Recovered Barnes bullet

[RockyMtnMT]

The shape makes very little difference.

Tissue is disrupted two ways, by the shockwave of the impact at supersonic velocity and by the diameter of the bullet coming directly in contact with the flesh and bone.

Round or square or any other shape makes very little difference as long as the bullet passes through.

Did the girls bullets fail in our two examples? No, they both seem to have performed as intended, they just weren't placed properly to ensure a clean, quick, and humane kill and due to their designs shot placement has to be virtually perfect to ensure same.

This simply is not true. If this were the case a bullet design would have no effect on the bc.

Steve

 

[WildRose]

This simply is not true. If this were the case a bullet design would have no effect on the bc.

Steve

BC doesn't dictate how the bullet performs going through tissue.

You should quit while you're behind because right now you're just embarrassing yourself.

 

[bigngreen]

I've recovered hundred of Barnes bullets from deer and elk while running a processing shop and the OP's bullet is normal, I would not drop down for elk in weight, the dropping down in weight is utter baloney IMO, if it was an elk I'd say the 168 is not adequate especially having shot dozens of elk with the 168 and seeing way to many times it sucking! If you drive a Barnes way fast but you do not blow the petals of and you get the full expansion you end up with very low mass vs the frontal area and at that point penetration and bullet tracking becomes an issue, I've seen a number of 168 Barnes stop on an elk shoulder from a 300 WBY!
Of all the copper bullets I've shot the Hammer bullets do more actual wound channel damage than any other I've seen, I shot one through 4 feet of elk starting it of on the point of the shoulder and ending in the hip, it still did some impressive damage to the vitals compared to a Barnes, Cutting edge or any other copper bullet I've shot. I'm thinking the nose opening well and breaking away earlier creates a good shrapnel and bone cloud but getting rid of the over expanded front give the bullet a blunt front and it maintains some velocity and just messes up the core of an animal, it's like the mono version of a Partition only a sleeker design.

 

[bigngreen]

BC doesn't dictate how the bullet performs going through tissue.

You should quit while you're behind because right now you're just embarrassing yourself.

Don't tell me you didn't understand what Steve was saying

 

[RockyMtnMT]

BC doesn't dictate how the bullet performs going through tissue.

You should quit while you're behind because right now you're just embarrassing yourself.

You are just letting it go over your head. I can't fix stupid. But I will try one more time.

If the shape of the bullet is responsible for bc because of how it directs the shock wave and has less drag how does that not also happen in soft tissue? You have to actually use your brain and forget the wives tales you are relying on.

Steve

 

[toddc]

Air and animals are all more or less fluids. BC is a measure of how a bullet moves thru a fluid (Generally air). I would ASSume that the BC and shape of a object would in fact impact its travel and effect in any medium.

 

[toddc]

The shape makes very little difference.

Tissue is disrupted two ways, by the shockwave of the impact at supersonic velocity and by the diameter of the bullet coming directly in contact with the flesh and bone.

Round or square or any other shape makes very little difference as long as the bullet passes through.

Did the girls bullets fail in our two examples? No, they both seem to have performed as intended, they just weren't placed properly to ensure a clean, quick, and humane kill and due to their designs shot placement has to be virtually perfect to ensure same.

What if the bullet isn't supersonic?

 

[Pdvdh]

The banjo string is starting to sing out high tension!

Good to learn more on the performance of the Hammer bullets versus elk this season. Thanks for sharing Rhian.

 

[bigngreen]

The banjo string is starting to sing out high tension!

Good to learn more on the performance of the Hammer bullets versus elk this season. Thanks for sharing Rhian.

Actually put three bullets through two elk, one soft no bone hit behind the shoulder, one tucked tight to the shoulder with more meat contact and one shot through about as much elk bone as a guy can, 177 gr Hammers from a 28 Nosler.

 

[Pdvdh]

What twist rate barrel?

I thought you didn't like .284 calibers?

 

[toddc]

What twist rate barrel?

I thought you didn't like .284 calibers?

That's un American. Now I an see hating a 7mm but not a .284.
Heck I like em all.
Just take a 284 and add 54 and its a real caliber.

 

[bigngreen]

What twist rate barrel?

I thought you didn't like .284 calibers?

It's painful, I know but I had a #5 8.5 twist Rock Creek barrel sitting here and the way the season was going I though I may need some serious range, I was running the 177 Hammers inside 1000 and the 195 Berger beyond that.

 

[WildRose]

You are just letting it go over your head. I can't fix stupid. But I will try one more time.

If the shape of the bullet is responsible for bc because of how it directs the shock wave and has less drag how does that not also happen in soft tissue? You have to actually use your brain and forget the wives tales you are relying on.

Steve

Because as soon as it strikes the target the shape of the nose is going to deform.

What the BC of a bullet is before it strikes the target makes no difference whatsoever.

You can have a solid (ball ammunition or traditional military ball) that doesn't expand at all and an expanding bullet of the exact same BC and their effect on the target is going to be completely different.

The surface area of the expanding bullet increases dramatically and the shape changes as well and as a result the shockwaves of the two bullets will be completely different.

There's a reason the great powers of the world got together and decided that the use of expanding bullets by their militaries should be outlawed. Expanding bullets do far more damage than a non deforming bullet by design.

You really need to quit before doing your own reputation even more damage here.

 

[RockyMtnMT]

Because as soon as it strikes the target the shape of the nose is going to deform.

What the BC of a bullet is before it strikes the target makes no difference whatsoever.

You can have a solid (ball ammunition or traditional military ball) that doesn't expand at all and an expanding bullet of the exact same BC and their effect on the target is going to be completely different.

The surface area of the expanding bullet increases dramatically and the shape changes as well and as a result the shockwaves of the two bullets will be completely different.

There's a reason the great powers of the world got together and decided that the use of expanding bullets by their militaries should be outlawed. Expanding bullets do far more damage than a non deforming bullet by design.

You really need to quit before doing your own reputation even more damage here.

You actually don't get it. I thought you were a pretty knowledgeable guy. I always knew that you were here out of a vested interest in Perigrine bullets. That you were faking as though you were just a consumer that happened to find this bullet and for the sake of humanity just had to get the word out.

You are officially a fake and a troll.

Steve