Soft Point Cast Boolit Expansion

[bmortell]

ya gel is used for the consistent data points that can be collected. but im not sure knowing exact penetration in gel for example is usefull.

like a week ago my relative hit a broadside deer with a 220gr air coww 30-06 at ~1800fps and got no exit, who thought that was gonna happen. anyone?

I feel like anything that gives a close amount of expansion is as good as your gonna get. from weight, surface area and speed you can infer or calculate the damage well within the huge amount of variation that comes from actually shooting a deer. gel is an consistent simulation of shooting water 10x more than it is a simulation of deer. of course federal bullet company or whatever needs actual data numbers, they cant say "likely to work" like you or I

personally id test like paul harrell does on youtube with porkchop>ribs>oranges>ribs>catcher, but hes crowd funded for that cost of doing that. even if that gives results that are half as consistent as gel I feel its still a better test of expansion, what happens after that isn't that usefull to try and simulate exactly.

[onelight]

Gel has its place there are accepted standards on the test format that can be duplicated so a great way to compare performance in gel that is as good as it gets .It is not possible to introduce all the variables that there are in the real world .
As far as I am concerned you mix the gel results with common sense and add to that field experiences of your own or people you trust and decide what you believe when you see a 22lR 36grain hp not exit a 1.5lb squirrel you kinda question the stuff that says expect 8 to 12" of penetration
It seems I remember a story from Elmer shooting an elk in the head with factory 38-40 soft points at just a few yards and none penetrated the skull.
I neck shot a whitetail at about 25 yards with a 220 grain RB from a .54 at about 1800fps he went down with a chunk knocked out of 1 side of the spine the ball was flattened laying on the spine did not exit maybe 8" penetration I then shot him in the head with a Ruger old army RB on 40 grains pyrodex p it did not exit. Most any one who hunts much with handguns or traditional black powder can probably tell the same type stories.
Bone stops bullets , unless they have the sectional density to push on through when they expand they loose that sectional density if a .357 bullet expands to .50 you have a pitiful .50 cal bullet if it's work is done fine if you need it to keep going you are out of luck at revolver speeds .

[edp2k]

The problem I have with a rapidly expanding nose, which ends up with a very mushroomed bullet, is that the now very mushroomed bullet
is now very likely to not continue to travel/penetrate in a straight line.

This is in addition to the mushroomed bullet now not being able to penetrate much and also now not typically being able to cause an exit wound
(which leaks more blood for tracking and accelerate the demise of the critter due to more and quicker blood loss).
Think of it as now having a drastically reduced "sectional density".

If you have ever played the game of "drop the nickle/dime/quarter into the water cooler jug (inverted) and filled with water,
with a shot glass centered in the bottom middle", you will know what I am talking about.
You used to see these in hardware stores and at county fairs and carnivals.
If your coin made it into the shot glass, you won something, typically 1/2 of the coin contents of the jug.

No matter how straight you dropped the nickle, it flutters and deviates from a strait path, and ends up typically hitting the side of the jug
before getting to the bottom.

Now apply this to shooting a deer.

A few years ago I shot a medium-to-large deer about 20 yards away when I was in a tree stand about 20 ft. up.
The deer was coming towards me up a trail with a slight rise, and the trail was angled to pass about 10 ft. to my left.
I was shooting a 12 Ga smoothbore with a Winchester factory sabot load containing a ~380 gr. 45-70 bullet listed at ~1600 FPS.
I forgot exactly what Winchester was naming the bullet on the packaging, however it was clear from examining the bullet
that it was the exact same construction as the Winchester Ranger SXT bullet, which is merely a renamed black talon.
It had a black surface finish and a very thick jacket (SWAG of 0.060" or so) covering the nose
and the jacket continued down into the hollow point cavity and covered the cavity.
There were pre-skived lines in the cavity where the HP petals were to fold back, and the fired,
expanded bullet had the classic, jacket metal, sharp "talons" on the ends of the folded back petals.

I aimed and fired at a spot on the front of it's left shoulder where the neck meets the shoulder,
about 1/3 of the way down from the top of the shoulder.
With this line of sight the bullet should have penetrated the chest cavity front to back, diagonally,
and exited through the last rib at the bottom of it's right rib cage.
Upon butchering and skinning I found the flattened bullet under the skin just behind it's upper right shoulder,
now about 0.300" tall and a perfect match of the very mushroomed picture on the cartridge box.

Instead of straight line, or almost straight line penetration, the bullet mushroomed after a couple inches of penetration by the neck/spine,
did a sharp left turn, went up over the spine at the neck, curved down, and stayed under the skin and ended up
between the skin and ribs on the right side.
Luckily the initial penetration shocked the spine enough that it did him in,
as the bullet did NOT penetrate through where I was aiming.

With everyone correctly stating "its all about shot placement", a well mushrooming bullet can and will often defeat you shot placement
by making the nickle flutter around the carcass and go a very different way, and not the way you intended.

[curioushooter]

To address some of the questions. First, I actually I conducted these tests according to "the protocol" as close as I am able. This isn't conjecture or wondering. I was surprised by it. A lot of the conventional "wisdom" is wrong. Some of it is correct though.

Getting expansion is neither difficult, nor that impressive for hunting purposes IMO. What is difficult is getting expansion and ample PENETRATION. Solid bullets excel at penetration. Every appropriate weight for caliber (like 158 for 357) solid cast boolit shot at normal handgun velocity (800-1200 FPS) into gel has penetrated through my "double block" which is 28" long. By comparison 38 Special 158 grain cast HPs out of snubs (442) and service sized revolvers (model 19) both expand to over .5" easily with a soft 32:1 alloy. The problem is they go only 8-9" deep. The greater velocity of 357 gives more momentum so the same bullet will go deeper. Increasing mass of the bullet increases the momentum and so it will go deeper (provided it holds together, a key shortcoming of the equations to determine predicted penetration depth from water). A lot of cast HPs I've shot have fragged badly past 1300 FPS. Some absolutely explode at 1600.

As to the question of wound tracks...they are nearly always perfectly straight if the shot is perpendicular to the gel face. Actually, cast boolits track straighter than JHPs for whatever reason (my hypothesis is that its because they mushroom and do not open up like a flower). One thing I have noticed is that certain HP cavities, the long narrow ones (like the Keith HPs), tend to collapse and not expand and track off if you shoot the gel with a 45 degree pie slice taken off the front. The conicial shaped (rather than bowl or cylindrical) HPs work better and more consistently with the alloys I've used (91-6-3 pb-sn-sb for magnum and 32:1 for special). I drill holes in other bullet designs using drill bits that I grind to shape and a drill press. I center using a centering gauge and clamp a H&I die to a drill press vice so I can do a few with centered holes.

The major advantage to gel is it allows for in-situ determination of penetration depth. You can lay a ruler on top of the gel (which is a solid material) and measure it easily directly (as long as the gel hasn't clouded). This is impossible with liquids like water. Water is a passable alternative to obtaining expansion data which can be used to predict penetration depth using a number of equations (wet phone books, clay, etc. are not valid mediums and are a waste of time...uncalibrated gel is almost as useless). Get Charles Schwartz's book "Quantitative Ammunition Selection" to get the math (warning, if you lack a collegiate mathematics education don't bother). Gel is also less messy, splashy, doesn't require a wheelbarrow of milk jugs or plastic bags or a calculator. Water is cheaper and allows multiple shots to me made in one outing, allowing much greater number of data points to be collected. Gel blocks, especially if working at rifle velocities, are a one shot deal. With 38 special you can get two to four shots before the gel is wrecked.

Penetration > Expansion for hunting to my thinking. You want the bullet to go through the animal you are going to shoot. This is why I think that for anything bigger than a whitetail that you really ought use a largebore solid cast boolit. 45-70 to my thinking is the ideal cartridge for large animal cast boolit rifle performance, and 44 Mag the ideal handgun cartridge. 30-30 or 30-40 I imagine are about the ideal rifle cast boolit cartridges for medium game.

Now for the smallish whitetails that most American hunters are dealing with, I think that an expanding boolit is what you want, but an expanding boolit that goes deep enough. The ammo manufacturers have developed (for the most part) their designs around the FBI protocol which takes humans as the target animal. Humans are thin bodied and thin skinned and we walk upright so we present a thin target. Deer by comparison have thicker skin and longer wound tracks and walk on all four and present a rather thick target despite a similar body weight. This is why if you hunt with expanding JHPs use one designed for medium game like the 158 grain Hornady XTPHP or the 180 grain XTPHP in 357. The 158 grain XTPFP is for rifle velocities, but even it doesn't hold together at 1900 FPS. I suspect that all the bigger bore XTPs in revolver calibers (.410, .429, .454) are designed for hunting, not for LEO use. Hornady uses thicker jackets than Speer and Sierra and with few exceptions I've found the Hornady XTP to be the premier JHP out there. That .429 XTP that hit the deer butt actually hardly expanded, and this is not surprising. The tissues around the anus are gristly connective tissues that act more like drumskin than muscle. Basically the boolit makes a hole in them and is not terribly upset. Then it hits the guts and the liver, rumen, and lungs which are all softer than muscle. The XTP did expand at little (I didn't measure but I doubt it expanded to a half inch) and that why it went about 40" deep. I gave it back to the guy without taking a picture. It did hold together. Typically XTPs lose about 10-20% of their weight if they hit near their upper design velocity. At the lower end of the design velocity they hardly expand at all.

Holding together is the best thing about cast HPs. If they don't break apart due to velocity they typically retain 99%+ of their weight leaving nice clean meat.

Cast hp boolits expand in a rapid and "uncontrolled" manner since they have no jacket. The jacket arrests expansion. The 158 XTPHP when launched at 1200 FPS penetrates consistently to over 20" but only expands to about .55". The 162 grain MP-Molds Hammer with Small HP pin made of 91-6-3 alloy launched at 1200 expands to .63-.67" and penetrates only ~16." With cast HPs you need to increase weight to increase penetration since you don't have the variable of jacket thickness to play with to control the expansion. I would think that a 180+ grain cast HP in the 357 launched at 1100-1200 FPS would deliver the goods (like two feet of penetration and >.6" expansion with 99% weight retention, but I have not tested it because I am cheap and can't decide what NOE HP mold I want to try next! I am not sure if I really believe Glen Fryxel's recommendation on the 358156 HP having "controlled expansion" but NOEs version, the 360-165-HP seems very versatile and there is lots of good data for a 158 grain GC CB since the 358156 is in Lyman's 4th. Then there is NOE's 360-198-HP which my experiments indicate would be the best choice (plus no gas check). I would have to use data for the SAECO #354 and back off 10% from start load.

Personally I like shooting 357 for a number of reasons, mainly because I shoot it a whole lot better (assisting in the all important good shot placement) and don't develop a flinch, don't mind carrying a <40oz revolver on my hip, and practice with it a whole lot more because I actually enjoy it. I simply did not enjoy shooting my supertuned super blackhawk and sold it to a friend years ago (so I can shoot/borrow it if I wanted to). If I ever go on some bear/elk/moose/big critter handgun hunt (extremely unlikely in my lifetime) I will use it, but I will almost certainly opt for a rifle if I ever have such an opportunity.

My overall goal with this whole project is to get 357 to perform as well OR BETTER than 44mag with a solid cast boolit (which I consider the benchmark) on whitetails using cast HPs (I've already accomplished this with two JHPs: the 158 XTPHP and the 180 grain XTP). The easy part has been getting 357 to expand to well beyond .429 inches. It's getting it to go "through the deer" (two feet of penetration) that is proving difficult.

I also don't trust the incredibly expensive synthetic gel. The only advantage I see to it is that it will probably be able to reused longer as it wont mold and has better visibility. Clouding of the gel is what makes it no longer useabe. I've got more than 10 recasts out of my original block...it was killed by my kids unplugging the refrigerator temp controller and making it freeze my block. After that I neglected it for a while and it molded. My 2nd block I still going strong.

[charlie b]

If you want to check real world expansion then get some shoulders, lungs, ribs, etc and see what happens. Makes for interesting results. Father-in-law and I used pork roast and ribs for some testing we did. Expensive but you see some interesting things. That was what drove me to use solids for hunting. SWC or large flat noses.

I would not rely on gel alone to determine bullet performance. HP in gel may go straight but they don't in many animal shots. Even solid lead bullets have problems when they graze a rib and 'bend'.

When I had a .45colt I remembered an interview with a pro hunting guide in Africa. He carried a Ruger BH in .45 colt with a cylinder slug of 300 or 350gn (don't remember which). He wanted bigger dia rather than higher vel of a .44mag. He said it was good enough for a charging lion. Penetrated deep and broke things along the way.

[megasupermagnum]

Wow this thread really escalated quickly.

Curious Shooter, you just have to ignore a lot of the people on this forum when it comes to expanding bullets. So many have bought into the penetration is king, all else is useless mentality. Likely because it does work, and doesn't require any effort on the casters part.

You have a perfect goal in mind, we both think alike. I still shoot my 44 magnum, but the smaller calibers are superior for shooting. I developed a bullet for my GP100 in 327 federal with only one goal in mind. Deer hunting by maximizing what the cartridge was capable of in the GP100. I did this at the possible sacrifice of range, but I am only capable of great hunting accuracy with an open sight revolver to 50 yards anyway. I used a multitude of test mediums including water, clay, wood, and wet newspaper. I may try gel again in the future, that's for another day. I ended up with a heavy bullet (148 grain), about as long as I though would stabilize in my handgun, and a hollow point. I tried lighter soilids, but did not find the accuracy I wanted. Likely you will find that penetration with heavier bullets. A bullet that casts 200-215 grains as a solid would be a good choice in 357 magnum.

I do question why you want 24" of penetration though. That deer I mentioned taken with a round ball was shot facing away at about the farthest angle I would ever feel comfortable taking. The ball entered just at the last rib, and went through the ribs on the other side about 3" from the collar bone. I have not recovered the ball yet. I measured the penetration at about 20". That was the most extreme angle shot you could really expect to make on a deer, any more and you would be having to shoot through the rear legs. That was a full grown MN doe.

I have never bought into "energy dump", hydrostatic shock, or any other jargon people come up with. I never will either. Still, I find myself wondering more why a pass through is that important? For every person who claims a better blood trail, there is another who didn't find a drop of blood. There is no doubt a 44+ caliber solid that doesn't expand is adequate hunting even large game, although not all that impressive on medium size animals. 357 magnum with expanding bullets can be as good as a 44 with solids, but you also get a gun that is far easier to shoot well.

I find it funny how guys argue about the difference in diameter of 44 vs 45, a difference of .022". I consider the difference from 38 to 45 caliber to be a slight jump. When I think large bore, I think 12 gauge (.729") or 10 gauge (.780"). My 54 caliber muzzleloaders don't look big to me at all. To me 45 caliber is a small bore.

Unless we are talking true large bores like shotgun slugs and muzzleloaders, I'll take expansion in everything else.

[bmortell]

I forgot about this boolit actually from a deer

Technically ive never seen a cast boolit exit yet but this is the only one in the velocity of the original question. Its a 250gr lee real 50 hit the deer at about 1300 lengthwise. Its pure lead making it easy to expand but its also a truncated cone which id think is one of the harder shapes to expand since triangles are very strong. But it did expand a bit and got something like 2 feet of penetration.

[edp2k]

Using gel so that bullet tests are repeatable and comparable between different people/test-instances/bullets
is the correct and scientific thing to do so that test results are scientifically comparable to each other.

Taking those results, and then thinking that the straight line track they may see in gel from a very flattened bullet
will indicate a straight track penetration in a real person/critter, is a fallacy which many people fall into.

Remember the nickle-in-water effect.

[onelight]

I think the gel tests are good and informative and for comparing bullet performance.
I also think that a hollow point might be a good choice for hunting with a revolver that is a choice the hunter makes for himself within local laws some states require expanding bullets.
and we can all have our own opinion on what a big bore is , but what is commonly accepted is .40 and up usually .44 or .45
The XTP being a common exception like was pointed out most pistol hp bullets are designed to limit penetration and to perform properly in a narrow velocity range it would seem that would limit shots to broadside on deer .
I would not want that limitation even for deer when I know that a Keith or other large flat nosed bullet 250 to 300 grains will do it broadside or any angle with even midrange loads if you bring bigger critters into the mix bear , hogs and up the any angle and better chance of breaking bones is a plus cause you only get to pick the first broadside shot. And if you carry for defense against animals the same big heavy bullets are still my choice .
I see single shot pistols as a different category than the traditional 44 and 45s they bump into rifle power.
One thing I am absolutely sure of is we will all be wrong on this topic in somebody's real experience .
That's what makes it interesting

[Outpost75]

https://www.policeone.com/police-pro...adcdc-64690535

...I worked with Hornady Manufacturing Company representatives to design a comparison test of the two mediums. Before we committed resources to a large-scale test, we began with a small-scale test that compared the performance of Hornady’s 9mm +P, 135 grain, Critical Duty Flexlock bullet in the two mediums. If this small test indicated there was a discrepancy, we would proceed with plans for a more exhaustive comparison.

In Hornady’s tests of its 9mm +P, 135 grain, Critical Duty Flexlock bullet, the projectile normally penetrated around 14.5 inches in bare, calibrated gelatin. Independent testing of this projectile by the US Department of Homeland Security (14 inches) and the FBI (14 inches), as well as joint Hornady/agency testing with the Mesa (Arizona) Police Department (14 inches), Nebraska State Patrol (14.75 inches) and the Texas Department of Public Safety (14.25 inches), validated this performance (using a variety of pistol makes and barrel lengths) and confirmed Hornady’s expectation for this projectile.

However, when Hornady tested the same ammunition in the clear, synthetic gelatin substitute (same test protocol and conditions, including barrel length and lack of an intermediate barrier) the 9mm FlexLock bullet penetrated around 19 inches. This represented a 31% increase in penetration in the clear synthetic product compared to FBI-calibrated gelatin.

Additionally, the profile of the wound tracks was different in the synthetic product in comparison to FBI-calibrated gelatin, with an almost nonexistent Maximum Temporary Cavity (MTC) dimension, and a longer Depth to Maximum Cavity (DMC), followed by an “ice pick” kind of penetration after that.

Based on these initial results, plans were made to proceed with a large-scale comparison test of the two products.

LARGE-SCALE TEST PROTOCOL

It was important to ensure that large-scale testing would be conducted in accordance with standard FBI protocols, with the highest measures of quality control and consistency, to develop a useful set of data for comparison.

This meant a professional facility would be required for testing. While there are many “backyard ballisticians” who prepare and shoot organic gelatin, such settings can introduce variables that will skew data. For instance, since organic gelatin is highly sensitive to temperature and can break down quickly in heat and direct sunlight, it must be carefully preserved at consistently low temperatures and shot for record before it warms. It’s difficult to maintain these temperatures when a block must be transported to an off-site test facility in a cooler, and shot in warm, ambient conditions – perhaps even in direct sunlight. It’s even more difficult to do this with multiple blocks and keep them all at a consistent temperature for reasonable comparison to each other. Spread the testing process out to multiple days, and the consistency challenge becomes even more complex.

The two-day test would be conducted at the same facility that Hornady uses for internal research and quality control testing, as well as testing for its extensive list of law enforcement, military and industry clients. This environmentally controlled facility would allow for consistent and measurable conditions and would allow access to calibrated equipment for measuring bullet velocities and weights. Organic gelatin blocks could be preserved at ideal and consistent temperatures in nearby industrial refrigeration units until they were removed for immediate testing, conducted only yards away.

All gelatin blocks – both organic and synthetic – would be tested for calibration in accordance with FBI standards, immediately prior to shooting. This test would involve firing a 0.177” steel BB into the gelatin at a measured velocity of 590 +/- 15 feet per second, and checking for penetration depth between 2.95 – 3.74 inches. Any organic gelatin block that failed to meet these calibration standards would be rejected to ensure the synthetic product was only compared to FBI-spec ballistic gelatin.

A single pistol (same serial number) would be used to conduct all testing for consistency. The Glock 17 was chosen as it is the most widely used 9mm service pistol in U.S. law enforcement. The test pistol was a Glock 17M model, as currently issued by the FBI.

In order to generate a data set that was not limited to Hornady products, the author solicited assistance from other major ammunition manufacturers to supply product samples. Law enforcement duty ammunition was received from both Speer and Federal in response to this request. Winchester and Remington were unable to supply samples, so the author purchased ammunition from these marques via commercial channels, to ensure they would be represented in the data.

A variety of bullet weights, velocities, pressure levels, styles and designs were represented in the data, to ensure the broadest comparison of the two test mediums. “Barrier blind” bullets from Hornady (Critical Duty 124+P and 135+P) and Speer (147 grain G2) were included, as well as advanced hollowpoint designs from Federal (124 grain HST) and Winchester (127+P+ Ranger SXT). A “low-tech” traditional jacketed hollowpoint from Remington (115+P HTP) was also tested to help broaden the selection.

The synthetic gelatin was sourced from a commercial vendor and the order was filled and shipped to Hornady by the manufacturer, who had been fully briefed that the blocks would be used in this testing.

The organic gelatin was prepared in accordance with FBI instructions. The blocks that were shot on the first day of testing were prepared in advance of the author’s arrival by Hornady personnel, and the author personally prepared the blocks which were used on the second day of testing.

Two individuals – one from Hornady and the author – would take all the measurements, and compare results with each other to identify errors and correct discrepancies before the final results were recorded.

AN ADDITIONAL QUESTION

It’s important to understand that the FBI specifications for gelatin calibration constitute a range of acceptable penetration depths for the test BB projectile. This is because organic gelatin may demonstrate slight variations in density as a result of mixing ratios, environmental humidity and the source of the organic gelatin itself. Additionally, the density may change slightly as the core temperature of the gelatin varies between acceptable extremes.

The FBI has determined that organic gelatin will provide useful and comparable results as long as the 0.177” calibration BB penetrates to a depth between 2.95–3.74 inches. Anything on either side of this band is considered unacceptable for measuring bullet performance in accordance with FBI standards for penetration, expansion and retained weight.

In order to provide the fairest comparison for the synthetic gelatin, it was important to quantify the performance change between bullets that were fired into “minimum spec” FBI gelatin and “maximum spec” FBI gelatin. This would allow us to compare the synthetic results to the full range of acceptable measures from organic gelatin, mixed in accordance with FBI standards.

To determine this difference, the ratio of organic gelatin powder to water was slightly altered to create gelatin blocks that would calibrate at both the high and the low ends of BB calibration. The “minimum spec” block we prepared calibrated at 3.00” and the “maximum spec” block calibrated at 3.625” when tested with the 0.177” BB, which was about as close as you could get to the FBI goalposts.

Three rounds each of Hornady 124+P and 135+P Critical Duty were fired into the minimum and maximum blocks, then measured. Retained weight was 100% in both blocks for all 12 rounds, and there was negligible difference in expanded diameter between them (an average of 0.005” more expansion – less than a 1% difference – for rounds fired into the minimum block). However, the penetration distance changed about 1.25” for the 135+P and about 1.0” for the 124+P between the minimum and maximum block. These distances were slightly longer than those noted in previous testing conducted by Hornady, using industry-standard 5 round samples (in lieu of our abbreviated 3 round samples), which revealed a 1.00” maximum (typically, less than 1.00”) difference between gelatin that calibrated at the minimum and maximum FBI specs.

From this, we conservatively concluded that any variation in penetration of less than 1.5” (including a generous 0.25” buffer over the already high 1.25” maximum average penetration observed in our 3-round test) in the synthetic gelatin could be ignored as statistically insignificant. Restated, if bullets penetrated 1.5” more in the synthetic gelatin than in the calibrated organic gelatin, we would judge the synthetic results as comparable to the organic medium.

SHOTS FIRED

Armed with this knowledge, and with a protocol that maximized consistency and repeatability, we began to shoot synthetic and organic gelatin with the selected ammunition.

Ambient temperature on the indoor range was 70-72 degrees, and organic gelatin blocks were kept at 38 degrees in a commercial refrigerator until they were taken out for calibration and testing, which occurred within minutes of removing them from the refrigerator. The synthetic gelatin blocks were stored on the range overnight and were kept at the 70-72 degrees ambient temperature of the range.

The organic and synthetic blocks were shot with 3 rounds each of the 6 models of ammunition (2 from Hornady, and 1 each from Speer, Federal, Winchester and Remington). In accordance with the FBI protocol, the blocks were shot at a distance of 10 feet from the muzzle of the Glock 17M pistol to the front face of the gelatin.

The heavy clothing testing was conducted in accordance with FBI standards, using materials that met FBI specifications. (Photo/Mike Wood)

The heavy clothing testing was conducted in accordance with FBI standards, using materials that met FBI specifications. (Photo/Mike Wood)

Each test medium was shot in accordance with Tests One and Two of the FBI protocol. In Test One, bullets are fired into bare gelatin, and in Test Two, the gelatin blocks are covered with FBI-standard “heavy clothing,” which consists of four layers of material, to include:

One layer of cotton t-shirt material (approximately 5.25 ounces per yard, 48 threads per inch);
One layer of cotton shirt material (approximately 3.5 ounces per yard, 80 threads per inch);
One layer of Malden Mills Polartec 200 fleece, and;
One layer of cotton denim (approximately 14.4 ounces per yard, 50 threads per inch).

OBSERVATIONS
The results and implications of this test will be discussed in the final segment of this series.

About the author
Mike Wood is the son of a 30-year California Highway Patrolman and the author of "Newhall Shooting: A Tactical Analysis," the highly-acclaimed study of the 1970 California Highway Patrol gunfight in Newhall, California. Mike is an Honor Graduate of the United States Air Force Academy, a graduate of the US Army Airborne School, and a retired US Air Force Lieutenant Colonel with over 26 years of service. He’s a National Rifle Association (NRA) Law Enforcement Division-certified firearms instructor, serves as a member of the PoliceOne Editorial Advisory Board, and has written the “Tactical Analysis” column at PoliceOne.com since 2014. Mike is the senior editor at RevolverGuy.com, and has been a featured guest on the Excellence In Training Academy and American Warrior Society podcasts, as well as several radio and television programs. He’s grateful for the opportunity to serve and learn from the men and women of law enforcement.

[Outpost75]

THANK YOU SCHWARTZ! I was hoping that you would chime into this thread and tie the ribbons on decisively.

[Tripplebeards]

I haven’t tried it on game yet but 16:1 pure lead and pewter I mixed has a BH of 7.5 and holds up in the dirt at 1575fps in HP configuration out of my Ruger 77/44.

Water test, Weighed a 136 grains. It started out at 263 grains...






Water is too hard of a test.


Here’s another one recovered from a dirt backstop (with the same 1575fps load) at 25 yards that weight 184 grains...





The tin holds it together nicely and makes the soft alloy tuff. I don’t think I’d want an alloy any harder for deer or any other thin skinned game. I like expansion,kinetic energy transfer, and as little tracking as possible.

Im Sure it would expand just fine in a solid boolit and slower velocities.

[curioushooter]

I am not quite sure why the clear gel was brought into this thread. It's expensive and doubtful. I don't use the stuff and don't think anybody should when water or actual gelatin can be procured at any bulk foods store and costs less. Go tell Chris Baker he's wasting everybody's time.

My entire gel testing rig cost less than $100 and that includes the Daisy 880 I purchased to do the BB test. I'm not trying to sell anybody anything either. Just for my own benefit and those of others.

Mike Woods' work is very interesting, I've read his book (Newhall) and follow his posts on his blogs. But he is from an LEO perspective. It's not really relevant to this thread.

I started this thread seeking EVIDENCE in meat, a live animal, water, or gel (valid test mediums) of expansion of solid cast boolits at ordinary handgun velocities (800-1300 FPS). I have not found any evidence myself, and wanted to give the whole soft alloy crowd a chance to present the evidence before I cease testing solids and conclude they don't expand.

I already have proven that most solids will expand well at ~1600 FPS and some as low as 1400 FPS. Don't bother uploading pictures if the solid impacted above 1300 FPS.

I was thinking about the matter of bones. I don't worry about them because the bones on deer at least where you are supposed to shoot them are pretty weak. I've yet to find a bullet that bounced back after hitting one. They usually break through or deflect in which case they still go into the animal and cause damage. Nothing is perfect in hunting except in our imaginations. The issue I have despite having a massive sample size of actual deer wounds to examine is that almost nobody hunts with cast boolits let alone cast hollowpoint bullets in my area besides me a few of my relatives/friends. And they are not the best at "shot placement" mostly because they all stubbornly refuse to use scopes.

[megasupermagnum]

As has been shown, pure lead will expand the velocities you state. I think what you really want to know is how soft you can go and still maintain decent accuracy, at least as good as a slightly harder hollow point. I can't answer that for you, but the original 357 magnum load was supposedly a very soft lead SWC sent at 1550 fps from an 8 3/8" barrel. I don't see where accuracy was ever a problem either. How true this is, or how soft the bullet really was I doubt we can know for sure.

I do think a solid soft bullet can do what you want, I would keep testing. I'm sure I said it earlier, but use a gas check design, choose a moderate weight like 158 grain, flat nose, and a soft lead like 40:1 if you want expansion below 1300 fps.

[wnc435]

I have many deer that have been harvested with the muzzle loader Pure soft lead bullets and or round balls a lot of different styles when the deer is leaking out both sides with a well placed shot I really don't care if it mushroomed or not. but the exit holes are always bigger so it either mushrooms or tumbles through? I was fortunate enough to harvest 2 with one shot with a round ball. It wasn't planned just happened. First one ran 50 yds. second was smaller and laying right there. All OK and legal WI has been very generous with bonus tags for decades. The second deer was hit in the front shoulder and ball was intact but very disfigured. I think a steel ball well placed would be just as deadly as a perfectly mushroomed lead bullet or ball. I have loaded .222 Rem with GC 55gr. 2300 fps and it went right through a 1/2 steel plate cold rolled at 50 yds. Makes a good dent at 100.

[Outpost75]

Agree with CuriousShooter that actual field results on game trump any other test.

I say this because it is hard to obtain a valid assessment based upon less than a dozen or so animals. Many pseudo-experts base their opinions on only a few. Those fellows who butcher game for a large hunting camp or semi-professionally, who observe multiple dozens of deer or other big game over a period of years can speak authoritatively. The fellow who changes his loads every year based on the current Internet whim cannot gain this knowledge. Black powder hunters who use weapons little changed from those of our ancestors know the truth, and are most knowledable, as are those who listen to those have "figured out what works" and stick to their well-proven formula.

My classmate the late Col. Gregory Kalnitzky shot hundreds of head of deer-sized game and hogs using either a .44 Magnum S&W Model 29 or a Marlin 1894S carbine with Saeco 260-grain #430 bullets cast of wheelweights, driven with 16 grains of #2400. He found heavier loads unnecessary. This powder charge was found in testing to be the lightest with #2400 which gave acceptable ballistic uniformity in both revolvers and rifles. It was also the heaviest which could be shot accurately using a soft, plain-based bullet in his MicroGroove Marlin. Velocity is about 1000 fps from a 4-5 inch revolver and 1300 fps from a 20-inch carbine. I have used similar loads in the .44 Magnum for 50 years, and similar loads with a 230-grain bullet of similar shape in the .44-40, using 17.5 grains of IMR4227 or 16 grs. of #2400 in both rifle and revolver.

When Greg was a licensed PH in Africa he used a .375 H&H Winchester Model 70 with #375449 cast from wheelweights and shot air-cooled without gascheck using 13 grains of Bullseye, approximating .38-55 black powder velocity, about 1300 fps, to shoot hundreds of Impala and similar sized game for biltong. My friends and I have killed over 100 whitetails with this load over the last 30 years. Greg used the same #375449 bullet gaschecked and water-dropped being driven by 65 grains of IMR4350 with a 2-grain Dacron fuller for about 2200 fps on heavier game such as Kudu and warthog. It also makes a great woods elk, black bear and moose load. George Martin from the NRA used similar loads which I prepared for him for a succesful African hunt which was written up in American Rifleman in the early 1980s.

[curioushooter]

Restating because some don't seem to get it.

What I want is EVIDENCE of a solid CB expanding at 800-1200 FPS made out of an alloy that can deliver at least useful accuracy and not lead up the barrel. For the record I am not going to bother testing pure lead because I know what is going to happen and know I will be the scraping it out with a Lewis Lead Remover. I'm sure not going to put it through my marlin.

I have already PROVEN that even fairly hard alloy (like 91-6-3 pb-sn-sb) expands greater velocities ~1600.

I already know that Lee slugs and round balls made of nearly pure lead expand...both use means to prevent leading and deliver useful accuracy.

So I ask again...anyone got the goods? So far nobody has...

[Outpost75]

Restating because some don't seem to get it.

What I want is EVIDENCE of a solid CB expanding at 800-1200 FPS made out of an alloy that can deliver at least useful accuracy and not lead up the barrel. For the record I am not going to bother testing pure lead because I know what is going to happen and know I will be the scraping it out with a Lewis Lead Remover. I'm sure not going to put it through my marlin.

I have already PROVEN that even fairly hard alloy (like 91-6-3 pb-sn-sb) expands greater velocities ~1600.

I already know that Lee slugs and round balls made of nearly pure lead expand...both use means to prevent leading and deliver useful accuracy.

So I ask again...anyone got the goods? So far nobody has...

And I would ask again, why is expansion so important?

Are solid, flatnosed bullets of suitable shape, having a meplat 0.6 or more of the bullet diameter, ineffective?

I would think not.

I simply don't understand the fixation upon expansion in a hunting bullet, unless there is some legal requirement in your state game laws which mandates it.

[megasupermagnum]

And I would ask again, why is expansion so important?

Are solid, flatnosed bullets of suitable shape, having a meplat 0.6 or more of the bullet diameter, ineffective?

I would think not.

I simply don't understand the fixation upon expansion in a hunting bullet, unless there is some legal requirement in your state game laws which mandates it.

What bullet has a .600" meplat? If you mean .060" then no. a bullet like that is a lost animal every time without expansion. A 30 caliber bullet of any kind that doesn't expand is dumb luck if you find the animal after a very long track. It's bad news if a 50 caliber spitzer pointed bullet doesn't expand.

A good expanding bullet will put a medium size animal down within 50 yards 90% of the time. A non expanding bullet will not do that unless you are into the larger bore sizes, 44 caliber+.

[Outpost75]

What bullet has a .600" meplat?...

I DID NOT say .600 meplat, what I said was 0.6 of the BULLET DIAMETER, as typical in ogival flatnosed cowboy and Keith SWCs.

I do agree with you in preferring the larger calibers, most simply stated as something which starts with a "4" throwing a half-ounce of lead at 900 fps as a floor level, specifically the .44-40 black powder load fired from a 5-1/2 inch revolver, a well-proven load of long experience. Fired at carbine velocity 1250-1300 is also well proven within 100 yards. Soft bullets will rivet a bit at revolver velocity and will expand at rifle velocity.

Attachment 253325Attachment 253326

The .357 Magnum is marginal until you get into WFN bullets with meplat 0.7 of bullet diameter over 180 grains at full-charge velocities.