Understanding the Meplate in Bullet Design

[BrushBuster]

I believe that I have been under a misaprehension that the cast bullet meplate besides being neccessary for tubular magazines, provided initial striking energy, and that a larger meplate would initiate more rapid expansion of the forward section of the bullet. Now, in talking to others, I get the impression that the meplate has a much more subtle function, and that mushrooming of a good cast hunting bullet for large game is not neccessarily desireable because it does so to the detriment of full penetration.

Could I have this clarified, in respect to what happens after the meplated cast bullet strikes larger game, and just what should be considered effective design and performance at that stage.

Please don't ask me to buy more books, I'm way over budget already!

[Sky C.]

Hello Brushbuster-

Some interesting information re: Hard Cast & Meplats vs. Jacketed & expanding is located over on the "Beartooth Bullets" forum.

http://www.beartoothbullets.com/tech_notes/archive_tech_notes.htm/13
http://www.beartoothbullets.com/tech_notes/archive_tech_notes.htm/31
http://www.beartoothbullets.com/tech_notes/archive_tech_notes.htm/9

I think these may at least partially answer your question.

Best regards-

Sky

[Castaway]

Like everyting else, it depends.  A hard bullet with a big meplat won't expand, soft ones do.  At one time, I cast two different alloys for the same caliber.  Hard for shooting pigs with my carbine and also for deer with my pistol.  For deer with my carbine, I cast a 50/50 lead and wheel weight to give a little expansion, but still drive through both sides.  My version of a controlled expansion bullet.

[stocker]

BB: I once took some 1/4" drill rod and used two pieces, one ground to a spire point and the other ground square. I set them on a piece of meat and drove them through with a hammer. The spire point mainly displaced the meat and when it was retracted the wound closed up fairly snugly with a bit of flexing. The square end basically punched a hole which did not seal very closely on removal. To my eye it looked like the larger hole would cause a lot more blood loss with less opportunity for clotting.  With varying velocitys and expanding copper jacketed bullets we are in a different game and other forces come much into play. With non-expanding (at least not that much) the benefits of the big square end seemed apparent to me.
Perhaps it's an oversimplification.

[carpediem]

My god man, square bullets!  What are you thinking?  Papal decree specifically outlaws the use of square bullets on Christians.   Now Non-Christians and animals, thats another story.

Square bullets would be pretty hard on game meat.

Kindest regards,

 :wink:

[BrushBuster]

Sky C, thanks for those articles; they do help to explain the meplate's part in killing effectively.  Stocker was a little more pointed (square) with his test procedure, but the principal is the same.  And, as Castaway pointed out, the meplate can be used to control expansion with varying levels of bullet hardness.

This must be getting into one of the  contraversial  areas of bullet casting that makes it interesting.

Coming from the old school of hunters, it's not easy to wrap around the concept of hydrostatic tissue damage from a hard casting, large meplate, and resulting longer wound channel; as opposed to the way I was educated years ago that only mushrooming bullets that remain in the animal, tear it up and impart 100% of their energy can be expected to kill effectively (did Jack O'connor ever give cast bullets a serious write-up?)

On the other hand, when applied against large game, I can appreciate that the harder cast bullet also has the potential to break bones and put game down quickly. High-speed bullets designed for fast mushrooming are lousy bone breakers. The only game that I have ever lost, was to a fast bullet (jacketed) that failed to penetrate to the vitals.

When I give it some thought, there's no doubt that a harder bullet would be a better choice in Grizzly country. Heart-lung shots are suicidal! And if your undergunned, penetration could make all the difference.

I'll be hunting with hard cast bullets for the first time this fall. I'm usually very careful about shot placement, and I am leaning toward taking advantage of their penetration by changing my aim point to the shoulder-spine region. I'm just not sure how effective the traditional heart-lung placement would work out; guess there's no substitute for experience. I would like to hear from others on this?

A point mentioned often about hunting with cast bullets has been that an exit wound (common with cast, rare with jacketed) is a plus if tracking is required. I don't like tracking wounded game out of consideration for the animal, and the fact that they can die in some awful places. But if I have to, a good blood trail is a blessing.

A very different type of bullet, and a different type of hunting. I'm looking forward to it.

[LAH]

We had quite a long string on sixgunner.com between Randy Garrett and Tim Sundles concerning meplat diameter and killing power. It was very long and very heated. I don't have the time to go into it as I must work at least some each day. To make a long story short, when speaking of caliber, the increase of meplat diameter increases killing power but like everything else, there comes a point when bigger is no longer better. I think Mr. Taffin also agrees with this is memory serves.