Are Australian buffalo immune to the soft and solid debate? It never seems to come up.

My buffalo experience thus far is limited to 1 in Africa and 3 in South America. I haven't seen anything so far to convince me to not just leave them home when I go to the NT in July. Both trophy and culls are planned, and I've about decided to take my .375 and .416 Rigby with A-Frames in both.

Any thoughts?

Good choice. 458 solids also work. The Aussie bulls can sure take a lot of punishment if the first shot isn't well placed.

Soft point first and then follow up with solids

A mate of mine has been using woodleigh hydrostats (lathe turned brass solids)in his 450 for buff up in the NT he said they work very well but you have to be careful as they well pass through so they were not using them for first shots.

I've always used one soft in the barrel over a mag full of solids, except for the last buffalo. I got the distinct impression that the solids weren't making much of an impression, and really couldn't fault the penetration of the softs.
'Course, I haven't hunted in Australia and don't know the local tradition.

From what I understand, the Aussie buffalo are as big as or generally bigger than their African cousins. I certainly saw some huge beasts when hunting there although I haven't been to Africa so cannot compare first hand. Remember that the Aussie buffs have vast areas to roam, feed and breed, and no natural predators so have every chance to develop into large beasts.

I used mostly solids (404J 400 grains) as much of the time the big bulls were not in with other animals and I was also not paying trophy fees or per animal so collateral damage was not a consideration not that there was any. I am naturally more disposed to shoulder and brisket shots, so think solids serve to provide security for any shot I take. With my old Norma and RWS solids the 404 did the job without question, I never thought that it wouldn't.

quote:

From what I understand, the Aussie buffalo are as big as or generally bigger than their African cousins

Maybe by body size, but not by attitude.
"They look at you like you owe them money"

quote:

Originally posted by KMG Hunting Safaris:

quote:

From what I understand, the Aussie buffalo are as big as or generally bigger than their African cousins

Maybe by body size, but not by attitude.
"They look at you like you owe them money"

This one wasn't exactly fluttering its eyelashes at me (not very clear photo unfortunately).

So I should take the solids then? Ammo weight isn't an issue as my wife is travelling with me.

Don't forget the Asiatic Water Buffalo is domesticated all over Asia and is basically 'the tractor' for Asian agriculture.

Load accordingly.

I was thinking 400 grain A-Frames in the .416 and 270 grain A-frames in the .375. (400 and 300 grain Barnes banded solids if needed.)

Softs like North Fork Swift
A frames are so good these days solids are not really needed

I tend to favor the premium soft point only view myself.

The A-frame worked well for me and others on Buffalo here. Load solids underneath if you prefer for follow-up, however as always the placement of the first shot is the determining factor.

Good luck .

Bondy,
What calibers have you and your friends used A-Frames in? The Swifts have replaced TSXs as my main "hit big things bullet" but I've only used them in .338,.375 and .416 so far.

Forget the solids and just use TSX's - you wont be able to use the solids on the culls in any case..

I'm think I'm just going to forget the solids.

Dogleg;
.35 and .375 cal. I have them for my .404 and the only other projectile I will use on big game is the TSX.

The most extreme test I have seen that the A-Frame survived was 270gn .375cal being driven @ 3300fps from a .378 Wby; one through a Buffs shoulders and one lengthways. Both recovered under the skin and retained weight 90%+ despite the speed and the lack of "appropriate" SD.

I'd happily use either the Swift or the Barnes in my rifles (and do).

Matt G has the far greater experience here; his advice will be worth the most.

I guess I should have said I'll be hunting with Matt Graham, or at least his outfit. He's already on record as being in the "premium soft only contingient".I'm happy leaveing the solids at home, if the guide isn't going to be asking where my solids are when I get there.

It's interesting and reassureing that you couldn't hurt the A-Frames at .378 Weatherby speed. I've used the same bullets at the more pedestrian H&H velocity on 3 South American buffalo. Shots were quartering away, broadside through the shoulders, then frontal and going away on the third buffalo. Despite going through the hip and about 3 feet of spine it held together and made it all the way up to the shoulder.
The solids that were in the magazine didn't impress me much on finishing shots, but those "little" 270 grainers really seemed to rattle their cage.

Sounds like I can quit thinking about solids altogether. That's really what I wanted to hear anyway.

Best of luck then; Matt G's clients have taken plenty of massive Buff this year and when the water recedes in 2011 you should be good to go .

If those South American buffalo you got were the same type as Elgin Gates hunted in Brazil, I think you'll find them to be the same species we have here.

I don't know what Gates hunted, but those we shot had horns like a big beef cow, instead of the triangular sweeping horns I see comeing from Australia. I suspect that if they swapped their headgear around there might not be much other difference between them. For what it's worth, I found the SA buffs to be bigger in the body than those in Africa.Some say that the Australian buffs are bigger yet, which I hope is accurate.
This trip will get me into buffalo on 4 continents, if I count bison and or Muskox for the north american portion. I know they're not really, but its as close as it gets up here.
Are buffalo hunted anywhere else?

All water buffalo are the same species per se but there are many, many different varieties... the Argentinian one is the same as the one from Europe that is the milking strain. The one in Brazil on the island is more like the ones we have here. You cant really hunt the Brazillian ones but you can do a few other buffalo hunts in Asia Pacific and in USA too - but none really as accessible and as large a population as here in Aust. Everyone I know who has done the Argentinian hunt has loved it, regardless of the origin of the animal they look to be a huge beast and can be quite dangerous too... as can all bovines.

I'm looking forward to it. I'm particularily interested in the numbers that can be taken.

Dogleg , European Bison is one , if you are including bison !

I use solids after the frist shot , shots through ass end into guts need to be tough to make it into chest area & when coming to you , you need to break stuff & smash bone in neck & or skull !
I don't trust Barnes , which are very good Most times ! Swift , Woodleigh are great !

Here I thought those were extinct so I had to google them. Turns out I was wrong about that, I must have been thinking about aurochs. It's probably wrong to count our bison, but writeing off my own continent saddens me. That's when I started exploreing the musk ox angle.

I should say that I never started out to collect the set, its just sort of evolved into that.

You can hunt European Musk Ox too !
Or you could ?

"I should say that I never started out to collect the set , it's just sort of evolved into that."

Always does , when you start to collect things .

quote:

Originally posted by Sarg:
Dogleg , European Bison is one , if you are including bison !

I use solids after the frist shot , shots through ass end into guts need to be tough to make it into chest area & when coming to you , you need to break stuff & smash bone in neck & or skull !
I don't trust Barnes , which are very good Most times ! Swift , Woodleigh are great !

What problem have you had with Barnes?? Any problems with the newer Barnes - TSX??

A mate of mine does muskox hunts on Greenland... pretty fun hunt by all accounts... not hard but you can fish and wingshoot after you get your muskox and it would be the only reason I would go to visit Greenland!!

Lots of trouble with the older style & yes TSX to , still not as good as most people say , animals are mostly dead , when you find them !
but bullets have failed in my opinion !

I have never had trouble with Swift & Woodleigh have been good to me also !

Seems folks are protective of they bullets , like Dogs,children,Wives,cars,rifles don't say bad things about them LoL !

I would not normally answer on this site as people like fighting on here , but I know you & where you are LoL !

Just my veiw , I didn't want to be contradictory !

Cheers !

The musk ox hunt we are going on is in April, so it is more an exercise in survial/endurance than a hunting trip. Still, since I'm more into the experience than anything, one has to take it for what it is, rather than what we would like it to be.

Count me as one of those who isn't real impressed with TSXs. I still use them in 1/2 dozen calibers, but get more decisive results with softer bullets. The .416 bullet that turned 90 degrees in a buffalo soured me somewhat too.

You guys might want to look in on our Terminal Performance thread on Big Bores. Lot's of info there about solids, conventional premiums, and NonCons, and most of it is really geared to Buffalo, as I rather shoot buffalo than anything I know of on this earth! So I am always looking for a buffalo bullet!

http://forums.accuratereloadin...931007641#2931007641


The link starts you out on page 115 or so, you may need to do some back pedaling!

For the record, I fall very heavy into the camp of backing up everything with a proper solid!

Michael

When the professionals can't agree, all that's left for the amateur is to go with his own experience and sort through the professionals for the ones that agree with him.
Just about any position can be backed up, but when the experts take different sides do you conclude that they are both right, both wrong, both partly right and partly wrong? Or do you conclude that it may not matter that much?

quote:

Originally posted by Sarg:
Lots of trouble with the older style & yes TSX to , still not as good as most people say , animals are mostly dead , when you find them !
but bullets have failed in my opinion !

I have never had trouble with Swift & Woodleigh have been good to me also !

Seems folks are protective of they bullets , like Dogs,children,Wives,cars,rifles don't say bad things about them LoL !

I would not normally answer on this site as people like fighting on here , but I know you & where you are LoL !

Just my veiw , I didn't want to be contradictory !

Cheers !

Im not protective of anything Sarg... I couldnt give a crap and truth be known I shoot and see more Woodleighs shot than anything else through the year. I am just finding that TSX is far more consistent for penetration with expansion benefits, unlike a solid.

Have you actually seen a TSX fail as such?? Under what conditions??

Problem with TSX's is that they wont fit in some of our guns, so we still use a lot of Woodleighs.

On the contrary - there has been a problem with some Woodleigh projectiles in recent years and we were unlucky enough to get some of those dud projectiles it seems (PP's) and they DID fail!!

The more recent ones seem better though.

quote:

Originally posted by Dogleg:
When the professionals can't agree, all that's left for the amateur is to go with his own experience and sort through the professionals for the ones that agree with him.
Just about any position can be backed up, but when the experts take different sides do you conclude that they are both right, both wrong, both partly right and partly wrong? Or do you conclude that it may not matter that much?

Dogleg

It matters, there are many good reasons to have a solid, and no reason whatsoever to not have them. One can argue the pass through hit another animal, but this can very easy happen with the premium conventionals as well.

Michael

quote:

Originally posted by Dogleg:
When the professionals can't agree, all that's left for the amateur is to go with his own experience and sort through the professionals for the ones that agree with him.
Just about any position can be backed up, but when the experts take different sides do you conclude that they are both right, both wrong, both partly right and partly wrong? Or do you conclude that it may not matter that much?

It's a learning experience for everyone.... any 'professional' who claims they know it all or that anothers opinion isnt valid - isnt worth listening to!!!

quote:

Originally posted by michael458:



Dogleg

It matters, there are many good reasons to have a solid, and no reason whatsoever to not have them. One can argue the pass through hit another animal, but this can very easy happen with the premium conventionals as well.

Michael

IMO there are plenty of reasons not to use them. Pass throughs dont happen nearly as often with quality softs - in fact with Asiatic buffalo, pass throughs are very rare with regular softs. Solids dont give any increased wound channel and tissue damage (because of expansion in the softs) - the main reason people actually use softs!! There is also the issue of deflection off bones too... it is widely recognised that conventional solids deflect off bones (more than softs)... that is one of the main reasons they made those Hydrostatic solids.

As far as using the them as a follow-up shot - that is pretty much up to the user to decide what is best... but there are certainly reasons to not use solids - just that not everyone agrees thats all.

quote:

Originally posted by Dogleg:
I got the distinct impression that the solids weren't making much of an impression, and really couldn't fault the penetration of the softs.

Amen!!!

quote:

Originally posted by Matt Graham:

quote:

Originally posted by michael458:



Dogleg

It matters, there are many good reasons to have a solid, and no reason whatsoever to not have them. One can argue the pass through hit another animal, but this can very easy happen with the premium conventionals as well.

Michael

IMO there are plenty of reasons not to use them. Pass throughs dont happen nearly as often with quality softs - in fact with Asiatic buffalo, pass throughs are very rare with regular softs. Solids dont give any increased wound channel and tissue damage (because of expansion in the softs) - the main reason people actually use softs!! There is also the issue of deflection off bones too... it is widely recognised that conventional solids deflect off bones (more than softs)... that is one of the main reasons they made those Hydrostatic solids.

As far as using the them as a follow-up shot - that is pretty much up to the user to decide what is best... but there are certainly reasons to not use solids - just that not everyone agrees thats all.

Matt

Maybe you should go take a look at the Terminal Performance Thread on Big Bores. That's exactly what we do, work with Real Solids, not conventional ones. In fact a good 65% to 70 meplat solid hits pretty hard, and it's not scared of bones. If you are talking conventional fmj solids, you are correct, they don't make much of an impression, and no doubt will more than likely go most anywhere and take any sort of turn. But a decent flat nose solid, North Fork, CEB BBW #13s, Barnes Banded, that is another story, and not to be confused with a fmj round nose by any stretch. You will very easy see the difference in the way a buffalo takes a proper flat meplat solid and the way he takes a round nose fmj. Night and Day. There is a big difference in wound channels of a big flat nose meplat solid and a round nose fmj, especially in the first 20 inches of penetration.

I am not saying use solids ONLY, use Soft or NonCon up front, then follow up with solids. If that second shot is needed it is most likely needed to penetrate from the south of a north bound buffalo, few conventional softs will be able to make that journey! There are no reasons NOT to have a solid, none that are viable, and still every reason to have them. I suppose we disagree on that point. I think you might need to check out some of the Woodleigh Hydros as well, they leave big wound channels being a cup point, penetration is not quite as deep as normal flat nose solids, but it is good enough, and hits like a hammer from what I hear from our guys in the field. Of course, it's still a solid!

Sorry to tell you, but I back everything up with solids since 2006 and it has been very very successful on every animal I hunt, regardless of buffalo to bear. That solid just might save you a bad time on a hunt, a long follow up, even a dangerous situation from a bad shot, or bullet failure, or all sorts of GOOD REASONS, again to have that solid, no viable reason not to!

But, do as you please, that's up to you. I am just telling you what I do. What I do, works for me. What you do, I suppose works fine. I will continue to do, what I do!

Michael

Just in case, these are some real solids that work for a living!



















And they also work just as well in the field!

Michael