Since you had Partition in the title, and it's been used with success for decades. I would like to see your results for it?
Not that it would change my opinion of it. I never had one fail me, but i'm curious.
The title is just to get people to look. However I will try to get one up of a Partition, though it will look very similar to the Accubond.
There is absolutely know way you can predict what will happen once you pull the trigger in the field with any bullet not knowing exactly where it will hit and what it will have to deal with getting to the vitals.
Gelatin test or any test are poor examples of field conditions and what a bullet will do..Under "Perfect" circumstances even gelatin test are not game animals with hide/bones and ribs and different substances than gelatin.
Nick a rib on a broadside(perfect shot) with a volatile bullet like the A-Max and see what happens.Way different than your graphs.
Jayco
Gelatin, while not perfect, has proven to be THE best predictor of what a bullet will do in tissue. As far as bone and hide do you really think that hasn't been tested?
Your AMAX comment is also wrong. That picture shows almost perfectly what that bullet consistently does whether it hits shoulders or not. The only difference being that if it hits shoulder/leg bones both shoulders will typically be lost and the exit wound will be around 4-5 inches in diameter rather then the 2-3 inch if only hitting the soft tissue of the chest. I do not mean this as a measuring test or ego but instead simply as a data point, however it is likely that I have shot more deer with any single variation of 6mm, 6.5mm, 7mm, and 30 cal AMAX then you have shot total. I have no questions as to what AMAX's do in deer. The 168gr from a 308 has no issue penetrating bone and reaching the vitals in deer type game.
Also I think there is the issue that physiologically some animals are simply tougher than others,and I don't know how we measure that!
What is obvious is that bullets aren't the same in a general sense in terms of how they inflict wounds and penetrate,and what they "do" after they land.
You are of course correct on all your points. While in an ideal world we would have millions of animals that are the exact same size, age, health, and mental state to test bullets on. Unfortunately there is no way to be consistent from bullet to bullet and shot to shot on animals and therefor comparisons would be less then accurate. Gelatin provides that consistency and also happens to nicely correlate with what we see in light boned mammals. IE deer and humans. Your point about some individual aniamls being physiologically tougher is spot on as well as phsycological differences as well.
How so?
How do these photos come close to on actual game performance?
Jayco
Because they do. Barnes TSX exhibit relatively narrow, deep penetration in ballistic gel. Barnes TSX exhibit relatively narrow, deep penetration in real animals. The wound patterns are very similar when measured. Nosler Accubonds exhibit wide expansion with a little fragmentation in the first part of its path producing a good sized max temp cavity, and medium to deep penetration in ballistic gel. They also exhibit wide expansion with a little fragmentation in the first part of its path producing a good sized max temp cavity, and medium to deep pentration in real animals. The Hornady AMAX exhibits extremely wide wound cavities with medium penetration producing extreme tissue destruction in ballistic gel. Ironically AMAX's exhibits extremely wide wound cavities with medium penetration producing extreme tissue destruction in real animals. Funny how that works......
Let's just take Elk as an example....If there rolling in there waller,first there wet then it turns into hard caked mud,the first barrier the bullet comes in contact with.Then there is the hair,then the hide then the bodily fluids if you do not contact muscle or bone.
So how do these gelatin test approximate real game and what a bullet will really do?
Jayco
Please point out where I have mentioned elk? In any case intermediate barrier penetration is tested. While there are some differences in general bone causes bullets to open/fragment more and usually penetrate less.
This paragraph by Dr. Fackler summarizes the subject perfectly, from a scientific point of view. Bullet mass and velocity are the only things that are used to calculate kinetic energy and momentum, so indirectly he's saying that both of those things are important! They certainly represent the potential that the bullet has to do damage, but as he points out (and you do, as well!), other factors determine how much actual damage and penetration the bullet achieves.
Again, I agree with you in principle, here, but energy is not meaningless, since it takes bullet mass and velocity into account, both of which are important in determining penetration and wound size. The non-scientific terms are fairly useless, though, like "hydro-static shock" (what is that, anyway?!), "knock-down power", etc.
At the end of the day, I'm with you all the way! The scientist in me just had to mention the trivial details that you had overlooked
Agree on all accounts.
