NR for dangerous game in Ontario

adamthebad said:
The poorly informed might think that the greater weight of the .44 Magnum bullet would compensate in some measure for its lack of energy by providing deeper penetration than the lighter .30 and .35 caliber rifle bullets. Unfortunately, this is not the case. It is sectional density (SD), the ratio of a bullet's weight to its diameter, that determines how deep it penetrates (all other factors--like bullet construction--being equal, of course). Here are the SD's of the bullets we are comparing (the higher the number the better).

30-30 Win., 150 grain - SD .226.
35 Rem., 200 grain - SD .223.
357 Mag., 158 grain - SD .177.
44 Mag., 240 grain - SD .185
Click to expand...

The 2000+ fps impact velocity of the .30/30 and .35 Remington is much more destructive to the bullet than the 1000-1200 fps impact velocity of the .357 and .44, where the frontal area of the bullet doesn't change, provided an appropriate bullet is chosen. I use 190 hard cast in the .357 and 325 gr hard cast in the .44.

Rifle bullets typically penetrate less due to the deformation they under go resulting in larger frontal areas, probably the loss of mass, greatly reducing the SD, resulting in a rapid decay in velocity, and reduced penetration. The advantage of the expanding rifle bullet is the soft tissue wound volume that the deformation of the bullet in a fluid medium causes. Generally speaking, the faster the bullet impacts, the wider and shallower the wound becomes in soft tissue.

It is much more difficult to slow down a low velocity bullet of even modest weight if that bullet doesn't deform. The trade off is a narrow wound channel in soft tissue, so large calibers have the advantage over small, but in the encased fluid medium of the brain, the damage from the passage of a handgun bullet is massive and has an immediate affect.

As I've already alluded to, something to consider when talking about defensive handgun loads in the wilderness defense role, is the target. I'm not attempting to punch a bullet through a 1000 pound bear, what I need is full caliber wound, with through and through penetration, of a 100 pound head. If we consider that either of the pistol loads I've referred to produce 18"-20" of penetration, that is sufficient to transect the brain of the largest bear alive today, and is certainly more than enough for the largest back bear, which is the subject of this thread.

If the brain shot is not available, the secondary targets are the spine, then the large supporting bones. A heavy non-expanding handgun bullet at 1000 fps will damage the spine sufficiently to cause paralysis, and will break the hip or shoulder impairing the bear's mobility, providing an opportunity for a subsequent killing shot.
 
Last edited:
Adamtheplagurizer

If you are going to post excerpts from Chucky as your arguements, you should at least credit his article.

https://www.chuckhawks.com/handgun_rifle_cartridges.htm
 
Last edited:
yomomma said:
Adamtheplagurizer

If you are going to post excerpts from Chucky as your arguements, you should at least credit his article.

https://www.chuckhawks.com/handgun_rifle_cartridges.htm
Click to expand...

He is just a punk kid... I can only see the posts that are quoted, because I put him on the "Ignore list" for posting more of the same sort of drivel in other threads.
 
The way some people carry themselves on CGN, you’d think they’re itching for a showdown with just about anything; bear, cougar, wolf, or a perp.

“Please give me an excuse to carry a gun because I’ve been fantasizing about a deadly encounter for so long”

Patrick
 
phinton81 said:
The way some people carry themselves on CGN, you’d think they’re itching for a showdown with just about anything; bear, cougar, wolf, or a perp.

“Please give me an excuse to carry a gun because I’ve been fantasizing about a deadly encounter for so long”

Patrick
Click to expand...

Of course, that's why I moved to the north 30 years ago. I'm a gun guy, what's your point?

Here's the thing though, if you are in any way involved in a defensive shooting situation, and haven't given any thought to the problem, you'll get it wrong. Most people involved with a dangerous game scenario will choose a chest shot, but a chest shot is a killing shot not a stopping shot, so you might not get the results you desire.
 
Last edited:
Boomer said:
The 2000+ fps impact velocity of the .30/30 and .35 Remington is much more destructive to the bullet than the 1000-1200 fps impact velocity of the .357 and .44, where the frontal area of the bullet doesn't change, provided an appropriate bullet is chosen. I use 190 hard cast in the .357 and 325 gr hard cast in the .44.

Rifle bullets typically penetrate less due to the deformation they under go resulting in larger frontal areas, probably the loss of mass, greatly reducing the SD, resulting in a rapid decay in velocity, and reduced penetration. The advantage of the expanding rifle bullet is the soft tissue wound volume that the deformation of the bullet in a fluid medium causes. Generally speaking, the faster the bullet impacts, the wider and shallower the wound becomes in soft tissue.

It is much more difficult to slow down a low velocity bullet of even modest weight if that bullet doesn't deform. The trade off is a narrow wound channel in soft tissue, so large calibers have the advantage over small, but in the encased fluid medium of the brain, the damage from the passage of a handgun bullet is massive and has an immediate affect.

As I've already alluded to, something to consider when talking about defensive handgun loads in the wilderness defense role, is the target. I'm not attempting to punch a bullet through a 1000 pound bear, what I need is full caliber wound, with through and through penetration, of a 100 pound head. If we consider that either of the pistol loads I've referred to produce 18"-20" of penetration, that is sufficient to transect the brain of the largest bear alive today, and is certainly more than enough for the largest back bear, which is the subject of this thread.

If the brain shot is not available, the secondary targets are the spine, then the large supporting bones. A heavy non-expanding handgun bullet at 1000 fps will damage the spine sufficiently to cause paralysis, and will break the hip or shoulder impairing the bear's mobility, providing an opportunity for a subsequent killing shot.
Click to expand...

awesome thanks
 
To all that contribute valuable info THANK YOU for the learning and different angles on how ballistics work and your real life experiences. it is very interesting to see the knowledge....and for those who are very delicate in some of my unconventional ways of getting that info by a cut/paste method or info from other find a good cheese to go with your whine
 
Rifle bullets typically penetrate less due to the deformation they under go resulting in larger frontal areas, probably the loss of mass, greatly reducing the SD, resulting in a rapid decay in velocity, and reduced penetration. The advantage of the expanding rifle bullet is the soft tissue wound volume that the deformation of the bullet in a fluid medium causes. Generally speaking, the faster the bullet impacts, the wider and shallower the wound becomes in soft tissue.

It is much more difficult to slow down a low velocity .[/QUOTE]

Mr Boomer

what would you say to projectiles being even as far as both being FMJ (pistol round fired in a rifle and a rifle round).
IMO i still think pistol cart in a rifle lessens the ability of the cartridge potential??
I know the limits on a Ruger SBH 44mag and know the capabilities/ranges
now take that same round and put it into a rifle and the capabilities are very similar (maybe a tad less)...the cartridge has not changed just the instrument to launch has.
A pistol round out of a rifle..
thoughts?
 
hoytcanon said:
There is NO DANGEROUS GAME IN ONTARIO...

Carry whatever you like to shoot...

For hunting, make it a 6.5mm and up for bears... coyotes and wolves can be taken with whatever you happen to be carrying.
Click to expand...

Smokinyotes said:
Meh, I think I would just carry a rape whistle.
Click to expand...


^^^This in a nutshell, I’ve spent a ton of time fishing up north as a kid and teenager with my dad in the French river area. I lived in Parry Sound as well from kindergarten to gr.4 or 5 and never had a negative encounter with an animal, I’d be more wary of people when in the wild to be honest lol. People do weirder things than animals, animals are more predictable.

If you’re looking for an excuse to get a new gun for “animal defence” get a 14”-20” barreled 12g that’s threaded for chokes, it will be good for bears if you need it but will be better for small game hunting. Rabbits and grouse especially.
 
adamthebad said:
Mr Boomer

what would you say to projectiles being even as far as both being FMJ (pistol round fired in a rifle and a rifle round).
IMO i still think pistol cart in a rifle lessens the ability of the cartridge potential??
I know the limits on a Ruger SBH 44mag and know the capabilities/ranges
now take that same round and put it into a rifle and the capabilities are very similar (maybe a tad less)...the cartridge has not changed just the instrument to launch has.
A pistol round out of a rifle..
thoughts?
Click to expand...

What? This is backwards. The longer the barrel the more time you have to burn a slower powder also more time for the force to act on the bullet base.... Tipicaly you lose 25-50fps per inch of barrel you lose. Just adding a longrr barrel can add a lot of fps. A few hundred.

Very small cases that cant fit much powder into can lose Fps with a longer barrel. Like a 25acp or 22shot.

Even a 22 long rifle picks up fps until you get to a 14" barrel.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom