Bullet Construction vs Lethality

[Petey308]

I'm at least curious why all the published BC's in my Applied Ballistic manual for Hammers do not reflect on Hammer's website.

And a G7 BC stays quite consistent over a wide velocity range, and actually tends to increase after going transonic.

Do not use a G1 BC for bullets like this. A G1 is modeled incorrectly for such a bullet and does indeed change quite a bit with velocity change.

 

[JAYgs8163]

I get called a walking encyclopedia by my friend group a fair bit. It's not always a compliment . Just the way my ADHD brain works, I have a tremendous capacity to remember volumes of random bits of mostly useless information but struggle to remember where I left my keys, wallet, when my appointments are, which clothes go in which kid's drawer, what people's birthdays or phone numbers are…thank God I'm married to a wonderful woman who has THAT kind of useful memory

Well as you get older CRS takes over for ADHD. Ask me how I know. Looked for keys yesterday while hunting Coues deer. Took me 45 minutes to find them in my cup holder. CRS=Can't Remember Sheet!

 

[nralifer]

I get called a walking encyclopedia by my friend group a fair bit. It's not always a compliment . Just the way my ADHD brain works, I have a tremendous capacity to remember volumes of random bits of mostly useless information but struggle to remember where I left my keys, wallet, when my appointments are, which clothes go in which kid's drawer, what people's birthdays or phone numbers are…thank God I'm married to a wonderful woman who has THAT kind of useful memory

Thank God for a great wife. I'm blessed that way also. Fortunately. Think about starting a thread about some aspect of bullet history. I would be especially interested in cannon bullets only because I know so little about them, but the choice is yours. Anything bullets and guns interest me.

 

[nralifer]

Well as you get older CRS takes over for ADHD. Ask me how I know. Looked for keys yesterday while hunting Coues deer. Took me 45 minutes to find them in my cup holder. CRS=Can't Remember Sheet!

Don't worry about it. I was looking one time for sunglasses I had positioned on the hat I was wearing

 

[xsn10s]

Haha... Even so...,

these facts remain... the terribly bloodshot shoulder was the side he said he shot at. And if he remembered wrong, and it was the exit shoulder, why was the doe still alive enough to launch itself halfway into his Ranger? After a complete pass through of both shoulders. He did say the bloodshot shoulder was a complete loss. But never said anything about damage to the other shoulder.

Yeah, it boggles the mind. Incredulous. So we grasp at straws for any plausible explanation. Which is why I deem it the Granddaddy of all bullet failures.

See this is why I wonder if it was facing the opposite direction than remembered. Penciled in and through the vitals, hit offside scapula either fragmented violently or tumbled causing the complete loss of that shoulder. Which would explain why it was still alive when he drove up to it. But like you say we are only grasping for straws for an explanation. Another explanation is simply the will to live, some animal just have a greater will to live than others. Since I wasn't there I'm just looking for possible explanations. The OP admitted the first box had a bunch of closed tips so penciling in until it hard bone makes the most sense.

 

[Lou270]

I hope all the bickering and pot shoting are nearly done as like discussions on terminal performance. Bullet constuction predominately determines how the energy is transefered to the target to do the wounding (ie lethality)

The wound volume potential is directly proportional to the energy of the bullet. The energy is determined by mass x v^2. A bigger wound may or may not cause something to die more quickly. A lot of guys say energy doesn't matter and hate it, but a better statement to me is once you have enough in right spot more does not matter.

Penetration is proportional to velocity x sectional density. This is terminal sectional density NOT starting sectional density. For ex, monos penetrate deeply because they have higher terminal sectional density and tend to lose velocity at slower rate due to less frontal area i.e. through less expanded diameter, space in between petals, or blowing off petals entirely. This is also why something like a nosler partition will penetrate more deeply than equivilant starting weight swift aframe

The diameter of the temporary cavity is proportional to the rate of energy transfer from bullet to animal at any given instance during penetration. The rate of energy transfer is basically drag which is proportional to frontal area and v^2. This is why smaller faster bullets can at times make wider wounds than slower wider bullets. I have seen some people call this bubble among other things.

Temporary cavity is called temporary not because of the damage it causes but because it happens in a millisecond in the wake of the bullet as material is blasted away from the passing of the bullet. It can be many times larger than bullet diameter and some tissue is simply blasted away and gone, some torn by stretching, and some snaps back. The wider the cavity is the more tearing happens vs stretching. I have seen various velocity levels people think this starts happening but nothing conclusive. However increased wounding almost always happens with high velocity/energy hunting cartridges and not so much in say defensive handgun rounds. Bullet fragmentation is a damage multiplier for temporary cavity. Tissues that only stretch will tear to shreds when have holes from fragmentation. In this regard high velocity can show much bigger diameter wounds than larger diameter slower bullets since not only promotes higher drag/energy transfer but also bullet fragmentation and expansion.

The final wound cavity is the size of whatever is destroyed by the bullet directly crushing it or tissue damage as a result of the temporary cavity. One thing a lot of people are not aware of is that much like temporary cavity, a slow bullet may push its way through tissue and once passes through tissue snaps back to smaller diameter wound channel or pushes organs out of way vs damaging.

As far as twist since this always comes up. Most terminal ballistics research dismiss twist as having no effect on terminal performance since there is little energy (assuming bullet is stable to begin with) except for the case of otm type bullets that rely on tumbling to do damage. The higher the sg the worse it is for this class of bullet since the neck will be longer before the bullet starts to tumble. This is the m16/fackler stuff that is well documented. Other effects of twist, which again depend on bullet construction, is that it may cause a bullet to expand more quickly or even over expand though I think this is less prominent with a hunting bullet and thicker jacket. The other area is if a bullet has a small, deep hollow point increased stability should help bullet stay straighter during initial penetration to acheive terminal shape before starts tumbling. I think this is why lot of folks like fast twist with untipped monos and the deep narrow hp to keep bc up. Somebody also asked how fast twist decreases once in target. It does not decrease much at all until towards end because much like during flight the nose of the bullet is blasting material (instead of air) away to form the temporary cavity. Once the bullet slows down enough significant material is touching the bullet rotation stops quickly since there is little energy there

So - think how these apply to your favorite cartridge, bullet, the shots you take, etc… and see if it makes sense. As you can see there is a complex system of events going on a bullet traverses the target, changes shape, and mass. You can sort of tweak how prefer this to happen based on your preference of terimal performance

Lou

 

[diggdugg70]

Really?

Yep

 

[Calvin45]

Yep

Sources?

 

[Petey308]

Sources?

Do we really want to open that can of worms?

I did a search and found several things that could definitely lead a guy to make that conclusion. I am not saying I made that conclusion.

I could PM you some of what I found, but I'm not going to break forum rules to do any of that publicly. I will say, publicly, that if I send you anything, I will let you draw your own conclusions and I'm not saying anything one way or the other about it.

 

[Calvin45]

Do we really want to open that can of worms?

I did a search and found several things that could definitely lead a guy to make that conclusion. I am not saying I made that conclusion.

I could PM you some of what I found, but I'm not going to break forum rules to do any of that publicly. I will say, publicly, that if I send you anything, I will let you draw your own conclusions and I'm not saying anything one way or the other about it.

Feel free to pm me. There's also a difference between "the hammer cult" being overeager and combative and "the hammer owners" doing what they've been accused of by Mr diggdugg70, who had been here on lrh since May of this year and only comments on posts to do with copper bullets so far, explicitly stating that they "told Bryan litz he didn't know what he was talking about" regarding bc.

Petey308 I've much appreciated your work in sectioning and analyzing different bullets and contributing to fair, open minded dialogue for our edification, keep up the good work sir.

 

[Petey308]

Feel free to pm me. There's also a difference between "the hammer cult" being overeager and combative and "the hammer owners" doing what they've been accused of by Mr diggdugg70, who had been here on lrh since May of this year and only comments on posts to do with copper bullets so far, explicitly stating that they "told Bryan litz he didn't know what he was talking about" regarding bc.

Petey308 I've much appreciated your work in sectioning and analyzing different bullets and contributing to fair, open minded dialogue for our edification, keep up the good work sir.

I completely understand what you're saying and how it looks. That's why I did my own searching to see what there was to see. Obviously anyone else could do the same.

Perception is everything. Perception comes from many influences behind it. We all have a different perception based on different influences.

There is definitely some dialogue that makes you wonder though.

I won't PM you unless you actually want me to. I'm not trying to convince you of anything lol

 

[FEENIX]

I'm at least curious why all the published BC's in my Applied Ballistic manual for Hammers do not reflect on Hammer's website.

And a G7 BC stays quite consistent over a wide velocity range, and actually tends to increase after going transonic.

Do not use a G1 BC for bullets like this. A G1 is modeled incorrectly for such a bullet and does indeed change quite a bit with velocity change.

Man, I need to get his books. He explained the difference between G1 and G7 in #29.

 

[Calvin45]

Feel free to pm me. There's also a difference between "the hammer cult" being overeager and combative and "the hammer owners" doing what they've been accused of by Mr diggdugg70, who had been here on lrh since May of this year and only comments on posts to do with copper bullets so far, explicitly stating that they "told Bryan litz he didn't know what he was talking about" regarding bc.

Petey308 I've much appreciated your work in sectioning and analyzing different bullets and contributing to fair, open minded dialogue for our edification, keep up the good work sir.

@diggdugg70 I wasn't aiming to be funny here, what exactly was so amusing about this? If it's to do with Petey I meant what I said, he has done a lot of work and contributed greatly to our forum.

If it's the fact that I quoted you word for word while pointing out that you have, in fact, not been around here very long, well, I meant what I said there too but don't see how that's funny. And you still won't put up sources or even a shred of evidence to back up the statement that you did in fact make. Laugh all you want…the ball is still in your court and I'm curious if you actually have anything to contribute here.

Can't help but feel like you've got an axe to grind here, BUT I've been wrong more times than I can count and would love to be proven wrong here, moreover I have no quarrel with you…I just do abide by the old saying that extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence and you made one heck of a claim. That's all man. I'm sure not your enemy but not sure if you're for real here either and it would be very, very easy to prove me wrong. I'm all ears.

 

[Calvin45]

Further, let the record reflect I've been plenty skeptical about hammers and some of their claims (or their followers claims), and I've even "gotten into it" pretty good with them on some occasions, having to iron things out and clear the air afterwords. I've loaded them in my 257 weatherby now and they're among the least finicky bullets I've ever had the pleasure of developing a load for, accurate…and FAST! 75 grain Hh at 4170 out of a 24 inch vanguard.

As for terminal performance, I have an antlerless mule deer tag and will get my usual Saskatchewan resident whitetail tag this November and put these bullets to the test to see for myself, Lord willing. Full report if I succeed.