I'll admit my inexperience with revolver hunting, killed a mentally challenged coyote with a 1851 Colt Navy replica a lot of years ago.

Mr. Stanton writes a persuasive essay and I'd like to get all of your thoughts on the subject.

http://www.beartoothbullets.com/tech_notes/index.htm

Mike

I think it was interesting, but it brought to mind a question I have had floating around in my mind, regarding expanding vs. non-expanding.

From a purely physics point of view, I don't understand the logic of NOT transferring all or most of the energy of the projectile to the animal. My meaning is, if a hard cast bullet is to "punch a hole through" it has not transferred all of it's energy. If the expanding bullet is "found under the skin on the opposite side", then it HAS transferred all of it's energy.

Obviously, energy transfer is not everything, and this article in particular discusses wound channel, yet if I get a .5 inch wound channel but have lost energy with a cast bullet and on the other hand I get a .75 inch wound channel with an expanding bullet which HAS transferred all of it's energy, then why would I want the hard cast bullet? Essentially, the length of the wound channel would be identical, so the resulting volume of that channel would be higher with the expanding bullet.

Remember, the article was light framed game, we aren't talking about Elk, Moose, and Grizzly here, so penetration isn't as heavily "weighed".

Lastly, I have to mention, that the article has to be considered somewhat biased given the commercial nature of the site. To be fair though, he does include some factory expanding designs in his data.

Let me temper my comments above with the following:

"I have NO idea what I'm talking about"

I think the idea of "energy dump" is iffy at best. Every tackle in every football game from junior varsity up, delivers more energy to the target than any handgun round, yet the targets, by and large, get up and become targets again and again.

I think punching a big, deep, straight hole through whatever critter you're shooting at is all you can ask of any bullet/load. Its then up to you to make sure the big, deep hole goes straight through something important.

I've got no real science for this, just my opinion.

Rick

In my opinion, and this is not to upset ANYONE. The guys who shoot some of the bigger bottleneck rounds or straight wall rifle rounds in single shot pistols are not worried about using cast bullets. The rounds we use offer us penetration and expansion. How many hundreds of moose and elk drop every year to the "small" (diameter) 30/06. If you shoot a .375 or larger handcannon, there is nothing in North America, including Bison and Brown Bears that you cannot penetrate and drop with heavy, expanding bullets. Maybe it's a question of using a different round or gun? Why limit yourself to only being able to penetrate game with a cast bullet? This has been my thought through all of the cast vs. expanding bullet forums. This was not to upset anyone because short of the African Five most game animals can cleanly be taken w/ 44 and up expanding projectiles given that they are heavy for caliber and YOU CAN MAKE A GOOD SHOT.

What really matters is the bullets ability to do its work, that is, destroy tissue. A rifle does this with high velocity & jacketed softnose bullets, a revolver is limited to much lower velocity but can still work wonderfully with correct bullets, thats because a big, wide, flatnose creates so much shock & tissue damage, that along with usually complete penetration makes the big bore sixguns very effective.
The term "energy transfer" would take several pages to explain but lets just say its the bullet design that makes it work....or fail. A 180 gr match bullet cannot work & wasn't designed to work like a 180 gr soft nose jacketed slug, yes they both weigh the same & they exit the barrel at the same velocity but one is going to fail on game.
If that jacketed bullet penetrates to the offside & stops I would say thats ideal BUT, what happens if that classic broadside shot isn't there & we have to take an angling shot from behind the diaphram, also what if the distance has increased to perhaps 300 yds instead of maybe 150 yds where the bullet stayed inside. Some people will still risk the shot, some will wait for another day & some won't even realize the conscequences.
I firmly believe that those who down play the effectivness of a good cast bullet simply haven't used them, they feel like they must have expansion to make them work, it isn't true but many believe that.
Also the single shot handguns have to be placed with the rifle group to be fair, most all of the good single shot calibers can exceed 2000 fps or even more & they use rifle type bullets, these bullets operate the same in single shots as they do in rifles, its in revolvers, with their much lower velocity that the cast bullet is supreme.
If we compare any combination you can dream up, whether its a rifle, a single shot handgun or a revolver & we are using quality ammo in all 3 & all 3 place their bullets in the vitals whats the most important thing any of them have left to do? I'm hoping you say, penetrate because you'd be right!
Just curious, has anyone ever seen a deer or elk that Marshall Stanton has taken with a handgun?

Dick

Remember, most opinions are "free", and worth every penny. The debate of cast vs. jacketed or heavy bullet vs. light will go on till they take our guns away. All four options haved taken game slowly or quickly, so there might never be a perfect answer.

I read this article a several years ago. It changed the way I looked at reloading for all my revolvers fom then on. The philosophy itself is geared toward Handgunners that use revolvers. If you look at most shots being at 70 yds or less which for the most part describes the majority of us that will or would hunt with an iron sighted or scoped revolver.
Mr. Stanton's philosophy of full pass throughs with large wound channels with hardcast loads with a wide meplat loaded to modest easy shooting loads made so much sense to me. Its possible to make a load with hardcast bullets that will kill game with modest loads with minimal recoil which means a lot more accuracy at all distances which also allows for a lot better shot placement fo cleaner kills.
Ever since I started loading in this way my accuracy has improved so much more especially with the bigger calibers like the 475,480 & 500.
I have used some of these BTB WFN's in the 44 at 900-1000 fps with full pass throughs on deer with amazing accuracy out to 50 yds. with not enough recoil to mention. The deer I've taken have all been good clean kills.
I beleive Mr. Stantons point is with an easy shooting modest hardcast load with a wide meplat is all thats necessary in a revolver for hunting.
I know first hand that this philosphy does work. Not knocking expanding bullets that I still use at times,but you cannot get these great hunting, easy shooting loads from expanding bullets that need speed to work well. That article by Mr.Stanton made great deal of sense to me. If you like to shoot a revolver or hunt with a revolver and want to improve your hunting accuracy while making well placed good clean pass through shots this is a great philosohpy to use in my opinion.

Didn't read the article but I agree with sixshot--Organ or tissue damage is what kills the animal.
On deer/antelope sized animals I have used both types of bullets with good success.
About 5-6 animals. Not nearly the count some of our more dedicated revolver guys do.
Shot placement being vital (pun intended) to the vitals is of "Epic" importance.

John Linebaugh and I have had this discussion several times, in his big bore seminars he runs every year he runs a penetration test. He said they have proved over and over that a hard cast bullet at 1200fps maxes out penetration. Over and over they show how you can drive the same bullet at 1500fps will gain perhaps 1" or 2" but sometimes it actually makes bullet penetrate less.

Yes a faster load will shoot somewhat flatter, yes they may create a slightly large wound channel, and yes they may "transfer" more energy into game. But you can not prove any of this in a quantifiable manner.

But these loads are louder with more muzzle blast, they recoil a lot more, they wear on gun more, and so on. None of these qualities help good accuracy that we can all agree is the single most critical part of the equation of killing game cleanly.

I guess the point is a good hard cast bullet, running at a moderate fast velocity, say 1100fps will kill consistently. They are easy to shoot, fast enough to be accurate, wont kill your ears if you don't have ear plugs in, and suitable for everyday loads for working a ranch or hunting game with. I would rather pick a single load and get to know it over a lot of rounds in all conditions than swap to a heavy hunting load right before season starts.

To each their own...

"Its then up to you to make sure the big, deep hole goes straight through something important."byRickL

"If we compare any combination you can dream up, whether its a rifle, a single shot handgun or a revolver & we are using quality ammo in all 3 & all 3 place their bullets in the vitals whats the most important thing any of them have left to do? I'm hoping you say, penetrate because you'd be right!"by Sixshot


"The debate of cast vs. jacketed or heavy bullet vs. light will go on till they take our guns away"by Smokewagon


"Its possible to make a load with hardcast bullets that will kill game with modest loads with minimal recoil which means a lot more accuracy at all distances which also allows for a lot better shot placement fo cleaner kills."by Vern

Some of the best advice, no need to say more.

Really good testimonial... Thanks Vern

Excellent advice...thanks, and that's what my goal is. I figure prodding and pulling all of this information out of you folks is my best bet for not wasting time or money. I may go back to the Linebaugh papers and have a look at the moderated ..44 mag loads.

I REALLY appreciate everyone's patience and for putting up with all of the questions.

My apologies to the OP if I have taken this too far.

The idea of using a 250-280 gr WFN or LFN at 1100-1200 fps for the lighter 29/629 guns is very appealing. Saving the heavier 300+ grain bullets at higher velocities for the big critters can be saved for Redhawk sized guns.

Smokewagon, very well put!

Dick

Excellant article by Stanton well worth the reading.I shoot 250 gr.XTP bullets out of my SRH in .454 Casull,their only doing 1520 fps,recoil is mild but man do they wallop the deer-they pass through the deer like their not even there,point is, their not loaded to max but they do the job, at least on whitetails.

This has been one of the best threads I have seen. I am learning more with every post please keep them coming.

I received this very same advice from Sixshot on another site several months ago and have since changed my loads to the 1100 to 1200 fps range, my shooting has improved greatly and I'm having way more fun than I have had in many years of shooting. Since I started casting my own bullets I can't wait to get a shot on a whitetail to see the out come.

Thank You all.

Randy, The Birddog.

I thank all of you for your insight. I have developed a load for the only revolver I own, a .357 5 1/2 inch Ruger Vaquero. It shoots lights out at 25 yds. from the bench and is on at 50. I'm relagated to using Cast Performance 160gr. WFNPB because that is what my revolver is factory regulated too, fixed sights. I tried 180s but they shot 3 ft high at 50 yds. I'm gestimating my velocity is somewhere around 1300 fps. from the Hodgdon manual. I'm shooting 8 grs. of Longshot and that gives a velocity list of around 1250 fps. with a Hornady 158 grn. XTP. Haven't killed anything yet with it as my skills with the revolver are not quite up to speed to hunt deer with. It was this article that got me interested in cast bullets.

Thanks,

Mike

Mike, sounds like you are enjoying your sixgun, thats great. Fixed sights can be somewhat of a problem if you want to shoot other bullets/loads, something I've done with many of my sixguns is use a small amount of JB weld to build up that front sight, it works great. Just build it up a little more than you need, then file it down to the correct height for the load you're using, then paint the JB weld with a magic marker & you're good to go.

Dick

I like that JB weld idea. Thanks for the tip.