Wolf Hunting Rifle/Cal.

The bullets in the 303 British, used either exclusively, or at least extensively in WW2 were designed with a little aluminum cone in the nose, under the fmj. This made them stable in the air, as witnessed by their extensive use in match shooting to 1,000 yards, after the war.
However, they became unstable and tumbled when they hit a body, such as an enemy soldier, the reason the aluminum cone was in them.
 
Oh, now it's "relative" :)

We were talking about FMJ bullets, not long range competition bullets.

I still think you are grasping at straws. The bullet is stable as it flies through the air. it gets unstable when it impacts something of different density at inconsistent angles. Then the rear end wants to swap ends, too.

Who's grasping at straws??? read your own quote above... the bullet is stabile in flight and then becomes unstable when it impacts at an "INCONSISTENT ANGLE"... if the bullet strikes at an inconsistent angle, it was very stabile in flight was it?

The bullets in the 303 British, used either exclusively, or at least extensively in WW2 were designed with a little aluminum cone in the nose, under the fmj. This made them stable in the air, as witnessed by their extensive use in match shooting to 1,000 yards, after the war.
However, they became unstable and tumbled when they hit a body, such as an enemy soldier, the reason the aluminum cone was in them.

Let's assume that your statement and assumptions are correct...

How much more stabile in flight would the projectile be without the aluminum in the tip, and how much less would it "yaw" in penetration... and therein lies my point.
 
The bullets in the 303 British, used either exclusively, or at least extensively in WW2 were designed with a little aluminum cone in the nose, under the fmj. This made them stable in the air, as witnessed by their extensive use in match shooting to 1,000 yards, after the war.
However, they became unstable and tumbled when they hit a body, such as an enemy soldier, the reason the aluminum cone was in them.

You're refering to the Mk VII load with was adopted back in 1910 which had a lighter nose portion under the jacket to induce yaw upon impact. The lighter nose portion was either aluminium alloy or a fiber based material.(Depending on the manfacturer)

This was the standard military load used until the .303 was dropped from service. I puts piles of them through my old No.1 MkIII when I was young. These worked well on every critter I took from squirrels to deer. That rifle shot great with this ammo.:)

We didn't worry about Gamies back then, & I never lost a critter that I connected with.;)
 
Who's grasping at straws??? read your own quote above... the bullet is stabile in flight and then becomes unstable when it impacts at an "INCONSISTENT ANGLE"... if the bullet strikes at an inconsistent angle, it was very stabile in flight was it?


.
'
I was referring to the target as being of "inconsistent angles" The bullet hits target that is clothing, skin, fur, then flesh, bone, etc....Lots of inconsistencies in angles and densities when hitting a living target. The bullet is flying nice and stable until the impact on the inconsistent target with inconsistent angles and densities causes the bullet to become unstable.
 
'
I was referring to the target as being of "inconsistent angles" The bullet hits target that is clothing, skin, fur, then flesh, bone, etc....Lots of inconsistencies in angles and densities when hitting a living target. The bullet is flying nice and stable until the impact on the inconsistent target with inconsistent angles and densities causes the bullet to become unstable.


If that was your point the same can be said of any bullet... and the more spire pointed the projectile is (heavier at base) the more it would tend to want to swap ends... also construction of varying weight materials, as H4831 suggested, would exaggerate this reaction... whatever... I'm still not shooting FMJ's at game with all of the other proven performers available.
 
If that was your point the same can be said of any bullet... and the more spire pointed the projectile is (heavier at base) the more it would tend to want to swap ends... also construction of varying weight materials, as H4831 suggested, would exaggerate this reaction... whatever... I'm still not shooting FMJ's at game with all of the other proven performers available.

It does happen with other bullets too. Which is why you sometimes find a bullet under the hide that is backwards or sideways.
 
Military fmj such as the 303 often had the bullet pulled then reloaded backwards making a wide meplate thick jacketed projectile. It was found that when loaded this way it would penetrate straight where normal positioned bullets would not. Many ivory poachers used this trick when they ran low on solids for their big bores

I've tried it with a 303 and to 100 yards they shot well
I'm not recommending this practice but fmj do have a purpose
 
Bullets precess (yaw) twice in flight, first when they leave the muzzle, then they stabilize only to yaw again upon impacting a denser than air object regardless of hardness or composition of the object. Stability in flight is dependent upon the center of gravity of the bullet coinciding with the geometric center of the bullet, and upon it's rotational velocity, which unlike its linear velocity, decays little during the time of flight. Upon impact the bullet's ability to regain stability so it can travel through the target in a stable trajectory is, by contrast, dependent on the position of its center of gravity along its length and on its rotational velocity. A boat-tail tends to balance the bullet more forward than a flat base which balances rearward. Likewise, a bullet with parallel sides tends to have its balance point near its linear center while a bullet with a secant ogive has its balance behind the point that a bullet with a tangent ogive would. Those folks who maintain the importance of a theoretical ideal rate of spin for any given bullet ignore the fact that the faster the bullet spins, the more rigid its stability is during the terminal portion of its trajectory, hence the deeper and straighter penetration tends to be. Thus in the discussion of terminal ballistics, when straight line penetration is desirable, a bullet from a 1:7 twist is preferable to one from a 1:12, provided the structure of the bullet is not compromised due to the greater centrifugal forces working on it as it deforms.

If we are talking about pure accuracy, there is no reason why a FMJ bullet cannot be as accurate as an expanding bullet, when both are manufactured within the same tolerances and a similar profile. Jacket uniformity, which effects the coincidence of the center of gravity and the geometric center of the bullet,is more important to accuracy than whether the bullet's nose is open or closed. Some FMJ bullets shoot very well, in fact my experience with a particular batch of Lapua .308/167 gr FMJs was nothing short of astonishing, as they decidedly out shot Sierra 168 MKs from my target rifle at 100, 500 and 800 yards. Those needle nosed mono-metal solids that Barnes manufactures in small bore calibers are quite accurate in some rifles, a pal of mine used them quite a bit in his .25/06 when hunting fur. Thus bullet construction has a much greater impact on terminal performance than on accuracy. A good bullet will shoot well, a poor one won't, provided that is, its chosen appropriately for the rifle its used in. When I acquired my son's rifle, which turned out to be a .270 (I was looking for a .30/06 but couldn't pass up the deal I could get on this .270) I immediately bought a few boxes of Woodleigh 180s to load for bear work. It didn't take much shooting to determine those bullets were inappropriate for use in his particular rifle, not that they were a poor bullet. But oblong bullet holes appeared in the target because those long bullets didn't fully stabilize in the 1:10 twist. Now it might be argued that bear defense is mostly a short range gig, and that marginal stability isn't a great issue, but bullet instability in the terminal portion of its trajectory could well become an issue when deep, straight line penetration is required for success.

Not all game is equal in density, and even game which has the densest body structure, is not uniformly dense. Hide is denser than viscera, bone is denser than hide, and blood is denser than the air pockets that surround organs and exist within the lungs. The resistance that the bullet encounters is a function of density, while its the construction of the bullet which determines how that bullet responds to the density. If resistance is slight, the bullet will slip through without much change to its shape, velocity, precession, or trajectory. But the denser the game, the more resistance the bullet encounters, and the greater the effect is on that bullet. Wolves tend to be long and lean, and one reason for their apparent toughness is that the bullet chosen might not upset as much as if it shall we say a pig of similar weight. Wolves are frequently shot while the hunter is in search of other game, thus the bullet he chooses is not specific to a 7' long animal that typically weighs quite a bit less than a third of the weight of an adult black bear.
 
Last edited:
Military fmj such as the 303 often had the bullet pulled then reloaded backwards making a wide meplate thick jacketed projectile. It was found that when loaded this way it would penetrate straight where normal positioned bullets would not. Many ivory poachers used this trick when they ran low on solids for their big bores

I've tried it with a 303 and to 100 yards they shot well
I'm not recommending this practice but fmj do have a purpose

I load my SPBT's backwards for my subsonic loads in 7.62X39 and .30/30...they fly with much more stability at lower velocities...
 
Do you have feeding issues in the 3030 or do you not use a lever action?

I shoot the .30/30 subs with backwards SPBT's mostly out of single shot rifles... but I have tried them in my 94's and they feed perfectly... if you saw the loaded round, you would almost think that it is a normal .30/30 lever load.
 
Back
Top Bottom