The Accurate Reloading Forums THE ACCURATE RELOADING.COM FORUMS Rifles Double Rifles 500/416 Reloading Woodleigh Hydrostatically stabilized bulletsGo | New | Find | Notify | Tools | Reply | |
| 500/416 Reloading Woodleigh Hydrostatically stabilized bullets | Login/Join |
| One of Us |
My K-Gun regulates and shoots very accurately with Woodleigh 410 grain SP bullets and 109.5 grain Hogdon H1000. On woodleighs site i find that there is no reason for worrying that I will get higher pressure shooting 400 grain hydros.. Can I safely assume that I can load the hydros with 109.5 grain H1000? as well? Also, what is the reccomended OAL for the solids? Also wrote mail to woodleigh about this but no reply yet... | ||
|
One of Us |
Geoff from Woodleigh is quite busy at the moment as there is a big gun show on this weekend. I'd recommend resending the email mid next week. | |||
|
| One of Us |
As with any change in reloading components, you should drop the charge 10% and work up again. I have only shot them in my 500/465 and they worked fine, same powder load. They also kill damn well !!! Had a few direct comparisons between Woodleigh bonded core (which I really like) and Hydro's shot one after the other into animals so could see the slight difference in penetration. Previously 500N with many thousands of posts ! | |||
|
One of Us |
I think there is some data on the Hydro bullets contained in the "Double Rifle Bullet of the Future" thread. If not there, it's on the "Terminals" thread somewhere in that 242 pages! IIRC, they produced higher barrel strains than many of the other bullets, the Woodleigh Soft included, but less than the Woodleigh FMJ. Might be worth while to take a look. Sorry, I don't have a page reference, try the "find" feature. The PH for my last two DG safaris in Zim, Rich Tabor, had some of these loaded for his 470. He was very impressed with their performance on Elephant. As 505G says, you should always drop back 10% and work back up anytime a component change is made! | |||
|
| One of Us |
I have used them in my my 470 and 465 doubles. Velocity was within 15 to 20 fps of the same load with Woodleigh softs or solids. Also they shot to the same point of impact and group size was similar. In my rifles they are interchangeable. Shot two elephant with them and can vouch for their affectivness. Depth of penetration was equal to North Fork or CEB solids. 465H&H | |||
|
| One of Us |
Same here, we ended up doing a bit on the chrony. RE Penetration, found more than you need, 2 identical shots on a big bull water buffalo, one Hydro, one Round nose, 6 inches apart on the same angle, the RN stopped under the skin on the off side, the Hydro exited. Wound channel comparison was interesting as well, same for both so proved that the Hydro's give a devastating wound channel even though they don't "open up". Previously 500N with many thousands of posts ! | |||
|
| One of Us |
Re what Todd said about Barrel strain, it is in the thread somewhere. Howeever I will caution that with older (English) DR'S, it is worth checking the bore size. Geoff at Woodleigh is very exact on bullet dimensions with the Hydro's to make sure only the bands are engraved. My 465 has slightly undersize bores for a 465 and you could just see the marks on the solid shank. Gun / barrels are fine and will be for ever and a day. We didn't notice, Geoff did when we sent the bullet recoveries back to him. Anyway, enough people have shot them out of doubles including expensive doubles to know they are good to go. As of this year, I have also used 235gn bullets out of a 375H&H and the penetration was as good as a 270gn or 300gn bullet, which was what we were trying to prove, that you could decrease the bullet weight in Hydro's and still get the same performance as a heavier RN. . Previously 500N with many thousands of posts ! | |||
|
One of Us |
Norsk, I would also take a hard look at the North Fork cup point solids. Maybe Todd remembers but I think they did very well as far as barrel strain too. I would not be afraid to shoot a cup point solid in any of my doubles and I do. Dave DRSS Chapuis 9.3X74 Chapuis "Jungle" .375 FL Krieghoff 500/.416 NE Krieghoff 500 NE "Git as close as y can laddie an then git ten yards closer" "If the biggest, baddest animals on the planet are on the menu, and you'd rather pay a taxidermist than a mortician, consider the 500 NE as the last word in life insurance." Hornady Handbook of Cartridge Reloading (8th Edition). | |||
|
| One of Us |
Yeas Dave, The North Forks did very well in the Barrel Strains. Both the flat nose solid and cup points were the same as they are both bore riders. IIRC, there terminal performance was excellent as well. Lots of data on those two threads! | |||
|
| One of Us |
Page 3 on Double Rifle Bullet of the Future thread. | |||
|
| One of Us |
Wow Sam! I knew the numbers weren't good but had no idea it was that bad. The second highest barrel strain and the highest chamber pressure. In fact, the chamber pressure is nearly 7,000 psi over and above the 45,000 psi limit you guys set as maximum safe! More reason to stick with the CEB! | |||
|
| One of Us |
The findings on those charts does not match the information I find on Woodleigs homepage. They state that the hydros do not increase pressure/barrel strain... The guy doing the testing in the thread affiliated with CEB by the way? | |||
|
| One of Us |
Those tests were done for everyone's benifit. Use your own judgement! | |||
|
| One of Us |
I don't shoot Woodleigh Hydros in my doubles opting for North Fork Cup Point Solids instead but I will tell you that they kick ass in a bolt gun. For you 45/70 guys, put a 400 grain Hydro in the tube and some 400 grain BBW#13 solids in the magazine and you will not be under gunned for anything short of an elephant. Dave DRSS Chapuis 9.3X74 Chapuis "Jungle" .375 FL Krieghoff 500/.416 NE Krieghoff 500 NE "Git as close as y can laddie an then git ten yards closer" "If the biggest, baddest animals on the planet are on the menu, and you'd rather pay a taxidermist than a mortician, consider the 500 NE as the last word in life insurance." Hornady Handbook of Cartridge Reloading (8th Edition). | |||
|
| One of Us |
| |||
|
| One of Us |
A couple of points to ponder. Bullets with high barrel strain and chamber pressure numbers from Michael's work include the Barnes solid, Woodleigh RN solid, in addition to the Woodleigh Hydro and Nosler solid. The first two bullets as well as the Nosler solid are used by several companies in factory loaded ammunition. Factory ammo must meet industry standards for chamber pressure. We have to assume that they are therefore safe in double rifles, if not the rifles are not safe because they can't handle that ammount of pressure. I don't know of any industry standards for barrel strain. That is a black hole as far as knowledge on what is too much barrel strain. It may well vary greatly between double rifle makes. Since we don't know what is permissable, we also don't know if Michael's methodology is comparable to other methods of determining barrel strain pressure. Obviously, the safest method is to go with low strain numbers if you can. Barrel strain can also be reduced by lowering velocity. One point that is a little bothersome on the barrel strain work done so far is that he can not get good reliable readings from full power double rifle loads. So he has to compare bullets by using reduced loads. I don't know if that will be shown to be a problem but it does leave an unanswered question out there. 465H&H | |||
|
| One of Us |
One note...I did not notice any undue signs of pressure for the Hydros when shooting them in a bolt gun but I am not sure how pressure correlates to barrel strain if at all. Dave DRSS Chapuis 9.3X74 Chapuis "Jungle" .375 FL Krieghoff 500/.416 NE Krieghoff 500 NE "Git as close as y can laddie an then git ten yards closer" "If the biggest, baddest animals on the planet are on the menu, and you'd rather pay a taxidermist than a mortician, consider the 500 NE as the last word in life insurance." Hornady Handbook of Cartridge Reloading (8th Edition). | |||
|
| One of Us |
465H&H, The reason Michael went to reduced loads for barrel strain was so we could see the pressure as strain not chamber pressure. Now we didn't say anything was exact but a comparison of bullets. You can see that in both tests the bullets fell in almost the same place on the chart. Now you say factories are using all of these bullets so they must be safe. Well whether they are or not you are correct in saying using the ones with the least strain should be safer. This was the point of the tests, to let you make the choice of which bullet you wanted to shoot. Sam | |||
|
| One of Us |
Sorry Walt, I've got to disagree with that statement. Chamber pressure can certainly be reduced by velocity. But not Barrel Strain. Also, I suggest the manufacturers are using the most commonly available factory ammo to regulate with as that is what is most likely for a non-handloader to shoot. Not that they have done any extensive testing of barrel strains. If they have done extensive testing, can we see the results? That all the loads tested by Michael and Sam may be perfectly safe to shoot, I don't dispute. However, if there is a bullet option that develops comparatively lower barrel strain, lower chamber pressures at normal velocities, AND provides significantly better terminal performance, why not use it? Of course, I don't think anyone is disputing the terminal performance of the Hydro's. Just the barrel strain and chamber pressures noted. The chamber pressures can be reduced to within limits, but the velocity will be reduced as well. How much velocity reduction? Don't know! There are better options! IMO of course. | |||
|
| One of Us |
Sam, You may well be right on Michael's reason for going to a lower barrel pressure. I'm surely not an expert on these matters. I do have some questions on that though. I'd better check with michael. It does streatch my imagination that a bullet hammered through a bore will put the same amount of strain on the barrel as one fired at normal velocity. 465H&H | |||
|
| One of Us |
I haven't read all the pages in the thread but I get the picture. Now the tricky part is figuring out what those numbers acutally mean with regards to barrels being shot out, doubles coming off face early etc. Of course I would as everyone have the marigins on my side if they are significant... But shooting solids.. I will not shoot that many through my rifle, just enough to find a load that regulates and the rest on the rare game that needs it. I am sceptical the differences in pressure/strain will be notable in light of such low volume being fired. Or am I wrong? The difference in strain comes from the hydros having too many driving bands? (think it is 7) What about the marketing that the hydros will create a larger permanent wound channel (in between a sp and a solid)? Hype or truth? | |||
|
| One of Us |
Truth that they create a large permanent wound channel. Larger than a SP ? I've seen both side by side, unless you shot hundreds of animals in different body parts, then come to a conclusion but definitely large and as big as if not more than a SP. Not sure what you mean by "in between a sp and a solid". A solid doesn't produce that big a wound channel above the bullet diameter. Previously 500N with many thousands of posts ! | |||
|
| One of Us |
I would believe the wound channel could be as big as the effect of a soft nose similar to a Swift A Frame or X bullet ONLY when extra speed is used. My experience (minimal with 9.3) shows similar effect to a standard FMJ with the MV velocity of 2330fps. Being that the 500/416 produces more velocity than your average DR round, they may reap the extra benefits of this hydro effect. | |||
|
| One of Us |
I am getting about the same velocity (around 2400fps).. | |||
|
| One of Us |
I have seen wound channels from Swift A Frames and they are the same as Woodleigh SNRN. MOST of the wound channels I have seen have been out of the 465 Double and they were as big as the wound channel that the RN created. And my 465 is not going that fast. Correct me if i am wrong. What you are saying is you only get this wound channel with the Hydro's when extra speed is used ? Well my DR is not going any faster. I have seen a few wound channels from a 375H&H, 235gn Hydro's, devastating is all I can say. It prooved that a 235gn Hydro would do the job of a 270 and 300 gn RNSN. Previously 500N with many thousands of posts ! | |||
|
| One of Us |
I have been sceptical with regards to the hydros creating a permanent wound channel similar (equal to) conventional softnosed bullets. 505's experiences are reassuring. If I reduce the loads by 10% I am goint from 109.5 grains H1000 to 99 grains which seem very low. Strange that woodleigh does not post load data for their bullets (legal liabilities probably). There has been some research here in Norway that indicates that us moose eating hunters have elevated lead levels in the blood. If these monometals hydros are as effective as conventional softpoints I may harvest my yearly 5 moose with them and more safely feed my family of 5. Of course I would presume 500/416 should suffice with FJM's as well as I see a lot of hunters felling moose with 6.5x55 swede with no problems. Problem is only expanding bullets are legal. The hydros fall outside of existing legislation perhaps. | |||
|
| One of Us |
Norsk Geoff at Woodleigh will give you load data for most cartridges if you email them. I think most just use what they are using for RNSN. If you feel dropping 10% is too low, then drops lightly less. It's only a rule when changing components so if you at at or near max and change a component (ie new batch of powder, new bullet type) that puts you over max, you don't cause yourself problems. BTW, I was also sceptical but I am no physicist but I could not see how a bullet that penetrated like a solid / didn't open up created a wound channel so large. Have also tested enough Woodleigh bullets to know what is what but their is no doubt they create a wound channel like a RNSN. I happened to be lucky in shooting the 2 bullets one after the other on a couple of occasions so could do a direct comparison their and then. If someone can PM me an email address, I'll email a photo that can be posted of the Buffalo Heart hit by a Hydro with an explanation of the difference between this heart and one hit by just a RNSN. Previously 500N with many thousands of posts ! | |||
|
| One of Us |
I also find this reassuring as It isn't what I found with my limited experience with them. Its a good thing too as I have plenty of stock. Certainly interesting info about the Swift A's as I found them to be too hard on light game and have restricted their to Buffalo and Eland only. | |||
|
| One of Us |
Here is a picture of a buffalo heart shot with a Woodleigh Hydro that I am posting for 505.   | |||
|
| One of Us |
Re the photos above, this ONLY shows the Hydro effect. I'll explain difference between a RNSN going through a heart and a Hydro going through the heart. I happened to shoot 2 Buffalo that were facing me, both 75 - 90 yards away, both good solid bulls. One was shot with a Woodleigh RNSN and one with a Hydro. Both bullets hit roughly in the same spot on the heart, the RNSN maybe a little bit higher. The RNSN made a nice, NEAT 1 inch hole through the heart (Sorry, NO photo available) The Hydro (as you can see by the 2 photos) made a real mess of the heart, opening up this great gash. Both bullets had the same effect, both animals managed to run a few yards but both were cactus by the reaction of the bullet hit. Previously 500N with many thousands of posts ! | |||
|
| One of Us |
Pretty devastating gash on that buff's heart! | |||
|
| One of Us |
Yes, especially after seeing the RNSN hole through the heart which I wish I had taken a photo of - like a1 inch hole. IMHO,the gash / blow out effect was Hydro created and less so by the position it hit the animal's heart. I've shot and seen enough heart shots with RNSN Woodleigh's over the years (Buffalo, Cattle) to recognise a difference. Previously 500N with many thousands of posts ! | |||
|
| One of Us |
I can completely understand the 1" hole that Woodleigh Round Nose Softs make. Swifts Don't seem to open as much though and 235grn 375 Hydros would be the bomb. Some examples of Woodleigh and Swift-A Softs used at a moderate speed;   | |||
|
| One of Us |
I am normally a "heavy for calibre" bullet user so tend to eerrr on the upside of bullet weight choice so I can punch through (to the vitals) from most angles. The reason for using the 235gn Hydro was they wanted to show / prove that the 235gn Hydro had the penetration and effect of a 270 or 350gn RNSN. Well, I fired a few and they certainly do both. One bullet, fired int a dead Buffalo went in the front at the start of the chest and exited out of it's ass / hip area - not what was expected as they wanted a recovery !!! Previously 500N with many thousands of posts ! | |||
|
| One of Us |
Yes, those Hydros are revolutionary. One problem I have is I can only get them to feed from my Blaser.  I did catch up with the guys from Woodleigh the other day and had a look at their prototype the "Caped Hydro". This Cap should solve the feeding problem. | |||
|
| One of Us |
Yes, it will fix any possible feeding problems. The 375H&H Hydro's I was using were some of the first Prototypes of the capped bullet. All went well. Never did find the cap though !!! On the subject of feeding problems, pelnty of guns have them (or used to have them) with different bullets - Mod 70 Winchesters in 458WM with other than 510gn bullets, CZ's etc. Previously 500N with many thousands of posts ! | |||
|
| One of Us |
I know I'll get flamed on this, especially from the guys "Down Under" but I just don't like the way those recovered Woodleigh softs look. I prefer the way the A-Frames look. The Woodleighs certainly appear to make a larger hole, but is the hole as deep as the one made by the A-Frames? It's a matter of preference I suppose but I actually don't ever want to recover the bullet. I want a complete pass through, while still opening up and doing its work. That's the reason I've preferred the TSX for so long and am now looking to the CEB Non-Cons. But from these pictures, even though recovered, the appearance to me is that the A-Frames probably out penetrated the Woodleighs assuming they were shot from the same caliber rifle at the same velocity. For me, especially on DG, penetration is the key issue, even with expansion. The reason being that it is seldom that a standing broadside shot is presented, especially after the first shot. So back to the Hydro's! There maybe some issues with pressure and barrel strain using them in a double rifle. Maybe not! Seems they are fine in a bolt rifle where pressure and barrel strain is less of an issue. But they won't feed well! Hopefully the "cap" will make them work better. I really don't like it however when tricks have to be used to get a bullet to work. A perfect example is the CEB Non-Cons with the tips inserted. They work fine for a double but from what I gather, they are too long to work in a magazine. So the answer is to ship them with a few tips, load the chamber with a tipped Non-Con and the magazine with non-tipped Non-Cons. I just don't like that arrangement either so I'm sticking with CEBs for the Double and TSX for the bolt; at least for now. Again, it's just a matter of opinion with room for interpretation! | |||
|
| One of Us |
Todd, No flaming from me. Everyone likes different things and unless you know what velocity it hit at, it's hard to comment. "load the chamber with a tipped Non-Con and the magazine with non-tipped Non-Cons." Having multiple bullet types gets messy. Tried that when testing bullets, different velocities, different types / weights depending on situation, just ends up confusing you. Previously 500N with many thousands of posts ! | |||
|
| One of Us |
Agreed. | |||
|
| One of Us |
Todd Re the way the Woodleigh's look, I agree they never look as "neat" as Swift A Frames but as has been commented, the A Frames seem to take longer to open up. In terms of penetration, haven't shot any / enough A Frames to compare but I haven't really had a problem with penetration with Woodleigh's, they always seem to get to the vitals fro where I shoot and that is personally 100- 150 Buffalo ranging from small to very large plus probably cut up another 150 - 300 which have been shot at the same time with Woodleighs). The only way to tell is do a direct shoot off with both bullets into a herd and see the results just as we do when testing ! If the velocity has dropped off a fair bit, the big petals / large front like shown above do hinder exiting as they bullet tends to push the hide away from the body of the animal and then spring back. I like the "ragged" wound channel they create - wide, messy (as in plenty of cut flesh) and stays open. Re the tip, I don't think it is a gimmick and in fact I think Geoff from Woodleigh suggested it be done from the start. BTW - Even though I like and use Woodleigh, I think the Swift a Frame is a great bullet. Previously 500N with many thousands of posts ! | |||
|
| Powered by Social Strata | Page 1 2 |
 | Please Wait. Your request is being processed... |
|
The Accurate Reloading Forums THE ACCURATE RELOADING.COM FORUMS Rifles Double Rifles 500/416 Reloading Woodleigh Hydrostatically stabilized bullets
Visit our on-line store for AR Memorabilia