I began to enter this under the thread of anealled nose .44's, but thought I'd better start a new thread. *

This might ruffle some feathers, but here it comes anyway.

When the subject of expanding bullets comes to mind, we think of the "classic hydrostatic shock" that was espoused by Roy Weatherby and Jack O'Connor during the golden years of magnumania, which we seem to now be revisiting.

When we speak of expanding handgun bullets, here too the idea of all bullet energy being "dumped" in our game animal by the expanding bullet when it doesn't exit, therefore we haven't wasted the energy and we have perfect performance... is hogwash!

Here's why, too much energy is used in "deforming the bullet", something these expert ballisticians and armchair theorists seem to overlook. * It take energy to deform that bullet! *These guys talk about all the energy dumped into the critter they are shooting, but the fact remains that the energy DOES NOT ALL GET DUMPED!

Ever try to deform a bullet so that it looks like the "classic mushroom" by putting it in a vice and pounding on it with a hammer? * If not you should sacrafice one bullet just to say you have... it takes a LOT OF ENERGY to deform that pill! *

Now, energy is energy, and when that bullet leaves the bore, it only has so much energy imparted to it. *Some of that energy is lost in flight by friction, the resistance to flight by our atmosphere.

Also, some of that energy is naturally lost on the animal in question as the bullet penetrates bone and flesh. * <span style='color:maroon'>But, the bulk of that energy is used to deform the bullet!</span> *That's right, not dumped on the game animal, but in the simple deformation of the bullet! *As you deformed that expanding bullet in the vise with your hammer, did you feel the bullet? *Notice how warm it became? *That is a result of the resistance to deformation, but we all know that it takes energy to heat something... right? *Where did the energy come from to deform the bullet and to make it warm up? *From the hammer you used to hit it!

Now, using this same information and applying it to the bullet penetrating the game animal we are harvesting, what is going on? *A huge percentage of the available energy is being used to deform that expanding bullet! *The game animal isn't contributing to that energy, it is merely providing the necessary resistance for the expansion to take place! *If the energy is being used to deform the bullet, then also, the heating factor, discovered in our vise/hammer experiment is also happening... all consuming energy! *

Now, having said all of this, do you really think, from a logical and realistic point of view that all the energy expended was really spent on the game animal? *Absolutely not!

As an extreme example of this, a friend of mine Peter Thorniley, the originator of the Thorniley Stopping Power Formula, was speaking to me on Christmas Day about a deer he had harvested.

He shot a smallish Oregon blacktail buck, at 40 yards with his .300 Weatherby MKV using an Alred Bonded Core 220 grain bullet at something over 3200 fps. *A frontal shot, and the bullet lodged in an off side hindquarter. *

Now, for the rest of the story... the deer never flinched! *It turned 90 degrees and ran full tilt for 80 yards! *The bullet was the &quot;classic mushroom&quot; when recovered, and retained 90+% of its original weight, yet failed to even knock down a peacefully feeding 120 pound class deer!

We compute the energy available here, and it is staggering... what happened? *I simply propose that it is a very extreme example of what I just outlined above! *The energy necessary to massively deform that extremely tough Alred Bonded Core Bullet probably nearly exhausted what was available to it! *If not, wouldn't you think that little blacktail deer would have done a backwards cartwheel with all the available energy &quot;dumped&quot; in it?

Yes this is but one example, and an extreme one that has made me consider this theory over the years... although I have no quantitative way making measurements of energy to prove it, I thought I would share it as my very biased opinion!

Thanks for taking the time to read my thoughts!

God Bless,

Marshall

Excellent points Marshall.

From a handgun standpoint, I have read more than one gun writer stating that you needed the bullet to mushroom and stay inside the animal so it could dump all it's energy on the animal. Idealy, lodging under the skin on the off side. This is a TALL order to say the least.

First off, a handgun will never compare to a high intensity rifle cartridge as to energy and hydrostatic shock affect. When I was thinking of getting into handgun hunting in the mid to late 80's, I spent more time fretting and sweating over trying to find the ideal jacketed bullet to accomplish this. It shot my confidence to crapola.

I then happened on the writings of Verl Smith. At the time he advocated &quot;small mushrooms&quot; with his soft-nosed lead bullets. This evolved into wide meplat handgun bullets and what really controlled wound diameter.

Since then, in using the calibers over 35, I subscribe to the full penetration school of thought and go for the largest wound diameter and fastest bleed out possible. I now handgun hunt with complete confidence and know if I do my part, the bullet will take care of the rest.

I also don't feel it's really necessary to have cylinder bulging loads in our revolvers to get the job done.

Thankfully too, the LBT designs are living on here as Verl was a pioneer in this respect.

Marshall and Friends of the Forum....The one thing about this forum is IT MAKES US THINK! Again..I am impressed by this &quot;THINK TANK&quot;! Remember that the &quot;eggheads&quot; say that a bumblebee does not have the wing surface vs bsats per minutes vs body weight to fly!
A few things to throw in..it appears that Hydrostatic happens only when bullet is (or remains) above the speed of sound @ a given elavation/temp. Next.. We did prove that an non-expanding bullet lost velocity, but no weight, passing through the test material. We also proved that by enlarging the meplat of the bullet it lost more velocity. My question is..if it lost velocity, it lost energy...where did it go?
Not in deformation.
I, like the rest, feel that a large wound channel( all the way through) and deep penetration is best! Remember that Taylor's formula was about full patch roundnose bullets!
Here's a formula to play with...Sectional Density x (Meplat x Meplat)x velocity.
Marshall..I've got to think about all this awhile!
Best Regards from to Hammock....James &nbsp;

Mr. Gates,

You are most certainly correct about the energy transferrd by both the full patch bullets and the flat meplat bullets in the tests you did with the gelatine blocks!

My post is only meant to stimulate the synaptic receptors! &nbsp;In regard to &quot;energy dump&quot; of EXPANDING bullets. &nbsp; Obviously the bullets will impart a portion of their energy into the target, but disproportionately so by measurement when figuring in the expanding bullet and the energy it consumes being deformed. &nbsp;

Besides, I like stirring the pot!

Blessings to you my friends,

Marshall

I've played both sides of this question. When I shot a ground hog with a 100 grain Speer hollow point out of a 25-06, if I held him right I could see daylight thru him or shake him and he's sound like a half full thermos. Then there's shooting a whitetail with a 105 .243 round nose from Speer and there would be little hole on my side and a big hole on the other side. Shot one in the neck and it removed a whole vertibre out the other side.
Then I got bit by the big bullet bug. A 445 grain 45-70 slug out of a Siamese Mauser, some where around 2,00 fps does a fine job on deer, turkeys, the odd grouse, and a ground hog.
The big hole going in and all the way thru lets the air in real fast. One of my hunting buddies is of the mind that it's getting lots of air in the animal quickly the brings them down fast.
I think that hitting the animal with something that creates a large hole all the way thru, busting up any bones on the way thru is the best and most humane way to kill.
Jim

I agree that energy dump is kind of a mystical thing. &nbsp;Sometimes you see it work with fantastic results. &nbsp;For example, high velocity .22 caliber bullets SOMETIMES can make &quot;hit by a lightning bolt&quot; kills on deer sized game and smaller. &nbsp;Other times a .300 Weatherby won't stop an antelope in its tracks. &nbsp;Why? &nbsp;I don't know and I don't really care. &nbsp;What I do know is that my .45-70 with 400 gr. cast bullets at 1900 fps. ALWAYS will drop any deer in my area when shot through the shoulders. &nbsp;The deer may not DIE immediately but it always stops. &nbsp;It physically cannot continue to move. &nbsp;No hydraulic shock, no hydrostatic shock, no energy dump. &nbsp;Just simple, bone breaking penetration. &nbsp;The wound channel created by the wide meplat is just icing on the cake. &nbsp;My opinion on bullet energy and other such matters is that it is Man's innate desire to predict inherently variable outcomes by quantifying everything in life into little formulas. &nbsp;This is fine until he begins to substitute formulas for real world results. &nbsp;Wide meplat hard cast bullets negate variability. &nbsp;Just my opinion.

Thanks Marshall,

I have had this very discussion with a couple of outdoors writers who apparently kill their deer with a word processor. &nbsp;Energy dump is not mystical, it is mythical. &nbsp;I have killed a little over 100 deer with with a broad range of calibers and conditions. &nbsp;Based on my experiences I have found the only way to kill an animal is severe hemorraging. &nbsp;The only way to surely stop an animal is to overload/destroy the nervous system or breakdown the support(skeletal) system beyond function. &nbsp;The &quot;bolt of lightning&quot; hits on small vermin spoken of earlier is simply a matter of extreme overmatching of bullet to game.

As I said, my opinions stated here are the result of skinning out a lot of dead animals.

Well, Boys..I didn't just get off the boat either! Let's put this thing in focus! All these formulas and tests do not tell anything about how well a bullet kills. If it's dead from a .257 Roberts or a .45-70 it's still dead! All have opinions, and opinions are like rearends--We all have one..and there's nothing unique about either. What we do know is..some tests can show one bullet's shape, and style,
against another bullet's shape or style performance-wise. It was obvious in our tests that a large meplat on a non-expanding bullet performed bettter than a roundnose. However these were tests on bullet vs bullet.The dicussions of Hyper-velocity vs. Heavy bullet is &quot;old hat&quot; and will go on as long as hunters pull triggers. It's kinda like..years ago Col. Townsend Whelen, John Olin (owner of Winchester-Western), Warren Page, and all of the WW sales force were at Stan &amp; Biggie's place in St. Louis. We had a &quot;newbie&quot; on the sales force, who wanted to say something important. He asked the Col.-&quot;Col.,I understand you still shoot a Highwall in .30-40 Krag...Why don't you switch to a .30-06, since it's 24% more power?&quot; The Col. light his pipe slowly, turned to the &quot;newbie&quot; and said, &quot;You know I would, but I've never killed anything 123% dead&quot;...Finus &quot;newbie&quot;
So..Let's look at various test and see if anything new comes up, however most of the time it just shows what we alresdy knew..Like Little Redding said..&quot; We will never cease exploration, and having explore all, we will find we have return to whence we began, and know it for the first time!
Best Regards from The Hammock....James

Well, Boys..I didn't just get off the boat either! Let's put this thing in focus! All these formulas and tests do not tell anything about how well a bullet kills. If it's dead from a .257 Roberts or a .45-70 it's still dead! All have opinions, and opinions are like rearends--We all have one..and there's nothing unique about either. What we do know is..some tests can show one bullet's shape, and style,
against another bullet's shape or style performance-wise. It was obvious in our tests that a large meplat on a non-expanding bullet performed bettter than a roundnose. However these were tests on bullet vs bullet.The dicussions of Hyper-velocity vs. Heavy bullet is &quot;old hat&quot; and will go on as long as hunters pull triggers. It's kinda like..years ago Col. Townsend Whelen, John Olin (owner of Winchester-Western), Warren Page, and all of the WW sales force were at Stan &amp; Biggie's place in St. Louis. We had a &quot;newbie&quot; on the sales force, who wanted to say something important. He asked the Col.-&quot;Col.,I understand you still shoot a Highwall in .30-40 Krag...Why don't you switch to a .30-06, since it's 24% more power?&quot; The Col. light his pipe slowly, turned to the &quot;newbie&quot; and said, &quot;You know I would, but I've never killed anything 123% dead&quot;...Finus &quot;newbie&quot;
So..Let's look at various test and see if anything new comes up, however most of the time it just shows what we alresdy knew..Like Little Redding said..&quot; We will never cease exploration, and having explore all, we will find we have return to whence we began, and know it for the first time!
Best Regards from The Hammock....James

This is just too tasty to pass it by. &nbsp;You see, I started reading all about guns &amp; bullets &amp; penetration &amp; such in the early 70's. &nbsp;From those who purported to represent truth. I heard all about minimum energy to kill a deer (1000 ft lbs), using all the energy inside the animal, faster is always better, 1:38&quot; twist will not stabilize heavy bullets and on and on. &nbsp;Over the last 10 years I have been slowly unlearning all the garbage that was (and still is in some cases) for sale at the newstand. &nbsp;There were are are a few good writers but the key word is few.

Personally, I have this theory of how the truth got so ignored. &nbsp;It was like a couple of narcotics. &nbsp;About a hundred years ago, our forefathers smelled smokeless powder and lusted after jacketed bullets. &nbsp;Just like a drug addict, all good sense went out the window. &nbsp;Everything was about speed, speed and more speed. &nbsp;Momentum picked up (though the opposite was happening to the bullets) until sillyness became the truth. &nbsp;

It seems that we are just now picking up where we left off a hundred years ago for both rifles and handguns. &nbsp;There are exceptions to that of course, but pretty few. &nbsp;It is good that men like Veral Smith and Marshall Stanton keep shouting the truth until it is heard. &nbsp;For example, can anybody understand why it took so long for the advantages of flat nosed bullets to be seen over round nosed bullets (I know that this is mostly an issue since we started either hardening lead bullets or putting jackets on them). &nbsp;

Yes sir, give me big, deep, through and through holes. &nbsp;Give enough velocity to make the hole with accuracy. &nbsp;Then buy a bigger freezer! &nbsp;

Thank you Marshall for stirring things up. &nbsp;One of our greatest challenges both in this context and in life in general (pardon my soapbox) is to find the truth and stick to it. &nbsp;Thanks.

God bless.................... &nbsp;Bill M

Excellent thread, and certainly proves the point that since no two animals are the same or will react the same after being shot, it's best to go with a weapon that will give you the greatest chance of recovery in as many situations as possible. &nbsp;A 100 grain jacketed bullet at 3000 fps will certainly be effective on a deer struck broadside through the lung/heart area, but would you like that same bullet when presented with a facing shot?

I also have been on the broad, cast bullet wagon for a few years now. &nbsp;There are some good jacketed handgun bullets out there, the Nosler Partition being one of the better. &nbsp;But, for ALL possible circumstances it seems tough to beat the &quot;punch a big hole on both sides&quot; concept. &nbsp;I've also shot a fair number of deer with a bow and arrow, and the same concept applies there. &nbsp;No arrow is going to kill by shock, but it will cut a good hole and bleed it out. &nbsp;Now if the hole is on both sides, it just helps with the tracking.............

Here are the addresses of two interesting articles on this subject. Both are quite long.

http://www.pbs.org/weta/thewest/wpages/wpgs650/buffalo.htm

* The memoirs of an old buffalo hunter. Some information on the old Sharps rifles and how they killed.


http://ulfhere.freeyellow.com/ballistics/wounding.html
*
* The strong opinions of a &quot;Ballistics Engineer&quot; (?). This one should start a few fights.

Bye
Jack

Matt,

The small mushroom theory that Veral Smith subscribed to with his earlier soft noses was based on the Nosler partition concept. A soft front that mushrooms immediately with the rear most area of the bullet that stays intact (partition). If the front portion is even torn off, the rear portion powers on through being essentailly a wadcutter.

Now we are just using the rear portion concept with the wide flat nosed slugs we use today in the bigger calibers.

Marshall has some great writings with the 30 calibers and soft noses.

I read the story about the Buffalo Hunter and enjoyed it very much. &nbsp;Then I attempted to read the balistics article. &nbsp;I am currently half way through it and I have a headache. &nbsp;Where is my Excedrins?

From what I have read so far, it comes down to what Keith said: &nbsp;Big Flat Bullet going fairly fast = end of situation and / or meat on table.

Hey, Hey way to stir things up Marshall! Well as long as everyone else is contributing......here goes my pennies worth. All this talk about energy, expansion, theories, etc. dosent mean squat. All it does is get your brain hurting trying to figure out an answer that is so simple. An animal dies, or a human for that matter, from one of two things ...Blood loss or a central nervous system shutdown, Period. How you cause that is very subjective. A .458 Winchester Magnum with a wide meplat bullet shot full length through an elk will kill it. Guaranteed! BUT will it drop immediatly, maybe, maybe not. But a .223 through his brain will drop him in his tracks! Guaranteed! So what did we learn? That the .458 Winchester Magnum is not adequate for elk? No. Is the .223 the best elk caliber in the world? No. It only worked because the &nbsp;central nervous system was shut down!!! Given enough time the elk would have expired with the .458 because of a severe loss of blood pressure. Now, the bigger the hole you make and the number of holes you make contribute to this rapid drop in blood pressure, thats where the LBT's come in. They make a large hole going in and coming out which makes the blood pressure drop quicker, Correct!
Lets pretend a minute. Lets say you have a Buck Rogers ray gun. And this ray gun has a dial that you can adjust to make your ray any diameter you want from .22 cal all the way up to 3&quot; Which one of these diameters is going to cause the quickest drop in blood pressure. If you said the .22 cal you need to shut this computer down and go back to watching Sponge Bob Square Pants on the T.V. I think you all get my drift on this subject. Large hole, complete penetration, rapid blood loss, freezer full.
End of Surmon

God Bless

Chris

Preach on brother! &nbsp;That's right with what I was saying earlier.

The only thing that's &quot;mythical&quot; about &quot;energy dump&quot; *--- *is that it's not mythical. *----- *It's just that there are a lot of VARIABLES. *----- *There are variables within and without the target/carcas/animal; *--- *internal (wound) ballistics, external projectile ballistics, -- the &quot;wizardry&quot; of propulsion, etc. etc. * ----- * Certain COMBINATIONS produce an optimum killing and /or stopping power, that appears to be superior to others that; have the same MV, or SD and MV, or jacket thickness or bullet construction *-- *or any other COMBINATION of variables. -- *But the trap in perception, here is that almost everyone puts blinders on and tries to think in a linear way; in terms of one or more of these -- ( i.e. tunnel vision). * -- * Ideal &quot;energy dump&quot; is when a bullet expends all of it's energy inside the target, and just barely pops out on the other side (leaving an entrance and an exit hole). *-- But that says nothing about the wound channel, and/or WHERE most of the energy was &quot;dumped&quot;. *--- *And all of that, does not explain why some &quot;mythical&quot; cartridge/bullet combinations, kill, stop, clobber, thump; -- better than others. *--- The ultimate answer lies in so many variables and thousands of combinations of those variables as to defy easy formulization. *----- *Better to study FIELD RESULTS (the bigger the data base, the better); -- especially in terms of the specific animal you plan to hunt, * --- *and forget about &quot;mythical&quot; concepts like &quot;energy dump&quot; * (which entail a million variables). * ---- *I like straightforward PRACTICAL concepts like the legendary &quot;Use Enough Gun&quot; *--- &quot;Legendary&quot; is better than &quot;Mythical&quot;. * * *---------- MMCOUGAR.

I stand by my earlier post as to &quot;energy dump&quot;. *To answer your question, most of the energy goes into deforming the bullet. *Many people seem to confuse the idea of energy and work. *If my 260 grain JSP Freedom Arms factory load was to impart all its 2200 foot pounds of energy into a 150 pound deer, it would be moved several feet in a direction. This is work, also known as the energy dump. &nbsp;Anyone who has shot animals in the field knows that this does not happen except in the case of extremely overmatching bullet to quarry, i.e. prarie dog shooting. &nbsp;*We are in agreement on the use enough gun. *Energy dump in my opinino is just a term that gun writers use whislt killing game with their word processors and not their firearms. *

(Edited by MS Hitman at 6:37 pm on Jan. 17, 2001)

*--- *MS HITMAN *--- *I agree, I agree. --- *&quot;Energy Dump&quot; is kind of an abstract and theoretical consideration in the (practical) business of hunting. *---- *It surely exists, - *it is quantifiable; - *an expert with a specialty in internal ballistics can reduce it to math, and can show it graphically in controlled mediums (like gelatin blocks), etc. etc. *----- *But when you introduce the other Variables found in the field; and in the animal, and in the CIRCUMSTANCES of &quot;the shot&quot;, -- it becomes pretty theoretical. * --- *There was a time early in the evolution of jacketed handgun bullets, -- when energy dump was a big topic in defense handgun work (and in law enforcement). *-- *But it was discussed so intensely, because they didn't have well designed jacketed bullets that opened up reliably, and resulted in &quot;energy dump&quot;. *-- *Almost all magnum bullets &quot;shot through&quot; with lots of steam left. *--- *This terrified police departments and agencies with the specter of innocent bystanders, down-range, being hit; (and well it should have). *--- *It was a highly relevant concept in that context; -- *but actually, &quot;energy dump&quot; just became a buzz-word to ask the questions; -- does the round have a good chance of transferring all of that energy into the target, to stop the undesired behavior (usually shooting at the Officer) -- and will it overpenetrate and harm someone down range - ?? *----- *In the Hunting arena, I don't think it's that important a concept. *---- * Better to read up on what works well for what you want to hunt; *-- *gather all the info. you can via cartridge manufacturers, experienced hunters; and most important, expand your own experience. *--- *You have to decide what CIRCUMSTANCES you want to give top priority to; *-- *e.g. are you interested in stopping an adrenaline filled Bear, in full charge - ? *-- *or are you going Bear Hunting - ? * *----- *Do you want your .45-70 or .458 to shoot through for maximum PENETRATION AND BONE-BREAKING (from any angle) or do you want maximum shock and disruption in the vital organs on a heart-lung shot - ? * ----- * When you decide your PRIORITIES; -- *then, how much &quot;penetration&quot; vs. how much shock (&quot;energy dump&quot;), and how deep inside you want that dump to occur, becomes a usefull concept. * ---------- * * MMCOUGAR.

Energy alone will not stop or kill any creature by itself in almost all circumstances. For example, I'm confident many of us have been hit with a baseball. If you just consider the amount of energy you absorb by that thrown baseball, then you've just been hit with the equivalent of a .45ACP or better. But unless you're unfortunate enough to have been hit in the head and not wearing a batting helmet, then most likely you aren't dead or hospitalized. That's because the energy wasn't directed to a vital spot, nor did it penetrate to reach vital places. The same can be said for bullets and game or miscreants. Unless the blow can be well-placed, it matters little what one shoots. Your game will get away. Or in the case of anti-personnel defense, your attacker may still be able to inflict a dangerous blow to you. Either way, accurate placement is arguably THE key component to clean kills or &quot;one shot stops.&quot; This is a lesson on which I think we all agree.

The small blacktail stopping the .300 Magnum/220 is quite interesting. I don't think any of us can explain it. If you hunt long enough, such oddities will happen. But that doesn't mean a .300/220 still isn't pretty darn good medicine for elk, big bears or lion. Nor does it mean all those deer taken every year by .243/100's, .257/117's and .270/130's are less dead. In the vast majority of similar cases, I think blacktail hunters would be far better armed with one of the latter cartridges than a .300 Magnum and stoutly-constructed 220's. If anything can be learned from that incident it's that this particular Alred Bonded Core bullet didn't penetrate very well. That long 220 should still be going after full penetration of a 120 lb. deer!

Well!....We have really wrung out this subject! I think what kicked this all off was my past post on Energy Deposit. Before we go any further let me clarify a couple of things..First, this was not done by, what some people refer to as &quot;armchair Ballistic People&quot;. Second, It was the FIRST test of this kind and my others pick it up and applied it to their beliefs. Third, there was Energy Deposited in the test medium, whatever form it was, I did not say! My only statement was, &quot;I think these test should have some bearing also on THIN SKIN game. If the velocity is high enough, and the bullet shape (meplat) is correct and hard, the ED will be high and have complete penetration&quot; I still hold to this statement. my next statement was, &quot;For thick - skin heavy game we still need the heavyweights for breaking bones, etc.&quot; I still hold to that statement. No one has been able to nail down just what is &quot;Killing Power&quot; on live animals because no two shots/game are, and never will be, the same. I have, and had, friends for the past 30 years that were on both sides of the Velocity of Bullet vs Mass of the Bullet
arguement. After looking at it and listening to all their statements, and these were not &quot;Armchair Ballistic&quot; people it appears that it's all based on the mid point at .35 caliber, with some overlapping there. Below .35 calibre the High velocity boys dwell and Above .35 caliber the big heavy bullet boys dwell. There are exceptions, but more or less the rule.I find myself putting the .35 caliber at the point I change from one to the other. My favorites are: 22-250, 257 Improved Roberts (and .25 Improved Krag), .280 Remington, .30.06 Spring. Then in middle ground: .35 Remington and .35 Whelen, The on the heavy side: .35 Winchester (obsolete, but great), .405 Winchester (obsolete, but great), .44 Mag.(both rifle and pistol), .45-70, and .458x2&quot; American. I am also leaning toward the .444 Marlin, but have ,as of yet, owned one. This does not mean that there are not other truly great cartridges, just those I have always enjoyed. I hunted in Europe with the .30-06 Spring.with 180 gr bullets at 2700 fps and never felt under-gunned. However, there were some hogs over there I would have liked to have the .458x2&quot; American!
Best Regards from The Hammock....James &nbsp;

Mr. Gates makes some excellent points, as always. Many &quot;gun nuts,&quot; and I use that term in its most friendly way, go overboard in cartridge selection. If truth were told we could be very happy hunting all God's creatures with cartridges that saw first light around the turn of the Twentieth century. A .30-06, .303 British, or .405 Winchester can do as well or better today than when first chambered. Isn't that a marvelous link to the past? That's one of the reasons I love levers and single shots, the history.

But that doesn't mean we don't have some grand
&quot;newcomers&quot; as well. *The .257 Roberts, .270 Winchester, .338-06, and others all deserve accolades.

Yet all must be used for the proper game. Mr. Gates' mid-point of .35 caliber is a good place to start. Most cartridges below the .338/.35 threshold are best against non-dangerous game under 600 lbs. or so live weight. Above that mark and you can start thinking about bigger critters that bite back or are exceedingly large. The .257 isn't any more suited to elk or moose than the .375 H&amp;H to woodchucks. If we all appreciate our vast selection of game cartridges for what they're best at, we'll be a very happy and well-fed lot.

Bill...I think you hit the nail precisely on the head and help bring this matter in focus! I left out a couple of &quot;greats&quot; that some of my friends like....338-06 &amp; .30-338
As time goes by and the forum grows. we will be getting some
shooters that believe that hyper-velocity is the answer to all things...&quot;will not rip, ravel, run down at the heels, and make child birth a pleasure!&quot;....So, if they go off on a tangant, we can say like Bill Jorden would say to Elmer Keith...&quot;Now....Elmer!&quot;
Best Regards from The Hammock......James

&nbsp; --- &nbsp; James Gates &nbsp; ---- &nbsp;(Adding to your last post) &nbsp; And having mentioned Elmer Keith; -- [my favorite all-time gun mentor] &nbsp;-- &nbsp;(with linkage back to our topic of &quot;Energy Dump&quot;), &nbsp;-- &nbsp;least we forget, - Elmer liked shoulder shots to anchor game with &nbsp;-- &nbsp;and thus picked up the best of both worlds, &nbsp;-- &nbsp;bullet/cartridge combinations that would break heavy shoulder bones with authority &nbsp;- (e.g. .333 OKH, - fore-runner of the .338) -- &nbsp;and also, bullets that had the INTEGRITY to penetrate deeply AFTER breaking heavy bone ! &nbsp;--- &nbsp;Very importantly, Elmer thought that a &nbsp;MINIMUM Sectional Density should start at .270 ; --- &nbsp; that speaks volumes as to how and where Elmer thought the energy should be &quot;dumped&quot; &nbsp;--------------- &nbsp; &nbsp;MMCOUGAR.

I stayed out of the thread for this long because I didn't really know how to broach the subject. Before I continue I want it to be known that I subscribe to both theories depending on caliber similarly to James.

I'd like to hash out the hyper-velocity (HV) .17 Rem. (4100+ fps muzzle). Those that haven't seen what this little needle launcher will do on suitable game are in for a treat. Sorry, no cast bullets, just jacketed. The bullets don't appear to expand, they totally shatter, in tests I've never found anything bigger than 1/16&quot; pieces. It's just a hunch, possibly someone more versed in Physics will know, but I suspect the reason the HV .17s are so deadly is because it takes little energy to shatter the bullet and more gets dumped into the target, heck, there's a lot of kinetic energy in the bullet too. Typically, the innards are totally trashed, just kind of turned to bloody jelly. The animal doesn't expire, they're &quot;turned off&quot; immediately, kind of like flipping a light switch- on/off - no dimming. It's the most impressive display of killing power I've ever witnessed.

I've tried FMJ .17s and they shatter even more violently than the HP Hornady 25, though I haven't fired them at anything living (I had just a sample of them). Typical behavior is a tiny .1&quot; entrance hole, no exit, and everything inside turned to mush.

Now don't anyone think I advocate the .17 on even medium game. I use it on varmints only, nothing bigger than coyotes, and suggest others limit it's use to those targets also. But doesn't it work great on suitable targets!?

Now, why? Anyone else have any ideas?

Brian..In thr mid-70's I came back for overseas and a little time on my hands..I came back to Florida, my home state for some RR..About that time the fox hunters brought a truckload of Red Fox and dumped them out in Central Florida near Lake Weir. Thats rolling hill country, allot of citrus groves, and near the Ocala National Forest. Soon there were Red Fox everywhere and much worst they brought with them a serious strain of mange. Soon it spread eveywhere due to the mites the fox carried. I had bought a little Sako in .17 Remington. A good friend of mine, Russel Sands, was an expert caller. We hunted two 3,000 acre tracts, one was pasture and the other grove. We shot only factory loads. I will tell you I have never seen anything put a large varmint, like a Red, down as hard. When to trigger was pulled,ZORK!, and that was it! Energy Deposit comes in many forms, and whatever form it was it, upon entering those Reds, was devastating to say the least. Parker Ackley was an advocate of the .17 cal. That was the only .17 I've ever owned, but it was a &quot;Dilly&quot;.
I would not even shoot wild goats, like Parker did, but I think the .17 has a place in pest control. Of course, they would have been just as dead, if shot with a .45-70.
Best Regards from the Hammock.....James


(Edited by James Gates at 9:55 pm on Jan. 20, 2001)

I WOULD RELATE SOME OF THIS MATTER TO AN INSTANCE TO WHERE I WILL USE DEER AS THE EXAMPLE. AS FAR AS ENERGY DUMP GOES THINK ABOUT SOME OF THE LIGHTER BULLETS IN SAY 24 OR 25 CALIBER ALOT OF THEM WILL BLOW UP ON DEER SIZE GAME. SO THEN ITS KINDA LIKE THE BULLET SELF TERMINATES AND USES WHAT ENERGY IT DID HAVE TO DELIVER TO THE INTENDED GAME JUST USED ALL OF THE ENERGY TO COME APART. I WISH I COULD HAVE USED BETTER ENGLISH ON THIS BUT I AM BLINDED FROM READING EVERYONE ELSES COMMENTS. I LIKE THE GOOD OLE HARDCAST WITH AS WIDE AS MEPLATE POSSIBLE FOR THE CALIBER. ENERGY IN AND ENERGY OUT. &nbsp;BUT I ALSO SHOOT FOR THE MAIN FRAME. DEAD CENTER OF THE SHOULDER, I LIKE THE BONE SHOTS. AND WATCH EM FOLD UP. &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp;JIM.

&nbsp; ---- &nbsp; BrianK &nbsp; ---- &nbsp;Brian, &nbsp;-- &nbsp;Re: your post of Jan. 20, on the .17 rem. etc. &nbsp; ------ &nbsp; You raised a very interesting question on what, I think, is the effect of extreme hydrostatic shock (?), &nbsp;-- &nbsp; (i.e. your example of the varmit with a tiny entrance wound, and all jelly inside). &nbsp;Serious meat hunters would shudder at the prospect, because bloodshot meat is a no-no to them (although to a child trying to survive in extreme circumstances, bloodshot meat eats just as good as any). &nbsp; ----- &nbsp; But there are many sport-hunters to which perfect meat is not as important as an instant, &quot;drop on their nose without taking one step&quot; - kill. &nbsp;The latter kind of hunter, is &nbsp;usually concerned that the animal does not suffer (to any extent) and that his targets NEVER get away and die a terrible death under some bush. &nbsp;A clean kill is top priority. &nbsp; ----- &nbsp; The kind of terminal ballistics you mentioned on the varmits, &nbsp;-- via the sweet 17; &nbsp;-- is what many of us (who will never be strict subsistence-meat-hunters), would like to see on &nbsp;all of our big-game shots. &nbsp; Perhaps this is the case for all of the direction towards the super-magnums. --- &nbsp; Perhaps to these sports-fans, massive-hydrostatic shock is the first priority -- ?? &nbsp; ----- &nbsp; Maybe fifty years from now, the ideal big-game rifle will include three recoil controling devices, and put out a 250 grain .338 (almost solid) bullet at 4000 fps. &nbsp;--- &nbsp;That should produce the &quot;jelly&quot; effect on Elk, Moose, and big Bears, &nbsp;-- &nbsp;What ? &nbsp; --- Is that where this thing is going &nbsp;__ &nbsp;?? &nbsp; ----- &nbsp;Or will we be back to yester-year with large heavy-for-caliber non-deforming bullets with big meplats. &nbsp;-- &nbsp;?? &nbsp; ----- &nbsp; Where and how will the energy-dump of the future develop &nbsp;-- &nbsp;?? &nbsp; [All opinion will be greatfully recieved]. &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; ---------- &nbsp; MMCOUGAR.

Just tromping through the archives a bit...can't let this one slip by!

The original statement was that "most of the bullet's energy goes in to deforming it..."

It does take energy to deform a bullet, but saying that MOST of a bullet's energy goes towards deforming it is incorrect.

"For every reaction there is an equal and opposite reaction".

If there is energy being used to deform a bullet, there is as much energy going the other direction (deforming flesh). Therefore, if a bullet "dumps" all of it's energy in to a target (no exit), it DOES become more deformed AND it does more damage. If a bullet exits the target, it "takes" some energy with it until it is absorbed by whatever it hits next.

This is essentially a question of physics...I'm not talking about shot placement or having blood trails to follow or other good stuff, I'm talking about physical fact.

There is an EQUAL amount of energy that goes in to deforming a bullet as there is causing damage to flesh. You simply can not have one side of the equation more heavily weighted. That being said, there really is something to be said about "energy" dump, especially those of us that shoot the light, hollowpoint bullets at targets that completely absorb them.

I am a little late getting in on this one but here goes...

This is an "egghead's" point of view. I am a mechanical engineer by trade, and a long time hunter/shooter. I don't have a background in bullet design but mechanics and physics should apply here. See if the following makes any sense to you guys.

The way I see it, Marshall you were really close to having right on your first post. A lot of energy is required to deform that bullet. Basically, when the projectile deforms it is, in essence being cold forged (or swaged). If any of you have done this before you will know that this process generates quite a bit of heat, especially when a lot of deforming is done (bigger mushroom). Heat is one form energy, you cannot discount the amount of energy converted to heat.

In the instant before the bullet contacts the animal nearly all of the energy is mechanical potential energy. At impact the bullet begins to deform. The potential energy becomes kinetic energy and much of it goes into deforming the bullet. Additional energy is converted into heat energy. More than many of you might realize. Assuming there is energy left over, transfer of that energy to the target would be very inefficient at best. Tissue disrupts and moves quite readily, not allowing a clean efficient transfer of mechanical energy. Impacting shoulders or other large bones probably results in the most efficient transfer, but again, must of the energy has gone into reshaping the bullet and heat loss.

This inefficient transfer of energy and heat is why, in most cases, there is not an equal amount of energy absorbed by the animals tissues. A poster was referring to Newtons first law. Heat generated is part of the "equal and opposite reaction". It also does not take much energy to create a wave that will travel throught the animals tissue. And tissue disrupts much more readily than lead and copper.

As far as the .17 Rem results on foxes, etc. well, foxes are pretty lightly built. I doubt that the tissues and membranes holding their insides together are as thick and tough as most game animals tissues. What little energy transferred is obviously sufficient to tear apart those membranes. Dumping energy into an animals tissues probably only works when the tissues are delicate. I suspect that brain and nervous tissue is more delicate than muscle and organ tissue.

Using this reasoning, I beleive that the only way to consistantly take game cleanly is to rely not on energy transfer but on quick bleed out. Two holes, bigger is better, and hit somewhere with a lot of high pressure blood vessels.

Sorry for the long length, I hope none of you were put to sleep, and I sincerely hope noone is offended.

I agree that there is some heat energy transferred.

That is still energy, and though "efficient" and "inefficient" it may be, there is only an exact amount of energy that goes in to deforming that bullet:

ALL energies considered, that amount is exactly 50%--is this right, Weave?

How that affects the tissues is different, and I like your description of soft versus hard tissues and waves of energy.

As for what is best on a specific animal (coyote, cat), don't forget I am very concerned about pelt damage. I don't want two holes. I want one .172" entrance hole and a wound channel that extends as far as possible without exiting. Blood loss? I can tell you that blood loss is something to marvel at upon internal examination, without all but a tiny scuff on that fur. Also, hitting shoulder or heavy bone on a coyote is a big mistake with a .17--often times the bullet won't make it far enough inside to stop them, and the result is a wounded coyote.

I think that the fact that you can get very efficient kills by either route is what propels this argument and always will. Weatherby and friends proved that you can very cleanly take animals with small bullets if those bullets are provided with enough propulsion. We have long known, and it seems too obvious to require debate, that a big bullet will give big holes that kill well.

Each route has its' pitfalls, but both can get there. Now for me I use both routes depending on the situation, but have to say that I am most comfortable with the best of both: medium bores (.338-.416), adequate SD, and decent velocity. You can not wind-up with your pants down with both a belt and suspenders, unless you want to.

Fireplug

TomT,
I really don't think you will transfer 50% of a bullets energy into a game animal under most circumstances. Even if you include heat it is likely a smaller fraction than that. Think back to the example of the .300 Mag and the 220gr bullet used on a deer. If half of that energy were transfered to the deer you would expect the equal and opposite reaction would be for that deer to have been pushed backwards several feet or more or some other very visible result, kind of like in a Terminator movie. You are talking about half of several TONS of energy being "dumped" into a 150lb animal. Also, if you shoot a deer in the lungs, the bullet is travelling through a certain amount of air. Unlike flesh or water, air is a compressable fluid. In other words, you can expend energy to compress the air and it will store that energy (VERY temporarily). That energy will likely not be transferred to the animal.

Now, I suspect that Weatherby and folks got great results (when the bullets held together) because that small bullet traveling at high speed opened up very wide on impact. That large frontal area (sound familiar?) would result in more efficient energy transfer...and open up a larger hole!

As for your .17 and smaller game. I've been thinking about that, if your bullets are fragmenting into many pieces you have many razor blades flying around in there to create more damage, similar to Remington's Golden Sabre shotgun slugs. Also, these smaller pieces collectively will have more surface area than one .17 bullet that holds together. This may result in more efficient transfer of energy. As long as you really don't need any penetration there is nothing wrong with that.

I like to shoot woodchucks here in western NY with a 22-250, It often turns them rather squishy inside, so I do believe some energy transfer occurs. However, you can make a woodchucks insides squishy by stepping on them and there isn't alot of energy in a stomp (sorry for the grossness but it was all I could come up with at the moment).:eek: And no, I have not tried it personally.

I think the 2 methods (fast and light vs. slow and wide) are just different ways of getting to the same place. Fast bullets opening up create a big hole to bleed out just like slow wide ones. One is modern technology and the other is old technology. I use both. Admittedly, I use the slow and wide more often though. My opinion is that it is more reliable. I do not have to depend on the bullet doing anything other than travel in a straight line.

Fast and light has advantages, range is less critical and perceived recoil is often less. Anyway, I am going on too long again. I will shut up and watch the rest of the posts. This has been quite fun.

Just a reminder that we are talking about energy transfer. Every action in the world of physics has an equal and opposite reaction. It is the TISSUE of the animal that is deforming the bullet, and it receives 100% of the energy it expends slowing or stopping the darned thing.

A mushroom and/or high velocity do the same thing in tissue: increase the RATE of deceleration, and the energy release per unit time. If this is very fast the wound channel will be short and fat. If it is very slow, the wound channel will be long and skinny. The trade-off is wound channel length vs cross section.

Optimizing this for the game hunted and bullet energy available is the name of the game we call humane kills.

Right. Maybe we're getting in to semantics, here, but "loader" and I are on the same page. Often times it's ideal to have exited bullets, other times not. But when a bullet stops inside of a target, all of it's energy ends up there...there's just no other place for it to go. Heat, inefficiency, efficiency...it's all energy.

O.K I've read this whole post ! So here I go into the fray.
I'm not going to argue the pionts made here. Just give a common sense perpective. As a hunter this is what I expect of my fire arms(Pistol-rifle). We'll all agree(I Hope?) that the biggest thing that must happen is that we as hunters put the bullet where it needs to be. Bottm line is if you do not place the bullet where it needs to be you could hunting with a Bazooka and it wouldn't matter a Bad hit is a bad hit!! For myself i select the Caliber appropriate for the animal I'm hunt be it a Groud squirrel or a Bear, then the bullet appropriate for that animal. Next when it comes to the shot I will ensure I can get the bullet where it needs to go. If not all the energy in the world isn't going to put that animal down!!
My prefferred shot is just behind the shoulder through to the off side shoulder. This accomplishes two things- It ensures a hit to the vitals (Heart/Lung) and most time cripples the animal enough to provide time for a follow-up shot if needed.
If this accomplished be it with a fast smallist caliber or a big slow Bullet most time your going to have a dead animal that doesn't run far.

This is my third day observing the discourse here,and I just had to say something.
First,I'm really amazed that the vast majority of Posters are "Two Hole Fans". This runs counter to my experience as a Whitetail Hunter.
Awhile back,I put two holes into a standing spike buck at about 60 yards,broadside,with 180 grain 30'06 factory rounds. They were 2 inches apart,and went through both lungs,and then out and beyond. Some Folks,here,would swoon if they did that.
The problem is ;the deer ran over 80 yards without leaving much of a blood trail.It took a long while for me to find him.
I never used that bullet/rifle combination ever again,and I never had tht problem again.
I can't add too much data here,because i mever counted exit holes. I don't know if most of my kills had exit holes,but I do know that most of them died within 10 feet of where they were shot. I also know that any bullet that is guarenteed to exit the deer ,unless it hits a bone,is a poor Whitetail bullet.Some of that bullet energy MUST be imparted to the Deer,to get a quick,humane ,kill.The energy that is expended into the trees,beyond the gams,is completely wasted.
Not quite"Bible",but strong opinion
Frank

Measuring energy is bull as a measure of lethality and considering the arrest of all or part that energy of it("dumping") is just as unuseable. A 22-250 and a 45-70 can have equivalent ft-lb energy figures and both can be fully stopped within a large deer or other animal, yet we know that the .45 will leave a far more consistently lethal wound than the .22. The "energy" level doesn't kill the animal, the qualities of the wound inflicted do.

Wound potential is far better considered with bullet shape/construction, SD, weight and velocity. Bell killed elephants with 6.5mm MS and 7x57mm because he knew they could drive far enough in with their super SDs (even though on paper the MS round is a 30-30 equivalent in bullet velocity and weight.)

Perhaps the term "energy dumping" can be used (poorly, I think) in the terminology of bullet selection for a particular animal and velocity, but it doesn't correlate to lethality.

.02

Charlie Z
Like I said select an appropriate Caliber/Bullet- Then put it where it needs to be.(Heart/Lung) end of story. Unfortunately we as humans have to get rapped around the axle on the little stuff like "emergy tranfer to the target". As many of the guy's here have said "Dead is Dead";)