Recommended dangerous game bullets and cartridges?

[Cheesehead]

It looks like the jacket thickness listed for the 550 grain .458 round nose is .050". I don't know how that compares to other commonly used bullets.

 

[grand veneur]

That is thinner than the jacket of the Woodleigh Weldcore soft nose bullets as well as that of my old Hornady Interbond RN bullets.

 

[Foxi]

So I talked to Jeremy at Aria Ammunition today and he’s sending me 10rds of the Hawk 550gr 458 WinMag…
He told me these are his favorite for Buff in Africa! He said that the impact and energy dump are crazy and that just hit harder than anything for a SP in 458 WinMag!
He’s been out more than most of us combined!
Now this is his loaded round that has a 550gr Hawk at 2200fps! Serious energy!View attachment 631843View attachment 631844View attachment 631845
His exact words were 550gr Hawks! A sight to behold!

I am amazed that it can reach this speed with such a heavy bullet,
You need a press load even at 100gn less.
What powder and load does he use, please ask him.
Thank you.

 

[grand veneur]

It can be so, but it also depends on how such velocity were achieved. Certainly not in the bush with an old rifle Winchester model 70 and a 20" barrel.

 

[Brian]

That is right. You can order Hawk bullets with your choice of jacket thickness. Pretty cool.

 

[M70375!]

I used Cutting Edge solids in 416, 400 gr on elephant, knocked him off his feet with a heart lung shot, PH said it was the first time they ever saw a bull get knocked down by a body shot.They are very accurate to and shoot to same point of impact as the Barnes 400 grain TSX. They are 67% of caliber matepat, large flat point and seem to hit really hard and feed perfectly in my Kimber Caprivi 416 Remington ,I like them better than Barnes. As for expanders, you can't go wrong with Barnes TSX, or I also am going to try some North Fork Percussion Points as well as their cup point solids. Now days there are several excellent DG bullets on the market, so don't wait for Swift. I am told they only make DG bullets once every couple of years, which I think is very disrespectful of their customers needs.

 

[375Fox]

Here are also a few classic SP bullets from Hornady, the predecessor model of the DG series and which, despite their appearance, did their job on buffaloes. The driving force behind was the cartridge 460 Weatherby Magnum. Maybe that is the difference. They were heart or lung shots, not frontal head shots where many other bullets could also fail.

It's not as some people here believe. I have also used other bullets with the same cartridge, including the Swift A-Frame and the Barnes TSX. On the other side, with completely different cartridges such as the 10,75x68 or the 11,2x72 Schüler, I used very marginal old bullets that also worked well thanks to a good shot placement, but I want not repeat such experiments.

All of this to say that one should remain somewhat critical when it comes to bullets and not immediately condemn some of that.

View attachment 628898

What was meant by my first post was the difference between the SP bullets that are bonded and the older models that are not. I used both types of bullets without noticing a big difference in the working and the remaining weight of the bullet after impact and penetration. I have also used premium bonded bullets to shot buffaloes, including the Swift A-Frame and the Barnes TSX, otherwise I could not say anything about their working compared to other bullets.

As for the Hawk bullets, some say they are clones of the old Barnes bullets. In this case they have the same jacket thickness as that of the Hornady bullets. Woodleigh and especially Degol make classic SP RN bullets with thick jackets.

Hornady .458 500gr Interbond RN bullet
View attachment 631910

I can’t understand why you continue doubling down on your statements. You posted photos of 5 of your bullets that appear in the 30-60% weight retention range. If you posted 5 swift A frames they’d be in 85-90% percent weight retention. If you posted 5 Barnes TSX they’d be 95-100% weight retention. I’m glad non-bonded bullets killed buffalo for you in past, but even from your own photos they are not dependable performance. Your definition of minimal difference between in the working of bullets and minimal difference of remaining weight is apparently very different from my definition. 30% vs 90% is a significant difference.

 

[CZDiesel]

CZDiesel, Good job. That is very interesting, Thanks. Did he say how thick the jacket is on these?
Please keep us up today on your results. When are you going to hunt buffalo? Brian

I am amazed that it can reach this speed with such a heavy bullet,
You need a press load even at 100gn less.
What powder and load does he use, please ask him.
Thank you.

He uses custom proprietary powders and won’t give out his powder info. You can always call them

 

[Rule 303]

Thanks to all for the information on the Hawk Bullets jacket thickness's.

I have seen Woodleigh SP bullets, that were used on DG and normal game and those of other manufacturers that are not bonded. The difference between them is very noticeable in regards to retained weight. This is not a put down of the other manufacturers just my observations. I think if Hornady had of used the Interbond Bullet Grand Veneur posted in the DGX they may of had few complaints about them.

For bullets used on non DG and non Large Game ( animals the size of cattle) there is probably no need for bonded bullets if the lead and jackets are strong enough to do the job. I have had conventional 130grain 270 bullets fail on pigs.

 

[CZDiesel]

Thanks to all for the information on the Hawk Bullets jacket thickness's.

I have seen Woodleigh SP bullets, that were used on DG and normal game and those of other manufacturers that are not bonded. The difference between them is very noticeable in regards to retained weight. This is not a put down of the other manufacturers just my observations. I think if Hornady had of used the Interbond Bullet Grand Veneur posted in the DGX they may of had few complaints about them.

For bullets used on non DG and non Large Game ( animals the size of cattle) there is probably no need for bonded bullets if the lead and jackets are strong enough to do the job. I have had conventional 130grain 270 bullets fail on pigs.

So this is my understanding on Hawk bullets and I’ve called them but have not been able to talk to someone yet. To be fair I called them late this afternoon so being a Friday they might have been closing shop…
But my understanding is the bullets are not a true bonded but they do two things to keep jacket and core separation…
One they put some sort of flux, for a better word, on the inside of the jacket that when the bullet is shot the heat of the powder burn and that of it going down the barrel does a chemical fusing…
Second to my understanding they leave a small portion of the bottom of the jacket open and have the lead core come down to where it is level with the copper jacket. They do this from my understanding so that again when the bullet is fired the heat melts the lead into the bottom of the jacket and prevents separation!
So although not a true bonding the Hawk bullet acts very much like a bonded bullet and all of us can look up reviews on them but all I have read they all maintain over 90% of their weight!
I have a box of the 550gr for the 458 WinMag in route so I’ll give ballistic feedback and I have a call into Hawk to talk engineering and performance they recommend for DG

 

[wildcatter82]

Leverguns 50 on YouTube has some good videos shooting Hawk bullets in ballistics gel, including the .458 550gr

 

[grand veneur]

When it comes to the weight retention of a bullet, It is certainly an advantage, especially by shooting heavy game species, but what is most important is how deep the bullet, or what remains of it, penetrates. We do not take calibers into account in this discussion. Buffaloes are shot with cartridges between caliber 9,3 mm or above all 375 H&H Magnum and 600 Nitro Express for example, therefore also with bullets of very different weights. It is certain that if a 300gr bullet loses 40% or more of its weight right after impact, the effect will not be the same as that of a 900gr bullet where the remaining piece of the bullet can, due to its weight, still cause great damage deeper. That probably were the reason why it was possible earlier times to shoot big game with much worse bullets but by using bigger calibers and heavier bullets. It is certain that how smaller the caliber that you use for shooting Big game is and so much you have to pay attention to the bullet. I primarily represent the faction of the big bore hunters, which is perhaps why there is a lack of understanding from some who have no experience with the bigger calibers for hunting big game and also other game species. I had the same discussions when it came to the use of the Game King bullets from Sierra.

 

[Rule 303]

Yes and No. The weight retention normally means deeper penetration for that bullet. Every bit of weight lost means less penetration. Also, the greater the size of the expanded bullet the shallower it will penetrate due to drag. This is why some of the early bigger bores did not penetrate as well as would have been liked, especially with soft lead. It was found for these bullets a heavier bullet travelling slower was a better penetrator. Little expansion for a 600 cal was nothing to get upset about as the wound channel was already as big or bigger than some of the small calibres. However if that 600 cal bullets opens up to 1.2" diameter it will pull up fairly quickly.

 

[grand veneur]

The cartridge 600 Nitro Express was perhaps a bad example, as were all the big bore cartridges that are primary used with FMJ bullets.

 

[Rule 303]

The cartridge 600 Nitro Express was perhaps a bad example, as were all the big bore cartridges that are primary used with FMJ bullets.

I get the impression I did not explain myself properly. I was talking about soft nosed/straight lead bullets, ones that expand not FMJ's. Most of the purely lead bullets were probably used in the black powder days, not sure on this.

 

[grand veneur]

I get the impression I did not explain myself properly. I was talking about soft nosed/straight lead bullets, ones that expand not FMJ's. Most of the purely lead bullets were probably used in the black powder days, not sure on this.

I understood it right, I just wanted to say that I should not mention cartridges that are mainly used with FMG bullets, including the cartridge 600 Nitro Express.

English is from far not my second language, so there are many more misunderstandings than I suspect.

 

[Altitude sickness]

That and being .458 bullets being available in DGX Bonded is why I used them. And that bullet totally failed. I bought 5 boxes of Bonded bullets and a box of solids. Waste of money because not all I can use them for is practice but I'm left trying to find an acceptable bullet to use in that 113 year old rifle. Or only use solids in it buy those need to be a metal clad lead bullet also. Not recommended to run a mono-metal bullet through those old barrels. Ironically I could have used a solid in that head on shot. But had those bonded softs loaded because I was hunting a huge bull in a herd.

Bob, hopefully .458 Michael will weigh in. But I think his findings were that the new solids. Northfork and Cutting Edge actually show less stress on the barrels than most “traditional” bullets. Only the bands engage the rifling

 

[North Fork Technologies]

Hi Alll,
This popped up on YT this evening,

I appreciate this is not DG but the Eland certainly has some mass.
The North Forks recovered show the level of expansion achieved.

I feel like I'm North Forks unofficial salesperson!

But ultimately they are located in Sweden, so for European hunters, in theory provide a choice when others are in short supply.

There is a huge amount North Fork in stock in the USA. Just look at www.northforkbullets.com and you see what you can get direct. All popular buffalo calibers as 375, 416, 423 are available in the USA today. This together with small calibers as 257 up to 358. We produce in Sweden but stock is mostly in the USA today.

 

[Rule 303]

Bob, hopefully .458 Michael will weigh in. But I think his findings were that the new solids. Northfork and Cutting Edge actually show less stress on the barrels than most “traditional” bullets. Only the bands engage the rifling

OK so those and the Woodleigh Hydrostatics are bore riders. That is good to know.

 

[Capebuffalo]

Hawk seems to indicate the thickness of the jacket for each type of bullet.

The Hornady DGX and DGS bullets came recently onto the market. I am talking about the older 500gr SP RN bullets from Hornady, some of which I still have in stock. In the meantime I switched to the 500gr PP SN bullet from Woodleigh.

You have it wrong…and it confuse others…The old Hornady DG SP RN bullets were not interbonds but just interlocks. The interbonds were a different bullet…quite good but expensive to make for the smaller calibers…so Hornady started to fase it out and went in big time with the ELD-X’s snd CX’s…The new DGX is a bonded bullet that will have total different results on a buffalo than a interlock….penetration will be much deeper and retention much higher…

That and being .458 bullets being available in DGX Bonded is why I used them. And that bullet totally failed. I bought 5 boxes of Bonded bullets and a box of solids. Waste of money because not all I can use them for is practice but I'm left trying to find an acceptable bullet to use in that 113 year old rifle. Or only use solids in it buy those need to be a metal clad lead bullet also. Not recommended to run a mono-metal bullet through those old barrels. Ironically I could have used a solid in that head on shot. But had those bonded softs loaded because I was hunting a huge bull in a herd.

The Hornady DGX and DGS bullets came recently onto the market. I am talking about the older 500gr SP RN bullets from Hornady, some of which I still have in stock. In the meantime I switched to the 500gr PP SN bullet from Woodleigh.