Hunting with FMJ's in Ontario and Quebec

The reason that there is an international convention against the useof expanding bullets by the military goes back to the very end of the 19th century. British military was researching ways of making military ammunition more effective. They came up with reliably expanding bullets. Work was done at the arsenal in Dum-Dum, India. (root of the term"dum-dum" for an expanding bullet).

The Imperial German Army heard of this research, and fearing that it would put them at a disadvantage in the anticipated Great War, stirred up a great propaganda campaign to allege the "inhumanity" of such ammunition (as they did not have a reliable military version developed). This campaign was successful and resulted in the Hague Convention .

The Geneva Conventions came much later and deal with different matters entirely.
 
I have to agree with everything Rick said. FMJ can be very effective. People seem to have conveniently omitted the fact that all bullets tumble and many fragment. Assuming a FMJ bullet will simply pass through and leave a small hole is a gross over symplification. Furthermore, some non FMJ bullets offer little or no expansion in many cases. Shot placement is always the key. Yes, premium hunting bullets offer better transfer of energy under most conditions, but they are certainly not golden BBs. To me it makes sense for hunters to be educated in the facts and allowed to choose the best options.
Others have pointed out that the arbitrary rules in place often make little sense. Minimum bullet diameter says nothing about muzzle energy. Alberta recently eliminated its long standing overall cartridge length rule which was equally useless. Perhaps all the arbitrary regulations could be eliminated entirely and the hunter training could focus instead on energy requirements, bullet options and real life experiences with various caliber/bullet/cartridge options.
 
redleg said:
I have to agree with everything Rick said. FMJ can be very effective. People seem to have conveniently omitted the fact that all bullets tumble and many fragment. Assuming a FMJ bullet will simply pass through and leave a small hole is a gross over symplification. Furthermore, some non FMJ bullets offer little or no expansion in many cases. Shot placement is always the key. Yes, premium hunting bullets offer better transfer of energy under most conditions, but they are certainly not golden BBs. To me it makes sense for hunters to be educated in the facts and allowed to choose the best options.
Others have pointed out that the arbitrary rules in place often make little sense. Minimum bullet diameter says nothing about muzzle energy. Alberta recently eliminated its long standing overall cartridge length rule which was equally useless. Perhaps all the arbitrary regulations could be eliminated entirely and the hunter training could focus instead on energy requirements, bullet options and real life experiences with various caliber/bullet/cartridge options.
Click to expand...

Redleg, your post is right on, except when you said that all bullets tumble. This is simply not true of the soft point bullet that expands properly, nor is it true of the properly designed flat or hemispherical nosed, parallel sided solid. Provided these bullets do not have their attitudes changed by intervening obstacles on their way to the target, they penetrate game animals in a straight line, provided their velocity is within the design parameters of the bullet, and provided that the bullet is long enough that it continues to rotate around a linear axis after expansion.

The reason for a bullet to tumble during penetration is almost always due to the fact that the bullet is tail heavy; so when the nose encounters resistance in a medium denser than air, the tail tries to pass the nose. The center of gravity of the expanded soft point moves to the nose of the bullet. That bullet is very stable regardless of the density of the medium it penetrates. Ditto for the properly designed solid. Tests have shown that the traditional Kynoch style solids tend to follow a path of least resistance, but the modern solid is of short length, parallel sides and bluff nosed is very stable throughout its penetration.
 
303 British ammunition of WW2 vintage was made with a piece of aluminum in the nose section. This was for the purpose of making the front of the bullet lighter, thus making the bullet more unstable, enabling it to tumble easier.
 
FYI - the term is yaw, as opposed to tumble.

Depending upon the impact velocity the yaw can expose the sides of the bullet to forces that they are not enginered for - this casues fragmentation.

Obviously for hunting for food or pelts a fragmenting bullet is NOT ideal, as it will damage a greater amount of the meat, and potentially the fur as well.
 
Quote "What about mandatory proficiency testing before hunting every year....make sure guys can actually shoot straight before going afield.....think that's a good idea too? You know....for the good of the animals and all that. Seriously: There are far more animals lost every year because people can't shoot....why not have him include a law on shot placement as well? "

I recall that in New Brunswick you have to wait 3 years before being allowed back in the draw for a moose tag. Getting a moose tag is a big deal. If your name is drawn, you have to go to a clinic and proove you can shoot. As I recall (maybe someone here can update or correct me) you have to be able to hit a 8x11 piece of paper at 25 yards from the standing position 2 out of 3 shots.

It is common for guys to finally get a tag opportunity but fail the shooting test.

As for tumbling. I have been involved with quite few ballistic gelatine tests. Occasionaly a non-expanding bullet is shot. These tests are at 200 yards, so that the bullets are stable when they hit.

A 62 grain 5.56 (223) military bullet tumbles within a couple of inches and usually breaks in half.

A Sierra match bullet sometimes goes straight through two blocks and sometimes tumbles. Some tumbling bullets break in half.

Hornady A Max bullets almost always mushroom like a hunting bullet.

The longer the bullet the more likley it is to tumble and break.

The neat think about ballsitic gellatin is that you can see the wound channel. A mushrooming bullet dumps energy quickly and creates a cavity. The cavity can be close to the surface, or deeper, depending on velocity and jacket strength.

A tumbling bullet makes a small cavity but leaves a larger channel. If it is well placed I see no reason to believe it would not quickly be lethal.

I am of the opinion that shot placement is 75% of the issue. Or, put another way, a good bullet/caliber does not amke up for a poor shot.
 
GANDERITE said:
If your name is drawn, you have to go to a clinic and proove you can shoot. As I recall (maybe someone here can update or correct me) you have to be able to hit a 8x11 piece of paper at 25 yards from the standing position 2 out of 3 shots.

It is common for guys to finally get a tag opportunity but fail the shooting test.
Click to expand...


:eek:
missing that is like missing a Lazyboy at 100 yards :runaway:
 
H4831 said:
303 British ammunition of WW2 vintage was made with a piece of aluminum in the nose section. This was for the purpose of making the front of the bullet lighter, thus making the bullet more unstable, enabling it to tumble easier.
Click to expand...

Yep, that would be the Mk. Vll adopted by the Brits in 1910. Chopped the hell out of enemy soldiers and a wagon load of deer.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom