I've got an antique 8bore and 12bore paradox rifle. I know of an 2" firearm and actually have some bullets from it. Some say that all bullets do the same thing, basically blood loss or if a lung shot its oxygen starvation to the brain followed by loss of blood pressure.

The question is when or what's the point whereball that business is no longer valid and pure mass and ft lbs energy of brute force take over

Ask this guy.

Whatever you do, don’t wake up the fast twist 223 shooters, they know nothing kills like a fast twist 223…

I have a fast twist 223. Cool and all, but not great by any means. More powder, more pressure, less taper, more speed, gets you a recipe for a lightning bolt. Efficient, most of the time no, but less is hardly ever more. Ask the 240 weatherby and 6.5x300 guys. On the other hand, I like an '06 and feel like it is the perfect balance between powder and lead, but hey, just my opinion.

Think about the cannon fire exchanged in the days of the sailing ships, men of war, ironclads, etc.

WTH HIT HIM?

Cannonball.

Merely a flesh wound.

Looks like one of the Mashburn WammyLoads.... But I guess a cannonball might come close

Yes bore size matters,but bullet selection for the job in any caliber is probably more important.As I've killed game with various calibers,I've also noticed the wound channel dia. difference the different calibers produce.I'm not just talking about bloodshot meat and organs,I'm talking about the wound cavity the bullet produces.I've shot a lot of game with a 7mag.I always felt like it was a great all around cartridge.It produced an ample wound channel without being too excessive.In the last fifteen years,I've been getting more into the 30cals and I can see a larger wound dia. with those with like type bullets.Stepping up to a 338,I noticed something different when I shot a red stag with a 338-06 using a 200gr Ballistic Tip.I shot him through the ribs and the entrance wound was about 1.5" in dia. as well as an exit wound about the same size.I was reading about the 35 Whelen and in the article it talked about bullet blow back as the bullet enter leaving a large entrance wound.I think that's exactly what I saw with the 338-06.Here is the article and a paragraph on the subject.
The increase in frontal area makes the .35 Whelen noticeably superior to the .338” bore. When using the .338 bore, the hunter must at times be careful with bullet selection in order to avoid having a bullet that is too tough for the job at hand. The .338 bore excels on larger bodied deer but can on occasion be left wanting if lean animals are encountered. In contrast to this, the .35 bore firing bullets of the same weight displays far greater and much faster energy transfer. So much so, that we sometimes see bullet blow back as a result of hydraulic forces. In these instances, entry wounds may at times be as large as exit wounds. Furthermore, the .358’s can display this performance at mild impact velocities. The .358 is not wholly reliant on velocity in the same manner as the small bores. In plain terms, one cannot have a full understanding of terminal ballistics until one has studied this bore diameter and this cartridge in particular.

https://www.ballisticstudies.com/Knowledgebase/.35+Whelen.html

Here is a video comparing a 30-06 to a 35 Whelen shooting a 25lb block of clay.Around the nine minute mark it shows the side by side videos as the bullets impact the clay blocks in slow motion.

Well, that video proved nothing as did the accompanying gibberish.

That's at the Musee de l'Armee in Paris. From the side it looks just like a 22LR went through a beer can. I'm sure it ruined his day.

Have a 240 and a 26 Nos (close to a 6.5-300), still like my 06’s.

Have fast twist .223 and .22-204. Still like my ‘06’s.

DF

I agree I've killed elk with the 30-06 and the .35 Whelen The elk usually went a few yards before expiring and the elk were all DRT. never moved from the point I shot them except for straight down.
PJ

Saying the .35 Whelen is better than .338 fails to take into account the better sectional density of 225-250 grain bullets often loaded in the .338 versus the usual loadings of similar weight bullets in the .35, it also fails to acknowledge the far better ballistics of say the .338 Win mag at long distance compared to the .35 caliber. I do agree bore diameter matters, but so do other things as well.

At a certin point the hydraulic effect of fluid displacement has a devastating effect on a body of living tissue, but still requires weight, velocity and diameter. For a light weight, light recoil, I prefer the 6.5s. However when I went o Africa, I carried a 300 WSM with 180s loaded to Win Mag velocity.

I do own a few 223s and a 458 Lott so can do both ends of the scale, plus most things in between. I believe in carrying an approperate rifle for the hunt.

Nothing I need an 8 guage anything for.

Over penetration

Not enough expansion. Need a hollow point?

DF

Man I would have hated to be the one to hose that out and shine it up.

Yep.

Could have been a tad messy.

DF

That was by a 9mm. Blew the lung right out of him. 😳😁

😁

Hmm…

Sounds like “wisdom” straight from Brandon himself.

Didn’t realize the 9mm was such a hoss.

But it must be so if the President says. He wouldn’t lie.

What?

DF

That's what old Brandon did to Cornpop.

That Cornpop a bad dude.

DF

Yeah, the cited website should also be taken with a huge grain of salt.

wild video damn I want one...

I once read John Taylor's book.

Pure unadulterated TRUTH!

Which website, who-tee-who or Nathan Fosters ?

I have it. I reread it about once a year. I also have several Wally Taber books. He promotes the 300 Weatherby mag as the perfect all around for all African hunting. They're worlds apart on philosophy

Bore diameter doesn't matter as much as the EXPANDED diameter of the particular bullet--which is often not closely related to bore diameter.

This can also apply to so-called "solid" bullets, depending on the nose-shape of the bullet.

John,

Depending on the thicknness of the critter and where you hit it first, is most of the damage kind of done before the the expanded diameter of the bullet really means anything? Inasmuch as lets say you hit a deer/moose broadside with a 308 win and the bullet expands to .6", the lungs and heart certainly have a lot more cavitation than a .6" hole going through them.

Or....is the expansion part of that equation and more is more, period?


I know what you mean about the solids....wide meplat definitely works better than pointy. But I just kinda figure unless you, lets say, hit a bigass shoulder first and it soaks up all the drama, the final diameter of the bullet aint the primary wounding mechanism unless you're shooting a sloooowww bullet like a pistola?

Or I could be way off here. Certainly wouldn't be the first time.

143ELDX?

Absolutely!! A fast twist 223 renders every other cartridge obsolete.

The latter.

Neither is worth a hell of a lot beyond entertainment. Who tee doesn't know enough to arrange meaningful tests and Foster is FOS.

The final diameter of the bullet also has a large affect on the amount of cavitation--which is also affected by velocity. Also, a bullet that expands to a flat-faced or even cupped front results in more cavitation than a rounded "mushroom." Which is also why "cupped" solids do more damage than flat-nosed solids.

One common misconception is that different bullets expand slower or faster. But considerable testing shows most start expanding when they hit skin, and normally expand completely by the time they penetrate their own length--and very few big game bullets are even two inches long. This is also why the area around the entrance hole usually has the most bloodshot and shredded meat.

The exception to this is some high-BC, hollow-point bullets where the hollow-point is actually closed, or nearly so. Instead of the hollow-point initiating expansion, as it does in hunting bullets with a larger opening, it collapses inward, so expansion's delayed somewhat. This is why Berger Hunting VLDs normally don't expand until penetrating 2-3 inches.

Every other one EXCEPT the .223AI

Thank you. Understood.


My theory was always that even if they started and finished expansion at the same rate, one might do so more violently, causing more tissue damage/destruction through tissue simply not being elastic enough to survive the temporary cavitation than the other.

Say, a 30 cal 180 grain ballistic tip vs a 180 grain A-Frame. The innards are quite a bit more pulped than shooting them with a .60" or so non expanding projectile would make them.

But, we all learn as we go! Or, ideally, we're supposed to haha. I had not considered mushroomed bullet shape either.

Again, thanks for the answer.

Great info, thanks.

Let's say just using this as an example, I wouldn't have thought that the expanded diamter of the bullet really counts for anythnig until like 6 inches. Or most of a deer's vitals. Like Mule Deer says, the expansion happens instantly pretty much but that first 6 inches as a whole is way more damage than a low velocity expanding bullet would do.




With that in mind, I can really see why, at least on a deer like critter but even big game, if you hit em in the vitals without needing to bust through a whole lot of heavy animal body first....diameter really probably doesn't make a whole lot of difference unless you're really stepping up velocity in a like constructed bullet.

They'll all make a pretty similar cavitation and damage a lot more internal organ than only that within the direct path of the expanded bullet until quite a few inches of travel.

One of the reasons I'd think say "308 Win vs 6.5 CM" bigger is better argument is kind of bogus. The bulk of the damage is done before the size of the expanded bullet (whichever ends up a tiny bit bigger) is the primary wounding mechanism! On most shot presentations anyway. Gettin through a moose front quarter first? Might be different.