Hydrostatic shock

H4831 said:
I grew up in the era when all bush homesteaders had to have wild meat, 12 months of the year, or the family would go hungry....
Another fellow killed thirty moose with a 30-30. I asked him how many he had wounded that had got away. He thought for a while, then said, "I can't remember any moose that got away wounded."
Click to expand...

I have thankfully never been there... but I imagine nothing sharpens your aim better than your childs growling belly.
 
smiley1 said:
I have noticed bang-flop more from hitting the CNS (spine/brain) then bullet speed.
Click to expand...

Bang Flop is over-rated unless you have a Mountain Goat standing on the edge of a 500 foot cliff... and CNS does put them down, BUT NOBODY should be AIMING for the CNS.
 
Although I haven't researched it as it relates to terminal ballistics, hydrostatic shock should relate to the time over which the bullet kinetic energy is transferred to the body that it impacts. So even though velocity and mass might change, there should always be a hydrostatic shock of some magnitude that would depend on the size/shape/speed/mass of the bullet and the density of the target that it impacts (how fast it slows down). So, short answer, no it's not likely that there's some magic velocity below which hydrostatic shock does not occur.
 
dthunter said:
Another thing that puzzles me.

People think that faster bullets deflect more. Not true at all!

Before the average guy gets his hackles up with this comment, just bear with me!!!


If a shooter fires a bullet into a tangle of bush (say a 3006,180grain bullet going 2700fps)
And another bullet (22-250,55 grain bullet, going 3500fps).

Most certainly the old 3006 is going to plow a straigher path through the nasty stuff.
But that is not comparing "apples to apples".
Two completly different bullet weights and momentum values.

situation #2:

a shooter fires a 3006, and a 180 grain bullet at 2700fps.
and he fires a second bullet, 180 grain bullet at 2850fps.
This is an apples to apples comparison.
the bullet with more 'momentum' (hence the faster) will plow straighter through the tangled mess.

But since no two bullets can fly through the same tangled path, through the same exact limbs and obstructions, it makes this age old debate some what pointless. LOL!

Again, Just another observation I felt compelled to comment on.

Anyone with any thoughts on this?
Click to expand...



My thoughts are as more force hits with the faster bullet on a twig the more force exerted back on the bullet. Therefore more deflection in an apples to apples comparison. Bullet construction allows plays a role as well. Blunt bullets seem to stay straighter then longer sleeker bullets as they have longer bearing surfaces to cause more angled momentum. For example, skipping stones on water. Longer narrower rocks skip better then blunt shaped ones. Just my opinions though. When I hunt open areas I take my 2506. When I hunt the thick stuff I take my 4570
 
Even a 22 LR High Velocity Hollow Point has hydrostatic energy. The higher the velocity the more energy... it's a simple fact.

Many years ago I managed to get shot through my right arm just above the elbow with a .22 LRHVHP ... what was left of the expanded HP bullet bounced off a rib. Instantly my arm and shoulder went limp and felt numb... I thought I had been shot in the shoulder and felt around my shoulder with my left hand. I did not know where I was shot until I got my jacket off and could see the blood spurting out... The feeling came back in a few minutes... I don't know if what I experienced was hydrostatic shock but I suspect an animal hit in the chest with a high velocity round would not really feel any immediate pain.
 
Hydrostatic shock potential of a cartridge won't matter much unless the bullet impacts the animal where it will penetrate AND cause a high enough pressure inside tissue and blood vessels to cause massive brain hemorrhaging via hydraulic affect. What we generally call immediate incapacitation.
 
Yikes guntech! I hope you fully recovered from that! Even a 22 can leave someone with a disability or life long chronic pain.
 
I have never before seen the infatuation with bang/flop kills as on this forum. I think it is a product of too much time in front of the computer and not enough time on a trigger. Hydrostatic shock does exist and is proven by the red jello around the wound channel of a high velocity bullet strike. How far from the strike the red jello radiates tells you how much shock destruction there is. It still doesn't help if the hit is in the hind quarters or guts though does it, so who cares?
I'm happy if they fall down right in their tracks, I'm happy if they fall down within sight, I'm happy if they fall down within a couple hundred yards, just so long as they FALL DOWN. I'm sorry but after killing well over 200 or maybe 300 big game animals the only conclusion I can absolutely attest to is if you put a bullet through or into the front 1/3 of an animal it will die. Any other hit and it may not die and a miss will almost guarantee it will not die in the foreseeable future.
 
Last edited:
kamlooky said:
And stay down.
Click to expand...

Good point Looky, I'm always afraid of the bang/flops leaping up and running off, not so with an animal that runs off a few meters and tips over, it will most likely never arise, but way too many bang/flops DO rise to run off and die another day. And in the case of dangerous game, may not afford you the same luxury!!
 
c-fbmi said:
I have never before seen the infatuation with bang/flop kills as on this forum. I think it is a product of too much time in front of the computer and not enough time on a trigger. Hydrostatic shock does exist and is proven by the red jello around the wound channel of a high velocity bullet strike. How far from the strike the red jello radiates tells you how much shock destruction there is. It still doesn't help if the hit is in the hind quarters or guts though does it, so who cares?
I'm happy if they fall down right in their tracks, I'm happy if they fall down within sight, I'm happy if they fall down within a couple hundred yards, just so long as they FALL DOWN. I'm sorry but after killing well over 200 or maybe 300 big game animals the only conclusion I can absolutely attest to is if you put a bullet through or into the front 1/3 of an animal it will die. Any other hit and it may not die and a miss will almost guarantee it will not die in the foreseeable future.
Click to expand...

Doug, I concur with your observations wholeheartedly. :D
Regards, Dave.
 
I agree with Doug as well, bang flops very often end up with the animal rising up quickly and darting off. Still recovered further down the trail, but rarely do they stay down unless it was spinal or brain shot.
 
guntech said:
I have never had a bang flop through the heart or lungs that got up...
Click to expand...

I have never had a bang flop from a heart or lung shot PERIOD! They always run off some distance... never very far, and ALWAYS with a good blood trail. Bang flop = DRT and zero distance covered after the shot... the only times that I have experienced this is when I MISSED.
 
H4831 said:
"It never fails to amaze me that people still put so much emphasis on velocity/energy, some even stating minumums to guarantee kills on game of this size, or that size."

Now Dave, you have to admit, the manufacturers of firearms and ammo, have done a tremendous job of keeping the shooting public convinced of that!
Otherwise, all these short and super short magnums of various dimensions, as well as some other designs, would never have seen the light of day, if it were not for all the bs fed us under the general heading of ballistics.
I grew up in the era when all bush homesteaders had to have wild meat, 12 months of the year, or the family would go hungry. They shot moose and elk with any rifle they happened to have, when that terrible age, known as the great deperession, overtook the world.
I had a considerable older brother who kept our rather large family well supplied in elk and moose meat, but other families weren't so lucky. I have often seen school kids going hungry, when the hens had quit laying for the winter, the cow was drying up, the vegetables in the cellar were nearly gone and the dad couldn't get a moose.
No one ever questioned whether a rifle was good enough for big game, they just took their rifle, whatever it was, and shot game with it. One homesteader, a family friend, had a Winchester 351 self loading. He bought a box of 20 shells for it and when the box was empty he had killed nine moose with the box of shells.
Another fellow killed thirty moose with a 30-30. I asked him how many he had wounded that had got away. He thought for a while, then said, "I can't remember any moose that got away wounded."
Click to expand...
Thanks for the story my grandfather told me stories like that about where he grew up in North West Sask. Just appriciate when guys like you and Dave share with us. Yup my gramps has a 30-30 he swears every shell but the first 3 that the gun has seen has shot either a moose, deer and elk. I believe him.
Cheers
Geoff
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom