Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Ask The Gunwriters Killing versus stopping

I shared it. It is the New Zealand author.


Didn't you post several pages ago u were done bantering with me. After u discussed " Our friend the diaphragm?"

[img]http://leak ? Did I say a rib cage leaks? I don't believe I did but nice try. I have a coffee cup sitting on my desk. It holds fluid and doesn't leak. Yet it's not sealed and it's open to the atmosphere. Same as your lungs, which are inside your rib cage, are open to the atmosphere. Reconcile that with your "logic." And while you're at it, continue commenting on the similarity of a bullet penetrating a ribcage and an artillery shell penetrating an armored vehicle. And throw in a few words about the necessity of blowing lung tissue out the exit hole while you're at it. "Thanks." Edited to add, Angus, before you respond, know that I'm done commenting on this subject. This is an interesting thread and I don't want to detract from it any more. So blaze away, but don't expect any more back and forth from me. Last edited by smokepole; 08/10/17.[/img]

That's right. Against my better judgment I re-engaged. Is that a problem for you?

Thanks for the tip jwall. I like to use the word energy, and was ignorant as to why it seemed offensive here.

BTW I also totally agree with the pouty lip post....( by APDDNSO804)

..why I was concerned about DeFlave or is it Clarks? Vision.

HERE IS THE PIG STUDY.

HINT HINT

I AM SHARING.

[img]http://Remote cerebral effects of ballistic pressure waves Edit Goransson et al. were the first contemporary researchers to present compelling evidence for remote cerebral effects of extremity bullet impact.[38] They observed changes in EEG readings from pigs shot in the thigh. A follow-up experiment by Suneson et al. implanted high-speed pressure transducers into the brain of pigs and demonstrated that a significant pressure wave reaches the brain of pigs shot in the thigh.[23][39] These scientists observed apnea, depressed EEG readings, and neural damage in the brain caused by the distant effects of the ballistic pressure wave originating in the thigh. The results of Suneson et al. were confirmed and expanded upon by a later experiment in dogs[24] which "confirmed that distant effect exists in the central nervous system after a high-energy missile impact to an extremity. A high-frequency oscillating pressure wave with large amplitude and short duration was found in the brain after the extremity impact of a high-energy missile . . ." Wang et al. observed significant damage in both the hypothalamus and hippocampus regions of the brain due to remote effects of the ballistic pressure wave.[/img]

Very interesting. Thanks, Angus.

A bullet impact is an inelastic collision, energy is not conserved, momentum is conserved. In an elastic collision both energy and momentum is conserved. This is fact not theory.

There are many types of energy, stored, electrical, heat,etc in ballistics we are talking about "kinetic energy" which is calculated not measured. The wound channel is produced by momentum transfer, direct applied force, the frontal area of the projectile for the direct crushed tissue, the amount of hydraulic pressure ( which is dependent on speed" to increase) not energy transfer.

Jerry: Lots of what we learned in the 70s and 80s turned out not to be true. Craig Boddington used to tout 2,000 ft-lbs. as the minimum amount of kinetic energy required for elk-sized animals. He doesn't do that any more.

The thing that different people on this site have said about kinetic energy is that it's not a good measure of lethality. The reason being, the velocity term is squared so velocity is given more importance in the calculation than it should be given. So a light fast bullet looks like a more lethal round than a heavy slow bullet, at least on paper.

The easiest way to illustrate is by comparing the KE of a typical hunting arrow to a lightweight bullet like the 40 grain .22 bullet out of a .22 LR. Not many would choose the 40 grainer out of a .22 LR for large animals yet it has roughly twice the calculated kinetic energy of a typical hunting arrow that will pass clean through the rib cage of say, an elk. Now, some may say that an arrow kills differently than a bullet, but the same logic holds when you compare heavy slow bullets to light fast ones. The light fast ones win on paper with the KE calculation but not necessarily in the field on animals.

Like jwp pointed out, momentum seems a better way to go. If you calculate the momentum of the hunting arrow vs the 40 grain .22 round, the arrow wins.

I completely agree, but how does one explain the lethality of a 100gr 257 @3700 over say a 375 H&H on deer?

Jorge,

That extra lethality (that is to say, very quick kills) isn't there with "harder" .25 caliber bullets, as I can personally attest from my experience with monolithics in the .257 Weatherby. With cup-and-cores it's there, and to a major extent with "partial cup-and-cores" like Partitions. The .375 H&H doesn't destroy nearly as much vital tissue with typical bullets, both because of the lower muzzle velocity, and because most .375 bullets are built to retain more weight.

My experience with quite a few different bullets is that quicker big-game kills result with more bullet weight-loss, which destroys more of the internal organs, whether the weight-loss of the bullet is a result of its construction or increased velocity. More than one bullet company has come to the same conclusion, including a major European ammunition firm, which shot over 500 animals during development of loads that would drop animals quicker, so they wouldn't make it across the border of neighboring land. This is a big deal over there, because the landowner owns the wild animals, and a deer that drops on a neighbor's land legally belongs to the neighbor.

The velocity term being squared gives it exactly the correct importance in the calculation of kinetic energy. The mistake is made in the misuse of the resulting number in a particular situation.

Misuse of momentum works the same way. If I toss you a bowling ball and you catch it you'll have more momentum to deal with than if I shoot you with a 22 LR. Yet which projectile would you rather catch?

You are correct of course. Being a mathman and all. What I should have said is, the calculated KE gives a distorted representation of lethality because of the contribution of velocity.

As far as the bowling ball, what I said had to do with lethality of bullets and arrows, and momentum being a better measure of lethality with those.

I don't hunt with bowling balls.

John, you've touched on the very thing that makes most "terminal ballistics" discussions devolve so quickly on the interwebs. What most hunters are really more interested in is the terminal effects of their bullets, and terminal ballistics is just a subset of that field of study. I have noted for years that students of terminal ballistics often miss the more crucial points of Fackler's academic papers, which had far more import in the understanding terminal effects than of terminal ballistics.

Terminal effects must take into account ballistics variables, which can be neatly summarized/symbolized in mathematical physics equations(although if you've read Duncan McPherson's book, you'll quickly discard any notion of it being "simple" physics!!!). But Terminal effects must also take into account the anatomy and physiology of the target animal, the path of the missile into/through the body, and the behavior of the bullet within the target animal's body.

A bullet's tendency to fragment (= weight loss) inside the target animal has a direct bearing on a shot's potential lethality, as you point out. Vincent DiMaio's opus on Gunshot Wounds has several photos of the "lead snowstorm" effect of highly frangible bullets in the human chest, and while he as a pathologist doesn't comment on the rapid incapacitation potential of such GSW's, as an emergency physician I will attest to the extremely short time-frame of survival of such injuries. It's this effect that manufacturers such as Berger and JLK have tried to improve upon, and in my estimation they have been very successful.

Of course you don't hunt with bowling balls. Your post was quite reasonable.

But I've considered trying hunting with bowling balls, though... doesn't that count? And neutrinos, too...

I think the best compromise would be a 400 gr VLD-type bullet with a meplat of 0.400" launched at a MV of 3200+ fps. Of course, you'd need a 25- pound rifle and have to be 7' tall and 350 pounds to boot...

If you hunt elk make sure you "use enough neutrino."

Will they over-penetrate?

Ed

Pretty much every time.

Thanks, John that is exactly what I was trying to convey. I just left out the "Hornady". That little pill punches way above it's weight. As to the 375, I tried it with a Sierra 300 gr. The exit hole was huge on the doe I killed but she ran at least 80 yards. Never with the little pill. THe 100gr TTSX also appears as deadly, but that "universe" of sample is quite small so far. Also, Roy Weatherby also writes the most spectacular kills (and failures) were with the 87 gr 257 ON ZEBRA! I think the Partition is THE happy medium you speak of and probably "operator error" on my part, but out of all the bullets I've tried, they are by far the hardest to group. My 257 7mm Weatheby hate them, as does my 7RM Model 70, but my 300 Weatherby likes them and that is what I used in Africa w great results. Lastly, I've also had a great deal of luck with the Interlocks at 3006 velocities, BUT a friend of mine had terrible luck with them with the 300gr in his 375, failing to penetrate on buffalo and although I've not tried them, LOTS of bad reviews on the Hornady DGX on the larger bores.

Your illustration reminds me of an experiment I did. For scientific research I placed a soft point bullet on its base on the garage floor. I then smacked it as hard as I could with a flat smooth hammer of about 16 ounces. Apparently the hammer was not perfectly perpendicular to the point of the bullet. It took off at a very high velocity and bounced off a couple walls before I could even think about dodging it. The garage was completely empty so I found the bullet quickly. The point was barely damaged at a slight angle. By the way this was back when I was in my thirty's so I was still very strong from the weight lifting.