Why are rifled slugs 'hollow points''?
- Thread starter vpsalin
- Start date
Expansion IS important as it helps to deposit ENERGY on target... You don't want to simply poke a hole through something, you WANT that projectile to expend it's energy on the way through... That's what leads to a clean and humane kill when hunting animals.
Cheers
Jay
Why are Brenneke rifled slugs world renowned as the best slugs out there? I know that they don't use hollow points, so that's probably part of the reason why. Maybe the cheaper brands out there would bridge part the gap somewhat if only they didn't drill a damn hole on the tip of their foster slugs.
Many tests show that rifled slugs are not known for their weight retention through simple ballistics gel! The hollow point tip doesn't help there that's for sure!
Many tests show that rifled slugs are not known for their weight retention through simple ballistics gel! The hollow point tip doesn't help there that's for sure!
It's there because the slugs are swaged. It's easier to design a deliberate deformation in the area where you will need to press the lead out of the mold. It also allows the lube to be pushed out rather than creating a dent in the surface.
What I find really funny is the sales pitch 'rifled' slugs leads people to believe that this will impart rotation to the slug. As far as expansion is concerned, look to muzzleloaders. If you use a pure lead slug, you will get penetration and great weight retention as pure lead is elastic and will obturate resulting in little to no fragmentation. With the diameter of a 12 gauge you don't require expansion as it's diameter is already larger than what smaller diameter, high velocity rounds can expand to and therefore you do want expansion to permit greater transfer of energy to the target and an increase in the hydrostatic upset.
Tb
Tb
Huh?? That makes no sense at all.
I've watched videos of a bear getting shot and still running towards the shoot with a heart that's completely non-existent after the shot. 12g. Now if that slug only punched a hole that shooter would have been dead before the bear died.
How did this become a discussion about defense against dangerous game? I was talking about a slugs used in a hunting role.
I doesn't matter though, because you're saying a HP rifled slug against a bear would of performed better then a 'solid' Brenneke slug? That makes a lot of sense. In Alaska, wildlife officers are issued 12GA Brenneke slugs to dispatch Moose and Grizz! They don't issue them HP foster slugs lol. Did you know that for the most dangerous game of all in Africa, most hunters load the first round of their magazine with 'solids' and follow it up with expanding rounds so the beast doesn't run off too far? The fatal shot to the vitals is usually from the first 'solid' bullet and the others are thrown in there for good measure. Why is it that a .375 slug doesn't require expansion to kill a Cape Buffalo, but our slugs do to kill a whitetail buck?
Last edited:
You got that one backwards. When mixed loads are used for buffalo (its a buffalo thing), the soft is in the barrel over a magazine full of solids. The theory, which is rapidly falling out of fashion is that the first shot is the best well-placed one and does the killing. The follow-ups are either at the ass of a departing animal or the CNS of an incomer. By this theory the extra penetration of the solids is an advantage on the outgoer and it doesn't make a bit of difference what you brain or spine and incomer with.
Its a nice theory. Doesn't work out in practice very often, but a nice theory. The reality is that a good soft breaking a hip will anchor an animal faster than a Texas heart shot that penetrates to the heart -lung area. This part of the follow up solid theory depends on the animal running straight away; which they seldom do.
I used to use solids for the back-up shots until after my fourth buffalo. Truth is, they don't work worth a fiddler's fornication. Rifles that are cranking over 5000 foot-pounds of energy act like a pellet gun as far as visible reaction to hits with solids. A soft will rattle their cage and make it look like their sides caved in.
Its a nice theory. Doesn't work out in practice very often, but a nice theory. The reality is that a good soft breaking a hip will anchor an animal faster than a Texas heart shot that penetrates to the heart -lung area. This part of the follow up solid theory depends on the animal running straight away; which they seldom do.
I used to use solids for the back-up shots until after my fourth buffalo. Truth is, they don't work worth a fiddler's fornication. Rifles that are cranking over 5000 foot-pounds of energy act like a pellet gun as far as visible reaction to hits with solids. A soft will rattle their cage and make it look like their sides caved in.
12 gauge solid projectiles are huge. Yup. Who needs expansion? Need is subjective, but Deer hunters can use it.
Deer can run that far with it's heart completely destroyed, after all, it does still have oxygen in it's blood, it just can't pump any MORE oxygenated blood to it's muscles. Deer can run long distances in a short period of time, so 100 yards with it's heart nicked? Yeah, I'd believe it. It doesn't change the fact than a 73 cal. slug is still larger in diameter than an expanded .243.
Sometimes being able to poke a hole all the way through is better than under penetrating because of excessive expansion. Especially a big hole like a 12 gauge slug (73 cal). PROPER amounts of expansion requires the PROPER selection of ammunition for your desired target. It's why we don't use V-Max on Grizzly. Expansion is desirable, yes... but HOW MUCH?!?
Brenneke's aren't renowned for being the best, period. They're renowned for their penetration on dangerous/heavily built game. Penetration isn't the only game in town. Brennekes probably wouldn't perform as well on lighter game, like Deer. A hollow point slug would most likely perform better in that case.
I tend to agree that the diameter of 12 gauge is pretty sufficient for most anything, and that I'd be erring on the side of penetration, rather than expansion. Some niches prefer the expansion (lighter built game). Meh. It's already 73 cal.
You know what I find really funny? The fact that not many people are pointing out that 12 gauge slugs are like any other ammo on the planet... they need to be selected with the desired target in mind!
Ok, what ammunition was used in these videos? Please links these videos in, and show us. If these slugs "only" punch a hole, it's still a 73 cal. hole. The Brennekes have been gel tested by a member here (Brobee), and have demonstrated some mild expansion in ballistics gel.
Also: Penetration through ballistics gel is only an analog to penetration through muscle tissue. There is more to an animal than muscle.
Ammunition for your choice of game is key... nothing is the "best". What provides expansion, also provides a shallower wound.
- Location
- Somewhere on the Hudson Bay Coast
Its a little misleading to compare the terminal performance of a high velocity rifle bullet to that of a rifled slug. One aspect we must consider in the terminal effects of the high velocity rifle bullet is supercavitation. Supercavitation occurs in fluid and soft tissue, though not in bone. While the bullet's velocity exceeds say 2000 fps, the expanded nose effects the shape of a gas or vapor bubble around the bullet, so very little tissue or fluid actually makes contact with the bullet. The tissue the bullet passes through while at high velocity is displaced violently, leaving a permanent wound channel several inches in diameter. As the velocity of the bullet decays to say 1500 fps, so too does the size and shape of the gas bubble around the bullet, and the diameter of the soft tissue damage is reduced. As velocity slows, the bullet begins to make contact with both tissue and fluid, slowing more rapidly, and at this stage the permanent wound channel is only as large as the frontal area of the bullet.
In the following examples we can see the effect that velocity induced supercavitation has on wound diameter and depth of penetration. But note how the diameter of the permanent wound channel is reduced as the velocity decays . . .
The shotgun slug has a somewhat different performance envelope. The muzzle velocity of the rifled slug never comes near 2000 fps, and according to my chronograph, even 1500 fps is pretty optimistic regardless of the claims by various manufacturers. At these low velocities, only the frontal area of the bullet contacts tissue. At first this seems like an argument in support of the expanding slug, until we realize, that the slug is light for caliber, with low sectional density, and that any expansion or upset of the slug will adversely affect penetration. For this reason, I believe the non-expanding slug produces the best terminal performance, which is why, for my purposes, I prefer Brenneke and Challengers over foster slugs. However, when the target is a deer, and the slug is fired from a rifled barrel, the new breed of copper slugs produce the accuracy necessary for long range hits (long range for a slug that is). The difference in penetration that expansion has on a light framed animal like a deer, won't effect the outcome, provided the shot was a good one.
In this example note that the permanent wound channel only matches the diameter of the low velocity slug . . .
In the following examples we can see the effect that velocity induced supercavitation has on wound diameter and depth of penetration. But note how the diameter of the permanent wound channel is reduced as the velocity decays . . .
The shotgun slug has a somewhat different performance envelope. The muzzle velocity of the rifled slug never comes near 2000 fps, and according to my chronograph, even 1500 fps is pretty optimistic regardless of the claims by various manufacturers. At these low velocities, only the frontal area of the bullet contacts tissue. At first this seems like an argument in support of the expanding slug, until we realize, that the slug is light for caliber, with low sectional density, and that any expansion or upset of the slug will adversely affect penetration. For this reason, I believe the non-expanding slug produces the best terminal performance, which is why, for my purposes, I prefer Brenneke and Challengers over foster slugs. However, when the target is a deer, and the slug is fired from a rifled barrel, the new breed of copper slugs produce the accuracy necessary for long range hits (long range for a slug that is). The difference in penetration that expansion has on a light framed animal like a deer, won't effect the outcome, provided the shot was a good one.
In this example note that the permanent wound channel only matches the diameter of the low velocity slug . . .
Last edited:
Brobee did a bunch of gelatin tests with 12ga slugs, here is the winchester slug, but look for his other vids on youtube (under Brobee223), he also did Brenneke and another one I know. I believe the solid brenneke held up best.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FKge3FF0Hx4
I have killed lots of deer with the winchester foster HP slug. Out to 100 yards the deer doesn't know the difference between a HP or solid.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FKge3FF0Hx4
I have killed lots of deer with the winchester foster HP slug. Out to 100 yards the deer doesn't know the difference between a HP or solid.
