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
Energy or bullet diameter most important?
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="Petey308" data-source="post: 2759631" data-attributes="member: 106845"><p>Hello Brett,</p><p></p><p>Yes, it's been a while since I've interacted here. Life gets busy at times, which I know you can relate to.</p><p></p><p>I guess first off, I'm a little confused by how you seem to say certain things I've said are good, and you agree, but also things are contradictory, and you gave no real explanation as to how or why. At least nothing real specific was given that I read. I'm sorry if it's just that you took offense to what I said. I was not at all trying to be offensive to anyone.</p><p></p><p>I don't want to get into any argument or heated debate. I'm not coming back at you or anything, as I don't think you were coming at me. I'm only responding in an effort to give clarity to what I said and what you said in response. In post #202 in this thread, when I quoted and broke down the other response, I was deliberate in trying to respond only to what was said, and not who said it.</p><p></p><p>I've taken my time now before writing this response because I don't want it to just be some irrational and emotionally driven response. There's no negativity behind this.</p><p></p><p>So with all that said, I'm not entirely sure where to start off here, so I'll just start with the two areas/terms you brought up for me to look into.</p><p></p><p>In regards to "planes and slip", I can only assume you're talking material science here and mostly trying to get at how slip planes relate to plasticity, or more specifically plastic deformation and how the copper reacts, deforms, and breaks away after impacting an animal (If I'm wrong, please correct me and explain how I'm wrong. There's no need to beat around the bush).</p><p></p><p>I do understand that concept and how it applies. It has a lot to do with how and why the nose/ogive of monos like Hammer, Apex, Cutting Edge, LeHigh Defense, etc come apart and break away from the shank. Differences in alloys affect this as well, like if the petals fracture into many pieces, a few large pieces, if the shank looks as though the petals chipped off, or if it's more of a clean break, etc.</p><p></p><p>The nose coming apart and petals separating occurs rapidly, and I can see where you're trying to compare it to a "shaped charge", as you mentioned. As in, the nose essentially explodes and you see it as similar to an HEI round.</p><p></p><p>Since there's no actual explosive in the nose of these bullets, it's not the same and the force created as the petals expand, peel back, and separate is still only just instant massive hydraulic force, which pushes the fluid and tissues outward (both forwards and perpendicular), producing a ton of outward force and pressure in the process. This would cause the ribcage to expand, and would produce what looks like a "bubble" formed in the chest cavity. I'm not trying to pick on your terminology. Use what terms you like. Heck, I might still be wrong in my interpretation of what you're using it to refer to.</p><p></p><p>So with that said, I also understand the flat surface area created and left behind on the shank of such a bullet produces far more outwards (perpendicular) force than a pointed or completely rounded shape. And less contact surface means less overall opposing force to decrease the forward momentum and it also decreases drag.</p><p></p><p>That said, a lead core bullet that sheds weight can produce a similar transfer/conversion of energy into a rapid pressure increase and hydraulic force, and the mushrooming and wider contact surface , even if more rounded, produces a lot of perpendicular force as well. It just tends to produce more opposing force and drag and loses momentum at a higher rate, and its penetration potential CAN be less. As stated in my previous posts, a higher rate of momentum loss means more energy is transferred/converted to force (hydraulic force in this circumstance). So due to the potential high rate of momentum loss, there needs to be sufficient starting mass and retained mass to ensure said bullet penetrates adequately.</p><p></p><p>So, by ensuring said lead core bullet has enough mass at the start, and retains enough mass, and also retains enough velocity after the initial impact and shedding of weight, it can and will still penetrate deeply and this is when we see exits. Having a rounded front/edges also has the effect of reducing some drag and lowering some of the opposing forces. The amount of wounding produced is still massive as well.</p><p></p><p>We see similar internal damage with both types of bullets too, in the form of puréed organs, from the hydraulic force blowing them apart, and overall wide wounding. This still is dependent on other things though. It's not always guaranteed with either type of bullet.</p><p></p><p>Mass tends to be a bigger factor with soft constructed lead core bullets, and more specifically: retained momentum. Getting the right amount and balance is definitely achievable though and putting it all together produces excellent results that have been well documented.</p><p></p><p>The post below was my attempt at discussing the differences in momentum and how with plenty of starting mass, plenty of retained mass with certain lead core bullets still occurs.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>This all may sound confusing and hard to do, but it's not. Hundreds and even thousands of hunters are successful with this all over the world. That's why there are countless success stories with soft constructed lead core bullets. It's still easy to screw up too, and is why we also have seen or heard about lots of horror stories, but every bullet has its share of horror stories. There are lots of threads in this forum proving that lol.</p><p></p><p>And to be clear, I am not at all trying to debate which bullet is better here. I'm discussing both basic types that were recently brought to attention in an example, and how each type puts energy to work. That's the whole point of this thread. It's not at all about saying a lead core is better, or a mono is better, or a specific type of either is better. It's about how any and all put energy to work and what is most important when selecting a bullet for your particular needs.</p><p></p><p>Hopefully this helps clear things up on my end. If you have more to discuss, I'm all ears.</p><p></p><p>Aaron.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Petey308, post: 2759631, member: 106845"] Hello Brett, Yes, it's been a while since I've interacted here. Life gets busy at times, which I know you can relate to. I guess first off, I'm a little confused by how you seem to say certain things I’ve said are good, and you agree, but also things are contradictory, and you gave no real explanation as to how or why. At least nothing real specific was given that I read. I’m sorry if it’s just that you took offense to what I said. I was not at all trying to be offensive to anyone. I don't want to get into any argument or heated debate. I’m not coming back at you or anything, as I don’t think you were coming at me. I'm only responding in an effort to give clarity to what I said and what you said in response. In post #202 in this thread, when I quoted and broke down the other response, I was deliberate in trying to respond only to what was said, and not who said it. I’ve taken my time now before writing this response because I don’t want it to just be some irrational and emotionally driven response. There’s no negativity behind this. So with all that said, I'm not entirely sure where to start off here, so I'll just start with the two areas/terms you brought up for me to look into. In regards to "planes and slip", I can only assume you're talking material science here and mostly trying to get at how slip planes relate to plasticity, or more specifically plastic deformation and how the copper reacts, deforms, and breaks away after impacting an animal (If I’m wrong, please correct me and explain how I’m wrong. There’s no need to beat around the bush). I do understand that concept and how it applies. It has a lot to do with how and why the nose/ogive of monos like Hammer, Apex, Cutting Edge, LeHigh Defense, etc come apart and break away from the shank. Differences in alloys affect this as well, like if the petals fracture into many pieces, a few large pieces, if the shank looks as though the petals chipped off, or if it’s more of a clean break, etc. The nose coming apart and petals separating occurs rapidly, and I can see where you're trying to compare it to a "shaped charge", as you mentioned. As in, the nose essentially explodes and you see it as similar to an HEI round. Since there's no actual explosive in the nose of these bullets, it’s not the same and the force created as the petals expand, peel back, and separate is still only just instant massive hydraulic force, which pushes the fluid and tissues outward (both forwards and perpendicular), producing a ton of outward force and pressure in the process. This would cause the ribcage to expand, and would produce what looks like a "bubble" formed in the chest cavity. I’m not trying to pick on your terminology. Use what terms you like. Heck, I might still be wrong in my interpretation of what you’re using it to refer to. So with that said, I also understand the flat surface area created and left behind on the shank of such a bullet produces far more outwards (perpendicular) force than a pointed or completely rounded shape. And less contact surface means less overall opposing force to decrease the forward momentum and it also decreases drag. That said, a lead core bullet that sheds weight can produce a similar transfer/conversion of energy into a rapid pressure increase and hydraulic force, and the mushrooming and wider contact surface , even if more rounded, produces a lot of perpendicular force as well. It just tends to produce more opposing force and drag and loses momentum at a higher rate, and its penetration potential CAN be less. As stated in my previous posts, a higher rate of momentum loss means more energy is transferred/converted to force (hydraulic force in this circumstance). So due to the potential high rate of momentum loss, there needs to be sufficient starting mass and retained mass to ensure said bullet penetrates adequately. So, by ensuring said lead core bullet has enough mass at the start, and retains enough mass, and also retains enough velocity after the initial impact and shedding of weight, it can and will still penetrate deeply and this is when we see exits. Having a rounded front/edges also has the effect of reducing some drag and lowering some of the opposing forces. The amount of wounding produced is still massive as well. We see similar internal damage with both types of bullets too, in the form of puréed organs, from the hydraulic force blowing them apart, and overall wide wounding. This still is dependent on other things though. It’s not always guaranteed with either type of bullet. Mass tends to be a bigger factor with soft constructed lead core bullets, and more specifically: retained momentum. Getting the right amount and balance is definitely achievable though and putting it all together produces excellent results that have been well documented. The post below was my attempt at discussing the differences in momentum and how with plenty of starting mass, plenty of retained mass with certain lead core bullets still occurs. This all may sound confusing and hard to do, but it’s not. Hundreds and even thousands of hunters are successful with this all over the world. That’s why there are countless success stories with soft constructed lead core bullets. It’s still easy to screw up too, and is why we also have seen or heard about lots of horror stories, but every bullet has its share of horror stories. There are lots of threads in this forum proving that lol. And to be clear, I am not at all trying to debate which bullet is better here. I'm discussing both basic types that were recently brought to attention in an example, and how each type puts energy to work. That's the whole point of this thread. It's not at all about saying a lead core is better, or a mono is better, or a specific type of either is better. It's about how any and all put energy to work and what is most important when selecting a bullet for your particular needs. Hopefully this helps clear things up on my end. If you have more to discuss, I’m all ears. Aaron. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Forums
Hunting
Long Range Hunting & Shooting
Energy or bullet diameter most important?
Top