Spitzer vs. round nose in brush.

[MBTcustom]

Another myth that I wonder about and frequently engage in heated discussions over, is given a certain caliber at a certain weight bullet, does a round nose bullet have any better chances of getting through a "brush shot" than a spitzer? Or are they all equally deflected by meeting with obstructions?

[mpmarty]

As in most things re: shooting "depends"

[waksupi]

They all will deflect.

[stubshaft]

They all will deflect.

Exactly.

[longbow]

Both Ross Seyfried and Mike Venturino have done documented deflections tests (and I am sure others have too) and it is amazing how little it takes to deflect a bullet... especially long skinny bullets.

If memory serves the results generally indicate that blunt shapes and round balls give the least deflection.

I may still have both articles in my stash of old Guns & Ammo and Shooting Times.

Overall, it is best not to shoot through brush if you want to hit something where you are aiming.

Longbow

[MBTcustom]

Both Ross Seyfried and Mike Venturino have done documented deflections tests (and I am sure others have too) and it is amazing how little it takes to deflect a bullet... especially long skinny bullets.

If memory serves the results generally indicate that blunt shapes and round balls give the least deflection.

I may still have both articles in my stash of old Guns & Ammo and Shooting Times.

Overall, it is best not to shoot through brush if you want to hit something where you are aiming.

Of course that is true. The situation I am faced with is that a buddy of mine is asking me to make him some round nose reloads with copper jacket bullets as opposed to the normal loads I make him that use spitzers. He is convinced that round nose bullets are not deflected near as badly as spitzers when shooting through brush.
I told him that I believed that there was very little differance between the two and that he should always wait for a clear ethical shot. I further asserted that if he was wanting less deflection, that a heavier projectile would trump nose shape every time, but would still be deflected quite a bit if met with a twig or brush, or anything other than deer hide. And so began a half hour debate on the subject, none of which was based on science on either side but just postulations about personal beliefs. It was decided that a test was in order to determine who was right. But not being able to produce the exact same results on a variety of bullets left us with the plan of setting up a target with copious amounts of brush between us and it, and firing twenty or so rounds and comparing the average deflection of the two different styles of bullets.
This sounds like a lot of work that might not be conclusive, so If you can get me that article, it would save me a ton of headache.

[Larry Gibson]

While it is true that both types of bullets will be deflected by "brush" that is only part of the equation. Most all "tests" of such (there have been quite a few published over the years) involve hardwood dowels used as the "brush". They also use a plain paper target area to show the deflection. I've not seen any that test the terminal effects of the bullets after hitting the "brush" just in case the bullet happens to hit the game animal.

Since hardwood dowel brush does grow where I hunt I decided to use the brush that did grow where I hunted. It gets pretty thick and has limbs of small to 1"+ diameter. In its natural state it is also much softer and more pliant that hardwood dowels. For a target I used large laundry soap boxes filled with newsprint (about 8" thick). I put a paper plate on the box as an aiming point and to represent the "kill zone".

I tested several cartridges; .223, 6.5x55, .270 Win, 30-30, 30-06, 35 Whelen, .338 Mag and 45-70. Each cartridge, except the 45-70 was tested with a spitzer and RN jacketed bullets of typical hunting weight and velocity. The 45-70 was tested with factory FN jacketed as typically loaded "Safe for use in Trapdoors" and my own heavy loads with jacketed and cast.

The brush I used was dense enough that the bullets would hit at least 1 but usually 2 or bore branches. If not then that shot was disregarded. I placed the target at 2 distances behind the brush; right next to it and 5 yards behind it. All shots were at 50 yards from the brush.

I found the HV spitzer bullets were, in fact, deflected the most with some not hitting the paper plate even on the close target but mostly missing on the 5 yard target. Most of them were key holing and many did not penetrate very far into the box indicating only a mildly and probably non lethal wounded game animal. Some of the varmint .223 bullets were breaking up and just peppered the front of the box with no penetration.

The RNs all penetrated the brush, hit the close paper plate straight on and penetrated completely through the box. On the 5 yard target there was some evidence of bullet yaw but all bullets hit the plate and penetrated the box completely.

The heavier 250 gr RN .35s and the 45-70 bullets just plowed through the brush and penetrated the boxes at both distances without much evidence of deflection at those short distances.

I did put a box 25 yards behind the brush and shot it with the best performers from the above test; the RNs from the 6.5, 30-30, 30-06, 35 and 45-70s. I found there was then good indication of deflection. However, the paper plate was hit 40-50% of the time with all such bullets hitting straight on and giving complete penetration. It should be noted that those bullets that were deflected and still hit the box gave excellent penetration and would have severely wounded the game animal.

Thus I believe there is some credence to the “myth” that slower moving RN bullets are better “brush busters” if the game animal is within reasonable distance of the brush. Not only do those types of bullets actually “plow through” the milder brush without breaking up or being deflected as much but they also still will have enough bullet mass to penetrate and kill game.

It is still much better to move or wait for the game to move to have a clear shot but some times you have to take the shot presented. Just make sure it is the "game" behind that brush and not another hunter.......another and the most important reason I don't favor "brush shots".

Larry Gibson

Goodsteel; it indeed was alot of work but was interesting. Took me a whole day in the woods to complete the test with a helper. Was tough job but someone had to do it:smile:

[Sonnypie]

"I told him that I believed that there was very little differance between the two and that he should always wait for a clear ethical shot. "

Goodsteel has it.

Wait for a clear shot, or don't shoot.
You owe at least a clean kill to the game you hunt.

I have "cleaned up" after idiots who called themselves hunters. One buck had a festered blown out knee joint, and it's entire nose tip shot off by one such individual.
The meat was pretty damned strong. It had been laying in the sagebrush for 4 days when I happened upon it. Poor thing.
But I took it, and it was not going to go to waste.
That idiot worked at the same place I did. He was dusk shooting, through brush, with some huge magnum caliber. His first shot wounded the leg, then he attempted a head shot and lost sight of it.
(338 Magnum or some such ridiculous thing. I know it had "Magnum" attached to it.)

[MBTcustom]

Larry, Your a champ. If you were local I would get you a case of liquid currency!
Thank you so much! I admit that I was totally wrong on this one (I am actually still shocked) but I dont think I could do a better job of testing this then you did.
You are a credit to this forum.

[longbow]

goodsteel:

I will do some digging but it may be a few days. I am not sure I still have the articles and I have lots of old magazines!

What I recall is:

- Mike Venturino did a test using a board drilled and hardwood dowels set into it much as Larry mentioned. This gives consistent testing but isn't terribly natural. The bullet path was pretty erratic through the dowels. I can't recall all the details and whether he found much difference between bullets or what calibers were used.

- Ross Seyfried used "brush" which which while natural isn't consistent. If memory serves, he commented on large round nose bullets and round balls being the best through brush based on his test but also, as Larry mentioned, if the brush was closer to the target/animal than it was to the hunter, chances of a hit were greater.

That is just my old memory though so let me try to find the articles if I can.

Mike is a member here and may be able to enlighten you first hand if you contact him.

I haven't read anything by Ross Seyfried in a long time.

Let the digging begin! Oh and Christmas is coming too.

Longbow

[Reload3006]

I do believe that rn will be less deflected than spitzer but I like Sonny would sure try to persuade someone from using any rifle in a "Brush Shot" to me the height of disrespect for your prey. If you dont have a clean shot ... dont shoot isn't that one of the first principles of safe firearm use?

[MBTcustom]

If you dont have a clean shot ... dont shoot isn't that one of the first principles of safe firearm use?
Your preachin' to the choir here fellers. I am all for clean, open, well placed shots. I used to realy go for the long shots, but I have decided to keep it close, based on the advice and chastisement from several older hunters and sportsman here.
But I can't tell someone else how to hunt and expect them to listen. All I can do is admonish them to be good sportsmen in the most convincing and forceful way I can, and hope they here my words in there ears when they go to take the shot.
Under no circumstances would I encourage someone to shoot through brush, shoot at extreme distances, or shoot a deer on the run, but I'm glad that I can ask some of my random questions here and get specific answers.
I honestly thought I was right on this one and this was another myth!

[Char-Gar]

This question has been around as long as I have. There have been numerous tests, articles written and opinions expressed. When it is all over, this is the bottom line.

1. There is no bullet that won't deflect in brush, when the brush is struck right.
2. One shape bullet is not better than another shape bullet for shooting through brush.
3. Don't shoot through brush.

[MBTcustom]

You know, another thing that we can all take from this is from a personal defense scenario, anything that you can put between you and a person who might be trying to shoot at you will increase you odds of not being perforated.
Very interesting.

[Mk42gunner]

In a real life hunting scenario it doesn't take much to deflect a bullet.

One time we had just walked into a field, I was going to one side and my buddy was going to the other when buck jumped up from his afternoon nap. He was about 65 yards from us. I shot at him with my 6.5-06 (140 gr Hornady and a large amount of Reloader 22) and missed. My buddy didn't miss, so I know that I never touched hair.

We couldn't understand it. I had a good sight picture, the rifle was accurate and sighted in; and I didn't think I flinched or jerked the trigger, I was in practice and could call my shots at the time.

The miss got to bothering me that evening, so I went back the next day and walked the line I shot along. What I found was a three branched fork of a small sumac that was about 1/2" in diameter below the fork, I had hit it right at the fork. it was roughly fifty yards from were I was standing when I shot.

Of course I had to cut it off with my knife and save it, you couldn't have centered it more precisely with a drill press. It was second year growth, woody but still pretty soft.

Robert

[Blammer]

IF your FIRST shot is through brush, you may want to wait for a better opportunity.

IF your second or more shots is through brush because you're after a wounded animal, it's a good thing to know how your bullet will react.

On my last hunt, I was sort of in a position I HAD to shoot through whatever was there to get my deer. It was dark where I was aiming and I was lucky in that my 'brush' was a 4" dia pine tree. :)

[303Guy]

Bullet deflection is to do with the impulse of a force as the bullet strikes the obstruction. The faster the bullet the higher that impulse and the lighter the bullet the greater the effect of that impulse. A spitzer is less stable than a round nose in flight so might yaw more plus it might strike a small obstruction on the angle of its nose while a round nose has less angle at the same point. So, a faster bullet imparts and looses more energy to an obstruction than a slower bullet would.

Taking it to extremes would be a shot I took at a small critter in a tree with fine leaves and terminal branches - wattle. I could see the head and the tail so there was no mistake where the body was. I missed. A week later the same thing happened to the same critter only this time enough boolit fragment got him to disable him. A 308 had no problems nailing him through the light branches. This critter had half his skin grazed away by the branch and leaf fragments that struck him the first time as well as the second time. We're talking a bullet that failed to reach its target less than a foot behind the beginning of the leaves! Lesson learned.

[williamwaco]

Of course that is true. The situation I am faced with is that a buddy of mine is asking me to make him some round nose reloads with copper jacket bullets as opposed to the normal loads I make him that use spitzers. He is convinced that round nose bullets are not deflected near as badly as spitzers when shooting through brush.




I live in the Texas brush country. I have hunted in brush all my life. I can tell you one thing with absolute certainty. NO bullet is predictable when fired into brush. If it hits anything more dense than a leaf - IT IS GOING TO DEFLECT. Whether one bullet or the other is not relevant. If it hits a branch a foot away from a deer's shoulder you have a dead deer.

If it hits a branch ten yards away from the deer, you do not. Spitzer, Round Nose, Flat Point doesn't matter.


That is assuming hunting calibers and game weight bullets. If you are talking about light weight bullets at high velocity, that is an entirely different matter. Most of them will not reliably make it through a tuft of grass.


You are correct but if you have read this thread, you should realize that you are not going to change his mind. If he is paying the bill, load him what he wants. ( Or better yet don't load him anything. Sooner or later loading for other people IS going to get you into trouble. )



Merry Christmas.

[crabo]

One thing also to remember is the math. The closer your bullet is to you, when it deflects, the farther the point of impact will be from point of aim. The closer to the target it deflects, the smaller the difference between poi and poa.

[Sonnypie]

It was dark where I was aiming and I was lucky in that my 'brush' was a 4" dia pine tree. :)

You have to finish the story, Blammer....

You shot,
the tree fell,
And it clubbed the deer to death. :lol:

:kidding:

[MBTcustom]

Now thats funny! I dont care who you are!

[firefly1957]

I have had a 180gr SBT bullet fired from a 30-06 change direction by 30 degree when it hit a 3/8" oak sapling it was tumbling like a buss saw after that.

[1Shirt]

An interesting thread! Given all the data, opinion, counter opinion, testing, theory, etc. a clear shot is always preferable. If you HAVE to shoot thru brush, the closer the better, and the bigger the projectile the better. And this subject will continue to be argued!
1Shirt!:coffee:

[Sonnypie]

An interesting thread! Given all the data, opinion, counter opinion, testing, theory, etc. a clear shot is always preferable. If you HAVE to shoot thru brush, the closer the better, and the bigger the projectile the better. And this subject will continue to be argued!
1Shirt!:coffee:

I've gone home more than once empty handed because I wouldn't take a shot.
Then again, I've had Buck Fever so bad I missed the mountain the deer was on, too.
I couldn't believe how bad that miss was! (300 Savage, iron sights, about 50 yards)
That was a huge muley that will forever live in my mind.

[Canuck Bob]

For me if I can't see and hit fur I don't shoot. Still, it is important to understand deflection. I have played around with my 444 and in non-scientific testing I did think it was better at penetrating bush than my 7 mm Mag was. That thing was far too willing to ricochet for my tastes. I once tried varmint hunting with my 243 and deer bullets for practice. I quit real fast because of the tendency to ricochet. I have no idea if there is any corelation between ricochet and deflection. I will try out my 54 flint next time I shoot it in a safe canyon with some bush around.

Larry's results are very interesting. I often wonder if my lethargic 1-38 twist helps the big 44 bullet in my Marlin stay on track. I'm always amazed at the rpm of high velocity bullets and the long ones seem prone to wobble easier if disturbed.

[Larry Gibson]

As I said in the earlier post it's always best to have a clear shot, I think we can all agree on that. I believe Ross found as i have that with large bore bullets they do want to plow through and keep going relatively straight. I can say for sure that the Lee C457-500-FN when cast hard and driven at 2100 fps will plow through a lot of limbs that will deflect lessor bullets.

Larry Gibson

[longbow]

Not sure if this is still of interest but I said I would dig and find the info so I did and here it is.

My memory isn't quite as good as I thought it was... wait a minute, what was I saying?

In any case, both articles on bullet deflection were published in Guns & Ammo.

Article by Mike Venturino June 1989:

- Mike used rows of dowels of 3/8" and 1/8" (different tests)
- cartridges used: .308 Win; 6mm Rem; .45-70
- the target was set up initially at 5' behind the rows of 3/8" dowels
- group sized from all cartridges showed approx 1 1/2" to 2 1/2" but the .308 & 6mm keyholed while .45-70 didn't
- then 7.63 x 30 FMJ was tested to see if the soft points were the problem ~ it keyholed too
- other designs of .45-70 bullets were tested including spitzer and all flew straight
- dowels moved to 15' from gun and 135' from target ~ even .45-70 missed the target
- dowels changed to 1/8" results the same

Article by Ross Seyfried August 1990:

This one was actually for rifled shotguns and slugs not rifles

- Ross used elm branches bunched in front of the target so little regularity in branch size hit
- a variety of slugs were used with all showing deflection
- worst was the .50 cal. BRI sabot slug which keyholed
- best was round ball
- Brenneke slugs did reasonably well with some horizontal spread

So, the short story is that if the brush is close to the animal then the bullet/boolit may hit near the aiming point but long bullets/boolits will still likely keyhole so will not perform as designed. Large heavy (& slow?) bullets/boolits may do the job only if the brush is close to the animal.

Even the big slow bullets and slugs were affected enough to say that brush busting is not something one should be doing with any gun/bullet in my opinion.

FWIW

Longbow

[turbo1889]

Flat wad-cutter nose is best of all:

http://www.ddupleks.lv/EN/articles/show/m32-bush-test