Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Africa Why use solids on non-dangerous game?

In reading about others African adventures, I've occasionaly heard about the use of solids on non-dangerous game. I noted also, that the Barnes catalogue recommends their solids on African plains game.

My question - why on earth would you want to use a solid bullet on an antelope? Are they any different than North American game in their construction?

Other than elephant and hippo, I wouldn't use a solid and most people don't. Expanding bullets even work better on Buffalo.

I haven't read the Barnes site, but I believe you would only use a solid on plainsgame if you were hunting something like a duiker, dik-dik, etc..... The reason is that a solid won't cause as much damage to the trophy. From personal experience, I would also use a solid on a Giraffe. You wouldn't believe how thick their skin is and how heavy their bones are.

For dangerous game, you wouldn't want to use solids on a Lion or Leopard. Buffalo can be debated, but I felt comfortable with a Trophy Bonded Bear Claw in the chamber with solids below.

Buffalo are herd animals and you have to be careful if you are using solids for your first shot. You could get a pass through, especially if it is a broadside shot, and wound the animal behind it. This could be one reason not to use solids for the first shot. There is also no guarantee that a high quality soft like a TBBC or a Barnes X will not do the same thing.

I haven't shot an Elephant, but I have shot a Hippo. Solids all the way. Their skin is about two inches thick and they are very dense. I would also use a solid on a Rhino. I take that back. I would really like to do a green hunt on a Black Rhino. For that you use a dart gun and wear brown pants. <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/grin.gif" alt="" />

I guess that the use of solids as referred to in some of the old hunting literature may extend to having to use what was available at the time. Ammunition in Africa was problematic in supply from time to time around the pre and post WWII era.

Other than using solids on tiny antelope to prevent trophy / cape damage most folk would be better served with a "premium soft" for African antelope.

Speaking from exeperience I know that s large calibre solids, while overkill, do work like a charm on antelope. I have shot bushbuck, sable, warthog, bushpig, and reedbuck for camp rations and other purposes on many an occassion using solids in my 458 Lott and 416 as that was all I had available at time.

A 3006 or 375 with softs would sufficed in every instance.

BCBrian:

There is no reason to not use solids on any game except where it may be banned.

I have solids and I use them frequently. Shoot through is to me very important.

ALL ARCHERS USE SOLIDS !!!!

Why use them ? Because they work ?

Bill Tibbe

Well Bill,

I have to take you to task on a point or two.

I'm not only a gun hunter, I hunt big game with a bow and arrow too. To call an arrow a "solid" is a bit simplistic. Yes, of course it's a solid, but it's a solid with a huge difference - with a hunting broadhead, or an expanding point (like I use) it cuts one huge slice of bone and muscle when it penetrates.

I would never think of putting a target-point through a game animal - because that wouldn't do enough internal damage to kill quickly - and that, in effect is what you do when you shoot a non - expanding bullet through a game animal. You cause it a much slower death, on average. I for one, was taught by my Dad - you owe the animal the fastest death possible.

The reason bullet makers have experimented on expanding bullets for the better part of the last century is because of one simple fact - they kill quicker. Of course, there are exceptions - head shots on elephants and Cape Buffalo come to mind. But it still amazes me that anyone could think solids will cause a quicker death than well constructed expanding bullet at least 99% of the time, anyways.

So, just as I said I want an expanding arrow head on game, I want an expanding bullet on game also. To shoot animals with target arrows, or solid bullets - is to my way of thinking, causing them a slower death, and more suffering than is needed.

I want the quickest death possible - for the animal, and when my time here on earth is over - for me too!

BCBRIAN:

Ouch!!! You took me to task and I am blemished <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/laugh.gif" alt="" />


However ___________________________

There are some very simple solutions to solids. For example, being too simplistic has it's consequences. <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/grin.gif" alt="" />

Let's do the math. A bullet which "exands" increases about 50% in diameter. Thusly, a .25 caliber will blosson out to .25 x 1.25 = .3125 <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/laugh.gif" alt="" />

If I am after BIG animules I shoot a BIGGER gun ZO a .30 caliber will expand to .45 caliber. Zo I yust shoot a 45 No Mon ami ? And if I have .45 caliber I yust shoot a .45 x 1.50 = .675 caliber. Simple math.

I'm an incorrigible high shoulder shooter. My bullet must penetrate both *( front <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/grin.gif" alt="" />) shoulders. I'm am an opponent of rear shoulder and Texas heart shots. If you cain't look him on the eye then any decent sportsman will NEVER EVER shoot him in the arse !!!! <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/laugh.gif" alt="" /> <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/cool.gif" alt="" />

An arse shooter should be hanged from the nearest Pee Can tree <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/cool.gif" alt="" /> <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/frown.gif" alt="" /> That's an old western custom. <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/cool.gif" alt="" />


Bill Tibbe.

There is a problem with just comparing bullet diameter. A bullet kills by tissue damage caused by extremely fast rotation or by the hydraulic disruption created by the bullet. A rotating expanded bullet of equal diameter compared to a rotating smooth solid causes enormously more soft tissue damage. Solids are fine for heavy bone penetration but they will not kill as quickly in the boiler room as an expanding bullet that maintains its weight.

I would speculate that the use of solids on nondangerous game is a holdover from the days when expanding bullets were notoriously unreliable in their action. If you wanted assured penetration and a good blood trail you used a solid, and, of course, if you were using a 9mm or larger on everything as many did, you got good shock effect anyway.

Tundra, I know the RPM of a rifle bullet is high, but isn't it still just 1 turn in 10" or or slower? That would make the trip through 20" of animal just two complete turns. Did I miss something? Not inconsequential but not devastating either.

SS

You can put a solid through bones and drop the animal on thee spot.

Conrad

SS,

Close but not considering the whole picture. For ease, lets use numbers that round off easily. Take an even slower twist 1:12 (1 revolution per foot) and take a relatively slow velocity of 2500 feet per second. This bullet is now spinning at 2500 revolutions "PER SECOND" or with 60 seconds per minute at a rate of 150,000 RPM. This factor is utterly devastating on impact.

If you could imagine the effect on soft tissue of a jagged piece of metal rotating at 150,000 RPM. That is why a modern bullet turns muscle and tissue into jello and can kill an animal with hydraulic shock when hit in the ham.

Realistically a bullet is travelling at 3000 fps and over 200,000 RPM. This is utterly devastating regardless of the inches of travel. On impact it dumps velocity from 3000 fps to say 1000 fps or less on a pass thru and also dumps the corresponding spin rate associated with that velocity difference inside the body. A 2000 fps difference is 2000 revolutions in a perfect world within the body, of course there are various resistances within the body to the spin rate causing it to lose momentum but nevertheless it is going to dump that spin inertia within the body.

The rotation makes the difference in tissue damage between a 2000fps muzzleloader at 1:48 and a regular rifle at 2000fps with 1:10. Controlling bullet eruption in flight is an ongoing science with bullet manufacturers. You may have heard of issues with 4000+fps .22 bullets 1:8 flying apart in flight.

Consider a non pass-through. Goes from 200,000 rpm to zero within 20 inches. That a lot of spins lost somewhere inside.

Rotation is a major factor in killabilty. Hard to imagine something spinning that fast inside the body, especially if it has a jagged edge, instant puree.

Tundra, I think I am following you. I do sort of intuitively understand that hydraulic shock. For the most part I hunt with a Sharps 40-70ss and I am used to the way it kills. I shot a couple of hogs the other day with my custom 6.5-06 and it reminded me of that lightning strike death I used to get on deer with a 30-338 I hunted with in college.

Thanks,

SS

Tundragriz:

That's a very good dissertation. However. I wouldn't be inclined to over estimate the energy transfer imparted by rotation from a small bullet. There isn't very much and it is essentially localized although indeed devastating on meat tissue which is relatively soft, mostly fluid and easily cut. The spin dissipates fairly rapidly as the bullet ploughs through resistance.

From your explanation it can be seen that the Barnes bullets which open copper petals do provide spinning cutters. I use the GPA all copper bullet which has a bigger hole in it's tip and petals which not only splay out but also break off and spread out like shrapnel causing even further damage.

The primary damage is caused by the bullets momentum which punches through regardless of spin or rifling twist. That was seen in the old Bison hunters who shot roundballs and long, slow rifling. It is also seen by 12 gauge smoothebore shotguns shooting slugs.

The 6.5x55 Swedish Mauser shoots an enormously long for caliber buller *( .88 inches ) and it has earned a reputation as a killer of moose, plains game and dangerous game *( in the old days ). Furthermore it is remarkably accurate shooting very small groups even from old barrrels worn, and pitted. It's ability to penetrate is legendary. No doubt due to its small diameter and very long lead. I believe that it's significant length and sectional density contributes to it's accuracy.

Over the years I have gradually evolved into a big caliber, heavy bullet proponent. Doubling a bullets diameter doesn't double it's area. It quadruples it. Time after time I have seen the very conspicuous reaction of game to bigger heavier bullets and there seems to be a threshhold wherein they are hit with something big and fast and it just devastates them in most cases.

Bill Tibbe

Wettibe,
This will be my last dissertation on this topic. I would just suggest you contact any bullet manufacturer or a small arms expert for a real experts opinion on the effects of a frangible projectile entering the body at a couple hundred thousand rpm.

But here's a practical experiment. Held at arms reach, take a 1/2 inch drill bit in a drill set at a low rotation speed and slowly but just momentarily dip it into a bowl of water. Notice the entire bowl of water slowly swirls around at about the same speed as the drill.

Now take a 1/2 inch router bit in a router set at a high rotation speed and slowly dip it into the water momentarily. You might want to have a towel nearby. The water attempts to spin at this speed but it can't for frictional reasons and agitation/cavitation occurs, you get spritzed.

Now, just for fun, plunge that router bit momentarily into the water but do it really fast this time - probably no more water in the bowl and you are soaked, be sure the router is electrically grounded. Liquid is non-compressible so both the forward velocity and spin are carried throughout all the liquid and it is literally knocked completely out of the bowl.

Because liquid cannot be compressed the disruption is carried throughout the whole system until frictional forces reduce it, like ripples rolling completely across a pond or a tsunami racing across the ocean. Blood vessels will be broken a long distance from the entry.

You can repeat this experiment but instead of using bits that approximate an expanded bullet, use someting solid with no edges. You'll probably barely displace any water.

Tundragriz,

Your analogy is fine, but has almost nothing to do with bullets.

SharpShooter is right in stating that the bullet only makes one or two rotations inside the game. 200,000 RPM (revolutions per minute) means practically nothing unless the bullet is in the game for a minute, instead of a fraction of a second.

The rotational energy of a bullet is actually very small, perhaps 1% of the total energy. Do the math and you can see this. Or, as an analogy, if rotational energy were important, the rifle would twist around in your hands (equal and opposite reaction).

Also, there is no such thing as "hydraulic shock." Bullets kill by two mechanisms. A. Causing blood to drain, which kills the brain. B. If the blood pressure is just in the right part of a heart beat, a pressure spike can be transmitted through arteries to the brain. C. Of course, destroying the brain by hitting it. If you hit bone near the spine, a blow can be transmitted by bone, knocking the animal out long enough for it to bleed to death.

Indy,

OK, I'll stick with bullets even though the physics don't change for them. What do you propose causes a 6 inch wound channel from a 1/2 inch bullet if it is not hydraulic action?

If you shoot a .308 at 3000fps into a water filled milk jug or a full paint can, what do you expect causes it to explode, almost disintegrate, if it is not hydraulic shock?

If you shoot a .308 at 3000fps into a dry piece of board, with the exception of some splintering, why is the exit hole basically the same diameter as the expanded bullet and not 6 inches?

Does a spinning object when it hits an immovable surface continue to spin until friction expends its energy even though there is zero forward movement? You can interpolate this from zero to some arbitrary body thickness. I think you could also apply this to certain types of ricochets.

If it is not hydraulic shock, what causes a prairie dog to explode when hit?

When the heart is on the compression stroke and blood pressure is at the highest point and additional shock is provided by a bullet, how is that shock transmitted to the brain vessels if it is not by hydraulic action through the already pressurized blood system?

Why was Mr. Weatherby able to instantly kill zebras by hitting them in the hams while developing his bullets?

From websters on hydraulics: "the transmission of energy or the effects of the flow of liquid in motion"

Tundragriz:

I have quite an impressive collection of all sorts of tools among which is a Roto Zip which goes round and round 30,000 rpm. That's a whole lot faster than 1800 rpm on an electric hand drill.

I also have Cabelas Guide quality coat and pants which are the ultimate in wet weather protection. About $600 worth. I'm going to suit up and perform your experiment. <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/grin.gif" alt="" /> <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/blush.gif" alt="" />

In the meantime I think you are very knowledgeable and quite conspicuously a thinking person. It is good to see that sportsmen have put on the old thinking cap and delved into the dark obscure corners of terminal ballistics.

Everyone has their own opinions but I do agree with you partially about there being hydraulic shock. I draw a very sharp distinction between "knock down power" and "hydraulic shock". They are two separate and different concepts.

I have a significant amount of information about wounds and wound channels. This was developed by military doctors. The amount of energy required to precipitate a wound in a human, in battlfield conditions, is astonishingly small !!!

Perhaps we can define the difference between flesh and meat. Flesh could be still living while meat is dead !!! <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/grin.gif" alt="" />

However, your concept of intricate timing of disrupting the peristolic and diastolic beat of the heart, and transmission of shock along avenues of blood vessels requires some documentation before I can, shall we say, accept it as gospel.

Bullets do indeed have the ability of producing very explosive effects on water cans, water melons, prairie dogs and ground hogs. Animal flesh is, however, plastic, pliable, shock absorbing and retentitive. It can absorb shock and spring back into it's original form. The "shock" impact damage is limited to a very small area of the ham or shoulder in flesh.

How much does a Prairie Dog weigh. 3 pounds ? If he is shot with a 100 grain .25-06 bullet travellng at 2800 fps he "blows up". That's 33.33 grains per pound. Now we will want to apply that same energy to an elephant that weighs a modest 12,000 pounds. To achieve the same blow up we will necessarily apply the same concept and it will result in a bullet weighing a corresponding *( 33.33 x 12,000 lbs ) = 399,960 grains <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/laugh.gif" alt="" />. There being 7,000 grains in a pound we can, therefore, calculate that the elephant should be shot with a bullet that weighs 571 poinds. Thus we will require a battleship and a 16" gun to effect the "blow up" phenomenon that we see in prairie dogs.

Some of the more savvy ballisticians thought up other ways of resolving the problem and came up with - voila !!! - penetration !!! <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/cool.gif" alt="" />

Never underestimate the diabolic ingenious of the human mind. <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/laugh.gif" alt="" />

Bill Tibbe

Tunragriz,

Interesting questions even though WE Tibbe has answered some of them.

About a year ago I read about the rotational energy on some post. It's a mere insignificant fraction of the energy from forward kinetic energy. Fact: If it were otherwise, the rifle would twist with an appreciable portion of the force with which it recoils. It doesn't.

I don't think you make 6" exit holes on big game. At least I don't. Mine are only a little bigger than the bullet, perhaps indicating that shock operates over very short ranges. I had one on an elk that measured about 1" by 4.5" but attributed that to a rib getting blown out.

I have also had 1" to 1.5" ENTRANCE holes twice, What causes that? Maybe hitting a rib on the way in and somehow sending exploding fragments from the rib and the nose of the Nosler Partition in all directions.

I disagree with Roy Weatherby. I have his story about shooting a cape buffalo in the ham with an 87 grain bullet and killing it instantly, following which he recommended this load for Alaskan brown bears. I just don't believe anyone could do either one consistently. Roy recommended his 300 Wby with 150 grain bullets for giraffe. The bullets probably explode they hit in the lungs. I use the 300Wby with 180 grain premium bullets for much smaller game.

On smaller game, all kinds of things happen. I once shot a woodchuck with a 110 grain hollow point and it made a cup sized entrance hole about as big as the whole woodchuck. There was no exit hole.

Tundragriz:

The "spin thing" is inaccurate. It still only turns twice on its way through the body. If you want to demonstrate using a drill, only power it for 2/2500 of a second and see how much disturbance you notice. That's how long the rotation projectile is in a 2 foot thick animal assuming a uniform 2500 FPS through the animal.


A better analogy would be to put an apple corer on a uncooked ham, and twist it two rotations while pushing down into the ham.

Two rotations is sufficient for any sharp object to cause lots of damage.

The temporary cavity and wound cavity are caused by impact trauma. To demonstrate this, fill a bucket with water, and slap it as hard as you can. SPLASH! Now do the same, but punch it. Splash! Now with just your finger. splash.

As the bullet enters, it opens, increases the frontal area, and the rotation starts to cause cutting.

It is the combined action, open, cut, impact, that makes the wound channel.

Still an unbeliever? Shoot a ham with a 223 FMJ, then with a 60 grain partition, then a varminter bullet.

All are rotating at the same speed, and impact at the same speed. The damage is very much a function of the bullet construction.

BTW, I hunt with a handgun, and use Long Flat Nosed bullets, a solid with a sharp edged meplat, if you will.

The wound channel is noticeable, but there is little cutting as you describe it. everything still bleeds a lot, and dies right on schedule.