Gates Extreme Meplat Bullets [Archive]

Dixie Slugs

03-08-2009, 08:08 AM

Cap'n Morgan

03-08-2009, 08:52 AM

The real discovey that veral made is overlooked today....and that was when he painted the nose of the 429421 and shot it into water......finding only the meplat was washed off (and not the step Elmer had in the 429421). It was then that some realized the bubble caused by the meplat during penetration.

James,

This is new to me, but quite interesting. If I understand correctly, the only thing that really counts is the size of the meplat. You gain nothing from the butt ugly step on the Keith design, and might as well use a tapered or ogive design for better feeding and ballistic?

44man

03-08-2009, 09:19 AM

I seem to have stired things up and that was not my intentions indeed. As for Elmer, I knew him well. There were various people playing around with designs at the same time, including Boser, Kilborn, and others, ut Elmer wrote the book.
The real discovey that veral made is overlooked today....and that was when he painted the nose of the 429421 and shot it into water......finding only the meplat was washed off (and not the step Elmer had in the 429421). It was then that some realized the bubble caused by the meplat during penetration. That began the search for the best meplat that goes on today. There has been many that have designed some interesting bullets, but were working for the gun and ammo companies and were not allowed to do any wriiting, etc.
I have no problems with anyone making modifications of any bullet that I have. There are just cherries out there that have been cut with one design. I just wanted the original specs to have my name to save confusion.
I supposed it was a mistake posting these bullets, but I was asked to do so by some members of this forum. If it has caused confusion, the moderator is welcome to delete the thread.
Regards, James
No confusion at all on my end. I see your point. :drinks: Today every SWC is called a Keith and every truncated cone is an LBT even through all kinds of changes that have nothing to do with the original design. I have no problem with a "Gates" boolit. I dislike the Keith. I have also said forever that the shoulder on a Keith is only good for paper.
Been there, done that with stuff. I designed the first lighted bow sight and it was stolen by some guy with money that seen me using them at night owl shoots or when hunting. I worked out the method to tune a compound for broadheads. My mistake was to send it out trying to get published and at least get my name on the method. That also was stolen and now Easton is using it. When I talked to them they told me some guys in the shop figured it out yeah, sure! :neutral: I still have the original copyrighted forms.
I was always poor and found it takes big money to make money but it would be nice to see my name on something so if one of you puts a nipple on a boolit it doesn't matter to me what you call it.
I designed the perfect WFN for the .475 that is so deadly accurate it is scary and it would be nice if it was called the JWM boolit. Even more scary is the fact that my boolit will fit a Freedom too! [smilie=1:[smilie=1:
Sorry, no drawings! I just call it an LBT style and all of you will too, so it is mine to keep. :mrgreen: This boolit has done 7/8" at 100 from my BFR and is the one I hit cans at 200 with but since WLN and WFN boolits are supposed to go unstable past 25 yd's I can't disclose the internal guidance system! :bigsmyl2:
Did I tell you I don't like the Keith?
Why argue about a name? If it is different and works, someone should at least get credit for the change. A very, very small price and just a few clicks on a keyboard.
Go for it James, I am going to die of old age and nobody will remember my name. :Fire:

Dixie Slugs

03-08-2009, 09:22 AM

When we get to this point, it is the Meplat Area that counts. There has to be a balance. Too big a Meplat and there may be some problem as the bullet goes from super-sonic to sub-sonic. Veral speaks of that problem. My friend Todd Corder/ John Linebaugh Seminar also discussed that with me.
Since we have been concerned with the meplat designs related to the water in tissue...it might be interesting to look into the Russian design, now copied by the USA Navy, on torpedo nose designs....all have a designed meplat to cause a ballistic bubble on the nose and reduced sidewall pressure drag.
The Extreme Meplat designs at not as accurate at super-sonic to sub-sonic velocity as our Truncated Cone designs. However the Extreme Meplat designs do cause more tissue damage at the same impact velocity. We see it happen, but really can not calculate it.
In 1973, we did some testing on various meplat designs using two chronos with Gel in between. When we went from a roundnose to a truncacted nose....everthing else the same...we got a lower reading on the second chrono.....energy deposit????. High speed photos also showed a larger cavity. Some writers, and bullet designers, were given the results....and we saw the first of the larger meplat designs. We, at the gun and ammo co's, were not allowed to publish the finding under our name as long as we worked for them.
What was observed was that the Meplat Area was coming into play....but no way to calculate it....a good average was a 73% meplat. That worked fine but the cavity was also changed with velocity.
As a general rule:
Tissue Damage is a product of Meplat Area and Velocity.
Penetration is a product of Sectional Densisty and Velocity
This should be taken into consideration as you all develop cast bullet designs.
Of course, this applies also to expanded meplats on jacketed bullets....but that's another story.
Regards, James

44man

03-08-2009, 09:45 AM

James, there is a problem when velocity gets too high. I have been testing WLN and WFN boolits on deer from my 45-70 BFR. Results have been extremely poor with several lost deer that were double lung shot. All of the deer recovered traveled three to four times farther then they do from slower boolits. When a necropsy is done, lungs are still pretty much intact.
I went to an 80% meplat with no change at all in killing power. Results were so bad I used the Hornady bullet once to kill better.
Once velocity goes over a certain level, the meplat causes a pressure wave that moves tissue out of the way causing a larger secondary wound channel instead of a large primary channel. The secondary channel then collapses after boolit passage leaving little tissue damage behind.
Next season I will have softer noses and maybe a hollow point to get expansion but the most important thing I will be trying to do is slow the boolit in the deer for more "dwell" time. I will not slow muzzle velocity because I do not want to lose the accuracy.
This effect can not be seen shooting into gel because the channel will stay fixed.
Shooting a very large animal should show better results from a fast WFN because the boolit slows with penetration distance and resistance, causing more internal damage.
Velocity can also be an enemy depending on the animal.

Dixie Slugs

03-08-2009, 12:32 PM

Moderator.....Please remove this thread and any other posts or threads I have answered or started....Thank you, James

45nut

03-08-2009, 12:46 PM

pm sent.

Bullshop

03-08-2009, 01:22 PM

James , my apologies to you Sir. If you have a very specific design mod that is origonal to your boolits and superior in some way to average run of the mill then I was off base and I apologise.
But as someone mentioned I/we tend to look at all SWC as Keith and the same for OW designs as LBT's WFN or LFN designs.
It seems there is much critisism for the Keith desigh and the sholder the design used that does not exist on an OW design.
As I understand it the sholder was not included in the design to cut paper or flesh but was intended to contact the forward edg of the cylender to establish alignment of the boolit/cartridge in the cylender.
Maybe Elmer was wrong about the cutting and maybe not. If you shoot both designs at paper you can clearly see that even though they are of the same caliber the SWC cuts a larger hole in paper than does the OW. Maybe it is different in tissue but on paper the differance in hole diameter is quite noticable.
Personaly I use both designs and am pleased with both. Performance in game has been good for me with either as long as the shot was placed well.
Thank you for posting your findings and your refined designs. I too didnt intend to start a fire on this but was just voicing one mans opinion. I have great respect for the work done by both Elmer and Veral but was unaware of unnamed men working behind the scenes on the same things.
I to have a few of my own designs helped along by Dans design program at Mountain molds. They have all turned out well for both pistol and rifle. In my description of them at my web site they are simply called LBT style WFN'S because I really had little to do with it other than some minor details. The program unless otherwise specified automaticly sets the meplate at 70% when using the OW program. So I see that its perty well established at the 73% you mentioned.
Anyway if I have ofended I do apologise and if anyone should leave this discussion it should be me. You have offered something to everyone but I have offered little more than argument. Sorry!
BIC/BS

Hardcast

03-08-2009, 01:41 PM

Moderator.....Please remove this thread and any other posts or threads I have answered or started....Thank you, James

James,

I consider your experience and input quite valuable and removing it from the forum would be a big loss for us. I encourage you to reconsider your request. I bought Veral's book years ago and am also a believer in large meplats. The trouble is, cast boolits with huge meplats are notorious for losing accuracy at longer ranges, especially if not driven to maximum velocity. Some handgun hunters like to shoot at long distance targets, therefore they don't like the big meplat boolits. As for myself, I am not a long range handgun shooter and therefore, I like 'em. :) Thanks for sharing with us and I hope to read more of your posts.

Neal

runfiverun

03-08-2009, 01:43 PM

way to step up there daniel.
the nose on the keith design was to help it align in the bbl throat of the colts he was shooting.
the shoulder was to fill the cylinder throats.
the rest like the in flight characteristics and game performance was a by product of the design to fit the gun.
this is my take on wwhat i have read and spoken to others who have spoken to elmer about it.

44man

03-08-2009, 02:57 PM

Moderator.....Please remove this thread and any other posts or threads I have answered or started....Thank you, James
Please do not James, everyone has turned into a gentleman and this can open a discussion on WFN stability at long range. Stay with us James and show long range results with your boolit designs.
I do not agree with the instability stuff because I shoot them to 500 meters.
Hardcast likes the boolits so let us show him stability is still there as far as anyone cares to shoot them IF THEY MATCH THE TWIST with drive length.
Go back and read my results on deer and give me your input on high velocity and too hard a boolit.

OBXPilgrim

03-08-2009, 03:27 PM

44man

03-08-2009, 06:50 PM

With what I've read - and seen, with my modified 358627 - hollowpoints seem to have an uncanny ability to stabilize a boolit as well. Some that have mentioned it have talked about the center of gravity shift and others have talked about another frontal pressure bubble.

So, has anyone tried the WFN with varying sizes of HPs?
That will be in the works this summer for my 45-70. I don't see any difference in accuracy between my WFN and the Hornady HP bullets so I don't expect a big change.

hammerhead357

03-08-2009, 09:15 PM

I agree please don't delete this. I think everyone can learn something from this. I know there were other people working on bullet designs at the same time that E.K. was. Just like there were other people working with higher powered 44 loads. We just don't hear about them as much. Hell I was only about 3 years old at that time so can only respond about what I have read about!!!!!!
Also James must be a little older than I thought, so maybe we can all benifit from some of his experince. So James please share some more of your thoughts and experinces.
Now Bullshop please don't go away either as you have a lot to contribute here also......
Wes

Bullshop

03-09-2009, 02:04 AM

Wes did you know that Dick Casull was blowing up Colt single action army's befoer Elmer in developing the 454.
His first 454 loads were put up in 45 colt cases with steel bushings in the primer pockets to reduce the diameter to small rifle. He was firing them in custom 5 shot cylenders with triplex loads of unique, 2400, and bullseye.
There was a 230gn load at 2000 fps from 2gn unique,25gn 2400,and 3gn bullseye, WOW!!! The Ackley book also shows a 250gn triplex with 2gn unique on the primer then 25gn 2400, then another 2gn unique on top for a kicker doing 1890 fps, CARUMBA! In a 45 colt case in a colt SAA, CARUMBA!!
They show the same load with a 300gn bullet at 1710 fps.
They show the first two loads in a 20" 1892 winnie at 2315, and 2185 respectavily.
This was all about the same time S&W was comming out with the model 44 mag.
I used to work for Erve Malnorich who was Elmers partner in a packing venture when they were both very young. Erv had an outfitting business in what is now the Bitterroot Sellway wilderness, this before the wilderness act that paid him .50 per acre and the feds burned the place down.
Anyway Elmer sent Erv one of two tool room non serial number 44 mag N frames to try on elk. These guns were smooth sided with no logo or numbers of any kind. Erv would guarante a 6 point bull from his service. Erv shot a few elk and reported to Elmer and Elmer wrote them up for the mags. I tried to get that gun from Erv but he said he would be burried with it. Most of us knew the story about the 44 but I was surprised to find out that Dick Casulls work went back that far too. The 454 didnt really take off until Dick got a partner with money to invest and they developed thier own frame.
All pretty interesting stuff. Sorry if I got a bit off track there. I am more than just a bit fond of cartridges that came out in 55 like the 44 mag, 358 win, and the 6mm rem.
Ya see thats the same time I was made.
Blessings
BIC/BS

Dixie Slugs

03-09-2009, 11:37 AM

Excellent indeed! It shows what I have known for some years and that is was people. workig for the industry and out, that did a great deal of work that others (maimly the Rag wrirers) took credit for.
In 1972, as Vice-Pres & Director of Marketing of the former Smith & Wesson Ammo Co, I saw a parade of people that took the work of Ted Curtis and Bob Evans (and others).....and wrote it up as their shotgun tests, etc.
There was a "dead zone" for working on cast bullets for me from about '66 to '74.
During that period we developed the S&W/Fiocchi Waterfowl Magnun along with the entire line of S&W Ammo. When Fiocchi and S&W fell out, I went with Fiocchi.
Later back to WW.
Early on, we had trouble with animals running off after shot with the early Keith style designs,,,,and used our dogs to trail up shot hogs and deer. Elmer even wrote that he watch some game shot go a couple of hundreds before going down....OK in open country but a no-go in swamps and dense cover. by '73 we knew it was the lack of Meplat Area, but had gotten sidetracked with jacketed handgun bullets that were hot then. Even then, most of the present hollow points looked good, but did not expand.
Some keep working in the background on cast though. It was during those days that developments in modern shotshells were being written up by Sells, Zutz, Labisty and others....theyvhad followed with what the company boys were doing and the articles they wrote are classics now.
No one really knew that the Former Alcan's Ted Curtis and Bob Evans (and others) were really behind it all.....so it go's
Then Veral can along with his work and the testings at the gun and ammo bunch took off again. Walt, at NEI, cut all manner of cherries!
S&W/Fiocchi bought the rights on the BRI sug thinking it would work with smoothbores....it sure did not! I got sidetracked on big conicals for shotgun bores.
That interest is my prime work today, but I have the old molds, except one mold I worked on coming from the early days of the 41 Mag. Marshall Stanton's boy Alex has it as a gift.
Most of those involved early with cast are now dead and gone! The true story has been forgotten.....or people do not want to know it!
Attached is a picture for you all to consider. .....James

Bullshop

03-09-2009, 01:13 PM

Dixie Slugs

03-09-2009, 02:13 PM

You know...I have spoken of a balance between meplat area/ impact velocity/sectional densiy for some time....but as you know nailing that down is not easy indeed. I think the answer is a lot more of gut-pile-analysis! Weight/momentum/penetration is related to Sectional Densisty, as most accept. then we get into dwell time the bullet is in a game animal....if that factor even exists. Now....I am not trying to be evasive, we both know it is hard to pin down. We can look at ballistic gel forever...and at best it will tell how it appears that one design factors vs another. Most of these arm chair fellows do not even understand that the tissue itself (and how much fat) differs animal to animal....different animals. Some like a true wild hog has a dryer tissue than say deer. Since Meplat Area is very important based on the water content in tissue.....a bullet that works on one will not/may not work on another.
And here is were the problem exists indeed. I agree that a bullet design must have momentum/sectional density to drive deep or through an animal. Early bullet designers for dangerous game, like Taylor, Hunter, and Thornily, were dealing most with roundnose solids. We know now that a hemi nose "swims" in tissue and creates no ballistic bubble. They got the penetration they needed by combining sectional density and a hemi nose....and that servred "their" purpose.
Now....we know that tissue damage is related to Meplat Area..in both an expanded bullet and non-expanding bullet. As has been said...to much expansion (or Meplat Area) with a high impact velocity....may give a quick large cavity, but little penetration....bad on large and/or dangerous game! The understanding of the factors of hard cast continues today! Each person along the way added to the knowledge...Elmer, Veral, and others.
Let's take one caliber...the 44 magnum for example. The ideal velocity of 1500'/" in a handgun and 1800'/" in a short rifle......seems (note I say seems) to be a weight about 265 grs. Combine that with a Meplat about .350"/375" and everthing seems to come together. Then you can staircase up through the various
44 calibers....the weight (sectional density) increase related to the % increase in velocity.....keeping the same meplat area...think about that.
However, I really do not know if this applies to other calibers...but I think it does.
The picture of the ballistic bubble would be constant (as with the torpedo) if the speed/velocity were constant, but would change as the bullet's velocity slows in tissue. It may be related to the speed of sound speed.velocity????
After long conversations with Todd Corder (Linebaugh Seminar) and the tests they did....the very large meplats went though some nose wobble as it became sub-sonic. So.....It had to do with something? The interesting fact is it did not happen with a truncated cone nose and large meplat! That's something for all you to think about.
What all this boils down to...is there are some that are working on the advanced cast bullet designs today! There are so many factors involved that it becomes very confusing.
Today's smart hard cast bullet designer matches his bullet designs to the hunting situation....such a closer range range handgun hunting (say 75 to 100 yards) and this is were a very large Meplat Area (and sectional density) comes into play! If the same caliber is used in a rifle (or the super handguns) it's best to reduced the Meplat Area and go with a truncated cone nose design.
You see....it's all is still progressing! What is really needed is an open mind and more gut-pile-analysis!
Regards, James

44man

03-09-2009, 02:24 PM

I like the picture, thanks. Think I will print a few coppies to hang about in my shop.
Now I have a question about it.
Would you please list for me in order of importance the things that will cause the perminant wound chanel to be larger.
meplate diameter
impact velocity
terminal velocity
angle of cone nose
weight
I feel that the weight because it adds momentum will yeald a more consistant terminal velocity through the medium so the wound chanel should be wider for a longer depth.
A lighter (faster) boolit may initially produce a steeper angle of displacment but because the terminal velocity is reduced by drag more quickly the channel will taper off to boolit diameter or less than if it stops in the media or is slowed substantially.
I guess what I am really looking for is an optimum of meplate, impact velocity, boolit weight, and nose angle or length per caliber.
I think they all work together and know that the meplate is importent but I also place great importance on the momentum to maintane a higher terminal velocity.
An optimal impact velocity must exist but in huntig is difficult to guarantee. The best we can do is to start out high enough that at the max range we are willing to shoot it will still be carrying the minimum acceptable.
I just love this stuff. Thank you for leaving it up.
Blessings
BIC/BS
I for one have no pat answer! :confused: Meplat is VERY important but from what I have been seeing, there is an optimum velocity range.
My .44 with the hard cast WLN (320 to 330 gr) at around 1316 fps destroys lungs and blood pours on the ground, deer seldom make 30 or 40 yd's.
The .45 Colt busts deer as good with heavy, hard cast WLN or WFN boolits (335 to 342 gr) going 1167 fps.
The .475 is best of all at around 1340 fps and either the WLN or WFN (400 to 430 gr) just smashes deer, most hard put to make 20 yd's.
The best part is that internals are destroyed but meat damage is mild and just a little trim is needed around the holes.
As soon as I get over 1600 fps in the 45-70 (317 to 378 gr), things change drastically with little blood sign, sometimes no blood on the ground for a long distance, deer going 100 to 200 yd's. An 80% meplat did not help. Too many deer tested to make me want to try another.
What happens with a WFN, hard cast at 1800 to 2000 fps? :confused:
Sure, shoot the deer at 200 or more yd's and they become killers again but what happens to the 30 yd deer? How many guys would revolver hunt at 200 or more yd's?
We have much to learn and I have been doing the testing on animals where it counts. Theory and shooting into test media proves nothing.
Some are just going the wrong way looking for faster and faster boolits, after all, flat trajectory with a revolver is a silly thing to look for unless you are shooting targets.
It is better to look for heavier boolits at the correct velocities to make use of a large meplat and gain penetration.
As far as nose angle I firmly believe you want a good fit to the forcing cone and forget about it's effect on boolit flight. The boolit needs to stay straight when it impacts the cone. That is why I do not like the Keith because the first thing to hit is the little shoulder. The nose provides no guidance.
Accuracy??? I can keep all of my 45-70 revolver boolits on a ram at 500 meters by aiming at a tree branch 26 or more feet, depending on the boolit, above the ram using a red dot. Does the WLN or WFL shoot poor at range? Can't prove it by me!
Killing power at the higher velocity---ZILCH, need expansion to slow it in the animal. Notice guns like the .454 and .460 depend on jacketed bullets to kill. Too fast for hard cast. They need heavy boolits slowed down and is why a .45 Colt will do the job as well once the .454 and .460 are slowed down.

leftiye

03-09-2009, 03:17 PM

Thank youse all for a most engrossing, and informative thread. James, ya gotta take it all with a little aspirin, yeah, we'll give you headaches. A lot of us here think we know something too. So join us for enjoyable explorations at the cutting edge.

I'm watching 44man's exploration of velocity working against killing power and occurring at a given velicity. Variations on this claim have been around for a long time (there may just be some substance there). AND it is indisputable that slow moving big bore guns have killed admirably forever. A 58 cal muzzleloader of mine in the hands of one of my friends produced a large bull elk doing the two step (two steps, lay down and die) at 200 yards. It (the boolit - a 500 grain cast grain spire point) couldn't have been moving very fast when it hit.

BABore

03-09-2009, 03:43 PM

I'm a firm believer in a boolit that has the following features;

- Heavy for caliber
- 65% to 75% Meplat
- Alloy that is heat treatable yet 3% or less antimony
- Hollow point cavity that 1/2 to 2/3rds the nose length

I agree that the impact velocity will affect the meplat's effectivness. That's why I like to combine a good meplat with a shallower HP. At higher velocity, where the meplat is less effective, the HP will expand rapidly. The shallower cavity depth will reduce over-expanding to some degree while the heavy-for-caliber boolit you start with will still have enough shank for good penetration. If you blow the nose off of a 420 gr, 460 dia. boolit, you will still have 350 to 375 grains of shank. The lower antimony alloy will allow any expansion to stay more intact rather than fragment and rivet. At longer ranges, where velocity is lower, the HP is somewhat negated. Now the large meplat can act as it should.

As far a the nose profile, James and I will forever argue about a truncated verses ogival nose. Can't say I can disprove his tests and theorys, The ogival nose is just my personnal preference. Based on the meplat/cavity illustration posted above, I could argue that an ogival nose might be buffeted less than the trucated nose. If the ogive matches the flow pattern around the nose, would it not be more stabile in flight? Less apt to jink around as the side flow is surrounding the nose rather than making a null area on each side? Just guessing here, but wouldn't any yawing inbalance these null areas and make things worse. Don't know for sure. so I'm just hanging it out there.

44Man,

I just mailed you out a little goodie box so you can test some of these theories for yourself.

mpmarty

03-09-2009, 03:48 PM

One of my favorite examples of this sectional density = penetration = killing power is the venerable 6.5 swede with its long heavy "cruise missle" bullets as loaded by Lapua and Norma. Not much velocity and the BC is low but it is a known killer of elk, caribou and moose.

Dixie Slugs

03-09-2009, 04:47 PM

No. I do not think there is an arguement over an ogival vs truncated nose as far as what happens going sub-sonic...I would lean towad a flow on the nose....but to how much difference is to be seen.
Where as I think the truncated nose is best in tissue. Since test show no wobble with the truncated nose going sub-sonic...I have stayed with it.
But what are we talking about...testing or designing bullets? As said before, I do not think there is a design to match all situations. About 10/11 years ago when I retired...I pull out all my notes going back to 1956 on cast bullets and old molds. I then decided to re-develop two designs for three calibers.....35, 44, and 45. one design was based on a extreme meplat and the other a truncated cone. This was based on the previous mentioned hunting situations....close and distance.
I am well aware that there are those here that have a great deal of knowledge, but there is a better way to disagree at times than I have seen.... and consider that there may be other knowledgeable people beside your family of regulars. It is very easy to be critical at someone else's design.
I would really like to see others post their designs indeed!..and then back it up with something besides speculation.
At Dixie, we are now deeply involved in designs for full bore 12 and 20 bore conicals...and I assure you that's uncharted water. What I have seen from actual public tests at the John Linebaugh Seminar on various designs....there still is a relationship that applies somewhat to smaller cast designs. but, we are talking about performance with 150 yards on large and/or dangerous game.
Yes indeed, I would like to see other's designs posted with an explanation as to why they feel theirs is best and to what extent. Then maybe, as you say, they would have to take an BC powder......James

44man

03-09-2009, 08:30 PM

44man

03-09-2009, 08:35 PM

Oh, I have to ask, is there a flow pattern on the nose with a big flat meplat?

BABore

03-10-2009, 09:01 AM

Thank you Babore.
You are correct and that is what I will use next season, 50-50, water dropped with a shallow hollow point. All the boolit needs do is spread a little on impact, nothing drastic.
How far do you want me to shoot what you are sending?

Up to you, they're yours now unless USPS screws up. They still need to be sized, heat treated, and lubed. Besides, I only sent two of each. One for testing and one for a deer.[smilie=1:

I usually impact test them at point blank, typical deer range, and maximum deer range.

44man

03-10-2009, 09:42 AM

BABore

03-10-2009, 11:43 AM

OK, one to sight and one for a deer. Will do! :drinks:
I no longer believe in test media after extensive testing last year on wet phone books and other stuff that showed large channels that deer did not exhibit.
We shot everything up to the .577 Nitro Express. What a BLAST!

Your thinking wrong here. Of course it's not deer flesh. Do you have a boolit that is known to do what you want in a deer? Use that one to establish a baseline in you test media first. Compare your unknown ones to that. Of course you can also pick up a few road killed deer, prop them up, stick a garden hose up their butt and fill em up a little, then have at it. My buddy and I are trying to find some goats to raise up over the summer. Keep the grass down in the shooting range while they fatten up. Come Fall they would become test media sausage.:-D Something tells me I'm going to be hearing from Boerrancher about this idea.[smilie=1:

44man

03-10-2009, 12:30 PM

Your thinking wrong here. Of course it's not deer flesh. Do you have a boolit that is known to do what you want in a deer? Use that one to establish a baseline in you test media first. Compare your unknown ones to that. Of course you can also pick up a few road killed deer, prop them up, stick a garden hose up their butt and fill em up a little, then have at it. My buddy and I are trying to find some goats to raise up over the summer. Keep the grass down in the shooting range while they fatten up. Come Fall they would become test media sausage.:-D Something tells me I'm going to be hearing from Boerrancher about this idea.[smilie=1:
:bigsmyl2:
The Hard 45-70 boolit showed more damage then the .44 and .45 hard cast. The .475 was a little larger. But the media has a tendency to hold the channels shape. I remember the .475 went 40" too.
I don't think a dead deer will show much because blood flow and systems are shut down, density is different and just putting water in amounts to shooting water jugs.
Now the goats are the way to go and since the meat will be used, what difference is there in how they are killed? Death is death! [smilie=1:
My boolits blow a whole row of gallon water jugs sky high too.
Now the .577 soft point blew craters as large as the books but penetration was poor. I have the results somewhere but can't find them. I will see if I can get the pictures from my friend too.
Anyway, seeing the crater from the 45-70 WFN is what made me try them on deer instead of the WLN. Poor choice.
The Hornady 300 gr HP is another story, it puts the hurt on deer. That is the bullet to copy. (For deer, not large animals.)

BABore

03-10-2009, 01:49 PM

How about these then? They weigh 320 grains as they set. The LH boolit was sized from 0.461 to 0.452 which created a 0.100 top band in the process. It's 45 2.1's dual purpose Hammer design.

44man

03-10-2009, 05:50 PM

PEEEEEERFECT! :drinks:

GLynn41

03-10-2009, 06:10 PM

Great thread -- for what ever it is worth Veral told me in a thread that as velocity goes up like in my .41 Mag Marlin -- then meplat needs to come down some to be a good killer at all ranges--
also my fav mold in the .41 is a TAN , .400" long nose and a .33 meplat and like (I think it was 44man) the deer I have taken are just whacked - little or no travel and good blood now I wonder what if i move it up to to carbine mv -- will it be less a killer? From my 5.5" Rhawk velocity is 1360 -1400 --in a 41/44 have not clocked it in a normal .41

03-10-2009, 06:23 PM

I like the looks of that boolit! Especially in .452. I'm in the process of putting together a .450 Bushmaster to serve as a "modern" cast boolit hunting rifle. My thoughts going in were along the lines of a 300 grainer just under 2,000 fps.

I did some testing involving big flat meplats in the .44 mag some years ago which included 265 grain WFNs, The Lee 310 grainer, 280 grain ogival wadcutters, (and just for fun some 180 grain flying trash cans). The conclusions I came away with were: There is a relationship between sectional density and meplat area in regard to how stable the boolit flies, and that it may be the speed of the meplat passing through flesh more than the weight of the boolit which matters in terminal ballistics.

Both the 265 grain WFN and the 280 grain OWC developed accuracy issues at the point they came down through the speed of sound, (the flying trashcans had accuracy issues right out of the tube). Both appeared to fly well off into yonder if launched at 1,110, but pushed past that they both had a range limit beyond which the groups really opened up.

The Lee 310 seemed to fly well to any range. The groups opened predictably with increasing range. I attributed this to the 310 grainer having enough sectional density to allow it to readily overcome any wobble induced by the "sound barrier". Not proof, just a deduction, and unfortunately this is not conclusive as I didn't have a platform to get the 310 up much over 1,300 fps, so it was coming down through 1,100 at a pretty close range where wobble may not have been so apparent on the target.

My further experience killing things with these boolits showed me that the 265 grainer did as much, or more, damage to deer and hogs as the 310 grainer, and still penetrated everything completely, with one exception. Again not conclusion as all of these kills were well inside 100 yards.

I'm looking forward to exploring this futher in .452 as the bushmaster will be able to launch the heavier bullets at considerably higher velocities, and I'll be capable of better baseline accuracy in that platform. Plus the need for a good taper crimp may require another boolit design :) always a benefit.
BD

Dixie Slugs

03-10-2009, 08:51 PM

As Veral said...There is something we saw on the .730"-73o gr Terminator. That bullet does look like a trash can! I sent three loads out to the Linebaugh Seminar for Todd to test....1200'/", 1300'/", and 1400'/"
What was found that after 1200'/", the velocity dropped, but the cavaity was larger. Other words pressure (or somethig) was builing up on the meplat as velocity increased.....it should not happen by all that some say, but it was there! The slug/bullets were bullet alloy and heat treated.....looked like they could be used again. So far, we know it can happen, but can't nail down any calculations.
This goes back to what I did on the bullets.....set up some for smashdown close and in the velocity range of 1000'/" to 1300'/"...ergo the Extreme Meplat designs. The other design, truncated Cone nose, was designed for higher velocity. The Extreme Meplat designs do not feed worth flip in lever guns, where all the Truncated Cone nose designs feed well and seem to fly better at higher velocities. Some have said that an ogival nose going down to the meplat "flow" better.....I do not argue that point at all but would have to see where they would be better than the truncated cone. Todd did think that a small radius where the truncated cone met the meplat might help the shear there....but since they found the truncated cone flew well, I have not altered the molds....they are expensive as you know.
Please understand, we are just now starting understand the whys and wherefores of advanced cast bullet designs.
Just some thoughts indeed!.....James

44man

03-11-2009, 09:22 AM

I think the larger meplat, shot faster might work fine on larger and tougher animals. I have no idea because all I have to hunt here are deer which offer very little resistance to boolit passage.
What each of you need to do is tailor boolits for what you are hunting. All will get different results depending on the animal.
It seems we have the same situation as jacketed bullets where each is made for a purpose and none will do it all. Changing boolit construction might be more important then I thought it was. It was my mistake depending on meplat alone.
What I have been finding will aid deer hunters but might not apply at all with tough game.
If you shoot deer with a hard cast WLN or WFN from a revolver and results are very good, I would look twice before shooting the same boolit from a rifle.
It happened to my grandson once. He shot my boolit from his .44 Marlin and made a perfect shot on a large doe. She spun around and he shot her again, this boolit exited right next to the first entry hole. The deer ran off and made somewhere between 150-200 yd's before dropping. I never did any thinking over that, two perfect shots and a long tracking job. Now I know what happened! :drinks:
To make matters worse, I used his rifle to drop another large doe in her tracks but thinking back, I shut down her nervous system where I hit her. That gave me more faith in the boolit.
The Marlin will now use some expansion also in the future.

Dixie Slugs

03-11-2009, 10:43 AM

Excelllent indeed! Just as the shooter/hunter understands the difference in jackected bullets designs for different game......so must the shooter/hunter understand the different cast designs for game!
Think of it this way.....if there is a balanced cast bullet.....sectional density/meplat area/velocity.....when you change one factor, it changes one or two of the other factors,,,,just like jacketed bullets. As you said, there is not one cast bullet design that works best for all hunting situations!
Many times the same bullet works by changing the alloy...that's the easy way...but, again calls for gut-pile-anaysis.....and most do not kill that much game today.
And, I stress again as to what distance your design was set up for. As I mentioned, I have broken my designs down into two catagories to simplify matters....not the best method, but works most of the time. I also apply that to shotgun bore designs.
Now...we are getting into the nitty-gritty of cast bullet designs and a collective effort can pay off indeeed.
During any given year Dixie talks direct to hundreds of shooter.hunters, mainly about deer, then wild hogs, and then a few that have had to put down really big bad critters. There is a little, but not much over-lapping of designs....as with jacketed bullets.
If we can get the cast bullets shooter/hunters thinking about cast bullet designs as much as jacketed bullet people....we will be farther down the road.
Regards, James

BABore

03-11-2009, 11:35 AM

That is why I decided to use 45 2.1's advise and use 50/50 WW-Pb alloy, along with a boolit that has a decent meplat. As cast it runs around 10 bhn. Good for alot of pistols and LV rifle rounds for thin skinned game. Good expansion. Want a bit more, then HP the same boolit. Water drop or oven HT the same alloy for 22 bhn and the solid version is a good penetrator that still shows some expansion at higher velocity. HP the harder boolit and you get a bunch more. If you need a hard boolit for the gun's likes, anneal the nose of either a solid or HP. One alloy and meplat design. It doesn't cover absolutely everything, but is the closest I've found so far.

Dixie Slugs

03-11-2009, 12:44 PM

Makes sense! If we can get the cast bullet shooter/hunter/designer to understand that, for the most part.... Tissue Damage is a product of Meplat Area (expanded or not)and Velocity...he will fully understand what Veral (and others)was saying about an incerase in Velocity may call for a decrease in Meplay Area. Note I said may.
Having underdtood that, he is ready to consider Sectional Density for penetration.
Going back to 1956.....the problem with Elmer's 429241 for 1200'/" with only
.280" meplat....reallly not enough of Meplat Area.....but some will not agree with that indeed!
We found that the cast 44 bullet weighing 265 grs and 1800'/" needed only about .325" meplat for plenty of tissue damage.
Regards, James

44man

03-11-2009, 01:07 PM

Well, I am screwed up now! I received more boolits from babore today and as usual, I don't know whether to shoot them or frame them. :drinks:
Thank you Bruce. :Fire:

felix

03-11-2009, 01:17 PM

Same thing happened to me, 44man! 26Charlie sent me some boolits that are still in their shipping package, a red cartridge block, on my desk. I loaded 5 and shot them, and determined they were just too good accuracy wise for beer cans. Reserving them for something more fruitful. ... felix

44man

03-11-2009, 01:50 PM

We have masters of the craft here, that's for sure. I just wished we didn't live so far apart. :neutral:

Bullshop

03-11-2009, 02:09 PM

For my rifle boolit designs with OW nose design I like to go with the most length that will stabalise in the twist it will be used in so the weight (sectional density) is there. For rifles where enough velocity is not an issue about 60% meplate has worked well for me.
With a rifle where you will consider longer shots the with a handgun the reduced meplate will raise the BC so at longer range impact velocity will be higher than with an extream meplate.
Really there are two discussions here one about handguns and one about rifles. Because of the differances in velocity potential the importance of design features changes.
BIC/BS

insanelupus

03-11-2009, 02:55 PM

Bullshop

03-11-2009, 03:35 PM

In boolit design for killing I am usually thinking center of mass hits and long wide wound channels.
If the situation allows, head shots. Boolit design wont matter there.
In a defensive situation against an animal that is intent on hurting me and has the capability I am looking at the brain and spine.
Potential velocity of the cartridge will dictate the size of the meplate but still and always for me for killing I want the longets practicle length/weight to insure higher terminal velocity and complete penitration. Alloy/hardness can be adjusted to the velocity of the cartridge and expansion charictoristics (if any) desired.
Discussing expansion and how much is desirable is a whole nuther subject with its own set of rules.
BIC/BS

leftiye

03-11-2009, 03:39 PM

All I know it that a lyman 375449 (out of a 375 H&H Improved) does waaay more damage on a jackrabbit than you'd believe. Both to the rabbit, and to yer shoulder! Maybe this could be applied to other game (big, long, flat nosed boolit, per caliber, and per game)? Kickum butt good, get less argument.

BABore

03-11-2009, 03:49 PM

It all depends on the animal your hunting. Deer don't take much to kill and they don't offer much resistance to a good cast boolit. Even a softer alloy, on a quartering forward shot, will break the shoulder, pass through the vitals, guts, break the hind and exit. Makes it kinda hard to run far busted up like that, but also wastes a bunch of meat. The same boolit will expand some on a broadside lung shot. It may or may not drop them right their. Just not enough resistance. Make the boolit harder and it can get worse. It's all on the meplat and velocity. Then the deer shows up to be shot at a range where things work against you. When I was playing around with alloys, hardness, meplate, and hollow pointing, I was trying to compare things to one of the best all around hunting bullets. The Nosler Partition. It's designed to expand quick and shed the nose. Then the shank penetrates deeply. I already outlined my cast boolit equivilent to that above by using a heavier boolit with a HP. It compares pretty well with the Partition.

For deer I'm shifting towards a little lighter boolit with the same properties cause they're not that big. By light I mean 250-260 grains in the 44 mag or 325 to 350 grains in the 45-70. As the animal gets bigger, so must the weight, so you have enough shank left for penetration. I also ajust the hollow point cavity depth. I guess elk would fall into this category. Anything bigger or more stoutly constructed and the HP goes and the alloy is harder. This is all based on hunting situations that I have been exposed to. If I were to be on a venison hunt where big bears were previlent, I would be rethinking my boolits some.

I do prefer a head shot if the range and presentation allows. Otherwise I like to be just behind the shoulder to save on meat loss. I won't pass on a quartering or shoulder shot if the situation dictates. Others here have different requirements due to there local. I can allow a deer to run a bit where I'm at. When I go out to Colorado elk hunting, it's a different story. This flatlander doesn't like to lug elk up big hills.

So to answer your question. It all depends! Test your boolits at point blank and extreme ranges and determine your shot placement based on their performance.

Bullshop

03-11-2009, 04:05 PM

I recall once testing the Lee 44/300 when it first came out. In ww alloy mine run about 310gn with the check.
In working up to absolute in a Marlin 44 mag carbine I found that at 1800 fps I would get about 50% extraction failiers. The thin stamped extracter on a Marlin is the week like to the systam. If you crack much over 40,000 psi they will begin to skip over the rim and leave the case in the chamber, this on the 1894 model.
Backed it off to 1700 fps for a good working load. We were raising rabbits at the time and on my way to the range there sat one about 20 yards away looking straight down my barrel. With the sake of gaining knolage for all in mind I shot that rabbit.
After the explosion of hair I found I must have hit him right on the nose because there was no head to be found, but I picked up all four legs completely sepperated from each other. The four legs were perfectly fine but thats all there was. The rest was scattered through out the brush and up in the trees.
The Marlin 44 mag is what My wife and I carried for protection from bears when we lived in logging camps. You get 10 shots of 310gn WFN's at 1700 fps. If those boolits are of a non expanding nature I feel quite comfortable with that in any defensive situation I may run into here. Now if I happened to live on the dark continent I would up my weight burden to the 1895 Marlin and feel none the less protected.
BIC/BS

44man

03-11-2009, 04:13 PM

I'm not sure I belong in this discussion as there are many here with more cast experience than I. I've not killed anything with a cast bullet yet. However, one aspect of this conversation on bullet design intrigues me, especially when a comparison is made as to jacketed bullets and different designs/bullets for different uses.

Where I live in Montana, if you draw all the tags (nearly an impossibility) one could, in the same season, hunt mountain goat (draw), sheep (draw), moose (draw), mountain lion, bears, elk and deer. At the time Elmer Keith designed his bullets he was also in similar game country.

One thing I don't recall him mentioning, nor have I seen on this thread is bullet placement. When I'm hunting elk, I have gone to a Nosler Partition, 250 grain, for my 35 Whelen. I shot a cow 2 years ago with a 250 grain Speer HotCor at less than 75 yards. The bullets did not exit. (First shot was a poor shot as it hit a limb I didn't see passing into the paunch and driving into the ham, the second follow up shot was a shoulder shot which lodged under the hide). As noted by Elmer Keith, she seemed "sick" and didn't go far and I was able to put her down quickly. Had she run I would have needed a good blood trail because of the thick lodge pole timber in the area. Hence I went with the Nosler Partition hoping for an exit wound next time. Incidentally, those were jacketed bullets at 2450 fps.

However, when using the same rifle on deer, even with the Speer bullet I get very little expansion. In the past if I'm meat hunting does I get close, real close, and just shoot them in the head. It's worked well. I've shot deer in the lungs and while it does the job, the deer run quite a ways with little blood trail. When they lay down though the blood flows out the wounds.

I've come to the conclusion I have to reach a comprimise and decide which animal I really wish to hunt, which for me is elk. More and better tasting meat in my opinion. However, on deer when using the Nosler bullet I've decided I'll take the shots which pass through the lungs, but also pass through a shoulder in an effort to break the animal down. I don't want a shoulder shot without vitals as well.

I've heard of this idea on black bears and it is a very hot and debateable subject. Additionaly, when I spoke to the Speer techs about the above bullet performance the gentleman I spoke with told me he had given up on lung shots in the thick timbered mountains like I hunt and he goes for shoulder shots. His comment to me was the following, "I never saw a lung shot elk run any closer to the truck."

So, all that long winded explanation is my point for considerations of bullet desings and then to ask those who know more than I. When you consider the bullet design to use, the velocity and also of course alloy, what kind of shots are you looking at? Are you limiting yourselves strictly to the lung shots or are you using a design intended to be able to take those quartering shots where heavy shoulders would be involved and how does that effect your considerations for the bullet design, alloy, and velocity?
You have touched on a touchy subject! [smilie=1: The best boolit choice is one that penetrates like gangbusters, busts up internals to mush and still will not destroy shoulder meat. The ideal is one that will go through heavy shoulders yet hold together and exit, same as a quartering shot needs to do. But it should also work if placed behind the shoulder.
Your question involves exactly what we have been discussing here about different alloys and hardness for each animal depending on the velocity.
Take a .44, .45 or .475 with heavy hard cast boolits with a good meplat and I don't think it matters where the animal is hit as long as it is in a vital area.
When you have to worry about where to hit an animal because of velocity, bullet/boolit construction, size of the animal and distance shot, then the problems are what we are trying to figure out at this time.
It is no good if only a shoulder shot can be taken OR only a shot behind the shoulder instead. Since we discuss mostly revolvers that make it tough to place a shot exactly, unlike a rested rifle, it is more important to get it right.
It still applies to a rifle although not as critical but you see for yourself, an elk bullet is wrong for a deer and the other way around too.
As you see, high velocity puts a different equation into bullet selection whereas a big, heavy, slow boolit does most anything. Like a big round ball from a muzzle loader busts anything or a good revolver does anything as long as the velocity does not get ridiculous.
Of all of the guns I have, I think the .475 Linebaugh can kill anything from a deer to a buf using only ONE hard cast boolit with a good meplat. The universal gun!
So bear with us, all calibers and velocities are different.

Bullshop

03-11-2009, 04:23 PM

helice

03-11-2009, 07:26 PM

James,

It took me a while to read thru this thread but I really enjoyed it. Your comments made me feel like I did when I read Veral's book the first 15 or 20 times. So much of what I believe about my pet boolits is just that -- "belief". I have very little to back up what I believe about my cast boolits. It was great enjoyment for me to read of someone who has real experience and obvious knowledge. Its great fun for me to share my "stuff" with the group when I can, but my reason for being here is to learn. Please James --- Keep Writin', cause when you're writin' I'm Learnin'. Helice

P.S. Thanks for sharing your mold specs with us. They are a gift to be sure.
P.P.S.S. Would that 35 caliber work well in a 350 Rem. Mag.?

Dixie Slugs

03-11-2009, 07:57 PM

Thank you for your kind words indeed....but I would like to stress that the learning curve, compared to the knowledge about jacketed bullets, is short.
Elmer (and a few others that did not write a book) started the cast bullet thing big. They had very little to fall back on. Then Veral picked up the ball. However there where many company fellows feeding out what they were seeing....I have mentioned few like Ted Curtis and Bob Evans. It is a fact that many of the company boys findings (and it still happens) ended up under someone else's name......but we have all profitted from it. If, 10 or 15 years ago someone would have said the even the ammo factories would be selling hard cast designs....people would laugh. I found some very interesting things that the Brits did years ago that was forgotten when smokless powder and Jacketed bullets came to the fore front. That really applies to hard cast in the big bores. You can rest assured that there is still ongoing research done on a daily basis with cast bullet design. The reloader has the advantage over the ammo makers, who can not alter their products to meet every situation. The ammo maker must decide on certain designs that will have to go unchanged to the market place....and, friends, that's a real challenge indeed. There are lots of ideas out there, but will sell? I lean toward the reloaders because most of the successful designs do come from that sector.
Just some thoughts.....James

Bret4207

03-12-2009, 07:31 AM

I am not sure without going to look but I think those are catalog items from NEI. No?
They dont carry the name in the catalog.
To get to name them you have to pay for the cherry too. Quite a bit more expensive to do that. All a them ogival wadcutters look like Verals design to me. He is the real Papa to all of um.
BIC/BS

All Veral did is take the old B+M designs and sharpen the leading edge of the metplat. Nothing new there. What Veral did have was Ross Seyfrid (sp) writing about his moulds at the height of his popularity. Like Jack O'Connor with his 270, all those words equaled sales. I take nothing away from Verals knowledge, although his judgment in tax matters is suspect. But as other here have noted, there ground work was all done decades earlier. I have a B+M mould from the 20's or 30's that would be a dead ringer for a WFN if the corner of the metplat was a wee bit sharper. If you do a little historical research you'll find most of what we think of as cutting edge today has an ancestor or 3 from the turn of the century or earlier.

I think, in the historical aspect, a lot of us miss the most important thing Elmer did- he went for a specific SIZE. If you read the old tomes you find lots of research on shape, but not too much on size. Elmer didn't have the whole thing down, anymore than we do, but he was the first guy I've found to talk size. With BP it didn't matter so much, but with smokeless it became important and he designed his boolits to a size as much as a shape and he spoke of it in his books. There were others no doubt that covered the same ground, but like Seyfreid boosting Veral, Elmer boosted size. I think that was a big step forward.

Dixie Slugs

03-12-2009, 10:32 AM

BABore

03-12-2009, 10:52 AM

BA bore
I have a customer from Texas that is using the Old Lyman 462somethingorother HP on nilgi or something like that. I understand they are quite large. I cast his orders in acww and as I said the mold is HP. The HP pin goes the full length of the nose which must be about a third of the boolits length. I wish I had gotten more details when he called to tell me how well they worked. From what I remember he is using a single shot, I dont know the velocity but he is shooting smokless. No other details on terminal performance accept that the few he has shot have dropped to the shot without running. I seem to remember him saying that is very unusual for those animals. If you are not familier with that old Lyman design it is a bore rider with about 1/3 the boolit in bore ride nose. It has a large meplate with some radious at the juncture of the ogive and meplate.
It is a very blunt (550gn in ww) long and heavy for caliber. He says he has shot with good accuracy out to 400 yards even though the profile looks rather inefficiant. There must be something to the slight radious at the edge of the meplate that is aiding to stability at longer range along with the weight to dampen any wobble.
BIC/BS

You must be talking about the Lyman 462560 boolit. That's a loooooong nose on that thing. With ACWW alloy and that deep of HP cavity it must have been a good expander. If he was driving them real fast, out of something like a Lott, it would have been a bomb. At max 45-70 smokeless velocity, it would have been around 1,500 fps or so. Would have been real nice moderate expansion with plenty of tail for penetration. For what I've heard, a Nilgia is one tough mother to put down.

I mainly shoot 45-70's and a 450 Marlin for big bores. Maybe, someday I'll get a Lott (don't know why). So, I'm always restricted on nose length. Sticking all that boolit in the case really takes a bite out of powder room. I've found that a 420ish grain boolit seems to have the most bang for the buck. Good velocity at 1,700 to 1,800 fps and enough mass. Before I took up casting I was getting cast from Beartooth, Cast Performance, and JB Young. JB has a nice heavy for leverguns that goes 550 grs. It's called the "Crater". I believe the mold is from Ballisticast. I was getting 1,550 out of my guide gun with it. Super penetrator and good smack down. Beartooth has a similar boolit at 525 grains. Cast Performance has a 458-460 gr GC that is a real sleeper. It's super accurate. It has a nose that's real similar to the boolit your talking about, although a tad shorter.

I had a 450 Marlin GG load that pushed that 460 gr boolit to about 1,700 fps using H322. Very accurate even at 300 yards. I only killed one critter with that boolit and was very impressed. Opening day of deer season, I was sitting on the edge of a hay field in a portable blind. It was pretty warm out and the deer weren't moving much. Out of the corner of my eye I caught movement, close, real close. I slowly turned my head and nearly jumped out of the blind. At 20 yards stood the most mangy coyote I've ever seen. Almost totally hairless except for a sparse strip right down the spine that was standing up like a mohawk. The skin was all grey and wrinkled. Looked just like the puppet/critter from "Tales from the Crypt". It started angling towards me as I brought the gun up. I put the crosshairs of the 1.75x scout scope behind the shoulder and let it rip. The impact must have tossed that yote a good 6 feet. The entrance hole was 1 1/4" as was the exit. Being only about 5 inches thick, there sure wasn't much resistance there. That boolit tore an intermittent furough of about 25 feet in semi-frozen field before zinging skyward to parts unknown.

Although I don't really have the need, one of these days I'm going to make a cherry for a similar 460 grain boolit so I can make a HP version. Maybe even one of them 550 gr craters.

44man

03-12-2009, 11:31 AM

Babore, to show how stupid I have been! [smilie=1: I sized a few of your boolits today for the 45-70 BFR and found they came out .458". I checked my boolits I have been shooting and they are .458" also. Lee die of course! They dropped through my cylinder throats so I lapped the die. I thought I slugged my throats at .4595". I lapped the die a tad too much and wound up with .4595", then found my throats are .4592". No problem because a thumb pop pushes them through.
I never measured a boolit after sizing, just depended on what the die was supposed to be. SURPRISE to me. :roll: I have not done this with other guns, how I let this one slip by is news to me, maybe because it shoots so good.
This gun has been shooting around 1" at 100 with boolits that were too small, yet groove size at .458".
Now to see what it does with a better fit. :Fire:

BABore

03-12-2009, 12:09 PM

All's I can say to that is;

Bwaaaaahahahahahahahahahah!

44man

03-12-2009, 01:02 PM

OK, OK, just so everyone else doesn't jump on the bandwagon too! :bigsmyl2:

44man

03-12-2009, 01:20 PM

I have to admit when I was working loads I used a .459" (Lapped.) die in my lube sizer. Strange that after going to the Lee die, accuracy did not change and there is no leading either.
Of course my .44 will shoot anything from .430" to .432" so really, how important is boolit diameter?
Do we stress fit too much without more stress on the brass which is more important anyway?
Measuring seating pressure with the smaller boolits and then again with larger boolits does not show any change because the brass is expanding to fit either boolit. I get the same readings.
I have 5 of your boolits sized .458" and will compare groups with .4595" boolits when I get back from hunting. I leave in a half hour.
Wish me luck on a piggy! :mrgreen: I am taking the .475.

BABore

03-12-2009, 02:21 PM

Don't forget to heat treat them first. They are as cast and 10 bhn. Unless of course that's your plan.

Size is important when the gun or boolit dimensions (i.e. fit) are bad. Velocity also makes a difference. When everything is perfect you can get away with alot.

Bullshop

03-12-2009, 03:41 PM

After hearing from the Texas hunter I thought I would try some of the big HP's myself.
I did not test them in game but shot them into a bermed up snow pile at 100 yards.
This test media is quite plentiful and afordable here most of the year.
Anyways using Elmers old faithful 45 Sharps velocity of 1550 fps with a 550gn boolit each shot yealded the same results.
About 1/3 of the way through the penitration would be found the nose in three very nearly equal weight pieces of about 80gn, then the shank of about 300gn alone at the end of the chanel. This was so consistant it was predictable. This was using the same acww alloy I was shipping to Texas. I dont know if you would call that a boolit failier or not but he says it was sure dropping them big critters.
I remember once having to take a texas heart shot (no offence ment to Texans) at a small fork horn moose with ol B00 loaded with the RCBS 525 at BHN-8 to Elmers choice 1550 fps. The shot was about 70 yards at the last possible second as he was slipping out of sight into the timber. The shot went center at about the vent. He did not go down but was so sick I could walk up to finish him as he stood with his head down in sad condition.
When I gutted him I found the first shot with about 2/3 its length expanded to larger then a nickle. It was at the diafram but did not go through it. It had completely penitrated the paunch which is basicly a bail of wet chopped hay.
If the boolit had be say the 425 version in the RCBS series and expanded to the same degree it would not have made it that far. If non expanding likely equal or better. If the 550 had been a non expanding I think it would have exited the front of the moose.
Here is another to ponder.
I was working as a caribou guide and had a customer shoot a nice bull with a 7mm mag making several hits in the guts. The bull was sick but not out. As I got very near the bull ,about 30 feet he stood and began walking straight away. He was too sick to run but still on his feet leaving. Since I was returning to the site of a kill to previous day and would be packing meat I was armed only with a Ruger bisley 45 colt. The load was pushing a 330gn wfn at between 1000 and 1100 fps. I looked back to the client who was paying no attention but saw my packer watching with bino's.
At about maybe 30 yards now I touched the shot and the bull crumpled. The hit was about the same as the small moose at about the vent and on through the paunch.
When my packer came over I asked if he saw the shot and he said yes he saw the chest swell with a puff of hair as the boolit exited. That bull cariboe was not quite as large as the small moose but not much smaller. All things to think about when trying to match the boolit to the game or the average conditions it will be used in.
In defence of the expanding 550 RCBS I shot a griz with the same load at about 25 yards straight on with the bear standing on hind feet. The shot went center in the chest but for some reason made two exit holes both on one side of the spine missing it.
The bear went down but did make a terrible sounding racket for about 30 seconds and it was over. That shot was from ol B00 who has been and old faithfull and never let me donw in several scrapes with beasts that were intent on hurting me.
Wow quite the ramble! Fellas I really go to go to work. I have several orders need cast up.
Blessings
BIC/BS

Dixie Slugs

03-12-2009, 05:02 PM

Interesting and informative! When I see a hollowpoint break up it meana to me that the alloy wad too hard....but I have also seen solids break up. To me pure WW seem a little brittle.
I got a calll years ago asking to bring my blood dogd to trail up a big tusker bore that had been shot many times with a sjotgun loaded with soft Foster slug. I loaded my tyger dog and a Remington 870 with a Hasting barrel...loade with 5 of our Terminator loads. We found the boar and hw was dragging a hind leg. When he was hit with one of the .730"-730 gr slug/bullets he rolled over. He had two Fosters and some buckshot in his shoulder shield!....plus the Foster in his hip. The shoulder shield was over 2 1/2" thick.....so much for soft bullets.
I still think we need a discussion on hollowpoints vs large Meplat Area
Regards, James

Dixie Slugs

03-12-2009, 05:10 PM

I want to add something here for clarification......I am not in the componenet handgun bullet business, nor do I have any plans to sell handgun bullets.
I do, on occasion, have our people run some special order 12 and 20 bore bullets that we put in our loaded ammo.
The handgun bullets and molds I have spoken of are my personal items....although I have given ammo recipes and mold specs to those that have asked.
I am not competeing we anyone that sells cast bullets indeed.
Regards, James

runfiverun

03-13-2009, 02:16 AM

i think the rounded edge does add something to a bullets ability to kill.
i use a rnfp point flat based, with about 65% meplat for my deer load from a lever action in 45 colt.
i tried several different hollow points on these boolits and could see no appreciable gain.
the alloy i use is acww's with 20% pure and 1% tin mixed in pushed to 1600 fps. [10 feet out]
the wound channels seem to be at least twice the diameter of the boolit.
i think the time in the animal along with the movement of it's insides [as the boolit expands] and the air being moved BEHIND the boolit plays a part in this.
wound chanell.
i like two holes in an animal and a flat nose it just seems to just be the better "killer" for me.
this same boolit also does well when bone is struck as the flat point isn't expending too much energy trying to penetrate the bone. but it does move bone fragments into/or out of the
animal.
i have used a smaller version of this same design on smaller animals and have noticed the same movement/tearing of flesh from this design. if shot in the lungs you can see a definate bruising through them as large as a silver dollar in places and as big as a half dollar all the wat through.
rabbits, sage grouse, etc show this torn flesh from where the boolit strikes and departs.
i don't have an explanation for what is happening here but violent expansion isn't the answer, as i have not yet found a boolit from an animal as large as a deer.
nor as small as a grouse shot in the neck or head.

Bret4207

03-13-2009, 07:03 AM

Well, I agree to a certain point. At the time Elmer was getting press, Boser had a design (#429360) in place for the 44 Special that might have been older.
The point I would like to make is none (today or then) have/had all the answers. The cast bullet designs have evolved and will continue as long as we keep an open mind.
The main difference I see today is that various designs are being studied to see what application thay have to the various game animals. That was not done in the past to the extent it is being done today.
We are now studying whether a hollow point design is better/worse that a large Meplat Area...and to what extent. If the shooter/hunter/bullet designer is hung up on one design....no progress is made.
I think we all agree that Meplat Area is important in jacketed bullets and cast bullets. The questioins arise as to which is the most consistant?
We know that for a hollowpoint to work it must expand, but not fragmate.
This means velocity and proper alloy. An expanded bullet loses Sectional Density ergo Penetration. There is a well defined velocity envelope that it works under. That is fine for thin skin game like deer, but undesired in an animal like a full grown wild boar hog....so we are back to relating the design to the hunting situation indeed!
Those that advocate the heat treated bullet with a large Maplat Area say....it is already pre-expanded and does not lose Sectional Density....very important for penetration. So...we start seeing the flaw of designers of the past that seem to state that their cast bulet design works for all game. It is unfortunate that some are still hung up on one design today.
These discussions are not plowing the same old ground! Some of us live this thing day in a day out. Maybe a discussion of large Meplat Area vs Hollowpoint should be another thread?
Regards. James

I'm not sure when Gordon Boslers design came out. There were other designs along about the same time as Keiths first 358429 that were similar. Keith just took things further on size. Phil Sharpe had a boolit similar the Keiths too that was used on developing the 357, so I imagine there were probably a few we don;t even know about. If you look at some of Keith's early designs they have the B+M look about them, and suffered from the same problem as some of the other WFN designs- instability at long range. Nothing new there.

As for the metplat vs. HP idea, I'm not sure you can lay down any hard and fast "this is better than that" rules. Alloys vary, temp varies, velocity varies, animals vary. In a perfect world I want through and through penetration, massive damage to internal organs and minimal meat loss. The largest animal I'm likely to hunt is a Whitetail, the largest I'm likely to shoot a cow or bull. What might work well on a WT may not work so good on a mad bull.

Overall, I think it's going to be hard to say metplat or HP kill better across the board.

Dixie Slugs

03-13-2009, 09:45 AM

I also think a discussion of Hollowpoint vs a large Meplat Area woulfd be tricky indeed. I am not sure one could tell must difference in thin skin game. The reason I like the Meplat Area design is it is consistant., whereas the expansion on a hollowpoint depends on many things such as impact velocity, alloy, etc. And I think that hollowpoint, in order to expand, must be softer than a heat treated solid and will not break up big green bones as well. Of course here we at back to the hunting situation.
All the way back in '72 we tested all the hollowpoint designs in handgun bullets that were available at the time. Many looked good, but just did not expand. Remington sent a fellow, I think named Chuck Byers, who collected all our tests. Al Hancock owned a jacketed bullet outfit and was trying to get Jacketed bullets off the ground. The main cartridge everyone was working on was the 9mm at that time. As the years went by, great advances were made on expanding bullets.....but mainly toward shooting humans instead of game. There are some great jacketed handgun bullets today.....but today, the same problem exists with either over-expansion or under-expansion. That can also be carried over to cast hollowpoint designs. So...I lean toward the large Meplat Area designs when used within the hunting distance they are designed for.
Just some thoughts.....James

dubber123

03-13-2009, 10:18 AM

Even though Seyfried gets alot of credit for promoting Verals stuff, (and promote it he did), I can remember an article he wrote on I belive an old British sporting round. It was loaded with a RF design, and apparently had been since the 1800's.

Seyfried even made the comment that "no Veral didn't invent the wide flat design". I'm sure I butchered the quote, but you get the point. Not much is new, just variation. Some may be improvements, some just that, variations on a theme.

Dixie Slugs

03-13-2009, 10:53 AM

I well agree with that to a certain point. If anything is new, it is because we are now just understanding what really happens on cast bullet designs.
Let's take some early Brit designs for dangerous game. They killed more big game in Africa and India than we will ever see!....and early on it was with lead bullets! They learned that a lead bullet must be hard to break down some of that game. They did a great deal of work on what we call shotgun bores.
Today, there is a misunderstanding on a great deal of what they did. Many today think most of those shotgun bore ammo was in brass hulls.....where it turned out maybe only 10% were. It now turns out that the land/groove was larger omne the guns designed for brass hulls. The Paradox guns we designe as a combo gun...shot and bullets. The Brits understood what a "squared load" was in both shot design and a bullet design......few today understand. They approached the Paradox design then different than the designs today for rifled barrels. Today the rifled barrels have a fast twist aimed a longer sabot loads. The H&H designs in 1893 differed from the Paradox designs in both that H&H was talking about fully rifled barrels instead of the Paradox designs....and in most cases had a smaller bore/groove design.
So...the point is...today we are exploring all matter of concepts and should be looking at what served well in the past. Elmer and Veral were looking for improvements in designs (as were unamed others).
The knowledgeable people here should be doing the same and sharing results! There is still plenty of room for advancing cast bullet designs!
Just some thoughts...James

waksupi

03-13-2009, 11:36 AM

James, I don't believe the African hunters were necessarily using hardened bullets to break down the animals. I believe it was more a case of needing the hardness for increased penetration.

Glen

03-13-2009, 12:32 PM

As a historical note concerning when wide meplat handgun bullets made their appearance, I have attached a photo of a Frankford Arsenal mould of a .38 design very similar to the WFN that I believe dates back to right around World War I (i.e. a little before Elmer Keith was playing around with the blunt-nosed Belding & Mull designs in the mid-1920s).

Dixie Slugs

03-13-2009, 01:15 PM

Interesting isn't it indeed! One wonders why it took so long for the design concept to catch on? Everything that has been done is just a continuing development. I also saw somewhere a British design for a "Dum-Dum" for the early .455's to be used against "uncivilized" warriors.
Regards, James

runfiverun

03-13-2009, 02:52 PM

i also recall reading stories of how the "hunters' of the time were casting with zinc in their lead,to add to their hardness for penetration.
once the full metal jacket [full patch] hit the market a lot of the old went out and the new came in.
then came over penetration [here in the states] and jacketed bullet development went hay wire.
with over expansion and poor penetration being the common theme.
so you just used a heavier bullet for better penetration.
just because there was more mass to carry on through the animal,this was where elmer got the bigger is better for elk from.
if you expand you can't punch through,and i think this influenced his cast boolit designs also.
maybe just maybe his designs are better for bigger animals like elk and he figured the straight line thing was fine [compromise] for deer too.

helice

03-13-2009, 02:58 PM

To whoever made this a sticky, My thanks.
To all of you, Keep writin' cause I'm learnin' and that's why I'm here. Helice

Bullshop

03-13-2009, 03:47 PM

That design is so near a full WC that I think it may have had stability issues, ESPECIALLY with black powder.
This brings up another facet of design and that is in the ability to deal with fouling.
I have been employed to cast some proven designs for muzzle loaders shooting bore diameter conicles. What I have been seeing is that with black powder the Keith nose (swc) rules. I had a couple molds cut using the OWC design (RF) and they performed poorly unless the barrel was cleaned between shots. As near as I could tell the OWC was riding up on the fouling and loosing its grip with the rifling.
Going to black powder is going to an extream in fouling but smokless also produces fouling especially when powder is burned below its optimum pressure as we so often do in reduced pressure loading. I believe it is the sharp sholder the SWC that aids in fouling control from shot to shot.
As for accuracy at long range it can be found but I think it will be aided by greater length (sd) than can be used in a revolver. I think that a much higher SD does dampen the wobble created by transitioning from supersonic to subsonic.
As in that early design you have shown which we think as beautiful today it was just too far ahead of its time for the components available. At the time many were still not accepting smokless powder for thier reloading.
I will go and see if I can find a pic of targets fired from a Sharps with a 50 cal 600gn Keith boolit. The ranges are 100 and 220 yards. I dont know at what range the boolit will go transonic but as you will see there are not stability issues with this boolit to 220 yards.
Mostly I am just spouting ideas that are floating in my head and cant proove anything beyond my own satisfaction.
Blessings
BIC/BS

Bullshop

03-13-2009, 03:57 PM

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v239/bullshop/P1010006-2.jpg

Dixie Slugs

03-13-2009, 04:55 PM

Excellent indeed! The more that ideas are discussed, instead of cussed
The more the possibility that a good design will come out. Todd Corder also like a shoulder that wll scrape out powder residue and some think the Keith shoulder seals/aligns the bullet in the handgun's chamber throat.
There has been some thought, but no factual tests yet....that by increasing the bullet's spin it (and weight) would aid in going from super-sonic to sub-sonic...interesting!
The biggest problem I see in many present designs...is people thinking one design works for all hunting situation!
And.....many times leaning on the heavy weight too much. There is where some of us feel there is an ideal sectional density per caliber based on the velocity. Veral mentioned it, but I don't see where he followed through on it.
As shooter/hunters, many are hung up on the BC of bullets. I even saw one time where a poster thought the BC aided in penetration.....without mentioning Sectional Density or Velocity.
There are some facts we all can agree on. One is the Meplat Area (expanded jacket bullet or non-expanding hard cast) is related to tissue damage . Another is Sectional Density related to penetration. That goes along way with basic designs.
Beyond that, it get into refinements.
Just some thoughts...James

felix

03-13-2009, 05:01 PM

Wet vertisol clay has been a fairly good medium for testing a boolit versus velocity. You can adjust meplat, sectional density, and velocity according to the amount of splash desired with little effort. ... felix

BABore

03-13-2009, 07:59 PM

As shooter/hunters, many are hung up on the BC of bullets. I even saw one time where a poster thought the BC aided in penetration.....without mentioning

Agreed! Many are not willing to put in the time to shoot at distance to see what their boolit/gun will do and spend the time to get accustomed to it. Shooting a few rounds at the bench, then looking up drop in a ballistic table, based on ballistic coefficient and velocity, is plain lazy,. Ballistic tables, like reloading manuals, are great reference and should be appreciated, but are no substitute for real trigger time.

I can already see that this thread, while extremely informative, should really be broken down into several subcategories. We all pretty much agree that one design, alloy, weight for caliber, hardness, expansion properties, revolver/rifle, velocity, critter, et all will not cover it. This is book-grade material that should have chapters dedicated to species like deer and then both cast rifle and handgun boolits discussed. Each critter deserves its own chapter like hogs and elk including differences in their vitals location and such. Much could be learned, or correctly stated, re-learned.

Dixie Slugs

03-13-2009, 08:16 PM

I agree and will discuss Hog Ballistics, if we go that route.....James

Bullshop

03-13-2009, 08:23 PM

James another thing I like to consider in the equasion of tissue damage is rate of deceleration of the projectile in tissue.
Of cource ROD will be determined by the frontal area expanding or non expanding, And sectional density. The differance between the expanding and non is that the expanding nose is never a constant and very hard to control.
A non expandint wide meplate is a constant that can have verying degrees of perminant wound chanels depending on the rate of deceleration in tissue.
A good way to see this in action is by using the three mold series from RCBS. They have a 45 cal 325, 425, and 525gn series with exactly the same nose profile but with progressivly longer shank as they get heavier. They can be fired so as to have the same impact velocity in a test media to determin weather or not ROD does effect the perminent wound channel diameter. Impact velocities being equal the lighter boolit will have a higher ROD than the heavier and should produce a lesser volume of displacment to the channel, or perminant wound channel. I am going to put my money on the 525gn causing the greatest volume of displacment impact velocity being equal. The RCBS has always proven to be a most excellent design rather combining the RF nose shape but having a slight sholder ahead of the crimp groove.
Sorry if I have taken this thread to places other than revolver but since I do provide a wide range of designs for many different shooters with many differant perposes I tend to look at a broader application for design. I am having fun with this though.
Blessings
BIC/BS

Bullshop

03-13-2009, 09:57 PM

OOPS! I forgot to mention about the increased twist thingy. I agree that it should/will help the transonic passage. BUT! Always a but isnt there, but that runs into the catch 22 with limiting velocity for boolits.
The old BP guns used just enough twist because they were dealing with fouling build up.
With BP more twist means more fouling. Thats why there was two 30/30's one with fast twist for smokless powder and one with slow twist for BP (32 special).
Even now getting away from the soft boolits alloys and BP of long ago the twist rate can still be a limiting factor in determining top velocity for any given boolit design.
Since velocity is directly related to pressure and accuracy dependant on the shear limits of the alloy to maintane its hold/seal with the grooves and increasing the twist increases the pressure the quicker twist will have a lower maximum velocity for good accuracy. WOW!!! I hope I said that right. So its a trade off if you give it more spin you have to be willing to accept a lower max velocity for top accuracy.
A drastic example I think is the 6.5 cruis missel for the quick twist milsurp rifles that was a GB here quite some time back. I think it was determined that it had a max velocity for accuracy of abot 1700 fps.
Once that boolit skids even just a smidg and the land cut in the boolit is wider than the land for the full length of the bearing surface the accuracy game is over and the leading game begins.
There is a balance there in how much twist can a certain hardness of alloy and certain length of boolit tolerate. I have seen some boolits that the land cut looked like a wedg being way wider at the leading edge then narrowing to just land width at the base. That to me would mean that that boolit was right at the ragged adge of holding the seal.
Thats why I have such trouble putting any faith in a gain twist barrel for boolits.
When ot come to keeping them flying point on through air turbulance or tissue I do believe more twist will help. That is why I believe they use such quick twists in dangerous game rifles, to keep a non expanding bullet spinning point forward to hopefully insure a straight path for the bullet.
Thats one reason Elmer trounced on the 30/06 with 220gn bullets. He felt the long bullet was not stable enough to depend on straight line penitration. A bullet that is margonally stable can do some crazy things when it hits something.
Well now I dont know how I got from wfn pistol boolits to the 30/06 220's but somehow I managed. Forgive me folks it seems I may have a touch of that ADD's I have heard about. Hope yall still love me even so.
Blessings
BIC/BS

Dixie Slugs

03-14-2009, 10:52 AM

I really do not think anyone cares if we drift as long as it concerns cast bullets.
Now...ROD! We have not been able to prove/disprove that the ROD relates to tissue damage, even though it appears to relate somehow. This ROD moves over to the thoughts of "Dwell Time" the bullet is moving through tissue. Some feel that the longer dwell time give more time for an Energy Deposit. As I mentioned, we saw first hand, when dealing with an extra large Meplat Area, that at some point in velocity there was a decrease in penetration, but a larger cavity....we still have not figured that one out? Otherwords, there was a faster ROD. Todd Corder, John Linebaugh, and I dicussed this in detail. it appears that at some point the Meplat Area gets to a point it can not move the uncompressed water in tissue (Pressure) and slows down. Of course, that the reverse of most thinking. In that case there was no expansion (so the sectional density remained the same) and the only thing that changed was the velocity between 1300'/" and 1400'/". This may apply also to a bullet expanding?????If this continues, it could be said that penetation at a distance from the muzzle that the bullet slowed down to 1300'/" it would penetrate deeper...how about that? The Terminator design is almost a full wad-cutter....and this did not show up on our truncated nose designs!
To me...there is no difference when we talk about cast bullets, whatever the size.
I will say this though....the larger the Meplat Area, the more likely to have nose expansion (or shearing, depending on the alloy).
We are getting into a foggy area that none of the past cast bullet designers reached indeed. The only way these questions will ever be answered will be from a collective effort and not pissing on each other's bunk bed.
The next question comes to my mind. is just how important all this is to the hunter/shooter? I have come to one place...bullets for handgun ranges and bullet for longer ranges....but still in reasonable brush gun situations. Beyond that I use todays great jacket bullet designs.
However, this has turned into a great thread indeed!
Regards, James

runfiverun

03-14-2009, 11:35 AM

black powder influencing elmers design..... that was something i never considered.
i do recall he used to grind b/p into smaller particles to get more into the baloon head cases he had. [also the reason he went to the 44 because it had thicker cylinder walls]
and his square grooves was to carry ,and distribute more lube.
interesting here as my 44 does shoot the swc g/c design better[half the group size] at further distances [100-150 yds] then it does the rnfp.
i will be testing an old lyman keith type against the rnfp i currently use in my 45 colt this summer.
these two boolits are equal[weight within 5 grs,lube groove size and location,crimp groove to base distance and base band length] except for the nose design.
even in my jacketed loads i have become a fan of middle of the road bullets and velocities.
7 mauser at 27-2800 fps and 140 gr cup and core's it seems to work just fine on deer ,elk,and coyotes.
i went through a period of studying bullets and finally come to the concclusion that matching velocity to the construction of the bullet is a dang good way to get performance.
how this relates to cast to me anyways is that i stick mainly to the nominal weight for the gun and drive it at nominal velocities, this is where the design [shape] takes over.
penetration and smoosh is what i want,as i always aim at the exit side of the animal.
i also wonder if the wfn boolits aren't expanding but if the nose is slumping to the side giving the appearance of expansion.

Dixie Slugs

03-14-2009, 11:57 AM

It's hard for me to accept that putting a little step on the nose of a bullet causes it to be more accurate at any distance than one without that step....all other things being equal. If anything is happening it would be in alignmnet in a revolvers chamber throat? On the other hand, I have a .431265 bullet without the step and has a truncated cone that shooters found extremelly accurate out of the Marlin 1894 guns. I think it comes back to the Meplat Area. As I remember, Elmer's 428421 had only a .280" meplat...and we had game run off with that bullet...to be trailed up with our dogs in the swamps. Even Elmer, in his Sixguns, stated he watched to where the game went down. That might work in open country, but would be a disaster in thick swamps indeed.
So...where are we now with all this? Have we established anything or just clouded the issue more?
I think it would be excellent if we sum up what we agree on. Someone go first and list our agreemnts.
Regards, James

runfiverun

03-14-2009, 12:32 PM

i will agree on at least 65% meplat is critical in performance.
not so sure what a shoulder will get you though.
i think a radius of sorts helps too.
and i also think dwell time plays a role.
but do wonder about air currents.
and muzzle/striking velocity is important,as well as alloy composition.
still on the fence about hollow pointing. maybe in a 30 cal but not necessary in the bigger cals 44 plus...

Bullshop

03-14-2009, 01:09 PM

Yes Sir a very interesting thread, one that it will take my mind some time to properly digest.
For sure though the one most important factor in killing anything with any shape of bullet/boolit is shot placment.
Of cource being true Americans we want every advantage we can get so the search for the best is and always will be ongoing.
Truth is folks have been getting the job done for a long time with what we may consider rather inefficiant designs.
The big differance is that they were generally woodsman of a true order and hunted of neccessity and so took the hunting part to a higher degree of efficiancy than most do or can today. Today the industry have a far greater push to shooting than to hunting. I find it rather appaling that the gun mags and makers would have everyone believe they can efficiantly harvest game at extream range if only they would buy a cartain line of products from a certain company.
There was a time when within the industry if it was not practacle it was not made/offered but we have left that idea far behind. When hunting became a sport/game it bacame what all the other sports games became, a win at any cost proposition where killing is everything and hunting just an unpleasant part of the game.
We can all use the combined knowledge posted in this thread to make some basic choices to our advantage but still the greatest advantage is to a hunter that has learned to get close and presicely place a shot to where it will do the most good, that is hunting in the truest sence.
Some folks even choose to enjoy that flavor to a higher degree by using primative weapons and I aplaud them because what they seek is not only the kill but the hunt and the person it brings out in us.
Yes and enjoyable thread, the most fun I have had typing in qute some time.
Thank you all!
God bless!
BIC/BS

Dixie Slugs

03-14-2009, 01:45 PM

Excellent Indeed! Now let's get our folks talking about cast bullets and different game.....based on gut-pile-analysis.....not speculation!
Regards, James

03-14-2009, 02:04 PM

I think for the most part we are all stumbling around the "boolit effectiveness" design issue basing our thinking on our own experience, or anecdotal experience gleaned from others whom we trust. I think to get further, while keeping the conversation going, we need to quantify some variables we feel are significant and try some more organized testing. Unfortunately molds cost money, so cutting a bunch of like design molds while varying a single aspect may not be practical, unless we can enlist the help of a couple of mold makers. As an example: We could certainly have a mold cut with gas check depth lube grooves and then mill it shorter in stages while testing penetration. We could probably have a mold cut and then have the meplat % expanded in stages while testing it as well, as so on. I am not capable of cutting molds, but I can contribute ideas, and maybe some $$ for blocks.

However, there are already a great number of flat nosed designs out there in .44 and .45, some quite similar. If we can agree on what we feel are the critical variables, we may be able to share boolits from our individually owned molds to assemble a group adaquate to test each of the variables.

I also feel that external ballistics and terminal ballistics may be somewhat unrelated, and whats good for the goose may not always be good for the gander.

I think we could all agree on the following to start: Meplat %, sectional density, ogive design, (and I include TC designs here), HP or not and velocity.

I'm also willing to discuss hog ballistics, although I think I've pretty much exhausted my experience there down in the "Cast Boolits for Hunting" room.

It's great to have a good, thought provoking thread that actually is right on topic for a change. My goals do not include "settling" any issues here, but they do include learning some things.
BD

Bass Ackward

03-14-2009, 03:45 PM

I will comment here because I was asked to read this thread by a friend and he will be expecting an answer.

The very thing that takes us so long (many years) to realize is that there is no universal constant to bullet design. 1. There are those designs that launch better. With better defined on how and what we are doing to it or put it through. 2. There are better designs for the nature of flight once it has left your barrel and is no longer controlled.

Elmer believed that accuracy peeked at somewhere between 62% and 64% with his design. And the truth is, that at the hardness he was using, and the velocity his load produced, he is ABSOLUTELY correct. Had Elmer cut back on the amount of unsupported nose weight on his bullet or widened his front band even more, he could have successfully widened his meplat and his experience would have been all different. But Elmer wanted excellent flight charastics for long distances after it left his control. So we have what he found with weight off the nose and balance toward the rear.

Dan at Mountain Molds was trying to launch a 35 caliber 180 grainer with an 80% meplat in an LBT style and was getting 6" groups from his 357 Mag lever. I told him to recut the exact same bullet at 75%, and he dropped to 2" groups. So is 75% the maximum? No. But it is under his conditions.

Problem is that there is no constant in the universe. Just like there is no one magic load. There are those that work better than others across many situations, but hand them off to someone else and they might believe the design / load sucks. No benchrest competition for accuracy is shot with a wide meplat bullet. None. That speaks volumes, so how what do we need to take away from that fact? There is no blueprint to go buy, only an understanding that you apply logic too. As soon as a person believes that they have found the holy grail, someone else comes along and things change. Or visa versa. Veral Smith reincarnated bullet designs from the 1800s and now gets credit for the olgival designs as Keiths did for all semiwadcutters. Neither is true.

I have guns that handled designs very poorly when new causing me to cuss the designs only to find out that 5000 or 20,000 rounds later, or after I corrected alignment that these have become my stallwarts. I have loads that I would put money on out to as far as I have tested them only to shoot at some longer range and laugh at what went wrong.

What makes a bullet launch well? Launching is a product of alignment defined as: until the nose encounters uncontrolled air patern at the muzzle with the base breaking square with the bore so pressure doesn't affect launch. Then the design has to establish a stable air flow pattern before the strength of the lead bullet that remains in the barrel .... fails. If it does, you get a good launch. Or you will need more RPMs. If it doesn't, then accuracy suffers which is why Veral states that his designs do best when pushed hard and in the heaviest weights. If you want to shoot lighter bullets, then you better learn how to compensate, buy well aligned guns, or you will have / launch a finicky bullet. Just that simple.

What makes a bullet fly well? Every design, because of it's BC and balance point will require a certain RPM / velocity combination out to the range of interest. And that is the "ultimate key" to understand. Generally, the wider the nose, the lower the BC and the faster velocity loss will upset your plans. Again, if you launch really heavy per caliber bullets and don't shoot over 200 yards, then you don't see what all the fuss is about. If you shoot lighter designs or longer distances, then you either need to get lucky. Or learn to love semiwadcutters, round nose bullets, or smaller meplat designs. Or even gas checked designs as this strengthens the deisgn to launch well.

So when you hear someone comment positively or negatively about a bullet design, you can pretty much figure out what velocity range he operates in, how hard of a bullet he shoots, what barrel length he shoots, and how well aligned his chambers are to his bore. Cause all of this affects the quality of his launch. When you hear how well it does at long range, you know how successfull he has been, for long range is the true test of flight.

Long range is defined as long for the ballistic coefficient you are launching. You have much more flexibility with a smaller diameter than a large one as the wind resistance on the nose has less force / effect to rip it off coarse from the bore until RPMS stabilizes it. The poorer you launch, the more air you catch and the more RPMS you will need to stabilize. Which is why most guys with handguns find best accuracy right near the top end for what ever they are shooting. Hides a lot of sins.

Bullshop

03-14-2009, 03:46 PM

OK then by gut pile analysis I guess you mean autopsy results.
Well Sir no can help with the hogs but maybe elswear. I never kept a log or anything like that, it didnt seem that important at the time. I thought I would just be forever young and always able to tramp the hills. Hows that go, too soon old and too late smart.
I will just have to grab at the memories as they pop into my head if I am to be of any help.
Here is one, a mid sized black bear shot with B00 with the RCBS 45/425, BHN-20, 1800fps muzzle velocity.
Bear running straight away and at say 75 yards turns braod side and heads up hill. The instant the bear turned B00 fired and took him through the lungs just behind the sholder.
Bear continues on up hill where it turns to face me laying acrost a stump. I spot the bear looking down at me so fire again hitting this time right beside the eye. Bear does nothing, couldnt, already dead.
The first shot took out both lungs but made only two 45 holes in the hide, in and out. Second shot did the same but from south to north, may have also contributed to some of the mess in the lungs. Thats all I got on that one, analyse.
OH OH heres a good one, large bull moose shot with 1886 50 cal with 510gn WFN at 1750 muzzle. Range about 170yards<bhn-15. High sholder/lung hit crumples moose. Very unusual for moose to crumple without a spine hit. Moose struggles to his feet so a second shot is placed about 1" from the first with the same results moose crumples.
Both shots are high sholder hits perhaps a bit too high but the crumpling thing is amazing to see from the fat 50 cal boolit, and to hear the hits SMAK.
Amazingly moose struggles to his feet again so a third 50 to the neck from close range ended the sceen. Top half of lungs wipped out, neck shattered, no boolits recovered all passed through.
Maybe you guys better stop me. I am having too much fun with this and likely not contributing to your goal.
My goal is to stay here til Jesus comes for me and until he does to let his light shine.
Blessings
BIC/BS

Bullshop

03-14-2009, 03:52 PM

Good ta see ya Bass

Dixie Slugs

03-14-2009, 05:04 PM

After reading Bass post, I can see now I do not qualify for any statements for cast bullets beyond what I have said. The reason is quite simple indeed...I have never considered using any cast bullet beyond what is considered brush gun distance as being a little over 100 yards. And any design I ever had mold cut for were to be used within that distance. Beyond that, I relied on jacketed bullet designs that had proven themselves.
I am not a paper or target shooter. Nor am I concerned much about the BC within the range I use cast bullets. I always have been more concerned with a bullet's lethal potential. And, while I did shoot at Camp Perry for years, never considered benchrest shooting with cast bullets. I would guess that one that shoots long range with cast bullets would have a design that matched proven jacket bullet designs....but I really do have a clue about that. Many of the things Bass spoke of apply also to jacketed bullets
I feel I was mistaken about what was the main goal here. I thought it was about game bullets....for that I apologize. Everything I have worked on was based on game bullets. When I started this thread by posting some specs for bullets I thought were good game bullets.....that is as far as my intentions went.
However, I will watch with interest as the dicussion broadens out to cover long range concepts.....James

badgeredd

03-14-2009, 05:04 PM

First, I also would like to say "Good to see you Bass."

And I just subscribed to this thread. The reason? Well for once I am really enjoying the thoughts and comments.

Although I am new to casting (a year or so) I do have a comment that you all may want to consider. I took a single cavity 358315 mold and modified it to get a heavier boolit for my 35 rifles. I made it a flat nose design, with about 70% meplat, mainly because I goofed when I made the cutter. At any rate, I found it flies considerably better out of four 35 caliber (different cartridges) than the original 358315 round nose. Now I need to also say this is out to 100 yards. I'll load some and see what happens at 200 yards as soon as the weather warms a bit more.

IMHO, the fact that I am happy with the accuracy (at the range I've tested) means that boolit placement will be better. When I test said boolit on game, I may find it doesn't do well. By game, I mean deer. My gut feeling is that it'll do a good job, but that's entirely an opinion based on limited experience with cast boolits. When I get a chance, I'll post a good picture to show you what I ended up with.

Edd

James,

I too am interested mainly in how a boolit performs on game. Paper with holes doesn't taste that good to me, no matter how much bacon I put on it.

badgeredd

03-14-2009, 05:26 PM

Here's a picture of my boolit, the one on the right.

http://i533.photobucket.com/albums/ee338/badgeredd/Picture022.jpg

Edd

Bullshop

03-14-2009, 05:40 PM

I too was refering mostly to hunting boolits. For long range I was thinking to 300 yards. I was also talking rifles where I think James was aiming more at handgun.
So where are we going no? To long range for long range sake or to long range for hunting?
For long range only you need only look at the standard 22 LR RN. It is the most coppied basic design in use for BPCR long range and I mean long range. For hunting, well because they are being run soft between 20/1 and 50/1 lead/tin they expand so they do OK there too. But this is getting too far away from the origonal point. If anybody was to take a stab at an average of what is about the best combination of meplate and lenght/sd/weight however you want to look at that I would say 60 to 70 % meplate and between 2 to 3 calibers is a good place to be. The more length the les meplate. Launch speeds between 1300 to 1800 fps will do nicely depending on how far you are willing to shoot. With those averages at the extream accept for the meplate say a 60% with three calibers length at 1800 fps I would have no problem with a 300 yard shot even with a non expanding boolit. Other small details are just that. Some may feel that three calibers of length is excessive but thats the great part of all this,I can think what ever I want. Stick to an average or comprimise of what we know and you should get good results if you do a good job placing the shot.
If we were to try and carry a perfect cartridge for any situation it would get too confusing, ther would be so many. One cant be right for all so take the best average.
Now I will like to see what you all think is a good average. I will even narrow it down to 65% meplate and 2.5 calibers for muzzle velocity not below 1500 fps.
BIC/BS

felix

03-14-2009, 05:54 PM

Speaking of the RPMs again, I can say for sure that the 30 cal boolit at 2100 with 12 twist -versus- the 32 at 2100 with 16 twist hitting water at the minimum angle as not to glance off, the advantage in killing power goes to the 32 cal without question. The consequential splash difference is easily seen. So, if the boolit is marginally stable after entering the game animal, the more significant RPM drop can very easily cause the projectile to simulate (via fish tail) a larger meplat without the flight disadvantage. Again, always use the mimimum amount of twist for the projectile which is realistic for the animal being taken. ... felix

GLynn41

03-14-2009, 06:31 PM

What cal. bullshop? And by 2.5 cal to length you mean as in 2.5 x.411=1.3" or 370+ gr I guess by that you are still on your rifle -- and as i reread your post i see the300yds. oops sorry -- I tend to use my .358 wins with 200 to 250 gr JSP or 30.06 with 165sp-- I would like and intend to go to cast bullets for the 2 .358s I have-- so I have an interest there too.
Ok help here as to 20-150 yard +- - at Deerish animals
I have only .41 cal hand guns and a Marlin
meplat needs to come down some??? .75 to ??% or not-- one example given of the 265gr .44 used a .35+ meplat which I thought was pretty big as mine is 81% at.33
some what heavier than normal cal. weight.
TC design maybe more stable--
so what would an optimum for hand gun and carbine if it can exist-- .41 possibly weigh etc. How long a nose to crimp? Anyone? Dan at MM. told he likes long bearing surface-- multiple lube grooves and as was stated was using a 180 with a .325 nose and .80% meplat --only worked for him at max vel

The British used the term dwell time in WW2 preferring the .38 sp. with a 200gr to the .45 ACP
they said it was better to push a vault door with your hand vs hitting it hard and fast with your fist.

Bullshop

03-14-2009, 07:09 PM

Felix
If that were true then why such a fast twist in 458win mag? I think standard is 1/14" and some even 1/12". If minimum were best they should be using 1/22" to 1/24".
Glynn41
I did muddy the water a bit combining rifle boolits and pistol boolits. Let me just say that for my choice for a 41 mag hunting boolit my mold drops a 300gn WFN in ww.
Thats only one mans comprimise.
Now jumping up to rifles I always felt the 405 win was handicapped with to light/short a bullet. My mold for that drops a 410gn LFN in ww. The differance there is potentail velocity the rifle having nearly 1000 fps more than the pistol with those boolit weights.
I have never killed anything with the 41 mag pistol but boy howdy dont that 405 do some kinda jog with that 410gn boolit with a 60% meplate when launched at 2000 fps.
I story lately is I have gotten away from all this and just shoot pure lead in paper patch.
That way it makes little differance in game what the nose shap was like before it hit.
Badgeredd
Can I get you to do my Lyman mold the way you did yours?
BIC/BS

GLynn41

03-14-2009, 07:38 PM

Thanks bullshop for your thoughts--unless I hunt something larger than a deer -- a 220K at 1250 will sail right on through-- as does a 240 LBT tc and and my 255what ever- .400 nose- --280 ssk gr from any angle and a 170jhc will drive about 2 feet chest on into a 5pt from 65 steps/ --I have the NEI mold for the SSK 285gr TC -- .meplat is .280 -- I am going to run some off for the marlin-- my concern is the Marlin and my 41/445 -- is the .33 too much of good thing at the speed these will drive the bullit - and max vel is not my goal -- but a good hunting load for 0-150 yds or so is

felix

03-14-2009, 07:41 PM

Dan, thick versus thin skinned game. ... felix

Bullshop

03-14-2009, 10:14 PM

GLynn41
Our small dear, caribou are 500 to 600 lb for a bull and our big dear, moose are 1500 lbs for a good bull. My comprimise has to be a little differant than yours.
Felix
Oh yes the target makes a differance, as well I suspect as the bullets being nonexpanding round nose.
BIC/BS

badgeredd

03-14-2009, 11:25 PM

Badgeredd
Can I get you to do my Lyman mold the way you did yours?
BIC/BS

Dan,

Tell you what I'd like to do for you. I can send you some samples and if you like them we can work something out on me modifying your mold. It wasn't really much to machine it, but I'd feel better about it if you had tried a few boolits first.

Edd

leftiye

03-15-2009, 12:35 AM

Yep, good to read another of your convoluted brain twisting treatises Bass! Missed ya.

Bullshop

03-15-2009, 01:09 AM

Badgeredd
OK great 5000 or 6000 should do it. Just kidding. So if the stock mold was 285gn then the modified must be over 300gn, yes?
I just recently had MM Dan cut one at about 275gn and it looks much like what you made. I would like to have one 300gn or over.
When Elmer praised the 35 Whelen he was generally talking about bullets between 270 and 300gn. I will be happy to swap ya something for the boolits and the work although I dont really think I need the boolits. I always thought the Lyman design would have been much better if they made it a flat nose so I dont use that one muct at all. I was rather disapointed with the group buy Bator in 35 cal. It seemed to have too low a velocity for good accuracy. Meplate maybe? Balance? I duno?!? Maybe hollow pointing it would make it sing. Anyway I would like to do something with you on that mold.
This thread seems to be winding down now but it was fun and I learned alot !
BIC/BS

Bret4207

03-15-2009, 08:25 AM

Oh boy. Hurt feewings already. Seesh! Look, it's really pretty simple. One mans accuracy is another mans "couldn't hit the broad side of a barn". One guys long range will be 125 yards, anothers will be 350 and a thirds will be 45 yards in an alder swamp. One guys big game will be Antelope, another Elk, another Bison and someone else's will be a black bear or grizz. Lets not get our panties in a wad just because someone else has a differing opinion based on his locale or sport or platform. We've done this over and over. It's about time to get past it.

Crass Whackwords

03-15-2009, 11:43 AM

there is no universal constant to bullet design.....Problem is that there is no constant in the universe.

Well put. As a wise man once told me, there are no universal truths when it comes to cast bullets.

Early in my casting career, I had a bad experience with Veral's ogival wadcutter, which refused to stabilize in my 44 at any speed or distance. It traumatized me for life, and to this day I get nervous when I see an extremely blunt and not particularly long cast bullet such as the type discussed on this thread. Yes, they work fine sometimes, but other times they don't. It's a gamble.

If you can get the short, blunt bullets to provide decent hunting accuracy, more power to you.

"Bass Ackwards" ????? Sounds familiar....... where have I heard that name before ???

Bullshop

03-15-2009, 01:02 PM

In defence of the 265gn weight for the 44 cal Gates design I remember reading of the development of the 444 Marlin cartridge.
The guys with the white caots found that for 44 cal 265gn was a balance point where velocity was lost by adding more weight and so the trade off was in energy.
Thats why they used a slow twist and the heaviest factory rounds were 265gn.
Of cource now we know that paper energy figures are not all that important in determining killing power.
We now see 444 Marlins from the factory with quick twist barrels that will stabalise boolits in the 400gn weight range and there by place the cartridge in a completely different class.
I dont think the designers ever saw the 444 as being more than a dear cartridge, but it always had the potencial to be more. I think maybe one of the issues there is it was designed by white coats that were capable of wonderful things with a slide rule but had little on the ball as to feild experiance with cartridges showing less than spectacular paper balistics pushing heavy slow moving boolits of high sectional density say for instance the origonal 45/70/500 BP. Read anything you can find as far back as you can find it from and they almost use the same description for that cartridge and even its little brother the 405gn carbine load, "its always been a good dependable killer of game", period. Paper balistics may be what sell products but if you piled up all the dear and elk thats been killed with a 44/40 you couldnt see over the top if you stood on your house.
I see and understand that balance, the trade off of adding weight but for me espacially where I live and for what I may need to shoot with them I accept the trade off in paper balistics for the momentum gained by adding weight over the balance.
BIC/BS

jhalcott

03-15-2009, 01:49 PM

I cast the 358318 from WW alloy and get a ready to shoot weight of just over 250grains. I have chucked the bullets in a drill and used a Dremel tool to cut off the round end (both bullet and cutter spinning). Thus tends to keep the cut square! I have shot many of these into wet paper and a few into deer with quite similar results. The RN's penetrate more and leave a smaller wound channel. The FNed bullets WILL go thru a deer or ~ 18" of wet pack and leaves a larger hole doing it. My muzzle velocity is around 2000 to 2100FPS. I have NOT had any reason to try this at longer than 200 yards. The gun is a Mauser actioned .35 Whelen with a light weight synthetic stock. A 3x9 scope is mounted. I truly have enjoyed reading this thread. I have learned quite a bit from it. Those "circumsized" bullets weigh about 242 to 245 grains as opposed to 251 to 255 normal weight. The load seems to be very good with either bullet!

Bullshop

03-15-2009, 01:54 PM

Thats just the same effect that putting a small meplate on 22 LR RN ammo has.
Those tools to do that made a 22 lr way more effective on rabbits. Your using the same idea just on bigger rabbits.
BIC/BS

Dixie Slugs

03-15-2009, 02:00 PM

Interesting indeed! When I posted the specs on the bullets, I did not specify they were handgun bullets. Their designs have been tested on game.
What we then saw was all matter of criticism about their design. That is all well and good, but as of yet I have seen no designs posted covering the three calibers that these critics feel are good hunting bullet. It's not a matter of hurt feelings or whatever. Is is a matter of taking shots at designs without the critics posting what they consider was the best design and why.
Until I see their designs and what they chose...... then I will assume that their critical statements are based on nothing more than speculation....or they resent some outsider on their turf....or whatever.
So...in all fairness, lets see first hand the designs that they feel are excellent handgun cast bullet designs....simple enough.
Regards, James

GLynn41

03-15-2009, 02:20 PM

Bullshop we do have different deer-- my two biggest are both 200#+ pounds-- biggest I have ever seen killed was an 11pt our count and it weighed about 240 #--How do Caribou taste by the way?:roll:-- I hope to hunt a boar-- etc I have a list in my head to hunt --nothing really major-- I will not ever do it but I would like to hunt a Buff in Africa
I guess I will take what Veral told me and what was discussed here and look at a bullit design from Dan
as for the bigger game you have, all I know is what I have read -- that a .41 220gr Speer soft point will shoot through the ribs of a Moose and the guy who wrote that was happy with the .41 as a moose getter. I shoot news paper in plastic bags and look as much at the the bag as the paper-- I do know that the .41 255/.33 meplat will easily go through 20" of stuffed tight together newsprint at 50 yards -- not sure what that means except it goes through stuff. Personally I'd reckon it would take a bou just fine do not know about Moose

Crass Whackwords

03-16-2009, 12:39 AM

What we then saw was all matter of criticism about their design. That is all well and good, but as of yet I have seen no designs posted covering the three calibers that these critics feel are good hunting bullet.
Regards, James

James, I do give you credit for making the effort to design a bullet specifically for the Marlin 44. There is a need for bullets tailored for lever actions as demonstrated by the popularity of the RD molds. Lever guns can be very picky about what they will feed and few shooters are willing to do the experimentation required to produce a "proven" design.

I could show you my pet designs, but I do not claim them to be the universal bullet for every application. My designs are tailored to my guns and my purposes.

My philosophy on meplats is to use as big a meplat as the gun will tolerate and still produce decent hunting accuracy. By "decent," I mean as well as I can shoot under field conditions with iron sights. Say, 6 - 10 MOA in a packing pistol or 3 - 4 MOA in a ghost-ringed Marlin.

That said, at lever action velocities and with hardened WW alloy, flat point bullets usually "rivit" on impact, becoming nearly a full wadcutter, so one need not lose sleep over meplat size, within reason.

Meplat may be more important for handgun velocities that are too slow to "rivit" the nose as rifle velocities normally do. Meplat may also be more important for "between the ribs" lung shots where little resistance is encountered.

My philosophy on penetration is that most any hard cast bullet will penetrate satisfactorily, so there is no need to waste lead and pulverize your shoulder attempting to create a load that will penetrate more than the other guy's load in some artificial test medium. If the bullet shatters both shoulders of a bull elk and keeps on sailing, I can force myself to live with that.

Pics show complete penetration through both shoulders of 5 point bull elk. Excessive meat damage. Bullet exited. Elk went down and didn't get back up. Marlin, heat treated wheelweight.
http://i487.photobucket.com/albums/rr235/mountainmolds/elk_shoulder1.jpg
http://i487.photobucket.com/albums/rr235/mountainmolds/elk_shoulder2.jpg

Guess the cartridge. Was it .... ???????

A) 45/70

B) 450 Marlin

C) 50 Alaskan

D) 444

E) 44 mag

F) 357 mag

GLynn41

03-16-2009, 07:49 AM

I saw your post some where else -- seems like it was ..........F?

MT Gianni

03-16-2009, 09:50 AM

Please indicate distance and velocity when you answer. The damage is impressive.

Dixie Slugs

03-16-2009, 11:05 AM

Interesting! First of all, I have never said that I designed bullets for all situations. In fact I have said the bullets I posted on this thread where designed (re-designed?) for handguns within normal handgun hunting distance.
Threre are plenty of visual results for the shotgun bore ammo I developed on the Dixie website for anyone that wish to see.
I have no idea what you shot the animal with and at what distance in the picture, but it does look like excessive meat damage?
We have also tested all of our bullet deisgns on all matter of game under all types of hunting situations. The various designs have been freely given to anyone that may might be interested. I only asked that the name remained the same.
As far as riveting, etc....There is no cast bullet made of of any alloy that I know of that will not show nose damage after breaking large green bones....and many will frag.
Being a license ammo maker selling hundreds of boxes of all types of ammo...we get reports almost on a daily basis of hunting results. Over the past five years we have modified our ammo at times to better suit the hunting situations. Some of our ammo has been used for crop damage control. Not one or two animalsl, but in many cases hundreds of animals.
The point is that after all that has been said, I am still waiting to see posted the handgun bullet designs they thought we best (or better)....and not the flukes that happened with a one time affair.
I am only interested in game bullets and have no interest in long range work with cast bullets. That is just someone else interests and is fine.
Every bullet we have is just a refined design based on actual field work....nothing more and nothing less. What people end up using is no real concern to me. In some parts of this thread, we saw some interesting data....the rest is pure speculation.
With all the variables involved in game shooting, there must be many actual field tests before a resonable idea of bullet design (or re-design) is done.
As far as I am concerned, I see no examples posted of what they think is a better design.....and all this talk has produced very little positive results. There has been a great deal of theory dicussed about all matter of flight of bullets, etc.
I am still waiting to see what is considered the best handgun bullet design and data to back it....really quite simple indeed.
The attached photo is a 2000 lb Angus bull that had to be put down. One shot in the head with a Dixie Terminator-.730"-730 gr hard cast heat treated bullet-1200'/". The bullet pentrated the skull and smashed up three or four vertebrate and still held together. Interesting!
Regards, James

03-16-2009, 11:15 AM

My interest in this is primarily hunting related, but I sure enjoyed hearing from Bass on the subject again.

In my search for the best .44 revolver boolit I eventually moved from the Lee 310 grainer down to a 265 WFN primarily to diminish the effects of recoil on POI. The heavier boolits just had too much change of POI due to differences in what gloves I was wearing, or what awkward rest I was making use of, or a one handed vs two handed grip. The 265s still completely penetrated anything I needed to shoot, and they made the details of my grip less critical. Both designs fly very well to the ranges of interest. I suppose there could be an instance where I'd be looking for a 500 yard handgun boolit, and thats fun to try, but my realistic hunting ranges are more like 75 yards and under.

In rifle boolits this is much less of an issue. It's more a trade off of tradjectory vs penetration and flight caracteristics IMO. I'm looking for 1 moa to 200 yards. The less a mistake in range estimation "costs", while still providing effective terminal ballistics, the better off I think I am. I know that the 265 grainers would not accomplish this at handgun velocities, and while they might do so at rifle velocities, there would still be some point at which they'd go unstable. So maybe a heavier boolit, or less meplat is in order.

There is a lot of stuff to explore here, and if it's approached systematically, we could wind up with some valid conclusions, or at least a framework from which to draw inferences for different situations.

My current project is a .451 carbine with a 24 twist as a platform to try and reach my rifle goals.

BD

felix

03-16-2009, 11:20 AM

Great, BD! You won't be disappointed. ... felix

leftiye

03-16-2009, 02:55 PM

James, I totally understand your desire for posted designs, and Game animal results. For myself however, and not to speak for anyone else - but for newer members/less experienced people - there is a very real need for the philosophical understanding (theory) behind all of this. The possession of understanding requires this.

Plus, I am more or less in the mental situation of saying that while there are fer sure places where a larger meplat is unquestionably better, it's kinda the Weatherby thang all over again. The "other boolits" do kill, and the animal won't know if they were shot with "tomorrow's rifle today" or not. They being dead that is.

Couple this with other concerns, like ballistic coefficient, and some of us are still experimenting with smaller meplats, and hollow points. All I'm saying is that - perhaps to your dismay - this thread has blossomed into an all around discussion of killing effect as relates to bullet design as applies to all calibers and ranges, and types of slug launchers, and I'm well pleased with it. This knowledge is very much needed by anyone who shoots game.

Dixie Slugs

03-16-2009, 05:45 PM

felix

03-16-2009, 05:53 PM

On the contrary, DS! I think most shoot cast because they are cheap. Very few of us use them in competition of any sort, including game. Maybe 50 a year at game? Maybe 500 a year for competitive shoots? I shoot maybe a 1000 a year at the very, very most, and they are shot at raging tin cans, shotgun shells, small rocks, etc. ... felix

GLynn41

03-16-2009, 06:01 PM

I did not think this was some else turf-- I would be glad to answer you but I am all over the place in kills with cast bullets so I have theory but not a lot of data to back it up--except all the deer died and I found no bullets--I can tell you what my bullets did as to wounds etc but they are few---I enjoyed the thread - and sorry you feel this way but it is certainly your right to choose what is best for you --as 4 yur designs-- I thought they would be just fine for six gun velocities out to 100+- and that too is theory --sadly no .41 but I understand all the best :-D

MT Gianni

03-16-2009, 06:31 PM

I shot about 1800 rds of cast last year, 2 at game animals.

Dixie Slugs

03-16-2009, 07:06 PM

Just so the friends i have over here do not misunderstand.....I design, make, and sell big bullets/ball loads to kill game. That is what I deal with on a daily basis and if I say so, have done quite well on the market level.....but that is due 100% to the great customers I deal with. That customer level is meat hunters. Therefore, it is only natural that I am concerned with hunting bullets and their performance on game.
I now understand that it seems most here are looking for something that I do not deal with.....that's fine as long as powder is being burned. Our priorities are just different. In my case, bullet performance comes before extra fine accuracy. I could not care less if a handgun hunting bullet tumbled out at some extended range, if in fact it did, as long as its accuracy was within the capabilities of the hunter and within his hunting situation.
This is precisely why I wanted to see cast hunting designs posted that others felt were better designed than mine......no more no less.
Of course, I would defend my designs and expect more than theory from someone that did not agree with my design. If they had a better design, I would just use it, just like I would expect anyone to use my designs.
Regards, James

felix

03-16-2009, 07:30 PM

You have plenty of friends over here. I don't know why you concern yourself. Are you doing something wrong? ... felix

Dixie Slugs

03-16-2009, 08:50 PM

Felix...Thank you for your kind words indeed. I really do not know what else to say. I understand more as to the main theme of the Forum. I realize that game bullets seem to be a minor part.
I have no problem with that at all. I am just not interested, as the poster said, in the philosophical aspect of cast bullets, as I deal with only the game bullet part.
From my standpoint...if ammo does not perform, the customer does not reorder....and I am out of business. For me it's really that simple.
Everything we sell has been tested at an open public test. That's a fly or die proposition.
I will always, as I have in the past, respond to the reloader with all the factual information we have.
I am versed only in game bullets design for handguns, brush guns, and shotguns as far as cast bullets go. That is my business, not a hobby.
Regards, James

crabo

03-17-2009, 12:58 AM

I read this forum because it is informative and I am learning a lot. To me, it is very interesting to see different viewpoints, experiences and personalities in the posts. When I started reading this forum, I had never cast a boolit. I now am having pretty good sucess with a bunch of different guns and calibers.

The wide diversity of posters, knowledge, and viewpoints make this a great learning institution. I am amazed how civil this discussion has been.

Bret4207

03-17-2009, 07:21 AM

I think if people took the time, they would find that most cast bullets used today are used on game. I disagree entirely. Most cast boolits are used in the plinking and paper arena, just as most of the jacketed bullets are. If you mean most DESIGNS, I disagree again. Hunting with cast is practiced by relatively few hunters and only a few designs get a real workout hunting. Currently those desings seem to be of the LBT/B+M style.

I have no problem with any bullet designer doing an indepth study on cast designs for range performance indeed.
What I do have a problem with critics lambasting someone's design, what ever it is used for..and not presenting their designs that they feel are better...just that simple indeed! Could you please point out where your designs were lambasted? I'm not seeing it.

I have been in this gun and ammo thing all my life...and this is nothing new. In my opinion cast performs within a certain velocity and range and that is reflected in all the ammo we build and sell. I don't think anyone is arguing that

This thread has taught me one thing......stay off other people's turf and I plan to do that exactly. I did not understand what was the prime purpose of Cast Boolits indeed. How can you NOT understand what this place is about? Furthering our understanding of the boolit and helping others do the same. I did not realize that heavy gun critics would be brought in to work over something as simple as some'one's idea what were good handgun game bullets. Again, where did all this take place?

I have many friends over here that I work with and will continue to work with on many ongoing projects indeed. But you will never see me post another spec sheet on bullets. I'm taking my ball and going home!? Comon'!So, friends, I do not know anything else to say. It has nothing to do with hurt feeling, it's just I see it as a no win situation indeed. If one reflects on this thread, there was no designs coming forth from this critics. ...only more self-center self expression. A great opportunity was missed where all of us could discuss the posted designs, rather than vague about this or that.It appears to me it IS about bent noses. I've re-read this whole thing and don't see anything that could possibly be taken as you picture it. Do a search on "RPM limits" and then you'll see bloodletting. You have a lot to offer, but so does everyone else, so maybe listen to them before deciding they're dissing you.
Regards, James

As I said in an earlier post- "short range or handgun range" varies from man to man and area to area and so does the game. You'll be passing up a lot of knowledge, as would the rest of us, if we refuse to at least consider what they're saying.

03-17-2009, 10:13 AM

I think this thread got started as a hunting boolit thread, and I'm real interested in it as a hunting boolit thread. I also really enjoyed Bass's post, from a theoretical standpoint. IMHO, A little different perspective never hurt any discussion.

My own experience typically runs about 7,000 - 10,000 pistol boolits a year into paper or steel targets, and just a few hundred hunting boolits into paper, and 10 into game when the opportunity arises.

However, my interest relative to the design of cast boolits is about 95% game, 5% target. Those target boolit designs for pistolas are pretty well worked out, and in most all cases the boolit design is not the limiting factor. That's what led to the BD acp. I was looking for a boolit that would work through a 1911 and was better at killing things than the H&G #68, or a RN ball.

Currently I'm real interested in the idea of a full bore "shotgun" slug with lube grooves for rifled barrels. The kind of thing a guy could mold at home and get decent accuracy with.

I'm also interested in sort of an "ideal" cast hunting rifle. I'm a little off the beaten path around here as "ideal" to me revolves around the AR type platform, rather than a lever gun, (never owned one). I'm building a .450 bushmaster to explore this, primarily due to the case capacity to bore ratio, and the slow twist available in factory barrels. Unfortunately I haven't found a barrel maker willing to produce my guess for the ideal tube, but that will come in time.

Lets keep this going, and get back to the design questions themselves.

What's your feelings regarding meplat% to velocity?

BD

runfiverun

03-17-2009, 01:38 PM

it is pretty hard for me to say anything about your boolit designs.
i haven't cast with them.
i haven't tried them on an animal.
nor have i shot them for groups.
all i can tell you is what has worked for me and discuss the merits of what has or hasn't worked,or the results of any testing i have done.
can't talk about pigs much as the only ones i have ever shot was in the pen.
i can tell you about shooting some steers each year a few deer and a couple of elk.
i can tell you about knocking down lot's and lot's of steel targets, holes in paper, dirt,trees and rocks i have shot.
but even the rabbits, coyotes,grouse etc..
don't mean much if you are gonna shoot a bufallo.

waksupi

03-17-2009, 02:49 PM

Pretty much all shooting I do, is with an eye for hunting in the end game.

I suppose I have taken 40-50 head of big game with cast bullets over the years. The determining factor in how well they kill, is nose design. A flat nose kills better. I have used as small as the 6.5X55, to .45-70's. Considering the nose diameter of these extremes, they both seem to kill in pretty much the same amount of time. Not too many bang-flops, as I tend to take shots through the ribs, so as to not ruin meat. I've seldom had an animal go over 40 yards from being hit.
The past few years, I have used the .358 Win. for the majority of my hunting, and it gives a good consistant wound channel. I must say though, the 6.5 gave every bit as good of a killing wound, as anything else I have ever used.

44man

03-17-2009, 03:04 PM

I don't think the answer will ever be in hand but from what all of you have posted so far, everyone really is having a better understanding and is doing a lot of thinking that is perfect instead of beating the bush about how great one boolit design is. I don't think there has ever been a better thread on any site. :drinks:
I agree 100% on a lot of stuff here. Like the Keith, nothing wrong as long as it is in it's in it's parameters. My only gripe is the accuracy in mine, not how good it works on game.
I feel a boolit that is not accurate will also have a problem with stability in an animal too. We want a straight path with maximum internal damage and full penetration. To expect all we need at every velocity with one parameter only can result in poor performance as animal size changes.
Keep it up fellas, wonderful, wonderful thoughts showing up! :Fire:

44man

03-17-2009, 04:06 PM

I think if people took the time, they would find that most cast bullets used today are used on game.
I have no problem with any bullet designer doing an indepth study on cast designs for range performance indeed.
What I do have a problem with critics lambasting someone's design, what ever it is used for..and not presenting their designs that they feel are better...just that simple indeed!
I have been in this gun and ammo thing all my life...and this is nothing new. In my opinion cast performs within a certain velocity and range and that is reflected in all the ammo we build and sell.
This thread has taught me one thing......stay off other people's turf and I plan to do that exactly. I did not understand what was the prime purpose of Cast Boolits indeed. I did not realize that heavy gun critics would be brought in to work over something as simple as some'one's idea what were good handgun game bullets.
I have many friends over here that I work with and will continue to work with on many ongoing projects indeed. But you will never see me post another spec sheet on bullets. So, friends, I do not know anything else to say. It has nothing to do with hurt feeling, it's just I see it as a no win situation indeed. If one reflects on this thread, there was no designs coming forth from this critics. ...only more self-center self expression. A great opportunity was missed where all of us could discuss the posted designs, rather than vague about this or that.
Regards, James
James, you know I have agreed with you every turn of the dial. You are going about it the way I would.
There is no perfect boolit design and I do not profess to have one. I work for accuracy first, then tailor failures on game to a change in either alloy or whether a hollow point would work better without changing the meplat. Velocity that a certain boolit is shot comes out as more important in the long run. Your boolit will do everything until it's parameters are exceeded. I found just changing meplat had zero effect when shot outside the correct velocity without an alloy change. YOUR BOOLIT WILL FAIL IF SHOT WRONG BUT WILL PERFORM BEYOND EXPECTATIONS IF SHOT CORRECTLY! And I bet I can make it shoot super tight groups WAAAAY out there.
My boolits also fail if shot wrong and no person here can claim any other design will not fail at some point.
This talk about boolit design only has to be ignored in the quest for a hunting boolit because even a round nose or a round ball works when using the correct velocity and alloy as does a boolit with a large meplat or a pointy nose.
If shot wrong a full wad cutter nose will fail and a pointy boolit will do a better job based on how it is made and shot and the other way around holds true too.
We are touching on stuff here that is important to hunters and there is no use for hanging on one point only because it worked once. Yeah, I killed a trapped fox instantly with one smack in the nose with a stick, but the next had to be beat many times so that must mean I need to find the exact stick again. Sorry, it just does not work that way.
I wish James, me and all the rest of you had the complete answer but none of us does and maybe never will. How easy would it be if we all shot the same size animals with the same caliber and same velocity from the same rifle or handgun?

44man

03-17-2009, 04:37 PM

James, I do give you credit for making the effort to design a bullet specifically for the Marlin 44. There is a need for bullets tailored for lever actions as demonstrated by the popularity of the RD molds. Lever guns can be very picky about what they will feed and few shooters are willing to do the experimentation required to produce a "proven" design.

I could show you my pet designs, but I do not claim them to be the universal bullet for every application. My designs are tailored to my guns and my purposes.

My philosophy on meplats is to use as big a meplat as the gun will tolerate and still produce decent hunting accuracy. By "decent," I mean as well as I can shoot under field conditions with iron sights. Say, 6 - 10 MOA in a packing pistol or 3 - 4 MOA in a ghost-ringed Marlin.

That said, at lever action velocities and with hardened WW alloy, flat point bullets usually "rivit" on impact, becoming nearly a full wadcutter, so one need not lose sleep over meplat size, within reason.

Meplat may be more important for handgun velocities that are too slow to "rivit" the nose as rifle velocities normally do. Meplat may also be more important for "between the ribs" lung shots where little resistance is encountered.

My philosophy on penetration is that most any hard cast bullet will penetrate satisfactorily, so there is no need to waste lead and pulverize your shoulder attempting to create a load that will penetrate more than the other guy's load in some artificial test medium. If the bullet shatters both shoulders of a bull elk and keeps on sailing, I can force myself to live with that.

Pics show complete penetration through both shoulders of 5 point bull elk. Excessive meat damage. Bullet exited. Elk went down and didn't get back up. Marlin, heat treated wheelweight.
http://i487.photobucket.com/albums/rr235/mountainmolds/elk_shoulder1.jpg
http://i487.photobucket.com/albums/rr235/mountainmolds/elk_shoulder2.jpg

Guess the cartridge. Was it .... ???????

A) 45/70

B) 450 Marlin

C) 50 Alaskan

D) 444

E) 44 mag

F) 357 mag
I will not guess about the caliber because all you list will do the same. Hitting bone will give you secondary projectile damage from bone fragments. Blood seepage into connective tissue looks bad but massive meat damage looks like pulp. I have no idea what you refer to about massive damage! Was it bloodshot or did it look like the meat was put on a concrete block and beat with a sledge hammer? All wounds will produce bloodshot meat as blood seeps between muscle groups. That damage looks right but it looks like you cut away more meat because it was just bloody.
I separate muscle groups when I butcher and blood is NOT in the meat but between it and it washes off.
If you are injured by a blow or fall and get a black and blue spot, that is blood seepage between muscle groups from a damaged muscle. But if the muscle is blown away and is mangled, that is meat damage.
If it is not more then 3" diameter at the spot of the shot, the shot was good and meat damage is not bad. If the whole shoulder was destroyed, I would worry.
I think you did well, good shooting. :drinks:

runfiverun

03-17-2009, 10:14 PM

the areas around the bone at the tip of the knife are mangeled worthless bits of flesh.
but they were caused by the bone fragments not the boolit....imo.

44man

03-17-2009, 11:42 PM

the areas around the bone at the tip of the knife are mangeled worthless bits of flesh.
but they were caused by the bone fragments not the boolit....imo.
That is normal with the correct boolit, bullet. You still did a great job. Good eating left.

Crass Whackwords

03-20-2009, 11:11 AM

Please indicate distance and velocity when you answer. The damage is impressive.

Approximately 50 yards, muzzle velocity 1725 fps, meplat 0.270".

About 10 pounds of meat was lost from each shoulder. That would have been typical for a jacketed bullet, but I am not used to seeing that much damage from cast, even when there is bone shrapnel.

Most of my cast hunting experience is with short barreled revolvers which just poke a finger sized hole. Rifle velocities are a whole 'nuther story.

Dixie Slugs

03-20-2009, 11:49 AM

The question still arises.....what was the caliber and alloy hardness?. Quite frankly that is more tissue damage that I am used to seeing with our cast bullets....James

runfiverun

03-20-2009, 01:07 PM

i think that with his velocity and small meplat there was too much energy concentrated in one spot.
i have seen damage such as this caused with shotguns at close distance.
the bones are the culprit.
with that size meplat i am gonna say the 357. and maybe from a carbine too.

Crass Whackwords

03-20-2009, 09:47 PM

The question still arises.....what was the caliber and alloy hardness?. Quite frankly that is more tissue damage that I am used to seeing with our cast bullets....James

357 Mag, heat treated wheelweight.

I've only shot 3 large critters with this rifle/load, and bullet placement was poor in all 3 cases. But -- bullet performance was awesome. Only one bullet recovered so far, just under the skin, on a bull moose.

No doubt the bone shrapnel contributed to the mess in the pictures, but cast bullets poked through the same bones at wheelgun velocities usually pencil through, leaving clean, finger sized holes.

Hard cast bullets and lever guns are a happy combination. :-D Lever gun velocities are enough to cause impressive tissue damage with hard, blunt bullets, yet velocities are not so high as to destroy the bullet.

HTWW will often "rivit" at rifle velocities, becoming essentially a full wadcutter, which is not a bad thing.

Dixie Slugs

03-20-2009, 09:54 PM

What bullet weight?....James

crabo

03-20-2009, 11:33 PM

[QUOTE=Crass Whackwords;525587]357 Mag, heat treated wheelweight.

I've only shot 3 large critters with this rifle/load, and bullet placement was poor in all 3 cases. But -- bullet performance was awesome. Only one bullet recovered so far, just under the skin, on a bull moose.

Crass, Would you please tell us what weight/ powder charge you used and show us a picture of the boolit. You ask us to guess and then you dribble out the info a little at a time. Come clean and give us the details.

Pepe Ray

03-21-2009, 01:29 AM

Seems like Crass likes to be coaxed.
P.R.

[smilie=1:

44man

03-21-2009, 08:18 AM

The worst mess I ever had was a large doe shot on a dead run at 220 yd's. with a .280. Hit behind the shoulder, it destroyed both lungs, the bullet came apart and sprayed the snow with spots of blood in every direction from shrapnel. The deer was bloodshot from the base of the head to the tail. Since I bone my meat, I was able to wipe the blood off with a damp cloth, no loss of meat but a full day to clean her. I sold the rifle! [smilie=1: Needed money for a revolver of course. :Fire:
Bloodshot meat can be cleaned, pulped meat can't, big bone hits do the most pulping.
Here is what the .475 hard cast does to a heart with no meat damage.

Dixie Slugs

03-21-2009, 10:12 AM

Interesting indeed! We also have used the .357 magnum (in both the hangun and carbine) with our 180 gr truncated cone bullet and have never seen as much meat damage as was shown. It looks to me like the velocity has high and a lightweight bullet fragmated on the bone? We do push out 44-265 gr bullet to 1800'/', but it has shown no tendancy to frag on big bones eiither. The boys in South Florida that do crop damage contol on deer on the farms tested it also. General comments were that the bullet penetrated well from any angle.
However, it all deepens on the bullet performance the hunter wants.....you can push any lightweight bullet, cast or otherwise, fast enough and it will blow apart on heavy bones.
Here again though, we design our bullets (as large as .730") for handgun, carbine, and rifled shotgun barrels....1200'/"up to about 1800'/" and for brush hunting use. Above that velocity, we depend on one of the best jacketed bullets, such as the Nosler Partition. But, as I said before, we are interested in game bullets only. On our shotgun bore ammo, we just re-introduced what the Brits used many years ago....but with modern components.
Regards, James

GLynn41

03-21-2009, 10:55 AM

I have been-- or the more southern we--I am from Mississippi__ :-D thinking about the designs posited -- -- when you started this good thread-- I love to learn and I have learned from this -- you had designs and experience ready to go -- so we were somewhat at a disadvantage in the discussion--(I certainly was anyway) here is my only and current design .400' nose, .33 meplat- 255 gr in weight depending on the alloy of course-- the bullet will shoot about as well with out the gc as with in a normal .41- I say normal because I have 2 wildcats--- and the boolit will shoot very will out 110 long steps which is far as I have tried it -- not used in my .41 Marlin yet or the 41/445---as to killing ///the 4 deer that allowed me to shoot them with this bullet up to 40 long steps or so -- have shown about the same results
measured 1.2-5" entrance and exits, the holes were rather oblong?- very damaged to torn apart lungs- rib fragments on the ground - good external bleeding - holes in the hide were just like the nose of the boolit-- I use this boolit in my hand guns- - and muzzler loader with a sabot- and hopefully soon the Marlin & contender thanks for all your thoughts
I have other .41 molds but this is pretty much it as far as hunting at least for now
here is the bullit http://i425.photobucket.com/albums/pp337/GLynn41/IMG_0537.jpg

44man

03-21-2009, 11:18 AM

I see a difference in the two cases as far as sizing goes. Why does the left one look as if it is not sized down far enough?

paul edward

03-21-2009, 12:39 PM

Thank you.

PED

Dixie Slugs

03-21-2009, 04:09 PM

Glenn...Those are good looking game bullets indeed. I have always like the 41's and have owned a few over the years...Rugers and Smiths.
I did not realize that most of the people here, as I have been told, are not interested in cast game bullets. I have been involved with Marshall Stanton, owner of Beartooth Bullets since 2000 and have worked with them on game bullets designs...or re-designs....or whatever.
Recently I finished a four part write up on cast bullets for the Ruger Old Army revolvers....the last two parts on hard cast hunting bullets for the 45 Colt in the Kirst Korventer cylinders.
Since I retired, most of my hunting now is for large true wild hogs....not these little Feral knots we see and hear some much about. Pound for pound, I think a mature wild boar is one of the most dangerous animals walking. Hunting them is a close drill and one can not risk speculation as to whether the bullet will perform or not. Sometimes I think those that hunt these Tuskers in close situations, including myself, are down right fools. It sure is more exciting than sitting in a tree stand and snipering a deer.
Regards, James

MT Gianni

03-21-2009, 04:34 PM

James, Don't get me wrong, I have a big interest in killing game cleanly, we just have a 6 week season in MT to do that. Most of my practice with rifles and handguns it to get my body, eyes and hands in tune for when that comes around. I can keep tuned as well with a 243, or a 9mm as my 45's. Gianni

Dixie Slugs

03-21-2009, 04:47 PM

I have never questioned anyone interest in killing game cleanly indeed. I have only tried to discuss hard cast bullet designs for game bullets!....James

GLynn41

03-21-2009, 07:06 PM

.44 -- the first one is a 41/44---- ballistics 250 cast performance 1500+ these bullits have a lot of bearing area so not so fast-- about 1400 -1410 --I think lots of folks are interested in cast on game but certainly other things too--I thought i remember 'd you from Beartooth - I have read much of your thoughts at times--I try to listen some one who has more inexperience than I weather it is casting or hunting -- I made the bullet up at Dan's and so far have not really wanted another one- happy with this one--next I want to hunt a boar with them--may be soon

44man

03-21-2009, 07:54 PM

Crass Whackwords

03-21-2009, 08:07 PM

Crass, Would you please tell us what weight/ powder charge you used and show us a picture of the boolit. You ask us to guess and then you dribble out the info a little at a time. Come clean and give us the details.

Isn't that part of the fun ? It seems to be a characteristic of members whose name rhymes with mine.:-D

It was a 190 grain bullet. Let's see if I can find a picture. Well, here's a picture of the bullet recovered from a moose. Note the nose "rivits", but HTWW will not form a big mushroom like a ductile alloy. If HTWW rivits too much, pieces will break off and it will shed weight, but at worst you end up with a full wadcutter, which is fine and dandy.
http://www.mountainmolds.com/pics/shoulder_bullet_853.jpg

Well, I can't find a picture of an unfired bullet, so let me see if I can go find a bullet and post back later.

Crass Whackwords

03-21-2009, 08:22 PM

http://i487.photobucket.com/albums/rr235/mountainmolds/357_190_75meplat.jpg

Crass Whackwords

03-21-2009, 08:44 PM

Velocity 1700 - 1725 fps, which can be obtained with either Lil Gun or WW296. Loat data cannot be used for any other 190 grain bullet (true of ANY 357 load data).

According to my notes, the best 5-shot average (not best group, best AVERAGE based on 3 or more groups) was 3.27" at 100 yards, with a ghost ring sight. Certainly not a tackdriver, but fine woods gun accuracy, especially considering the crappy SAAMI "throat."

A smaller meplat would probably shoot more accurately, but the 1894 is a hunting rifle, not a target rifle.

A hollow point might perk things up, too, but "if it ain't broke, don't fix it."

Someone mentioned bullets breaking up. I've never had a HTWW bullet break up in game. I've never had one break up in the dirt berm at the range, either, and dirt is tougher than game. Sure, if you hit a steel plate or a boulder, the bullet may disentigrate, but it doesn't seem to happen on game. Sometimes the nose sheds weight as it "rivits," but nothing to be concerned about.

I have seen other folks' bullets break in two. I seem to remember that happening to BAbore with a store bought 480 bullet on a bison (he's been casting his own ever since :mrgreen:). Since it doesn't happen to my bullets, either I've been lucky, or else I'm doing something right, like modest casting temperatures and oven treating instead of water dropping.

Crass Whackwords

03-21-2009, 08:54 PM

I should add that some tuning is required to feed this bullet.

My Marlin, as it came from the factory, wouldn't even feed FMJ's.

I slicked up the action, oh-so-lightly chamfered the entrance to the chamber, and modded the carrier to COL's 1.600" or maybe a few thou more, vs. 1.59" out of the box. Doesn't sound like much but the 190 crowds the powder space.

HiVelocity

03-23-2009, 06:59 PM

Folks, I've known James Gates and his products well. Be sure and check out his 12ga "Tri-Ball".

J.Kirk in SC
HiVelocity

PS- I've used his .35 caliber cast bullet and have 50 left loaded for my L frame Smith. Outstanding!

Daves1

03-24-2009, 05:05 PM

Crass, whats your recipe for heat treating?

Dixie Slugs

03-24-2009, 05:36 PM

Crass...It's nothing exotic indeed! For the .625" and .730", including the .500 Tornado. Our people cook them for one hour at 425 degress and water quench in water that is 72 degress...then Alox 350 wash. This cooking time gives an ever heat throughtout the bullet.
There are write-ups on Dixie Slugs as to how they stood up to the Bone Box at the Linebaugh Seminar.
We use the same setup for handgun bullets (for our use), except we size/gas check first, heat treat, and then lube in the Star.
We have on occasion, heat treated the high antimony buckshot from BPI.
Really rather simple......James

Dixie Slugs

03-24-2009, 05:37 PM

I am sorry, I thought he was talking to me....James

Daves1

03-24-2009, 06:59 PM

I got just what I was looking for, Thanks James

Crass Whackwords

03-24-2009, 11:24 PM

cook them for one hour at 425 degress and water quench.........
We use the same setup for handgun bullets (for our use), except we size/gas check first, heat treat, and then lube

Same here, maybe 430 degrees, but that's splitting hairs, since kitchen ovens are not calibrated precisely.

I've never gotten excited about bucket dropping, even though it seems to work satisfactorily for most people. Too many downsides, and no upside from my point of view.

The only downside to oven treating is that the bullets usually have trace amounts of lube when they are placed in the oven (because I size before treating, and use a tiny bit of lube for sizing purposes, plus there is residual lube in the die, anyhow) so there may be some odor. Perhaps your significant other is the type who does not care for the pleasant aroma of scorched bullet lube ? :coffee: I suspect that is why most people prefer to bucket drop.

GLynn41

03-25-2009, 08:29 AM

personally --I prefer to not cook lead and food in the same place -just me--which is why i wdww if I do anything --have found it is not needed for deer

Dixie Slugs

03-25-2009, 10:01 AM

44man

03-25-2009, 11:56 AM

We have an older gas stove in the shop that we put a temp gauge through the door. As I mentioned, we seldom use it for our bullets for handguns and Marlin 1894's....most of the time it's used for the ammo Dixie sells which is not sized and the Alox 350 wash is done later. We also have a few of the table top electric ovens that are used for small quantities of special orders.
I agree that one really does not need heat treated bullets for thin skin game....but most of our Dixie ammo is ordered for large and/or dangerous game and has proven best when heat treated.
I fully realize that our ammo is 100% game loads and designed for a specific hunting situation. I do not profess to know much about long range cast bullets designs...or need to.
On the other hand, we have done quite a bit of testing on nose shapes hit with a high pressure water stream. The angle of the spray tells alot about what happens to the water in tissue......but that's another story and I doubt it would be of interest here on this forum.
Regards, James
It would indeed James. Or in a new post because it fits in nicely with what I see in deer.
I remember about my thinking long ago with soft jacketed hollow points that expanded like crazy in water, etc and thought how they would knock down deer and explode the internals. I never hunted them back then and did not think about needed penetration, blood trails and meat damage.
Then when I started using FN boolits on them at the proper velocities, success was so good I thought they would work at any speed, how mistaken I was! :coffee: I have learned a lot by doing a necropsy on each and observing what each boolit does.
This is a continual learning process and I never base results on one animal that happens to die fast because a false sense of effectiveness blurs further testing. Faith in the wrong boolit for the velocity can cause failure in the field and depends on the size of the animal being hunted too.
I read it all the time how good a boolit worked for someone at 1800 fps but in reality it can be the wrong assumption. I have been guilty of that also.
I consider what a boolit does in the animal the highest priority and though I admit, shooting into all kinds of media is never the same as flesh and blood, your testing is of great interest.

Dixie Slugs

03-25-2009, 12:33 PM

It is a simple fact that killing one or two animals will not give the absolute lethal potential of some bullet design. There are just to many variables. We can establish certain designs for certain hunting situations.
But....we have to set the requirements based on the game and distance. After years on tests on game, we see the starting points of a game bullet design. We can agrue about the % of meplat to the diameter of the bullet forever...but it better have a lot of meplat area.
I do feel that cast bulllet shooters, within brush gun ranges, have leaned too far on weight. They need to forget weight and study Sectional Density...since it is Velocity & Sectioal Density that gives penetration.
It is a fact that many existing game bullets designs have been refined....and those refinements are based on observed results....not slide rule speculations.
Now....understand I deal with game bullets only! The designs I have posted are based on a velocity of 1100'/" to 1800'/"...The 1800'/" from short barrrel brush guns. ....and for the most part within 100 yards. Beyond that, the design must be changed on out to 175 yards or so. .....still based on brush guns.
Qiute frankly, I do not consider bullets that are not at least .357" and up to be good cast game bullet designs. I am quite sure there will be disagreements on that statement. Under .357", I leaned toward today's excellent jacketed ullet designs. So...I can speak only about game bullets within the above distance.
Regards, James

44man

03-25-2009, 01:15 PM

Again, you are 100% correct! :drinks: This is no easy task. Distance changes everything and if I shot my 45-70 WFN boolits into deer at 200 yd's I am sure they would be perfect but I need to tailor my boolits from 20 to 100 yd's only---a whole new set of variables.
Velocity is my enemy, If I shot the same boolit from my .45 it would kill from zero to as far as an animal could be hit with it but from the 45-70, closer range kills are iffy. I could slow it down but would lose accuracy BIG time.
I understand your problems trying to satisfy all kinds of variables to cover all distances, alloys, meplats, etc. You have no idea what a hunter will shoot at or how far. Whether he needs an expanding boolit or just a big meplat.

Dixie Slugs

03-25-2009, 05:16 PM

That's the exact reason I do not plan to get into the general selling of component bullet business. But, it goes beyond that. I have a good friend in the component bullets business. He starrted out with a well designed line of game bullets, but his customers always wanted something different. Now, he has so many in line that he can't plan ahead for inventory. They buy one and then another...always changing!
Most now are not cast bullet hunters (who tend to stay with one design they have found that works) and are still wanting him to have a mold cut for some exotic new re-design. He told me that he has molds that were cut and only a few hundred bullets were ordered from.
I have in house now all the equipment that Rock Island Ballistics bought....Magma Casters, Star's (with heaters, bullets feeds, and air cylinders), and a series of good game bullet molds for the Magma Casters. I use the equipment now just for a selcted group that hunt around here. I have given quite a few people the spec sheet so they could have molds cut.....and they have been satisfied with the results.....but I have also seen these designs picked apart by some that have never shot the bullets to see how they perform. But again, I say I am only involved in game bullets. There is lots of speculation out there indeed!
I have established in my mind the following:
(1) Tissue Damage is a product of Velocity and Meplat Area
(2) Penetration is a product of Velocity and Sectional Density
There ia a balance of the two that comes from Gut-Pile-Analysis. And there is a different set of rules for different hunting situations...there is no bullets that does it all!
Regards, James

03-25-2009, 05:32 PM

Ok, I'm looking for general guidlines to start. I've had real good luck killing things with a 70% meplat at at handgun velocities +/- 1,350 fps or so. Now I'm looking at rifle velocites closer to 2,000 fps. If I'm following this thread correctly, I should be looking at smaller meplats, and/or hollowpoints?

Intuitively I can understand how a smaller meplat at higher velocity will accomplish much the same work as the larger but slower meplat. What is not intuitive is why the larger meplat becomes less effective at higher velocities?

BD

Dixie Slugs

03-25-2009, 05:42 PM

I will let those here that deal with cast bullets at 2000'/" answer you question....James

helice

03-25-2009, 10:00 PM

44man

03-26-2009, 09:09 AM

James,

I'm still looking for the information concerning your tests of boolit noses hit by high pressure water streams. I'd like to see it in a post all by itself but I guess it would be ok to put it here.

There are enough of us on this forum who shoot cast all year at paper only to take one deer in the fall. I agree with the large meplat concept but would like to know what your water under pressure tests revealed. It would be interesting just to know how you put these tests together. Keep writin', I'm learnin'. Helice
What I figure for next season is to stay with my hard cast WLN and WFN boolits for the .44, .475 and .45 as they work to perfection. But the 45-70 will use a 50-50 WW and pure boolit with a hollow point, heat treated. I do not believe the meplat size itself will affect killing power as the boolit will upset. I just need to be careful that they do not expand too much or come apart.
The boolit picture Crass posted looks about perfect.
I want to slow the boolit in the deer, reduce the frontal pressure wave so lung tissue is closer to the boolit for a larger primary wound channel.
It is a funny thing to think about! :redneck: Let us say you are shooting a very large animal with a very fast hardcast with a large meplat. Shoot it at a quartering to you angle and damage to lungs is poor and the slowing boolit does it's most damage in the guts.
Now shoot a quartering shot from the rear so the boolit slows before it hits the lungs and results will be much better because the lungs will subject to a more effective velocity.
Strange how us rednecks think! [smilie=l:

GLynn41

03-26-2009, 12:00 PM

Until this thread and a conversation with Veral -- I had never thought of too much speed having the kind of impact on bullit performance you experienced-- I wonder what the threshold is -- I had just assumed that like my 255 fired out of my 41/445 would just be way too much of the same good splash impact-now I am not so sure-- but it will be fun to try experiment and learn -- I knew -- at least I thought i did - what the 255 was going to do before I took game with it-- what you described in your last post -- was how i had to use the first gen of Nosler BTs in my .358 win -- at 2440broad side hits were not much - but angle it in and the bullet did much better- but mostly the last third before exit- anyway I quit using them because of that

44man

03-26-2009, 03:09 PM

There is no perfect bullet/boolit for every range, velocity, size of game or shot angle. We can only reach the best balance point by making a good choice.
I learned a hard lesson with a Lone Eagle pistol in 7mm-08 with 139 gr bullets. I had killed several deer but the next was hit right behind the shoulder because she was moving when I shot. I found lung tissue on tree branches but little blood. I tracked her a long way and she never stopped moving. I lost blood and was following tracks until she went onto a trail full of tracks.
A lot of thinking concluded that the bullet did not open and lung damage was almost at the bullet exit. I should have used the 120 gr bullet in the pistol.
I did the same with my 7R but found the deer by walking circles. Not a drop of blood on the ground---wrong bullet. Too slow for bullet construction but the same bullet exploded in deer from the .280. Trying to fit this bullet into the right place only comes up with the 7X57. To try and use this bullet in everything from the pistol up a 7mm mag can give a guy a lot of grief.

04-01-2009, 10:13 AM

I'd sure like to continue the hunting related parts of this discussion down in the "Hunting with CBs" room.

BD

Dixie Slugs

04-02-2009, 11:46 AM

It seems hard for some folks to understand Meplat Area vs Meplat Diameter. When I speak of Meplat Area for cast bullets....it covers both those with a non-expanded meplat....and those that are expanded.
There are vastly different ideas on cast game bullets indeed. Some want a cast bullst alloy that will rivet or expand....while others want a large meplat that does not expand.
It would be next to impossible to run a thread on cast bullets for hunting as there are different opinions as the just what is the best design. Besides that, some believe in bullet "Dwell" time in game and others say it does not exist as a factor.
I for one...if I want an expanding bullet, I will use jacketed bullets. No matter whether it is an expanding design cast bullet or a jacketed bullet....they are not consistant and their design is based on impact velocity....that's just the way they are designed. As for a hard heat treated hollowpoint design....most I have seen blew the nose off and did not expand even.
I prefer to depend on a non-expanding design with a proper amount of Meplat Area for tissue damage.
So...I don't think we could ever come to an agreement on the cast bullet design for game
Regards, James

BOOM BOOM

10-29-2009, 07:31 PM

Hi,
1) i will remember your names.
2) i appreciate your work.
3) please do not stop posting.

trent2

02-17-2010, 11:19 AM

Thanks to all for a great thread.
Now, is there any math wizs out there that could post a chart or formula from what we have all learned? Say one for casting hunting bullets that would be good for what ever intended purpose we have for said bullet at velocity, caliber, weight, meplate, etc.?
It sure would help to be able to summarize all this information into an easy to apply form of some sort.
Thanks again,
Trent

Dixie Slugs

02-17-2010, 05:01 PM

I really do not think there is any handy math that answers all the questions that come up. Just a thought!.....as Velocity goes up, Meplat Area can come down....and give the same Tissue damage.
We have a formula that we use to give an idea of what is happening. Not perfect, but does seem to be able to factor one design against another:
Sectional Density X Meplat Area X Velocity = Factor.
I do warn against using Thornily though as it was designed exclusive for round nose designs.
Bottom line is what seems to work for you in actual hunting situations is best for you!
To venture onto Holy Ground! The Keith 429241 was never a good game bullet for us. We solid hit many deer/hogs, only to have to go get the dogs to trail them up. It's small meplat of .250" just did not give the tissue damage we wanted. If one really reads Elmer's writings. you will find thst he watchced the animal for a distance before it fell. That's fine in open country, but is bad in heavy cover. For general handgun hunting (not hand rifles), we want an extreme meplat bullet....no matter if it is .357" to .430" to 452"/.454. Over the years we have found that a .357"@180 grs, a .430"@ 265 grs and a .452"/453"@ 285 gr....gave the best of Sectional Density and Velocity. These are just our findings though.
I will say that we have been using cast bullet designs since 1956.....mainly in 44 Mags. But...we do not know beans about high velocity cast bullets in rifles indeed!
What I really like about this group...is we can kick things around wihout being flamed!
Regards, James
Oh yes....We have been using our .454" (285 gr) Extreme Meplat bullet in the black Hornady plastic sabot in our 50 cal ML'ing hammer guns!

trent2

02-17-2010, 07:38 PM

Dixie,
Can you give me more info on your formula and how I might use it?
My cast hunting guns are 45 long colt in pistol and lever action and 45-70 in lever and double rifle.
Any help in determining best cast for deer and hog would be greatly appreciated.
I'm using a Ranch Dog mould now in 435 gr for the 45-70 lever. It may be over kill, but comforting to have if I should ever decide to hunt bigger game else where.

Thanks,

Trent

GLynn41

02-17-2010, 11:28 PM

go to his web pages and read he has a formula there to play with

trent2

02-18-2010, 08:52 AM

Excellent, thank you GLynn, I don't know how I missed it in checking out his site yesterday.
James, you're brilliant. I always believed in Taylor's formula, but knew it wasn't perfect.
I guess these gun writers these days just, well........write?
Now I have some way of comparing molds and different designs for my use.
Thanks and keep up the good work James.
Trent

Dixie Slugs

02-22-2010, 06:22 PM

I have just posted a spec sheet on the EMC bullets....James

Dannix

03-04-2010, 05:44 PM

I'm a young green-horn here, but any thoughts about "HyperCaving" a HP cast boolit?
New bullet: "hypercav" - New Test Results (http://www.thehighroad.org/showpost.php?p=6289373&postcount=267)
As I posted there, I'm particularly interested in the results of a non-expanding HCHP.

Your thoughts?

That is why I decided to use 45 2.1's advise and use 50/50 WW-Pb alloy, along with a boolit that has a decent meplat. As cast it runs around 10 bhn. Good for alot of pistols and LV rifle rounds for thin skinned game. Good expansion. Want a bit more, then HP the same boolit. Water drop or oven HT the same alloy for 22 bhn and the solid version is a good penetrator that still shows some expansion at higher velocity. HP the harder boolit and you get a bunch more. If you need a hard boolit for the gun's likes, anneal the nose of either a solid or HP. One alloy and meplat design. It doesn't cover absolutely everything, but is the closest I've found so far.

Dixie Slugs

03-04-2010, 09:42 PM

Let's see how I can best approach this answer? The poster is correct that water can not be compressed...indeed It should also be understood that as a jacketed bullet expands, the Meplat Area (area of the exposed expanded nose) inceases.
As the nose area increases it moves more water in tissue. The faster it expands...the larger diameter the first cavity is...but the faster it expands, the less penetration. Jacketed bullet are design the expand within a certain velocity envelope!
On the otherhand, an nonexpanding hard cast bullet depends on the designed mepalt for tissue damage.
There have been many attempts to explain what causes tissue damage indeed. It is really quite simple....
Tissue Daamge is a product of Meplat Area and Velocity.
Penetration is a product of Sectional Density and Velocity.
It is up to the bullet drsigner to undersand these factors and design the bullet to be the best balance in all the designs for the expected use/range/game of the bullet.
A closer range game bullet would have a different design that a longer range bullet! The problem arises that most bullet designers have not killed enough game to put the final touch on the design....James

Dannix

03-05-2010, 09:28 AM

I just thought it was interesting how the 'ports' in the HP direct the water in the tissue for a greater wound channel. Thanks for your reply Dixie.

Dixie Slugs

03-05-2010, 12:22 PM

Please understand that there are many gimmicks out there that are supposed to do wonders indeed. Over the many years I have been in this gun and ammo thing...I have seen hundreds!
The very basic meplat still is the most consistant! The various angles on a non-expanding bullet's nose should be understood first of all.
The water is tissue is forced away from a bullets nose on the exact angle that it hits the nose. Otherwords the angle of deflection equals in angle of inflection. The make a simple example.....if the angle of the nose is at 45 degrees from the axis of the bullet. The water would be forced way at the same 45 degrees from the angle.......or 90 degrees from the axis of the bullet. In theory, a non-expanding bullet with a nose angle of 45 degrees to a point (thus moving the water at 90 degrees) would give the most water movement.
While this may be true....we have found a flat meplat area creates a high presuure area and causes the most tissue damage.
Now....the uncerstanding of cast bullet designs for handgun has been going on since the 1950's. Many have been involved, but only as of late have we understood what was really causing tissue damage.....and have been able to control it with bullet design!...James

bbailey7821

05-08-2010, 01:08 PM

Great Minds think alike! I've got a 360 grain from Mountain Molds, that I patterned after a Cast Performance Bullet that is a DEVASTATING wild pig killer!

bbailey7821

05-08-2010, 01:11 PM

Furthermore, this monster will penetrate 36" of San Antonio Yellowpages, and keep on Trucking! I shoot it out of my Casull at 1400 fps.

Dannix

06-03-2010, 01:00 AM

James, not sure if you can answer this question or not...

Have you ever played with adding a rebated boat-tail to a flat-nosed/large/extreme metaplat boolit design?

I thought of it just recently (http://castboolits.gunloads.com/showthread.php?p=912076#post912076), but not sure where it falls in the dumb/brilliant/not-worth-the-extra-effort spectrum. If I'm not mistaken the trailing edge can make a significant difference in aero/hydrodynamics at low velocities, but not sure how much the trailing edge matters at supersonic speeds, in the context of a WFN.

Dixie Slugs

06-03-2010, 06:17 PM

I have not played with a rebated base on the bullets I designed. There was a great deal of static over these large meplat designs indeed. Some even said they were not accurate and tended to tumble.....we have found no sign of that if the bullet left the barrel stable!
However, none of these large meplat bulets were designed for extreme range, but rather a balance of weight for penetration/meplat for tissue damage/velocity for ranges expectted for brush hunting (say 100 yards or so)
We continue to hunt with these bullets in handguns and brush rifles. They are just plain meat bullets!
Regards, James

.357

06-13-2010, 01:54 PM

I would love to see the .357 in a group buy i would get really excited about that.

Dannix

07-27-2010, 09:10 PM

James, got another question for ya. How greatly is terminal performance effected when the metplat is somewhat modified from a pure flat nose? In the context of non-expanding bullets, how inferior would a very shallow 'disk/cup' hollow point be? Or for that matter how about a very flatish but round nose?

Maybe the flatish RN would be no good because there is no edge, but the cup/dish HP would be OK? Some rough drawings attached.

Dixie Slugs

08-04-2010, 01:58 PM

Quite frankly, I have not tested the other designs you show. In various conversations with Todd Corder (part of the Linebaugh group), we found some interesting facts about flat meplats. It seems the meplat design (about 70% or so) cause the nose of the bullet to Rivet instead of mushrooming. it appears the flat meplat forches the lead back toward the center instead of outward. this causes the mid point of the bullet to expand out, causing a rivet type of expansion.......hard to descibe! The more maplat area/velocity.....the more the rivet. Of course, the hardness of the alloy will vary the size of the vivet.
Just what these other designs will do, I just do not know. At present, all our field testing is done with the flat meplat.....Regards, James@Dixie

BOOM BOOM

08-04-2010, 02:36 PM

HI,
To further corroborate what Dixie & 44man have said , I also have moved from the 158-160gr. 357 bullets to the 180 gr. , really like it.
In the 44 I have moved from the 240-250 gr. bullets up to the 265gr. bullet.
Did try the 325grlee in the 44 but ouch- did not like it.

Dixie Slugs

08-04-2010, 08:15 PM

I certainly do not want to stir things up...however, we do field testing and in-house testing all the time.
Taking everything into consideration, velocity, recoil, and performance on deer/hogs.....we feel the ideal cast bullet weight in .357 to be 170/180 gr.
In the 44 mag - hard cast 265 gr. In the 45 Colt - hard cast 285 gr. All shold have plenty of meplat area.
I know this runs crossgrain with the present leaning to super heavy bullets, but it's just we have found......James

Dannix

08-05-2010, 12:22 AM

Thanks for the response James.

It seems the meplat design (about 70% or so) cause the nose of the bullet to Rivet instead of mushrooming. it appears the flat meplat forches the lead back toward the center instead of outward. this causes the mid point of the bullet to expand out, causing a rivet type of expansion.......hard to descibe! The more maplat area/velocity.....the more the rivet. Of course, the hardness of the alloy will vary the size of the rivet.
Interesting. The 'rivet type of expansion' reminds me of the Federal EFMJ.

http://www.goldenloki.com/ammo/gel/9mm/efmj.jpg
http://www.goldenloki.com/ammo/gel/9mm/xefmj.jpg
Federal 9x19mm EFMJ +P 124gr
Pics by GoldenLoki

Dixie Slugs

08-05-2010, 10:38 AM

I think the sample shown is a good example of what I am trying to describe....ergo Rivet vs Mushroom-thanks!..James

onesonek

08-21-2010, 04:36 PM

Being new to casting and the use of cast bullets for hunting, I found all this thread a very interesting read, and informative as well!!
Thanks to all !!

I think also,,, there is no such thing as the "perfect bullet". There are just way too many variables. I think and agree that there is always some evolution or room for improvement, but generally it still all boils down to a degree of compromise, to "what will work" in a variety of conditions. There is an "ideal situation" somewhere in the performance range,,but all else is a compromise.

Dave

Oyeboten

08-22-2010, 04:25 AM

Hi Dixie Slugs, all...

Very interesting Thread.

Your original blueprints of the three Bullets look supurb for accuracy and penetration and mushrooming, in higher FPS conditions.

They are elegent.

I have been brooding on Bullet Shape for Revolver for a while now, and the 'Riveting' bulge you mention is what I was thinking would occur with a flat wide-as-possible Meplat, in a harder Alloy.

My expectation is that it would not happen with a softer Alloy, or that it would be matched and then passed up, by the mushrooming of the front.

I have been brooding on Bullets for .45 Colt ACP 'Snubby' Revolver.

Bullets/Boolits, of say around 230 Grains, and maybe a Brinel of 12 or so, with a FPS of around 850 FPS...

Where, the Bullets would be like the bottom half of an Aerosol Can in shape - Cylinderical, a couple Lube Griives, and a dished front ( like how the bottom of an Aerosol Can is 'dished' in).

Maybe a small bevel to the edge of the 'dish' to even out some of the forces, so it would not overly mushroom too soon.

In my imagination, this might penetrate well, while, mushrooming well...and the rate of either could be regulated by how large the bevel is, of the edges of the 'dish', with respect to the Alloy, or Hardness, of course.

This would be a prospctive SD condition Bullet, and not a Hunting Bullet, so it's aerodynamics with respect to Air resistance at upper sub-sonic Speeds would not be an issue for the distances involved.

What do you think?

Dixie Slugs

08-24-2010, 10:18 AM

I think the basic design could be carried over to a lighter bullet for the 45 ACP revolver (around 250 or so grains. I see no reason the cup the nose though.
Regards, James

Oyeboten

08-27-2010, 04:38 AM

Probably a flat front would be fine.

I had imagined a 'cupped' front might 'cut' a little better, and encourage mushrooming at the speeds it would have, but, probably, would make no difference in the actual dynamics of things.

I'd have to try some of each in some testing medium to find out.

Dannix

08-27-2010, 11:39 PM

Dixie Slugs

08-28-2010, 01:39 PM

Those are excellent looking bullet designs indeed! However. I think we are talking about two different designs....one being a non-expanding bullet (or maybe a rivet design) vs a mushrooming hollow point design.
both are great, but it depends on the caliber, penetration, and velocity.
Regards, James

Dixie Slugs

08-28-2010, 01:42 PM

And I might add for thougts! With the hollowpoint design, he bullet must be softer so the nose does not breal up/fragment....James

Dixie Slugs

01-08-2011, 10:16 AM

Looks like we have had a pile of people running this thread indeed! And....That is excellent!
We have brought forward many excellent points! I think it is starting to dawn on all of us that the meplat Area is very important in bullets (now-expanded and expanded).
What we seem not to be settled on is what % meplat is best! That can not be calculated, but seen in the field...and over quite a period.
dixie's Extreme Meplat bullets were designed for brush guns and never designed for much over 100 yards. Witin that envelope we never saw that acuracy fall off.
And we ststed that we were dealing only with bullets designs of .357" and up. We also ststed what weight withing our designs that we felt were at a balance of meplat area, weight, and velocity....and those factors are important!
Now.....a bullet in the air does not know what gun it came from...so, the discussion can cover all matters of firearms. What is important is the discuss bullet designs within the yardage they were designed for. This is where the bullet's BC comed into play!
Thyose that have read in detail what Keith said.....he watched the animal travel a distsnce before it fell. That;s fina and dandy in open country that he hunted in.......but in heavy cover0 or swamp), that can lead to a lost animal unless you use dogs.
Back in the late 50's we tried is famous 44 bullet, only to see deer/hogs that we hit well travel some distance. The original bullet has a meplat of .280". Those that have calculated the Area of a meplat know that it takes only a small incerase in the Diameter of the meplat to make quite an increase in the Area!
Regards, James

82nd airborne

01-11-2011, 07:05 PM

Im not trying to be argumenative, just bring up my experence. Have you ever done any testing with "brush guns"? Heres a test I did.
make a barrier out of 1"x1" pine pickets driven into the ground, to where the bullet must hit 3 at different, but set locations for each caliber. The guns that people call "brush guns" did worse than the faster, sleeker bullets. I tested .270, .260, ,308, .45/70, and 30-30. Each caliber hit the same amount of pickets at the same distances, so the only variable was caliber.

The first three cartridges did far far better than the 30-30 or 45-70. These two deflected much more than did the .270,.260, and .308. Very few tests can be completely conclusive, as there is always something that could have been different, but I ran ALOT of ammo through each on this test and every time, the three faster calibers with spitzers, (Not FMJ) came out on top.

I also did the same test with a pile of actual brush in front of the target at various distances. Once again, the non traditional "brush guns" came out on top.

Just to reitterate, I am not trying to debunk anyones ideas on brush hunting, I just thought someone may find my test results interesting.

Old Ironsights

01-11-2011, 09:23 PM

Because rarely (if ever) will anyone encounter "brush" where a bullet will be forced to hit 3 separate, offset 1x1 bits of brush?

Most "brush" is considerably smaller than that, and you hit far less of it.

A better "test" would be to shoot through a rose bush or hedge... or if one must "replicate" "brush" then maybe a pile of... Brush (or christmas tree branches) loosely (so you can see through it) interposed between you and the target...

So, just how thick was the "brush pile" you created, and what size branches were included?

If you are shooting through "brush" you can't see through - i.e. an unsafe shot in the real world - what good is the test?

Dixie Slugs

01-11-2011, 10:03 PM

Just for clarification.....What I consider a Brush Gun is one that is best in heavy cover......not one to shoot through brush, limbs, vines, or whatever.
Now....I do not agree that the stated calibers do indeed shoot through brush piles without breaking up....all factory tests do not show that. However, if that is what you think, then by all means go for it.
This thread was started to show how well extreme meplat area bullets perform...period!
Most so-called brush gun calibers have a modest velocity, compared to the faster long range items that have a great BC....that's anothr discussion indeed.
What we were dicussing is non-expanding bullets (hard cast), somewhat heavy (high sectional density) with a large meplat area for tissue damage.What is in question that most are interested in is just what % is the best all around meplat?
Some state that there is a % meplat area that causes the bullet to wobble (not accurate). Smith stated that wad cutters were not accurate....but what was he describing? Pistol target wad-cutters velocity vs twist is on the very edge of being stabile. They were slowed down for the shooter's comfort in a long match. However, when they have an increased velocity.....there seems to be an arguement as to what distance they become un-stable (if they do/?) Some believe that air pressure builds up on extreme area meplats that caused tumbling. What we have seen is even meplats running 80% to 90% remain accurate within what is considered the hunting range these firearms/bullets are designed for. If we are to believe Keith in his 500/600 yard pistol shot....a .430" bullet with a 280" meplat was still accurate. We are still testing Meplat Area (% meplat) and have not seen accuracy fall off as some have described.
So...where does that get us? Most say a 73% meplat will be acurate....until where? Our deigns have a larger % and are being used every day
Regards, James

Dannix

01-11-2011, 11:19 PM

Aaron,

When hitting an object square on, it makes since to me a spitzer would fair far better than any other type. Like AP ammo. However, I think the idea of a FN being the choice for a brush gun is that when an object is not hit square on, the bullet path being only partially obstructed, as is more likely the situation encountered in brush, a FN is more likely to plow through the obstruction and a spritizer is more likely to be deflected and/or destabilized.

That's where my admittedly abstract thinking takes me anyway.

Dannix

01-11-2011, 11:43 PM

Something you may be interested in James: non-expanding, reverse-taper, cup-point. This may prove to be an effective way of achieving FN-like terminal performance at higher velocities than those where the FN is effective.

Hydrostatically Stabilized Boolits (http://castboolits.gunloads.com/showthread.php?t=91796)
Those are excellent looking bullet designs indeed! However. I think we are talking about two different designs....one being a non-expanding bullet (or maybe a rivet design) vs a mushrooming hollow point design.
both are great, but it depends on the caliber, penetration, and velocity.
Regards, James
Just to clarify, that's a non-expanding, non-mushrooming cup-point. It's an interesting looking animal. On my maybe-someday project list, I'd like to get a custom mould made up based on the 311-165 RD and featuring this new nose design, and compare it to the 311-165, FN and HP, at higher velocities.

Dixie Slugs

01-12-2011, 03:18 PM

Quite frankly, I would like to see actual tests of the other mentioned bullet designs at a public tests like at the Linebaugh Seminar...shot by Todd Corder.
As many know, I have subminted these designs free that we have spent time, money, and testing on.
Suggestions of other designs are fine, but I want to see the actual results before I change to another design.
I am not being hard-headed, but cost of molds etc do count. The question remains as the whether these other designs do prove worthwhile to give added performance. There are many exotic designs out there that have not been proven to add anything but cost in the molds.
I will contiune to post designs that we have developed....free to members of Cast Boolits indeed! I really do not know of anything else to add to what has been posted?
Regards James

GLynn41

01-24-2011, 05:54 PM

thank for your efforts James

Dixie Slugs

01-25-2011, 08:16 PM

I may not be the best person to answer some of these post about exotic bullet designs. I am involved in the production of ammo in a small private (family) owned
company...and have to look at production cost, quality, and market.
Many that do load ammo for a hobby, can (and will) spend money that I would not.
I am also very pragmatic when it comes to bullet performance. If the truth was known...there is very little one can do to present bullet designs that would make for better performance (on game)...within the designed ranges the bullet was design for!
There always will be Ko-Ko designs for sale! I have seen hundreds over the past 50 years.
Any design that is different must be able to prove, beyond a shadoew of a doubt, that it improves bullet potential! This comes for plenty of testing!
Now..that does not mean there might be some small thing done that has been overlooked!.....however it is not magic!
The next improvement will come in cast bullets!....but long range accuray is not the answer for those that produce loaded ammo.....the overall market is satisfied with products out there now...although some like Lehigh Bullets are costly indeed!
The people here on Cast Boolits are trying all matter of designs...and equipment indeed!
I say again....look for improvemant in bullet performance on game!....Regards, James

castormd

02-16-2011, 09:45 PM

Thank you, James!
All who contribute to this site are truly dedicated to the cause of improved boolit performance.
It is refereshing to come to a website, and gleen pure experiences of folks who have "been there and done that", without a bunch of superficial advertisement and BS. Thanks to all!

Dixie Slugs

02-16-2011, 10:43 PM

You are quite correct that this is the best, of the best, when it comes to factual information indeed! Of course the members here have different designs they look for! I started playing around with cast handgun bullets as early as 1956......some were popular, but not the best game bullets. Over the years many have added to what we now know about cast bullets. I have always like handgun game bullet designs and have tried many. Still, I designed into my cast bullets my needs. That boils down to bullet designs for game (deer/hogs) and within the normal hunting yardage for handguns in heavy cover. Some may say that my designs are not accurate over 100yards.....I can not even see that distance where we use designs in handgun bullets! Outsideof the group here.....we see lots of critics, who have never design anything and deal with speculation indeed..or what they read in some Rag. Here on Cast Boolits you find people that know what they are talking about!
There are only two (this is one) that I even spend time on! I have a limited amout of time from making ammo for sale at Dixie Slugs.....and want to spend that time with people I can learn concept from!
Regards, James

white eagle

02-23-2011, 10:58 AM

James
I find what you have said to fit my hunting
situation to a "T"
I am a believer as well in big large mepalts
most of my handgun boolits are designed that way
I am getting into full bore shotgun slugs as well
I have a custom mold on the way weighing in at 770 gr
if you can share any tips or point me in the direction
I need to be going I would appreciate your help
BTW I do have 4 boxes of you slugs in my stock
I personally would like to thank you for you work
David White Eagle

Dixie Slugs

02-23-2011, 06:52 PM

First, you must tell me the design of your slug....for rifled barrels?....for smothbore barrels? for both? It would also help if I knew the as-cast diameter.
Of course, I will help all I can.....James

white eagle

02-24-2011, 05:48 PM

sorry James
the design is a solid base slug ....three driving bands and a truncated cone shape with
a .375 meplat I plan to modify the mold for a hp
as cast dia is .735 I am .003-.004 over bore dia
coming out of a rifled ultra slug hunter
I plan on casting with 50/50 or str8 w/w

Dixie Slugs

02-24-2011, 09:44 PM

Interesting! You must be planning for a rifled bore. I might add that most of the rifled barrels we checked came out at .727"/.728" in the grooves. That is why we hold to 730" for our Terminator and IXL-DGS. If you plan on roll crimping, watch the depth of the trumcated nose....as it makes for real problems if it is very deep.....James

white eagle

02-25-2011, 10:52 AM

James
my barrel slugged out @.7315 that is why I went with .735
btw I switched the dim.to .733
I will be waiting for the mold anxiously
If you could send me a pm with the powders I should consider
I will be very appreciative
I am starting out with 2.75 hulls
but may go to 3.000"

Dixie Slugs

02-25-2011, 01:39 PM

Perfect choice on bullet diameter indeed! A good rule of thumb when dealing with 12 bore and hard cast slusgs......is to have the bullset diameter no more than .003" more than groove diameter.....ergo a .730' bullet for a .727" groove diameter (Hastings).
Now.....I would suggest the 3" hull more that the 2 3/4" hull for the following reasons:
(1) Most work has been done with the 12 bore 3" hull as far as powders, etc.
(2) The 12 bore 3" hulls allows a better filler wad base for crimp index
(3) The 12 bore 3" hulls allows the use of slow burn bulky powdrs.
(4) The 12 bore hull allows the bullet to be close to the forcing cone/barrel leades
Use at least 1/2" of hard filler wads, plus a good powder seal like BPI X12X. You may want to consider using, in the wad stack, a Circle Fly .250" (1/4") hard nitro card!
A good place to start is with Alliant Blue Dot powder. Weigh the bullet and find a shot load within 11,500,12,000 psi. Hold your velocity to 1,200 '/"to 1,300'/" for best control of recoil. Another powder to consider is Primex 516 (LiL'Gun). Stay away from Longshot as it has a tendency to pressure peak. Use straight wall hulls!
We have drifted away from the discussion of bullet designs, but these are important suggestions for designing slug loads......James

nanuk

02-26-2011, 06:51 AM

Mr Dixie, I am also interested in what you have to say about 12ga loadings. As I cannot buy from the US, I am forced to handload.

I will pm you my questions.

and thank you in advance for your work in this field. You break ground for the next generation.

Dixie Slugs

02-26-2011, 09:34 AM

Of Course, I will help all I can! I have noticed that over the past five years there has been a increased interest in shotguns indeed. There are more reloaders working on specialized loads for shotguns. There always have been loaders of shot, but we see more interest in ball loads and multi-ball loads like Tri-Ball.
This is a healthy trend indeed, but there is little good information out there.
Regards, James

Dixie Slugs

03-05-2011, 02:05 PM

Interesting indeed! However, we keep going back to longer ranges. The EM bullets I designed are for reasonable handgun ranges in heavy cover. These bullets have not been designed for long range and have not been tested at over 100yards. We saw no in-accuracy in hadguns or rifles within those ranges.
Regards, James

Dixie Slugs

11-28-2011, 11:36 AM

Well Friends, The Dixie Crowd is back and we are planning to crank up production in the first week of Dec.!
Looking at the reults of our hunts on Florida Coastal Islands, I am more convienced (sp?) than ever that the most important factor in cast bullt design is the size of the meplat....no mater what the velocity and weight is!
We also shot a prototype extreme meplat .452" bullet weighing about 210/230 grs at a muzzle velocity in the high 900's muzle velocity in the revolvers.. There was a great deal of tissue damage and complete penetration within 75 yards on medium size hogs.
The real interesting firearm was the Uberti Remington 1858 carbine with a R&D conversion cylinder in 45 Long Colt using the 452" - 200 gr Laser Cast bullets with 10.5grs of Herco (Ken Water's load). Everyone wanted to play with that litle gun! That gun also performed extra well with the prototype Extreme Meplat bullet!
Another outstanding game load was the discontinued Dixie Tornado out of a Hasting 12 ga - 20" rifled barrel (scoped) on a Remington 870. The hog was hit about 100 yards on the tidal marsh - spun around - dropped dead. Here again that cast bullet in the older BPI sabot has a large meplat.
I have yet to see any loss of acuracy with these extreme meplat bullets, but there we no shots taken that were more than 100 yards.
I want to thank all the good folks/customers that supported Dixie in the past. We will continue to sell direct to the hunter!......James

1Shirt

01-23-2015, 11:33 AM

A most excellent thread, well worth reading all the way from beginning to end.
1Shirt!

gondwana

03-06-2015, 04:54 PM

Thank you James!

gondwana

03-06-2015, 04:57 PM