Impact energy VS Penetration

[norfolk shooter]

The Empire was built on cups of tea. When in doubt, fear, joy or any other human emotion tea is to be drunk.

You may want to change the brand.....

I feel your taking the thread down a personal avenue if you dont mind can you keep to the question that has been posed. If you dont have anything of worth to add dont bother. Equally if you want to question my courage feel free to pm me.

 

[Ridge Runner]

norfolk shooter,

Your thread goes along with my previous thread regarding the 1-1/2 : 2 rule; by which a bullet must be able to drop an an animal.

If an animal weights 300 pounds then the bullet/caliber should have a penetration/ punch factor of 450 to 600 foot pounds of punch at the appropriate maximum range the hunter expects to make.

Then there are the speed freaks, who believe the faster the better. That the speed of a bullet is enough to take down an animal regardless of how much the animal weights, because the speed of the bullet will give the proper penetration to get to an animal's vitals.

So: is it better to be hit by a Corvette traveling 80 mph or by a semi (MAC) truck traveling at 40 mph: dead is dead.

As long as the bullet is of; proper weight, proper expansion velocity, proper caliber, and delivered accurately to the vitals: dead is dead.

If a bullet's impact energy doesn't allow it to penetrate properly or the penetration is not adequate to do the damage to an animal's vitals.....then an animal will either suffer through and survive being wounded or the animal is left to suffer an agonizing death.

Thus impact energy and penetration: not impact energy vs. penetration.

Just my 2 cents.

 

[bruce moulds]

I have gutted many goats that have been shot with military ball ammo, either 308 or 223 or both, and recovered.
there was a line of scar tissue where the bullets went through.
the full metal jacket bullets did not expand or tumble, but had full pass through penetration, and probably enough energy to get the job done with a different bullet.
the bigger the frontal area with sufficient penetration will get the job done better.
some suggest that the bigger frontal area offers a greater energy transfer, but whatever the case it does more damage.
bruce.

 

[norfolk shooter]

norfolk shooter,

Your thread goes along with my previous thread regarding the 1-1/2 : 2 rule; by which a bullet must be able to drop an an animal.

If an animal weights 300 pounds then the bullet/caliber should have a penetration/ punch factor of 450 to 600 foot pounds of punch at the appropriate maximum range the hunter expects to make.
.

A valid point @Ridge Runner and I agree. Didnt stink of of approaching the question in that way. Based on that at 75 yrds I would be able to take a 2000lb bull if one should trot along. In the mean time I have decided to keep going with my 416 and IF a nice 500/577NE came up for grabs and I had the funds I would go for it

 

[IvW]

Extractors its a sabbati and an accurate one

I would sell it and buy a proper double.

I have never seen an encore but they call the little bits pawls. Being an engineer I have looked at them and put a few shots through the rifle and the are good as gold. Many makers including merkel and H&H make double in this cal.
As for speed I can keep up with a bolt action for 4 shots thats the most we have raced. But saying that in a close charge after the first two it should be over

A Sabbati cannot be compared to a H&H in terms of build and functional reliability. It is going to fail sooner or later.

No way a Sabatti with extractors and chambered for the 416 Rigby can beat a bolt that holds 4 rounds in four shots with this configuration. The cases have to be removed by hand before the reload.

416 Rigby is a great caliber in a bo;t action, 500 NE is probably the best caliber for DG in a double for a serious hunter or PH, 577 NE lacks penetration and the recoil is much more with a very slow recovery compared to a 500 NE or 470 NE.

 

[norfolk shooter]

I would sell it and buy a proper double.
.

Thanks for your input but like I have said already thats not what the thread is for . It seems you get joy from insulting people. I understand you a PH or so I have seen somewhere on the forum that you are?? Is this correct?

 

[Forrest Halley]

This thread has so far failed to address temporary wound cavity, permanent wound cavity, and fluid shock trauma/hydrostatic shock/whatever it's called.

I'm looking forward to reading about tales of the large meplat solids and the North Fork Cupped Point Solid which is a very intriguing design and off of course the Woodleigh hydrostatic.

Don't take any of this personally @norfolk shooter . From rereading the thread you opened the door for sarcasm when you mentioned our beloved Greta Thundertantrum...let it roll like water off the duck's...

 

[norfolk shooter]

Don't take any of this personally @norfolk shooter . From rereading the thread you opened the door for sarcasm when you mentioned our beloved Greta Thundertantrum...let it roll like water off the duck's...

Beloved!!!!

 

[fourfive8]

This thread has so far failed to address temporary wound cavity, permanent wound cavity, and fluid shock trauma/hydrostatic shock/whatever it's called.

I'm looking forward to reading about tales of the large meplat solids and the North Fork Cupped Point Solid which is a very intriguing design and off of course the Woodleigh hydrostatic.

Don't take any of this personally @norfolk shooter . From rereading the thread you opened the door for sarcasm when you mentioned our beloved Greta Thundertantrum...let it roll like water off the duck's...

I have some experience with the NF Cup Point Solid and it does seem to fill the gap between a true flat point monolithic solid and a controlled expanding soft point. My test results in wetpack media are nearly identical to the hunting field results with the CPS on both buffalo and eland. Judging by what I've seen with others shooting the Woodleigh Hydro, I'd say the CPS leaves a slightly larger wound channel than the Hydro but with slightly less penetration - kind of a long parallel shaped channel. An average controlled expanding soft point usually leaves a somewhat pear shaped channel narrowing to a parallel one as it slows and near its terminus. I think the theory behind all the modern cup point and flat point solids is similar. Form a bubble of gas around the front and sides of the bullet for the bullet to "fly" in as it travels through dense media. It maximizes the length the spin stablization is in effect while traveling though the media and produces a slightly weight forward form, both of which assist stability as the bullets slows and approaches its terminus of penetration. I think both Woodleigh and GS Custom use lab data supporting that theory.

In my experience, all the CPS tracks were very straight with the bullet ending nose end forward in each case. The amount of mushroom of the shallow nose cavity was nearly identical comparing the wetpack tests to both the buffalo and eland recovered bullets. Actually surprisingly consistent given the track through the eland involved nearly all the neck vertebrae from just under the chin to the rear edge of the shoulders.

Here's a CPS recovered from the vertebral column of a large bull eland just at the rear edge of the shoulders after traveling down the entire length of the neck 416 Rem, 370 gr with estimated impact vel of 2100-2150 fps. This small, flared profile of the nose is nearly identical in all instances. Weight retention is always nearly 100%.

 

[norfolk shooter]

I have some experience with the NF Cup Point Solid and it does seem to fill the gap between a true flat point monolithic solid and a controlled expanding soft point. My test results in wetpack media are nearly identical to the hunting field results with the CPS on both buffalo and eland. Judging by what I've seen with others shooting the Woodleigh Hydro, I'd say the CPS leaves a slightly larger wound channel than the Hydro but with slightly less penetration - kind of a long parallel shaped channel. An average controlled expanding soft point usually leaves a somewhat pear shaped channel narrowing to a parallel one as it slows and near its terminus. I think the theory behind all the modern cup point and flat point solids is similar. Form a bubble of gas around the front and sides of the bullet for the bullet to "fly" in as it travels through dense media. It maximizes the length the spin stablization is in effect while traveling though the media and produces a slightly weight forward form, both of which assist stability as the bullets slows and approaches its terminus of penetration. I think both Woodleigh and GS Custom use lab data supporting that theory.

In my experience, all the CPS tracks were very straight with the bullet ending nose end forward in each case. The amount of mushroom of the shallow nose cavity was nearly identical comparing the wetpack tests to both the buffalo and eland recovered bullets. Actually surprisingly consistent given the track through the eland involved nearly all the neck vertebrae from just under the chin to the rear edge of the shoulders.

Here's a CPS recovered from the vertebral column of a large bull eland just at the rear edge of the shoulders after traveling down the entire length of the neck 416 Rem, 370 gr with estimated impact vel of 2100-2150 fps. This small, flared profile of the nose is nearly identical in all instances. Weight retention is always nearly 100%.

View attachment 325431

I sure hope the new chap that has taken over north fork (moved to sweeden now) sorts out the website and will still make them

 

[tarbe]

Sometimes people are unable to read and understand what was written without filtering it through there own prejudices.

Two words; Bow wave.

 

[bruce moulds]

458,
you mention spin stabilization, and rightly so.
a nose on bullet is a must.
and stable in the air does not necessarily equate to stable in flesh and bone.
bruce.

 

[fourfive8]

Here's a more complete "picture" of the 370 gr 416 North Fork CPS. All impact velocities similar, ranging from about 2000-2200 fps.

Left to right as labeled:
Unfired, Wetpack media 25" penetration, Eland approx. 3 1/2 ft, Cape buffalo approx. 4, 5 ft.

 

[fourfive8]

Of all the wetpack tests I've done this was one of the more surprising. Usually a normal caliber and weight (like 180 gr, 30 cal) high power, controlled expanding, premium jacketed rifle bullet traveling at a normal 100 yd hunting impact velocity will penetrate, in my media, somewhere around 14-18". The media is always the same- bundles of 100% water saturated phone books with a bone simulation hardwood insert of 1 3/4 - 2" thickness placed behind the first bundle... or about 4-6" in from the entry face.

Just out of curiosity one day I loaded up an original Civil War issue 69 caliber US military rifle, an M 1861 Navy (Naval), aka Plymouth rifle, with a Lyman #68569 Minie' and tested it. The moderate FFG BP load used should have yielded about 800-850 fps at the media. The hollow based Minie's I cast for this rifle are of near pure lead, a nominal .690" diameter and weigh about 730 grains. The result was almost 20" of straight line, point forward penetration! Plus, as shown in the photo, the Minie' suffered very little deformation and nearly 100% weight retention. Go figure? Maybe a basic bullet penetration demo comparing the concepts of momentum to kinetic energy- I dunno?

 

[Forrest Halley]

Of all the wetpack tests I've done this was one of the more surprising. Usually a normal caliber and weight (like 180 gr, 30 cal) high power, controlled expanding, premium jacketed rifle bullet traveling at normal impact velocity at "normal hunting" distance (about 100 yds) will penetrate, in my media, somewhere around 14-18". The media is always the same- bundles of 100% water saturated phone books with a bone simulation hardwood insert of 1 3/4 - 2" thickness placed behind the first bundle... or about 4-6" in from the entry face.

Just out of curiosity one day I loaded up an original Civil War issue 69 caliber US military rifle, an M 1861 Navy (Naval), aka Plymouth rifle, with a Lyman #68569 Minie' and tested it. The moderate FFG BP load used should have yielded about 800-850 fps at the media. The hollow based Minie's I cast for this rifle are of near pure lead, a nominal .690" diameter and weigh about 730 grains. The result was almost 20" of straight line penetration! Plus, as shown in the photo, the Minie' suffered very little deformation and nearly 100% weight retention. Go figure? Maybe a basic bullet penetration demo comparing the concepts of momentum to kinetic energy- I dunno?

View attachment 325794

That's really neat!
That penetrated 20" of phone books at 100 yards? Makes me want to revisit black powder.

 

[fourfive8]

Yes, every time I think I have it all "figured", something like that result pops up. Makes me take a second look at material written by Selous about his adventures. Looking back... some of the muzzleloader terminal ballistics I've seen also fit into this discussion. The first really good mule deer I ever got was with a 50 cal TC hammer percussion of the early 70s shooting a pure lead Maxiball. Not an extreme charge IIRC, maybe 85 gr of FFg under the 370 gr solid base conical. At just over 100 yds and around 1000 fps that bullet went through that deer like it wasn't there. That squares with the above Minie' test. On the other hand, I also witnessed kind of the opposite result on another deer. A friend shot one with a muzzleloader at really close range with a fairly hefty BP charge under a 180 gr 50 cal pure lead roundball. The deer took off and wasn't found for several days. The ball's impact velocity was probably 1700-1800 fps at that close range, penetrated only to the surface of the shoulder blade and stopped there. When recovered it looked like a flat pancake.

 

[Forrest Halley]

Yes, every time I think I have it all "figured", something like that result pops up. Makes me take a second look at material written by Selous about his adventures. Looking back... some of the muzzleloader terminal ballistics I've seen also fit into this discussion. The first really good mule deer I ever got was with a 50 cal TC hammer percussion of the early 70s shooting a pure lead Maxiball. Not an extreme charge IIRC, maybe 85 gr of FFg under the 370 gr solid base conical. At just over 100 yds and around 1000 fps that bullet went through that deer like it wasn't there. That squares with the above Minie' test. On the other hand, I also witnessed kind of the opposite result on another deer. A friend shot one with a muzzleloader at really close range with a fairly hefty BP charge under a 180 gr 50 cal pure lead roundball. The deer took off and wasn't found for several days. The ball's impact velocity was probably 1700-1800 fps at that close range, penetrated only to the surface of the shoulder blade and stopped there. When recovered it looked like a flat pancake.

Now you're speaking the language of my youth. The mention of Maxi-balls brings a smell of sulfur right back! .490 round balls over 90 grains of FFG. I'm eight years old again standing there with my Dad firing his T/C Hawken for the first time. Then it fades to the smell of bore butter and that minty cleaner. Thank you for that.

 

[bruce moulds]

458,
most interesting.
years ago I hunted pigs with various 577 muzzle loaders and pure lead minies.
I used 180 to 240 gns of 2f. (dupont in those days)
I had to give up due to the bullets riveting and not penetrating much at all on their fighting pads.
maybe I should have tried 70 to 90 gns.
it sure would have been easier to shoot.
bruce.

 

[crs]

Forrest,
I have not shot any wet newspaper, wood, or jugs of water, but have taken game with the North Fork FPS, CPS and SS (bonded jacketed soft point) and found them all to be superlative WRT accuracy and effectiveness.
My CPS experience was taking down a large water buffalo at a range of 45 yards with my .405 WCF. The bullet pulverized the upper leg bone (turned it into bone meal) passed through the right side ribs, heart, left side ribs, left upper leg, and was found just under the off side skin. The buff hit the ground so dead that its head bounced upon impact. This story with pix was posted on the NF web site early on.

When I told Mike Brady my story, He said a FPS would have shot clear through and exited the body! I agree with him as a .458 FPS later did just that on a frontal brain shot on an ele. Fortunately, I have a good supply for my .405.

fourfive8,
thanks for the pix of the bullets in game.

 

[fourfive8]

Of all the bullets I've tested in wetpack media, one penetrated through both attempts at stopping it. It is the 450 GS Custom 458 FP Solid. Impact velocity of load out of the 450 Watts was approx 2150 fps to simulate a 50 yd impact. 1st attempt was with normal media of 100% water saturated phone book bundles with a 2" hard wood bone simulation placed between bundle 1&2. Complete pass through of 36" media length. I re-built the trough and lengthened it to handle 48" of saturated, bundled phone books. 2nd attempt with same wetpack/ wood bone media set up and same load was complete pass through. Both tracks were perfectly straight with the bullets exiting point forward.

I give! I believe it's safe to say, in that velocity range, that bullet has adequate penetration for any hunting situation I will ever need. Plus, getting enough phone books of the right size is not easy as the phone books in the test are a one-time-use.

Here's the bullet.
1st pic 450 GS Custom 458 FP Solid

2nd pic is of 2 bullets recovered from a bull elephant and an unfired 450 GS FP Solid. Bullet on left is an old poacher's or farmer's muzzleloader iron slug. Middle is 450 GS FP Solid from skull. Bullet on right is unfired 450 GS FP Solid. Wasn't my elephant but I was there for the process!

3rd is wetpack in trough showing set up before test shot- note the average premium controlled expanding bullet max penetration depth mark of 18"... A Frames, TSXs and the like.

4th is rear of trough showing 450 GS Custom FP Solid exit at the 48" mark.