Article on heavier vs lighter for caliber bullet penetration

[Daisy]

Hunting Bullets: Is Heavier Better?

It's a widely accepted idea that the heavier the hunting bullet, the deeper it penetrates. But how did this idea come about? Is this really true? Let's take a looked at Sectional Density and how it may change yoru mind about heavier bulletw

cuttingedgebullets.com

 

[Hunter-Habib]

Personally speaking, I am an advocate of heavier-for-weight bullets at a relatively modest velocity.

For instance:
175Gr bullets at 2400 FPS for 7x57mm Mauser
220Gr bullets at 2400 FPS for .30-06 Springfield
300Gr bullets at 2500 FPS for .375 Holland & Holland Magnum

50 years of field experience has taught me that these combinations work best.

 

[Daisy]

I am an advocate of heavier-for-weight bullets at a modest velocity.

For instance:
175Gr bullets at 2400 FPS for 7x57mm Mauser
220Gr bullets at 2400 FPS for .30-06 Springfield
300Gr bullets at 2500 FPS for .375 Holland & Holland Magnum

50 years of field experience has taught me that these combinations work best.

I think that works great.

I think a modern bullet moving fast would work better.

Thanks for all your input on the board!

 

[Aaron N]

I now have raptors for my 270 (100gr), 8mm’s (175gr) and my .30 cals (100,130gr). I really need to cook up loads for them and put them to use!

 

[steve white]

I am not buying it! Here are a few reasons why: 1. those raptors/nosler partitions and others who shed their petals become in essence solids from that point onward. Everyone knows that an expanding bullet (which is tough and holds together) will create a larger permanent wound channel than a solid. Even if it penetrates less than a solid, or the solid-like remains of a Raptor or Partition, it will create more trauma in most cases. I might bow to bone shards exploded from a solid bullet's impact with bone, or the added trauma of designed fragment travel from a Raptor, for example. But if I want a solid, or believe a solid is the right application I will select one. Personally, in most cases, especially for the first shot, I want a quality soft point, not a gimmick that ends up being a solid by default. In short, I want a big hole vs a little one in most cases. Pointed military fmj penetrate--so what?!
2. The argument about remaining sectional density cuts both ways. A shorter soft point that still mushrooms will be shorter still after it does. This explains why the 10.75x68 and those like it failed to impress Pondoro Taylor--lack of penetration compared to heavier rounds with sufficient SD. That cartridge could be improved today just by selecting better projectiles.
3. At distance, a heavier projectile will have more momentum and comparatively more retained speed than a lighter projectile. They take longer to slow down, so they partially overtake the lighter ones which were faster at the start. Long, sleek, heavy long range rounds illustrate this. At distance a bullet must perform at the speeds imparted at impact--not sure how I feel about TSX opening up at distance...but lots of traditional high SD rounds mushroom perfectly way out there.

But here is where I just might buy the premise, with caveats--the development of monolithic bullets--they are already longer, lose less weight upon impact generally, unless designed to do so like the Raptor, and being lighter, can be driven to higher velocity. A now defunct bullet company out of SA that manufactured banded monolithic bullets made a sales pitch of how their hunters were able to use lighter projectiles, driven to higher velocities (and appreciably less recoil) and still get the job done on buffalo! They had many success stories. I can see advantages in what they were touting, and bought some of their wares to try out. I think lighter TTSX etc. could experience the same for buffalo, but not necessarily at long range, because they need the speed to reliably expand?? But close in, yes a 235--250 gr monolithic could carry the mail IMO. I still see folks touting the 300 gr TSX, but is it needed at buff ranges, and is it a danger for over penetration?

 

[Doug Hamilton]

Personally speaking, I am an advocate of heavier-for-weight bullets at a relatively modest velocity.

For instance:
175Gr bullets at 2400 FPS for 7x57mm Mauser
220Gr bullets at 2400 FPS for .30-06 Springfield
300Gr bullets at 2500 FPS for .375 Holland & Holland Magnum

50 years of field experience has taught me that these combinations work best.

Hunter-Habib,
If you say it, I'm going to believe it! Although I've never felt a need to use 220 grain bullets in a .30-06, if I ever have to kill a man-eating tiger with one of mine, I will follow your advice! We don't actually have a lot of tigers in Washington state, but they are now reintroducing grizzly bears into the North Cascades. I have hunted there in the past. Just in case a grizzly decides I'm edible, I might have to go heavier for deer and elk!

 

[Tra3]

I think that works great.

I think a modern bullet moving fast would work better.

Thanks for all your input on the board!

My concern with a lighter, super fast bullet is the amount of bloodshot meat that occurs.

Shedding petals also leaves the shed petals somewhere in the animal to be found later by the meat grinder. I try to avoid lead bullets now due to not wanting to eat lead.

So, that leaves me with a monometal like barnes.

With all that said, I’d love to try these bullets on a cull hunt and see how they work.

 

[Saul]

I prefer Barnes TTSX because they retain weight and I know that they will consistently perform and penetrate regardless of how fast I drive them. Even with Barnes, I still do not choose their lightest bullets.

I share the concern about their performance at lower speeds, but I tend to shoot rather fast cartridges and I like to take my shots as close as possible, so it has never been a problem for me.

If Barnes were not available, I would shoot a reputable bonded bullet like Swift, Accubond, or Federal TBBC. However, unlike the Barnes, I would choose heavier for caliber weights.

In all fairness, I have never used CEB or similar designs. Peregrine comes to mind as being of a similar bullet philosophy. They may work great, just not my cup of tea.

 

[375Fox]

I’m not against going lighter on bullets for the right application and bullet, but I’d rather stay with standard bullet weights like 180 gr in 30 caliber or 300 gr in 375 with Barnes or quality bonded bullets for most hunting. Cutting Edge seems to have an interesting concept compared to other bullets but I have not tried yet. However, I do think the heavy for caliber concept is outdated in some ways. Most quality lead bonded hunting bullets stop at 200 gr in 30 caliber and 300 gr in 375 caliber. Loading a 220 gr 30 caliber bullet or a 350 gr 375 caliber bullet slow to stay inside bullet limitations when you could load a slightly lighter but more heavily constructed bullet fast for the same or greater amount of energy and still get deep penetration doesn’t make sense to me. Weatherby Cartridges would have a very different reputation today if the bullet technology existed at the time to match the velocities.

 

[Puddle]

Personally speaking, I am an advocate of heavier-for-weight bullets at a relatively modest velocity.

For instance:
175Gr bullets at 2400 FPS for 7x57mm Mauser
220Gr bullets at 2400 FPS for .30-06 Springfield
300Gr bullets at 2500 FPS for .375 Holland & Holland Magnum

50 years of field experience has taught me that these combinations work best.

300 grain A-Frame at 2450 from a .375 H&H 24" barrel using H4350. With H4350 I don't care how hot it is in October, it will still launch at 2450.

And when they finally quit making the A-Frame, I'll finally get around to coming up with Plan B.

 

[Daisy]

My concern with a lighter, super fast bullet is the amount of bloodshot meat that occurs.

Shedding petals also leaves the shed petals somewhere in the animal to be found later by the meat grinder. I try to avoid lead bullets now due to not wanting to eat lead.

So, that leaves me with a monometal like barnes.

With all that said, I’d love to try these bullets on a cull hunt and see how they work.

Surely that’s not a concern on a trophy hunted animal? If so then why not use a 22-250 and head shot them? Most shots in Africa are less than 100 yards. Should be easy to do

 

[Daisy]

My concern with a lighter, super fast bullet is the amount of bloodshot meat that occurs.

Shedding petals also leaves the shed petals somewhere in the animal to be found later by the meat grinder. I try to avoid lead bullets now due to not wanting to eat lead.

So, that leaves me with a monometal like barnes.

With all that said, I’d love to try these bullets on a cull hunt and see how they work.

Look up @michael458 on here. He did this very work on 100s of cull animals including many many buffalo.

 

[Tra3]

Surely that’s not a concern on a trophy hunted animal? If so then why not use a 22-250 and head shot them? Most shots in Africa are less than 100 yards. Should be easy to do

Very good point. I used a neck shot to fill my 2023 MT deer tag, as it was an animal I would be eating. (7 mag with a berger 180 grain VLD). To avoid lead and meat damage I used a high neck shot. My double standard here is that the Berger’s shoot so well…
But, I prefer Barnes for Africa for the high shoulder shots.
I need to venture out and find a new bullet that shoots as accurately as the berger but doesn’t have lead.

 

[PHOENIX PHIL]

I have experience with the CEB bullets. Killed a number of game with them in Africa with my .458B&M using quite light for caliber 260gr Raptors. And a black bear using I think it's a 480gr Raptor, the one intended for buffalo anyway.

Make no mistake about it gents, they are killers. When those blades break off and fan out, the destruction is something you have to see to appreciate. I would never compare this bullet to a Nosler Partition or the Peregrines. I know of no other bullet that is designed the way these are. I know of only one knock on the CEBs which is they need a clear path to the target. Hit brush before the animal and things can go badly.

I'm certain that Cutting Edge produced this data as many cannot wrap their heads around using lighter for caliber bullets. I was that way too. But the simple fact of the matter is you just can't shoot typically a heavy for caliber brass bullet and expect accuracy. The bullets are too long and will not stabilize in typical barrel twist rates for any given caliber.

You must use lower weights to have accuracy with these bullets. Having said that, the math is there and makes the point for Cutting Edge. So many will use SD as a reason to select a heavy for caliber weight but ignore the fact that it all changes on impact. Whatever SD is at the start is not the same as at the end. If SD is a good barometer to judge an unfired bullet, retained SD of a recovered fired bullet holds just as much importance.

Again I would not compare the Raptors to a Partition, Peregrine or any other bullet. Yes in the latter half of travel, the CEB will perform a bit like a Partition that has shed the frontal half and acts a bit like a solid. But you just can't compare the terminal performance those blades provide to a mushroomed Partition, A-Frame, North Fork or whatever bullet you wish. You have to see that impact on the animal from the moment it's hit through when you open up the chest cavity and see for lack of a better term, the goo that come out that was once lung tissue.

Now any of you who have ever read any post from me concerning bullets knows I'm a huge fan of the North Fork Bonded cores and also the Swift A-Frame. My experience with them has simply been great.

My only concern with the Raptors is that accuracy issue when it comes to hitting brush. I consider @michael458 a good friend and I defer to his judgment and experience. His independent work in terminal ballistics pales mine and I'm sure most anyone else's on this forum. I mean no disrespect to anyone, but I doubt anyone has put the time and effort he has into this subject over the years. But as much as he loves the Raptors, this latter accuracy issue if I recall correctly I learned from him. Please correct me if I'm mistaken Michael.

 

[michael458]

My only concern with the Raptors is that accuracy issue when it comes to hitting brush.

Good Morning Phil......... Correct, Raptors do not like to hit brush, sticks or similar at all. BTW, there are very few bullets that do not have an adverse reaction to hitting brush, most do have some negative effect. But fact is, if a Raptor or other similar bullet like the Gen 1 CNC bullets do not hit front forward, then they cannot perform their magic. Raptors..... Avoid Brush, be patient with your first shot.

Raptors are what I call Generation II CNC Trauma Inflicting Bullets. Make no mistake they are the most devastating, tissue destroying, trauma inflicting bullet ever designed, and ever put to the field. Most are made from brass, CEB has several made in copper and they work the same way, but require some manipulation to work like Brass Raptors. Here is how a Raptor works in ANY aqueous Medium or tissue, and BTW, they do it 100% of the time, when impacting at what we call "Shear Velocity", most times above 1500 fps.

After 1.5-2 inches of penetration, all blades, most instances 6, SHEAR at the same moment. This Shearing effect is explosive in itself, The Center Remaining Bullet is at this point a broken beer bottle full caliber Solid, which continues to penetrate dead straight. The Blades continue to travel with the center bullet for 3-5 inches of penetration after the shear. As tissue expands, the Blades rip, tear, slice and dice that tissue during the passage of center projectile, this tissue is destroyed, it looses its elastic properties and cannot close back. After this point the Blades continue to move away from center and become secondary projectiles slicing and dicing blood vessels, organs, and any other tissue that they come in contact with. The Center Remaining bullet continues to penetrate straight and under most circumstances will exit far side.

They are Blades, they are NOT PETALS......... They slice their way through penetration, they do not push their way through. Some of these bigger bore "Blades", will penetrate deeper than most 38 Special bullets or most any conventional handgun bullets fired from 9mm or 45 ACP, Petals cannot do that..... The mechanism that allows this is sharp edges on the blades themselves.....

Smaller Caliber Raptors the Blades do not travel as far from the center bullet as some larger caliber Raptors can. For instance, a 458 Caliber Raptor, the blades will travel as far as 10-12 inches from center, animals weighing in at 200 lbs, the blades can even exit far side as well as the center bullet.....Of course larger animals like buffalo, the blades will be caught up in internal organs destroying all tissues they come in contact with.

No Conventional Premium Expanding Soft can come close to the Devastating Effect, Trauma Inflicted, Tissue Destruction that a Raptor inflicts. I know, been there, done it, both sides of the coin, MANY TIMES......... My Buddy Sam and I have a running joke, He has said this, I have said this, and to a man, everyone that has used a Raptor in the field, and then studied the effects after have this statement....... "I Have Never Seen Anything Like That"........... Referring to the tissue destruction inflicted, blood loss, and overall effect a Raptor can have....

Heavy/Light....??? No, you do not need or require heavy Raptors to get this performance. To give you some examples, lets say buffalo, my favorite buffalo bullet in .458 caliber is a 420 Raptor. This is devastating on buffalo, they will exit all broadside shots, so yes, watch the other side, be patient and hold on until you get a shot...... if your shot is frontal center, then look for the bullet far side of the stomach..... Yes, that is correct........ Oh, and the heart will have about a 3-4 inch hole clean through it on that shot..... A 420 Raptor outpenetrates a 500 Swift A from 458 Lott, does not matter if fired from 458 Winchester or 458 B&M. Most of the time you will find your 500 Swift or 500 Woodleigh or other conventional, but the Raptor has exited.......

I shot a lot of buffalo with .500 caliber, Buffalo Raptors in .500 (Not .510) are 410-450 Raptors mostly, but I have shot buffalo with 350 gr Raptors with devastating effects....

In .510 caliber the best Raptor is one that Sam requested, a 475 gr Raptor (Matching solid is 510 gr) both are very well proven...... Sam also is a big fan of 577 NE, he also requested a 650 Solid, and matching 600 Raptor..... both have proven over the years with buffalo, hippo and of course elephant.

You see me mention "Matching", the Solids were the first designed. Then the Raptors. I had a theory that if we used the Solid to make the Raptor, then the bullet length, bearing surface and everything would be the same as the solid, just minus the hollow cavity in weight. My theory was that they would shoot the same point of impact at 50 yards. Well, it is no longer theory, and if you load the matching solid and Raptor with the same load, they will be in the same hole at 50 yards. Regardless of the Raptors weighing less. Weight equal pressure, so Raptors can be pushed just a bit faster than the matching solids, most all cases this raises POI by 1/2 to 3/4 inch at 50, windage still good.....

Next post, to continue this discussion properly, we will talk about Generation I bullets.......

 

[calling4life]

When testing those 458 raptors in your medium, how far did the petals penetrate?

Did you measure that specifically, as that would be what I'd want to know to compare them to an expanded A frame or the like.

Essentially, it's the "expanded" damage wound channel length, past that is just the shank, which isn't nothing, but depending upon the circumstances may not be wanted or seen as an added benefit.

So, for example, if an Aframe will penetrate to 20-24 inches but the CEB Raptors have shed their petals and the petals are done after, 14-16", then the Aframe should have a better wound channel from 16-24" give or take. And a person may see the added benefit of not having penetration that would wound an animal behind. So Aframe may still be the choice for them.

But if the petal penetration length of the CEB is materially the same or even greater, then there really may not be much of an argument to be had.

Good Morning Phil......

View attachment 602715

 

[Hyde Hunter]

Very good point. I used a neck shot to fill my 2023 MT deer tag, as it was an animal I would be eating. (7 mag with a berger 180 grain VLD). To avoid lead and meat damage I used a high neck shot. My double standard here is that the Berger’s shoot so well…
But, I prefer Barnes for Africa for the high shoulder shots.
I need to venture out and find a new bullet that shoots as accurately as the berger but doesn’t have lead.

you should give Hammer Bullets a try, I have found them to be very accurate

 

[michael458]

When testing those 458 raptors in your medium, how far did the petals penetrate?

Blades......... can be found in the medium from 5-8 inches for most of the big bores 458+.........

So, for example, if an Aframe will penetrate to 20-24 inches but the CEB Raptors have shed their petals and the petals are done after, 14-16", then the Aframe should have a better wound channel from 16-24" give or take.

Wrong....... The damage done by a Raptor far far far exceeds any and all conventional premium expanding, you have to see it to believe it........... And I have. Along with many others........... I have used A Frames extensively and there is no comparison........ I have used Woodleighs, North Fork and many others, there is NO COMPARISON......... The Trauma inflicted by a Raptor is way past WICKED.....

But if the petal penetration length of the CEB is materially the same or even greater, then there really may not be much of an argument to be had.

I am not here to argue, I don't care what you believe or what you think, I am here to tell you the facts, and nothing more, there is no argument. I have shot literally 100s of animals from impala to buffalo with Raptors and I have seen 100s more shot..... I have studied internals...... I am not in the bullet business and have zero to sell you...... Again, they are not petals........

You may continue to use Swifts, or other premium conventionals, and with great success...... but they do not inflict the trauma that Generation I and Generation II CNC bullets can inflict.........

you should give Hammer Bullets a try, I have found them to be very accurate

I have worked with the 400 Hammer extensively in test work here, and recommend them as a very good Buffalo Bullet. This is a Generation I CNC, copper HP....... I used some of the first Lehigh Copper Gen 1 Bullets extensively in Africa and Australia with incredible success, the mode of terminal performance is slightly different, but very deadly and far far more trauma inflicted than conventional expanding........... Hammer, Lehigh, and CEB Maximus are all examples of Gen I Bullet Tech.............

Gen I Copper bullets have PETALS.............. Not Blades............

 

[Hunting Hitman]

Good Morning Phil......... Correct, Raptors do not like to hit brush, sticks or similar at all. BTW, there are very few bullets that do not have an adverse reaction to hitting brush, most do have some negative effect. But fact is, if a Raptor or other similar bullet like the Gen 1 CNC bullets do not hit front forward, then they cannot perform their magic. Raptors..... Avoid Brush, be patient with your first shot.

Raptors are what I call Generation II CNC Trauma Inflicting Bullets. Make no mistake they are the most devastating, tissue destroying, trauma inflicting bullet ever designed, and ever put to the field. Most are made from brass, CEB has several made in copper and they work the same way, but require some manipulation to work like Brass Raptors. Here is how a Raptor works in ANY aqueous Medium or tissue, and BTW, they do it 100% of the time, when impacting at what we call "Shear Velocity", most times above 1500 fps.

After 1.5-2 inches of penetration, all blades, most instances 6, SHEAR at the same moment. This Shearing effect is explosive in itself, The Center Remaining Bullet is at this point a broken beer bottle full caliber Solid, which continues to penetrate dead straight. The Blades continue to travel with the center bullet for 3-5 inches of penetration after the shear. As tissue expands, the Blades rip, tear, slice and dice that tissue during the passage of center projectile, this tissue is destroyed, it looses its elastic properties and cannot close back. After this point the Blades continue to move away from center and become secondary projectiles slicing and dicing blood vessels, organs, and any other tissue that they come in contact with. The Center Remaining bullet continues to penetrate straight and under most circumstances will exit far side.

They are Blades, they are NOT PETALS......... They slice their way through penetration, they do not push their way through. Some of these bigger bore "Blades", will penetrate deeper than most 38 Special bullets or most any conventional handgun bullets fired from 9mm or 45 ACP, Petals cannot do that..... The mechanism that allows this is sharp edges on the blades themselves.....

Smaller Caliber Raptors the Blades do not travel as far from the center bullet as some larger caliber Raptors can. For instance, a 458 Caliber Raptor, the blades will travel as far as 10-12 inches from center, animals weighing in at 200 lbs, the blades can even exit far side as well as the center bullet.....Of course larger animals like buffalo, the blades will be caught up in internal organs destroying all tissues they come in contact with.

No Conventional Premium Expanding Soft can come close to the Devastating Effect, Trauma Inflicted, Tissue Destruction that a Raptor inflicts. I know, been there, done it, both sides of the coin, MANY TIMES......... My Buddy Sam and I have a running joke, He has said this, I have said this, and to a man, everyone that has used a Raptor in the field, and then studied the effects after have this statement....... "I Have Never Seen Anything Like That"........... Referring to the tissue destruction inflicted, blood loss, and overall effect a Raptor can have....

Heavy/Light....??? No, you do not need or require heavy Raptors to get this performance. To give you some examples, lets say buffalo, my favorite buffalo bullet in .458 caliber is a 420 Raptor. This is devastating on buffalo, they will exit all broadside shots, so yes, watch the other side, be patient and hold on until you get a shot...... if your shot is frontal center, then look for the bullet far side of the stomach..... Yes, that is correct........ Oh, and the heart will have about a 3-4 inch hole clean through it on that shot..... A 420 Raptor outpenetrates a 500 Swift A from 458 Lott, does not matter if fired from 458 Winchester or 458 B&M. Most of the time you will find your 500 Swift or 500 Woodleigh or other conventional, but the Raptor has exited.......

I shot a lot of buffalo with .500 caliber, Buffalo Raptors in .500 (Not .510) are 410-450 Raptors mostly, but I have shot buffalo with 350 gr Raptors with devastating effects....

In .510 caliber the best Raptor is one that Sam requested, a 475 gr Raptor (Matching solid is 510 gr) both are very well proven...... Sam also is a big fan of 577 NE, he also requested a 650 Solid, and matching 600 Raptor..... both have proven over the years with buffalo, hippo and of course elephant.

You see me mention "Matching", the Solids were the first designed. Then the Raptors. I had a theory that if we used the Solid to make the Raptor, then the bullet length, bearing surface and everything would be the same as the solid, just minus the hollow cavity in weight. My theory was that they would shoot the same point of impact at 50 yards. Well, it is no longer theory, and if you load the matching solid and Raptor with the same load, they will be in the same hole at 50 yards. Regardless of the Raptors weighing less. Weight equal pressure, so Raptors can be pushed just a bit faster than the matching solids, most all cases this raises POI by 1/2 to 3/4 inch at 50, windage still good.....

Next post, to continue this discussion properly, we will talk about Generation I bullets.......

View attachment 602709View attachment 602710View attachment 602711View attachment 602712View attachment 602713View attachment 602714View attachment 602715

When Michael starts posting I just read it and buy whatever he suggests! To much experience, knowledge, and wisdom in his posts.

Thanks for all the information.

HH

 

[calling4life]

Blades......... can be found in the medium from 5-8 inches for most of the big bores 458+.........

Wrong....... The damage done by a Raptor far far far exceeds any and all conventional premium expanding, you have to see it to believe it........... And I have. Along with many others........... I have used A Frames extensively and there is no comparison........ I have used Woodleighs, North Fork and many others, there is NO COMPARISON......... The Trauma inflicted by a Raptor is way past WICKED.....

I am not here to argue, I don't care what you believe or what you think, I am here to tell you the facts, and nothing more, there is no argument. I have shot literally 100s of animals from impala to buffalo with Raptors and I have seen 100s more shot..... I have studied internals...... I am not in the bullet business and have zero to sell you...... Again, they are not petals........

You may continue to use Swifts, or other premium conventionals, and with great success...... but they do not inflict the trauma that Generation I and Generation II CNC bullets can inflict.........

I think you missed my intent of the second point, the point to which your response started "I am not here to argue."

But that's fine, I'm not here to argue either, I'm here to understand the entirety of the performance.

So, moving on:
To the first point, are you stating that once we are past the point of the BLADES, in the animal, so the bullet has penetrated and shed the blades and now continues through the animal.

Are you stating that that shank that continues through the animal is still producing more damage than an expanded Aframe or the like? It's producing a larger more devastating wound channel even in that form?

So, in case I wasn't clear. What I'm talking about is this.

In your penetration test of the 458 lott A-frame, the A-frame penetrated to a depth of 24".
The CEB Raptor to 29" AVG, though from a different round. That dimension is what I'm talking about.

Let's just presume expansion from the start to leave out the variable of when these start expanding, as that just opens another bit of mess.

Then the A frame would have 24" of expanded, to a degree or another, wound channel.

But the CEB sheds it's blades and then becomes a solid, so it would have an expanded wound channel as deep as the blades continue, but then the wound channel would be that of a solid, correct?

So, you noted 5-8" for the blades, I'm guessing with these numbers you actually meant the blades penetrated 5-8" away from the main wound channel, you're talking about a different dimension here.

What I meant is how far into the medium did you find the blades in regard to the same dimension as the bullet shank.

So, the shank penetrated 29" on avg., how far did the blades make it in on that same axis? Or do they really only penetrate to 5-8" into the media. Not the distance they spread out from the main wound channel, but the depth to which they penetrate, the A-frame penetrated to 24", the shank of the CEB to 29" avg, how far did the blades reach in this same dimension?


By the way, CEB, on their site, and what I checked was the 420gr .458, has this, "Instead of mushrooming, six petals shear off...," so the quarrel about petal vs. blade can be had with the powers that be, either way we know what we're discussing. No need to beat that drum.

And honest to GOD I'm not speaking in an adversarial voice here, I'm trying to understand the degree to which these CEBs may be useful over a bonded bullet, and if there is an area where they would lose to that same bullet. Only then can I know what may be best for me.