REMINGTON ANNOUNCEMENT

[MOUNTIN DU]

well said jagermaster, siringo, mudbug... a solid copper, ribbed, 250gr hollow spire point with modest boattail; will have by design, a better sectional density & ballistic coefficient than a jacketed lead core of same design; it has barnes xpb written all over it and the xpb is a pistol bullet designed to expand at the velocities we're pushing at the 150yd mark. jmho
where's the rem. 250gr corelokts??? midway is saying middle january now!

[MudBug]

This is part of the reason why I like the WFN cast boolits. No expansion required.

That's a good point, my comment was only that IF an expanding bullet is chosen (Either a standard HP or a ballistic tip type bullet) then the velocity at which it reliably expands needs to be tailored to what we have to work with.

I understand that a 45 caliber bullet starts out bigger than many 30 caliber bullets expand to, but it would be silly to think that a 275-300 grn bullet that expands to .75" and retains most of it's weight though thick skinned critters would be less that fantastic. It would be a real game stopper.

I believe that many of the 45 caliber bullets made for the 454 casull or the 460 S&W magnum would be able to manage that kind of performance on thin skin game like whitetail and antelope.

[Siringo]

We should carefully consider whether a boatail will help of not. Take a 30 cal. 150 gr. flat base vs a boatail at 2800 fps and there is virtually no difference out to 300 yards. Just my thought!

[MudBug]

We should carefully consider whether a boatail will help of not. Take a 30 cal. 150 gr. flat base vs a boatail at 2800 fps and there is virtually no difference out to 300 yards. Just my thought!

I don't know how this works on these larger caliber, slow moving bullets, but I know that in the precision shooting world most prefer flat base bullets for the shorter ranges because they settle faster and the boat tail bullets advantages don't show up till further out.

[MOUNTIN DU]

My thoughts about a "modest" boattail design had more to do with the ease of starting the bullet in the case mouth rather than down range sorry for the confusion. it's a well known fact that a flatbase bullet heel supports a mushroom much better on impact than a boat tail in lead core profiles and all of my 450b shots will be under 200yds if i ever get one.

[MOUNTIN DU]

Maybe a .452 copy of the Barnes 300gr .458 socom... in a 230-275gr class?

[wildcatter]

Keep in mind, we really do not need any expansion at all as the 45cal is already bigger than a 30cal gets after expansion and with expansion there is no guarantee which direction the bullet is going after it starts to expand and even a 180 degree turn is possible and I have the 3" scare on my face to prove it. Also, a pointed bullet for us is quite long, now add a pure brass bullet and the thing gets so long for say a 250gr, that powder capacity becomes an issue and almost no capacity for a pointed 325grainer or at least speeds so slow as to make the pointed solid moot. I myself am more into the BD-1 camp of thought. A high-speed flat point will give us 300+yds no problem and a FP disrupts more tissue than any expanded bullet in the same caliber and has the added benefit of traveling pretty much straight threw tissue, thus hitting the target we actually want destroyed, like a heart from a quartering away shot, which is a shot no expandable 30 cal can make on a moose, but we can. To do all that, given the extra length a brass bullet yields, and the need for speed to get the 300+yardage, the weights will have to probably be under 250gr. in a Flat Point configuration. Now, I have a great deal of experience with the 230gr-FMJ-FP's jacketed lead-core bullets and can wholly say they absolutely work, but even they will expand some. So the reality is, we're trying to design is a bullet that some here will buy and others won't, but even the others want choices. So, the mission is, what has the most over all utilitarian use and the most appeal at the same time. Of course we could always tweak the nose of the Camp-Followers and ask Barnes to size their 330gr socom bullet to 452, boy that would make some madder than ever, especially when their already limited supply of bullets gets allocated to a 452 size. Just a thought and maybe not even a good one, but tactically a wonderful idea, except, we probably need a much lighter bullet given the length issue.. But then again, who says we can't get them to build a couple of bullets, a light weight and a heavy one, humm.. One other thought, a boatail adds even more length. So you need to consider many issues and as this develops, don't be afraid to change your mind, SHOT isn't until the nineteenth, so we've got a little time and believe me, I will take your thoughts to the Biggies, just keep this Constructive Debate alive (this is the biggest reason I like it here, Const-Debate, could it ever occur on some of those other boards?) and thoroughly examine all the angles. And finally, when I tell them of the blue-ribbon panel of well over a hundred high-end Gun Cranks, they Will sit up and take notice, as they say..

[NordicRX8]

To do all that, given the extra length a brass bullet yields, and the need for speed to get the 300+yardage, the weights will have to probably be under 250gr. in a Flat Point configuration. Now, I have a great deal of experience with the 230gr-FMJ-FP's jacketed lead-core bullets and can wholly say they absolutely work, but even they will expand some. So the reality is, we're trying to design is a bullet that some here will buy and others won't, but even the others want choices. So, the mission is, what has the most over all utilitarian use and the most appeal at the same time. Of course we could always tweak the nose of the Camp-Followers and ask Barnes to size their 330gr socom bullet to 452, boy that would make some madder than ever, especially when their already limited supply of bullets gets allocated to a 452 size. Just a thought and maybe not even a good one, but tactically a wonderful idea, except, we probably need a much lighter bullet given the length issue.. But then again, who says we can't get them to build a couple of bullets, a light weight and a heavy one, humm.. One other thought, a boatail adds even more length. So you need to consider many issues and as this develops, don't be afraid to change your mind, SHOT isn't until the nineteenth, so we've got a little time and believe me, I will take your thoughts to the Biggies, just keep this Constructive Debate alive (this is the biggest reason I like it here, Const-Debate, could it ever occur on some of those other boards?) and thoroughly examine all the angles. And finally, when I tell them of the blue-ribbon panel of well over a hundred high-end Gun Cranks, they Will sit up and take notice, as they say..

I'd love to see Barnes put out a .452 bullet (or several) for our use, but as has already been mentioned several times (and from personal experience), solid copper bullets are about twice as long as their equivalent counterparts made primarily from lead. The hollow point .451 185gr XPBs (first version) are already longer than the Hornady 250gr FTXs (including the poly tip). Maybe a tungsten core would help? Maybe a smaller hollow point cavity could reduce the OAL of the bullet as well.

The 250gr weight is well represented by Hornady and their FTX bullet... maybe Barnes can produce lower (and higher if the demand is there) weighted projectiles.
A 185gr solid copper .452" hollowpoint screaming along @ 3000+fps sounds good to me.
A .452" Varmint Grenade (frangible) would be an interesting projectile too, although several Gold Dots and Golden Sabers I have tried seemed to have disintergrated on impact.

As to the matter of mass consumption... Barnes (to me and my reloading buddies) is already considered a high end projectile (high cost - XPBs were about $1.00 each when first introduced). The only time a Barnes tipped cartridge is used at the range is to sight in a new optic or testing new powder charge rates. At the cost of $1.00 per bullet, I'd think most would rather shoot Hornady (or Remington CoreLokt) factory ammo and have Brass to reload.

[Siringo]

Here is an interesting thread regarding the heavy flat points.
http://www.marlinowners.com/forums/index.php?action=printpage;topic=39557.0

Also, Barnes already sells a "Buster" in .451 diameter (why can't they use .452?). Weight is 325 grs.

[BD1]

I have some experience killing things with round nose flat point cast lead boolits. I also had the opportunity to see the results of quite a few bullet impacts on game. For a few years I carried the lee 310 grain design in .44 mag while guiding bear hunters, and to hunt deer. That boolit at 1,100 fps muzzle velocity completely penetrated everything I shot with it, including six shots through a 10" maple tree, (but that's another story). After the six shots through the tree episode I went with a .265 grain WFN design to lower recoil and reduce the difference in point of impact due to different gloves. I've shot a truck load of game with the .265 grainer and it has also completely penetrated everything I've shot with it, (no trees so far), with one exception on a down angle shot into the shoulder of a boar where the boolit traveled down the leg bone and took the leg clean off at the knee. My bad on the shot placement. Anyway, the moral of this tale is that a 300 grain .45 WFN design doesen't need to be going fast to do the job. 800 FPS wil do the trick on anything in north America but the big bears.
I believe that a 300 grainer leaving the muzzle at 1,900 to 2,000 fps is more than enough.

If you can better the BC to hold that velocity out a little farther, you're just increasing your effective range capabilities.
BD