- Joined
- Dec 29, 2007
- Messages
- 4,946
- Reaction score
- 3,106
Much better result than before.
Wonder what the lead composition difference is as you tested the same bullet a few years back.
View attachment 4197
They just drop in their tracks Ed! Seen it many times, that's why I'm a conical shooter/hunter first then maybe will try a sabot after the freezer is getting full!Look what that bullet did to the first three jugs! Can you imagine the devastation to the insides of a deer or whatever big game animal you shot with it?
A few years back we had a batch of lead delivered that was supposed to be pure lead and we sent a few boxes out before we caught it. Seemed that batch contained 2% tin which made them a bit hard and not very accurate. We sent it back and got the pure lead we had ordered. Could be one explanation. We test all of our deliveries now prior to casting anything. I do like the results. The wound channel on those big 420s and 460s is unexplainable. Thx for the tests and posting the results. Dave (muzzleloading-bullets.com)Much better result than before.
Wonder what the lead composition difference is as you tested the same bullet a few years back.
View attachment 4197
No one like to see photos of their favorite bullet not perform in these test - hence the retest asking for different parameters, alloy, etc..but bullet was velocity beyond that for the test, thus the 50 grains. Why is it so hard for people to see that
Wow, that's an improvement. I believe I provided the .460 bullets for the 2015 test. I've had a time getting consistent results. Still have most of a box left, will need to use them up at the range and see if my accuracy improves with a new box.
The base of the bullet, in my experience has to be pristine, small dents and such from bouncing around in the box on the mail truck, makes a huge difference in my Whites.
Enter your email address to join: