416 Caliber Terminal Performance

[michael458]

Seems some of you may have interest in how various 416 caliber bullets compare. All tested over the years in consistent wet print medium here.

 

[Rule 303]

Informative results.

 

[Wyatt Smith]

Thanks for sharing. I was very impressed with the lighter bonded bullets performance.

 

[USMA84DAB]

WOW! What a massive payload of great work! Thank you for sharing these! Lotta work went into that and I truly appreciate your putting these up for all to see/use! 60 seconds of Big Bites for you!

 

[ldmay375]

Seems some of you may have interest in how various 416 caliber bullets compare. All tested over the years in consistent wet print medium here.

Thanks for sharing those, and the work of conducting all the testing and documentation you did.

 

[double rifle newbie]

great info! i would like to see how the 400 grain woodleigh hydro compares.

 

[michael458]

great info! i would like to see how the 400 grain woodleigh hydro compares.

Woodleigh Hydro's are "Limited Penetration Solids"..........They are considered in between expanding or trauma inflicting bullets and true deep diving solids. They will penetrate much deeper than trauma inflicting bullets, or conventional expanding bullets. They will not produce as much trauma, but drive much deeper. They produce MORE trauma than the deep diving solids, but not as much penetration. I did not test these in 416 caliber, but did test in 458 and I believe 9.3 as well.

Woodleigh Hydro's work in the same manner that the North Fork Cup Points do. The meplat is dipped in, which fools the tissue or test medium into thinking the meplat is larger and has more surface area, while not increasing actual diameter. This of course presents more surface area to the target tissue or medium and causes more damage. With increased surface area on target, penetration is less of course.

 

[michael458]

Now that you have looked at conventional expanding bullets, and Trauma inflicting Non Conventional bullets, such as the Raptor, I will take you into the world of "416 Caliber Solids"......... Which it a totally different world and operates on different principles.

During Terminal Penetration, Solids become "Front End Drive". The nose profile and meplat is what steers the bullet during penetration. There are 8 Known Factors of Terminal Penetration of Solids, the first 5 Factors involve proper bullet design. The next two Factors #6 Velocity and #7 Twist Rate become very important factors as well for 416 Caliber. 416 Caliber is not as forgiving as 458 caliber plus. With 458 Caliber + you can have the perfect design bullet with a 65% meplat size and it will Self Stabilize during Terminal Penetration, with very little influence from Velocity and no influence at all from Twist Rate for 90% or better of its total depth of penetration. In other words, you can fire a properly designed 458 caliber + Solid in a smoothbore and it will self stabilize for 90% of total penetration. You cannot do that with 416 caliber.

Faster Twist rates and higher velocity gives great assistance to 416 Solids. We find that 1:12 is optimum for 416. Naturally even faster would be better. Most 416s are 1:14 or slower. This does not bode well for 400 gr Solids, even properly designed solids. My own 416 B&Ms are 1:14 twist rates, I honestly did not pay much attention to this when we built the first rifles, as the capacity of this cartridge 350 gr bullets were more suitable, and 350 gr Solids were stable. But in a quick and dirty little test, we had a 416 B&M in 1:14 and another in 1:12 twist rate testing 400 gr CEB #13 Solids that have a 67% Meplat of caliber. You can plainly see that the 1:12 was more stable...............

The only photo I have of a 350 gr #13 was one of the first prototypes prior to the current CEB Version. In this test one bullet suffered a damaged meplat, which affected its penetration, had the meplat not been damaged both of these would have been dead straight and stable to 65 inches.
This showing that 350s are stable in 1:14.......and the added velocity helps.

And in this test you will see that VELOCITY ALONE was able to stabilize the 400 CEBs in 1:14.

Now the reason I am showing you this, is so that you understand how the various Factors of Solid Penetration effect the Terminals of Solids much differently than expanding or Trauma Inflicting bullets. And in the case of 416 caliber the Factors outside of Bullet Design become even more important, especially #6 and #7.

I will be posting other various solids, even some CPS bullets and you will see many other factors coming into play..........

 

[michael458]

I apologize for the order of these, they will be posted as I come to them in my system, and not by proper organization, you may have to weed through some of them to get the jest of things.

CPS........> CUP POINT SOLID these expanded to a point.....

 

[BrownMax]

Thanks for sharing this, @michael458 !

Regarding the Woodleigh SP bullets (400 & 340 grain), do you have data on penetration?

I'm considering using either the 400 grain Swift A-Frame or 410 grain Woodleigh RN SN in a 416 Rigby for an upcoming Buffalo hunt. I suspect the Swift A-Frame will have superior penetration? But perhaps the Woodleigh will expand to a greater diameter, more trauma, etc.?

 

[michael458]

Regarding the Woodleigh SP bullets (400 & 340 grain), do you have data on penetration?

Unfortunately I do not have penetration recorded on those two bullets. Those were very early tests, I was still using straight Wet Print mix, as noted. And somehow, the depth of penetration did not get recorded, my apologies.

I can tell you this, I was very impressed with the 340 Woodleigh, and used it extensively in Tanzania 2005 in a Winchester M70 416 Remington. I used it mostly on plains game, zebra and such, and it was superb for a conventional bullet.

But also in that same class and equal or superior would be the 350 Swift A Frame and the 350 Barnes TSX and 300 Barnes TSX...... for conventional bullets.......

Also in the same class 300-350 gr conventional bullets...... the North Fork 325 would be at the top of the list in performance. The 350 Barnes TSX however comes in at the bottom threshold for penetration on buffalo.... the others are close, but more suited for thin skinned dangerous game, or plains game...........

 

[BrownMax]

Again, thanks for sharing these pictures / data of 416 bullets performance!

The only .416 bullet I have recovered from game was a 300 grain Barnes X (the old type, not available anymore?), loaded to 2650 fps, see picture below. This bullet went through a small tree before entering a deer at 20 meters, later found in the skin at the opposite shoulder. Excellent bullet performance, in my opinion, perhaps a bit of luck involved since the bullet did not deflect after going through the tree.

 

[michael458]

I'm considering using either the 400 grain Swift A-Frame or 410 grain Woodleigh RN SN in a 416 Rigby for an upcoming Buffalo hunt

If those two were my choice, the nod goes to the Swift A Frame for penetration. There really would not be much difference in trauma inflicted.....

For buffalo, when looking at my terminal performance of Trauma Inflicting bullets, conventional expanding or Mono Non Conventional such as Raptors, the bottom line of penetration is 18 inches. Now, you can get by with less of course on the PERFECT broadside buffalo shot, maybe even behind the shoulder shot. But at 18 inches or better in my test medium you have a better chance at those less than perfect shots. I actually rather it be 20-22 inches +. But have done it with less on occasion.

 

[michael458]

The only .416 bullet I have recovered from game was a 300 grain Barnes X (the old type, not available anymore?), loaded to 2650 fps, see picture below. This bullet went through a small tree before entering a deer at 20 meters, later found in the skin at the opposite shoulder. Excellent bullet performance, in my opinion, perhaps a bit of luck involved since the bullet did not deflect after going through the tree.

Absolutely concur, extreme, excellent performance, and the reason I included it in the post above along with the 340-350 Class bullets. Had your bullet not went through a tree first, you would not have recovered it, unless of course it was end to end.......not broadside.

For me and my purposes I use nothing but the 225 Raptors up to buffalo in 416. And have even shot Aussie buffalo with the 225s, and they exited. But I do recommend other for buffalo. But the 225s will handle with ease everything up to that point with incredible devastation and penetration.

 

[Marinho]

Olá Pessoal, Comprei uma Ruger M77 416 Rigby, nos EUA, e deve chegar aqui no Brasil em 90 dias. Aqui eu caço búfalos, estive na África 4 vezes caçando caça nas planícies e espero que em 2023 caçar um hipopótamo ou elefante. Estou pensando em recarregar minha munição com 400 grãos a 2.350 pés, o que você acha dessa carga?

 

[michael458]

Olá Pessoal, Comprei uma Ruger M77 416 Rigby, nos EUA, e deve chegar aqui no Brasil em 90 dias. Aqui eu caço búfalos, estive na África 4 vezes caçando caça nas planícies e espero que em 2023 caçar um hipopótamo ou elefante. Estou pensando em recarregar minha munição com 400 grãos a 2.350 pés, o que você acha dessa carga?

Translated.......

Hello Guys, I bought a Ruger M77 416 Rigby, in the USA, and it should arrive here in Brazil in 90 days. Here I hunt buffalo, I have been in Africa 4 times hunting game on the plains and I hope that in 2023 I will hunt a hippo or elephant. I'm thinking of reloading my 400-grain ammunition at 2,350 feet, what do you think of that load?

Its all about the bullet, What Bullet? For what you indicate I would use a CEB 400 Safari Solid. Or, a Flat Nose Mono, with at least 65% meplat of caliber. If the twist rate is slower than 1:14, then I would drop the weight down to 350-370 gr bullets.

Back to translated....

257 / 5000

Translation results​

É tudo sobre a bala, que bala? Pelo que você indica, eu usaria um CEB 400 Safari Solid. Ou um Flat Nose Mono, com pelo menos 65% meplat de calibre. Se a taxa de torção for mais lenta do que 1:14, eu reduziria o peso para balas de 350-370 gr.

 

[BrownMax]

Just for fun… and I’m not going to compete against the scientific testing done by @michael458 . I shot a 410 grain Woodleigh RN SN and a 400 grain Swift A-Frame from my 416 Rigby into some water jugs. Distance to target was 30 meters.

The Woodleigh bullet was a fairly mild load, roughly “Nitro Express”-velocity of 2150 fps, should yield impact velocity below 2100 at 30 meters. The Swift A-Frame was loaded to 2360 fps, impact velocity roughly 2300 fps. So we are not comparing apples-to-apples, still I thought it would be interesting.

My setup was a 1“ wooden plank in front of 5“ jugs of water. The Woodleigh RN SN was found in the 7th jug, poking a small hole out of the 7th jug – but did not leave this jug. The A-Frame left the 7th jug, made a little scratch into the 8th jug, but did not enter the 8th jug. I found the shiny led exposed A-Frame in the dirt next the jugs.

Both bullets had 99% weight retention. The Woodleigh bullet expanded to a greater diameter than the A-Frame, 2xcaliber vs 1.8xcaliber, respectively, as can be seen in the pictures above.

Perhaps not surprising that the Woodleigh expanded to a greater diameter than the A-Frame. But I would expect the penetration would be greater with the A-Frame… this was not apparent in this test. Shooting into a wet-pack would probably yield different results.

 

[michael458]

Perhaps not surprising that the Woodleigh expanded to a greater diameter than the A-Frame. But I would expect the penetration would be greater with the A-Frame… this was not apparent in this test. Shooting into a wet-pack would probably yield different results.

@BrownMax .......Yes "almost" different results, just because of the medium. Behavior basically the same, since both mediums are "aqueous". Your actual results in animal tissue, and even my test medium would have been close to the same, end result. Since my test medium is denser, then penetration would most definitely be less. Typical depth of penetration in my medium would have been probably 20-22 inches for the Woodleigh, and maybe 23-24 inches for the Swift. So end results not that much different.

Yes, the Woodleigh is softer, and does not have a partition across the middle like the Swift. The big difference here is the Velocity difference. The lower velocity of the Woodleigh allowed it to penetrate basically the same as the Swift. Had velocity been higher, the penetration of the Woodleigh would have been less. And for basics, its mostly the same with any conventional premium bullet that relies on expansion only to inflict trauma. the higher the velocity, the more expansion and trauma inflicted, but less penetration. The lower the velocity, some less trauma, but increased penetration to a point, depending on bullet design.

One Conventional Premium that defies normal results is the North Fork Soft. The faster you run those, the more trauma inflicted, and INCREASED penetration. The expansion tends to fold over on most bullets at higher velocity, and the same with the North Forks, but the North Fork always penetrates deeper at the higher velocity. I almost termed them Non Conventional "Conventional Premiums"....... LOL

 

[BrownMax]

In the book «Dangerous Game Rifles» by Terry Wieland, he elaborates on how Jack Carter developed the bonded bear claw bullets, how good they performed, and later when Federal took over the production how performance dropped – now with bullets coming apart upon impact, apparently due to changing from pure copper for the jacket to a copper allow with zinc making the jacket more brittle. These bullets falling apart were tested in 2004, cape buffalo and wet pack tests. Does anybody know if Federal have resolved this issue?

In a local gun shop I came across a couple of boxes of Federal Trophy Bonded Bear Claws in 416 Rigby, apparently priced to get rid of them. As a dedicated reloader I never thought I was going to buy factory ammo in calibres such as 416 Rigby, but the price was not too bad. I ran three rounds over the chronograph, averaged at 2390 fps despite it says 2300 fps on the box.

I shot one of these into water jugs, the same setup as used for the A-Frame and Woodleigh bullets shown in my previous post (Apr 26, 2021): 1” wooden plank in front of 5” jugs of water. The Bear Claw bullet was found in the 7th jug, making a hole out of the 7th jug, but did not leave this. Expanded diameter just a little bit more than 2xcaliber, 98% weight retention. So pretty much similar behaviour as the 410 grs Woodleigh RN SN.

Lining up the 416 bullets I have tested in water jugs, from left: 410 grs Woodleigh RN SN, 400 grs Trophy Bonded Bear Claw, 400 grs Swift A-Frame, and 350 grs Swift A-Frame:

While packing up my gear after doing this test, I saw a couple of geese landing behind some trees some 3-400 metres away, apparently not aware of my presence. The place I use for such bullet testing and fun shooting happens to be one of my hunting grounds, and hunting instincts immediately kicked in… With my 416 Rigby in hand, and a 400 grs bear claw in the chamber, I sneaked into some 50 metres away from the nearest goose, found a stable sitting position, and fired into the lower throat pit with the goose facing me. It dropped stone dead, leaving a huge exit wound, and I did not recover the bullet. Assuming the penetration was adequate.

 

[Forrest Halley]

With my 416 Rigby in hand, and a 400 grs bear claw in the chamber, I sneaked into some 50 metres away from the nearest goose, found a stable sitting position, and fired into the lower throat pit with the goose facing me. It dropped stone dead, leaving a huge exit wound, and I did not recover the bullet. Assuming the penetration was adequate.

View attachment 525974

Apparently the .416 Rigby is suitable for PLANES game...