My thoughts on solid copper bullets and in comparison to other bullet types.

@Hard rock
I get what you're saying, but like I said, any bullet needs to be used within its particular limits, and also placed on/in the animal well. Many cup and core bullets are simply used outside their limits.

I fully understand and appreciate why guys use solids to limit over-expansion. And I said more than once in the post that I know many guys are using such bullets within the particular limits of them and they work great. I'm not disputing that at all. If you're happy and getting the results you like, keep doing it. I'm not trying to dissuade anyone here. I'm not bashing solids. I'm merely stating my own observations and what I've theorized so far. I don't want to say I've actually concluded anything. That would imply my mind is made up, and it's not.

I don't have anything against Hammers either. I want them to succeed as much as anyone else. They do indeed work very well when used within their limits and as I said in the post, there are many guys doing just that. My hats off to them. May they continue to thrive.
 
fordy said:
Settle guys 🤣 I would like 2 get a second thread past a couple posts this time please 😛

@ petey308
Could we just talk true solids for a moment please
not the monos the ones we use for dangerous game like elephant, buff etc

How are you on those designs & what they do ?
Click to expand...
Could you give me a few specific examples? Please don't take me wrong here. I'm not an expert and I won't claim to be. I have a passion for this stuff though and am always looking to learn more. I truly wish to one day hunt in Africa, but I have not yet and I will fully admit I have not studied extensively on hunting African game and what is required for best results on those kinds of animals.

I did not make this post to try to make myself look good or come off as some guru. I made a post on bullet construction the other day and was asked to share my thoughts on solids, so here it is. It's really that simple. I feel like suddenly though I'm getting ganged up on to try to tear this whole post apart. Hopefully I'm wrong though. I remember your post the other day. I made a comment or two on it. I did see it has since disappeared. I hope you don't think that whatever issue you had with someone else regarding Hammers is carrying over here. That's the impression I'm getting though. I really don't want any part of all that though.

I'm just here sharing my thoughts and experiences like everyone else in the hopes we all become better and have even more success out there. If you can teach me new things, I'm all ears and will welcome it.
 
Petey308 said:
That's really hard to answer outright lol. They're both different. Hydrostatic shock is like an electrical impulse or shockwave. It's not really doing the actual wounding. It's just traveling through the animal to the spine and brain and through autonomic plexuses (nerve centers) to shut down the CNS. Hydraulic shock is what ultimately causes the wounding, and there's different levels of it. The way I think about them to remember which is which is to think static is like from radio waves (the shockwave) and hydraulic is fluid, so fluid and tissue displacement.

Ultimately both are dependent upon too many other factors to tie an exact velocity to them on when they occur. The bullet's construction/composition, how it transfers energy, impact velocity, shot placement, etc, etc will all determine if and how much of both things occur. You'll need more velocity with some bullet types, and less with others. Sometimes you don't get hydrostatic shock, or the shot is placed in an area it simply isn't sufficient enough to reach the nervous system sufficiently. You'll always get a degree of hydraulic shock though. Any amount of tissue and fluid displacement around an object going through a body will cause it. The more speed and disproportionate to original caliber size wounding caused by expansion of the projectile though, the more
overall hydraulic forces are created and the more ruptured tissues and wounding there is. That will again depend more on the bullet type and shot placement than a specific speed.

Does that answer your question?
Click to expand...
Good explanation IMO. There isn't a magic velocity number for the static shot in my small experience. From what I've seen, it mostly depends on the bullet. Fast fragmenting bullets deliver a much greater outward shockwave on impact (I have slowed down videos of it). So for me, Berger's are much more prone to drop an animal, hit in the vitals, from "shock". I killed two bucks with hammer bullets this year, that I am almost certain would have dropped in their tracks with a 195 Berger do to the shot angles. But I just wasn't happy with the berger penetration honestly. They never exited, ever, for me. The bucks I shot with the 169 hammers though, one went 5 yards, big exit hole, blood pouring everywhere. The next was bedded, and never made it to his feet. Over 24" of penetration with a large exit hole and blood pouring everywhere. I've personally decided to give up a little of the "shock" factor in seek of slight shock, and deep penetration with exits. Just a personal choice, and so far I've been happy with it. But the shock of a berger upon impact is indisputable.
 
I'm asking in all sincerity. Can you cite references for your information on the "temporary coma" theory? I have some experience in the field of wound ballistics as a layman and end user but received my information from medical doctors who studied thousands of cases of combat wounds and I've never heard of temporary wound cavity causing that type of CNS reaction consistently. If it were true, the guy that shot himself in the face with a 12 gauge, removing his face from the eyes down, should have "shut down for diagnostics", but made it to the trauma room and was conscious for a couple hours until he died from multiple brain bleeds. There are thousands of cases of people being shot in the thorax and still go on to fight while bleeding out. Shouldn't many of those have gone into "temporary coma" from the "electrical shock wave" traveling through their rib cage to their spine and into their brain?
 
Huntnful said:
Good explanation IMO. There isn't a magic velocity number for the static shot in my small experience. From what I've seen, it mostly depends on the bullet. Fast fragmenting bullets deliver a much greater outward shockwave on impact (I have slowed down videos of it). So for me, Berger's are much more prone to drop an animal, hit in the vitals, from "shock". I killed two bucks with hammer bullets this year, that I am almost certain would have dropped in their tracks with a 195 Berger do to the shot angles. But I just wasn't happy with the berger penetration honestly. They never exited, ever, for me. The bucks I shot with the 169 hammers though, one went 5 yards, big exit hole, blood pouring everywhere. The next was bedded, and never made it to his feet. Over 24" of penetration with a large exit hole and blood pouring everywhere. I've personally decided to give up a little of the "shock" factor in seek of slight shock, and deep penetration with exits. Just a personal choice, and so far I've been happy with it. But the shock of a berger upon impact is indisputable.
Click to expand...
I find nothing wrong with your decision and it sounds well thought out. Softer constructed bullets like Bergers won't always exit, but if you can increase the sectional density enough, and place your shots where the amount of resistance upon impact isn't too high (sometimes you can sometimes you can't), you can better balance expansion versus penetration and get exits with such bullets. I've seen many huge exits from Bergers actually.
 
whatnext said:
I'm asking in all sincerity. Can you cite references for your information on the "temporary coma" theory? I have some experience in the field of wound ballistics as a layman and end user but received my information from medical doctors who studied thousands of cases of combat wounds and I've never heard of temporary wound cavity causing that type of CNS reaction consistently. If it were true, the guy that shot himself in the face with a 12 gauge, removing his face from the eyes down, should have "shut down for diagnostics", but made it to the trauma room and was conscious for a couple hours until he died from multiple brain bleeds. There are thousands of cases of people being shot in the thorax and still go on to fight while bleeding out. Shouldn't many of those have gone into "temporary coma" from the "electrical shock wave" traveling through their rib cage to their spine and into their brain?
Click to expand...
I'm not a doctor, first of all, so I'm not qualified to make such medical determinations. That said, I completely agree it doesn't always happen. I don't believe I said it always happens either. There has to be sufficient trauma to a nerve center to shut down the CNS. Blowing your face off isn't hitting a plexus of nerves. Not everyone gets knocked out in a fight either. Each individual tends to be different. Animals would be the same. Their anatomy does differ a bit from humans though too.

I have seen first hand plenty of examples where an animal has defied the odds and didn't drop and even ran with wounding you'd never think would allow it to be possible. Strange things do happen. If I implied I was talking in absolutes in my posts, I didn't mean to.

As far as the "temporary coma", this is something I've seen mentioned in multiple places, including Nathan Foster describe it. I believe you would be able to find him mention it in some of his articles on his website even. It's just a term I've also decided to use to best describe what I've seen. There are likely millions by now cases of animals being shot in the body and shoulders and didn't receive sufficient hydrostatic shock to drop. It has a lot to do with the particular bullet and how it transfers that energy and shockwave. It depends on where it hits too. It depends on a lot of things really, to include the animal itself.
 
whatnext said:
I'm asking in all sincerity. Can you cite references for your information on the "temporary coma" theory? I have some experience in the field of wound ballistics as a layman and end user but received my information from medical doctors who studied thousands of cases of combat wounds and I've never heard of temporary wound cavity causing that type of CNS reaction consistently. If it were true, the guy that shot himself in the face with a 12 gauge, removing his face from the eyes down, should have "shut down for diagnostics", but made it to the trauma room and was conscious for a couple hours until he died from multiple brain bleeds. There are thousands of cases of people being shot in the thorax and still go on to fight while bleeding out. Shouldn't many of those have gone into "temporary coma" from the "electrical shock wave" traveling through their rib cage to their spine and into their brain?
Click to expand...
Actually, I just went back to my other thread about bullet construction and @fordy just made a comment describing what sounds just like a prime example of such a "temporary coma". The animal he shot dropped from hydrostatic shock and laid there for a bit, but didn't experience enough blood loss to die before recovering and getting up and running off.
 
Petey308 said:
That's really hard to answer outright lol. They're both different. Hydrostatic shock is like an electrical impulse or shockwave. It's not really doing the actual wounding. It's just traveling through the animal to the spine and brain and through autonomic plexuses (nerve centers) to shut down the CNS. Hydraulic shock is what ultimately causes the wounding, and there's different levels of it. The way I think about them to remember which is which is to think static is like from radio waves (the shockwave) and hydraulic is fluid, so fluid and tissue displacement.

Ultimately both are dependent upon too many other factors to tie an exact velocity to them on when they occur. The bullet's construction/composition, how it transfers energy, impact velocity, shot placement, etc, etc will all determine if and how much of both things occur. You'll need more velocity with some bullet types, and less with others. Sometimes you don't get hydrostatic shock, or the shot is placed in an area it simply isn't sufficient enough to reach the nervous system sufficiently. You'll always get a degree of hydraulic shock though. Any amount of tissue and fluid displacement around an object going through a body will cause it. The more speed and disproportionate to original caliber size wounding caused by expansion of the projectile though, the more
overall hydraulic forces are created and the more ruptured tissues and wounding there is. That will again depend more on the bullet type and shot placement than a specific speed.

Does that answer your question?
Click to expand...
Ye Sir it does and I'm impressed with your answer and you are 100% correct, I was a hardcore cup and core guy and long story short I switched............ For a reason to Barnes which did quit well and now to Hammers, I'd really like to have a civil discussion without everyone saying I'm beating the Hammer drum if your up for it, if not I'll yield, No worries either way
 

Similar threads

Petey308
Bullet construction
11 12 13
Replies
172
Views
24K
haisardao
haisardao
Petey308
Selecting a Hunting Bullet
Replies
2
Views
12K
Petey308
Petey308
V
bullet ballistics
Replies
9
Views
2K
Mysticplayer
M
PA Plumber
280 AI : Any Down Side To Fire Forming With All Copper Bullets?
2 3 4
Replies
46
Views
5K
Alsealongrange
A
K
Copper and powder questions???
Replies
9
Views
2K
RidgeTop
RidgeTop

Recent Posts

Top