Ammunition > Rifle

Expanding Bullets: How They Really Work (Page 2)

There are many myths and misconceptions when it comes to what hunting bullets actually do—or don’t do—when impacting game.


So why do bullets sometimes appear to “knock down” an animal? Most of the time this occurs because the animal was hit in the spine. It isn’t knocked down, but falls down because the spinal cord is severed. Sometimes, however, a bullet passes close enough to the spine to temporarily disrupt the nervous system, often by striking a rib or the “dorsal processes” on top of the vertebrae. If the bullet passes under the spine, through the lungs, the deer probably will go down and stay down, but if the bullet hits the top of the spine the deer may get up and run away.


A related theory is that a bullet that stays inside a deer expends all its energy, thus somehow “shocking” the deer more severely. Well, not exactly. Bullets that stay inside usually do so because they expanded widely. This slows them down quickly, due to resistance—but the wider bullet also creates a bigger hole in the deer’s vital organs. The bigger hole, not kinetic energy shocking the deer, kills quickly.


How much energy is “lost” when a bullet exits? This has been determined by setting up a chronograph on the far side of a block of media. Normally an exiting bullet is going less than 1000 fps—often less—and we can assume the same is true of a bullet that exits a deer. A 180-grain bullet from a .30-’06 Sprg. at 100 yards carries about 2,500 ft.-lbs. of kinetic energy. If the bullet retains two-thirds of its weight (120 grains) and exits at 1000 fps , it has 266 ft.-lbs. of energy. Subtract 266 from 2,500 and we find that more than 2,200 ft.-lbs. of energy was “dumped” inside the animal. This would seem to be sufficient.


This is also part of the reason why many bullets are found just under the hide on the far side of big-game animals. Fresh animal hide is fairly tough, somewhat elastic, and only lightly connected to the muscle underneath. Most expanded bullets are rounded into the classic lead-faced “mushroom,” so they can’t cut their way through the hide at vastly reduced velocity. Instead they tend to push the hide away from the muscle—until the hide stops stretching and snaps back.


This is the heart of another fallacy believed even by some experienced hunters, who reason that a bullet that doesn’t exit on broadside shots might not penetrate deeply enough on angling shots. This sounds logical, except that the inside of an animal’s chest is mostly lungs, the softest organs in an animal’s body, since they’re filled partly with air. A bullet that penetrates into the lungs will almost always keep going until it reaches something tougher.


My wife Eileen shot a Shiras moose as it quartered away at about 125 yards. The Partition entered the short ribs on the left side and ended up under the hide on the right shoulder, with more than 30 inches of penetration. It did not stop halfway there, even though we have found other 150-grain Partitions under the hide after they only penetrated 15 inches of broadside elk.


Some modern bullets open into four sharp “petals” rather than a rounded mushroom. These petals tend to cut through the hide instead of merely pushing, one reason bullets like the Barnes X-Bullet and Nosler E-Tip often exit.


Of course, X-Bullets and E-Tips retain more weight than most bullets, but many bullets that retain 90 percent of their weight don’t penetrate nearly as deeply. Frontal area is the primary factor in penetration, not retained weight. I once watched a hunting buddy shoot a 100-pound fallow deer with a 360-gr.ain.416 Woodleigh bullet, and the bullet stayed in the little deer. It was shot from a .416 wildcat at close to 2700 fps, somewhat faster than the muzzle velocity the bullet was designed for. It opened up to two and a half times its original diameter, so it didn’t penetrate very far even though it retained 90 percent of its weight.


Oh, and the big bullet did not knock the deer down, despite striking with over “two tons” of kinetic energy. Instead the deer stumbled a few yards before falling. It takes at least 10 seconds for blood pressure to drop after even a small “big-game” animal is hit in the chest, even with a heavy bullet. Expanding bullets work because they induce the medical kind of “shock,” causing blood pressure to drop by putting a hole in the vitals.


In the end it’s that simple.


<< PREV   1   2  

Share |

Comments

ADD YOUR COMMENT

Enter your comments below, they will appear within 24 hours


Your Name


Your Email


Your Comment

12 Responses to Expanding Bullets: How They Really Work (Page 2)

zigo wrote:
December 10, 2012

you are correct about most of what you say but,There still is a shock value involved, but it is the reaction of the soft tissue being extremely damaged . the faster a bullet is traveling,the higher degree of damage is involved to the soft tissue,nerve endings by the blood displacing at a higher velocity. if you were to take a water bottle shoot through it at a low velocity, the water would simply move out of the way of the bullet,as the velocity increases,the water does not have time to move out of the way, damaging any tissue that can not with stand the rapid expansion, causing massive damage and instant death.that's why many times a deer is shot through the chest,without hitting the spinal cord,causes instant death.

ntrudr800 wrote:
July 16, 2011

Interesting & useful article

Rob wrote:
November 21, 2010

I figured this out years ago. Common sense told me that a piece of lead less than a 1/2" inch in diameter couldn't knock me down no matter how fast it was going. And I was pretty sure that if it was going too fast it would probably zip right through me without transferring all of it's energy making it even more ineffective. My favorite round for nearly everything I hunt from antelope to elk is a 7mm Remington Mag with a 140 grain softpoitn running out at about 3,200 fps. Accurate bullet placement is everything.

Eric wrote:
November 16, 2010

I once shot an approximately 120lbs doe with a .300 Win Mag loaded with 150gr soft points at 3300-3400fps. Shot her right through the rib cage behind the shoulder. There was at least a 2 inch exit hole with pieces of lung scattered in a triangle shaped pattern just beyond the exit wound. Deer literally flipped over in her tracks without moving following the shot. When field dressed the lungs were shredded and the heart literally fell out of the chest cavity having been completely sheared away from the great vessels. I think there is definitely something to the hydrostatic shock theory.

Rifleman wrote:
November 16, 2010

Building a box, filling it with moist dirt and then extrapolating transfer of projectile energy to animal flesh and bone is like comparing a child's riding his tricycle down the sidewalk to an F-18 Super Hornet on an attack run because they both move through air. How does Barsness spell b.a.l.l.i.s.t.i.c g.e.l.a.t.i.n? Perhaps some insights from African P.H.s who understand what it takes to anchor any of the Big Five might have lent some practical legitimacy to this article.

Jim from Missouri wrote:
November 16, 2010

MY son and I kill a lot of whitetail deer. He hunts with a 338 win mag and I use a 375 h&h mag just because we like those guns. We dress and cut up our own deer. We try to shoot the deer just behind the front shoulder with a broadside shot. With either gun, we will have a nice entrance hole and a slightly larger exit hole with the vitals pulvurized. If the bullet goes too high or too far forward and strikes connected bone we end up with a large exit wound. As large as 12 in. By the way, you can't tell the difference from the 338 and the 375. He shots speer 250 gr grand slam and I shoot 300 gr Hornady rn. I always thought it had someting to do with the bullet slowing down for an instant that made the difference somehow. I enjoyed your article, but I'll have to re read it several times to maybe get my answer. I think it's in there somewhere.

Anton Petrash wrote:
November 16, 2010

The problem with hydrostatic shock tearing open the internal organs is the extreme elasticity of these tissues. The water jugs, while not entirely rigid, are not very elastic, and therefor are torn apart.

sunaj wrote:
November 16, 2010

Useful article, but the explanation of shock was not explained very well, in a living system the effect of hydrostatic pressure cause an instantaneuos pressure wave that destroys tissue, function and disables the nervous system, hence it frequently stops the animal immediately

Anton Petrash wrote:
November 16, 2010

It's time to put and end to the idea that "muzzle" or kinetic energy is what causes bullet penetration and that anything other than shot placement and penetration depth contribute to "knock down power." Essentially, momentum (F=ma) and not kinetic energy (F=mv2)is the important force here. That's why I prefer big subsonic rounds (.45 230gr and 9mm 147grain) for self-defense.

Rancher wrote:
November 16, 2010

I agree for the most part, however I question a couple of things based on my experience/observations. The long narrow wound channel of the hunting bullet may be true but I suggest as Pop did that the amount of hydrostatic shock damage around that wound channel is what determines the lethality. Also regarding the meat damage around entrance vs exit, I often see more damage around the exit. It appears to me to be for 2 reasons. 1. The bullet does not fully expand instantly on entrance. 2. Exit damage is the result of the expanded bullet as well as the blood and tissue it is pushing (hydrostatic shock)

Pop wrote:
November 12, 2010

Very interesting and makes alot of sense. But... When I was a kid, "shock" was explained to me as "hydrostatic shock". I.e. When you hit a one gallon water jug with a hegh velocity bullet the water jug exploddes. It explodes because the bullet slamming into water, at very high speed,creates a wave of high pressure which shatters the jug with a momentary pulse of very high water pressure. When a bullet hits the inside of the animal "hydrostatic shiock" tears open the enternal organs. So I was taught. What do you think blows up the jug? Is there a "hydrostatic shock effect" that streaches and tears the internal organs? You believe this because?

Joe Gallagher wrote:
November 10, 2010

Great article!!!