stupid bullet question...

S

Super-Dave

New member
Suppose you have two identical bullets, bullet A and bullet B. Suppose bullet A impacts medium to large game at 2600 fps and suppose bullet B impacts identical game in same spot at a velocity of 1300 fps. If neither bullet yaws, mushrooms or fragments and completely penetrates the game, do the bullets cause similar destruction? Will bullet A cause significant more damage?
 
I have. Some experts claim its not significant.

In addition would not bullet A transfer the same amount of energy as bullet B since both bullets completely penetrate?
 
Still too many unknowns. It would depend on the bullets construction, weight, and the type of animal hit. Some bullets are designed to work at 2600 fps, others would fail at that speed. Same with an impact of 1300 fps, some will work, others not. Use the right bullet for the job at hand and they work. Use the wrong bullet and it will fail.
 
In addition would not bullet A transfer the same amount of energy as bullet B since both bullets completely penetrate?
Click to expand...
Not even close. The energy increases as the square of the velocity. So the bullet going 2600 fps would have 4 times the energy of the one going half that speed. Since you are eliminating expansion and fragmentation, the result would be deeper penetration and hence more internal damage to bones and organs.
 
good question...and suppose we add that the path through the animal does not injure a major organ nor cause bleed out.

looking at lots of info from gelatin penetration tests is visually seems
that the heavier bullet causes more cavitation within the media. the easy explanation is that effect is caused by the fact that the bullet is spinning faster
(RPM = MV x 720/twist).

yet lots of evidence when hunters found the bullet literally against the opposite side of the entry against the skin or laying right on the ground.
did the animal die faster than a pass through?
--to answer that a hunter would have to cut and examine on the spot
and than, over time, compare to other examines; always using the same bullet and 2 powder charges.

me, I'm a gonna go ask Bullwinke; tune in next week

----------
Mal, I agree with you as to its kinetic energy yet I read the question as being how much energy it gives ( the size/shape of its destructive path) up as it passes through -- and I see from the gel tests that faster does. it may be that the groves on the bullet are responsible. just one possibility. but the faster you push something out of the way, the more energy you transfer, the more disruptive the object is.

so I've talked myself into the answer:

speed kills and faster causes more destruction
 
Last edited:
In addition would not bullet A transfer the same amount of energy as bullet B since both bullets completely penetrate?
Click to expand...

While the faster bullet in theory would have more energy to transfer, without expansion to help dump that energy and not hitting a significant amount of tissue that both bullets pass completely thru, to me while more energy is transferred, damage would be similar. Hit something solid, like bone and the story changes, as bone will transfer energy mor readily than soft tissue, IMHO. Back during Vietnam when the .223 was introduced to the military, Popular Mechanics ran an article claiming that even with the use of FMJ ammo, that the round was so fast, superficial wounds would turn all the surrounding flesh into mush from Hydrostatic shock. Hitting bone would shatter it in the whole limb. This did not prove to be true. FME, In real life hunting, two bullets, going the same velocity, hitting the exact same spot on an animal may have obvious differences in damage due to variables we cannot control.
 
Without expansion of any kind, the only remaining factor is Hydrostatic Shock.

Hydrostatic shock is essentially non-existent at any and all handgun velocities, up to about 1,800fps, and really doesn't become a major factor until between 2,600 and 2,900fps, minimum, from what I've studied.

Since your fastest bullet is barely at the bottom of the theoretical range and you have no increased surface area to aid in the energy transfer necessary for hydrostatic shock to be maximally effective, my guess is that the difference in your two scenarios is how fast each bullet is going when it hits the tree on the other side.
 
My guess is:
If both bullets completely penetrate the animal, and
If the slowest of the two went through a major organ, and
It resulted in the death of the animal,
The faster bullet probably would not make it any more dead.
 
I get what the OP is asking. In a pass through shot where the bullet's energy is not a factor because its expelled in the stree behind the animal, when traveling through flesh without hitting bone, with no change in bullet weight, does the speed of the bullet while passing through affect the size of the wound channel? Part of me says the force at which the bullet parts the flesh causes a wider wound, while the other part of me says the faster it moves, the cleaner it cuts.
 
TimSr said:
...does the speed of the bullet while passing through affect the size of the wound channel? Part of me says the force at which the bullet parts the flesh causes a wider wound, while the other part of me says the faster it moves, the cleaner it cuts.
Click to expand...

There's more to it that the size of the wound channel. Hydrostatic shock is REMOTE damage in an area that the bullet itself didn't hit, created by the shockwave/compression of fluids.

The trouble is, it depends on rapid energy transfer (bullet expansion) and high speed. The OP's example has neither.
 
I kind of think bullet A's extra energy is not transfered because it does not yaw mushroom or fragment. The only time any extra energy might be transfered is on initial impact, but that is done on the skin and outside of the games body resulting in probably no significant hydro shock value.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top