Terminal performance comparison

[barnfrog]

The picture below is of two bullets shot into a bullet trap consisting of a bucket of sand with rubber matting held across the mouth. Range was 25 yards. The one on the right is an Acme .358 Hi-Tek coated 158-grain SWC (I think; I bought them from another forum member). If it is in fact an Acme bullet, it is BHN 16. I load these with 5.0 grains of Universal, resulting in a muzzle velocity from my Model 19 of around 825 fps, give or take. The bullet on the left is an MBC .411 Hi-Tek coated 215-grain SWC (I know it is; I bought them from MBC). Those are loaded with 15.3 grains of 2400 and are traveling about 1100 fps when they leave the barrel of my Model 57.

I thought it was very interesting to see the vastly different amounts of expansion, which I assume are primarily due to the velocity differential since the bullets are pretty similar in hardness. The .41 Mag expanded to .51" or about 25% at its widest point, while the smaller but slightly softer bullet hardly expanded any, if at all. I would have thought the .358" bullet would expand a little bit at least.

This of course does not tell me anything about how either would perform when used on game, only how they perform relative to each other at these speeds in this medium. Intuitively, it seems like expansion would be greater when shot into a pile of sand than when shot into soft living tissue, but I'm no terminal ballistician. Hitting bone would of course alter things, too.

No great revelations here. Just made me go hmmmmm.

 

[AJC1]

The picture below is of two bullets shot into a bullet trap consisting of a bucket of sand with rubber matting held across the mouth. Range was 25 yards. The one on the right is an Acme .358 Hi-Tek coated 158-grain SWC (I think; I bought them from another forum member). If it is in fact an Acme bullet, it is BHN 16. I load these with 5.0 grains of Universal, resulting in a muzzle velocity from my Model 19 of around 825 fps, give or take. The bullet on the left is an MBC .411 Hi-Tek coated 215-grain SWC (I know it is; I bought them from MBC). Those are loaded with 15.3 grains of 2400 and are traveling about 1100 fps when they leave the barrel of my Model 57.

I thought it was very interesting to see the vastly different amounts of expansion, which I assume are primarily due to the velocity differential since the bullets are pretty similar in hardness. The .41 Mag expanded to .51" or about 25% at its widest point, while the smaller but slightly softer bullet hardly expanded any, if at all. I would have thought the .358" bullet would expand a little bit at least.

This of course does not tell me anything about how either would perform when used on game, only how they perform relative to each other at these speeds in this medium. Intuitively, it seems like expansion would be greater when shot into a pile of sand than when shot into soft living tissue, but I'm no terminal ballistician. Hitting bone would of course alter things, too.

No great revelations here. Just made me go hmmmmm.

View attachment 1208641

Any bullets shot into the same medium give a comparable example. A bullet shot at 38 velosity will not compare to magnum velocity results. A 357 vs 41 would provide more like results....

 

[BJung]

Can you speed 'er up a bit. Do you have more bullets? How about a .357-158SWC load using 8.7gr BD?

My records shoes that the best accuracy for a .357magnum is with 17 - 18bhn. Do you have any empty milk jugs to fill with water?

 

[barnfrog]

Can you speed 'er up a bit. Do you have more bullets? How about a .357-158SWC load using 8.7gr BD?

My records shoes that the best accuracy for a .357magnum is with 17 - 18bhn. Do you have any empty milk jugs to fill with water?

I don't necessarily want to increase expansion of the .357 projectile. My post was more of an observation than looking for ideas of how to change performance. I've tried various loads going up to around 1060 fps. Nothing shoots really well out of that gun, and there's the whole forcing cone issue with the Model 19. So I'll continue to shoot these as target loads until I decide to upgrade to a Model 27.

 

[AJC1]

I don't necessarily want to increase expansion of the .357 projectile. My post was more of an observation than looking for ideas of how to change performance. I've tried various loads going up to around 1060 fps. Nothing shoots really well out of that gun, and there's the whole forcing cone issue with the Model 19. So I'll continue to shoot these as target loads until I decide to upgrade to a Model 27.

I wasn't advocating for pushing a round, but to temper expectations based on speed. I don't expect 454 belistic performance out of 45c

 

[barnfrog]

I wasn't advocating for pushing a round, but to temper expectations based on speed. I don't expect 454 belistic performance out of 45c

Understood. I was responding to BJung's inquiring if I could "speed 'er up a bit."

 

[GeoDudeFlorida]

The picture below is of two bullets shot into a bullet trap consisting of a bucket of sand with rubber matting held across the mouth. Range was 25 yards. The one on the right is an Acme .358 Hi-Tek coated 158-grain SWC (I think; I bought them from another forum member). If it is in fact an Acme bullet, it is BHN 16. I load these with 5.0 grains of Universal, resulting in a muzzle velocity from my Model 19 of around 825 fps, give or take. The bullet on the left is an MBC .411 Hi-Tek coated 215-grain SWC (I know it is; I bought them from MBC). Those are loaded with 15.3 grains of 2400 and are traveling about 1100 fps when they leave the barrel of my Model 57.

I thought it was very interesting to see the vastly different amounts of expansion, which I assume are primarily due to the velocity differential since the bullets are pretty similar in hardness. The .41 Mag expanded to .51" or about 25% at its widest point, while the smaller but slightly softer bullet hardly expanded any, if at all. I would have thought the .358" bullet would expand a little bit at least.

This of course does not tell me anything about how either would perform when used on game, only how they perform relative to each other at these speeds in this medium. Intuitively, it seems like expansion would be greater when shot into a pile of sand than when shot into soft living tissue, but I'm no terminal ballistician. Hitting bone would of course alter things, too.

No great revelations here. Just made me go hmmmmm.

View attachment 1208641

Which dash on the Model 19?
Don’t really matter for the post, I’m just curious. I always liked the 15 and 19 Masterpieces. Don’t have any left but I have had a few of each.

 

[barnfrog]

Which dash on the Model 19?
Don’t really matter for the post, I’m just curious. I always liked the 15 and 19 Masterpieces. Don’t have any left but I have had a few of each.

It's a 19-4.

 

[CraigC]

I would say the difference is mostly impact velocity.

 

[Shawn Dodson]

Intuitively, it seems like expansion would be greater when shot into a pile of sand than when shot into soft living tissue, but I'm no terminal ballistician. Hitting bone would of course alter things, too.

The bullet on the left didn't expand, it deformed. Yes, its recovered diameter is larger than its unfired diameter but this is the result of colliding with a solid medium, like the front end of a car deforms when it runs into a brick wall.

Hitting bone also causes deformation instead of expansion.

Hollowpoint bullets require fluid pressure to expand, and will usually expand to a greater diameter in water than when fired into sand.

 

[BJung]

I think the bhn is too hard for a .38 hollow point. Try shooting it into 4 - 5 jugs of water or into a 50gal drum of water.

 

[CraigC]

The bullet on the left didn't expand, it deformed.

Same difference. That's how a solid nose cast bullet "expands". Like this one.

 

[Shawn Dodson]

Same difference. That's how a solid nose cast bullet "expands". Like this one.

View attachment 1208716

It's deformed (crushed due to shear force) as opposed to expanded. The bullet on the right is expanded, where the core of the bullet nose "flows" backward around the shank (due to inertial force).

 

[GeoDudeFlorida]

I think the whole discussion around “expansion” is more than a little misguided. It’s all about, “The Majik Bullet” theory and completely ignores what actually kills a living beast. A .22LR six gun is a capable hunting tool. I have hunted with old swamp rats who took 150lb pigs with one. Defense enthusiasts go gaga over .32ACP hollow points that reliably expand to .38” but refuse to acknowledge that a .38Spl is already .38” and moving faster than the .32

It’s all a little silly to be honest. You want a through shot. You want to induce heart failure (cardiac arrest) or central nervous system failure. You want the bullet to hit where it can do one or both of those things. A double-lung shot with no expansion is far better than a peritoneal shot with 200% expansion.

Back to those old swamp rats: they could put a .22LR in the brain box at five paces or 20yds, which ever the animal was giving them. That’s experience and skill working together. I managed to do that once and decided to stick with a .38. Less demanding. Call it a cheat.

 

[41 Mag]

So I will play along with my little bit of who do voodoo..

When I began casting my initial bullets were the wide flat nose type, mainly for my magnum revolvers. All was right with the world right up until I discovered MOE and MP molds.

Ok so a few other things contributed as well. It was about the same time as Remington stopped selling the majority of their component bullets, as well as a shortage due to the political front. I needed to have a reliable source of bullets for hunting with my handguns and I prefer HP's mostly in things below 44 caliber. Well that posed a new problem for me on how to verify they would actually expand, verses pretty much explode.

At our country place the soil is a sandy loam sorta baby powder consistency sand. I have used it for years to catch bullets but mainly unencapsulated, as in just where ever they landed in the berm. I have shot thousands of rifle bullets and JHP handgun bullets into it as well as compared recovered bullets from deer and hos to those and the comparison is close enough for the gals I go with.

I had access to a ton of 6 gal buckets with screw on lids. I used these packed full of this sand and just dampened by about 8'ish ounces of water and left to peculate for about a week prior to shooting. Think terrarium if you will. I could set up three or four, screw the lids on when we left, and they would be perfect the following weekend after sitting in the sun.

My goal was to formulate an alloy which I could as closely as possible duplicate the performance of the jacketed bullets I had been using. So blending up small batches at a time of around 3-5lbs, and pouring up enough bullets to get an idea from it began about a year or so journey of blending and shooting. As mentioned there is a difference in expansion and sheer. I have seen both, and plenty of in between.

Below are some pics of several different bullets both solid and HP in various forms of good expansion and over expansion.

I have zip lock sammich bags half full of these from the testing. It bears to note however that not only does one have to find a proper accurate load, but also to know the impact velocities at the approximate ranges they will be used because as mentioned this is what is going to dictate the resistance when things get together. Most of my testing was done at 50 and 75yds on the heavier bullets simply due to the penetration of them through my buckets. With the lighter ones and smaller calibers like 9mm up to 357's I could use 25yds and 50yds.

 

[Show Me]

Good pictures. FYI , dumped some cast bullets that had been shot into sand into a pot of lead and poof it was all over the bench just missing me.

 

[41 Mag]

and poof it was all over the bench just missing me.

Yeah, ya gotta be careful about that.

Usually when I "recycle" the ones recovered at the range berms, and outta the pasture, I put a sizable wad of them in my smelting pot all by themselves. Then bring the heat up nice and slow so it gives ample time for any moisture to expand and evaporate.

Yes trapped moisture in a pot of molten lead is a scary scene. Nobody likes a visit from the tinsel fairy.