The other way around: large slow and light

[3Ddepression]

We all hear a lotabout superfast redhot sizzling cartridges and with the exeption of occasional articles of momentumbased "Lethalityfactor" tables it seems that burning pounds of powder to send a round about a mile beyond target is the name of the game today. To me it seems like a recoilincreasing waste and I would like to hear opinions and experiences of the following thesis: The cause of death of a shot deer is a hole in through some organs. Hence a large bullet makes a bigger hole leaving more bleedeing and damage. A exit hole makes an eventual tracking easier so all we need is a large caliber using light bullets(reducing recoil)which go only fast enough to punch through.

Apart from thatthis sells less guns in in style calibers is there other things that Im missing

[bigbulls]

Yes there are other things missing.

The cause of death is not meerly a hole through an animal.

A bullet creates massive trauma by transfering its available energy to the animal. High velocity soft expanding bullets create massive hydrostatic shock inside an animals body as they expand to double the original diameter and literally destroy the internal organs several inches beyond the actual hole the bullet creates. These bullets do not need to weigh nearly as much due to the higher velocity associated with them.

Large slow bullets are designed to transfer this energy differently. Most of these bullets do not expand much and many are designed not to expand at all. These bullets have flat noses called meplates and these meplates is what creates the shock and transferes the energy to the animal. As the bullet is passing through the animal the flat nose creates a pressure wave inside the animal much like the faster but lighter expanding bullets. Because of this flat nose design these bullets must have suficient weight in order to maintain the bullets velocity through the animal and cause sufficient trauma to surounding tissue. With out the weight the bullet would slow very rapidly and not penetrate the animal or create any trauma and simply punch a pencil hole through an animal and do very little damage to the vital organs outside the hole.

[3Ddepression]

I hear you but for the sake of argument...

Cannot a larger caliber expand with equal result. Say killwise (not ballistically)wouldan 180 gr .44 bullet do worse than a 180 gr .308 with similar bullet configuration. And as such would not the larger bullet slow down more which I understand is the energy transfer process.

Is it not a Newton classic that it is inno way possible to transfer more energy into an animal than oneself absorbs by recoil?

Is it not a general opinion that a .358 causes faster demise than a .243. (Is there fact behind this or is it merely built in face value trust in what weighs in heavier in the hand)

Do we agree thateverything that a bullet does after it has left the animal is totally wasted. (at the best!).

And again Im the Fawn here so forgive my foolishness.

[stubblejumper]

Unless you are talking solids,the bore diameter does not determine the size of the wound channel.The diameter of the bullet as it passes through the animal decides the size of the wound channel.The initial diameter of the bullet does have some effect on this but the expansion of the bullet is far more important.In other words a .308" bullet that expands to twice it's diameter is going to leave a larger wound channel than a .358" bullet that expands to one and a half times it's diameter.

[3Ddepression]

Well, no Im not talking solids.
Why could there not be an equally expanding .358 as a .308. Surely a .358 would have a head start in making a big wound channel.
Energy is largely based on speed and I get the hydrostatic shock argument mentioned in a earlierreplyalthough I really doubt that it plays a major role in dropping game fast.Organs are by nature very flexible to facilitate our movement and the small push of a bullet could not rupture anything could it? I mean slugs from shotguns are very effective and energywise they are not comparing with .325 magnum and their likes. (are they,? perhaps they are?)
Is there experience and data to solve this?
Is there a deer kill register like the Evans where data of people shot with different bullet types and caliber are gathered for real life effectiveness?
Maybe it is a project for this site?

[mossy33oak]

Where's Roy Weatherby when you need him........didnt he answer these questions like 50 years ago?????

[Paul L Mohr]

Velocity and good bullet design do kill, it's a proven fact. This is why a small caliber high powered rifle is more effective than a 12 guage 600 grn slug from a shotgun. And at twice the distance to boot.

You can take all the energy tables and figures you see and pretty much toss them out the window. They don't mean much on live game. They are simply a way to compare different kinds of ammo. How effective a bullet is on game has more to do with shot placement and bullet design. A lot of these rounds have energy figures high enough that it should throw a deer down and slide it across the ground when you hit. Have you ever seen that happen? I haven't. Realistically they can't have any more power than is transmitted to you at that shot. If it didn't knock you down at the muzzle, don't expect it to do that 100 or 200 yards away.

And you mentioned powder amounts and recoil. In order to get a heavier bullet to do the same damage as a lighter faster one you would need to increase the velocity to have the same effect. This would mean more powder and with a heavier bullet much more recoil. If it was even safe to shoot due to the higher pressure. The advantage a heavier slower expanding bullet has is better penitration for large dangerous game.

The advantage of a lighter faster bullet is better hydrostatic shock and a flatter shooting bullet for more accurate shots at longer distances. And in most cases less recoil because of the lighter bullet.

It sort of depends on the weapons you are talking about though. I personally think with Inline muzzle loaders a heaver bullet works better. Like say a 350-400 grn bullet compared to a 180-200 grn bullet. It has more to do with limited velocities and bullet shape and design though.

Paul

[bigbulls]

Basically the larger the bullets diameter the heavier it must be in order to equal the penetration of a smaller diameter but faster bullet.

It is much harder to put into words here so..............

Try this test. Get two or three boxes of wet sand or stack a few feet of wet newspaper or phone books together (two or three stacks) or even get water mellons and then get a 30-06 with 180 grain expanding bullets and then get either a 44 Rem mag or a 40 S&W loaded with 180 grain bullets. Fire them into their own target and examine the results.

[3Ddepression]

Yeah yeah yeah[:-]

I guess Im of track here.

I didnt test the watermelon shootoutbut my guess is that the 44 mag would do just fine at shorter range.Not that I have hunted a great deal of them.Since waste of energy and overpenetrationisone point Im making here it is really a good example.
I really appreciate thethougts on muzzleloaders. Agood field experience based statement.

Would it not be neat to collect a massive amount ofdata of effectiveness so that I knew for sure. I mean just in case Im right and the rest of the hunting world is wrong.

If we had every hunter registred here fill in a form of every shot this season. bullet, caliber, range, hit, meters the game walked after it had been hit etc we would soon know a lot more than we do today. (Even if I alreadyhave learned quite a bit thanks to you all)

Well, this year, I am doing something different. I have been using a 45-70 with 300gr bullet kicking around 2050fps. Yesterday it made a heck of an exit wound at 80-90 yards on an 8 pt. Think I might do that more often.