475/416 Rigby
- Thread starter logger
- Start date
Boomer,
I agree that mass reduction will reduce penetration, but I believe too much frontal area is just as much to blame.
I've been thinking a lot about the how the new 300gr TSX performs in game as it relates to my 375 Ultra. Expansion is violent and in it certainly tears up the vitals, but I recover way too many of them....I almost never recovered an old style X.
I'm thinking about having an annular ring machined in the forward portion of some 375 300 grain TSX's then testing penetration. I am thinking that if the cut makes 1/3 to 1/2 of the petals break off (every time) the slight reduction in frontal diameter and more consistent petal size will facilitate both more and straighter penetration....Sort of like a Nosler Partition, but with a bit more frontal area....
Any thoughts?
Great to have you around Dave!
And just so we are clear I am glad to see you site is still up and running.....It's a great effort and is very educational.
I agree that mass reduction will reduce penetration, but I believe too much frontal area is just as much to blame.
I've been thinking a lot about the how the new 300gr TSX performs in game as it relates to my 375 Ultra. Expansion is violent and in it certainly tears up the vitals, but I recover way too many of them....I almost never recovered an old style X.
I'm thinking about having an annular ring machined in the forward portion of some 375 300 grain TSX's then testing penetration. I am thinking that if the cut makes 1/3 to 1/2 of the petals break off (every time) the slight reduction in frontal diameter and more consistent petal size will facilitate both more and straighter penetration....Sort of like a Nosler Partition, but with a bit more frontal area....
Any thoughts?
Great to have you around Dave!
And just so we are clear I am glad to see you site is still up and running.....It's a great effort and is very educational.
Hi X Fan
You are correct about too much frontal area restricting penetration. My friend shot an Eland bull with a 585 Nyati. He was using a 750 grain Woodleigh bullet and the bullet turned itself inside out almost and the bullet didn't make it through the Eland broadside which led to a follow up. The bullet must have been close to an inch and a quarter across. The Barnes were always advertised as penetrating 30 percent more than any other bullet of comparable weight which was true. Maybe if they expand a little more and hold together better is a good thing. If your animals are dropping dead maybe your best to just carry on.
Take good care,
Dave
You are correct about too much frontal area restricting penetration. My friend shot an Eland bull with a 585 Nyati. He was using a 750 grain Woodleigh bullet and the bullet turned itself inside out almost and the bullet didn't make it through the Eland broadside which led to a follow up. The bullet must have been close to an inch and a quarter across. The Barnes were always advertised as penetrating 30 percent more than any other bullet of comparable weight which was true. Maybe if they expand a little more and hold together better is a good thing. If your animals are dropping dead maybe your best to just carry on.
Take good care,
Dave
- Location
- Somewhere on the Hudson Bay Coast
I like heavy for caliber bullets combined with a moderate velocity because this combination produces excellent penetration and a large wound volume. I also like to have an exit wound. The pic I posted shows the 270 and 300 gr X's sans petals. Had the petals not broken off, would these bullets have penetrated better? I don't know, but each of those bullets would of had more momentum due to their respective heavier mass. Perhaps the increased frontal area would make up for the heavier mass, the end result being penetration equal to the bullet with the broken petals, but what would not be equal would be the wound volume which would increased by 10-15% due to the larger frontal area.
The 380 gr bullet impacting hundreds of feet per second less velocity than either X bullet penetrated to the exact same depth as both deflowered X's, with a wound volume of perhaps 4 fold. The lower velocity ensured it's structural integrity, and as a result both its momentum and wound volume were maximized. Since the largest wound cavity results in death in the least amount of time, I suppose wound volume trumps through and through penetration.
According to the what the marketing folks at Barnes say, and reports from the field seem to confirm, the TSX expands very quickly once it enters fluid bearing tissue. This in itself might be the reason that you have observed less penetration with the TSX than you did with the older series of X bullet, although I've heard complaints that some of the older X bullets wouldn't expand on North American big game. I just wish they would stop making their bullet backwards.
As I have said before, Barnes adjusts the weight of their X's based on the length of the shank. All of the hollow points are the same depth within caliber regardless of bullet weight. If we want to have a full powered .375 H&H load produce a muzzle velocity of 2500 fps, we would need a bullet that weighs about 300 grs. Why does the 300 gr bullet have an expanded diameter the same as a 250 gr bullet? This means that there is no way that the 300 gr bullet can out perform a 250 gr bullet, other than for the fact that it might not loose the petals if it's impact velocity is below 2500 fps. If the depth of the hollow point extended into the shank leaving 33% of the bullet's shank solid, expansion would be larger, and the petals would be stronger because there would be more meat on them. Ergo, you would gain penetration due to increased momentum and you benefit from a larger wound volume. If you are going to doctor the TSX, I would attempt to deepen the hollow cavity, rather than reduce the bullet.
The 380 gr bullet impacting hundreds of feet per second less velocity than either X bullet penetrated to the exact same depth as both deflowered X's, with a wound volume of perhaps 4 fold. The lower velocity ensured it's structural integrity, and as a result both its momentum and wound volume were maximized. Since the largest wound cavity results in death in the least amount of time, I suppose wound volume trumps through and through penetration.
According to the what the marketing folks at Barnes say, and reports from the field seem to confirm, the TSX expands very quickly once it enters fluid bearing tissue. This in itself might be the reason that you have observed less penetration with the TSX than you did with the older series of X bullet, although I've heard complaints that some of the older X bullets wouldn't expand on North American big game. I just wish they would stop making their bullet backwards.
As I have said before, Barnes adjusts the weight of their X's based on the length of the shank. All of the hollow points are the same depth within caliber regardless of bullet weight. If we want to have a full powered .375 H&H load produce a muzzle velocity of 2500 fps, we would need a bullet that weighs about 300 grs. Why does the 300 gr bullet have an expanded diameter the same as a 250 gr bullet? This means that there is no way that the 300 gr bullet can out perform a 250 gr bullet, other than for the fact that it might not loose the petals if it's impact velocity is below 2500 fps. If the depth of the hollow point extended into the shank leaving 33% of the bullet's shank solid, expansion would be larger, and the petals would be stronger because there would be more meat on them. Ergo, you would gain penetration due to increased momentum and you benefit from a larger wound volume. If you are going to doctor the TSX, I would attempt to deepen the hollow cavity, rather than reduce the bullet.
Slightly differing points of view.....Interesting!
I personally use the 375 (Ultra) as a general purpose hunting round and as such tend to overlook bullet weights such as the 380. I shoot moose, deer, and elk with my 375's and reserve a 416 with 400gr Swifts or Partitions for coastal bears.
For my intended uses I have more than enough bore size so I tend to look for (and prefer) penetration above all else. I am quite happy to give up frontal area to get it. Though the old X bullets were somewhat unpopular I thought them perfect for my uses.
After all that I must admit that most of the game I have shot with the new TSX died instantly and it appears (to me) as if Barnes is on to something. The TSX rips up internals like nothing I have ever seen before.....That I have recovered most of the bullets shot into game (broadside) is personal cause for alarm. My concern is (of course) that a deep rear angle shot will fail to penetrate far enough.
I admit my concerns may be unfounded, but I remain cautious in matters of bullet performance.
Great discussion!
I personally use the 375 (Ultra) as a general purpose hunting round and as such tend to overlook bullet weights such as the 380. I shoot moose, deer, and elk with my 375's and reserve a 416 with 400gr Swifts or Partitions for coastal bears.
For my intended uses I have more than enough bore size so I tend to look for (and prefer) penetration above all else. I am quite happy to give up frontal area to get it. Though the old X bullets were somewhat unpopular I thought them perfect for my uses.
After all that I must admit that most of the game I have shot with the new TSX died instantly and it appears (to me) as if Barnes is on to something. The TSX rips up internals like nothing I have ever seen before.....That I have recovered most of the bullets shot into game (broadside) is personal cause for alarm. My concern is (of course) that a deep rear angle shot will fail to penetrate far enough.
I admit my concerns may be unfounded, but I remain cautious in matters of bullet performance.
Great discussion!
- Location
- Somewhere on the Hudson Bay Coast
X-Fan, its because of those like us who pay attention to bullet performance that the products continue to improve. Despite my criticism of the TSX, I recognize it as being better than any bullet we had when I got into this game and I would probably use it exclusively if I hadn't discovered the Rhino bullet. Too bad though that Barnes lost sight of the advantages of the heavy for caliber bullets that put them ahead of the pack so many years ago.
I agree completely about the role of the .375 Ultra as a do it all rifle. It will deal with dangerous bears on one hand, and kill small game as neatly as a .22 rimfire on the other (270 gr Hornady @ 1200). It reaches out to 300 yards or better with a 260 gr Nosler, and although I can hit a ways out there, I prefer not to take marginal long range shots at game.
I found the .416 Rigby to be similarly useful, but the cost of the brass I found prohibitive. Remington made a mistake by not bringing their .416 out on the .404 case, and both the .416 Remington and the Ultras must of been in the development stage in an over lapping time period.
I agree completely about the role of the .375 Ultra as a do it all rifle. It will deal with dangerous bears on one hand, and kill small game as neatly as a .22 rimfire on the other (270 gr Hornady @ 1200). It reaches out to 300 yards or better with a 260 gr Nosler, and although I can hit a ways out there, I prefer not to take marginal long range shots at game.
I found the .416 Rigby to be similarly useful, but the cost of the brass I found prohibitive. Remington made a mistake by not bringing their .416 out on the .404 case, and both the .416 Remington and the Ultras must of been in the development stage in an over lapping time period.
No, I mean I have a little red dot on the bottom left corner. What does it mean? I am finding all the stuff you guys are talking about really great reading. Keep it up.Can anyone guess what big bore I own that has a 30 round clip? And it is legal.
- Location
- Somewhere on the Hudson Bay Coast
Dave,
I came across something today and wondered what your experience and thoughts were.
When a bullet impact an animal, the bullet is subject to precession, the torque induced on the bullet as it hits it's target. Now, here's the interesting part. The writer claims that penetration can be dramatically effected by the rate of twist of the barrel the bullet comes from!!?? because there is less precession from a faster spinning bullet.
The example he gives is a .460 Short and a .460 Weatherby. Both cartridges were loaded with the identical lead core solids, but the .460 Short out penetrated the .460 Weatherby despite the lower velocity, and the reason given was that the 1:10 twist of the short magnum caused less precession than the 1:16 twist in the Weatherby.
In another test, a reduced load and a full powered load were compared from the same .460 Weatherby. The slower bullet again penetrated deeper, this time because it is thought that the lower velocity bullet exited the muzzle with less yaw and as a result was subject to less precession.
Interesting stuff.
I came across something today and wondered what your experience and thoughts were.
When a bullet impact an animal, the bullet is subject to precession, the torque induced on the bullet as it hits it's target. Now, here's the interesting part. The writer claims that penetration can be dramatically effected by the rate of twist of the barrel the bullet comes from!!?? because there is less precession from a faster spinning bullet.
The example he gives is a .460 Short and a .460 Weatherby. Both cartridges were loaded with the identical lead core solids, but the .460 Short out penetrated the .460 Weatherby despite the lower velocity, and the reason given was that the 1:10 twist of the short magnum caused less precession than the 1:16 twist in the Weatherby.
In another test, a reduced load and a full powered load were compared from the same .460 Weatherby. The slower bullet again penetrated deeper, this time because it is thought that the lower velocity bullet exited the muzzle with less yaw and as a result was subject to less precession.
Interesting stuff.
Boomer,
I'm having a new 375 Ultra built on a 10" twist barrel.
I saw a test a while ago that showed a significant improvement in penetration ( a 375 H&H was tested) with the faster twist. The tester (a PH) created a measured average (depth of penetration of actual game shot) before and after the barrel change...The results were significant.
The PH figured the standard 375 twist (12") rate was too slow....He might be right.
I see Dan Lilja is offering a 10" twist so it must be getting more popular.
Time will tell!
I'm having a new 375 Ultra built on a 10" twist barrel.
I saw a test a while ago that showed a significant improvement in penetration ( a 375 H&H was tested) with the faster twist. The tester (a PH) created a measured average (depth of penetration of actual game shot) before and after the barrel change...The results were significant.
The PH figured the standard 375 twist (12") rate was too slow....He might be right.
I see Dan Lilja is offering a 10" twist so it must be getting more popular.
Time will tell!
