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
Rifles, Reloading, Optics, Equipment
Rifles, Bullets, Barrels & Ballistics
Bullet Trap
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="rscott5028" data-source="post: 659872" data-attributes="member: 24624"><p>Expansion is a matter of degree rather than an true/false question. </p><p> </p><p>Steel makes a great backstop but the bullet will expand way beyond what it would for hunting. Indeed, it'll splatter even at lower velocity. </p><p> </p><p>As such, the first issue is to shoot into/through media that's somewhat representative of your prey. ...notwithstanding that, animals are comprised of soft tissue and bones such that results could be slightly different depending on POI. </p><p> </p><p>The second issue is recovering the bullet. If you use something too dense, e.g. steel or even phone books, you won't get representative performance either. </p><p> </p><p>bigngreen had some great suggestions and I think that's been Barnes' recommendation in various threads on their forum as well. </p><p> </p><p>In any case, you can ask Barnes and I think they've been saying 1800-1900 fps is sufficient for the TTSX's to perform well. </p><p> </p><p>In any case, simulating on static targets will give you a pretty good indication when velocity is completely inadequate. But, it won't really help identify a particular threshold since "hydrostatic shock" is not really measurable and it all comes down to destruction of vital tissue which is a function of many variables. </p><p> </p><p>Regardless, it sounds like a great experiment. Let us know what you find. </p><p> </p><p>-- richard</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="rscott5028, post: 659872, member: 24624"] Expansion is a matter of degree rather than an true/false question. Steel makes a great backstop but the bullet will expand way beyond what it would for hunting. Indeed, it'll splatter even at lower velocity. As such, the first issue is to shoot into/through media that's somewhat representative of your prey. ...notwithstanding that, animals are comprised of soft tissue and bones such that results could be slightly different depending on POI. The second issue is recovering the bullet. If you use something too dense, e.g. steel or even phone books, you won't get representative performance either. bigngreen had some great suggestions and I think that's been Barnes' recommendation in various threads on their forum as well. In any case, you can ask Barnes and I think they've been saying 1800-1900 fps is sufficient for the TTSX's to perform well. In any case, simulating on static targets will give you a pretty good indication when velocity is completely inadequate. But, it won't really help identify a particular threshold since "hydrostatic shock" is not really measurable and it all comes down to destruction of vital tissue which is a function of many variables. Regardless, it sounds like a great experiment. Let us know what you find. -- richard [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Forums
Rifles, Reloading, Optics, Equipment
Rifles, Bullets, Barrels & Ballistics
Bullet Trap
Top