Phuloschit

<font face='Comic Sans MS'>The bullets destructive description is called &quot;hydrostatic shock&quot;. This occurs when a projectile has the momentum to overcome the resistance of a liquid or semi-solid.

To demonstrate this to yourself, try a hard slap to the surface of water - it hurts your hand because your hand is traveling too fast and the water can't get out of the way. Plus, your hand stops, penetrating very little. Now if you slowly hit the water, with you hand at a 90° angle, it will slice through the water no problem.

So I believe this explains why an arrow can penetrate better than a bullet. However, I still haven't made up my mind if a bow will penetrate better than a rifle. I think the rifle, being more pointed will penetrate better, but only up to the scope.</font id='Comic Sans MS'><img src=icon_smile_wink.gif border=0 align=middle>




[font=Comic Sans MS]

Hunting is a right, treat it like a priviledge - respect nature

5 shot

It realy depends on the arrow, and Ke it has, and what kind of bullet used in the rifle. Light fragile bullets can exsplode at impact, but &quot;solids&quot; that do not deform or mushroom can penitrate very well. This is one of those tests that realy proves nothing due to so many variables involved.

TAKE YOUR KIDS HUNTING AND YOU WON'T BE HUNTING FOR YOUR KIDS

huntn freak

i was shown in bows ed that i<img src=icon_smile_evil.gif border=0 align=middle>t is

EricS

<BLOCKQUOTE id=quote<font size=1 face='Verdana, Arial, Helvetica' id=quote>quote:<hr height=1 noshade id=quote>
I believe the bullet is a more efficient dumper of its energy into the target. That is why a deer will sometimes not know it has been shot on a pass-through. The arrow's shock to the animal is often not very high if no bone is encountered. A bullet uses shock to kill(as well as destruction of tissue), whereas an arrow uses the cutting and bleeding to kill. Just my thoughts.

The most important bloodtrail leads right to the foot of the cross
<hr height=1 noshade id=quote></BLOCKQUOTE id=quote></font id=quote><font face='Verdana, Arial, Helvetica' size=2 id=quote>

this statement is the way it was explained to me as well. An arrow kills by hemoraging, a bullet kills by causing shock. That is why you need such powerful firearm to kill an equal sized animal.

comndr45

5 Shot makes a good point. I believe most states don't allow FMJ bullets because they don't expand very much if at all and will pass completely through without causing enough bleeding to bleed them out quickly. This is especially true if they don't encounter bone which at least then deforms it and adds shock trauma.

The most important bloodtrail leads right to the foot of the cross

davidmil

Yup, depends on the bullet. There are a lot of choices. But the demonstration with the water makes it's point as to the effectivenss of an arrow. take a 1 foot palm tree. Shoot it with a bow and then again with a 50 Caliber full metal jacketed bullet. The bullet goes thru, kills the guy on the other side and richochettes into space. An arrow stops at the first 2 or 3 inches. Shoot the same tree with a 22 and you don't hurt it. A 30-06 is in between the two bullets but better than the arrow in a tree. Now put a FMJ on that 06 and you're close to poking thru again.