CB + hollow points

[turtlezx]

Iam interested in hunting 150lb deer.
With cast boolits out of a 308 at 2200fts 155 gr pointed boolit
would hollow points be a benefit ??
If so what size hp ??
I would do the hp with a drill press
What suggestions do you all have on this ??

thanx turtlezx

[Frosty Boolit]

I'll offer some thoughts. Based on what I've seen from boolits in cardboard bales, mud, and logs,(never recovered one from game) I'd say that it will probably mushroom up and maybe even bend and do some serious damage. I really don't think a hollow point on it will make much a difference as you already know it is more important to hit a vital organ or break a shoulder.

A thought on expansion, I only hunted deer with 12 gauge slugs and all shots have been pass throughs with the in and out hole being the same size. Three of the four deer I shot have been with "hollow points" and I've seen little expansion. The other was hit with a lyman 12 ga. slug and it was a big hole in and out.

[MtGun44]

Spitzers are unstable in flesh after some travel, with exact tumble point dependent on
boolit length and RPMs (function of twist and vel). My bet is that a lead alloy spitzer will
turn sideways and blow apart. On a little deer like you are talking about, with a broadside
shot, my bet is completely shredded lungs with proper placement, assuming wwt alloy.

Also, no need to push that fast to be effective and that velocity is likely to be problematic
with spire point boolits. The conventional wisdom is that Pb spitzers are accurate at only
moderate velocities, with accy going away beyond the 1600 fps range being reported by
many users. I have used the 311413 with very good accuracy with 1500-1600 fps class
loads, but not chronographed.

Bill

[Larry Gibson]

I got my 311041HP mould in '70 and have used it extensively in numerous .30/.31 cal cartridges since then hunting deer and other game. I also have used the 8mm 325471HP mould. In addition I've been using the Forster HP 1/8" tool on other cast bullets of .30, .31, 8mm, .35, 375 and .45 calibers in CF rifle cartridges along with the .357, .44 and .45 caliber pistol cartridges in rifles. I most often load the CF rifle cartridges to 2000 - 2200 fps for hunting.

I've found over the last 42 years using them that FP cast bullets kill better than RN cast bullets. That should really be of no surprise to anyone. I've also found that a properly HP'd .30/.31 cal cast bullet of a soft malleable alloy that expands is more effective at killing than either a RN or a FP. Again that should be of no real surprise. A HP'd cast bullet of .30/.31 cal weighing 170 - 200 gr of soft malleable alloy at 2000 - 2200 fps will kill every bit as well as the best of 150 - 170 gr factory loaded jacketed 30-30 bullets.

Now some may say dead is dead and it doesn't matter. That may be the case for them but I, and many others, prefer to kill game as quickly as possible. This lessons the suffering of the animal and it also means they do not travel as far after being shot before laying down and/or dying. In many circumstances killing the game as quick as possible is essential. For that the more efficient HP'd cast bullet is the answer.

Many years ago I learned the HP stems in the common Lyman Mould was way too long. I’ve shortened all of mine used for big game hunting so the HP is not more than 2/3 the length of the bullet nose. In .30/.31 cal moulds I HP them with the 1/8” Forster tool to 1/8 – 3/16” deep. When cast of an alloy, which must be soft and malleable to properly expand without the expansion petals shearing off too soon, expansion is excellent to 200 yards when the muzzle velocity is 2000 – 2200 fps.

I’ve come to really appreciate hunting cast bullets cast of an alloy of (WWs + 2% tin) + 50% lead and AC’d. Best accuracy is maintained with cleaning the barrel after 7 – 10 shots. That is fine with me as if I’ve not got the game in 7 shots I should go home and clean the rifle anyways. My own 311041s when cast of such weigh 177 gr fully dressed. I use Javelina lube and Hornady GCs and size them to .311 for use in the .30-30, the .308W, the 30-06 and, when sized at .312 in the .303, the 7.65 Argentine and the 7.62x54R. I push them at 2000 – 2200 fps in all those cartridges. I really don’t recall the last time I shot a deer twice with any of them. With a heart /lung shot the exit wounds all show excellent expansion and penetration has always been through and through.

HP’d cast bullets of the correct alloy with the correct HP design/depth are very beneficial and much more effective than FPs alone and certainly better than RN cast bullets.

Larry Gibson

[turtlezx]

Thank larry
very informative !!
just the info i was looking for

turtlezx

[Larry Gibson]

If you've a Forster case trimmer or your trimmer takes pilots with .185 shafts you can use the Forster 1/8" HP tool with equal success.

Larry Gibson

[dmitch]

Mr Gibson,

In your experience, have you seen a significant shift in the point of impact for the HPed rounds compared to the solids, let's say at 100 yds? And, is there any difference in accuracy between the HPs and the solids?

[Bret4207]

Turtle- I'd like to add to Lars excellent post. A RN will kill better than a SP, a FP better than a RN. A HP that mushrooms is basically just a much bigger FP. While I'm not a huge fan of HP for hunting, I do see them as an option IF you can do the work Larry has, that is- to spend hours and days and weeks testing boolits, HP depth, powders, alloys and accurately recording all the info AND coming up with a suitably accurate load too. It can be done, but it's a lot more complex than simply drilling a hole in the nose of a boolit and popping it out the tube. It may mushroom, or it may not or it might go to pieces a inch in or in flight.

In short, IMO using a HP successfully requires and awful lot of work, something many people either can't do or are unwilling to do, and not everyone finds that "sweet spot". And the faster you push it, the harder or softer your alloy is from perfect, the trickier it gets. OTOH, a good FN will always work to a greater or lesser degree giving god shot placement and penetration.

Just something to consider.

[DLCTEX]

The Lee 309-170 FP will kill deer when poured from WW. If you want mushrooming, try the two part boolit as done by a fellow member. I'm thinking it was Bruce B. Do a search for two part casting. This is not two piece, but two different alloys cast into one boolit.

[MT Gianni]

Milk jugs are your friends. See what the 155 sp hp boolits do at ranges of 50, 100, 150 and 200 yards against a 150 gr or 170gr fp lee mold. If any load will not fully penetrate 3 one gallon jugs you don't want it.

[Larry Gibson]

Mr Gibson,

In your experience, have you seen a significant shift in the point of impact for the HPed rounds compared to the solids, let's say at 100 yds? And, is there any difference in accuracy between the HPs and the solids?

With the longer, deeper HP of a standard Lyman HP mould there can be some verticle dispersion, perhaps noticeable at 100 yards and definately so at 200 yards. This is simply because the HP bullet (talking 170 -220 gr .30 - 8mm moulds) is usually quite a bit lighter and with the same load the velocity is a bit higher.

With such bullets correctly HP'd with the Forster I've not found any practical difference in zero change with FP bullts. With Lyman or Redfield receiver sights with 1/4 moa it's most often not even worth 1 click adjustment. However, the 311299 HP'd as in the photo has a much lessoned BC and will show a little more drop at 100 - 200 yards. It is not very much though and if using hold over with a 100 yard zero perhaps an inch more is needed.

Not much to be overly concerned about at 200 yards and no concerned at 100 yards is the bottom line. However, I'm sure there are some rifles with barrel harminics that are the exception, I just haven't found one in 40+ years of using HPs is all.

Larry Gibson

[Larry Gibson]

Bret

You are correct; over the years I've put in lots of time and effort developing the HP technique and testing. In the OPs case of the .308W with cast at upwards of 2200 fps he can find success quite easily. I found that alloy of WW + 2% tin + 50 % lead works very well in that velocity range with most every cast HP I've used it on. It is a soft and malleable alloy that holds together very well with excellent expansion charactoristics. When correctly HP'd with a correct stem or the Forster HP tool I've never had one go to pieces in flight (even when pushed to high RPM....you know how I am about that subject!) or in a game animal. Harder alloys, especially with high antimony content, and overly long or large HPs can shatter in game or the petals break off too quick reducing the effectiveness. With that alloy and a correct HP I've yet to recover a cast bullet from a deer and all have died very very quickly. There was not indication of "blow up" in the deer or loss of expansion petals. Nothing but good, clean, quick kills better than with any other cast bullets and as quick as with any 170 gr jacketed 30-30 load I've used.

Forster recomends a depth of 1/8" with either size of their HP tool and I concur with that as minimal and 3/16ths as maximum with that alloy when used at 2000 - 2200 fps in game. For varmints or with lower velocities using the same alloy the HP can be deeper up to about 2/3 the nose length. With softer alloys in the 800 - 1600 fps range the HP can be deeper and/or wider. With Magnum 357, .41 and .44 loads in the 1300 - 1450 fps range that alloy or a 16-1 is excellent. With GC'd 358156, 410610 and the 429244 cast of such and HP'd with the 1/8" Forster to about 1/2 the nose length gives excellent expansion over normal hunting ranges. Such cast of 20-1 or 30-1, HP'd to 2/3 the nose length and pushed at 950 - 1150 fps will also give excellent expansion.

The 429640 "Devestator when cast of the WW/tin/lead alloy or 16-1 and pushed at 1350 - 1600 fps is....well....just "devestating" with excellent expansion and minimal weight loss.

I have to admit, amny years ago, that I was quite frustrated with the results of my HPs on game, deer particularly. However, by reading what others had dome and extensively experimenting I found it isn't difficult once the alloy is correct and the HP is correct. If the OP uses a proven alloy (as I've given him) and HPs the bullets correctly (as I've explained) it is really not difficult to get very good HP'd bullets that perform extremely well. Perhaps it's time for you to "revisit" the HP cast bullet?

BTW; I'm not taking credit for the development of correct alloys and HPs for use with cast bullets. Alot of others have been working on this also. The knowledge is there and readily available to use.

Larry Gibson

[btroj]

Larryand Bret are right. I used a big hollowpoint with the wrong alloy at the wrong velocity for deer a couple years ago. Very poor penetration, almost lose the deer.

I will most likely not be using a hollowpoint again for deer as I don't care to take the time or energy to do the amount of work Larry has done. I find it easy enough to use a nice FP cast froma soft enou allow to allow a bit of expansion. Not rock hard brittle bullets for me.

It is all about balancing the nose shape, alloy, velocity, and bullet diameter to get a good, deep wound channel.

[dmitch]

Larry Gibson,

I believe I understand the alchemy of your alloy (WWs+2% tin+50% lead), but I learned a long time ago not to necessarily assume too much. Assuming WWs to be 96.5 PB-.5 Tin-3.0 Antimony and using one of the alloying programs, (4.9lbs WWs, .1lbs tin, and 5lbs of pure lead) I end up with an alloy of 96 Pb-2.6 Tin-1.4 Antimony. Makes sense.......increased tin for castibility.........reduced antimony for mallability.
Are these firgures about right?
dmitch

[Larry Gibson]

Larry Gibson,

I believe I understand the alchemy of your alloy (WWs+2% tin+50% lead), but I learned a long time ago not to necessarily assume too much. Assuming WWs to be 96.5 PB-.5 Tin-3.0 Antimony and using one of the alloying programs, (4.9lbs WWs, .1lbs tin, and 5lbs of pure lead) I end up with an alloy of 96 Pb-2.6 Tin-1.4 Antimony. Makes sense.......increased tin for castibility.........reduced antimony for mallability.
Are these firgures about right?
dmitch

In a ternary alloy, which is what we are discussing, the properties of tin and antimony in solution are important. It is dry reading but the articles on metallurgy in Lyman's Cast Bullet Handbooks give a good explanation. I've found it best to have a solution of close to 3% tin and perhaps a little more antimony as the properties of the sum of the parts is better than considering the individual properties of lead, tin and antimony by themselves. It is the percentage of each in the solution with lead that makes for the better malleability of the alloy, not just the tin alone. This is for velocities in the 2000 -2200 fps range. A certain "hardness" is still required to maintain accuracy at such velocity and it is the antimony that is the "hardener" and therefor a certain % is required.

Your alloy should do very well for velocities upwards of 1500 fps, perhaps more, (not tested but swag"d based on experience) with just AC'd bullets. The problem is the "assuming" of the content of the batch of WWs one has. I've found WWs (at least in my neck of the woods) to run 4+% antimony and .05% tin according to the spec sheet I looked at from a wholesaler of WWs a couple years back. That's why I add 2% tin to make the antimony to tin ratio closer. I've not found any real benifit to adding more than 2% tin of which it has always worked for me.

Larry Gibson

I've corrected the formula in the original post above to read (WWs + 2% tin) + 50% lead to avoid potential confusion. The 2% tin is computed on the weight of the WWs and added. Then the 50% lead is computed on the combination of the WWs + the added tin.

[runfiverun]

he's ending up with about 1.5% antimony and 1.25% tin.

water dropping this alloy will get you to about 15-17 bhn,it wiill allow you to push it to 1900 fps, yet retains the ability to open easily.
there are other ways to manipulate this alloy too..
it all depends on what you are trying to do, penetrate,open faster or slower, punch shoulders whatever.
the more you work on something in one direction the less generalized it becomes, if you make a deep hollow to allow the boolit to open quickly and all you get is a shot through the back ribs.....

that's where larry's is working for him,it's not too much.
the alloy is balanced,
and is not too soft or super hard.
the velocity is not too much or too little.
he has changed how much expansion he is getting,balancing that with penetration.
and he know's it's distance limitations.

[Larry Gibson]

he's ending up with about 1.5% antimony and 1.25% tin.

That's about right, I figure about 1.75 - 2% antimony and 1.5 - 1.75% tin.....all depends on the WW composition to begin with. I use a 95.5 Lead/0.5%/4% antimony formula for my WWs simply based on what the %s were on that WW wholesalers test data. Close enough for what we're talking. I use AC'd bullets though. They require cleaning every 7 - 10 shots to maintain best accuracy but that's ok as I don't shoot that many when hunting. The same bullet sans the HP cast of WWs + 2 % tin run around 16 BHN and I can shoot them most all day long with the same load without having to clean and accuracy remains very good.

Larry Gibson

[dmitch]

Larry / fiverunfive:

Thank you, gentlemen. Proof once again that this forum saves immeasureable time, energy, lead, powder and primers because many of you are willing to share your expertise.

dmitch

[1Shirt]

Beagles theory that I agree with is that HP's have the potential to be more accurate than the non HP version of the blt. Note the fact that so many jacketed match bullets are HP's. That said, I find that hard (say 18 BH or higher) are good for paper but not for hunting particularly in deer rifles. Soft nose cast HP's, that are made of two alloys or are hard cast but nose softened have deer hunting merit, but are a pain for most to make. However, the larger the cal, and the flatter the nose, at the proper alloy the better the killer. There is also the factor of the accuracy of the caster of HP's. It takes awhile (or it sure took me awhile) to learn to cast good HP's, and I have HP molds from 22 thru 458. Not all casters are willing to spend the time and effort to cast HP's.
1Shirt!:coffee:

[runfiverun]

it will save you some powder and primers.
you still need to test them for yourself.
there are a couple of way's to get to the same point.

and as you can see the ww's i normally use are a bit softer than the ones larry uses.
ww's have changed through the years from 9% antimony in the 40s'-50's
to 7% in the 60's-70's down to 4% by the 80's-90's.
and seem to have been mixed and recycled with the stick-on's so that they have both changed in the last 10-15 years.
stick-on's seem to have become a bit harder and clip on's somewhat softer.
i fugure newer ww's to be in the 3-3.5% antimony range now.
the larger truck size ww's are harder [i figure in the 5-7% range still] out of necessity.

not really the point though.
the point is no matter whether you use my figures or Larry's the numbers come out balanced on the tin to antimony ratio and that is what matters.

if i run into larry out hunting and we both had our 308's with us.
i'd bet we could swap rounds and shoot a three shot group that was right comparable to the ones we were carrying.
even though we used a different route to get there.

[Larry Gibson]

if i run into larry out hunting and we both had our 308's with us.
i'd bet we could swap rounds and shoot a three shot group that was right comparable to the ones we were carrying. even though we used a different route to get there.

I would bet on that. There usually is more than one way to skin the cat.......
Larry Gibson