Has anyone tried the Woodleigh Hydros in a double? What's your take? Are they safe in a double?

Dave,

I have shot them in my 470 and had good penetration test results. Engraving was fine. Woodleigh states "Can be used in most nitro double, and magazine rifles"

I was hoping 505G could obtain any pressure/strain test results from Woodleigh and share them with us.

This picture was posted on another thread.

Mike, I'll ask, I am sure someone
has done some testing.

I've used them out of my WR 465 double and bolt actions (375 and I think 338WM).

Work well, penetrate more than RN SN in a direct comparison on the same animal with almost identical shots (both shots hit 4 - 6 inches apart and followed the same path, Hydro exited, RN SN was under the skin.

Through the heart shots, Hydro's seem to cause more damage in that instead of a hole, it blew a great chunk out of the heart.

You can get away with a lighter bullet inthe Hydro's, so where I use a heavy for calibre RN SN bullet like a 300gn in a 375H&H, a 235gn Hydro will do exactly the same job in terms of damage and penetration. We had 235gn Hydro's penetrate full length on a Buffalo.

Finally, as with any double, measure your bores.

I know of others who use them in Holland Royal 500 Nitro and other doubles and they have gone to Africa.

505: I guess the trick would be finding the hydro that will do the work you need done, but which regulates, eh?
I really hate to do this, but has anyone else been tempted to nickname them "foreskin bullets"?

Dave, why in the world would you not choose the BBW #13's????

quote:

Originally posted by Bill/Oregon:
505: I guess the trick would be finding the hydro that will do the work you need done, but which regulates, eh?

From everyone I have talked to, they regulate the same as all other bullets, same or similar charge.

Dave,

I have used them on elephant frontal brain shots from a 470 Searcy double at 2,150 fps. They penetrated as deeply as North Fork or CEB #13s for me on the same shots, same rifle, same velocity. Expect to find any of these bullets 10 to 12" behind the shoulder blade in the loin meat after elephant frontals. The Hydro gave more bone damage to the head than the others but I only checked it on one. Hope to either verify or not verify this in the spring.

465H&H

quote:

Originally posted by DoubleDon:
Dave, why in the world would you not choose the BBW #13's????

DD

The same could be asked the other way round,
why would you use a BBW # 13 when you can use
any other bullet that performs the same.

In any case, he asked about Hydro's so let people answer him.

.

quote:

Originally posted by DoubleDon:
Dave, why in the world would you not choose the BBW #13's????

Don:

I think the BBW#13s are superb solids. I also love the North Fork solids and cup point solids. The Hydros just give us another option. Woodleigh suggests that by using the Hydros you no longer have to pick between a soft and a solid and that they produce a bigger permanent wound channel similar to the NF cup points solids. That is especially important for a guy who wants to use a lighter rifle, like a .375 flanged or a 9,3X74R to hunt heavy game like buffalo. I am thinking that a Hydro or NF cup point in one barrel and a BBW#13 in the other would be just the ticket.

I have tested the Hydros in my 450 Marlin in wet phone books at my range. They do really penetrate well. I just was wondering if anyone was using them in a double. Would love to see some barrel strain data.

A lot of guys use them here in bolt guns, but not doubles that l know of. (not a lot of doubles around) They have been getting a lot of testing on pigs, and some buff. With good reports back from guys on local forums here. But they are very pricey, even here for us to buy. We can almost get Hornady and BBW#13 cheaper than the woodleigh. But the Hydros seem to be punching well above there weight from all reports. The same may be the same of other good bullets mentioned here.

Some info from a local forum, from guys that have used them a lot and testing done.. But not in doubles that l know of.


[/quote]
Graeme Wright of "Shooting the British Double" fame has done some very conclusive tests with Woodleigh Hydros which proves once and for all that these bullets out perform standard solids & softnose bullets when it comes to resisting deflect. In his words "The test was extemely severe and the Woodleigh hydro was a standout"

Read the attached details of the test.

From this it can be seen that when it comes to shooting Deer or dangerous game through brush, the Woodleigh Hydro is the one that will hit where you are aiming.



Also attached is a test which demonstrates the effect that velocity has on the size of the wound channels when using hydros. As can be seen in the photo as velocities increase the wound channel becomes massive. At 3200fps the .375 cal hydro is punching a wound channel of over 2 inches. PHs in Africa are finding similar size wounds in brain shot elephant when using hydros.



I am told that the Hydro designers have almost completed testing on the New Generation Hydro 2. It is said that this new generation hydro has solved the feeding problem in bolt guns. In addition the BC is much improved being on a par with the Woodleigh soft nose bullets. Further to this they are reporting that wound channels are bigger for a given velocity & directional stability is even better when compared to current hydros.

Bullet Deflection Testing

Hunting conditions in much of southern Africa and indeed Australia would be what South Africans describe as bushveld. Good numbers of full sized trees plus lots of scrubby, bushy growth all interspersed with coarse grasses. Shooting ranges tend not to be too great but will very often involve trying to find a clear path between the shooter and the animal. Under these conditions one often repeated saying is “just shoot through the brush – it will be ok”. With dangerous game hunting this saying may be modified to “just use a solid – it will be ok”. I have always had my doubts about this particular piece of “field wisdom” and decided to set up a trial to find some answers.



It was decided to test three general ballistic groups. Group A would be a dangerous game cartridge in the 450 - 470 class. Group B would be the ubiquitous and ever popular 375 H&H. Group C would be a smaller, higher velocity cartridge in the 300 to 338 range.



Method:

The shooting bench is placed 80 yards from the target. This was considered a good average distance for shots at big game on a typical Africa safari. The rifle is held on the bench with a lead sled and sand bags. The target consists of a paper cross wire style that allows a very precise hold with a scope sight.



A portable frame was made with a “window” in it to hold various types of media – the window can open and close using a drawstring. The media is clamped into the window using wooden slats top and bottom. The frame can then be positioned at any distance between the shooter and the target. To conduct a test, the frame is set at a pre-determined distance from the target. The unloaded rifle is lined up on the target and the frame adjusted so that the bullet will go through about the middle of the window. At this stage the window is open.



After making sure the range is clear, the rifle can be loaded and the test shot fired. Using sand bags and the sled, the shooter would align the scope onto the target. While holding very steady, the shooter would then ask for the window to be closed using the drawstring. When the window is closed the shooter cannot see the target, which means that the bullet must hit the media on the way through.

Finally, without moving the rifle, the shot is squeezed off and the target is examined for the point of impact.



Media used: 5/8” (16mm) hardwood dowel, cane approximately 1/4” (6mm) and grass.



Range from the media to the target: The first range tested would be 40 yards, simulating hitting an obstruction half way between rifle and animal. Two shorter ranges of 10 yards and 10 feet were also chosen to give some mix to the data. The 10 foot distance would give a good simulation of an animal standing in cover when the shot was taken.



Shot assessment: The vital heart / lung area on a big game animal, such as a buffalo, could be considered fairly large. However, the heart area itself is about 8 inches diameter and a hit through the heart could be considered a positively fatal shot. This then was the standard used - if any bullet fell outside this area it would be considered as a failure to hit close enough to the vitals and therefore unreliable. At the beginning of each test a datum shot was fired at the target with no obstructing media. The shots fired through the media were accessed in relation to the datum shot. If a shot fell more than 4 inches from the datum it would be considered to have not hit the vital area.



Group A:


Typical dangerous game ballistics in the 450 - 470 class.


Rifle – Ruger No1 with a scope sight. Chambered in 450 x 31/4”

Projectiles - 480 grains at approximately 2200 fps MV.



Test 1: media – 5/8” hardwood dowel, 40 yards form the target. Five shots per test.



480 grain soft points: one bullet impact 18 inches from the datum and another one more than 4 inches from the datum. Most holes were oblong showing that the projectiles were becoming unstable and yawing.



480 grain full metal jacket: one bullet impact 9 inches from the datum and one about 4 inches from the datum. Some bullet holes showing slight yawing but very much less than the soft points.



480 grain Hydrostatic solids: one bullet impact 4 inches from the datum and showing some yawing. All others fell within 2 inches of the datum and no yawing.



Summary: This would be considered a tough test by any standard. The bullet s were sent through a hard media and then had to travel another 40 yards to the target. As expected the SP’s preformed the worst. They appeared to have opened up to at least some degree and were unstable arriving at the target. A further problem with soft point projectiles is that if they have started to open up before hitting the animal then this will undoubtedly have an adverse affect on the penetration performance. The FMJ’s were better but one missing the vitals altogether and one on the edge of the acceptable area. The hydrostatic solids were the stand out performers here – all would have hit the vitals. One on the edge of the acceptable area but all the others within 2 inches.



Test 2: media – 1/4” cane, 40 yards form the target.

Five shots per test.



480 grain soft points: group size was 1.2 inches which may indicate some instability but very slight. All impacts within 1.5 inches of the datum.



480 grain full metal jacket: group size 1.0 inch and all impacts within 1.0 inch of the datum.



480 grain Hydrostatic solids: group size 0.9 inches and again all impacts within 1.0 inch of the datum



Summary: Even with another 40 yards to travel to the target the cane media did not present much problem to rifle ballistics of this type. All 15 shots would have hit the vitals.



With this performance in cane there was no point in testing the lighter and less dense grass.



[/quote]

[/quote]

Hydro's as a rule dont kill as quickly as a well placed expanding bullet ....but kill 10 x better than a standard FMJ. [/quote]

quote:

Originally posted by 505G:

quote:

Originally posted by DoubleDon:
Dave, why in the world would you not choose the BBW #13's????

DD

The same could be asked the other way round,
why would you use a BBW # 13 when you can use
any other bullet that performs the same.

In any case, he asked about Hydro's so let people answer him.

.

Don't see how my response prevented anyone from answering Dave.

Jack, thanks for taking the time to share those data, especially the deflection tests.