The thread about the 30-30 and armored vest penetration made me think about how much armor it would take to stop a 375 H&H, 416 Rigby, or 458 Win Mag or Lott. Will these calibers penetrate any armored vest currently available or vehicles if necessary?
Safari Rifles and Penetration
- Thread starter GI Joe
- Start date
- Status
Art Eatman
Moderator In Memoriam
I reckon the bullet would stop on the plate, and the plate would stop on the ground on the off-side of the fella. 
Plumb messy.
, Art
Plumb messy., Art
I bought a level II vest a couple of years ago. I also had an opportunity to test a level II vest, so see what threats it would defeat.
12 GA 2 3/4 slug did not penetrate the vest, but it pushed a patch of vest almost as big around as one of those little maraschino cherry jars about 2 1/2" into the railroad tie the vest was wrapped around.
So, like Art said, mebbe it wouldn't penetrate, but would it matter?
John
12 GA 2 3/4 slug did not penetrate the vest, but it pushed a patch of vest almost as big around as one of those little maraschino cherry jars about 2 1/2" into the railroad tie the vest was wrapped around.
So, like Art said, mebbe it wouldn't penetrate, but would it matter?
John
nextjoe
Member
This is a Woodleigh 410 grain steel-jacketed solid fired from a .416 Rigby at 2350 fps. It penetrated somewhere between 4 and 6 feet of sand.
When my gunsmith test-fired the rifle after some work, he fired into a clay bank. He wanted to recover the bullet for me, but his longest cleaning rod couldn't reach far enough into the hole (perfectly straight penetration, btw) to touch the bullet.
*I* wouldn't want to be hit by one of these, no matter *what* I was wearing
Best,
Joe
Cosmoline
Member
The SD on those big boys is quite a bit better than your average shotgun slug, and the forces involved are several times the magnitude. The RN solids are also well-neigh impossible to destroy, so they aren't likely to deform like a soft slug would. I would expect even the highest level of armor would be destroyed. I would LOVE to see a test, though. Who here has a nitro express?
Art Eatman
Moderator In Memoriam
Hokay, Cosmo, and you round us up some testees with testes.
, Art
, Art
Gordon
Member
I have a .470 Nitro BUT I think that a .375 300 grain solid at 2600-2900 would penetrate kevlar armor or steel plate better than .470 500grain at 2100fps. I noticed my .300 Weatherby with 150 grain X bullets at 3400fps kinda melted their way thru the range gongs I've fired them at. I think that high velocity AND bullet weight/sectional density all play apart in defeating armor of course along with non frangible bullets. My example : the sabot round of tank 120 mm guns shoot smallish diameter tungsten rods at well over 4000fps. Whoops I forgot my .50 BMG does well with 700 grains at 2800fps!
Whoops I forgot my .50 BMG does well with 700 grains at 2800fps!John, IIRC that slug load used on the vest was a handload. I think it would stop many people (OUCH!).
It was much more impressive than my 300 grain castcore from my 4" 629. The castcore drove the vest far enough into wood that it took some work to get out. I suspect it would have been survivable, but could have cracked rib.
The little 5.56 ziped right thru BOTH sides of the vest, I don't remember if it exited the wood or not?
I would like to see what a 45 Colt with buffalo bore 325 grain HC would do and what 480 Ruger would do.
It was much more impressive than my 300 grain castcore from my 4" 629. The castcore drove the vest far enough into wood that it took some work to get out. I suspect it would have been survivable, but could have cracked rib.
The little 5.56 ziped right thru BOTH sides of the vest, I don't remember if it exited the wood or not?
I would like to see what a 45 Colt with buffalo bore 325 grain HC would do and what 480 Ruger would do.
nextjoe
Member
I don't know much about what it takes to penetrate armor, but the .375 with a 300 grain solid and the .416 with a 410 grain solid have a reputation for DEEP penetration, more so than the bigger Nitro Express cartridges, due to higher velocity and higher sectional density.
Best,
Joe
Best,
Joe
Penetration in say elephant vs metal/bricks/etc are not always similar. And I am starting to think that SD matters far less than bullet construction (ie toughness and stability after it hits).
If you check military manuals wou will see that max penetration against sandbags, concrete, and other hard materials is usually at extended ranges (5.56, 7.62, or 50 bmg doesn't matter they all perform better at longer range). After the bullet has slowed enough so it doesn't fragment, bend, or flatten when it hits.
So from a practical perspective a weaker cartridge might have greater penetration against say concrete at close range because bullet isn't destroyed on impact. Something to remember about backstops, what works up close might not be good at greater distance. IIRC 308 max penetration is around 600 meters.
I think we have learned enough about bullet performance on game to know that higher velocity requires tougher bullets (X's, failsafes, siwfts, Noslers, etc) to perform.
Old elephant cartridges all ran around 2150 fps and seemed to work well with FMJ.
Hardcast lead bullets work well in handguns and low velocity rifles like 45-70.
Old military cartridges (303, 7x57, 6.5's, 30-06, etc) with bullets moving 2050 to 2400 fps worked well with FMJ on Big animals like buff and elephant.
Remember the 416 Rigby was a high speed DG cartridge for the time, and it used slightly tougher bullets.
The 375 was designed AFAIK for thin skinned game. It was high speed for the technology of solids at that time. I think this is were some of the bad press about using 375 on buff and elephant comes from.
If you check military manuals wou will see that max penetration against sandbags, concrete, and other hard materials is usually at extended ranges (5.56, 7.62, or 50 bmg doesn't matter they all perform better at longer range). After the bullet has slowed enough so it doesn't fragment, bend, or flatten when it hits.
So from a practical perspective a weaker cartridge might have greater penetration against say concrete at close range because bullet isn't destroyed on impact. Something to remember about backstops, what works up close might not be good at greater distance. IIRC 308 max penetration is around 600 meters.
I think we have learned enough about bullet performance on game to know that higher velocity requires tougher bullets (X's, failsafes, siwfts, Noslers, etc) to perform.
Old elephant cartridges all ran around 2150 fps and seemed to work well with FMJ.
Hardcast lead bullets work well in handguns and low velocity rifles like 45-70.
Old military cartridges (303, 7x57, 6.5's, 30-06, etc) with bullets moving 2050 to 2400 fps worked well with FMJ on Big animals like buff and elephant.
Remember the 416 Rigby was a high speed DG cartridge for the time, and it used slightly tougher bullets.
The 375 was designed AFAIK for thin skinned game. It was high speed for the technology of solids at that time. I think this is were some of the bad press about using 375 on buff and elephant comes from.
Cosmoline
Member
SD is critical, but if the bullet falls to pieces then it's SD goes down the toilet. I'd like to see some of the new-generation Barnes solids put up against various forms of body armor. I suspect this hasn't been done because the antis might get wind of it and label them "cop killers."
Guy, actually, the .223 went through the front of the vest, through the wood, and stopped on the inside of the vest at the rear. It was the 300 grain .45-70 SJHP that went throught the wood, both sides of the vest, and kept going!
I think you may be right, at least to some degree, about penetration and speed. I remember reading an article a few years ago about point-blank bear defense. Evidently, a lot of excellent longer-range bullets weren't nearly as good at a few feet, because the high velocity bullets fragmented...
John
I think you may be right, at least to some degree, about penetration and speed. I remember reading an article a few years ago about point-blank bear defense. Evidently, a lot of excellent longer-range bullets weren't nearly as good at a few feet, because the high velocity bullets fragmented...
John
Preacherman
Member
In World War I, there are numerous reports of the British bringing out African big game rifles and using them against German reinforced sniping positions. Apparently the big bores (firing solid ammunition) could easily penetrate up to half-an-inch of the mild steel used in those days, and go on to kill anyone standing behind it. I remember reading about this in McBride and other contemporary trench memoirs.
Gordon
Member
I thought about this today and remember the North Fork Bullets web info with their proprietary .408 Cheytac rifle cartridge being unbelieveable with their lathe turned bronze bullets. A lathe turned bronze bullet is gonna go thru any kevlar like its not there, high speed heavy solid bullets will take out steel and ceramic. 
Last edited:
John: My bad (but who uses poodle shooters anyway )
John can you check your military manuals (you have newer ones?), the penetration figures I have come mainly from Field Manual No. 90-10-1:
Hmm, been a while since I looked at this. Says 7.62 nato would not defeat single layer of sandbags at 50 meters, but will at 200 meters.
Remember this is with military ball and AP ammo. AP ammo doesn't always give best straight line penetration on living targets because twist rates are usually not designed to keep those long round stable in target.
I suspect some of JD Jones's cartridges like the 50 (500? The one based on 460 Weatherby shortened to fit standaard length actions) whisper would do well with correct twist rate because bullet is started at much lower speed. Not very likely that it will self destruct on target.
If you us Barnes solids you probably want a bit faster than normal twist. I have a theory that part of the reason hard cast blunt tiped bullets are proving to be good in handguns and rifles like 45-70 is because the shorter length provided by blunt tip gives you greater margin for bullet stability inside target (ie harder to tumble it even if it hits bone at an angle) than roundnose or spitzer.
)John can you check your military manuals (you have newer ones?), the penetration figures I have come mainly from Field Manual No. 90-10-1:
Hmm, been a while since I looked at this. Says 7.62 nato would not defeat single layer of sandbags at 50 meters, but will at 200 meters.
Remember this is with military ball and AP ammo. AP ammo doesn't always give best straight line penetration on living targets because twist rates are usually not designed to keep those long round stable in target.
I suspect some of JD Jones's cartridges like the 50 (500? The one based on 460 Weatherby shortened to fit standaard length actions) whisper would do well with correct twist rate because bullet is started at much lower speed. Not very likely that it will self destruct on target.
If you us Barnes solids you probably want a bit faster than normal twist. I have a theory that part of the reason hard cast blunt tiped bullets are proving to be good in handguns and rifles like 45-70 is because the shorter length provided by blunt tip gives you greater margin for bullet stability inside target (ie harder to tumble it even if it hits bone at an angle) than roundnose or spitzer.
Funny thing about "penetration" and big, dangerous game.
While a 416 might cut through 6 linear feet of clay, it probably won't exit a broadside shot on a hippo. Pachyderms have really TOUGH hide, and the bullet expends a LOT of energy punching through it. Not to mention dense bone, thick muscle, etc. Solids are designed to break bone and NOT deform, to keep moving in a straight line through the bone to the vitals. Breaking the shoulder "anchors" the dangerous game, incase your bullet doiesn't kill it outright.
The Myth of the 375 as being "light" for elephant was in its high speed 235 grain trim, as opposed to its low speed 300 grain variety. (You are also talking about an argument that started between guiys like us almost 100 years ago). More over, there were some ivory hunters using .256 rifles (basically a 7x57mauser with solids) to punch elephant with head shots. NOT something I'd recommend.
According to John Pilaster, and Tales of the Gun, African Hunters did indeed loan heavy rifles to front line troops in WW1 to knock out german snipers, who would advance into no man's land behind portable steel or iron plates that were impervious to .303 fire.
Anyway the point is, even if a .416 will shoot through a half-track it won't likely shoot through a hippo.
And the day a gang banger can afford a .470 double rifle...
well.. 'nuff said.
While a 416 might cut through 6 linear feet of clay, it probably won't exit a broadside shot on a hippo. Pachyderms have really TOUGH hide, and the bullet expends a LOT of energy punching through it. Not to mention dense bone, thick muscle, etc. Solids are designed to break bone and NOT deform, to keep moving in a straight line through the bone to the vitals. Breaking the shoulder "anchors" the dangerous game, incase your bullet doiesn't kill it outright.
The Myth of the 375 as being "light" for elephant was in its high speed 235 grain trim, as opposed to its low speed 300 grain variety. (You are also talking about an argument that started between guiys like us almost 100 years ago). More over, there were some ivory hunters using .256 rifles (basically a 7x57mauser with solids) to punch elephant with head shots. NOT something I'd recommend.
According to John Pilaster, and Tales of the Gun, African Hunters did indeed loan heavy rifles to front line troops in WW1 to knock out german snipers, who would advance into no man's land behind portable steel or iron plates that were impervious to .303 fire.
Anyway the point is, even if a .416 will shoot through a half-track it won't likely shoot through a hippo.
And the day a gang banger can afford a .470 double rifle...
well.. 'nuff said.
Dr.Rob: The 6.5 and 7mm loads used on elephant didn't they have mv around 2300-2400 fps? About the same as the 416 Rigby, but a bit slower than 375H&H/300 @ 2550?
I agree with you that "Solids are designed to break bone and NOT deform," but sometimes the construction of the bullet isn't up to the job in the higher speed cartridges. Extreme example would be 460 Wby loaded with a 500 grain solid.
I agree with you that "Solids are designed to break bone and NOT deform," but sometimes the construction of the bullet isn't up to the job in the higher speed cartridges. Extreme example would be 460 Wby loaded with a 500 grain solid.
John, that exact finding was posted by Elmer Keith in "Rifles for Big Game" more than 50 years ago. A lot of powerful cartridges like 35 Whelen would be a tremendous game bullet at 200 + yards but a failure at close range due to fragmentation of the payload. Available bullets have prolly been improved by this time but a high speed light bullet is not necessarily the best stopper, paper bullistics aside.
mtnbkr
Member
IIRC, it's the ratio of width (caliber) to length. A longer bullet will penetrate better because it tends to maintain a straighter trajectory after it enters the target. I'm working from memory here, so I may be wrong.
SD is one of the reasons cartridges like the 6.5 Swede work as well as they do on large game.
Chris
nextjoe
Member
Sectional density is the ratio of weight to frontal area. It's calculated by weight of the bullet in pounds (7000 grains=1 pound) divided by the square of the bullet diameter in inches.
You'll notice that this formula would be for a "square" bullet, instead of circular (in cross section). I don't know why it's done this way, probably so we don't have to go dragging pi into the equation
All else equal, higher SD should equal better penetration. When you get into expanding bullets with various materials and constructions, all bets are off...
Best,
Joe
You'll notice that this formula would be for a "square" bullet, instead of circular (in cross section). I don't know why it's done this way, probably so we don't have to go dragging pi into the equation
All else equal, higher SD should equal better penetration. When you get into expanding bullets with various materials and constructions, all bets are off...
Best,
Joe
mtnbkr
Member
D'oh! I forgot about the weight aspect.
Chris
Chris
nextjoe
Member
Chris,
Making a bullet heavier without increasing diameter is usually done by making it longer, so you were pretty close. The only other way to do it is by using a denser material like DU or tungsten. Speer's African Grand Slams use a tungsten core to increase weight without increasing length. They also cost like imported sin.
On the flip side, bullets like the Barnes X and North Fork are lighter than a conventional bullet of the same length, since they're less dense (copper in the Barnes, copper with a smallish lead core in the North Fork).
On further reflection, I suppose the *other* only way to make a bullet heavier without increasing length or diameter is to make it closer to cylindrical, like an LBT solid or a wadcutter (but without the hollow base)...
Best,
Joe
Making a bullet heavier without increasing diameter is usually done by making it longer, so you were pretty close. The only other way to do it is by using a denser material like DU or tungsten. Speer's African Grand Slams use a tungsten core to increase weight without increasing length. They also cost like imported sin.
On the flip side, bullets like the Barnes X and North Fork are lighter than a conventional bullet of the same length, since they're less dense (copper in the Barnes, copper with a smallish lead core in the North Fork).
On further reflection, I suppose the *other* only way
to make a bullet heavier without increasing length or diameter is to make it closer to cylindrical, like an LBT solid or a wadcutter (but without the hollow base)...Best,
Joe
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked
