Forums
New posts
Search forums
What's new
Articles
Latest reviews
Author list
Classifieds
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles and first posts only
Search titles only
By:
New posts
Search forums
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Forums
Hunting
Long Range Hunting & Shooting
25-06 rem thoughts
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="RockyMtnMT" data-source="post: 231124" data-attributes="member: 7999"><p>Hicks,</p><p></p><p>You would have to develop a load for every distance and weight of animal that you may possibly shoot in order to keep the bullet in the animal. I used to subscribe to this theory as well, but physically it is not logical.</p><p></p><p>The only way to insure a good killing shot, is with full penetration, from a bullet that creates a large permanent wound channel.</p><p></p><p>As far as the energy goes, there is relatively little of it. If the bullet struck the animal and did not penetrate at all, like hitting a steel target, the energy the same or less than the recoil that hit you in the shoulder. Go punch an elk in the ribs as hard as you can and see if it kills him.</p><p></p><p>In a nut shell, the bullet must expand in a controlled manner so as to retain enough mass to penetrate fully. The more blunt the shape that the expanded bullet takes the larger and more permanent the wound channel will be. The speed and shape of the expanded bullet are going to be relative to the size of the wound channel.</p><p></p><p>Having a bullet that partially penetrates is not as good as full penetration.</p><p></p><p>Perhaps we should start another thread on this subject, this is the stuff that I find fascinating.</p><p></p><p>Steve</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="RockyMtnMT, post: 231124, member: 7999"] Hicks, You would have to develop a load for every distance and weight of animal that you may possibly shoot in order to keep the bullet in the animal. I used to subscribe to this theory as well, but physically it is not logical. The only way to insure a good killing shot, is with full penetration, from a bullet that creates a large permanent wound channel. As far as the energy goes, there is relatively little of it. If the bullet struck the animal and did not penetrate at all, like hitting a steel target, the energy the same or less than the recoil that hit you in the shoulder. Go punch an elk in the ribs as hard as you can and see if it kills him. In a nut shell, the bullet must expand in a controlled manner so as to retain enough mass to penetrate fully. The more blunt the shape that the expanded bullet takes the larger and more permanent the wound channel will be. The speed and shape of the expanded bullet are going to be relative to the size of the wound channel. Having a bullet that partially penetrates is not as good as full penetration. Perhaps we should start another thread on this subject, this is the stuff that I find fascinating. Steve [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Forums
Hunting
Long Range Hunting & Shooting
25-06 rem thoughts
Top