Dwell Time
 

Well, don't know if any of you want to tackle this, but it is the off season. I read about an English ballistics gent that had a theory about dwell time, wherein the lead bullet at certain velocities may be more effective going through tissue at slower, as opposed to faster, speeds. This sets aside the idea of hydrostatic shock, as I recall.

A case in point was when the British first used the 38 Webley revolver and the bullet was too light compared to the 455. They then theorized that by going to 200 grain bullets, the effect would be about the same with the 38. In actual combat at the expense of the Germans, this was found to be true. Not such a popular topic, given our move in the USA to high velocity. Indeed, other than some empirical things like this, a hard idea to prove.

Any thoughts?

RE: Dwell Time
 

Just another theory. The medical fact is, the faster you can elminate blood pressure the faster the brain will shut down. this is why lung shots are better than heart shots. Lung shots, the heart keeps beating and the lung keeps leaking. A heart shot the heart stops beating so blood loss ( blood pressure) isnt as rapid so the brains stays functioning a little longer. Well thats what I read once. Or you can take it to the brain and eliminate this whole process intsantly.;)

RE: Dwell Time
 

BJ,

I've heard of the same theory. Can't recall where I came across it, it was some years ago. I suspect there may be something to it. I mean, one of the objects, whether with
handgun or rifle, is to have the bullet expend all or most of its' energy IN the target.
While it's in the target it's dumping energy so, even if it passes thru/exits, the longer it takes to do so the more energy is dumped in the target.

Looking at shooting reports, stopping power reports/calculations, etc. it's hard to dismiss the old, heavy, relatively slow moving slugs such as 44Spec., 45Colt, and the 45ACP.
They don't rely on expansion like the smaller, higher velocity slugs from the 9mm, or
357mag. That said however, the newer ammo for the smaller calibers seems to be pretty reliable for expansion - something that wasn't always the case years ago.

I've got a 9mm, and a 357mag., but my favorite is the 45Colt. Pleasant to shoot, and I feel comfortable relying on that big slug to do the job.
Heck, look at the Moros in the Phillipines. The Army went to the 38, and their troops were getting hacked up by those guys with the machetes. A switch back to 45Colt guns put a stop to that sort of thing.
I've said it before, but would you rather be hit with a baseball going 90mph, or a bowling ball doing 50mph.? That baseball is gonna' hurt for sure, but the big one's gonna' knock ya' on your caboose! ;)

RE: Dwell Time
 

Here's a simple test you can do anywhere you can shoot a rifle.

Get two watermellons. Shoot one with a 350 grain hard cast bullet from a 45-70. Shoot the other with a 180 grain soft point from a 300 magnum.

Watch to see what happens.



Assuming that you are useing a bullet properly constructed to get THROUGH the vitals of your intended target, no matter if it stops under the skin or exits, the bullet that transferes its energy the quickest will create more trauma inside the animals body. The slower a bullet travels through a body the less trauma it creates around the actual bullet hole.

Getting hit by a baseball and a blowling ball can not be considered because they do not go through a persons body like a bullet does.


Not true. A bullet only has a specific ammount of energy to transfer to the animals body. The longer it takes a bullet to transfer its energy into the body the more gently it does it and the less trauma it creates. It mearly punches a straight hole all the way through instead of creating a huge shockwave inside a body.

We've all seen pics of ballistics gel after being shot by different bullets. The faster moving bullets always produce larger wound channels.

RE: Dwell Time
 

By the time they were fighting Germans, the 200 grain lead bullet had been replaced by a lighter FMJ bullet, due to the Hague convention of 1907. Weight was about 178 grains. Don't know about the affect of dwell time, but the 178 FMJ had a miserable record. The 200 grain lead, which was also offered in the US, was considered a pretty good stopper at the time.

RE: Dwell Time
 

Hot damn ! can you believe that ? someone repeated what Ive been saying to these monkeys for a month now.

RE: Dwell Time
 

instead of a big slow bulllet, or a small fast bullet....how about a super big super fast one?

RE: Dwell Time
 

Bingo ! we have a winner.

RE: Dwell Time
 

Correction. That was the Enfield revolver. Now, where's my coffee.

RE: Dwell Time
 

This is just for information for those who really want information and I don't intend to debate the subject. There is good reason for the 50 year debate(In my case) about velocity VS Bullet size. The old slow vs fast debate. There are other things to consider that make just as much difference. What has been said above about the speed of bullets is true as far as it goes. The other side of the debate for which there is just as much evidence comes from the study of bullet Meplat. Width of the bullet nose. Wide Meplat bullet create permanent wound channel. What velocity does with a fast light bullet can also be done with a wide nose bullet that creates shock wave ahead of the bullet. The wider the bullet nose, the wider the wound channel. Velocity will also increase the size of the wound channel but not as much as increasing the width of the bullet nose. Thats why frontal area of a bullet must be considered as well as other things.

We all know that a 300 Win Mag and a 45-70 will both kill lets say a moose. How they perform this may differ but the moose is just as dead. I have been a student of this stuff for 50 years and I could put up a good debate with plenty of evidece to back up either side of the debate. The info and proof is there to be found and for me the debate and study has gone into high velocity rounds VS Cast bullet with wide Meplat driven to lower velocity because of there massive weight.


There is a lot of talk these days about velocity but long before the high velocity rounds of today, a good percentage of the earths critters like the buffalo were nearly wiped off the face of the earth with 500 grain bullets at 1300-1400 fps. This is just as true of most of the African game taken out with 4, 6, and eight Ga muzzle loader and Cordite rounds. Like I said this is information for those who want it or want to study it further.

RE: Dwell Time
 

well, not exactly what you said. You said, I only have one gun and I am defending it. Thats what I got out of it.:D

RE: Dwell Time
 

James what about the expansion of a .300 as opposed to the .45 non expanding solid core.
I've seen tests on my beloved .24 that had a .48 diameter after expansion with 90% bullet weight retention. I can only imagine what a .300 would measure probably around .600 diameter. Thats a big hole with a lot of umph.

RE: Dwell Time
 

There are a lots of factors that will affect terminal ballistics. To me as a hunter, terminal ballistics means geting the animal down humanely, in the shortest distance, and time! Some people may misconstrue this as "overkill!" But there are other reasons besides just a "humane kill," that dictate getting the game down fast!
So the three most important bullet factors are going to be weight, speed, and bullet type! With the right combinations, I think that the faster bullets will preform better! But I would rather have a 200 gr. bullet going 2600 FPS than an 80 gr. bullet going 6000 FPS, even if you could push one that fast! Both would be deadly! The first within 0-200 yards, the second in 0 yds. to miles!
Zee, as far as the blood pressure theory, I don't think that they could really tell any difference at all, from a lung shot, or heart shot! Blood pressure will be dropping instantly either way! And its not the blood pressure the brain needs anyway, its the O2! No flow, no pressure, no O2! Either shot is good, the lungs are a great target! Taking out the heart is just gravy!

RE: Dwell Time
 

Good points jag.
My exp. has been that the deer I have shot ,ran farther with heart shots than with lung shots. Which happens to coincide with that theory I read. Dont know if theres any truth to it or just coincidence.

RE: Dwell Time
 

Zee, it would be a very hard point to prove, one way or the other! Deer rarely drop with either shot. But, the good thing with either shot, is you usually get a great blood trail, that doesn't go very far!
All-in-all, I'd give the edge to bullet speed! It just has to be balanced with the right weight, and type of bullet!

RE: Dwell Time
 

There is really nio way to figure the expansion of a jacketed bullet because it is all dependent on where it hits. If it hits a big bone it could expand to the point where penetration would be lost. It could miss all the bones and expand very little. If all goes well they will expand as intended however again it would depend on what the make up of the bullet is. There are to many to know. The wide nose hard cast bullet is already as big as most expanded bullet are after expansion. At higher velocity some cast bullets will expand too but that would steer them off track and limit their penetration. This said most big cast bullet give plenty of penetration. Big cast bullets have been killing game animals very well for 150 years or more. Cast bullets are really a whole other world of their own. The completely flat nose and square edges also add tho their performance and add greatly to the permanent would channel. (Channel that doesn't seal up after the bullet passes through.

RE: Dwell Time
 

A great site- not necessarily on stopping power, but on terminal ballistics, well worth the read (and a fun read to boot:D) to draw your own conclusions

http://theboxotruth.com/

RE: Dwell Time
 

45-70 is a monster...lmao. I like that last quote....



Moral of this lesson: Don't get in any gun fights with buffalo hunters. There ain't no such thing as cover.


That sight should be about all the proof most folks need bout penetration..however Im sure theres one certain one in particular that will try to find a way to smother it with bs :D


They arent even using the hot 45-70 loads either...lol.

RE: Dwell Time
 

Sorry guys, but a heart shot will drop blood pressure MUCH quicker than a lung shot...

zrex, get your "medical facts" straight.... The heart can in fact beat after a heart shot, due to the properties of heart muscle tissue (autorythmicity) i.e. the ability to initiate its own contractions. However with the degree of tissue damage, even if the heart is still beating, any blood it pumps will not go to the arteries, but rather out into the chest cavity and the arteries will actually drain towards the heart. All this takes place in a matter of 15-20 seconds and unconsiousness due to lack of blood supply to the brain will will drop the dear almost instantly.

A lung shot will also drop BP, however at a much slower pace due to the ability of the heart to remain pumping blood to the brain.

RE: Dwell Time
 

Like I said, I have had deer run farther with heart shots. Dunno why ?
You say it can keep beating, but it can stop beating just as well, which would leave pressure in the lines, correct ? then it would take a minute or two for the brain to run out of oxygen, correct ?

RE: Dwell Time
 

Sorry zac but you got that completely backwards.

I pasted my response to this exact question from a while back.

Same thing would go for taking out the aorta coming off the top of the heart.

RE: Dwell Time
 

now that makes more sense.

RE: Dwell Time
 

Found this:


DOUBLE LUNG VS A HEART SHOT

Picking a good, clean shot depends on your level of experience and proficiency. I asked Mike Roux an outdoor writer and Pro-staff member for Lohman Game Calls his thoughts on shot placement. By the way, Roux just happens to be the chief technologist of nuclear cardiology at Blessing Hospital in Quincy, Illinois. Roux always encourages hunters to aim for the lungs over a heart shot. He believes the benefits of a double lung shot are vastly improved when compared to a heart shot.

"From a physiological standpoint", Roux explains when there is trauma to the heart the body automatically responds by shutting itself down. This causes the blood in the body to move slower.

In other words, all the arteries, veins and major organs retain the blood they currently possess. When a deer is hit in the heart,

blood circulation decreases and less blood exits the body. Therefore, a heart shot deer may not bleed as much compared to a lung shot.

Conversely, Roux states: that, "on a double lung hit, the wound causes the heart to beat harder. This is mainly due to the loss of blood pressure. As the body tries to compensates for the loss of blood pressure to supply the brain with blood, the heart pumps harder. Whenever the heart beats faster, more blood is lost and a hunter has a better chance of finding the animal".

By no means do I suggest that a heart shot is not effective. The fact is, a heart shot is lethal. This is simply a good rule of thumb to remember whenever you are picking your shot. The lungs also provide a larger target area that gives hunters an easier shot as compared to the smaller sized heart. With this information in mind I asked Roux his opinions on the "waiting game" after a confirmed hit? Like most of us, he suggested waiting 30 minutes. Whenever hunters push deer, the type of shot and the amount of adrenalin within the animal determines how far a deer will run. The further away a deer runs often times lessens your chances of finding the animal.

RE: Dwell Time
 

Sorry, to disagree again... :D but NO,NO,NO..... Blood pressure is pressure within a closed system, once the system is opened due to trauma (aorta, carotid, or even lung shot, etc) the heart will attempt to increase arterial pressure by beating faster. This is only if the heart has the ability to function (ie lung shot). If the heart itself is destroyed, it cannot beat at all and BP will drop and the animal will lose consciousness and die. Presuming you get a double lung shot the BP drop will follow a different pattern. The lungs will begin to fill with blood as the heart will continue to beat, eventually as the lungs fill, BP will drop and (more than likely the animal will die of asphyxiation....not blood loss. The problem with this is that the heart is still able to function to capacity and pump far more blood that it could have with a heart shot. Sorry guys it’s a scientific fact. Double lung shot deer could hypothetically run 75-100 yds. (dead none the less) Heart shot deer maybe (big maybe) 25 yds. Take out a shoulder AND the heart and he won't even take a step.

Bigbulls, as much as I hate to disagree with you, your talking about VENIOUS pressure (i.e. un-oxygenated blood returning from the organs), not at all the same as the instant lose of OXYGENATED blood to the brain.

zrex, it has nothing to do with how much the animal bleeds....understand this, without a constant uninterrupted (FRESH) blood supply to the brain the animal will be brain dead in a matter of minutes and on the ground in seconds due to hypoxia. I'm not arguing that an animal might not bleed more from a double lung shot, what I will argue is that a clean heart shot will drop any animal faster than a double lung (all other factors aside). Your only valid claim with a lung shot is that it will certainly result in a dead deer and presents the hunter with a larger vital target and the increase in blood trail will make your animal easier to find. Just remember if you would have heart shot him you wouldn't be trailing anything.

RE: Dwell Time
 

A heart shot human can run 50 yards if they have the will too. Or, they can dedicate those last moments to perpetration if they choose to. God have mercy on the soul.

(Bad night on Okinawa.)

RE: Dwell Time
 

I would have to agree with Zac. A shot which takes out the top of the heart or the aorta is the best. One is damaging the muscles the animal runs on and the pump. This is a great shot if one is using the proper (re: not a varmint weight bullet in a small caliber) bullet. If one takes out the central nervous system, one has instant death, but the targets are small and difficult to hit. The heart shot takes out the lungs from most angles and causes loss of consciousness in a matter of seconds. Lung shots can hit either of the other systems by accident. Without striking large bones, the lung hit deer is going to go farther. I can talk about this because I have had graduate level classes in anatomy, physiology and pathology. While in school, the cardiac physiology professor was an avid hunter. His viewpoint was, lung hit for archery and heart shot for rifle. The reason being was one couldn't be as precise with an arrow. His view so the bow hunters need to hunt him down to argue with. He also liked using his 45/70 for deer with a large meplat. He view was kinetic energy didn't foretell the killing effect as well as a lagrge bullet blowing through and leaving a blood trail which looked as though it was laid by a bucket. We talked at length and I liked what he had to say. He hunted as often with a shotgun as a rifle. Blow out the heart, it causes hypoxia much quicker.

Dr Fatguy

RE: Dwell Time
 

[

Dr Fatguy
[/quote] I'd rather take the lung shot 'cause I've got other plans for the heart. Plans that involve mushrooms, onions, biscuits and a Dutch oven.

RE: Dwell Time
 

All this medical stuff is great, but animals (particularly whitetail deer and antelope) often put on a burst of speed when heart shot that carrys them a hundred yards or more. Pure andrenelin, no doubt.