Bullet performance...what do you expect?

[Lefty-Canuck]

Originally Posted by 209x50

Not close enough. That blood is in capillaries, minute vessels without the substantial volume of fluid required and incapable of carrying the shock wave. So now what? I'm serious, explain to me how it works and I'll drink the kool aid.

Honestly I don't have the breath to further explain this.....if you feel that bullets make holes like poking a fast moving blunt stick into meat without any other effects related to impact then all the power to you.

I am not trying or about to reinvent the wheel:
http://welshdeer.com/page1/page2/page64/page64.html

As I stated in my original post this thread is about what bullet performance do you expect what bullet you choose and why....not what is hydrostatic shock and does it apply when firing a bullet at an animal? and How are the bullet companies deceiving us by using the concept of hydrostatic shock in their marketing materials....etc.

Lefty

[209x50]

Originally Posted by Lefty-Canuck

Honestly I don't have the breath to further explain this.....if you feel that bullets make holes like poking a fast moving blunt stick into meat without any other effects related to impact then all the power to you.

I am not trying or about to reinvent the wheel:
http://welshdeer.com/page1/page2/page64/page64.html

As I stated in my original post this thread is about what bullet performance what bullet you choose and why....not what is hydrostatic shock and does it apply when firing a bullet at an animal? and How are the bullet companies deceiving us by using the concept of hydrostatic shock in their marketing materials....etc.

Lefty

Yes this is true. I guess what I was trying to convey is that with good placement and with hydrostatic shock from the energy of the bullet I would hope not to need to track too far.

This quote is from your second post on this thread. Obviously you meant for "hydrostatic shock" to be a consideration in the conversation. I'm just asking how it works. I know the physics involved in the speed of a shockwave through fluid but can't understand understand how a bullet could produce the wave in a highly elastic vessel with so little fluid.

[Lefty-Canuck]

Originally Posted by 209x50

This quote is from your second post on this thread. Obviously you meant for "hydrostatic shock" to be a consideration in the conversation. I'm just asking how it works. I know the physics involved in the speed of a shockwave through fluid but can't understand understand how a bullet could produce the wave in a highly elastic vessel with so little fluid.

WOW just wow.....

read into it what you want....I don't even know how all this got started lol.

I have only said that I feel hydrostatic shock is a factor.....that is only a peice of the puzzle of what a bullet does when it hits something.

Maybe I wasn't clear in what I was trying to convey. I will now state, in no way shape or form do I feel hydrostatic shock is the ONLY factor in a bullets performance.

Click on the link in my post it explains how it works with science backing it... http://welshdeer.com/page1/page2/page64/page64.html

...like I said I am not about to reinvent the wheel here....read for yourself I am not an expert and I am not explaining it to you.

Lefty

[209x50]

Originally Posted by Lefty-Canuck

WOW just wow.....

read into it what you want....I don't even know how all this got started lol.

I have only said that I feel hydrostatic shock is a factor.....that is only a peice of the puzzle of what a bullet does when it hits something.

Maybe I wasn't clear in what I was trying to convey. I will now state, in no way shape or form do I feel hydrostatic shock is the ONLY factor in a bullets performance.

Click on the link in my post it explains how it works with science backing it... http://welshdeer.com/page1/page2/page64/page64.html

...like I said I am not about to reinvent the wheel here....read for yourself I am not an expert and I am not explaining it to you.

Lefty

Well I did click on your link and it didn't convince me the first time I read it years ago. You have been so voluble in your support of "hydrostatic Shock" that I thought there had been some new proof to support the theory.

[Tracker34]

I like a bullet that is going to leave a nice exit wound. 180 gr power points did it for me this past fall on my white tails. Not much left to the lungs with an exit wound I could put a tennis ball through. A tad bit overkill as all 3 were less than a 40 yard shot using a 300 wm.

[Lefty-Canuck]

Originally Posted by Tracker34

I like a bullet that is going to leave a nice exit wound. 180 gr power points did it for me this past fall on my white tails. Not much left to the lungs with an exit wound I could put a tennis ball through. A tad bit overkill as all 3 were less than a 40 yard shot using a 300 wm.

For the price it is tough to beat those powerpoints, I have seen the results from those as well. I have used them in a .300winmag and they were really accurate too....



Lefty

[Tracker34]

Originally Posted by Lefty-Canuck

For the price it is tough to beat those powerpoints, I have seen the results from those as well. I have used them in a .300winmag and they were really accurate too....



Lefty

For some reason, they are the mose accurate factory loads I have found. I have tried Fussion, Federal Premium and Winchester Sepreme and they were crap. The bullets hit all over the paper, well, the ones that actually hit the paper. I now shoot the Winchester PP or my own reload recipe. Same goes for my 308.

[Lefty-Canuck]

Originally Posted by Tracker34

For some reason, they are the mose accurate factory loads I have found. I have tried Fussion, Federal Premium and Winchester Sepreme and they were crap. The bullets hit all over the paper, well, the ones that actually hit the paper. I now shoot the Winchester PP or my own reload recipe. Same goes for my 308.

I am with you on that one, I actually couldn't find a load that shot as well as these do in the Heym of mine. I think these bullets get overlooked because the are not "premium" and aren't the latest and greatest, but dead is dead no matter how you slice it.

Lefty

[209x50]

Originally Posted by Tracker34

For some reason, they are the mose accurate factory loads I have found. I have tried Fussion, Federal Premium and Winchester Sepreme and they were crap. The bullets hit all over the paper, well, the ones that actually hit the paper. I now shoot the Winchester PP or my own reload recipe. Same goes for my 308.

I think part of the reason is they are cup and core bullets and it is easy to make very accurate cup and core bullets. Secondly the ammo isn't pushing the envelope for speeds, most guns shoot better with average loadings and the critters don't notice the difference!

[Lefty-Canuck]

After I shot the group above I went back to Wholesale and bought 9 or 10 boxes of the same lot number ammo, still have 5 or 6 boxes kicking around.

So if anyone knows what power they use in the .300 win mag Winchester power points I would love to know. I know I can buy the bullets it would be nice to reverse engineer some. I have heard some ammo manufactures use blended powers and I am not messing with that.....

Lefty

[Pathfinder76]

Originally Posted by Lefty-Canuck

After I shot the group above I went back to Wholesale and bought 9 or 10 boxes of the same lot number ammo, still have 5 or 6 boxes kicking around.

So if anyone knows what power they use in the .300 win mag Winchester power points I would love to know. I know I can buy the bullets it would be nice to reverse engineer some. I have heard some ammo manufactures use blended powers and I am not messing with that.....

Lefty

What power? Reverse engineer? Man you are barking up the wrong tree.

[Lefty-Canuck]

Originally Posted by chuck

What power? Reverse engineer? Man you are barking up the wrong tree.

I dont follow what you are saying.... I was saying I would like to know how the factory ammo I purchased was loaded so I could duplicate results...thats all.

typo in my post, power should have been POWDER.

Lefty

[Pathfinder76]

Originally Posted by Lefty-Canuck

I dont follow what you are saying.... I was saying I would like to know how the factory ammo I purchased was loaded so I could duplicate results...thats all.

typo in my post, power should have been POWDER.

Lefty

Good luck.

[Lefty-Canuck]

thanks for your insight.....trying to figure out what you have against me? Maybe cause I am new to the forum? maybe cause you just don't like me

Lefty

[Pathfinder76]

No, I don't dislike you. I'm just chronically intolerant of ridiculous.

[Cal]

Originally Posted by chuck

No, I don't dislike you. I'm just chronically intolerant of ridiculous.

Actualy Chuck, I would say you are just chronicly intolerant. Nothing against you so dont take it personaly but it is what it is. The new guy might not know this and feel that he has made some collosal blunder when in reality he merely had an opinion that was different from yours.

[Lefty-Canuck]

Originally Posted by Cal

Actualy Chuck, I would say you are just chronicly intolerant. Nothing against you so dont take it personaly but it is what it is. The new guy might not know this and feel that he has made some collosal blunder when in reality he merely had an opinion that was different from yours.

Now there is a bit of insight I can understand and appreciate.

Lefty

[Traps]

Originally Posted by 209x50

LOL! Nope.
Some one answer me this. Shock waves travel through fluid. At the millisecond of impact the lungs are full of air. What does the "hydrostatic shock wave" travel through?

Originally Posted by 209x50

Not close enough. That blood is in capillaries, minute vessels without the substantial volume of fluid required and incapable of carrying the shock wave. So now what? I'm serious, explain to me how it works and I'll drink the kool aid.

209x50 your very confused. Shock waves don’t always travel through a fluid but hydrostatic shock waves do, hence the name hydro. The term shock waves would be a better substitute than hydrostatic shock because the body is only roughly 60% water. Shock waves aren’t particular about what they travel through. It can be earth, (just ask Japan), air (ding, ding, ding.....yes its a fluid) or a liquid. So to answer your question what does the shock wave (correct term here, pay attention) travel through? It travels through everything the lungs are made of. Shock waves are the sonic boom that you hear when a jet fighter breaks the sound barrier, seismic waves that follow the earth’s plates shifting and the gas and bullet breaking the sound barrier when it leaves the muzzle of your gun.

Have you ever watched a high speed bullet on film impact the side of an animal? There is a ripple at the point of impact. What transmits the shock wave......the body and everything it is made of surrounding the point of impact.

[Traps]

Originally Posted by 209x50

This quote is from your second post on this thread. Obviously you meant for "hydrostatic shock" to be a consideration in the conversation. I'm just asking how it works. I know the physics involved in the speed of a shockwave through fluid but can't understand understand how a bullet could produce the wave in a highly elastic vessel with so little fluid.

You know the physics involved then you say you can’t understand how a bullet can produce the wave in a highly elastic vessel with little fluid. To sum up your thoughts, you have no clue what your talking about. Someone was saying something about the minds of the uneducated and misinformed. LOL, I'm embarrassed for you and Chuck and how you treat a new member.

[Duramaximos]

I found this video interesting.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nV8ij1gK-ck
At approx the 1:50 mark they shoot a TSX into a block of ballistic gel. From what I can see there is a lot more going on there than simply poking a hole through... I think there is something to be said for hydrostatic shock.
Another similar video:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mFvrr9s_M-4

A similar video of an arrow:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6dv1QySWQ6I

[Lefty-Canuck]

Originally Posted by Duramaximos

I found this video interesting.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nV8ij1gK-ck
At approx the 1:50 mark they shoot a TSX into a block of ballistic gel. From what I can see there is a lot more going on there than simply poking a hole through... I think there is something to be said for hydrostatic shock.
Another similar video:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mFvrr9s_M-4

A similar video of an arrow:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6dv1QySWQ6I

Thanks for those. If that doesnt display hydrostatic shock them I am not sure what does? .....to some its still marketing and/or a myth.

Lefty

[Savage 88]

a bullet sent thru bone will create a larger wound channel but my son shot a big bear with his bow last fall and that bear died within 25 yards. he left on a dead run and by his third jump he was already losing his balance. piled up shortly thereafter. muzzy 100 grain took out both lungs. i believe that the same shot with my accubond 180 300wm would have had the same result.

[Cal]

Originally Posted by Lefty-Canuck

Thanks for those. If that doesnt display hydrostatic shock them I am not sure what does? .....to some its still marketing and/or a myth.

Lefty

I think if you dropped the "Hydrostatic" part you would have more people agreeing. I'm convinced that, like Traps said, shockwaves are sent through the body and it can play a factor in the death of an animal. To me the term Hydrostatic shock refers to a different sort of kill and one I'm not so sure about, I'm not going to say it doesnt happen but I dont know that it happens reliably enough for me to worry about it much.

[Lefty-Canuck]

Originally Posted by Cal

I think if you dropped the "Hydrostatic" part you would have more people agreeing. I'm convinced that, like Traps said, shockwaves are sent through the body and it can play a factor in the death of an animal. To me the term Hydrostatic shock refers to a different sort of kill and one I'm not so sure about, I'm not going to say it doesnt happen but I dont know that it happens reliably enough for me to worry about it much.

Fair enough maybe my terminology is off. Should it be considered hydraulic shock? I am just using the terms sited in one (what I would consider, obvious opinions vary) reasonable explanation found in this link, http://welshdeer.com/page1/page2/page64/page64.html

Lefty

[209x50]

Originally Posted by Traps

209x50 your very confused. Shock waves don’t always travel through a fluid but hydrostatic shock waves do, hence the name hydro. The term shock waves would be a better substitute than hydrostatic shock because the body is only roughly 60% water. Shock waves aren’t particular about what they travel through. It can be earth, (just ask Japan), air (ding, ding, ding.....yes its a fluid) or a liquid. So to answer your question what does the shock wave (correct term here, pay attention) travel through? It travels through everything the lungs are made of. Shock waves are the sonic boom that you hear when a jet fighter breaks the sound barrier, seismic waves that follow the earth’s plates shifting and the gas and bullet breaking the sound barrier when it leaves the muzzle of your gun.

Have you ever watched a high speed bullet on film impact the side of an animal? There is a ripple at the point of impact. What transmits the shock wave......the body and everything it is made of surrounding the point of impact.

I'd research the term "hydrostatic" if I was you.

[209x50]

Originally Posted by Traps

209x50 your very confused. Shock waves don’t always travel through a fluid but hydrostatic shock waves do, hence the name hydro. The term shock waves would be a better substitute than hydrostatic shock because the body is only roughly 60% water. Shock waves aren’t particular about what they travel through. It can be earth, (just ask Japan), air (ding, ding, ding.....yes its a fluid) or a liquid. So to answer your question what does the shock wave (correct term here, pay attention) travel through? It travels through everything the lungs are made of. Shock waves are the sonic boom that you hear when a jet fighter breaks the sound barrier, seismic waves that follow the earth’s plates shifting and the gas and bullet breaking the sound barrier when it leaves the muzzle of your gun.

Have you ever watched a high speed bullet on film impact the side of an animal? There is a ripple at the point of impact. What transmits the shock wave......the body and everything it is made of surrounding the point of impact.

I'd also research the speed at which that wave travels in various substances and how fast a projectile has to be going to create it. You'll learn wondrous things.

[Lefty-Canuck]

Can you expand on your thoughts 209X50? Let us know what "hydrostatic" means? according to you I have it mixed up with something else, I am willing to learn if you are willing to teach.

Lefty

[209x50]

Originally Posted by Duramaximos

I found this video interesting.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nV8ij1gK-ck
At approx the 1:50 mark they shoot a TSX into a block of ballistic gel. From what I can see there is a lot more going on there than simply poking a hole through... I think there is something to be said for hydrostatic shock.
Another similar video:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mFvrr9s_M-4

A similar video of an arrow:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6dv1QySWQ6I

That gel or flesh moved out of the way is the result of the temporary wound channel. Temporary being the key word as it closes back up with little or no damage other than the permanent wound channel. While it looks impressive this very elasticity is what prevents remote damage by the relative slow impact of a bullet. For certain it is not indicative of a "bolt of energy" being transferred.
Energy is never lost but it is converted, the energy the bullet has by virtue of its motion is kinetic energy. The majority of the kinetic energy is converted in heat from the friction of the bullet passing.

[209x50]

Originally Posted by Traps

You know the physics involved then you say you can’t understand how a bullet can produce the wave in a highly elastic vessel with little fluid. To sum up your thoughts, you have no clue what your talking about. Someone was saying something about the minds of the uneducated and misinformed. LOL, I'm embarrassed for you and Chuck and how you treat a new member.

I know you think acting rude is cool, you'll grow out of that one day. Unlike you I wasn't rude in any way in my post. If I was taken that way then Lefty has my unqualified apology.
Once again I'll recommend you check into the required speed of an energy wave in flesh for lethality.

[Duramaximos]

Purely based on the visuals, I have to believe the surrounding tissues occupied, albeit breifly, by the temporary wound channel would be devastated. I'm picturing the results of that temporary wound channel on a near by lung or heart.

Would and organ such as the heart be completly unaffected by this temporary wound channel if it were rapidly displaced by several inches - estimating 4" - 6", then rapidly rebounding?

I'll play devils advocate on myself. By this logic I'd also expect to see a heart completly obliterated with a direct hit, however I've been fortunate to see a few heart shots, and apart from the direct wound the rest of the heart appears undamaged.

I think the shock wave does play a role, but the more I think about it, it should be a secondary consideration/benefit.