Big Bullet Baloney?

[Spartacus]

Anyone read John Taffin's Big Bullet Baloney article in the May/June American Handgunner?

It is an article on the foolishness of using those extra heavy bullets in your handguns. How they do you absolutely no good as far as speed, penetration and range and will do harm to your revolver.

Just wondering what y'all thought about this.

[MtGun44]

If Elmer wanted you to have a boolit heavier than 250 gr for a .44 Mag, he would have
issued you one. . . . . .

Naw, just kidding. I find that the normal weights seem to work pretty well, exiting on
most game and accurate. Not sure I really see the need, but heck - it's still a free country
the rest of the week.

Bill

[steg]

I haven't read the article, but I will say that a few months ago I had a H&G 141 wadcutter .38 caliber mold recut and using by gosh and by golly math trying for a 200 Gr RFN, they cast at 195 Gr. I enjoy shooting these in my security six, and puma in .357 mag, it does tend to a barrel flip a little in the security six, and I also use them in my CC S&W airweight .38, i don't use really hot loads in any of my guns. I really can't see any problem using these or if you would consider them as being heavy boolits...........................steg

[looseprojectile]

that can't seem to cast a boolit that I would not reject.
His pictures of cast boolits show several defects that any dedicated caster would be ashamed of. In my opinion he don't cast any keepers. He never did catch on to how to make softnose casts.
As far as heavy boolits are concerned I am with MtGun44.
Ranch Dog 35s and 44s are heavy enough for me.
If it feels good do it.

Life is good

[fredj338]

There probably is some merit against the ultra heavy for caliber bullets in handguns. Heavier bullets, more recoil, more wear on the mechanism. I have little use for anything heavier than 300gr in a 44mag or heavy 45colt.

[Tom W.]

I've fired a few 300 gr. from the .45 Colt Blackhawk, but prefer the RCBS 270 SAA boolit by far. I'll also shoot the RCBS 255gr miscut mold that I have. It's mighty accurate, too. In my SRH I'll shoot the Lee 310 gr boolit or the RCBS 245 gr plain base boolit. I have loaded some of the 270 SAA boolits in my .454, but as of yet haven't tried them. I normally shoot the Lee 300 gr, and had grand accuracy from some 300 gr RCBS boolits that a friend in Ak. sent me. I don't see a need for anything heavier.

as for wrinkled boolits, if the base is good and I just want to plink, and if they aren't too ugly, they usually shoot pretty well.

[Crusty Deary Ol'Coot]

There is a little something to be said for the comment of ware with the heavies.

Using 325 and 310gr boolits in a RUGER BlackHawk, I did experience some damage to the cylinder pin (base pin) and the spring loaded pin keeper.

Never had the problem before using the heavies.

I currently shoot a RUGER RedHawk, and it just takes a lick'in and keeps on ticking with a 310gr LBT/WFN giving a tad over 1300fps out of a 5.5" barrel.

Keep em coming!

Crusty Deary Ol'Coot

[Link23]

i shoot the LEE 310 out of my Rossi 44 mag with Very good results, im getting around 1500-1600FPS with my 20 inch carbine
Link23

i can tell you they make a kentucky white tail do a back flip before it hits the ground when you hit him at 70 yards

[35remington]

None of the bullet weights mentioned by the previous respondents of this thread are of the weight class John was talking about. He's against the bullets that are substantially heavier than that.

[Dutch4122]

JMHO, but I do subscribe to the "it's your gun so shoot whatever bullet you want in it" mindset. Of course, some boolit weights are just totally impractical for any cartridge. If a handloader can't figure that out on his own then maybe he should be prepared to pay for the repairs to "abused" equipment.

[MT Gianni]

I have read that John Taffin has had hand problems for the last few years. He probably has personal experience he wants to share.

[MtGun44]

IIRC, he has pounded his wrist bones into oblivion with ultra hot loads, and has a lot of
pain because of it. I think in some of his articles he brings in some other shooters to do
some of the heavy recoil work. John is like the rest of us, not getting any younger and I
think he pays for abusing his hands and wrists over the years.

Might be a lesson there.

Bill

[geargnasher]

There is, Bill, there is.

Gear

[btroj]

I no longer enjoy hot loads in my 45 Colt so I don't shoot them in it. Pain is not fun.

Brad

[bbqncigars]

I've been on a couple of handgun forums that Lee Jurras regularly participated on. Lee stated that he couldn't shoot the stout loads anymore because of the cumulative wear/tear on hands and wrists. I only shoot 'mega' loads in handguns that will slide in the hands, and that, rarely. I got enough constant pain below the waist to risk that in my hands.

[troy_mclure]

i prefer a "heavier"(than modern versions) round in my 10mm, the original 200gr.

i believe there is a place for heavier than norm bullets/boolits, just like i believe there is a place for lighter than norm bullets/boolits.

[Blackwater]

Fellas, I guess I'm just a dumb redneck, but I don't recall anyone claiming that the heavier/slower bullets created better "cavitation," which Taffin has clearly indicated in his writings and his book is the standard by which he judges handgun loads, than the lighter/faster stuff. It's an apples and oranges question if ya' ask me, which of course nobody has.

Light/fast/quick expanding bullets kill lighter game quicker, no doubt about it IME. The heavier/slower/deeper penetrating stuff works in an entirely different way, by cutting a sufficiently large hole to leak blood so as to get quickly lethal results on game. Two entirely different approaches, really, isn't it?

If I were going for grizzly bear with a .44 handgun, I'd deeply appreciate having the LBT type bullets so as to better assure me (nothing's "always" in shooting) of sufficient penetration to get to the vitals from most any angle. On the southern whitetails I hunt, I'd much prefer a quicker opening, faster bullet so more of the energy available from the bullet gets "dumped" inside the animal, tearing tissue and organs, rather than having it expended on the scenery beyond my quary. Just seems to me to be judicious to match the bullet to the game being sought, with consideration of the caliber used. I'd hedge my bets a bit with a .357 on deer by leaning at least slightly to the heavier end of its wt. range.

Some years back, a buddy shot about a 165 lb. buck in the rear end, hitting it squarely right between the hams with his 4" .44 Special S&W. He was using a 250 gr. Keith type bullet and 7.5 gr. of Unique. Can't recall the velocity, but it wasn't dawdling around much. The bullet exited the chest, and the deer took 2 or 3 bounds, fell and kicked its last. A light/fast/quick opening bullet would have failed miserably ON THAT SHOT.

40+ years experience has led me to conclude that it's good to have BOTH types of loads available for their respective applications. IMO, this kind of crappy article is just another version of the old "Let's you and him fight" type of articles that our glossy mags seem to think if just the ticket for the shooters in this "New Millenium." Maybe it's because most folks don't want to think, or gain experience any more, and want quick, pat answers to silly questions. When Elmer and Skeeter and the old timers wrote, they wrote about their EXPERIENCE, not their experimentations based on hypothetical assumptions, which is what the scientific method always starts with anyway. Experienced observation trumps theoretical experimentation ANY day, and while I value Taffin's experiments, I can't quite swallow the thesis that his is the ONLY way, or even the BEST way sometimes, to kill something with a handgun.

Nobody knows what shot he'll have when he strikes out on a hunt, but with some experience, he can guess fairly well what the liklihoods are, and not everyone takes rear end shots, too, so ALL of that has to be factored in. I quit having to kill something everytime I go out quite a few years ago now, and I've never taken a rear end shot at a deer with a rifle or a handgun. Just didn't seem proper, or "sporting" if you want to call it that. Therevore, and due to the fact that I hunt southern whitetails, which tend to run smaller than some of you guys' larger northern types, I lean toward the light fast stuff, though I like my Marlin Guide gun, too.

All these type arguments seem to be much ado about nothing, as ol' Shakespere termed it. Then too, I think a real HUNTER ought to be able to take deer of any size cleanly and efficiently with a .22 LR, and most people think that alone makes me crazy, so what do I know anyway???

This kind of article is why I stopped buying the glossy magazines years ago, unless one's got an article in it that I find interesting enough to make me pay for it for that one article. Yep. Much ado about nothing, IMHO.

[stubshaft]

There is a point, where the weight of the boolit gives you diminished returns. In my 454 I have loaded boolits from 185grs to 390grs. My usual hunting boolit is a 300gr LFN and since I have never been able to recover one in the many animals I have killed with it, it would appear to give good penetration. It shoots flat enough for the ranges I hunt at, so shooting something heaver would show no advantage.

[David2011]

Brad, I'm with you. Back in the early '80s it seemed like every pistol magazine had an article on the latest and greatest hot loads for the Ruger Blackhawk and Contender in .45 Colt. My buddy Mac and I had to try 'em all. I wasn't 30 yet and i pretty good shape. I got tendonitis so bad from the heavy recoil that I had to quit shooting pistols for about a year for it to heal. I no longer enjoy the pain. I do shoot some substantial loads in a Contender with a 44 Mag Super 14 barrel but that's a working gun, not so much a plinker in that caliber.

I did read Taffin's article on heavy bullets and I have to agree with his conclusions. Although he didn't mention this point, the bullets he was writing about are so long for caliber that standard twist rates would be inadequate. Seems like he was writing of bullets well over 350 grains for .44 and .45 calibers. He did discuss accuracy problems but leaned on the recoil issue more than the physical limitations of bullet length and twist rate. I read it at lunch today but didn't commit the bullet weights to memory. They were REALLY heavy, though.

David

[Lloyd Smale]

ive allways felt there was a point where any heavier did more to harm your load then to improve it. My rule of thumb has been 260s in the 41 320s in the 44 and 350s in the 45s I also thing theres a bottom end to weights that are useful. 200 in the 41 240 in the 44 and 250 in the 45. My biggest complaint with bullets on the heavy or light side of this isnt nessisarily how they do on game but more has to do with accuracy. In some cases they can be made to shoot but with stock twist rates it can be a challenge.