Best bullet for Cape Buffalo

buy-a-donkey said:

Barnes TSX are absolutely fantastic bullets, but I switched to North Fork for one big reason... They are solid copper alloy. Copper is less dense than lead, thus the same grain-age bullet is significantly longer. This presents an issue when cases like the .458 Lott are already running compressed loads.

Click to expand...

While you are correct about copper bullets being longer, what many seem to fail to realize is that first, most copper bullets tend to like to be further off the lands than typical jacketed bullets so OAL may actually be similar. This does not address the compressed load issue, however. But, the second thing that most fail to realize is that you can go down in bullet weight 10-15% with the mono metal and still get more than sufficient penetration. When mono metals first hit the scene, they were in light for calibre offerings because that was all that was really required but shooters unfamiliar with them refused to used the lighter bullets because they were basing their decisions on typical jacketed bullet performance. Barnes has answered with heavier mono metals that serve little purpose other than feeding misconceptions of the public. Hornady has so far stayed mostly with the lighter offerings. The only downside of the mono metals is that they like speed and impact velocities should be above 2,000fps...another argument for lighter weight bullets.

I am +1 with you sheephunterab,

In other words that; The monometal expanding bullets are best, when impacting at rather high velocity.
If I ever end up deciding to use these rather hard metal (compared to lead) hollow point style rifle bullets for hunting (for instance, if my chosen PH insists that I use them while hunting with him or her), I will do as you described in your excellent post - select a bit lighter one than I would have chosen for a lead core bullet, to help keep the monometal bullet's impact velocity a bit higher.
Hopefully I will not get myself into that position because my personal experiences with hollow point bullets have led me to conclude that they are just not my thing.

The monometal expanding bullets work like a buzz saw when they work, which reportedly is most of the time.
However, just as soft lead core bullets can impact heavy bone at too high of velocity, resulting in their breaking up and failing to penetrate adequately, likewise a very hard bullet can impact soft tissue (small animal/rib/lung hit) at too low of velocity to activate the petals into peeling back as desired.
Also, Hannes Swanepoel of Hannes Swanepoel Safaris has told me that he has seen the mono metal expanding Barnes bullets almost always fail to expand when striking large, muddy animals at less than flat-on angle.
This he explained, has consistently has resulted in the sharp pointed tip of the bullet getting slightly bent over, so that the hollow point cannot fill with blood (required to initiate the critical first stage of expansion with any hollow point bullet).

For my money, I prefer the Swift A-Frame to any other premium expanding bullet but, that is not intended to be the Gospel unto all the world, it is only my opinion (and I wish all their heaviest A-Frames for each caliber were available in round nose profile, such as their excellent 500 grain .470 bullet is - oh well, their semi-spitzers nonetheless are quite excellent).
Last but not least, there is this quote from John Luyt of Duke Safaris: "I have never seen an A-Frame fail" (never is a pretty strong endorsement).

There are some guys who seem to believe that any new product just simply must be a better product.
And then there are skeptical geezers like me who, are automatically suspicious of anything new, generally avoiding it until it has been around for a long time and thereby has thoroughly proven itself.

Cheers,
Velo Dog.

Agreement with the monumental = lighter bullet for the application argument... Indeed, all might light guns (for up to elk) fire Barnes TTSX bullets that are lighter (i.e. 165 instead of 180 ect..) as I can crank up the speed and the bullet's construction can easily withstand the impact. Deadly, deadly combo...
However, for the DG calibers I would never go lighter in bullet selection. I always go with the heaviest for caliber bullet available. Granted, I don't shoot 550gr in my Lott (only 500gr) but the name of the game is penetration and there is "no replacement for displacement", meaning heavier is always better.
I would however feel perfectly well armed using a stoked and blazing fast .375 H&H with say 250gr TSX bullet vs the 300gr.
Something not hit upon so far in the conversation that I feel is the secret to DG performance is sectional density... Long bullets penetrate straighter and longer than short fat bullets. Using that argument, the Barnes TSX are actually quite good.

Velo Dog said:

I am +1 with you sheephunterab,

In other words that; The monometal expanding bullets are best, when impacting at rather high velocity.

Velo Dog.

Click to expand...

Rather high velocity is a bit of a stretch. It needs to be put into perspective. Most premium jacketed bullets do best above 1800fps....mono metals 2000fps.....it may be a 50-100 yard difference....at most. With my 250 grain GMX in the .375 H&H going a little over 2800fps at the muzzle I'm pretty safe out to 400 yards...likely the same range as a heavier jacketed bullet. Well beyond typical cape buffalo range that's for sure. I'd say mono metals actually expand more rapidly with soft tissue hits. Bone hits can do all kinds of weird things deflecting bullets...etc. Stories of "failed" mono metals are greatly exaggerated primarily by those that don't understand the dynamics of the way they expand. To say someone has seen them almost always fail on muddy animals is a bit of a stretch. I have no doubt it's happened but I've seen similar failures with all bullets. They are extremely rare at best. I shoot a GMX with a polymer tip that aids in expansion but I've killed plenty of animals with TSX and haven't seen more than one "fail" Not taking anything away from premium jacketed bullets as they do the job well too but there are is so much misinformation and misunderstanding surrounding mono metals.

So much of what we believe about bullets today, like the importance of sectional density, energy, TKO is based on unjacketed lead bullets. It doesn't apply to modern jacketed and mono metals, especially when comparing different types of bullets.

sheephunterab said:

Rather high velocity is a bit of a stretch. It needs to be put into perspective. Most premium jacketed bullets do best above 1800fps....mono metals 2000fps.....it may be a 100 yard difference....at most. With my 250 grain GMX in the .375 H&H going a little over 2800fps at the muzzle I'm pretty safe out to 400 yards...likely the same range as a heavier jacketed bullet. Well beyond typical cape buffalo range that's for sure. I'd say mono metals actually expand more rapidly with soft tissue hits. Bone hits can do all kinds of weird things deflecting bullets...etc. Stories of "failed" mono metals are greatly exaggerated primarily by those that don't understand the dynamics of the way they expand. To say someone has seen them almost always fail on muddy animals is a bit of a stretch. I have no doubt it's happened but I've seen similar failures with all bullets. They are extremely rare at best. I shoot a GMX with a polymer tip that aids in expansion but I've killed plenty of animals with TSX and haven't seen more than one "fail" Not taking anything away from premium jacketed bullets as they do the job well too but there are is so much misinformation and misunderstanding surrounding mono metals.

Click to expand...

Hi again sheephunterab,

In response to my negative information on this topic of "buffalo bullets" (parroted by me, from a PH you likely have never met), your retort: "bit of a stretch," leads me to suspect that I am beginning to annoy you, and for that I apologize.
However, if you should decide to hear it directly from the source, Mr. Swanepoel's email address is: big5game@worldonline.co.za (but I can't blame you if you don't - whatever).
I do respect your opinion and I sincerely enjoy reading your posts very much.
So anyway, I will clam-up right here and call it a wrap before I dig myself a deeper hole.

Kind regards,
Velo Dog.

No annoyance at all and I don't doubt your word that that was said to you but people do have a tendency to exaggerate a bit when talking about bullets they aren't fans of. Phrases like "almost all" and the such can often mean it happened once or perhaps it happened with some early model X Bullets. Lord knows they were plagued with issues. Barnes released them too soon. I thought we were having a respectful and productive discussion...no need to clam up. I'm just passing along what I know from personal experience on animals and a lot of testing in gel and other mediums. There are a terrible amount of misconceptions about mono metals and it should come as no surprise as they are relative new comers and their performance does differ greatly from the bullets most of us grew up shooting. I apologize if you took my comments to mean I was doubting your word as I wasn't.

sheephunterab said:

So much of what we believe about bullets today, like the importance of sectional density, energy, TKO is based on unjacketed lead bullets. It doesn't apply to modern jacketed and mono metals, especially when comparing different types of bullets.

Click to expand...

I think there is an awful lot of truth in that last paragraph. I wouldn't dismiss these long time parameters but I do believe they're a bit over emphasized.

PHOENIX PHIL said:

I think there is an awful lot of truth in that last paragraph. I wouldn't dismiss these long time parameters but I do believe they're a bit over emphasized.

Click to expand...

I will agree with you there. Sectional density still has some value comparing bullets of identical construction but of different weights but is basically useless for comparing different types of bullets. Each one controls expansion and retains weight in a different way and once you achieve maximum penetration, more penetration according to SD really doesn't matter. Energy is applicable in that you need enough for the bullet to expand and penetrate but the old charts for energy required to kill different animals are basically useless now that all bullets perform so vastly different. And TKO, well it is well past its prime. At one time big and slow was what you needed on big animals but once we wrapped copper around bullets and then started making mono metals, many of the rules changed. With bullet technology changing so rapidly and people pushing the boundaries of speed and distance, it's hard to keep up with technology!

sheephunterab said:

I will agree with you there. Sectional density still has some value comparing bullets of identical construction but of different weights but is basically useless for comparing different types of bullets. Each one controls expansion and retains weight in a different way and once you achieve maximum penetration, more penetration according to SD really doesn't matter. Energy is applicable in that you need enough for the bullet to expand and penetrate but the old charts for energy required to kill different animals are basically useless now that all bullets perform so vastly different. And TKO, well it is well past its prime. At one time big and slow was what you needed on big animals but once we wrapped copper around bullets and then started making mno metals, many of the rules changed. With bullet technology changing so rapidly and people pushing the boundaries of speed and distance, it's hard to keep up with technology!

Click to expand...

Yep. I think SD is presumed to be a static parameter when it isn't. As soon as the bullet impacts and begins to expand and possibly lose weight, SD changes with it. The dynamics of this will vary from bullet to bullet.

keep in mind we now have monometal bullets that will open at lower velocities. Peregrine bullets use a brass plunger rather then your typical HP. this brass plunger means in theory that it doesn't matter how fast the bullet is going to open to at least some degree.

I run 600gr Peregrine VRG3's in my 505 Gibbs at the leisurely speed of 2060fps at the muzzle. I have no reason to believe I wont get rapid full expansion on animals out to 100 yards which is the longest shot id ever even consider with this rifle.

here is a picture of what im talking about (sorry about the size I cant seem make it smaller):

Even Perigrine says they need an impact velocity of at minimum 1600fps. Any tough bullet requires some degree of speed to open but it does allow for use in some slower cartridges that more traditional mono-metals may not be as reliable in. It's an interesting concept for sure.

sheephunterab said:

Even Perigrine says they need an impact velocity of at minimum 1600fps.

Click to expand...

id be pretty shocked if their flat nosed bushmaster bullet didn't open quite well at even lower speeds assuming the SD is high enough. momentum is not going to allow the bullet to stop and once the bullet starts to open I doubt it will stop opening given its design (the opening is massive). I just checked and my 505 Gibbs load with a muzzle velocity of 2060fps still holds 1800fps at 100 yards according to Hornady's ballistic calculator so the slow load is still well above their requirement. in fact it looks like it holds 1600fps out to 200 yards which is far above and beyond what I would ever ask of that cartridge.

I wish I had some good test material... id be happy to test these 600gr VRG3's to see how slow they have to be before they stop opening. I would almost be willing to bet they open all the way down to pistol velocities (800-900fps) considering the cavity in my .505" bullets is as big or bigger then most HP pistol bullets.

-matt

buy-a-donkey said:

Agreement with the monumental = lighter bullet for the application argument... Indeed, all might light guns (for up to elk) fire Barnes TTSX bullets that are lighter (i.e. 165 instead of 180 ect..) as I can crank up the speed and the bullet's construction can easily withstand the impact. Deadly, deadly combo...
However, for the DG calibers I would never go lighter in bullet selection. I always go with the heaviest for caliber bullet available. Granted, I don't shoot 550gr in my Lott (only 500gr) but the name of the game is penetration and there is "no replacement for displacement", meaning heavier is always better.
I would however feel perfectly well armed using a stoked and blazing fast .375 H&H with say 250gr TSX bullet vs the 300gr.
Something not hit upon so far in the conversation that I feel is the secret to DG performance is sectional density... Long bullets penetrate straighter and longer than short fat bullets. Using that argument, the Barnes TSX are actually quite good.

Click to expand...

If they weigh the same, the sectional density is the same. The shape of a bullet does not alter its sectional density. A 400 grains short and squat bullet in a particular caliber and a longer 400 grains TSX in that same caliber have the same identical sectional density. What changes with shape is the ballistic coefficient.

over my head,i,just know what the bullet is that kills the best for me.

I just shot a Buffalo with a 470 NE of the 2 bullets recovered both where a perfect mushroom. I haven't got home yet but would guess weight retention at 95 %

edward said:

over my head,i,just know what the bullet is that kills the best for me.

Click to expand...

That's all that matters !

Spooksar said:

I just shot a Buffalo with a 470 NE of the 2 bullets recovered both where a perfect mushroom. I haven't got home yet but would guess weight retention at 95 %

Click to expand...

Bullets where Woodlieghs, I shouldn't try to write stuff after a 11 hour flight with no sleep

Velo Dog said:

Also, Hannes Swanepoel of Hannes Swanepoel Safaris has told me that he has seen the mono metal expanding Barnes bullets almost always fail to expand when striking large, muddy animals at less than flat-on angle.
This he explained, has consistently has resulted in the sharp pointed tip of the bullet getting slightly bent over, so that the hollow point cannot fill with blood (required to initiate the critical first stage of expansion with any hollow point bullet).

Click to expand...

That is an interesting observation. I have probably shot 100 or more hogs with monos, and dozens with the TTSX. Most of the big boars pushing 300# have been absolutely covered in mud, and you rarely get a perfect shot on a hog, mostly quartering. I have not seen this failure that he observed once. Do you think that the thicker hide has more to do with his observations than the mud?

The PHs I have communicated with over the last couple of years for Buff hunts almost all told me that they prefer their clients bring Barnes or A-frames.

Desert Dog said:

That is an interesting observation. I have probably shot 100 or more hogs with monos, and dozens with the TTSX. Most of the big boars pushing 300# have been absolutely covered in mud, and you rarely get a perfect shot on a hog, mostly quartering. I have not seen this failure that he observed once. Do you think that the thicker hide has more to do with his observations than the mud?

The PHs I have communicated with over the last couple of years for Buff hunts almost all told me that they prefer their clients bring Barnes or A-frames.

Click to expand...

Hello Desert Dog,

I can only submit an uneducated guess as to wether or not the thicker hide of buffalo plays a role in that particular PH's observations.
He is a friendly sort and if you get a chance to email him, no doubt he will be happy to comment on that.
big5game@worldonline.co.za

Also, I cannot remember if I had already quoted another Limpopo area PH, John Luyt (pronounced John "Late") within this thread or not.
But on the subject of projectiles well suited for Africa, John has said: "I've never seen an A-Frame fail".
If I was to hunt buffalo with a repeater or single shot, the A-Frame would be my choice for the all important first shot.

In my limited experiences with hollow point bullets, rifle and handgun inclusive, they have failed to expand now and then.
Therefore, I prefer plenty of lead showing at the business end of my expanding type bullets.
Fact is, flat nose and round nose JSP bullets are partially expanded before you even fire them, LOL.

My singular experience in seeing an animal shot with a Barnes expanding mono-metal bullet was with the original Barnes X and it acted like a military FMJ spitzer.
It was a 180 gr .30-06 vs a bull caribou.
In fairness, that bullet has been superseded by others from Barnes now and rightfully so.
Nonetheless, I have experienced no failures from old fashioned JSP bullets and so will stay with them for my hunting needs.
(The secret to success is to first, use enough gun and then also to avoid loading them past their velocity threshold).

One man's bread is another man's poison.

Cheers,
Velo Dog.

From brown bear to Cape buffalo one shot kills with my 375 Ruger with 300 grain Nosler partition . John