Is sectional density imporant?

[tony m]

and for that matter muzzle energy? If a bullet exits an animal ,what difference does this make under say 400 yards?

 

[gillettehunter]

Hi Tony. Good question. First of all sectional density refers to penetration. How well a bullet penetrates into an animal. It's not the the most important factor. As long as the bullet gets to the vitals. Muzzle energy refers more to " knock down" power. A lot of people like to see 1000 ft lbs of energy for an elk. Less will work, but more will ensure humane kills. Your other comment about bullets exiting...... If you have to track an animal then a hole through both sides gives a better blood trail. Some will argue if the bullet goes through then part of the energy is wasted. Lots of opinions. I have shot a number of animals with a Barnes TTSX. Most of the time that bullet exits. Here of late I've been using a Berger in my rifles. They rarely exit for me so far. Interestingly they all seem to kill just fine when I do my part. Both types have their place. Learn your limitations as well as your bullets limitations. Used the search function and look at comments on bullets you r thinking of using. You'll figure out quickly enough what you wants to use. Good luck. Bruce

 

[royinidaho]

Kind of.

 

[gillettehunter]

Hey Roy. Thats got to be one of your shortest and most cryptic replies. Mabe you can explain it better than what I did. I think you have a little more experience than me. Bruce

 

[FEENIX]

Hey Roy. Thats got to be one of your shortest and most cryptic replies. Mabe you can explain it better than what I did. I think you have a little more experience than me. Bruce

Agree! Perhaps he's still asleep.

But wait for it ................

 

[jrock]

It's been proven that bigger bullets (diameter) cause more damage. I think bullet construction will bring more value to you than SD based on how you have phrased your comment.

 

[tony m]

That is really what I am getting at..bullet construction is the key.caliber is not.Big Game Hunters are rarely underpowered, what the missle does on impact is the thing..in my view.Personally ,I am more precise and effective using a very familiar rifle...alot.So I am questioning some of the old thinking about sending a rifle ball downrange.Cheers ( yes in this country we occasionally get grizzlies in the chicken houses)

 

[HARPERC]

My 2 cents, when discussing terminal performance sectional density is only useful comparing bullets of the same construction, and it's minimally helpful.

I believe expanding bullets are mostly spent as they exit, and I don't really believe energy figures are meaningful or useful in any practical way.

Bullets that rapidly expand, and don't exit, damage more tissue, and appear at times like more "energy" ended up in the animal.

I prefer exit wounds. One, a large sucking chest wound on both sides seems to slow critters down, two, a better blood trail helps recovery especially in heavy cover.

 

[tony m]

Thankyou .Exit wounds are the key.locating a blood trail a must (our terrain anyways) These days with modern bullet capabilities, in effect ,to shoot at our best, perhaps choose a smaller lighter bullet using this in a smaller caliber.Then practice tons in field conditions and see how you do- to boot its even more enjoyable.Smaller, lighter bullets can penetrate if you choose well.Cheers

 

[bigngreen]

I look forh as much sectional density per cal as I can then change construction to match my launch velocity don't worry much about energy. I no longer worry about an exit but I want to see very good trauma to the vital organs caused by frag and use the sectional density to drive to the far side of the chest and only exit once we get out past 600 yards. I have not had an elk die out of sight and every bullet has made it into the chest cavity since abandoning the use of bullet construction to get through an animal vs sectional density.

 

[HARPERC]

I look forh as much sectional density per cal as I can then change construction to match my launch velocity don't worry much about energy.

I'm not sure the best way to say it, I prefer heavy for caliber bullets. More sectional density, but as a number that can be used to compare different bullet types, and or calibers, I'm doubtful it can be reduced to a number.

Launch and terminal velocity are indicators of bullet performance, but reducing it to a usable, meaningful number such as energy is to me suspect.

Trying not to talk in circles.

 

[tony m]

It is the dialog that matters anyways.musket or Magnum . personally I don'believe I have seen anyone underpowered.All other factors-the three that stand out , bullet performance , the skill in the field and the level of fitness.Cheers.

 

[jrock]

One doesn't need an exit wound to track a deer...if it piles up on the spot because a fragmenting type bullet mushed up its entire insides. Comes down to personal preference. I can imagine that a pass through and more blood on the ground would be helpful at long range shooting where the memory of marking the place the animal was standing fades on your long hike. I think a stronger bullet construction (more penetration) is the safety factor on a shot if you hit large bone. I think if one wants to pay attention to SD it is more linked to BC than "penetration."
This is a good read:
7mm Remington Magnum

 

[HARPERC]

...if... it piles up on the spot because a fragmenting type bullet mushed up its entire insides. Comes down to personal preference.

"IF" is always a large word, and most of our preferences could stand to be backed by more experience.

With a little luck, and enough of the right bullet, we get both, smashed up organs, and a big leaky hole. Then everybody is happy.

That'll be the day. LOL