Since I dont see a terminal performance thread...

[WildRose]

From what we learned reading Steve's post the OP's friends 45-70 should have flattened that cow quicker. I agree with what Sreve wrote and this is why I wonder what happened with those 300gr .458 Leverevolution in that case. The bullets should have expanded as well as they should have there was plenty of velocity at that range. Even if the bullets never opened 3 would have been close to a 1.5 inch hole for blood to flow out of the system. That alone should have dropped blood pressure real fast and ended the matter.
I do not want to sound cruel but I personaly would like to have had more 300gr .458 bullets tested in this matter. That cow would be roughly the size of a big moose it would be nice to know which bullet to use for him.
I have loaded the Hornady 325gr levrevolutions in my 45-70 leaves me wondering now did I choose the right bullet.

Haven't shot any cows with it but in my SBL guide gun they are absolutely devastating on hogs exceeding even 450lbs at Sub 100yd ranges.

 

[RockyMtnMT]

I don't know that it should have flattened that cow quicker or not. Not sure how long it took him to shoot that many rounds. I wanted to stay out of the speculation of the test. I think this man had a sick cow and wanted to test out what he was about to hunt with and expected it to flatten the cow and be lights out at the shot. Being domestic and sick it just stood there and then he felt terrible about his decision to test on the cow and wanted it over and just kept shooting till she was down. Having grown up around live stock I am sure he was sick about it. The slow moving projectile just doesn't create the larger permanent wound channel that the higher vel impacts do. I think if this situation were in a hunting scenario many hunters would have watched the animal run off looking healthy and never even look to see what happened assuming they missed because the animal did not drop. But really it was good bullet performance and the animal bled out in about 10 seconds running full tilt and it made it 200y and died unrecovered. Too many hunting shows that only show the bang flops when reality is that is not how it always happens.

Steve

 

[jrsolocam]

I don't know that it should have flattened that cow quicker or not. Not sure how long it took him to shoot that many rounds. I wanted to stay out of the speculation of the test. I think this man had a sick cow and wanted to test out what he was about to hunt with and expected it to flatten the cow and be lights out at the shot. Being domestic and sick it just stood there and then he felt terrible about his decision to test on the cow and wanted it over and just kept shooting till she was down. Having grown up around live stock I am sure he was sick about it. The slow moving projectile just doesn't create the larger permanent wound channel that the higher vel impacts do. I think if this situation were in a hunting scenario many hunters would have watched the animal run off looking healthy and never even look to see what happened assuming they missed because the animal did not drop. But really it was good bullet performance and the animal bled out in about 10 seconds running full tilt and it made it 200y and died unrecovered. Too many hunting shows that only show the bang flops when reality is that is not how it always happens.

Steve

I believe Steve hit the nail on the head 100%. I didnt think this would start such an emotional reaction. I wanted to discuss the variables of terminal performance. I apologize to those i offended.

 

[desertcj]

"An exiting bullet is still doing damage to soft tissue. A slowing and stopped bullet no longer does damage. There is no such thing as an "energy dump". It is a marketing ploy."

I'm going to respectfully disagree on this point. An exiting bullet is no longer doing any damage to anything except what is beyond the animal. A bullet that has stopped inside is no longer doing any damage either, but it has already done all that it was capable of doing and the bullet that stopped inside DID display an "Energy dump"! All of the bullets energy was expended inside of the animal. The bullet with the pass through did NOT expend all of its energy inside the animal. I've killed critters both ways. They both work, but I believe the bullet that doesn't exit must hit harder.

 

[Wild Bill G]

You actually started a very interesting discusion jrsolocam. When it gets right down to how often do we really examine what the bullets we shoot do. Except for Steve creating deadly bullets is his living.
I took a close look one year when the CT150gr Nosler I shot did not perform the way I thought it should have. It was a 200yd shot on a broadside Whitetail buck. My load was 150gr CT out of my 280 Rem with a muzzle velocity of about 2800fps. The bullet never made it to the second lung and never hit the shoulder just skin and ribs. To say I was shocked would be a huge understatement. In my mind at least that bullet should have passed through or at least made it to the other side of the deer. Maybe I am wrong maybe that is how the bullet is to perform if it is it's not for me.

 

[jrsolocam]

Wild Bill, thanks. The guy who did this also has done many, many tests with boards and newspaper measuring penetration and retained weights. But like we both have experienced, sometimes **** happens, and we cant explain it. But the more research the better!

 

[Wild Bill G]

Yes and boards and news paper are not living creatures made of bones,skin and what not. It is hard to compare or say the two are the same.

 

[George Dean]

Modern tests on live beef confirmed the hypothesis.

Oh boy, here we go again. ;-)

I'm disappointed to read the condescension appearing here regarding this issue. I read the posts on this site for real world information, not to read nags. My sis sent me a key fob recently, as a gift. It is embellished with the following: I'm offended by the easily offended.

Please keep the informative post coming folks, for the ad hominem we can track social media or the MSM.

 

[RockyMtnMT]

"An exiting bullet is still doing damage to soft tissue. A slowing and stopped bullet no longer does damage. There is no such thing as an "energy dump". It is a marketing ploy."

I'm going to respectfully disagree on this point. An exiting bullet is no longer doing any damage to anything except what is beyond the animal. A bullet that has stopped inside is no longer doing any damage either, but it has already done all that it was capable of doing and the bullet that stopped inside DID display an "Energy dump"! All of the bullets energy was expended inside of the animal. The bullet with the pass through did NOT expend all of its energy inside the animal. I've killed critters both ways. They both work, but I believe the bullet that doesn't exit must hit harder.

You are correct. The bullet that stopped in the animal had no energy left and the bullet that exits has energy left. My point is that the bullet that stops does progressively less damage as it is slowing down to a stop. The bullet that deforms properly on impact and is displacing soft tissue as it travels displaces soft tissue all the way out in an overall larger permanent wound channel. Bullets do not have a set of brakes that they apply after they have passed the vital tissue. As I said earlier there is such a thing as shock that is a key player in terminal performance. This more an effect of impact velocity not energy. Energy is a pretty arbitrary stat that is good for comparing one carrtidge/bullet to another. I think we as hunters get caught up in the energy figure thinking it is more important than it really is. If two bullets of equal energy but different design are fired into a deer and one blows up on impact and barely gets into the onside lung dumping all of its energy will more than likely result in a poor ending. Compare that to a bullet that deforms on impact to the desired form and zips all the way through the deer putting a permanent wound through both lungs but putting much of its energy into the ground where it stops will end in a better way every time. This is a both ends of the spectrum comparison only to make the point that it is not the energy doing the damage. My point when I say that we are subject to marketing is that there is no science backing up the energy theory. What a bullet does on impact is a function of how fast it is going and how it is constructed. Bullets can not tell how far they have penetrated and then suddenly deform at just the right rate and know how far they must penetrate to reach a deep enough track to do damage to far side of the vital organs and then stop in the hide. We have been successfully marketed high fragmenting bullets through this notion that dumping energy is a good thing. The end result is we are using potentially a bullet if impacted at too high a vel may result in poor penetration. The high fragmenting bullet hits at the right vel and completely comes apart inside the vitals will have more potential for drt shock that shuts off the cns. Shock not energy causing this result. We have been working on a low weight retention bullet line that are calling the Dead Blow Hammer. They are designed to retain about 40%. So far the results have been very good. With the pure copper the shed pieces stay quite large and so far shown to also exit. This has shown more shock without the meat damage typical to high fragging lead bullets. Will get test results on elk soon.

Steve

 

[desertcj]

You are correct. The bullet that stopped in the animal had no energy left and the bullet that exits has energy left. My point is that the bullet that stops does progressively less damage as it is slowing down to a stop. The bullet that deforms properly on impact and is displacing soft tissue as it travels displaces soft tissue all the way out in an overall larger permanent wound channel. Bullets do not have a set of brakes that they apply after they have passed the vital tissue. As I said earlier there is such a thing as shock that is a key player in terminal performance. This more an effect of impact velocity not energy. Energy is a pretty arbitrary stat that is good for comparing one carrtidge/bullet to another. I think we as hunters get caught up in the energy figure thinking it is more important than it really is. If two bullets of equal energy but different design are fired into a deer and one blows up on impact and barely gets into the onside lung dumping all of its energy will more than likely result in a poor ending. Compare that to a bullet that deforms on impact to the desired form and zips all the way through the deer putting a permanent wound through both lungs but putting much of its energy into the ground where it stops will end in a better way every time. This is a both ends of the spectrum comparison only to make the point that it is not the energy doing the damage. My point when I say that we are subject to marketing is that there is no science backing up the energy theory. What a bullet does on impact is a function of how fast it is going and how it is constructed. Bullets can not tell how far they have penetrated and then suddenly deform at just the right rate and know how far they must penetrate to reach a deep enough track to do damage to far side of the vital organs and then stop in the hide. We have been successfully marketed high fragmenting bullets through this notion that dumping energy is a good thing. The end result is we are using potentially a bullet if impacted at too high a vel may result in poor penetration. The high fragmenting bullet hits at the right vel and completely comes apart inside the vitals will have more potential for drt shock that shuts off the cns. Shock not energy causing this result. We have been working on a low weight retention bullet line that are calling the Dead Blow Hammer. They are designed to retain about 40%. So far the results have been very good. With the pure copper the shed pieces stay quite large and so far shown to also exit. This has shown more shock without the meat damage typical to high fragging lead bullets. Will get test results on elk soon.

Steve

Sounds a lot like the Lehigh Defense controlled chaos? Sounds good either way and I think we are basically on the same page. I do like the mono/copper bullets fyi.

I will still say that bullets DO have brakes and those brakes are called expansion. When a bullet fragments and does not pass through, I'm going to have to say that yes, that bullet did in fact "Throw on the brakes" and all energy that bullet had went into the animal. I saw this first hand a few weeks ago while Antelope hunting. My buddy double lunged a buck at 325yds with a 7mm mag 150gr trophy copper. 7mm entrance, quarter size exit....300yd recovery. I made a poor hit with my .243(105gr HPBT) due to wind and a walking animal that was 6" high and 6" back...did not exit. Animal dropped in its tracks! Found the jacket under the hide on the far side. "Energy dump"....

 

[jrsolocam]

Yes and boards and news paper are not living creatures made of bones,skin and what not. It is hard to compare or say the two are the same.

Yes, wood and paper are not good examples, but thats what we have. Fwiw the Hornady SST is the toughest bullet he has tested.

 

[HARPERC]

..........You are correct. The bullet that stopped in the animal had no energy left and the bullet that exits has energy left..........We have been working on a low weight retention bullet line that are calling the Dead Blow Hammer. They are designed to retain about 40%. So far the results have been very good. With the pure copper the shed pieces stay quite large and so far shown to also exit..........Steve

While there are variables, generally I don't believe the energy left in an exiting bullet represents enough energy to mean anything.

Looking forward to the Dead Blow arrival, 40% retention is OK for my use, but generally I start with a heavy for caliber option.....

I haven't figured out a way to ask the question to my satisfaction, but I'll take a stab at it. In .30 caliber bullets run from roughly 130-200 grains. Your thoughts on how much rear section of the bullet needs to be retained to continue on in a meaningful way?

 

[Wanfalt1]

Didn't intend to denigrate this site. This site is an abnormal one, in the positive sense. Most hunters would benefit from some time on this site. Having said that, there seems to be more eagerness here today to correct, critique, and call out other posters than there was a few years ago when I was on more frequently. The art of polite, constructive criticism is one we shouldn't let die. I made my attempt. I think I'll leave this discussion with you all. Have a good one.

This is not fair to you. Sounds like people that have never killed a domestic animal. We are really lucky to have the bullets / broadheads we have. Sometimes it goes really well and sometimes it doesn't. I am sure that some of the flames come from people that have never found their critter. If you have never made an animal suffer you haven't hunted much. No one does it intentionally. Unless they are bad people. You feel really bad but you move on. In my opinion you are trying to educate. Anyone trying to make you feel bad should be ashamed. I thank you for your courage. Sincerely!!! My name is on my profile

 

[desertcj]

I know you were asking a specific person...My opinion is approximately 50gr....