The wound channel from a 77 grain .223 coming apart is so large that if it hits the lungs the animal is just as dead as if the wound channel is twice as large. When the lungs are destroyed, the animal dies. It isn't more dead.
-
If you are being asked to change your password, and unsure how to do it, follow these instructions. Click here
Neck Shot Disappointment
- Thread starter cantfixstupid
- Start date
Help Support Long Range Hunting Forum
Well in this case the wound channel was obviously not big enough to incapacitate the deer. A bigger bullet may have.
GDKinCO
Well-Known Member
I've had a few successful neck shot kills that hit the spine perfectly and had instant drops. I've had a few that were clean misses and occasionally got a follow up shot.
My last bull elk presented a neck shot only at 15 yards. I was using a rifle I hadn't hunted with in years - an early 1980s Savage 110 .308 with a Simmons 3x9 scope. The scope is mounted with low rings and I assumed I had a good idea of scope offset. I held at the top of the neck but not quite high enough. I ended up hitting vein/artery and windpipe and he went about 100 yards before he bled out and died. Left a blood trail that you could follow with your eyes closed. Got lucky, as this was close to a complete miss.
My last bull elk presented a neck shot only at 15 yards. I was using a rifle I hadn't hunted with in years - an early 1980s Savage 110 .308 with a Simmons 3x9 scope. The scope is mounted with low rings and I assumed I had a good idea of scope offset. I held at the top of the neck but not quite high enough. I ended up hitting vein/artery and windpipe and he went about 100 yards before he bled out and died. Left a blood trail that you could follow with your eyes closed. Got lucky, as this was close to a complete miss.
Sometimes things just don't work out. I shot a big whitetail buck with a .375 H&H and Nosler Partition (not really hunting deer, but couldn't pass it up). Perfect double lung. Golf ball size exit. He went over a hundred yards, the furthest any deer I've ever shot ran. Go figger.
memtb
Well-Known Member
With an oxygenated system…..muscles can maintain their functioning for several (possibly 10 seconds) seconds…..an inspired Whitetail can cover a lot of distance in a few seconds! memtb
Exactly. Any whitetail that drops within 150yds? I'm happy.
I removed the heart from a smallish black bear once with a 338 Win Mag from ~85yds. Bear still ran ~110yds. Bullet must have sucked the heart parts and pieces out the far side. Bullet struck where the heart should'a been. I opened him up and couldn't find anything that looked like a heart. Nothing at all.
Then he missed his small target. The size of devestation of the wound channel is about the same regardless of bullet, the difference is mostly in the total length of the wound channel. The diameter is going to be over 3 to 5 inches for match type "explosive" bullets I have experienced. Mono and bonded type are different, they are made for punching deep and breaking through bones, so their wound channel isn't as large.
Here, we are talking about a neck. Bullets penetrate a couple of inches at least before mushrooming or for match bullets—coming apart, big or small. Then, the jacket tears, separates, lead breaks and separates.
The first 6 -8 inches of wound channel are going to be pretty similar. The diameter of the wound channel between a 77 grain .223 and 180 grain .308 isn't going to be much at all. What, maybe two inches bigger in diameter? So in practical terms the .308 gives you an increased margin of error of 1"?
That is why in real world terms he most likely just missed his small target. Blaming the bullet construction or bullet size is easy and fuels the eternal debates. Bullet manufacturing and quality is such that blaming the bullet isn't productive, IMO.
Any hunting bullet is going to cause enough damage if you put it in the right place at the right velocity.
Ehh I have a 350 rem mag that would dispute that. Bigger caliber bigger hole.when a bullet mushrooms the larger frontal area creates a larger wound channel. 1" may have been difference between spine shot and meat shot. I mean theres a reason people dont shoot large caliber animals with small caliber bullets. Or at least they shouldnt. I have a grendel. Have killed with it. Much prefer a 7mm or 30 cal going 500-700 fps faster. Or even a .35 low sd bullet going 2800. Even a creed at 2900 with a 140 is better.
I don't have an opinion as to wether the OP should take neck shots or not.
Hell, half my deer have been neck shots because if they take 2 steps out of a sendero, you need a grapple to pull them out.
I would challenge anyone to shoot the same block of gel with a 6.5 Grendel at 2400~ fps MV and any 30 cal traveling at 2800~fps MV, check with a slow motion camera, and come back to say the wound channel is the same.
My 300wm has nearly double the energy as my 6.5cm at virtually the same speed(I don't own a Grendel).
You will be sorely mistaken to say the wound channel is anything near the same.
Hell, half my deer have been neck shots because if they take 2 steps out of a sendero, you need a grapple to pull them out.
I would challenge anyone to shoot the same block of gel with a 6.5 Grendel at 2400~ fps MV and any 30 cal traveling at 2800~fps MV, check with a slow motion camera, and come back to say the wound channel is the same.
My 300wm has nearly double the energy as my 6.5cm at virtually the same speed(I don't own a Grendel).
You will be sorely mistaken to say the wound channel is anything near the same.
FWIW - @hereinaz qualified it as "if impact velocity is the same"...
I know what he means. Different bullets do different things, but I've seen enough small caliber hits do fast kills and long death-runs from big magnums to know that bigger doesn't always mean more terminal performance. 
But I know what you mean too. 
Hey, its Thanksgiving - let's just go eat the turkey.
There is a lot of misconception about what makes a bullet lethal and what causes damage. I submit this article, among many others that provide more scientific approach to the "knockdown power". I used to be persuaded by old rules of thumb like "minimum energy" "larger frontal area" "sectional density" and others. I was confused by what all the people were arguing. I went to the experts who examine bullet wounds more than any hunters that only examine dead critters.
When it comes to the "better" caliber, you like the extra inch of potential wound channel. I agree that you get a little better margin of error when it comes to larger bullets. But, I like the smaller caliber because they are easier to shoot smaller groups out of a hunting rifle. At the range, group sizes are invariably smaller with smaller caliber bullets. And, in the field I see far more misses "over the back" with a magnum. That is why I always pitch for maximizing between bullet size and controllable recoil.
The "temporary cavitation" is 11 to 12.5 times larger than the caliber. So, at 11 times larger, a .223 is 2.453 and a 308 is 3.388 inches. That is only 1 inch total, so a larger caliber gets you .5 inches in margin of error on the edges. But, arguably controlling a magnum increases the margin of error by .5 inch.
I used to use gel as a comparison tool. But, after reading up on the scientific literature about wounds in flesh and carefully observing pictures, and my own experience, I stopped believing the old rules of thumb that refuse to die. The slow motion shot of a bullet in gel to gauge "wound channel" isn't effective or valid. Check out the studies above and you should understand the "wound cavity" you see in gel isn't what destroys tissue. Tissue is destroyed by pieces of the bullet traveling at high speeds through flesh. Gel is a poor gauge of what a wound channel will look like in flesh, unless you pay attention to where the shards of metal go. Just like the gel returns to its shape, so does most of the tissue in our bodies. The "wow" factor of temporary cavitation in slow motion doesn't really do much to flesh, muscle, intestines, most organs, etc. Just consider what it looks like in slow motion when a boxer gets punched. Liver, and kidneys really are the only soft tissue that are affected by temporary cavitation (except the brain that is trapped inside a contained space).
Bullets do the vast majority of their work when the lead, copper, or brass cut through tissue destroying it. The "shockwave" doesn't really cause lethal damage. But, it can "shock" the central nervous system temporarily like hitting the funny bone, but it isn't permanent damage. You have to sever the nerves physically. They will just stretch with the temporary cavitation.
I have shot critters with my 180 vld from 100 yards to 1100 yards. The only real difference was the size of final third of the "wound channel". At 100 yards there was enough force to blow out a softball sized chunk of offside lung. At 1100 yards some bullet pieces exited. But, there has always been practically no difference in the first 2/3 of the wound. Pictures provided by others look pretty much the same from similar bullets.
Similarly, the difference between a 77 grain and 180 grain at the same impact velocity is really just in the later part of the wound channel. When it comes to a difference between the physical damage by metal shredding flesh, the extra size of a .308 bullet won't be the difference between a living or dead critter if hit in a lethal spot.
The bullet creates a small hole in the first few inches, then it comes apart and the pieces shred flesh and tissue. A bullet like a Berger or ELDm scientifically cause more tissue damage than any other bullet when shot in the ribs through the lungs. Doesn't matter the size of the bullet, it really just matters whether it is going fast enough to deform the tip and tear the bullet apart.
All in all, that is a long explanation for my position, and anyone who wants to can spend the time in the scientific literature... That is my story and I am sticking to it.
Bottom line, the bullet has to be inside the lethal zone to kill. If the deer didn't die, it didn't land in the lethal zone.
WOUND BALLISTICS - Motion and Effects of Projectiles in the Human Body - White Mountain Forensic
Dr Andrew provides an evaluation of firearm Injuries, and the tissue damage associated with them. The damage caused by projectiles is a function of their kinetic energy, which is transferred to the victim on impact. The amount of energy that the projectile possesses is found in the following...
www.whitemountainforensic.com
When it comes to the "better" caliber, you like the extra inch of potential wound channel. I agree that you get a little better margin of error when it comes to larger bullets. But, I like the smaller caliber because they are easier to shoot smaller groups out of a hunting rifle. At the range, group sizes are invariably smaller with smaller caliber bullets. And, in the field I see far more misses "over the back" with a magnum. That is why I always pitch for maximizing between bullet size and controllable recoil.
The "temporary cavitation" is 11 to 12.5 times larger than the caliber. So, at 11 times larger, a .223 is 2.453 and a 308 is 3.388 inches. That is only 1 inch total, so a larger caliber gets you .5 inches in margin of error on the edges. But, arguably controlling a magnum increases the margin of error by .5 inch.
I used to use gel as a comparison tool. But, after reading up on the scientific literature about wounds in flesh and carefully observing pictures, and my own experience, I stopped believing the old rules of thumb that refuse to die. The slow motion shot of a bullet in gel to gauge "wound channel" isn't effective or valid. Check out the studies above and you should understand the "wound cavity" you see in gel isn't what destroys tissue. Tissue is destroyed by pieces of the bullet traveling at high speeds through flesh. Gel is a poor gauge of what a wound channel will look like in flesh, unless you pay attention to where the shards of metal go. Just like the gel returns to its shape, so does most of the tissue in our bodies. The "wow" factor of temporary cavitation in slow motion doesn't really do much to flesh, muscle, intestines, most organs, etc. Just consider what it looks like in slow motion when a boxer gets punched. Liver, and kidneys really are the only soft tissue that are affected by temporary cavitation (except the brain that is trapped inside a contained space).
Bullets do the vast majority of their work when the lead, copper, or brass cut through tissue destroying it. The "shockwave" doesn't really cause lethal damage. But, it can "shock" the central nervous system temporarily like hitting the funny bone, but it isn't permanent damage. You have to sever the nerves physically. They will just stretch with the temporary cavitation.
I have shot critters with my 180 vld from 100 yards to 1100 yards. The only real difference was the size of final third of the "wound channel". At 100 yards there was enough force to blow out a softball sized chunk of offside lung. At 1100 yards some bullet pieces exited. But, there has always been practically no difference in the first 2/3 of the wound. Pictures provided by others look pretty much the same from similar bullets.
Similarly, the difference between a 77 grain and 180 grain at the same impact velocity is really just in the later part of the wound channel. When it comes to a difference between the physical damage by metal shredding flesh, the extra size of a .308 bullet won't be the difference between a living or dead critter if hit in a lethal spot.
The bullet creates a small hole in the first few inches, then it comes apart and the pieces shred flesh and tissue. A bullet like a Berger or ELDm scientifically cause more tissue damage than any other bullet when shot in the ribs through the lungs. Doesn't matter the size of the bullet, it really just matters whether it is going fast enough to deform the tip and tear the bullet apart.
All in all, that is a long explanation for my position, and anyone who wants to can spend the time in the scientific literature... That is my story and I am sticking to it.
Bottom line, the bullet has to be inside the lethal zone to kill. If the deer didn't die, it didn't land in the lethal zone.
I'm not a scientist and I never slept with one at a holiday inn express. But I have killed an 18 wheeler load of critters over the years. If you think a 77 gr 223 has as much killing power as a 30 cal going the same speed, then as my granny used to say bless your heart. Have a great turkey day everybody.
Rich Coyle
Well-Known Member
Some of us use ignorant prejudice to support our claims. That way facts CAN'T get in the way.
Well that and about 150 dead deer. Do people elk hunt with 223's asking for a friend.Some of us use ignorant prejudice to support our claims. That way facts CAN'T get in the way.
