It isn't sexy but it is very stable, because it clamps directly to the receiver, is quick to set up, dial in, and I don't have to find a shelf for it.

And, if you don't have a swivel base to set the taper, you can remove one bolt, pivot the vise to the desired angle and secure the loose side of the vise to the table with a machinists clamp.

So..you have to dial in the width, then the length, then the taper?

I dunno, seems like you could make a fixture in the time you just spent...but...got to admit it should work

It isn't that complicated, really.

Re-dialing the vise is quick and should be done periodically anyway. I'm sure your method works for you and I doubt the quality of the job suffers either way. I suppose it's just a matter of what a person is used to.

Ok, I understood some of what was actually being said. It is a real plus for me. So I actually have the 6.5-284 feeding from my Mauser from both sides. The problem I still have is that the brass, usually from the left rail, looks like Duane's original pics....scratched like hell. It still cuts the brass. Do I just need to take a little more off the left rail, or do something to the underside? I do not have all the fancy tools, just files, emory, dremmel (since Duane uses one I guess it's ok to mention).

I just don't want to overdo it, since I can't weld more back on.

Suggestions?

If it's feeding fine otherwise, then I would locate the area that is dragging, and hit it with some emory cloth to knock down the burrs to smooth it up. Lightly, using your fingers.

You know, sometimes it helps to blue the case (like Prussian Blue, bearing blue, etc) feed the case and you can usually see exacly where work is needed Re Dremel tool: Damn handy! aways have a couple on the bench

I do so enjoy the topics and pictures of Quality professional craftsmen !.

Subjects of interest too us all . Thank You fellas .

quote:

Re Dremel tool: Damn handy! aways have a couple on the bench

Thank you!!! In the right hands I've found it a valuable tool, and other times I've got in trouble with it.

Wow, I just noticed the # of views on this thread, 1404!

I guess I'm not the only one who really likes these types of
threads. Thanks Duane.

Allen

Thanks guys, I think I will try some more this weekend.

This may be a real can of worms; but does anybody have some general ideas to offer on how to help the newer flat nosed bullet designs feed?

I apologize in advance...

At least the latest iterations are tapered somewhat and have at least a slight radius between meplat and ogive.

LD

quote:

Originally posted by lawndart:
This may be a real can of worms; but does anybody have some general ideas to offer on how to help the newer flat nosed bullet designs feed?

I apologize in advance...

At least the latest iterations are tapered somewhat and have at least a slight radius between meplat and ogive.

LD

What action and round are you talking about?

The big problem with feeding flat nose bullets from a staggered magazine is getting them to emerge from the rail enough to hit the ramp before the rails let go. It's possible a person could modify the mag box to encourage this, but it would be tough to say exactly what would be needed without having the actual gun and round in hand.

Buenus Tardes Senior Malm,

I be tinking a 404J with a North Fork 380 grain (+/-) FPS out of a VZ 1924 conversion (class of 1938) with Senor Weibe's bottom metal (class of 2009.

The other possiblies are 404J conversion to a Winchester CRF (class of 2003) in 300 RUM DUM.

375 H&H on a Sako action; same same for a 375 Weatherby on a Sako action (minimal .370" free bore per the new chamber prints.

9.3x64 on Interarms Mark X with senor Weibe's 5MX bottom metal.

It would be kind of hard to sell FPS ammunition unless I can post pictures and a video of flawless feeding right side up, upside down, left and right, etc.

BTW Malm, "de check be in de mail" ( "I was just helping this sheep over the fence,I paid for this seed corn company ball cap and the government did not subsidize me last year." "What's the white stuff on my chin after the job interview?" "Who cares, I got hired"). "No, I never did see a construction company foreman wear penny loafers either."

PS Malm,

When I get the magazine box in, can you make that Mauser feed the 9.3x64 in FPS? The box is designed for the 375 & 416 Ruger. The box measurements are basically spot on; it just needs a touch of rail work

quote:

Originally posted by lawndart:
PS Malm,

When I get the magazine box in, can you make that Mauser feed the 9.3x64 in FPS? The box is designed for the 375 & 416 Ruger. The box measurements are basically spot on; it just needs a touch of rail work

I'll see what I can do.

That's my man, amen,

As I start cranking out mass quantities of heavy weight ammunition with matching Soft Nosed and Solid Flat Meplat North Fork bullets, I hope to develop a list of twenty or thirty gunsmiths around the country who can help rifles feed the flat nosed solids reliably.

That is my holy grail, I guess. You can sneak in ever so close to the large Pachyderms and Bovines with your chosen mix of softs and solids, secure in the knowledge that you rifle will never hiccup.

Also, correction. Duanes 5MX bottom metal is a drop box design; the 5M is the normal version.

We will give it a wack.

LD

I didn't mean to be a thread killer.
After talking with Mike Brady a while back (just reviewed my notes, duh), and doing the same with the new proprieters of North Fork, the overall recommendation is to load the FPS solid a bit shorter than the soft nose.

After reading this thread, we thought we should post our instructures for loading of our solids and cup point solids. This instruction can also be found on our website: www.northforkbullets.com.

North Fork Tech Notes:
Flat and Cup Point OAL Reloading Guidelines:

NF Flat and Cup Point Solids are designed to deliver the maximum lethal affects possible. For optimum terminal performance and unfaltering magazine feeding, the cartridge OAL (Overall Length) may need to be adjusted for an individual rifle. The ideal situation is to produce a cartridge with the longest OAL (giving the greatest powder capacity) that will reliably feed from the magazine BUT still not contact the rifling with the bullet( minimum of .025″ off the lands) . That OAL can, and is likely to be, different for every individual rifle. Only the customer can find the correct OAL for his/her own rifle.

Tip for setting seating depth:

1. Establish the maximum cartridge OAL for your rifle:

a. Establish the minimum seating depth (maximum OAL) of a solid with your rifle
(bullet just short of engaging the rifling minimum of .025″ off the lands) .

b. Determine the maximum OAL your magazine will hold. With standard length actions, that length is usually around 3.34″. In magnum length actions, it is closer to 3.6″.

c. The maximum cartridge OAL for your rifle is the smaller OAL from steps 1 and 2.

2. In a sized DUMMY CASE (no primer, no powder), seat the bullet out to the maximum OAL length determined in step 1 and is still able to be crimped in a groove but DO NOT crimp at this point.

3. Place DUMMY cartridge into the magazine and test feeding into the chamber.

4. If DUMMY cartridge loads into the chamber, make a few more DUMMY cartridges at this OAL and fill the magazine to determine how it feeds from both sides of the magazine. It is not unusual for a rifle to feed from one rail of the magazine and fail to feed from the other.

5. If all DUMMY cartridges feed, this is the starting OAL for load development.

6. If any one of the DUMMY cartridges fails to feed, then seat the solid into the case one groove further. DO NOT crimp at this point.

7. Repeat Steps 4 – 6 if necessary. Do not seat above the forward most groove.

If the forward most groove has been reached and the rifle still does not feed reliably, the rifle may require tuning by a competent gunsmith. Occasionally, there are rifles due to their design (flat faced breech, improperly shaped magazine follower, burrs or weak magazine spring), which will not feed.

The OALs will also vary by cartridge. Different cartridge lengths and shapes will demand different exposed lengths of bullet. For instance, with the short case length of the 458 Win Mag., it is not unusual for the bullet to be crimped in the third or fourth groove from the front. With the 458 Lott, the longer case length requires less exposed bullet than with the Win Mag., requiring the bullet to be seated deeper.


If you still have issues with feeding, please contact North Fork Technologies for additional recommendations.

I have a Steyr marked 98 feeding a .444 Remington,now barreled up and ready to stock.. great tips and photo's ,Mr. Wiebe

quote:

Originally posted by Duane Wiebe:
Screw up a 98...well, you CAN replace it with some degree of certainty.....at least until Jan 20th!

What happens on Jan 20th ?

quote:

Originally posted by Phil Lozano:

quote:

Originally posted by Duane Wiebe:
Screw up a 98...well, you CAN replace it with some degree of certainty.....at least until Jan 20th!

What happens on Jan 20th ?

The original post was Nov 08, I think he was refering to Obama's impending inaguration in Jan 09.

Interesting for me to see the tally of interest.

A few days ago, I got a call. The man had purchased a 375 Wby from the family of a deceased. (M-70 new action)

"The magazine spring seems a little weak" "Does it feed?," I asked..."Oh yeah..flawlessly in every position imaginable" Well "Maybe you better put in a new spring"....Give me a break!

quote:

Even without ammo, this bolt was pretty cranky and wanted to hang up...about 15 minutes with lapping compound, runs very smooth

Very informative and I enjoyed reading the thread. Where do you place the compound to smooth up the bolt?

Over the past several months, I've received many phone calls regarding this and that feeding issue.

One that crops up regular as ex lax is the problems encountered feeding those popular flat nose bullets.

From experience, I found that you can make traditional round nose such as Woodleighs feed slick. Put one of those flat nose ...you sometimes gotta start all over again.

If thought over a bit, it becomes evident that flat forms a "corner" right up at the front that has to climb up a steep ramp..it has to make a faster ascent than the round nose.

That ascent means the round it now rying to climb out of the rails a bit sooner, the rear has to drop a bit, so sometimes the bolt face has much less contact with the cartridge base.

Not a good scenario on a DGR! I have told the callers to try seating the bullet a bit deeper if possible in an effort to slow down that ascent mentioned ealier...the cartridge now moves a bit futher forward before trying to climb the ramp.

I'm told this usually takes care of the problem...anyway, something to try out...seeya Duane

Hi Duane,

Do you solder ribs inside the magazine at the shoulder junction of the case to prevent the cartridges moving forward under recoil?

Is it also feasable to solder ribs at the back of the magazine box so that the extractor groove on the case then clips into the rib, further stopping the round moving forward?

I understand this was a system that Heym introduced on their big bore calibre bolt actions, along with the front of the magazine box on a spring system to stop battering of the bullets under recoil.

Michael.

Everything you mention..in theory..should be a marvelous step forward..just never saw it fly in the real world...we do machine a step in the magazine box(at the shoulder junction) when we think it might be a good idea..but mostly for smooth feeding. The 375/416 Ruger is an example in our 5M model

quote:

Is it also feasable to solder ribs at the back of the magazine box so that the extractor groove on the case then clips into the rib, further stopping the round moving forward?

A lot of this stuff will work great for protecting the nose of the bullets, but it is just one more thing that can foul-up feeding.

Ans when it comes right down to it, slightly battered bullets don't really hurt anything. But a rifle that fails to feed can get you killed.

The reasoning behind flat nose solids is that they simply kill better than round nose, the leave better blood trails and they penetrate in a strieght line in flesh and bone..

Like Duane W says, it is harder to make them feed, and sometimes if they do feed then RN softs and RN solids don't feed so well..Sometimes you get lucky and have the best of both worlds..

If, however, your gun will only feed RN bullets, all is not dome, RN solids have been killing elephant and Buffalo for a mighty long time.

Here are some examples of variables that you can run into. A rifle that feeds a couple styles of bullet doesn't necessarily feed something like the North Fork Solids...too sharp of a corner to enter the chamber mouth when champferred "normally"...Didn't take too much to fix, just not comtemplated. This example is 404 Jeffery.

A close look at the extractor grooves and rim thickness will show a visible difference betrween Norma and Hornady brass. The extractor groove diameter is larger on the Norma. Set it up with Norma and you may have lazy ejection with Hornady.

The rim diameter on both is smaller than CIP MAX...could be a possible problem in case some mfg is making brass closer to MAX...you may not have opened up the bolt face enough to accept a MAX cartridge.

So...the obvious answer is top set up with one brand, try other brands you have available, but caution customer about the potential.

Wiebe

I am glad to see that you are making more of an effort to get "Proper" Dangerous Game Bullets to feed in these rifles. One does not sacrifice field performance because a particular rifle won't feed a proper designed flat nose solid. One either accomplishes the mission by getting that rifle to feed proper ammo, or one does not take that rifle to the field at all. I won't sacrifice field performance in favor of taking the easy route to use a round nose solid, that has more potential to fail in the field than that of a proper designed bullet. Yes, by all means 100% reliability is foremost and first, but it also has to feed and function with a bullet that will give the best field performance as well. One without the other is a sacrifice either way.

Yes, you can get by on a round nose solid, but the potential is there, more so than with a proper bullet with a proper size meplat. Which happens to be 65% of caliber. You will also do better in this area by recommending faster twist rates in these big bores designed for this sort of work. A faster twist rate goes a long way to stabilize less than optimum bullets designed with smaller meplats than 65% of caliber. Terminal Stabilization.

If you have a rifle that flat refuses to feed either of these bullets North Fork (especially the new design with 68% meplat of caliber) a BBW#13 Nose Profile with 67% meplat of caliber, or the now defunct Barnes Banded FLAT NOSE that is 65% meplat of caliber, this rifle under no circumstances belongs on a dangerous game hunt. If all it will feed is a round nose solid--then it belongs in the trash bin and one needs to get a proper rifle that will feed proper or can be made to feed proper! End of Story, and there is no compromise position on this matter with me.

As I understand you are a superb gunsmith, well respected, and you have my respect in that arena.

Michael

Keith Wood (American Hunter) latest issue has some reports on bullet configuratiion. He makes special mention of problems with flat noses.

quote:

Originally posted by Duane Wiebe:
Keith Wood (American Hunter) latest issue has some reports on bullet configuratiion. He makes special mention of problems with flat noses.

And Keith Wood is very very WRONG! Seems to me he could use some education. Since I receive the Rifleman, not the hunter, I will reserve some comments until I read that silly article, it is being sent to me now. Until I see what sort of "Problems" he may be speaking of, it's difficult to comment.

There are no "Terminal Penetration" issues or problems with Flat Nose solids of proper design. Or, are you speaking of getting cheap rifles to feed as the "problem" with Flat Noses? What exactly are you saying is a "problem"?

I am speaking of "terminal Performance" with dangerous game, one does not sacrifice that at all.

Michael

Well...maybe read the article first?

quote:

Originally posted by Duane Wiebe:
Well...maybe read the article first?

Rest assured I will read the article. I become aware of the article a few days ago from a friend over in TX. This is the message he sent to me, just in case you are interested. These are not my words, and I am not at liberty to say who. The article is being sent. I will also send a letter to Mr. Keith Wood if warranted as well. And I suppose I was incorrect in my thinking that you are making more of an effort to get proper bullets to feed and function in these so called rifles, especially in light of this article, if you did indeed make that quote stated below.

Remember, this was sent to me, not my words!

quote:

Jan 23, 2012

Michael,

Have you seen the latest American Hunter magazine? Kieth Wood, the author, I assume has little to no experience with flat-nosed solids. He goes so far as to say," Any custom rifle builder who specializes in big-bore dangerous game rifles will likely turn red when you bring up the subject of feeding flat-point solids." He then goes on to quote Duane Wiebe,"If you change the geometry to make it feed at that steeper angle you often compromise round-nose feeding, so its better to stick with a round nose in the first place."

What a bunch of crap! I have had exactly zero issues feeding BBW#13s in my 375 and 600, or rapters in my 308. Several folks I shoot with have had stupendous results with .458 and .500cal bullets.

I am not swayed in the least by the propaganda machine. I am sending a personnal challenge to Mr. Wood to use flat-point solids and see for himself whether they cause problems or not.

I do understand he is advertising for Barnes and thus makes shameless plugs. However merely taking the words of the ammo maker with no personnal experience makes one look rather dumb.

These are some of the things that are being talked about by those who hunt big game, and know the difference in terminal performance and how that terminal performance can work for you in the field. At times, possibly even saving life and limb, yes--that is correct, because of a proper designed bullet it could just save life and limb!

I am sure the article will arrive in a day or so. I am a Patron Member of the NRA, wife and kids members, the kids used to get Hunter, but I get rifleman. So I have not seen it myself yet, as I said I received the above the other day.

Michael

Duane Wiebe

Well, no article by this woods chap yet, but have been told I should have it the next day or so.

In the meantime I think there is something you might should read. Since it seems you are not willing to take my word on the matter, and would prefer something because it has been printed, then you really should take a good hard look at this most recent book. There is an excellent section in this book about Solid Bullets. All the reasons why Flat Nose Solid designs perform better, and are the choice of Dangerous Game Hunters. While it is the best book in print right now on these subjects it comes up just short of being up to date with some of the latest bullet designs. Regardless, it is the most up to date book of its kind currently.

In this book you would soon learn why we as Dangerous Game Hunters demand our rifles get a steady diet of proper designed solids, and round nose bullets are NOT part of that equation! I think you might want to also recommend this to your friend keith woods, I am sure he might benefit from it as well.




Michael

I have no dog in this fight and I do admire the work done by both Mr Wiebe and Mr McCourry. Just thougt I'd throw in some info from an other DG rifle maker, D'Arcy Echols. I quote;

"Here we have a short video of us testing the feeding of a .458 Lott Legend rifle using a mixture of flat nosed 500 gr. Barnes Banded Solids and the Trophy Bonded Sledgehammer solids.  We have found that these two bullets, with their wide flat meplats, are the ultimate test bullets for checking feeding in a dangerous game rifle.  In other words, if the rifle will feed a flat nosed solid when the bolt is worked as if your life depends on it, it will feed anything.

Obviously this is an extreme example as most mortals can't operate the bolt from the shoulder at this speed while actually firing and hitting the target.  However, we have found that most any bullet profile will feed ok when operated slowly, assuming the basics such as extractor tension, feed ramp shape and angle, and rail dimension are correct.  It is at extreme speed of operation that a rifle will most often choke, usually due to the bullet nose deflecting at an extreme angle and burying itself into the extractor cut of the cone breech. The flat nose solid exacerbates this situation.  Careful attention to the feed ramp shape and proper release timing will solve the problem.

*  Warning:  No animals were harmed in the filming of this video, only dummy rounds."



http://www.youtube.com/watch?v...youtube_gdata_player

Hi Klein

Welcome to AR. Thanks for the adder from D'Arcy. I can see some really good points about this. A real Dangerous Game Rifle should feed Real Dangerous Game Bullets in this manner. All of mine do feed Dangerous Game bullets, exactly as they are supposed to. However, I use only Winchester M70s. And nothing else.

A real Dangerous Game Rifle is not a stand alone component! Because it says, or because the maker says that it is a Dangerous Game Rifle, does not make it so. There are 3 major parts to being a true DGR, the "Rifle" is only one of those components. It is the platform, and that is all it is. Now, I concur with Wiebe, it must be 100% reliable, nothing else is acceptable. It must be made this way, and made to withstand a great deal of abuse, as it will most certainly be put to the test in the field. As for design those things are still being looked at by many individuals. And by design I am not talking about bolt, or double or lever, I am talking about length and weight. To me, a long barrel is not advantageous for a DGR. My barrels are now 18-20 inches. I favor a Winchester M70. I like weights no more than 8 to 8.5 lbs MAXIMUM. To me, a rifle much longer than this can be a DGR, but it should be termed more a DGHR--Dangerous Game Hunting Rifle, for the casual hunter.

The second part of the triad is the cartridge. It must be powerful enough and have enough capacity to accomplish the mission asked of it. If that mission is Elephant, then that cartridge needs to be capable of launching a bullet of proper caliber and proportions to a velocity conducive to being capable of taking that elephant. It has to be more than just "Adequate", it has to be a step above that and be into the "Stopping" category.

So now we have the Platform, called a Rifle. We have the Cartridge. And we can have all the fancy rifles that work slick as snot, and all the big impressive cartridges to show our friends how big they are and how impressive they are, but if you don't have a proper bullet to accomplish your mission, all the rest is just moot, and more for bragging rights than anything else! I am sorry to tell you this, but here it is, THE BULLET DOES ALL THE HEAVY LIFTING! It does all the work in the end. The BULLET is EVERYTHING. You can't possibly sacrifice the performance of the bullet and say you have a Dangerous Game Rifle, capable of doing any mission asked of it! OK, throw the rifle at the animal, see what happens! Throw the cartridge at the animal, see what happens! Chunk a proper designed bullet at the animal, see what happens!

Sacrifice Terminal Bullet Performance so it makes it easier to make the rifle feed? What kind of logic is that?

I did in fact receive a copy of Mr. Woods article, and it is nothing more than a advert for Barnes, and all the propaganda is straight from Barnes. All the so called "QUOTES" about "PERCEIVED" performance of flat nose bullets, straight from Barnes. The whole thing is nothing but a Barnes Commercial, and propaganda to promote their decision to move away from the really good bullet they developed, the Barnes Banded Flat Nose, to a round nose POS, so it would feed in CHEAP ASS RIFLES. This is in fact the jest of the matter, and nothing more. So one way or the other, Barnes is lying to shooters! When the Barnes Banded Flat Nose Solid hit the market, the propaganda then was that the Flat Nose bullet drives deeper, and straighter, and hits harder than the round nose. Today, they are telling us that was all just "Perceived" and because of reliability they promote the round nose as superior. Either way, it is a lie. They did not tell us when the flat nose hit the market, it was only "Perceived" as being better, hell no, it was better by all accounts! I never saw the word, "Perceived" anywhere in their information!

Sacrifice Bullet Performance to make cheap factory rifles feed better! A shame, disgrace, and actually a slap in the face to shooters, and to folks who know better. And all those that would join in this mockery are no better. Count Keith Woods as one of those.

"Perceived increase of terminal effectiveness of the flat-point solid"

Not only is this a load of BS, but it has been proven for many years now, by hunters, shooters, both in the field, and in the lab that the Flat Nose Solid is FAR SUPERIOR in all arenas of Terminal Performance to any round nose solid ever used or designed. I challenge any individual, any company, anyone, anywhere to show me exactly what area the round nose solid is superior in, and prove it to me! If you want to see "Lab Work" just go upstairs to Big Bores, read the 217 page thread on Terminal Bullet Performance, and you will see it proven there time and again of how both bullets react not only in test work, but in the field as well. It's all there, you don't have to go far. I don't "Perceive" anything, it's fact. Read the Dangerous Game Cartridges book listed above, you will once again, see it the PROVEN performance throughout those pages, and that is by real people doing real things, with real dangerous game.

The article mentions tow "Dangerous Game Hunters" in camp with Woods that had untimely failures to feed using flat nose solids. Yet he mentions nothing of their experience, the rifle make and model, even the brand bullet or sort of bullet, cartridge, nothing. No more info than necessary to leave an impression on the unknowing out there so as to look bad and ugly for the flat nose! He does not wish to explain the problem, just to hi-light it in an attempt to paint a dark picture on the poor flat nose solid! Man, he should go to work for all of the ANTIs out there, he would fit right in with the propaganda crowd they have!

I have been in camp with lot's of hunters, many of them never even fired their rifles before leaving. Some had the PH sight the rifle in for them. Some bought ammo from the Wally World! Some had no clue as to what bullet they were even shooting! I know of one chap that went buffalo hunting with one of those "Cheap Ass Rifles" I mentioned, in 458 Lott and it would not keep rounds in the magazine, nor would it feed proper. Basically a Single Shot bolt gun. He went anyway, managed to get a Swift A Frame in the right spot, and he had his buffalo. I know another fellow that went elephant hunting, I caught him struggling with his rifle to load it, checked what he was doing, elephants were coming down the path, and he was trying to get a 4th round in his 3 ROUND MAGAZINE! He did not even know how many rounds his rifle held! And there are 1000s of more stories like this,if you hunt Africa, ask your PH, he will have stories on top of stories about these sort of things. Does it come as a surprise two hunters in camp had trouble with their rifles? Oh my god, how stupid, of course it's not a surprise, it will happen on the very next trip I promise you! But it will ALWAYS be from the guys who never shot their rifle, and if they did, shot a few times to sight it in, maybe. It won't be from a serious shooter who knows his rifle, that much is a 100% given! I can give you another incident that just occurred today. I know a fellow that is going elephant hunting this year. His Gun Dealer called me today, as he is going to shoot, test, and sight in this mans rifle for him. So he calls and asks advice on what, how, and where. I hope my man shoots the rifle some himself before going on this trip.

Woods then shoots his buffalo with a TSX from the factory Barnes ammo, great success, and makes no further mention of solids? I suppose he never fired another round after the 1st. There is zero mention of using the round nose factory solid ammo.

This so called "article" is a farce, its a joke, and an insult to all those who know better. A slap in the face to shooters and hunters, a disservice to hunters who don't know any better. I would want no part of that, and would hate to have my name attached to it.

Duane, I mean no insult to you personally or otherwise. We are for sure on different sides of the fence on this issue. I know your work is beyond reproach, and is in many ways an art that I could never grasp. And you are to be commended on that work. But I tell you right now, I am a Dangerous Game Hunter, I have a good bit of experience in this matter, and if you were MY GunSmith, and building a DGR for me, it would damn well feed the bullets I needed it to feed, to increase my potential for success in the field. And you would make sure it did this 100% of the time, and I promise you this, it would be a Flat Nose Solid, in fact, it would be a CEB BBW#13 Solid, with a 67% meplat of caliber. And if you could not accomplish that mission, I would expect you to tell me to find myself a rifle that is capable of feeding this bullet, or to find myself another gunsmith and you and I would be dandy! But don't ever tell me that I am better off having a round nose solid because my rifle will feed better, and that a DGR should use RN solids because of reliability!

Michael

Michael: Interesting points and I really can't say you're "wrong" Darned if I can find if I ever said that.

I did not make the quote about feeding issues directly to Mr Wood..but certainly stand behind that quote.

The bottom line is that I DID MAKE THOSE BEER CANS FEED.... as the customer wished!

I do maintain, however, that the chances for a "stumble" with almost square corners are far more likely to occur than with round noses.

That is not rocket science...it's that very principle that freeways are made with sweeping curves instead of corners.

These are just opinions....but in fairness to the client, I will continue to point out the pros and cons of the feeding reliability issue. You see....in a charge, I'd rather he got off a shot with his antiquated,unreliable RN that a jam with his whiz-bang ultra penetrating straight line flat nose.

Want flat noses to feed? ....OK...I revert to rule No 1 " The man wants a blue suit, you turn on the blue lights"

Duane, I would like your feedback on the 13 degree nose profile with the radius edge. Seems they have not had feeding issues. The radius helps it act like a round nose for feeding purposes. The old Barnes had a sharp edge to a round hybrid. Hunting DG with an off the shelf rifle not tuned by a gunsmith is idiocy. If a hunter has the means to hunt DG he should have the means to hire a top gunsmith like you to give it the working over it needs. I think the BBW #13 profile is an ideal shape for performance and feeding. In an untuned rifle a round nose might have a slight feeding edge but not much I would guess. But why take a rifle to aim at an elephant that has not been shown reliable. It's a moot point to the non Darwin award candidate crowd.