close
Long Range Hunting Online Magazine


Go Back   Long Range Hunting Online Magazine > Rifles, Reloading, Optics, Equipment > Rifles, Bullets, Barrels & Ballistics

Rifles, Bullets, Barrels & Ballistics Applied Ballistics

Reply

BULLET TEST COMPARISON (as promised)

LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
  #22  
Unread 04-08-2010, 09:25 PM
Platinum Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: rathdrum, id.
Posts: 4,879
Re: BULLET TEST COMPARISON (as promised)

Thanks again Mark! I plan on trying to set up a water media in the near future to give everything a fair chance. Water tends to work quite well and will definitely give more uniform results from shot to shot. AT the very least, I think these first results are good for comparison. The Nosler had a "slight" edge in these tests because it was a 200 grainer fired at equal velocities with the lighter weights. The momentum with the higher sectional density would exert a little more force on the bullet nose and help expansion. Feel free to chime in guys. I would like your input and ideas.......Rich
Reply With Quote
  •   #23  
    Unread 04-08-2010, 11:26 PM
    Official LRH Sponsor
     
    Join Date: Mar 2007
    Location: Montana
    Posts: 2,594
    Re: BULLET TEST COMPARISON (as promised)

    Quote:
    Originally Posted by elkaholic View Post
    Thanks again Mark! I plan on trying to set up a water media in the near future to give everything a fair chance. Water tends to work quite well and will definitely give more uniform results from shot to shot. AT the very least, I think these first results are good for comparison. The Nosler had a "slight" edge in these tests because it was a 200 grainer fired at equal velocities with the lighter weights. The momentum with the higher sectional density would exert a little more force on the bullet nose and help expansion. Feel free to chime in guys. I would like your input and ideas.......Rich
    Kind of surprised by the Berger pics. Fairly high velocity, little bullet deformation. I thought they were more frangible than that. I have never used them, but thought they had a reputation of being explosive.

    Steve
    __________________
    Hammer Bullets
    Advanced Technology
    Simply Better


    To hunt... or not to hunt...? What a stupid question.
    Reply With Quote

      #24  
    Unread 04-09-2010, 12:00 AM
    Platinum Member
     
    Join Date: Dec 2008
    Location: rathdrum, id.
    Posts: 4,879
    Re: BULLET TEST COMPARISON (as promised)

    Quote:
    Originally Posted by RockyMtnMT View Post
    Kind of surprised by the Berger pics. Fairly high velocity, little bullet deformation. I thought they were more frangible than that. I have never used them, but thought they had a reputation of being explosive.

    Steve
    I think they are explosive, but the question is at what velocity and upon hitting what? It seems that there might be a little more narrow window where they either explode or don't expand? I'll do some more testing with water and I think that should firm things up a bit........Rich
    Reply With Quote
      #25  
    Unread 04-09-2010, 12:18 AM
    Platinum Member
     
    Join Date: May 2008
    Location: South of Canada and North of Wyoming
    Posts: 6,068
    Re: BULLET TEST COMPARISON (as promised)

    Interesting results Rich. Like Steve, I would have thought the Bergers and probably the SMK's would have expanded. I always figured the narrow meplat would lead to inconsistent results, but for the most part, figured they would expand at least 90% of the time. It would be interesting to see a little larger sample size. Am looking forward to the water tests.

    I had an idea for water tests that I might try someday. Make a plywood box about 4' long by about maybe 1 1/2' square. 2x2's could be used to fasten the plywood at all the joints. Glue and screw it all together. Seal the inside joints and surfaces with polyurethane or driveway sealer (cheaper) to water proof it. Cut a hole in the shooting face and put a block of self sealing foam (like archer's use for targets) over the hole in the face to shoot through. You would probably want to put some sort of pressure relief in the lid, like a piece of PVC pipe sticking up so the box doesn't blow up.

    Not real sure how well the self sealing foam will hold up. Construction foam board might be another option and cheaper but might not seal off as well as the self sealing stuff.
    Reply With Quote
      #26  
    Unread 04-09-2010, 01:27 AM
    Platinum Member
     
    Join Date: Apr 2005
    Location: Alaska
    Posts: 4,646
    Re: BULLET TEST COMPARISON (as promised)

    Quote:
    Originally Posted by MontanaRifleman View Post
    I had an idea for water tests that I might try someday. Make a plywood box about 4' long by about maybe 1 1/2' square. 2x2's could be used to fasten the plywood at all the joints. Glue and screw it all together. Seal the inside joints and surfaces with polyurethane or driveway sealer (cheaper) to water proof it. Cut a hole in the shooting face and put a block of self sealing foam (like archer's use for targets) over the hole in the face to shoot through. You would probably want to put some sort of pressure relief in the lid, like a piece of PVC pipe sticking up so the box doesn't blow up.

    Not real sure how well the self sealing foam will hold up. Construction foam board might be another option and cheaper but might not seal off as well as the self sealing stuff.
    I would leave the entire top uncovered - or else expect the unit to be good for no more than one shot from a 7mm-300 mag class cartridge. Water being an non-compressible fluid, I would wager that the pressure spike of an expanding bullet will be too great to be relieved through any constricted area. But video the first shot if you seal the top!
    Reply With Quote
      #27  
    Unread 04-09-2010, 01:34 AM
    Platinum Member
     
    Join Date: Apr 2005
    Location: Alaska
    Posts: 4,646
    Re: BULLET TEST COMPARISON (as promised)

    Quote:
    Originally Posted by RockyMtnMT View Post
    Kind of surprised by the Berger pics. Fairly high velocity, little bullet deformation. I thought they were more frangible than that. I have never used them, but thought they had a reputation of being explosive.

    Steve
    I fully expect the Bergers will come unglued when they impact water, based on the wound paths I've seen on game. But looking forward to learning how they perform. They shrapnel quite consistently and reliably on the frail ribcage of game animals - broadside hits. That's been my experience. No different than Berger's description of their most typically observed, on-game, wound cavities.
    Reply With Quote
      #28  
    Unread 04-09-2010, 10:38 AM
    Platinum Member
     
    Join Date: Dec 2008
    Location: rathdrum, id.
    Posts: 4,879
    Re: BULLET TEST COMPARISON (as promised)

    Quote:
    Originally Posted by MontanaRifleman View Post
    Interesting results Rich. Like Steve, I would have thought the Bergers and probably the SMK's would have expanded. I always figured the narrow meplat would lead to inconsistent results, but for the most part, figured they would expand at least 90% of the time. It would be interesting to see a little larger sample size. Am looking forward to the water tests.

    I had an idea for water tests that I might try someday. Make a plywood box about 4' long by about maybe 1 1/2' square. 2x2's could be used to fasten the plywood at all the joints. Glue and screw it all together. Seal the inside joints and surfaces with polyurethane or driveway sealer (cheaper) to water proof it. Cut a hole in the shooting face and put a block of self sealing foam (like archer's use for targets) over the hole in the face to shoot through. You would probably want to put some sort of pressure relief in the lid, like a piece of PVC pipe sticking up so the box doesn't blow up.

    Not real sure how well the self sealing foam will hold up. Construction foam board might be another option and cheaper but might not seal off as well as the self sealing stuff.
    I made a box VERY similar to what you described one time to test in a slurry. Yes, You do want to keep the lid loose! My ultra had a habit of causing frequent repair work at around 5000 lt/lbs.
    Reply With Quote
    Reply

    Bookmarks

    Thread Tools
    Display Modes


    Similar Threads for: BULLET TEST COMPARISON (as promised)
    Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
    6mm and .243 Bullet Comparison? TnTom Reloading 10 11-18-2010 12:24 PM
    As Promised, 30-30 Load Data justgoto Reloading 13 11-01-2009 12:31 AM
    Seating Die Runout Comparison/Test RockZ Reloading 1 09-25-2009 09:28 PM
    Promised pics of the 510 Allen Magnum... Fiftydriver Rifles, Bullets, Barrels & Ballistics 23 02-28-2008 04:19 PM
    200gr Accubond comparison test of sort Brent Rifles, Bullets, Barrels & Ballistics 12 06-28-2003 06:08 PM


    All times are GMT -5. The time now is 02:28 AM.


    Powered by vBulletin ©2000 - 2016, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
    Content Management Powered by vBadvanced CMPS
    All content ©2010-2015 Long Range Hunting, LLC