FOX Bullets expansion.

[User00033]

1 Barnes ttsx 270 130 gr & Hornady gmx 30-06 150 gr both factory ammo shot into a sand bank at 645m/700yds.
I think there needs to be more R&D into copper bullets, having shot them exclusively over the last 3 months, I am not impressed.I have lost more deer in the last 3 months than I have in the last 3 years contracting using lead.
I agree that as a meat producer copper is the way to go, but it needs more development..
It needs the issue of non expansion at distance addressed, there was a youtube clip from RWS that suggested there copper bullets could not be relied upon past 175m(tried to find it but I think it has been removed),now for some that is fine,but for others it is not.

I honestly believe there is a solution but until the manufacturers are forced onto non toxic , then I think it will be "one size fits all" attitude.

@griff’s post sums up the dilemma, well put.

One thing that sometimes gets lost in this debate about longer range monolithic performance is the fact that the shooter must always select the correct type of lead core bullet for adequate expansion at range. It’s not like all lead core bullets will expand to 2x calibre at 600m. In fact, it’s quite a specific subset of jacketed lead core bullets that are considered “safe” to use on game at impact velocities <2000fps.

(I’ll limit that to small bore applications... what I mean is a large bore .44 will kill by virtue of a big hole, and it leaves the barrel at a lot less than 2000fps.)

So when we bemoan the lack of expansion of monolithics at low impact velocity, what we mean is relative to certain types of lead core bullet. Not all of them.

 

[Edinburgh Rifles]

Not sure I understand the benefit of running a test on Ballistic gel at 400yds when the same terminal velocity has already been tested...
Apart from the issues with hitting the mark at 400yds.
Slight wind and you have a raking shot that exits the side of the gel

As for a lack of direct comparions of Lead/Cup&Core/Jacketed bullets vs Non lead
5 mins of Youtube will show you that ever manufacturer known to man has a video of pretty much every bullet they produce in a 10-15% Ballistic gel test
more often than not with recovered bullets.

The primary issue with any bullet test is our quarry is not made of gel, or soap, or clay.
Sticking a bit of play in front of the gel doesn't replicate bone or thicker skin

The variable density target is always going to throw anomalies in the mix
Sadly if there is an anomaly that looks like a negative then it will be blamed on the material choice when it comes to an evocative Non lead subject.

No-one ever points out that a lead bullet may have failed because it is made of lead when they get over penetration, over expansion ,non linear pass through etc etc

I shot a Sika with a Peregrine 136gr .308 bullet yesterday
It didnt exit
Point of shoulder quartering shot
Very unusual for a monolithic.
Didn't recover the bullet

Huge expansion and thoracic damage
large hole internally from Scapula/Humerus joint and through ribs
2x calibre entry hole

Deer died very quickly
No I could report that the bullet had failed to do what I wanted it to do (i.e Exit) and this is down to it being a monolithic.

but I can't
Its one shot
Too few samples to draw a conclusion.
Huge number of variables and no way to give a direct comparison with a lead bullet in the same scenario

Suffice to say I am looking forward to testing them at longer range is this is what they do at short range!

 

[Sonicdmb73]

I have shovelled clay, VERY hard work!!! and I was a strapping 20 year old then.
There is a plentiful supply of clay on one of my perms, predictably a bit stony. The challenge is filling several sacks, de-stoning it and having NO air pockets. Also it all must be the same water content. Doing all that by hand is virtually a non starter.

I have shovelled it too, not easy. You could always wait till someone is digging it out with a machine and ask them for a barrow or twos worth.

 

[hammo]

I have shovelled it too, not easy. You could always wait till someone is digging it out with a machine and ask them for a barrow or twos worth.

The clay may get tried one day.
There seems zero interest in getting together for a big test, I am more than happy with my results at 100 and 200. Still have a bag of sand left, so may sit it out at 300 when Im out on the quad next.
Realistically, most of my shots at anything four legged are around 100. The expansion is ample.
If I get the 300 test done I will be sure to post on here.

 

[Sonicdmb73]

The clay may get tried one day.
There seems zero interest in getting together for a big test, I am more than happy with my results at 100 and 200. Still have a bag of sand left, so may sit it out at 300 when Im out on the quad next.
Realistically, most of my shots at anything four legged are around 100. The expansion is ample.
If I get the 300 test done I will be sure to post on here.

I would love to have the time to test bullets, but because of work etc I struggle sometimes to get a decent day for zeroing.
If I was nearer I could probably sort the clay side out. Might take a little while, and my lad might think I’m losing the plot. But as he drives machines for a living it might not be that hard. I might just ask him anyway for my own amusement. I have a few bullets it would be interesting to see the terminal performance of.

 

[hammo]

I would love to have the time to test bullets, but because of work etc I struggle sometimes to get a decent day for zeroing.
If I was nearer I could probably sort the clay side out. Might take a little while, and my lad might think I’m losing the plot. But as he drives machines for a living it might not be that hard. I might just ask him anyway for my own amusement. I have a few bullets it would be interesting to see the terminal performance of.

Im normally working a lot too, been off after surgery to hand though; so time to play. I think hardest challenge with the clay will be filling a sack or container and not having air pockets. My clay is a bit too hard for that, machine or no machine. Would then need to cart it off to a suitable area for a 300m shot with a good backstop away from footpaths etc. Lots to think about.

 

[Sonicdmb73]

Im normally working a lot too, been off after surgery to hand though; so time to play. I think hardest challenge with the clay will be filling a sack or container and not having air pockets. My clay is a bit too hard for that, machine or no machine. Would then need to cart it off to a suitable area for a 300m shot with a good backstop away from footpaths etc. Lots to think about.

If you have a pressure washer or even a hose pipe you can try the method they use for digging tree roots in conservation areas.
They turn it to liquid and then settle it in a tank.
So if you filled a hessian sack with a clay soup. Then let it settle and dry out. To the right consistency you have got rid of any air etc out of it too. Stones can be screened out at the same time.

 

[Blobby159]

Im normally working a lot too, been off after surgery to hand though; so time to play. I think hardest challenge with the clay will be filling a sack or container and not having air pockets. My clay is a bit too hard for that, machine or no machine. Would then need to cart it off to a suitable area for a 300m shot with a good backstop away from footpaths etc. Lots to think about.

Do you have an operational 'speed tester' to hand? If so, and you know through ballistic tables what your 300 yard bullet velocity would be give or take a little for errors, could you not set your targeted clay bundle out at 100yds and download to take 200 yds of travel out of the equation?? That way you can have a realistic 300yds shot into clay, have a relatively easy(?) shot and where wind deflections etc should be easy to dial out. What I would do if I had some decent medium to fire into anyways. AND you should be able to stick your clay target infront of a decent backstop with much greater ease and choice too methinks??

Just a thought anyway.....


ATB ..... and shoot safely

 

[griff]

What about the o'l fashioned medium of wet telephone books, worked for years.

 

[09mutley05]

What about the o'l fashioned medium of wet telephone books, worked for years.

Do they still print telephone books?

 

[hammo]

To be honest, I think the builders sand sacks are a fair medium. Consistent allowing like for like comparison. I am going to try to do a 300m test in the near future with it.

 

[Blobby159]

To be honest, I think the builders sand sacks are a fair medium. Consistent allowing like for like comparison. I am going to try to do a 300m test in the near future with it.

Well, consistent, yes.... but waaaay much harder and more resistant than animal flesh, maybe even some light bones. I would anticipate even a fairly 'hard' bullet expanding some on hitting sand (?)...


ATB ..... and shoot safely

 

[CarlW]

Well, consistent, yes.... but waaaay much harder and more resistant than animal flesh, maybe even some light bones. I would anticipate even a fairly 'hard' bullet expanding some on hitting sand (?)...


ATB ..... and shoot safely

Agreed. The expansion data from sandbags will be of little value.

 

[hammo]

The builders sand sacks are super cheap, readily available and consistent media. Obviously don't directly replicate the consistency of an animal, but I will bet its not as far away in terms of bullet deformation/expansion as you think. The sand is not compacted down, its damp and rather loose. At the higher velocities bullets tend to react similarly in a range of mediums. A container of water versus soil both give somewhat similar results. The challenge is recovering the bullets in soil, often a lot of digging!
As I have mentioned earlier, I would jump at the chance to try a tailor made ballistic medium. Any suggestions of a cheap-ish supplier?

 

[hammo]

Just found a UK supplier,

Ballistic soap £55
Ballistic gel £70

In both cases that is for a reasonable sized block.
Hmmmmm.

 

[hammo]

Found the powder to make the gel, £35. A fair bit of work involved in prepping it, heating and cooling.

 

[Border]

As previously mentioned, I use water filled Aspen containers at various ranges. I have a plentiful supply of these from work. Not a true substitute for ballistic gel but a constant test media that works ok for my needs. Bullet is a 6.5 Norma Oryx 156 grain at 80m. Most deer bullets penetrate 3-5 cans @ 100m.

 

[User00033]

Wow. That’s an impressive mushroom @Border. Do you know the overall diameter at the maximum extent?

 

[Border]

Wow. That’s an impressive mushroom @Border. Do you know the overall diameter at the maximum extent?

17-18mm at it's widest point.
Below 140 Woodleigh PP, Norma Oryx 156 both .264" cal both samish diameter (Woodleigh due to mantle shard) Norma Oryx 165 .308w, 16-17mm

 

[hammo]

Not sure I understand the benefit of running a test on Ballistic gel at 400yds when the same terminal velocity has already been tested...
Apart from the issues with hitting the mark at 400yds.
Slight wind and you have a raking shot that exits the side of the gel

As for a lack of direct comparions of Lead/Cup&Core/Jacketed bullets vs Non lead
5 mins of Youtube will show you that ever manufacturer known to man has a video of pretty much every bullet they produce in a 10-15% Ballistic gel test
more often than not with recovered bullets.

The primary issue with any bullet test is our quarry is not made of gel, or soap, or clay.
Sticking a bit of play in front of the gel doesn't replicate bone or thicker skin

The variable density target is always going to throw anomalies in the mix
Sadly if there is an anomaly that looks like a negative then it will be blamed on the material choice when it comes to an evocative Non lead subject.

No-one ever points out that a lead bullet may have failed because it is made of lead when they get over penetration, over expansion ,non linear pass through etc etc

I shot a Sika with a Peregrine 136gr .308 bullet yesterday
It didnt exit
Point of shoulder quartering shot
Very unusual for a monolithic.
Didn't recover the bullet

Huge expansion and thoracic damage
large hole internally from Scapula/Humerus joint and through ribs
2x calibre entry hole

Deer died very quickly
No I could report that the bullet had failed to do what I wanted it to do (i.e Exit) and this is down to it being a monolithic.

but I can't
Its one shot
Too few samples to draw a conclusion.
Huge number of variables and no way to give a direct comparison with a lead bullet in the same scenario

Suffice to say I am looking forward to testing them at longer range is this is what they do at short range!

I can't find a single ballistic gel test of FOX bullets online. Does any footage exist?