I will shoot no more round nose solids forever.
(A paraphrase of Chief Joseph.)

The A-Square "Monolithic" brass round nose solid, of .475/500 grain persuasion, was fired into the "Steel Buffalo" (no more maiden/mistress crap), impacting at about 2300 fps. It keyholed in the third board, went into a full-on sideways propeller spin through the 4th and 5th water bags (deduced from reading the boards between each bag), veered down and to the right, and struck the steel bracket holding the bottom of the fifth board.

This is the first damage to the Steel Buffalo. It was easily fixed by removing the foot long piece of plated steel "angle iron" and beating the dent out of it with a 4 pound mini sledge hammer.

Next:

The North Fork .475/500gr FPS at about 2300 fps impact velocity: It made it to the tenth board.

The North Fork went straight through 8 water bags (7.5" of water in each) and 8 boards (15/32" plywood), after having entered the first bag through 4 layers of truck tire innertube, keyholed through the 9th board, and smacked the 10th board hard enough to send splinters out to pierce the 11th bag. The bullet was recovered fronm the 10th water bag, looking like it could be used again.

Recall that the same North Fork bullet from the .470 NE at about 2100 fps impact velocity was an ELEVEN BOARD LOAD.

The .470 Capstick will be better with the Cup Point on game, no doubt, than the .470 NE.

However the slower velocity does better with the FPS in the .470 NE, FOR PENETRATION, in the Steel Buffalo!

The splashes keep getting more dramatic.

The heat nearly stroked me out today, 98 degrees F, high humidity, heat index 110 to 115 degrees. I whimped out. I called it off after only those two shots. The delirium has just now lifted enough to allow me to type this.

I will get to the Cup Point and the XLC at 2300 fps next time with the .470 Capstick, and hopefully the .470 Mbogo at 2500 fps with 500 grainers, for comparison.

I am wondering if the .470 Mbogo can equal the penetration of the .470 Capstick? Also I am hoping it doesn't dismantle the Steel Buffalo with one shot.

Photo rehash of the Steel Buffalo and Chief Thunderstick:

RIP,

Does all this mean that the 460 Wby is still a rabbit gun or does it mean the 460 Wby could be used on big game

Mike

I wonder if a 2nd bullet fired from each rifle would perform the same as the first. Or perhaps there is enough variation shot to shot to not really be able to tell the difference between the two cartridges. Just thinking out loud.

.

Mike378,
The .460 Wby is especially suitable for rabbits if using round nose solids.

500grains,
Time will tell.
I am handicapped when out at the Spartan Gun Range, by having to haul water in 5-gallon buckets from a pond. When I go out there, I need an assistant. I try to exclude the frogs and fish so as not to be cruel, but each compartment takes about 4 gallons to fill. At Vip's backyard, I have a garden hose. Then I can handle it myself. Vip and Rip. Get it?

Prior to this, I was firing a GSC .375/300gr at 2500 fps as a standardization load at each outing. This is not necessary anymore, as I have settled on the recipe for the box. There could hardly be a more consistant medium.

I have a scale of 0 to 12 for penetration. 12 water bags, each backed by a single board used for witnessing straight-line penetration and the inevitable keyholing, and stopping the bullet when it gets completely sideways and slowed down, unstable and tumbling.

I think a one compartment difference is significant. There is no splitting hairs with the Steel Buffalo. If the bullet stops at X board, then X is the score of the load, whether it just dented that board or went through but did not hit the next board, but settled into the next water bag. Simple.

Beyond the 12th compartment there is room for a stack of 7 boards at the end of the Steel Buffalo.

So, the .475/500gr North Fork FPS, at 2100 fps with a score of 11 beats 2300 fps with a score of 10. The latter could be my new calibration load, with an identical score as the GSC .375/300gr FN at 2500 fps, so I will be repeating it just for you ... when the heat lets up, and with a garden hose assistant.

quote:

Originally posted by ALF:
RIP

Whilst in the RSA two or so weeks ago a PH showed me two bullets fired from his 470, they were Federal factory loaded and both failed to penetrate on a Elephant skull.

Both showed signs of sidways impacting forces indicating that they likely tumbled in target and thus slowed to a dead stop prior to getting to the brain.

Makes one think doesnt it

Alf, what bullet?
Federal has been known to load Woodleighs and TBSH. Federal factory loads can be erratic if the powder is not settled back against the primer before firing, thus some real swings in velocity like 1800 fps to 2100 fps, which I have seen myself. They need a filler with that RL-15.

Even if it was the TBSH, these newer ones are reportedly inferior to the Jack Carter product due to materials and process.

If it was a Woodleigh FMJ round nose "solid" then I can sure understand the fishtailing and lack of penetration.

Elephant skull might be a lot different than plywood and water ???

This is a Steel Buffalo.

After being in Kuwait and Iraq I thought the 98 or 100 degrees or whatever it got here today didn't fill bad at all. I was push mowing, weed eating and raking in it today. Was going to do some shooting but after but got dark on me to quick I remember when we were over in the desert it felt great if I got down to 100 which didn't happen very often though.

but now cold weather I hate the crap.
Im curious to know more about your 470 capstick I think one someday would be a good one to add on to the rifle battery.

RIP:

quote:

I will shoot no more round nose solids forever.

That is my principle since five years.

quote:

I think a one compartment difference is significant.
So, the .475/500gr North Fork FPS, at 2100 fps with a score of 11 beats 2300 fps with a score of 10.

I wonder, if really all parameters are kept similar? I doubt that this difference in Vo has an inverse effect on penetration.
How looks the nose like, the 2300 f/s may show a broader nose after impact?

quote:

Elephant skull might be a lot different than plywood and water ???

For sure. It depends on the shot placement. The centre of the atlas vertebra and part of the bone between the eye and ear are hard like "steel". Copper monolithics may be a little compressed after hitting these bones.

Sorry RIP but I think you are drawing too big of a conclusion from too little data. Shoot some more of each (30) and analyze.

Some of the skull is very hard; some is like honeycomb filled with jelly... all of it is designed to stop impacts (it looks like they evolved with a behavior of banging their heads into each other -- at least in part). If a bullet hits some of the harder surfaces before getting into the honeycomb, all sorts of weird results have been reported -- Just having a projectile tip over isn't so bad. So -- what kind of Federal projectile was it? Their Tungston solid?

Actually, the wood and water test looks like it will be pretty consistent from shot to shot. It looks like a great test for differences in penetration between different loads. If you stuck joints in there (cow-bones, elbows, etc) in one of the early layers, you might see a more informative statistical variation that reflects what shooting at buffalo shoulders would do for specific loads. It would be really neat to see if some bullets gave better consistency than others after breaking through buff bones.

On the other hand, given the burden of carrying water (how much does it weigh? had how many trips with how much load do you have to carry?) After all, this is supposed to be FUN -- not work.

I think you have a great project, RIP!

Dan

Rip, It would be interesting to conduct similar experiments with .510 and .620 dia FMJ Woodleighs. Not much info on elephant for these calibers. Last year, two of my .510 dia 570 gr Woodleighs (500 AHR) 2250 fps were recovered from an elephant skull, one was perfect, the other was flattened. Penetration was not reported. Makes one wonder what happened and I have no way of knowing which bullet was fired first.
Now the prospect of shooting elephant with a 600 with a FMJ Woodleigh 900 gr solid SD-.312 leaves one wondering.
African Hunter is reported to have an article on some large bore penetration, may check this.

Do you think your "iron buffalo" simulates penetration in buff or ele???
or is it more of a standard reference to rate a series of bullets?

Dak

sounds like its time to re-visit the 45-70...

everybody knows your 470 ain't got nothing on a 45-70, come on anybody knows that
just kidding

.

You are correct, Alf. My info came from the following quote:

quote:

The elephant’s skull is truly unique, having to support not only the tusks, but also the trunk. As the trunk has no bones in it, all movement is achieved by a complex system of (massive) muscles and tendons which are all anchored to the skull. To fulfil these requirements, the skull has to be large, but, if it were solid bone, it would weigh too much, so the majority of the skull is composed of a ‘honeycomb’ of bone covered by an incredibly hard outer layer (see photos 1 & 2) In life, the surfaces of this ‘honeycomb’ bone are covered with a gelatinous substance. Unless fired from a quartering away shot into the back of the brain, any bullet has to pass through some 18" to 2½' of muscle and bone before it reaches the brain. The hard outer surface of the skull acts like armour plate, often causing the bullet to deflect if it hits it at too acute an angle, whilst the internal honeycomb and jelly absorb most of the ‘shock’ or concussion effect of the bullet. The brain is very small in relation to the head as a whole (its about twice the size of a human brain) and bullet placement is critical.

which came from http://www.african-hunter.com/elephant_part_1.htm .

As you can see, the original states that the surfaces of the honey-comb are coated with jelly, not that the structure is filled with jelly. The mis-statement was my fault, not my source's. Some of my own misunderstanding derived from the suggestion that the jelly could and did play a role in absorbing the energy of the slug.

If you follow the link, you'll see some very good pictures of skulls that have been cut-away to expose the "honeycombs."

Dan

Please take this the right way RIP, but your "tests" are not very scientific and really do not prove anything. Drawing any conclusions at all from what you have doen to date is a stretch and would be quickly discarded by people who set up and execute tests for a lving. I am not saying you are not having fun blasting away and making water fly in the air, but please do not try to read too much into the results of your "testst." Pleas eudnerstand I am not trying to be contrary at all. I am just saying that any proclomations made as a result of your shooting would be instantly thrown out in a professional or accademic setting that was designed to study penetration of bullets.

.

It is the whole testing mehtodology that is flawed here. Again, please understand I am saying this 100% politley and not trying to start anything or hurt any feelings. It would take a month to type out everything here that is requirred to have truly meaningful tests (meaningful to an engineer or scientist). THis has been a fun exercise fo rhte shooters but it is far from a scientific test, regardless of what is or is not reprsented by the medium. THe methodology is flawed and assumptions are being thrown around that are not sound. The overwhelming majority of the population "tests" in the same way and gets results that are equally invalid. I am not going to post any more on the topic, as I don't want it to appear that I am trying to be rude, argumentative, or anything else. If we were able to speak in person you could see that I am beeing fully polite and just throwing out a professional observation that was meant to be constructive. TO try to explain all of the things required for good tests and then debate them with people here who hav enever done extensive testing would filll up an ungodly amount of bandwidth. My hands do well to type what little they do these days, so I am not going to get into a back and forth. Also, I am saying this from a constructive point of view, and often folks get a little testy if anything they believe gets questioned. THey then spend more energy defending a wrong position than listening to others. Engineering theory gets thrown around here a lot and some of it is pretty good, and some of it is pretty lacking.

Marc,

Perhaps it would be worth while pointing out how controlled an experiment can be?

On the one hand, it isn't a buffalo... on the other hand, a bunch of buffalo do not count as a controlled experiment, but lives are at stake for projectiles to work reliably in such uncontrolled conditions. Perhaps the iron buffalo does not correlate with real buffalo, and would make a poor proxy for comparison. THAT's something that would require testing. Another component has to do with measuring tissue damage. I have read technical reports of rigorous testing performed by shooting pig carcasses as a proxy for projectile performance on humans... yet, much of the results are handled in a sort of ad hoc anecdotal manner. The bullets show lots of variation depending on what kind of tissue they hit. The description of wound channels, bone fragments forming secondary projectiles, effects of spin, etc, were described in terms of disection of each of the unique wound tracks. Some things have been more predictable (bevel of bullet holes in skulls, for instance).

Tell us more...

Dan

I think being too scientific with this sort of stuff is a bit like measuring the width of a brick with a micrometer

But if you have some real life experience on animals or imput from people who do then you will know whether your testing setup is providing reasonable comparisons between bullet A and bullet B. For example, one does not need to do too much testing of soft point bullets in trees and the like to realise that such material tends to hold soft bullets together.

Mike

quote:

Originally posted by Jarrod:
After being in Kuwait and Iraq I thought the 98 or 100 degrees or whatever it got here today didn't fill bad at all. I was push mowing, weed eating and raking in it today. Was going to do some shooting but after but got dark on me to quick I remember when we were over in the desert it felt great if I got down to 100 which didn't happen very often though.

but now cold weather I hate the crap.
Im curious to know more about your 470 capstick I think one someday would be a good one to add on to the rifle battery.

Jarrod,
I too cut grass and weed-ate an acre of yard in 100 degree heat before heading to the range to tote water in 98 degree heat. Even though I was alternating Gatorade and water at a quart an hour, I was sweating more than that! In the future, have garden hose, will shoot.

For the .470 Capstick, try a 10" twist McGowen and use the A-Square manual data. Art may be a crook, but wrote a good book.

quote:

Originally posted by Norbert:
RIP:

quote:

I will shoot no more round nose solids forever.

That is my principle since five years.

How looks the nose like, the 2300 f/s may show a broader nose after impact?

Norbert,
Nose deformation is not a factor here. At 2100 to 2300 fps, the North Forks are insignificantly changed. They just have rifling marks on the driving bands

I have gotten a suggestion to slow one down to 2000 fps and speed one up to 2500 fps for a more meaningful comparison.

quote:

Originally posted by Mikelravy:
Sorry RIP but I think you are drawing too big of a conclusion from too little data. Shoot some more of each (30) and analyze.

Will do.

quote:

Originally posted by DanEP:

... On the other hand, given the burden of carrying water (how much does it weigh? had how many trips with how much load do you have to carry?) After all, this is supposed to be FUN -- not work.

Dan

Dan,
Thanks for the suggestions and sympathy! I will have a garden hose!

quote:

Originally posted by dakota45056:
Rip, It would be interesting to conduct similar experiments with .510 and .620 ...
Do you think your "iron buffalo" simulates penetration in buff or ele???
or is it more of a standard reference to rate a series of bullets?

Dak

Dak,
I may get to .510 but doubt I'll ever do .620 ...
Regarding your Woodleigh experience: Unpredictable, but sometimes you get lucky and they work. The Flat nose solid is more reliable. Stay away from those round nose solids of any type!

Really the "Iron Buffalo" (good one, thank you) can only be compared to a stack of wood and water, but I think it is a pretty good scoring device for potential on any game. Thanks again.

quote:

Originally posted by boom stick:
sounds like its time to re-visit the 45-70...

boom stick,
Why?

Marc,
You are taking this way too seriously!

quote:

Originally posted by Mike378:
I think being too scientific with this sort of stuff is a bit like measuring the width of a brick with a micrometer

Mike

Mike,
You and Alf are showing two sides of the same good coin here.
Thanks.

In closing:

Yes, all reasonable, you are, to my open mind (except for the .45/70 kooks).

Higher velocity, more hurt'em and kill'em too, the other side of the wounding coin: splash AND penetration.

Iron Buffalo may speak with a forked tongue for elephant skull shots. Me uncertain. Ron "Mahohboh" Thomson (with over 5000 ele in the bag) thinks the .458 WinMag with 500 grainers at 2100 fps is impeccable.

Must be Iron Buffalo gets mad and gets harder when it is smacked harder with faster bullets?

Energy losses occur more rapidly or to a greater degree, or with energy and momentum "splashing" away from the bullet path more into the wound, perpendicularly to bullet path and 360 degrees radially into the temporary and permanent wound channel? Of course.

Maybe a particular medium requires a certain harmonic of caliber and velocity for a given momentum, for best penetration. Twilight Zone.

quote:

Originally posted by DanEP:
On the other hand, given the burden of carrying water (how much does it weigh? had how many trips with how much load do you have to carry?) After all, this is supposed to be FUN -- not work.

I think you have a great project, RIP!

Dan

FYI, water weighs very close to 8 lbs. per gallon.

I knew he must have said it, but I didn't recall how many of those 8 lb gallons he had to carry :-)

Even so, the question doesn't need an answer (rhetorical) -- just sympathy noises.

Dan

RIP

One thing you might want to consider is the rifling twist. Most rifles have twists designed to stabilize the heaviest in caliber bullet (when made from jacketed lead). The monolithic bullets are considerably longer and harder to stabilize. I saw this really pointed out when I rechambered a Ruger No. 3 from 45/70 to 45/120 Basic and then cranked it up to Weatherby velocities (Ouch!!) I found that the heavier bullets wouldn't stabilize, even at the higher velocities. Granted this was a quite a difference in twist between 45/70 standard and 458 standard, but it seemed to be a pretty sharp break. Either they stabilized or didn't. I know that I foolishly had a 6/284 made with a 1:12 twist. A difference of 10 grains in bullet weight throws it over the edge, even at 3500 fps. It could be the RN monolithic is just at the point as is easier to throw off line and tumble. You might want to compare the 470 with a RN monolithic and a RN lead core solid.

quote:

Originally posted by RIP:

quote:

Originally posted by boom stick:
sounds like its time to re-visit the 45-70...

boom stick,
Why?

the slower velocity went further

Art S,
I was using my 1 in 10" twist McGowen with the tumbling A-Square Monolithic.

I have also seen the same thing happen using a .423/400gr Kynoch Steel FMJ at 2400 fps MV, versus the North Fork .423/380gr Flat Point Solid at 2525 fps MV. Both of these were from the 10" twist McGowen barreled .404 Jeffery.

5 gallon water buckets laid end to end on the ground, before the Iron Buffalo:

The Kynoch Round Nose FMJ solid tumbled in the third bucket, keyholing through the bottom of the third bucket, continued sideways through the 4th bucket lid and bottom, stopped in the fifth bucket, leaving a sideways dent in the bottom of the fifth bucket.

Amazingly, the North Fork FPS stayed nose first, straight and true until it stuck in the lid of the 9th bucket.

There is only one answer: Round Nose Solids Suck!

I will use round nose solids no more forever.

RIP,
What part of kentucky do you live?
I live in Tompkinsville about an hour from Bowling Green. Just a few miles from TN line

Twist, and thus rotational speed, is the only obvious factor why the slower bullet should out penetrate the faster bullet (assuming both went straight). That, or just random error-- one of each doesn't necessarily give you statistical significance.

As is obvious, the 2300 fps bullet will penetrate some distance, then have slowed to 2100 fps. From there, behavior should be identical-- but it should travel further overall.

Perhaps the twist makes some difference, but my guess is that it's just random variance. I'm not suggesting you repeat these tests ten times or anything though.

It does look like a fairly substantial difference in impact velocity doesn't make much of a difference in penetration. It would be interesting to fire one of those Garrett Hammerheads and see what happens, in my opinion. Or slow the North Fork way down-- try 1500 and 1800. I'd guess that at 1500 you lose less than two buckets' penetration.

Pertinax

quote:

Originally posted by Jarrod:
RIP,
What part of kentucky do you live?
I live in Tompkinsville about an hour from Bowling Green. Just a few miles from TN line

Jarrod,
I am lately an "Army Contractor" working at Fort Campbell, KY ... and the Post is mostly in Tennessee/Clarksville. Pretty close to you. I do not want to blab about myself any more than that.

quote:

Originally posted by pertinax:
Twist, and thus rotational speed, is the only obvious factor why the slower bullet should out penetrate the faster bullet (assuming both went straight). That, or just random error-- one of each doesn't necessarily give you statistical significance.

As is obvious, the 2300 fps bullet will penetrate some distance, then have slowed to 2100 fps. From there, behavior should be identical-- but it should travel further overall.

Perhaps the twist makes some difference, but my guess is that it's just random variance. I'm not suggesting you repeat these tests ten times or anything though.

It does look like a fairly substantial difference in impact velocity doesn't make much of a difference in penetration. It would be interesting to fire one of those Garrett Hammerheads and see what happens, in my opinion. Or slow the North Fork way down-- try 1500 and 1800. I'd guess that at 1500 you lose less than two buckets' penetration.

Pertinax

Pertinax,
The slower twist Merkel at 2100 fps with the North Fork .475/500gr was the champ so far, and it needs to be confirmed. The Merkel has an 18" to 20" twist, IIRC, but don't quote me on that.

I will work up 2000 fps and 2500 fps loads for the same bullet in the .470 Mbogo using its 16" twist Pac Nor barrel. Using the same bullet AND twist, just different velocity in the IRON BUFFALO.

.

The trouble with penitration media is results are seldom simular from test to test, that is why I hang elephants on the clothesline and shoot them as that is the most practical media to use..it can be a little rough getting them tied upside down, but hey thats the cowboy way, and the results are spectacular! Glad to share my results with all of you...

I found the RN solids to work well most of the time and I found the flatnose solids from GS and Bridger to work all the time, at least so far, but my clothesline broke and I had to suspend testing for the time being...It just takes too many elephants hanging upside down for the monolithics and I need to reset the posts further apart!!

Alf,
We see that Ray is still working on standardizing his test medium. What he says is true because the gas content of elephants is highly variable, leading to inconsistent results with the clothesline technique.

Not so with the Iron Buffalo. There is nothing more consistent!

I am getting the impression that spin rate after impact with test medium or game has no importance. Great importance in flight through the air, as you say.

Others have suggested that faster spin might help the tipsy round nose solid in a very minimal/marginal way, but it seems the Flat Nose solid needs no help. Velocity effects on medium resistance, shoulder stabilization, and non-deformation seem to be what is important with the Flat Nose Solid, given enough MO/XSA .

From the Iron Buffalo tests so far, it is also hinted that (Are you sitting down?) SECTIONAL DENSITY is the best predictor of penetration, assuming that it is a flat nose solid that does not tumble, and for a given moderate, effective velocity.

Iron Buffalo Penetration Factors in order of importance suggested by scant data so far:

1. Nose shape: Flat and nondeforming is best.

2. Heavy for caliber: SD around .3 (or higher?)

3. "Medium" velocity: Not too slow, not too fast, maybe "it depends" on the "medium."

No importance so far for: Twist Rate.

More shooting at the Iron Buffalo is required.

Others have helped with these suggestions:

A. .475/500gr North Fork FPS at 2000 fps in a 10" Twist .470 Capstick, and a 16" twist .470 Mbogo. Easy. The .470 Mbogo has a capacity very like the .470 Nitro and can be downloaded with a 105 grain-ish charge of H4831SC, or thereabouts, for 2000 fps.

B. Same bullet at 2500 fps in the .470 Mbogo 16" Twist to compare to itself at 2000 fps.

A. will sort out Twist at constant velocity.
B. will sort out velocity at constant twist.

Those should be different enough for significance.

The champ so far has been 2100 fps in an 18" twist Merkel, near as I can tell. Bumfuzzling.

From the same source as the A. and B. suggestions, the spin calculations:

470 Nitro @ 2100 fps in 18" twist = 1400 revs/sec
470 Capstick @ 2300 fps in 10" twist = 2760 rps
470 Mbogo @ 2000 fps in 16" twist = 1500 rps
470 Mbogo at 2500 fps in 16" twist = 1875 rps

As the NIGHT JAR warbles in the darkness under the Southern Cross and Milky Way: GOOD LORD DELIVER US!