I don't even know if it can be seen or measured on a target but here's what I am wanting to do.
I want to set up somekind of target material approx. three to five yds away that might give me an indication if there is any instability in bullet flight (yawing of the bullet) at that distance. I don't believe paper or cardboard targets would show any subtle yawing from that distance, maybe it's going to be undetectable through any media, I've thought about using a small sheet of formica. Anyway, your thoughts.

Something stiff like construction board glued over cardboard.

I tried this with my 470 at near point blank. No yawing as "greatly feared."

I'm convinced all this worry is just internet baloney.

dirk

I would do 2 different tests.

One with thick construction paper. I would be afraid cardboard might not give good results, I think a single sheet would be easier to "read".
After shooing look for any elongation of the hole that is out of round. I would shoot several shots.

Then I would shoot through plywood, probably 3/4" to see if the holes showed any instibility/tendency to tipping.

I would shoot these tests at 5, 15,25 and 50 yards.

Let me also add that I have brain shot 4 elephants at six yards or less and did not have any problems with the solid bullets tipping.

None of the soft or solid bullets fired point blank, some as close as a few inches, showed any signs of tipping either.

Dirk,

Let me hijack the thread for a moment if you do not mind. What load are you shooting in your .500 with the GS FN solid bullets? I am shooting some old 570 grain GS FN solids in my Searcy with 96 grains of RL15, F215M and 1/2 Kynoch wad and am getting between 2115 and 2160 fps. I saw somewhere that you were using 540 grain GS FN solids with 88 grains of RL15, but did not see the velocity you were getting. Thanks Dirk.

I think several sheets of poster board spaced maybe a foot or two apart.

If they look round individually, but aren't, I think this would really show up when you stacked then with the holes aligned. Any out of round issues should be apparent since the oblong "tails" shouldn't all be in alignment. (Unless you where so incredibly unlucky that you spaced the sheets just perfectly in sinc with the yawing, not real likely, unless I was doing the test.)

JPK

I don't know what it's called, but there's a "pad" that's used under some heavy items during shipping that's basically two sheets of cardboard separated by a series of "baffles", usually about 4" thick. A bullet fired through the stuff edge-to-edge would go through a "baffle" every couple of inched for four feet, none of which should offer enough resistance to alter its flight but would indicate any "yawing".

I'll try to track down what they are actually called.

quote:

Originally posted by Jefffive:
I don't know what it's called, but there's a "pad" that's used under some heavy items during shipping that's basically two sheets of cardboard separated by a series of "baffles", usually about 4" thick. A bullet fired through the stuff edge-to-edge would go through a "baffle" every couple of inched for four feet, none of which should offer enough resistance to alter its flight but would indicate any "yawing".

I'll try to track down what they are actually called.

With a Google search the closest I can find is what's called a "corrugated pad", but they are all in small sizes. The ones I'm thinking would be ideal for your application are used in truckload/railcar shipping, sometimes under heavy stuff and sometimes between items.

How about just shooting several bullets through one sheet of card board? If they are unstable at all at that distance one should show an elongated hole.

465H&H

I think poster board spaced as JPK says in your best bet! However I agree with Will,in his belief that the yawing is nothing more than internet baloney. For that matter at 15 yds what difference does it make? The amount would be so little, if it exists at all, that it wouldn't make any difference to the amimal hit at that range! Still I'd be interested in what you find!

quote:

Originally posted by MJines:
Dirk,

Let me hijack the thread for a moment if you do not mind. What load are you shooting in your .500 with the GS FN solid bullets? I am shooting some old 570 grain GS FN solids in my Searcy with 96 grains of RL15, F215M and 1/2 Kynoch wad and am getting between 2115 and 2160 fps. I saw somewhere that you were using 540 grain GS FN solids with 89 grains of RL15, but did not see the velocity you were getting. Thanks Dirk.

Mike,
Remembering that I have an exceptional hot lot of R-15 that I am using right now. What I have found with this lot of R-15 is that everyone of my loads for the 375, 416, 500 are 3-5 grains less than normal loads so my load is a freak load. I use R-15 89 grains, GS 540 grain FN, Jamison brass, 1/2 Kynoch wad, F-215 primers and I am getting 2115 fps with sd of 3 fps.
I use a great chono, Oehler with four foot screen span so I believe my speeds are spot on.
Mike I'm going to start using the 570g GS FN's, I can shoot those same POI with the 540's at 2165 fps. I am going to post some targets sometime in October showing my tests results. Mike I also am going to up my velocities on both bullets setting my regulation distance at 25yds, if they crossover at 50yds it won't be but an inch or so. As you well know ele hunting is less than 50 yds 99% of the time. The GS FN's were also more accurate than the 570 grain Woodie solids BUT the 600 grain Woodie solids out of my rifle are very accurate (as accurate as the GS's) and regulated at 2100 fps.

Dirk

That is interesting. I shot 10 rounds this morning and got an average velocity of 2123 fps with the 570 grain GS FN with 96 grains of RL15. I did not think you could still get the 570 grain bullets, I would prefer those to the 540 grain bullets. I need to check with Bryan.

quote:

Originally posted by MacD37:
I think poster board spaced as JPK says in your best bet! However I agree with Will,in his belief that the yawing is nothing more than internet baloney. For that matter at 15 yds what difference does it make? The amount would be so little, if it exists at all, that it wouldn't make any difference to the amimal hit at that range! Still I'd be interested in what you find!

Mac,

There are old reports of experienced guys trying to brain elephants and not being successful at short ranges, despite what they thought was good placement, and given their experience...

The thinking was/is that the bullets were still yawing, hadn't "gone to sleep" yet and that the yawing was causing either not straight penetration or too much resistance for enough penetration.

I think most were blown shots, some bullets that didn't cut it and deformed.

But who knows? I've made a shot or two on eles and been suprsed when they weren't deader than stone.

(Good reason for a double, then.)

JPK

JPK, Like you i think most of those shots were simply hendered by bad bullets, hitting a twig before getting to the ele, or poorly placed. If there is a yawing effect, that is so slight that it can't be easily seen on a target shot from 15 yds, then IMO, it wouldn't make a hair's difference.

Sometimes well placed shots simply do not do the trick, and yawing may be one of the reasons, but, again, I believe there could be hundereds of variables that could cause enough deflection to cause a bullet to do strange things, but that are so slight that they can't be seen on a target. Some very high speed filming would be a better method of finding a yaw that is that small. Who knows!

quote:

Originally posted by JPK:
Mac,

There are old reports of experienced guys trying to brain elephants and not being successful at short ranges, despite what they thought was good placement, and given their experience...

The thinking was/is that the bullets were still yawing, hadn't "gone to sleep" yet and that the yawing was causing either not straight penetration or too much resistance for enough penetration.

I think most were blown shots, some bullets that didn't cut it and deformed.

But who knows? I've made a shot or two on eles and been suprsed when they weren't deader than stone.

(Good reason for a double, then.)

JPK

Ditto's JPK,
The penetration problems Ganyana talked about with the two PH's one with a 470 the other with a 500 were at very close range (velocity was not an issue for one of the PH's). Ivan Carter has seen some penetration issues arise on frontal shots of ele bulls at close quarters. That's when overall bullet length and barrel twist can become an issue on penetration. One of the reasons I prefer the 500 (1:15 twist rate) over the 470 (1:21 twist rate). An example of bullet length being an issue is why Gerard has discontinued the 570 grain .510 bullet because the 540's out penetrate the 570's.
FYI, when I put a 540 GS FN bullet next to a 600 grain Woodie they have about the same bearing surface area thus they probably stablize about the same, that being the reason for this post that's the bullets I want to shoot through close media.

Dirk

quote:

Originally posted by MacD37:
JPK, Like you i think most of those shots were simply hendered by bad bullets, hitting a twig before getting to the ele, or poorly placed. If there is a yawing effect, that is so slight that it can't be easily seen on a target shot from 15 yds, then IMO, it wouldn't make a hair's difference.

Sometimes well placed shots simply do not do the trick, and yawing may be one of the reasons, but, again, I believe there could be hundereds of variables that could cause enough deflection to cause a bullet to do strange things, but that are so slight that they can't be seen on a target. Some very high speed filming would be a better method of finding a yaw that is that small. Who knows!

Ditto's Mac,
There are so many other variables that are probably at the forefront of this issue, it's just fun to play around and try and sort some of this stuff out if it is even part of the equation in the end at all. That would mean that Will was right after all, it could well be internet baloney.

Dirk

Found the stuff I was trying to describe if you're still trying to figure out a test method...

Hexacomb is one brand name, paper companies that ship rolls use it a lot, a simple request for a sample might work.

Thanks Jeff,
I've seen some of that stuff around at an auto shop here in town. I'm going to try the staggered poster board first but right now hunting season is around the corner so it will wait till the end of October before tests begin. Also waiting on some GS FN's at this time also.

Dirk,

The 600 grain Woodies arrived today. I loaded up four, 93 grains RL15 (been using 96 grains with the 570 grain Woodies), 1/2 Kynoch wad, F215M primer, and intend to take them to the range in the morning. I will let you know how they work and what velocity I get.

I've tested the yaw theory and the one about how a bullet wildly swings left or right depending on the barrel used.
I did so by shoot several groups from a solid rest at 5', 10', 15', out to 75'. The results were that there is no discernible difference in group in barrel to barrel spread or any signs of yaw.

I've tried it with several rifles in .470 and .500.
If a double throws a bullets left to left and right to right it is such a minuscule amount as to be completely inconsequential to the shooter.
If the bullet are "yawing" before going to "sleep" it is also such an inconsequential variable as to be unmeasurable for practical purposes.

I used shoot and see targets on cardboard.
The old rag about holding left or right at close range for barrel off set is complete horse pucky as far as I can tell.

quote:

Originally posted by surestrike:
I've tested the yaw theory and the one about how a bullet wildly swings left or right depending on the barrel used.
I did so by shoot several groups from a solid rest at 5', 10', 15', out to 75'. The results were that there is discernible difference in group in barrel to barrel spread or any signs of yaw.

I've tried it with several rifles in .470 and .500.
If a double throws a bullets left to left and right to right it is such a minuscule amount as to be completely inconsequential to the shooter.
If the bullet are "yawing" before going to "sleep" it is also such an inconsequential variable as to be unmeasurable for practical purposes.

I used shoot and see targets on cardboard.
The old rag about holding left or right at close range for barrel off set is complete horse pucky as far as I can tell.

The barrels hitting right on right, and left to the left, is the way they are supposed to hit, so that is not a problem but is proper! That is the reason a properly regulated double haveing to be held left or right at close rang, is horse pucky!

The barrels shoot paralell from muzzle to infinity, if the load is proper for rifle's regulation! A doubel rifle's individual barrel group "CENTERS" will always remain on it's own side of the POA, at any range. As the individual groups get larger the right half of the left barrel's group will mix with the left side of the RIGHT barrel's group barrels group, makeingh an egg shape composite group. This doesn't mean the centers the barrel's groups cross at any distance.

Mac,

I think Surestrike is referring to the theory that because of the rotation of the bullet it travels in a curved path from muzzle to POI. And I mean curved right or left depending on twist direction rather than curved downward because of gravity.

The theory would have one aiming right or left at short range depending on the twist direction to offset for the curve since the rifle is sighted in at longer range. The theory isn't specific to double rifles.

I think we all know that this theory, which I have read about, is irrelevant, true or not, at any hunting range.

JPK

quote:

Originally posted by MacD37:

quote:

Originally posted by surestrike:
I've tested the yaw theory and the one about how a bullet wildly swings left or right depending on the barrel used.
I did so by shoot several groups from a solid rest at 5', 10', 15', out to 75'. The results were that there is discernible difference in group in barrel to barrel spread or any signs of yaw.

I've tried it with several rifles in .470 and .500.
If a double throws a bullets left to left and right to right it is such a minuscule amount as to be completely inconsequential to the shooter.
If the bullet are "yawing" before going to "sleep" it is also such an inconsequential variable as to be unmeasurable for practical purposes.

I used shoot and see targets on cardboard.
The old rag about holding left or right at close range for barrel off set is complete horse pucky as far as I can tell.

The barrels hitting right on right, and left to the left, is the way they are supposed to hit, so that is not a problem but is proper! That is the reason a properly regulated double haveing to be held left or right at close rang, is horse pucky!

The barrels shoot paralell from muzzle to infinity, if the load is proper for rifle's regulation! A doubel rifle's individual barrel group "CENTERS" will always remain on it's own side of the POA, at any range. As the individual groups get larger the right half of the left barrel's group will mix with the left side of the RIGHT barrel's group barrels group, makeingh an egg shape composite group. This doesn't mean the centers the barrel's groups cross at any distance.

Mac,

That is exactly what I was trying to say. However my original post should have said there is NOdiscernible difference.

What I was getting at was the myth that a double will throw a lateral parabolic curve ball style bullet path left or right depending on the barrel used.
If you do a search you'll find that at least one well respected yet questionable poster has brought forth and in his classic style virulently defended this mythical curving bullet path fairly tale.
He was also the one who was warning neophyte double gun shooter to to hold into a barrel at close range so as not to have the bullet hit out to one side or another.

My post is merely attempting to deflate these double rifle myths.
If my post was unclear to you I apologize.