On collecting gallon jugs...

[jgt]

I could draw no conclusion from a test like the one in the picture. It has too many variables to even conclude how a bullet would react to being shot into anything.

[Cholla]

Mar 15, 2021 10:35:03 GMT -5 jgt said:

I could draw no conclusion from a test like the one in the picture. It has too many variables to even conclude how a bullet would react to being shot into anything.

If you're talking about my picture, it's just water, I'm not sure what you mean by variables. The piece of plywood behind the water was just to stop bullets that exited all the water containers from flying out across the my backyard.

To my way of thinking water yields more easily than other mediums, so I figure if a bullet will expand in water, it will expand in just about anything. The expanded bullet in my avatar came from a buck I shot a few years ago, and ironically it is a twin of the same bullet fired into my water baskets.

[bradshaw]

"To my way of thinking water yields more easily than other mediums, so I figure if a bullet will expand in water, it will expand in just about anything. The expanded bullet in my avatar came from a buck I shot a few years ago, and ironically it is a twin of the same bullet fired into my water baskets.”
----cholla

*****

To parallel your experience, my .45 ACP handload of Remington Golden saber 230 JHP over 8.5/Accurate #5, fired into water jugs, looks same as two taken from the off-side hide of a whitetail buck. I may have one or two other instances with near-identical recoveries from game and water jugs. The Golden Saber 230 JHP’s i’ve shot----handload and factory load----predate the bonded version, yet perform beautifully. And a .45 Nosler 260 Partition fired into water jugs looks like same bullet James from Jersey recovered from game.

Bullets which go through an animal and aren’t recovered escape comparison. With the water jugs, I get to view some bullets for the first time after putting then to work.
David Bradshaw

[jgt]

If the test had been in something repeatable it would tell me what a bullet would do in that medium. For instance, I see four different jugs and two baskets. Some jugs have no lid, some have snap on lids, some have screw on lids, and one is of a different design and construction as the others. None are filled with the same amount of water. Then there is the tarp/baskets. With all the different factors giving different hydraulic effects on the bullet I would not understand the conclusion you could draw from such a test. If all the jugs had the same amount of fill, the same design (milk jugs for instance), and the same screw on, snap on, or no lid. You would be able to duplicate the test with different bullets and say this is how this bullet acted in this test. Another example could be The basket/tarp/water containers end to end of the same size, make, and fill.

People are free to do any test they want, any way they want. But if you want any repeatable results worth the trouble of the test, it has to compare apples to apples.

[bradshaw]

Mar 15, 2021 10:35:03 GMT -5 jgt said:

I could draw no conclusion from a test like the one in the picture. It has too many variables to even conclude how a bullet would react to being shot into anything.

*****

The reader is free to draw his or her own conclusion, or no conclusion at all. I value the effort of others to learn about their firearms, bullets, and marksmanship. Not sure we ever learn everything about a bullet. Among handgun sports, none places higher value on the one-shot “kill” than silhouette, where a miss scores ZERO, and no second shot for that target. Just because not every target falls to a perfect hit does not itself condemn the ammunition. The ammo must be accurate and carry enough energy----however you care to measure it----to knock over steel.

I try to use all the same kind of jugs. When I run out, I substitute and so note. Water is a generally plentiful medium, closer to anything else I can think of which gives repeatable resistance. Without costing an arm and a leg. The only way I know to compare results between a line of water jugs and an animal is from shooting the same bullet and/or load into animals, and there is plenty to be observed. Even when handgun rounds fired into game are not recovered, to recover the same bullet from water jugs provides information. As for shooting game, a shot never repeats exactly, yet we stand to learn from each & every squeeze.

As much as I enjoy sharing information, I am curious to see the work of others. To see a bullet fired into water fail expectations----is to gain information.
David Bradshaw

[Cholla]

Mar 16, 2021 11:48:28 GMT -5 jgt said:

If the test had been in something repeatable it would tell me what a bullet would do in that medium. For instance, I see four different jugs and two baskets. <snip>

I think maybe you missed the only sentence of my post, you might check that out. Either way, you are absolutely entitled to your opinion.

With the jugs, I found I could shoot once, then had to line up more jugs while with the baskets and tarps, I can fire several bullets before having to deal with water leaking from holes in the tarps.

My MO is to load the rounds to be tested down to expected impact velocities then write said velocity on the case. Fire a round, pluck the bullet from the water and set it next to the fired cartridge case, repeat, then snap a photo or two before moving on to another caliber and/or bullet. This keeps me from having to take notes while I'm in the middle of shooting.

                                              

 .32 S&W- 120 gr. HP @ 835 fps                    .38 Spec.- 160 gr. HP(358429) @ 700, 750 & 800 fps      .44 Spec.- 243 gr. HP(429244) @ 800 & 850 fps

   All of the above bullets were cast with the same alloy and are around 8.5-9.0 Bhn. What I find interesting is the degree to which the shape and depth of the HP cavity affects expansion, and the .358" bullets pictured above were a real surprise to me in regards to the extent of their expansion even at low velocities. One can see in this "glamour shot" that the HP cavity is fairly cavernous-

  

   With respect to repeatability, the water tests are probably more repeatable and predictable than field use, at least where non-jacketed bullets at fairly low speeds are concerned. 

   Going back to the bullet in my avatar, it struck and was removed from a buck standing at exactly 48 yds. distance where the bullet would've impacted at just under 1000 fps. A couple of weeks later I shot a javelina that was standing within a couple of feet of where the buck had stood. A postmortem with examination of the exit wound indicated that there was no expansion from the bullet. Different mediums, different results.

  
Although I feel I've been able to draw some parallels between bullets fired in water and bullets recovered from game, the purpose of the water tests (for me) is less about predicting how a bullet might behave in hair, skin, bone, muscle and organs, than it is in seeing how different type of HP's react in a given medium.

ETA-
Mr. Bradshaw I appreciate your input re the 230 gr. Golden Sabre. I've been wanting to load some of these in my old Colt Series 70, but like all commercial bullets they're not to be found. Do you know the velocity of your load?

[bradshaw]

cholla.... carry on, Shooter. Dramatic expansion of your .44 Special cast 243 grain HP from 800 fps to 850 fps!

I hand loaded the Remington 45 ACP Golden Saber 230 JHP quite a while before firing the factory load. The bullets were plentiful at gun shows during a period before military swamped the tables. Around 2000, after trying various powders, I settled on a load of 8.5/Accurate #5 in (mostly) Federal .45 ACP brass. Sandbagging a Les Bear 1911 Super Tac at the old club in Lafayette, Louisiana, my Golden Saber handload recorded a couple of 5x5-shot groups down to 2.7-inches @ 100 yards. Federal Hydra-Shok 230 JHP and Hornady XTP 230 JHP+P both shot under 3-inches the length of a football field. As I recall the Federal load cut 2.9”. For certain Hornady factory XTP 230+P grouped 5x5 into 2.8-inches. Animals have been killed clean on lung shots with my Remington handload and the Federal factory Hydra-Shot. Don’t recall putting the crimp on anything with the Hornady XTP+P .

Remington Golden Saber 230 JHP, 8.5/AA#5 in Les Baer 1911 5” averages 866 fps. Same load from the Ruger 03 5-1/2” averages 915 fps.

Federal Hydra-Shok 230 JHP from Les Baer 5” averages 889 fps. (Failure-to-expand of the Federal Hydra-Shok 230 JHP will be seen in an upcoming Bullet vs Water photo essay.) The Hydra-Shok 230 JHP tucked immediately behind the front leg rolled a pig marauding the pecan orchard. Pistol: SIG/Sauer P220 4.4”; velocity (as I recall) about 790 fps. Bullet not recovered.

Note on 1911: The Les Baer 1911 Super Tac wears an 18 or 18.5 lb. recoil spring. 8.5 grains medium pistol powder pushes the slide harder than a light charge of fast powder. Two bullets squeezed from the Les Baer and recovered from the offside hide of a whitetail buck show perfect expansion. The Ruger 03 adds 50 fps and, fired into water jugs, blew up the first two gallon jugs and penetrated 15”. Bullet expansion: .770” x .700”.
David Bradshaw

[bula]

I'm the last milk drinker here so down to smaller containers. Then was using cat litter buckets, but the dern cat up and died of old age. Used the last 4 buckets to play with using one of Sixshots 385gr 480 HP. Wish I could get quality video sent. Dramatic stuff ! Next time I'll get Harrison Ford to play my part. At 10ft, and a pile of A2400 pushing it to @1200fps(reducing) the mushroomed bullet was amazing but one petal broke off. At that short distance, velo and into water, not surprised. Friend of mine built a box, I'll call it a tray. It's 5-6ft long and slotted every so many inches to hold slide in cardboard to act as dividers. Between dividers he uses water filled gallon ziplock baggies. Bullets almost always caught. Believe plans were popular online some years back.

[bula]

Remembered the Box'O'Truth guy and googled. He has a water box of truth similar to my friends. See he also has a 1917 Enfield 30-06 though his an Eddystone and mine a Winchester. His amazingly cartouche'd, inspected by, OGEK, yup, Elmer Keith. 

[jgt]

I did not say I did not value the effort. I test bullets myself. I was surprised early on in my reloading when doing tests on trapped coyotes with jacketed hollow point bullets I had been lead to believe would expand above curtain velocities. Those bullet could have been used again when recovered and the "hollow" in the point was filled with flesh and hair.
I have also noted penetration tests done by well known a gun builder that had obvious flaws but the results were parroted far and wide across the internet none the less.
I have nothing against Cholla and to tell the truth, I had not noticed the identity of the poster until afterward. I have always liked his posts and would not intentionally hurt his feeling in anyway. I just pointed out what I saw in a picture. The chips will fall where they may.

[Cholla]

Mar 17, 2021 7:07:53 GMT -5 bradshaw said:

cholla.... carry on, Shooter. Dramatic expansion of your .44 Special cast 243 grain HP from 800 fps to 850 fps!

I hand loaded the Remington 45 ACP Golden Saber 230 JHP quite a while before firing the factory load. The bullets were plentiful at gun shows during a period before military swamped the tables. Around 2000, after trying various powders, I settled on a load of 8.5/Accurate #5 in (mostly) Federal .45 ACP brass. Sandbagging a Les Bear 1911 Super Tac at the old club in Lafayette, Louisiana, my Golden Saber handload recorded a couple of 5x5-shot groups down to 2.7-inches @ 100 yards. Federal Hydra-Shok 230 JHP and Hornady XTP 230 JHP+P both shot under 3-inches the length of a football field. As I recall the Federal load cut 2.9”. For certain Hornady factory XTP 230+P grouped 5x5 into 2.8-inches. Animals have been killed clean on lung shots with my Remington handload and the Federal factory Hydra-Shot. Don’t recall putting the crimp on anything with the Hornady XTP+P .

Remington Golden Saber 230 JHP, 8.5/AA#5 in Les Baer 1911 5” averages 866 fps. Same load from the Ruger 03 5-1/2” averages 915 fps.

Federal Hydra-Shok 230 JHP from Les Baer 5” averages 889 fps. (Failure-to-expand of the Federal Hydra-Shok 230 JHP will be seen in an upcoming Bullet vs Water photo essay.) The Hydra-Shok 230 JHP tucked immediately behind the front leg rolled a pig marauding the pecan orchard. Pistol: SIG/Sauer P220 4.4”; velocity (as I recall) about 790 fps. Bullet not recovered.

Note on 1911: The Les Baer 1911 Super Tac wears an 18 or 18.5 lb. recoil spring. 8.5 grains medium pistol powder pushes the slide harder than a light charge of fast powder. Two bullets squeezed from the Les Baer and recovered from the offside hide of a whitetail buck show perfect expansion. The Ruger 03 adds 50 fps and, fired into water jugs, blew up the first two gallon jugs and penetrated 15”. Bullet expansion: .770” x .700”.
David Bradshaw

Very interesting information and I am in awe of sub 3" groups at 100 yds. with a 1911-style handgun!! I'm definitely going to add my Series 70 to the "kill a deer with it" list.

Regarding the .44 Special bullet, and actually all these cast HP's, it's been interesting to see how well they perform when the alloy is softened and tin is added to spruce up the malleability of the bullet. This is the same bullet as above only booted out of a .44 Special at an average of 1105 fps, after it struck a smallish buck at 38 yds. during the '17/'18 season. It entered behind the left shoulder, breaking a rib, passed through the lungs and through the right shoulder coming to rest under the hide.



He never so much as took a step. It amazes me how well these unjacketed bullets hold together when cast with the proper alloy.

 Cholla

[bradshaw]

cholla.... I, too, have re-shot water jugs a few times. Mostly just flatten shot jugs and take to recycling. I press jugs against one-another when lining them up. Penetration might well be different if there was an air gap between jugs, and I suspect it would be less. Many handgun rounds blowup the first 1-gallon jug, some blowup two----which suggest the bullet holds enough velocity fro continue dramatic hydrostatic effect for 12-inches. When a bullet just punches a hole in, another hole out, velocity has slowed below hydrostatic displacement. Yet some bullets continue to penetrate deeply, while others give up the ghost.

When you fetch your Colt 1911 Series 70, if possible show us some cast. Stuck on a mountain with 1911 and in search of venison, I’d rather have a soft cast hollow point than a hard lead bullet. And avoid the near-side shoulder bones.
David Bradshaw

[kgb]

I've never shot a bullet through water jugs, but do wish to find out how the 100gr HP .32's from GT bullets might react at somewhere around 1150fps. The jugs I've saved up, over a number of years, held laundry detergent and are at least double the thickness of milk cartons. For such a relatively mild bullet, will they affect the results vs milk cartons? No idea, but whatever they do will give me a starting point for whatever other rounds I might want to try.

[bradshaw]

Mar 19, 2021 17:16:07 GMT -5 kgb said:

I've never shot a bullet through water jugs, but do wish to find out how the 100gr HP .32's from GT bullets might react at somewhere around 1150fps. The jugs I've saved up, over a number of years, held laundry detergent and are at least double the thickness of milk cartons. For such a relatively mild bullet, will they affect the results vs milk cartons? No idea, but whatever they do will give me a starting point for whatever other rounds I might want to try.

*****

Correct, thicker, tougher plastic is used in laundry detergent jugs, and a different, hard plastic for large juice jugs. Plastic milk jugs and paper cartons may better reflect bullet behavior in meat. Animal hide has incredible elasticity ----which amounts to shock absorbency. The elasticity of living hide (“hide" can refer to living as well as tanned skin), gives a thick layer of hair greater absorbency, also. A challenge of hollow point design has been to make a bullet which commences expansion despite biting a mouthful of hair. In my experience, the old half-jackets from Speer and those made on the C-H Swag-O-Matic press made a consistent habit of commenting expansion despite the Hair & Hide caper. In self-defense handgun bullets, a parallel challenge took place to design bullets which would commence expansion despite biting a mouthful of clothing.

My purpose in testing bullet behavior in water jugs is to observe the result. There are different ways to skin this cat. To set water-filled Zip-Lock bags in a trough is another way. I’ve stood on a ladder and shot bullets into a 55 gallon drum full of water. My inauguration in that practice found me standing on a strep ladder, firing down into the drum with a Redhawk 5-1/2” .44 Mag. My first shot was with Federal (#44B) 180 JHP. At 1,610 fps, the 180 JHP expanded violently, fracturing with jacket/core separation. Despite the vicious impact, there was a 3/8-inch concavity in the bottom sheet metal. The Federal 180 JHP had penetrated 33"-35” water.

Next shot, Federal (44A) 240 JHP made a notably deeper dent, with hairline crack across its dome. What remained of the bullet weighed considerably less than its original 240 grains. Having dropped deer with both bullets from barrels as short as the 4" M-29 up through the 8-3/8” M-29, the the 5-1/2” Redhawk tucked in between, and having venison but no bullets to show for it, I appreciate the chance to fire these bullets into water and see them after. Again, good information is to be gained.
David Bradshaw