They dont need a complete mushroom!

[charger 1]

I had a thread on here looking for opinions as to weather my 458 lbt wfn was mushrooming enough. After the test I did last night,I thinkt it mushrooms quite fine,and even if it didnt at all the hydra shosk from this meat pusher is pure Elmer Keith lethal. The test was a polymer 50 canadian gallon wine grape barrel. Their atleast 1/8" thick with a 1' dia heavy screw on lid. shot from sixty yards, which will be the average where I hunt(actually the upper end of average).The barrel was filled with water,and hit one third the way up from bottom. The lid blew up onto the roof of the nearby shed ,10' high. When the projectile bearly came out the back the polymer aroung the hole was split 3 ways . All splits were 4-6" long. Once again the slug was found just laying in a wood pile. Made it out but 100% energy spent..I know these dont spread out like we're used to,but you gotta think all that hydraulic shock counts for something

Sometime before fall there will be a dead farmers pig involved in this test,and pics as to how the far side of him fairs out.My guess is not good..I've heard some say I'm to hard on this alloy. Would it not be better when in elk/bear country to error on the side of to hard??

[Wayne Smith]

Yeah, in that country that's exactly what I would do. In some scenarios you just need penetration!

[Bucks Owin]

Looks mighty deadly to me!
(But since I'm one of the rare guys who DOESN'T think the sun rose and fell on E. Keith, I'll just say it looks "John Linebaugh lethal"....)

Dennis

[Pilgrim]

I can't remember who originally made the point that "...a half inch hole going in and coming out will leak a lot of blood", but there is a whole lotta truth there. I don't think expansion is any problem for you. As long as your bullet is heat treated WW it should hold together. Linotype has a reputation for shattering when hitting anything hard (like bone) although I cannot say I have ever tried to verify it one way or the other. I think bullet break up is the only thing that will effect your penetration. I've read...repeatedly...that a 45 Colt boolit will go completely thru an elk (I can't verify that statement either) and it is only 255 to 300+ gr with a muzzle velocity of 1300 fps or less. That is basically a "45-70 light". I suspect you are well beyond that level of performance. Go whack 'em without worrying about it. FWIW Pligrim

[Pawpaw]

I showed up one year at deer camp with a .54 cal caplock. I had been shooting it all summer and knew exactly what it would do. The boys were aghast, "It won't expand." Well, I told them that they hoped their .30 cals would expand to a half inch, and I was starting out over half an inch. I didn't give a darn if it expanded.

Cast bullets kill differently than jacketed. Not better, or worse, just differently. It all boils down to the shooter.

[charger 1]

I showed up one year at deer camp with a .54 cal caplock. I had been shooting it all summer and knew exactly what it would do. The boys were aghast, "It won't expand." Well, I told them that they hoped their .30 cals would expand to a half inch, and I was starting out over half an inch. I didn't give a darn if it expanded.

Cast bullets kill differently than jacketed. Not better, or worse, just differently. It all boils down to the shooter.

Exactly. Even before I switched to cast I noticed the day I bought my 45/70 it turned a lot of bad shots good. Shots I had no business taking they were so far out of range the death of the animal had nothing to do with the expansion that you hope for with a 270 copper,but rather the fact that it just had a 458 hole slucked through it side to side...Thats gotta count for sumpin

[BOOM BOOM]

HI,
Don't worry that bullet will do the job. Hydrostatic shock does't even need to be considered in this case.
They have been using nonexpanding solids in Africa for centries w/ success, some at lower velocities & on bigger game.
I myself, & many on this board have taken deer & bigger game w/ cast .44s & up.
Bullet placement is more important than vel. or expansion.

[Bass Ackward]

Would it not be better when in elk/bear country to error on the side of to hard??

Whether solids in jacketed or hard in cast, hardness is only necessary when bullet weight is insufficient to complete penetration in an expanded state or not enough diameter is properly utilized. The only difference is that solids do not utilize a meplat in most cases.

If bullet weight is not sufficient, then hardness is mandatory. Fascination with wide (er than necessary) meplats on larger bores under all hunting conditions almost requires hard(er) cast to maintain shape and minimize expansion.

Shock can be substancial enough upon entrance / exit with a wider than necessary meplat that blood vessels in the area of the wound will clot around the hole and prevent immediate blood flow. When this happens, assuming that no nerve hit was made, death will be slow. This is not a good perscription for bear territory but is all you got if you don't have enough gun to go heavy and soft with lead.

[BAGTIC]

"Shock" is what you get when you stick your big toe in the light socket.

[Dale53]

Hard cast round noses do NOT do a good job. I have evidence of same. You NEED a decent meplat and I would much rather have one "too" wide than none at all. A pointed round nose will drill thru and not necessarily make a half inch hole thru. A wide meplat will displace MUCH more than its diameter in meat and bone.

All of the above comments are on .44 caliber and larger. I have no experience with small diameter bullets on big game. I seriously doubt that I will ever have such experience as I am a big bore believer when it comes to cast bullets. This is particularly true when we discuss pistol and revolver velocities.

Whatever we decide, we should base our decisions on projectile size and shape after thinking a bit. Some do and some just accept urban myths. There are a few people who write about terminal ballistics on big game that have had lots of experience. Those are the people that I tended to listen to and now that I have a good bit of experience (much less than a lot of you but considerably more than some) on my own, I still lean toward the big bore (.44 and above) when using cast bullets.

One thing that bothers me a bit when we discuss bullet design and action on game on this forum, we tend to discuss rifle and pistol ballistics in the same breath. A bullet acts quite differently when it hits at 1200 fps as opposed to 2000 fps. It would be much easier to follow and learn if we kept those two quite different subjects in separate threads.

Just a few thoughts...

Dale53

[Bass Ackward]

All of the above comments are on .44 caliber and larger. I have no experience with small diameter bullets on big game. I seriously doubt that I will ever have such experience as I am a big bore believer when it comes to cast bullets. This is particularly true when we discuss pistol and revolver velocities.

One thing that bothers me a bit when we discuss bullet design and action on game on this forum, we tend to discuss rifle and pistol ballistics in the same breath. A bullet acts quite differently when it hits at 1200 fps as opposed to 2000 fps. It would be much easier to follow and learn if we kept those two quite different subjects in separate threads.

Just a few thoughts...

Dale53

Dale,

You have hit the nail on the head. The correct way to look at hunting with cast is not by caliber or bullet weight or handgun or rifle, but on strike velocity and penetration on game. You adjust the variables under your control until you can produce the results you want. A meplat, is a meplat, is a meplat. By that I mean that it works the same regardless of caliber. You have to have that small bore experience to realize what you do are doing with larger bores.

Take a 30 caliber on deer as an example. A 70% meplat is about .215. Run that ACWW bullet with a strike velocity on a deer of over 1800 fps and you get a 1" hole with broad side shots only. So lets assume that we want to create the same effect in a larger bore? Well, on a 44 caliber bullet that is striking at the same velocity, I only need to have the same meplat diameter to punch the same size hole. That .215 represents a 50% meplat on a 44 caliber bullet.

So .... if I have a firearm or bullet launching system that can maintain velocities over that velocity level all I need to produce that 1" hole is a 50% meplat. If my launching system is not capable of doing that velocity, then I need to start increasing my meplat size to compensate. I can continue to increase my meplat size as long as it doesn't affect my penetration ability on the game of interest or until I lose stability of flight at the range of interest. Because the velocity level where I lose stability of flight is the same velocity level I will lose stability of penetration. And stability of penetration is needed to maintain the nose in a forward position. Otherwise I have to start limiting my shot angles to those where penetration can be guaranteed.

I started out using a deer as an example. But flesh is flesh and bone is bone. The only difference is that there is more of it or that it may be a little tougher. Or that it might fight back. No matter what the animal, if my penetration starts to become inadequate in the animal of interest and I don't want to limit my shots, I have two choices left to me. I can either harden my bullet so that it won't deform and create an even larger meplat that is slowing down my bullet. Or .... I must go up in bullet weight.

Going over size on a meplat regardless of caliber places more forces on that bullets nose to maintain its shape. Even at 2300 fps, you can expand HTWW. Lead expands predictably ALL the time. But the margin of error increases the harder your bullets become. And once you start expansion with any hard bullet expansion can become unreliable. You are just stressing the metal beyond what it should be.

So in order to reduce my failure rate on cast bullets performance, I have maximum standards on my meplat size. I suppose that that maximum size could really be increased as the bore diameter of the bullet is increased because a 45 caliber bullet has more strength from it's diameter than say a 22 caliber. From this you can say that you have more flexibility for error in a 45 caliber or a wider margin for error in a 45 caliber. The bullet weight limit is more related to the launching system of interest to produce the trajectory desired.

If I do need more meplat or more weight, I have a practical limit that I have established for myself. I stop at 60% meplat diameter for rifles and 70% for handguns. And .... in truth, most of my designs are a lot less. My 44 bullets for handguns are 62-64% because that is about peek for accuracy from my testing. And guess what? They produce about 1" to 1 1/4" holes down to 800 fps in deer. So do I need a wider meppy? No. Once I get to those levels, if I need more meplat than that to produce my 1" hole, I go up in my bullet launching systems until I can get it.

I imposed those limits on myself as a disipline so that I would never be under gunned and forcing a cast bullet to perform in a method that could become unpredictable. I look at that as eithical to the animal of interest. That is when cast "can" begin to fail and regrets happen. That probably isn't on bambi, but deer are a confidence builder to bigger animals. From my experience, if you think in this way, you will be safe to hunt anything and adapt as your experience level on the game of interest grows.

[felix]

Also, keep in mind the difference between the LBT and Keith forms. The former has only one meplat, and latter has two. So, a typical former meplat is 70 percent, and the latter 62 percent, followed by a 100 percenter. It would stand to reason that the former would have more penetration at the same weight and diameter should the strike velocity be low. If both styles had "excessive" velocity at the target, then it can be assumed the wider, up-front meplat, would displace more liquid within the target. The secondary meplat would not enter the equation because of the path generated by the primary meplat. This I have noticed often at the riva' where nighty percent of my targets are around water and/or wet mud. ... felix

[Dale53]

Good material, people.

Dale53

[cherok9878]

Excellent discussion, I now feel that my .30 cal is more than adequate for white tail as long as I do my part, can't wait to whack one with my 03A3........larry

[Bass Ackward]

Excellent discussion, I now feel that my .30 cal is more than adequate for white tail as long as I do my part, can't wait to whack one with my 03A3........larry

Larry,

Sure! That's all my wife uses these days.

She is working on a new load because she moved her stand. This location will require longer range shots. For this reason, she is trying to get about 2100-2200 fps muzzle. This makes her new likely ranges 70 min to 150 yards max. Any closer than 70 yards and she will need to pas on the shot, harden her bullet or reduce her velocity. Either of the last two would take away from her maximum range potential of 150 yards. Ideal "working" range for that load is 100 yards for this bullet / hardness / load combination.


Felix,

My grandad always said you can learn alot by shooting into water. Around here, water attracts homes that frown on experimentation. I have to wait for the neighbors to leave before I can use the ponds any more.

[Bret4207]

Excellent thread! BA's thoughts mirror mine exactly. WW or ACWW is hard enough for darn near anything. "Super Hard LBT style" boolits is advertising hype. Most any FN with adequit metplat and velocity works fine. The "hard" bullet may be needed to get a certain gun shooting well, but not necessarily for the terminal ballistic reason.