416 Ruger VS 416 Rem Mag

[Edge]

This is correct, to a point. At .416 caliber some of the other factors become more important than in larger calibers, one of the primary ones is twist Rates. We found to fully stabilize the 400 CEB #13 we needed a 1:12 twist rate, and penetration was extreme at that point. Velocity alone, running the 350s at 2477 fps in 1:14 twist was equal to 400s at 2250-2300 fps and the 350 more stable during terminals. But when you ran that 400 #13 up to 2440 fps, even in 1:14 twist rate penetration went extremely deep about 20% deeper than the 350s at close to the same velocity, one instance where SD becomes a factor. Twist rates become a big factor at 2250-2300 fps

Based upon your work, I’m having a 12 twist being built on a Model 70, 416 Rem.

Is there even a need for the 400 solids with the amount of penetration you have recorded with the 350gr? I have a large supply of 350gr Barnes flat nose solids that I plan on using for everything.

They worked well on Buffalo out of a 416 Ruger African that I sold earlier this year with the on-going Model 70 build. The Model 70 is so much smoother than the Ruger.

 

[BlueFlyer]

So if anything, a tapered case with a shallow shoulder would be worse for pressure.

Is there any truth to the theory that a straight walled cartridge gripps the chamber and applies less thrust onto the breach? This would also reduce the "stretching" of the action and back slap.

 

[michael458]

Based upon your work, I’m having a 12 twist being built on a Model 70, 416 Rem.

Outstanding, good decision. .416 with solid terminals gets a little squirrely. Size does matter! If you have a 65-68% Flat Meplat Solid in 416, 458 and .500 calibers and look down at the size of the meplat, it is just pure logic that .458 plus is easier to stabilize, and in the larger calibers can actually self stabilize to an extent. A 65% meplat of caliber is the breaking point, but even that in 416 other factors become more important than perhaps in larger calibers. Twist Rate and Velocity as mentioned.

Is there even a need for the 400 solids with the amount of penetration you have recorded with the 350gr? I have a large supply of 350gr Barnes flat nose solids that I plan on using for everything.

Everything else being equal of the Factors of Solid Terminal Penetration, SD has an effect, the 400s will just give you MORE with everything else equal, and assuming proper twist rate and so forth...... I personally have less experience with the heavies with 416, I have shot buffalo but not elephant or hippo with 416. However, I have had many guys shoot elephant and buffalo with 416 and never came up short with 350 gr Solids. Before the CEB #13 Solid I was also using 350 Barnes FN Solids and they test and performed well in what few areas I had experience with. I think you are fine with the 350 Barnes FN...... I know you are going to 1:12, but 350s are much more stable in 1:14 or slower. I understand, but not sure of, that some 416s come with 1:16 twist rates, which I think is way too slow.

I love Winchester M70, no surprise with your assessment of Winchester vs Ruger.......

 

[sgt_zim]

I am talking out of a bolt rifle, specifically a 416 Rem. DRs are a whole 'nother thing. Some PHs still want to to load softs then solids in a bolt action, and they need to hit to roughly the same POI at say 100 yds. The specific application is cape buffalo in South Africa, where a 100 yd shot on a buffalo is a distict possibility. There is also a possibility 300 yds on plains game, which can also happen, and the velocity helps a little with that.

There seem to be certain velocities that are well known to work with certain calibers and bullet weights, and around 2400 fps with 400 grainers has been a proven combo for 100 years. Just like 2150 fps with 500 grainers from a 458 or 470.

2400 fps is not an issue with a 416 Rem and modern temp stable powders. Not sure it was even with the less temp stable powders common in use when the cartridge came out 35 years ago. My own 416 Rem is well away from pressure at 2400 fps.

Also, when it comes to well-constructed solids, added velocity aids penetration, at least to a point. Thats why a 350 CE Safari Solid at 200 FPS faster penetrates about the same as a 400 grainer. And no, I don't remember if I got that data from @michael458 or from the CE website.

If we want to talk recoil, a 10 lb 416 Rem bolt rifle shooting 400 grainers at 2400 fps is very managable. Doubles are a different story. The 450 NE DR I had took some getting used to to shoot 450s at 2300 fps, and my current 470 NE DR will take some getting used to shoot 500 grainers at 2150 fps. The 470 DR feels like it has twice the recoil of the 416, but it doesn't. It's maybe 12-15 ft lbs more. However, the steep drop at the comb on a double--so we can use iron sights, makes the recoil much more noticable due to the greater muzzle rise. At least to me..............

So if there were any huge downsides to a 416 Rem with 400 grainers at 2400 fps, then I would agree to load them slower. But there just arent' any downsides, only upsides.

If you're taking a 300 yard poke with a 416/423/458, irrespective of solid vs soft, the only thing that matters once the bullet leaves the barrel is the ballistic coefficient. And unless the BC difference is greater than about .15 or .2, even the BC makes very little difference.

Shooting Hornady SPRP 286 gr (BC .41) out of my 9.3x62 at about 2425 fps vs shooting Speer 180 gr Grand slam at 2550 out of my 308 (BC .374) - out to 300 yards, there is no meaningful difference in ballistic arc. Firing 160gr PPSN (bc .51) at 2400 fps out of my 6.5x55 also produces no meaningful difference in ballistic arc out to 300 yards when compared to my 9.3x62 and my 308 Win.

We could look at a 400 gr Parition vs a 400 gr Nosler solid, BC of .39 vs .289, respectively; 150 yard zero for both

Fire the solid at 2250 and the Partition at 2400, and there's all of 4" of difference in ballistic arc at 300 yards. While there is a chasm of difference in energy between them at 300 yards (3300 fpe vs 2400), I don't imagine you're too worried about that since any non DG animal you shoot at that distance won't know the difference. At 200 yards, there's less than 1" of difference in the arc, and at 100 yards, less than a half inch. I imagine even on a Lord Derby at 300 yards, either of those bullets will make 2 holes.

Note, I'm not saying *don't* go for faster loads, I'm saying after a lot of time on the reloading bench, at the range, and hunting, a 1.0 - 1.5 MOA group where there's no more than about 200 fps delta in MV just doesn't move the needle enough to put in the effort of chasing the velocity, at least not for me.

Given the difficulty of acquiring reloading components over the last couple years (and I don't see that changing at any point in the near future), especially for larger calibers, it puts me in the position of using components chasing velocity that may take me a year or two to replenish; components I could be using to hunt.

YMMV

 

[intj]

This is correct, to a point. At .416 caliber some of the other factors become more important than in larger calibers, one of the primary ones is twist Rates. We found to fully stabilize the 400 CEB #13 we needed a 1:12 twist rate, and penetration was extreme at that point. Velocity alone, running the 350s at 2477 fps in 1:14 twist was equal to 400s at 2250-2300 fps and the 350 more stable during terminals. But when you ran that 400 #13 up to 2440 fps, even in 1:14 twist rate penetration went extremely deep about 20% deeper than the 350s at close to the same velocity, one instance where SD becomes a factor. Twist rates become a big factor at 2250-2300 fps

What about 350s running 2550-2600? The 350s being 150-200 fps faster than the 400s. I have always expected that at some point there would be too much velocity and it would affect penetration. If anyone has such data it would be you.

 

[intj]

Is there any truth to the theory that a straight walled cartridge gripps the chamber and applies less thrust onto the breach? This would also reduce the "stretching" of the action and back slap.

I don't even have anecdotal evidence for that one, but it might make sense. We all know that case wet with lube will show pressure because the lack of grip increases bolt thrust. Also, when we polish chambers we don't want them super smooth for the same reason.

 

[intj]

If you're taking a 300 yard poke with a 416/423/458, irrespective of solid vs soft, the only thing that matters once the bullet leaves the barrel is the ballistic coefficient. And unless the BC difference is greater than about .15 or .2, even the BC makes very little difference.

Shooting Hornady SPRP 286 gr (BC .41) out of my 9.3x62 at about 2425 fps vs shooting Speer 180 gr Grand slam at 2550 out of my 308 (BC .374) - out to 300 yards, there is no meaningful difference in ballistic arc. Firing 160gr PPSN (bc .51) at 2400 fps out of my 6.5x55 also produces no meaningful difference in ballistic arc out to 300 yards when compared to my 9.3x62 and my 308 Win.

We could look at a 400 gr Parition vs a 400 gr Nosler solid, BC of .39 vs .289, respectively; 150 yard zero for both

Fire the solid at 2250 and the Partition at 2400, and there's all of 4" of difference in ballistic arc at 300 yards. While there is a chasm of difference in energy between them at 300 yards (3300 fpe vs 2400), I don't imagine you're too worried about that since any non DG animal you shoot at that distance won't know the difference. At 200 yards, there's less than 1" of difference in the arc, and at 100 yards, less than a half inch. I imagine even on a Lord Derby at 300 yards, either of those bullets will make 2 holes.

Note, I'm not saying *don't* go for faster loads, I'm saying after a lot of time on the reloading bench, at the range, and hunting, a 1.0 - 1.5 MOA group where there's no more than about 200 fps delta in MV just doesn't move the needle enough to put in the effort of chasing the velocity, at least not for me.

Given the difficulty of acquiring reloading components over the last couple years (and I don't see that changing at any point in the near future), especially for larger calibers, it puts me in the position of using components chasing velocity that may take me a year or two to replenish; components I could be using to hunt.

YMMV

It's not a matter of going after faster velocities. There is no added effort here. It is simply a matter of loading to the most consistent accuracy around the nominal velocities a cartridge typically produces with a given bullet. Slowing it down 200 fps doesn't save a significant amount of powder, nor does it significantly reduce the stress on components.

We are not talking about making HOT loads, which would probably be a 416 Rem at over 2500 fps in a 22" barrel. We are talking about loading to NORMAL velocities.

Loading a round to a well established velocities is a not poor practice.

 

[michael458]

What about 350s running 2550-2600? The 350s being 150-200 fps faster than the 400s. I have always expected that at some point there would be too much velocity and it would affect penetration. If anyone has such data it would be you.

So as to not confuse...... This is about Solids only......

@intj As for hard cold absolute "Data"....... a little bit, but not enough to be 100% sure........ enough experience to believe that your statement has truth to it. I believe, and suspect strongly that you reach a point with any given design that you just do not gain more depth of penetration at some upper end of velocity. This upper end is different with different Nose Profile Designs as well, It also will be different with the construction and material a Solid is made from. You will reach upper velocity quicker with copper than with brass, as copper will start to flow at lower velocities. Caliber also will come into play as well.

I was asked recently to do a study with different .308 caliber Copper CEB Solids. .308 is small caliber that has more effect than say .416 or .458 when it comes to flow and movement of material. At higher velocity impacts copper starts to deform, flow, and move, causing instability during terminal penetration.

Below are two bullets on the left that had a muzzle velocity of 2670 fps, you see the flow and movement of the meplat, compared to an bullet on the right that has not been fired.....

Muzzle velocity of 2340 fps showed much less deformation of the meplat, and gave deeper, and straighter penetration. In these cases, Less Velocity Gave you More Penetration, and straighter penetration than higher velocities. All concerning with Caliber and Material.

Nose Profiles of Solids react differently to the other Factors of Solid Penetration. I like the Barnes Flat Nose solids, I first used them in 2005 in Tanzania on buffalo, and they were great compared to what we had. In years of study and many tests in many calibers of these bullets I found they are do not react so much to increased velocity giving more depth of penetration. They reach a point of course to where more velocity really does not give you more penetration. A CEB #13 does react a bit more to added velocity, but it too seems to reach a point that is the upper end and will give no more as well. This leads me to believe that each bullet, each caliber, has a point of getting no returns for depth of penetration. The best example I have of this concept is a 325 gr CEB Solid. The Nose Projection on this bullet is longer than the Lever Solids, this one at .600.

We see a large difference in penetration from 1500-1600 fps to 2300 fps or so. But moving up to 2570 fps we don't see any gains in depth of penetration, I believe with this particular bullet we have reached the maximum depth that it is going to achieve at 2350 fps or so........ More velocity, did not give us more depth.

In years of testing nearly all the different nose profiles, I see the same thing. Some will do give better results than others with added velocity, but they all seem to reach a point that added velocity gives little return on depth of penetration.

Is there anything else that added velocity can have an impact on, with a Flat Nose Solid? Yes, there is another benefit to added velocity, and that is added trauma up front..... Flat Nose Solids hit hard and cause much more trauma than similar round nose that produce little or no trauma up front. More velocity, harder the hit up front and more trauma inflicted. This shows up in Terminal test work, and it also shows up in the field with animal reactions to taking the hit.

You have many considerations to take into account with Solids, Velocity is Factor #6 out of 8 total to be considered, but velocity also effects Nose Profile Factor #2, and Construction & Material Factor #3. Added velocity can have effect on poor or slower twist rates Factor #7. Unless you understand how all these Factors can have effect on other factors, it can become quite a study to sort out.