458 win mag minimum bullet weight for Cape buffalo

[RR 314]

Have you tried the 420gr Raptors and 450gr solids? Those 420s are also devastating on buffalo and would penetrate from any angle without having to be so careful.

I just bought some 420 Raptors for a .450 Rigby heading my way. I was speaking to a friend and he voiced his displeasure at shooting anything under 500 grains in any .458. I assured him I would be just fine. . . and the buffalo will not be fine.

 

[IvW]

Quick easy answer....... More......

BUT........ all other factors of solid penetration must be equal before SD has any true effect........

A #13 500 gr Solid at 2300 fps will penetrate deeper than a 450 gr at 2300 fps with all other factors equal.............. A 550 #13 Solid at 2300 fps will penetrate deeper than a 500 gr at 2300 fps......... and so on and so on............. Pure Science .......

However, sometimes Science does not meet reality....... you must get all factors equal in the real world, and that is not always possible. And at this point some of the other Factors begin to edge other factors out.

Cool....as I am busy developing a 420gr 404 Jeff brass solid. I am leaning towards 75% meplat but am also thinking of trying a cavity 45 degree shoulders in the meplat. Need maximum penetration but also want more "damage" for buff and lion. This rifle will be used for dg foot safaris and only solids are permitted. Elephant is always the greatest threat but buff and lion can occasionally cause problems.

 

[michael458]

Cool....as I am busy developing a 420gr 404 Jeff brass solid. I am leaning towards 75% meplat but am also thinking of trying a cavity 45 degree shoulders in the meplat. Need maximum penetration but also want more "damage" for buff and liin. This rifle will be used for dg foot safaris and only solids are permitted. Elephant is always the greatest threat but buff and lion can occasionally cause problems.

No doubt about it, 75% meplat will cause more damage and trauma up front, you are on the right path for that. The issue may be feed/function with that larger meplat.

We know for a fact, that .458 caliber +, a 65% meplat of caliber will actually self stabilize itself during terminal penetration, even without any twist rate, or extremely too slow twist rate. We also know for fact that 65% to 70% is optimum for depth of penetration....... below 65% you start to have stability issues, and above 70% depth of penetration starts to diminish because of meplat size..... you trade a little depth for more trauma basically........ but with a good nose profile 75% meplat still gives you all the depth you would need anyway.

I limited the meplat size on the #13 Solids to 67% and we went 68% on the North Forks (John at North Fork just had to be a little different..LOL) This was primarily feed/function in Winchester M70 Control Feed guns. I found if we went to 70% or slightly better, we started having some issues feed/function, by dropping to 67% and 68% meplat feed/function is 100% in M70 Control feed guns. So that is where we are, and the fact that we did not want to drop further for terminal stability.

I am a little lost on 45 degree shoulder part.... but not a concern I don't think?

If you can get your bullet to 75% in .423 caliber and it feed/function, then it will definitely enhance your up front hitting ability and will still give you plenty of good straight line penetration....... In the smaller caliber you might be able to pull it off.... .416 to .423............. Keep us posted, that might be a great development for the smaller calibers...........

 

[IvW]

By 45 degrees I basically mean "drilling"/machining a cavity with 45 degree angle into the front of the meplat. Excuse my lack of correct terminology.....like a cup point....

 

[ldmay375]

No doubt about it, 75% meplat will cause more damage and trauma up front, you are on the right path for that. The issue may be feed/function with that larger meplat.

We know for a fact, that .458 caliber +, a 65% meplat of caliber will actually self stabilize itself during terminal penetration, even without any twist rate, or extremely too slow twist rate. We also know for fact that 65% to 70% is optimum for depth of penetration....... below 65% you start to have stability issues, and above 70% depth of penetration starts to diminish because of meplat size..... you trade a little depth for more trauma basically........ but with a good nose profile 75% meplat still gives you all the depth you would need anyway.

I limited the meplat size on the #13 Solids to 67% and we went 68% on the North Forks (John at North Fork just had to be a little different..LOL) This was primarily feed/function in Winchester M70 Control Feed guns. I found if we went to 70% or slightly better, we started having some issues feed/function, by dropping to 67% and 68% meplat feed/function is 100% in M70 Control feed guns. So that is where we are, and the fact that we did not want to drop further for terminal stability.

I am a little lost on 45 degree shoulder part.... but not a concern I don't think?

If you can get your bullet to 75% in .423 caliber and it feed/function, then it will definitely enhance your up front hitting ability and will still give you plenty of good straight line penetration....... In the smaller caliber you might be able to pull it off.... .416 to .423............. Keep us posted, that might be a great development for the smaller calibers...........

We do know the .458, 380 grain Lehigh copper WFN solid has a sweet spot range for COAL, to feed in most 458 Winchester bolt rifles. That meplat is .346 for this .458 bullet. I think this is about a 75.5% meplat.
A radiused nose edge would possibly help it feed a with a slight bit more COAL tolerance range. Though, this bullet is intended for 45-70 lever rifles. I don't see a little edge radius effecting that aspect either.

 

[michael458]

By 45 degrees I basically mean "drilling"/machining a cavity with 45 degree angle into the front of the meplat. Excuse my lack of correct terminology.....like a cup point....

OK OK, I am with you now, I know what you mean........... Yes, basically making a brass Cup Point... a good thing, would be stronger than copper, would not be as prone to deform...... My friend Sam made some of these similar to what you are talking about, I believe they were for his 500 NE....... might have been .585 caliber too...

We do know the .458, 380 grain Lehigh copper WFN solid has a sweet spot range for COAL, to feed in most 458 Winchester bolt rifles. That meplat is .346 for this .458 bullet. I think this is about a 75.5% meplat.

Do you remember what we tested those in? 458 B&M?? I remember we gave them a go, but I forgot, probably the B&M....... Might have been that 20 inch 458 Win? But I did not really put it to feed/function tests..... just terminals.........

I loaded the rest of those Lehighs in 45/70 recently.............

 

[ldmay375]

OK OK, I am with you now, I know what you mean........... Yes, basically making a brass Cup Point... a good thing, would be stronger than copper, would not be as prone to deform...... My friend Sam made some of these similar to what you are talking about, I believe they were for his 500 NE....... might have been .585 caliber too...


Do you remember what we tested those in? 458 B&M?? I remember we gave them a go, but I forgot, probably the B&M....... Might have been that 20 inch 458 Win? But I did not really put it to feed/function tests..... just terminals.........

I loaded the rest of those Lehighs in 45/70 recently.............

I believe the penetration test was 9/14/22, with the 458 B&M.
Edit: the same day testing the 400 gr #13 solid.
You did do load pressure with both the 458 Winchester & Lott.

 

[IvW]

OK OK, I am with you now, I know what you mean........... Yes, basically making a brass Cup Point... a good thing, would be stronger than copper, would not be as prone to deform...... My friend Sam made some of these similar to what you are talking about, I believe they were for his 500 NE....... might have been .585 caliber too...


Do you remember what we tested those in? 458 B&M?? I remember we gave them a go, but I forgot, probably the B&M....... Might have been that 20 inch 458 Win? But I did not really put it to feed/function tests..... just terminals.........

I loaded the rest of those Lehighs in 45/70 recently.............

Any test results? Want to go in the same direction with the 500 Jeff......600gr bullet same design.....

 

[One Day...]

@Hunter-Habib I completely understand your thoughts here, I would have been exactly the same 15 years ago, and actually had lots of reservations myself until putting similar bullets to buffalo. Let me explain;

First, for this exercise I am keeping this directed to TWO Objectives. 458 and Buffalo only.......

If thinking in Conventional expanding Trauma inflicting bullets only, then @Hunter-Habib and I are on exactly the same page. In 458 Winchester I like the 450 Swift or North Fork, either one. Both will hit broadside and do damage, and both will be found on the far side under the hide. They can both get up enough velocity in 458 Winchester to do the job, and then backup with a good solid, today either CEB #13s or North Forks.... No question about it. I would probably do the same in larger capacity like the Lott as well..... I shot several buffalo with the Lott and 500 Swifts, also recovered some of those on the far side too......... backed in those days by 500 Barnes Solids, and 2005 by the FN Versions. I have shot buffalo with 500 Woodlieghs as well, same story, recovered a few of those as well. Those were conventional days, and this is where we started gathering information from test work to gain comparisons and get correlation data between the two.

In 2009 I started doing a lot of shooting with the First Generation Copper CNC HP bullets. Conventional beliefs and teachings always taught us that once a bullet starts shedding weight that this was bad, you would loose penetration, loose effectiveness and it was just bad and a failure if your bullet started breaking apart loosing weight! RIght? Yes........... I was more or less forced into this by trying to come up with suitable DG Bullets for my .500s...... I tested, petals/blades break off, but I was having a hard time reading the tea leaves. What I was finding in the test work, before going to the field with these, that I was getting deeper penetration than Conventional wisdom told me I could get? In fact, deeper than conventionals in .458? On top of that, I was getting more trauma in medium as well? Deeper Penetration? How, all the petals and blades sheared? First time to the field I knew I did not have enough bullet for buffalo, I would have to be careful and take my shots accordingly........ that was until the first buffalo shot, and these bullets were burning through buffalo like they were hot butter, and destroying everything in their path to pieces. Buffalo stand and quiver many times...... I had more than enough bullet, exits were common.......... The light bulb finally came on..........First Generation Copper CNC would now be CEB Maximus and Hammer Bullets as examples.

Next were the Raptors, What I call 2cd Generation CNC...... I like brass and most of them are brass, but some copper Raptors exist but have to be manipulated to behave like a Brass Raptor. Brass Raptors Shear BLADES at 1.5 to 2 inches inside any aqueoua tissue or test medium, these are not petals, they slice and dice everything in their path, and radiate aways from center, center bullet becomes a full caliber broken beer bottle solid and continues to penetrate dead straight. Massive trauma is inflicted, blades slice vessels, tissues, organs everything to pieces. In a buffalo .458 caliber Raptors these blades can be found in the goo that comes out of the chest cavity at the skinning shed, but you have to do some sifting through all the blood, gore and goo left behind. If that shot was broadside, it is unlikely you will find a center bullet, but you will find a nice full caliber hole going out the far side. CEB makes a 450 Solid, that is just superb in all 458 caliber cartridges, its matching Raptor is 420 gr. It is the premier Buffalo bullet for 458 caliber, and many a buffalo has been put in the dirt with them. The 420 Raptor IS the 450 Solid just with a big hollow cavity. Same length, same bearing surface. Before this time, I had a theory, make the solid, then give it a hollow point .4 inches deep and we had to adjust each caliber cavity width to get proper shear, the thought was to have the same bullet, and with the same load you would have the same POI at 50 yards. Most try to manipulate the weight to get this, but this would have caused issues with CNC brass and copper. By making bearing surface and length the same as the solid, you have the same POI with the same load...... It worked.

From my Conventional Wisdom Days, I determined a proper buffalo bullet had to penetrate in my test medium here, from 18 inches +........ The best penetration I ever acheived was 500 gr Swift A Frames at 24 inches....... so a minimum was set in my mind, 18-24 inches in my medium, we had a buffalo bullet, and I pretty much keep that to this day. After many a bovine shot, both cape and asiatic we learned a few things along the way. I never changed this minimum because of these new Non Conventional Bullets, but we probably could to an extent, but we are very safe staying with these numbers even with Non Cons......

This is why I said above that if careful, the 295 Raptor will be fine on buffalo with a perfect broadside, but I have some reservations about severe angled shots. And also, perhaps I am being a little conservative on this, because it is YOU, and not me. Me, I would do crazy things, but you I want to not have any problems. I have almost no doubt, broadside 295 Raptor can exit, and will most of the time.

In 2013 I was testing the new 250 Socom Raptors in the field, I had shot several Zebra, wildebeast and so forth in my 18 inch 458 B&M. I was running the 250 Raptors at 2900 fps, and just lucky in this gun POI was close enough at 50 yards matching the 420 Raptors and the 450 Solids, so I could pick and choose the bullet, not change the sight systems............. This 250 Socom Raptor was doing one hell of a number on large plains game....... it was ripping them to pieces, and zebra would drop to the shot consistently, I never had one run after taking the hit. Same with everything else as well......... I even had to use one for the biggest hippo I had ever taken, but it was a brain shot at 15 steps, and 100+ yards from the shore line. The brain shot was incredible, squirting brain out both ear holes 6 feet in both directions........

So, I wanted to see what would happen with this 250 Socom .458 caliber bullet on buffalo! We found a good shot at a Cow buffalo, I was careful, I made a deliberate shot behind the shoulder. This proved effective. After we did find the base of the 250 Socom on the far side in the hide, it did not exit. But it did make it all the way through. OK the remaining bullet from a .458 caliber 250 gr bullet had just penetrated as deep as I have seen 500 gr Swift A Frames in .458 caliber..... Let that sink in for a second! I only recovered two 250 gr Socom Raptors, one behind the skull of the hippo, and this bullet on far side of cow buffalo..........

View attachment 619002

Now, I would not recommend the 250 Socom for buffalo. But if careful, it could be done in a pinch.

I believe, but I am not 100% certain that the 295 Raptor test I showed above was done with the bullets not having the Talon Tips installed. I am looking at tests done with the 300 ESP Raptor, Enhanced System Projectile..... meaning Raptor on one end, and #13 Solid on the other end, it can be loaded either way.........

View attachment 618992

View attachment 618991

View attachment 618993

Take particular note that the increased velocity at 48 yards with Talon Tip installed, the increase in penetration. This is definitely no doubt about it absolutely Buffalo Capable ................. and you can also use the solid to reasonable effect for buffalo. The Nose projection on the solid end is short and this is its main limitation.

Now, here is the reason that the 420 Raptor is very much a serious buffalo bullet........... The only one I ever recovered was a frontal chest shot, and the bullet was finally found just behind the stomach of that buffalo....... easy 4 ft of penetration, and had to completely traverse all the stomach contents............

View attachment 619001

View attachment 618994

View attachment 618996

There is no conventional expanding bullet that would have penetrated that stomach completely.

Remember, 500 Swift A Frame, 458 Lott, 2270 fps penetrated to 24 inches in my test medium...........

View attachment 619000

I was asked to do some research on the 400 gr Hammer in .458 Caliber in 458 Winchester. I actually did a lot of pressure data with various powders and loads, but ended up doing the Terminal tests with B&Ms........... After doing the Terminals with the 400 Hammer I declared it "Buffalo Capable".......... later at least a couple of guys used the 400 Hammer on buffalo with extreme success, I was told the bullets "Hammered Buffalo to the Dirt"................ This is an example of Generation 1 Tech...... 400 gr Bullet on buffalo......

View attachment 619004

View attachment 619003

Now, there are two other types of Non Conventional bullets that I know would be effective, the Expanding CPS North Forks and the Lehigh Extremes. I have used the Expanding North Forks on buffalo in .500 caliber and in .474 caliber, I believe the two CPS in .458 would easy be buffalo capable..............

View attachment 618999

View attachment 618998

View attachment 618997

If I were not retired I would also put the Lehigh Extremes up against buffalo..........

Lehigh makes a 225 gr, 250 gr and 325 gr Extreme............ and from what I can see here, they do what they say they can do............

Last fall I had a friend that used a 250 gr Lehigh Extreme in his 458 B&M at 2900 fps for Bison. It was one shot, less than 50 yards, and DRT on the spot....... His statement "This is a Deadly Bullet"..... no bullet recovered............

View attachment 619006

View attachment 619005

This is a GREAT post, thank you michael458 for all this DATA.

I have five questions.

Broader context:

Based on personal field experience and logical reasoning, I came to the private conclusion that because Nosler Partition - which had been the only bullet I shot at game for several decades when they were the only premium bullet available - typically lost 40% of their mass (weight in common parlance) upon expansion/disintegration of their front core within the first couple inches of penetration (hopefully within the lung cavity), it would be logical to go down in bullet weight by 30%, hence reduce recoil significantly, with new monometal bullets that retains typically 90%+ of their weight upon expansion, and still achieve comparable results. For example, a .300 NP traditional 180 gr could in theory be replaced by a TTSX 130 gr. I have never done it because it felt intuitively wrong, similar to Hunter-Habib's reaction, but I have been very successful with 165 gr (8% weight reduction) on Kudu, Wildebeest, etc. and I know some folks in Arizona who are happy with 150 gr (16% reduction) on Elk. I had Lance Hendershot load some .300 Wby 130 gr TTSX, but I have not tried them on large game (Wildebeest/Elk class) and remain hesitant to do so...

Narrowing the context:

When going from the traditional 500 gr .458 (whether Win, B&M, Lott, etc.) to 400 gr there is a 20% mass/weight reduction (40% for 300 gr). If I interpret them correctly, your tests indicate that both in various Cutting Edge, North Fork, etc. have excellent penetration for Buffalo, right?

Now the questions:

1. Am I interpreting your tests correctly if I summarize at the 10,000 ft. level along the lines of "a .458 400 gr monometal does the same/better job as a traditional 500 gr"? Is it your general recommendation that .458 400 gr monometal define a new normal on Buffalo?
2. Do you generally subscribe to a rule of thumb of going down in weight with monometal bullets? In PG? In DG? 20%? 30%?
3. Did you test the .458 TSX? Do you have similar results for their 500gr, 450 gr, 400 gr, 350 gr, 300 gr? I would think that a Lott loaded with 400 gr, not to mention 300 gr, would have significantly less recoil, and, maybe more importantly, an almost PG caliber trajectory... Imagine a .458 monometal load as easy to shoot and with the same reach as a .375 traditional load, while still performing like a traditional .458 load..........................
4. I notice that Barnes offer .300 Win ammo with 180gr, 165gr, 150 gr TTSX - which could support some version of my context setting(?), although I believe that they offer the 150 gr for folks seeking long range on smaller animals (e.g. Pronghorn in the US), rather than for folks wanting to reduce bullet weight on Elk.. - but they do not offer anything but the 500 gr TSX (or BND SLD, which I consider inadequate on Buffalo due to over penetration) in .458 Lott - which would not adhere to the conclusions of your tests. Why do you think that is? Purely marketing (produce what the market demands) in a market where most folks still stick to the traditional weights, regardless of evolving bullet technologies?
5. Do you think that the performance of the monometal bullets capable of BOTH expansion AND penetration blur the line between the traditional conceptions of "soft" and "solid"? For example:

500 gr .458 TSX @ 2,200 fps. (Lott).
Should we call it an "Expanding Solid"?
It BOTH expanded to 0.73" AND retained 494 gr (99%)...​

Note: I have no particular allegiance to the TSX or TTSX, but since I do not reload (can't seem to have the time for everything!) their loaded DG ammo is a convenient commodity for me, and I guess that I could just as well have been shifting from NP to ETip if Weatherby had picked them for their .257 Wby and .300 Wby ammo, but I notice that they recently started offering ammo with Hammer bullets, which may open new horizons...

Looking forward to your thoughts

 

[One Day...]

I know that all the younger hunters these days are quite dismissive towards the concept of sectional density...

...
As you see, the Raptors Terminal Sectional Density is over twice as large as any of the expanding premium softs. Could this explain its superior penetrative abilities?
...

I believe it does...

 

[One Day...]

Sometimes I‘m wondering, if I‘m here in a „hunting forum“ or more in an experimental laboratory for ballistics, where people try to use rifles and reloading Equipment, which aren‘t simply made for the bespoken case!
Behind all this whole discussion I see the idea to reinvent the wheel again! Hey, Lots of heavy brainers and full time big game hunters have been through this materia 50 years ago!
With the all over known and proven best results!
Dear gentlemen, my advise is, take a 458 Win, if You can hold and handle it, load it with Premium 450 Grainer, invest on planning and get physically fit, scratch some real money together, book the best safari Your wallet can buy, hunt the biggest of the biggest, if You can afford it, the pricelist up and down, stay honest and hunt fair, that the hunting gods are blessing You!
That is my recipe for unforgettable hunting and comming home safely!

Well, along that line of thought, should we still hunt elephant with a black powder 4 bore? They certainly worked!

I personally think that the monometal bullets we have now are revolutionizing concepts we developed 50 years, and maybe more accurately 100 years ago, and I see no reason why adopting these new bullets, and the change they bring to our thinking, should be different from adopting CNC machining, and the change they bring to our rifles, or vapor deposition glass coating, and the change they bring to our optics, or Gore-Tex and synthetic fibers, and the change they bring to our clothing, etc.

Golden Age periodicals were replete with extensive technical discussions through articles and, maybe more importantly, Letters to the Editor, of comparable technical issues. It seems that forums like AH have been - also as a result of evolving technology, from paper to numeric - taking this place. I personally welcome it.

 

[michael458]

Now the questions:

What must be understood is the method, or mode of action, that these bullets cause or produce trauma.... For trauma inflicting bullets it can be broken down into 4 different methods or modes of action.

#1. Conventional Expanding Premium Bullets............ Everyone understands this, one speaks a lot about the Barnes TSX, it is a premium expanding bullet, same as Swift, Woodeigh, and many various others............ it expands, causes trauma by that expansion, but rarely do those petals break off......

#2. 1st Generation Copper CNC Hollow Points.............. They all work like this, upon entry the petals/blades start to shear off the bullet, for the most part these petals/blades stay within the wound channel and are distributed throughout the wound channel as the remaining solid slug or blunt trauma solid continues to penetrate straight. Now, this causes a massive amount of trauma and total tissue destruction, larger than normal conventional wound channels, and more tissue destruction than conventional expanding bullets. In addition, that remaining full caliber solid continues to penetrate, giving far more penetration than any conventional expanding bullet. Examples Hammer and Lehigh, Cutting Edge Bullerts has some of these, Maximus as well.............

#3. 2cd Generation Brass CNC Hollow Points............These work similar to the 1st Gen Copper CNC HPs, but the "Blades" shear in a more consistent pattern, 1.5 to 2 inches after entering any aqueous medium, animal tissue. These Blades, have broken sharp edges which allows them to rip tissue to pieces for that first 4-5 inches of travel with the main center bullet. Causing massive tissue destruction within a very large wound channel from 2-6 inches of that beginning of penetration. Larger caliber blades, begin to radiate from center in a star pattern, and begin to be secondary projectiles slicing and dicing everything they come in contact with. This causes massive blood loss and additional tissue destruction. All the while, the center bullet has now become a broken beer bottle type full caliber solid, penetrating straight. In my experience these cause the maximum amount of trauma and tissue destruction of any bullet I have ever witnessed. With the 1st Generation Copper CNC HPs not very far behind.

#4. In my mind, opinion, I include the Solid Copper EXPANDING North Fork Cup Points, and other bullets such as the Peregrine expanding bullets. One might consider these just another expanding bullet, but because of the extreme penetration they can achieve and the trauma they introduce, I put them in a separate category of their own.

Perhaps a case could also be made for the Lehigh Extremes that I really like as well, they produce a lot of trauma and also work in a slightly different method in which to achieve that goal.

All Monumentals are not created equal.........

Am I interpreting your tests correctly if I summarize at the 10,000 ft. level along the lines of "a .458 400 gr monometal does the same/better job as a traditional 500 gr"? Is it your general recommendation that .458 400 gr monometal define a new normal on Buffalo?

Depends on the TYPE of Monumental........ If you are talking Barnes, no. If you are talking 1st Gen or 2cd Gen CNC then Yes. Easy. If you are talking Expanding Cup Point or Lehigh Exteme, yes, easy........

Do you generally subscribe to a rule of thumb of going down in weight with monometal bullets? In PG? In DG? 20%? 30%?

Rule of thumb will be the depth of penetration during Terminal Tests............

Did you test the .458 TSX? Do you have similar results for their 500gr, 450 gr, 400 gr, 350 gr, 300 gr?

No I did not. In the early years mid 90s, I loved the terminal performance of the X bullets, but this was before the grooves were introduced, accuracy was haphazard at best, poor at worst. I moved to other Premiums such as Swift A Frames. When Barnes introduced the grooves, this solve all the accuracy issues and they really became a #1 Premium bullet from that point forward. However, by the time I got around to the Barnes, I had already moved past them to the 1 Generation CNC Bullets, and had concentrated most of my efforts there. I do however like the Barnes as a conventional expanding bullet. In .458 caliber I am very partial to the 300 and 350 Barnes and believe it would be superb in many areas.......... For buffalo I would do nothing but either 1st or 2cd Generation CNC type, Expanding Cup Points, or perhaps Lehigh Extremes......... I think you get way more bang for the buck.

I notice that Barnes offer .300 Win ammo with 180gr, 165gr, 150 gr TTSX -

Again, I don't have a lot of experience with the smaller calibers, but in all my .308 caliber needs or requirements I use a 100 FB Raptor and in some cases I have a 130 FB Raptor loaded in 300 Winchester........ 100 FB Raptors in 300 Winchester at 3800 fps + takes care of all my Zombie busting requirements, or should I say, Zombie Exploding...........

Do you think that the performance of the monometal bullets capable of BOTH expansion AND penetration blur the line between the traditional conceptions of "soft" and "solid"? For example:

NO.

Any test results? Want to go in the same direction with the 500 Jeff......600gr bullet same design.....

I went back and looked and I can't find where we tested those. I am trying to recall, but I believe it was in .585 caliber that Sam made some of these for his own use on one trip he took, I remember him taking a warthog with it, but do not believe he took a buffalo or anything substantial that I remember.

While I was looking for a test on those, I ran across one of many of the WILD THINGS we did test and play with, this was one of them..... We had a nasty name for these bullets, I won't repeat here.... LOL

 

[Rosch]

Well, along that line of thought, should we still hunt elephant with a black powder 4 bore? They certainly worked!

I personally think that the monometal bullets we have now are revolutionizing concepts we developed 50 years, and maybe more accurately 100 years ago, and I see no reason why adopting these new bullets, and the change they bring to our thinking, should be different from adopting CNC machining, and the change they bring to our rifles, or vapor deposition glass coating, and the change they bring to our optics, or Gore-Tex and synthetic fibers, and the change they bring to our clothing, etc.

Golden Age periodicals were replete with extensive technical discussions through articles and, maybe more importantly, Letters to the Editor, of comparable technical issues. It seems that forums like AH have been - also as a result of evolving technology, from paper to numeric - taking this place. I personally welcome it.

Yes, I see Your point, but with this new materials the whole setup should be overthought! The combination cartridge dimensions to bullet make and size don‘t fit anymore the makers thoughts, when creating the cartridge!
For example: Those „new“ bullets are much longer with less weight and change everything and the guns, cartridges and bullets should be overthought and optimised for this kind of use!
When the 458 Win was created, the technicians would have loved to present and load lighter bullets for big game because so the speed would increase, recoil would habe been much less and the caliber would have been much more excepted by customers!
They chose the 500 grainer because they were outproven successfull, did the advised job and got the mission done!
Today we do have those new solid bullets, which means less weight, less penetration, less space for powder, less transfer of energy, less less!
And now here is somebody trying to tell me 290 grains are an excaptable alternative to 500 grain softpoint premium bullets?
No, thank You!!

 

[IvW]

What must be understood is the method, or mode of action, that these bullets cause or produce trauma.... For trauma inflicting bullets it can be broken down into 4 different methods or modes of action.

#1. Conventional Expanding Premium Bullets............ Everyone understands this, one speaks a lot about the Barnes TSX, it is a premium expanding bullet, same as Swift, Woodeigh, and many various others............ it expands, causes trauma by that expansion, but rarely do those petals break off......

#2. 1st Generation Copper CNC Hollow Points.............. They all work like this, upon entry the petals/blades start to shear off the bullet, for the most part these petals/blades stay within the wound channel and are distributed throughout the wound channel as the remaining solid slug or blunt trauma solid continues to penetrate straight. Now, this causes a massive amount of trauma and total tissue destruction, larger than normal conventional wound channels, and more tissue destruction than conventional expanding bullets. In addition, that remaining full caliber solid continues to penetrate, giving far more penetration than any conventional expanding bullet. Examples Hammer and Lehigh, Cutting Edge Bullerts has some of these, Maximus as well.............

#3. 2cd Generation Brass CNC Hollow Points............These work similar to the 1st Gen Copper CNC HPs, but the "Blades" shear in a more consistent pattern, 1.5 to 2 inches after entering any aqueous medium, animal tissue. These Blades, have broken sharp edges which allows them to rip tissue to pieces for that first 4-5 inches of travel with the main center bullet. Causing massive tissue destruction within a very large wound channel from 2-6 inches of that beginning of penetration. Larger caliber blades, begin to radiate from center in a star pattern, and begin to be secondary projectiles slicing and dicing everything they come in contact with. This causes massive blood loss and additional tissue destruction. All the while, the center bullet has now become a broken beer bottle type full caliber solid, penetrating straight. In my experience these cause the maximum amount of trauma and tissue destruction of any bullet I have ever witnessed. With the 1st Generation Copper CNC HPs not very far behind.

#4. In my mind, opinion, I include the Solid Copper EXPANDING North Fork Cup Points, and other bullets such as the Peregrine expanding bullets. One might consider these just another expanding bullet, but because of the extreme penetration they can achieve and the trauma they introduce, I put them in a separate category of their own.

Perhaps a case could also be made for the Lehigh Extremes that I really like as well, they produce a lot of trauma and also work in a slightly different method in which to achieve that goal.

All Monumentals are not created equal.........


Depends on the TYPE of Monumental........ If you are talking Barnes, no. If you are talking 1st Gen or 2cd Gen CNC then Yes. Easy. If you are talking Expanding Cup Point or Lehigh Exteme, yes, easy........



Rule of thumb will be the depth of penetration during Terminal Tests............


No I did not. In the early years mid 90s, I loved the terminal performance of the X bullets, but this was before the grooves were introduced, accuracy was haphazard at best, poor at worst. I moved to other Premiums such as Swift A Frames. When Barnes introduced the grooves, this solve all the accuracy issues and they really became a #1 Premium bullet from that point forward. However, by the time I got around to the Barnes, I had already moved past them to the 1 Generation CNC Bullets, and had concentrated most of my efforts there. I do however like the Barnes as a conventional expanding bullet. In .458 caliber I am very partial to the 300 and 350 Barnes and believe it would be superb in many areas.......... For buffalo I would do nothing but either 1st or 2cd Generation CNC type, Expanding Cup Points, or perhaps Lehigh Extremes......... I think you get way more bang for the buck.


Again, I don't have a lot of experience with the smaller calibers, but in all my .308 caliber needs or requirements I use a 100 FB Raptor and in some cases I have a 130 FB Raptor loaded in 300 Winchester........ 100 FB Raptors in 300 Winchester at 3800 fps + takes care of all my Zombie busting requirements, or should I say, Zombie Exploding...........


NO.

I went back and looked and I can't find where we tested those. I am trying to recall, but I believe it was in .585 caliber that Sam made some of these for his own use on one trip he took, I remember him taking a warthog with it, but do not believe he took a buffalo or anything substantial that I remember.

While I was looking for a test on those, I ran across one of many of the WILD THINGS we did test and play with, this was one of them..... We had a nasty name for these bullets, I won't repeat here.... LOL

That is the nose shape I am looking at but with a bit smaller hole and more meplat.....thanks

 

[One Day...]

What must be understood is the method, or mode of action, that these bullets cause or produce trauma.... For trauma inflicting bullets it can be broken down into 4 different methods or modes of action.

#1. Conventional Expanding Premium Bullets............ Everyone understands this, one speaks a lot about the Barnes TSX, it is a premium expanding bullet, same as Swift, Woodeigh, and many various others............ it expands, causes trauma by that expansion, but rarely do those petals break off......

#2. 1st Generation Copper CNC Hollow Points.............. They all work like this, upon entry the petals/blades start to shear off the bullet, for the most part these petals/blades stay within the wound channel and are distributed throughout the wound channel as the remaining solid slug or blunt trauma solid continues to penetrate straight. Now, this causes a massive amount of trauma and total tissue destruction, larger than normal conventional wound channels, and more tissue destruction than conventional expanding bullets. In addition, that remaining full caliber solid continues to penetrate, giving far more penetration than any conventional expanding bullet. Examples Hammer and Lehigh, Cutting Edge Bullerts has some of these, Maximus as well.............

#3. 2cd Generation Brass CNC Hollow Points............These work similar to the 1st Gen Copper CNC HPs, but the "Blades" shear in a more consistent pattern, 1.5 to 2 inches after entering any aqueous medium, animal tissue. These Blades, have broken sharp edges which allows them to rip tissue to pieces for that first 4-5 inches of travel with the main center bullet. Causing massive tissue destruction within a very large wound channel from 2-6 inches of that beginning of penetration. Larger caliber blades, begin to radiate from center in a star pattern, and begin to be secondary projectiles slicing and dicing everything they come in contact with. This causes massive blood loss and additional tissue destruction. All the while, the center bullet has now become a broken beer bottle type full caliber solid, penetrating straight. In my experience these cause the maximum amount of trauma and tissue destruction of any bullet I have ever witnessed. With the 1st Generation Copper CNC HPs not very far behind.

#4. In my mind, opinion, I include the Solid Copper EXPANDING North Fork Cup Points, and other bullets such as the Peregrine expanding bullets. One might consider these just another expanding bullet, but because of the extreme penetration they can achieve and the trauma they introduce, I put them in a separate category of their own.

Perhaps a case could also be made for the Lehigh Extremes that I really like as well, they produce a lot of trauma and also work in a slightly different method in which to achieve that goal.

All Monumentals are not created equal.........


Depends on the TYPE of Monumental........ If you are talking Barnes, no. If you are talking 1st Gen or 2cd Gen CNC then Yes. Easy. If you are talking Expanding Cup Point or Lehigh Exteme, yes, easy........



Rule of thumb will be the depth of penetration during Terminal Tests............


No I did not. In the early years mid 90s, I loved the terminal performance of the X bullets, but this was before the grooves were introduced, accuracy was haphazard at best, poor at worst. I moved to other Premiums such as Swift A Frames. When Barnes introduced the grooves, this solve all the accuracy issues and they really became a #1 Premium bullet from that point forward. However, by the time I got around to the Barnes, I had already moved past them to the 1 Generation CNC Bullets, and had concentrated most of my efforts there. I do however like the Barnes as a conventional expanding bullet. In .458 caliber I am very partial to the 300 and 350 Barnes and believe it would be superb in many areas.......... For buffalo I would do nothing but either 1st or 2cd Generation CNC type, Expanding Cup Points, or perhaps Lehigh Extremes......... I think you get way more bang for the buck.


Again, I don't have a lot of experience with the smaller calibers, but in all my .308 caliber needs or requirements I use a 100 FB Raptor and in some cases I have a 130 FB Raptor loaded in 300 Winchester........ 100 FB Raptors in 300 Winchester at 3800 fps + takes care of all my Zombie busting requirements, or should I say, Zombie Exploding...........


NO.

I went back and looked and I can't find where we tested those. I am trying to recall, but I believe it was in .585 caliber that Sam made some of these for his own use on one trip he took, I remember him taking a warthog with it, but do not believe he took a buffalo or anything substantial that I remember.

While I was looking for a test on those, I ran across one of many of the WILD THINGS we did test and play with, this was one of them..... We had a nasty name for these bullets, I won't repeat here.... LOL

Thank you for the answer Michael.

This is fascinating how things come and go ... and come back...

Believe it or not, starting in 1992 and for a few years, I was deeply involved, and financially invested, in trying to introduce to the U.S. what I think you would categorize as a French "2nd Generation CNC Hollow Point", although it was copper. See here under the product flier I developed with a friend who co-invented the GPA (Grand Puissance d'Arret = High Killing Power) bullet. We described it as a "programmed fragmentation" bullet.

We went absolutely nowhere with it, precisely because the petals were designed to shear off and create 4 additional wound channels, and this was considered a heresy in the U.S. 32 years ago.

Also, in those days the internet was not what it is today, forums like AH did not exist, and distribution i.e. big business controlled the narrative and the access to customers...

Nonetheless, we were quite successful in France/Europe, and my friend has been running a brisk business since.

Sologne GPA - Cartouches Sologne

Sologne GPA Grande Puissance d'Arrêt

www.cartouches-sologne.fr

It is refreshing to me to see that the concept I (unsuccessfully) co-pioneered 32 years ago was not so far fetched after all

Note: suspicious minds can verify on Google easily in the New Jersey records that I (Pascal B.) owned Rock Enterprise LLC and that I owned 11 Georges Hill Road, Newton CT at the time (1990.s).

Barnes X won in those days, precisely because their petals did not shear off, but they adopted a few of our design specifics, including a major one that was the bands (my friend was an artillery ballistician), although we initially marketed them as "crimping grooves" because those were all the rage at the time.

As to 1st vs. 2nd generation CNC vs. TSX vs. Peregrine, I believe that the petals staying in place accomplish a number of things, which various people judge variously:

1. It retains mass. Positive in my view.
2. It increases trauma in the primary (sole) wound channel. Positive in my view.
3. It increases the diameter of the primary (sole) wound channel. Positive in my view.
4. It slows down the bullet and reduces penetration. Negative in my view when super deep penetration is useful, e.g. rear shot at wounded Buffalo running away.
5. It limits trauma to a single wound channel. Mild negative in my view, considering item #2.
6. It can in theory cause the bullet to deflect during penetration. Definitely negative, although it does not seems to be the case generally in practice:
   1. possibly due to the spinning of the bullet in soft tissues, that, I speculate(?), evens out the effect of the irregularities of the petals(?);
   2. due to the petals generally shearing off on heavy bones (e.g. Buffalo or Elephant legs or skulls), leaving, in your words a "broken beer bottle type full caliber solid, penetrating straight". Which is the reason why I believe the reports from Africa that .458 TSX penetrate successfully elephant skulls even on frontal shots (heck! a 500 gr .458 TSX must still be at least a 400 gr solid after the petals shear off...), and why I actually believe that these monometal blur the line between expanding and solid.

Everything being considered, I am comfortable with the fact that ALL (1st generation CNC, 2nd generation CNC, TSX, Peregrine, and a few others) work well enough, including when deep penetration and/or bone penetration is needed, even if some are likely not the optimum design for everything, but such designs are compromises, hence good enough for everything but perfect for nothing.

Similarly, everything being considered, I agree that Cutting Edge, North Fork, Lehigh, etc. solids are a no-compromise design, better at deep penetration, and I understand why reloaders gravitate to them. On the other end, the Barnes Banded Solid represents the old, time-tested school of round nose solids, that feed reliably in all rifles, every time, and DO penetrate Buffalo and Elephant lengthwise. They may indeed be out-penetrated by modern meplat designs, but then, when is enough, enough?

In a different lane, I do believe that one of TSX major (emphasis: major) advantages is that they come loaded in commercial ammo. Yes many folks reload, but this market remains niche compared to the loaded ammo market.

 

[michael458]

On the other end, the Barnes Banded Solid represents the old, time-tested school of round nose solids, that feed reliably in all rifles, every time,

Terminal stability is the issue with Round Nose solids......... When a Solid begins terminal penetration they become "Front End Drive"......... the round nose will at some point turn off course, that point may be after it completes the mission asked of it, but it also may be long before the mission is completed. Reliable straight line penetration is very desirable........... I have used in the old days the Barnes Round Nose, it was my solid of choice before the new Barnes Flat Nose solid came out, which I used extensively in .458 caliber from 2005. I recovered a few 500 gr RN Barnes .458s from Buffalo and elephant. Then after all the work done to get a reliable .500 caliber solid, ending up being the Cutting Edge #13 and the current North Forks, I moved to these solids from that point forward. I used nothing but Winchester M70 Control feed guns, which are 100% reliable with solid meplats up to 68% meplat of caliber....... I can't really speak for anything else.

 

[RayAtkinson]

Ive shot a lot of buffalo, prefer 500 gr bullets only in a 45 cal and 400 gr bullets in a 40 caliber. I favor heavy for caliber Woodleigh's, No, Forks, GS Customs, Noslers and Barnes X are good on the black bulls. These bullets are time tested .. They will stop a charge as the stick together and penetrate. I fear many modern bullets with great claims are and designed not for a bulls boss or massive bone, it takes mass to stop a bulls charge. Ive also used solids many times and no complaints so far..but today we have soft point expanding bullets that are fine for the first shot with a solid for backup, but hay Im old and old school and sot in my ways..seen too many failure claims with todays magic bullets...