I never heard of hydrodynamic shock with bullets and flesh! I heard of hydrostatic. What is the hydrodynamic
No Hydrodynamic Shock Below 2600FPS??
- Thread starter ralphjunius
- Start date
Help Support Long Range Hunting Forum
Hydrodynamic expresses fluid in motion. Add the word shock, and it should mean fluid in motion causing shock to an animal's physiology.
ATH
Well-Known Member
You need a new "expert" ballistician.
I would like to see some evidence to support this 2600fps cutoff because I've killed somewhere around 150-200 big game animals from 3 to 760 yards with everything from a 10mm Auto to 3338 Edge and I've not seen it. Any inflection in damage is at a velocity well below that.
Hydrostatic shot, hydraulic...whatever you want to call it...I think we're talking about the ability to cause tissue damage and bleeding some distance outside the immediate wound channel. IMHO it's not just a matter of velocity, but a combination of velocity and bullet construction to determine how quickly energy dumps into the tissue and must be absorbed. Shoot an animal in the shoulder with a FMJ at 3000fps and you're going to get a very different experience than a plastic tipped hunting bullet.
IMHO the inflection point is somewhere around magnum pistol velocities. That's where you really start to see a difference between punching a wound channel and causing collateral tissue damage. That's why I like the 44Mag carbine as a woods gun, it is incredibly effective and gives good wounding but does not cause the massive over-damage that faster rounds do at that range. I've read reports on effectiveness of various rounds in shootings of the homo sapiens kind, that support the notion that there is an inflection point in damage around the 10mmAuto/357Mag range. Curiously this happens to be where many states draw the line for legal pistol rounds for deer.
The type of "shock" that causes an animal to immediately drop it irrelevant. That's either CNS disruption or causing enough skeletal damage they can't stay up.
I would like to see some evidence to support this 2600fps cutoff because I've killed somewhere around 150-200 big game animals from 3 to 760 yards with everything from a 10mm Auto to 3338 Edge and I've not seen it. Any inflection in damage is at a velocity well below that.
Hydrostatic shot, hydraulic...whatever you want to call it...I think we're talking about the ability to cause tissue damage and bleeding some distance outside the immediate wound channel. IMHO it's not just a matter of velocity, but a combination of velocity and bullet construction to determine how quickly energy dumps into the tissue and must be absorbed. Shoot an animal in the shoulder with a FMJ at 3000fps and you're going to get a very different experience than a plastic tipped hunting bullet.
IMHO the inflection point is somewhere around magnum pistol velocities. That's where you really start to see a difference between punching a wound channel and causing collateral tissue damage. That's why I like the 44Mag carbine as a woods gun, it is incredibly effective and gives good wounding but does not cause the massive over-damage that faster rounds do at that range. I've read reports on effectiveness of various rounds in shootings of the homo sapiens kind, that support the notion that there is an inflection point in damage around the 10mmAuto/357Mag range. Curiously this happens to be where many states draw the line for legal pistol rounds for deer.
The type of "shock" that causes an animal to immediately drop it irrelevant. That's either CNS disruption or causing enough skeletal damage they can't stay up.
choprzrul
Well-Known Member
Circa 1995 in Frontier County Nebraska. Mule deer came out of a plum thicket at 15 yards and all I could see was hair thru the scope, so I pulled the trigger.
Browning AB2 Composite Stalker in 300 WM. 165gr Interlock over 79.1gr of RL22 making right at 4000ft lbs at the muzzle, velocity measured with chrony.
My shot hit the deer a little low in the front shoulder. In the time it too me to walk those 15 yards, that deer wasn't even twitching. Stone cold dead.
I'm not a veterinarian, or a forensic pathologist, so I can't tell you what killed that deer, but the bullet was under the far side hide and it was one very dead deer.
Maybe it bled out while I was walking (down hill) those 15 yards?
baggy270
Well-Known Member
The old Roy Weatherby school of learnin!
Win.308Stealth
Well-Known Member
Was this "Ballistician" appointed by the current administration? Let me guess, they are soon going to start pushing the idea that you really don't need a firearm that sends bullets over 500 fps.
Equalizer
Well-Known Member
I don't know about the theories so much but the guy (Nathan Foster) has killed thousands of feral horses and lots of other game with tons of different calibers and cartridges. I bet he's killed way more critters than most of the people around here sayin they are death incarnate, poison mean on anything with fangs, claws or horns. To add obvious insult to injury he's even capable of conducting testing, and writing about it. Maybe read his stuff before you unceremoniously bash it. Look him up. I bet he knows more than you.
Edit: I looked it up he's killed over eight thousand medium to large game animals.
Edit: I looked it up he's killed over eight thousand medium to large game animals.
Last edited:
Equalizer
Well-Known Member
I'll even link the article (second time it's been posted).
Effective Game Killing
Effective game killing- How bullets kill and where to aim to ensure a fast clean kill.
www.ballisticstudies.com
Equalizer
Well-Known Member
And his info/story
And since the OP never linked it, I'll point out that the description of the very article everyone is dismissing says…
And since the OP never linked it, I'll point out that the description of the very article everyone is dismissing says…
Last edited:
WC Shooter
Member
Hi, I've hunted black bear in Alaska, Canada and the lower 48's with hand gun or rifle. Shot placement.is what is important, don't worry about hydrostatic shock, it's bullet placement. Black bears are not that hard to kill. A 44 mag, 30-30 and up will do the job if you place your shot. Don't worry about shock power, your 338 is more than adequate, place your shot!
Please see my attached short video of a nice bear I shot in Manitoba, CA with a 45-70, hand load, (300 gr Nosler Silvertip, IMR 4198 49.5 grs., MV; 2160fps). The bear died instantly.
Good luck hunting.
UncleDano
Well-Known Member
How does your respected ballistics expert define what exactly is hydrodynamic shock value? And how is it related to killing ability of a bullet?
What was your impact velocity?
On a serious note the original post makes 3 main claims/questions
First: hydrostatic? (I have to assume) shock only exists above 2600 fps
I am assuming op made a typographical error and meant hydrostatic not hydrodynamic
Source please. I find it hard to believe bullet construction has nothing to do with it and that velocity is your only variable. Extremely hard. I would like to see a modern peer reviewed paper that even uses the term hydrostatic shock, and not a magazine article. This is leaving aside that it is debated that pressure waves can even have such an effect on cns systems.
*if it's from the tbr above his own words are much less cut and dry about 2600 being a dead stop and it appears a little more dynamic than this in his own words with a different fps being given for larger bullets and bullet design possibly being a large factor also*
Second(implied): you need hydrostatic shock to kill effectively
You dont, you need tissue trauma damaging vital organs/blood lines
Third: should op change their plan to account for this issue (implication current plan not adequate)
Pick the bullet more accurate in your rifle
This entire forum is based around a discipline (LRH) that by nature means many impacts will be under 2600fps. That is not proof that hydrostatic shock(if real) has anything to do with a certain specific velocity number or not. It does however present a body of work that shows many real world examples that if that were the case it is not needed for effective take of game animals. This leads me to the idea that it is largely irrelevant to OPs situation in a real world sense.
However, in an academic manner the first question (velocity limit of cns disruption through pressure wave) is still relevant if OP believes it is. Again given it exists in any manner, which I have little opinion on as frankly, I just don't care all that much for my needs.
First: hydrostatic? (I have to assume) shock only exists above 2600 fps
I am assuming op made a typographical error and meant hydrostatic not hydrodynamic
Source please. I find it hard to believe bullet construction has nothing to do with it and that velocity is your only variable. Extremely hard. I would like to see a modern peer reviewed paper that even uses the term hydrostatic shock, and not a magazine article. This is leaving aside that it is debated that pressure waves can even have such an effect on cns systems.
*if it's from the tbr above his own words are much less cut and dry about 2600 being a dead stop and it appears a little more dynamic than this in his own words with a different fps being given for larger bullets and bullet design possibly being a large factor also*
Second(implied): you need hydrostatic shock to kill effectively
You dont, you need tissue trauma damaging vital organs/blood lines
Third: should op change their plan to account for this issue (implication current plan not adequate)
Pick the bullet more accurate in your rifle
This entire forum is based around a discipline (LRH) that by nature means many impacts will be under 2600fps. That is not proof that hydrostatic shock(if real) has anything to do with a certain specific velocity number or not. It does however present a body of work that shows many real world examples that if that were the case it is not needed for effective take of game animals. This leads me to the idea that it is largely irrelevant to OPs situation in a real world sense.
However, in an academic manner the first question (velocity limit of cns disruption through pressure wave) is still relevant if OP believes it is. Again given it exists in any manner, which I have little opinion on as frankly, I just don't care all that much for my needs.
Last edited:
I've taken many a deer with 12 gauge slugs. The finest (IMO are the Hornady 300 gr SSTs), It's 'shocking'
the damage these low velocity slugs will do.
"https://www.hornady.com/ammunition/shotgun/12-ga-sst-300-gr-ftx-slug#!/"
UNMATCHED LONG RANGE ACCURACY
The SST® Shotgun Slug delivers true 200 yard accuracy and you'll achieve sub-2" groups at 100 yards. No other slug gun ammo can come close to the performance of the SST®. I use an 18" rifled Rem 870 with a red dot.HARD-HITTING TERMINAL PERFORMANCE
The SST® Shotgun Slug packs a target-dropping punch! The 12 GA 300 gr FTX® delivers a crushing 1793 ft/lbs of energy at 100 yards and the smaller, 20 GA 250 gr FTX® delivers an impressive 1200 ft/lbs of energy at the same distance.TEST BARREL (24")
Velocity 100 yds 1641 fps
150 1482
200 1341
