Page 2 of 3

Re: My first hog hunt to bag a 164lb boar

PostPosted: Fri Sep 23, 2011 7:14 pm
by Texas Sheepdawg
Snip
DFWDave wrote: That shield looked to be about an inch thick when I watched them skinning the hog, so when you consider that TexasSheepDog has shot through 3/8 inch steel with a .450b and yet it couldn't penetrate two layers of inch thick shield, those hogs are tough muthers.

Actually, I have successfully shot through 1/4 inch steel plate. The plate that I have videoed twice with unsuccessful penetration is actually 7/16", (.421"). We initially thought it was 3/8" just by visual observation, however, using two different calipers, we have micD it out to .421". But I am patient. I will keep trying.
That bullet you retreived from your hog looks like it stayed together pretty good considering... I would guess-timate visually that it probably still weighes about 130-160 grains total. But that's just a guess. Anyway, that it a nice hog and congratulations.

Re: My first hog hunt to bag a 164lb boar

PostPosted: Sat Sep 24, 2011 6:45 am
by DFWDave
It sounds like i only recovered 131 grains of my original 250 bullet then. The lead looked like a single piece, but I wonder if more is missing somewhere in the neck cavity. Oh well, that's coyote fodder by now. In any event, it did the job very effectively, and I don't think I would change a thing.

Re: My first hog hunt to bag a 164lb boar

PostPosted: Sat Sep 24, 2011 8:02 pm
by Bob L Swagger
Congrats on a job well done!

Re: My first hog hunt to bag a 164lb boar

PostPosted: Sun Sep 25, 2011 8:45 am
by bushmeister
Those shields are definitely strong. Years ago, I shot a boar 5 times with my 45acp with the "super lethal expanding bullets" only to have to finish it off with a 30-06. When I skinned it all of those super expanding bullets fell out between the skin and shield. The worst part was that they didn't even expand and they looked brand new other than the rifling marks. :? Needless to say I never bought any more super expanding lethal bullets anymore.

Re: My first hog hunt to bag a 164lb boar

PostPosted: Sun Sep 25, 2011 4:05 pm
by DFWDave
It's a good thing the Hornady ammo works well on feral hogs, because for a non-reloader, there aren't any other options as of right now.

For this particular application, feral hogs, the round and the caliber seem perfectly suited:

1. you have a flat trajectory out to typical feeder-blind distances,
2. the round leaves a large enough entry wound to allow most of the blood to drain out,
3. it does the requisite amount of internal damage to take the animal down right there on the spot, and
4. it doesn't provide too much risk of collateral damage (as for instance if it were able to create an exit wound and travel another hundred yards, for instance)

Re: My first hog hunt to bag a 164lb boar

PostPosted: Tue Sep 27, 2011 9:15 pm
by MOUNTIN DU
:) NICE one... good shot! i love to csi 'um at the scene of the crime and again at the skinnin' rack. :P

Re: My first hog hunt to bag a 164lb boar

PostPosted: Thu Sep 29, 2011 10:48 am
by 450b-recluse
commander faschisto wrote:Interesting results with the core/jacket separation. I'll bet a Remmy 250gr Core-Lokt would have stayed together (hint, hint, Remington suits...). This FTX did the job, more or less "the hard way" through the shield, so I guess ya can't really criticize a whole lot. Good info, DFW (I used to be stationed at Carswell AFB in Ft. Worth....trivia for ya).

7000 grains to a pound, BTW.



I thought he said he shot it through the neck

Re: My first hog hunt to bag a 164lb boar

PostPosted: Thu Sep 29, 2011 12:26 pm
by commander faschisto
Yeh...but it was through the shield, as DFW Dave said in his second post here.

Re: My first hog hunt to bag a 164lb boar

PostPosted: Thu Sep 29, 2011 5:27 pm
by BillytheKid
Congratulations Bro! This is one of the things on my "to do list"

Re: My first hog hunt to bag a 164lb boar

PostPosted: Thu Sep 29, 2011 7:16 pm
by wildcatter
DFWDave wrote:It's a good thing the Hornady ammo works well on feral hogs, because for a non-reloader, there aren't any other options as of right now.

For this particular application, feral hogs, the round and the caliber seem perfectly suited:

1. you have a flat trajectory out to typical feeder-blind distances,
2. the round leaves a large enough entry wound to allow most of the blood to drain out,
3. it does the requisite amount of internal damage to take the animal down right there on the spot, and
4. it doesn't provide too much risk of collateral damage (as for instance if it were able to create an exit wound and travel another hundred yards, for instance)



Great Job and ConGrats!!

Breakfast at Dave's HQ!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

This definitely shows some of the things we've been talking about..

Even though the bullet failed, it killed with deadly aplomb all the same, something that a 300 magnum, might not do, especially if it had the same type of failure, which would be normal for a small caliber like the .30. Now, what would be the results if a 7mm Mag were used or a 308 or 6.5 Grendel (yeah right) and those guys all tout the success of the 6.5g on Hogs, at incredibly ridiculous ranges. If ya just gotta kill it NOW and if the animal stays alive for fifteen minutes, in the heavy Mountains, it might take a couple of days to get to it, get my meaning?

So, the moral of the story is to take enough gun.

Now for the rest of the story and this is why enough gun is the prerequisite. These were done with my personal 450b with 325gr BarnesBusters@2100fps.

viewtopic.php?f=14&t=1589&start=0#p9932


These should be real Eye-Openers and will further educate, on the reasons to take enough gun-

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NZ1Mg0a7Tpw
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WfpzDYogmnM
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3AaCIcxz ... re=related