Irregular bullet preformance to consistency

ButterBean said:

Frangible ?

Click to expand...

When I bought all the CZ 550 SAFARI CLASSIC MAGNUMS, except the 500 Jeffrey, the only ammo easily accessible was Hornady DGX.
What an absolute DISASTER of a bullet…
In every case, except 404 Jeffrey, those bullets either shed the jacket, broke up leaving shrapnel or turned into flattened coins.
The 404 Jeffrey was a different animal altogether, it barely mushroomed and 3 were found in Zebra bent and backwards facing to entry.
This put the final nail in the coffin for me regarding ALL Hornady products.
I shot a donkey with the DGX 458 cal 500g out of my 458Lott on the first day, it virtually exploded in the vertebrae of it's neck, thinking it was a fluke with bullet placement, I used my 450 Rigby the next day with the same bullet not anywhere near the spine, fragments were everywhere from striking behind the ribs, taking out ribs on the opposite side and clipping the lower leg bones as it angled through from a rear angling shot. The lungs were peppered with shrapnel, so was the inside of the ribs and surrounding organs, did not ever expect that.

Frangible? Definitely!

Cheers.

Gday magnum following on from your post above
the DG bullet / pill world is a fascinating thing of what some claim but ultimately it comes down too

some care
&
Some care more on selling

Cheers

fordy said:

Gday
This is often a fun one to delve into
So let's rip a few things apart & muddy some more ( if one can understand me being the first hurdle )

The first port of call is what is a irregular bullet ( pills as I call them or the projectile part of a bullet )

So to me it starts with the bullet company we get their standard to start with as they tell us that's how the pill works

Probably the best one that the vast majority of us know is Barnes & the ever so picture perfect mushroom that we all have seen so no need to attach a pic of one those

back to general pills now
But then we hear or have it happen to us but the pill blew up or penciled

Yet many others will come in & go no way I got this result & the better ones show pictures of their results and in many cases we get into this ****ing match & it goes off the track & ultimately we end up arguing about everything else than the irregularities that ultimately lead to a failure

Now I mean this with the utmost respect
Most people go off the good which is only part of the story & I like full stories & until we take the bad into account we will learn nothing as we are all happy in acceptance mode right
I like the good ones but in all reality the bad ones teach us more

The real issue is here ( the bad ones & % numbers aren't factual & is just a talking point for conversation sake ) as it may only be 50% that it shows up of being irregular & yet 50% of those may still give a good result of a fairly good killing efficiency
So now we are down to a 25% failure or are we
No way as now we need to analyse where those 50% irregularities are occurring & more importantly why / where the failure is occurring ( then add the happy with a dead critter people & man alive you now have real issues on that 25% getting found out especially if it's a company as then it's you get what they are happy with and that's a low bar although they will portray it differently )

Now let's break that 25% down further & This is the hard part as now you need numbers of critters & today I even struggle to get enough of them to form a higher probability of a irregular occurrence & ultimately a failure occurring
But what I am extremely lucky in doing is honing in on where a pill will give these irregular results & more likely failure point of seeing these failures occurring in the field


It's not that I'm smart it's far from it it's I'm measuring /recording a lot of things & a couple of my yank mates who I've had the pleasure of entertaining in my home state Tassie soon saw why I hone in on certain angles & resistances as if it passes them you just won't see that so called 25% failure rate

Best example I can give is my 6.5 data I gathered on around 10 pills if I was to shoot the critters like I know & has shown killed better I wouldn't have gathered a better indicator of a pill's capabilities @ those lower impacts & i pretty well guarantee I would then have a shaded view on where things work better down there as I did prior to that particular cull but I had my eyes opened pretty wide on what occurred

But let's get even more anal everything still showed irregular results across those low velocity test from pill to pill & within ea pill itself but also by breaking ea of them down & looking @ the process of the way ea pill was working I could see patterns & simpler version of that still holds somewhat true of soft was the more consistent player @ low velocity impacts but also I found a little more on wet & dry impacts & where the hydraulic system was playing roles in certain brands more than others & some seemed immune to needing fluid so are they the better option to use

Some cases yes others no imo but learn we can so to lessen our own risk of the irregular occurrence

Just think how we have heard the need to stay off bone or hit bone or keep that pill above or below certain velocities ,
Yep depends on one's choice of pill to it's actual good working velocity window & the bandaids we can apply also help to reign in some of the irregular eg cleaning hp to increasing twist rates etc

Just a little to start ticking on & one I'll add some more as we go

Cheers

Click to expand...

What is it they said about the US and the British but in this case Aussie, two people separated by a common language.

With all civility and respect, I have no idea what you are trying to get at.

med358-boise said:

What is it they said about the US and the British but in this case Aussie, two people separated by a common language.

With all civility and respect, I have no idea what you are trying to get at.

Click to expand...

Gday med358

med358-boise said:

What is it they said about the US and the British but in this case Aussie, two people separated by a common language.

With all civility and respect, I have no idea what you are trying to get at.

Click to expand...

A few parts really
1st
Is how the pill behaves across various resistances which in reality we see irregular results

2nd
The capacity of that pill to determine it's overall performance level of consistency

& by analysing those you are in a position to make have a better understanding/ choice of what pill will give us a little more time or leeway before Murphy shows up

Case in point of pills used on here & using the 260 gr accubond on buff is going to get you into eventually I wish I had used a better pill in the HP OEP pill but the OEP bb one offers better reliability over both the previous pills & the list goes on as was discussed


So how do we get to a stage of not putting ourselves into the position of picking the accubond in the first place now to be fair on that it would be all be flipped around if we started chasing goats for example

That's the part Is one that we often fail to understand of where the pill's strengths & more importantly weaknesses are
So my main part is don't just look @ a dead critter it's we can all help our fellow hunter & by taking a little more notice ( with respect) we will start to see patterns

3rd
im @ the stage of my life I just can't keep going on the journey of finding better pills & need more help so putting this thread up to me is somewhat selfish as I'm looking for that person/s who can see things a little differently & see even in some great pills we have today that they have flaws or @ a minimum found wanting that bit extra & im not a person to accept those flaws as I will challenge the concept of that's all one can get out of a pill yes improvement but man I also get things majorly wrong on design but testing proves it was one way or another & learn we do ( my close terminal junkie mates understand failure is a form of education & growth well how we look @ it )
So I'm looking for a individual /s with fresh eyes that goes hmmm if only but you need to see it first to get to the level we are trying to get achieved

On achieving I've got in my possession various pills that no one makes & seen where companies can do it

I am not in it to make bullets as I have no need or expertise in that field
I just want a better pill for tomorrow as a smile is all I care about ( a lot in that smile for me but not many will understand that ) & covering more bases of what a pill can achieve is what I look for & some may say that's a pipe dream
Well not when you've seen what some pills can do

Think of all the great attributes of ea pill & try combing them to come up with a holy grail
That's been my journey for many decades & while I know the holy grail status will never occur the bar has definitely been raised

So get one's thinking caps on & lift the bar like the group I rub shoulders with now
On what we have documented is possible & need to confirm in more testing ( even on what pills I've got in my possession there are still improvements possible as I just got shown a broached pill can produce pop but no broached pill I've tested produces the pop that can occur so the bar can be raised no doubting that )
Hope that makes sense

Might be easier if I show what can occur & along with my bad writing skills lol
But first one needs to understand the weaknesses or less than ideal results of pills so maybe that's a better place to start
So please forward on one's Thoughts ( if one can understand me )

If one can't please ask & show where /what

If one doesn't want to change from what one uses as they already have the so called holy grail that's cool but a different path we are on that I accept

Cheers

fordy said:

Gday med358


A few parts really
1st
Is how the pill behaves across various resistances which in reality we see irregular results

2nd
The capacity of that pill to determine it's overall performance level of consistency

& by analysing those you are in a position to make have a better understanding/ choice of what pill will give us a little more time or leeway before Murphy shows up

Case in point of pills used on here & using the 260 gr accubond on buff is going to get you into eventually I wish I had used a better pill in the HP OEP pill but the OEP bb one offers better reliability over both the previous pills & the list goes on as was discussed


So how do we get to a stage of not putting ourselves into the position of picking the accubond in the first place now to be fair on that it would be all be flipped around if we started chasing goats for example

That's the part Is one that we often fail to understand of where the pill's strengths & more importantly weaknesses are
So my main part is don't just look @ a dead critter it's we can all help our fellow hunter & by taking a little more notice ( with respect) we will start to see patterns

3rd
im @ the stage of my life I just can't keep going on the journey of finding better pills & need more help so putting this thread up to me is somewhat selfish as I'm looking for that person/s who can see things a little differently & see even in some great pills we have today that they have flaws or @ a minimum found wanting that bit extra & im not a person to accept those flaws as I will challenge the concept of that's all one can get out of a pill yes improvement but man I also get things majorly wrong on design but testing proves it was one way or another & learn we do ( my close terminal junkie mates understand failure is a form of education & growth well how we look @ it )
So I'm looking for a individual /s with fresh eyes that goes hmmm if only but you need to see it first to get to the level we are trying to get achieved

On achieving I've got in my possession various pills that no one makes & seen where companies can do it

I am not in it to make bullets as I have no need or expertise in that field
I just want a better pill for tomorrow as a smile is all I care about ( a lot in that smile for me but not many will understand that ) & covering more bases of what a pill can achieve is what I look for & some may say that's a pipe dream
Well not when you've seen what some pills can do

Think of all the great attributes of ea pill & try combing them to come up with a holy grail
That's been my journey for many decades & while I know the holy grail status will never occur the bar has definitely been raised

So get one's thinking caps on & lift the bar like the group I rub shoulders with now
On what we have documented is possible & need to confirm in more testing ( even on what pills I've got in my possession there are still improvements possible as I just got shown a broached pill can produce pop but no broached pill I've tested produces the pop that can occur so the bar can be raised no doubting that )
Hope that makes sense

Might be easier if I show what can occur & along with my bad writing skills lol
But first one needs to understand the weaknesses or less than ideal results of pills so maybe that's a better place to start
So please forward on one's Thoughts ( if one can understand me )

If one can't please ask & show where /what

If one doesn't want to change from what one uses as they already have the so called holy grail that's cool but a different path we are on that I accept

Cheers

Click to expand...

Fordy,

Thanks, I appreciate it.

If I can summarize:

1) There is often more to learn from failures than success.
2) Success is not simply defined as a dead critter.
3) With respect to evaluating bullet design, it is not just did the animal die but did the bullet perform the way it was designed and if not you have to look at the specifics and the details of each incident -type of failure, impact velocity, shot angle etc.
4) If we have enough incidents with details and specifics we will likely see patterns of failures for a particular bullet or even category of design.
5) The analysis of those patterns will lead to a better body of knowledge for bullet design.

Did I get pretty close?

med358-boise said:

Fordy,

Thanks, I appreciate it.

If I can summarize:

1) There is often more to learn from failures than success.
2) Success is not simply defined as a dead critter.
3) With respect to evaluating bullet design, it is not just did the animal die but did the bullet perform the way it was designed and if not you have to look at the specifics and the details of each incident -type of failure, impact velocity, shot angle etc.
4) If we have enough incidents with details and specifics we will likely see patterns of failures for a particular bullet or even category of design.
5) The analysis of those patterns will lead to a better body of knowledge for bullet design.

Did I get pretty close?

Click to expand...

Gday med
Let's say I wish I had your writing skills as that's perfect

Thankyou very much

Cheers

fordy said:

Gday med
Let's say I wish I had your writing skills as that's perfect

Thankyou very much

Cheers

Click to expand...

Glad I got it right and I appreciate the effort you are making on research. I also agree with your sentiment that if you are a shooter and you are simply satisfied with if the animal died the bullet succeeded that's fine but don't "take me to task" for pursing more knowledge. (I am not sure you said that and I do not mean to put "words in your mouth" but I think gathered that from your comments).

I will also add from what I hear, I wish I had 1/10th of the field experience you have.

Take care mate!

I've chosen not to add too much more as generalisation and discussing a specific item are two different things.

Fordy mentions OEP BBT's which I also use and cannot fault them. I've not had a single failure with one. Maybe their design is superior to many, but in my experience an animal typically expires quicker with a well chosen bonded core lead bullet than with any mono. So, is the time it takes for an animal to expire a measure of consistency? Some would regard a long tracking job as a bullet performance failure.

Another point I'd like to make is don't assume a solid, or FMJ, won't fail either. Before embarking on a dangerous game hunt, try firing them into blocks of hardwood…. I've found some from reputable manufacturers in both .375 and .458 to bend, tear, rivet, and alter course in as little as 5" of hardwood, whereas others will easily penetrate 24"+. The ability of a solid to never fail is likely to be at least as important as the performance soft nose bullets, when considering solids are usually only needed for game that can trample you to death.

Aussie Hunter Steve said:

So, is the time it takes for an animal to expire a measure of consistency? Some would regard a long tracking job as a bullet performance failure.

Click to expand...

I can't think of a way to account for the adrenaline response of any particular animal even across many many data points. The video below is just for interest not to prove or disprove anything. Animal was recovered 100+ yards uphill (reasonably steep) into the trees. If you zoom in and slow it down, you can see arterial spray right around the the 16 second mark. I have no idea how far it would have gone running on flat ground.

med358-boise said:

Glad I got it right and I appreciate the effort you are making on research. I also agree with your sentiment that if you are a shooter and you are simply satisfied with if the animal died the bullet succeeded that's fine but don't "take me to task" for pursing more knowledge. (I am not sure you said that and I do not mean to put "words in your mouth" but I think gathered that from your comments).

I will also add from what I hear, I wish I had 1/10th of the field experience you have.

Take care mate!

Click to expand...

Gday med

Thanks again & the kind words are appreciated

Not putting words in my mouth
They are showing me I need to try better to get my written language explanation across better

If you don't mind I would like to use your words of wisdom in post #20 in some of my future discussions ?

Cheers

fordy said:

Gday med

Thanks again & the kind words are appreciated

Not putting words in my mouth
They are showing me I need to try better to get my written language explanation across better

If you don't mind I would like to use your words of wisdom in post #20 in some of my future discussions ?

Cheers

Click to expand...

thanks for the compliment and you may use those words anyway you want

Gday Aussie writer
Nice post

Aussie Hunter Steve said:

I've chosen not to add too much more as generalisation and discussing a specific item are two different things.

Click to expand...

& please add more

Aussie Hunter Steve said:

Fordy mentions OEP BBT's which I also use and cannot fault them. I've not had a single failure with one. Maybe their design is superior to many, but in my experience an animal typically expires quicker with a well chosen bonded core lead bullet than with any mono. So, is the time it takes for an animal to expire a measure of consistency? Some would regard a long tracking job as a bullet performance failure.

Click to expand...

On above that is generally one I agree with if we are comparing apples with apples in the case of velocity impacts yet we are seeing some advancements in the way some of these pills are made or more importantly these systems they are implementing in their designs are terminally acting

So broadly speaking
Let's take the likes of the a standard c&c designed pill that mushrooms it creates a ex size caliber mushroom that due to its design it looses weight as it penetrates @ a higher rate of decay than a bonded & higher rate of decay again a mono mushroom pill & more weight more penetration right ( but what's really needed lol )

( Let's leave the fragments part alone causing damage as it's a complement to the overall wound but not the main killing mechanism )

So how I look @ this is the size of the meplat is important yes but equally is the shape or is it more important

So to use imo or best I've seen the best bonded pill are woodleigh as the mushroom also offers a pretty flat meplat so best of both worlds right well when used within the velocity window that woodleigh puts up as they have been tested tweaked & tested again & again to get to the pills we have today now if one pushes the pill to hard the same old problem occurs a bigger mushroom & or more decay or both which results in less penertration so woodleigh has done extremely well on giving us a velocity window that shows it's optimal level of design that kills very well & hard pressed to find lightweight woodleigh for a good reason these stuck with what has worked so consistently

Now move to the mono mushroom & the OEP ( I need to find these recovered pills for better reference so bare with me as really time poor ) the OEP has shown to be a quicker killer in some situations against the woodleigh of same weight @ same impact yet just dropping the impact speed of both these pills the woodleigh wins the race nearly every time as the meplat has shown to be superior on the woodleigh to the both styles of the OEP ( bb better @lower impact & hence less resistance most times )

That has been somewhat reversed when you see impact speeds that are higher on the 2 types as the mono dosent loose weight due to decay & hence greater weight gives greater penertration ability once the petals are lost on some OEP the games changed again & ever so hard to get a pill to cover velocity windows like some companies claim ( it's also not really fair to woodleigh as they make HD pills for this case or tougher critters or both but let's not get bogged down in those things for the broad conversation I'm trying to have /achieve )

So now we get back to the need for weight if in case of the OEP if it looses it's petals as then you find the woodleigh comes out on top again

So aussie writer I kinda agree with your statement of bonded killing better but if we look @ the improvement of the mushroom monos over the years & ballistix out of Africa created a mushroom mono that gave a very flat meplat & still mushrooms very well & kills a lot more consistent than the OEP & if you run that lighter mono pill than the woodleigh equivalent the results favoured the ballistix or even the OEP if penertration wasn't the concern

I guess for our USA friends to think of is those who started with the Barnes look @ how those pills have more flatter meplats & better mushroom capabilities with today's pills than those of the original
Well on the ones I've tested I've seen that occur over the years so the bar has raised

Today we have brand's doing different things in their design eg shedding monos & dual core pill eg rhino solid shank & both kill in some cases better than we use to use others have taken a step backwards in terminal preformance

So user be very careful on going with the new beaut pill on the market as is the case in some instances no gain in the newer pills but the bar can be raised as some have proven the case to be

On bullet failure that's a great point & one that deserves its own attention so I'll leave that alone for another day but love to hear yours

Aussie Hunter Steve said:

Another point I'd like to make is don't assume a solid, or FMJ, won't fail either. Before embarking on a dangerous game hunt, try firing them into blocks of hardwood…. I've found some from reputable manufacturers in both .375 and .458 to bend, tear, rivet, and alter course in as little as 5" of hardwood, whereas others will easily penetrate 24"+. The ability of a solid to never fail is likely to be at least as important as the performance soft nose bullets, when considering solids are usually only needed for game that can trample you to death.

Click to expand...

On above
5star advice

Plenty of reasons not to use a solid but those who say it's not needed today either are not looking @ the whole picture of why a solid is the best solution for the task @ hand or they have not shot enough DG critters maybe even both

The choice of a solid pill imo can be the most important decision in one's life & some solids are total junk so choose very wisely is my advice

Side note I'll keep you in mind on my upcoming tests on solids as they may shed some light on potential improvements in that solid world

Enough of my dribble for now lol

Cheers