Bullet Construction vs Lethality

[xsn10s]

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

You could google false memory retention. It shouldn't be hard to find on your own. Even look up false memory retention of hunts if you want to be specific.

 

[JTH]

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 View attachment 490930
& 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
View attachment 490931View attachment 490932
Here's a petal pattern on the offside rib cage of a asiatic floodplain buff
View attachment 490933
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

The terminal performance of the Hammers is outstanding. While it's nothing close to the volume you've stacked up (I appreciate all the info, photos, etc that you share) , I've killed a handful of big bodied Whitetails and a bunch of hogs with them at distances up to about 300 yards. All have had exit wounds (including a mature hog that was head shot at about 300 yards) and all have either been dead right there, or traveled 30 yards max with unbelievable blood trails. The terminal design of the Hammers is close to perfect IMO. There's plenty info on this site and elsewhere supporting this. But the BC's need improvement for bucking the wind at longer ranges. In a heavy for caliber mono like a 200 grain .308 or 155 grain .284 the first number in the G7 BC should be a legitimate 3.

Last year I stacked up a few animals with the PVA Cayuga's. Nothing went further than 30 yards, but blood trails were pretty sparse. Had similar experience using Federal trophy copper ammunition several years ago (before I started reloading) with several elk and a whitetail at ranges of 400 to 600 yards. All died within eyesight but blood trails were not what I've seen with the Hammers, not even close.I've got a bunch of the 195 Badlands loaded up in a new 300 WSM, will try them out this Fall and see how they do.

The perfect bullet for my use would be if Hammer can keep their terminal performance while modifying the design to achieve the actual higher BC's that Badlands, PVA, Cutting Edge, etc are achieving, Or one of the other higher BC mono manufacturers mentioned above figures out how to design a pill with the terminal performance of Hammers by testing different hollow point diameters and depths, possibly different alloys.

Then we'd really be on to something.

 

[Wyo37]

Here I will stir the pot.......people who choose 100% copper bullets are suckers.

There I said it hammer cult.

 

[nralifer]

The "penetrate deeply at angle angle to reach vital organs" is a tough one. If you look at ballistic gel testing, I've never seen a bullet with a truly LONG and WIDE wound cavity. Some penetrate a ways before opening up, some open up sooner…but either way the length of that maximum wound cavity is a real limiting factor.

It does me no good to shoot a bull or buck quartering away hard, and have the bullet exit the front of the animal but the wound cavity through the vitals is narrow. Experienced this the hard way on a whitetail that gave me a very long tracking job.

Let us know when you find the magic bullet; I don't believe it exists.

There are always skeptics. From the very first animal we shot with the first generation Bulldozer we noticed wound channels that are quite wide when the bullet went mostly through muscle. A large Blue Wildebeest was our first kill at 482 yds with a 150 gr BD bullet. The video of the shot is posted on YouTube "Bulldozer vs Blue Wildebeest". That first generation had a different configuration of the hollow in the ogive and would expand at 1900 fps impact velocity. The second and current generation, the BD2, has a configuration of stressor groves in the hollow such they allow expansion at 1700 fps at least, and improved BCs, the combination significantly improved the effective range because it allowed reliable expansion down to 1700 fps and less energy loss in flight. The wound channel on that Wildebeest was a high oblique shoulder shot that we measured at about 15 " long and big enough to put my fist into. The bullet was not recovered. You can see in the video a small bullet splash about 100 yds beyond the animal. The photo below illustrates the efficiency of the BD2 tipped hollow point compared to a competitor's bullet that does not use a tip. That bullet simply doesn't expand quite as wide as the BD2 does even at low speed. Since then we have several accounts of BD2 fully penetrating longitudinally Elk and Moose and with oblique frontal chest shots on a Moose, the bullet exits near the ham, indicating a penetration of several feet. A lot of these shots frankly surprised us. We never would have thought they could penetrate that way.

 

[xsn10s]

Here I will stir the pot.......people who choose 100% copper bullets are suckers.

There I said it hammer cult.

 

[CMP70306]

Here I will stir the pot.......people who choose 100% copper bullets are suckers.

There I said it hammer cult.

Oh no now you've brought the Barnes and California crew into it as well.

So out of curiosity do tipped bullets count as they are after all only 99% copper and 1% polymer/aluminum/brass?

 

[Phil Rizzo]

There are always skeptics. From the very first animal we shot with the first generation Bulldozer we noticed wound channels that are quite wide when the bullet went mostly through muscle. A large Blue Wildebeest was our first kill at 482 yds with a 150 gr BD bullet. The video of the shot is posted on YouTube "Bulldozer vs Blue Wildebeest". That fist generation had a different configuration of the hollow in the ogive and would expand at 1900 fps impact velocity. The second and current generation, the BD2, has a configuration of stressor groves in the hollow such they allow expansion at 1700 fps at least, and improved BCs, the combination significantly improved the effective range because it allowed reliable expansion down to 1700 fps and less energy loss in flight. The wound channel on that Wildebeest was a high oblique shoulder shot tha we measured at about 15 " long and big enough to put my fist into. The bullet was not recovered. You can see in the video a small bullet splash about 100 yds beyond the animal. The photo below illustrates the efficiency of the BD2 tipped hollow point compared to a competitor's bullet tha does not use a tip. That bullet simply doesn't expand quite as wide as the BD2 does even at low speed. Since then we have several accounts of BD2 fully penetrating longitudinally Elk and Moose and with oblique frontal chest shots on a Moose, the bullet exits near the ham, indicating a penetration of several feet. A lot of these shots frankly surprised us. We never would have thought they could penetrate that way.

Looks mighty fine there

 

[nralifer]

The terminal performance of the Hammers is outstanding. While it's nothing close to the volume you've stacked up (I appreciate all the info, photos, etc that you share) , I've killed a handful of big bodied Whitetails and a bunch of hogs with them at distances up to about 300 yards. All have had exit wounds (including a mature hog that was head shot at about 300 yards) and all have either been dead right there, or traveled 30 yards max with unbelievable blood trails. The terminal design of the Hammers is close to perfect IMO. There's plenty info on this site and elsewhere supporting this. But the BC's need improvement for bucking the wind at longer ranges. In a heavy for caliber mono like a 200 grain .308 or 155 grain .284 the first number in the G7 BC should be a legitimate 3.

Last year I stacked up a few animals with the PVA Cayuga's. Nothing went further than 30 yards, but blood trails were pretty sparse. Had similar experience using Federal trophy copper ammunition several years ago (before I started reloading) with several elk and a whitetail at ranges of 400 to 600 yards. All died within eyesight but blood trails were not what I've seen with the Hammers, not even close.I've got a bunch of the 195 Badlands loaded up in a new 300 WSM, will try them out this Fall and see how they do.

The perfect bullet for my use would be if Hammer can keep their terminal performance while modifying the design to achieve the actual higher BC's that Badlands, PVA, Cutting Edge, etc are achieving, Or one of the other higher BC mono manufacturers mentioned above figures out how to design a pill with the terminal performance of Hammers by testing different hollow point diameters and depths, possibly different alloys.

Then we'd really be on to something.

Two Elk shot beyond 1000 yds. The third photo shows the heart of the Elk shot at 1495 yds which is shown in photo 1. Customer supplied photos. Bullet was a 375 SBD2 390 gr whose G7 BC begins with 5, actually 0.512 as measured by AB's Doppler radar.

 

[Petey308]

The terminal performance of the Hammers is outstanding. While it's nothing close to the volume you've stacked up (I appreciate all the info, photos, etc that you share) , I've killed a handful of big bodied Whitetails and a bunch of hogs with them at distances up to about 300 yards. All have had exit wounds (including a mature hog that was head shot at about 300 yards) and all have either been dead right there, or traveled 30 yards max with unbelievable blood trails. The terminal design of the Hammers is close to perfect IMO. There's plenty info on this site and elsewhere supporting this. But the BC's need improvement for bucking the wind at longer ranges. In a heavy for caliber mono like a 200 grain .308 or 155 grain .284 the first number in the G7 BC should be a legitimate 3.

Last year I stacked up a few animals with the PVA Cayuga's. Nothing went further than 30 yards, but blood trails were pretty sparse. Had similar experience using Federal trophy copper ammunition several years ago (before I started reloading) with several elk and a whitetail at ranges of 400 to 600 yards. All died within eyesight but blood trails were not what I've seen with the Hammers, not even close.I've got a bunch of the 195 Badlands loaded up in a new 300 WSM, will try them out this Fall and see how they do.

The perfect bullet for my use would be if Hammer can keep their terminal performance while modifying the design to achieve the actual higher BC's that Badlands, PVA, Cutting Edge, etc are achieving, Or one of the other higher BC mono manufacturers mentioned above figures out how to design a pill with the terminal performance of Hammers by testing different hollow point diameters and depths, possibly different alloys.

Then we'd really be on to something.

Try Apex Outdoors Afterburners and see if they give you what you're looking for.

 

[diggdugg70]

Here I will stir the pot.......people who choose 100% copper bullets are suckers.

There I said it hammer cult.

Unfortunately we here in california were forced to shoot 100% copper bullets, because If we weren't forced to I'd still be shooting nosler partitions.

 

[Petey308]

Here I will stir the pot.......people who choose 100% copper bullets are suckers.

There I said it hammer cult.

I take this as some comic relief, but since there are legitimate reasons to use and pick copper bullets, this is unproductive and just as ignorant in this thread as saying BC doesn't matter.

Not going after you or anyone else, I'm just trying to be fair.

If you can elaborate on why you feel that way with legitimate reasonings, maybe it would become productive.

 

[Wyo37]

There are 0 reasons to use 100% copper projectiles.

 

[Petey308]

There are 0 reasons to use 100% copper projectiles.

copy that….

 

[FEENIX]

I take this as some comic relief, but since there are legitimate reasons to use and pick copper bullets, this is unproductive and just as ignorant in this thread as saying BC doesn't matter.

Not going after you or anyone else, I'm just trying to be fair.

If you can elaborate on why you feel that way with legitimate reasonings, maybe it would become productive.

Agreed! We could all use a break.