New SOLID from Swift Bullets

[bassasdaindia]

never seen an expanded A-frame before?

yes, the two expanded bullets are A-frames and given the discoloration I presume all these bullets were pulled from dead animals.

id happily try these out on game but they are still difficult to get and I don't believe they are even making .505" or .510" bullets yet.

-matt

@matt85 , I cant seem to find much literature on line regarding the swift solids , do you know what calibers they are available in ?

 

[matt85]

at this moment I think they have 375, 416, and 458. they said they would be releasing more over the course of this year but I haven't gotten them to respond to my emails.

-matt

 

[PHOENIX PHIL]

Did Swift ever have these on their website? Not for sale, just some sort of announcement and/or information. I got to think about these today as the hell that is a summer in Phoenix is not far from over which means load development time for me. I went to their website and there was nothing on it.

 

[matt85]

I see grafs apparently had swift factory 500 NE at some point (sold out now). they offered both soft and solids.

-matt

 

[Royal27]

Has anyone ended up using these real world?

higher than giraffe testies

Gizmo was right on the price....

 

[spoonieduck]

I'm not quite as impressed by the penetration as some here which is not to say that this is not an excellent bullet. I studied the 6.5 Carcano military fmg years ago. My system was also wet newsprint but was only the dimension of a folded out newspaper. The Carcano bullet is quite long, extends out of the case some distance and 'looks' unstable. Most bullets defected out of my narrow, stacked newspaper but I did recover one bullet. I think it is a 130 grain fmg, of the exact type used to kill JFK. It penetrated 72 inches.

Years ago, Barnes produced a copper alloy solid that was an excellent bullet. Then Congress declared them 'cop killers'. Barnes stopped producing them. I was told that, to comply with Federal guidelines, a 'solid' bullet must be full metal jacket, meaning [I think] that it must have a soft metal core [lead] but be coated with a steel jacket. I believe the steel jacket can't completely cover the lead core--some lead must be exposed at the base of the bullet. [Interestingly, this is why the Connally 'pristine' bullet isn't pristine. It tumbled on entry, the base of the bullet striking something hard, probably bone. It struck with enough force that lead extruded from the base and stuck in the tissues around Connally's femur, which was visualized by x-ray. The bullet was by no means 'pristine'. We see photos of the bullet from one angle but, if you turn it 90 degrees, the base of the bullet is compressed 50%, and lead bulges from the opening at the base of the bullet.]

The Feds also have limits as to how thick the steel jacket must be. I'm guessing that there are different steel thickness limits for solid bullets of various calibers, but that's a guess. If I can recall rightly, Woodleigh came up with a solid that was somewhat different than U.S. Federal standards. I've heard it is an excellent bullet but available only in larger calibers.

Now Swift has come up with a new solid. Producing a better solid is no particular trick, but producing a superior solid that meets present Federal limitations, is. How is Swift's bullet designed? Does it have a lead core or a core composed of some other alloy? Is the metal of the core exposed at the base? How thick is the steel jacket? Is the jacket made of steel or some other alloy? How thick?

 

[machinistbutler]

I'm not quite as impressed by the penetration as some here which is not to say that this is not an excellent bullet. I studied the 6.5 Carcano military fmg years ago. My system was also wet newsprint but was only the dimension of a folded out newspaper. The Carcano bullet is quite long, extends out of the case some distance and 'looks' unstable. Most bullets defected out of my narrow, stacked newspaper but I did recover one bullet. I think it is a 130 grain fmg, of the exact type used to kill JFK. It penetrated 72 inches.

Years ago, Barnes produced a copper alloy solid that was an excellent bullet. Then Congress declared them 'cop killers'. Barnes stopped producing them. I was told that, to comply with Federal guidelines, a 'solid' bullet must be full metal jacket, meaning [I think] that it must have a soft metal core [lead] but be coated with a steel jacket. I believe the steel jacket can't completely cover the lead core--some lead must be exposed at the base of the bullet. [Interestingly, this is why the Connally 'pristine' bullet isn't pristine. It tumbled on entry, the base of the bullet striking something hard, probably bone. It struck with enough force that lead extruded from the base and stuck in the tissues around Connally's femur, which was visualized by x-ray. The bullet was by no means 'pristine'. We see photos of the bullet from one angle but, if you turn it 90 degrees, the base of the bullet is compressed 50%, and lead bulges from the opening at the base of the bullet.]

The Feds also have limits as to how thick the steel jacket must be. I'm guessing that there are different steel thickness limits for solid bullets of various calibers, but that's a guess. If I can recall rightly, Woodleigh came up with a solid that was somewhat different than U.S. Federal standards. I've heard it is an excellent bullet but available only in larger calibers.

Now Swift has come up with a new solid. Producing a better solid is no particular trick, but producing a superior solid that meets present Federal limitations, is. How is Swift's bullet designed? Does it have a lead core or a core composed of some other alloy? Is the metal of the core exposed at the base? How thick is the steel jacket? Is the jacket made of steel or some other alloy? How thick?

What is different between the old Barnes sold and the Nosler solids? They are a monometal, no exposed lead. No steel jacket from what I can see either. I am just not sure why the noslers would be allowed and the Barnes outlawed.

 

[IdaRam]

I spoke with Brad from Swift Bullets at SHOT Show today and here is a pic of their new solid. Available any time now... IIRC he said 80 inches of very straight penetration in wet newspaper from the .375 dia.

View attachment 36427

What is different between the old Barnes sold and the Nosler solids? They are a monometal, no exposed lead. No steel jacket from what I can see either. I am just not sure why the noslers would be allowed and the Barnes outlawed.

Lead core is why I believe. Not a momometal.

 

[Royal27]

Lead core is why I believe. Not a momometal.

Both Northforks and CEB are mono, although both are brass instead of copper I believe?

 

[IdaRam]

Both Northforks and CEB are mono, although both are brass instead of copper I believe?

Oh yeah... well, there is that I suppose

 

[Royal27]

I think ATF just picked on Barnes for some reason..... supposedly they were going to begin making again when Trump was elected but that never happened.

 

[PHOENIX PHIL]

Both Northforks and CEB are mono, although both are brass instead of copper I believe?

CEB does make a brass solid. NF solids are copper actually I think it's a copper mix, akin to a gilding metal.

 

[RockSlinger404]

Resurrecting an old thread..

Has there been any more recent experience with the break away solids? Especially on Elephant?

Regarding the lack of crimping groove, how would you go about crimping this bullet? For a double, can you use the step down in size to act in the same manner as the one half of a regular crimping groove as the risk is that the bullets are pulled rather than setback?

 

[RockSlinger404]

Resurrecting an old thread..

Has there been any more recent experience with the break away solids? Especially on Elephant?

Regarding the lack of crimping groove, how would you go about crimping this bullet? For a double, can you use the step down in size to act in the same manner as the one half of a regular crimping groove as the risk is that the bullets are pulled rather than setback?

Swift replied to an enquiry sent to them, asking how to crimp these bullets. He confirmed what I expected above, that the "step down" can be used to serve as one half of a crimping groove. He recommended seating the bullet 30 thou down and then crimping.

Does anyone have recent real world experience with these bullets?

 

[rinehart0050]

I used the swift Solids on my recent elephant hunt last summer. 470NE double rifle. The elephant died, so I assume they performed as advertised. Here are 2 of the rounds recovered...

 

[crs]

My first job was delivering newspapers, but it never occurred to me to shoot papers with my BB gun.

Never shot them with North fork bullets either, but I did shoot water buffalo and our bullet testing team shot NF and Punch bullets through 5/8 inch steel plates before using them on Ele and cape Buff. They both shot through ele heads and on into the body = ele died DRT. Most shot through buff too.
The Punch is brass with lead filled base and NF solids are solid copper. Been loading some NF .458
350 grain SS today for my 45-70 DR, sort of an in between kill-all test coming up.

Anyone know if the new Swift solids will shoot through 5/8 inches of steel from 50 yards?

 

[Wyatt Smith]

Piercing a steel plate would not be much of a test in my opinion, when the most important part is deep straight line penetration.

 

[Forrest Halley]

@rinehart0050 those are so very pretty. I do like the performance.
@crs I'm not sure the newspaper is an accurate representation of penetration but it is somewhat understandable. I do not think that steel is a good medium to measure penetration. I feel like it is more an evaluation of metallurgy and velocity. Which I suppose you could argue is being measured in the newspaper also.

Piercing a steel plate would not be much of a test in my opinion, when the most important part is deep straight line penetration.

It does measure resilience to a point, but you are correct that depth and overcoming if friction is important.

 

[spoonieduck]

Piercing a steel plate would not be much of a test in my opinion, when the most important part is deep straight line penetration.

Piercing a steel plate would not be much of a test in my opinion, when the most important part is deep straight line penetration.

 

[spoonieduck]

I agree that steel plate is not only of limited value on a large animal. It is probably even poor in comparing different bullets in head-to-head trials. I'm reminded of a famous shooter [he is so famous that I can't remember his name]. He said a 220 swift, when loaded with a solid of about 55 grains would penetrate a significant steel plate of 1.5 or 2.0 inches whereas a 30-06 firing a 180 grain bullet [solid?] would not. He demonstrated and was able to shoot through the plate time after time with the 'little' 220 Swift. The 30-06 only dented it. Now the 220 leaves the muzzle at almost 4,000 ft per second whereas the 30-06 might be going 2,700 ft per second.

The 220 Swift is adequate for whitetail deer, impala, bushbuck, pronghorns and mature hogs but probably shouldn't be used for larger game. I just shot a large roan bull, Sable, Oryx with a 30-06. They were all devastating one shot kills. A 220 Swift on the same animals would have probably produced long follow ups.