PDA

View Full Version : Wfn, wln, lfn?



subsonic
01-29-2012, 11:20 AM
I'm ordering a mould from LBT for my 5.5" Bisley .45 colt.

I am ordering a 340gr plain base. I want this mould for hunting, so I want a decent meplat, with accuracy to 150yds being my #1 requirement.

I am hung trying to decide on nose shape and nose length. Veral's suggestion for my goals is a .450" nose LFN.

Anybody agree or disagree and have a good argument as to why?

If you have pictures of a WLN from one of Veral's moulds, please post it. I am curious about what kin of front driving band they have outside the case. My storebought Cast Performance WLNs are .449" immediately in front of the crimp groove, and get smaller from there. I would assume this is so they will chamber in guns with undersized throats and that his moulds will yeild a full diameter driving band for alignment.

Lloyd Smale
01-29-2012, 11:40 AM
stick with an lfn. Its a good killer and probably the easiest design to work with.

Whitworth
01-29-2012, 11:42 AM
Can't go wrong with the LFN. Give it a try.

subsonic
01-29-2012, 12:07 PM
What do y'all think about nose length? I'm conflicted here as well.

The best chunk of lead this gun has ever flung was the CP 335gr WLNGC with .400" nose.

These would land in a circle less than 3.5" on a good day from the bench @50yds. I'd really like to get groups like that @100yds from this gun.
My 300gr WFNGCs from an LBT mould were close, but not quite as accurate as thos CP boolits..

Any theories on how much lead should be in the case vs outside?

It seems like I have always had better accuracy with a little shorter nose for whatever reason.

freedom475
01-29-2012, 12:07 PM
+1 LFN....DON"T buy the WFN if you plan to shoot it very far, They will not shoot! John Linebaugh proved that to me when he saw that I had a bunch of them loaded...He walked over to me and said "Those wont fly"; "prove me wrong" ... He was SO right.

subsonic
01-29-2012, 12:12 PM
Is 150yds "very far"?

I won't shoot them past that, and likely will never shoot them at game past 50yds. I only chose 150 to make sure they are plenty stable out to 100 and cover my butt if I made a slight range estimation error.

Interested to see what 'ol Jim haS to say, as he has shot his own breed of WFNs way out yonder with groups that are borderline questionable for a precision bolt gun.

subsonic
01-29-2012, 12:17 PM
+1 LFN....DON"T buy the WFN if you plan to shoot it very far, They will not shoot! John Linebaugh proved that to me when he saw that I had a bunch of them loaded...He walked over to me and said "Those wont fly"; "prove me wrong" ... He was SO right.

What gun and load were you shooting when they didn't fly? I think the slower twist in some guns might be a contributing factor in this.

freedom475
01-29-2012, 12:19 PM
Jim is the only guy I have known that has gotten them to shoot....I would NOT buy the wfn ever again...and the idea that they kill game better is probly a dream that is just not true...is "Deader" really a word??..:redneck:

subsonic
01-29-2012, 12:21 PM
Roun' herr we sez mo dedder!

I think faster kill might be the right wording.

If we coul find some of those deer compsed of wet newsprint or gellatin, we could prove it.
But you'd need to shake a lot of spices on those buggers!

freedom475
01-29-2012, 12:28 PM
It was a Freedom Arms...but John said that they wouldn't fly in anything he had tested... He said he saw a video that someone had sent him and you could actually see the boolits start buffeting and then slice way off to the side.

The theory is that they are not destableizing due to a too slow twist...But rather, they are catching too much wind accros there nose and being forced to buffet and tumble or slice.

When I say these won't fly, I am not talking about groups opening up a little. At 100 yards+ they would flat change direction and coarse...we are talking about misssing by 30 yards or more from shot to shot, this is huge...and then one will go exactly to the top of the front sight...lol.

It was a total joke to watch them land somewhere that your gun wasn't even pointed... Completey unpredictable.,

subsonic
01-29-2012, 12:36 PM
Wow. Interesting.

I wonder if boolit length affects it?

I don't know if you saw my thread on my deer from this year, but what you describe is what happened INSIDE my deer. A broadside shot at less than 20yds into the ribs and liver and 2 boolits exited the hams. A 3rd shot to the neck exited a front elbow. Strange stuff. This was with the 400gr Lee WFN copy from my .475 BFR at about 1300fps.

white eagle
01-29-2012, 12:36 PM
Tom from Accurate Molds has a whole slew of
45 cal molds
some specifically designed for the colt
I have used a bunch
great quality molds and craftsmanship
check him out

Lefty SRH
01-29-2012, 12:41 PM
Tom from Accurate Molds has a whole slew of
45 cal molds
some specifically designed for the colt
I have used a bunch
great quality molds and craftsmanship
check him out

I'll second this!

http://www.accuratemolds.com/catalog.php?page=7

subsonic
01-29-2012, 12:56 PM
Another note to add.

I have fired those 300gr WFN mentioned above as well as my 359-160 WFNs from my 686 at 100yds. Both made round holes and grouped roughly 2x what they did at 50yds. So I can say that I have not seen what you describe at 100yds. But I can't say that it never happens either.

44man
01-29-2012, 01:07 PM
I have a few left, WLNGC but they are loaded. They are 335 gr.
I have had several 1" groups with them at 75 yards and killed deer just over 100.
They have a .370 meplat and right above the crimp they are .449.
The LFN has a little larger meplat but still has a long nose. It should also work fine.
The 335 is the very best at 1160 fps and the Lyman 452651 that is supposed to weigh 320 gr or so comes out 347 gr for me. I use the same load and it does 1167 fps.
A 340 should work fine.
The thing with the Ruger .45 is the 1 in 16" twist so if you push to real high velocity trying to stretch range, it will be spun too fast. It is just as bad if you load it down.
Yes I shoot a lot of WFN boolits and shoot them far, out to 400 yards.
The boolit I hit 1" targets at 100 with is a WFN or close at 76%, with my 45-70.
Loading to stability is what works.

subsonic
01-29-2012, 01:08 PM
It was a Freedom Arms...but John said that they wouldn't fly in anything he had tested... He said he saw a video that someone had sent him and you could actually see the boolits start buffeting and then slice way off to the side.

The theory is that they are not destableizing due to a too slow twist...But rather, they are catching too much wind accros there nose and being forced to buffet and tumble or slice.

When I say these won't fly, I am not talking about groups opening up a little. At 100 yards+ they would flat change direction and coarse...we are talking about misssing by 30 yards or more from shot to shot, this is huge...and then one will go exactly to the top of the front sight...lol.

It was a total joke to watch them land somewhere that your gun wasn't even pointed... Completey unpredictable.,

I would like to hear more about the circumstances when this happened.
What velocity, gun, range, boolit? What was the temperature?

I wonder what the heck caused it? That is so weird.

I want to be clear that I'm not doubting this, I just would like to figure it out so I can be sure to avoid it.

subsonic
01-29-2012, 01:11 PM
I have a few left, WLNGC but they are loaded. They are 335 gr.
I have had several 1" groups with them at 75 yards and killed deer just over 100.
They have a .370 meplat and right above the crimp they are .449.
The LFN has a little larger meplat but still has a long nose. It should also work fine.
The 335 is the very best at 1160 fps and the Lyman 452651 that is supposed to weigh 320 gr or so comes out 347 gr for me. I use the same load and it does 1167 fps.
A 340 should work fine.
The thing with the Ruger .45 is the 1 in 16" twist so if you push to real high velocity trying to stretch range, it will be spun too fast. It is just as bad if you load it down.
Yes I shoot a lot of WFN boolits and shoot them far, out to 400 yards.
The boolit I hit 1" targets at 100 with is a WFN or close at 76%, with my 45-70.
Loading to stability is what works.

I have fired all but 2 of my CP 335gr WLN boolits. They ALWAYS outshot the 300gr WFNs in this gun. So that's where I'm headed. I refuse to buy more of those at the outrageous prices they are charging now, and think that a no-compromises boolit will outshoot them if I keep my QC in check on my casting. I doubt I can make them worse than CP did... some were missing lube half way around and others had wrinkles. I shot them and they were not what I would call obvious flyers.

My goal is about the velocity you're talking about, but from my 5.5". I was able to get there with the .4" nosed CP's, so I am sure I can get there with a .45" nose 340

subsonic
01-29-2012, 01:16 PM
Anybody else say wiff-en, will-en, and elf-en to themselves when they talk about these?

The elf-en must be best as they are made by elves, which are magic, right?

Nabisco must not be pleased with those dang Keebler cookie cooks slacking off designing boolits.

:mrgreen:

subsonic
01-29-2012, 01:34 PM
I have a few left, WLNGC but they are loaded. They are 335 gr.
I have had several 1" groups with them at 75 yards and killed deer just over 100.
They have a .370 meplat and right above the crimp they are .449.
The LFN has a little larger meplat but still has a long nose. It should also work fine.

Did you mean smaller meplat?

freedom475
01-29-2012, 02:29 PM
I was shooting at the John Linebaugh seminar in Cody WY when this happened. The first thing that happened to me was when I sat down at the range and John walked over and asked what I was shooting? Then he said "Those won't shoot, prove me wrong".

I hoped he was wrong, and I started shooting....he was right and his "blanket statement" must mean that this is something pretty common knowledge for him to say that before I even fired my first shot....Lucky for me he took pitty on me and gave me some of his personal ammo (LFN's) to shoot so that I could enjoy the games with everyone else.

The gun was a 6" FA83 475L
The boolit was a 420WFN GC, Lyman#2 alloy, HT to 22BHN, LBT Blue lube.
The load (i don't remember exactly) but it was enough A4100 (Enforcer) to get me somewhere around 1100 or 1250fps? (I chronoed the load to find the best ES) The load seemd to shoot good enough when I paper plated it over the hood at 25 and 50 yards, so I loaded every brass I had with this load and headed to the seminar.

Weather..it was cold, rainy and windy...probly around 40-50 degrees.

Maybe this load was still hitting well at 100yards, But we didn't go to the seminar to shoot close range. But the load went real bad when it went bad and I don't think it was much past 100yards.
The distance we were shooting was Far... we were shooting metal targest from 200yd Chicken, then the 300 pig, 400 turkey and the 500 ram, various tagets at 6,7,800 and then the buffalo was at a 1000.

subsonic
01-29-2012, 03:31 PM
Thank you for typing/sharing all of that!

98Redline
01-29-2012, 08:02 PM
I can't comment on the WFN performance out past 100 yards however at 100 the Beartooth WFNs I am shooting out of my .44 will keep a 4" group when the gun is sandbagged and I do my part.

I do agree that the LFN profile will probably provide better aerodynamics for longer shots and JL is probably right on the money, however at 100 and in, the WFN profile works perfectly.

PacMan
01-29-2012, 08:56 PM
I would go with the LFN for sure. I am shooting a 335 grain one in my 454 Puma and the accuracy is amazing.
No scope on the gun so a reall group size is hard to say but at 50 yars where my eyes work best they go into one large hole. At 200 yards they will wear out a quart oil bottle when i do my part and adjust the sights for that range.

dubber123
01-29-2012, 09:16 PM
http://i254.photobucket.com/albums/hh83/dubber123/IMG_0011.jpg I think velocity affects the WFN quicker. The smaller paper group on the left is with a 440 gr. WFN from an LBT mould. When I shot it daily, it averaged about 1-1/4" or so at 50 yds. It is still accurate enough for the 200 meter plate at our club, but my start velocity is just under 1,350 fps. I tried shooting the same boolit at 800 fps., and it grouped about 24" at 50 yds.

stubshaft
01-29-2012, 09:20 PM
Even Veral admitted that the WFN wasn't much for accuracy out to 100yds. I am with the LFN crowd for ease of accuracy and killing power.

BTW - Nice groups Dubber.

dubber123
01-29-2012, 09:37 PM
The LEE 400 gr. is more of a LFN design, and is accurate even with loads as slow as 550 fps. I have several WFN moulds, and like them but the longer nose, slightly smaller meplat designs do seem more flexible. I'm just saying don't wholesale dismiss the WFN's, they just seem to require more speed to hold accuracy at longer ranges, at least in my experience. The slow twist of my F/A and the heavy for caliber boolit is probably partially to fault also.

Lloyd Smale
01-30-2012, 07:06 AM
I was at that seminar and watched that movie. It was a real eye opener. It wasnt just done with one wfn bullet either. He tested many of them and to watch them move like a pitcher throwing a curve ball was eye opening.
It was a Freedom Arms...but John said that they wouldn't fly in anything he had tested... He said he saw a video that someone had sent him and you could actually see the boolits start buffeting and then slice way off to the side.

The theory is that they are not destableizing due to a too slow twist...But rather, they are catching too much wind accros there nose and being forced to buffet and tumble or slice.

When I say these won't fly, I am not talking about groups opening up a little. At 100 yards+ they would flat change direction and coarse...we are talking about misssing by 30 yards or more from shot to shot, this is huge...and then one will go exactly to the top of the front sight...lol.

It was a total joke to watch them land somewhere that your gun wasn't even pointed... Completey unpredictable.,

Whitworth
01-30-2012, 08:11 AM
+1 LFN....DON"T buy the WFN if you plan to shoot it very far, They will not shoot! John Linebaugh proved that to me when he saw that I had a bunch of them loaded...He walked over to me and said "Those wont fly"; "prove me wrong" ... He was SO right.

A number of years ago, Ross Seyfried tested a number of bullet nose profiles and he was seeking a true MOA load. It was the WFN that got him there. Remember, if it doesn't come from Veral Smith and LBT, it probably ain't a WFN, LFN, or WLN (not a true WFN, LFN, or WLN). And there's more to it that merely a meplat percentage.

LBT-style is the second most misused term in cast bullet design, behind "Keith-style." How many bullets are called Keith-style and they don't really resemble a true Keith? Yup, they're a semi wadcutter, but from there the similarities end.

Ed K
01-30-2012, 09:06 AM
Veral will readily admit that if long-range accuracy is the goal, then LFN is the way to go but I do not believe Veral has ever conceded that the WFN has any accuracy issues at handgun hunting range which in my book is not a Keith 600yd shot. If the discussion is to include that then sure, forget about the WFN. I am not too anxious to give up killing power however so that I'm always at the ready for a shot like that.

Whitworth
01-30-2012, 09:58 AM
What do you consider a long range shot? If the purpose of the bullet is for hunting, how many of you guys will be taking 600 yard shots? At normal hunting distances with a revolver (let's say out to 150 yards -- which is still farther than most are willing to shoot), there is nothing wrong with a true WFN.

white eagle
01-30-2012, 10:32 AM
What do you consider a long range shot? If the purpose of the bullet is for hunting, how many of you guys will be taking 600 yard shots? At normal hunting distances with a revolver (let's say out to 150 yards -- which is still farther than most are willing to shoot), there is nothing wrong with a true WFN.

trueism
considering a handgun(revolver)is a short range tool
a 150 yd shot is a long long poke
[smilie=2:

44man
01-30-2012, 10:38 AM
Did you mean smaller meplat?
The WLN would be the smallest meplat, the LFN in between and the WFN would be a little larger but a shorter nose.
Yet if you look at pictures of boolits, so many look exactly the same but just a few thousandths more or less meplat. Some have straight truncated cone noses and others have rounded ogives yet are named the same. The designations alone tell little and you really need to hold a bunch in your hand.
I never had any of the latter to measure though since I started making my own molds and I don't know how to name what I come up with. Are some of mine true WFN or are some LFN?
All I know is that as I add a little to the meplat, I see no change in the way they shoot. Some of mine go 83% and I don't think it is needed for deer.
My .500 JRH boolit is 83% and just yesterday I shot it 3 times, and a neighbor shot it once. He was here to shoot a few shotguns so I took my .500 too.
I set up a 2 liter coke bottle of water at 100 yards and set up my steel pig. I shot from the bags and blew the bottle sky high. I let the neighbor shoot the pig and he hit it after I told him how to shoot the gun.
I then made a high shoulder hit on it off hand.
Then moved back to 200 yards from bags, estimated hold over and made a perfect center shoulder hit.
4 shots, four hits.
Someone has to explain to me why an 83% meplat will go off course! :veryconfu
After shooting my neighbor told me he had never before shot a revolver or any handgun. :bigsmyl2:
When he seen the bottle explode he said "Oh my God." Of course he said the same about the recoil! [smilie=s:

Whitworth
01-30-2012, 10:50 AM
Actually, the WLN and the WFN share the same meplat size, the WLN is just longer nosed.

44man
01-30-2012, 10:58 AM
One thing all of you should try for fun.
Start with a heavy boolit in the .44 with a certain percentage meplat at a certain velocity and shoot a gallon jug of water at 100 yards.
Now step to a little heavier boolit with the same percentage meplat in the .45, same velocity and shoot another jug.
Now go to the .475 and then the .500. Keep meplat percentage and velocity the same for all.
It will teach you something about energy and more would be wanting the .475 and .500 JRH for longer ranges.
They also shoot much flatter then the .44 and .45 even though the boolits are larger and heavier.

44man
01-30-2012, 11:20 AM
Actually, the WLN and the WFN share the same meplat size, the WLN is just longer nosed.
I have two boolits here I just measured, a WLN and a WFN.
The WLN is 78% and the WFN is 83%.
I then measured nose length percentage to overall boolit length and both are 46%.
I found a WLN in another caliber and the meplat is 79.6% and the nose is 40%.
All are CP boolits.
There is a difference.
It is why I say you can't go by designations unless you have true LBT boolits in hand.

Whitworth
01-30-2012, 11:23 AM
I have two boolits here I just measured, a WLN and a WFN.
The WLN is 78% and the WFN is 83%.
I then measured nose length percentage to overall boolit length and both are 46%.
I found a WLN in another caliber and the meplat is 79.6% and the nose is 40%.
All are CP boolits.
There is a difference.
It is why I say you can't go by designations unless you have true LBT boolits in hand.

That is directly from Veral. Actually, a true WFN is right around 81%. You're the one who calls his own bullet designs WFNs, etc. The designations only really apply to LBT bullets.

freedom475
01-30-2012, 11:24 AM
Well I have no idea "Why" the WFN will destablize and fly off coarse, but I saw it with my own eyes. And this was after John Linebaugh made the prediction...but it doesn't matter much to me either, I just want my boolits to shoot and stay on coarse for the full ballistic arch. I want them to fly straight and kill well...the LFN does just fine in the killing dept.

Long range to me is ..well, how far away can I see the boolit impact and make adjustment to put the next one closer or "on" target. Here in Montana it is pretty easy for me to find places that I can shoot a mile..... shooting at coyotes at a mile away is a B"BLast. And yes, I have seen coyotes rolled at over a mile away. I have places that you can overlook huge expanses of land and see the fence lines..most of the fence lines are either full sections (1mile squares) and some are split into 1/4's or 1/2's.

I shoot a 265g GC keith out of my 44's at 1500fps
A 430gr LFN PB out of my 475L at 1150fps
A 450gr. Kieth out of my 500S&W at 1040fps

Bottom line is that I want to be able to shoot my pistol like a sharps rifle...NO WAY do I want to to worry about the range that it stops working and becomes un'predictable:confused:. I only get 2"- 6" inchs of control, influence, and "english" to put on my boolit...then it is on it's own....

I tend to believe that if it's flight "falls-apart"somewhere/anywhere along it's flight, then the boolit was NEVER sent on it's way with the proper english.

The LFN and even the Keith seems to kill just fine, so I just can't believe anyone would even entertain the idea of shooing a boolit that has a pre-set range that it stops working. And the WFN can't kill much better...just how big do you think an animals heart is?? Can it fill a garden hose with blood??? For how long?? and the LFN will make "this big" of a hole and make it a Whole lot deeper than the WFN.:popcorn::mrgreen:

Whitworth
01-30-2012, 11:27 AM
You didn't say what your distance limitations are hunting with a revolver. I don't in any way feel that I have some limit imposed upon me when using WFNs. Also, if hunting with open sights, really how far of a shot are you willing to take?

44man
01-30-2012, 11:48 AM
Any boolit needs a certain spin no matter the velocity.
It is why the slower twist guns fall apart once boolit weight goes too high. Velocity can't go any faster so the long boolit is under spun.
Speed up the twist rate and you might be shooting the boolit TOO fast so you need to lower the velocity for the proper spin rate.
Ignoring twist rates is a common trait of revolver shooters.
It has less to do with meplat percentage then anyone thinks.
An unstable boolit starts that way at the muzzle. Outside influence then will gain control over some distance, close or farther depending on how bad the boolit was started.
Some are so out of touch they would shoot 500 gr boolits from the .44 if they could make them chamber! :roll:

Whitworth
01-30-2012, 11:54 AM
Well I have no idea "Why" the WFN will destablize and fly off coarse, but I saw it with my own eyes. And this was after John Linebaugh made the prediction...but it doesn't matter much to me either, I just want my boolits to shoot and stay on coarse for the full ballistic arch. I want them to fly straight and kill well...the LFN does just fine in the killing dept.

Long range to me is ..well, how far away can I see the boolit impact and make adjustment to put the next one closer or "on" target. Here in Montana it is pretty easy for me to find places that I can shoot a mile..... shooting at coyotes at a mile away is a B"BLast. And yes, I have seen coyotes rolled at over a mile away. I have places that you can overlook huge expanses of land and see the fence lines..most of the fence lines are either full sections (1mile squares) and some are split into 1/4's or 1/2's.

I shoot a 265g GC keith out of my 44's at 1500fps
A 430gr LFN PB out of my 475L at 1150fps
A 450gr. Kieth out of my 500S&W at 1040fps

Bottom line is that I want to be able to shoot my pistol like a sharps rifle...NO WAY do I want to to worry about the range that it stops working and becomes un'predictable:confused:. I only get 2"- 6" inchs of control, influence, and "english" to put on my boolit...then it is on it's own....

I tend to believe that if it's flight "falls-apart"somewhere/anywhere along it's flight, then the boolit was NEVER sent on it's way with the proper english.

The LFN and even the Keith seems to kill just fine, so I just can't believe anyone would even entertain the idea of shooing a boolit that has a pre-set range that it stops working. And the WFN can't kill much better...just how big do you think an animals heart is?? Can it fill a garden hose with blood??? For how long?? and the LFN will make "this big" of a hole and make it a Whole lot deeper than the WFN.:popcorn::mrgreen:


By the way, I was just over on your website and you make some really nice holsters.......

subsonic
01-30-2012, 11:59 AM
By the way, I was just over on your website and you make some really nice holsters.......

Definitely agree!

freedom475
01-30-2012, 12:09 PM
You didn't say what your distance limitations are hunting with a revolver. I don't in any way feel that I have some limit imposed upon me when using WFNs. Also, if hunting with open sights, really how far of a shot are you willing to take?

I prefur to think of hunting limitaions set by the situation or circumstances....Not a set distance. Elmer Keith had a "situation that "needed" addressing when he shot the wounded muley at 600yards with his 44.

Ethics are different...We do our best to make clean and fast kills...We all want to go out peacefully in our sleep, like Grandpa, not screaming in horror like the other 3 people in his car!:mrgreen::Fire:

freedom475
01-30-2012, 12:13 PM
Definitely agree!

Thank you guys!!! I try hard.

subsonic
01-30-2012, 12:15 PM
Well, since all I have ever shot are WLN and WFN, I guess I'll try a LFN. It cannot shoot worse than the WFN or WLN from what everyone is saying. And I think the meplat will be plenty for whitetails. Although I could use the standard answer... get both!

Whitworth
01-30-2012, 12:19 PM
You won't be disappointed with the LFN.

bobthenailer
01-30-2012, 01:07 PM
I have the LBT 300 grgc LFN for my 454 casulls its super accurate form any of my FA revolvers . Ive personaly have shot numerus 1 inch or better 5 shot groups at 50 yards and 2 inches at 100 yards from a bench with a 7x scope .

Whitworth
01-30-2012, 02:01 PM
I have the LBT 300 grgc LFN for my 454 casulls its super accurate form any of my FA revolvers . Ive personaly have shot numerus 1 inch or better 5 shot groups at 50 yards and 2 inches at 100 yards from a bench with a 7x scope .

Can't argue with that!

subsonic
01-30-2012, 04:07 PM
They also shoot much flatter then the .44 and .45 even though the boolits are larger and heavier.

Wonder what the BCs of these boolits are? It's always higher as caliber gets larger, contrary to what is intuitive.

jandbn
01-30-2012, 09:01 PM
That is directly from Veral. Actually, a true WFN is right around 81%. You're the one who calls his own bullet designs WFNs, etc. The designations only really apply to LBT bullets.
Whit,
Not looking to start a "he said..." type of discussion, but based on a quote from Veral, meplat % would determined by diameter?

Quote from Veral on GBO (http://www.go2gbo.com/forums/index.php/topic,222266.0.html): The WFN meplat is .090 smaller than body diameter while the LFN meplat is .125 smaller than body diameter.

subsonic
01-30-2012, 09:06 PM
For a .452" boolit, both work out about the same.

My .359-160 WFN meplat measures about .270"

jandbn
01-30-2012, 09:48 PM
For a .452" boolit, both work out about the same.

My .359-160 WFN meplat measures about .270"
Mathamatically based on Veral's statement, the smaller the diameter, the smaller the meplat %.

40289

44man
01-30-2012, 10:15 PM
So it looks like my boolits have larger meplats then the LBT's!
Whit, you can no longer call my boolits "almost WFN."
Funny, they should not shoot at all and should flip-flop! :holysheep

subsonic
01-30-2012, 11:19 PM
And Jim, just wait til you see what Whitworth is going to do to his JRH! Blasphemy!
:-)

Seriously though, anybody even have a SWAG about BC on these suckers?

LEE says .271 for the 400 gr .475 and .296 for the 440gr .500.
The 310 .44 comes in at .218 and the 300gr .45 is listed as .233

Doesn't seem like enough to produce the flat trajectories some have witnessed.

"Low" velocity just doesn't follow all the rules.

subsonic
01-30-2012, 11:27 PM
.475 whisper anybody?

tek4260
01-30-2012, 11:46 PM
I agree with 44man that most people will not load these heavy boolits to a velocity high to stabilize them regardless of WFN/WLN. I would get a boolit design that leaves you plenty of case capacity to get the velocity you need to stabilize them.

Lloyd Smale
01-31-2012, 07:31 AM
Like freedom i do alot of long range shooting. I dont shoot live animals with open sights any farther then a 100 yards so i will consede that at those ranges a wfn will work. I will say this though. Most of the loads that do the best out long range in my revolvers are the same loads that give the best accuracy at 25 and 50 yards. Also most loads that open up and go weird way out there are allready opening up at a 100 yards. Loads like that may shoot an inch a 25 yards but by the time there out to a 100 your looking at 8 inch or larger groups. Ive shot alot of deer bear and pigs with sixguns. Mostly all with cast bullets and although its tough to make a blanket statement on killing power due to the fact every animal reacts a bit different. I will say though that i sure havent seen any differnce in killing power between wfns lfns and swcs on game. Hit them in the right spot with any of the designs and you have a dead animal. Hit them to far back and no cast bullet will compensate. Personaly i like swcs and keiths. Im a bit old school but will be the first to admit that they to suffer from the flight issues. Some fly as well as a lfn but then ive seen some that fly even worse then a lfn. Thing is you cant just look at a bullet and figure out which are going to fly and which arent. One thing ill say is ive got alot of molds. Lots of all three of those designs. Ive got one drawer where the molds i consider duds goes. Bullets that will only shoot well in say one gun with one load or bullets that dont fly well or bullets i just dont like. Theres not a single lfn in that drawer.

subsonic
01-31-2012, 08:16 AM
I agree with 44man that most people will not load these heavy boolits to a velocity high to stabilize them regardless of WFN/WLN. I would get a boolit design that leaves you plenty of case capacity to get the velocity you need to stabilize them.

Out of the 6 shot .45 Rugers, the 335WLNGC is only going about 1150. An it appears to be stable to 100yds. That seems slow to me. But the Ruger has a faster twist.

44man
01-31-2012, 09:45 AM
Out of the 6 shot .45 Rugers, the 335WLNGC is only going about 1150. An it appears to be stable to 100yds. That seems slow to me. But the Ruger has a faster twist.
That is true and is what I get. I tried to speed it up for better impact on deer but groups started to open with just 1/2 gr more powder and just got worse.
The penetration with the .45 is amazing and Whit seen it go through a 16" tree, cut a large grape vine and vanish in the ground. It kills deer just fine where it is at to 100 yards by sighting at 75 yards. My only problem with my Vaquero is the sights.
Lloyd is right and I don't see any difference between the meplats on deer either. Where I see the most change is when you go to a larger caliber and a heavier boolit. The difference between the .44 and the .475 at the same velocity is stunning. :holysheep
I have killed a ton of deer with the WLNGC boolits, they work. I am not going to tell anyone they need a WFN.
I try to explain that when I make a cherry and cut, file the nose, I just go by what looks right to me. I have no problems shooting any meplat I wind up with. That has never been a problem but I have WLN molds that GG's, etc, were wrong and they will NOT shoot. Those molds will be re-cut to larger calibers at some point.
There is not a thing wrong with a Keith for hunting, I just can not get them as accurate as I want.
Deer season is only part of it and is short so when I shoot the rest of the year, I use the same loads. I want the best accuracy I can get for long range and hitting tiny targets. I never change loads. I am only guilty of making light loads for the .44 and .45 once in a great while for close shooting at cans, etc. I go to a lighter Keith.
There is no sense down loading a 300 gr+ boolit!

subsonic
01-31-2012, 04:26 PM
Interesting that everybody focuses on meplat percent or diameter, but the guys who have shot a lot of game with them say there isn't much difference.

YOU ARE JUST NOT SHOOTING THE ONES MADE OF NEWSPAPER OR GELLATIN I TELL YOU!

frank505
01-31-2012, 05:46 PM
I have tried wfn's lfn's, and wlnfngxyzor whatever they are called. IT IS NOT THE TWIST RATE OR VELOCITY that makes wfn's and wlnetc fly like ****. We have shot the same bullets in a 454 from 700 to 1700 fps with the same results. In the video at JL's seminar, you can see the bullet do some weird jumping around until it disapears from the viewfinder. Ask Lloyd Smale. There are lots other bullet designs that will not shoot at much over a hundred yards. Ask John Linebaugh about 45/310 Keiths in his rest gun shooting an 18" inch group at a thousand yards. All measured distances.
I shoot a lot of long distance rocks all year and even hit a coyote once in a while at stupid distances. Do I shoot anything other than a Keith bullet? NO, hell to get a 475 and 500 Linebaugh bullet that will shoot distance we turned samples on a lathe until we could hit the ram at 385 yards. Worrying about meplat % is a waste of time, you have to hit em in the right spot. We have killed whitetail and mule deer does with loads from 720 fps to 335 Keiths at 1200 fps. Which works better? I dont know as they are all dead. I have killed quite a few bison with 45 and 500 Linebaugh. Yup the 500 works better, does the 45 kill them? Of course, might take a little longer. These are bison cows at 900 to 1000 pounds, for bulls I use a 416 or better yet the 505 Gibbs with cast bullets usually.
Antelope die with a 310 Keith too, just have to HUNT harder.
If lbt has such a mystical great idea, WHY, if you apply his "formula" for an lfn it comes up to what the 44/250 keith meplat has had since 1930 something?????????
Just some ramblings of a sixgunner.

subsonic
01-31-2012, 06:31 PM
Thanks for sharing that. That's a lot of typing!

18" @ 1000 is quite good for a precision bolt rifle. I would think just the wind would be a nightmare at that range. But as mentioned above, these slow boolits don't follow the "ballistic rules".

Living in Missouri, I just don't have the opportunity to shoot that far. My heavy barreled .308 has never been shot past 100yds.

MaxEnergy
01-31-2012, 09:03 PM
If lbt has such a mystical great idea, WHY, if you apply his "formula" for an lfn it comes up to what the 44/250 keith meplat has had since 1930 something?????????
Just some ramblings of a sixgunner.


the meplat of a true "keith" bullet is quite a bit smaller than an LFN. if it has a bigger meplat, ill bet it aint a true keith

jwp475
01-31-2012, 09:26 PM
I have tried wfn's lfn's, and wlnfngxyzor whatever they are called. IT IS NOT THE TWIST RATE OR VELOCITY that makes wfn's and wlnetc fly like ****. We have shot the same bullets in a 454 from 700 to 1700 fps with the same results. In the video at JL's seminar, you can see the bullet do some weird jumping around until it disapears from the viewfinder. Ask Lloyd Smale. There are lots other bullet designs that will not shoot at much over a hundred yards. Ask John Linebaugh about 45/310 Keiths in his rest gun shooting an 18" inch group at a thousand yards. All measured distances.
I shoot a lot of long distance rocks all year and even hit a coyote once in a while at stupid distances. Do I shoot anything other than a Keith bullet? NO, hell to get a 475 and 500 Linebaugh bullet that will shoot distance we turned samples on a lathe until we could hit the ram at 385 yards. Worrying about meplat % is a waste of time, you have to hit em in the right spot. We have killed whitetail and mule deer does with loads from 720 fps to 335 Keiths at 1200 fps. Which works better? I dont know as they are all dead. I have killed quite a few bison with 45 and 500 Linebaugh. Yup the 500 works better, does the 45 kill them? Of course, might take a little longer. These are bison cows at 900 to 1000 pounds, for bulls I use a 416 or better yet the 505 Gibbs with cast bullets usually.
Antelope die with a 310 Keith too, just have to HUNT harder.
If lbt has such a mystical great idea, WHY, if you apply his "formula" for an lfn it comes up to what the 44/250 keith meplat has had since 1930 something?????????
Just some ramblings of a sixgunner.



When talking long range the term is subjective. What is long for some is not for others. If one wants to shoot to 600 yards or more then the WFL or WLFN is not the bullet for you. But to revolver hunting distances the WFN/WLFN is a very accurate bullet

Ross Seyfried used a 45 caliber WFN to shoot MOA 5 shot groups at 100 yards. Nothing wrong with tat knd of accuracy.

A TRUE KEITH SEMI WAD CUTTER DOES NOT HAVE THE SAME SIM MEPLAT AS A TRUE LBT. A 44 caliber KEITH SEMI WAD CUTTER has a meplat of a .240, which is not large

Seems that everyone making a semi wad cutter today is calling them "Keith" and that is simply not correct. The same has happened to LBT makers have similar but not exact bullet and yet they call them "LBT" which is not correct. Some do not perform nearly as well as a "true" LBT

frank505
01-31-2012, 11:01 PM
I hunt with a revolver all the time and will not be limited by a bullet that falls out of the sky. A TRUE KEITH HAS THE SAME MEPLAT AS LFN IF YOU WOULD BOTHER TO READ THE FELONS BOOK AND USE HIS FORMULA. Come out west and try your ideas and experience failure of your notions of what guns and bullets. Its real easy to see when your eyes are open.

MaxEnergy
01-31-2012, 11:04 PM
I hunt with a revolver all the time and will not be limited by a bullet that falls out of the sky. A TRUE KEITH HAS THE SAME MEPLAT AS LFN IF YOU WOULD BOTHER TO READ THE FELONS BOOK AND USE HIS FORMULA. Come out west and try your ideas and experience failure of your notions of what guns and bullets. Its real easy to see when your eyes are open.


your just wrong. the keith bullet has a much smaller meplat than an lfn. we hunt out east to. the keith boolit is great for punching paper

jwp475
01-31-2012, 11:16 PM
I hunt with a revolver all the time and will not be limited by a bullet that falls out of the sky. A TRUE KEITH HAS THE SAME MEPLAT AS LFN IF YOU WOULD BOTHER TO READ THE FELONS BOOK AND USE HIS FORMULA. Come out west and try your ideas and experience failure of your notions of what guns and bullets. Its real easy to see when your eyes are open.



I have some of the original Keith 44 bullet and they are certainly dot not have the same size meplat as an LBT, You are clearly mistaken and it is obvious that you have an axe to grind against LBT

As to hunting with a revolver well I have a bit of experience in that regard

http://i33.photobucket.com/albums/d62/jwp475/00000009.jpg


http://i33.photobucket.com/albums/d62/jwp475/parker_buffalo.jpg


http://i33.photobucket.com/albums/d62/jwp475/HuntingPicturesfrom2006079-1.jpg


http://i33.photobucket.com/albums/d62/jwp475/HuntingPicturesAndBuddy014.jpg


http://i33.photobucket.com/albums/d62/jwp475/HondoHunt2008033.jpg


As to your comment about long range accuracy the LFN is your "Huckaberry"

When it comes to hard cast bulets make mine an LBT

Tar Heel
01-31-2012, 11:29 PM
Holy smokes folks. Just place your shot well. I doubt a .000032 difference in a meplat makes all that much difference in the real world. I never heard a hog I heart shot say..."jeez....now that was a real hard bullet. I'd bet it was 22 on the BHN scale with a 73% meplat."

subsonic
01-31-2012, 11:30 PM
Well, it's pretty clear that there are differing opinions on this, and we are all free to disagree in this here great country. Please keep this thread un-locked....

felix
01-31-2012, 11:33 PM
The 44 Keith has a 62 percent meplat; the 44 LBT LFN has a 70 percent. Those measurements are as close as I can measure because of the barely rounded corners on each.

Like Lloyd says, I prefer the LFN types because of fast loading in revolters, and for fast loading into lever guns. Also, the LFN shoots just as well when using naked sights. The 44man has more or less proven that each boolit is its own boss, and generic style has little to do with accuracy up close. As the range increases, the style becomes immensely more important. For example, 1000 yard boolits/bullets have fairly constant specs.

... felix

frank505
01-31-2012, 11:39 PM
do the flippin math, .430 minus .130 equals .300 right?And that is exactly what the meplat measures on 429422 mold I bought from Elmer Keith himself. So exactlty how wrong am I??????????????????Geez, all the animals, deer and coyotes must have suddenly died of old age right as Keith bullet hit. Hmmm, another miracle. Please dont be brainwashed, read the felons book several times and you will start to pick out the lies. Read Sixguns several times and tell me where there are any lies.
I quit the 44 years ago and went to the 45 Colt and 500 Linebaugh with a a 475 six shot that took some years in the middle. Gave the 475 to Good Son and never looked back. Shot keith bullets in all of them and enjoyed some hunts that are so special in the memory bank.
Oaks said this years ago, "we have killed more game animals than Elmer Keith did, or wrote about" and he is correct. Ask lloyd, oaks and I have tried about every bullet we could and have gone back to a Keith bullet for all our shooting. Wonder why?

jwp475
02-01-2012, 06:16 AM
I can read a dial caliper and a REAL KEITH 44 BULLET AIN'T .300 , but a WFN is .339

Shoot enough game as I have and Ray Charles could see the larger wound channel produced by the LBT bullets

Lloyd Smale
02-01-2012, 07:29 AM
anymore its tough to call what molds are true keiths and which are not. I guess my take on it is if you dont have a mold elmer owned you really dont have a keith. As to swcs i will say this. You guys that think they dont kill need to go out and do some hunting. Ive killed more deer bear pigs and buffalo with swcs then i have with all other designs combined.

I have yet to loose an animal shot with a swc and have shot enough to know they kill just as dead and just as fast as an lfn. I know in my life ive shot at least a 50 deer with handguns a good number of pigs and bear and a half a dozen buffalo. As to claiming wound channels being bigger it would take a dial caliper to tell the differnce as your not going to see the differnce in a swc and an lfn with your eyes. Keep in mind you cant judge by two animals shot. Ive looked at many shot with both and am a bullet wound junky so i look closely at every animal. My dad will chuckle at me out at night digging through a gut pile and sticking my head up into a cavity. If you were claiming a wfn shows a bit bigger wound channel id have to agree but the differnce in a typical lfn and a typical wfn is like saying a 250 savage gives a bigger wound channel then a 243. Not only that but to be fair you have to factor in velocity, alloy, bullet placement ect. Ive yet to see two deer in my life hit in the EXACT same place by both using the exact same alloy at the exact same speed when it hit.

Bottom line anyway is dead is dead. I will bet my entire lifes savings (which isnt much) that ANY animal hit with a swc lfn or wfn out of a 44 mag or 45 colt in the vitals will die. Use any combo of those bullets or calibers and it might make the differnce in the animal making one or two more steps but thats about it.

Jwp i know youve shot alot of animals but i personaly know frank and hes shot a slug of them too. Probably more then i have. He like me can be an obstanate sob and definately has some predudices when it comes to bullet designs (some i dont agree with) but ill say this about frank. He is flat out has the most real world knowlege about cast bullets and what works and what doesnt of anyone ive met in person. If he says it you can about take it to the bank as ive yet to hear one once of bs come out of him. Hes also a personal friend of John Linebaughs and lives close to him and has worked with him for years and I doubt anyone here will argue the writings of John and lots of his opinions come from testing and hunting frank and him did. I dont know if all of you know it but frank is the owner of MT Baldy bullets. This is more then a hobby for him its his life. He lives eats and breaths cast bullets.

MaxEnergy
02-01-2012, 07:49 AM
He is flat out has the most real world knowlege about cast bullets and what works and what doesnt of anyone ive met in person. If he says it you can about take it to the bank as ive yet to hear one once of bs come out of him.

except the dimensions of the keith bullet. maybe he ought to get a new caliper if he cant see that the meplat of a lfn is bigger than a real keith. its obvious he doesnt care for veral smith, but discredits himself with his ascertion about keiths having the same meplat as lbts lfn. owning mt baldy dont make him right - obviously

winelover
02-01-2012, 08:50 AM
Jeez---you guys sound just like the Republicans vying for the nomination. Use what works for you in your particular suituation with your chosen gun. No two scenarios are exactly alike. There is no correct answer.

I have no issues with SWC's for hunting. I fact my first hand gun whitetail was with the RCBS 44-240 GC, cast from Lyman #2 alloy. Took out two one inch saplings before it hit the deer. Dead deer, 65 yards later.

Since then, I've used WFN's , RNFP's and even JHP's. First and last unrecovered deer, was shot with a JHP in thick cover. Don't use em any more!

I've settled on the RNFP's as my prefered design choice. They work in my guns (Redhawk & Marlin carbine) equally well at the ranges I tend to harvest deer at. YMMV.

Winelover

MaxEnergy
02-01-2012, 09:55 AM
Jeez---you guys sound just like the Republicans vying for the nomination. Use what works for you in your particular suituation with your chosen gun. No two scenarios are exactly alike. There is no correct answer.

Winelover

thats not the point. he falsly states that a keith - a true keith - has the same sized meplat as a lfn. it doesnt. not arguing what works better

PacMan
02-01-2012, 10:16 AM
If a person is going to talk about a man he should have enough respect to refer to him by his name not felon. You do not have to like him or follow his writings but you can use some amount of respect.
Dwight

freedom475
02-01-2012, 10:38 AM
If you guys had "Any" idea who you were talking to you would be quiet and humbly thank Frank for sharing his wisdom... As he said he bought his "Kieth" directly from Elmer himself!

Now I don't know what SWC you guys are measureing, but if it is the RCBS 240, it is nowhere near a Keith design.

And yes the true LBT LFN measures right around 70-73% nose...the lyman 429244 Keith measures right at 70%!..same size. Just where do you think Veral came up with that number??


thats not the point. he falsly states that a keith - a true keith - has the same sized meplat as a lfn. it doesnt. not arguing what works better

felix
02-01-2012, 10:59 AM
Isn't the 244 a Thompson design? My "Keith" is the 421. ... felix

MaxEnergy
02-01-2012, 11:09 AM
Isn't the 244 a Thompson design? My "Keith" is the 421. ... felix

exactly. y'all are measuring the wrong boolit. do we know who were talking to? yup. does he know who he is so disrespectfully talking about? the fellon? should call veral and thank him for any advice he gives

44MAG#1
02-01-2012, 11:17 AM
sorry

frank505
02-01-2012, 11:24 AM
I wrote the wrong mold number, 429422 is the hollow base version of 429421. The mold came in red cardboard box which is still in nice condition. Too bad I dont shoot a 44 much. Maybe I will cast some 429422's in 16:1 and 22 of 2400 and kill something.

MaxEnergy
02-01-2012, 11:40 AM
sorry

how come you deleted your post?

PacMan
02-01-2012, 11:46 AM
I have two LBT 44 molds. One is a LFN and the other a Keith bullet.
Real hard to measure so i quit trying.I will tell you that when i put them nose to nose the LFN has a larger mepla.Not a lot but it is larger and both molds came from Veral.

In discussion with him he told me that the meplat of the Keith was almost the same as the LFN but a little smaller.I dont remember the numbers he gave me on the Keith offhand.

I would only guess that the diffrence is miscule in nature as far as killing of game.
The OP was about accuracy and i have little to offer in the handgun dept. but in my rifles the LFN has out shot everything i have tried.

My very limited experience between the two is that the LFN seems to be less alloy make up and hardness critical than the Keith if that makes any sense.Maybe it is just my rifle.

Frank
02-01-2012, 12:07 PM
The original thread asked which smoothly curved ogive design to pick, not the sharp shoulder design. Veral's book discusses the benefit of the smooth ogive design, the smaller meplat for long range and wider meplat for stopping power. But too much of the ladder, Veral explains, is not good. He provides a formula for the reader to calculate. Best of all, the book is put together in a concise and precise format, which really is genius and useful, not typical of the volumous and cumbersome material we more often than not see from other sources on the topic.

tek4260
02-01-2012, 01:31 PM
Will a LFN kill better than a SWC if the animal is hit at, say a 79deg angle instead of a 90deg angle?

Whitworth
02-01-2012, 03:02 PM
Will a LFN kill better than a SWC if the animal is hit at, say a 79deg angle instead of a 90deg angle?

Only between 82.5 and 87 degrees. All bets are off at a 90 degree angle. :bigsmyl2:

jwp475
02-01-2012, 08:55 PM
Keith was very particular about his bullet design. Lyman produced molds exactly as Keith design the bullet and latter changed the grease grooves from Keith's square groove design to a "U" groove design if memory serves. Keith wrote Lyman that is they changed anything including the grooves to not call the bullet a "Keith"

I f we do not maintain what is and is not a "Keith" then we will not know what someone is talking about other than it is a "semi wad cutter" in these discussions. I have a very old Lyman mold that produces a 250 grain "Keith" semi wadcutter and the meplat as near as I can measure is about .240/.242 as near as I can measure the meplat

I have and shoot semi wad cutters that have WIDE meplats and they work very well and leave large wound channel, but make no mistake they are not "Keith" semi wad cutters and that is the point

jandbn
02-01-2012, 11:42 PM
This does not really relate to the OP's question, but Glen has some good info on the .44 SWC: http://www.lasc.us/Fryxell44SWC.htm

and the .45 SWC: http://www.lasc.us/Fryxell45KeithSWC.htm

44man
02-02-2012, 11:32 AM
Isn't the 244 a Thompson design? My "Keith" is the 421. ... felix
That is correct!
Both great in their time and Veral is not to be ever put down. All of them advanced the revolver to what it is today.
Elmer was my start with the revolver. Veral knows boolits.
If I remember, Veral had tax problems. As much as the government cheats all of us, I do not blame him at all. Half the people in this country pay no taxes, why should a business man support them?
I am on SS with a small pension left and I have to pay the feds and the state every year. I have zero deductions and can not meet the standard deduction if I lie like crazy.

jwp475
02-02-2012, 06:54 PM
This does not really relate to the OP's question, but Glen has some good info on the .44 SWC: http://www.lasc.us/Fryxell44SWC.htm

and the .45 SWC: http://www.lasc.us/Fryxell45KeithSWC.htm



Very good info in the links

Lloyd Smale
02-03-2012, 07:01 AM
Im in the same boat about exactly. Differnce is you and I pay ours.
That is correct!
Both great in their time and Veral is not to be ever put down. All of them advanced the revolver to what it is today.
Elmer was my start with the revolver. Veral knows boolits.
If I remember, Veral had tax problems. As much as the government cheats all of us, I do not blame him at all. Half the people in this country pay no taxes, why should a business man support them?
I am on SS with a small pension left and I have to pay the feds and the state every year. I have zero deductions and can not meet the standard deduction if I lie like crazy.

Lloyd Smale
02-03-2012, 10:20 AM
Well pal your dragging a man through the weeds that is 3 times the man veral is without even actually knowing him.
exactly. y'all are measuring the wrong boolit. do we know who were talking to? yup. does he know who he is so disrespectfully talking about? the fellon? should call veral and thank him for any advice he gives

Lloyd Smale
02-03-2012, 10:33 AM
Id like to know what your calling a real keith. If its the 429421 that bullet has been made in at least 3 variations over the years so to call it a true keith isnt quite correct. The rcbs kt is close but not exact either. Like i said to measure a true keith you about have to have one of elmers molds. i will say that my 429421 molds do have a slightly smaller metplat then some of my lfns but its tough to really call because veral cuts his molds with a lathe and not a cherry so if you have say one of his 280 .44 lfns and wear it out and need a new one your not going to get the exact same bullet the next time. Ive seen enough difference between two of his molds cut at differnt times to make load developement go out the door. Sorry guys but i dont worship on the alter of veral smith. Ive had as many of his molds through the years as anyone here and have casted as many bullets out of the as anyone here and just never saw the greatness some have. For the same price you can buy a ballistic cast mold that is 5 times the mold any lbt is. Glorified lee mold with a beer can spruce plate imo. Compare one side by side with a mihec, ballistic cast or noe mold or even a 4 cav lyman and tell me what im paying for. If you want to look at a top shelf aluminum mold you should have been around when BaBore was making them. Like noes aluminum molds at least they had steal inserts for the alignment pins and a real spruce plate.
thats not the point. he falsly states that a keith - a true keith - has the same sized meplat as a lfn. it doesnt. not arguing what works better

MaxEnergy
02-03-2012, 10:46 AM
Well pal your dragging a man through the weeds that is 3 times the man veral is without even actually knowing him.

well pal, you are dragging veral through the mud. do you know veral? you made the claim this gentleman is 3 times the man veral is and youve based your opinion on what? y'all jumped to his defense when he was measuring the wrong bullet. i dont worship at verals alter either, but to call him a felon and basically claim he hasnt contributed anything to cast bullet tech is nonsense and you know it. im not trying to start anything here, but you are taking issue with me defending veral, meanwhile you are defending your buddy frank. we can agree to disagree

by the way we are discussing design not mold quality. so how did you determine that these molds are 5 times better? what are the parameters? did you set the parameters or did some commission? is there a mathematical equation? just trying to figure out how you decided these molds were 5 times better than any lbt mold

2shot
02-03-2012, 01:06 PM
I'm slow at work. Thanks for the entertaining reading.

:coffeecom

Piedmont
02-03-2012, 03:31 PM
I don't really have a horse in this race. It has been obvious for a long time that Veral is selling meplats as far as handgun moulds go, and I think he goes overboard with the WFNs. My two Lyman 429421 moulds have .280 meplats, my one .44 LFN has a .300" meplat, just as his catalog states.

I would happily trade any non-H&G mould for an LBT and own probably ten LBTs. To call them "glorified Lee moulds with a beer can sprue plate" is just absurd. The man who said that got into an argument on Veral's forum a few years back. Lloyd was answering questions to Veral for him, because Lloyd knows so much. Naturally Veral took exception since he and Lloyd disagree on things and Veral pays Graybeard for forum space. Ever since I have noted that Lloyd takes shots at Veral whenever opportunity presents.

Everyone deserves to know that backstory.

44MAG#1
02-03-2012, 04:57 PM
Piedmont:

I can vouch for what you said about the little tiff between Smith and Smale. Kinda like the Hatfields and McCoys.

Lloyd Smale
02-03-2012, 05:07 PM
I never said he didnt know cast bullets. Just the oposite. He is very knowlegable. But he just cant keep his pride and his sales pitch seperate from his actuall knowlege. Ask him and every other mold maker in the US doesnt kow a thing and that his ideas are the only correct ones. ANYONE thats delt with him will tell you that. On this fourm you will learn one thing if nothing else. NOBODY has the entire answer. There are many ways to tackle the same problem and get good results. Veral did do alot for bullet casting though.

He got us out of the dark ages and crushed some of the myths that were preached for years about cast bullets. He believes in harder bullets then most in his alloy recomendation and so do I. I also think he did a great service comming up with the lfn but should have shelved the wfn and wlfn when he quit making keiths years ago. I see he has keiths back which is kind of comical because hes done nothing but critisize that design for years. Frank on the other hand would never badmouth his competitions products. As a matter of fact hes good freinds with most in the industry. Hes a good old fashion Christian man with old fashion values. Not some nut case that thinks our goverment has secret plans for our destruction or is responsible for tilting the worlds axis. Sorry, he does know bullets but hes a nut case!

As to mold quality i can only give MY opinion. Ive used both for over 20 years and have a pile of wore out lbts but have yet to wear out of ballistic cast mold. EVERYONE of the ones i own and that includes old h&gs that were the same thing still cast as good as the day i bought them. If your the type that thinks running 10lbs of bullets out of a mold is a casting session and will last you all year then there fine for you. But in my opinion and it is just my opinion they dont hold up any better then a 6 cav lee. If you doubt my comparison id suggest you ask others who have used both or buy a ballistic cast mold yourself.

do i like the man. NO! did i get into a tiff with him yes. Why? Because i had to audacity to question some of the bs he was spouting about how his molds were hands down superior to anything on the market and so were his bullet designs. Sorry but i stuck my foot in it because i felt he was doing a diservous to new caster that ask a few questions and didnt know the differnce between a sales pitch and actual good advice. By the way that did happen on Greybeards forum and if you go there youll see even though i disagree with veral and dont pass on many good words about him there Greybeard still respect me enough that ive been a moderator on one of his fourms for over 10 years. So jump down my throat all you want. Im not the one who claims to have all the answers and theres lots of old timers here that will vouch for my integrety and honesty.

QUOTE=MaxEnergy;1573921]well pal, you are dragging veral through the mud. do you know veral? you made the claim this gentleman is 3 times the man veral is and youve based your opinion on what? y'all jumped to his defense when he was measuring the wrong bullet. i dont worship at verals alter either, but to call him a felon and basically claim he hasnt contributed anything to cast bullet tech is nonsense and you know it. im not trying to start anything here, but you are taking issue with me defending veral, meanwhile you are defending your buddy frank. we can agree to disagree

by the way we are discussing design not mold quality. so how did you determine that these molds are 5 times better? what are the parameters? did you set the parameters or did some commission? is there a mathematical equation? just trying to figure out how you decided these molds were 5 times better than any lbt mold[/QUOTE]

44man
02-03-2012, 05:49 PM
Lloyd, I don't know how you did it? I never went against anyone and only posted a few times but when I showed a picture of a boolit too soft and slumped taken from a gun rag, I was booted off. I actually praised Greybeard for knowledge.
I never posted a single time with Veral.
NO, I do not agree with everything Veral says either. Experience when hunting trumps theory. But I respect many anyway.
One I get sick of wears a hat like Elmer, holds a six gun wrong, shoots 20 yards and only records the best 4 out of six shots. He really thinks he is another Elmer but is only a tick bite on the butt.
Guess who? [smilie=s:

PacMan
02-03-2012, 08:38 PM
Say Loyld could you explain to a newbie like me what is wrong with the LBT sprue plate?

I would also be willing to take some of those wore out lbt molds off your hands if they are calibers i can use.

Just as info Ballistic Cast is going to lathe cutting their molds like a lot of other makers are doing. Oh by the way how many makers can you call up and get the mold cut the size you want?

I have owned three Lee molds and to say they are as good as LBT is pur nonsense.

Uncle R.
02-03-2012, 09:20 PM
Wow.
<
I have a lot of respect for Veral.
I don't own a single LBT mould so I can't say about their quality. I just never happened to buy one - or need one - but his book gave me a big boost in my understanding of what works and why in the use of cast bullets.
<
I'll admit that Veral comes across a little "over the top" now and then, call it sales pitch or passion for his product - or "nut case" if you must. I still respect his accomplishments.
<
I also have a lot of respect for Lloyd.
And I have a lot of respect for Jim.
<
I've been pouring and sizing and loading and shooting for around thirty years now and I still don't consider myself an expert on the subject of cast handgun bullets. I do like to think that I've learned enough to tell a knowledgeable opinion from a manure spreader - but I'm also old enough to understand that even guys with loads of genuine experience can disagree.
<
Did I mention that I have a lot of respect for Lloyd?
And Jim?
And Veral?
<
Uncle R.

Lloyd Smale
02-03-2012, 09:30 PM
Dont know the answer Jim. Hes allways like me and you know me good enough to know that i say it like it is and dont hold back. guess ill take a break from this one pal so the veral groupys dont get there pantys in a wad any more. "Experience when hunting trumps theory" couldnt have said it any better and i do have alot of respect for whitworth and jwp475 because they too actually do get out and kill things with handguns.
Lloyd, I don't know how you did it? I never went against anyone and only posted a few times but when I showed a picture of a boolit too soft and slumped taken from a gun rag, I was booted off. I actually praised Greybeard for knowledge.
I never posted a single time with Veral.
NO, I do not agree with everything Veral says either. Experience when hunting trumps theory. But I respect many anyway.
One I get sick of wears a hat like Elmer, holds a six gun wrong, shoots 20 yards and only records the best 4 out of six shots. He really thinks he is another Elmer but is only a tick bite on the butt.
Guess who? [smilie=s:

PacMan
02-03-2012, 10:08 PM
Say Loyld could you explain to a newbie like me what is wrong with the LBT sprue plate?

I would also be willing to take some of those wore out lbt molds off your hands if they are calibers i can use.

Just as info Ballistic Cast is going to lathe cutting their molds like a lot of other makers are doing. Oh by the way how many makers can you call up and get the mold cut the size you want?

I have owned three Lee molds and to say they are as good as LBT is pur nonsense.

No reply or answer?

jwp475
02-03-2012, 10:48 PM
Say Loyld could you explain to a newbie like me what is wrong with the LBT sprue plate?

I would also be willing to take some of those wore out lbt molds off your hands if they are calibers i can use.

Just as info Ballistic Cast is going to lathe cutting their molds like a lot of other makers are doing. Oh by the way how many makers can you call up and get the mold cut the size you want?

I have owned three Lee molds and to say they are as good as LBT is pur nonsense.





I have to agree that is not calling it like it is

Piedmont
02-04-2012, 02:16 AM
I think Veral's sprue plate is the best in the business. My support of Veral here is not for all his theories but because his moulds are some of the best casting I have ever used. They are just a joy to cast with. His sprue plate lube is best too. It isn't used like the Bullshop, which is great too, but is touched at the pivot screw. It immediately lessens the friction.

I have gotten in on lots of group buys here and love that we are getting designs we want at sizes we want. Mountain Molds and Accurate Molds are great for ordering exactly what you want. With Veral he knows best (grin) so you get his designs but can tell him what weight and diameter to give you.

We are living in the golden days for getting the moulds me want. Opposing that are all these restrictions on lead now.

Lloyd Smale
02-04-2012, 07:12 AM
Ill address the spruce plates as one last post. I like a good HEAVY spruce plate one that stays down on its own. I dont care for the stay down fingers on lbts as they break contantly and need to be tweeked often. Lbt molds in my hands also seem to get scared up on top fast. I often wondered if it wasnt the fact that the spruce plates are thin and get hot to fast and then wipe lead off the base of the bullet which then scratches the mold top on the next filling. that and the recesses in the plate proably act like a scraper. Between the tops of the molds getting beat up and the alignment pin holes eventualy getting hogged out they just dont last in this house. I could probably live with the spruce plates but theres no reason not to put some steal inserts into the alignment pin area of a mold that costs over a 100 bucks. Maybe im a bit more ham fisted them most but i dont think ive got an alumium mold of any kind that has more then 5000 bullets or so casted out of it that isnt beat up in some way and maybe you can make them last but im not the only one that beats them up. Ive got a buddy whos casted even longer then i have and we lone molds back and forth and his lbts dont look a bit better then mine.

Ive got balllistic cast, 4 cav lymans and even rcbs molds that ive owned since the first year i started casting over 30 years ago that still cast as good as the day I bought them. Actually i have to ask too why anyone would prefer an aluminum mold to a steal one unless you have no arm strenght. Only advantage to them is there easier to machine. As to the lee molds. I have no use whatsever for there 2 cav molds. But there 6 cav molds hold up for me just as well as any lbt ive owned. Like i said i dont care for any aluminum mold. there fine for a rifle shooter or a handgun shooter that might shoot a couple hundred rounds a month but they just dont hold up for a high volume handgun shooter. At least not this one. Even taking my feelings for veral out of this im not going to spend a 120 bucks on an aluminum mold when i can buy something like a ballistic cast for the same price. Im on a fixed income now and my money means alot more to me now and i tend to buy stuff that will last the rest of my life. Now im done. You guys can buy what you want and worship who you want. Its a free world. Its 6am and the casting pot is heating up and ive got to load a couple boxes of 4570s for dad and then run a pot or two. Id rather cast then fight anyway.

PacMan
02-04-2012, 08:43 AM
Thanks for the reply Loyld. As you statedi a steel mold will last a life time if cared for and i would never argue that fact.And no i do not cast large volumes as some do so i guess my needs arent like some others. I will say that the first mold that i got from Veral two years ago has cast m 4000+ bullets without one problem and i have several others and to date have never had and problem with any of them.

Do i worship at LBTs door? No way or any other mortal mans for that matter. Do i take offense to others dislike of his molds?Not at all. When some one attacks anothe man or his product do i want to know why? Yeap and the reason is we can all learn for others experience when they are fair without a bone to pick.

By the way i like a good steel mold also and i contacted Balsti cast about a 44 mold but never got a good feeling about what dia. the mold would cast. That is when i was told that they was buying a lathe and would be able to cut their molds any dia. i wanted.

By your way of thinking they will no longer be able to duplicate a mold but whose counting the number of makers that are using lathes to cut molds anyway.

I have a new Noe 360 mold that needs broken in and seeing as its raining i should get to it.
Dwight

44MAG#1
02-04-2012, 09:22 AM
I will say this. There are some people that can tear up anything. That is the reason I won't lend even a pocket knife to anyone for a minute unless I am there with them.
Some could probably tear up a wrecking ball with a claw hammer.
Molds are the same way. Some casters are heavy handed and brutal to molds and any reloading equipment.
Just because someone can wear out or demolish a mold doesn't mean someone else will even casting the same amount of bullets.
Without being there watching someone use the molds one will actually never know.
But the possibility exists that some are heavy handed no matter what they use.
Another thing. I am not the sharpest knife in the drawer but if I see two molds one a steel mold and one an aluminum mold one thing comes to mind. I will be more careful with the aluminum mold thantthe steel mold just because I learned ar an early age that aluminum is not as tough as steel.
It is not a thing it takes an Einstein to figure out.

Lloyd Smale
02-04-2012, 11:35 AM
well i loaded 40 4570s and ran a pot of lead this morning. Still have got some 2506 and 257 wby that need loading today. I guess one thing you need to keep in mind with me is this isnt a once a week hobby for me. Its at least 2-3 hours every day out in the loading room. Yes i may be rough on molds. No, sorry i wasnt raised by Einstein and never claimed to be the most intelegent peg in the board. . when im casting i want to crank out bullets and not look at the scenery or smell the roses or contenplate the theroy of relitivity. Its the same reason i quit loading my high volume stuff on a single stage press 20 years ago and why ive used a star sizer for about 20 years. When im casting im usually casting at least two molds and sometimes 3 or 4 at a time. I DONT WANT to have to baby a mold. I doubt youll see many high volume comercial casters wasting a dime on a aluminum mold. Some may own them for low volume stuff but thats about it. Im kind of a hypocrit ive got probalby a dozen lbt molds and twice that many lee 6 cav molds and a few noe and babore aluminum molds. Why? because i couldnt get that bullet in a steal or brass mold and if im buying another mold that is going to cost me over a 100 bucks its sure not going to be aluminum. I guess the easiest way to settle this is you cast the way you want with the molds you like and so will I;)

44man
02-04-2012, 11:45 AM
Dont know the answer Jim. Hes allways like me and you know me good enough to know that i say it like it is and dont hold back. guess ill take a break from this one pal so the veral groupys dont get there pantys in a wad any more. "Experience when hunting trumps theory" couldnt have said it any better and i do have alot of respect for whitworth and jwp475 because they too actually do get out and kill things with handguns.

I do things different all the time, whether it is archery or whatever, I do the testing mainly to prove some things wrong. Archery has gone 100% the wrong direction as has the super heavy revolver boolits.
I do have issues with Veral's opinions of meplats and effectiveness regarding boolit hardness. By the way, he HATES "boolit."
I respect those that have contributed but I will never hang on someones coat tails either.
At one time or another, I rub EVERYONE wrong and I don't care who they are. It is never a reason to get angry.
A man is not doing right by going by another mans opinions. You must find what works for you by getting out of the box. To stop learning, thinking for yourself and repeating what someone else wrote just makes noise when you pull the trigger.

tek4260
02-04-2012, 01:37 PM
I have to agree with Lloyd. Durability is a pretty good percentage of quality, and holding holding a Mihec in one hand and an LBT in the other, the nod goes to Mihec. Same with Lyman and RCBS when making the comparison. Even Stevie Wonder can see the difference. This isn't to bad mouth a LBT, but I think we don't need to fool ourselves into thinking it will last when compared to anything except a Lee.

44MAG#1
02-04-2012, 05:48 PM
This is the post that the OP made.

"I'm ordering a mould from LBT for my 5.5" Bisley .45 colt.

I am ordering a 340gr plain base. I want this mould for hunting, so I want a decent meplat, with accuracy to 150yds being my #1 requirement.

I am hung trying to decide on nose shape and nose length. Veral's suggestion for my goals is a .450" nose LFN.

Anybody agree or disagree and have a good argument as to why?

If you have pictures of a WLN from one of Veral's moulds, please post it. I am curious about what kin of front driving band they have outside the case. My storebought Cast Performance WLNs are .449" immediately in front of the crimp groove, and get smaller from there. I would assume this is so they will chamber in guns with undersized throats and that his moulds will yeild a full diameter driving band for alignment. "

No where was the quality of his molds mentioned. Just a bashing and name calling session of someone and something as I see it.
Just like the posts made by some concerning Freedom Arms and their products.
A bashing session.

jwp475
02-04-2012, 11:03 PM
I have LBT moulds for my 475 that I have had since 1988 and it is still going strong. I see nothing what so ever wrong with them. The ones I have cast excellent bullet and work as advertised

To the OP post go with Veral's suggestion and don't look back. You will not be disappointed

44man
02-05-2012, 12:06 PM
I have LBT moulds for my 475 that I have had since 1988 and it is still going strong. I see nothing what so ever wrong with them. The ones I have cast excellent bullet and work as advertised

To the OP post go with Veral's suggestion and don't look back. You will not be disappointed
I have to agree with you John. I have molds from day one, maybe 58 years, that have made hundreds of thousands of balls or boolits. I have a pile of Lee molds, Lyman, RCBS, LBT, Saeco and my home made ones. I never damaged any and if a problem comes up, fix it quick. No lead smears or top of mold gouging allowed. Close a mold gently.
Cutting molten sprues will ruin a mold. Speed casting is like cocking a SA as fast as you can. Why a mold needs to be fanned is beyond me.
Guys come to cast or shoot. I tell them to close my molds gently, wait for the sprue to harden. Never cock my revolvers fast.

johnmerry
02-05-2012, 08:04 PM
+1 LFN....DON"T buy the WFN if you plan to shoot it very far, They will not shoot! John Linebaugh proved that to me when he saw that I had a bunch of them loaded...He walked over to me and said "Those wont fly"; "prove me wrong" ... He was SO right.

Ross seyfred used a Hamilton Bowen 5- shot 45 Colt and produced 1 inch groups at 100 yard 360 WLN at 1400 fps from a machine rest.
I shot the 325 gr lfn with 13 gr of HS6 for 1025 fps it is extremely accurate and will penetrate 16 inches of wet newspaper and make a hole as big as a Nickel

subsonic
02-05-2012, 09:43 PM
Actually, I have that article and Ross did that off of sandbags.

PacMan
02-05-2012, 09:58 PM
I am not sure how many diffrent designs there are of WFN bullets but i know there is more than one. I have some that i bought several years ago and i also have a LBT 44 cal 280 WFN mold and there is a decided diffrence in the nose profile and the meplat size. Not much but some.
I will try and take some pictures tomorrow.

I think that to just say a WFN will not shoot is careless and covers to much ground in one sentence.

Lloyd Smale
02-06-2012, 07:43 AM
no doubt your right. I know 44man has had some luck with some of his designs. I guess genericaly calling a bullet a wfn is no differnt then calling a swc a keith. the only real wfn would be one that came from veral or an exact copy.
I am not sure how many diffrent designs there are of WFN bullets but i know there is more than one. I have some that i bought several years ago and i also have a LBT 44 cal 280 WFN mold and there is a decided diffrence in the nose profile and the meplat size. Not much but some.
I will try and take some pictures tomorrow.

I think that to just say a WFN will not shoot is careless and covers to much ground in one sentence.

Lloyd Smale
02-06-2012, 07:48 AM
Freedom isnt talking a 100 yards as long range. some of us shoot out 300 and beyond. For the most part about any bullet will hold up at least well enough at a 100 yards to take game. there is some exceptions but not many. If all a guy is ever going to do is whitetail hunt with a handgun a wfn isnt a bad choise. Ive even shot some one inch 50 yard groups with some of my guns using wfns. Personaly i just cant see bothering working up a load anymore for a hunting gun that doesnt also shoot well at long range though. Its nice to decide to do some long range shooting and know your gun and load is ready for it. there maybe some guys capable of taking advantage of the differnce in accuracy even at 200 yards in the hunting field but im sure not one of them. Longest ive ever shot a deer was 130 yards with a sixgun and i about considered that a stunt. Sights look pretty big on a deer at that range.
Ross seyfred used a Hamilton Bowen 5- shot 45 Colt and produced 1 inch groups at 100 yard 360 WLN at 1400 fps from a machine rest.
I shot the 325 gr lfn with 13 gr of HS6 for 1025 fps it is extremely accurate and will penetrate 16 inches of wet newspaper and make a hole as big as a Nickel

PacMan
02-06-2012, 09:15 AM
Loyld i agree. Heck i am the worlds worst pistol shot.Think i started to late in life. But i like to plink out there at longer distance and shooting a bullet/load combination you have faith in helps. When i miss as i often do i know it is the shooter not the load or bullet.
Heck i feel good when i get close.
dwight

44man
02-06-2012, 10:15 AM
Deer are TINY with open sights or a red dot. Need a scope and rest for long shots.
I have to question Lloyd about his use of wood SPRUCE plates! [smilie=s:
Yeah, my friend, it made me giggle! [smilie=w:

Whitworth
02-06-2012, 10:26 AM
SPRUCE plates! [smilie=s:
[smilie=w:

Now it is clear why they don't last long.:bigsmyl2:

Whiterabbit
02-07-2012, 12:39 AM
The thing with the Ruger .45 is the 1 in 16" twist so if you push [335 grains] to real high velocity trying to stretch range, it will be spun too fast. It is just as bad if you load it down. .

Oh man, NOW you tell me that, after loading those 315 grain LEE bullets past 454 casull velocities trying like heck to get them to work in my 16" twist barrel! Getting nowhere till I'm at 50% case capacity usage....:target_smiley:

Lloyd Smale
02-07-2012, 07:27 AM
dont know guys. Even after 55 years the wood is still pretty stiff!!

Whitworth
02-07-2012, 08:20 AM
The thing with the Ruger .45 is the 1 in 16" twist so if you push to real high velocity trying to stretch range, it will be spun too fast. It is just as bad if you load it down.


Hang on a second, I missed this earlier. The 1:15 twist rate of BFRs is "perfect," but 1:16 is somehow a compromise in the case of the .45 Colt Ruger? How is this inconsistency possible? Could there be a BFR bias?? Naaaaaaahh, not possible! :bigsmyl2:

mellonhead
02-07-2012, 08:50 AM
dont know guys. Even after 55 years the wood is still pretty stiff!!

Thanks Lloyd!! I was taking a drink of coffee while I was reading this! Needless to say there is coffee everywhere!

Toby

Whitworth
02-07-2012, 09:42 AM
dont know guys. Even after 55 years the wood is still pretty stiff!!

Yes, they have medication for this now. Sorry, couldn't resist! :kidding:

44man
02-07-2012, 10:37 AM
Hang on a second, I missed this earlier. The 1:15 twist rate of BFRs is "perfect," but 1:16 is somehow a compromise in the case of the .45 Colt Ruger? How is this inconsistency possible? Could there be a BFR bias?? Naaaaaaahh, not possible! :bigsmyl2:
You confuse caliber! :veryconfu
MR only makes one revolver in .45 Colt unless you order a special gun. It is also a .410 and has a 1 in 20" twist.
The BFR .454 is 1 in 16", where it should be.
The .475 is 1 in 15", where it should be.
The .44 shorty is 1 in 16", where it should be.
The .45 Colt Ruger can handle long, heavy boolits without pushing them to pressure extremes. It is the best for the strength of the gun. Go to 1 in 20" and you need a lighter boolit.
The reason the .44 Ruger is 1 in 20" is because the gun operates at higher pressures and velocities. The BFR .44 shorty twist is better for the short barrel.
I firmly believe that as you shorten barrels, you should speed twist because of reduced velocity.
No company pays so much attention to twist rates then MR.

Whitworth
02-07-2012, 11:32 AM
You confuse caliber! :veryconfu
MR only makes one revolver in .45 Colt unless you order a special gun. It is also a .410 and has a 1 in 20" twist.
The BFR .454 is 1 in 16", where it should be.
The .475 is 1 in 15", where it should be.
The .44 shorty is 1 in 16", where it should be.
The .45 Colt Ruger can handle long, heavy boolits without pushing them to pressure extremes. It is the best for the strength of the gun. Go to 1 in 20" and you need a lighter boolit.
The reason the .44 Ruger is 1 in 20" is because the gun operates at higher pressures and velocities. The BFR .44 shorty twist is better for the short barrel.
I firmly believe that as you shorten barrels, you should speed twist because of reduced velocity.
No company pays so much attention to twist rates then MR.

Actually, if you order a BFR in .45 Colt, it'll come from the Precision Center and it'll get the same barrel that the .454 gets -- it's what Badger supplies them with. So, the twist rate is virtually identical to that of a Ruger in .45 Colt - 1:16. It's not 1:20, so what's your point?

Lloyd Smale
02-07-2012, 12:19 PM
my wife has reminded me of this so maybe the oak is turning to pine.;)
Yes, they have medication for this now. Sorry, couldn't resist! :kidding:

Whiterabbit
02-07-2012, 12:22 PM
His original point if I read it right was that the 16" twist combined with 335 grain .452 sized bullets was perfect in the 1100 fps range. Pushed to casull velocities or above and it spins too fast.

I quoted it because it has been exactly my experience. And I wish he told me earlier, it would have saved me 50 pounds of lead!

I wish my 45 cal barrel were 1 in 20, I bet it would shoot much more like a S&W X-frame. Might be interesting to add to the WFN LFN and WLN the leverevolution style tipped-but-expanding bullet style!

44man
02-07-2012, 01:16 PM
Actually, if you order a BFR in .45 Colt, it'll come from the Precision Center and it'll get the same barrel that the .454 gets -- it's what Badger supplies them with. So, the twist rate is virtually identical to that of a Ruger in .45 Colt - 1:16. It's not 1:20, so what's your point?
The point is that 1 in 16" is better for the pressure limitations of the .45 Colt and can handle heavy boolits just fine if you don't try to turn the gun into a magnum.
The .45/.410 is 1 in 20" because it is just a medium for shot, shotgun slugs and the .45. None to work right by the way. It might be OK for slugs.
Now if the BFR .45 custom shop has the heavy cylinder like the .475 and .500, it could be loaded way up and then a slower twist might work better for average loads but the BFR .45 should be at home with real heavy boolits.
Seems as if the BFR .454 is 1 in 16" too. Is it right? Yes with HEAVY boolits over any other .454.
Looks like both can be turned into real THUMPERS. Just increase boolit weight for the added velocity to match.

Whiterabbit
02-07-2012, 01:35 PM
which begs the question, what is preferable? That 20" twist 45 colt if it can be loaded to Ruger levels can shoot 180-200 grain bullets really fast and should stabilize. And speed means energy. Including the ability to expand hard materials. Flatter shooting, it all seems advantageous.

Meanwhile shooting the heavies means a speed so slow that energy (on paper) suffers. bullets rainbow. They have to be made soft(er) to expand. Is a slow heavy bullet really better for game compared to a fast expander?

(this is a serious question from someone unused to loading heavy bullets, and intends to hunt not just kill paper)

mellonhead
02-07-2012, 01:54 PM
I'm not a big fan of light and fast! A slow heavy will out penetrate a fast light. Heavier is usually flatter shooting also.

Toby

44man
02-07-2012, 02:43 PM
which begs the question, what is preferable? That 20" twist 45 colt if it can be loaded to Ruger levels can shoot 180-200 grain bullets really fast and should stabilize. And speed means energy. Including the ability to expand hard materials. Flatter shooting, it all seems advantageous.

Meanwhile shooting the heavies means a speed so slow that energy (on paper) suffers. bullets rainbow. They have to be made soft(er) to expand. Is a slow heavy bullet really better for game compared to a fast expander?

(this is a serious question from someone unused to loading heavy bullets, and intends to hunt not just kill paper)
I much prefer a heavier boolit at the proper velocity and I have seen no flies on a heavy .45 at 1160 fps. If you speed it to 1300 or so, it is BETTER if you do not lose accuracy---there is the key, ACCURACY FIRST.
Forget flat shooting junk, any have little drop to 100 yards, just sight in a little high at 50 or dead on at 75.
The .45 with 250 to 260 gr hard cast with a good meplat would be hard to beat.
I stay FAR away from fast, light, quick opening bullets.
Even the 240 XTP from the .44 is not right and I prefer a slower opening 240 or the 300 gr XTP. I kill deer with the .44 using my 330 gr WLN and zero expansion, about 1316 fps, it is deadly.
Toss ME figures in the scrap heap, it is where energy is applied in an animal. Yes, energy is important or we would hunt with a sharp stick. Apply it wrong and you might do better with a sharp stick. [smilie=l:
The .44 and .45 are both great but you must forget the 180 and 200 gr stuff.
If you want to increase killing power, step up in caliber without changing velocity. The .475 is stunning and the .500 JRH will turn a deer inside out. It is applied energy, not wasted energy from quick expansion. Sure, the .475 will kill 3 deer in a row but it still worked in the first one and any extra energy is not a waste.
Guess what, the .44 and .45 will also kill 3 deer in a row but it still applied the right energy to the first one. The light, quick expanding bullets might not make it through the first deer and you could lose it. Energy dump is false. ME does not tell what a bullet will do and neither will velocity.
All of you should have seen my picture when shooting 14, one gallon water jugs with the .475, 420 gr WFN hard cast. It blew 4 jugs like a bomb, split 2 more and went all the way through all 14 jugs. A deer is only 2 jugs wide. Do I need extra wasted energy beyond? Darn right.

Whitworth
02-07-2012, 02:46 PM
which begs the question, what is preferable? That 20" twist 45 colt if it can be loaded to Ruger levels can shoot 180-200 grain bullets really fast and should stabilize. And speed means energy. Including the ability to expand hard materials. Flatter shooting, it all seems advantageous.

Meanwhile shooting the heavies means a speed so slow that energy (on paper) suffers. bullets rainbow. They have to be made soft(er) to expand. Is a slow heavy bullet really better for game compared to a fast expander?

(this is a serious question from someone unused to loading heavy bullets, and intends to hunt not just kill paper)

Dang, people use expanding bullets in the .45 Colt?? I found that with 335s and 360s, it doesn't leave you wanting anything......JMHO.

Whiterabbit
02-07-2012, 02:56 PM
thanks for that :)

Whitworth
02-07-2012, 03:10 PM
thanks for that :)

Sorry, I couldn't resist. :mrgreen:

44man
02-08-2012, 10:07 AM
Long, long ago I was always looking at the .44 bullets and shooting at all kinds of stuff to see expansion. It was fun and I always said "wow" what would they do to deer?
I could not deer hunt with a revolver and a deer was impossible to find in Ohio anyway. The year I had to leave Ohio they had a huge herd of very large deer and opened up handgun use.
I started on deer with the .44 here in WV so I started with the 240 XTP. Oh it killed them fine but I would examine what the bullets did and I always back tracked the deer. I would find almost no blood on the ground and I recovered all the bullets against the chest wall with double lung shots. Nice mushrooms.
The problem is that if any had gone out of sight in the thick, I might not find them plus I started to worry about quartering shots or bone hits. Some of the deer are large and I shot several doe that went over 200#.
I sent for CP, 320 gr WLNGC boolits, found accuracy was fantastic.
The first deer made 30 yards but the best part was there was so much blood on the ground, I could track on a run if I could run! :mrgreen:
Piles have fallen to the 320 and my 330 gr boolits without a loss.
The .45 has proven to be reliable with a good boolit.
The .475 was icing on the cake, deer run right into trees when hit and meat loss was minimal. Many dropped without a kick. I had one problem with the .475 at first. I relaxed too much shooting at deer and took hair off the top of a few's backs. I had to hold as tight as when target shooting and the problem went away.
Now go hunting with a light, short barrel in a huge caliber like the .500 S&W or an air weight .44 and recoil with barrel rise will over shoot animals. You will need double strength to hold the gun down.
Have a bear attack and need a one hand shot quick with those guns and you better aim at the ground. False security, bears like to use those guns for toothpicks! :popcorn:

jwp475
02-08-2012, 03:09 PM
Toss ME figures in the scrap heap, it is where energy is applied in an animal. Yes, energy is important or we would hunt with a sharp stick. Apply it wrong and you might do better with a sharp stick. [smilie=l:

The .44 and .45 are both great but you must forget the 180 and 200 gr stuff.
If you want to increase killing power, step up in caliber without changing velocity. The .475 is stunning and the .500 JRH will turn a deer inside out.

2-It is applied energy, not wasted energy from quick expansion. Sure, the .475 will kill 3 deer in a row but it still worked in the first one and any extra energy is not a waste.
Guess what, the .44 and .45 will also kill 3 deer in a row but it still applied the right energy to the first one.

The light, quick expanding bullets might not make it through the first deer and you could lose it. 3-Energy dump is false. ME does not tell what a bullet will do and neither will velocity.

3-All of you should have seen my picture when shooting 14, one gallon water jugs with the .475, 420 gr WFN hard cast. It blew 4 jugs like a bomb, split 2 more and went all the way through all 14 jugs. A deer is only 2 jugs wide. Do I need extra wasted energy beyond? Darn right.



I have no idea what you are talking about when you say "applied energy". What science is this based on? None that I am aware of.

In commentt #-1 you state "Toss ME figures in the scrap heap" OK I am with you here, but you follow up with ", it is where energy is applied in an animal. Yes, energy is important or we would hunt with a sharp stick. Apply it wrong and you might do better with a sharp stick."

First let me point out the many people do very well with a sharp stick, I believe that you use them as well with great success. Next there are many type of energy such as electrical, stored, potential, thermal, kinetic and sound is also a form of energy. The wound channel can not be predicted by "foot pounds of energy". The wound channel is created by 1-direct applied pressure 2-the amount of hydraulic pressure created (the higher the velocity the higher the hydraulic pressure) and the amount of momentum transferred. The amount of "direct applied pressure in conjunction with the frontal area of the bullet accounts for the amount of crushed tissue. A large enough amount of "hydraulic pressure" will stretch the tissue past its elastic limits causing the tissue to rip apart and adding to the volume of the wound channel, all of this in conjunction with the "momentum transfer" makes up the volume of the wound channel and the depth of penetration (length of wound channel)

Energy is never lost, therefor cannot be wasted

In number 2 of your statement again you use the phrase "-It is applied energy, not wasted energy from quick expansion". The fact is quick expansion increase the frontal area of the bullet, thus increasing the area of "direct applied force and increase the area of "crushed tissue". By quickly expanding the momentum is transferred faster and penetration decreases dramatically when compared to a slower expanding projectile or minimally expanding projectile. This is why hard cast bullet achieve the deeper penetration. The wide me-plat hard cast or jacketed (as is the case with the Belt Mountain Punch Bullets) leave a relatively larger wound channel completely through the animal


In number 3- you again talked about wasted energy and I am at a loss as to how it is wasted?

The diagram of the ballistics pendulum shows us exactly what happens with "kinetic energy" in an inelastic collision" which is no conservation of "energy" in the collision. Since "energy" is never lost most of the "energy is transformed into other forms of "energy" mostly thermal, as well as other forms such as sound, etc.


http://i33.photobucket.com/albums/d62/jwp475/BallisticsPendulum.gif


The ballistics pendulum just is an "inelastic collision" just like a bullet striking an animal is. Don't let the difference in material throw you off in understanding this

Whiterabbit
02-08-2012, 03:39 PM
I assumed that by wasted energy he meant energy transfered into the hillside rather than the animal. Not wasted as in disappears entirely. I also assumed by applied energy he meant "dissipated inside the animal", which I would imagine wouldn't be found in any science textbook.

It was a response that should have been tailored to my questions directed specifically at the terminal performance inside game, not just terminal performance with respect to the laws of physics.

I appreciated the response because the usual one is "you can't kill an animal deader" and that wasn't my question. Since it wasn't the response, it was helpful :)

jwp475
02-08-2012, 04:30 PM
I am not sure how an incorrect explaination could be helpful.

Kinetic energy as expressed in Foot pounds of energy is a calculation of mass in motion as I explained in the post above is not transferred into the animal as is often stated


Get your hands on this book, it takes a book to get the full picture


http://i33.photobucket.com/albums/d62/jwp475/DuncanMacPhearson.jpg



A 22 caliber 55 grain bullet at 3600 FPS has a calculated 1583 FT Lb Energy. A 360 grain 45 caliber bullet at 1400 FPS has a calculated 1567 Ft Lb energy. If energy was the vehicle to predict lethality then the 22 caliber would be slightly better, but it ain't the one that I am picking to stop the enraged grizzly charge to save my bacon.


Trying to explain how a bullet creates the wound channel by using "energy" to explain is just not correct

Whiterabbit
02-08-2012, 04:43 PM
I am not sure how an incorrect explaination could be helpful.

Often times I ask questions to get information I use to lead me down a path of action/experimentation, not to be handed an answer on a plate to regurgitate. What can get frustrating is when people try to solve my problems when that wasn't the point of my questioning. So how can an incorrect explanation be helpful? It can be helpful when the result is giving me direction, rather than an answer.

I make no comment on this specific case, particularly if ANYONE's explanation of anything in this thread is right or wrong, I'm just reading and enjoying. My post here only mentions my thought process in general, and my response to how any explanation, incorrect or not, can be helpful to me or anyone else.

44man
02-08-2012, 05:19 PM
I assumed that by wasted energy he meant energy transfered into the hillside rather than the animal. Not wasted as in disappears entirely. I also assumed by applied energy he meant "dissipated inside the animal", which I would imagine wouldn't be found in any science textbook.

It was a response that should have been tailored to my questions directed specifically at the terminal performance inside game, not just terminal performance with respect to the laws of physics.

I appreciated the response because the usual one is "you can't kill an animal deader" and that wasn't my question. Since it wasn't the response, it was helpful :)
That is what I meant. After the animal has the lungs, heart, etc destroyed, there is no more need for the energy the boolit has left and that is transferred to penetration.
It does not matter if the boolit goes another 10 miles or through a tree, it has done the job first.
If you ever want to see the wrong way, use a gun with a lot of ME but the wrong bullet like ball or armor piercing on an animal. They kind of zip through an animal like a sharp stick.
Go the other way and shoot a deer with a 45 gr bullet at over 4100 fps and see what you get.
There is a right place and I will not show pictures of hammers, etc.
You understand that JWP actually agrees with me that it is where and how energy is applied and the ME doesn't mean anything if all of it is on the other side of a deer or on the skin only of one side.
JWP has used my picture of hard cast damage done to a deer, yes, it is my deer! The boolit might still be going for all I know. :mrgreen:
This is far from "energy dump" because the boolit made moon orbit after doing he job.

jwp475
02-08-2012, 05:29 PM
The use of the phrase "applied energy" and using energy in the wound chanell is where we do not agree. Energy is not what creates the wound channel. Read my post above

The part about a bullet exiting not being a problem is an agreement

44man
02-09-2012, 10:07 AM
The use of the phrase "applied energy" and using energy in the wound chanell is where we do not agree. Energy is not what creates the wound channel. Read my post above

The part about a bullet exiting not being a problem is an agreement
John, a boolit still needs energy.
Applied energy just means it needs to be in the wound channel.

jwp475
02-09-2012, 06:47 PM
John, a boolit still needs energy.
Applied energy just means it needs to be in the wound channel.



Kinetic energy is simply a calculation of mass in motion, obviously if a bullet has no energy then it has no motion. If you read my earlier post it explains clearly that a bullet cannot "apply energy" to or in an animal.

jandbn
02-09-2012, 08:48 PM
This thread, as other threads often do, has veered off in tangent for the OP’s original question about nose design for best accuracy. That being said I apologize for adding more to the tangent now being discussed.

I recently asked and was given permission by the author of an essay to quote excerpts of his material in regards to terminal ballistics. The author agreed as long as links were posted to the material so the quotes are not taken out of context. I had hoped the author would agreed to including the links because I ain’t near as smart or able to communicate effectively as does the author. So in an effort to entice some of you to read the essay, I hope the quoted tidbits will whet the appetite enough to want to learn more. This essay is by far the most thorough resource of terminal ballistics I have found on line. A huge added plus is that the author is a hunter and seasoned shooter. The author has even poured his own and visited CB on occasion for load data!

The name of the essay is “Shooting Holes in Wounding Theories: The Mechanics of Terminal Ballistics (http://www.rathcoombe.net/sci-tech/ballistics/wounding.html)”. It is written by an engineer. The link to the essay is here: http://www.rathcoombe.net/sci-tech/ballistics/wounding.html. Many noted folks are mentioned in the essay. To name a few, there are Whelen, O’Connor, Taylor, Aagaard, Fackler, Linbaugh, and Veral Smith. Some of these notable folks’ information is supported, some, maybe not so much.

As would be expected of an engineer, the essay is to the point. There is a lot of data, both written and pictorial to mull over and terminology in the essay which may help alleviate misunderstanding and semantics in our threads/posts. A few of the common terms used in the essay are penetration, cavitation, momentum, meplat, and energy. However, with the exception of Section V. Analytical Modeling of Terminal Ballistics (http://www.rathcoombe.net/sci-tech/ballistics/modeling.html), the terminology is defined in understandable scientific terms, some of which we should be using in our posts to help ward off miscommunication and the ensuing squabbles that follow. Don't get me wrong, I know that there are some here who do understand the terms and terminal ballistics. This information is for those that may be unfamiliar with or just want to know.

To possibly pique your curiosity and which some may consider as blasphemy, there are statements such as “In a word, stopping power is a myth (http://www.rathcoombe.net/sci-tech/ballistics/mechanics.html)” and “hydrostatic shock is an oxymoron (http://www.rathcoombe.net/sci-tech/ballistics/myths.html).” Included in the essay is superb penetration data from multiple sources. There is much much more for the reading and includes citations to the information and data as well as links to other resources.

In Section I Introduction (http://www.rathcoombe.net/sci-tech/ballistics/wounding.html#introduction) of the essay the author provides details of his day job. “I am a mechanical engineer by profession and employed in the defense industry as an analyst and designer of anti-armor lethal mechanisms (ie, warheads and penetrators). Terminal ballistics is both my hobby and my profession. (http://www.rathcoombe.net/sci-tech/ballistics/wounding.html#introduction)” In my unqualified opinion, I believe that the author’s day job sufficiently qualifies him as more than competent to write the essay and for us utilize it for our purposes. One other particularly meaningful partial statement at the end of the Introduction is “two physically equivalent wound tracks in a game animal will have an equivalent effect, no matter how different were the kinetic energies or other physical attributes of the bullets which caused them (http://www.rathcoombe.net/sci-tech/ballistics/wounding.html#introduction)”. Another partial statement is “the hole caused by a bullet is its only measure of lethality (http://www.rathcoombe.net/sci-tech/ballistics/wounding.html#introduction)”. There is an exception referenced in this last statement, so to clarify the intent, the Introduction will need to be read.

There are five more sections with subsections in the essay. Some of the titles of the subsections are not necessarily what you may think when you read the title! In regards to this tangent of the thread, one of the more relevant subsections would be the Mechanics of Penetration (http://www.rathcoombe.net/sci-tech/ballistics/mechanics.html#penetration) although the Relationships of Force, Momentum and Energy (http://www.rathcoombe.net/sci-tech/ballistics/myths.html#relationships) subsection would be applicable too. For that matter, there is much more pertinent information in other sections which relate to this tangent.

There is way to much good stuff to quote from the essay, but just to give an example in reference to the beginning of Section II, below are some quotes. Please keep in mind that these quotes are from paragraphs which must be read in their entirety to keep these statements in context!
“Rapid death is brought about only by brain death (http://www.rathcoombe.net/sci-tech/ballistics/mechanics.html)”
“The single most important factor in wound lethality is bullet placement. (http://www.rathcoombe.net/sci-tech/ballistics/mechanics.html)”
“brain death will likely occur prior to cessation of cardiac function; the time required for brain functions to deteriorate to the point of unconsciousness (http://www.rathcoombe.net/sci-tech/ballistics/mechanics.html)”
“There is another mechanism of cardiac arrest that is less well understood (http://www.rathcoombe.net/sci-tech/ballistics/mechanics.html)”
“a violent wound to the lung tissue may create a tiny embolism that interrupts cardio-pulmonary function at a critical moment (http://www.rathcoombe.net/sci-tech/ballistics/mechanics.html)”
“sudden pressure resulting from the bullet's passage (through the heart?) coupled with the coincidence of the systolic peak of the blood pressure cycle may communicate up the arteries to the brain and produce, in effect, a ruptured cranial aneurysm (http://www.rathcoombe.net/sci-tech/ballistics/mechanics.html)”
“sharp cuts generally bleed more freely and longer than ragged, macerated wounds (http://www.rathcoombe.net/sci-tech/ballistics/mechanics.html)”
“Based upon research to estimate the minimum lethality required to cause a game animal to collapse from hemorrhage within 10 seconds (or 100 yds) from a wound caused by an arrow (Jan Friis-Hansen, "Mesolithic Cutting Arrows: Functional Analysis of Arrows Used in the Hunting of Large Game", Antiquity, No. 64, 1990, pp. 494 - 504), the minimum lethal wound surface area for ideal performance by a bullet can be similarly estimated. (http://www.rathcoombe.net/sci-tech/ballistics/mechanics.html)”

I could go on and on, but rather than quote the essay endlessly, I would suggest reading the essay in its entirety to grasp its full potential and maybe learns something not already known. Having read the essay more than once, there is a lot there to absorb.

Prior to finding CB on the Internet, I had located this essay with a Google Search. I had major doubts about using a handgun again for hunting due a previous hunting experience with a bear. I have to give credit to the author’s essay for my opting to use a handgun again for hunting. This essay is a fantastic resource. Read what you will and form your own opinions and conclusions. I did!

The sections of the essay are:

II. The Mechanics of Terminal Ballistics (http://www.rathcoombe.net/sci-tech/ballistics/mechanics.html)
a. Mechanics of Lethal Wounding (http://www.rathcoombe.net/sci-tech/ballistics/mechanics.html#lethality)
b. Mechanics of Terminal Ballistics (http://www.rathcoombe.net/sci-tech/ballistics/mechanics.html#terminal)
c. Mechanics of Penetration (http://www.rathcoombe.net/sci-tech/ballistics/mechanics.html#penetration)
d. Mechanics of Cavitation (http://www.rathcoombe.net/sci-tech/ballistics/mechanics.html#cavitation)
III. Myths, Misconceptions and Miscalculations (http://www.rathcoombe.net/sci-tech/ballistics/myths.html)
a. The Mythology of Wound Lethality (http://www.rathcoombe.net/sci-tech/ballistics/myths.html#mythology)
1. Kinetic Energy, Part I: "Energy Dump", "Overpenetration" and "Hydrostatic Shock" (http://www.rathcoombe.net/sci-tech/ballistics/myths.html#energy)
2. Momentum and "Stopping Power" (http://www.rathcoombe.net/sci-tech/ballistics/myths.html#momentum)
3. Kinetic Energy, Part II: Thresholds of Wounding Potential Based on Kinetic Energy (http://www.rathcoombe.net/sci-tech/ballistics/myths.html#momentum)
b. Miscalculations of Lethality (http://www.rathcoombe.net/sci-tech/ballistics/myths.html#miscalculations)
1. Optimal Game Weight (OGW) (http://www.rathcoombe.net/sci-tech/ballistics/myths.html#ogw)
2. Taylor Knockout (TKO) (http://www.rathcoombe.net/sci-tech/ballistics/myths.html#tko)
3. Lethality Index (http://www.rathcoombe.net/sci-tech/ballistics/myths.html#wli)
4. Hornady Index of Terminal Standards (HITS) (http://www.rathcoombe.net/sci-tech/ballistics/myths.html#hits)
5. Bekker Knock-Out Value (KOV) Formula (http://www.rathcoombe.net/sci-tech/ballistics/myths.html#bkov)
c. "When Good Physics Goes Bad" (http://www.rathcoombe.net/sci-tech/ballistics/myths.html#wgpgb)
1. Relationships of Force, Momentum and Energy (http://www.rathcoombe.net/sci-tech/ballistics/myths.html#relationships)
2. Bogus Ballistics (http://www.rathcoombe.net/sci-tech/ballistics/myths.html#bogus)
IV. Empirical Methods of Estimating Actual Terminal Effect (http://www.rathcoombe.net/sci-tech/ballistics/methods.html)
a. Performance of Non-Deforming Bullets (http://www.rathcoombe.net/sci-tech/ballistics/methods.html#lbt)
1. Flat-Nosed Handgun and Rifle Bullets (http://www.rathcoombe.net/sci-tech/ballistics/methods.html#flat-nosed)
2. Round-Nosed Solid Rifle Bullets (http://www.rathcoombe.net/sci-tech/ballistics/methods.html#round-nosed)
b. Performance of Deforming Bullets (http://www.rathcoombe.net/sci-tech/ballistics/methods.html#deform)
1. The Handloader-Sciuchetti Study (http://www.rathcoombe.net/sci-tech/ballistics/methods.html#sciuchetti)
i. Observations from the Sciuchetti Data - The Effect of Impact Velocity (http://www.rathcoombe.net/sci-tech/ballistics/methods.html#impact_velocity)
ii. Controlled Expansion versus Controlled Retained Weight (http://www.rathcoombe.net/sci-tech/ballistics/methods.html#expansion_retained_wt)
iii. Further Observations - Discontinuities Near the Hydrodynamic Threshold Velocity (http://www.rathcoombe.net/sci-tech/ballistics/methods.html#threshold)
2. Minimum Wound Dimensions (http://www.rathcoombe.net/sci-tech/ballistics/methods.html#minimum_wound)
3. Medium-Bore Bullets (http://www.rathcoombe.net/sci-tech/ballistics/methods.html#medium_bore)
i. .308 Caliber (http://www.rathcoombe.net/sci-tech/ballistics/methods.html#308_caliber)
ii. .338 Caliber (http://www.rathcoombe.net/sci-tech/ballistics/methods.html#338_caliber)
iii. A Study of Sectional Density (http://www.rathcoombe.net/sci-tech/ballistics/methods.html#sd_study)
iv. .348 Caliber (http://www.rathcoombe.net/sci-tech/ballistics/methods.html#348_caliber)
v. .375 Caliber (http://www.rathcoombe.net/sci-tech/ballistics/methods.html#375_caliber)
4. Small-Bore Bullets (http://www.rathcoombe.net/sci-tech/ballistics/methods.html#small_bore)
i. Premium Bullets in .284 Caliber (http://www.rathcoombe.net/sci-tech/ballistics/methods.html#284_premium)
ii. Another Study of Sectional Density: Small-Bore (http://www.rathcoombe.net/sci-tech/ballistics/methods.html#SD_small_bore)
iii. Too Light for Big Game? .224 and .243 Calibers (http://www.rathcoombe.net/sci-tech/ballistics/methods.html#too_light)
5. Handgun Bullets (http://www.rathcoombe.net/sci-tech/ballistics/methods.html#handgun)
6. Large-Bore Bullets (http://www.rathcoombe.net/sci-tech/ballistics/methods.html#large_bore)
V. Analytical Modeling of Terminal Ballistics (http://www.rathcoombe.net/sci-tech/ballistics/modeling.html)
a. Introduction (http://www.rathcoombe.net/sci-tech/ballistics/modeling.html#analytical-intro)
b. Fidelity in Modeling (http://www.rathcoombe.net/sci-tech/ballistics/modeling.html#fidelity)
c. A Simple Analytical Model of Bullet Penetration (http://www.rathcoombe.net/sci-tech/ballistics/modeling.html#simple-model)
VI. The Politics of Terminal Ballistics (http://www.rathcoombe.net/sci-tech/ballistics/politics.html)

I hope all the links are working! Enjoy.

Lloyd Smale
02-10-2012, 07:50 AM
Lots of good info in that article. As typical i dont agree with every single word as ive seen differnt results with some of the loads and bullets on game animals that didnt really mirror his penetration testing and summerization. But ill say its one of the better articles on bullet performance ive seen.

44man
02-10-2012, 11:01 AM
Kinetic energy is simply a calculation of mass in motion, obviously if a bullet has no energy then it has no motion. If you read my earlier post it explains clearly that a bullet cannot "apply energy" to or in an animal.
This is a total contradiction! Are you saying a boolit does not apply energy in an animal?
Do you mean a .30 cal stick pushed through slow has the same effect as a .300 mag?
Apply means "utilized", "to bring into contact with something", "put on or to."
If I take a tack hammer to a large nail, you are saying a sledge hammer does not apply more energy to the nail.
I do NOT understand what you are saying.
Do you have a new word for "apply?"
I have over 250 bow kills and the arrow does NOT apply energy but it does apply CUTTING to vital tissue.
If you shoot a gallon jug of water, does not the boolit "apply" energy to it?
Jandbn has provided much info that would educate you about applying energy.
My point is that you can "apply" energy at initial contact to do little after, you can "apply" energy during passage or you can "apply" all energy AFTER passage into the air or ground, maybe a tree.
Add enough energy like a .50 BMG and energy is "applied" at the initial contact, in passage and well beyond into anything it hits.
If I read you right, the .50 BMG does not apply energy, it pokes a .50 cal hole. Yeah, right! Shoot a deer with it and you need to learn to cook hooves.
The revolver has limited energy and that must be "applied" at the right place, INSIDE the animal.
I notice that you use a gun, not a sharp sick.
Some new bullets "apply" both energy and cutting with sharp, peeled jackets.
Maybe I am wrong and a slingshot will dump an elephant! [smilie=l:

jwp475
02-10-2012, 06:29 PM
This is a total contradiction! Are you saying a boolit does not apply energy in an animal?
Do you mean a .30 cal stick pushed through slow has the same effect as a .300 mag?
Apply means "utilized", "to bring into contact with something", "put on or to."
If I take a tack hammer to a large nail, you are saying a sledge hammer does not apply more energy to the nail.
I do NOT understand what you are saying.
Do you have a new word for "apply?"
I have over 250 bow kills and the arrow does NOT apply energy but it does apply CUTTING to vital tissue.
If you shoot a gallon jug of water, does not the boolit "apply" energy to it?
Jandbn has provided much info that would educate you about applying energy.
My point is that you can "apply" energy at initial contact to do little after, you can "apply" energy during passage or you can "apply" all energy AFTER passage into the air or ground, maybe a tree.
Add enough energy like a .50 BMG and energy is "applied" at the initial contact, in passage and well beyond into anything it hits.
If I read you right, the .50 BMG does not apply energy, it pokes a .50 cal hole. Yeah, right! Shoot a deer with it and you need to learn to cook hooves.
The revolver has limited energy and that must be "applied" at the right place, INSIDE the animal.
I notice that you use a gun, not a sharp sick.
Some new bullets "apply" both energy and cutting with sharp, peeled jackets.
Maybe I am wrong and a slingshot will dump an elephant! [smilie=l:



You are wrong in the terms that you use for sure and certain.

I am going to re post my last post, because either you didn't read or you do not understand it. If it is a lack of under standing then maybe we can help


I have no idea what you are talking about when you say "applied energy". What science is this based on? None that I am aware of.

In comment #-1 you state "Toss ME figures in the scrap heap" OK I am with you here, but you follow up with ", it is where energy is applied in an animal. Yes, energy is important or we would hunt with a sharp stick. Apply it wrong and you might do better with a sharp stick."

First let me point out the many people do very well with a sharp stick, I believe that you use them as well with great success. Next there are many type of energy such as electrical, stored, potential, thermal, kinetic and sound is also a form of energy. The wound channel can not be predicted by "foot pounds of energy". The wound channel is created by 1-direct applied pressure 2-the amount of hydraulic pressure created (the higher the velocity the higher the hydraulic pressure) and the amount of momentum transferred. The amount of "direct applied pressure in conjunction with the frontal area of the bullet accounts for the amount of crushed tissue. A large enough amount of "hydraulic pressure" will stretch the tissue past its elastic limits causing the tissue to rip apart and adding to the volume of the wound channel, all of this in conjunction with the "momentum transfer" makes up the volume of the wound channel and the depth of penetration (length of wound channel)

Energy is never lost, therefor cannot be wasted

In number 2 of your statement again you use the phrase "-It is applied energy, not wasted energy from quick expansion". The fact is quick expansion increase the frontal area of the bullet, thus increasing the area of "direct applied force and increase the area of "crushed tissue". By quickly expanding the momentum is transferred faster and penetration decreases dramatically when compared to a slower expanding projectile or minimally expanding projectile. This is why hard cast bullet achieve the deeper penetration. The wide me-plat hard cast or jacketed (as is the case with the Belt Mountain Punch Bullets) leave a relatively larger wound channel completely through the animal


In number 3- you again talked about wasted energy and I am at a loss as to how it is wasted?

The diagram of the ballistics pendulum shows us exactly what happens with "kinetic energy" in an inelastic collision" which is no conservation of "energy" in the collision. Since "energy" is never lost most of the "energy is transformed into other forms of "energy" mostly thermal, as well as other forms such as sound, etc.


http://i33.photobucket.com/albums/d62/jwp475/BallisticsPendulum.gif


Newton's 3 laws of motion deal with "MOMENTUM, MOMENTUM TRANSFERS, AND ACCELERATION, NOT ENERGY RELATIONSHIPS"

Energy in an INELASTIC COLLISION transforms to other forms of energy mostly thermal but also some goes to sound, etc as well. Thermal energy is heat and 1 Joule is equal to 0.73756 foot-pounds. This is why the Europeans ammo makers use Joules instead of Ft LB

DO a google search and learn about inelastic collision and then you will realize why when you make the claim of "applying energy" it is totally incorrect.

44man
02-11-2012, 10:08 AM
Well, I never seen a boolit move anything it hit except steel where all energy is "applied" at the surface or a hard object that is small enough to move.
I seen Whit hit a pop can at 100 yards with his .500 JRH and it did not fall. When I hit it, it just fell off the rail.
What you show is transfer and change of energy, not what happens in an animal.
I have yet to see any deer hanging by strings but I assure you, it would never swing when hit. :)

jwp475
02-11-2012, 11:22 AM
Well, I never seen a boolit move anything it hit except steel where all energy is "applied" at the surface or a hard object that is small enough to move.
I seen Whit hit a pop can at 100 yards with his .500 JRH and it did not fall. When I hit it, it just fell off the rail.
What you show is transfer and change of energy, not what happens in an animal.
I have yet to see any deer hanging by strings but I assure you, it would never swing when hit. :)



No I show a transfer of momentum and direct applied force combined with hydraulic pressure. The higher the momentum the more the steel moves. A 22 caliber bullet at 3600 FPS has more energy than a 240 grain 44 caliber bullet at 1400 FPS. The 44 caliber 240 grain bullets has more momentum and will move the steel a greater amount.

Shoot a ground squirrel with a 40 grain 22 caliber bullet 4000 FPS and it will blown a the ground squirrel into small pieces. Shoot the ground squirrel with a 45 caliber 500 grain bullet at 2000 FPS and it will not blown the squirrel into as many small pieces because the slower projectile creates lees hydraulic pressure despite has over twice the amount of kinetic energy

The can did not fall over because the bullet was able to penetrate without encountering enough resistance to be knock over. A thicker wall will create enough resistance to knock the can over

44man
02-11-2012, 12:51 PM
No I show a transfer of momentum and direct applied force combined with hydraulic pressure. The higher the momentum the more the steel moves. A 22 caliber bullet at 3600 FPS has more energy than a 240 grain 44 caliber bullet at 1400 FPS. The 44 caliber 240 grain bullets has more momentum and will move the steel a greater amount.

Shoot a ground squirrel with a 40 grain 22 caliber bullet 4000 FPS and it will blown a the ground squirrel into small pieces. Shoot the ground squirrel with a 45 caliber 500 grain bullet at 2000 FPS and it will not blown the squirrel into as many small pieces because the slower projectile creates lees hydraulic pressure despite has over twice the amount of kinetic energy

The can did not fall over because the bullet was able to penetrate without encountering enough resistance to be knock over. A thicker wall will create enough resistance to knock the can over
All of this is correct of course.
But neither scene can be compared to big game. The light fast .22 can blow on the surface removing a large patch of hide and not get inside.
The .45 is what to use but either way, it still all depends on where the boolit does it's work and is only what I have tried to explain.
The application of what ever you choose to call it, energy, momentum, pressure, heat, whatever. It must be applied to the vitals or it is useless.
I know you don't like the word but I can find none better.
Like when you screwed up in school and had the paddle "applied" to your posterior! :bigsmyl2::bigsmyl2:
Energy is also the best word because it encompasses any transitions it might make.
I know you agree with me 100% on making a boolit work where it needs to work and you just argue over my choice of words. Never have I read about any bullet, boolit or round listed by "momentum." Animals do not feel that and are never blown off their feet. I did knock a woodchuck off it's feet with a .50 RB once but most just stay in place while pieces blow in all directions.
Momentum works on steel and is of use for IHMSA as is "dell time" on steel because the slower the bullet explodes, the more force exerted can knock the targets over.
Momentum is the product of mass and velocity. Since a 200# deer weighs 2800 X more then a 500 gr boolit and boolit momentum is expressed as pounds- seconds, it is of little use.

jwp475
02-11-2012, 02:01 PM
Energy is not the best word, because it is incorrect. A 200 pound man that runs a 10 second 100 yards is running 30 feet per second and that equates to 2798 Foot pounds of kinetic energy. Yet there are professional football players that are bigger and faster that hit each other every Sunday during the season without killing each other. If energy was the proper term then the morgues would be full of football players after each game and this is not the case

Penetration and holes through the vitals case by "direct applied force" aloung with "momentum transfers' AND 'hydraulic pressure" creates the wound channel through the vitails

Transfering momentum moves tissue

44man
02-11-2012, 03:55 PM
All in definitions. It takes energy to overcome inertia and it is stored as kinetic energy along with energy developed with momentum.
Now, you call it force when contact is made with something. What is the definition of "force?" "ENERGY!"
Momentum is the quantity of motion.
Energy is where it starts and what is stored to be released.
A football player can disperse all his stored energy into the ground by stopping fast.

jwp475
02-11-2012, 04:27 PM
All in definitions. It takes energy to overcome inertia and it is stored as kinetic energy along with energy developed with momentum.
Now, you call it force when contact is made with something. What is the definition of "force?" "ENERGY!"
Momentum is the quantity of motion.
Energy is where it starts and what is stored to be released.
A football player can disperse all his stored energy into the ground by stopping fast.


ENERGY ISN'T WHAT MAKES THE OBJECT AT REST MOVE AFTER IMPACT, the ballistic pendulum drawing illustrates this very clearly



http://i33.photobucket.com/albums/d62/jwp475/BallisticsPendulum.gif


If it were energy then the arc distance of the pendulum swing would measure the energy transfer instead it is MOMENTEUM that is transfered and measured.

Look at the drawing closely it is very clear

Newton's 3 laws of motion deal with momentum, momentum transfers and acceleration. NOT ENERGY RELATIONSHIPS
Newton's First Law of Motion:
I. Every object in a state of uniform motion tends to remain in that state of motion unless an external force is applied to it.

This we recognize as essentially Galileo's concept of inertia, and this is often termed simply the "Law of Inertia".

Newton's Second Law of Motion:

II. The relationship between an object's mass m, its acceleration a, and the applied force F is F = ma. Acceleration and force are vectors (as indicated by their symbols being displayed in slant bold font); in this law the direction of the force vector is the same as the direction of the acceleration vector.

This is the most powerful of Newton's three Laws, because it allows quantitative calculations of dynamics: how do velocities change when forces are applied. Notice the fundamental difference between Newton's 2nd Law and the dynamics of Aristotle: according to Newton, a force causes only a change in velocity (an acceleration); it does not maintain the velocity as Aristotle held.

This is sometimes summarized by saying that under Newton, F = ma, but under Aristotle F = mv, where v is the velocity. Thus, according to Aristotle there is only a velocity if there is a force, but according to Newton an object with a certain velocity maintains that velocity unless a force acts on it to cause an acceleration (that is, a change in the velocity). As we have noted earlier in conjunction with the discussion of Galileo, Aristotle's view seems to be more in accord with common sense, but that is because of a failure to appreciate the role played by frictional forces. Once account is taken of all forces acting in a given situation it is the dynamics of Galileo and Newton, not of Aristotle, that are found to be in accord with the observations.

Newton's Third Law of Motion:


III. For every action there is an equal and opposite reaction.

This law is exemplified by what happens if we step off a boat onto the bank of a lake: as we move in the direction of the shore, the boat tends to move in the opposite direction (leaving us facedown in the water, if we aren't careful!).




http://csep10.phys.utk.edu/astr161/lect/history/newton3laws.html

jwp475
02-11-2012, 04:29 PM
All in definitions. It takes energy to overcome inertia and it is stored as kinetic energy along with energy developed with momentum.
Now, you call it force when contact is made with something. What is the definition of "force?" "ENERGY!"
Momentum is the quantity of motion.
Energy is where it starts and what is stored to be released.
A football player can disperse all his stored energy into the ground by stopping fast.



In classical mechanics, linear momentum or translational momentum (pl. momenta; SI unit kg•m/s, or, equivalently, N•s) is the product of the mass and velocity of an object:

Like velocity, linear momentum is a vector quantity, possessing a direction as well as a magnitude. Linear momentum is also a conserved quantity, meaning that if a closed system is not affected by external forces, its total linear momentum cannot change. Although originally expressed in Newton's second law, the conservation of linear momentum also holds in special relativity and, with appropriate definitions, a (generalized) linear momentum conservation law holds in electrodynamics, quantum mechanics, quantum field theory, and general relativity. In relativistic mechanics, non-relativistic linear momentum is further multiplied by the Lorentz factor


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Momentum

jwp475
02-11-2012, 05:15 PM
All in definitions. It takes energy to overcome inertia and it is stored as kinetic energy along with energy developed with momentum.
Now, you call it force when contact is made with something. What is the definition of "force?" "ENERGY!"
Momentum is the quantity of motion.
Energy is where it starts and what is stored to be released.
A football player can disperse all his stored energy into the ground by stopping fast.

The powder in the case is "potential energy"
A compressed spring is "stored energy"

The ignition of the powder by the primer releases the stored energy in the form of hot expanding gas that propels the bullet down and out of the barrel toward the intended target. The bullet once in motion has "kinetic energy"

In physics, a force is any influence that causes an object to undergo a change in speed, a change in direction, or a change in shape. In other words, a force is that which can cause an object with mass to change its velocity (which includes to begin moving from a state of rest), i.e., to accelerate, or which can cause a flexible object to deform. Force can also be described by intuitive concepts such as a push or pull. A force has both magnitude and direction, making it a vector quantity. Newton's second law, F = ma, was originally formulated in slightly different, but equivalent terms: the original version states that the net force acting upon an object is equal to the rate at which its momentum changes.[1]

Related concepts to force include: thrust, which increases the velocity of an object; drag, which decreases the velocity of an object; and torque which produces changes in rotational speed of an object. Forces which do not act uniformly on all parts of a body will also cause mechanical stresses,[2] a technical term for influences which cause deformation of matter. While mechanical stress can remain embedded in a solid object, gradually deforming it, mechanical stress in a fluid determines changes in its pressure and volume.[3][4]



http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Force


Definition: Energy is the capacity of a physical system to perform work. Energy exists in several forms such as heat, kinetic or mechanical energy, light, potential energy, electrical, or other forms.
According to the law of conservation of energy, the total energy of a system remains constant, though energy may transform into another form. Two billiard balls colliding, for example, may come to rest, with the resulting energy becoming sound and perhaps a bit of heat at the point of collision.

The SI unit of energy is the joule (J) or newton-meter (N * m). The joule is also the SI unit of work.



http://physics.about.com/od/glossary/g/energy.htm

44man
02-11-2012, 06:03 PM
Well John, you are entirely correct.
The stored energy overcomes the bullet inertia once released, same as the football player unleashing his muscles. Then it does indeed change to kinetic energy and the bullet and football player then gain momentum as they speed up and that adds more kinetic energy.
But once stopped the energy is released and can change form. The slowing bullet transforms energy into pressure, heat, whatever but loses all momentum if it stops. The heavy boolit that passes through maintains some momentum until it stops but it does not increase as the boolit slows, it is reduced which bleeds off energy that can be applied.
Momentum is lost as the boolit slows with distance, outside influence etc. A boolit constantly loses energy from the instant it leaves the barrel. It loses the stored energy behind it and it loses momentum. That is a loss of kinetic energy during flight.
The key is to have enough at the animal.
It is fun going back and forth and I don't know why we do it! :bigsmyl2:
But I think everyone here knows what we are talking about.
I am willing to agree to disagree over use of terms-----it is still ENERGY! [smilie=s:
Oh I forgot, an inelastic collision is against something so hard or heavy it does not move. The football player slamming into the goalpost.

jwp475
02-11-2012, 06:24 PM
Why insist on using incorrect terminology, science is correct why not accept it. A bullet only stops when it has transferred all of its momentum. as long as the bullet maintains momentum it will continue on.

You are incorrect on the definition of an inelastic collision. An inelastic collision is when one are both of the colliding bodies change shape permanently. 2 billiard balls rolling on a pool table collide is an illustration of a elastic collision. Since neither ball change shape permanently.

A bullet colliding with a deer leave a wound channel (hole) through the deer the bullet may also deform, since the colliding bodies changed shape then the collision is an inelastic collision

44MAG#1
02-11-2012, 06:34 PM
The real question on energy is: How much energy is wasted when trying to argue with a rock?
Who will win?
Could that energy be better spent on doing something more constructive around tthe house or maybe taking a nap?
In the end the nap will be more fruitful.

PacMan
02-11-2012, 07:44 PM
And some would be better served doing most anything like letting things lay than calling people names.

44MAG#1
02-12-2012, 08:41 AM
I agree. Name calling is never good.

Whitworth
02-12-2012, 09:42 AM
Who is name calling? Am I missing something?

fivegunner
02-12-2012, 09:56 AM
words can mean diffrent things for sure, :bigsmyl2::goodpost:

subsonic
02-12-2012, 10:21 AM
Can somebody tell me what the meaning of the word "is" is?

Bill?

jwp475
02-12-2012, 10:30 AM
Can somebody tell me what the meaning of the word "is" is?

Bill?

BIll Clinton, can define is...........:drinks:

subsonic
02-12-2012, 10:34 AM
Too early for :drinks: still working on :coffee:

44man
02-12-2012, 12:32 PM
Who is name calling? Am I missing something?
No name calling because John and I are really friends. We really agree except to word definition.
We have never called each other names. I respect his experience, he is a real hunter. I do enjoy disputing word meanings. :bigsmyl2:
Like inelastic that means 'Not elastic, inflexible, unadaptable. Like STEEL. An animal is elastic. A boolit is also elastic if it expands.
I use a dictionary for word meaning. Not much because I know what energy means, how it is built and is expended.