two basic bullet theories
08-23-2005, 06:15 PM
#1
Nontypical Buck
Thread Starter
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Western Nebraska
Posts: 3,393
two basic bullet theories
In fact there's dozens of thought trains but in the final analysis there's two basic theories on bullet performance.
1. The hunter wants a fragile bullet that does not exit the animal. He wants the bullet to mushroom well and penetrate to the far side of the animal and not exit. Not exiting is the proof that the bullet expended all it kinetic energy in the animal. This helps to assure that hydrostatic shock kills the animal instantly!!!
2. The hunter wants the bullet to mushroom and do as much destruction to tissue and internal organs as possible and still have the momentum to exit the animal. The reason he wants an exit wound is because he knows that there's absolutely no guarantee that the animal will expire instantly and will run a distance.....the exit wound leaving a well defined and easy to follow blood trail.
For the many years I was following theory one.....then I changed over night and now subscribe to theory two.....
Where are you and which bullets fit which theory?
1. The hunter wants a fragile bullet that does not exit the animal. He wants the bullet to mushroom well and penetrate to the far side of the animal and not exit. Not exiting is the proof that the bullet expended all it kinetic energy in the animal. This helps to assure that hydrostatic shock kills the animal instantly!!!
2. The hunter wants the bullet to mushroom and do as much destruction to tissue and internal organs as possible and still have the momentum to exit the animal. The reason he wants an exit wound is because he knows that there's absolutely no guarantee that the animal will expire instantly and will run a distance.....the exit wound leaving a well defined and easy to follow blood trail.
For the many years I was following theory one.....then I changed over night and now subscribe to theory two.....
Where are you and which bullets fit which theory?
08-23-2005, 07:07 PM
#4
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Blissfield MI USA
Posts: 5,293
RE: two basic bullet theories
Depends on what I am hunting and where. If I want it to drop on the spot, #1 with a heavy slug in the shoulder or something. Down side lots of damaged meat.
I prefer two with a quality bullet. And if you are using a rifle with enough velocity it will still most likely drop them on the spot from what I have seen and heard (never hunted with a high powered rifle though, only seen video)
With my muzzle loader and jacketed controled expansion bullets it leaves a small hole going in, and a fairly small one going out. However when field dressing the animal and surveying the spot I shot it at the vitals were destroyed. The lungs are liquafied and some them actually get pulled out of the body with they bullet. And if you hit bone by accident (or on purpose) they usally pentirate the bone as well since that is what they are designed to do.
You might have to track them a few hundred feet maybe, but if you put the bullet in the right spot it shouldn't be much farther, if that.
Paul
I prefer two with a quality bullet. And if you are using a rifle with enough velocity it will still most likely drop them on the spot from what I have seen and heard (never hunted with a high powered rifle though, only seen video)
With my muzzle loader and jacketed controled expansion bullets it leaves a small hole going in, and a fairly small one going out. However when field dressing the animal and surveying the spot I shot it at the vitals were destroyed. The lungs are liquafied and some them actually get pulled out of the body with they bullet. And if you hit bone by accident (or on purpose) they usally pentirate the bone as well since that is what they are designed to do.
You might have to track them a few hundred feet maybe, but if you put the bullet in the right spot it shouldn't be much farther, if that.
Paul
08-23-2005, 07:16 PM
#5
Senior Member
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location:
Posts: 1,813
RE: two basic bullet theories
Theory two, and the pictures of this meat buck says it all!!!
I walked up to the deer that fell on the inlet side, took a pict., then turned him over and took another pict.. "If" that bullet had not exited what kind of a blood trail would i have had if i had needed one??????
Drilling Man
Inlet
Exit
I walked up to the deer that fell on the inlet side, took a pict., then turned him over and took another pict.. "If" that bullet had not exited what kind of a blood trail would i have had if i had needed one??????
Drilling Man
Inlet
Exit
08-23-2005, 07:17 PM
#6
Boone & Crockett
Join Date: Feb 2003
Posts: 10,679
RE: two basic bullet theories
Definetly #2.
I have only shot one elk where the bullet did not exit the chest. It stoped just under the skin on the far side of her chest. This was a quartering away shot and the bullet had to penetrate through the liver before getting to the lungs. The entrance wound did not bleed at all as the liver was simply mush and cloged the wound. She was dead only 75 yards downhill but she didn't drip a single drop of blood. Had their been an exit wound after the bullet passed through the lungs there would have been a blood trail to follow if I had needed one.
I have only shot one elk where the bullet did not exit the chest. It stoped just under the skin on the far side of her chest. This was a quartering away shot and the bullet had to penetrate through the liver before getting to the lungs. The entrance wound did not bleed at all as the liver was simply mush and cloged the wound. She was dead only 75 yards downhill but she didn't drip a single drop of blood. Had their been an exit wound after the bullet passed through the lungs there would have been a blood trail to follow if I had needed one.
08-23-2005, 07:36 PM
#7
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Blissfield MI USA
Posts: 5,293
RE: two basic bullet theories
Oooh, that buck has a pretty coat.
That is about what the ones I shoot look like. Yet when you dress them the vitals have PLENTY of damage to them. That is the difference between hydrostatic shock and just having a big bullet transer a ton of energy in my opinion.
Paul
That is about what the ones I shoot look like. Yet when you dress them the vitals have PLENTY of damage to them. That is the difference between hydrostatic shock and just having a big bullet transer a ton of energy in my opinion.
Paul
08-23-2005, 07:45 PM
#9
Giant Nontypical
Join Date: Nov 2004
Posts: 5,425
RE: two basic bullet theories
Neither....I guess I'll call this #3...On center lung, broadside shots I want a bullet that will have an exit wound...On high shoulder shots (bullet through the shoulder blades) or on quartering shots I would rather see a bullet that is found under the hide on the off side...(I am assuming we are talking about centerfire rifles and the quarry is deer)...I have used bullets that "always" left an exit wound and I've used bullets that "never" had exit wounds....the "softer" bullets will drop a deer quicker with a center lung shot...I'm talking within 20-50 yards and I've used bullets that always went through...leaving an exit wound about the size of a quarter...on center lung shots these deer required more tracking and would go 75-125 yards...
On high shoulder shots...they drop....With this type bullet, you have enough penetration that you can take a high shouder shot and drop them (this is very important in Eastern NC because of the swamps...I'm a pretty good tracker...but its hard to find a blood trail in 4-8 inches of water)...Also with this type bullet, if you are sitting over a field and don't mind if the deer runs aways you can take a center lung shot...if you have let the deer get 50 yards or so out in the field...they never make it back to the woods...
Playing "devils advocate"...a lung shot deer will leave a blood trail...they bleed through the mouth and nose....over 35 years ago I used a 22-250 to control the deer herd on our farms...This was before Partitions/Bear Claws etc...using plain old Remington 55gr hp, I killed many, many deer....with center lung shots, I had a blood trail....Its just not as "heavy" as pass throughs...
By picking a bullet that leaves an exit wound on broadside center lung shots and that stays in the animalon quartering and shoulder shots you have insured yourself that you have maximum energy transfer and more than enough penetration to get into the vitals and quickly do its job...
On high shoulder shots...they drop....With this type bullet, you have enough penetration that you can take a high shouder shot and drop them (this is very important in Eastern NC because of the swamps...I'm a pretty good tracker...but its hard to find a blood trail in 4-8 inches of water)...Also with this type bullet, if you are sitting over a field and don't mind if the deer runs aways you can take a center lung shot...if you have let the deer get 50 yards or so out in the field...they never make it back to the woods...
Playing "devils advocate"...a lung shot deer will leave a blood trail...they bleed through the mouth and nose....over 35 years ago I used a 22-250 to control the deer herd on our farms...This was before Partitions/Bear Claws etc...using plain old Remington 55gr hp, I killed many, many deer....with center lung shots, I had a blood trail....Its just not as "heavy" as pass throughs...
By picking a bullet that leaves an exit wound on broadside center lung shots and that stays in the animalon quartering and shoulder shots you have insured yourself that you have maximum energy transfer and more than enough penetration to get into the vitals and quickly do its job...
08-23-2005, 08:19 PM
#10
Guest
Posts: n/a
RE: two basic bullet theories
I like theory 2. I don't know if its some wierdness in me or what. But there's something I like in seeing large tissue damage. I feel like all those hours at the reloading bench paid off, maybe. I know you don't need a fist sized exit hole but it sure is nice sometimes.