Fail Safe ammo
Question:
There is no reason to believe that Fail Safe bullets are much better / worse than any other Nosler bullet. There is little basis to call expansion "lousy" by just shooting into water- – – that’s the reason for shooting into ballistic gelatin and meat. > I also did an expansion/weight retention test with this ammo using 1 gallon >water jugs. The load was a factory Winchester load in 30/06. Weight retention >was ok, the 180 grain bullet weighed 148 grains after. Expansion was >terrible. >It penetrated 8 jugs and barely expanded. My buddy did this same test but >used >a 7mmm instead with the same exact results. I would not reccomend them to >anyone. > Jim
Randy Wakeman Visit the rec.hunting and rec.hunting.dogs FAQ Home Page at: http://sportsmansweb.com/hunting/
Response:
> I also did an expansion/weight retention test with this ammo using 1 gallon > water jugs. The load was a factory Winchester load in 30/06. Weight retention > was ok, the 180 grain bullet weighed 148 grains after. Expansion was terrible. > It penetrated 8 jugs and barely expanded. My buddy did this same test but used > a 7mmm instead with the same exact results. I would not reccomend them to > anyone.
On large, thick skinned game they are designed for penetration rather than expansion. If you need to break bone on something such as a grizzly/brown bear I can’t think of anything better. akpls Visit the rec.hunting and rec.hunting.dogs FAQ Home Page at: http://sportsmansweb.com/hunting/
Response:
> There is little basis to call expansion "lousy" by just shooting into water- – > – that’s the reason for shooting into ballistic gelatin and meat.
Sitting on to of my monitor is a 7mm mag slug that I recoverd from under the throat skin of a whitetail I shot in a right-facing quartering-away shot. The fail safe went through nearly all the right-side ribs before stopping under the skin under the chin. It had mushroomed perfectly with 90 degree talon-like petals, all intact. Most of these bullets, however, go all the way through the deer, blacktails included. This slug has been placed back in the cartridge that fired it, just for amusement. The expansion was perfect. The box does say for light thin-skinned game, deer fit this description and I have no reason not to use them. Sorry to hear all the dis-satisfaction with them, but I will continue to use them exclusively, they function as advertised. — http://Sprite.viptx.net/~moomesa/index.html Visit the rec.hunting and rec.hunting.dogs FAQ Home Page at: http://sportsmansweb.com/hunting/
Response:
> in water, better yet, get some ballistic gelatin, then make
Does anyone have instructions for making Ballistic Gelatin? Or barring that, where is it sold? d.t. Visit the rec.hunting and rec.hunting.dogs FAQ Home Page at: http://sportsmansweb.com/hunting/
Response:
– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text -> I also did an expansion/weight retention test with this ammo using 1 > gallon > water jugs. The load was a factory Winchester load in 30/06. Weight > retention > was ok, the 180 grain bullet weighed 148 grains after. Expansion was > terrible. > It penetrated 8 jugs and barely expanded. My buddy did this same test but > used > a 7mmm instead with the same exact results. I would not reccomend them to > anyone. > On large, thick skinned game they are designed for penetration rather than > expansion. If you need to break bone on something such as a grizzly/brown > bear I can’t think of anything better. > akpls
Use a slower heavier calibre with a conventional bullet and it will expand as well as penetrate. Dan Hockly > Visit the rec.hunting and rec.hunting.dogs FAQ Home Page at: > http://sportsmansweb.com/hunting/
Visit the rec.hunting and rec.hunting.dogs FAQ Home Page at: http://sportsmansweb.com/hunting/
Response:
> I also did an expansion/weight retention test with this ammo using 1 gallon > water jugs. The load was a factory Winchester load in 30/06. Weight retention > was ok, the 180 grain bullet weighed 148 grains after. Expansion was terrible. > It penetrated 8 jugs and barely expanded. My buddy did this same test but used > a 7mmm instead with the same exact results. I would not reccomend them to > anyone.
But the question is, how is the bullet going to react on living tissue? I’m sure that the people that have tested these bullets used something a little more scientific than milk jugs filled with water. Try testing these bullets on something a little denser than water. Use newspaper that’s been soaked in water, better yet, get some ballistic gelatin, then make a definitive statement that expansion was terrible. Fail Safe bullets are "controlled expansion" bullets, they were not designed to open fully on initial impact. — http://www.herefishyfishy.com The Official Website of the ROFBMP Northwoods Classic http://www.uglybass.com/rofbmp Visit the rec.hunting and rec.hunting.dogs FAQ Home Page at: http://sportsmansweb.com/hunting/
Response:
There is no reason to believe that Fail Safe bullets are much better / worse than any other Nosler bullet. There is little basis to call expansion "lousy" by just shooting into water- – – that’s the reason for shooting into ballistic gelatin and meat. Hey,,, I got the water idea from a few different magazines, so it cannot be all that bad. I do understand that shooting live animals might bring different results though. I tested 8 different factory 06 loads last summer, and the Fail Safe expanded by far the worst. Weight retention was good though. The Fail Safe bullet is alot different from the Nosler Partition.I guess i do not know where you get the idea that they are the same. Maybe you are confusing the Federal Premium Nosler Partition load and the Winchester Supreme Partition Gold loads? Here is what i got for results: 1. Winchester Fail Safe 180gr. End weight was 148 grains,it lost 18%. Almost no expansion. By far the worst of the bunch. 2. Winchester Power Point Plus 150gr. End weight was 99 grains, it lost 33%. Good expansion. 3. Remington Core Lokt 180gr. End weight was 131 grains, it lost 27%. Best expansion of the bunch. 4. Nosler Partition 180gr. End weight was 112 grains, it lost 38%. Very good expansion, front core seperated. 5. Winchester Partition Gold 150gr. End weight was 124 grains. it lost 17%. Excellent weight retention and expansion. Very small front core was recovered seperated. 6. Federal Premium Ballistic Tip 165gr. End weight was 66 grains, it lost 60%. Front core seperated completely, causing major weight retention loss. Good expansion otherwise. 7.Winchester Power Point Plus 180gr. End weight was 128 grains, it lost 29%. Very good expansion. 8.Hornady Light Magnum 165gr btsp. End weight was 111 grains, it lost 33%. Very good expansion. Visit the rec.hunting and rec.hunting.dogs FAQ Home Page at: http://sportsmansweb.com/hunting/
Response:
>> Expansion was terrible. It penetrated 8 jugs and barely expanded….. > I would not reccomend them to anyone. >On large, thick skinned game they are designed for penetration rather than >expansion. If you need to break bone on something such as a grizzly/brown >bear I can’t think of anything better.
The hunter has to be wise enough to choose the correct ammunition when going hunting, and this is a good example why According to the Winchester website, the 150-grain .30-06 FailSafe ammo gives: "Rapid, controlled expansion. Penetrates thin skin, light muscle and bone. For antelope, deer, black bear." The 180-grain FailSafe ammo gives: "Delayed, controlled expansion. Deep penetration through thick, tough skin, heavy muscle tissue and bone. For large, heavy game." Testing the wrong ammunition, or using poor testing techniques, is bound to give inaccurate results. FailSafe ammo has been used world-wide with great results. Like any ammo choice however, common sense is required. Jay T Visit the rec.hunting and rec.hunting.dogs FAQ Home Page at: http://sportsmansweb.com/hunting/
Response:
I recently purchased a new rifle in .300 Win Mag. I bought a box of Winchester Supreme Fail Safe cartridges to go with it. What are people’s opinions on this type of ammo (Fail Safe)? Depending on the responses I get, I may choose to reload some of these, which leads to me to my next question. Where can you buy just the Fail Safe bullets, or a similar design of bullet? Thanks. Visit the rec.hunting and rec.hunting.dogs FAQ Home Page at: http://sportsmansweb.com/hunting/
Response:
>I bought a box of >Winchester Supreme Fail Safe cartridges to go with it. What are people’s >opinions on this type of ammo
They are basically Nosler Partition loads- (though coated) and are well proven, as with any previous Nosler P. round. Randy Wakeman Visit the rec.hunting and rec.hunting.dogs FAQ Home Page at: http://sportsmansweb.com/hunting/
Response:
Howdy! I have a 7mm Rem. Mag and I have used fail safe ammo for taking an elk and a black bear. In both cases the bullet went all the way through on a double lung shot. I like the ammo; however, I have wondered if maybe some other kind of bullet may be just as good. I don’t reload ammo at this time. Hope this helps. Always, Gene Visit the rec.hunting and rec.hunting.dogs FAQ Home Page at: http://sportsmansweb.com/hunting/
Response:
> I recently purchased a new rifle in .300 Win Mag. I bought a box of > Winchester Supreme Fail Safe cartridges to go with it. What are people’s > opinions on this type of ammo (Fail Safe)? Depending on the responses I > get, I may choose to reload some of these, which leads to me to my next > question. Where can you buy just the Fail Safe bullets, or a similar design > of > bullet? Thanks.
I can’t comment on the Fail Safe in .300WM, but the performance of the 230 grain .338WM on moose has been excellent in my experience. I also recently conducted a very non-scientific test of various bullet types, one of which was the Fail Safe. The others were the Barnes X (225 grain) and Swift A-Frame (225 grain), all in .338 WM. All were loaded with 73 grains of Reloader 22. I filled a box with phone books, set it up at 100 yards, fired into it and then recovered the bullets. The Fail Safe penetrated almost 18" and expanded exactly as advertised (4 peeled back petals). Weight retention was almost 100%. The A-Frame penetrated 12" and also expanded as advertised (mushroom-like). Weight retention was about 93%. The Barnes X penetrated about 10" and split into 2 pieces. Like I said, not a scientific test and certainly not definitive, but it satisfied my curiosity and told me enough to know that I’m sticking with the Fail Safe for large game (moose, bear, etc.) for now. Not that the others wouldn’t do the job, but the Fail Safe has filled the freezer for me over the past several years. I intend to try it again with some other bullet types when I get time. I bought my last batch of Fail Safes from Cabela’s, but they are also available from Midway and others. Hope this helps. akpls Visit the rec.hunting and rec.hunting.dogs FAQ Home Page at: http://sportsmansweb.com/hunting/
Response:
I tried the fail safe ammo and was disappointed. While clearly well constructed, the ammo is extremely inaccurate in my particular rifle (ruger 77). Instead of 1 inch benchrest groups at 100 yards I was scattering shots about 10 inches apart. Thus my dissapointment is not in the ammo but in the fact that my gun doesn’t "like" the ammo. Dean Visit the rec.hunting and rec.hunting.dogs FAQ Home Page at: http://sportsmansweb.com/hunting/
Response:
The FailSafe bullets are reported to me from a guide buddy of mine in Maine as "impressive" in terms of performance. He’s a realist too. No BS… Personally I’m not a believer that a whitetail or black bear needs a supreme bullet. Speer Mag-Tips are my favorite but Hornady Interlock are also good. If you’re going after the big stuff (Moose / Elk / Big bear) then the extra cash might be justified for the premium bullets. Fail safe are supposed to be good (as my buddy reported) but they are said to be not so accurate in some rifles. Also consider, Speer Grand Slam, Nosler Partition, Barnes X, Swift A Frame if you’re going to spend a bunch on the bullets. The Fail Safe line are expensive. They’ve come down considerably in price since being introduced. Might be worth a try! http://www.midwayusa.com/online/productpage.exe/showproduct?SaleItemI… 2&KeyWord=fail+safe Good Luck… REM7600 > I recently purchased a new rifle in .300 Win Mag. I bought a box of > Winchester Supreme Fail Safe cartridges to go with it. What are people’s > opinions on this type of ammo (Fail Safe)? Depending on the responses I > get, I may choose to reload some of these, which leads to me to my next > question. Where can you buy just the Fail Safe bullets, or a similar
design Visit the rec.hunting and rec.hunting.dogs FAQ Home Page at: http://sportsmansweb.com/hunting/
Response:
> I recently purchased a new rifle in .300 Win Mag. I bought a box of > Winchester Supreme Fail Safe cartridges to go with it. What are people’s > opinions on this type of ammo (Fail Safe)? Depending on the responses I > get, I may choose to reload some of these, which leads to me to my next > question. Where can you buy just the Fail Safe bullets, or a similar design > of > bullet? Thanks.
I have shot the failsafe for three years now. They are handloaded 165 gr. for the .300 Win mag. They perform great, three one shot kills on three deer. Two in Utah and one in California. You can buy the bullets from CombinedTechnologies in a varity of Calibur weights. The one draw back is expense. They are very expensive compared to other equally lethal bullets, around thirty or so dollars per box of fifty. I’m not sure they are THAT good for the price, and don’t know if I will spend the money to reload another batch. I think I may stick to the Noslar Ballistic Tip in the 165 or 180 class. Great bullet for a lot less money per cartridge. Good luck with you’re new .300. Anthony Osuna Visit the rec.hunting and rec.hunting.dogs FAQ Home Page at: http://sportsmansweb.com/hunting/
Response:
> I tried the fail safe ammo and was disappointed. While clearly well > constructed, the ammo is extremely inaccurate in my particular rifle (ruger > 77). Instead of 1 inch benchrest groups at 100 yards I was scattering shots > about 10 inches apart. > Thus my dissapointment is not in the ammo but in the fact that my gun > doesn’t "like" the ammo.
In my experience, it’s more difficult to find ammunition a Ruger 77 likes than the opposite. If you found one that will shoot 1" groups, consider yourself lucky. Visit the rec.hunting and rec.hunting.dogs FAQ Home Page at: http://sportsmansweb.com/hunting/
Response:
> disappointed. While clearly well constructed, the ammo is extremely inaccurate > in my particular rifle (ruger 77). Instead of 1 inch benchrest groups at 100 > yards I was scattering shots about 10 inches apart. Thus my dissapointment is > not in the ammo but in the fact that my gun doesn’t "like" the ammo. > In my experience, it’s more difficult to find ammunition a Ruger 77 likes than > the opposite. If you found one that will shoot 1" groups, consider yourself > lucky.
I hunt exclusively with a Ruger M77S in 7mm Mag. with Fail Safes. Thg gun loves this ammo and has performed flawlessly with it. My first kill with the gun was 285 yards on my own land. The deer took a shoulder hit broadside and did not take another step. I have taken an entire box worth of game with this combo and had two misses (offhand shots-no rest) and zero bad kills (hit where I intended, neck or shoulder) in both white and blacktail and hogs. The gun is stock except for the Timney trigger I installed, I had a gunsmith mount the scope when I bought the gun. 5 years now and I have the same zero and 1" groups at 100 yards with no changes. The blacktail I just took was appx. a 200 yard shot from the prone. The two 8 pointers I took, and the doe my 8 yearold took this last weekend were all at least100 yard shots, and the animals all dropped where they stood. The Fail Safes, while expensive, have let only one doe run more than thirty yards and one box lasted more than four seasons. I am now on my second box. The last bullet of the first box took my recent black tail (one stainless cartridge is on the ground somewhere in Terrell county, fell out of my belt). My 2 cents. — http://Sprite.viptx.net/~moomesa/index.html Visit the rec.hunting and rec.hunting.dogs FAQ Home Page at: http://sportsmansweb.com/hunting/
Response:
I also did an expansion/weight retention test with this ammo using 1 gallon water jugs. The load was a factory Winchester load in 30/06. Weight retention was ok, the 180 grain bullet weighed 148 grains after. Expansion was terrible. It penetrated 8 jugs and barely expanded. My buddy did this same test but used a 7mmm instead with the same exact results. I would not reccomend them to anyone. Jim Visit the rec.hunting and rec.hunting.dogs FAQ Home Page at: http://sportsmansweb.com/hunting/
Response:
>>I bought a box of >Winchester Supreme Fail Safe cartridges to go with it. What are people’s >opinions on this type of ammo >They are basically Nosler Partition loads- (though coated) and are well >proven, >as with any previous Nosler P. round.
They are not Nosler partition bullets. They are a bullet built by Nosler utilizing one of Winchesters patents, hence the name "Combined Technology." The failsafe is a fully encased lead in the rear portion of the bullet (for weight retention) and a copper hollowpoint front. I have found the bullet to be extremely accurate out of my 7mm STW Mod 70 (sum MOA) and lethal on deer and elk. Carl Degner carldives at aol dot com A fine is a tax for doing wrong. A Tax is a fine for doing well. Visit the rec.hunting and rec.hunting.dogs FAQ Home Page at: http://sportsmansweb.com/hunting/
