the weight of a bullet

M

Monochrome

Active Member
Here be the question that most dont want to answer or think about.

On a certain forum, not this one, you need to use 170 grains minimum in a rifle for cast bullet hunting. But the same forum has no issue with using 140 grain cast bullets in say 7x47 or 6.5 swede at the same velocity to kill deer.

But yet why is the 150 grain cast in a 308, "wrong"
 
M

Monochrome

Active Member
eggs, no. spurts, yes. deffinitely spurts.

The problem i have always had is that how can those who clap and offer agrandisements and shouts of heroism, to a man who takes self claimed 150 yard shots on deer using a henry rifle in 327 federal, using a 130 grain flat noseat 1500 fps beat down on a man who askes about a 30 caliber, 150 grain cast flat nose at the same velocity?
 
J

Jeff H

NW Ohio
Monochrome said:
...how can those who clap and offer agrandisements and shouts of heroism, to a man who takes self claimed 150 yard shots on deer using a henry rifle in 327 federal, using a 130 grain flat noseat 1500 fps beat down on a man who askes about a 30 caliber, 150 grain cast flat nose at the same velocity?
Click to expand...

This little phenomenon of "relativity" has puzzled me for a long time. Such nonsense is something which would theoretically be corrected with an open forum, available to the masses, but the propagation of myth and nonsense seems to have proliferated rather than having waned.

Some of the "hotter" revolver rounds of the past handful of decades basically duplicate a lot of the old, large-caliber, loping velocities and arcing trajectories of 19th century black powder arms who many claim to be ineffective and ineffectual game-killers.

The 357 Mag in a rifle will do what a 357 Max will do in a long-barreled handgun, but I've read many times where people will poo-poo the 357 in a rifle at 50 yards, but the 357 Max in a pistol is a flat-shooting, thumper at 200 - while both will yield essentially the same external ballistics with the same bullet.

Dead Horse Alert: The 6.5CM will zap deer at 200 yards, but the older 6.5s are weak and pathetic...

Ignorance and ego? I don't know. When I wonder about ballistic stuff, I do some research and compare things. When I wonder about the subject paradox, my head hurts and I avoid thinking about it. I get numerous texts from my best friend each week regarding the same irrational behavior on a shotgun reloading forum. People will dismiss an idea our-of-hand if it does not conform to their empirical data, without considering all the available information to allow them to make an informed and logical assessment.

Sometimes it's funny. Sometimes it just makes my head hurt.
 
JBinMN

JBinMN

Member
I hear the same things even in local watering holes, Sporting goods/gun stores, coffee shops & such. Not just on internet forums.

There are those who say things, that if one would take the time to educate themselves, they would find out that their opinion is skewed by not knowing enough about what they formed their opinion on.

IOW, they have only limited info & without a complete knowledge of the facts & factors that come in to play that they are not aware of being/happening to be able to actually give a knowledgeable & reasonable opinion.

Be it from what they consider to be "their experience", "something they heard", or "Grampa said ( or whomever)", or similar "background".

I have heard a 20 year LEO say on more than one occasion when others were discussing casting/reloading/ballistics/etc., something along the lines of:
"I would never use a cast bullet in one of my firearms after all the leading I got shooting them on an LEO qualifying range and it took us "hours" to get the leading out.". , as just another example of what I am trying to say here.

Even when told that there were factors that caused that situation & they could be easily taken care of with some attention to detail, and knowing a bit more about how to do things & the reply(ies) are generally along the lines of,

" Nope, not even gonna try. Lead cast bullets are crap, and always have been."

Or some such nonsense as that.


You could talk most any subject...about tractors, how to plant a garden, shoot archery, hunt different types of game, heck, even how to whittle a wooden spoon or make a walking stick.
One is most often gonna get someone who disagrees in one way or another, in most any subject, based not on knowing by the doing, or doing research to find out more, etc., but simply for some inane reasoning like some of the examples I mentioned above.

To top it all off, even if You are correct, some folks will just dismiss it as wild talk like as if ya said the moon is made of cheese or something.

Imagine when folks were thinking the world was flat and that someone could sail off the edge if they went out too far, or other such "opinions". If you were one who had the knowledge that they were mistaken & just did not know any better & said something, you would be ostracized/ridiculed, (and even tortured or put to death), simply for having more knowledge about a subject than others who were not willing to know more than what they thought themselves.

Yep, gonna run in to it over & over, but it isn't worth the time, if the ones you are dealing with won't even listen.
( Particularly on the internet where everything is true don't ya know. Just depends on who is telling ya something, right? < /Sarc.)

IMO, folks should just take the time to educate the ones who ya can about the things you know and can show if they are interested, & the hell with the rest.
Long post,eh?

.. Oh well, Thanks if ya got to this point & actually cared enough to read it.
 
Last edited:
J

Jeff H

NW Ohio
One advantage I have, which keeps me from going insane, is that I teach. I have a captive audience and I can MAKE them THINK.

I'll ask a question.

Silence.

I remind them ANY answer is a GOOD answer if it leads to discussion and thought - right, wrong, incomplete, whatever - GIVE ME SOMETHING.

Even a wrong answer is a PLUS, because whatever is asserted, we kick around, pick apart and decide if it's "right," or if it fits, whether it's valid.

If it's NOT "right," we have still advanced by eliminating an impossibility - we can put it aside, we've narrowed the field of POSSIBILITIES.

THINKING, I sometimes think, is simply beyond the average person these days. I spend more time trying to induce thought than covering the technical topic. It's WORK, but after three semesters, all who have made it that far can at least process logic, deduce, solve problems.

They resist at first, but eventually, they come to appreciate and embrace the concept of THINKING, in deference to just deciding what to accept.
 
RicinYakima

RicinYakima

High Steppes of Eastern Washington
Jeff H said:
They resist at first, but eventually, they come to appreciate and embrace the concept of THINKING, in deference to just deciding what to accept.
Click to expand...
Jeff,

An excellent post as always. I taught, part time, adult education for LEO, FFs and Medics for about 25 years. Thinking is a requirement as if you don't your, or your fellows, life is at risk. After Desert Storm, the Army was sending new 2LTs to the academy to teach them how we made quick decisions, with only partial information. Teaching thinking is much harder now that they grow up with electronic media and only answer multiple choice questions.
 
D

Dusty Bannister

Well-Known Member
I have to wonder if the default to heavy bullet weight is just not thinking past the length of the bullet nose to engage the lands. The heavier bullet weights usually have long body and long nose sometimes to the point of having to deep seat the bullet in the case. A bullet with a short nose (perhaps light for caliber) engages the lands early in the throat with the driving band and leaves the nose "free floating".
 
fiver

fiver

Well-Known Member
you get a lot of stupid answers from people that ain't tried nuthin.


we got a guy here in town that belongs to the whack-boom [flinch] club.

when we retrieve targets i'll say sumthin like hmm that's not bad but i think i could do better IF,,,, what do you think?
he just say's ''i've seen your groups before'' and heads over to his bench hiding his paper.
i guess he doesn't know i can see his groups through my scope.
 
RBHarter

RBHarter

West Central AR
That won't work . You can't do that . You're going to learn how to get lead out of the bore .
Vs
Try stuff. If it doesn't work you learned it doesn't work. If it works but fails you have a place to work from until it does work .

I've tried a bunch of stuff. I've scrubbed lead out of several miles of barrels . I've used 1000#@100yd for a long, long time..........about 40 yr .


200 gr @ .325 bc in 30 cal at 1900 fps MV.
Then I started looking at the 30-30 ....
Then i killed a few hogs with a 45 Colts.......
 
C

castmiester

Active Member
RBHarter said:
That won't work . You can't do that . You're going to learn how to get lead out of the bore .
Vs
Try stuff. If it doesn't work you learned it doesn't work. If it works but fails you have a place to work from until it does work .

I've tried a bunch of stuff. I've scrubbed lead out of several miles of barrels . I've used 1000#@100yd for a long, long time..........about 40 yr .


200 gr @ .325 bc in 30 cal at 1900 fps MV.
Then I started looking at the 30-30 ....
Then i killed a few hogs with a 45 Colts.......
Click to expand...
assumed that for many years until some guy stressed fit is king and cylinder throats diameters are the same or very close.
 
Last edited:
RBHarter

RBHarter

West Central AR
There are lots of formulas out there .
Taylor Knock Out
ME @ distance
There's another that "works " but it escapes me .

The short version of all of the numbers is that they give a number and you can use that number to compare loads , weights , and terminal arrivals. Upon terminal arrival an FMJ, SP , HP , and FP are going to be the deciding factor in the end results.
Do you want a clean hole in the paper ?
Do you want to be compliant with the Geneva Convention in case the Zombies cry war crimes ?
Want instant jello from a golfball sized hole with a pencil exit ?
Want to convert a 1-7# agricultural annoyance into a red poof ?
Want to make a leaky liver , flat lungs , rupture major arteries and not blow up the stomach?
Want to break a bunch of heavy bones with 2 holes?
Just CNS failure ?

Punching paper and little groups are relatively easy .
Break out of 75# and yd it gets more complicated. Bullet shape becomes almost more important than alloy . Then you have to have an alloy that will do what it needs to do on both ends of it's flight ...... unfortunately predicting how much energy you need is hard when your expectations are 65-105 yd and the field presents 10-150 yd ..... being dialed for a 400 shot over flagstone at 8000 ft makes a 50 yd shot in waist high sagebrush a lot harder than you'd think. Likewise a firm bullet for 50-75 yd expected shot is likely to just pencil through at 150 and if you want it double dia at 125-150 and take a 25 yd shot ......... To turn a not American phrase "it'll be bloody amburger' lad ." Of course there's stuff we can do to offset that .......I have what amounts to a 30 cal 165 gr ogival WC , 158 OWC/200 gr RNFP/250 gr narrow SWC in 9/35 cal and several.451&458s from 250-530 with at least a .300 flat point to offset "that wasn't part of the plan" .
 
J

Jeff H

NW Ohio
RBHarter said:
...
Do you want to be compliant with the Geneva Convention in case the Zombies cry war crimes ?
...
Click to expand...

If zombies were "legal," (no closed season, no bag limits?) I'd be looking most closely at pelt preservation.

Small entrance wound, NO exit wound, but explosive performance on important internal components.

If you look at the jeans some girls are wearing today, there HAS to be a market for zombie pelts!


...I'm sorry for that. I had to venture into town today and it always sours my demeanor for a while after I get home.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.