Testing hollow point expansion

[Shooter6br]

Besides actual game preformance, What media do you use? I have read using water to shoot into, sand, sawdust, slab of beef, dry newpapers ,wet newspapers etc. I use an indoor range so i want to keep the mess to a minimum.Thanks Rick(I guess I have too much time of my hands in this cold Pennsylvania winter

[geargnasher]

Wet phonebooks or newspaper works for me. Not a very good indicator of real world performance on game, but a cheap and easy standard of comparision.

Gear

[Shooter6br]

Seems the simplest to do .Water shooting has to be a soaking experience

[Larry Gibson]

To be able to predict how effective the specific test media is we must use a "reference" bullet. Using a known expanding bullet that is successful in expanding in game gives us something to compare to. With that comparison a logical conclusion as to whether the HP'd cast bullet will expand can be drawn. I learned of this method from a couple articles I read back in the '70s and have been using it without fail. I use soaking wet newsprint (used to use Shotgun News) and generally initially test at 15 yards for a handgun and at 100 yards for a rifle.

The casting, alloy, size and depth of HP, GC or PB, etc. have all been covered on other threads so I will just address the testing.

First we must select the type of game we are hunting in which we want the HP cast bullet to expand. In this case we expect to shoot deer in the 150 lb class. A broadside shot through both shoulders will have to penetrate 12 - 14". A stack of wet news print of 16” is then used standing on end. Thus we'll want our cast HP to begin expansion in 2-3" and cause maximum cavitations in 6-12". Can we expect to duplicate this in wet news print, probably not? We can however shoot a bullet of known expansive performance on such deer into the wet newsprint. How that bullet then expands and penetrates gives us a reference. If we make our cast HP expand and penetrate similarly in the wet newsprint then it should expand and penetrate similarly in deer as does the reference bullet of known performance.

Let's take the 44 Magnum for instance and assume we have a 429244 we have HP'd. We have a good load for it at 1400 fps out of our 6 1/2" Ruger. A good reference bullet for this is the Speer 240 gr Gold Dot. With a muzzle velocity of 13-1400 fps this is an excellent performer on deer out to 100 yards providing excellent expansion and penetration. Using a stack of once folded wet news papers we can expect to get 4 shots per stack (on end for test) but I usually shoot 3 shots per stack in the initial test. More shots than that and the cavities begin to overlap and skew the results. At 15 yards I shoot 3 shots of the 240 gr GD load into one stack. I then begin peeling back layers of newsprint and get a rough measurement (I use a ruler and measure to the nears ½”) of the depth where cavitation begins, the depth of maximum cavitation, the width of the maximum cavitation and depth of penetration. If the bullet exits 16” of wet newsprint in my experience it will also exit a deer even if the shoulders are hit. An average of these measurements for the 3 shots is made. This then is the “reference” standard we want our cast HP to approximate. I then shoot 3 shots of my cast bullet HP into the other stack of wet news print. I make the same measurements and averages and then compare those to the reference. If my HP (if recovered) has expanded and all of the cavitation measurements are equal to or perhaps better than that of the reference then I can expect my HP to expand as well as the reference bullet on deer.

The same test procedure is done with cast HP bullets used in rifles. The exception is the test range which is 50 or 100 yards depending on the cartridge.

When I am satisfied with the expansion and performance of my cast HP bullet I then test it at extended range to determine the max effective expansion range. I again shoot the reference ammunition (1 good shot is usually sufficient) at each range for comparative purposes. For my handguns this is usually at 25, 50, 75 and 100 yards. With cast HPs in rifles I use 50, 100, 150 and 200 yards. I take the longest range where there was expansion, cavitation and penetration (12” minimum) (at least comparable to the reference bullet) of my cast HP as the maximum effective range for that firearm, cartridge and cast HP bullet load.

Yes that is a lot of testing but I only hunt deer or other big game with cast HP bullets of known performance. Many years ago I was greatly disappointed by the performance of a HP’d cast bullet on a deer (it was shot 3 times, all good hits). Since I began testing as described and using such developed and tested cast HP bullets I have not been disappointed. The results of my RCBS 35-200-FN HP on that Texas buck is an excellent example.

Properly cast, loaded and tested HP bullets are very effective on game. They are much more effective than non-expanding bullets, even those with large meplats. However, if not properly tested to assure that they do expand properly they can be very disappointing.

Larry Gibson

[Bullshop Junior]

Besides actual game preformance, What media do you use? I have read using water to shoot into, sand, sawdust, slab of beef, dry newpapers ,wet newspapers etc. I use an indoor range so i want to keep the mess to a minimum.Thanks Rick(I guess I have too much time of my hands in this cold Pennsylvania winter
What ever you do, PLEASE don't waste that hunk of meat!! I am drooling already........

[Bullshop Junior]

My common test platform for that is a 1 gallon can full of river silt. (I use the river silt because it is easy to get here. Just about any kind of sand will work) I fill the can with sifted sand, then snap on the lid, then set it out and shoot it. Then I take it in, and dig the boolit/bullet out, then run the rest threw a screen to get any boolit/bullet chunks out. The I put ducktape on the hole, and shoot it again. If you are shooting boolits/bullets that you can tell apart, you can shoot the can more then once before digging threw it.

[JIMinPHX]

I've found that boolits I recover from crumb rubber traps exhibit similar expansion to what I see in boolits recovered from soft tissue in deer sized animals. It's not the same, but it seems close.

More on crumb rubber traps here - http://castboolits.gunloads.com/showthread.php?t=26627

[yondering]

First thing to remember when testing for expansion is that your bullet won't perform the same way every time when shot into an animal. Your test medium will probably be more consistent than the body of an animal.

With that in mind, think about how hollow points work. On impact, the hollow point is pressurized; that pressure forces the cavity walls apart, opening the hollow point out to the sides. This is different than a soft nose bullet, which expands by the point first being forced to the rear.

To pressurize the hollow point cavity, you need some sort of fluid medium. Wet newspaper, gelatin, very wet clay, and things like that will work well. Wood, dry sand, sawdust, etc, do not work the same way. Dry test mediums like this will cause expansion/deformation, but not in the same way that a bullet would perform in an animal. None of the traditional wet test mediums I mentioned above are exact either, but are a much closer approximation to an animal's body.

I use both wet newspaper and milk jugs full of water. They do not perform the same; jugs of water will expand a bullet very quickly, often causing over-expansion, while the newspaper is tougher, and more closely simulates flesh. It's also more trouble to set up.

[fredj338]

Wet phonebooks or newspaper works for me. Not a very good indicator of real world performance on game, but a cheap and easy standard of comparision.

Gear
I like wet neswpaper or phone books. IMO, they do replicate expansion I get on live game. Penetration is less, about 3/4 of what you may see in the field, but the few bullets I have recovered from game look pretty much like those I test in wetpack. Bullet on left from wetpack, on right from 1200#+ buffalo
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v703/fredj338/DSCN0552.jpg
Bullet on left wetpack, on right 700# kudu bull
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v703/fredj338/210GRNP.jpg
So I use wetpack. It is portable, repeatable & not too messy. If you are careful, you can get 6 handgun shots into a stack of phone books, 4 rifle shots. You'll need at least 12" for most expanding handgun bullets & 20" for most expanding rifle bullets. I would expect the same result using either JSP or LHP. Saok the paper well, several hours, it should be dripping wet. You will not get enymore uniform results from more expenisve bal.gel. & it's way easier to deal with.

[303Guy]

My common test platform for that is a 1 gallon can full of river silt.I'm using fine, soft sea sand (high shell content) at the moment because it stops the boolit in the container. I have not compaired the results to flesh yet. I did think that perhaps if the boolit held together in the soft sand it would hold together in game flesh.

Some results to show what I mean.

The first one is a lighter 209gr 303 hollow point, the rest are 246.5gr flat points at increasing speeds.
http://i388.photobucket.com/albums/oo327/303Guy/MVC-449F.jpg

This is 262.5gr 303 hollow point.
http://i388.photobucket.com/albums/oo327/303Guy/MVC-458F.jpg

[yondering]

303Guy, those are some cool looking mushrooms, but probably not a good indication of what the boolits will do in flesh. Try adding some water to that sand, so it's real soupy, that may change the results dramatically. Even wet sand is too solid though. Newspaper or plain water would be even better. Can you find some clay where you live? That will work too, if you can get it the right consistency (not too hard).

[MtGun44]

When I shoot any of the pistol calibers with factory jacketd HPs into very wet
newsprint, I get identical expansion and almost exactly half the penetration
reported by the pros with their expensive calibrated ballistic gelatin. This has
held true for .38 spl, 9mm, .44 mag and .45 acp with many different bullet
designs. I'm sure that this is a bit less precise, and I have not shot with the
glass, steel car door and various clothing requirements for the FBI criterion,
but for bare gelatin, very wet newsprint is a really excellent stand in if you
double the depth of penetration. Also, the cavities shown in the ballistic
gelatin are larger than the disrupted volume (let alone the actual hole) in the
wet newsprint. Final expanded shape looks absolutely identical to what is
shown from bare ballistic gelatin tests. Phone books work the same, too.

just to be clear - I get 6.5 " penetration when the bare gelatin reported
penetration is 13 inches. It is supposed to be accurately calibrated for
flesh. Someone else said it, but it is worth repeating - Animals vary a
whole lot in density and composition. Lungs are foamy and low density,
a full rumen on a deer full of wet cellulose based material is very dense,
as is bone. you'll see a lot more variation in actual animals than in
the test medium.

Bill

[303Guy]

My choice of fine, soft sea sand was due to convenience and I figured it would give some indication of comparison between boolits and velocity changes.

I have found a good correlation between waterlogged wool furniture padding and small game both in depth of penetration and bullet expansion/disintegration. This works fine for a 22 hornet but a 303 Brit requires a lot larger volume and length, which I don't have, hence the dry sea sand.

http://i388.photobucket.com/albums/oo327/303Guy/MVC-572F_edited.jpg?t=1262490545http://i388.photobucket.com/albums/oo327/303Guy/MVC-580F_edited.jpg

Same bullet with a bit more Oomph!
http://i388.photobucket.com/albums/oo327/303Guy/MVC-887F.jpg

The trick here is to cut out out the 'beverage' can top, stuff it full of padding then saturate with water.
It's a lot more labour intensive than dry sand but the sand must be fine and 'soft'.

[fredj338]

My choice of fine, soft sea sand was due to convenience and I figured it would give some indication of comparison between boolits and velocity changes.

The trick here is to cut out out the 'beverage' can top, stuff it full of padding then saturate with water.
It's a lot more labour intensive than dry sand but the sand must be fine and 'soft'.

You could do sim thing w/ 1gal or 1lit plastic jugs. Tear up or shred newsprint & stuff the bottles full then fill w/ water. Much more labor intensive than a stack of wetpack & still only good for one shot. Bullet manuf used wetpack for years to test their factory bullets until the advent of bal.gel. I would love to test in bal.gel. but it is expensive & diff to use as it must be kept ref. All wet paper needs is to be wet.[smilie=w:

[redgum]

For what it's worth.....
I cut the top and bottom out of a large coffee can or similar container and make a roll of newspaper (layer upon layer) until the roll fits loosely inside the can. Immerse in water for a few hours and shoot through the centre(end to end) You can tape 2 or more cans end to end with duct tape as well if needed.
Just dont pack them too tight because the paper expands as it soaks up water.

[outdoorfan]

For what it's worth.....
I cut the top and bottom out of a large coffee can or similar container and make a roll of newspaper (layer upon layer) until the roll fits loosely inside the can. Immerse in water for a few hours and shoot through the centre(end to end) You can tape 2 or more cans end to end with duct tape as well if needed.
Just dont pack them too tight because the paper expands as it soaks up water.

Wouldn't shooting through the side make more sense as far as the way the paper is orientated?

[Johnch]

I am using several sections of 12" steel pipe with a welded end cap on 1 end full of water/saw dust mix
4 steel tubes 3' long so I can test 4 shotsloads before refilling them
Sort of like oatmeal
I then duct tape a pice of the plastic cardboard over the end to keep the mix in

Saw dust is free
If I can hit the 12"
I can test at that range

Just a FYI
A good impact blows the plastic off and the saw dust soup blows out
So I put a 12'x12' tarp under the steel tubes to catch the blow out
So I can reuse the sawdust soup

I find the saw dust is close enough to deer unless I need to know about bone
I then add some bones from the bucher shop in front to shoot

John

[redgum]

"Wouldn't shooting through the side make more sense as far as the way the paper is orientated? "

You could I guess, but I see no difference. once the paper is thoroughly soaked through and has expanded it is like a mass of paper mache'
Besides this way the cans are re-usable and you can collect the blown out mache' and repack them. Stretching the knotted leg of an old pair of jeans over the can helps to catch/hold the paper mache' also.

[44man]

None of you are doing it right, no fun there at all. [smilie=l:
Years ago we found some beautiful blue clay on a river bank and brought home a few 5 gallon buckets. I figured to make some blocks but I had to leave for work.
My friend lived in Cleveland so he decided to experiment in his basement. He took a big can and mixed a bunch of water with the clay to make a slurry instead of a block.
Yeah, he shot it in the basement with his .44 :holysheep You have never lived until you get a whole basement full of blue clay, dripping from the joists and everything else! :bigsmyl2:

[303Guy]

:lol: I bet he only did that once! ;-)

A few good ideas gave been posted. I like the rolled newsprint in a coffee can.

I often use wet bundled rags stuffed into a steel tube. It works for faster boolits but the slower ones go right through and still penetrate wet sand.

Here are 'Wet Rag / Wet Sand' and 'Wet Sand / Wet Rag' comparisons.
http://i388.photobucket.com/albums/oo327/303Guy/MVC-465F.jpg
Both 'Wet Sand' boolits were too slow to expand in wet rag, penetrating the wet rag and the wet sand underneath to expand against the steel pot base.

Here is a high velocity 'Wet Rag / Dry Sand' and a low velocity 'Dry Sand' comparison.
http://i388.photobucket.com/albums/oo327/303Guy/MVC-462F-1.jpg

My next mission is to get some crumbed rubber. With a long enough container tube it should be as easy as dry sand and as 'accurate' as flesh - I hope!

[fredj338]

Here are 'Wet Rag / Wet Sand' and 'Wet Sand / Wet Rag' comparisons.
FWIW, dry sand or dry paper or wood, etc. are all rerrible test mediums. They tear at a bullet mat'l. not really expand it. While it may be somewhat relavent between several bullets tested, it isn't going to give you an idea how a bullet will do in a flesh medium. After all, sandbags have been bullet stoppers for years. JMO, go wet organic something to get closer to living flesh.

[sdelam]

I've used 1 gallon milk jugs lined up full of water. They work well for HP handgun bullets but soft points or solid slugs dont stop. Rifle bullets seem to come apart completly in very short order.

I also did test to see how bullets would react after passing through an interior wall. Notice the shorter barrel of the G26 didnt allow it to accelarate enough to expand after passing through the drywall, which caused increased penetration.

http://i105.photobucket.com/albums/m237/sdelam1/IMG_5928.jpg

http://i105.photobucket.com/albums/m237/sdelam1/IMG_0998.jpg

http://i105.photobucket.com/albums/m237/sdelam1/IMG_5931.jpg

[fredj338]

I find straight water is actually pretty "hard" on bullets. It will almost always give good expansion or even fragmentation of JHP. Add some newspaper to the waterjugs for a better result.

[geargnasher]

I like wet neswpaper or phone books. IMO, they do replicate expansion I get on live game. Penetration is less, about 3/4 of what you may see in the field, but the few bullets I have recovered from game look pretty much like those I test in wetpack. Bullet on left from wetpack, on right from 1200#+ buffalo
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v703/fredj338/DSCN0552.jpg
Bullet on left wetpack, on right 700# kudu bull
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v703/fredj338/210GRNP.jpg
So I use wetpack. It is portable, repeatable & not too messy. If you are careful, you can get 6 handgun shots into a stack of phone books, 4 rifle shots. You'll need at least 12" for most expanding handgun bullets & 20" for most expanding rifle bullets. I would expect the same result using either JSP or LHP. Saok the paper well, several hours, it should be dripping wet. You will not get enymore uniform results from more expenisve bal.gel. & it's way easier to deal with.


Nice. Ever been attacked by and angry mob of wet, outdated truck parts catalogues? I have. Fortunately the .45 Colt saved the day. :bigsmyl2:

Gear