Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Deer Hunting Hydrostatic shock: Mystery or Myth? My theory

Roy Weatherby's orignal experiments on hydrostatic shock theory used the .270 Winchester loaded with 110 grain bullet. He compared this to a range of usual loads including the .30/06 and 180 grainers. The results shooting water containers was not surprising.

When he went ot Africa to test this theory, he took a .30/06 and a .308 with his .300.

When you read the log, if I remember correctly, the .308 dropped more consistently than the others.

I have always believed that velocity was only part of the equasion. The bullet construction at point of impact, the size of the game, distance of the shot, temperament of the animal and the shot placement, are all other factors that can cancel out any single factor an individual is trying to "sell".


I once compared a 7x57 side by side against a 7mm Remington for culling work. The Mauser had the highest DRT's

I also compared the .270 against the .30/06. The '06 won no matter what bullet I tried with up to 300fps velocity variations.

I compared the .30/06 against the .300 Winchester, Weatherby and RUM. The magnums offered advantage in trajectory for shots across valleys but the .30/06 still performed along side out to 400 yards. After this range, I found the magnums killed with the same efficency as for closer shots, so it in effect, maintained .30/06 performance over greater distances, which is what you would expect.

AGW

Interesting on the 4570... I"m digressing a bit, I shoot 50 beowulf, 275 X driven as hard as I can... I've shot about 4 deer so far, I don't shoot bones, but I"ve yet to see one do anything but run like crazy about 30 yards... Have yet to see the bangflop from that round which is very similar to a 4570.

Jeff

AGW, I agree, and thank you for clarification.
I was ready to get out the chicken bones and tarot cards!
There are a passel of ways to get game. Pick one and go foreward.

A compilation of much of the latest science on terminal ballistics.
http://www.rathcoombe.net/sci-tech/ballistics/myths.html#energy
http://www.rathcoombe.net/sci-tech/ballistics/wounding.html

It is all about the wound channel and there are various ways to create one that kills.

I think that my statement and my conclusion has been mischaracterized. Maybe it is time to reset both.

I DO NOT subscribe to the theory of "hydrostatic shock" as I had a perfect example of it NOT working.

As far as 3,000 fps not being fast enough....please remember that Weatherby's loads were not designed for use at 40 yards but rather at 200 yards and beyond. This is the reason why he figured he had to get them going at 3,500 fps at the muzzle so that they'd arrive going close to 3,000 fps. Get it?

No one has yet comment on the fragmentation theory yet. You see....a small bullet (or a large one for that matter) which fragments or starts bone fragmentation moving through the deer's body at high speed will likely hit many organs well away from the initial bullet's path.

It is one of those accelerated fragments hitting the spine that I say causes the sudden "bang-flop" effect on heart/lung shot deer.

As a side note: For the record...this theory assumes that heart/lung shot deer generally run some distance on the oxygen left in their system where as a neck/CNS shot deer goes down immediately due to the sudden loss of signals from the brain to the rest of the muscles.

Okay....now, continue with the debate.

When every anyone brings up that subject I just refer them to the history of the Bison and how it was reduced from herds of millions to a mere few thousand by the use of BP firearms shooting big hunks of pure lead at about 1400fps. What most "hunters" seem to conveniently forget is about the guys like me who kill great big animals shooting big lead bullets from revolvers rarely at speeds of 1500 fps. I my case at less than 1300fps. The only place where hydrostatic effect comes into play is when you are shooting very small animals as in PD, GH, squirrels, or something the size of a dik dik. IMHO of course!!!

I dont' think anyone is arguing that big hunks of lead, slow, kill. Or that regular rounds kill...

But there is no denying that a hyper fast bullet explodes inside an animal, there is some kind of super shock that goes on.... the 220 swift deal convinced me of that, and had I not seen it, I would not have believed it, but since I've known that fellow, I"d say that conservatively he has killed probably at least 100 plus deer that way....

Jeff

I have no doubt that many have had "super quick kills" with the .220 Swift, .257 Weatherby, .223 Remington and other fast moving smaller caliber bullets.

We can agree that these bullets when they can penetrate into the vitals will kill as good (or better) than any of them.

The theory shared by many is that the killing power is the "hydrostatic shock" that fast moving bullets create.

Whereas I REJECT this theory and surmise that it is the FRAGMENTATION OF THE BULLET OR BONE THAT THEN HITS THE SPINE THAT CAUSES THESE SPECTACULAR SUPER QUICK KILLS.

Does this mean that the .22-250 or the .220 Swift will ALWAYS create "super-quick kills"? No. However, because the bullets they use tend to fragment and that these fragmentations act like a sort of shot-gun inside of the deer....my guess is that there is more of a chance that some of these fragmentations will find the neck or spine and shut a deer down "super-quick".

Does that make sense?

I am not a expert on anything im just a dumb ole ag teacher but i believe just my theory that they are more variables than speed and bullet wieght that make a good deer round good. However i pay more attention to the speed to bullet weight ratio when searching for a load less sppeed more weight more speed less weight but it may be different foor different with different bullets I shoot lilobitty alabama white tails with gamekings with all my rifles that i hunt with

I am a believer, roy weatherby built his reputation on the theory. I think hydro shock is one reason deer shot head-on in the chest tend to drop on the spot more often than those shot broadside. I have three deer on the wall at home, make that four, that did not take a step after being shot in the chest, straight-on. my son has killed four that way, not a one taking a step. i think there is definetly something to it.

sure, big slugs make big holes and critters take a few steps and die but I think jack oconner was right (in support of the 270 win) and ten gallon hat elmer was wrong (big bore only)

257Bob:

Roy Weatherby was great at marketing his product....simple as that.

Those at Reminging who think every hunter needs a "Remington Ultra Magnum" are marketing their products, too.

Gun writers tend to have a degree in marketing as well. When the manufacturer of Winchester gives a writer two hand engraved Model 70's to test and to write about.....you can be sure that the endorsement of that rifle has been bought and paid for. No doubt...the writer can send the rifle back with a note saying "I don't like it and can't endorse it...." but really....how often does that happen?

All marketing aside now:

I believe you when you say that your deer drop like stones with frontal shots with ultra-fast loads.

I am simply saying that the REASON why they are dropping so quickly is because a FRAGMENT of the bullet or perhaps a FRAGMENT of bone chipped off and injured or severed the spine or neck.

You and I agree that there is something to this myth....but I believe that the mystery does not reside in "hydrostatic shock" rather instant "bang-flop" was because a bullet or a fragment HIT the spine, the neck or injured the spinal column.

Simple enough?

Simple enough? yes indeed. Certainly, some of the bang-flops were central nervous system kills but that does not mean that I do not subscribe to the hydro shock theory.

big and fast is deadly, no doubt about it and I am not a "magnum" fan by the modern definition mainly because I simply don't like recoil. however, based on my personal observation (non-scientific), the 270 win with a 130 gr pill at 3050 fps is a real deer killer and I believe that there is a hydro element in its effectiveness.

my experience is that big bodied deer offer more resistance than their younger/smaller counterparts and absorb more energy and often succumb faster, I think hydro shock plays a part of this.

there must be a reason the 257 mag is so popular because so many campfire ranger like it, me included.

I think a lot of roy weatherbys legend is marketing but there is certainly something to his related experiences with speedy projectiles and impact on big game.

Personally....I like the .257 Weatherby round. Aside from all the other Ultra-Super Magnum-Blast-em-up magnums being toted for chipmunks to Grizzly Bears...the .257 Weatherby is by far the most impressive and most needed.

If you have ever seen gelatin tests done with super high velocity rounds vs regular velocity rounds...the high-vel really impress.

Varmint rounds I totally believe in the hydrostatic shock theory when shot at varmints under 15 lbs simply because they are torn to pieces by it. Consider this...a 55 grn bullet is .0078 of a pound (as 7000 grn equal 1 lb)
Move a .0078 pound bullet 4000 fps and you have a 10 pound varmint blow to bits. In order to get the same explosive force on a 200 pound deer you'd have to find a bullet that weighs 200 times heavier with a similiar sectional density. Try 1100 grn bullet of about .75 caliber moving at 4,000 fps and you might be on to something. Of course, you'd have to shoulder a rifle that would be producing about 39,076 foot lbs.

Nope.....not likely.

I totally believe that you can push a large enough bullet, fast enough to deliver enough energy so as to blow any animal up...but when dealing with an animal the size of a deer...the hydrostatic shock theory leaves me searching for a more plausible explanation because the round that it would require to do this only exists in the form of a field gun owned by the military.

I like your theory.

I think hydraulic shock is what causes the damage, but there is no electrical impact on the CNS.

The reason big, slow, flat-nose bullets produce wound channels similar to small, high velocity expanding bullts is becasue the slow-flat nose bullets displace about the same amount of water as the small fast exapnding bullets.