|
|
Post by whitworth on Oct 30, 2009 5:04:25 GMT -5
Here's one that should to elicit a stoning,... ;D For those of you who shoot the really heavy heavies (bullets) in your handguns,.....regardless of caliber,....why? What was the heaviest Keith ever used in his handguns? What advantages are there to compensate for the extra recoil and use of extra lead in that one shot? (semi-rhetorical) Who here is going to shoot something that actually NEEDS the extra weight that a standard, hard cast bullet would be a disadvantage? Has this become the newest part of the newest fad? HUGE handguns that shoot HUGE bullets?? It seems to me the bullets just keep getting bigger, and bigger, and bigger,........and,..... Priest, I have read and reread your original post and I don't think I am missing a single point. You make many assumptions like the one about increased recoil -- I think a couple of us have addressed this and you haven't acknowledged it. As TEXASFIVEGUN pointed out, they do more and punish the shooter less. You also assumed that many hunters would not need the extra penetration offered by heavier cast bullets. I would think that is not the case as many here hunt game much larger and tougher than whitetail. Even a 200 + pound wild hog requires more bullet than deer -- just a more densely built animal. You asked why some of us shoot really heavy for caliber bullets, and I explained that to you as well. Penetration, penetration, penetration. The only question I failed to answer was the one about Elmer Keith's bullet choices. I can honestly say that he would probably approve of the direction handgun hunting has gone with a couple of exceptions, but we have come a long way since, in my estimation. Thank you, TEXASFIVEGUN, you hit the nail on its proverbial head. Priest, do you hunt? |
|
|
|
Post by whitworth on Oct 30, 2009 6:45:07 GMT -5
Actually, Elmer Keith was a proponent of heavy for caliber bullets, but you have to remember that in those days, there were no really strong platforms to deal with the higher pressures associated with higher performance revolver rounds. Quite a few handguns were blown up in the creation of the .44 magnum. We have better revolvers available made of much better materials, better powders, etc.
I suspect that Linebaugh quote was from a long time ago, but talk to him today about the .475 and he will prescribe 420s at 1,200 fps.
|
|
|
|
Post by AxeHandle on Oct 30, 2009 7:39:23 GMT -5
I played with some 350s and 500s in my 500 S&W a while back... Both bullets loaded over a full charge of H110... The first impression was the the 350 kick hardest... After a few rounds it became obvious that the 350 was a lot of hot air... The 500 was a hammer!
|
|
|
|
Post by the priest on Oct 30, 2009 9:03:08 GMT -5
Geez,....I'm not sure how I can miss the point of my own thread. So you guys are saying that if we all shot a 300 gr bullet at 1200fps out of a handgun, then shot a 400 grain bullet out of the same handgun, at the same velocity it will kick less? That hasn't been my experience. As a matter of fact,....that's pretty much impossible if you're running both at the same velocity. Maybe you guys are trying to say that a heavier bullet doesn't need to go as fast to do the same job?  ? Yes,....I definitely hunt. |
|
|
|
Post by AxeHandle on Oct 30, 2009 9:36:18 GMT -5
Haven't seen Mr "Super Vel" chime in here yet.... I bet the curmudgeon has some distinctively different ideas about the bullet weight and bullet velocity trade off.... Something kwel about a fire breathing 180 grain 44 magnum....  |
|
|
|
Post by whitworth on Oct 30, 2009 10:23:50 GMT -5
Geez,....I'm not sure how I can miss the point of my own thread. So you guys are saying that if we all shot a 300 gr bullet at 1200fps out of a handgun, then shot a 400 grain bullet out of the same handgun, at the same velocity it will kick less? That hasn't been my experience. As a matter of fact,....that's pretty much impossible if you're running both at the same velocity. Maybe you guys are trying to say that a heavier bullet doesn't need to go as fast to do the same job? ? Yes,....I definitely hunt. That is not what we are saying at all. You don't have to drive heavier bullets so fast for them to get the job done. Now, load heavy bullets and drive up the velocity, you'll get all the recoil you desire (or not). Did I not address every single point of your original post? What do you hunt, if you don't mind me asking? The reason I ask is that big and heavy aren't necessary for deer, but I'm not willing to change my load for an animal that I hunt once a year. |
|
Len
.30 Stingray
Posts: 358
|
Post by Len on Oct 30, 2009 10:56:39 GMT -5
What do you hunt, if you don't mind me asking? The reason I ask is that big and heavy aren't necessary for deer, but I'm not willing to change my load for an animal that I hunt once a year. [/quote]
Absolutely correct, you become more proficient with your gun load combo and the deer can't be shot too dead
Len
|
|
Aggie01
.375 Atomic
max
Posts: 1,779
|
Post by Aggie01 on Oct 30, 2009 11:39:50 GMT -5
DO you guys know how tempted I am to throw a whole pile of meaningless numbers into this discussion?
Something along the lines of:
Surface area to volume ratios being what they are for cylindrical objects, a large caliber bullet can be fired at the same velocity and will penetrate more deeply & lose velocity less quickly than a smaller caliber bullet of equal material, design, sectional density & initial velocity.
|
|
|
|
Post by TEXASFIVEGUN on Oct 30, 2009 12:15:45 GMT -5
NO AGGIE01 NO DON'T DO IT! YOU WILL MAKE MY HEAD HURT AGAIN!
|
|
|
|
Post by maxcactus on Oct 30, 2009 12:52:54 GMT -5
DO you guys know how tempted I am to throw a whole pile of meaningless numbers into this discussion? Something along the lines of: Surface area to volume ratios being what they are for cylindrical objects, a large caliber bullet can be fired at the same velocity and will penetrate more deeply & lose velocity less quickly than a smaller caliber bullet of equal material, design, sectional density & initial velocity. I certainly don't want to give TEXASFIVEGUN a headache, but I LOVE those sorts of "meaningless numbers" - as long as you know how to apply them, they can be really fun. Back to The Priest's quote of John Linebaugh, both the .475 and .500 Linebaugh's existed when he wrote about the 260 gr Keith @ 900 fps being sufficient for whitetail even out to @ 100 yards. I think Linebaugh's quote needs to be taken in context of the full article/thesis. He was stating that the 45 Colt loaded with standard loads is sufficient for most hunting, but loaded to it's full potential can flatten trajectory extending effective range (provided the shooter is up to task) and can be used to tackle heavier game. He certainly promoted larger cartridges (his own) if the shooter KNEW he was going after game that could potentially trade places on the food chain. Priest asked about "NEEDING the extra weight" for the game we usually hunt and if a standard weight slug wouldn't suffice. I can certainly see the logic in using one load for all hunting - and if you hunt elk, moose, bear, etc, making it the largest/heaviest you can handle. Conversely, if most of our hunting is deer, antelope, small pigs, etc, does an extra heavy bullet/load provide us any REAL advantage? Also, I (and I'm sure others here) can't/don't use the same load in our Rugers that we do in our Smiths. Same bullet maybe, even if heavy, but not driven to the same velocities. So there has to be some adjustment. So if we switch from say a 300 or 330 gr bullet to a 280 gr slug, are we really giving up that much performance at normal hunting distances on the majority of the game we hunt? As an example, I'm looking at a word document of some results from one of the Linebaugh Sixgun Seminars and some of the results are surprising. Looking at the .45 Colt results, I see a... 350 gr LFN @ 1030 fps penetrating 26" of wet newsprint and a 265 gr. Mt Baldy Keith @ 675 fps penetrating 27" of same. I realize this is only a single example from a large test and while a single test like this isn't conclusive, it does help me to see things from The Priest's perspective. Does the additional weight (and velocity) buy us enough of a performance increase to offset the additional recoil, blast, etc? In many cases it may - especially in the case of large critters. But on deer?? Max. P.S. A couple more examples from the same document... 335 gr CPBC LFN @ 1158 fps penetrating 29" of newsprint. 240 gr LRN @ 950 fps went 21" 330 gr LFN @ 1289 fps went 22" 300 gr LBT @ 1180 fps went 38" 350 gr LBT @ 1187 fps went 42" 350 gr LBT @ 1400 fps went 43" (ouch!) All these loads from a .45 Colt (I'm assuming the last two loads from a 5 shot revolver). |
|
|
|
Post by AxeHandle on Oct 30, 2009 12:53:42 GMT -5
Ha! Put them numbers up dude.... You going to show us how a 250 grain .452 Keith SWC launched at 1050 FPS will out perform a 250 grain HPBTMK out of my 300 whisper at 1050 FPS right?  |
|
|
|
Post by boxhead on Oct 30, 2009 13:40:37 GMT -5
So with all of the above that I have have not read as I assume it is the same ol' stuff... clearly it does not take much to kill a deer, even the fatties that existed in southern Alberta from which I just departed. Remember what the gold ol' 30-30 has done for years, with "simple" bullets too. While a fan of heavy cast slugs my experience is that the 240 gr XTP launched from a 44 Mag will flatten any deer or hog if placed where intended. I shoot the 45's, 475 and 500 because it is fun. I would have no qualms chasing elk with lesser calibers and heavy cast or jacketed bullets. Crap, we kill people with the 9mm, 45 ACP and 223 and 308...
|
|
jgt
.327 Meteor
Enter your message here...
Posts: 807
|
Post by jgt on Oct 30, 2009 14:33:53 GMT -5
|
|
|
|
Post by the priest on Oct 30, 2009 14:52:18 GMT -5
Thanks Boxhead,....and much of it has been the same old stuff. Hell, JT has said a few times he hunts whitetail with pretty much the same thing. So the previous poster was wrong here,...sorry.
All right......because Chad asked me to spoil the fun (that Whitworth still isn't getting),...
This WHOLE thread has had a few intentions, one of which is to get people to think. Think about WHY they shoot the really heavy bullets when they're generally NOT needed. And, hopefully,......finding the REAL benefits to shooting 'heavy for caliber' (I'm sick of that phrase by the way) handgun bullets. Shooting a whitetail with 400 grain bullets for reasons of more penetration is ridiculous as a general rule. It's also pretty ridiculous to carry 400 grain bullets,....in we'll say a .45,.....because you're worried about Grizzly bears in New Mexico. That's plain silly. It's also pretty silly to say, "because I'll have more stopping power at 150 yards". Let's get real,.... So do we 'need' them for penetration? No we don't,....we already have enough,..............SO WHAT ARE THE OTHER BENEFITS!!!
The fact of the matter is, if you run two bullets at the same velocity the heavy ones kick more. Fact. I can prove that mathematically if anyone wants to continue to deny it. So the question begs,.....why shoot these heavy bullets if they're not needed for penetration? If that game animal (WHATEVER that animal is) is being completed penetrated and exited,....WHY shoot something different, something bigger. Have we forgotten that the sole purpose to a hard cast bullet is generally to get the whole way through? It's not going to cause damage like a rifle, it doesn't need enough speed to open like a JHP. Poke a hole,....that's it.
Chad, aka TexasFiveGun, brought up the best answers for the field,....getting past natural obstructions. Accuracy was mentioned by CAS, Chad, and one other whom I can't remember at this point (sorry!). Lee also made a good point that is sometimes true. What I was hoping to find were the 'always' answers for their use,.......not the ones that only apply to this gun, or that gun,.....ones you can all but put in stone.
There are STILL other answers here to why these are beneficial. I'm hoping someone will find them before this gets further off track.
I was also hoping the Curmudgeon would chime in, both to show that there is more than one way to skin a cat,......and also to add in his experience.
Last thing I'll mention is that yes, I hunt. I'm not a target guy for the most part although I do enjoy shooting. I've been hunting with a handgun since I was about 16 and I stopped counting at 50 whitetail. That was years ago. I can hunt,......I'll hang my hat on that statement. But again,.....what we're hunting doesn't matter,....it's the principle here that matters and we're still missing some of the benefits to shooting these bullets.
So, in the end I'm a fan of the big and slow theory, although I don't generally use them for hunting. I'm just playing the 'other side of the fence' here to have a discussion. If all of us just kept saying,..........yeah, I like 'them there' bullets,......is that fun??? ;D
|
|
|
|
Post by TEXASFIVEGUN on Oct 30, 2009 15:40:48 GMT -5
priest on the recoil of heavy vs light. When a light bullet is loaded to the same POWER the recoil does indeed feel sharper with the light bullet. The heavy bullet does feel more like a push and doesn't hurt my hand as much.
|
|
? 
