.223 for Deer Hunting
10-28-2009, 04:11 PM
#91
Nontypical Buck
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Henderson, KY
Posts: 1,760
b/c that shock in the ass, is not destroying a vital. It will most likely cause enough mass tissue damage to result in a dead deer (eventually. most likely from infection). Shock waves cause damage. Look up how some bombs work. Hell, nuclear bombs are proven to kill live objects enclosed in a structure, w/out damaging the structure.
It doesnt take a whole lot of trauma to stop a beating heart.
It doesnt take a whole lot of trauma to stop a beating heart.
10-28-2009, 04:24 PM
#92
Nontypical Buck
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Henderson, KY
Posts: 1,760
[quote=ipscshooter;3484503]I thought this "theory" was pretty much discredited as a bunch of hokum...
What if you "transfer" all your energy penetrating the hide and the bone and then only get another 1/8" of penetration?
The concept of "transferring all the energy" inside the game is absurd from a physics standpoint. What would you really rather have, a bullet that hits the front shoulder with 2500 ft lbs of energy, and then penetrates and hits the back shoulder with 2100 ft lbs of energy and then exits, or a bullet that hits the front shoulder with 2500 ft lbs of energy but, doesn't penetrate to the far shoulder, thus, that shoulder gets hit with 0 ft lbs? The energy transfers during the full penetration event. The first bullet will hit the front shoulder at 2500, the first lung at 2400, the heart at 2300 the second lung at 2200. The second bullet hits the front shoulder at 2500, the first lung at 1750, the heart at 1000, the second lung at 250, and then pretty much bounces harmlessly off the rear shoulder. If the bullet is slowing down to the point that it fails to penetrate, it's going to transfer less and less and less energy as it slows. The first animal's various organs are hit by a cumulative energy transfer of 11,500 ft lbs. The second gets hit by 5500.[/quote]
What your saying is absurd... With two EVEN weighted bullits you could have exactly what you are saying. Im not sure what condition I would ever want this in unless I needed to shoot a tank but here we go... Keep in mind, both shots are the same, and they travel the same path...
We will start with bullet 1. Bullet 1 has an initial impact of 2500#'s. It is a lead tipped bullet.
Bullet 2 has the same specs as #1, except it is not meant to expand. It is meant for strictly penetration, so... its structure will stay composed at all times...
Bullet 1 lodges in the opposite shoulder. Bullet 2 passes through cleanly.
Upon exit, Bullet 1 left with 2000#'s of energy. Impressive on penetration yes.
Which Bullet would you rather hit a deer with??? The one that leaves a bullet sized hole in the deer but only expends 500#'s as it travels through the deer, or the one that smacks it hard, expending all of its energy inside of the deer tearing the inside apart.
You know which one did more damage!
What you are saying above is true yes and can happen. But in equal circumstance, the bullet that is not passing through is OBVIOUSLY doing more damage
What if you "transfer" all your energy penetrating the hide and the bone and then only get another 1/8" of penetration?
The concept of "transferring all the energy" inside the game is absurd from a physics standpoint. What would you really rather have, a bullet that hits the front shoulder with 2500 ft lbs of energy, and then penetrates and hits the back shoulder with 2100 ft lbs of energy and then exits, or a bullet that hits the front shoulder with 2500 ft lbs of energy but, doesn't penetrate to the far shoulder, thus, that shoulder gets hit with 0 ft lbs? The energy transfers during the full penetration event. The first bullet will hit the front shoulder at 2500, the first lung at 2400, the heart at 2300 the second lung at 2200. The second bullet hits the front shoulder at 2500, the first lung at 1750, the heart at 1000, the second lung at 250, and then pretty much bounces harmlessly off the rear shoulder. If the bullet is slowing down to the point that it fails to penetrate, it's going to transfer less and less and less energy as it slows. The first animal's various organs are hit by a cumulative energy transfer of 11,500 ft lbs. The second gets hit by 5500.[/quote]
What your saying is absurd... With two EVEN weighted bullits you could have exactly what you are saying. Im not sure what condition I would ever want this in unless I needed to shoot a tank but here we go... Keep in mind, both shots are the same, and they travel the same path...
We will start with bullet 1. Bullet 1 has an initial impact of 2500#'s. It is a lead tipped bullet.
Bullet 2 has the same specs as #1, except it is not meant to expand. It is meant for strictly penetration, so... its structure will stay composed at all times...
Bullet 1 lodges in the opposite shoulder. Bullet 2 passes through cleanly.
Upon exit, Bullet 1 left with 2000#'s of energy. Impressive on penetration yes.
Which Bullet would you rather hit a deer with??? The one that leaves a bullet sized hole in the deer but only expends 500#'s as it travels through the deer, or the one that smacks it hard, expending all of its energy inside of the deer tearing the inside apart.
You know which one did more damage!
What you are saying above is true yes and can happen. But in equal circumstance, the bullet that is not passing through is OBVIOUSLY doing more damage
10-28-2009, 05:50 PM
#93
Giant Nontypical
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: HENDERSON KY USA
Posts: 6,634
[quote=drockw;3487483]
I might be wrong about this but isn't this what makes Full metal jacketed bullets illegal.
I thought this "theory" was pretty much discredited as a bunch of hokum...
What if you "transfer" all your energy penetrating the hide and the bone and then only get another 1/8" of penetration?
The concept of "transferring all the energy" inside the game is absurd from a physics standpoint. What would you really rather have, a bullet that hits the front shoulder with 2500 ft lbs of energy, and then penetrates and hits the back shoulder with 2100 ft lbs of energy and then exits, or a bullet that hits the front shoulder with 2500 ft lbs of energy but, doesn't penetrate to the far shoulder, thus, that shoulder gets hit with 0 ft lbs? The energy transfers during the full penetration event. The first bullet will hit the front shoulder at 2500, the first lung at 2400, the heart at 2300 the second lung at 2200. The second bullet hits the front shoulder at 2500, the first lung at 1750, the heart at 1000, the second lung at 250, and then pretty much bounces harmlessly off the rear shoulder. If the bullet is slowing down to the point that it fails to penetrate, it's going to transfer less and less and less energy as it slows. The first animal's various organs are hit by a cumulative energy transfer of 11,500 ft lbs. The second gets hit by 5500.[/quote]
What your saying is absurd... With two EVEN weighted bullits you could have exactly what you are saying. Im not sure what condition I would ever want this in unless I needed to shoot a tank but here we go... Keep in mind, both shots are the same, and they travel the same path...
We will start with bullet 1. Bullet 1 has an initial impact of 2500#'s. It is a lead tipped bullet.
Bullet 2 has the same specs as #1, except it is not meant to expand. It is meant for strictly penetration, so... its structure will stay composed at all times...
Bullet 1 lodges in the opposite shoulder. Bullet 2 passes through cleanly.
Upon exit, Bullet 1 left with 2000#'s of energy. Impressive on penetration yes.
Which Bullet would you rather hit a deer with??? The one that leaves a bullet sized hole in the deer but only expends 500#'s as it travels through the deer, or the one that smacks it hard, expending all of its energy inside of the deer tearing the inside apart.
You know which one did more damage!
What you are saying above is true yes and can happen. But in equal circumstance, the bullet that is not passing through is OBVIOUSLY doing more damage
What if you "transfer" all your energy penetrating the hide and the bone and then only get another 1/8" of penetration?
The concept of "transferring all the energy" inside the game is absurd from a physics standpoint. What would you really rather have, a bullet that hits the front shoulder with 2500 ft lbs of energy, and then penetrates and hits the back shoulder with 2100 ft lbs of energy and then exits, or a bullet that hits the front shoulder with 2500 ft lbs of energy but, doesn't penetrate to the far shoulder, thus, that shoulder gets hit with 0 ft lbs? The energy transfers during the full penetration event. The first bullet will hit the front shoulder at 2500, the first lung at 2400, the heart at 2300 the second lung at 2200. The second bullet hits the front shoulder at 2500, the first lung at 1750, the heart at 1000, the second lung at 250, and then pretty much bounces harmlessly off the rear shoulder. If the bullet is slowing down to the point that it fails to penetrate, it's going to transfer less and less and less energy as it slows. The first animal's various organs are hit by a cumulative energy transfer of 11,500 ft lbs. The second gets hit by 5500.[/quote]
What your saying is absurd... With two EVEN weighted bullits you could have exactly what you are saying. Im not sure what condition I would ever want this in unless I needed to shoot a tank but here we go... Keep in mind, both shots are the same, and they travel the same path...
We will start with bullet 1. Bullet 1 has an initial impact of 2500#'s. It is a lead tipped bullet.
Bullet 2 has the same specs as #1, except it is not meant to expand. It is meant for strictly penetration, so... its structure will stay composed at all times...
Bullet 1 lodges in the opposite shoulder. Bullet 2 passes through cleanly.
Upon exit, Bullet 1 left with 2000#'s of energy. Impressive on penetration yes.
Which Bullet would you rather hit a deer with??? The one that leaves a bullet sized hole in the deer but only expends 500#'s as it travels through the deer, or the one that smacks it hard, expending all of its energy inside of the deer tearing the inside apart.
You know which one did more damage!
What you are saying above is true yes and can happen. But in equal circumstance, the bullet that is not passing through is OBVIOUSLY doing more damage
I might be wrong about this but isn't this what makes Full metal jacketed bullets illegal.
10-29-2009, 01:23 AM
#97
Nontypical Buck
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Texas
Posts: 2,695
copied and pasted.
try and understand sport.
The other popular contemporary misconception results from the assumption that the kinetic energy of the bullet is "transferred" to the target, thereby somehow killing it through "hydrostatic shock".
I don't know where this term originated, but it is pseudoscience babble. In the first place, these are dynamic - not static - events. Moreover, "hydrostatic shock" is an oxymoron. Shock, in the technical sense, indicates a mechanical wave travelling in excess of the inherent sound speed of the material; it can't be static. This may be a flow related wave like a bow shock on the nose of a bullet in air or it may be a supersonic acoustic wave travelling through a solid after impact. In terms of bullets striking tissue, shock is never encountered. The sound speed of water (which is very close to that of soft tissue) is about 4900 fps. Even varmint bullets do not have an impact velocity this high, let alone a penetration velocity exceeding 4900 fps. Unless the bullet can penetrate faster than the inherent sound speed of the medium through which it is passing, you will not observe a shock wave. Instead, the bullet impact produces an acoustic wave which moves ahead of the penetration. This causes no damage.
Some people use "shock" in the colloquial sense to describe a violent impact, but it is confusing, especially in connection with the term "hydrostatic" and lends undeserved quasi-scientific merit to the slang. It also tends to get confused with the medical expression attending trauma. We are not describing any medical shock. The word shock should never appear in a gun journal.
The rate of energy transfer to the target is vastly more important than the quantity of energy transferred. This is the technical definition of power. Anyone sunbathing on a clear summer day at the beach will receive an irradiance equivalent to over 4600 ft-lbs every minute! Eventually, this bombardment by extremely high velocity particles will result in sunburn, but the body can withstand the energy it receives because it is spread over a large area and arrives at a relatively slow rate (compared with bullets). The power and intensity (power per unit area) is much less than ballistic events.
Bullets which "overpenetrate" do not stop opponents as readily as those that remain in the body. Therefore, if the energy isn't "wasted" on exit, the bullet is more effective. Right?
Not exactly. A bullet of a given construction and impact velocity will create a cavity of predictable dimensions over its path, whether it stops or penetrates completely. Therefore, if the hole created can penetrate all the way through, it causes more damage than if it stops at some point. The critical issue here is what sort of hole are we making, not whether it goes all the way through. "Overpenetration" is a misnomer. The ineffective stopping attributed to overpenetration is actually caused by "undercavitation".
Last edited by zrexpilot; 10-29-2009 at 01:55 AM.
10-29-2009, 04:22 AM
#98
Giant Nontypical
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: HENDERSON KY USA
Posts: 6,634
copied and pasted.
try and understand sport.
The other popular contemporary misconception results from the assumption that the kinetic energy of the bullet is "transferred" to the target, thereby somehow killing it through "hydrostatic shock".
I don't know where this term originated, but it is pseudoscience babble. In the first place, these are dynamic - not static - events. Moreover, "hydrostatic shock" is an oxymoron. Shock, in the technical sense, indicates a mechanical wave travelling in excess of the inherent sound speed of the material; it can't be static. This may be a flow related wave like a bow shock on the nose of a bullet in air or it may be a supersonic acoustic wave travelling through a solid after impact. In terms of bullets striking tissue, shock is never encountered. The sound speed of water (which is very close to that of soft tissue) is about 4900 fps. Even varmint bullets do not have an impact velocity this high, let alone a penetration velocity exceeding 4900 fps. Unless the bullet can penetrate faster than the inherent sound speed of the medium through which it is passing, you will not observe a shock wave. Instead, the bullet impact produces an acoustic wave which moves ahead of the penetration. This causes no damage.
Some people use "shock" in the colloquial sense to describe a violent impact, but it is confusing, especially in connection with the term "hydrostatic" and lends undeserved quasi-scientific merit to the slang. It also tends to get confused with the medical expression attending trauma. We are not describing any medical shock. The word shock should never appear in a gun journal.
The rate of energy transfer to the target is vastly more important than the quantity of energy transferred. This is the technical definition of power. Anyone sunbathing on a clear summer day at the beach will receive an irradiance equivalent to over 4600 ft-lbs every minute! Eventually, this bombardment by extremely high velocity particles will result in sunburn, but the body can withstand the energy it receives because it is spread over a large area and arrives at a relatively slow rate (compared with bullets). The power and intensity (power per unit area) is much less than ballistic events.
Bullets which "overpenetrate" do not stop opponents as readily as those that remain in the body. Therefore, if the energy isn't "wasted" on exit, the bullet is more effective. Right?
Not exactly. A bullet of a given construction and impact velocity will create a cavity of predictable dimensions over its path, whether it stops or penetrates completely. Therefore, if the hole created can penetrate all the way through, it causes more damage than if it stops at some point. The critical issue here is what sort of hole are we making, not whether it goes all the way through. "Overpenetration" is a misnomer. The ineffective stopping attributed to overpenetration is actually caused by "undercavitation".
try and understand sport.
The other popular contemporary misconception results from the assumption that the kinetic energy of the bullet is "transferred" to the target, thereby somehow killing it through "hydrostatic shock".
I don't know where this term originated, but it is pseudoscience babble. In the first place, these are dynamic - not static - events. Moreover, "hydrostatic shock" is an oxymoron. Shock, in the technical sense, indicates a mechanical wave travelling in excess of the inherent sound speed of the material; it can't be static. This may be a flow related wave like a bow shock on the nose of a bullet in air or it may be a supersonic acoustic wave travelling through a solid after impact. In terms of bullets striking tissue, shock is never encountered. The sound speed of water (which is very close to that of soft tissue) is about 4900 fps. Even varmint bullets do not have an impact velocity this high, let alone a penetration velocity exceeding 4900 fps. Unless the bullet can penetrate faster than the inherent sound speed of the medium through which it is passing, you will not observe a shock wave. Instead, the bullet impact produces an acoustic wave which moves ahead of the penetration. This causes no damage.
Some people use "shock" in the colloquial sense to describe a violent impact, but it is confusing, especially in connection with the term "hydrostatic" and lends undeserved quasi-scientific merit to the slang. It also tends to get confused with the medical expression attending trauma. We are not describing any medical shock. The word shock should never appear in a gun journal.
The rate of energy transfer to the target is vastly more important than the quantity of energy transferred. This is the technical definition of power. Anyone sunbathing on a clear summer day at the beach will receive an irradiance equivalent to over 4600 ft-lbs every minute! Eventually, this bombardment by extremely high velocity particles will result in sunburn, but the body can withstand the energy it receives because it is spread over a large area and arrives at a relatively slow rate (compared with bullets). The power and intensity (power per unit area) is much less than ballistic events.
Bullets which "overpenetrate" do not stop opponents as readily as those that remain in the body. Therefore, if the energy isn't "wasted" on exit, the bullet is more effective. Right?
Not exactly. A bullet of a given construction and impact velocity will create a cavity of predictable dimensions over its path, whether it stops or penetrates completely. Therefore, if the hole created can penetrate all the way through, it causes more damage than if it stops at some point. The critical issue here is what sort of hole are we making, not whether it goes all the way through. "Overpenetration" is a misnomer. The ineffective stopping attributed to overpenetration is actually caused by "undercavitation".
Its not the KE thats killing its the work done by it
I'll concede the bullet doesn't have to stop,never really thought that to be true but my point is penetration is NOT always what we are wanting.I was just trying to make a point.
So if ke is CAUSING the work,then it stands to reason that the one with the higher ke has more POTENTIAL for damage.Of course we need the expansion of the bullet and not just a jacketed bullet that is going to zip through.With that expansion comes less penetration,right? Now it comes down to the compromise between expansion/energy release and penetration.
I personally will take one that stops in the other side over 1 that has NO expansion and just zipped right through.
Last edited by TFOX; 10-29-2009 at 05:00 AM.
10-29-2009, 06:19 AM
#99
Boone & Crockett
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: The Republic of Texas
Posts: 11,887
[quote=drockw;3487483]
You're arguing a completely different point. I'm noting that it is absurd to say that because a bullet entered at 2500 ft lbs and exited at 2000 ft lbs, that it "only expended 500 ft lbs as it traveled through the deer." That's pure unadulterated BS. It has lost 500 ft lbs on its way through, but, it is expending energy during every microsecond of its travel through the deer. It's simply ridiculous to say that a deer hit in the front should by 2500 ft lbs, and in the rear shoulder by 2000 ft lbs has had less energy "expended in the deer" than one that gets hit in the front shoulder by 2500 ft lbs and 0 ft lbs in the rear shoulder because the bullet "expended all its energy inside the animal" and didn't fully penetrate. A hunting bullet that fully penetrates, and carries its KE all the way through the deer is going to cause more permanent and temporary cavitation on its way through than a bullet that stops half way through. Your apples to oranges comparison using the FMJ bullet kind of proves the point that its not the KE that kills, since the FMJ has the same amount of KE as the soft point. What kills is the damage caused on the way through, which is the result of the interaction between the bullet and the tissue. Try carrying your hypothesis in the other direction, using a 100 gr bullet of light construction designed for varmints, versus a 100 grain bullet designed for deer that fully penetrates. Both enter with the same KE. The varmint bullet expends all of its energy, but, doesn't penetrate very far. The bullet designed for deer holds together and fully penetrates, causing damage all the way through the deer. Which would you rather have?
Once again, the idea of "transferring all the energy inside the deer" i.e. by not fully penetrating, is ridiculous. There is far more energy transferred during a full penetration event.
I thought this "theory" was pretty much discredited as a bunch of hokum...
What if you "transfer" all your energy penetrating the hide and the bone and then only get another 1/8" of penetration?
The concept of "transferring all the energy" inside the game is absurd from a physics standpoint. What would you really rather have, a bullet that hits the front shoulder with 2500 ft lbs of energy, and then penetrates and hits the back shoulder with 2100 ft lbs of energy and then exits, or a bullet that hits the front shoulder with 2500 ft lbs of energy but, doesn't penetrate to the far shoulder, thus, that shoulder gets hit with 0 ft lbs? The energy transfers during the full penetration event. The first bullet will hit the front shoulder at 2500, the first lung at 2400, the heart at 2300 the second lung at 2200. The second bullet hits the front shoulder at 2500, the first lung at 1750, the heart at 1000, the second lung at 250, and then pretty much bounces harmlessly off the rear shoulder. If the bullet is slowing down to the point that it fails to penetrate, it's going to transfer less and less and less energy as it slows. The first animal's various organs are hit by a cumulative energy transfer of 11,500 ft lbs. The second gets hit by 5500.[/quote]
What your saying is absurd... With two EVEN weighted bullits you could have exactly what you are saying. Im not sure what condition I would ever want this in unless I needed to shoot a tank but here we go... Keep in mind, both shots are the same, and they travel the same path...
We will start with bullet 1. Bullet 1 has an initial impact of 2500#'s. It is a lead tipped bullet.
Bullet 2 has the same specs as #1, except it is not meant to expand. It is meant for strictly penetration, so... its structure will stay composed at all times...
Bullet 1 lodges in the opposite shoulder. Bullet 2 passes through cleanly.
Upon exit, Bullet 1 left with 2000#'s of energy. Impressive on penetration yes.
Which Bullet would you rather hit a deer with??? The one that leaves a bullet sized hole in the deer but only expends 500#'s as it travels through the deer, or the one that smacks it hard, expending all of its energy inside of the deer tearing the inside apart.
You know which one did more damage!
What you are saying above is true yes and can happen. But in equal circumstance, the bullet that is not passing through is OBVIOUSLY doing more damage
What if you "transfer" all your energy penetrating the hide and the bone and then only get another 1/8" of penetration?
The concept of "transferring all the energy" inside the game is absurd from a physics standpoint. What would you really rather have, a bullet that hits the front shoulder with 2500 ft lbs of energy, and then penetrates and hits the back shoulder with 2100 ft lbs of energy and then exits, or a bullet that hits the front shoulder with 2500 ft lbs of energy but, doesn't penetrate to the far shoulder, thus, that shoulder gets hit with 0 ft lbs? The energy transfers during the full penetration event. The first bullet will hit the front shoulder at 2500, the first lung at 2400, the heart at 2300 the second lung at 2200. The second bullet hits the front shoulder at 2500, the first lung at 1750, the heart at 1000, the second lung at 250, and then pretty much bounces harmlessly off the rear shoulder. If the bullet is slowing down to the point that it fails to penetrate, it's going to transfer less and less and less energy as it slows. The first animal's various organs are hit by a cumulative energy transfer of 11,500 ft lbs. The second gets hit by 5500.[/quote]
What your saying is absurd... With two EVEN weighted bullits you could have exactly what you are saying. Im not sure what condition I would ever want this in unless I needed to shoot a tank but here we go... Keep in mind, both shots are the same, and they travel the same path...
We will start with bullet 1. Bullet 1 has an initial impact of 2500#'s. It is a lead tipped bullet.
Bullet 2 has the same specs as #1, except it is not meant to expand. It is meant for strictly penetration, so... its structure will stay composed at all times...
Bullet 1 lodges in the opposite shoulder. Bullet 2 passes through cleanly.
Upon exit, Bullet 1 left with 2000#'s of energy. Impressive on penetration yes.
Which Bullet would you rather hit a deer with??? The one that leaves a bullet sized hole in the deer but only expends 500#'s as it travels through the deer, or the one that smacks it hard, expending all of its energy inside of the deer tearing the inside apart.
You know which one did more damage!
What you are saying above is true yes and can happen. But in equal circumstance, the bullet that is not passing through is OBVIOUSLY doing more damage
Once again, the idea of "transferring all the energy inside the deer" i.e. by not fully penetrating, is ridiculous. There is far more energy transferred during a full penetration event.
10-29-2009, 06:36 AM
#100
Giant Nontypical
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: HENDERSON KY USA
Posts: 6,634
I was going to post the whole article but it is too long but a very good read. http://library.med.utah.edu/WebPath/...S/GUNBLST.html
Pay particular attention to the highlighted areas.
What do all these formulae mean in terms of designing cartridges and bullets? Well, given that a cartridge can be only so large to fit in a chamber, and given that the steel of the chamber can handle only so much pressure from increasing the amount of gunpowder, the kinetic energy for any given weapon is increased more easily by increasing bullet mass. Though the square of the velocity would increase KE much more, it is practically very difficult to increase velocity, which is dependent upon the amount of gunpowder burned. There is only so much gunpowder that can burned efficiently in a cartridge. Thus, cartridges designed for hunting big game animals use very large bullets.
To reduce air resistance, the ideal bullet would be a long, heavy needle, but such a projectile would go right through the target without dispersing any of its energy. Light spheres would be retarded the greatest and release more energy, but might not get to the target. A compromise for a good aerodynamic shape is a parbolic curve with low frontal area and wind-splitting shape. The best bullet composition is lead (Pb) which is of high density and is cheap to obtain. Its disadvantages are a tendency to soften at velocities >1000 fps, causing it to smear the barrel and decrease accuracy, and >2000 fps lead tends to melt completely. Alloying the lead (Pb) with a small amount of antimony (Sb) helps, but the real answer is to interface the lead bullet with the barrel through another metal soft enough to seal the bullet in the barrel but of high melting point. Copper (Cu) works best as this "jacket" material for lead.
Yaw has a lot to do with the injury pattern of a bullet on the target, termed "terminal ballistics." A short, high velocity bullet begins to yaw more severely and rotate upon entering tissue. This causes more tissue to be displaced, increases drag, and imparts more of the KE to the target. A longer, heavier bullet might have more KE at a longer range when it hits the target, but it may penetrate so well that it exits the target with much of its KE remaining. Even a bullet with a low KE can impart significant tissue damage if it can be designed to give up all of the KE into the target, and the target is at short range (as with handguns). Despite yaw, an intact bullet that comes to rest in tissue generally has its long axis aligned along the path of the bullet track, though its final position may be either nose forward or base forward. (Jandial et al, 2008)
Pay particular attention to the highlighted areas.
What do all these formulae mean in terms of designing cartridges and bullets? Well, given that a cartridge can be only so large to fit in a chamber, and given that the steel of the chamber can handle only so much pressure from increasing the amount of gunpowder, the kinetic energy for any given weapon is increased more easily by increasing bullet mass. Though the square of the velocity would increase KE much more, it is practically very difficult to increase velocity, which is dependent upon the amount of gunpowder burned. There is only so much gunpowder that can burned efficiently in a cartridge. Thus, cartridges designed for hunting big game animals use very large bullets.
To reduce air resistance, the ideal bullet would be a long, heavy needle, but such a projectile would go right through the target without dispersing any of its energy. Light spheres would be retarded the greatest and release more energy, but might not get to the target. A compromise for a good aerodynamic shape is a parbolic curve with low frontal area and wind-splitting shape. The best bullet composition is lead (Pb) which is of high density and is cheap to obtain. Its disadvantages are a tendency to soften at velocities >1000 fps, causing it to smear the barrel and decrease accuracy, and >2000 fps lead tends to melt completely. Alloying the lead (Pb) with a small amount of antimony (Sb) helps, but the real answer is to interface the lead bullet with the barrel through another metal soft enough to seal the bullet in the barrel but of high melting point. Copper (Cu) works best as this "jacket" material for lead.
Yaw has a lot to do with the injury pattern of a bullet on the target, termed "terminal ballistics." A short, high velocity bullet begins to yaw more severely and rotate upon entering tissue. This causes more tissue to be displaced, increases drag, and imparts more of the KE to the target. A longer, heavier bullet might have more KE at a longer range when it hits the target, but it may penetrate so well that it exits the target with much of its KE remaining. Even a bullet with a low KE can impart significant tissue damage if it can be designed to give up all of the KE into the target, and the target is at short range (as with handguns). Despite yaw, an intact bullet that comes to rest in tissue generally has its long axis aligned along the path of the bullet track, though its final position may be either nose forward or base forward. (Jandial et al, 2008)
