sectionnal density and penetration

Why not? said:
As always, bullet placement wins..........

_Bear_Shot_Placement_big_one-510x630.jpg


Ted
Click to expand...

The percentage numbers beside each image are fun. :)
 
Yes, and you know, they are pretty significant. I can remember numbers of times I have turned down a shot, or waited for a much better one, because of the poor angle on a bear.

The big grizzly of Fall 2011 is a perfect example. At one point he was about 45 yards away and completely unaware of my presence, but the shot was just not certain, even though the 270 gr Matrix was proven and reliable. Ended up taking the shot at around 65 yards perfectly broadside, and one was all it took.

Ted
 
Never a bad idea to ensure good positioning, but Some of the shots I've taken on bears with very good results have low percentage scores in that chart. I wish they had given the centre pic a score. That's one shot I think that can easily go wrong, but is dramatic when it goes right
 
medvedqc said:
is there always a correlation between the SD and penetration?.....
Click to expand...

Well, what can we agree on? .. some of us suggest that the answer is 'yes, there is a relationship between SD and penetration' .. and others 'no'.

I answered 'yes' because I was considering principles rather than practice.
In principle, as seen for example with full-metal-jacket military bullets (which ideally have zero expansion), SD exerts a strong effect on the of penetration.
However, this is a hunters forum, and in practice, hunters use bullets designed to expand and transfer as much energy as possible inside the target animal's body.
In effect, because hunting bullets have their expansion vs. penetration capabilities 'tailored' to match the target (from varmint to grizzly), the effect of their SD is lessened.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom