Forums
New posts
Search forums
What's new
Articles
Latest reviews
Author list
Classifieds
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles and first posts only
Search titles only
By:
New posts
Search forums
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Forums
Hunting
Long Range Hunting & Shooting
What hits harder?
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="blackco" data-source="post: 166916" data-attributes="member: 7356"><p>jwp475,</p><p>First, the computer I'm on won't show most pics (security stuff) I really wish I could see. I have a GOOD idea though.</p><p></p><p>I am positive you and I are talking about the exact same thing! I use "energy" for lack of a batter term. It's energy that's "crushing and destroying tissue." (well put) I shoot big revolvers also; not nearly as big or as much as you, darn :-( I remember reading something a long time ago about pistol bullets, I think from Kieth, supporting the "wide flat point" of hard cast SWC big-bore pistol bullets (that's all I shoot). It said people who shoot rifles want a bullet that expands, a 243 that expands to double its original caliber is great results; that's 48 caliber and a "wide flat point." Low and behold, that's exactly what you are shooting out of your 475's, not even what you are shooting from your 500, and just a little more than I get out of my 454. What you have in mass(weight) they make up for in velocity. The problem with velocity is it disapears FAST in big animals (don't shoot a bear with the 22-250). I am a big supporter of shooting big animals with big-bore revolvers; I REALLY want to shoot a buffalo with my Casull. Since your bullet is already expanded when it makes contact with the animal (wide flat point) it is immediatly transfering energy (energy dump) into the animal (crushing and destroying tissue) which causes the visual impact to the animal.</p><p></p><p>Your evidence from pistols proves what I was trying to say and pistols demonstrate it quite well; the shape of a pistol HUNTING bullet transfers the energy (energy dump) into the animal quickly while the weight of the pistol bullets pushes it all the way through the animal (perfect load for the animal). </p><p></p><p>As I read back through this I appologize if it sounds derogatory or like a flame, IT IS NOT IN ANY WAY MEANT THAT WAY!!! I agree 100% with what you said, I just hope I didn't fail misserably in conveying that. </p><p></p><p>Teutonic, you're dead balls on. If the animal is within the effective range of a slug (I have NO experience) that's a great choice. It's awful hard for an animal to go far with no front legs. That was also the shot of choice for many moose hunters in Alaska shooting 30-06. A round nose bullet through the shoulders anchored the animal, then they would finish it if necessary when they got up to it.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="blackco, post: 166916, member: 7356"] jwp475, First, the computer I'm on won't show most pics (security stuff) I really wish I could see. I have a GOOD idea though. I am positive you and I are talking about the exact same thing! I use "energy" for lack of a batter term. It's energy that's "crushing and destroying tissue." (well put) I shoot big revolvers also; not nearly as big or as much as you, darn :-( I remember reading something a long time ago about pistol bullets, I think from Kieth, supporting the "wide flat point" of hard cast SWC big-bore pistol bullets (that's all I shoot). It said people who shoot rifles want a bullet that expands, a 243 that expands to double its original caliber is great results; that's 48 caliber and a "wide flat point." Low and behold, that's exactly what you are shooting out of your 475's, not even what you are shooting from your 500, and just a little more than I get out of my 454. What you have in mass(weight) they make up for in velocity. The problem with velocity is it disapears FAST in big animals (don't shoot a bear with the 22-250). I am a big supporter of shooting big animals with big-bore revolvers; I REALLY want to shoot a buffalo with my Casull. Since your bullet is already expanded when it makes contact with the animal (wide flat point) it is immediatly transfering energy (energy dump) into the animal (crushing and destroying tissue) which causes the visual impact to the animal. Your evidence from pistols proves what I was trying to say and pistols demonstrate it quite well; the shape of a pistol HUNTING bullet transfers the energy (energy dump) into the animal quickly while the weight of the pistol bullets pushes it all the way through the animal (perfect load for the animal). As I read back through this I appologize if it sounds derogatory or like a flame, IT IS NOT IN ANY WAY MEANT THAT WAY!!! I agree 100% with what you said, I just hope I didn't fail misserably in conveying that. Teutonic, you're dead balls on. If the animal is within the effective range of a slug (I have NO experience) that's a great choice. It's awful hard for an animal to go far with no front legs. That was also the shot of choice for many moose hunters in Alaska shooting 30-06. A round nose bullet through the shoulders anchored the animal, then they would finish it if necessary when they got up to it. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Forums
Hunting
Long Range Hunting & Shooting
What hits harder?
Top