but there are those times that one does not just "Get By", and those are the times that a better bullet just might make the difference. Think about that, when you get all nostalgic and traditional. Then, by all means, do as you please, and if you make the wrong choice, then cross your fingers and hope to "Get By"!

Michael

0ne to ten thousand for the rifle-Five thousand + for the hunting trip. I think the bullet at 2 bucks each is a steal--NON CON is the way to go and never look back. Ross

Ross, where can you get a DG hunting trip for only $5000?

I don't think you can. I was refering to most all of the hunting trips Elk etc. I think a DG trip is about 15+

Where can you hunt DG for $15k? Maybe for a buf somewhere, not much else.

It reads 15+

I seriously doubt it.

I believe bullet selection will remain diverse because we shooting consumers prefer it. If we were mostly interested in uniformity we'd all shoot .300 winchesters or .375 H&H's with Barnes bullets and thats that.

We're just not like that. Rather than using something tried and true we stuff as big a bullet as we can in an -06 case, (400 whelen,) as small a bullet as we can in the biggest case, (geez, take your pick,) and we just can't be satisfied with Nosler or Barnes performance, we just gotta go buy a box of CEB's or Northforks or Hornaday's newest flavor.

I do use tried and true .375 and .458 and I do use tried and true Noslers and Barnes but thats more because at this time circumstances dictate. Hopefully sooner than later I'll have the resources to experiment to nobodies betterment and that is why traditional soft nose bullets will always be around.

Scott:

Well said but Barnes bullets are not traditional soft nose bullets. You have already made the leap.

Right you are Dave and what I was poorly trying to say was that even though I'm currently using standardized and in the case of Barnes modern, I think eventually I'll retro out of boredom, interest, or just to be contrary.

IMO,one needs to find the right recipe for performance on game-a bullet and load that works every time,on a shoulder shot,that leaves the game DRT or close.

I think they will be around a lot longer than any of us unless the greenies get them legislated out of existence. The North Fork soft point is a soft point with lead nose core and is considered one of the best softs available. I can't imagine a world without Nosler Partitions.

465H&H

I think Pagosa and Cal, as well as 465 have a point. Until the major ammunition providers like Federal in it's Premium line of bullets or Winchester, Remington, etc. pick up CEBs or North Fork, they remain a handloader's bullet and as such a specialty item used by a select few. Even those who handload won't gravitate to one or two brands of bullets but will go with what they have confidence in or what shoots well in their rifle.

So as long as somebody is loading a bullet like a Core-Lokt or Interlock and selling it at a very competitve price point, there will still be traditional bullets used for big game long after we depart for the Happy Hunting grounds!

And even tried and true bullets like the Woodleigh, that was pointed out in an earlier thread, are light-years ahead of what hunters were shooting in the 70's or 80's! Or even the 90's! And very capable of cleanly killing DG.

And with innovations in bullet technology, today's new idea is tomorrow's old hat...