What flaming moron thought of this one?

[Lone Star]

The laws of fluid dynamics and gravity interplay to prevent a high-powered magnum from hitting planet earth with the same velocity if we shoot it straight upward, but the rather slow velocity of a handgun allows it to happen. A college physics professor would actually agree with the writer.

Strange, your own data does not support your claim.  What matters is the terminal velocity of the bullet - this depends on the BC of the falling object - there is no universal terminal velocity. With a lower BC than a rifle bullet, the typical handgun bullet will have a much lower terminal velocity than a rifle bullet has.  In your own example, a 150-grain FMJ military bullet had a terminal velodity of 300 fps - how can a bullet with half the BC have a higher terminal velocity? Answer - it cannot.  Ya scored zero on that college physics test son.  Sorry about that....

[Glanceblamm]

Has been great reading, and like some of you I have let my mag subscripts expire. I have to admit that I do like to see Carmichael articles though.

I had a lenghty reply based on personal exp but this was greatly simplified by Graybeard who covered this nicely when talking about CNS/Tissue damage. We want enough gun to preform the latter with the former being a Bonus usually associated with a close range or high velocity shot.

I think that Mikey hit the energy dump theory on the head when he said.

Folks, as I recall the 'energy dump theory' it began with police shootings and the like when they moved away from the 357 and 41 magnums some street officers were pakin' in the midwestern states and moved to calibers and ammo that wouldn't penetrate so badly. It was a 'people' thing, not a 'hunting' thing and then some idjit took it to hunting.

[knight0334]

My theory is,  try to apply all ideas.  A big hole, deep penetration and transfer lots of energy.  Expanding jacketed 45cal slugs work for me on everything I've killed from groundhog to big whitetail.

[safetysheriff]

With a lower BC than a rifle bullet, the typical handgun bullet will have a much lower terminal velocity than a rifle bullet has.  In your own example, a 150-grain FMJ military bullet had a terminal velodity of 300 fps - how can a bullet with half the BC have a higher terminal velocity? Answer - it cannot.  Ya scored zero on that college physics test son.  Sorry about that....

LS'

Haven't given any data yet.....agree with your statement about BC.....and passed college physics with flying colors.....       Sorry about that....

But I agree, that I didn't realize the part of terminal velocity being as low as it is in air ...and am wrong about the handgun bullets falling velocity.    A falling skydiver, from my research, with extremities pulled in, would hit approximately 295 fps as terminal velocity.     Terminal velocity for a handgun bullet might reach 400 fps (?) from what I can see, but it may not reach that much.   (I'd expect the handgun bullets BC to be better than that of a skydiver, of course.)    Obviously it is less than what a handgun will fire a bullet at.

I was wrong.

SS'

[safetysheriff]

Ya scored zero on that college physics test son.  Sorry about that....

Did you have to come down on me so hard...........mom?  :-D

Sorry about that.... :wink:

SS'

[Van/TX]

SS, you can come out of your room now  Just kiddin' :wink: ....Van

[Lone Star]

You  may not like this......but...a college physics professor would actually agree with the writer.  Sorry 'bout that....SS'

What's good for the goose is good for the gander......but I did not intend to be mean in my response, and I am sorry if I was "too hard" on you!

[KYsquirrelsniper]

Funny that in this conversation that not much has been said concerning hydrostatic shock.  It has to come into some play depending on where the animal is hit.  After all much of an animal is basically water and as the shockwave bounces around the insides causes some damage.  I think everyone has shot a gallon jug full of water with various calibers.  It is easily seen which bullets and calibers create a bigger shockwave.

I'll throw in my $.02 on hydrostatic shock, which of course everyone else may or may not agree with. I have no doubt that hydrostatic shock exists to some degree, because as you said, animal  tissue is made up of a lot of water. However, I do not believe that it has much, if any, influence on the overall "killing effect" of a bullet, especially at typical big bore revolver velocities.

My main realm of hunting experience has been with rifles, which at least in theory should be the choice if you're concerned about hydrostatic shock. I've used everything from a 223 (no flames please) up to a 450 Marlin and several "magnum" calibers for whitetail. Whitetail really aren't very tough animals, and if the hydrostatic shock theory held true, it should at least apply to thin skinned game such as whitetail. However, I'm never seen any conclusive proof that it helps make a quicker kill.

I've taken deer with high velocity rounds that should produce a great degree of hydrostatic shock, and yet the deer would take off running even with a properly placed shot into the heart/lung area. Then again, I've used low intensity rounds such as the 30-30, which shouldn't produce spectacular results, yet the deer would crumble immediately. Of course this is just a couple examples, as I've seen deer react in a wide variety of ways after being hit with various calibers. However, the point I'm getting at is that I've found no evidence that high velocity rounds capable of great hydrostatic shock drop deer any faster than a slower round. Sometimes a high velocity round may drop them in their tracks, but then the next 2 or 3 you shoot may run 50yds. The same can be said for rounds like the 30-30 and 44mag, sometimes they'll drop in their tracks and sometimes they a run a bit. So evidentally there's much more important factors at work.

As for the water filled jug shooting, I do that too, but I certainly won't judge the performance of a round by it. Why? Well, if I judged performance based on that, my 243 Win loaded with 70gr Ballistic Tips would be the best hunting rifle I own, as it will absolutely devastate a water filled plastic jug. My 450 Marlin with a 350gr JFP is very mild by comparison in the same test. Even though it seems to defy logic, my 300RUM loaded with 180gr SPBTs at speeds nearing the 243/70gr combo doesn't do the damage the 243 does due to the explosiveness of that little 243 bullet. But, do you think the 243 with 70gr BTs is a suitable choice for big game hunting? Personally, I don't, and that caliber/bullet combo is used for predators and varmints only. My point here is that there's more important factors than what happens to the water, whether its in a jug or an animal's tissue.

[De41mag]

Well, I guess I 'll chime in there like KY did.

Back in the eighties, Jim Carmichle did an article on what he thought was the best deer catridge for whitetail. His response was a 243 with a 85gr. HPBT Sierra. At least what he thought for deer in the southeast. So when I bought my 7mm-08 Rem. Mod 7FS with a 18-1/2' barrel, I decided to use the 120gr. HP what Remington suggested for varmits. The little round grouped an inch at 100yds. for five shots. And since I was using a short barrel I thought it would be good for whitetail. And my theory held true. Deer were dropping in their tracks, shot after shot. The bullet went in, and hardly ever came out. But the the deer went down almost instantly when shot with the 120gr. HP. I used that round for 10 years, without a lost deer, best round I found out of a rifle. As far as a handgun goes, I've only shot one, a four point two years ago with a S&W 657 41 magnum with a 170gr. JHC Sierra. That shot was a fell in his tracks shot, but also it was in the neck too. If you look at the post bb44 made a while back. He shot two does with a Kieith bullet I loaded for him. He wrote that the first deer shot ran about forty yds. but the doe behind her fell in her tracks. That post was, two birds with one stone.

Dennis  

[safetysheriff]

Well, I guess I 'll chime in there like KY did.

Back in the eighties, Jim Carmichle did an article on what he thought was the best deer catridge for whitetail. His response was a 243 with a 85gr. HPBT Sierra. At least what he thought for deer in the southeast. So when I bought my 7mm-08 Rem. Mod 7FS with a 18-1/2' barrel, I decided to use the 120gr. HP what Remington suggested for varmits. The little round grouped an inch at 100yds. for five shots. And since I was using a short barrel I thought it would be good for whitetail. And my theory held true. Deer were dropping in their tracks, shot after shot. The bullet went in, and hardly ever came out. But the the deer went down almost instantly when shot with the 120gr. HP. I used that round for 10 years, without a lost deer, best round I found out of a rifle.
Dennis  

Dennis,

I find it very believeable that at a reduced velocity (short rifle barrel you said) the varmint bullet worked like it did.    That's one of the things that I find interesting about this hobby......doing what so many say can't be done.

Glad to hear of your success,

SS'

[riddleofsteel]

THere is really not much mystery to the entire thing if you do detailed analysis of the tramua on your deer once you dress it. Deer shot in the classic kill zone i.e. heart-lung area will often run for up to 100 yards or more before expiring. Deer with transected aortas will run for up to 100 yards before they go down. The simple fact is that until thier brain runs out of oxygen form lack of blood they will continue to run.
Hydrostatic wave or disruption is only one componet of what will become the PWC. If enough nerve tissue i.e. spine, brachial nerve plexus (arm pit), brain is included in the PWC area you get the sledge hammer effect.
It really comes back to; No replacement for bullet placement. I shoot heart lungs if I am shooting from a distance and I know the type of terrain within 100 yards will make for easy recovery. However, if I am close enough so my bullet has energy to spare or if there is a swamp, river, or other difficult recovery obsticles nearby I am going for the front shoulder. I know that the brachial nerve plexus is ther and the base of the deer's neck and cervical spine is just behind that. If your hydrostatic disruption includes these two items the deer will be slammified and go down, plus it is harder to run with a broken shoulder if they get back up.
Typically a 120\129 grain 6.5 bullet or a 117 grain .25 bullet at 2500 to 3000 FPS results in enough physical and hydrostatic trauma to that area for clean and quick kills. You lose a little meat but you do not look for your deer. On lung shots you will have to look, its just that simple.
Hydrostatic shock and rounds that produce it are not death rays. It is the disruption of vital tissue that kills either by physical damage from the bullet or the hydrostatic bow wave it produces. Marksmanship and an accurate rifle are still the key elements.
 

[Van/TX]

On lung shots you will have to look, its just that simple.

That has been my experience too over many years with a .30-60.  I can't ever remember a deer going straight down when shot broadside thru the lungs. They normally run 50 yards or so.   However about 6 or 8 years ago I started using a .243 with 100 grain bullets (factory loads).   More times than not a shot with this round in the same place produces a "bam, flop".  I don't know why that is and of course this is just my experiences.  

Being hooked on handguns lately I doubt I'll be doing anymore testing though  :-D .....Van

[riddleofsteel]

My own experience has been pretty much limited to bores .25 and above and bullet weights 117 and above. It has been two decades since I used a 6mm Remington to take a white tail. However, the 100 grain bullet in the .243 is roughly equal to the 120 in .25 as far as on paper. Perhaps I will load up some 100 grain loads for my 25-06 and take a few lung shots and see what happens. The 117's may be a bit to heavy for blowing up lungs.
I still like the versatility of having the weight to brake down a shoulder if I need to and that takes a little heavier bullet.

[De41mag]

Thanks, SafetySheriff.  :wink:

You are right, go ahead and go against the grain so to speak.
Nothing is better than learning from your own experiences.
All those deer over the years helped put confindence and understanding in the cartridge and what I intended to use the rifle for.
Again, Thanks, SS.

Dennis  

[safetysheriff]

Dennis,

Today is Dec' 5th; so our firearms season just ended this evening.    Wish we had more time like you do down in Alabama.    You guys can gun hunt till you need your next haircut!    

I was in a tree this year, enjoying it greatly, only to come home and be sick for several days.    A bunch of people here in NE Ohio have been badly sick already, possibly with the flu.

I'll try varminting when I feel better.

Keep up your good work,

SS'

[Daveinthebush]

OK so.....you would think that a 12 gauge slug would not only transfer the energy but produce a lot of hydrostatic shock.

On my recent trip back to NY, I shot an eight point buck from nine yards with a 2 3/4" 12 gauge slug.  I rangefinded a log in the trail where he decided to head into a ravine.  He went about another 15 yards for a total of 82 yards minus 9 or 73 yards.

The autopsy revieled that I had removed 1/3 of his heart.   The blood trail was out both sides all the way up the logging road.  Makes for easy trailing.

I also took a doe at 32 yards with the bow, a double lung shot, massive blood out both sides.  The deer traveled about the same distance, 70 something yards.

Soooooooooo........would it not be better said that caliber and energy (or weapon used) does not matter and that the most important thing is damage that eventually disrupts the certral nervous system though the lack of blood to an organ (lungs or brain) or an abrupt disruption or the CNS.

[riddleofsteel]

If the CNS is not part of the PWC or disrupted by the hydrostatic bow wave the animal will function until the brain runs out of oxygen and passes out.

I botched a shot on a buck with a muzzleloader this year and cut his aorta at the level of the last rib. He was knocked off of his feet, jumped up, and ran over 100 yards before he layed down and died. The total volume of his blood was in the abdomen when I cleaned him.

It was a good chance to teach my 11 year old son tracking by blood drops though.

[Doc T]

That old idea of wanting the bullet to stay in the deer goes WAY back.  It originally started when the only projectile was a patch and ball.  Out in the wilderness lead was hard to come by.  If the ball stayed in the animal, it would be recovered, saved and eventually melted and molded into a nice new ball ready to kill another deer.

[Questor]

DaveInTheBush:

Do you find that deer shot with arrows show a good blood trail? I have not hunted deer with a bow but would like to.

By the way, I had a similar experience with slugs this year. The blood trails were outstanding.  We got the classic clump of hair at the site of the hit also.

[safetysheriff]

OK so.....you would think that a 12 gauge slug would not only transfer the energy but produce a lot of hydrostatic shock.

.[/i]

quickd'

not to be a smart guy....but i'm not sure how much shock is generated by something as slow as a slug out of a shotgun.    it might be enough, it might not.    i sincerely believe that with Most whitetails, a 55 gr' Hornady spire point out of a .223 kills quicker than the average forster slug out of a 12 gauge.......because of what i've seen in person from both.    

i see hydrostatic shock as similar to what we get with a sonic boom in the air.....pressure building ahead of and around an object at sufficient speed.    instead of noise, the energy of a bullet is converted to hydrostatic pressure.    the air is one medium, the blood/water/cell walls of a deer being just another kind.    that's why i believe the shock wave surrounding a bullet is a verifiable phenomenon -- if velocity is sufficient.

but i do agree, an arrow/broadhead can kill surprisingly fast.   it's amazing in some of the 'training films' i've watched.    i just think that velocity has an effect, however, if it's sufficient, with a proper bullet construction to take advantage of it.    they both work -- in different ways.

take care,

SS'

[KYsquirrelsniper]

Personally, I wouldn't classify a 12ga slug in the realm of calibers capable of hydrostatic shock. I'd classify it more in the realm of big bore revolver cartridges and muzzleloaders, just a big bullet punching a big hole at moderate speed.

As for bows, with a sharp broadhead and a heart/lung shot resulting in a complete pass through, they can leave some of the best blood trails I've ever seen. Of course it makes sense too, because you've just cut a huge hole through the animal with glorified razor blades. On the other hand, if you mess up and get a shoulder or have a set-up that won't produce a pass through, then you may have some problems, as the arrow shaft can partially plug the entrance hole. Luckily I've never personally had that happen, yet.

[Black Jaque Janaviac]

I think this topic will perpetually remain a mystery, which is why it is so fascinating.

Hydrostatic shock:

I just butchered a fawn that I shot with a .357 lever action.  The second shot went in high in the brisket, took out several vertabrae, and lodged under the shoulder, between the shoulder and the ribcage.  Interestingly, the bone was broken - even though the bullet didn't get that far.  That's hydrostatic shock.  

I prefer my bullets to stay in the deer, for the simple fact that I can recover them!  They make neat souvenirs.  

There's something really important here that is not being discussed - bullet construction.  I see some people say a .30-06 will drop 'em, then others say their .243s do that more consistantly.  Then another person will testify to just the opposite.  Well the whole discussion of comparing cartridge performance is useless if you don't correct for bullet construction.  

I, personally, will cast my lot in with the old timer's wisdom that you're better off seeking a cartridge that will compromise and balance all aspects of performance, and forget the "drop-in-its-tracks" ideal.   I don't mind tracking 50 yards, hell even 100+ yards if I can rely on the bullet plowing through any muscle or bone and making a nice wide, deep, wound channel.  I don't mind throwing away an entire shoulder, that's better than the whole animal going off never to be recovered.  I don't mind watching a deer run a little ways, if I have confidence that I didn't flinch at the shot because I know my gun won't make me flinch.

[SBEACH]

I was just thinking that sometimes when the bullet does not exit if the bullet destroys the heart/lungs to the point of a sudden massive drop in blood pressure that the animal would indeed go into shock. I believe that was some of the reasoning. A lighter than normal bullet would do this such as the aforementioned 85 gr in a .243. The bullet almost explodes when it hits the targe area leading to massive instant trauma. I also wondered if the bullet hitting at high speed would carry a sonic boom into the chest cavity. The faster the projectile the more violent the boom. I've read of people using .22 centerfires on deer and having immediate one shot drops and wondered if this is the reason. Now shooting through bone would be different. Just my .02.

[De41mag]

Safetysheriff;

Hope you get feeling much better SOON!  :grin:
I'm not a ballistic expert but seems to me that when the bullet stays in an animal, all of its energy is expelled inside the animal, if the bullet exits, then all that energy that the bullet has left is wasted.
Just my two cents.  :?

Dennis  

[Hooker]

I'm not a ballistic expert but seems to me that when the bullet stays in an animal, all of its energy is expelled inside the animal, if the bullet exits, then all that energy that the bullet has left is wasted.

If the bullet exits and the animal dies is the residual energy wasted?
I've gotten a kick out of this topic with all it's varied theories. I've seen these theories work and fail. Bullet placement is the only insurance to putting meat on the table
The only thing that concerns me is what did the bullet do as it went through the animal regardless of whether if exits or not. All death is caused by shutting down of the CNS. It's the chain of events leading up to this shut down that vary. If I can't get good hit  that takes out the CNS, I would prefer massive hemorrhage the best way to get that is to have an exit wound.

Pat

[Spyro Andes]

If your goal is to kill by hydrostatic shock, you want a frangible bullet and high impact velocity.  The tissue in the area will receive the energy.  The bullet has energy be it in the form of rotational and kinetic.  They energy can not be lost, it has to be accounted for at impact.  The quickness of the delivery of that energy into the surrounding SOFT tissue is what determines the amount of hydro-static shock.

I have shot 4 black bears outside of Fort Smith, NWT using a Marlin in 45-70 loaded with a hot 400 grain Speer soft flat points...  all of the ranges were under 50 yards...  all were shot broadside right in the heart/lung area... all of the bears exhibited similar behavior after being shot...

1) all of the bears instantly dropped
2) all of the bullets never exited and only tiny pieces were found
3) many of the internal organs in the bear seemed to be liquified.
4) one of the bears had a lung shoot out of it's mouth.

I have seen similar behavior shooting various deer sized game using my encore in 338-384 w/ the 180 grain ballistic tip.  Again same deal with no exits even on coues deer or antelope but they were absolutely stoned at the shot.

The first blackie that I ever shot was 20 years 2 months ago, to the day, in the Angeles National Forest  in southern california...  I had a great stalk and the bear was about 60 yards away standing on a little mound that was about 15 feet higher than me.  I clicked the safety off the sako 375 H&H and unloaded 270gr soft point right into his shoulders.  I flipped, what turned out to be a 310lb bear, right off that mound.  The bear was dead as a could be when I got up there.

HOWEVER... notice it is a big HOWEVER...  I think that with standard pistol calibers, trying to kill with hydrostatic shock is foolish.  Not saying that I haven't but I don't rely upon it.

Give me a big bore w/ a big meplat and enough energy to drive thru both shoulders and exit then has enough energy to exit...  I'll show you lots of dead animals.

I really believe that the key here is meplat... the larger the meplat... the quicker they die.  Also, the large the meplat, the more velocity you need to drive the bullet as far as one of a more HYDRODYNAMIC design of the same sectional density.

Notice that word HYDRODYNAMIC...  it is an important one...

Lets switch gears to divers...  we have a diver on a 10 meter diving board... the diver weighs the same on each dive and jumps the same height.  He starts with the same potential energy (lets say 100 kilos @ 10 meters) and, when he reaches the water, all dives will have identical kinetic energies.

All the diver is doing is altering how HYDRODYNAMIC he is when he enters the water.

For his first dive... the diver executes his dive w/ a world class olympic style entry.  It is a very hydrodynamic design that creates little splash.  The diver travels a long way before he stops.  In other words, as evidenced by the lack of splash, the water is displaced more gradually because the energy is dissipated more slowly.

For his second dive... the diver executes a perfect canon ball.  It is less hydrodynamic and creates a larger splash and the diver travels a much shorter distance.  More water is displaced because the energy is dissipated into the water quicker.

For his last dive... the diver does a perfect belly flop.  It is the least hydrodynamic design...  It creates the largest splash and displaces the most fluid because the energy is transfer the quickest.

While I know that the diving is not a perfect anecdote... it is close enough...  the bigger the meplat, think of it as an already expanded bullet, the larger the wound cavity.

With a standard type handgun round, I want a wound channel that goes from side to side.  Again just enough energy to make it thru some skeletal structure and still exit.

With a rifle on standard game, I want a bullet that blows up an inch past the entry hole.

With a rifle on dangerous game, I want a solid bullet of LARGE diameter that will hold together thru the worst skeletal structure.

SA

PS.  Any of you ever shoot a 200lb game animal, lets say a pig, in the heart/lung with a 300gr solid from a 375 H&H?  I did when I was 16yrs old and it was less than impressive.  Actually, I learned real quick to shoot the rest of that box at the pigs' shoulders.

[Van/TX]

I have shot 4 black bears outside of Fort Smith, NWT using a Marlin in 45-70 loaded with a hot 400 grain Speer soft flat points... all of the ranges were under 50 yards... all were shot broadside right in the heart/lung area... all of the bears exhibited similar behavior after being shot...

1) all of the bears instantly dropped
2) all of the bullets never exited and only tiny pieces were found
3) many of the internal organs in the bear seemed to be liquified.
4) one of the bears had a lung shoot out of it's mouth.

I'm confused.  Did you shoot the bears thru both shoulders?  If so I can understand the results.  If shot just thru lungs/heart this would seem unusual reaction from a bear size animal with a large caliber relatively slow bullet.  Just curious  .....Van

[Spyro Andes]

Van,

The shot were all taken at broadside bears, in the heart lung area, the only skelatal structure encountered was a rib.

And yes, I did find the outcome rather interesting myself and, yes, the bullet was slow moving but not slow for a 45-70 or for the bullet's construction.

The bullet was moving much faster than the velocities for it was designed.  In other words, relatively speaking, a very frangible bullet for the velocity at impact.

SA

[Van/TX]

Thanks Spyro for the additional info.  I'm no longer confused ....Van