Gone overboard with heavy hard bullets

[sore shoulder]

Easy Sore Shoulder, easy. He's new here, and doesn't know who he is dealing with. I'm on your side, but its a new forum and we need to be polite to our new cousins.

-Tutt

It's never acceptable to come into a new group and start telling everyone they don't know what they are talking about. It's particularly annoying when it's not done intelligently.

Now, I do appreciate that not everyone is as direct as I am, and I believe the world is a better place because of it. However I am how I am.

I also suspect he is a reincarnation of an old troll, probably one of a handfull that have been banned here.

[Rimfire McNutjob]

Rimfire, regarding the Punch Bullets, I did do my own penetration testing with them from 20 ft into a box of 20 lb weight copy paper in a 454 Puma rifle. I compared it to a 360 grain Cast Performance bullet at less velocity (the PB weighed 316 grains). The lead bullets shattered, but the PB I could have reloaded and shot again. Made a big believer out of me, and that's why I use them as my "bear load" in my Ruger 45 Colt.

Excellent. I didn't realize they were 1/2 hard brass casings at 0.075" thickness as the article states. It's a nice, tough looking bullet at about 400gr in .458 as the article states it. I thought I read about someone on the board using them on the Africa trip a couple of years back. Might have been the old site though.

[piller]

Just my experience, and it is admittedly limited, but in thin skinned light game which is not really dangerous I prefer an expanding faster bullet. In my one and only experience with dangerous game, I noticed that the heavy for caliber, sort of slow bullets did more damage in that large animal. I don't wish to argue with anyone, but my results got my attention. I hope to someday try again and see what the results are. The best results were some very tasty steaks.

[CowboyTutt]

Rimfire, I would readily trust my life to one of these bullets in my 454 Puma in Africa. In John Linebaugh's penetration tests years ago, they performed EXTREMELY well.

Fact is, the story is sort of funny. I called John L. after one of his earlier penetration test articles and asked him "what was a Punch Bullet?" because the data was so intriguing. He actually did not remember at the time. He asked me to call him back later, and he would let me know. I did so, and he informed me that is was Kelye Schlepps bullet (of Belt Mountain fame) made out of turned brass and filled with hot lead under pressure to seal it to the brass case.

I wasted no time in calling Kelye and he helped me to develope a test load in 45 Colt since no one had done that at the present time (only 454). He actually took the time to try out my proposed test loads based upon an educated guess using H110 and got back to me by phone about their performance over a chronograph. I have rarely seen that kind of customer service in my whole life.

You could never do wrong with one of Kelye's bullets.

-Tutt

[CowboyTutt]

Pillar, what you experienced sounds reasonable. Pick the right bullet for the type of game you are hunting. Duh!

On the other hand, there is something to be said for "eating right up to the bullet hole!"

-Tutt

[Rimfire McNutjob]

Just my experience, and it is admittedly limited, but in thin skinned light game which is not really dangerous I prefer an expanding faster bullet.

You'll get no argument from me on that. I think it's a perfectly reasonable choice. As I mentioned in a previous post, my last deer was taken with a 270 Winchester ... not exactly a slow plodding round.

[JohndeFresno]

Dang, this is good reading!

Thanks all for your sage observations; and thanks, Jim T, for the link to your most appropriate article dealing with the subject.

[The Lewis]

+1 on that "Dang, This is good reading!"

[Bluehawk]

I have certainly enjoyed this discussion also VERY IMFORMATIVE
A few thoughts
OVERLY heavy bullets at lower velocity due to their weight can certainly have a lethal effect on game It does not take velocity AND it will completley penetrate . YOU DO NOT have to have a large or overy disruptive wound channel to kill big game cleanly or humanely .
MY arrows are over jsut about 700 grains they kill by hemorrhage ALONE the ENERGY a of the arrow is wasted due to the fact that it COMPLETELY penetrates the game USUALLY Death is VERY QUICK.
Wound channels are dictated by the muscle mass and density of the tissue as much as the velocity and the bullet shape and mass. A very large wound chanell will be created in a human as compared to a bear all other things being equal . They just dont have the same construction. Bear requires a bullet that will do more damage in the much more dense tissue than a human would require . A HUMAN may be more receptive to a light bullet that does not leave the body than a bear that requires a much more heavily constructed bullet to disrupt his tissue . That bullet SHOULD leave his body after passing all the way through.
Tempoeary wound channels that are NOT seen in the ballistic gelatin are interesting too and they are dependant on the material or tissue density that is bsing shot temporary wound channels are as much or MORE responsible with instant death than measureable ones after death ( Read DiMaio "Gun shot Wounds " he is the expert on human gun shot wounds ) MOST of my experience is wiht human targets not animals ( I only have approx 40 head of big game to my credit ) ON Humans I can tell you that I see NO Difference in human tissue destruction and death on shots that are "through and through " and ones that stay in the body if any thing the ones in the body are usually the ones who lived the longest
I AM NOT A DOCTOR ! I AM NOT A FORENSIC PATHOLOGIST I am a death investigator and an autopsy technician . BUT I have seen numerous gun shot wounds and destruction of tissue in humans and When im carrying im carring the biggest heaviest bullet in my guns i can get to get the job done cause they are the ones that are RELAIBLE
MY 45 I cary is with 230 grain HB or HP MY 10mm i carry is with 200 grainers or at least 180 grainers I do not think the lighter loads in either cal are as RELIABLE SUDEN STOP FIGHTERS as the big bullets AND THE BIG BULLETS SELDOM STAY IN THE TARGET
JMHO

[jlchucker]

I've used the Remington 405's and the Remington 300 gr bullets in my 1895S since the early 1980's and have never had a problem with either one. In 45-70 they are my jacketed bullets of choice, and I've tried Speer, Sierra, and Hornaday. While I am not an engineer, I suspect that Remington, over the years, has employed many in their ammunition division, as has Winchester. These companies have successfully produced excellent bullets and ammo for years. They stay in business by producing quality products. Remington corelocts have killed countless heads of game over the years--more than gun-magazine writers and armchair experts have seen.

[Rimfire McNutjob]

I've used the Remington 405's and the Remington 300 gr bullets in my 1895S since the early 1980's and have never had a problem with either one. In 45-70 they are my jacketed bullets of choice, and I've tried Speer, Sierra, and Hornaday.

At $28 per 100, I'm thinking they are going to be my jacketed bullet of choice too. I'm guessing that the Remington "Core-Lokt" and the Hornady "Interlock" are employing a similar method of core control.

Given the several recommendations from members here, I'm definitely going to pick up a pile and test drive 'em.

[Montanan]

The load that I have been using with this bullet is 45.0 gr of IMR 3031 with good results. I know I've commented in other threads about seeking data for a 430-gr WFN GC cast bullet, but that is for something else more defensive.

I was just going to order these thru MidwayUSA as they are $28.99 per 100 ct... nice price but the shipping is $14.08 so that brings my total to $43.07 They should just ship USPS which has two differant boxes that go flat rate for $8.95 I think I will just pay my local dealer who has these for $17.99 a bag with no sales tax. I thought I was going to save money with MidwayUSA but forgot about shipping charges. For those also interested, go there and read the comments on those that have used the Remington 405-gr JSP bullet, very nice reports.

[243dave]

I've got a question! Has anyone ever had one of the real heavies fail to penatrate because it tipped side-ways, probably due to being mildly unstable, too slow of a twist perhaps? I've read of such a thing, but never experienced it. Maybe you can go to heavy. By the way, great discussion!! Dave

[CowboyTutt]

Dave, that is a very good question. I have belonged to this forum (in this form or its original one) for a couple of years, and lurked for a year or two before that. A few guys here pre-date me by a lot and I will let them speak for themselves, but I don't remember ever reading of such an occurance. All modern 45-70 rifles use a 1 in 18 twist that seems to stabilize the original 500 grain round nose bullet very well. I have a Shootist friend who tells me this bullet is as good as it gets for long range accuracy. I'm pretty sure the 1 in 18 twist is slightly faster than what the Greely Formula would predict based upon some of my own experimentation with heavy bullets in 43 caliber, which is probably why it does work with the 500 grain and heavier bullets in 45-70.

But I hope to hear from someone else who has been here far longer than me!

-Tutt

[w30wcf]

243 Dave,
The large flat point really helps keeping the bullet going in a fairly straight path based on my testing in wet newspaper.

w30wcf

[Bramble]

With respect Nath, I do not think that you interprited my post in the way it was written. Perhaps I was not clear.
What I was attempting to point out that in even proven big game calibers one requires both penetration and expansion to sucessfully anchour an animal if the hit is not to CNS. This promotes massive blood loss and rapid drop in blood pressure.
By explaining my experience by accident with one of these calibers and the wrong (high penetration but non expanding bullet). I was attempting to explain that IMHO less than ideal calibers that have been made to acchieve long penetration by the use of non expanding heavy for caliber projectiles that may give less than adaquate performance on large game.
That they will kill is indisputible, however as in the case of my Blesbok it died unrecoverable in 12,000 acres of Mopane. (It was gone from the herd the next day)
On the 2007 Levrguns Safari, Marlin made nice one shot kills with a 45-70 with Leverevolution ammo.
From what I have seen clean pass throughs with non expanding bullets may result in lost game.

This whole issue was done in the early 1900's when the big game rifles went from solid lead and blackpowder, to NE cartridges and jacketed soft points.
10's of thousands of the largest creatures on the earth were killed in the next 40 years, nobody that hunted Africa or India wanted to go back to the old lead solids.
These current special 45-70 cartridges generate almost identical balistics in term of bullet weight and velocity to turn of the centery BPE cartridges. At that time such .45 cal rifles were considered small bores. The .577BPE class being mediums and for the big game (ele rhino buff) 4 bores were preferred 1750 grain heads @ 1500 fps.
That we are doing it now is because people want more killing power from the 45-70. Because its performance is marginal with softs from the wrong angles with (major manufacturer)factory ammo on the largest game.
As a solution I am working on Regan to build a .450 3 1/4 NE in a lever action, but he is not biteing at the moment
Regards

[Grizz]

nobody that hunted Africa or India wanted to go back to the old lead solids.
These current special 45-70 cartridges generate almost identical balistics in term of bullet weight and velocity to turn of the centery BPE cartridges. At that time such .45 cal rifles were considered small bores.

Apples to oranges. Generating identical ballistics is not the same thing as generating the same terminal forensics. That's the difference 'twixt then and now. The bullets you cite were dead soft lead, were they not? There is no comparison to today's hard cast bullets. Those bullets essentially perform as solids. You know, like the solids so highly regarded as DG bullets?

It would be much better to compare the hard cast lead performance to the brass and copper solids that are used in Africa.

As far as losing animals, there are too many variables to lay all the blame on the type of bullet used.

Grizz

[Nath]

Dear Bramble, the bullet failure or wrong choice you experianced in Africa was a full patch ROUND nose was it not?
To form an opinion based on such an experience to a .45 with a large flat nose INMHO is wrong.
Is it a general British thing about using SOFT lead to whack critters with (I have this argument many times with the licencing dept), you indicated thet it was a poor performer in the BP days? There was /is more issues as to why there was a general switch to jacketed bullets, smokeless powder being the main one created higher pressures so that meant making alloys or paper patch and then a copper/brass based jacketed bullets. There was a general decrease in bore size as the added speeds were recognised.
All over America and alot of other countries except dumb Britain they are still harvesting large game with BP and soft lead bullets but to discount a heavy slow wide flat pointed bullet is folly. That flat point still acts as say a hollow point target bullet that creats a cushion of air in front, only the big flat nose is causing a large bow wave in the critters flesh that then leads to bleeding to the same result, death.
I have not tested my opinions on large game but have on small game, I have used a full jacket R nose out of a Hornet on rabbits and yep the dog has more fun trying to find them than me killing them on the spot discounting head shots of,course.
But after a small experiment that was posted on here I filed the tips flat and exposed the lead core of which seems quite hard certainly not soft. A much better result was achieved but recoverd bullets from the ground revealed little if any expansion. This left me to conclude that the shape alone was causing enough internal damage so as to kill them considerably quicker than a R nose.
Nath.

[preventec47]

I've been away for a while but with a new reflection on the matter I believe
I will in the future distinguish the excessively heavy hard cast bullet users
as deep hole drillers. Nothing wrong with that, it is all hobby until you
meet up with a dangerous animal that wants to eat you. The way I see
it very simplistically is you get the choice of drilling a ten foot deep hole
of one inch diameter or a two foot deep hole of three inches diameter.
( dont challenge me on the specific parameters. I'm just trying to make a point)

By that I mean a 300/350ish grain mushrooming bullet that holds together
at higher velocities vs a 500 gr plus bullet that doesnt deform at all
and would shoot through three large game sideways.
To state another way, if a bear was charging me, I dont care about an
exit hole or whether it will bleed out and leave a nice trail to track.

That was what I meant earlier with the term lethality. A cartridge
choice that will shoot through a 4 ft tree will not create the
explosive and destructive splash 6 to 18 inches deep inside the
critter the way a faster mushrooming ( say 350gr ) bullet will.

Many have said elsewhere the reason why they use hard cast is
to prevent excessive meat destruction and my response to that
would be to shoot a smaller gun or lower power recipe if you are
trying to do less damage.

I'm simply saying again that if a bullet exits an animal with the
power to kill another two animals, then I dont think the choice
has been made for it to have been the most lethal choice
for that one animal. Forget bleeding and tracking and blood trails etc.

No one can argue that the faster mushrooming bullet doesnt create
a bigger internal splash after initial entry than the slower super hard
cast heavy bullets. So unless anyone here is shooting elephants
and rhino from the rear, there is little justification for the
500 plus gr deep hole drillers.. That is what I meant by going overboard.
( other than the bragging rights of shooting the heaviest bullets )

[Grizz]

No one can argue that the faster mushrooming bullet doesnt create
a bigger internal splash after initial entry than the slower super hard
cast heavy bullets. So unless anyone here is shooting elephants
and rhino from the rear, there is little justification for the
500 plus gr deep hole drillers.. That is what I meant by going overboard.
( other than the bragging rights of shooting the heaviest bullets )

You're still wrong in your assumptions and conclusions. You lack actual experience and are hypothesizing. Nothing wrong with that, but based on the experience of a lot of people's actual results your theory is groundless.

A. There are numerous examples of expanding bullet failures on game. There are quite a few examples of those failures on attacking bears and moose. Yup, moose are dangerous and manage to kill people easily when they've a mind to. There are many examples of the bullets you cite as more than adequate failing to kill bears, because they are not so adequate in real life.

2. I routinely hunted deer among a huge population of huge bears. I used heavy for caliber hard cast lead bullets and literally made tons of meat with them as we lived off the land for a great deal of our food supply.

Third, it turns out that the hard cast bullets are not only the closest thing there is to a sure thing, when a bear is trying to eat you, of making a CNS shot, they are also ideal at making venison. So it's a two-fer. Almost every deer I shot was DRT, I never lost one using heavy bullets, and they create A LOT LESS MEAT DAMAGE than the bullets you cite as ideal.

Finally, experience is a good teacher for those willing to learn from it. I learned a lot from those who had to defend themselves to outlive bear attacks. And I learned from those the bears ate. But I never learned from paper theories expressed as absolutes. I test out everything I can in real life, out there, subsisting off of game. That's how I know what I know. That's how I know what it takes to make a CNS shot on dangerous game. And that's how I know what results those same bullets obtain on meat making trips.

Grizz

[preventec47]

Grizz-
I dont question your experience but you always want to take
a position at the extreme of my assertions. Yes you are correct about
many failed shots with expanding bullets. Sure if you want to use
the example of varmint bullet or other cheap type bullets intended to
explode immediately but again I will state that I am talking about
tough built expanding bullets as shown much earlier that produce
a perfect mushroom and stay together for the duration of the
penetration. I have excluded the surface exploding bullet scenario
long ago.

I'm saying again, in general terms hunters with any given big bore rifle
has the choice of bullets that will penetrate 1 foot , 3 feet or 10
feet with the diameter of the wound channel inversely proportional
to penetration depth. Forgetting how many thousands animals have
been killed with sticks and guns do you agree or disagree with that
statement.

Assuming you agree with that and I dont see how you couldnt, the next
step is to estimate with a hi probability or 90 percent of the time
or whatever probability you want, what is the distance from point
of penetration to the most vital areas that are most susceptible?

Then I would say pick your ammo's depth of max destruction to most
closely match the depth of vital areas. No matter what number of
animals have been killed with guns, more have been killed with spears
so that is not really relevant. Once again. NOT talking about
elephants and rhinos. Nothing larger than bears and I doubt even
the biggest polar bears have any vitals deeper than two feet.

[Grizz]

One last try. I get your point, I just don't accept it.

bullets that will penetrate 1 foot , 3 feet or 10
feet with the diameter of the wound channel inversely proportional
to penetration depth. Forgetting how many thousands animals have
been killed with sticks and guns do you agree or disagree with that
statement.

I totally disagree with this statement. A boiler room shot with hardcast will jelly the lungs or blow up the heart like a pricked balloon. Where do you get this "inversely proportional" information. That's not my experience. You also make suppositions about wound channel diameter that don't apply either to bears or to deer.

I also require 2 holes for my hunting. I've had a 7mm rem mag bullet stop inside a deer. I ditched that gun as soon as I could replace it. In my book that's bullet failure, not only on the deer, but because of what it implies about that round on bears. And guide experience in Alaska bears this out. Pun intended.

Nothing larger than bears and I doubt even
the biggest polar bears have any vitals deeper than two feet.

Again, this is totally irrelevent if the bear is on you because you can blow the heart out of a bear and it will still live long enough to gut you.

I know people who have killed brown bears with .270s and 30-06s. That does not mean that I recommend doing it.

The statement you made is that people have gone overboard with heavy bullets and you have a theory that all you really need to do is calculate the depth to the vitals and call it good. I've tried to 'splain why that's woefully inadequate, at least in my area of experience. I stand by my statements, disagree with yours, and wish you good luck with your calculations.


Grizz

PS: It's not likely or necessary that we will agree about this stuff. Most of us agree with ourselves more than anyone else anyway. I am trying to make my opposite point of view clear and understandable. If you understand my point and I understand yours, then we've communicated sucessfully. I'm not offering advice. I'm just arguing with your premise. And having a good time doing it.

[Old Savage]

In Layne Simpson's Article about the records of a hunting outfit on 63 brown bears, the lowest shots per bear came in the 270, 30-06, 7 mag category. It was in either rifle or handloader - very intetesting reading.

[Wes]

I've been reading this with interest and finally have to put my two bits in. With my old 45-70 I've shot a couple truck loads of deer, elk and antelope. What I've found on the deer/antelope is that if you shoot the 400gr + bullets (I don't care if it's hardcast or not) behind the shoulder you'll find them dead eventually. If you poke a 300gr JHP in the same spot they are mostly laying where you shot them. They're both dead. Step up to elk and moose and the bigger jacketed bullets have a more pronounced effect.
One of the first critters I shot with the 45-70 was a good sized mule deer buck. I hit him behind the should with a 405 Rem JSP and watched him trot off 100 yards and disappear in the brush. Man was I shocked that he didn't just fall over! The next week I shot the same rifle/load into a raghorn elk and it knocked him off his pins at 80 yards. After that I just used 300jhps for deer/antelope and 350+ for elk/moose. Works good.
I've only used the hardcasts a small amount compared to the others, but it seems as if they do have more thump than I'd have thought. They are a little different breed of cat.
To get back to the original post, it seemed to me that it was aimed at non-dangerous game or more especially thin skinned game, and I'd have to say I agree.
Dangerous game is a different ball game. I still pack my 45-70 with 405 Rem JSP's and as much H4198 as I can stand to shoot when I'm in the grizzly country. I'm sure the hardcasts will out penetrate them, but we're talking about a close encounter with smaller Yellowstone grizzlys, and I would bet my life that a 405 will get him where he lives.
I have no engineering degrees or well thought out theories.
Just my experiences. Not intended to ruffle feathers.

[bj94]

I think there are valid points on both sides of this topic, and in my limited experience there is some benefit to high velocity expanding bullets. I think a high velocity expanding bullet will stop a deer or elk faster than a slower, larger, non-expanding bullet. Anybody with experience using both want to comment? For instance shooting deer or elk with a .30 cal. soft point AND a .45 Cal. hard cast?

BUT, back to the subject- more important than velocity or bullet diameter or expansion or whatever is PENETRATION. The bullet MUST penetrate to the vital organs before it can do its job. If the bullet stops short then it's nothing but a surface wound. Penetration is probably not a problem until you get to animals larger than deer. At a Linebaugh seminar some years back I witnessed various handgun calibers try to shoot through bones that John brought. I noticed that a hot-loaded .44 mag with 300 grin hardcast bullets would not go through the bones. So if your bullet hits the shoulder of an elk and doesn't penetrate, then that's a failure. Corresponding bones in a deer are probably not heavy enough to stop most big game bullets, but for larger animals they certainly can be heavy enough. If you might have to deal with heavy bones, then use the bullet weight and hardness that you need for penetration.

When is expansion beneficial? If the target animal is light enough that there isn't any problem with penetration, an expanding bullet should do better than a non-expanding bullet of the same weight. If the animal is light enough then both bullets will penetrate plenty.

I've read about the benefits of punching an entry hole AND an exit hole, and provide twice as many holes for blood to come out of. I'm not a medical expert but it seems that bleeding is still effective even if the blood doesn't come out. If the bullet penetrates the lungs, then the lungs fill up with blood. If the bullet penetrates the heart or the major vessels then the blood exits internally and doesn't complete its journey to the brain and other organs. Any medical experts want to add to this?

[TedH]

I will agree that internal bleeding can kill a critter just as fast. The reason that I insist on an exit hole is for those times, and it will happen to everyone that hunts eventually, when the animal is shot then proceeds to run out of your sight. Having a big exit hole to bleed makes for a lot easier blood trailing and higher probability of recovering the animal. Especially if it's a big fat hog or bear that have a lot of fat that will plug up a little entry hole right away.