Is Bullet Expansion Necessary for Effecive Killing of Game

[Pdvdh]

The answer to the original question is "no" that was proven from the very first lead ball to go down a musket barrel. good clean hits with solids kill game on a daily basis, they kill very dead and fast and anyone who thinks they don't should as a African guide what he wants in his rifle for a ****ed buffalo. A lot of us shoot game with smk's or a equally hard jacket including myself and what kills the animal is a GOOD, CLEAN hit in a vital area.

Few (I doubt anyone on this Forum) using lead balls to kill game past 500 yds. Also doubtful that anyone is using .223 or 220 Swifts to kill large game past 600 yds. I used a 12 gauge slug to effectively dispatch a bull moose at 130 yds one time. Put the bead 18 inches over the top of the back and dropped it into the lower 1/3 of the boiler room. Aftrican PHs don't have clients shooting cape buffalo at 500 plus yards with the 900 Nitro Express or 458s. That's an entirely different setting than long range hunting. African PHs are coming around to the fact that Barnes TSX kill more quickly for body hits on large game than solids. I've watched the Mark Sullivan videos where they shoot cape buffalo countless times with 600 and even 900 Nitro Express with FMJs and the buffalo wander around endlessly with multiple holes in both sides of their hide - until someone finally drives a solid into the brain or CNS. I personally have never killed a cape buffalo, but after watching those video tapes, I wouldn't hesitate to use a rugged controlled expansion bullet out of a 375, 458, 460. I have no doubt they would be more lethal on body hits than the solids they were driving through the bodies of these animals.

We're using long, sleek, pointed bullets at long range for high BCs and to assist in precise placement to the vital areas at ranges where the beads on the doubles rifles used in Africa will cover up two or three animals.

This has been a round-about-way of acknowledging varmint bullets in 22-250s will put down deer as if struck by lightning with rib shots time and time again provided the bullet is still streaking along at Mach 3 speeds. And Brenneke 12 gauge slugs will efficiently kill large game provided they still have sufficient speed to penetrate the body cavity of the game being targeted. Neither are practical or effective past 600 yds.

Our engineer described the ideal LRH bullet aptly in his long post. Highly accurate for proper placement, streamlined for high BC and downrange energy retention, expanding to maximize the transfer of that retained energy to the vitals of the animal we're targeting.

For long range hunting (say past 500 yds) of large game where we're targeting and planning on solid body hits (not aiming for the brain or spinal cord), I have 100% confidence in the position that expanding bullets kill an animal in shorter lapsed time from the moment of impact to the time of death, and with much greater reliability and consistency than any non-expanding bullet. Again excluding brain and CNS hits.

 

[MontanaRifleman]

The answer to the original question is "no"that was proven from the very first lead ball to go down a musket barrel. good clean hits with solids kill game on a daily basis, they kill very dead and fast and anyone who thinks they don't should as a African guide what he wants in his rifle for a ****ed buffalo. A lot of us shoot game with smk's or a equally hard jacket including myself and what kills the animal is a GOOD, CLEAN hit in a vital area.

Bud, I think most of us will agree that a 50 cal round ball is very effective, but it isn't what most of us use in LRH. The way I figure it is, it is already expaned when manufatured so to speak.

Now you say.... " A lot of us shoot game with smk's or a equally hard jacket including myself and what kills the animal is a GOOD, CLEAN hit in a vital area"

Would you care to give some more details?

I have seen reports of non expanding sptitzer style bullets killing game. My question is how reliable are they? If I thought I had a 95% chance of quickly dropping an animal with let's say non expanding solid bullet like a GS SP with high velocity and BC, why even bother with anything else? including an SMK?

Mark

 

[ObiJohn]

The difference between a bullet strike and a stab wound is the wounding mechanism of energy transfer to destroy tissue. A stab wound (with a knife or an arrow) destroys only the tissue that is touched by the knife/arrowhead. A bullet strike destroys tissue that is not in the immediate path of the bullet via the force imparted from kinetic energy that transfers momentum and thus motion to tissue that stretches or tears it.

Wounding effect due to energy transfer is real. Does anyone doubt that a monolithic bullet traveling at 5,000 ft/sec would cause more damage than the same bullet traveling at 1,000 ft/sec? The real question is, at what velocity does kinetic energy contribute the majority of tissue damage? Empirically it seems to be at a sufficient velocity to cause bullet deformation... which is dependent on bullet construction. It may also depend upon the speed of sound in tissue which is higher than in air due to the incompressibility of tissue (solids and liquids transfer energy better than gases)... exceed that speed and expect much greater tissue destruction. Figure around Mach 2 (over 2,200 ft/sec) at bullet impact to start seeing a disproportionate amount of damage.

The cases I've seen that have significant energy dumps from non-expanding spitzer bullets have all been due to the bullet not being stable and thus starting to tumble quickly upon impact. This was the unintended benefit of the original AR-15 using 55 gr bullets and a 1:12" twist at 3,200 ft/sec muzzle velocity at close range; the bullet would tumble and then fragment at the cannulure. A great round for significant wounding at close range in jungle warfare, not so great for engaging targets at distance. Similarly, something like a 6.5x55 with a 1:9" twist rate with 140+ gr bullets, or a .30-06 shooting 220 gr round nose bullets out of a 1:10" twist rate are on the edge of stability with an increased chance of tumbling upon impact. From a physics standpoint, given two bullets of the same length the one with the lower sectional density (lighter mass) will be more prone to tumbling.

 

[FEENIX]

I am pretty sure the OP had it figured after 14+ years.