Badlands Precision Bullets thread - From BC to terminal ballistics

[HenryT]

curious what is the reason that gel shows that permanent wound channel going thick to thin back to thick again

Seen it in a few cases of gel that people have put up & never used gel myself so just curious as I don't take information on gel as Gospel as been burnt from thinking it would act that way once in a critter

This is from a friend who studies this stuff: "Ballistic gel is not a perfect analog for living tissue. Still, it can show the behavior of a bullet in a consistent medium and therefore allows us to compare projectiles and approximate performance on game."

Also worth noting; there are two types of damage caused by a bullet. Crush damage is the damage created by direct bullet-to-tissue interaction, radial tearing is the stretch damage or tearing caused by cavitation / hydraulic pressure. The difference between the two is hard to tell in a shot gel, but you can see the stretching clear as day in high-speed footage.

The reason for the change in wound channel diameter is energy loss - Newton's first law is helpful in understanding this stuff.

It takes some time for a bullet to expand, this is why you see the "initial pencil hole" (1)

Then once expanded the rate of deceleration increases as energy is transferred from the bullet to the tissue or gel. As it decreases, less energy is available to transmit and therefore the displacement and stretching/tearing damage to the medium is less and less. (3)

With badlands, we also have the petal effect. Provided the impact velocity is high enough, the petals break from the shank and radiate out just after expansion, creating their own smaller wound channels perpendicular to the one created by the shank (2). This serves to increase the surface area of the wound and accelerate loss of blood pressure.

What's wild is the remainder of the wound channel which is created by what is a caliber-diameter shank, appears to compare favorably to a Barnes or similar performing copper solid - even ones that expand to more than 2x caliber. I can only assume this is due to the higher impact velocity, and I would like to get an apples-to-apples comparison soon. For anyone interested the North American Nonlead Partnership has done some comparisons that I have helped out with. We'll be posting more as we iron out our methodology here soon.

 

[nralifer]

This is from a friend who studies this stuff: "Ballistic gel is not a perfect analog for living tissue. Still, it can show the behavior of a bullet in a consistent medium and therefore allows us to compare projectiles and approximate performance on game."

Also worth noting; there are two types of damage caused by a bullet. Crush damage is the damage created by direct bullet-to-tissue interaction, radial tearing is the stretch damage or tearing caused by cavitation / hydraulic pressure. The difference between the two is hard to tell in a shot gel, but you can see the stretching clear as day in high-speed footage.

View attachment 504416

The reason for the change in wound channel diameter is energy loss - Newton's first law is helpful in understanding this stuff.

It takes some time for a bullet to expand, this is why you see the "initial pencil hole" (1)

Then once expanded the rate of deceleration increases as energy is transferred from the bullet to the tissue or gel. As it decreases, less energy is available to transmit and therefore the displacement and stretching/tearing damage to the medium is less and less. (3)

With badlands, we also have the petal effect. Provided the impact velocity is high enough, the petals break from the shank and radiate out just after expansion, creating their own smaller wound channels perpendicular to the one created by the shank (2). This serves to increase the surface area of the wound and accelerate loss of blood pressure.

What's wild is the remainder of the wound channel which is created by what is a caliber-diameter shank, appears to compare favorably to a Barnes or similar performing copper solid - even ones that expand to more than 2x caliber. I can only assume this is due to the higher impact velocity, and I would like to get an apples-to-apples comparison soon. For anyone interested the North American Nonlead Partnership has done some comparisons that I have helped out with. We'll be posting more as we iron out our methodology here soon.

Have you tested any of the Badlands bullets? Would be instructive if you also specified the impact velocity. For that you need to develop loads that have the velocity you need and shoot tge gel close enough so that there is insignificant velocity loss before the bullet his the gel. I assume you used 10% clear gel, which is what we use. Also the barrel twist at low speed tsts have to be tight enough to assure the bullet is table at impact.

Would like to add that the percentage of first round kills improved for me when we started hunting with the bullets we made. True of both the first generation and second generation (BD2) Bulldozers. Seen it in 2 trips to Africa, 4 Antelope hunts and one Black Bear hunt in Alaska. Total animals harvested 24 and one miss (shooter's error). All 24 harvested were one shot kills at distances of 40-482 yds. We are getting the same feed back from customers.

 

[HenryT]

Have you tested any of the Badlands bullets? Would be instructive if you also specified the impact velocity. For that you need to develop loads that have the velocity you need and shoot tge gel close enough so that there is insignificant velocity loss before the bullet his the gel. I assume you used 10% clear gel, which is what we use. Also the barrel twist at low speed tsts have to be tight enough to assure the bullet is table at impact.

Would like to add that the percentage of first round kills improved for me when we started hunting with the bullets we made. True of both the first generation and second generation (BD2) Bulldozers. Seen it in 2 trips to Africa, 4 Antelope hunts and one Black Bear hunt in Alaska. Total animals harvested 24 and one miss (shooter's error). All 24 harvested were one shot kills at distances of 40-482 yds. We are getting the same feed back from customers.

Yup. All of this is in reference to the 135 SBD2's I mentioned earlier in the thread. Just trying to answer fordy's question about the gel.

 

[graywolf]

Have you tested any of the Badlands bullets? Would be instructive if you also specified the impact velocity. For that you need to develop loads that have the velocity you need and shoot tge gel close enough so that there is insignificant velocity loss before the bullet his the gel. I assume you used 10% clear gel, which is what we use. Also the barrel twist at low speed tsts have to be tight enough to assure the bullet is table at impact.

Would like to add that the percentage of first round kills improved for me when we started hunting with the bullets we made. True of both the first generation and second generation (BD2) Bulldozers. Seen it in 2 trips to Africa, 4 Antelope hunts and one Black Bear hunt in Alaska. Total animals harvested 24 and one miss (shooter's error). All 24 harvested were one shot kills at distances of 40-482 yds. We are getting the same feed back from customers.

This has probably been discussed, sorry if so. But are you generally trying to shoot through the shoulder or heart/lungs? And does distance affect your choice?

 

[nralifer]

This has probably been discussed, sorry if so. But are you generally trying to shoot through the shoulder or heart/lungs? And does distance affect your choice?

Generally just behind the shoulder to minimize meat damage. If quartering, all the better. Punching through the shoulder is easy. Distance does not matter much because the bullets penetrate so well. Distance should not be further than to allow for an impact velocity of 1700-1800 fps, usually 900-1100 yds depending on atmospheric pressure.

 

[BuckeyeRifleman]

Well second bull shot with the badlands Bulldozer II's went much better for me than the first.

This was a longer shot, 540 yards. 150gr BDII's with a MV of 2906 out of a 22in 7 SAUM. Impact velocity of approx 2260.

Bull was shot twice, first impacted in the lungs just below the spine and just rear of the front shoulder. It did not exit.

Second impacted the spine and that bullet was recovered just under the far hide. The first was obviously fatal, but the second anchored him.

Due to the bull getting shot right at sunset and in the heart of grizzly county, I didn't get to take as many pics as I would've liked. I didn't experience the off axis wound track like last year. This may be because the shot was longer and all petals were retained.

Bull

Retained weight of ~140 from a 150gr bullet… That's excellent.

Impact of the lung shot. Unfortunately I forgot to get pics of the far side. Very little meat loss overall.

Really pleased this go round. That's very good performance for a copper solid at that range.

 

[Pdvdh]

Well second bull shot with the badlands Bulldozer II's went much better for me than the first.

This was a longer shot, 540 yards. 150gr BDII's with a MV of 2906 out of a 22in 7 SAUM. Impact velocity of approx 2260.

Bull was shot twice, first impacted in the lungs just below the spine and just rear of the front shoulder. It did not exit.

Second impacted the spine and that bullet was recovered just under the far hide. The first was obviously fatal, but the second anchored him.

Due to the bull getting shot right at sunset and in the heart of grizzly county, I didn't get to take as many pics as I would've liked. I didn't experience the off axis wound track like last year. This may be because the shot was longer and all petals were retained.

I calculated your sea level bullet SG at 1.63, using the entire 1.505" length of that bullet.

The three copper monos I've had boomerang within game animals had sea level based stability SGs of 1.26 (275gr 338 recovered from moose @ ~650yds), 1.40 (196.5gr 308 recovered from caribou @ ~280yds) and 1.41 (265gr 338 recovered from moose @ ~650yds). Two were Bulldozers. One was a Cutting Edge Lazer.

Two of the bullets that boomeranged (corkscrewed) were recovered from the moose. The frontal portions of those two bullets were sheared off, with a blunted nose a bit larger in diameter than caliber. One was a Cutting Edge Lazer. The other a Badlands Bulldozer.

I plan to continue shooting copper monos, but future barrels will be purchased with faster twist rates. My goal is to spin them with a minimum sea level calculated SG of 1.75

 

[nralifer]

Well second bull shot with the badlands Bulldozer II's went much better for me than the first.

This was a longer shot, 540 yards. 150gr BDII's with a MV of 2906 out of a 22in 7 SAUM. Impact velocity of approx 2260.

Bull was shot twice, first impacted in the lungs just below the spine and just rear of the front shoulder. It did not exit.

Second impacted the spine and that bullet was recovered just under the far hide. The first was obviously fatal, but the second anchored him.

Due to the bull getting shot right at sunset and in the heart of grizzly county, I didn't get to take as many pics as I would've liked. I didn't experience the off axis wound track like last year. This may be because the shot was longer and all petals were retained.

View attachment 505615
Bull

View attachment 505616
View attachment 505617
View attachment 505618
Retained weight of ~140 from a 150gr bullet… That's excellent.

View attachment 505619
View attachment 505621
View attachment 505623
Impact of the lung shot. Unfortunately I forgot to get pics of the far side. Very little meat loss overall.

Really pleased this go round. That's very good performance for a copper solid at that range.

Nice post! Not often that we see a recovered bullet. If you hit the spine with the recovered bullet, it looks like you lost about 8 gr of petals and hit the spine a glancing blow, which is fine because the shock disabled the spinal cord. You are correct in saying the first high lung shot would have been fatal. It would have caused a tension pneumothorax, that would have collapsed the lungs under pressure as the Elk attempted to breathe. Until the lung collapse is under pressure, the heart can still pump out blood keeping the brain perfused. It can take 30-60 seconds to achieve complete collapse stopping the blood flow from the heart. You were correct in taking the second shot given the circumstances.

 

[06caurru]

wondering if anyone has first-hand experience shooting the 150gr BD2 from a Ruger M77 MkII 30-06? (1:10 twist) What were your results?

 

[fordy]

Gday Henry

This is from a friend who studies this stuff: "Ballistic gel is not a perfect analog for living tissue. Still, it can show the behavior of a bullet in a consistent medium and therefore allows us to compare projectiles and approximate performance on game."

Also worth noting; there are two types of damage caused by a bullet. Crush damage is the damage created by direct bullet-to-tissue interaction, radial tearing is the stretch damage or tearing caused by cavitation / hydraulic pressure. The difference between the two is hard to tell in a shot gel, but you can see the stretching clear as day in high-speed footage.

View attachment 504416

The reason for the change in wound channel diameter is energy loss - Newton's first law is helpful in understanding this stuff.

It takes some time for a bullet to expand, this is why you see the "initial pencil hole" (1)

Then once expanded the rate of deceleration increases as energy is transferred from the bullet to the tissue or gel. As it decreases, less energy is available to transmit and therefore the displacement and stretching/tearing damage to the medium is less and less. (3)

With badlands, we also have the petal effect. Provided the impact velocity is high enough, the petals break from the shank and radiate out just after expansion, creating their own smaller wound channels perpendicular to the one created by the shank (2). This serves to increase the surface area of the wound and accelerate loss of blood pressure.

What's wild is the remainder of the wound channel which is created by what is a caliber-diameter shank, appears to compare favorably to a Barnes or similar performing copper solid - even ones that expand to more than 2x caliber. I can only assume this is due to the higher impact velocity, and I would like to get an apples-to-apples comparison soon. For anyone interested the North American Nonlead Partnership has done some comparisons that I have helped out with. We'll be posting more as we iron out our methodology here soon.

Thankyou for the links I'll have a look once time permits & sorry for delay not my intention but my body had other ideas & back on song now well most of it as some can't be helped lol

Great walking me through that analogy ( please accept my apology in advance if that /this is abrasive as not my intention @ all ) on the gel thankyou for spending the time as it's great when people do that & you've got a good handle on it no doubt

Where I'm looking on that gel ( my lack of writing skills in relaying what I was asking & maybe this approach is better ) is the parts that I've crudely wrote on your pictures below are
In #1
Where we have the narrowing of that permanent wound channel what is causing this as the way in critters this happens is a tumble & let me 100% clear to nrailer so he dosent think I'm attacking his product in this gel picture from what I'm seeing the projectile has gone straight as you can basically see that well I think you can from that pencil like wound channel in the transition zone till it excited
So what is causing this as I've seen it in a few cases now on the non tumble pills .
I think if you can work that out you may get a better grasp on how gel relays to critters
Basically I think a wound channel should act like the yellow lines filling in those voids

#2 I just don't see how or why that permanent wound channel stops like that as where the petals are I can see the wound channel around them is in relation to them well my interpretation anyway but #2 is a mystery to me but maybe the flex in gel as the pill passes through

Once again thank you for spending the time & wish you the best in your journey
Cheers

 

[fordy]

I calculated your sea level bullet SG at 1.63, using the entire 1.505" length of that bullet.

The three copper monos I've had boomerang within game animals had sea level based stability SGs of 1.26 (275gr 338 recovered from moose @ ~650yds), 1.40 (196.5gr 308 recovered from caribou @ ~280yds) and 1.41 (265gr 338 recovered from moose @ ~650yds). Two were Bulldozers. One was a Cutting Edge Lazer.

Two of the bullets that boomeranged (corkscrewed) were recovered from the moose. The frontal portions of those two bullets were sheared off, with a blunted nose a bit larger in diameter than caliber. One was a Cutting Edge Lazer. The other a Badlands Bulldozer.

I plan to continue shooting copper monos, but future barrels will be purchased with faster twist rates. My goal is to spin them with a minimum sea level calculated SG of 1.75

Gday pdvdh
That will definitely help
Also don't be frightened to go a little lighter than one is use too if possible as sometimes your max range will cancel that pill out but on a lot of cases most go to heavy as we revert back to what we were taught on needing x weight pill to get the job done & in a lot of cases with c&c this is true but today I think that those guys are also going to heavy due to some of the new offerings where the bullet company would need a extremely soft pill to really work any better
Looking forward to your journey evolving please post your results as I'd like to see your thoughts
Cheers

 

[fordy]

Gday
Grey wolf

This has probably been discussed, sorry if so. But are you generally trying to shoot through the shoulder or heart/lungs? And does distance affect your choice?

Generally speaking broadside & please accept my apology on the non accuracy of those drawings of mine as the blue line goes way to far back & don't advocate a gut shot

These numbers in order will give you the best impact to tip if we don't make contact with the cns in 1&2 on the higher placed shots , note #1 takes out the cns on a lot of occasions & cns while effective is basically useless for true terminal evaluations
No doubt any pill off shoulder will cause less meat damage but also one that results of longer runs if we don't use pills that give us very good wounding @ minimal resistance & no pill will give us better results with lower velocity impacts between the rib shots vrs a higher velocity one
There are velocity windows that every pill has id suggest researching what those are & then you can make a great decision on your pill & shot placement

Once angles are incorporated things change a bit on the above
Hope that helps
Cheers

 

[fordy]

Gday nrailer

You need to shoot these Bulldozers at animals yourself, place the bullets well then make comments based on actual experience and backed up by photographic evidence of the wound channels. These bullets do not act like other "monos" and to extrapolate the behavior of other monos as predictors of Bulldozer behavior at impact is not accurate.

Good to finally get to this & way more appropriate in this thread but imo of course

So let's step back a little first on our discussions some time back ( most likely over a year ) & I asked you to expand explain on how your gen 2 pills are doing anything different than your gen 1 as yes I've tested your gen 1 pills which when I did that was in a semi hunt /cull situation/s & I'll leave those result's alone but my judgment is based on those results & your lack of delving deeper on my or other peoples questions & ultimately just go quite but that's you

So moving forward once again & see if we can get anywhere this time

Yes You previously failed to explain how & why , now I'll give you the advancement in being able to get your gen 2 to open 200 below the gen 1 but that In no way has convinced me to use these in a hunting situation especially when we have also had interactions on different results on these gen 2 pills & some of your comments on that plus designs of the tip & construction of your pills yes I've tried to give you the opportunity to explain or even better back your statements up with factual evidence or @ a minimum @least say where it did impact ( That YouTube you quote a bit is a classic ) & yet you just go quiet which to me is not confidence building in the least so moving onto my hunts

my hunts are paid for these days & very limited due to the cost of those as I'm not a rich person & to be up front on that I earn about 45k a year & that's Aussie dollars so do that on exchange rates for Africa & take my cost of living away yes I'm not left with a lot ea year so I would not take your pills on a hunting trip , I'm just being straight up front which I hope you understand that but gladly used if they showed in my tests they can handle what shots I will take in the field & I also try on my hunting trips to place the shot as well as I can but never any guarantee especially with me so hope that clears that up

Now here's the next stage I will give you the opportunity once again to address my questions on how your gen 2 is superior to the gen 1 & please don't belittle yourself & say they open 200 fps lower as I'd not even get close to those low levels in a hunting situation anyway regardless of pill or caliber I have & ranges I shoot @ these days

A subtle hint , it's more like let's delve deeper on wound channel width, length where it starts to taper where it opens in the transition zone across various resistances & velocity impacts then once you address those we are getting closer to what is needed

So next part "photographic evidence"
I not only do this I will most likely understand why a pill has done what it has better than you ( not the correct terminology as I'm dumb on that front) & leads me to the next part

I push you to try & get you to make a better pill as the mushroom monos are one that can gain more no doubt on that , I also am watching a few of those other mushroom mono companies & testing some as I write . if yours are part of that mix I doubt you'll ever know but a fair few people already know what I am in the process of completing & believe me I'm not after any notoriety just want better pills & try & show where the best pills for their needs are when I'm asked or @ a minimum angles resistances to avoid

I look forward to you explaining how your pills have improved from gen 1 & we can also go back over to that construction thread & discuss the tips in more detail then delve deeper into the other parameters which give even more insight into what little things gets us the results we get

No hard feelings either way just laying my cards on the table be nice if you do the same
Cheers

 

[nralifer]

wondering if anyone has first-hand experience shooting the 150gr BD2 from a Ruger M77 MkII 30-06? (1:10 twist) What were your results?

I don't have any hunting experiences with a 30-06, but lots of experience with that bullet from a 308win with a load that meets or slightly exceeds published 30-06 loads shooting 150 gr lead core bullets. A friend of mine that uses a 30-06 Weatherby Vanguard for which I have loaded the 150 BD2 for him. His results on Deer have been excellent out to about 600 yds but usually within 300-400 yds. No bullet recovery and all shots were 1 shot kills except one.