A couple of other current threads made me decide to start this one. My basic question is this, which factor is more important when shooting bullets into animals, expansion or penetration? Does the species that is being shot affect which is more critical? If you had to loose some of one to gain some of the other, which would you choose?
I am not a ballistician or even the most experienced hunter in the world. However, I think that penetration is more important. Don't get me wrong, I understand that expanding bullets should cause larger wounds, thus more tissue damage and quicker death. That is what us hunters really want, a quick and merciful end to an animals life.
Hearts, lungs, even brains are not located near the surface of most animals. If a bullet doesn't reach a vital, all the mushrooming in the world is worthless. Most of my hunting experience is with bird hunting. Small shotgun pellets don't exactly expand. I do like to explore the interanl damage done by them when I am field dressing a bird, espically if the bird died before hitting the ground. On those instant dead birds, I have found the one or more pellets had reached the lung or heart, no expansion of the pellet. In fact, if the projectile was cleaned it could be used again.
I realize that bird anatomy is very different then deer or bear anatomy. But shouldn't the principle be similar. If a bullet, expanded or not, cuts through an animal's heart, the animal soon expires. If a bullet expands but doesn't reach a vital, the animal will suffer some.
So, where do you guys stand on this? I want to hear form hunters that have more experience then me, which is probably most of you.
I am not a ballistician or even the most experienced hunter in the world. However, I think that penetration is more important. Don't get me wrong, I understand that expanding bullets should cause larger wounds, thus more tissue damage and quicker death. That is what us hunters really want, a quick and merciful end to an animals life.
Hearts, lungs, even brains are not located near the surface of most animals. If a bullet doesn't reach a vital, all the mushrooming in the world is worthless. Most of my hunting experience is with bird hunting. Small shotgun pellets don't exactly expand. I do like to explore the interanl damage done by them when I am field dressing a bird, espically if the bird died before hitting the ground. On those instant dead birds, I have found the one or more pellets had reached the lung or heart, no expansion of the pellet. In fact, if the projectile was cleaned it could be used again.
I realize that bird anatomy is very different then deer or bear anatomy. But shouldn't the principle be similar. If a bullet, expanded or not, cuts through an animal's heart, the animal soon expires. If a bullet expands but doesn't reach a vital, the animal will suffer some.
So, where do you guys stand on this? I want to hear form hunters that have more experience then me, which is probably most of you.