Can we please stop talking about "flat shooting" cartridges

[sgt_zim]

I like a hole on both sides of game. If a bullet won’t completely penetrate a broadside deer what can you expect if one is turned more than you thought? To me, there is no such thing as too much penetration if the bullet still expands.
Here we could be hunting deer or elk & bump a sorehead grizzly.

All else being equal, an expanding bullet that makes 2 holes means more tissue destruction and more bleeding, and likely a quicker death and less tracking.

 

[Inline6]

All else being equal, an expanding bullet that makes 2 holes means more tissue destruction and more bleeding, and likely a quicker death and less tracking.

Most kills that I have witnessed that were DRT, were not pass through. If the bullet exists all energy was not absorbed by said animal. That's just a fact, not saying that a pass through can't kill fast. Having cleaned a good many of animals and seeing the reaction. Most pass through do not have the trauma, slow the bullet down and you see even less.

If we are saying all else is equal, why is it shooting deer broadside with the same rifle but different bullets, we have different reactions. That was my point about match bullets. My son had a few monos leftover from Africa he used on deer. The bullet zipped right through it like it did on most of the plains game. Deer ran 100 or so yards and died. Taking a Berger or SMK, other deer just drop in their tracks DeadRightThere. The internal trauma is very noticeable. I'm not quoting what I have read on the internet, this is real world experiences that are first hand. Again, are Berger bullets right for every animal, no. Are they right for every person, no. To say they don't work in not correct. Have to many accounts with different types of bullets to understand what they do.

 

[sgt_zim]

this isn't meant to be a gotcha, just something to think about

under the energy dumping theory, an elk shot from 100 yards with a 150 gr 30-30 and the bullet only penetrates 2/3 of the way through is preferable to a 150 gr bullet fired from a 30-06 that creates an exit wound.

by the same token, a 220 gr bullet fired from a 30-06 that didn't create an exit would be preferable to a 225 gr bullet fired from a 338WM that did create an exit wound.

"energy dumping" would seem to hold that 30-30 > 30-06 > 338 WM

 

[Newboomer]

Most kills that I have witnessed that were DRT, were not pass through. If the bullet exists all energy was not absorbed by said animal. That's just a fact, not saying that a pass through can't kill fast. Having cleaned a good many of animals and seeing the reaction. Most pass through do not have the trauma, slow the bullet down and you see even less.

If we are saying all else is equal, why is it shooting deer broadside with the same rifle but different bullets, we have different reactions. That was my point about match bullets. My son had a few monos leftover from Africa he used on deer. The bullet zipped right through it like it did on most of the plains game. Deer ran 100 or so yards and died. Taking a Berger or SMK, other deer just drop in their tracks DeadRightThere. The internal trauma is very noticeable. I'm not quoting what I have read on the internet, this is real world experiences that are first hand. Again, are Berger bullets right for every animal, no. Are they right for every person, no. To say they don't work in not correct. Have to many accounts with different types of bullets to understand what they do.

I prefer head on shots if possible. You've got the heart and lungs up front, then the rest of the body for the trauma to work on. Lots more area to contain the full effect and nothing lost to the atmosphere.

 

[akrifleman]

this isn't meant to be a gotcha, just something to think about

under the energy dumping theory, an elk shot from 100 yards with a 150 gr 30-30 and the bullet only penetrates 2/3 of the way through is preferable to a 150 gr bullet fired from a 30-06 that creates an exit wound.

by the same token, a 220 gr bullet fired from a 30-06 that didn't create an exit would be preferable to a 225 gr bullet fired from a 338WM that did create an exit wound.

"energy dumping" would seem to hold that 30-30 > 30-06 > 338 WM

Mixed comparison leading to a false analogy. What would be equivalent would be a bullet of the same caliber, weight, and velocity of different constructions. Or comparing the exact same construction with different velocities. Or the same construction and velocity in a different caliber.

Energy dumping is a very poor way of describing things like expansion (or lack of), intentional or unintentional fragmentation, performance at various velocities, and so forth.

 

[Inline6]

this isn't meant to be a gotcha, just something to think about

under the energy dumping theory, an elk shot from 100 yards with a 150 gr 30-30 and the bullet only penetrates 2/3 of the way through is preferable to a 150 gr bullet fired from a 30-06 that creates an exit wound.

by the same token, a 220 gr bullet fired from a 30-06 that didn't create an exit would be preferable to a 225 gr bullet fired from a 338WM that did create an exit wound.

"energy dumping" would seem to hold that 30-30 > 30-06 > 338 WM

It not apples to apples. We need to be talking about the same weight bullet, going the same speed, so that the energy levels are the same.

For instance, 300WM 180gr mono passed through the deer. It is not much bigger going out because it doesn't have a lot of resistance to open the bullet up. You still have part of the heart and lungs that are easy to identify.

A 168 Berger or SMk out of the same gun is producing close to the same energy do to speed difference. That bullet may not exit, it will come apart. The lungs and heart are not identifiable. It looks like blood soup. The amount of meat damage is more extensive, the body of that animal absorbed most of the energy of that round.

The mono deer is going to run, the Berger is going to fold up. I think we are on two different pages of the way we are viewing energy.

The best way I know how to say it is all things are equal meaning mono bullet is make 2000ftlb of energy and Berger bullet is making 2000ftlb of energy. The one that does not exist is going to be the one that transferred the most amount of energy into the animal.

I hope that makes sense, I'm not trying to say you are wrong. I just don't think we are looking at this the same way. Hopefully I did a better job of explaining it.

 

[Woodcarver]

And this is why we can't stop talking about flat shooting cartridges....

The heart is one of my favorite cuts from any animal, furred or feathered, so I prefer mine not to be served as soup.
Massive tissue damage is not the only cause of death, or the only way to have an animal DRT after the shot. Hydrostatic shot plays a part; we will get that to varying degrees based on where the hit occurs. Blood loss plays a part; 2 holes with an open channel between will improve this. CNS impact, perhaps the hardest to directly call unless the head or spine is directly impacted. But at the end of the shot, the goal is a quick, humane kill. And meat in somebodies freezer or drying/smoking rack.
Sometimes, even the perfect shot results in an animal traveling various distances. My first deer, 180gr 30-06, shot through both lungs (mush) and dead center of the heart, broken left shoulder, jumped and ran 30 yards. Would have been farther, but the wet aspen leaves and only 3 legs caused him to wrap around and aspen tree. Bear hit at 30 yards with 405gr 45-70 at 1750fps, both lungs mush, top of the heart gone with 1st shot. Hit twice more as he spun. Left a blood trail waist high for a curving 60 yards where he piled up against a tree. He did give the death moan where he stopped. Antelope hit at 120 yards with a 130gr 270Win broadside, slightly down hill. Both lungs mush, heart was torn up. He ran about 150 yards in a big circle, almost right back to where he started. I was about to put another round in him when he just toppled over. All of these were pass throughs, but the tissue damage was massive. Why didn't they just fall on the spot?
Made a bad hit on an antelope as he stepped forward at the same time the trigger broke. 250-3000 with 100gr bullet at 110-115 yards quartering towards me. Missed the boiler room, but clipped the liver. He took 2 steps and dropped. No exit wound. So is the trick to start aiming at the liver instead of the heart?
The only animals I'll use match bullets on is a prairie dog or coyote, I haven't found a good recipe for them yet . But for big game, my preference is a hole on both sides with edible meat in between. That requires a better bullet, hopefully that mushrooms as designed, but punches through the other side.

 

[Inline6]

And this is why we can't stop talking about flat shooting cartridges....

The heart is one of my favorite cuts from any animal, furred or feathered, so I prefer mine not to be served as soup.
Massive tissue damage is not the only cause of death, or the only way to have an animal DRT after the shot. Hydrostatic shot plays a part; we will get that to varying degrees based on where the hit occurs. Blood loss plays a part; 2 holes with an open channel between will improve this. CNS impact, perhaps the hardest to directly call unless the head or spine is directly impacted. But at the end of the shot, the goal is a quick, humane kill. And meat in somebodies freezer or drying/smoking rack.
Sometimes, even the perfect shot results in an animal traveling various distances. My first deer, 180gr 30-06, shot through both lungs (mush) and dead center of the heart, broken left shoulder, jumped and ran 30 yards. Would have been farther, but the wet aspen leaves and only 3 legs caused him to wrap around and aspen tree. Bear hit at 30 yards with 405gr 45-70 at 1750fps, both lungs mush, top of the heart gone with 1st shot. Hit twice more as he spun. Left a blood trail waist high for a curving 60 yards where he piled up against a tree. He did give the death moan where he stopped. Antelope hit at 120 yards with a 130gr 270Win broadside, slightly down hill. Both lungs mush, heart was torn up. He ran about 150 yards in a big circle, almost right back to where he started. I was about to put another round in him when he just toppled over. All of these were pass throughs, but the tissue damage was massive. Why didn't they just fall on the spot?
Made a bad hit on an antelope as he stepped forward at the same time the trigger broke. 250-3000 with 100gr bullet at 110-115 yards quartering towards me. Missed the boiler room, but clipped the liver. He took 2 steps and dropped. No exit wound. So is the trick to start aiming at the liver instead of the heart?
The only animals I'll use match bullets on is a prairie dog or coyote, I haven't found a good recipe for them yet . But for big game, my preference is a hole on both sides with edible meat in between. That requires a better bullet, hopefully that mushrooms as designed, but punches through the other side.

As stated not for everyone.

I do find it interesting, the bullet that did not exist was the animal that went the shortest distance. Even with a not perfect shot. I do believe the hydrostatic shock is magnified if most of the bullet energy is transferred to the animal.

 

[akrifleman]

As stated not for everyone.

I do find it interesting, the bullet that did not exist was the animal that went the shortest distance. Even with a not perfect shot. I do believe the hydrostatic shock is magnified if most of the bullet energy is transferred to the animal.

A few years ago, I believe it was Jim Carmichael had written about a forensic study on this. The researchers found it was directly related to the bullet coinciding with the heart beat. This simultaneous event caused an over-pressure in the brain. This is why some oddly light strikes produce instant death, and some do not. I no longer have that study in front of me, but I'm sure somebody can find it and chime in. If that doesn't occur, than any subsequent death not related to instant disruption is solely a product of hypoxemia (lack of oxygen in the blood) or straight up blood loss. Trauma shock is the reasons animals behave in various ways before expiring.

African animals tend to have less vitals behind the shoulder than many other places (I understand the shoulders are further back, and perhaps the vitals a bit more forward). As a result, African guides tend to prefer bullets that go through (and penetrate the vitals). In other parts of the world, the vitals are usually only protected by ribs. Expanding bullets cause more damage, and result in hypoxemia quicker than a little or non-expanding bullet. We also don't have a team of professional trackers that can see a drop of blood @100 yds. Additionally, a lot of what we experience is small sample size. A lifetime .200 hitter can start the season 13-15 at the plate, but it won't be sustained. Due to the massive number of engineering variables, what we individually experience tends to be a small sample size. But, as a group... experience has taught African hunting guides to prefer a different bullet than North American and European hunters. Even said, with the advent of premium bullets, over the years in Africa... it seems the preferences for solids or FMJs have given way to one soft followed by a solid. Makes sense, as a premium bullet does more initial damage, but follow up shots are often a terrible angle and lots of tissue to travel through.

 

[Woodcarver]

As stated not for everyone.

I do find it interesting, the bullet that did not exist was the animal that went the shortest distance. Even with a not perfect shot. I do believe the hydrostatic shock is magnified if most of the bullet energy is transferred to the animal.

Agreed

The bullet that did not exit, did not due to hitting what amounted to a bunch of water in the gut. Death came from the massive blood loss from hitting the liver. I would wager the hydrostatic shock did play a part, but a heavily damaged liver will bleed something out as fast as cutting a femoral artery. His gut looked like a blown up heart shot from the volume of blood. Really, really stinky blood, lol.

 

[Inline6]

I'm not a scientist, I'm just decent at squeezing the trigger. I don't know the works of Jim Carmichael. I'll see if I can find his article, my sample size is not large, it's not that small either. I just don't think I can be that lucky that they all fell out the way you are describing.

When I first started hunting on my own, I wanted the fast bullet possible. So I worked all summer and saved up for my rifle and scope. Wanted a 300wm, I also wanted the most accurate round I could reload. I settled on the 168SMK, the Lee reloading manual gave me the starting point and I worked it up. At 200yds I was shooting cloverleaf. I did not know any better, was 16. We also did not have online information like we do today. So with my worked up load, I started stacking up deer. No one ever told me I was using the wrong bullet.

Later on in life when you could read everything and them some on the web. Well everyone said it was the wrong bullet. Same way with Berger, and Amax bullets. We have ate a whole lot of venison due to those bullets and tracking was never a problem.

Now when I am actually the one that is pulling the trigger, most of my shots are neck shots with Berger bullets using a little 6mm 105gr bullet.

This information doesn't make anyone wrong for the bullets they use. To me it makes no difference, someone asked a question and I was providing an answer. It is not the end all be all, it has worked for many years for my family. I have learned a lot from people on forums, I have also read a lot of misinformation too. The biggest thing I see, people tend to believe their way is the best. The reality is if I handed anyone a rifle and they did not know the bullet that was loaded in the rifle They shot an animal with it and it fell DRT. I can't see anyone worried what bullet was used.

 

[akrifleman]

I'm not a scientist, I'm just decent at squeezing the trigger. I don't know the works of Jim Carmichael. I'll see if I can find his article, my sample size is not large, it's not that small either. I just don't think I can be that lucky that they all fell out the way you are describing.

When I first started hunting on my own, I wanted the fast bullet possible. So I worked all summer and saved up for my rifle and scope. Wanted a 300wm, I also wanted the most accurate round I could reload. I settled on the 168SMK, the Lee reloading manual gave me the starting point and I worked it up. At 200yds I was shooting cloverleaf. I did not know any better, was 16. We also did not have online information like we do today. So with my worked up load, I started stacking up deer. No one ever told me I was using the wrong bullet.

Later on in life when you could read everything and them some on the web. Well everyone said it was the wrong bullet. Same way with Berger, and Amax bullets. We have ate a whole lot of venison due to those bullets and tracking was never a problem.

Now when I am actually the one that is pulling the trigger, most of my shots are neck shots with Berger bullets using a little 6mm 105gr bullet.

This information doesn't make anyone wrong for the bullets they use. To me it makes no difference, someone asked a question and I was providing an answer. It is not the end all be all, it has worked for many years for my family. I have learned a lot from people on forums, I have also read a lot of misinformation too. The biggest thing I see, people tend to believe their way is the best. The reality is if I handed anyone a rifle and they did not know the bullet that was loaded in the rifle They shot an animal with it and it fell DRT. I can't see anyone worried what bullet was used.

There is much to be said for competency and bullet placement. You may not be a scientist, but they'd agree that placing a bullet in the correct location is a recipe for cause. I use Berger's all the time, despite the reputation, particularly in my 338. I was not disagreeing with you, only explaining your results. Causality is often misunderstood. We know it works, but not always the why.

 

[Inline6]

The sad part of this conversation is, I can for see a time when we will be required to use none lead bullets. Then we will have a whole new conversation.

 

[Bonk]

the longer a bullet travels, the more it is sent off-course, by wind. outside of KY. lol

Ok, I admit. I can't tell if you're being serious or not.

If you're being serious you might have misunderstood what I posted. Let me clarify. Two identical bullets shot at a target 500 yards away. One is averaging 2000fps and rises 3 feet before descending to hit dead center. The other, averaging 2250 fps has a perfectly flat path. No rise at all. Without digging up a geometry formula the slower bullet with the arc travels an additional 6 feet on it's way to the target (500yds + 3 ft rise + 3 foot fall) and takes .753 seconds to get there. The faster bullet covers it's flat 500 yards in .667 seconds. A difference of .4% distance (500 yds vs 502 yds) and .086 seconds travel time. All you math majors out there feel free to correct my arc distance vs flat trajectory distance. I may not have that part exactly correct but it doesn't change my hypothesis in any meaningful way.

Will allowing the wind an extra 2 yards and an additional .083 seconds to deflect the bullet yield any real world difference in wind deflection? No, it won't. That's why I said the difference is mainly just a theoretical exercise. Quantifiable? Yes, but the effect is not enough to matter at normal hunting distances. Stretch it out to 1000 yds or more and the potential wind deflection will have to be dealt with.

If you were just joking about KY I'm cool with that. No thin skin here.

 

[akrifleman]

A 270 Win can be thrown off 6" at a mere 300 yds w/only 10 mph winds. An inability to judge wind is therefore much more determinate then MPBR which wind has already doubled. Any fool can can calculate drop, but windage at 500 yds is indeed a couple yards. IE a complete miss. Even with physics and gravity defying bullets. Since flat shooting implies implies magically extended ranges, we aren't talking "common shooting distance". This is why windage isn't theoretical. If your talking under 300 yds, "flat shooting" is a in irrelevant concept.

Calculating TOF in terms of windage is a fallacy. Drift is measured angularly. TOF is only relevant to target movement.

 

[Inline6]

You are opening up a whole new can of worms I'm not sure this thread is ready for.

Just realize the higher the bullet goes the strong the wind is compared to the readings on the ground. That stronger wind will move the bullet. Then we can get into shooting over canyons where wind speed is accelerated by funneling effect. Across hills that have up or down drafts.

Obviously the further you shoot the more thing come into play.

This is getting way outside the box of what most shooter experience.

 

[Inline6]

@akrifleman you treed me.

 

[akrifleman]

@akrifleman you treed me.

G@ddamn engineers, right?

 

[Inline6]

G@ddamn engineers, right?

I just squeeze the trigger.

 

[akrifleman]

I just squeeze the trigger.

Mate, knowing what works for you overcomes paper any day. I'd take you out any day.