Ridiculous analogy. Carry on.
BTW, that was Federal Ammunition. The FBI ballistic study was quite extensive and to compare it to Covid vaccines is just dumb.
What caliber are you using to get pass through shots on elk
- Thread starter chevyman181
- Start date
BTW, that was Federal Ammunition. The FBI ballistic study was quite extensive and to compare it to Covid vaccines is just dumb.
buffybr
Well-known member
"Ridiculous analogy"? Which one of my analogies is not true?
I was simply responding to your statement that "The wound channel is not created by energy. It’s created by additional velocity..." with analogy's where either velocity or mass was zero.
Again, simple math: any factor in a multiplication equation that is multiplied by zero will give an answer of zero.
Yes, additional velocity applied to the mass of a projectile would create a larger wound channel by giving that projectile a greater energy. Again, it's the energy of the projectile and not just it's velocity that creates the wound channel.
I can easily see where the FBI and Ammunition companies would do extensive testing to see how the weight, velocity, shape, and composition of various bullets would affect the wound channels made by those projectiles. And I see little reason that the FBI would lie about those studies. But, in recent years, the FBI has lied about other things, just like the Federal government lied about the Covid vaccines. That's not dumb, it's been proven true.
carry on
buffybr
Well-known member
Back to the original question of this thread, of the 35 elk that I've shot, I can only recall 2 pass throughs. The first pass through was a 5 pt bull that I shot just outside of Steamboat Springs, CO back in 1973 with a fiberglass arrow from a recurve bow. The front part of the arrow went through him and broke off, the back part of the arrow with the fletching broke off, and there was about a foot left of the center of the shaft in his chest cavity.
I don't remember any of the bullets completely passing through the elk that I shot with a .30-40 Krag, my .30-06, 7 mm RM, or .30 Gibbs. Of the 20 or so elk that I shot with my .30 Gibbs, I think all were with 180 grain Nosler Partition bullets and I found most of those bullets mushroomed just under the hide on the far side of the elk.
The only bullet that I remember completely passing through an elk was a 168 grain Barnes TSX that I shot with my .300 Weatherby. The lower arrow in these pictures show a .30 caliber entrance hole and about a 3/4" exit hole behind the bull's off shoulder.
I don't remember any of the bullets completely passing through the elk that I shot with a .30-40 Krag, my .30-06, 7 mm RM, or .30 Gibbs. Of the 20 or so elk that I shot with my .30 Gibbs, I think all were with 180 grain Nosler Partition bullets and I found most of those bullets mushroomed just under the hide on the far side of the elk.
The only bullet that I remember completely passing through an elk was a 168 grain Barnes TSX that I shot with my .300 Weatherby. The lower arrow in these pictures show a .30 caliber entrance hole and about a 3/4" exit hole behind the bull's off shoulder.
OntarioHunter
Well-known member
- Joined
- Sep 11, 2020
- Messages
- 5,980
I agree with your physics. Absurd to think energy and velocity are somehow unrelated. However, there is no factual basis for your COVID vaccine comments. No one, govt or pharmaceutical companies, ever said the vaccine would keep everyone from getting COVID. The best numbers I recall were about 70% protection from infection and almost 100% keeping patients out of hospital if they did get infected. That was for the first variant.
blacksheep
Active member
162gr Hornady Precision Hunter in 7mm Rem Mag. 2 passthroughs @315 yds on me elk in 2021. Dropped in his tracks.
blacksheep
blacksheep
buffybr
Well-known member
OntarioHunter
Well-known member
- Joined
- Sep 11, 2020
- Messages
- 5,980
Provide your source. I don't remember anything in the news. The good doctor in charge never said anything like that and as we know from the previous administration, he never shied away from correcting the president when needed.
I never said they weren’t related.
The research engineers at Federal identified 2100 FPS as the velocity threshold where the bullet surpasses the elasticity of tissue and starts creating a larger wound channel. If it was energy they were concerned about, I think they would have referenced it.
Bullet manufacturers reference a minimum impact velocity to attain proper bullet expansion. If they were concerned about energy, I think they would have referenced it.
A bullet can hit with tremendous energy upon impact and not create a wound channel of sufficient width or depth to achieve quick lethality. Energy transfer is not directly correlated to a sufficient wound channel.
OntarioHunter
Well-known member
- Joined
- Sep 11, 2020
- Messages
- 5,980
Of course "energy transfer" IS "directly correlated to sufficient wound channel." How else do you think "sufficient wound channel" is attained? Simply by the diameter of the bullet fired out of the barrel? Energy transfer occurs when the bullet mushrooms or comes apart. The change in size and/or fragmentation is accomplished by a transfer of energy. Nothing can be reformed without energy. The more energy dissipated on impact, the more surrounding cells have their cell walls crushed = more bloodshot and tissue loss = greater "wound channel." More bloodshot = more trauma = more rapid death. A larger bullet fired at slower velocity may impart less energy but still kill effectively simply because the entrance and exit holes are larger. But, of course, a larger bullet traveling slower will have a much reduced effective range. And it is less likely to produce an exit wound and less internal hemorrhaging. Thus the margin for error for losing a wounded animal due to improper shot placement is reduced even at close range.
By:
Bullet velocity at impact
Expansion of the bullet
Maintained integrity of the bullet
Diameter and expanded frontal diameter of the bullet
Sufficient retained mass and momentum to provide depth of wound channel
Like I said, you can have a bullet that is light or of frangible construction that transfers a tremendous amount of energy to the body, but does not penetrate enough to create a sufficient wound channel. Ergo it’s not a direct correlation or weak one at best.
Last edited by a moderator:
The Hedgehog
Well-known member
Even the ones you shot in the ass?
I only do that, after they are dead. Why would you want to pack out the heavy stuff?
buffybr
Well-known member
Google. It was a story from the Washington Post
EKYHunter
Well-known member
- Joined
- Dec 13, 2020
- Messages
- 1,177
Video of Biden Saying Vaccinations Prevent COVID Resurfaces After Infection
Exactly one year ago, the president claimed: "You're not going to get COVID if you have these vaccinations."
www.newsweek.com
Brian in Montana
Well-known member
Last couple elk I shot were with a .308 - 165gn Hornady Interbond (best hunting bullet on the market, in my opinion). Both were pass-throughs. One was right at 300yds.
OntarioHunter
Well-known member
- Joined
- Sep 11, 2020
- Messages
- 5,980
That was a gaff for sure. In the same context he also said that the vax was the best protection against hospitalization and death which by all scientific accounts is true. He clearly meant the vax would prevent serious illness and death. But of course that's not what he said. It's not like he said injecting disinfectant might cure COVID and then in the same context cleared it up by also saying it doesn't.Video of Biden Saying Vaccinations Prevent COVID Resurfaces After Infection
Exactly one year ago, the president claimed: "You're not going to get COVID if you have these vaccinations."
Back to shot placement and wound channel word games.
