Jim, I'm mainly going on what I've seen. When most of my whitetails have been hit, they just crumple and fall as fast as gravity will take them to earth. I can't imagine anything but the total overwhelming of their electrical system doing this. I've heard the theories about the shock being transmitted to the brain via the major blood vessels. Maybe that's what we call hydrostatic shock, but I am not of that opinion, unless someone can provide better evidence.
Hydrostatic shock is simply the high pressure compression and "shock wave" that happens when a high speed expanding bullet hits highly aqueous tissue. Lung tissue is mighty light, and thus not of high water density, but it's very soft and easily compressed. I think this compressibility, combined with the high pressure of the "shock wave," really DOES do something. The evidence I'd cite in support of this can be seen when one shoots a whitetail with something like a .270 with the 130 gr. bullets. The lung tissue becomes a singular mass of blood clot, virtually. SOMETHING is happening to create that, and it's surely not the path cut by the bullet. It has to be that compression wave that does it.
I've also noted that whitetails shot with the slower .30/30 don't succumb to this effect nearly as often or dramatically as those shot with faster bullets.
I do think that adequate penetration is ALSO necessary for clean one-shot in-the-tracks kills on whitetails. Based on what I've observed from kills and autopsies, I'd say that near full penetration is essential, though maybe 3/4 full penetration will suffice if the shock effect is great enough.
Again, I'm speaking only of whitetails here, and NOT of the 250 and up pounders.
Good shooting is the most reliable thing in getting venison, and many old African hunters used what they could get, which was often pointed or RN FMJ's, and they still ate well. They just had to be really sure of placing the bullet well.
I also know from many conversations with game wardens and a few others that pointed FMJ's do a lot better job than most folks would give them credit for. Darned dangerous downrange beyond the deer, though, and not as effective as a proper expanding bullet, but still better than most would give them credit for. I think hydrostatic shock plays a part in that effectiveness as well. It would have to, I think, since a pointed FMJ isn't noted for large wound channels, but still will bloodshot significant amounts of meat. I'm thinking here of the '06, and maybe 8x57's in African use, and maybe others.
I hear hydrostatic shock poo-pooed so often, and it just doesn't jive with what I've observed, that I simply can't imagine how people think those massive blood clots get there.
I've even seen a couple of deer hit in the paunch that fell instantly and never got up - both with .22/.250's which I'd tried to talk a couple of buddies out of using. They DID in fact quit them later on, after some equally dramatic failures, however, which I think supports my contention about the necessity of adequate penetration in addition to velocity and expansion. Another one I didn't observe is a buddy whose word I trust completely in these matters. He lost not one but TWO whitetails with the 7 mag and 140 gr. Nos. BT's. Both due to inadequate penetration. He's the same guy who lost the deer with the 100 gr. .264's. With the .264, he'd been set up to shoot very long distances (300+) with that rifle, and the 100 grainers worked beautifully out where the velocity had dropped off significantly, just as they do from single shot pistols at comparable velocity. The biggest buck of his life stepped out at 60 yds. and the bullet blew up on his shoulder, making a horrible looking wound. He got down and went to it, and it got up. Not wanting to mangle the cape up any more, he held his shot, just "knowing" it would drop. One quick turn and leap, however, and it was gone back into the woods, and he heard it running for quite a ways. He searched for that deer for several days, but it was never found. Bad judgment and bad bullets costs deer! A lesson learned, to be sure!
I just don't think that hydrostatic shock gets a fair shake these days, and again, that's based on my observations and from what I've seen doing those autopsies, and after checking out many of the stories associated with each of the kills. I don't think negating or denying the usefulness of hydrostatic shock is doing our game much service. That's just MHO, of course, but I've got a pretty fair amount of reason for believing that.
Why don't you think hydrostatic shock exists?
