I, for one, wish the original person making this observation ( not the OP but the person he mentions) would have gave some kind of estimate of the velocity of either round's bullets at impact, distances covered etc......but I realize that's asking a lot.
While we'll agree that where the bullet strikes is THE most important factor to be considered for a quick and humane kill, the whole concept of what it takes to produce MY desired "bang-flop" results, WITHOUT hitting spine or brain, has been something I've read every opinion (and Ill concede that an "opinion" is all each is and can be) and article I could find on such for a very long time.
***To answer the original question, 9 seconds seems to be a fairly accurate estimate from my own kills.....even with traditional archery equipment, not just firearms.***
Regardless of how, (it seems to me so far) circulation is all but stopped to the brain, results have seemed fairly consistent BUT those very few (also so far and is something I hope to gather more info on this season) bang-flop, brown and down results were indeed dependent upon impact velocity AND bore size.
A large number of opinions I've read try to quantify this type of results with actual velocity estimates ( they seem to think is accurate down to less than 100 fps as an error factor) and draw an imaginary line between all the available caliber sizes to divide them into only two groups, giving each group a "minimum impact velocity" for deer sized animals to drop in their tracks.
My background in physics, right or wrong, suggests there exists more of a "curve" in combinations of velocity and bullet diameter that may produce the desired results but what that curve actually is remains fairly moot. I will, however, pay attention to estimated impact velocities when a bang-flop result are achieved.
While I feel I've a good grasp on what it takes with a 35 caliber, this is my first season with a 7mm diameter round so my curiosity is peaked, to say the least. One opinion online suggests "at or above 2600 fps impact velocity" for bullet diameters under 35 caliber (or perhaps 338 and under, I forget) but TOO.......I have to wonder how much such is effected by how quickly the bullet expands.
Much of the writing done on this side subject STILL point towards that there still exists a short amount of time required to result in the actual death of the animal and that the animal is not "immediately dead".
More than a few assume it's a combination of two things: incapacitating the animal (but the label put on the process is often heatedly disputed, and entirely moot IMHO)...WHILE it takes the short time to actually demise, keeping in mind that this information strictly does NOT include brain or spine hits but focused on "broadside double lung" hits exclusively, or something close.
This too roughly agrees with this estimated short amount of time required for the animal to die.......with a difference of it doing so while stationary.
Regardless, the amount of time is (thankfully) pretty quick..........but DAAAAAAAAAAANG can they cover some turf in 8-10 seconds!
I'd prefer for them to not do that in a few of the areas I hunt so.......I continue my own studies. I'll probably never find the perfect bullet, perfect impact velocity range and bullet diameter (for MY area) producing the shortest distance to track one, with the least amount of meat loss...........but is sure is FUN looking for it!
(Before any replies to my 2 cents worth appear........yes, I'm aware some feel they have already found such. Happy for you. My own search will continue, thanks anyway.)
No........while related, but slightly off topic, I'll not re-initiate conversations (arguments) on the pros and cons of head shots.
Getting to be that time of the year! The best of seasons is my wish for one and all.
God Bless
Steve
