Mac:

I notice more and more guys seem to be shooting Barnes TSX and banded solids in their doubles and now, Michaels BBW#13s. I confess that I have shot a few banded solids in my .470 but I still have some real reservations about doing do especially when there are some really good alternatives from Woodleigh available. However, I have not seen any negative reports from the guys using homogenous bullets and Barnes says they will not hurt your double. Do you still feel the homogenous bullets are ill advised in a newer double?

Anyone else feel free to weigh in here as well.

Must....Resist.....To....Comment....!

If you are shooting a substandard POS like a Blaser or a Kreighoff or a Chapuis you should never use anything other than soft rubber or balsa wood bullets.

In a Searcy you can shoot anything you'd like including Diamond platted uranium hardened solids.

....and the Butch Searcy disciples said "AMEN"
Magwana

I am looking for a source of depleted uranium solids for my POS Blaser (and Krieghoff). The K gun shoots the GS Custom solids extremely well but that is probably before the rib flies off and the barrels come apart. Plus everyone knows that RSA made bullets are inferior to American made ones. I anxiously await the words from the prophet, mainly because I KNOW that I will be dicing with death should I ever take either of these out into the plains of Africa, so, the first two shots HAVE to count or I am DEAD because of the dreaded cocking device that Satan himself designed so that I would be HIS for all eternity!
Peter.

quote:

KNOW that I will be dicing with death should I ever take either of these out into the plains of Africa, so, the first two shots HAVE to count or I am DEAD because of the dreaded cocking device that Satan himself designed so that I would be HIS for all eternity!
Peter.

Peter,

It's good to hear from a man who understands the limitations of his weapon! As Clint once stated A man has got know his limitations!!

quote:

Originally posted by surestrike:
If you are shooting a substandard POS like a Blaser or a Kreighoff or a Chapuis you should never use anything other than soft rubber or balsa wood bullets.

Now that's funny!

Brett

Mac, I'm sorry. I should have just sent you a PM. Since we didn't get any serious answers, let's just let this thread die a quiet death.

surestrike, you are correct I know the limitations only too well. My third gun, an M.K. Owen, I can't use because it is not lively enough. In doubles that leaves my 9.3x74R, but I can't use that because it is an over and under and I can get killed because that is slower to reload than a SxS! I guess I am doomed.
Peter.

quote:

Originally posted by Dave Bush:
Mac, I'm sorry. I should have just sent you a PM. Since we didn't get any serious answers, let's just let this thread die a quiet death.

No problem Dave! I have no problem with those who disagree with me, unlike at least one here seems to have!

To answer your question, I don’t use them in my double rifles new or old! Others may do as it suits!

The only Mono-metal bullets I will use in my doubles are GS CUSTOM, NORTH FORK, and Michael458’s new solids! All are designed properly IMO, for use in even older double rifles being bore riders with very thin pressure rings, and the cuts between the rings deep enough to accept the displaced metal engraved by the rifleing! Thse three mono-metal bullets actually develope less chamber pressure or stress on the barrel walls, with the same load than the triditional steel jacketed lead core solids!

quote:

I guess I am doomed.
Peter.

Peter,

In my professional opinion you are 100% up the creek!!

Mac, I hate to disagree again on this issue but reviewing Michael458's data on the Double Rifle Bullet thread, page 7 and beyond, the TSX shows LESS chamber pressure and barrel strain than the traditional Woodleigh solid as well.

My buddy who posts on here ocassionally Cal Pappas has his own ideas on this. I'll see if I can get him to respond.

Brett

quote:

Originally posted by Todd Williams:
Mac, I hate to disagree again on this issue but reviewing Michael458's data on the Double Rifle Bullet thread, page 7 and beyond, the TSX shows LESS chamber pressure and barrel strain than the traditional Woodleigh solid as well.

Hi Todd. Concerning the TSX tested. Well, you are correct, and then again, not really! I like TSX, so I don't have an issue with it, performance, or terminals. I don't own doubles, so I have zero stake in it either. But the problem with this particular comment is that this was a 350 gr TSX, and not a 450 or 500 gr. I promise, a 450 or 500 gr TSX would have given more barrel strain than the 350 version. Simply because it's longer, more bearing surface and heavier than the 350.

As for shooting the TSX in doubles--I don't really know, it's just not my area of expertise. I do believe in the work we did on the barrel strains, there is no arguing with that body of work to be honest, it's the real deal and shows how much a barrel expands at that point with any given bullet. I was also disappointed with the Barnes banded in the 458s. It's undersized! To .456 caliber and that is why it showed up so well. Take it to .457 or .458, with those multiple bands and see what happens to barrel strain! I wish at the time I would have had the heavier TSX to test, it would have been a good, no a great learning experience! Probably should have thought of that and bought some. Just did not occur to me at the time. Sorry!

Maybe sometime in the near future I will have time to do another run of Barrel Strain tests and will include the TSX at that point. Right now I have my hands full with the new Raptors and appears I will be tied up for some time doing that. Not to mention doing pressure traces on some of my own cartridges and getting them ready for the field.

Todd, you need to get some of these BBW#13 NonCons, you won't want TSX anymore! HEH........

Enjoy, sorry to butt in!

Michael

Gents:
Thanks, Brett, I'll throw in my 2 cents but before I do, remember guys, this is my opinion and my experience. Please don't make a Cal Pappas carving out of soap and then dissolve it in a steam of hot water whilst sticking pins in it.

I've shot 4 boxes of Barnes Banded solids a few years ago in my 1914 Wilkes .600 double rifle. The bullets are a bit undersize and the numerous bands and grooves allow displaced metal to flow as it moves through the rifling. No problems, no OSR, same accuracy, the rifle opens as easily as with standard projectiles, including cast lead.

I believe a hard solid, shot at high velocity and pressure, and a bit over size will cause OSR and other problems, but not so with the Barnes due to the factors above.

Good shooting, all.
Cal
PS. Just to throw in a plug--my book on bore rifles is ahead of schedule and will be out summer 2012. Expect up to 400 glossy pages and over 100 bore rifles photographed. Plus, lots of tools, moulds, balllistics, ammo, and dozens of pages of historical use as well as modern use.

Here is a 286 gr TSX from my 9,3 Merkel - it is obviously undersized...I shoot them from my double occasionaly...FWIW.



and here is a 265 gr. GS FN that I shoot regularly:

Hello Michael,

I actually did purchase some CEB Non-Cons and shot them last week. Here is the problem I had. I originally shot my new Chapius 9.3X74R without a scope and with the 286 TSX. At the Max load, it actually matched the test target exactly. Everything was great, right?

Well, 2 weeks later, I mounted a Trijicon 1.25X4 scope with the quick detach mounts. 1st out of the chute was the 286 gr Barnes Banded Solid which I did not shoot without the scope. 50 yards gave a 1" group. 100 yards and they went into the same hole. Great! Next the TSX. 50 Yards, they crossed 6" apart. 100 yards, they crossed off the target! Go figure.

3 days ago I shot the 255gr Non-Cons. 50 yards, 1.5" groups. No crossing. Did not get to 100 yards but I like the bullets and have ordered more for that rifle.

But, because I like the CEB Non-Cons, doesn't make the TSX unsafe. They just don't regulate well in that particular rifle with the scope on!

You and I discussed this TSX test of yours before on this forum and I remember you saying that although the 350gr tested less strain than a 500gr would, your opinion was that with them being undersized, you postulated they would be equal or slightly higher than the Woodleigh which everyone assumes as "Safe". Concerning the .458 Banded Solid being undersized, you state, "Take it to .457 or .458, with those multiple bands and see what happens to barrel strain!". That statement is a red herring because it is constructed undersized, not .457 or .458 so you have to measure is as it is! That's like saying "but put a round nose on it instead of the flat nose and see what happens to penetration!" Fact is, the bullet has a flat nose, or at least they did before Barnes sold out and the marketing guru's got hold of them.

Going back and reading some of the OSR threads, a well respected manufacturer made the point that barrel issues with mono-metal bullets are more likely due to substandard steel issues in old guns as well as nonstandard bore sizes. Combine those two issues together and you're asking for trouble no matter what bullet you send down that tube.

Here is what I don't get about this whole issue. The original X is what spooked everyone, I suppose. But the TSX has groves in it that to my mind, function the same as the bands on the true "Bore Rider" bullets. They give the excess material a place to migrate into just as the bands do. With the bullet being undersized somewhere between .0005 and .001, that further reduces pressure. Your test bears this out, albiet on a shorter bullet, but the data is there. Speculation on what the 500gr will do is just speculation at this point, but the data is real. At this point, none of the TSX detractors have even publicly acknowledged that test result. But most importantly, some guys who shoot double rifles opine they are unsafe while several MANUFACTURERS state they are safe. I still haven't seen a single MANUFACTURER issue a warning in the instructions that accompany a new gun to not shoot them. Until I see a manufacturer send a warning against shooting mono-metal bullets in their rifles, it's bullshit as far as I'm concerned.

Going back to your test data, what were the conclusions drawn from the extremely high pressures generated by the cast lead bullets. I'm not looking at the data right now but off the top of my head, the cast lead produced some of the highest readings. Is there an upswell of opinions stating to stop shooting cast lead bullets in double rifles? This just doesn't jive! If it walks like a Duck, honks like a Goose, it doesn't mean it's a Turkey!

Methinks this is nothing more than the traditionalists sticking with tradition! Just as the traditionalists stuck with tradition in bolt guns when the original X bullet hit the market. Remember all the hoopla about how they wouldn't work and they wouldn't shoot accurately, etc. etc. My opinion then as now was that this reaction was driven by the other bullet manufacturers realizing that a quantum leap in bullet technology had just occurred and they were now behind. That being said, the boys at CEB best be on the lookout because another leap has just been made. Let's see what kind of criticism they run into as they become more popular and show up on the big boys radar screen!


Cheers,

Todd

Michael,

Some more of your data here concerning the 350gr TSX vs the 500 TSX and why I say the data you have should be considered instead of opinion of what the larger bullet will produce.

Your data shows the 500gr Barnes Banded Solid giving a barrel strain value of 11,627 and the 450gr Barnes Banded Solid giving a value of 14,785. Clearly the 500gr bullet is larger than the 450 but gave a lower barrel strain value. This is why I say that the 350gr TSX value you have should be considered for its own merit. There is no guarantee that the 500gr TSX will be significantly higher than the 350. The CEB results also show this to be no guarantee.

More importantly, here are some other numbers from your tests in descending order of pressure:

Woodleigh 500gr FMJ 18,137 "Safe" right!?
500gr Barnes X "OLD" 17,376 "Not Safe"!?
450gr CEB 15,584
450 North Fork 15,526 "Safe" right!?
420 CEB 15,329
450 Barnes Banded 14,785 "Not Safe" right?
350gr TSX 13,507 "Not Safe"
480 CEB 13,474
500 Barnes Banded 11,627 "Not Safe" right?

So according to your data, the original Barnes X without the grooves that the TSX possesses, had lower barrel strain than the 500gr Woodleigh FMJ. But the Woodleigh is safe and the X isn't. Go figure!

I like data that I can look at and get my mind around. It isn't opinion.

Todd

You are correct on many points, and no argument from me at all. As for the TSX safe or not, Honestly I would think with the Bands it is FAR safer than many other bullets out there. Sam and I have shot TSXs in many of his doubles, included his 577, they did fine, and he was not scared of them I don't think, and he knows a hell of a lot more than I do about that subject.

I do know I had some old barnes x, no bands, and wow they produced barrel strain, and so did the old barnes round nose solids, no bands. They were at the top end of all tests done. Yes, I would think that a lot of the concerns are carried over from those times. No doubt. These things stick in the minds of many folks.

quote:

Concerning the .458 Banded Solid being undersized, you state, "Take it to .457 or .458, with those multiple bands and see what happens to barrel strain!". That statement is a red herring because it is constructed undersized, not .457 or .458 so you have to measure is as it is!

This statement, correct on all counts. And it was measured as so, but very well pointed out my concerns with stability, and you can only go so much undersized before running into issues. Many of the barnes are so undersized now, that one cannot even get them loaded proper. And, I think the sizing issue changes from one lot to the next, as some of the latest bullets Sam has tried he can't get tight in his cases! At some point, undersized becomes an issue either with loading, or stability. Terminal stability.

quote:

Going back to your test data, what were the conclusions drawn from the extremely high pressures generated by the cast lead bullets. I'm not looking at the data right now but off the top of my head, the cast lead produced some of the highest readings. Is there an upswell of opinions stating to stop shooting cast lead bullets in double rifles?

Conclusions on the cast bullets? Whew, hard one. Not really sure there is right now. This came as the biggest surprise of all to both Sam and I, as we figured it would be the very lowest of barrel strain right off the bat. Wrong, it rang the bell highest in all our tests with 470s and 458s. Consistently. About the only thing Sam and I could imagine was causing this is that the cast being softer, may be slugging up going down the barrel, causing higher barrel strain issues. Not conclusive, only theory. Would be willing to listen to what anyone else could come up with on that too. Fact is, they cause more barrel strain than anything. Safe? I don't think Sam is going to shoot anymore cast in his rifles. About all I can say about that.

Sam and I also experienced a lot of really serious pressure spikes in chamber pressures in the 470 Nitros using various sorts of filler, serious, going well into 50000 PSI+ with 43000-44000 PSI Loads! We both decided that there were strong possibilities that some guns could possibly have more issues with this than with actual barrel strains in many cases.

I think there are lot's of things that can cause, and has caused issues with doubles in the past no doubt some of it barrel strain, but other factors as well.

Glad you like the BBW#13s. I like them too. I am busy with Raptors now---wow! Fun.

Michael

Guys,

All kidding aside. Thanks for your informative posts. This is the kind of stuff that keeps serious shooters and hunters coming back to AR.

Cal,

Great info there buddy! From what I've read shooting a Barnes TSX or BBS was a death sentence for a classic double. Thank you for your time and effort to expose the truth!

Mike and Todd...Ditto guys, thanks!

Todd

This is the last barrel strain I did in .458, which was all done at one time, with just about every 458 caliber bullet I had on hand at that time.




Safe or not Safe is not for me to decide, I only present the numbers as is. Once I did explain you really can't go back and do just one or two tests and come up with the same numbers because of several factors involved with the equipment, environmental, electrical, and many other little things that effect the barrel strain. So if you run a test, you have to do them all with one hookup to get really good comparisons.

Personally, I never would consider the Woodleigh FMJ safe, it has a steel insert as I understand, it don't give much. We used the Woodleigh Soft as a benchmark, I think most everyone considers it safe, so I go by that. To me, if it falls under the Woodleigh Soft in any caliber, then it should be fine. But, that is me, and everyone has to make that decision for their own rifles. I don't own or shoot them, but if I did, I would look at it that way. Honestly, my opinion can't count for much as the reality of the matter, I don't even own a double. But, the data speaks more than I can. It is what it is.

Michael

Oh and by the way, please take notice. HEH..... I had to know, so I actually shot a 416 caliber bullet down the same 458 caliber rifle to get barrel strain from that! As suspected it was rather low, but there is a number there regardless. I did not hit much with that round however!

Whatever you do, don't overlook the Woodleigh Hydro. It is a hell of a bullet.

quote:

Originally posted by Dave Bush:
Whatever you do, don't overlook the Woodleigh Hydro. It is a hell of a bullet.

Hi Dave!

No, we didn't, I had some of those on hand and the barrel strain was good, see the spreadsheet above, which I know you already have, just pointing out. It did not do as well in barrel strain with the 470. ?? Why??? Don't know. Anyway....... That thing is about the "Ugliest" bullet I have ever seen! LOL

Received the bullets you sent for testing. Have them. Probably the weekend, maybe first of the week depending on the shooting workload! Which is HEAVY right now with the Raptors!

Michael

Michael, take you time. I know how busy you are.

Michael,

I really enjoy these discussions with you. Again, let me say that we appreciate the amount of work and effort you have done at your own expense of time, effort, and money to produce such data.

I fully understand the limitations of just hooking up the machine and taking off on further testing.

Cheers,

Todd

Hey! Maybe there is hope for me yet! My 500NE shoots the North Fork 570gr. solids well, and my 9.3x74R shoots the CEB 260gr. solids well.
Redeemed! Saved!
Peter.

Surestrike:
Email me and send your post address. I'll photocopy two pages of my .600 book and what I wrote on the Barnes bullets and my .600. If it wasn't safe, I would not have shot them in my old classic .600.
Cheers,
Cal

Cal,

I sent my info to you on your CalPappas.com contact page. And thanks partner, I appreciate it!

Greg

Michael,

Have you done barrel strain estimates for any of the Hornady DGS solids?

465H&H

465H&H

No, I did not do barrel strains on the Hornady DGS. I know I had some 500 gr at one time, but I am not showing them in inventory now? I may have given them to someone, I don't recall. I know I must not have had them at the time I did the strains in 458 or I would have most certainly done them.

Seems like, this and the other thread I am getting some requests. As stated above, I think a test is only good for that one time, can't compare one day to the next with the exact numbers, one can compare ranking over several different tests however, and the ranking is holding out pretty well, even across calibers, with the exception of the Barnes banded solids, which in different calibers, and different runs of those, they may be different sizes, which obviously effects strain.

So I am considering running another test soon, if you or anyone would like for me to do a bullet that has not been done, I would be happy to include it, including the Hornady DGS. Send me a few, 5-6 of them, no, make it 6 just in case of a hookup or electrical issue. I try and run 3 for a decent test, as long as the curves and numbers are close during those 3. If not, then 3 more would give me a backup on that.

I have right now some 450 gr TSX that I can do terminals, along with Barrel Strains with. Of course I will include the "BenchMark" bullet, 500 Woodleigh Soft. I have just enough of those left to do a test with. Along with others for direct comparison.

Michael

quote:

Originally posted by michael458:
465H&H

No, I did not do barrel strains on the Hornady DGS. I know I had some 500 gr at one time, but I am not showing them in inventory now? I may have given them to someone, I don't recall. I know I must not have had them at the time I did the strains in 458 or I would have most certainly done them.

Seems like, this and the other thread I am getting some requests. As stated above, I think a test is only good for that one time, can't compare one day to the next with the exact numbers, one can compare ranking over several different tests however, and the ranking is holding out pretty well, even across calibers, with the exception of the Barnes banded solids, which in different calibers, and different runs of those, they may be different sizes, which obviously effects strain.

So I am considering running another test soon, if you or anyone would like for me to do a bullet that has not been done, I would be happy to include it, including the Hornady DGS. Send me a few, 5-6 of them, no, make it 6 just in case of a hookup or electrical issue. I try and run 3 for a decent test, as long as the curves and numbers are close during those 3. If not, then 3 more would give me a backup on that.

I have right now some 450 gr TSX that I can do terminals, along with Barrel Strains with. Of course I will include the "BenchMark" bullet, 500 Woodleigh Soft. I have just enough of those left to do a test with. Along with others for direct comparison.

Michael

Michael,

Have Midway send you a box of .458 500 grain DGS and then send me the bill.

465H&H