Hard Body-Soft Nose for Hunting

[BrushBuster]

As I prepare to cast boolits which I primarily intend for hunting use, I'm intrigued by the procedure of hardening them and then softening the nose. The following is a quote from Paco Kelly, and the method is also attributed to Elmer Keith.

"Here’s a trick I write about often...to get soft nose and hard body cast bullets, cast them hard and hot, frosty bullets are better no matter what the experts say... drop them from the mold into water to temper....then place your bullets standing in water to their shoulder just above the top crimp groove, so the nose is exposed....take a butane torch and run it over the noses sticking out of the water...this detempers just the noses, so you in effect have a soft nose-hard body, cast bullet. It takes a little practice...but as soon as you see the bullet noses change color at all, pull the flame...or the nose will slump over...it doesn’t take much flame time, especially on small caliber bullets. Cast bullets made this way will resist fouling but will expand in any size animal....from rabbits on up."

If this works well, I'd like to give it a try, but don't take lightly the effectiveness of projectiles I lob at game animals. Your thoughts please, before I proceed.

Also, on the subject of frosty bullets, everything I've read indicates that this appearance is in no way detrimental to boolit performance. I've also read that for use with liquid Alox, the frosty surface aids and compounds lube surface adherance.

All sounds good to this novice, what do you folk's think?

[BruceB]

BB, sir;

Go up to the toolbar just above your post, and do two searches.

One search for "softpoint" will bring up 18 results, and another search for "softnose" will get 9 results. Some of those will be duplicates from the first search, but there's still a lot of discussion on the subject.

I make mine by casting with two separate alloys, and others seem to prefer selective annealing.

...and there's nothing at all wrong with frosty boolits. I prefer to see mine that way.

[wills]

Mountainmolds makes a two cavity mold, one cavity for the nose only. Pour the nose from pure lead, put it in the other cavity, pour the rest of the boolit with harder alloy.

[carpetman]

Brushbuster---My question would be why try it? The common description I hear about hunting with cast is use a big ol heavy bullet and expansion is not an issue. If you need to make a soft nose----either use a jacketed bullet or get a bigger bore. In effect you would be lobbing a guinea pig round at one. I am guilty of attemting a deer with a cast bullet in a .243. It had more velocity than the jacketed loads(which work)that I use. So I figured it should do the trick. Bottom line was the deer ran off and not one drop of blood found. I regret doing it and hope the deer wasn't injured.

[44man]

I agree, a big bore boolit with a big meplat doesn't need expansion. If you are hunting with a small bore then half and half is best so the nose expands but the base is hard. Tempering the nose will not change the lead enough. You only get the difference between air cooled and water dropped. In fact it is less because the water sucks heat and the nose will not heat down far enough.

[BrushBuster]

BruceB, it was the utter simplicity of the nose-annealing process that interested me. I'm not ready to take on duel-alloy casting or two-stage casting methods until I'm more comfortable with personal casting procedures. It is a subject that has been tossed around a lot as you pointed out, and I look forward to trying differing methods when I'm more comfortable working with molten lead.

Carpetman, why try it? A good question, considering that I have already killed several mule-deer with hard cast commercial boolits. The results so far have been that boolits are effective killers, especially if one is able to place the boolit precisely to take advantage of their increased penetration. Not having recovered a spent boolit so far, I can only go by the wound channels, and these indicate little or no expansion. In two cases, the deer died instantly falling in their tracks, while another ran for 50 yards leaving a blood trail a blind man could follow. As a hunter, I do want full penetration for trailing if required. Finding the balance between that and improved expansion would be doing all I can to be hunting with an effective and humane boolit. Seems like a good quest to me! However, if there's a concensus among the more experienced of you that this is not a worthwhile excercise you would be doing me a big favour.

I want to shoot more in future, and casting my own will help me with that. They say practice makes perfect, and it makes sense to also hunt with the boolit that one becomes most proficient with, but not if it results in wounding game. I would have to see positive results, and quickly.

I'm 65, and want to finish my hunting days using great boolits that I have made myself. This might help explain the fast-track I seem to be on, but having fun is also very much a part of it. I appreciate the help.
BrushBuster

[Bass Ackward]

Brush buster,

Is there an advantage to annealing a nose? Yes and no.

So many variables to think about here and most are related to bore diameter, bullet weight, meplat size, velocity, shot angle, distance, and size of the game. Without knowing all of those, one cannot answer the question.

Here is some of my experience regardless of all the variables above. If your expansion causes blood cloting in the meat around the entrance or exit hole, then you will delay or stop an immediate blood trail unless you cut an artery. The more cloting, the longer the delay. If you cut larger than a 1 1/4" hole, you are likely to find cloting. I find most ACWW to be perfect for most game if the meplat isn't too wide or the velocity too high for a particular caliber. As an example, you can find cloting with just a 30 caliber hole if your velocity is high enough or your bullet soft enough. It is easier to expand a 30 caliber bullet than a larger one because the bullet diameter adds strength at the same hardness.

So what you have to find out is what you are getting from your bullet currently and adjust from there. You may not need a soft nose. Or you might benifit from one. Only the animal / load / distance can tell you for sure.

I can guestimate for you with more data if you need a place to start. But from one post, you were already using hard cast, so remember what you saw upon processing the meat and adjust logically from there. Listen / watch what the animal tells you as you experiment.

[carpetman]

Brushbuster----There you go. You had two drop on the spot and one go 50 yards leaving a good blood trail. It was working. Nothing guarantees they all drop on the spot. You don't know till you pull the trigger. The one leaving a good blood trail apparently didn't need more expansion----good hole or there wouldn't be a good trail. Sounds like if it aint broke don't fix it.

[waksupi]

I've had some experience with varius hardnesses of cast bullets for hunting. I've used the 6.5 at around 1700 fps, air cooled, and got full penetration on a buck. Shattered the liver, and left a nice big hole in the lungs. Two years ago, I shot an elk with a hardened bullet. Full penetration, eight inch hole in the lungs. Last year, elk with a annealed nose. Once again, full penetration, and lotsa interior damage.
My assesment? If you are using a good flatnosed bullet, any way you can get them out of the tube, is going to kill well. I imagine I have killed at least 40 head of game with cast bullets, ranging from coyote to buffalo, and have never had anything go over twenty five or thirty yards, I don't believe.

[StarMetal]

Ric,

You should have some experience with various hardness at your aget don't ya think? [smilie=l:

Joe

[versifier]

BrushBuster,
Like Carpetman says, what you've been doing obviously works well. What caliber are you shooting? If you were still of a mind to experiment, how about hollow pointing your loaded rounds with a tool like Forster makes, or the homemade variety? I am playing with different ways to get some expansion with .30carb small game handgun rounds, not the same as rifle boolits, but still seeking the same goal. (I'll be trying it on the rifle loads, too, but I'm still searching for the best combo of boolit and powder for them first.)

[waksupi]

Ric,

You should have some experience with various hardness at your aget don't ya think? [smilie=l:

Joe

Still hard enough to pound nails with, Joe!

[carpetman]

Waksupi---Still hard enough to pound nails with it. Ewe said it---did she?

[Roudy]

Maybe the correct answer is 45-70!!

[waksupi]

Waksupi---Still hard enough to pound nails with it. Ewe said it---did she?

A satisfied Wooly Mammoth, is a happy Wooly Mammoth. She is satisfied.

[BrushBuster]

Well, if there's no holy grail of hunting boolits to chase after, I'm all for keeping things simple. The feedback here indicates that the hard-cast boolits I purchased from Wayne Doudna and shoot in my .348 Win., have performed typically and as well as should be expected. That's great, it gives me a standard to begin with and I'm confident I can match that as I begin casting for the .35 Remington.

So many variables! Good thing I got into handloading first because that was a good introduction to variables, but I kinda think this "passion":holysheep has got it beat!
Brushy

[BruceB]

Personally, I have serious reservations about hunting with a non-expanding bullet. In fact, I refuse to do so.

This is based on a single hunting incident, wherein I shot a good-sized Wood Bison cow SEVEN times in the chest with .404 Jeffery 400-grain solids (steel FMJ, intended for heavy African game) and I ended up losing the animal in dense bushland. I also recall a thread a couple years ago from Shuz, who reported on a moose which absorbed quite a few hard-cast bullets, and took a considerable amount of time in dying.

I will NOT hunt with a round which "may" or "may not" kill efficiently and quickly.

Thus, my search began for a cast load which WILL kill efficiently and quickly, in a manner comparable to good jacketed bullets, and by that, I mean my benchmark.....Nosler Partitions.

When considering cast boolits for hunting, I decided I was placing myself back about 1890, when velocities were lower and most bullets were still lead, not jacketed. So, my parameters for a GOOD CB hunting load were:

-a HEAVY bullet

-ability to expand AND hold together

-fast enough for a decent trajectory to 200 yards, i.e.: above 2000 fps

The development was successful.

The end result is the .416 Rigby load I carried to Alberta last fall. The RCBS bullet weighs 365 grains, with a pure-lead nose and wheel-weight alloy shank. This bullet travels at 2100fps and groups three rounds in 1.5" from 100 yards. Zeroed at 170 yards, it's 2.5" high at 100 and 2" low at 200. From testing the bullets at muzzle velocity on jugs of water, I'm confident it will be a decent killer of large game, and it will NOT pencil through an animal with only minor damage. Bullets expanded to over .80 caliber while still weighing in the area of 300 grains.

I believe that cast bullets selected for hunting should be fatter and heavier than what we might select for a cartidge with jacketed bullets. My personal choice for big game rifles with CAST bullets would start at the .338 diameter and at least 250 grains of EXPANDING bullet. My new NEI .338 mould casts at over 300 grains, and would be a prime candidate for CB hunting...WITH a softnose for expansion.

There's a very good reason that so many States' game regulations BAN FMJ bullets. They are well known as the cause of a great many wounded and lost animals. Using a hard cast bullet runs the risk of duplicating FMJ non-performance, and I want no part of such a miserable scenario. BD,DT, and I still regret that bison cow, over thirty years later. Live and learn.

[44man]

Bruce, everything you say is true. The only variable is the nose shape with hard cast. Most of those FMJ's for big game have round noses that slip through without enough tissue disruption. They are made to break heavy bone or penetrate to the brain on huge, tough animals. The same thing happens with the smaller calibers that do not expand. I helped a guy drag out the smallest full grown deer I ever seen, in PA, that was shot six times in the chest with the old 180 gr WW Silvertips in a 30-06. No expansion at all. He tracked the deer for miles in the snow after every hit. All shots could be covered with my hand.
Any bullet or boolit with the wrong nose shape or a small caliber bullet that does not expand is Trouble with a capitol "T". I would not trust a small caliber in hard cast either as the meplat can not be made large enough. This is where a soft nose really makes them effective.
I am willing to bet the buf would have reacted much differently to a large, flat meplat and you would not have lost any penetration.
There is a fine line between a bullet that gives no response from an animal that is hit, to an effective killer, to the bullet that blows the hell out of the animal. Choosing the proper bullet or boolit is a responsability you can't ignore.

[KCSO]

Maybe I am having different results than others here, but I shoot a 30-40 Krag with 220 RNFP G/C bullets and push them at 1950 FPS. The bullets are case from w/w and they seem to expand fine in test medial, typicaly matching the 180 jacketed soft point. I have yet to recover one from a deer as they have so far all went through and left an average of a 2" hole on the far side of a dead deer. The farthest I have had to follow up? was one deer that hunched at a heart shot and ran 50 yards or so before tumbling. I have had a 30-06 180 jacketed rounds do the same. I will admit that I shoot 30 and up and when I get to the 45's I try to match the bullet to the game as I HAVE had a 45-500 soft lead RN slip right through the lungs of a deer and the deer had to be tracked aut 1/2 mile. By going to the 330 Gould cast soft for the lighter game I have not had a problem. What ever I shoot I like to do a lot of water jug and wet pack tests before I go hunting.

[Dale53]

I am just a "Piker" compared to a lot of you folks. I have only killed a half dozen deer with a handgun (.44 magnum). A couple of them were central nervous system "instant kills" but most were "behind the shoulder" shots. In each case of the behind the shoulder shots, the Keith bullet totally penetrated regardless of angle and left a GOOD blood trail. The deer ran 35-100 yards before dropping. I consider that good performance. I did have one deer that ran about 200 yards after being heart shot at about 10 yards - a child could have followed that blood trail. So, I guess, with a revolver bullet, I would have to say the Keith style was just fine. However, i have moved to the Lee C430-310 (a friend and I designed this bullet) for absolute best in the .44. Understand, any similar bullet with a large meplat (the Lee is .350") would no doubt do just as well.

Most pistol bullets, at least up to the power level of a .44 magnum, may not penetrate as well as we might like with an expanding bullet. In fact, I will say here, that a wide flat meplat is what I really want in a pistol or revolver bullet. I want total penetration from any direction. We do NOT have the hydraulic action of a high speed rifle bullet and need a positive blood trail. That is achieved with total penetration.

However, with a suitable rifle, we have power to spare, and can, and should, utilize an expanding bullet. Author Paul Mathews has done a LOT of Pennsylvania deer hunting with cast bullets and he is a champion of soft, paper patched bullets. I certainly agree with him, in theory, at least ( I have never shot any thing with a paper patch bullet). Because of the perceived tediam of making up paper patch bullets, I have never done so. I suspect that is what we should be doing :razz: .

FWIW, a friend wanted to go Buffalo (Bison) hunting with his 45/70 Sharps. He asked me to make his 45/70 into a 45/90 equivalent using black powder. I loaded him up a serious, but safe, duplex load with the Lyman 500 gr Government bullet. It was cast 30/1 (lead/tin). The Bison was shot at 100 yards about four inches behind the leg about 1/4th up from the bottom of the body. It took a rib out going in, got the aorta, both lungs and a rib on the way out. The bullet was recovered under the hide on the far side. It showed near perfect expansion (like the ad pictures of jacketed bullets). At the shot, the Bison hit the ground, got up, staggered five or six steps and fell for good. The guide was absolutely amazed that the Bison (a large Bull) hit the ground at the shot, with "that old gun". It seems that the guide had never seen one of the Bison hit with anything other than a super magnum and stated that NONE had ever hit the ground at the shot unless brain or spine was hit. MY friend gently reminded the guide that the buffalo were wiped out with guns similar to his... :???:

Another friend shot a deer in Colorado with a hard cast 45/70 Lyman government bullet (in fact the same mould that I used to cast the bison bullet). The first shot was a little bit far back, and he ended up shooting the deer six times over a period of hours while tracking for nearly a mile in hip deep snow. In each case, the bullet merely penciled through the deer. After the adrenalin is up animals are hard to put down. This obvious bullet failure was due to "too hard" and a round nose. If the bullet had been soft, it might have done ok, even with the round nose, However, for deer, he would have been much better off with the 330 gr Gould bullet cast 25/1 (lead/tin).

To sum up, I believe that we should make certain that our bullets are the best we can make for the job at hand. We have a moral obligation to refrain from inflicting unnecessary suffering on the animals we hunt. Besides, I don't wish to EVER lose an animal unnecessarily. If we cannot meet those goals with cast bullets then maybe we should use (gasp!) jacketed.

Just a thougnt or two...

Dale53

[BrushBuster]

BruceB
Your commitment to bullet expansion is totally understandable to me. Those of us that take our hunting seriously also shoulder a deep compassion for the creatures we hunt.

I too have a cross to bear in having lost an animal to my own carelessness and ignorance of the bullet I was shooting at the time. My own failure was due to the lack of jacketed bullet penetration on a bull moose hit solidly in the front shoulder. The 30-06 I was using at the time had accounted for considerable game, but the 180 grain bullet was new to me and had previously only been tried on deer. At the hurried shot, the bull went down and didn't move, so I got back into my canoe to paddle over to where he lay. When only half way to him, he jumped up and plunged into the lake. Travelling only on three legs he left me behind and the needed second shot was not delivered. I tracked him for two days, until the drops of blood had long stopped and he entered a vast swamp that I could not traverse.

So, differing from your experience, I was left with the determination never to attempt a shot on a large animal with bullets that didn't penetrate fully, even when encountering bone and muscle.

In hindsight, I know that he could have been killed cleanly with calmer shot placement that included knowledge of that particular bullets limitations. I suspect that you too have relived those moments with the bison and could also do the same. We both screwed up by not doing our homework. These are very different bullet-hunter failures, and confirm that tailoring the load and bullet to the game we hunt is essential. Few hunters put that much consideration into their sport, but then again, there are shooters and there are hunters. Screwing up motivates improvement, and repeating such correctable mistakes is just not acceptable to a hunter.

Knowing how to successfully adjust boolit penetration through casting methods is a valuable skill that I would like to learn. Your method has been duly recorded, and I fully intend to explore it before too long.

[carpetman]

Brushbuster---The deer that got away being on three legs makes me think it was more of a case of perhaps poor shot placement rather than bullet performance. For 30-06 I use 150 grainers and that has included moose and no problems. Many dont agree with using the 150 grainer---funnny thing is that some that don't are using 130's in a .270-----go figure that one.

[BrushBuster]

Carpetman, your right! It was poor shot placement with a bullet that could not compensate. I really don't think that moose should be attempted with bullets and loads that can not bring down the animal if struck similarly. Had I been using a Nosler Partition or hard boolit of the same weight, I'm sure I would not have had a problem. My circumstances that morning were not untypical of moose hunting; paddling down a remote lakeshore, and bailing out to take the shot off the beach at an animal heading into the thickets. Short of time, and winded. Bad combination! Of course I couldn't just blame the bullet, but it was one of the factors that could be improved on, especially after seeing its limitations when things don't go just right. :violin:

[versifier]

Moose don't go down easily in my experience with them no matter what you hit them with. (My personal belief is that they are so stupid that it takes some time for them to figure out that they're dead.) I have watched them keep walking for more than a hundred yards with two holes drilled through the heart. The bullets were Sierra .30cal 165SBT's, the shots were broadside, they expanded well and exited with 2" holes on the far side. I have seen one take six good hits from a .44mag at 20yds - 300gr JSP's - any one of which would have been fatal, and the bull walked about 70yds before laying down and dying. There was barely any of the heart left to cook. I have also watched one drop with one shot at 50 yds from a .30 Herrett Contender with a 130gr SSP bullet. I have come to believe that moose are in a special class all their own and trying to compare results with other species is not really productive.
I agree totally that hunting boolits must expand. It is the only ethical way to do it. That said, the wound channel created by a .44, .45, or bigger slow boolit can do as well or better than an expanded slug from a smaller bore at higher velocity, even if there is little or no expansion noticable. The bigger the hole you can make, the better, and if you get an exit wound to help with the tracking when needed, it's an added plus.

[stocker]

versifier; Funny how different experiences shape different opinions. I've shot a lot of moose over the past 50 years and I've always thought they were softies, most dropping within a step. I have seen one rutting bull soak up 5, .375 H&H 300 grain bullets and despite broken shoulder , punctured lungs and heart it ran until it was head shot with a .270 Win. Proves there are exceptions to what you might believe to be the rule. The shooter was one of our national hunting rifle class champions and not one of the shots would have failed to kill the moose. We just kept wondering, when?

[steveb]

Im as new to casting boolits as new can be,as im casting my first ones this weekend.I will be using some of Paco's hints and tricks as well.He is very knowledable,and a fine gentleman to boot.

[carpetman]

I have to go along with Stocker---the moose(3)I saw shot all went down easy. That's very limited,however,I did talk to a bunch of folks in Alaska with a lot of experience and the common thing said was they go down easy. Brushbuster--you might speculate that a different bullet would have performed better. I'd speculate not,a bad shot is a bad shot. I suspect making a good shot from a canoe would be hard. Maybe wait for a better one.

[robertbank]

If you want expansion in a handgun boolit drill a hole in the tip and fill it with Mercury then seal it. I would not suggest you use the round for anything you want to eat but you will get expansion real quick.

Stay Safe

[StarMetal]

Why not use something safer and edible like cooking oil?

Joe

[Bullshop]

I wonder if it would work if you melted some boolit lube and pourd the cavity full. Would it have the same hydrolic effect?
BIC/BS

[Bass Ackward]

I wonder if it would work if you melted some boolit lube and pourd the cavity full. Would it have the same hydrolic effect?
BIC/BS


Dan,

Absolutely. But you don't need to waste that. Plain old candle wax is what I use. You can use a small torch if you need to reheat it and get it deeper. When you use wax, you can use 50% less hole and still expand just as much.

[44man]

Dale, those are my thoughts exactly. The alloy used has to be matched to the boolit nose shape. Round nose and pointy boolits MUST expand. With enough velocity, WW metal does very well. As the velocity decreases, the lead must be made softer. As bore size gets smaller, even more expansion is needed but with the smaller bores, as velocity decreases the poor penetration can negate the expansion, causing lost animals.
Using a very heavy, soft boolit in a large bore is very effective because the boolit weight gives the penetration combined with expansion.
With a large bore boolit using a large flat meplat, the expansion is less of an issue, however with enough boolit weight, some expansion makes it even more effective. Lower velocities with the heavy boolits of the proper shape or alloy does not cut down on the effectiveness either.
Trying to shoot game with hard round nose boolits at low velocity or hard small caliber boolits can make a believer out of most guys. They either learn that it is wrong or go on doing it because one animal died quick.
I will keep saying that the alloy and velocity must be matched to the boolit shape and weight and this also holds true with jacketed bullets but bullet constuction will now enter the picture instead of lead alloy.

[Bullshop]

Bass
Thats very good and interesting news. I have some HP molds and some swage HP punches. The swaged HP's have a much more shallow cavity than the cast and dont seem to expand as well as the deeper cavity cast HP's
This just might be the way to make them work about the same. I will have to try some on our next small game hunt.
This is good I can use the same boolit with solid nose in my big game rifle.
BIC/BS

[Bass Ackward]

Thats very good and interesting news.


Dan,

The hollow point needs to fill up with material from the target / game you are shooting at in order to expand. The wax just speeds up that process so expansion starts immediately.

All you gotta do is think back to when you were a kid. Think about shooting birds with your 22. The hollow points meant severe damage to starlings over normal solids, but you still got a carcus. When I got the hollow points filled with wax I called them "Poofers". All you heard was poof and then nothing but feathers floating down.

[versifier]

Stocker & Carpetman, I've only been on hand for about a dozen. Not an expert by any means, but they just seem to take longer to go down after a fatal hit (or hits) than anything else I have ever seen. Maybe they're more stupid here because only people hunt them? They have no fear of anything, they ignore the sound of the shots, and the biggest challenge hunting them here in Maine or NH is making sure you drop them near enough to a road or trail to get them out of the woods with a minimum of hassle. The only time I have ever seen a moose move quickly after a shot was when I shot under a flushing partridge in front of a hemlock thicket with a load of 7 1/2's. There was a bull on the other side who was a tad bit irate at being peppered and chased me up a pine tree. :shock: He lost interest after a half an hour or so.... The dog had enough sense to go back to the car and wait there for me. :violin:

[BrushBuster]

Hey, please tell me more about the concept of drilled and wax-filled bullet noses? Is this an effective method to achieve expansion for a hunting boolit? Has this been thoroughly pursued by any of you? How do hard and soft boolits react to this? Any legal issues to deal with here?

Versifier, our moose in Canada can be pretty dumb, but not so dumb as to actually enjoy getting peppered with birdshot?:kidding: I remember a weathered picture I saw years ago of a young fella way up a limbless skinny pine. Right below him was a bull moose running around the base and snorting and tearing up turf. The guy in the tree still had an axe in his hand, and the story was that he was chopping on the tree when the bull in rut heard it and got turned on to scrap! Never did hear if he came down.

I vote for moose being generally and relatively easy to kill. Big muley buck would be just as challenging. I also think Maine moose are easier to hunt because of the lack of predators. I've seen several CD's on moose calling in that region, and could hardly believe their docile behaviour. Have to agree though, the hardest part of moose hunting is getting a tag these days!

[Bass Ackward]

Hey, please tell me more about the concept of drilled and wax-filled bullet noses? Is this an effective method to achieve expansion for a hunting boolit? Has this been thoroughly pursued by any of you? How do hard and soft boolits react to this? Any legal issues to deal with here?



Barry,

I have used this technique for a few decades now. Is it viable? Heck yes. "IF" the animal you are going after, using that gun / load, requires it for expansion. And if you can do it so that accuracy remains unaffected. Delivery is still the primary goal. But maybe you don't need expansion. It is highly effective at opening all hardness levels quicker than without. But it also will cause bullet breakup quicker too at high velocities because a hard bullet will try to expand from a much farter distance back than a soft one that just starts to roll back at the nose. Another thing that makes it tough to answer is how hard is hard? So you must control your antimony content or at least balance it with tin to stay ductile. If you got weight to spare, so be it. As I said before, common sence should rule and let the game talk to ya before and after.

I can see that you are serious about this. What you need is a data base in your head to give you some confidence.

So start getting some milk jugs together along with some news papers. Soak the news paper over night. Fill the jugs with water. Then place twice the amount of news paper wrapped tightly together as the entrance hide thickness on the game (at the shot angle you prefer) you are after. Example: I use 2" of wet news print to simulate quartering deer.

You can even add bone if you have a comparable size sourse. If you do, then drop your news print back to a 1 to 1 ratio. Place enough milk jugs behind it to simulate penetration distance at that angle. Or you can use enough to capture the bullet for the weight / caliber slug you intend to use. Usually 6 - 8 should do. If you penetrate more than that, you might need more expansion. I spray paint the bone location on the front of the paper so I can hit that location. (sometimes)

What you want to see (for deer) is that the first milk jug blows up. Even better if the second one does too. Then the others just split or develop a hole. The blow up is shock energy transfer.

I use this set-up in one loaction and then I back up at different ranges to "see" my minimum distance (where I don't over expand or the bullet hangs together) and a maximum. So you will see for yourself how range plays a "BIG" part in what you WANT to achieve. Or the hardness you select instead of receiving opinions that may not apply.

It is really hard for deer (small penetration distance) to get a cast bullet to perform at 200 yards that won't blow up at 50. Only one bore diameter (that I have used) comes close that can give you enough trajectory to deliver it on target properly at that range. But you will see this for yourself.

You must still think .... logically. As I said before, not all animals require expansion or to the same degree. If you don't have enough bullet weight that will show up too.

[BrushBuster]

Thanks Bass, for taking the time to point me in the right direction. It's all hypothetical for me right now, but if I see the need for improved expansion I now have a couple of methods to explore. At this point, it appears to me that BruceB's lead tipped bullets might be more effective with larger boolits and bigger game. Most of my deer shots are under 100 yards, so the"drilled and filled" concept might work better with the 210 grain boolits I'll be cranking out first. My preference for lung shots on deer doesn't challenge a boolit much, and a little extra control there could be helpful.

Got awfully funny looks from the wife, when I asked her to save all the milk jugs, but not so bad as before, when I snagged onto the wax wrapper from the last cheese she bought. :confused:

[BruceB]

Gents;

Bass presents a very good analysis of the requirements of the bullet vis-a-vis the intended game. He also clearly identifies the balancing act needed in the alloy to ensure efficient performance on-target.

Although I didn't analyse the problem in such excellent terms, having little experience in preparing HUNTING loads for cast bullets, it definitely appeared to me that my solution for a successful cast-boolit elk load would be dependent on the factors of:

-expansion

-weight retention

-penetration and the ability to break heavy bone

-and the ability to reach out for 200 yards with accuracy.

I wasn't much worried about accuracy, because the RCBS .416 bullet is my ONLY design on-hand for the rifle, and I've used well over 1500 rounds with it so far. It's a known quantity, and the #1 was grouping the hunting load in 1.5" from 100 yards (3-round groups).

Pure lead is also a known factor, and the best available medium for sure expansion. Therefore, it came down to creating a bullet that would hold together, without breaking at the point where the two alloys (pure lead and wheelweight allloy) were joined. The high-temperature casting solved that problem, as there is no physical joint between the metals. Instead, there is a smooth mixing of the alloys in the area of the transition, and the effect is one of UNITY, without a potential weak spot.

In the water-jug test I did, I used only the jugs themselves, (nothing in front of or between the jugs) but it was impressive. I used an aircooled softpoint for one test, and a water-dropped (harder-shanked) softpoint for the second. 365 grains at 2100 fps represented the muzzle speed of the proposed hunting load, and I fired them from ten feet. With both bullets, the first two jugs in the row were completely shattered, with pieces flying as much as ten yards and an estimated thirty feet in the air, and the third one was badly smashed. The aircooled bullet stopped in the sixth jug, expanded to 0.85" and still weighing about 66% of its original 365 grains. The water-dropped bullet went through all eight jugs and stopped at the milk crate and dry newsprint behind the last jug, where I picked it up , as it was just lying there. It lost a couple of pieces in the sixth jug, but I figured that six jugs was enough penetration to credit the bullet's total recovered weight with those recovered pieces.

Note that my design objective was replication of Nosler Partition performance, and that on close-range shots, 66% is EXACTLY typical of the Noslers I've dug out of assorted defunct fauna over a lot of years....if they were in fact still in the critters, and not still zipping along somewhere else.

Unfortunately, although I carried these softpoint rounds to Alberta, no animals appeared willing to be shot for my research. I seriously doubt that a deer would come close to stopping one of these, and even an elk or moose could easily develop a through-and-out wound as well. I wouldn't anticipate the need for much tracking, if any, given a well-placed shot.

If I hadn't had faith in the bullet, I would never have set out to hunt with these rounds in my rifle. I'll repeat my main reason for going this route, which is that pure lead is a well-known element, and its properties of malleability and cohesiveness are stellar virtues in the hunting field. Once I solved the problem of possible separation of the bullet components, my reservations were satisfied and I had no further qualms. I believe this method of casting is at least equal to, and possibly superior, to the casting of separate nose sections for later assembly.

In the .416, the process is successful. I want to try it again in something smaller, and my new NEI 308-grain .338 boolit is a prime candidate. As the bullets get smaller and 'thinner', the strength of the lead in the nose may become an issue, with slumping of the soft metal in the nose under the stress of acceleration being a possible problem. I suspect the .338 is still fat enough to resist such slumping, but we'll see.

I do run on, n'est-ce pas?

[BrushBuster]

Run on all you want BruceB, that was great.

The calibre I'm interested in trying your methods on is the .348 with 250 grain boolits. This is a mould purchase I haven't made yet, but am looking at an NEI #108 or a Lyman 350482 (if I can ever track one down). I would especially be interested in your opinion of how much of these long nosed bore-riders could be devoted to lead? I hope you get the opportunity to work with that NEI 308-grain .338 boolit, because that 's right in the ball park for me. My focus will be on a moose stopping boolit that I could optimize for around 2200 fps. and 100 yard shots.

I'm assuming that a lead-nose boolit cast as you've described would provide accuracy and point-of-aim comparable to the same conventially cast boolit. It would be a benefit to be able to practice and sight-in with a regular boolit and save the specialized ones for the hunt.

Lets see now, if a .416 Rigby blasts hell out of six jugs, how many does my .348 need? :veryconfu

[BruceB]

BB, sir;

".... am looking at an NEI #108 or a Lyman 350482 (if I can ever track one down)."

- I've seen 350482 occasionally on Ebay, but didn't bother watching the prices since I don't own a .348 just now. It could either go high, as a rare item, or low because of limited demand. An NEI mould is only about a two-week delivery (and $80!) away.

" I would especially be interested in your opinion of how much of these long nosed bore-riders could be devoted to lead? "

For my .416, the entire nose is lead, right back to the crimp groove. I used a .40 S&W case for a lead dipper to measure the amount of pure lead used. On the NEI .338, a very long-nosed design, I'm thinking about 2/3 of the nose length would be about right for the pure-lead portion. I really want the bullet to retain a lot of sectional density, even after nose expansion, to keep the penetration going. Two holes in the animal are much better than one, in my book. Looking at the 350482, I'd likely start with about half the nose in pure lead. Is this for a '71 Winchester? If so, I'd look carefully at the noses after a test-cycling, just to make sure the noses aren't getting damaged. I don't think there'd be a problem because the feed line is pretty straight, but I'd check anyway.


"My focus will be on a moose stopping boolit that I could optimize for around 2200 fps. and 100 yard shots."


- I think your focus is very reasonable, and achievable, too.

"I'm assuming that a lead-nose boolit cast as you've described would provide accuracy and point-of-aim comparable to the same conventially cast boolit. It would be a benefit to be able to practice and sight-in with a regular boolit and save the specialized ones for the hunt."

-Absolutely! There's no difference in point of impact from 'normal' cast bullets to the softpoints in my .416, and there's really no discernible weight variation either, which surprised me a little bit.

"Lets see now, if a .416 Rigby blasts hell out of six jugs, how many does my .348 need?"

-Your .348 with that nice, long 482 boolit will penetrate like there's no tomorrow! Six jugs would be good to start with, but do as I did and place a bundle of dry newsprint behind the last jug "just in case". Even if the bullet does get that far, the speed will be low enough that it won't be damaged much by the stop, and you'll still get a good idea of how it performed en route.

Funny, how much trouble we go to, when the jacketed bullets are easily available....that's why we call ourselves "gun nuts", I reckon.....

[BrushBuster]

This has been a very rewarding thread. It's gone directly to where I wanted to focus, and I now have two major casting projects to undertake. I could actually stop asking questions at this point because I have so much to do! But I probably won't. :Fire: