458/470 vs 500 Caliber Stopping Rifles

rookhawk said:

well, you’ll need to get with the times because your bullets no longer exist, they are extinct.

In the olden days, a “solid” was a lead slug that had a steel jacket applied in the cup-and-core method but it was applied point-to-tail. In this case, the meplat at the back of the bullet had a hole in it where you’d see lead. Then a copper gilding metal was applied to the bullet so it wouldn’t damage the rifling during engraving/firing.

those do not exist anymore. Anywhere. The tooling isn’t running with any brand, although certainly most softs are made by that process, but without steel and they apply the jackets heel-to-nose with an exposed lead tip.

today, solids are monolithic, usually brass, copper, or a similar alloy. Hydro static shock happens with all of them, allow though a hollow point (non-expanding) creates a cavitation wave causing more sheer damage than a rounded nose.

by the way, the old solids failed because the lead would oooze out of the meplat and bend, thus changing course. That’s why mono metal solids exist now.

Click to expand...

I make my own jacketed bullets and I am familiar with most all the commonly used materials and processes for making them, and their various pro's and con's. With all due respect, while your comments about the superior qualities of modern monolithic solids are well taken, some of your points are incorrect, incomplete, or overstated.

1. "those do not exist anymore. Anywhere. The tooling isn’t running with any brand," This statement is entirely incorrect. Indeed, current production Hornady DGS solids, and others, are still made in the general way you describe the "olden days" solids being made. Picture below is of a current production Hornady DGS solid, still being manufactured by the hundreds of thousands today.



These type bullets, when well made with good materials and processes, have killed game with ruthless proficiency by the millions for the last 100 years, and will continue to do so for the next hundred years if using lead in bullets is not completely outlawed. They will continue to be made because they will always work as they always have, unless and until the price of materials changes drastically. For now, they are the most inexpensive, highly effective, solids to manufacture.

2. "today, solids are monolithic, usually brass, copper, or a similar alloy. Hydrostatic shock happens with all of them," While this is technically correct, "hydrostatic shock" generally is used to refer to massive temporary wound channels created by rapidly expanding soft-points driven to extreme velocities and is particularly effective for quick incapacitation of smaller and/or more thin skinned game like deer, and the great felines. Hydrostatic shock is minimal with solids, lead core or monolitic, to the point of having little to no effect on wounding or rapid incapacitation. The new genre of cup-nosed monolithic solids and broad meplat, flat nose solids make use of a principal called "hydrostatic stabilization" that pushes a relatively small hydrostatic wave in front of the bullet as it passes through soft tissue which makes it penetrate deeper and straighter. Expanding monolitic bullets like the TSX, do create hydrostatic shock as all expanding bullets do. However they must be driven to higher velocities to reliably expand, they generally expand less than premium lead bullets, can over penetrate due to insufficient expansion, and can penetrate off straight line if one petal detaches and others do not. All types of bullets have their specific pro's and con's.

3. " by the way, the old solids failed because the lead would oooze out of the meplat and bend, thus changing course. That’s why mono metal solids exist now." This lead core "ooze" and bullet bending is not at all common in lead core solids UNLESS:
A. the bullets were made decades before the cartridge was manufactured and/or fired, and the jacket material was compromised (weakened) by the process of galvanic corrosion between the dissimilar metals in the bullet jacket (steel, copper, and zinc) and/or:
B. The lead core was NOT bonded to the jacket, and/or
C. The lead core did not have sufficient antimony content.
To be certain some lead core solids did fail in just the way you describe, but it was definitely the exception, not the rule. The reason why monolithic solids exist today is not due to massive failures of lead core solids, it is because fully automated CNC lathes now exist which make the manufacture of monolithic solids an economically viable option. That coupled with the fact that there are known health hazards associated with lead and its mining and use in manufacturing is becoming an increasing financial liability within industry circles, and increasingly unpopular in political circles.

There never was a large scale failure rate of properly manufactured and used lead core solids, but monolithic solids certainly have their advantages. If I have a choice and need a solid, I would use a flat nose or cup nose monolithic solid on thick-skinned DG because it is more likely to penetrate deeper and straighter than a lead core solid, with a somewhat larger permanent wound cavity. I think round nose monolithics are on par with lead core round nose solids. That does not mean I would hesitate to hunt any DG or PG with a quality made lead core solid, where the use of a solid is advised. In some cases I would prefer a lead core solid if powder capacity was at a premium, like with my 458 Win Mag. I do make my lead core solids with flat noses though. Properly made and used lead core solids will still kill as well as ever, which is pretty darn well.

Yes, there is. But only if you’re the white hunter or someone who regularly hunts elephant or hippocampus on land. A .500 Nitro Express, .500 Jeffery, .505 Gibbs, .577 Nitro Express or even .600 Nitro Express is a really good thing to have when dealing with dangerous game in the thickets (esp. during a follow up job in low visibility situations). But only if you can handle the recoil (which a good majority of client hunters unfortunately can’t).

But vast majority of client hunters traveling to Africa will probably never be in a situation where they will appreciate the stopping power of the .500+ bores. For them, .470 Nitro Express is the upper limit of what most of them can handle (with a lot of people maxing it out at .416 bore).

I actually accompanied during an elephant hunt where both a .500/465 Nitro Express (the client’s) and a .500 Nitro Express (the white hunter’s) were fired at an inbound bull tusker. Both were missed frontal brain shots using Superior Ammunition (employing Woodleigh round nosed steel jacketed FMJ solids). But it was the .500 Nitro Express which actually managed to turn the bull. Something worth thinking about.

I’ve shot hippopotamus on land over the years with .375 Holland & Holland Magnum, .404 Jeffery and .600 Nitro Express (so far). I’ve never seen anything hammer them as aggressively as that .600 Nitro Express did.

I really like this quote from Sir Samuel White Baker in “Wild Beasts & Their Ways”:

“There can be little doubt that a man should not be overweighted, but that every person should be armed in proportion to his physical strength. If he is too light for a very heavy rifle he must select a smaller bore; if he is afraid of a No. 8 with 14 drams, he must be content with a No. 12 and 10 drams, but although he may be successful with the lighter weapon, he must not expect the performance will equal that of the superior power.”

And George P. Sanderson In “13 Years Amongst The Wild Beasts of India”:

“I advocate the use of the heaviest rifle the sportsman can manage upon all sorts of game. Yet it is not unusual to hear men express a decided opinion to the contrary, generally conveyed in the formula, "A small bore is big enough for anything." Such men should rather say, " I cannot carry a heavy gun," or, " I cannot shoot with one," than speak against them on principle.“

In the six years since my post a lot has happened.

1.) the cup and core Hornady solids (DGS) no longer have the infamous bonding defect.

2.) Woodleigh is in production and has US distribution again.

3.) More erratic results have come through regarding hydros in medium bore calibers.

4.) More research an noted problems have come up shooting some hydrostatic monometal solids in double rifles, contrary to the initial “safer at lower pressure” claims Barnes was making years ago.

I use monos in bolt guns and lead cores in doubles now. Chalk it up to more experience , more options, and more data.

rookhawk said:

In the six years since my post a lot has happened.

1.) the cup and core Hornady solids (DGS) no longer have the infamous bonding defect.

2.) Woodleigh is in production and has US distribution again.

3.) More erratic results have come through regarding hydros in medium bore calibers.

4.) More research an noted problems have come up shooting some hydrostatic monometal solids in double rifles, contrary to the initial “safer at lower pressure” claims Barnes was making years ago.

I use monos in bolt guns and lead cores in doubles now. Chalk it up to more experience , more options, and more data.

Click to expand...

Interesting. I wasn't aware the Hornady DGS ever had a bonding defect, infamous or otherwise. I knew the Hornady DGX had such a defect and was redesigned by bonding the core, which they should have done in the first place. It is more labor intensive and requires additional manufacturing processes, but Hornady, and unfortunately some of their customers, found out the hard way that cutting corners on DG ammo is a TERRIBLE IDEA.

Woodleigh is back in production after their facility fire and still making their very fine "olden days", gold standard, steel jacketed, lead core, solid bullet. This bullet has an excellent and well-deserved reputation on all DG. It has the thickest steel jacket I have ever seen on a commercial bullet. I add additional cannelures on long, lead core, bullets, especially steel jackets like Woodleigh and Hornady, to reduce bearing surface and therefore reduce chamber pressure and barrel stress. Monolithics must have these reduced diameter/driving band combinations just to make them work at all, at anywhere near acceptable pressures and velocities.

Hornady should also take a lesson from Woodleigh, Winchester, and others, and wrap that jacket around the lead core at the bottom of the bullet. Even with some level of galvanic corrosion or insufficient bonding, the performance of the bullet is retained. Again, cutting corners, when a little more attention to detail would make a good bullet a great one. Just ask Woodleigh, and the people who use their bullets. Woodleigh's are bullet maker's bullets. They do everything I would do.

Left picture - Hornady solid

Middle picture - Winchester Platinum (400gr .500 cal - cannelure added by me) Note jacket lip on bottom of bullet.

Right picture - Woodleigh - note bottom jacket lip and jacket thickness.



To the OP's original question, I think Hunter-Habib nailed it. I also think we have the best bullets with the best ballistics of any generation before us, monolithic or lead core, to make stopping rifles more effective than ever. Like you say, Rookhawk, the more real world data we collect, the more we can sort through the marketing hype of the bullet makers. On truly large and dangerous game, elephant, hippo, cape buffalo, there seem to be instances where multiple shots on the shoulder and through the heart/lung area has not stopped a determined animal, even using big stoppers like 505 Gibbs. On some occasions it seems, from first hand reports, that ONLY a CNS shot, brain or spine, with a sufficient caliber to penetrate either , will truly stop some animals. On many occasions though, it seems a similar shot from a lager round stopped animals when smaller rounds did not. So I want as many factors in my favor as possible. As a client hunter I think I would use a round like the 416 Ruger or 450-400 or 400 Whelen with best bullets I could make, modify or buy. If possible, I would want a 458 Lott or larger in my hand to follow up a wounded animal, even with a PH present and taking the lead. A follow up shot on a charging animal is likely to be a snap shot at close range, firing like a shotgun. No time to worry about recoil. I might as well shoot the biggest I can stand behind.

The largest I currently own is a rifled 12ga (From Hell), .730 caliber, using 3.85" brass cases made from 50bmg rifle brass on a 10ga frame with VERY heavy, VERY thick walled 24" rifled 12ga barrels. The frame and barrel are capable of withstanding 60,000 psi and is factory chambered for those pressures. It will fire a 715gr custom jacketed .730 slug at 2500fps, or a 500gr, .50 cal bullet in a sabot at 2700fps. I can make custom sabots to fire any caliber bullet, .500, .510, .577, .600. With that huge straight wall case, pressures are low, about 25,000 psi, fired cases will fall out of the gun, but recoil is stiff unless the rifle is weighted to around 25 pounds. Even then the recoil is not for the faint at heart. I am working on building a double. I am a big guy, but that would still require a need to find a PH with a gun bearer, or 2, and/or carry the thing on an ultra-light backpack frame, and/or go back to the truck for it. Probably better stick with my 458 Lott in a CZ 550. If the PH's stopper and another 458 Lott don't sort things out, its just not my day.

The only certainty, where STOPPING large thick-skinned dangerous game is concerned, seems to be that ONLY a CNS shot, brain or spine, with a sufficient caliber to penetrate either , will truly stop some animals. A 375 H&H, or 7x57, will do that if the shooter can brain shoot or spine shoot a charging animal . A close miss with a jumbo caliber is probably much better than a close miss with 375 caliber, but it is still not a certain stopper, all due respect to John Taylor and his KO factor. I have shot 100lb whitetail deer through the heart and both lungs, and still had them hunch their back, jump 3 feet straight up in the air at the shot, and run 40 yards before the keel over. It was dead on its feet, it just didn't know it. If you have a Cape Buffalo dead on his feet and doesn't know it, you might be dead off your feet by the time he does know it.

If it were easy, everyone would do it.