#2290013 - 07/03/08 11:00 AM
Distance traveled after impact.......
|
Reloader7RM
Campfire Regular
Registered: 09/20/05
Posts: 961
Loc: NW La.
|
Offline
|
|
Didn't want to rob from any other threads, so thought I start a new one on the subject. Hopefully we can keep this G rated 
Now to the topic, regardless of studies conducted by various sources which don't give every piece of data to merit much IMHO,here's alittle of what I've noticed through the experiences of killing over 150 head of big game and witnessing 100s of others.
I've found that faster carts put down game much faster than slower carts of the same cal and bullet type. I've taken animals with quite a few diff cals of various speeds and I've noticed a large trend that the faster you push a given bullet the more internal damage occurs and quicker death was achieved. I do feel this is directly related to the internal damage caused by the variance in velocity.
IE, compare the 30-30 to the 30-06 or 300WM, the 7-08 to the 7RM/7WEA/7STW/7WSM, the 270 win to the 270Wea/270WSM etc. It has proven many times over IME that the faster carts put down medium game in a much quicker fashion. I've seem multiple rib/lung/rib impacts result in DRT kills with the faster carts and though I have seen a handful DRTs with slower carts of the same cals and bullets, most of the animals traveled a piece after impact.
Let's get one thing straight, I'm not saying slower doesn't kill, infact, they kill very well. I've learned through experience the more damage you do to the internals, the faster the game expires. I made a move to faster carts about 10 years ago and to my surprise during that time and after dozens of kills, tracking has become very rare. When I primarily used slower carts, blood trailing with my beagles was a very common occurance. This may be a bold statement, but I've never had to use a dog to trail a vitally hit animal with a fast cart, never. Most were either DRT or mere feet from impact.
I admit, I'm also an expandable broadhead shooter for the same reasons. I can remember quite a few long blood trails from fixed heads with smaller cutting diameter heads through the lungs. With larger CD expandables they don't make it far and the blood trails are very easy to follow.
Anyone else noticed this trend?
Again, this isn't to pick on you slower cart guys, I have a few myself and love to use them from time to time. I also feel the slower carts shine with more expansive/softer bullets...
Have a Good One,
Reloader7RM
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#2290077 - 07/03/08 11:33 AM
Re: Distance traveled after impact.......
[Re: Reloader7RM]
|
Ruger # 1
Campfire Regular
Registered: 10/19/05
Posts: 411
Loc: Ohio
|
|
Offline
|
|
I pretty much agree with everything you posted.This has been my experience as well,with the exception of having to use dogs to trail.I've never had a deer go farther than 50 yards with any gun.
Also switched to expandables on my compound a few years ago.I'll never go back.No comparison between fixed and expandable.I still use cut on contact off my recurve though, for obvious reasons.
_________________________
"The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil...
...is for good men to do nothing."
Edmund Burke
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#2290772 - 07/03/08 06:33 PM
Re: Distance traveled after impact.......
[Re: Ruger # 1]
|
Jordan Smith
Campfire Regular
Registered: 03/29/06
Posts: 1210
Loc: Calgary, AB, Canada
|
Online
|
|
Yup, sounds about right to me. As long as the bullet can hold up, as a general trend, faster bullet = faster expiry of animal. I guess that's why there are so many people beginning to use the 120gr TTSX in 7mm over the older 160gr bullets they used to use.
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#2290779 - 07/03/08 06:36 PM
Re: Distance traveled after impact.......
[Re: Jordan Smith]
|
VAnimrod
Campfire Oracle
Registered: 04/21/04
Posts: 27145
|
|
Offline
|
|
I've found that the more stuff I break at the shot, regardless of caliber, bullet weight, or velocity, the less distance the critter goes after the shot.
Hmmmmmm..... bust up the running gear, and stuff goes nowhere.....
Simple, that.
_________________________
The right of the citizens to keep and bear arms ... the palladium of the liberties of a republic
3 J. Story, Commentaries §1890, p. 746 (1833)
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#2291031 - 07/03/08 08:29 PM
Re: Distance traveled after impact.......
[Re: Reloader7RM]
|
Okanagan
Campfire Ranger
Registered: 01/25/01
Posts: 1829
|
|
Offline
|
|
Thanks. You post some interesting observations.
A curiosity question and a few comments:
1. What kind of big game are the 150 and hundreds of others? Mostly deer or are there significant numbers of a wider range of critters?
2. FWIW I think it is Sweden that did an extensive study over several years on how far big game animals went after being hit by various cartridges. Interesting info, though mainly moose as I recall. From your post you may have another thread with a similar topic in mind but I haven't read it so the Swedish study may have already been mentioned.
3. Seems like driving a bullet faster increases expansion and size of wound channel, as you observe, but doesn't significantly increase penetration, within hunting velocities anyway. I'd be interested on stats one way or the other on that.
4. I've observed similar quick kills with fast frangible bullets as long as the bullet hits at a speed and place to insure that it expands inside the frontal chest cavity. The physically larger, constitutionally tougher, and more dangerous the game, the greater the need for the insurance of deep penetration and a blood trail. (And a need for discipline to only shoot when we can place the shot well.)
Hey, I'm envious of your tracking beagles. I sure could have used them a few times on deer, elk, moose and especially black bears in thick brush, even if the bear only goes ten feet.
Edited by Okanagan (07/03/08 08:33 PM)
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#2291170 - 07/03/08 10:04 PM
Re: Distance traveled after impact.......
[Re: Reloader7RM]
|
BC30cal
Campfire Regular
Registered: 05/30/07
Posts: 868
Loc: South Central BC
|
|
Offline
|
|
Mr. Reloader7RM;
Thanks for sharing the interesting observations.
My personal sample range is not numerically as high as yours, but I’d think that I’ve been either responsible for or present at the demise of around a hundred or so deer/bear/sheep sized animals. The carcass weight would usually average out to be slightly under a100lbs on deer and closer to150lbs on bear.
As an added source of necropsy data, a few young fellows use our place to cut their game, so we’ve been able to get good information on about 3 or 4 dozen additional animals that way. The story of their hunt always includes ballistic information, etc. as well.
We began to move from .308/.30-06 velocities to .308 Norma/.300 Win.Mag velocities about 18 years ago. I have never shot game with muzzle loader or shotgun slugs as yet, so slow would be .30-30 velocities.
While we noticed some improvement with regard to how quickly the added velocity put game down, candidly it was not as much improvement as I’d thought it might be.
At this stage of my hunting experience, I would have to say that I tend to concur more closely with Mr. VAnimrod’s assessment.
Naturally, being well bitten by the sickness, I continue to try new bullets, cartridges and combinations thereof in search of any that might show more promise than the rest.
As always, other's experience will vary from mine, which is OK too.
Regards,
Dwayne
_________________________
The most important stuff in life isn't "stuff"
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#2291196 - 07/03/08 10:30 PM
Re: Distance traveled after impact.......
[Re: BC30cal]
|
Calhoun
Campfire Outfitter
Registered: 08/06/05
Posts: 7609
Loc: Eastern Nebraska
|
|
Online
|
|
I'd have to concur that if you hit a medium sized animal with a fast bullet it will fall faster than if you hit it with a small bullet. Probably dies faster, but I've seen quite a few lying there kicking for quite a while so I'll withhold judgement on that.
Those faster moving bullets can also can destroy a lot more meat.
Speaking as one who hunts to fill his freezer, I'll take the difficulty of tracking an animal a few yards over the (sometimes huge) loss of meat. I find that a good, penetrating bullet placed just behind the front shoulder on a deer results in an average tracking job of 50 yards, 150 tops. The three neck shots I've taken ranging from 10 yards to 75 yards have resulted in 0 yards of tracking, but I only use that when I can't get a good shot and am hurting to fill the freezer.
I've had to track one animal over 150 yards in the last 10 years, and that was 100% my ignorance on scope choice.
I've moved from the 7mm Mags and 30-06's down to the 243's, 250 Savage and 300 Savage's and find that the deer still die just as dead, and my freezer's often a bit fuller. Even had compliments from the owner of the meat locker about how clean our kills are as opposed to the pie plate exit holes he often has to deal with.
Just the opinion of this meat hunter..
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#2291519 - 07/04/08 06:50 AM
Re: Distance traveled after impact.......
[Re: Calhoun]
|
CrimsonTide
Campfire Ranger
Registered: 11/05/04
Posts: 1671
Loc: Kentucky
|
|
Offline
|
|
I have tried a few different cartridges, but to the best of my memory, I have never shot a deer with a magnum rifle cartridge. the deer I shot with the .25-06 and the 7/08 using Nosler Ballistic Tips fell dead in the place they were standing. The ones I shot with a .30-06 always seemed to do just a little traveling, none more than 25-30 yards, there were deer taken with the .280 and the .257 Roberts in there too, as well as the .223 and some muzzleloader deer.
Speed kills. I doubt that very little. For my part though, I don't require much more killing than 2,650 to 3,000 fps gives me.
_________________________
"An evil man seeketh only rebellion: therefore a cruel messenger shall be sent against him." Proverbs 17:11 (KJV) There is nothing wrong with a little shooting, as long as the right people get shot.
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#2291668 - 07/04/08 08:21 AM
Re: Distance traveled after impact.......
[Re: CrimsonTide]
|
BobinNH
Campfire Tracker
Registered: 01/28/07
Posts: 5745
|
|
Offline
|
|
I agree with the premise that speed kills, so long as bullets can withstand the higher impact velocities.
I like high velocity with fairly tough bullets(even on deer) that expand to a good size frontal area,yet maintain a significant portion of their weight to smash through bones and reach vitals. I've used that kind of stuff on game up to brown bear in size(250 gr 375)and they work very well.
And when I have used these combinations, I have seen blood everywhere whether there was an exit or not because the damage to internal organs was so extensive the animals were leaking from the nose, or mouth, or entrance wound almost right away.I really don't care much whether bullets exit or not because it does not seem to make a difference in terms of how quickly an animal expires;most of the damage is already done by the time the bullet reaches the off-side hide anyway.(That said,blood trails are no doubt helpful to guys like JJ Hack who hunt herd animals in dry,dusty conditions,and I would be thankful for it on stuff like Cape Buffalo,although it seems those African boys could trail a butterfly if they wanted to).
So, yes I agree with the poster that,while the faster cartridges hold no monopoly on the ability to kill, they certainly seem to do a pretty thorough job of it if you use good bullets and hit right.
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#2291686 - 07/04/08 08:27 AM
Re: Distance traveled after impact.......
[Re: CrimsonTide]
|
rickt300
Campfire Regular
Registered: 10/15/02
Posts: 793
|
|
Offline
|
|
I have shot well over 150 animals including bears and elk and my experience is that bullet placement makes a lot more difference than velocity as does bullet design. In my 7x57 the 150 grain Ballistic Tips make more internal damage than the 160 grain Nosler Partitions from my 7MM RM. I have only once had to trail an animal over 100 yards, most are within 20 yards or right at where I hit them. Modern rifles with good bullets kill very quickly. My 358 with it's slow 2450 fps 200 grain RNCL has taken three deer, two DRT's and one went 30 feet.
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#2291832 - 07/04/08 09:25 AM
Re: Distance traveled after impact.......
[Re: rickt300]
|
varmintsinc
Campfire Ranger
Registered: 06/25/04
Posts: 2326
Loc: East Bay, California
|
|
Offline
|
|
I never thought a .270 was slow...
_________________________
Brag about how close you got not how far you shot.
Hunt hard, kill clean, waste nothing and offer no apologies.
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#2291843 - 07/04/08 09:29 AM
Re: Distance traveled after impact.......
[Re: Reloader7RM]
|
prairie dog shooter
Campfire Tracker
Registered: 01/25/01
Posts: 5774
|
|
Offline
|
|
If higher velocty kills quicker it is because higher velocty is necessary to make that particular bullet expand properly.
I agree that fast expanding bullets drop deer like lightning bolts. But high velocity isn't alwasy needed. Choose a bullet with a thin jacket that will expand quickly and you will get the same results with your 243, which isn't known as a high velocity cartridge.
Taking out the running gear was the only way I could drop a deer with my 270 when I was shooting hard bullets. If I didn't put the bullet through both shoulders I'd have a tracking job to do. When I switched to Sierra GameKings and Nosler Ballistic Tips all that foolishnes came to an end. Every time I put one of those bullets into a deer's chest they drop right there.
The answer wasn't switching to a faster cartridge. It was finding a bullet that performed correctly on the game I was shooting, at the velocities that cartridge produced.
IMO it's all about the bullet, not the cartridge. Your 243, or 257 Roberts will kill just as quickly as the 25-06 or 257 Weatherby if you use the right bullets.
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#2292093 - 07/04/08 11:42 AM
Re: Distance traveled after impact.......
[Re: prairie dog shooter]
|
Mannlicher
Campfire 'Bwana
Registered: 11/08/03
Posts: 11255
Loc: Gainesville, FL
|
|
Offline
|
|
all things considered, and if everything goes EXACTLY according to plan.............
But most of the time they dont. There are a lot of variables out there.
_________________________
Sam.......
"The trouble with our liberal friends is not that they're ignorant; it's just that they know so much that isn't so"..........Ronald Reagan
The Bonnie Blue Flag; may it wave proudly forever.
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#2292333 - 07/04/08 02:03 PM
Re: Distance traveled after impact.......
[Re: Reloader7RM]
|
BCBrian
Campfire Guide
Registered: 12/26/03
Posts: 4080
Loc: Vernon BC Canada
|
|
Online
|
|
I once posted the results of a study (no - not the Swedish moose study) that came out of the eastern USA - and only looked at deer (and no - I can't find it now) that found that with deer -quick opening bullets put them down significantly FASTER than more moderate "penetrating" bullet designs.
I'd agree with that.
But, and it's a big but, I think that although quick-opening bullets might well put animals down quicker - slower-opening "penetrating" bullets will put them - down - more RELIABLY.
Personally, I'd rather track an animal further (and the difference further the animal went was measured was far less than a football field, of distance, between the two bullet types) - to be sure it was going down - even if I hit bone, shot from a bad angle or missed where I was aiming.
In short, if I could be sure of a broadside - through the lungs or heart hit - every time - then I'd use quick large diameter openers - like say Nolser Ballistic Tips or Hornady Interlocks.
But, since I can't always get perfect angles and shoot perfect shots every time I try, I'd rather shoot smaller diameter "penetrators" like the Barnes X family, Nolser Partitions, E-tips, Winchester Failsafes and the like - and be prepared to track a few more yards - in order to achieve a "more-certainly-downed" animal.
_________________________
Brian
Vernon BC Canada
"Dance like nobody's watching. Love like you've never been hurt. Sing like nobody's listening. Live like it's heaven on earth." Mark Twain
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#2292514 - 07/04/08 04:48 PM
Re: Distance traveled after impact.......
[Re: BCBrian]
|
Okanagan
Campfire Ranger
Registered: 01/25/01
Posts: 1829
|
|
Offline
|
|
But, and it's a big but, I think that although quick-opening bullets might well put animals down quicker - slower-opening "penetrating" bullets will put them - down - more RELIABLY.
Personally, I'd rather track an animal further (and the difference further the animal went was measured was far less than a football field, of distance, between the two bullet types) - to be sure it was going down - even if I hit bone, shot from a bad angle or missed where I was aiming.
In short, if I could be sure of a broadside - through the lungs or heart hit - every time - then I'd use quick large diameter openers - ...
But, since I can't always get perfect angles and shoot perfect shots every time I try, I'd rather shoot smaller diameter "penetrators" ... - and be prepared to track a few more yards - in order to achieve a "more-certainly-downed" animal.
+ 1 to Brian's entire post, especially the part about penetrating bullets putting them down more reliably. Well said.
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#2292516 - 07/04/08 04:51 PM
Re: Distance traveled after impact.......
[Re: BCBrian]
|
jimmyp
Campfire Ranger
Registered: 11/28/03
Posts: 2157
Loc: Georgia
|
|
Online
|
|
I don't know how many deer I have shot but bucks shot thru the lungs/heart always run unless shot thru spine, shoulder, neck, or brain pan, does usually just fall over for on the spot for me anyway with 24, 27 or 30 at 2600-3000fps. Bucks run out of gas at about 50-60 yards when shot this way. I used a 300WSM with a 180Accubomb thru the lungs at 22 yards at 3000 ft per second last year on an 8 point, he ran 60 yards, just like with any other gun I have ever used. I am going to try a .223 remington for some does this year.
_________________________
"Politics is supposed to be the second-oldest profession. I have come to realize that it bears a very close resemblance to the first." Ronald Regan
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#2292586 - 07/04/08 05:48 PM
Re: Distance traveled after impact.......
[Re: Reloader7RM]
|
magnumb
Campfire Guide
Registered: 05/04/06
Posts: 3496
|
|
Online
|
|
Lots a great experiences and thoughts so far. I like just such a thread. It goes to show how much alike and unlike our experiences can be, but the end results are almost always identical......dead deer.
With all the variables mentioned (cartridges, velocities, bullet weight and so forth), placement seems to be the common denominator.....and not just one particular placement shot. We've heard different placement shots here, which is reflective of our experiences and how we think differently about the terminal effects of placing whatever bullet into that particular area.....consistently. Obviously, there will be times when the "perfect" shot isn't available to us, but that's where an experienced hunter using a load he's confident using can improvise and end up with deer steaks all the same.
I've shot most of my deer with a 25-06 and 120gr. NP's movin' as fast as safely possible. I also hunt thick timber and clear cuts that can be quite large. 10 to 400 yards and everything in between. I've never had a deer go further than 20 feet, most (95%) are DRT. I shoot lungs, but have had to take neck and chest shots as well. When very young up until a few years ago, I would have sworn that the 120gr. NP out of a 25-06 was THE magic bullet. Then again, that's all I'd ever used up until just a few years ago.
The last few years I've used a 270WSM with the 140gr. AB (as has my son) and the 25-06 with 110gr. AB's (my new Sako 75 didn't like the 120gr. NP's.....I was distraught). Guess what......same exact results. The components changed, the velocities changed, the bullet weights changed and in some instances the cartridge changed, but still the results mirrored my first 40+ deer.
My hunt in "the Bob" last Nov. saw me take a large mulie buck with a 200gr. NP. out of my 300RUM (elk were also on the menu). I'd never taken a deer with my 300RUM as I'd never carried it for such a purpose, but I sure knew it was quite up to the task. A high double-lung shot planted him in the deep snow right where he stood. Impressive, but no more so than my large blacktail's demise last Oct. while using the 110gr. AB out of my 75.
I believe in gettin' the most bang for my buck with whatever cartridge I use and own. I also believe in using well constructed bullets which include those well stocked in my reloadin' room (NP's, AB's and TSX's). But it is shot placement that seems to be the most important component of all, no matter what bullet we prefer and have had good experiences with.
It's a bit like goin' to the free throw line. If we approach it the same way each and every time and arc (trajectory) that shot exactly as we did the last time it swished through, we should expect the same result, time and time again. Change the ball (but not dramatically), but still present the shot in the same manner, same result. Being that none of us are perfect, swishes won't always happen, but the closer we miss, the better our chances of still scoring.
FWIW and YMMV, but I believe that shot placement is the #1 most important factor and using a good ball is very close behind.
Edited by magnumb (07/04/08 06:46 PM)
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#2293131 - 07/05/08 06:08 AM
Re: Distance traveled after impact.......
[Re: Reloader7RM]
|
264bore
Campfire Regular
Registered: 03/24/04
Posts: 919
Loc: New Jersey
|
|
Offline
|
|
Thats interesting because your findings are totally opposite of what John Barsness aka mule deer has found. That the slower carts actually put em down quicker.
Im going to refer to the Scandinavian study: thousands of moose killed, two highest sample's are with 30-06 and 6.5X55, direct comparison has the 6.5X55 killing em quicker( travelled less distance) and with less shots, how could this be? Thats easy, it comes down to shot placement.
Most animals that "drop at the shot" are high lung shots, where the bullets energy clips the CNS. Like someone else has stated, hit a deer with a high stepper in the shoulder and your throwing away that whole shoulder.
I used to use a 30-06 for deer with Hornady's 150gr light-mag factory load, until i caught a couple of shoulder's way too much meat damage. I now use a 6.5X55 in a Rem 700 classic and the deer go just as far with much less meat damage if i wander into a shoulder.
Being a bow hunter i dont mind blood trailing as long as i have two holes, i'll get em, but to each their own.
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
Moderator: RickBin, SYSOP
|
|
|
1
|
2
|
3
|
4
|
5
|
6
|
|
7
|
8
|
9
|
10
|
11
|
12
|
13
|
|
14
|
15
|
16
|
17
|
18
|
19
|
20
|
|
21
|
22
|
23
|
24
|
25
|
26
|
27
|
|
28
|
29
|
30
|
31
|
|
|
|
|
19510 Members
65 Forums
206885 Topics
2555754 Posts
Max Online: 1366 @ 08/07/07 07:51 PM
|
|
|
