**Huge CGN .264 Bullet Test Result** (lots of pics!)

Andy said:
H4198 is suitable in the 6.5X55 for cast bullets which need to use reduced loads. I'd estimate that 20.0 grs with the 174gr cast gave about 1500 fps. It's great in the 7.62X39, but unless you're using cast in the 6.5X55, I'd go with something much slower like H4350.

The lesson here is that slow and heavy will out penetrate fast and light - but 45-70 shooters have known that for 125+ years!
Click to expand...

Thanks for the explanation!:)
 
Andy said:
The lesson here is that slow and heavy will out penetrate fast and light - but 45-70 shooters have known that for 125+ years!
Click to expand...

That theory has been debunked when comparing apples to apples. The myth arose when comparing flat nosed hard cast bullets to soft point expanding bullets. The former acts much like a solid.

For example, look here where the same bullet is fired at different velocities. The faster load penetrates more:

http://470mbogo.com/PenetrationComparison.html

There is also an outstanding thread on Accurate Reloading forums. What do you think penetrates better - 9.3mm 320gr Woodleigh Solid or a 400gr - 520gr cast .45-70? The former does +60", the latter varies between 14 and 34" (see page 23):
http://forums.accuratereloading.com/eve/forums/a/tpc/f/4711043/m/2861098911/p/1
 
A quick comparison shows the Lapua Mega to be equal to the highly regarded Partition and they are about 50% of cost and very accurate.

Thanks,

Peter
 
1899 said:
That theory has been debunked when comparing apples to apples. The myth arose when comparing flat nosed hard cast bullets to soft point expanding bullets. The former acts much like a solid.

For example, look here where the same bullet is fired at different velocities. The faster load penetrates more:

http://470mbogo.com/PenetrationComparison.html

There is also an outstanding thread on Accurate Reloading forums. What do you think penetrates better - 9.3mm 320gr Woodleigh Solid or a 400gr - 520gr cast .45-70? The former does +60", the latter varies between 14 and 34" (see page 23):
http://forums.accuratereloading.com/eve/forums/a/tpc/f/4711043/m/2861098911/p/1
Click to expand...

My wording was poor, and your points are good, but unless I still don't get it, we're not really talking "apples and apples". In this test, they were all 6.5mm. We don't know the MV's, but I'm assuming that the 85 gr, which broke into bits was fastest, and it penetrated the least. The heaviest was the cast, and it was the slowest and penetrated the most. In between (120-140 gr) where MV's were probably close, the penetration seemed to depend on retained weight. The cast did act much like a solid, in that it didn't expand much, but it did lose a fair bit of weight, unlike what would happen with a good solid. Would the 85 gr have penetrated more if it had gone slower? I think so because it would have lost less weight. Would the cast have penetrated more at higher "jacketed" (2200+ fps) MV's? I think not, because unlike a solid, it would have fragmented.

So if a bullet holds together and doesn't expand much, it will penetrate more as its weight and/or MV increases. Bullets that are overspeeded don't hold together, and consequently can penetrate less as MV increases.

Does that sound right?
 
Andy - yes, I see your point now. I misunderstood that you were making a much more broad and sweeping statement - obviosly I was wrong!
 
In all honesty this, to me, is the most informative and valuable thread that has been posted here on CGN since I've been around the last 6 yrs or so.

BCSteve, if you don't mind, I think I'm gonna save the pics and info and try getting a poster made to hang in my reloading cave.:cool:
 
Goose25 said:
In all honesty this, to me, is the most informative and valuable thread that has been posted here on CGN since I've been around the last 6 yrs or so.

BCSteve, if you don't mind, I think I'm gonna save the pics and info and try getting a poster made to hang in my reloading cave.:cool:
Click to expand...

Thanks! and go nuts with the poster:D.
 
By the way, it was brough to my attention that the Swift Scirocco II are actually 130gr. They were sent to me as 140gr and I never realized that they didn't exist. I've corrected the data so the % weight retained is also adjusted.
 
Great work Steve and very well presented. I concur with the statement about one of the best posts I've seen on CGN.

I have to make a presentation on ballistics (including terminal ballistics) next month. I was hoping to get your blessing to use some of your findings (and photos) with proper reference and attribution, of course.
 
Last edited:
Goose25 said:
In all honesty this, to me, is the most informative and valuable thread that has been posted here on CGN since I've been around the last 6 yrs or so.....
Click to expand...

There are quite a few generous and knowledgeable folks on CGN who have contributed a great deal over the years, but this is easily the best single effort I've seen based on scale, effort, quality, usefulness and applicability.

A++
 
You guys have all missed the point of this thread. Steve just really wanted to go shooting a lot and found a very clever way to get people to send him free bullets to do it with! :D

Seriously, great job, Steve.

To the Mods, how is this NOT a sticky yet?

Mark
 
Great Job

I've been on the fence about building a 277 or 264 wild cat, well decision made 264, great work man. and I shoot my grandpa's 6.5x55 featherrweight all the time, right on.
 
Moosetracker said:
Great work Steve and very well presented. I concur with the statement about one of the best posts I've seen on CGN.

I have to make a presentation on ballistics (including terminal ballistics) next month. I was hoping to get your blessing to use some of your findings (and photos) with proper reference and attribution, of course.
Click to expand...

Use anything that will be useful for your presentation.
 
Just a thought... how about editing your original post (post #1) with the results from part deux, that way people who don't flip to page 19 of this thread don't missout on some valuable info.
 
Goose25 said:
Just a thought... how about editing your original post (post #1) with the results from part deux, that way people who don't flip to page 19 of this thread don't missout on some valuable info.
Click to expand...

That's my intention. I'll leave them seperate for a week or two so people can see the new results. After that, I'll insert the latest bullets in the original test so everything is in weight order. I'll also take a new picture of the bullet line up.
 
So near as I can tell, part 3 will include the following bullets, which were missed the first time around:

Barnes 100 T-TSX BT
Hawk 100 RNSP (.030")
Hornady 100 SP
Lapua 100 FMJ*
Lapua 100 FMJ*Cutting Edge
Lapua 100 Scenar*
Lapua 100 Scenar*Silver jacket
Norma 100 Hollow point
Nosler 100 Ballistic Tip
Nosler 100 Partition
Sierra 100 HP Varminter
Sierra 107 HPBT Match King
Lapua 108 Scenar*
Lapua 108 Scenar*Silver jacket
Hawk 120 RNSP (.030")
Hornady 120 A-MAX
Hornady 120 GMX
Norma 120 Full jacket pointed
PRVI 120 HPBT
Sierra 120 HPBT Match King
Sierra 120 SPT Pro-Hunter
Speer 120 HOT-COR
Hornady 123 A-MAX
Lapua 123 Scenar*
Lapua 123 Scenar*Silver jacket
Sierra 123 HPBT Match King
Hornady 129 INTERBOND
Hornady 129 SST
Berger 130 Match Hunting VLD
Nosler 130 Accu-Bond
Hawk 135 RNSP (.030")
Lapua 139 Scenar*
Lapua 139 Scenar*Silver jacket
PRVI 139 FMJBT
PRVI 139 SPBT
Hornady 140 BTHP MATCH
Sierra 140 HPBT Match King
Speer 140 DEEPCURL
Swift 140 A-FRAME
Woodleigh 140 WeldCore
Lapua 144 FMJ*Boat Tail
Norma 156 Soft point Alaska
Norma 156 Soft point Oryx
Norma 156 Soft point Vulkan
Hawk 160 RNSP (.030")

I presume these should be ready to go by, oh say, January 15th?

;-)
 
jamesharrison said:
So near as I can tell, part 3 will include the following bullets, which were missed the first time around:

Barnes 100 T-TSX BT
Hawk 100 RNSP (.030")
Hornady 100 SP
Lapua 100 FMJ*
Lapua 100 FMJ*Cutting Edge
Lapua 100 Scenar*
Lapua 100 Scenar*Silver jacket
Norma 100 Hollow point
Nosler 100 Ballistic Tip
Nosler 100 Partition
Sierra 100 HP Varminter
Sierra 107 HPBT Match King
Lapua 108 Scenar*
Lapua 108 Scenar*Silver jacket
Hawk 120 RNSP (.030")
Hornady 120 A-MAX
Hornady 120 GMX
Norma 120 Full jacket pointed
PRVI 120 HPBT
Sierra 120 HPBT Match King
Sierra 120 SPT Pro-Hunter
Speer 120 HOT-COR
Hornady 123 A-MAX
Lapua 123 Scenar*
Lapua 123 Scenar*Silver jacket
Sierra 123 HPBT Match King
Hornady 129 INTERBOND
Hornady 129 SST
Berger 130 Match Hunting VLD
Nosler 130 Accu-Bond
Hawk 135 RNSP (.030")
Lapua 139 Scenar*
Lapua 139 Scenar*Silver jacket
PRVI 139 FMJBT
PRVI 139 SPBT
Hornady 140 BTHP MATCH
Sierra 140 HPBT Match King
Speer 140 DEEPCURL
Swift 140 A-FRAME
Woodleigh 140 WeldCore
Lapua 144 FMJ*Boat Tail
Norma 156 Soft point Alaska
Norma 156 Soft point Oryx
Norma 156 Soft point Vulkan
Hawk 160 RNSP (.030")

I presume these should be ready to go by, oh say, January 15th?

;-)
Click to expand...

Hmmm James, do I take it that you intend to run Part 3?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom