The Accurate Reloading Forums THE ACCURATE RELOADING.COM FORUMS Rifles Double Rifles Barnes TSX Safe for Vintage Doubles?Go | New | Find | Notify | Tools | Reply | |
| Barnes TSX Safe for Vintage Doubles? | Login/Join |
| One of Us |
A friend of mine has some Barnes TSX bullets and wants to know if they will be safe for use in his vintage Rigby 470 Nitro. I know the bands on the new TSX helps to reduce pressure spikes. He also has Woodleigh FMJ solids. I suggested rather using the Woodleigh Weldcores as they will most probably print the same as the FMJ's. Any help would be appreciated. Thanks. | ||
|
One of Us |
jac: I have shot Woodleigh solids (weldcore) in my vintage .600, .500, .450no2, .450-400, and will do so when my .350no2 Rigby comes in. I reduce the powder charge a few grains (2 grains in the .400, 5 grains in the .600, and 3 grains the the .450 and 500) and pressure is safe and accuracy is good. I have shot the Barnes Banded Solids in my .600 with no problems. However, when shooting a mono metal bullet (not lead core) I would suggest making a cast of the bore to make sure it matches the diameter of the bullet. If the bullet is over size there is less forgiveness with a monometal than in a lead core bullet. If the diameter of the bullet matches the groove depth or is .001 or .002 less than the groove diameter then all should be fine if the rifle is in sound condition. The Barnes Banded Solids were made .002 undersize for safety and worked fine in my old Wilkes .600. Perhaps MAC can weigh in here as he has forgotten more about doubles than I will ever know. MAC….? Cal _______________________________ Cal Pappas, Willow, Alaska www.CalPappas.com www.CalPappas.blogspot.com 1994 Zimbabwe 1997 Zimbabwe 1998 Zimbabwe 1999 Zimbabwe 1999 Namibia, Botswana, Zambia--vacation 2000 Australia 2002 South Africa 2003 South Africa 2003 Zimbabwe 2005 South Africa 2005 Zimbabwe 2006 Tanzania 2006 Zimbabwe--vacation 2007 Zimbabwe--vacation 2008 Zimbabwe 2012 Australia 2013 South Africa 2013 Zimbabwe 2013 Australia 2016 Zimbabwe 2017 Zimbabwe 2018 South Africa 2018 Zimbabwe--vacation 2019 South Africa 2019 Botswana 2019 Zimbabwe vacation 2021 South Africa 2021 South Africa (2nd hunt a month later) ______________________________ | |||
|
| One of Us |
Thanks Cal, I might try that. Have recently seen a .500 NE Merkel with a bulged barrel from using a Barnes TSX. It was probably too hot a load rather than an oversized bullet. | |||
|
One of Us |
 I shot no less than 1000 TSX in my 500NE Merkel with no ill effects whatsoever. Probably as you say, "A too hot load rather than an oversized bullet". Barrel strain data on the "Double Rifle Bullet of the Future" thread shows the Woodleigh FMJ and Hornaday solid and DGX to exceed the strains produced by the TSX. Same old crap arguments, long ago solved and disproven.  | |||
|
one of us |
jac, as long as a mono-metal bullet is properly made, with properly pliable material, and as Cal says below, if the bullet is not over size in the groove diameter any bullet is safe in even the oldest Nitro proofed double rifle.
I agree with Cal on this! However because one mono-metal happens to have the right dimensions to work in a particular double doesn’t mean it will be safe in all double rifles. As Cal says one needs to do his homework and cast the bore in his rifle before using ANY hard bullet!
The fact that “Double Rifle Bullet of the future” measured the stress for that bullet in one rifle generating less stress that traditional jacketed solid bullets made today only proves that modern jackets are harder than the older bullets, and that the mono-metal bullet in question and that in their experiments it did not cause OSR. OSR is not caused by over loading of a cartridge. That simply bulges or bursts a barrel if it is over enough. OSR (Over Stressed rifling)is caused by bullets that are too hard, and/or too large for the bore. I have seen examples of this in two vintage double rifles, and know one person who has seen several more, also in vintage rifles as well. In every case the OSR was in the last 10 or 12 inches near the muzzles where the barrels are at their thinnest, and with the steel being softer in old rifles. I have never used this particular bullet in one of my doubles, but Cal, and Tod have as noted above, both without damage. I use North fork CPS and FPS Mono-metal solids in my doubles. These bullets are IMO, properly made, and are made from copper, not bronze. Also, IMO, the OSR I have witnessed was caused by the old original mono-metal solids that were made without the so-called pressure rings that give the displaced metal engraved by the rifling a place to go into the grooves between the pressure rings. In the final analysis the OSR has not been proven to not be caused by bullets that are too hard, or to be simply an OLD WIVE’S TALE! My recommendation is to proceed with caution, and do your home work of measuring your bore and groove and the bullet. Though it may not cause the damage in the first few rounds doesn’t mean it will not in future, or in another rifle of the same chambering. A new set of barrels for a double rifle are in the 7 to 10K to have built for a rifle and that money will buy a lot of bullets that will not damage your double rifle. Just as both sides of this old debate are well presented in print, and as in most cases will start character bashing contest that is not needed, but stand by and dig your fox hole for the “IN COMING” are already in flight! .....................................................................  .... ....Mac >>>===(x)===> MacD37, ...and DUGABOY1 DRSS Charter member "If I die today, I've had a life well spent, for I've been to see the Elephant, and smelled the smoke of Africa!"~ME 1982 Hands of Old Elmer Keith  | |||
|
one of us |
Here we go...  Antlers Double Rifle Shooters Society Heym 450/400 3" | |||
|
| One of Us |
Nope! Not gonna do it anymore. Don't have the desire. On second thought, I will say something more. Is this forum doomed to just rehash the same old crap arguments over and over and over ad nauseam or is it possible to take the conversation forward? Take a look over at the main page, "African Hunting". There are topics on the front page that have been there for weeks. Are we out of topics to discuss? Mac, I cited the "Double Rifle Bullet of the Future" thread for one reason and one reason only, that being that up until that time, all the discussions concerning what bullets are safe in doubles and what are not were merely based on opinions without ANY real objective data to support it. "Everybody" believed the Woodliegh FMJ and Hornady offerings "have to be safe because that's what the modern manufacturer's use for regulation" but those bullets were objectively shown to produce more strains and at least IMHO, that took the discussion forward and past the "Old Wives Tales". Maybe it's not 100% conclusive but it sure beats something to the effect of "that sounds logical to me since a mono can't compress"! Well, neither can a steel jacket over the lead core! It's just a tired old argument and has been hashed to death to the point that I'm surprised anyone still has any interest in beating the dead horse further.  Personally, shoot whatever floats your boat. Who cares? They all work fine. If I was going to be concerned with rifling spurting out the end of my barrel, I'd be more worried about it from a steel shanked bullet than a mono of soft copper. That said, I wouldn't be worried about shooting ANY bullet made today in any rifle made today! Mac, go back and check out the latter parts of that thread where Sam and Michael shot oversized STEEL monos out of that paper thin barrel without causing the rifling to transfer to the outside!! I believe their research was a bit more extensive than you want to give credit for. Here is a good place to start: http://forums.accuratereloadin...091002681#9091002681 Damn I said I wasn't going to fight this old argument any longer but I'm on a roll now so what the hey? What is it about soldering two barrels together that would all of a sudden cause rifling to spurt out the end of the barrel or transfer to the outside of a barrel due to a mono metal bullet? If a mono metal bullet is capable of causing rifling to transfer to the outside of a barrel, wouldn't it be possible for it to happen on a bolt or single shot rifle (read ONE BARREL) as well? OSR ... don't believe it exists. As stated before, I had a Ruger M77 in 338WM with the "candy stripes" on the outside of the barrel, delivered that way NIB from the factory, long before mono bullets were fired in that rifle. For you OSR believers, here is a photo you may enjoy! It's Bigfoot on a trail-cam! More likely than OSR!!     | |||
|
| One of Us |
Your description above of what you call "OSR", is a long long way removed from what was originally described as OSR by very experienced DR people some 15 years or so back. The whole OSR story has been twisted around and exaggerated by some people on internet forums, that some of those who claim to have "disproved" it, don't appear to really know what OSR actually is. For a good description on what "OSR" is, and also what it is not, look in the damage to double rifles chapter of Graeme Wright's book "Shooting The British Double Rifle". | |||
|
| One of Us |
Todd: Good to see you back on AR. But, tell me, how did you get the black and white photo of my ex? Cal _______________________________ Cal Pappas, Willow, Alaska www.CalPappas.com www.CalPappas.blogspot.com 1994 Zimbabwe 1997 Zimbabwe 1998 Zimbabwe 1999 Zimbabwe 1999 Namibia, Botswana, Zambia--vacation 2000 Australia 2002 South Africa 2003 South Africa 2003 Zimbabwe 2005 South Africa 2005 Zimbabwe 2006 Tanzania 2006 Zimbabwe--vacation 2007 Zimbabwe--vacation 2008 Zimbabwe 2012 Australia 2013 South Africa 2013 Zimbabwe 2013 Australia 2016 Zimbabwe 2017 Zimbabwe 2018 South Africa 2018 Zimbabwe--vacation 2019 South Africa 2019 Botswana 2019 Zimbabwe vacation 2021 South Africa 2021 South Africa (2nd hunt a month later) ______________________________ | |||
|
| one of us |
Todd....dude; you were sooo close. And it's fixin to be Christmas, man.  Antlers Double Rifle Shooters Society Heym 450/400 3" | |||
|
| one of us |
Life is too short to rehash old arguments that have changed nobody's mind either way. With that in mind, I will leave it to the powers that be to decide for everyone what the truth is! See jac, what happens when you ask for a serious question here on AR? .............................................................................Hell lets go hunting! ................................  ....Mac >>>===(x)===> MacD37, ...and DUGABOY1 DRSS Charter member "If I die today, I've had a life well spent, for I've been to see the Elephant, and smelled the smoke of Africa!"~ME 1982 Hands of Old Elmer Keith | |||
|
| One of Us |
Cal: 5Seventy: I'm WELL aware of Graeme's proclamations in his book! Been there, done that! If interested in this dead horse beyond this particular thread, do a search on some of the heated but friendly battles Mac and I have had over the topic. Have you seen a "striped" barrel? I have. Owned one. A bolt rifle as described, not produced by a mono. BTW, have any of these supposed "OSR" afflicted rifles ever been reported to no longer shoot just as accurately as a non "OSR" rifle? I can tell you that "OSR" M77 was a tack driver! Killed a bunch of elk with it!!  Terry:  Mac: I'm with you on the last part! Let's go hunting and forget all of this BS! It doesn't amount to a rat's ass after all Pardner!  | |||
|
| One of Us |
Todd, I am not at all interested in trying to convince anyone that OSR is either fact or fiction, and the same goes for which bullets might be safe or unsafe to shoot in DR's of any year or maker. My post above was just to show how, when put into an internet forum, a book description of "shadows outlining the rifling" morphed into "rifling spurting out the end of a barrel".  Regarding your Ruger M77 candy striping, that would be nothing more than a poorly finished external barrel surface. (Friday arvo job) AFAIK Ruger barrels were mass produced, hammer forged, and machine polished, which is soooo different to the way that quality DR barrels are externally finished. And yeah, I agree about Ruger 77 bolt guns. I've owned four Ruger 77's over the last 30 years, have used them for both pro and recreational shooting/hunting, and all of them were very accurate rifles. Never had any with candy striping though.  | |||
|
| One of Us |
jac, If you are genuinely interested in knowing the answer to your question, you might try emailing Paul Roberts @ J Roberts and Son in the UK. Paul Roberts had the Rigby name at one time and I believe he has also owned and hunted with vintage Rigby DR's. He might be prepared to comment on suitable bullets for the vintage stuff. | |||
|
| one of us |
Sounds like a pregnant idea to me! By the way where in hell have you been? I haven't seen a post from you in a coon's age! .......................................................................  ....Mac >>>===(x)===> MacD37, ...and DUGABOY1 DRSS Charter member "If I die today, I've had a life well spent, for I've been to see the Elephant, and smelled the smoke of Africa!"~ME 1982 Hands of Old Elmer Keith | |||
|
One of Us |
+1....Remind me to buy the first round in Dallas... USN (ret) DRSS Verney-Carron 450NE Cogswell & Harrison 375 Fl NE Sabatti Big Five 375 FL Magnum NE DSC Life Member NRA Life Member | |||
|
One of Us |
Just an observation. This thread was started about vintage doubles. There are many folks that say they have shot monometal bullets out of doubles with no issues, but it seems that most of those folks are referring to modern doubles. We also have the strain gauge work that suggests that the monometals may in fact be preferable to lead core steel jacketed bullets when fired in modern doubles. That said, I do not recall seeing many people with pre-war English doubles talking about their experience with shooting monometal bullets in their vintage doubles over a extended period of time. My point is simply, for me it is a risk/reward proposition. I know that lead core, steel jacketed bullets have been used in vintage doubles for years with no issues . . . and they perform fine in the field. I cannot make that same statement for monometal bullets. So when I decide what to push down the barrel of a $25K + vintage English double, for me personally I will stick to what has been used in the past. On the other hand if the makers of monometal bullets would like to go buy a pre-war Holland & Holland double for $50K and shoot a bunch of monometal bullets in it to demonstrate that changes in metallurgy, manufacturing techniques, materials, etc. over the last 70 years mean there is no material difference between a modern double made by Heym or VC and a vintage double made by Rigby or Holland insofar as shooting monometal bullets is concerned, I would be open to reviewing their work . . . I guess stated another way, if some of the those that do not feel there is an issue with shooting monometal bullets in a double owned a vintage Holland & Holland Royal, I kinda wonder whether they would be happy to feed it a steady diet of monometal bullets. Mike | |||
|
| One of Us |
Jorge, you're on Pardner. I'll buy the second round!! Tanker posit? Jines, here is another observation. Check my initial BS flag. It was made in response to a statement that a MERKEL 500NE was seen to have a bulged barrel "from using a Barnes TSX". The thread was started about vintage rifles, but the statement was made regarding modern rifles. I'll stand by that call of BS. But it does appear that Cal has pre-empted your challenge by firing Barnes Banded Solids in his old Wilkes 600 without ill effect! | |||
|
| One of Us |
Todd and Mike: Several years ago, at SCI, I purchased four boxes of the banded solids to do some experimenting. I started out with a very low velocity and measured the recovered bullet. Increasing velocity I eventually equalled the factory regulated load for my rifle which was 110 grains of cordite and 1900 fps from the 26-inch barrel. No problems. No OSR. No change in accuracy. But, they are too long to easily put in the correct amount of slow burning 4831 in the case. And, they are not traditional looking. Actually, kind of ugly in a vintage double. That said, they performed fine. I shot all four boxes. None remaining. I now use only Woodleigh due to performance, weight retention, and their beauty! Cal PS. To reply to a possible question of case capacity. In my book on the .600s, the case capacity of several head stamps is listed. I could only load to velocity with 4831 in cases with the largest internal capacity--read thinner brass--with the banded solids. _______________________________ Cal Pappas, Willow, Alaska www.CalPappas.com www.CalPappas.blogspot.com 1994 Zimbabwe 1997 Zimbabwe 1998 Zimbabwe 1999 Zimbabwe 1999 Namibia, Botswana, Zambia--vacation 2000 Australia 2002 South Africa 2003 South Africa 2003 Zimbabwe 2005 South Africa 2005 Zimbabwe 2006 Tanzania 2006 Zimbabwe--vacation 2007 Zimbabwe--vacation 2008 Zimbabwe 2012 Australia 2013 South Africa 2013 Zimbabwe 2013 Australia 2016 Zimbabwe 2017 Zimbabwe 2018 South Africa 2018 Zimbabwe--vacation 2019 South Africa 2019 Botswana 2019 Zimbabwe vacation 2021 South Africa 2021 South Africa (2nd hunt a month later) ______________________________ | |||
|
| One of Us |
So curious Todd, if you had a Holland & Holland Royal built in 1935 that you paid $80K for, I presume you would be perfectly comfortable shooting monometal bullets in it . . . better yet, buy one then do it since it is easy to say sure I would when it is hypothetical, a bit different in reality. So we have a data set of one with Cal. Where are the other vintage double owners that shoot monometal bullets on a regular basis in their vintage doubles? My guess, speculative of course, is that universe is pretty darn small. Why? One reason might be that the risk is too great and the reward is de minimus. Again, just an observation. Mike | |||
|
| One of Us |
Mike: Before I shot the banded solids in my Wilkes, I has a chamber and bore cast done so I knew the exact diameter of the groove depth. I knew the diameter of the solid bullets and started off with a very low velocity and measured each bullet with each jump in velocity to see if anything changed. They all were constant with no changes. Accuracy improved with velocity as with all doubles. What I did was out of curiosity. There was nothing scientific about it. I felt confident the bands would displace any metal from passing through the rifling. I would not feel comfortable, however, shooting a mono metal bullet of solid shank design. By the way, all of this came about when Graeme Wright showed me a .450-400 with OSR. The twist of the rifling was on the outside of the barrels. I know what I saw but there would be too many variables for me to speculate the exact cause. One lying SOB from the south east told me he personally saw the rifling lands pushed out of the muzzle of a .600 due to a solid bullet. Of course, no names, no pictures, no documentation. Over the years he as proved himself to me to be a, well,… Just my story for what it is worth. Mike: I enjoy all of your comments here on AR. Todd: Good to see you back. Cal _______________________________ Cal Pappas, Willow, Alaska www.CalPappas.com www.CalPappas.blogspot.com 1994 Zimbabwe 1997 Zimbabwe 1998 Zimbabwe 1999 Zimbabwe 1999 Namibia, Botswana, Zambia--vacation 2000 Australia 2002 South Africa 2003 South Africa 2003 Zimbabwe 2005 South Africa 2005 Zimbabwe 2006 Tanzania 2006 Zimbabwe--vacation 2007 Zimbabwe--vacation 2008 Zimbabwe 2012 Australia 2013 South Africa 2013 Zimbabwe 2013 Australia 2016 Zimbabwe 2017 Zimbabwe 2018 South Africa 2018 Zimbabwe--vacation 2019 South Africa 2019 Botswana 2019 Zimbabwe vacation 2021 South Africa 2021 South Africa (2nd hunt a month later) ______________________________ | |||
|
| One of Us |
Your powers of observation seem to be diminishing Mike! I'll once again direct you to the bold print above! Nothing more, nothing less is what drew me to this discussion! I am curious however as to the tone of your comment challenging me to purchase an $80K vintage H&H Royal and THEN talk ... as if I had a reputation of talking smack without backing up my commentary through experience or demonstration! Have you known me to behave in such a manner from past experience? You wouldn't be trying to impress or intimidate me now would you as I'm not inclined towards either? Personally, I could give less than a rat's ass as to what anyone shoots in ANY of their rifles, modern / vintage, double / bolt!! I know exactly what works for me through first hand experience and that's what I'll stick with and we aren't likely to see eye to eye on that subject ... and frankly, who cares? After all, I'm just a guy that likes to hunt ... especially DG with double rifles! Don't have any rifles to sell ya! Don't have any bullets to sell ya! Don't have any BS to sell ya! None of it profits me a shilling!! But when I see Bull Shit, I'm more than likely to call it!! And the claim that a bulged barrel on a modern day MERKEL 500NE was due to a Barnes TSX bullet being fired in it is BS and you know it! I'll let you have the final whack at the dead horse if you're so inclined. Personally, I'd prefer to see something new to discuss, like the work that Sam and Michael did in an attempt to interject some objective data into the discussion ... but that's just me! | |||
|
| One of Us |
Thanks Cal for the welcome back. Busy year with other interests at the time ... mainly work and cars to be honest but hey, it's hunting season here in TX so I thought I'd pop back in here and there. BTW, I'd like to say thanks for making the accurate statements highlighted above as well as the accurate statements you've consistently made for as long as I've followed your posts. As we've discussed at length previously, I have no doubt you saw a rifle with what appeared to be an imprint of rifling on the outside. As stated, I had a M77 with those same markings. The problem comes in when specific statements to the effect that "A Barnes TSX" caused it. From a critical thinking perspective, I for the life of me, cannot reconcile how a copper bullet, softer than the softest vintage steel, could cause a very shallow set of rifling, as measured in terms of height inside the barrel (ie groove to bore measurement), to transpose itself onto the outside of a very thick barrel wall, at least in comparison to the thickness of said rifling (ie groove to bore measurement), especially when the steel has not been super heated into a pliable material, nor does the culprited TSX bullet have a negative form surrounding the outside of the barrel in which to press the steel into, thereby leaving (or forging) the rifling impression ... perfectly. Again, critically thinking, it appears to me that damage to the rifling in terms of flattening or smearing it would be much more likely than causing an impression to travel through that much thicker barrel wall. Oversize bullet? More likely to bulge the barrel than cause the rifling to imprint through a barrel wall to the outside and remain visible!! After all, if the rifling were capable of transferring it's pattern to the outside of the barrel wall, would not the rifling necessarily have to be of a much stronger steel than the barrel wall for the imprint of the very shallow rifling (again, groove to bore measurement) to travel through that thick wall and leave the imprint? The concept just leaves me scratching my head as to how this could be possible within our laws of physics! There just is NO WAY rifling imprints itself onto the outside of a barrel, simply because of soldering two barrels together, then firing a bullet down the tube. Again, I don't doubt the imprint's existence. The question is, what caused it? Most likely a product of the barrel's construction process. And once again, if the softer steels of vintage rifles are that much of an issue, why don't we hear these same arguments regarding mono metal bullets, OSR, and the like when speaking of the old bolt or falling block rifles? Why only the doubles? A solder joint can't be responsible for the rifling imprint on the outside of the barrels ... can it? | |||
|
| One of Us |
Third Deck, outside the Dallas Ballroom, Thursday around 1730? PM inbound with contact stuff. USN (ret) DRSS Verney-Carron 450NE Cogswell & Harrison 375 Fl NE Sabatti Big Five 375 FL Magnum NE DSC Life Member NRA Life Member | |||
|
| One of Us |
Gee, nothing to get all wrapped around the axle about. I do not think anyone was out looking for a fight, I certainly was not. And absolutely no need to be defensive. The point I must have been inarticulately attempting to make was actually quite simple. It seems that in virtually 90%+ of the cases where someone says shooting a monometal bullet in a double is fine, if they back up that statement they do so by citing their personal experience with a modern double or the strain gauge work. Other than Cal, who I was certainly unaware of, I have not heard people citing as support for the notion that monometals are okay in doubles their experience in shooting monometals in vintage doubles. Why is that? Maybe there is a vast universe of such persons, if so they are certainly the new silent majority. If the observation is correct though, that most people shooting vintage doubles are not using monometals, then I was simply offering an explanation that perhaps it is because the risk of experiencing a problem, regardless of how slight, is such that if there is a issue the consequences could be extreme. So why not just avoid the risk altogether and shoot lead core steel jacketed solids in a vintage double since those rifles have been shooting that type bullet for years. I am not stating this explanation is a fact, that every vintage double owner feels that way or anything more than, a possible explanation is that they prefer to avoid the risk altogether because the downside if the risk materialized is asymmetric with the harm that might be done to their vintage double. That is certainly the case with me . . . why even take a pinhole risk if the consequences could be severe. Sorry if my attempt to simply make that point came across otherwise. Mike | |||
|
One of Us |
I shoot CEBs in my 1907 Boswell. I would shoot CEB's in any double capable of shooting a Woodleigh solid as they produce less barrel strain than a steel jacketed bullet. I also had the barrel measured (slugged) by JJ before it left Champlins. This should be done on any old double no matter which bullet you are shooting to confirm you are shooting the proper bullet. If you read some of the info on the Woodleigh monolithic they mention testing bullets from a 465 Holland and Holland Royal Double. They report no ill effects. http://www.woodleighbullets.co...tic_monos_page_2.pdf I agree with Todd's statement 100%
When the CEB NonCons first appeared I refused to use them. I was hunting buffalo with the North Fork Cup Point Solids which I like very much. Since then I have switched to the CEB NonCons as they are devastating on buffalo. I did not believe it until I used them myself. For me they are a better bullet than a Woodleigh soft for buffalo and pose no more risk for my double. Shoot whatever floats your boat, I do not care if it is rock salt out of a 45-70 double at an elephant. I have nothing to sell, but few on here have shot more buffalo than me in the last five years. I have also taken quite a few wet newspaper trophies. | |||
|
| One of Us |
Thanks for that Mike. Perhaps other vintage double owners with experience with monometal bullets will share their experiences as well. I will check out the Woodleigh info. [Not sure that link goes to the testing data, but I will wander around on the Woodleigh site.] Mike | |||
|
| One of Us |
Hmmmmmmmm, Todd, not to hijack this thread..that photo looks suspiciously like Shit-A-Way practicing with his Searcy .500? Dutch | |||
|
| One of Us |
If Woodleigh did some testing of their hydrostatically stabilized solids in double rifles, including a vintage English gun, and someone has a better link, please share it. It would certainly be interesting and informative to see such information. I do not recall having seen it before. [I would also note that it is all a matter of degree, since even lead core, steel jacketed bullets differ from the old copper or gilding metal jacketed bullets. So even using a lead core, steel jacketed bullet in a vintage double is using something "harder" than the bullets of the era the guns were built. There is a just a longer track record of using the steel jacketed bullets in such doubles versus the monometal bullets.] Mike | |||
|
| One of Us |
I would like to solicit more details about your use of NF and CEB if I may. There is not a great deal of pressure data out there for the use of CEB or NF in many of the vintage rifle chamberings. > What pressure limits do you place on your loads? > If you do not have equipment to read strain or pressure how did you arrive at your loads for CEB or NF beyond the typical regulation needs? As an example, maybe your Boswell was regulated with a 480 gr. Woodleight type bullet at 1800 fps. Did you utilize a similar weight in the NF or CEB and then adjust until regulated or did you employ some other means to ensure that you did not exceed some pressure limit? There is some pressure data and correlations out there for NF and CEB with reference to conventional bullets I was just wondering what you did when making the switch from conventional to non-con. I did pick up on the importance of slugging the barrel. Thanks, Eric NRA Benefactor TSRA Life DRSS Brno ZP-149 45-120 NE | |||
|
| One of Us |
Dutch:  | |||
|
| One of Us |
Todd, I did mention in a seperate sentence that it was more likely, too hot a load than the fault of the chosen bullet. This can obviously occur with any bullet loaded too hot. It just so happened that the Merkel .500 had its barrel bulged whilst using a Barnes TSX bullet. I didn't mean to point fingers at the TSX. | |||
|
| One of Us |
http://www.woodleighbullets.co...tic_monos_page_1.pdf http://www.woodleighbullets.co...tic_monos_page_2.pdf Mike, The reason I posted the link is you asked Todd if he would shoot a monometal from an H&H Royal. The link I provided showed that the Woodleigh guys will and do. Testing may have been the wrong word as they stated the bullets were "experimental" So I guess they trust the monometals enough to experiment with an H&H Royal. Also please note at the end of page one of the white paper:
While they may not have specific pressures and data listed I will make the assumption Woodleigh is reputable enough to have tested their bullets before making this statement, especially since the comparison is to soft nose bullets, not solids. Eric, The only pressure data that I am aware of that is readily available is on AR in the "Double Rifle Bullet of the Future" thread. I worked up loads similar to Woodliegh bullets. Regulation was great in my Krieghoff and Boswell. Accuracy was actually better in the Boswell using the CEBs. Final loads ended up within a couple of grains of the Woodleigh loads. The Boswell is a 450-400 3 1/4" and I have only shot the 400 grain bullets from it. It was slugged at .410 and the bullets I shoot are .409. The first round I shot was in a wet pack through a chronograph. Deep and straight penetration and velocity was what I expected. Found the bullet to make certain only the driving bands were contacting the rifling. I then began load development. The first load actually regulated fine and velocity was good. In conclusion, I could perform Vickers Hardness testing on the various bullets and even thought about hardness testing one of the barrels on the Boswell, but (Edited to eliminate unnecessary comment) I do not feel it is warranted, however after the holidays I may perform the test and report the results. Good luck with the bullet of your choice and have fun hunting and shooting. | |||
|
| One of Us |
Absolutely correct Mike, everyone should just shoot what makes them happy. That said, the original post was about someone that did not know what would make them happy in their vintage double and so they asked. My response (or $0.02 if you prefer), if it was my vintage Rigby .470, I would not shoot Barnes TSX bullets in it, I would stick to the Woodleighs. Mike | |||
|
| one of us |
ELeeton, For what ever it might be worth, I was an early user of NF's solids in a double rifle and my double rifle is a pretty high end (read expensive) modern rifle in the odd for a double 458wm. Mike at Norfolk was concerned about the high pressure of the 458wm combined with a load which was worked up, as he recommended, based on Hornaday's published data for their lead cored 500gr solids. The NF load both required and generated higher velocity to shoot to the rifle's regulation. Woodleigh also recommended using the Hornaday date for their 500gr solids. [Interstingly, the 500gr Woodeigh load which shot to the rifles regulation at 2135fps required the same amount of the same powder as the 450gr NF FN and CN solids at 2220fps.] Mike loaded some rounds with my worked up load and shot them through a pressure barrel and found the load to be comfortably below the max CIP and SAAMI specs for the 458wm in Mike's 24" pressure barrel, and produced higher velocity that our of my ~26" barrels, inferring even lower pressure in my barrels. The data from Hornaday was comfortably below max as well for their 500grainers. My take and Mikes was that if you stick to a powder charge that works for the standard cartridge bullet weight - i.e. with an appropriate powder delivers that velocity and barrel time required to shoot to a rifle's regulation - and switch to the lighter NF FN or CN solids, you can work up to the heavier bullet's powder charge and not exceed the heavier bullet's pressures. This testing was done more than a decade ago on the first generation NF's and the bullets have gone though three evolutions or so and changed a bit, so... Mike tested the second generation NF FN and CN solids vs. the first generation and found inconsequential pressure differences. I have a life time supply of the second generation FN and CN solids because I know that the load which shoots to regulation in my rifle is below CIP and SAAMI max and because I know the bullets work extremely well for some purposes. JPK  Free 500grains | |||
|
| One of Us |
Just as an aside, I was shooting original Kynoch 480 grain projectiles in my Rigby 450 3 1/4,(both original loaded rounds as well as original projectiles in my reloads of RL 15 to duplicate factory loads). In every load tested the original Kynoch projectiles, both reloads and originals, printed significantly lower on target than the Woodleighs. Woodleighs are touted as being almost identical to Kynoch's original design but they sure don't print to the same point of aim. I experimented with my .40 cal original Kynoch projectiles and the same results, significantly lower point of aim than the Woodleighs. I would point out that the original Kynoch loads were very accurate. The only thing I could think was more bearing surface on the Woodleighs than the Kynochs. Dutch | |||
|
| One of Us |
I believe some of the Kynochs are copper jacketed. The steel jacketed Kynochs are done with a much thinner steel. That being the case you would think they would print higher. A thinner steel jacket would mean less pressure and consequently less velocity and a higher point of impact. The thicker jackets would intuitively produce more pressure and more velocity and a lower point of impact given dwell time during recoil or some such effect as I understand. Did you chrono the loads? Mike | |||
|
| Powered by Social Strata |
 | Please Wait. Your request is being processed... |
|
The Accurate Reloading Forums THE ACCURATE RELOADING.COM FORUMS Rifles Double Rifles Barnes TSX Safe for Vintage Doubles?
Visit our on-line store for AR Memorabilia