Bullet Construction vs Lethality

[fordy]

Gday no time to quote any particular person

Here's a little more information & one I hope some can step back & clear one's mind

Yes old school thoughts & not being derogatory to anyone SD .SF are ones that come to mind pretty quickly as the bar has moved yet everyone is quoting old systems formulas which is cool as we needed to work with something but until you clear your mind you will not see what truly can be achieved but nothing wrong with having a higher than needed figure to cover our backside & personally I like to do that if I go hunting but is it needed like it use to be

So we have a mushroom mono that will out penertrate a shedding isn't that physics that will answer that I don't really know what I do is look @ actuals in the critter
Simple answer that's a incorrect statement
Yep & I'll back up my statements


Well I'd say one needs to go & shoot bullets side by side to get the correct information
Here's a Comparison
& this has been replicated many times ( look @ those meplates & I'll come to that later )

Need I say what out penertrated the other
BUT that is not also the only thing we need to look @ as the width of that wound channel is a major factor or we would all be using true solids with the correct meplat/shape & weight

then when you delve a little deeper I hear the part of those petals also can't penertrate due to size
WELL that also depends on the pill design
as some are designed to shed in a extremely quick outward pattern others are designed to stay close to the shank & some in between
Then you have petal shape & that along with weight is one I thought I had worked out extremely well as I'd got it down to a weight range of a petal across many many critters I've taken & let's be clear THAT is many different companies yet it's no different to mushroom monos as different companies do different things eg some broach some don't some different hp depths /width
To give us a tweaking of there pill but one that is the major difference is the alloy one company uses & that is a whole new chapter & one would be foolish to just look @ the trees on this one but I'm leaving that there & back to this

So how can a on average 14.25 gr petal reach the far hide of asiatic buffalo

Here's a petal pattern on the offside rib cage of a asiatic floodplain buff

So do we need to do lung comparisons of these 2 system types
Yes that will come but once again one would be foolish to believe the mushroom monos give better wounding

On the how these petals are actually doing this That is still a learning process & work is ongoing on how & / why & I look forward to the physics majors that this information is hopefully on the way to & hopefully we will get a reply as my anal terminal mates & I have our theories but they are theories & all I really know is that it's happening time after time in various critters

On cape buff they are soft skinned ( nastier though) compared to asiatic buff & these shanks on them ( depending on angle) you will have trouble catching a shank yet I've had no trouble catching mushroom pills ( not all the time but a way way higher % than asiatic & replicates across many critters many calibres
It even has me ticking on hippo & elephant & id also not worry about stating that a single shot is all that was required as imo hunting DG one would be advised to keep shooting until the critter is down & then a insurance shot for good measure
I also note sometimes one shot is also only possible so that's when the best bullets show why they are the best not just a dead critter that takes longer to tip on the fur calculator

Those angled meplats are ever so important & along with alloy I'll give the SF on DG as important but a very well balanced solid dosent need it as much as one thinks as from a whisper I'd heard in Africa around 10 years ago I shot a solid out of my 410 to see if that held up as I thought a 12 gauge had huge potential if it worked

Well the solid worked in my 410 ( please if anyone wants to do that confirm your choke size & pill are adequately matched ) yet preformance just wasn't there yep my theory on the 12 gauge was exactly that & a stupid thought & why I now have a 500 Jeffery

Got to run

Clear one's mind is one I suggest is the best approach & actual results in critters sorts all sorts of theories out & I've personally got way more to learn
Cheers

 

[asd9055]

I don't know much compared to most of you guys here. I only used I think maybe 4-5 bullet brands, some factory, mostly hand loads. One brand (factory loads) was really bad for many of my and my friends rifles, but, not naming them. Others are happy with them. I have hand\ted with Remington, Winchester and Federal factory, all worked. Handloads, I have only handed with Nosler. All worked. I have one load with a mono, shoots incredibly well, but never hunted with it. Don't have to at the places I have hunted.
The thing I find interesting, is how far people who claim they have nothing to do with a particular bullet maker, wether cup and core or mono, how far they will go to promote or defend a particular bullet maker. I can't imagine what they would do if they worked for the company, or even owned it. Fighting over Chevy vs Mopar when we all know its Ford!
From my point of view, and the way my mind works, its easier to be turned off by this on a particular product in general than give it a try. Thats probably why I will not give Tikka a try for example. Maybe I am too cynical, I hear that a lot.
Soooooo...express your opinions, which are mostly just that, opinions, but don't make it personal.
my 2cents. Thank Len for "unwatch"

 

[Horse1]

It's hard to get enough big game tags as an individual in North America to get a decent sample size for one brand, style, diameter and weight, let alone the above in any multiples. It takes a decade or better for even very avid hunters to get to 50 Animals tagged.

It's sort of unfortunate that the folks in Aus and Africa who do a lot of culling big game and can really pile up significant numbers don't have reasonable access to all of the choices we do.

It's also unfortunate the number of folks who get their ego and/or need for acceptance so wrapped up into either vehemently defending what they do use or vehemently denigrating that which they don't/won't. Especially if you agree with the gist of my 1st paragraph in that very few in NA get enough tags, even those who hunt internationally don't usually get enough pure numbers to be of significance. Most of them are trophy hunting, not culling.

 

[FEENIX]

I don't know much compared to most of you guys here. I only used I think maybe 4-5 bullet brands, some factory, mostly hand loads. One brand (factory loads) was really bad for many of my and my friends rifles, but, not naming them. Others are happy with them. I have hand\ted with Remington, Winchester and Federal factory, all worked. Handloads, I have only handed with Nosler. All worked. I have one load with a mono, shoots incredibly well, but never hunted with it. Don't have to at the places I have hunted.
The thing I find interesting, is how far people who claim they have nothing to do with a particular bullet maker, wether cup and core or mono, how far they will go to promote or defend a particular bullet maker. I can't imagine what they would do if they worked for the company, or even owned it. Fighting over Chevy vs Mopar when we all know its Ford!
From my point of view, and the way my mind works, its easier to be turned off by this on a particular product in general than give it a try. Thats probably why I will not give Tikka a try for example. Maybe I am too cynical, I hear that a lot.
Soooooo...express your opinions, which are mostly just that, opinions, but don't make it personal.
my 2cents. Thank Len for "unwatch"

I have a pretty good inventory of bullets (lead and lead-free) from various bullet makers, but there is only one that I will NEVER use for multiple reasons.

 

[CMP70306]

@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.

Considering the topic of reference very much predates diggdugg's arrival and the vehemence in his words I'm going to assume that he is simply another reincarnation of an old user that has an axe to grind. They pop up every few months when someone gets bored and feels like starting trouble.

Assuming it is the same person they have been banned before and they will most likely be banned again so it's honestly not worth your time trying to get an answer because you wont get anything of substance.

 

[Petey308]

Considering the topic of reference very much predates diggdugg's arrival and the vehemence in his words I'm going to assume that he is simply another reincarnation of an old user that has an axe to grind. They pop up every few months when someone gets bored and feels like starting trouble.

Assuming it is the same person they have been banned before and they will most likely be banned again so it's honestly not worth your time trying to get an answer because you wont get anything of substance.

Could be a prior banned member. Could also be someone that has only viewed the forum forever and finally made an account.

I know a few people that frequent this forum researching things but have never had an account.

I'm just saying it doesn't always have to be somebody that was already banned with an axe to grind.

Either way, it sure got a lot of attention lol.

 

[ButterBean]

Considering the topic of reference very much predates diggdugg's arrival and the vehemence in his words I'm going to assume that he is simply another reincarnation of an old user that has an axe to grind. They pop up every few months when someone gets bored and feels like starting trouble.

Assuming it is the same person they have been banned before and they will most likely be banned again so it's honestly not worth your time trying to get an answer because you wont get anything of substance.

Exactly

 

[Petey308]

So what about the members that were banned for behavior, and then allowed to come back, and have since resorted back to that same behavior and are not only still here now, but are supported by some of you? Is that not a bit of a double standard if you're seemingly against people that were banned coming back under a new username? Does it just depend?

I'm not saying any of it is right or wrong. I don't make the rules and decisions here.

I just try to give everyone the benefit of the doubt, until there is no doubt.

Again, not condoning anything here. I'm just playing devil's advocate and looking at it from another perspective. Maybe we should just move on, especially if he's not responding to questions.

 

[CMP70306]

Could be a prior banned member. Could also be someone that has only viewed the forum forever and finally made an account.

I know a few people that frequent this forum researching things but have never had an account.

I'm just saying it doesn't always have to be somebody that was already banned with an axe to grind.

Either way, it sure got a lot of attention lol.

Possibly but that's too specific of a reference and too much conviction for someone not personally involved. I can barely remember what I ate yesterday let alone remember a random post on a forum I read several years ago.

Heck I knew I read the posts because I had commented about it previously and even I had to go look them back up because I didn't remember them.

 

[Petey308]

Possibly but that's too specific of a reference and too much conviction for someone not personally involved. I can barely remember what I ate yesterday let alone remember a random post on a forum I read several years ago.

Heck I knew I read the posts because I had commented about it previously and even I had to go look them back up because I didn't remember them.

You might be right

 

[FEENIX]

So what about the members that were banned for behavior, and then allowed to come back, and have since resorted back to that same behavior and are not only still here now, but are supported by some of you? Is that not a bit of a double standard if you're seemingly against people that were banned coming back under a new username? Does it just depend?

I'm not saying any of it is right or wrong. I don't make the rules and decisions here.

I just try to give everyone the benefit of the doubt, until there is no doubt.

Again, not condoning anything here. I'm just playing devil's advocate and looking at it from another perspective. Maybe we should just move on, especially if he's not responding to questions.

Yep!

 

[CMP70306]

So what about the members that were banned for behavior, and then allowed to come back, and have since resorted back to that same behavior and are not only still here now, but are supported by some of you? Is that not a bit of a double standard if you're seemingly against people that were banned coming back under a new username? Does it just depend?

I'm not saying any of it is right or wrong. I don't make the rules and decisions here.

I just try to give everyone the benefit of the doubt, until there is no doubt.

Again, not condoning anything here. I'm just playing devil's advocate and looking at it from another perspective. Maybe we should just move on, especially if he's not responding to questions.

I can't speak for the temporarily banned members who came back and then started picking fights again. I'm honestly not on here enough nor do I care enough to keep up with the constant back and forth across multiple threads and topics. Occasionally I'll get sucked into one but for the most part I try to stay out of it and to date I've never stepped out enough to get banned.

My issue is it's more the fact that these types of accounts don't exist to provide any meaningful contributions to the site, they exist solely to start fights between themselves and other members in the threads.

Len has previously stated that some of the instigators were new usernames of permanently banned accounts. So it's either someone who keeps coming back to a site that has repeatedly banned them for the sole reason of arguing with people they disagree with or it's someone on this site using a series of burner accounts to not risk their primary account getting permanently banned.

Either way that just seems like entirely too much effort to argue with people on the internet.

 

[Petey308]

I can't speak for the temporarily banned members who came back and then started picking fights again. I'm honestly not on here enough nor do I care enough to keep up with the constant back and forth across multiple threads and topics. Occasionally I'll get sucked into one but for the most part I try to stay out of it and to date I've never stepped out enough to get banned.

My issue is it's more the fact that these types of accounts don't exist to provide any meaningful contributions to the site, they exist solely to start fights between themselves and other members in the threads.

Len has previously stated that some of the instigators were new usernames of permanently banned accounts. So it's either someone who keeps coming back to a site that has repeatedly banned them for the sole reason of arguing with people they disagree with or it's someone on this site using a series of burner accounts to not risk their primary account getting permanently banned.

Either way that just seems like entirely too much effort to argue with people on the internet.

Yep. Ultimately it's not worth it. That's why I didn't engage with him and only entertained the points others made from it.

I just had those thoughts regarding all this and figured I'd say them "out loud".

Moving on…

 

[RichCoyle]

Well it was back when I worked with training police officers so that was 26 years ago. But it's a simple google search Rich. You should try it.

Try a google search of what you did twenty-six years ago. I don't think so.