Buffaloes are tough

[TTundra]

@ActionBob has posted other failures with DGX Bonded. The PHs tell me they are much better but still see what they consider failures compared to swift and trophy bonded bear claws.

I do remember seeing that. Statistically I would expect to see more Hornady issues as they likely produce 10X the quantity and will undoubtedly have more quality issues. I have read and seen images of failures from every large scale bullet manufacturer. I do also remember seeing reports on AH of non bonded bullets being put in Bonded boxes as well when first released. That is a mistake beyond comprehension in the DG game.

I worked for the nations largest gun and ammo distributor for a time and the amount of Hornady ammo inclusive of the DG series we shipped was astronomical let alone components.

Just today my father purchased a brand new Ruger Hawkeye African in 35 Whelen. Bolt is absolutely horrid on it and he has a new 9.3x62 to compare side by side so it it confirmed. Ruger CS stated every bolt is hand fit and tuned before it leaves...obviously not as I felt it as well.
Point is the more you make the more issues you will see. Ruger builds a lot of rifles...

Im still curious as to more of the specifics to better determine the why it failed if not a manuafcthring error.

 

[Brian]

I do remember seeing that. Statistically I would expect to see more Hornady issues as they likely produce 10X the quantity and will undoubtedly have more quality issues. I have read and seen images of failures from every large scale bullet manufacturer. I do also remember seeing reports on AH of non bonded bullets being put in Bonded boxes as well when first released. That is a mistake beyond comprehension in the DG game.

I worked for the nations largest gun and ammo distributor for a time and the amount of Hornady ammo inclusive of the DG series we shipped was astronomical let alone components.

Just today my father purchased a brand new Ruger Hawkeye African in 35 Whelen. Bolt is absolutely horrid on it and he has a new 9.3x62 to compare side by side so it it confirmed. Ruger CS stated every bolt is hand fit and tuned before it leaves...obviously not as I felt it as well.
Point is the more you make the more issues you will see. Ruger builds a lot of rifles...

Im still curious as to more of the specifics to better determine the why it failed if not a manuafcthring error.

My pal bought a new Ruger Hawkeye about a year ago, terrible piece of crap. That is just a corporate choice.

Same with Hornady. It's all about the marketing with some of these big manufacturers not about the quality of the product. The consumer lets them get away with it and it is loved it in the board rooms, for a while.

 

[Kevin Peacocke]

My pal bought a new Ruger Hawkeye about a year ago, terrible piece of crap. That is just a corporate choice.

Same with Hornady. It's all about the marketing with some of these big manufacturers not about the quality of the product. The consumer lets them get away with it and it is loved it in the board rooms, for a while.

A bit off topic, but I wonder if Ruger 're-introduced' the No1 what reception it would have? It is truly iconic, it works, it looks good, and perhaps with a few tweaks like better sights and wood, even as options, it would take off again.
On our recent hunt my No1 30-06 took two impala, one by my buddy and one my daughter. Both declared that they love the rifle. It is just so right.

 

[Sideshow]

A bit off topic, but I wonder if Ruger 're-introduced' the No1 what reception it would have? It is truly iconic, it works, it looks good, and perhaps with a few tweaks like better sights and wood, even as options, it would take off again.
On our recent hunt my No1 30-06 took two impala, one by my buddy and one my daughter. Both declared that they love the rifle. It is just so right.

Yes but I’d say the bean counters would have a very big fat finger in that pie so you’re not likely to get what you are wishing for, as nice a dream as it is!

Gday slideshow

I’m guessing you’re relating to this post #126 on the hornady DGX failure ?

Let’s break this down & where one is with respect making excuses

Kevin Robertson with total respect that information is plain outdated
his knowledge fits well in with that era & is very sound on that but if one wants to move forward to the better results of today there has been a shifting of those great for the era knowledge base but in today’s world of understanding more the knowledge base has refined this to a better system of why things are doing what they are doing & a great one to research is sectional density of that era vrs todays terminal sectional density knowledge as that’s more in line with a pill’s characteristics of abilities & those even are probably outdated as I write this hmmm I wonder ???? Just ticked on something stay tuned as I think it’s already been done

Now we need to raise the bar & break things down rather than excuses is my plain & simple side of approach these things

Why do I say this?? Not to be a arse it’s because if you use a better bullet you just don’t get the level of failures up close as this whole process of making excuses & let’s hornady in this case ( if it was shot @ say 5 yards but wasn’t from my reading ) off the hook as we should be demanding the best & if one has to on a buff hunt go hang on a minute i better get back past 20 yards so the bullet stabilises is a absolute joke right

as we know one will take what’s offered & the bullet SHOULD BE UPTO THE TASK not that shit

Now I’ll also somewhat defend a company on testing a bullet in media it is important to get consistent results in the development of said pill as inconsistencies will be evident due to the angle the bullet impacts the media on
So yes a baseline is needed to take these variables out BUT now reality of what occurs & that is in the field you watch the better pills rise to the top under the “ not ideal” situations we as hunters will put them in & spike & I were talking about the Aframe so I’ll use that one
Which those who have used that pill will understand how consistent it is across various conditions & preforms very well in it’s capabilities in close for me of 7yards or out to 100 ish yards ( probably would work consistently past that but I haven’t tested that so no idea )

Once again I’m not having a go @ you I’m just trying to show unless we understand the better pills performance advantages one will get a higher percentage of less than ideal results & for that the dgx is not a top tier pill imo but kill it will as we just saw
Cheers

@Fordy definitely no offence taken, I find this fascinating a little bit like a crime scene or a good who done it and why/how.
That’s why I asked the question thanks for a more updated answer.
But have I got this right? You are saying SD and counting in velocity as the bullet reaches each step in its flight path ie at 5y velocity equals 20y v etc?
I think the failures are sometimes more interesting than the ones that don’t “ohoo it worked Again”!! (A Frame, CEB)
Looking forward to more discussions.
Cheers Sideshow

 

[Fordy]

Gday slideshow

@Fordy definitely no offence taken, I find this fascinating a little bit like a crime scene or a good who done it and why/how.

Cool & that’s a different kind of explanation on the subject but I tell you what that makes a huge amount of sense for me I love it

That’s why I asked the question thanks for a more updated answer.
But have I got this right? You are saying SD and counting in velocity as the bullet reaches each step in its flight path ie at 5y velocity equals 20y v etc?

Not from my reading
I’m sorry I don’t understand the above but potentially I know what I did which is probably the way I’ve wrote it ( I only got 2 % points above a failure in English @ school so I understand I’m not clear on my writing skills & apologies for that )
I’ll keep on trying to relay in a better way & thanks for asking for clarification as it’s important in my eyes

So take 2 on the following
SD
5yards &20 yards

SD I believe I should’ve been more thorough on my description as SD can be interpreted in a few ways
Standard deviation is potentially what i think you’ve thought my SD was about where I’m meaning sectional density that’s related to the projectile itself & nothing to do with velocity

If that’s the case Sectional density ( SD ) was in the era gone by a good measure of the ability of penetration ability which that is what Kevin Robertson often talks about in today’s world where the terminal sectional density (TSD ) gives us a better indication of penetration ability .

A easy hypothetical equation for this to be seen is let’s take 2 identical weight bullets in the same calibre one a expanding the other a true solid in a double rifle ready to shoot , the 2 bullets have exactly the same Sectional density prior to being fired

Now if one pulled both triggers @ once & the bullets hit the critter @ the same time the expandings Sectional density decreases where the true solids sectional density remains the same

That above is completely separated from the 5&20 yards as that relates to how the projectile leaves the barrel muzzle
Which we have been lucky to see due to extreme slow motion cameras catching this wobble as it leaves the muzzle the bullet takes a little time to settle that wobble down
So @ the said 5yard mark one just can’t get a consistent point of impact that is the same ea shot & why to understand the bullets capabilities this 5 yard mark is hard to get a true understanding of what the bullet is actually doing where if we move to the 20 yard mark ( I think 22 was the distance I was told years ago & recently used 25 yard as the distance ) the wobble has settled & now the bullet is @ a point on the impact where the wobble that dosent give us a potential false indication of what just occurred ( variability I guess is a better word? )
Now those numbers are what I base things off on the explanation I have been given but others may have way more beneficial information on those yardages re wobble of the bullet

Now on this yardage’s in testing a apples vrs apples bullet vrs bullet or pattern of the zones one gets a good idea in test media @ those 20 yards I mentioned where in real life testing in the field you see the better bullets still preform @5yard just like they did @20 yard where the lessor pill will give us erratic results @ that 5 yard mark

Now one needs numbers to fully see this but it’s one that puzzled me why I got the odd results of poor preformance on those in close results
Now another interesting part is the smaller the caliber the greater the less than ideal results occur on those real close shots compared to the big bores which I believe is where @michael458 research confirms the meplat size & caliber size just give a self stabilisation where as he calls them the rat calibers (375 especially lol ) needs a lot more going for it than say the .510 cal

In my experience you can get a slightly sloped meplat in the .510 & yet it will still track pretty straight where in my beloved 375’s you get the same slight angled & you’ll often see a turn
Turns can still kill well but a turn is also very close to a tumbling occurring & those tumbling are one that are totally erratic on where they end up & how they kill , so one may accept a turn or tumble but for good consistency a dead straightline bullet gives us the highest level of consistency

On the velocity side I don’t know what else to say other than its finding a bullets limits under various situations has proven to be very valuable in understanding & be wary of what some companies will tell you as just like bullets some poor some ok some good

Hopefully I have explained that in a better way ? If not ask away or if I’ve cocked up on anything above please point it out & explain why would be good as then I can learn a little more ( that goes for anyone who has a different view or better still facts as then we all raise the bar on a knowledge level together

I think the failures are sometimes more interesting than the ones that don’t “ohoo it worked Again”!! (A Frame, CEB)
Looking forward to more discussions.
Cheers Sideshow

x2
Cheers Fordy

 

[Sideshow]

Thanks @Fordy that makes much more sense think we’re now both in the same pub drinking the same beer.

The TSD double barrel description makes perfect sense. Really nice way of understanding it.

What solids are you used in your 375s?

If anyone feels this is deviating from the OP then let us know.
Cheers

 

[Jhsmith]

As per my other post about the new 500 Jeffrey acquisition a few of you asked, why the step up? It surprised me a little too, having always been a proponent of the 'enough gun, but not too much' tenet, but after our last hunt I just couldn't ignore the facts any longer.
I am only referring to our close group with buffalo results that I have personal experience upon, and here are the statistics:
1. Bull. 375 H&H. Soft. Gut shot possibly clipping a lung. 24 hr successful followup.
2. Bull. 375 H&H. Hornady DGX. Side two lung shot and plumbing. Dropped immediately and expired.
3. Cow. 375 H&H. Side chest, heart and lungs. Ran 10m, dropped and expired.
4. Cow. 375 H&H. Swift A frame. Frontal, possibly one lung? Set up ambush but bayed by dogs. 3 hrs.
5. Bull. 375 H&H. Hornady DGX. Centre chest frontal. Ran 10m, dropped and expired.
6. Cow. 375 H&H. DGX. Side heart and lungs. Ran 20m. Collapsed and expired.
7. Cow. 375 H&H. Swift A frame. Frontal. Ran, not recovered after 1 day.
8. Bull. 450/400. DGX. Side heart and lungs. Turned and staggered 10m. Dropped to second side shot to heart and lungs.
9. Bull. 375H&H. DGX. Side heart and lungs. Dropped, but got up again. Second shot heart and lungs. 375 H&H. DGS. Dropped again, but got up. Third shot. 450/400. DGX. Chest. Dropped, tried to get up. 5th shot 450/400. DGS. Chest. Tried to get up. Sixth shot. 450/400. DGS. Frontal brain shot, finally finished it.
10. Cow. 375 H&H. DGX. Frontal, possibly a bit high. Took off and ran, but rested at least four times in dense bush, no second shot possible. Copious blood, including a little pink blood initially so possibly a nicked a lung. Followed up the next day. Another three resting places observed with blood. Then blood dried up. Not recovered despite thorough search. No vultures.
11. Bull. 375 H&H. DGX. Frontal. Ran, no blood for 200 metres or so. Then minor spots of non-lung blood. Too dark to follow. Followup the following day. Blood dried up, but dragging the right hind leg. Set up ambush and charged from 12 metres. Initial heart lung side shot as it got up from a 500 Jeffrey solid. Then a 375 H&H DGX to the neck. Then another 500 Jeffrey solid quartering as it came around. Then a 450/400 DGX frontal. Then it dropped at 4 metres. Then a 500 Jeffrey and a 450/400 into the neck from above at 4m ended it.
The initial 375 H&H damaged the front leg and broke the back one, maybe ran down the side?

So in summary;
Three of the 375 side chest shots were one shot quick kills.
The 450/400 side chest shot was a 'one shot' quick kill.
One of the 375 frontal shots was a one shot kill.
Four of the 375 frontal shots were not killed outright, two were recovered on followup, two lost.
One of the 375 gut shots resulted in a 24 hr followup
One 375 side chest shot dropped, but took a lot of finishing off.

Conclusion:
375 H&H worked well for pefrect side chest heart and lung shots, but not well on frontal shots.
450/400 worked well on perfect side chest shot.

The sample is small I know, but for me it is enough. Not all shots will be perfect side heart lung and the problem stems as much from a poor first shot as from ineffective bullet performance. My kids will be hunting buff more and more with my equipment so I am opting for something to absolutely monimise risk. To me that is a lot of gun topped with a good DG scope and equipment wise that is as much as I can do. The rest is down to training and practice

As per my other post about the new 500 Jeffrey acquisition a few of you asked, why the step up? It surprised me a little too, having always been a proponent of the 'enough gun, but not too much' tenet, but after our last hunt I just couldn't ignore the facts any longer.
I am only referring to our close group with buffalo results that I have personal experience upon, and here are the statistics:
1. Bull. 375 H&H. Soft. Gut shot possibly clipping a lung. 24 hr successful followup.
2. Bull. 375 H&H. Hornady DGX. Side two lung shot and plumbing. Dropped immediately and expired.
3. Cow. 375 H&H. Side chest, heart and lungs. Ran 10m, dropped and expired.
4. Cow. 375 H&H. Swift A frame. Frontal, possibly one lung? Set up ambush but bayed by dogs. 3 hrs.
5. Bull. 375 H&H. Hornady DGX. Centre chest frontal. Ran 10m, dropped and expired.
6. Cow. 375 H&H. DGX. Side heart and lungs. Ran 20m. Collapsed and expired.
7. Cow. 375 H&H. Swift A frame. Frontal. Ran, not recovered after 1 day.
8. Bull. 450/400. DGX. Side heart and lungs. Turned and staggered 10m. Dropped to second side shot to heart and lungs.
9. Bull. 375H&H. DGX. Side heart and lungs. Dropped, but got up again. Second shot heart and lungs. 375 H&H. DGS. Dropped again, but got up. Third shot. 450/400. DGX. Chest. Dropped, tried to get up. 5th shot 450/400. DGS. Chest. Tried to get up. Sixth shot. 450/400. DGS. Frontal brain shot, finally finished it.
10. Cow. 375 H&H. DGX. Frontal, possibly a bit high. Took off and ran, but rested at least four times in dense bush, no second shot possible. Copious blood, including a little pink blood initially so possibly a nicked a lung. Followed up the next day. Another three resting places observed with blood. Then blood dried up. Not recovered despite thorough search. No vultures.
11. Bull. 375 H&H. DGX. Frontal. Ran, no blood for 200 metres or so. Then minor spots of non-lung blood. Too dark to follow. Followup the following day. Blood dried up, but dragging the right hind leg. Set up ambush and charged from 12 metres. Initial heart lung side shot as it got up from a 500 Jeffrey solid. Then a 375 H&H DGX to the neck. Then another 500 Jeffrey solid quartering as it came around. Then a 450/400 DGX frontal. Then it dropped at 4 metres. Then a 500 Jeffrey and a 450/400 into the neck from above at 4m ended it.
The initial 375 H&H damaged the front leg and broke the back one, maybe ran down the side?

So in summary;
Three of the 375 side chest shots were one shot quick kills.
The 450/400 side chest shot was a 'one shot' quick kill.
One of the 375 frontal shots was a one shot kill.
Four of the 375 frontal shots were not killed outright, two were recovered on followup, two lost.
One of the 375 gut shots resulted in a 24 hr followup
One 375 side chest shot dropped, but took a lot of finishing off.

Conclusion:
375 H&H worked well for pefrect side chest heart and lung shots, but not well on frontal shots.
450/400 worked well on perfect side chest shot.

The sample is small I know, but for me it is enough. Not all shots will be perfect side heart lung and the problem stems as much from a poor first shot as from ineffective bullet performance. My kids will be hunting buff more and more with my equipment so I am opting for something to absolutely monimise risk. To me that is a lot of gun topped with a good DG scope and equipment wise that is as much as I can do. The rest is down to training and practice.

Good post Kevin.
Lots of useful information.
Please post another table at the end of this season.

As per my other post about the new 500 Jeffrey acquisition a few of you asked, why the step up? It surprised me a little too, having always been a proponent of the 'enough gun, but not too much' tenet, but after our last hunt I just couldn't ignore the facts any longer.
I am only referring to our close group with buffalo results that I have personal experience upon, and here are the statistics:
1. Bull. 375 H&H. Soft. Gut shot possibly clipping a lung. 24 hr successful followup.
2. Bull. 375 H&H. Hornady DGX. Side two lung shot and plumbing. Dropped immediately and expired.
3. Cow. 375 H&H. Side chest, heart and lungs. Ran 10m, dropped and expired.
4. Cow. 375 H&H. Swift A frame. Frontal, possibly one lung? Set up ambush but bayed by dogs. 3 hrs.
5. Bull. 375 H&H. Hornady DGX. Centre chest frontal. Ran 10m, dropped and expired.
6. Cow. 375 H&H. DGX. Side heart and lungs. Ran 20m. Collapsed and expired.
7. Cow. 375 H&H. Swift A frame. Frontal. Ran, not recovered after 1 day.
8. Bull. 450/400. DGX. Side heart and lungs. Turned and staggered 10m. Dropped to second side shot to heart and lungs.
9. Bull. 375H&H. DGX. Side heart and lungs. Dropped, but got up again. Second shot heart and lungs. 375 H&H. DGS. Dropped again, but got up. Third shot. 450/400. DGX. Chest. Dropped, tried to get up. 5th shot 450/400. DGS. Chest. Tried to get up. Sixth shot. 450/400. DGS. Frontal brain shot, finally finished it.
10. Cow. 375 H&H. DGX. Frontal, possibly a bit high. Took off and ran, but rested at least four times in dense bush, no second shot possible. Copious blood, including a little pink blood initially so possibly a nicked a lung. Followed up the next day. Another three resting places observed with blood. Then blood dried up. Not recovered despite thorough search. No vultures.
11. Bull. 375 H&H. DGX. Frontal. Ran, no blood for 200 metres or so. Then minor spots of non-lung blood. Too dark to follow. Followup the following day. Blood dried up, but dragging the right hind leg. Set up ambush and charged from 12 metres. Initial heart lung side shot as it got up from a 500 Jeffrey solid. Then a 375 H&H DGX to the neck. Then another 500 Jeffrey solid quartering as it came around. Then a 450/400 DGX frontal. Then it dropped at 4 metres. Then a 500 Jeffrey and a 450/400 into the neck from above at 4m ended it.
The initial 375 H&H damaged the front leg and broke the back one, maybe ran down the side?

So in summary;
Three of the 375 side chest shots were one shot quick kills.
The 450/400 side chest shot was a 'one shot' quick kill.
One of the 375 frontal shots was a one shot kill.
Four of the 375 frontal shots were not killed outright, two were recovered on followup, two lost.
One of the 375 gut shots resulted in a 24 hr followup
One 375 side chest shot dropped, but took a lot of finishing off.

Conclusion:
375 H&H worked well for pefrect side chest heart and lung shots, but not well on frontal shots.
450/400 worked well on perfect side chest shot.

The sample is small I know, but for me it is enough. Not all shots will be perfect side heart lung and the problem stems as much from a poor first shot as from ineffective bullet performance. My kids will be hunting buff more and more with my equipment so I am opting for something to absolutely monimise risk. To me that is a lot of gun topped with a good DG scope and equipment wise that is as much as I can do. The rest is down to training and practice.

Great post Kevin.
Lots of useful information.
Please post another table at the end of this season.

 

[Fordy]

Gday sideshow
Totally with you on this

If anyone feels this is deviating from the OP then let us know.
Cheers

Thanks @Fordy that makes much more sense think we’re now both in the same pub drinking the same beer.

The TSD double barrel description makes perfect sense. Really nice way of understanding it.

Cool

What solids are you used in your 375s?

Nothing I’m 100% happy with actually probably around 90% happy but the main one I use is the woodleigh hydro in the 300 gr model

If the 500 Jeffery solids work in critters ( it’s worked in media ) I’ll scale these to 375 & if the same traits are seen as the Jeffery’s that’s what I will be using without a doubt

Time will tell but the Jeffery needs completion first

Cheers

 

[Sideshow]

Nothing I’m 100% happy with actually probably around 90% happy but the main one I use is the woodleigh hydro in the 300 gr model

If the 500 Jeffery solids work in critters ( it’s worked in media ) I’ll scale these to 375 & if the same traits are seen as the Jeffery’s that’s what I will be using without a doubt

Time will tell but the Jeffery needs completion first

Cheers

You building a Jeffery’s? Got any pics?

 

[Brian]

Sideshow,
My 50-110 with specialty like your Hydro, knocks cape buffalo down MUCH quicker that with a .375 HH with same quality of bullets. And my 50-110 is at least 20% slower that your Jeffery. You will be very happy!

 

[Fordy]

Gday sideshow
My Jeffery is pictured in my avatar & is just a sako but I took the scope off it not because it’s no good on it as I loved my swaro on it but on running shots & up close nothing beats a fed dot imo

I’d say where I’m not fully understandable & our wires may have crossed is I’m tinkering with ideas on new bullet designs & just followed on with the 375 that have shown the same traits as the .510 cal & man alive they are easy to shoot & I’ll tell in a few days wether they pass those tests in critters or not & are worthy of moz in July for elephant & whatever else I get lucky with

So far it’s one that’s going to have a few people understanding why I I’m not worried on getting called a crazy taswegian lol

Cheers

 

[BruceS]

As per my other post about the new 500 Jeffrey acquisition a few of you asked, why the step up? It surprised me a little too, having always been a proponent of the 'enough gun, but not too much' tenet, but after our last hunt I just couldn't ignore the facts any longer.
I am only referring to our close group with buffalo results that I have personal experience upon, and here are the statistics:
1. Bull. 375 H&H. Soft. Gut shot possibly clipping a lung. 24 hr successful followup.
2. Bull. 375 H&H. Hornady DGX. Side two lung shot and plumbing. Dropped immediately and expired.
3. Cow. 375 H&H. Side chest, heart and lungs. Ran 10m, dropped and expired.
4. Cow. 375 H&H. Swift A frame. Frontal, possibly one lung? Set up ambush but bayed by dogs. 3 hrs.
5. Bull. 375 H&H. Hornady DGX. Centre chest frontal. Ran 10m, dropped and expired.
6. Cow. 375 H&H. DGX. Side heart and lungs. Ran 20m. Collapsed and expired.
7. Cow. 375 H&H. Swift A frame. Frontal. Ran, not recovered after 1 day.
8. Bull. 450/400. DGX. Side heart and lungs. Turned and staggered 10m. Dropped to second side shot to heart and lungs.
9. Bull. 375H&H. DGX. Side heart and lungs. Dropped, but got up again. Second shot heart and lungs. 375 H&H. DGS. Dropped again, but got up. Third shot. 450/400. DGX. Chest. Dropped, tried to get up. 5th shot 450/400. DGS. Chest. Tried to get up. Sixth shot. 450/400. DGS. Frontal brain shot, finally finished it.
10. Cow. 375 H&H. DGX. Frontal, possibly a bit high. Took off and ran, but rested at least four times in dense bush, no second shot possible. Copious blood, including a little pink blood initially so possibly a nicked a lung. Followed up the next day. Another three resting places observed with blood. Then blood dried up. Not recovered despite thorough search. No vultures.
11. Bull. 375 H&H. DGX. Frontal. Ran, no blood for 200 metres or so. Then minor spots of non-lung blood. Too dark to follow. Followup the following day. Blood dried up, but dragging the right hind leg. Set up ambush and charged from 12 metres. Initial heart lung side shot as it got up from a 500 Jeffrey solid. Then a 375 H&H DGX to the neck. Then another 500 Jeffrey solid quartering as it came around. Then a 450/400 DGX frontal. Then it dropped at 4 metres. Then a 500 Jeffrey and a 450/400 into the neck from above at 4m ended it.
The initial 375 H&H damaged the front leg and broke the back one, maybe ran down the side?

So in summary;
Three of the 375 side chest shots were one shot quick kills.
The 450/400 side chest shot was a 'one shot' quick kill.
One of the 375 frontal shots was a one shot kill.
Four of the 375 frontal shots were not killed outright, two were recovered on followup, two lost.
One of the 375 gut shots resulted in a 24 hr followup
One 375 side chest shot dropped, but took a lot of finishing off.

Conclusion:
375 H&H worked well for pefrect side chest heart and lung shots, but not well on frontal shots.
450/400 worked well on perfect side chest shot.

The sample is small I know, but for me it is enough. Not all shots will be perfect side heart lung and the problem stems as much from a poor first shot as from ineffective bullet performance. My kids will be hunting buff more and more with my equipment so I am opting for something to absolutely monimise risk. To me that is a lot of gun topped with a good DG scope and equipment wise that is as much as I can do. The rest is down to training and practice.

Good info. Not a fan of frontal shots as a first shot. With a perfectly placed shot, almost any caliber will work. However crap happens and I like to be prepared. My 450Ackley is my choice but I would love a 500.

 

[deewayne2003]

It's often said in Auto Racing, there is no substitute for cubic inches.

I believe you mean……

There is no replacement for displacement!

 

[Sideshow]

Sideshow,
My 50-110 with specialty like your Hydro, knocks cape buffalo down MUCH quicker that with a .375 HH with same quality of bullets. And my 50-110 is at least 20% slower that your Jeffery. You will be very happy!

Had to look that one up as I'd not heard of that round before. Cheers

 

[Sideshow]

Gday sideshow
My Jeffery is pictured in my avatar & is just a sako but I took the scope off it not because it’s no good on it as I loved my swaro on it but on running shots & up close nothing beats a fed dot imo

I’d say where I’m not fully understandable & our wires may have crossed is I’m tinkering with ideas on new bullet designs & just followed on with the 375 that have shown the same traits as the .510 cal & man alive they are easy to shoot & I’ll tell in a few days wether they pass those tests in critters or not & are worthy of moz in July for elephant & whatever else I get lucky with

So far it’s one that’s going to have a few people understanding why I I’m not worried on getting called a crazy taswegian lol

Cheers

Good luck for Moz Hope you have a ball. Never got there as they where still having a bit of a dispute going. But looks like the country has come back in leaps and bounds since then. Look forward to your report!

 

[Fordy]

Good luck for Moz Hope you have a ball. Never got there as they where still having a bit of a dispute going. But looks like the country has come back in leaps and bounds since then. Look forward to your report!

I’ll probably do 2 reports as one on the journey & events themselves
The other on on the prfformsnce of the pills used themselves the later will be more detailed if we take critters & one I hope shuts the door on a lot of questions I’ve had bugging me for probably close to 40 years

Time will tell on that & a lot hopefully also learned in next week as
In camel country after a few hours zzz & a bit more driving then it’s game on lol
Catch you on the flip side till I can get back into reception range
Cheers

 

[Brian]

After 19 cape buffalo;
- I love the 500's for buffalo, has to be a premium bullet, load it down a bit and it's still a hammer.
- I Love the frontal chest shot, it's like a box 4" wide, 6' tall, easy shot at 50 yds.
- Shot placement is important? Duh... that's like saying it's important keep the car on the road.
Happy hunting.

 

[blackpowder12bore]

As per my other post about the new 500 Jeffrey acquisition a few of you asked, why the step up? It surprised me a little too, having always been a proponent of the 'enough gun, but not too much' tenet, but after our last hunt I just couldn't ignore the facts any longer.
I am only referring to our close group with buffalo results that I have personal experience upon, and here are the statistics:
1. Bull. 375 H&H. Soft. Gut shot possibly clipping a lung. 24 hr successful followup.
2. Bull. 375 H&H. Hornady DGX. Side two lung shot and plumbing. Dropped immediately and expired.
3. Cow. 375 H&H. Side chest, heart and lungs. Ran 10m, dropped and expired.
4. Cow. 375 H&H. Swift A frame. Frontal, possibly one lung? Set up ambush but bayed by dogs. 3 hrs.
5. Bull. 375 H&H. Hornady DGX. Centre chest frontal. Ran 10m, dropped and expired.
6. Cow. 375 H&H. DGX. Side heart and lungs. Ran 20m. Collapsed and expired.
7. Cow. 375 H&H. Swift A frame. Frontal. Ran, not recovered after 1 day.
8. Bull. 450/400. DGX. Side heart and lungs. Turned and staggered 10m. Dropped to second side shot to heart and lungs.
9. Bull. 375H&H. DGX. Side heart and lungs. Dropped, but got up again. Second shot heart and lungs. 375 H&H. DGS. Dropped again, but got up. Third shot. 450/400. DGX. Chest. Dropped, tried to get up. 5th shot 450/400. DGS. Chest. Tried to get up. Sixth shot. 450/400. DGS. Frontal brain shot, finally finished it.
10. Cow. 375 H&H. DGX. Frontal, possibly a bit high. Took off and ran, but rested at least four times in dense bush, no second shot possible. Copious blood, including a little pink blood initially so possibly a nicked a lung. Followed up the next day. Another three resting places observed with blood. Then blood dried up. Not recovered despite thorough search. No vultures.
11. Bull. 375 H&H. DGX. Frontal. Ran, no blood for 200 metres or so. Then minor spots of non-lung blood. Too dark to follow. Followup the following day. Blood dried up, but dragging the right hind leg. Set up ambush and charged from 12 metres. Initial heart lung side shot as it got up from a 500 Jeffrey solid. Then a 375 H&H DGX to the neck. Then another 500 Jeffrey solid quartering as it came around. Then a 450/400 DGX frontal. Then it dropped at 4 metres. Then a 500 Jeffrey and a 450/400 into the neck from above at 4m ended it.
The initial 375 H&H damaged the front leg and broke the back one, maybe ran down the side?

So in summary;
Three of the 375 side chest shots were one shot quick kills.
The 450/400 side chest shot was a 'one shot' quick kill.
One of the 375 frontal shots was a one shot kill.
Four of the 375 frontal shots were not killed outright, two were recovered on followup, two lost.
One of the 375 gut shots resulted in a 24 hr followup
One 375 side chest shot dropped, but took a lot of finishing off.

Conclusion:
375 H&H worked well for pefrect side chest heart and lung shots, but not well on frontal shots.
450/400 worked well on perfect side chest shot.

The sample is small I know, but for me it is enough. Not all shots will be perfect side heart lung and the problem stems as much from a poor first shot as from ineffective bullet performance. My kids will be hunting buff more and more with my equipment so I am opting for something to absolutely monimise risk. To me that is a lot of gun topped with a good DG scope and equipment wise that is as much as I can do. The rest is down to training and practice.

Wow sir you have been there and done that. It seems that your weapon of choice for buff is the 375 H&H, which makes me feel good about my choice of a 375 ruger. I have at my disposal all the same bullets you had plus some others. I have available to me some proprietary bonded 400gr FMJs and flat nose SPs being made for me from scratch. The 400 grain 375 endeavor has been a costly one but before I even get a chance to put them through my own rigorous penetration testing at home which is a prerequisite to using it on any live game especially in Africa, I would like to go ahead and get your opinion or as good as you could give me with the level of information I'm able to give to you. The 400 grainers for my .375Ruger will be some form of extreme heat and mechanically bonded. And since they are not large company bullets, but are coming from a smaller but quality shop that is well known for making good quality bullets I have no way of knowing if the type of bonding they are doing to them is good enough to make them hold up against thick cape buffalo hide heavy bone and strong muscle. That is why I will perform a penetration test which consists of firing the 400 grain FMJ through a plate of ar500 steel, a couple 2x4s, 14 thick wet phone books, and a 7-in pine tree. So far the only things that have made it all the way through and exited are the 458 lot with a 400 grain hardcast, and the 460 Weatherby with a 500 grain full metal jacket at 2660.

I realize because I am new here and don't know anybody and have never even been to Africa yet that you may not even deem it worthwhile to answer my question because so many other people have asked so much different questions that have been to Africa but it would really help me if you could give your input.


My first question to you is: do you think I should use a 400 gr FMJ, or should I stick to the 400 grain soft points for Cape buffalo?

Question 2 is: do you think that if a bullet can make it all the way through my penetration testing media then it should be okay for buffalo?

I've always wanted to go to Africa but some things have happened in my life that may actually make it possible for me to go to Africa within the next year or so. So that's why I'm really getting into learning about it now.

I see you've had a lot of responses so I don't blame you if you don't respond to my question but hey no matter what you have a good week!

 

[SRvet]

Wow sir you have been there and done that. It seems that your weapon of choice for buff is the 375 H&H, which makes me feel good about my choice of a 375 ruger. I have at my disposal all the same bullets you had plus some others. I have available to me some proprietary bonded 400gr FMJs and flat nose SPs being made for me from scratch. The 400 grain 375 endeavor has been a costly one but before I even get a chance to put them through my own rigorous penetration testing at home which is a prerequisite to using it on any live game especially in Africa, I would like to go ahead and get your opinion or as good as you could give me with the level of information I'm able to give to you. The 400 grainers for my .375Ruger will be some form of extreme heat and mechanically bonded. And since they are not large company bullets, but are coming from a smaller but quality shop that is well known for making good quality bullets I have no way of knowing if the type of bonding they are doing to them is good enough to make them hold up against thick cape buffalo hide heavy bone and strong muscle. That is why I will perform a penetration test which consists of firing the 400 grain FMJ through a plate of ar500 steel, a couple 2x4s, 14 thick wet phone books, and a 7-in pine tree. So far the only things that have made it all the way through and exited are the 458 lot with a 400 grain hardcast, and the 460 Weatherby with a 500 grain full metal jacket at 2660.

I realize because I am new here and don't know anybody and have never even been to Africa yet that you may not even deem it worthwhile to answer my question because so many other people have asked so much different questions that have been to Africa but it would really help me if you could give your input.


My first question to you is: do you think I should use a 400 gr FMJ, or should I stick to the 400 grain soft points for Cape buffalo?

Question 2 is: do you think that if a bullet can make it all the way through my penetration testing media then it should be okay for buffalo?

I've always wanted to go to Africa but some things have happened in my life that may actually make it possible for me to go to Africa within the next year or so. So that's why I'm really getting into learning about it now.

I see you've had a lot of responses so I don't blame you if you don't respond to my question but hey no matter what you have a good week!

Looks like you have an interesting project going on. I’m not an expert by any means but I have shot a good number of animals, some of which were dangerous game including buffalo. Are you happy that the 400 grain bullet will be stable in flight and after impact? It is certain to be a long thin bullet relatively speaking which may be fantastic or could be disappointing if it tumbles on impact and deviates from straight line penetration. I have read this is more likely where the solid shank of the bullet remains long. I came across this phenomenon when researching a bullet for my 458 Lott. I like the Barnes bullet design and gravitated towards the long for calibre 500 grain bullet. Plausible reports suggested this bullet tended to become unstable and tumble after impact which reduced the depth of penetration. Clearly not ideal! I was advised to look at the 450 grain TSX instead which performed beautifully on my buffalo and a large bull giraffe. Seemingly there are down sides to uber heavy bullets. Can I ask why you are going down the hard road of having untried bullets rather than starting with those with established excellent track records like the A frame, TSX, North Fork etc. it would be very interesting to hear other people’s point of view on your project, particularly those with massive experience of bullet testing like @michael458

 

[michael458]

Can I ask why you are going down the hard road of having untried bullets rather than starting with those with established excellent track records like the A frame, TSX, North Fork etc. it would be very interesting to hear other people’s point of view on your project, particularly those with massive experience of bullet testing like @michael458

A very good question, among several I have as well. First out the gate @blackpowder12bore you will not find me .375 caliber friendly at all, not even in the least bit. Keep that in mind as I state any opinion. Anyone that knows me, knows this. Would not be my choice for anything larger than a wharf rat.

That said, I see a few issues, first out the gate, a 400 gr bullet for .375? Best have a very fast twist rate I would think. You mention 400 gr FMJ........ well if that is a Round Nose design, it starts out totally useless for any sort of penetration in reasonable aqueous medium or animal tissue. I must also point out that I have not run into any buffalo yet made out of ;

a plate of ar500 steel, a couple 2x4s, 14 thick wet phone books, and a 7-in pine tree.

This test will NOT give you any indication at all of how it would perform in any animal tissue. If you wish to test bullet behavior with any simulation at all to animal tissue, test with straight up wet print, nothing else. Whether that is phone books totally soaked or wet news print. It must be aqueous. Dry wood, boards or trees are not aqueous. Buffalo are aqueous.......

I also have dealt with smaller bullet manufacturers several times, and while their intentions are well meaning, it has never worked out to equal my specs. It has always been a disappointment in the actual performance of the projectiles.

My first question to you is: do you think I should use a 400 gr FMJ, or should I stick to the 400 grain soft points for Cape buffalo?

No. First on the count of 400 gr being stable in common twist rates. That said, I don't have a clue as to what twist rate any 375 might be, and don't care. I won't ever be shooting one. But up to 300 gr bullets are common in that caliber, I would think that twist rates would be conducive to that bullet weight. Another is the Nose Profile of the FMJ, Solids and FMJ meant to drive deep and straight are driven by the front end once terminal penetration begins, front end drive, RN is not stable in aqueous medium and will at some point veer off course, tumble, and fail to accomplish its mission of driving deep and 100% straight. A Flat nose solid of at least 65% meplat of caliber is required to do that.

I believe you should reconsider your bullet options seriously with proven well designed bullets. There are many many great choices out there these days and one does not need to be messing with unknown factors, not when it comes to buffalo.