Pm an address, I'll send the scrapbooking details. Guns? I don't wanna talk about it, twas a brain fart.

I really think you should have a better understanding of how a diaphragm helps us breath and anatomy in general before you continue to repeat such stories. Organs don't slosh around in us or critters for instance. I'll say this your Dad was quick with an imaginative excuse for a poor shot.

that is without a doubt the best post on this forum! thanks dave, lee

Pass through. Never a guarantee of instant kill and I want a blood trail. Not interested in killing without recovery. That was the thing with the old. 30-30, never instant kills but great blood trails. Almost had to be careful not to get any on ya! Now my. 338 for everything. Usually instant kills but if not, always a great blood trail, deer, bear or moose.

A better question was why didn't he just shoot into the water? With the mooses head underwater the "hydrostatic shock" would have killed him instantly right? Right? .....

Hahaha! Thats good. I love it.

I tend to avoid the hydrostatic whack crowd like lepers and crabs. It just doesnt make any sense when facts and science is applied.

Yet another intelligent response....why don't you explain all knowing one :)

I know they don't slosh....I never said they did. The diaphram moves throughout the process of breathing. Are you saying the diaphrams does not move at all during the breathing process?

I know my Father knows quite a lot about anatomy actually.

Yet again attacking one of my posts...I figured you might have a bit more class than that....but I guess not.

LC

Just trying to help you understand. Check into how a diapfhram works. Have you ever gutted an animal? I wouldn't expect such statements from someone who gutted their own animals.

You know the diaphram is a muscle that expands and contracts?...and actually has a certain amount of movement...in a human it moves up and down and in 4 legged beasts it moves laterally back and forth....it doesn't move a lot but it does move...

Read this...first two paragraphs...you might learn something.
http://www.nhlbi.nih.gov/health/heal...athappens.html

Of course I have gutted my own critters, why do you have to talk down to people?...Have you?.... and my Father was a butcher...what are you getting at?.... Just say it...

You may have a differing opinion to mine...and you weren't there when the statement was made, nor did you see the results of the shot and the placement...no need for you to be so condescending though...

LC

lol.......

I think the only problem with that theory LC is that the Diaphragm acts as a vaccum seal basically. Puncture it and the lungs have a very hard time inflating and you end up with equal pressure in the chest and gut cavities. It would be impossible for gut to get sucked into the chest cavity. If you have gut in the chest cavity, it's because the bullet pushed it there, likely from a hard quartering away shot. The liver and stomach actually sits next to the diaphragm, neither of those are going to get sucked into the chest cavity....blown in by a bullet but not sucked in.

You are correct that the diaphragm is a muscle and has some slight movement but never enough to alter shot placement depending on the breathing cycle. My Dad told me some whopper stories as a kid too...that's what Dads do.

If the theory were true though, it would make a great arguement for the high shoulder shot ;)

X2 well said ,makes scence to me

As to the OP, give me a bullet that expands fast to a roughly 2x diameter and retains its weight and I'm a happy camper on North American game. Sometimes it will pass through and other times it won't but it will always make a big permanent wound channel and a temporary wound channel as well. If I were hunting dangerous game in Africa where the need to break through heavy bone to acheive maximum penetration were required, then a solid may indeed be a better option.

I like a big bore bullet of sturdy construction. My 444 gives me that. I also prefer a double hole blood trail. It is neither right or wrong. It suits my style. I usually hunt with a rifle that has excess power because of the days when a guy might shot a deer or maybe a moose out for the day.

I tried a 7MM Mag for bigger game and a 243 for deer and had good results but the meat loss was significant.

Pass through here the hydrostatic shock is still there just with an exit hole.

Piston broke you seem like you think you know a lot about bullets but in the few posts you have made about them it's obvious you don't know as much as you think you do..... Listen to people here with an open mind ..... Could really help... Asking a poll question with such a solid view already seem pointless!!

damaged lungs or heart...or both with a hole on either side is best....two holes for the blood to run out of and leave me a trail.

shockwave killing animals is a myth. a hole in the vitals is what kills them.

Elk11 is bang on.

Lmao, good one I'm not saying much for a reason
I wanna see what others think , I never made this
Poll for me , I did it for YOU guys

So many variables with terminal ballistics....

Did bullet pass through because it failed to expand.... probably not a good thing...

Did bullet stay in far side of hide because it did not expand and calibre was too small for it to make it through?

Did bullet exit because it expanded late.... and waste energy outside of animal....

Did bullet not exit because it expanded too fast?

PERFECT world is where bullet starts expanding immediattely upon enetring animal is able to shear through bone without stopping or fragmenting and has enough energy to make it all the way to far side of animal before finally petering out leaving a wave of hydrostatic destrucion in its wake....

Rarely are we in perfect world....

Try to make a 300 wsm 180 grain bullet stay inside a deer without a shouler hit.... or have a 223 bullet pass through an elk while expanding....

I have seen many situations that were less than ideal. I saw a moose hit witha 300 Win Mag at 30 yards that entered the moose and fragmented in the longs and actually dislocated the shoulders creating huge internal blood shock and was not noticed until there was a horrible stench after hanging for 3 days....both shoulders were lost. Yet that bullet did not exit....

Seen a moose killed with a 243 where bullet went through the heart and expanded and yet exited and moose dropped in its tracks....

Seen a deer hit with a 300 win mag at 500+ yards that dropped in its tracks but bullet on expanded enogh to take far lung out (was hanging on tree 30 yards behind the deer....yet no meat wasted!....

Another time a quartering to deer hit with a 243 that hit spine and bullet travelled along spine and out the hind end and completely ruined the meat in the deer... and deer dropped in his tracks....

All I can say is sometimes too much energy and sometimes too little.... it needs to be applied in the right spot. However having too much energy will results in a humane kill more often than too little...it just all depends on how much meat you want to consume.

All these variables ca be taken into consideration and there are many opinions on these variables as well and if there were not we would not have the bullet, and calibre selection discussions that we can all learn from....

I think that all things considered that two holes means you erred on the side of caution and had more energy than required... better than not enough...

Energy has never killed an animal...it's pure an absolute bunk. Energy allows a bullet to do its work, nothing more. If that bullet is designed properly and there is suffucient energy to allow it to expand and penetrate...things die. Two bullets, depending on construction, can do very different amounts of work with the same amount of energy. Energy basically means nothing with modern bullets......provided there is enough to allow them to do their work.

X2. Well done sir well done , bravo , I mean this
Sincerely to

So let's try and stay on track to what the OP
Had originally posted , let's try that lol

No sure how this isn't on topic if we are trying to understand bullet performance...most people have a very poor understanding of how bullets actually work and subsequent damage they cause....regardless if they pass through or not. Your original post is a classic example of that. It is filled with very flawed conclusions.

No condescation intended. If you feel inferior that wasn't my fault. I thought you were puiling a gag on every one.

well do what you can with the OP then i guess, IT IS VERY ENTERTAINING and knowledgeable to .... :sHa_shakeshout:

Pick and choose Rich...pick and choose.

Feel inferior to who? You?....yah that's it. That's the biggest gag in this thread. Thanks for yet another stellar contribution...

LC

The OP simply asks whether one hole ot two are preferred, which in itself is pretty much meaningless, if you don't consider what the bullet does while it's inside the animal. As such, all discussion on what the bullet does while inside the animal is quite relevent to the topic. However, seeing as how flawed your understanding appears to be of just how bullets kill, I can certainly understand why you would want to avoid discussion of this type.

After doing some reading on "bullet energy, hydrostatic shock" I would not say "it's pure an absolute bunk". Sheep, where do you get your view that it is so?

A ton of research, common sense and real world experience.

It is the unleashing of energy that creates the harm.....

It is how that energy is unleashed.... If I hit you with a 5,000,000 lb weight very slowly but laterally it will move you with very little harm, put the ground under you and lower at same speed and you will die!....

Bullets transfer their mechanical kinetic energy and that is how they kill. they transfer the energy into little tiny bags of water that make up tissue (cells) and they cannot contain the energy and breaks the cell membranes destroying the tissue and interrupting its function. This has been coined as "hydrostaic shock" but is really a strong hydraulic force being applied in a very focused zone creating traum and destruction. The degree of damage is a function of available energy to be transfered and the efficiency of the transfer mechanism. Thus an expanding bullet increases surface area of transfer and changes the damage column from being long and skinny to shorter and larger diameter. in the end the same volume is affected.

Another factor that determines amount of damage is the target substrrate, bone, cartilage, flech, muscle also has an effect.

So in order to maximise damage... increase available energy, use the right expansion rate to dmage the tissue according to substrate, and maximise the column of destruction....

But ensure this column of destruction damages vital organ tissue to create a humane kill.

So on a small animal once that column of destruction extends beyond the available tissue to damge it is wasted.... or if the animal is built where the damage column is too broad and not deep enough to reach vital tissue it is an issue as well.

In the end it is the maximisation of the size of the damage column and the placement of it where it can work on the most vital tissue is important.

A 22 calibre bullet to the brainstem is as lethal as a 300 WM to the heart... Hard to argue which makes an animal more dead.... in the end having a 300 WM to the brainstem is more destructive but not anymore lethal.... just more tissue damaged and a higher probability of a kill with less than perfect shot...

Dead is dead!....