Can plains game A Frames or TSX bullets be 30% lighter?

[One Day...]

Why did Nosler never bond the Partition?

By the way, all this urges me to ask a question I have always been wondering: why did Nosler never bond the front core of the Partition? Especially when Swift did it in the A Frame (which is but a copy of the Partition, although with thicker jacket and bonded core) !?!?!?

I have always suspected that Swift may have patented something to keep Nosler from doing it, but I actually do not know. Does anyone know?

 

[Rule 303]

Joining this discussion a bit late. I apologize if what I am saying has already been said. Just means I missed it or did not take it in.

First up "Energy". Energy per se never killed anything. In a frangible bullet the massive blowing up of the bullet causes the loss of the energy, the loss of energy does not cause the blowing up of the bullet but it needs the energy to do it. You won't get penetration without the energy. Energy along with bullet construction dictates penetration. Least ways that's my take on the issue.

Going lighter with a monometal or better constructed bullet to achieve a kill the old style heavier bullet did. Hummmm, yes and no. This is just my take on the question. Yes if as mainly discussed the shots are through soft tissue or light bones. Now if we are talking heavy animals with tough skin and bones.

Take the ole Cape Buffalo - only ever shot one so not basing to much on that but a bit on Doc Robertson.Front on even the rib bones can deflect a heavy soft nose bullet. A lighter monometal at speed might get through the rib but being lighter it will shed velocity a lot faster and will be full or just about full expanded. This means the parachute effect comes into play as well, so penetration then-to me at least- becomes an issue. Think we need several carcasses to do some testing on.

Now if we talk leg/shoulder shot the light bullet will pull up faster than the heavier slower bullet and I doubt-but admit do not know- that the lighter faster bullet will have the same penetration. I suspect for these shots a heavier monometal would be the better choice if using an expanding bullet.

The tougher skin on a Buff will slow a lighter bullet more than a heavier bullet and if we are talking an angling shot from the rear then the bullet has further to travel through the animal to reach the vitals. Will the lighter bullet have the retained energy to do this? Think we need those carcasses.

Yes, the question is about plains game and I use the Buff to highlight the extreme. I guess I could have used the Eland as the example. As said these are just my thoughts on the question and do realise there are other factors that come into play.

 

[Dr Ray]

I think part of the answer (in my opinion) is that the lighter Bullets have a “poorer” sectional density and shed velocity rapidly.
Personally I prefer the better sectional density Bullets.
A needle is very streamlined but doesn’t have the sectional density etc.
I also feel that the lighter Bullets aren’t as heavily constructed as the same caliber heavier Bullets and will open up too quickly and therefore won’t penetrate so deeply.
Modern bullet structure is excellent I might add. I guess it depends on the intended target as to whether a lighter bulkets that has a higher velocity is the question we need to ask.

 

[BobT]

Why did Nosler never bond the Partition?

By the way, all this urges me to ask a question I have always been wondering: why did Nosler never bond the front core of the Partition? Especially when Swift did it in the A Frame (which is but a copy of the Partition, although with thicker jacket and bonded core) !?!?!?

I have always suspected that Swift may have patented something to keep Nosler from doing it, but I actually do not know. Does anyone know?

I have wondered the same thing myself, I'm not entirely sure but the Partition Gold may have been bonded, I know it had a thicker jacket and a steel cup around the rear core.

 

[Von S.]

A 22 LR hits a groundhog with about 15 times it's weight in foot pounds.

A 30-06 hits a white tailed deer with about 15 times it's weight in foot pounds.

A 375 hits a cape buffalo with about 4 times the animals weight in foot pounds.

The 22 LR offers the groundhog about 4 grains of bullet per pound.

The 30-06 offers the deer about 2 grains per pound.

The 375 H&H offers the cape buffalo about .3 grains per pound.

I kinda get a chuckle when someone says how hard to kill a cape is to kill, or how a 375 H&H is the right stuff to tangle with something that wants to festoon its horns with your intestings and wash it's hoofs with your blood.

It's more "sportsman like" to shoot deer with a .233.

 

[Hogpatrol]

For those desiring an exit hole, use a Berger Hybrid, Classic or VLD. They will give you an exit hole in large, larger and largest sizes.
If you have two animals standing broadside in line, not more than ten yards between them, you could very well get a double.

 

[vancewalker007]

Last year at SCI I went to a presentation on how bullets kill. From this person's research, shooting thousand of rounds into ballistic gel and into animals, bullets kill the best by travelling in a straight line. This happens by the bullet taking a symmetrical mushroom shape. If you're talking about normal African hunting ranges, say out to 300-400 yards max, the lighter Barnes is still going to be carrying a lot of ft-lbs, likely very close to the Partition or greater, so in this case a tougher well mushrooming Barnes is going to travel straight through the vitals and deliver about equal energy. Here is some data from my 375 Ruger. The heavier bullet is behind on energy right away. Its really unfair in a way since the Barnes has a higher BC.

270 LRX from mu 375 Ruger, 2850fps
Range Energy
(yd) (ft-lbs)
500 2292.1
450 2485
400 2690.5
350 2909.9
300 3143.6
250 3389.9
200 3652.5
150 3929.8
100 4224.4
50 4536.5
0 4869.4

300 Nosler Partition from my 375 Ruger, 2715fps

Range Energy
(yd) (ft-lbs)
500 2039.1
450 2242.9
400 2461.5
350 2699.4
300 2955.1
250 3228.1
200 3520.2
150 3834.3
100 4167.8
50 4527.2
0 4910

 

[Bos Javanicus]

Hi, I read some of your original post and you just plain lost me, no offence meant of course.
Im 52 now and first shot a rifle at 10 i think.
I've shot a lot of red deer and more Asiatic Buff than I can remember and one thing I've learnt is velocity is not always your best friend and sectional density is the guy I'd rather have a beer with.
A 160gn RNSP in my little double has better penetration and weight retention at 2200fps than 140gn any day moving faster and the 160gn seems to kill better. The same seems to work with all the cals I use.
So basically I use the largest bullet I can for the calibre and put it in the right spot, of course you need to use an A grade bullet.
Bell used a 6.5 and a .303 to shoot out of his elephants with heavy for calibre bullets and he lived to an old age.
Just to add to this my .404 out penetrates my .500 double shooting RNSP's. 400 vs 570's go figure.

 

[Luvthunt]

As you did not list vel I could not calculate momentum, which I believe is a greater factor in penetration.
If you would list the momentum values they should,in all cases be higher with he heavier bullet and be a truer pic of penetration.

 

[bruce moulds]

in the real world, a 30% reduction on 300 gns is 90 gns.
will a 210 gn barnes do what a 300 gn lead core bullet will do.
it certainly won't do what a 300 gn swift will do.
on lighter game in a bigger calibre this might not matter.
bruce.

 

[tarbe]

@one day, This July my dad used his 404 Jeffrey with a 400 grain A-Frame @ 2300 FPS to harvest a bull Eland broadside at 80 yards. The shot was perfect, the bull took one step backwards and dropped. The bullet was recovered just under the skin on the offside of Eland. You can see the bullet and the weight retention on the "Bullet performance data base" thread. Just because you use a premium bullet doesn't mean you'll always get an exit hole.

Very true. I had 180gr TTSX stay inside Kudu, Gemsbok and Zebra...but also had one pass through both shoulders of an Eland. Same load, relatively same impact velocities...all shoulder shots.

As soon as we start to generalize....

 

[One Day...]

... If you would list the momentum values they should,in all cases be higher with he heavier bullet and be a truer pic of penetration.

100% agreed.

...will a 210 gn barnes do what a 300 gn lead core bullet will do? It certainly won't do what a 300 gn swift will do... bruce.

100% agreed.

As indicated from the beginning of the thread, and as we all know, A Frame and Nosler Partition are not the same, despite an identical design. Thanks to chemical bonding and a thicker jacket the A Frame retains 95+% of its weight and Partition retains 70-% of its weight. It is therefore pretty clear that a 210 gr Barnes will not equal a 300 gr A Frame, and that it will have less momentum.

But what I have been pondering is not (T)TSX vs. A Frame that retains 95%, but (T)TSX vs. Partition that retains 70%.

Does a 210 gr TSX that retains 100% of its weights carries throughout the animal more/same/less amount of momentum/energy/penetration/mechanical tissue damage than a 300 gs Partition that looses 30% of its weight during the first inch of penetration?

I agree 100% that

... on lighter game in a bigger calibre this might not matter. bruce.

but I am trying to assess whether it would also make sense on heavier game (e.g. wildebeests, hartebeest, eland, etc.) the idea being that where a 300 gr Partition - assumedly from a .375 H&H - has been fully satisfactory, will a 210 gr (T)TSX perform at least as well?
(PS: no question the 300 gr A Frame will perform better, but this is not the question, and it is not needed where the Partition has been enough).

The same question applies to whether a 185 gr (T)TSX will perform at least as well as a 250 gr partition from a .338/.340; or whether a 100 gr TTSX will perform at least as well as a 120 gr Partition from a 25-06/.257?

... you just plain lost me, no offence meant of course...

The reason for all this pondering is to determine:
1) whether a Partition that looses 30% of its weight in the first inch of penetration can be replaced by a 30% lighter (T)TSX that retains its full weight, and reduces the recoil from the .375 or .340 by ~20%?
2) whether a (T)TSX "up-guns" a small caliber into the next class and whether, for example, a .257 Wby shooting mono-metal can be safely used on animals in the 250 to 300 lbs range.

 

[Von S.]

Does the 378 equal the 375 Chey Tac in distance energy?

Does the 340 equal the ,338 Lapua in distance energy?

Sure! Actually they do, but was that Roy's idea when he put those rounds into lightweight sporting rifles? No, absolutely not. He did not envision turning hunters into ,1000 yard deer snipers, he envisioned a guy shooting an animal at a relatively short range compared to it's speed and knocking it down because of massive shock and not getting up again and having onlookers say, I gotta get me one of them.

My obsession with Weatherby Magnums began when I was handed a 300 with hot loaded 150 psp . It is absolutely amazing what happens when you hit a buck dead on at 150 yards with a slug going 3600 plus feet per second at 100 yards.

Speed wonderful speed.

 

[Luvthunt]

My 300Wby expierence is a bit different, shot elk, moose and deer with it but used a 200 gr Swift A Frame. Most always shoot for high lung so pass thrus are normal.
Shot my first Gemsbok with the same bullet and pin wheeled the front shoulder needed a second. Red Hartabeast next then a springbok and anEland but was back to the high lung placement.
Was shooting a 340 Wby on that hunt as a backup with 225 or 250 gr Partitions and after the animals mentioned above went all to the 340 as it was doing the better [quicker] job of putting an animal down.
Next trip only took the 340 and a 375, with the Partitions in the 340 and the A Frames for the 375.

 

[Saul]

I am a big fan of the .300 weatherby and my love for it has only grown with the advent of monometal bullets. I use Barnes TTSX and it allows Wby cartridges to really perform at their maximum without worrying about bullet failure.

In my .338 Lapua, I want to avoid unnecessary meat damage so I still use the heaviest Barnes bullets I can which is the 280gr LRX. I think shooting the heaviest Barnes you can is about your best bet.

 

[PHOENIX PHIL]

Not exactly comparing apples to apples, but I saw a post in a hunting group today on Facebook regarding the Nosler Accubond. The person posting complained that the AB gave him poor results in Africa. He lost a waterbuck and an eland took 3 shots to kill.

He was using a .300WM and 150gr ABs. That load would be at least in the 3200fps range, possibly over 3300fps. Sorry that's a poor choice in my mind for Africa. I've not hunted with the Accubond, but in a .300WM, I'd go no less than 180gr.

Pushing the monometals that fast is fine I guess, but I wouldn't do that even with my favorite North Forks, nor the A-Frames.

 

[lcq]

I've been absent from the board for a while. This was my first experience with Barnes bullets on game. Hunted at HuntersHill with my 26" 7mm magnum and barnes 145 LRX at around 3250fps. I guess the massive eland was proof enough for me that lighter barnes at high velocity work like a charm. The first 2 shots were through and through and a third quartering was retained 144gr. It should be noted that only 1 shot would have sufficed but I was told to keep shooting.

https://www.africahunting.com/threads/south-africa-huntershill-may-2018.43574/

 

[PHOENIX PHIL]

Not exactly comparing apples to apples, but I saw a post in a hunting group today on Facebook regarding the Nosler Accubond. The person posting complained that the AB gave him poor results in Africa. He lost a waterbuck and an eland took 3 shots to kill.

He was using a .300WM and 150gr ABs. That load would be at least in the 3200fps range, possibly over 3300fps. Sorry that's a poor choice in my mind for Africa. I've not hunted with the Accubond, but in a .300WM, I'd go no less than 180gr.

Pushing the monometals that fast is fine I guess, but I wouldn't do that even with my favorite North Forks, nor the A-Frames.

Thought I'd follow up on this post of mine. I've not hunted with the AB's but I know those that have and swear by them. In case it wasn't clear, my comment about it being a poor choice was in reference only to the bullet weight and not the bullet design itself. That's just going a bit too light and I see no advantage in the speed for typical African shooting distances.

 

[lcq]

Thought I'd follow up on this post of mine. I've not hunted with the AB's but I know those that have and swear by them. In case it wasn't clear, my comment about it being a poor choice was in reference only to the bullet weight and not the bullet design itself. That's just going a bit too light and I see no advantage in the speed for typical African shooting distances.

my experience with accubonds 165gr out of a 300wsm are accurate as hell, great BC but they come apart fast at high velocity. I'd say at long range they are fantastic, up close and personal not so much

 

[stug]

A 180 or 200gr accubond would be better choice for a 300 magnum. Accubonds are pretty soft up front.