This guys done the most real world research into this topic. I purchased his book at an astronomical cost. It’s a very dense read. Videos do a better for introducing explanation. The videos give you about half of his written details. Book is worth the cost if you’re really interested and have the time to read. If not just watch his videos.
https://www.ballisticstudies.com/

I hear a lot of shooters who get a 300 RUM, because they are self admitted bad shots. Guess what- they still get animals that run off after being hit. Even with the biggest of rounds, if you don't hit something vital with good shot placement, the animal will continue to go.

I believe it's a combination of many factors that provide good and quick kills. But the top item on the list is shot placement. My son shoots my standard 168 grain A-max/ELD-M bulk ammo for hunting everything. I've taught him how to shoot properly, and he drops stuff in their tracks with a 20" Tikka T3. Exit wounds are nickel to quarter size exits almost all the time. I personally switch back and forth from 150/155 grain and 168 grain A-max/ELD-M in my 16" 308 Win with same results. Before that, I ran a 300 blk out for 4-5 years with 125 grain. Almost everything dropped in it's tracks. I aim for the heart, which is about 1/3 way down into the shoulder or just behind the pocket of the shoulder. I had many does that don't even take a step with the blk out. Our boys shot a simultaneous double shot on 2 does last season, and both dropped in their tracks. One 300 blk out bolt gun and one a 10" AR-15, both shooting 125 grain bullets. Both were perfect shots and DRT.

As long as you are using an effective caliber and bullet combination, good shot placement will trump all the other items. I find it humorous when I talk to customers and they are shooting a 338 Lapua Mag for hunting, and wondering about enough energy and stopping power. I hear it often.

10/4 on good bullets (7mm 120 BT) and good placement.......



We guided hunters for over 15 years, about 160 of them for deer, antelope, aoudad, varmints. I was shocked how many of these guys showed up over gunned, and over scoped. I can count on two hands the number of animals they killed over 350 yards, in very open country.

Ok, so answer me this. I have killed many animals ( deer and hogs mostly) with non expanding cast bullets. Same size in and out. Very few ran and if they did , not far. I have seen a lot of bullets change directions after first impact but not with cast or long for bore bullets. The 6.5x 55 is a good example of straight line penetration and kills way above its power.

Yep.

Let's talk about this hydrostatic shock "Theory". Now I'm all ears and as I said a big bullet always works. That said, from what I understand when a small high velocity bullet hits soft tissue and the bullet expands, etc. a huge disruption around the bullet path takes place- say a 4" area or better. Some of this tissue "springs back" and other tissue is permanently damaged and that's the effect of this hydrostatic shock. The extent of the damage- if the lungs- causes massive bleeding and quick death. If I'm wrong on that please update me- I really haven't read that much about it.
Police say there are a fair amount of murders committed with 22 rimfire handguns. I guess the bad guy holds the gun right next to someone's head and pulls the trigger. Does the kind of bullet make a difference? I doubt it, does that means a 22 rimfire makes a good choice for self defense? Not to me. In any event, as I said, there seems to be a huge gray area.
Question, if anyone has killed a number of deer with a 45/70 and "something else (7mm/08,, 308, etc.) any difference in how each worked? I used an old 30-30 for years, even on black bear HOWEVER back in those days I thought you were supposed to wait for a broadside shot so how well the 30-30 worked ought to take that into account. I ended up using Winchester Silver tips and then reloaded using Hornaday 170's which gave great accuracy in my rifle.

Folks make it way harder than it needs to be. There are basic caliber ranges that work well for the specific quarry being hunted. Shooting ability is the #1 factor. Caliber and bullet choice is important, but not really rocket science taking the animal(s) hunted into consideration. What calibers and bullet types work well for what animals considering all factors (likely shot ranges, etc.) should be pretty basic knowledge for anyone with even a modicum of hunting experience.

No one can “big bore” themselves into guaranteed kills. But using a too-small or minimum caliber for an intended animal doesn’t make sense to me either if one can shoot a larger caliber accurately and confidently. Does that mean to always use a .338 Win Mag for deer if you can handle it? Of course not. It just means if you can shoot a .308 as well as a .243, why not use the .308 and have a little more margin for error? Those that say they always hit exactly where they aim and every animal is DRT are better shots than I will ever be and have way more accommodating animals than I have encountered. I have shot many animals in the heart and many through both lungs. Very few dropped in their tracks. That takes a high shoulder or CNS shot for me. But well shot animals don’t go far in any event.

Again, folks make it harder than it needs to be with all the numbers. For example, even with the numbers being similar in some respects, it’s pretty common sense that a .45-70 is a better hog rifle at short ranges than a .22-250. JMHO.

On other words, don't overthink it.

“Of course not. It just means if you can shoot a .308 as well as a .243, why not use the .308 and have a little more margin for error?”
^^^This from Nog needs to always be considered on a subject like this.
Lots of good info by many on here and Nogs entire last post said lots of good stuff to me.

While I certainly agree that one doesn’t NEED to overthink this to harvest game it is still very interesting to ponder. In your example of .308 vs .243 the .308 clearly clearly is the winner - larger diameter, heavier bullet, more energy etc. Where it gets confusing at least to me is my example of the 45-70 vs the .308. The 45-70 is bigger diameter and heavier but the 308 has more energy. Both will easily kill with a well placed shot but which does better? People spend countless hours researching the pros and cons of various pickups and which is best for them when in reality they all will most likely do the job. The largest animal I have ever killed was a huge mule deer about 20 years ago and that was with a .243. Any reasonable caliber will do the job if the shooter does theirs I just find it interesting analyzing the calibers to stack the odds in your favor.

I hear ya, sewar. Its interesting to discuss these things. This one is way over my head. No harm in discussing as long as no one gets real hung up splitting hairs. Im detail oriented and Im a numbers guy when I can. In baseball coaches will put a 299 hitter ahead of a 297 hitter. Its easy for me cause I only hunt deer and I only use the same 3006 I inherited from Dad 50 years ago. Its shoots very good and I shoot it good and they die very good. Nothing for me to discuss but Im reading the thread anyway.

copied and pasted.


The other popular contemporary misconception results from the belief that the rapid "transfer" of the kinetic energy of the bullet thereby kills instantaneously through "hydrostatic shock". This term gets used rather loosely to describe quite a lot of things, including some actual wound mechanics, but for the sake of the following discussion I confine my reference to purported effects induced far from the wound cavity that are attributable to a "shocking effect" ascribed to certain bullets or loads.

I don't know where this term originated, but it is pseudoscientific slang. In the first place, these are dynamic - not static - events. Moreover, "hydrostatic shock" is an oxymoron. Shock, in the technical sense, indicates a mechanical wave travelling in excess of the inherent sound speed of the material; it can't be static. This may be a flow related wave like a bow shock on the nose of a bullet in air or it may be a supersonic acoustic wave travelling through a solid. In terms of bullets striking tissue, shock is never encountered. The sound speed of muscle tissue has been measured to be about 5150 fps, and that of fatty tissue around 4920 fps (A Cavitation Model for Kinetic Energy Projectiles Penetrating Gelatin, Henry C. Dubin, BRL Memorandum Report No. 2423, US Army Ballistic Research Laboratories, December 1974). Even varmint bullets do not have an impact velocity this high, let alone a penetration velocity exceeding 4900 fps. Unless the bullet can penetrate faster than the inherent sound speed of the medium through which it is passing, you will not observe a shock wave. Instead, the bullet impact produces an acoustic wave which moves ahead of the penetration. The initial acoustic wave causes no damage (it has been observed in testing passing harmlessly in advance of the bullet's path).

Some people use "shock" in the colloquial sense to describe a violent impact, but it is confusing, especially in connection with the term "hydrostatic" and lends undeserved quasi-scientific merit to the slang. It also tends to get confused with the medical expression attending trauma. We are not describing what is meant by shock to the medical profession. The word shock should never appear in a gun journal, in my opinion.

Before I become too dogmatic and overstate the situation, let me concede that there may be some merit to the idea that hydrodynamic (not hydrostatic) impulse created by bullets which have a high kinetic energy (or perhaps simply a high velocity) and generally exhibit violent cavitation (or merely generate local pressures of a certain magnitude in combination with specific shotlines), can cause some secondary effects due to pressure on the nervous system or circulatory system. In addition to the pressure induced cranial hemorrhage described previously, it is possible to kill manually by nerve "strangulation". In this case actual damage to the central nervous system is not caused, but the signals governing the heart or diaphragm are shut off, resulting in instantaneous unconsciousness or even death. This sort of thing makes for lurid mythology in the martial arts and bad movies, but there is some real science behind it. Certain rare sports fatalities have been definitely attributed to a swift blow which interrupts the cardiac rhythm. Acoustic pressure on the spine can also cause temporary paralysis.

That is crazy. My whole life I believe the faster a bullet traveled, the more it dumps energy, because of the increased deformation and fragmentation. I did not know there was a threshold that goes back the opposite direction.

Can a bullet pencil through at 3,000 fps?

Some bullets yes, pencil through. Berger will be most people's bullet to complain about. Run em heavy for cartridge and slow em down, and they do better. Seen it many times.

If speed kills, why does the .30-30 and. 45-70 work so well inside 200 yards? They are not "fast" by any means.

In the realm of medium to long range hunting, you do need to have some MV on your side. Your B.C. is what is going to maintain your velocity. So the .30-30 and .45-70 example are not appropriate at the medium to long range shots, they have lost too much speed. They did not have a high MV, and they do not have a B.C. to help them at distance.

Right tool for the job.

I am not going to use my 7 Rem Mag with 180 Bergers in my creek bottoms, on hogs, with shots less than 100 yards. And at the same time, I am not going to use my .30-30 in Terrell County with mule deer shots potentially as far as the eye can see.

A very interesting article. If I read it correctly, the results support the observation of Fireman in regard to the effectiveness (lethality) of the sub 3000 fps rounds.

I said it, didn't I?

That's a ton of reading. Sure would be easier to just read Jason's post above.

I love the 30/30. Still a 30/30 cult in Missouri. Something like the .270 cult in Texas lol. I love it.

Like Fireman said, it all depends on where and what you are hunting. Right tool. I just look at bullet size, construction and impact speed of likely shots when selecting a cartridge & bullet combo. I’m not a huge speed guy and think the whole velocity squared muzzle energy formula is not the best for measuring killing power. I like moderate velocity with a bullet that opens up easily and will retain about 2/3 it’s weight. Those bullets are pretty easy to find when you keep impact velocities under 2700 fps. If the game is bigger, I’d rather have a bigger bullet than more speed or a harder bullet. Heavier bullets that open easily and moderate speeds waste less meat and kill plenty fast. A 45-70 has a lot of knock down power because it puts a big hole all the way through the animal.