Me too. Either Barnes, or Bloodlines.

How many Barnes ML bullets have you shot at 2200fps into water jugs?

Barnes petal shear or fail to expand too.

Bullet on the left lost most of its petals


Video of the impact at nearly 2300fps

Spitfire 285gr failed to open with a 90gr load. The 110gr load worked.

First........ shooting bullets into a water jug, does or proves nothing, with any bullet. Its why you never see bullet manufacturers using milk jugs filled with water in bullet testing. If shooters want to play with water filled jugs for something to do, I guess that's ok.

Of the over 10,000 Barnes bullets I've sent down range or at a whitetail, up to 2,100fps, NEVER once have I recovered a bullet that did not expand properly or, that had lost petal. And I'm pretty sure I've shot more whitetail with Barnes bullets, than the guys at Barnes themselves and every bullet I've recovered, was perfect.

Now the Spitfire with the tiny hollow point may not expand. Its been identified by some when hitting bone (shoulder). However the guys shooting them from smokeless rifles do not seem to have a problem with the Spitfire.

Wow, that is quite a strong statement.

A few years ago what i did was set up a system where i would shoot different bullets into the same exact water jug set, using the same exact powder charge, from the same distance. Perhaps i was deluding myself, but i felt it gave me a way to compare bullets. It kinda makes me sad these days, because those jugs are no longer available; those comparisons are only unto themselves.


Never did i feel i was collecting some kind of super scientific data about bullet performance on critters. However, i did feel, i was
gathering a little information on comparative bullet performance The shooting i did yesterday, and today, provided results that make sense to me, and i really do think the results are meaningful. Too bad the jugs are milk jugs, and not the juice jugs, i used in past years.

I agree Ron. When I shoot a bullet into my trap, it provides me a comparison to all the other bullets I've shot into the trap. Just like a jug of water, its not a live animal - but provides me an apples to apples comparison as to how the bullets perform in that particular media.

While most of the tests folks like us do are not super scientific, I believe they are of value. The info you provided with your test gives us some good data - the federal bullet should do fine above "x" fps. Below that, it may not.

Well GM, I can't say that I have ever fired ANYTHING into water jugs. But I have eyes and a pretty good amount of simple common sense. That simple common sense is screaming at me saying "if a jug of water will blow the petals off then what the hell would a shoulder bone do?" The problem I have had a couple of times is bullets blowing up on close range shots. My TC likes hot loads with just about every bullet weight. Combine that with I tend to rarely have shots OVER 60 yards on ML Deer or Elk and I have a problem with bullet fragmentation. The Barnes T-EZ is an extremely accurate bullet out of my rig as well as my old trusty Scorpion Golds. I go by peoples reports that have actually USED the product in the field on game. Not a water jug. But a water jug test can be and is very informing.

I'm not saying it won't give you an idea of what a bullet may or may not do. However, you can take 10 of the same bullets, same charge/load and shoot them into water filled jugs and have completely varying results from 1/2 of the bullets. Its been proven many times by many shooters performing a water jug test. Testing in water gives a good representation of penetration, but its not equal to living tissue or other ballistics media.

Here's one test, showing where one bullet didn't expand, a second shot fired expanded properly. Although not a muzzleloader, its an example. http://www.theboxotruth.com/the-box-...-truth-part-2/

Very Interesting. :happy0157:

:popcorn:

Put your reading specs on and read the posts some more GM. It wasn't ME that said they were meaningless. Just that I PERSONALLY have never shot water jugs. Haven't found a good recipe for plastic yet ;) That doesn't mean that they are meaningless. They can be informative on bullet reaction in hydraulic situations. I personally like tests that show a bullet passing through a hard medium THEN hydraulic medium THEN through hard again. Simulating actual field conditions as well as possible. If a bullet is going to "blow up" with JUST a hydraulic test then I personally believe it is safe to say it's not that impressive to me for real world application on large game.

If a Barnes won't stay together we have no hope.