Accubonds and elk

Phantom Hunter

Very Active Member
Messages
1,588
Have any of you had any experience shooting bull elk with Accubonds? My NM bull this year was shot with a 7MM Rem Mag shooting 160 gr Accubonds at 2900fps. The bullet hit just below the elbow joint on the left shoulder, took out about 2" of bone and went on into the chest cavity. The bull traveled about 75 yards and expired. There was no blood trail and no exit wound. I was hoping for an exit wound with this load but maybe hitting the leg bone nothing would have exited. Just wondering if I try it again or go back to the Partition on elk???
 

dang302

Active Member
Messages
355
I watched my buddy shoot his bull last year at about 200 yards with a 30-06 and 180 grain accubonds. This was a broadside lung shot and the bullet exitted. Bull went somewhere between 50 and 100 yards.
 

hhunter23

Active Member
Messages
605
two bulls this year out of my 270 win with 140 grain accubonds and the first one at 100 yards, stammered 50 yards then dropped. the secound dropped in his tracks at a 200 yard shot. both bullets didnt even exit. found on the opposite shoulder mushroomed perfectly. best bullet ever invented IMHO



"Shoot Straight"
 

Craig

Very Active Member
Messages
1,747
Shot a bull in Montana in 2012 at about 200 yards with a 180 Accubond from my .300 ultra mag. Bull just stood there and then fell over. Bullet did not exit and i recovered the bullet against the hide on the far side of the bull.

Shot a mule deer with the same set up at about 250 yards and the bullet did not exit. The buck went about 30 yards and died. Not much blood.
 

Cornhusker

Long Time Member
Messages
3,902
Oh boy this will soon turn interesting. Everybody has their favorite bullet based on experiences. I have used accubonds with success and two notable failures although I recovered both animals. Most notable failure was on a really good Kudu we recovered the animal 6 miles and 8 hours after he was shot double lungs exit hole was the same size as entry. I use Partitions and have for decades no failures to this point.
 

Calif_Mike

Active Member
Messages
565
3 years ago my ex wife shot a large cow at 270 yards. Broke both shoulders and did not exit. That being said we have killed 6 other elk with partions and I have recovered 3 or 4 of the partions so they don't always exit either.
 

pookiebar

Active Member
Messages
581
I prefer to use a bullet that will exit the other side because it leaves a much better blood trail. So I always use partitions, I have never seen them not exit.

Even shot a big black bear with my 300 Win Mag. Hit him in the near shoulder a bit higher then I wanted, did not really even hit the lungs, but it went through spine and far shoulder blade, so pretty much all bone and it still exited. The exit wound was the size of three fingers put together, so it just plowed a lot of material on the way out.
 
M

muleyslayer02

Guest
My daughter shot a 6x6 Bull last year with a 200gr Accubond out of a 300 win at 350yds. Watched the impact through a spotting scope. It was a great hit right behind the right shoulder. Gave him 30 min and begin to search never found a drop of blood. We searched for 2 days and never recovered him:( That was my experience.
 

pookiebar

Active Member
Messages
581
The Accubond probably did not go through. IMO, if the bullet exits the animal, the blood trail is always bigger. Seems like if the bullet does not exit the animal it will all just pool up inside the body cavity, and very little gets on the ground.
 

jarheadhunter

New Member
Messages
0
My one and only experience with them.

General elk hunt using a .270 and 150gr Accubonds. Nice 5x6 bull comes walking through the trees about 60-75 yds out. I am in the prone with a solid rest. Shoot for just behind the shoulder. Elk scatter after the shot including the bull. I go to the spot in the snow where the elk were and find a bunch of tracks and no blood.

Went back and forth from where I shot to where the elk was thinking I should find blood. I finally just pick out the biggest set of tracks and start to follow them through the trees. I get about 200 yds from where I shot and come through some thick pines and the bull is standing there looking at me 15 yds away. I shoot him again in the ribs 1/4 away from me. He goes about 5 steps and drops. Put a few more in the neck when he was trying to get up.

Find my accubond inside the elk while gutting him and it looks like a perfect bullet almost. The plastic tip pushed off to the side and fell off somewhere.

Never found a drop of blood until the neck shots from 5 feet.
 

GLEDEASY

Active Member
Messages
912
LAST EDITED ON Oct-17-13 AT 04:23PM (MST)[p]My only experience with them was this year on my bull with the 180 gr from a 300 wsm.

At 217 yards the first bullet stopped the bull in his tracks (which was recovered under the hide so not a pass through), the second shot blew a hole on the exit about the size of a softball.

I should add that this bull didn't even go 10 yards.
 

falloutwest

Active Member
Messages
255
So far, I have used Accubonds to harvest 5 big game animals: 2 bull elk, 1 mountain goat, and 2 mule deer. all but one of the bulls were killed with 140 grain Accubonds out of a 270. The large bull was killed with 160 grain Accubonds out of 7mm. All 5 animals were dead within 50 yards of where they were shot. Ranges were from 175 to 350 yards. I have had some pass throughs. With both the larger bull (7mm) and the goat (270), bullets were found mushroomed under the far side hide after passing through the front shoulders. I also witnessed two large bulls shot with them out of a 30-06. Same story. These bullets are hard to beat in my opinion. I get outstanding accuracy out of them. Not sure why folks are worried about a blood trail. You aren't archery hunting. Shoot the critter where it counts and don't worry about a blood trail. A bullet recovered from under the hide has put every ounce of energy it is packing into the animal. A pass through puts a bunch of that energy into the side of the hill.
 

jodog

Very Active Member
Messages
1,469
Accubond or Partition...I would use either one they are both great bullets !! I have never shot anything as accurate as the Accubond .
 

mtmuley

Long Time Member
Messages
5,294
10 bulls so far, I can't count the deer and antelope and a couple bears. And none of the tips fell off. Course if you are looking for the tips well..... The "I used them once and they didn't work" guys crack me up. mtmuley
 
H

Hixsok

Guest
This year with 325 wsm 200 gr accubond. Kudu, impala, warthog, blesbuk, gemsbuck, zebra, female lion, bull elk. My 12 year old son. 270wm 140gr accubond. Bull elk and soon cow elk.. Accubonds. The only way to go!!!
 

adamwipp07

Active Member
Messages
226
This years elk was shot at 150 yards with 338, 250grain accubonds. Hit the bull in front shoulder, base ball entrance hole but no exit. Found bullet on other side. Not much blood! But there wasnt any need for tracking he went strait down and was dead instantly. So far +1 for accubonds
 
J

JB148

Guest
I shoot the 150 grn accubond in my 300WBY. I have killed elk out to 520 yards and at 100yrds. I love the bullet and have killed antelope deer and elk with it. No problems for me. JB
 
T

Timberline270

Guest
I shot a cow at about 360 yards with a 130 grain Accubond, she didn't go more than 15 yards. The bullet hit a rib going in and made a big entrance wound but didn't exit. Both deer that I've shot with them dropped in their tracks.
 

marley

Very Active Member
Messages
2,042
200 grain accubond, 300 RUM. 2 antelope, 4 Muleys, 3 elk, 2 aoudad, 4 hogs, 2 axis, 1 mountain goat, 1 buffalo.....19 bullets....19 animals.
 

alp75

Very Active Member
Messages
1,365
My experiences with accubonds have been exceptional. As long as the shots hit where they are supposed to the animal goes down. I am shooting a 300 rum with a 200 grain accubond @3200 FPS. So far it has shot 3 cows, 3 muleys, 2 antelope, a mountain goat and a moose. None of them went more than 50 yards.
 
3

300RUMMAN

Guest
LAST EDITED ON Oct-17-13 AT 09:51PM (MST)[p]If you really want exit wounds on Elk go bigger with bigger bullet weight and caliber. I think any QUALITY bullet will do.

I have killed four elk with my 300RUM and all passed through but one. That one that didn't exit was on a shot quartering toward me when I squeezed. Bullet went through front shoulder, lung, guts, lodged in the back ham, just under the skin. (ethical shot? Yes, if you know what your bullet will do.)

I am shooting 180 grain scirroccos out of my RUM over 3100 FPS.

Compare 160gr at 2900 to 180gr at 3100 and the difference is 2987ft-lbs to 3840ft-lbs. Huge. Just depends on how much recoil you want to deal with. (I actually kinda want to upgrade to 338 Ultra...)

I know, I know, a well placed shot will let a .243 take down even the biggest bull with ease, but anyone who says they always make a perfect shot is a liar. A little caliber insurance is well worth it in my opinion.

Big blood trails...

-Meat Hunters: Feel free to do your hunting at the store-
 

anadavid25

Active Member
Messages
102
Killed my bull this year at 300 yards broadside using powershock 165 grain, bonded soft point, 308 rounds. First shot woulda killed him, second shot was to make sure. This is the first time I have used powershocks and I will tell you, I would not recommend these rounds for deer. The two bullets tore a huge path thru this bull. Looked like he had been hit by a 50 cal. I was very lucky not to lose very much meat due to bloodshot. If I had hit him in any quarter(s), they woulda been goners. I am now leary of using these again due to the damage the bullets caused. I hunt for the meat, so I probably will go back to my reloads.
 

teamhoyt

Active Member
Messages
179
falloutwest is spot on. bullets killed by shock. arrows kill by hemoraging. A bullet that stays in an animal has delivered 100% of its energy therfore creating the most shock possible.
 

BWO

Active Member
Messages
153
I have shot everything from Canadian Moose to Coues Deer with 160 grain Accubonds out of a 7mm Ultra. I have never had one failure. Some bullets I have recovered just under the hide on the far side, others have been complete pass throughs. All in all I have shot over 20 animals with them and have been more than pleased with their accuracy and performance.
 

mtmuley

Long Time Member
Messages
5,294
A bullet that passes through puts plenty of energy into an animal. I have NEVER recovered an Accubond. All that "expends the energy inside the animal" crap is just that, crap. mtmuley
 

excaliber

Active Member
Messages
394
I was hoping to use Accubonds this year but I have not been able to get powder to work up a load. The Doubletap 180 grain Accubonds I do have will not shoot worth a darn in my gun(Rem 700 BDL 300 win mag 26" barrel). My gun shoots the slower 2960 fps Federal SP and TC loads really well.

Some guns don't like the Accubonds.
 
S

shooter21

Guest
iv killed a ton of game with my 300 and a 180 gr accubond not one issue from the bullet now human error is a hole different thing!!!
 

desperatehills

Active Member
Messages
887
341img_0162.jpg


Here is a picture of a Wyoming antelope I shot with a 25-06 and a 110 grain Accubond. The shot was from 280 yards and hit a little high on the shoulder. It tried to push its shoulder blade out the off side. I used Accubonds to fill all five of my tags without any issues. I have not tried them on elk yet, but there accuracy is fantastic and that is the name of the game. Nosler partitions are a great bullet as well. I would use what shoots best in your gun.
 

grosventrehunter

Very Active Member
Messages
1,341
I love the Accubond bullet, Weatherby 30-378 180gr, but have had an issue with the tips breaking off. Anyone else have the same experience?
 

Mallards_Only

Active Member
Messages
722
>A bullet that passes through puts
>plenty of energy into an
>animal. I have NEVER recovered
>an Accubond. All that "expends
>the energy inside the animal"
>crap is just that, crap.
>mtmuley


What you call "crap" the rest of us call ballistics. You are mistaken. As a couple educated hunters have already pointed out, bullets kill by percussion shock and internal damage. The ideal bullet mushrooms and dissipates its energy into the vitals of the animal causing severe damage. The ideal situation is as some have described--finding the bullet just beneath the hide in the far side of the animal. Bloodtrails are generally not necessary when the shot is well-placed with a good bullet.
 

mtmuley

Long Time Member
Messages
5,294
So you're gonna figure out just how far away you need to be, how fast the bullet needs to go and where to place it to get a perfect mushroom on the off side every time? Sorry, I don't subscribe to the expend energy theory. And neither did the dozens of animals I've run an Accubond through. Bullets kill by disrupting one or more of the several vital systems of an animal. Don't matter if the bullet does or doesn't exit. mtmuley
 

sigboy66

Active Member
Messages
152
>I was hoping to use Accubonds
>this year but I have
>not been able to get
>powder to work up a
>load. The Doubletap 180 grain
>Accubonds I do have will
>not shoot worth a darn
>in my gun(Rem 700 BDL
>300 win mag 26" barrel).
>My gun shoots the slower
>2960 fps Federal SP and
>TC loads really well.
>
>Some guns don't like the Accubonds.
>


Try the 200 grain bullet over RL22. I use 73 grains which is a max load but is fine in both my Remington 700's. Work up to it, every rifle is different. I have killed 16 big game animals (moose, pig, mule deer, African plains game (springbok - Kudu) 1 pronghorn with a 140 grain Accubond with a 6.5-284) with this load, some where 12 where 1 shot stops, 4 where not. It was all about bullet placement. All where shot between 35-450 yards. Few bullets recovered (kudu and gemsbok) most exited.
 

sigboy66

Active Member
Messages
152
Equal and opposite reaction. Your shoulder takes as much energy from recoil as the animal does when it is hit by the bullet, well actually it is less some energy is lost to gravity and wind drag traveling through the atmosphere. Bullets kill by blowing holes through vital organs needed for normal function and tearing up arteries causing blood loss. As far as shock goes there is hydrostatic shock, much like hitting a milk jug full of water causes it to explode, hitting an organ like the heart full of blood will do the same. If you hit the lungs there is no shock except from massive blood loss.
 

bowhunt

Long Time Member
Messages
3,402
Your shoulder does NOT take all the energy of the shot.
Equal and Opposite is correct. OBVIOUSLY..but
-Shoulder
-Gas out barrel
Are the opposite reaction.

The animal does absorb the full energy of the traveling bullet, if it ends in the animal.
However it does not have to terminate in the animal to cause maximum damage.
Watch a video of a bullet traveling through gel.
The channel trauma is HUGE.
 

justr_86

Long Time Member
Messages
4,359
My experience with them has been boom, thump, dead... never had to track a deer or elk since I started shooting them. 300 win mag, 7mm rem mag, 270 wsm, 270 win..

4b1db2ac644136c4.jpg
 

sageadvice

Long Time Member
Messages
11,970
Of all the Bullets that i've put down range at critters, so far, i'm the most satisfied with the Accubond product. Not saying that it is perfect but it's a good one!!

They shoot great in several of my rifles, make a devastating wound channel, and instantly pork up a animal.

Between a pass thru or having the bullet stay in the animal, i'd take the pass through, especially with the Accubond wound channel, hands down every single time and in deciding between the two, it's not even close. So far, i believe all my Accubond kills have been pass thru's.

Joey


"It's all about knowing what your firearms practical limitations are and combining that with your own personal limitations!"
 
3

300RUMMAN

Guest
>>A bullet that passes through puts
>>plenty of energy into an
>>animal. I have NEVER recovered
>>an Accubond. All that "expends
>>the energy inside the animal"
>>crap is just that, crap.
>>mtmuley
>
>
>What you call "crap" the rest
>of us call ballistics.
>You are mistaken. As
>a couple educated hunters have
>already pointed out, bullets kill
>by percussion shock and internal
>damage. The ideal bullet
>mushrooms and dissipates its energy
>into the vitals of the
>animal causing severe damage.
>The ideal situation is as
>some have described--finding the bullet
>just beneath the hide in
>the far side of the
>animal. Bloodtrails are generally
>not necessary when the shot
>is well-placed with a good
>bullet.

So, lets say you shoot an elk and when the bullet hits him its carrying 2000ft-lbs of energy. It mushrooms, stops just before exiting on the other side the animal. Perfect right?

Then I shoot elk with bullet that has 3000ft-lbs of energy at impact. It mushrooms, expends 2000ft-lbs of energy inside and uses its extra 1000ft-lbs to exit and leave blood all over everything. How is my elk any less hurt than yours?

Gotta agree with mtmuley here

-Meat Hunters: Feel free to do your hunting at the store-
 
C

cletus14

Guest
remember fellows people kill elk with sticks and string as well as ancient round balls traviling at a snails pace in comparison.
 

sigboy66

Active Member
Messages
152
LAST EDITED ON Oct-21-13 AT 08:44AM (MST)[p]Gas out the barrel acts like a Jet engine and pushes the rifle straight back at you. This is why muzzle brakes work. The direct the gas outwards. This helps keep the muzzle down and bleeds off some of the pressure pushing forward. It is an equal and opposite reaction. When you stand on the ground if you way 200 lbs the ground has an opposite reaction of pushing 200 lbs of force back at you else sink into the ground. Cannons and guns recoil. As the cannon ball flies on one direction, the cannon moves in the opposite direction.If we turn the cannon up on end, it gets a little closer to how a rocket works. The force that pushes the cannon ball down also pushes the cannon up. But since the cannon is bigger than the cannon ball it has more inertia acting to keep it in one place. We would need a larger force to push the cannon a great distance. Same reason you don't see animals fly through the air like in Hollywood when hit as the force their hit with is not that great. Expending energy in the animal to cause more death or shock is a myth.
 
G

gnatboy911

Guest
My Dad killed his bull this year with 300 RUM with 180 gr. accubonds. First animal he's killed with it. 214 yards. First shot went through the shoulder blade and didn't exit, ended up just under the skin. Second shot was about 3 inches back and passed through. The bull never took a step. Just stood there frozen after the first shot, after second shot stood for another couple seconds then collapsed.
 
M

mtdream

Guest
>I was hoping to use Accubonds
>this year but I have
>not been able to get
>powder to work up a
>load. The Doubletap 180 grain
>Accubonds I do have will
>not shoot worth a darn
>in my gun(Rem 700 BDL
>300 win mag 26" barrel).
>My gun shoots the slower
>2960 fps Federal SP and
>TC loads really well.
>
>Some guns don't like the Accubonds.
>

.300 win mag recipe.... 75.5 grains RL22...180 grain accubond...
 
M

mtdream

Guest
multiple Bulls, multiple cows, and lots of deer...same results, very clean kill from well placed bullets...Have had pass throughs and not...have recovered some bullets....

from a variety of Calibers: .270, 7 Mag, .280, .300 win mag...

pic below is from this last week and my sons very first deer...clearly complete pass through (and sorry not a bull, but a recent event)...and lots of damage...(covered sons face somewhat just for concern posting kids pics online..)



Here is a bull, ran about 30-50 yards...no tracking necessary...no passthrough, except for the heart and lung...(relaoded the bullets for my buddy pictured) (was a 140 grain .270 Accubond)

 

sageadvice

Long Time Member
Messages
11,970
Sigboy said, " you don't see animals fly through the air like in Hollywood when hit as the force their hit with is not that great. Expending energy in the animal to cause more death or shock is a myth."


Huh? A myth huh? I liked the rest of your post until you got to that part. I think i see what you're getting at but i don't totally agree. The greater the retained energy that a bullet has, the more violent and penetrating the bullet will be and so, the better to put lights out on Mr. Big Boy!

You guys shooting 140 gr Accubonds at Elk thru a 270 Winchester picked a good pill for the job but it must be remembered that the good ol 270 Win is on the small side for elk...as is the 7mm-08, the various 6.5's, the .280 Rem. and a few others come to mind.

Good bullet, accurate rifle, and self control on shot placement and distance can make these mid type cartridges sure enough elk killers. With these though, holding off on the longer shots, +3-400 yds, is all important on just how far a Accubond might penetrate, maybe pass on thru or not.

Joey


"It's all about knowing what your firearms practical limitations are and combining that with your own personal limitations!"
 

sigboy66

Active Member
Messages
152
LAST EDITED ON Oct-21-13 AT 04:57PM (MST)[p]LAST EDITED ON Oct-21-13 AT 04:50?PM (MST)

>Sigboy said, " you don't see
>animals fly through the air
>like in Hollywood when hit
>as the force their hit
>with is not that great.
>Expending energy in the animal
>to cause more death or
>shock is a myth."
>
>
>Huh? A myth huh? I liked
>the rest of your post
>until you got to that
>part. I think i see
> what you're getting at
>but i don't totally agree.
>The greater the retained energy
>that a bullet has, the
>more violent and penetrating the
>bullet will be and so,
>the better to put lights
>out on Mr. Big Boy!
>
>
>You guys shooting 140 gr Accubonds
>at Elk thru a 270
>Winchester picked a good pill
>for the job but it
>must be remembered that the
>good ol 270 Win is
>on the small side for
>elk...as is the 7mm-08, the
>various 6.5's, the .280 Rem.
>and a few others come
>to mind.
>
>Good bullet, accurate rifle, and self
>control on shot placement and
>distance can make these mid
>type cartridges sure enough elk
>killers. With these though, holding
>off on the longer shots,
>+3-400 yds, is all important
>on just how far a
>Accubond might penetrate, maybe pass
>on thru or not.
>
>Joey
>
>
>"It's all about knowing what your
>firearms practical limitations are and
>combining that with your own
>personal limitations!"

There is more to it then just expending energy (e = MC squared). A light fast bullet that expends it's energy and explodes on the shoulder bone may cause a nasty shoulder wound but may not penetrate to the vitals and cause death. A heavy slow bullet with good sectional density with the same energy will penetrate better reaching the vital causing damage blood loss, even if it exits and does not transfer all the energy to the elk will do more to kill the elk than the prior bullet. It is momentum (MV) which penetrates, also bullet construction and sectional density of the bullet. Would you shoot an elk with a 30-06 and a 125 grain bullet at enough velocity to equal the energy of the same rifle with a 180 grain bullet going slower? Even if the 180 exits the elk and the 125 grain bullet does not, which do you think is going cause more damage and likely to kill the elk? Cowboys in days of old shot buffalo with .45-70 black powder loads using 405-500 grain bullets top speed was around 1300 fps giving you 1519.48 ft-lbs of energy. Which would at most times penetrate the width of the buffalo. The bullet won't expand much but does penetrate.
 

sageadvice

Long Time Member
Messages
11,970
Sigboy, you are preaching to the choir here as "most" who frequent here do know, or should already know, what you just said to be more than true. That's not what i questioned you about, was this, again, "...Expending energy in the animal to cause more death or shock is a myth."

I use good bullets with a high Sectional Density, high Ballistic Coefficient, and that penetrate well while leaving a nice unhealthy wound channel. The Accubond does all this for me.

Joey


"It's all about knowing what your firearms practical limitations are and combining that with your own personal limitations!"
 

sigboy66

Active Member
Messages
152
I know what your saying. Sorry to use the elk flying through the air bit. I just trying to make a point that the force and energy hitting the elk isn't all that great. Whether it stays in the animal or not or expends all the energy or not. Where the bullet is is placed, and what organs vital to metabolic function that are torn up and severing arteries creating blood loss is what kills them. Force at a small focused point to push through tissue and bone is what kills. Like a nail hit with a hammer, does not require a lot of force but it pushes the nail through a less solid object. Attach a blade to the butt plate of your rifle and pull the trigger it is going to penetrate your shoulder when you pull the trigger. But not with a soft wide squishy recoil pad will not. Ok I will shut up. Whipping a dead horse here.

And yes the Accubonds are awesome bullets, not the toughest out there but darn accurate and low drag. I love them too and don't hunt with anything else. Put them where you need to, and use a heavy enough bullet for the task it will get the job done.
 

BIGJOHNT

Long Time Member
Messages
4,940
LAST EDITED ON Oct-22-13 AT 03:49PM (MST)[p]There was a video done in the eighties I think ? It was called Deadly Effects what bullets do to bodies. I have a copy on 8mm . It goes into a lot of theories of shock and so on. It is very long and a little boring. But I have it because of all of the talk of shock, and magic killing bullets. It show ex-rays of what bullets do when they hit bodies in different situations . Yes this is a law enforcement video and it show graphic photos of crime scene. It covers all different calibers up threw large military rounds.
Basically they are trying to find a round to permanently in compensate someone with one shot. So they cannot return fire and hurt others. I know this is not about elk, but this does cover all of the theories talked about here. It does use FBI studies and really world situations. I would think you can search for it on the web and find a copy ?
 

sigboy66

Active Member
Messages
152
>>I'm still trying to figure out
>>what mallardsonly means by percussion
>>shock. mtmuley
>
>
>Obviously.


There are many theories on Hydrostatic shock, when a bullet hits tissue made up of water, causes a pressure wave which destroys other tissue away from the point of impact or not directly contacted by the bullet. Other theories that say this is crap, tissues that are en-elastic can be destroyed by being stretched by a bullet rapidly pushing through them which man not be in direct contact with the bullet. Anyway nobody has all the answers.
 

anadavid25

Active Member
Messages
102
Every bullet shoots differently. I shot a spike elk broadside at about 150 yards with a self-loaded 180 grain soft point 308 round and knocked him off his feet and head over heels. This is a 400lb animal, flattened by a bullet, so yes, I would say certain loads pack plenty of wallop at the time of impact.
 

Mallards_Only

Active Member
Messages
722
>mallard, stick to ducks man. This
>bullet stuff is way over
>your head. mtmuley


No, I think we've established who needs a lesson in ballistics. Perhaps, you should educate yourself before running your mouth. Can animals be killed with bullets that penetrate and pass through? Sure they can--just like arrows. But for maximum effectiveness, a bullet expends all its energy in the animal. One can't load a cartridge to have this happen at every conceivable range and condition. Therefore, loads are established to deliver the desired energy into the animal at the effective range. At close range, additional energy is wasted with passthrough. Do a search as BIGJOHNT recommended. You might learn something.
 

sigboy66

Active Member
Messages
152
LAST EDITED ON Oct-23-13 AT 09:23AM (MST)[p]>Every bullet shoots differently. I shot
>a spike elk broadside at
>about 150 yards with a
>self-loaded 180 grain soft point
>308 round and knocked him
>off his feet and head
>over heels. This is a
>400lb animal, flattened by a
>bullet, so yes, I would
>say certain loads pack plenty
>of wallop at the time
>of impact.


There are too many factors at play that will knock an animal on its butt but flying through the air no. According to the laws of physics the rifle hits you as hard as the bullet hit the elk. equal and opposite reaction. The rifle does not pick you up and knock you to the ground when it recoils. No different than a 80,000 pound semi hitting you at 1 mile an hour (assuming the truck is rolling and no one has there foot on the gas accelerating). The truck hits you with 2487 ft-lbs of energy. It pushes you a little bit, maybe tips you over if you loose your balance, but does not send you flying through the air. Same semi hitting you at 60 mph different story.
 

Charina

Member
Messages
54
> knocked him
>off his feet and head
>over heels. This is a
>400lb animal, flattened by a
>bullet, so yes, I would
>say certain loads pack plenty
>of wallop at the time
>of impact.

That there is funny.

For every action there is an equal and opposite reaction. Basic physics. The projectile from a gun can have NO more energy than is imparted against the gun and shoulder from which it was launched. The static 7-9 pound gun will be moved more by the bullet than a 400 lb static animal since the bullet can have no more 'energy' than it had when it left the gun, and imparted to the gun with the equal and opposite reaction to the launch.

All these annecdotal accounts are interesting, but pretty useless. I shot my GS elk this year with standard out-of-the-box 180 grn 30-06. Stumbled for a few seconds, and fell within just a couple yards. So, I can conclude that these factory loads are so much better than accubonds because so many of the elk shot with accubonds traveled over 10 yards? Hunters are a gullible bunch.
 

Charina

Member
Messages
54
>>mallard, stick to ducks man. This
>>bullet stuff is way over
>>your head. mtmuley
>
>
>I guess this guy should stick
>to ducks too.
>
>http://www.chuckhawks.com/rifle_bullet_killing_power.htm

Have you even read Chuck's article? Because it certainly does not support what you are contending that hydrostatic shock or percussion is the primary killing power of centerfile projectiles.

Quote: "Shock seems most likely to occur when light framed animals are hit by high velocity bullets. The classic case would be when a small (say about 100 pound), relaxed, deer or antelope is hit by a 130 grain .270 bullet at short to medium range."

"Light framed animals . . . by high velocity bullets." Not large, very durable elk hit with moderate velocity 180-220 grn bullets.

Chuck preaches shot placement over ANYTHING else, sectional density for penetration as critical, and practically ignores the hype of shock though so many of his articles. It is clear from other articles than the one you linked to that he would rather see a person shoot a .243 on elk if they are consistently accurate with it than with a .300 magnum which they will not handle as accurately. About the only time you hear of the hype of 'shock' or 'percussion' is in marketing campaigns, and those repeating it. But when educated and reasoned individuals consider it, it ranks very low, if at all, in the priorities of consideration in game hunting.
 

sigboy66

Active Member
Messages
152
The reason I smack my head when I hear the energy transfer kills the elk is because energy is a measurement of work. It is like saying the marathon runner died because the miles killed him. No he probably died of dehydration, a heart attack, or killed by overworking his body and dying of exhaustion. Energy is how much work a 180 grain bullet had to do penetrate an elk. Dumping all a bullets energy inside an elk is just another way of saying it bullet did not penetrate and exit the elk.

It is really hard to predict how much energy a bullet with a certain weight and and sectional density will kill an elk. There are to many factors because the elk's body is not made up of uniformly dense material. Elk come in different sizes. Elk are always not shot at the same angle and different places. Was the elk alert to your presence and have an adrenaline dump before you pulled the trigger. Which with a good charge of adrenaline an elk with a heart shot to pieces can run 100+ yards before expiring and maybe why an elk which was shot through the same place falls over dead while eating breakfast with the same rifle and cartridge combination. This is not an exact science, common sense will tell bigger tougher bullets from cartridges that produce lots of energy and are capable of tearing up a lot of tissue are better than smaller bullets moving with less energy.
And the fact we learned over time time what cartridges work better on elk than others.
 

sigboy66

Active Member
Messages
152
I was on the receiving end of a 135 grain Federal Hydroshock fired from a .40 S&W (someone accidentally shot me). It knocked me on my butt because it shattered my tibia on the leg my weight was mostly on. No longer structurally able to support my weight on that leg, my butt hit the floor. The energy of the bullet did not put me there directly, but gravity did. One action caused another, which caused my butt to hit the floor.
 

anadavid25

Active Member
Messages
102
Humm,

interesting posts fellas, never thought of energy transfer that way. And yes, it coulda been the angle on the spike bull. All the other elk I have killed have not fell over like that spike did.
 

mtmuley

Long Time Member
Messages
5,294
Charina knows what I'm talking about. Mallard, you better hit the Google hard dude. "Percussion shock", knockdown power and hydrostatic shock are all BS. Believe what you want, I'll keep killing stuff with a 200 grain Accubond pass-through. mtmuley
 

BLooDTRaCKeR

Very Active Member
Messages
1,568
Did some research this summer and decided to go with the 200 grain accubond backed by 91.5 grains of retumbo out of my 300 RUM. I killed my bull this year with a clean pass through. I killed my deer this year with the same bullet. Again, a clean pass through with extensive damage. Love this combo for my rifle!
 

bowhunt

Long Time Member
Messages
3,402
The force is equal, but the transfer of Kinetic energy is greater to the bullet than the shooter:

However, the smaller mass of the bullet, compared that of the gun-shooter system, allows significantly more kinetic energy to be imparted to the bullet than to the shooter.

The ratio of the kinetic energies is the same as the ratio of the masses (and is independent of velocity). Since the mass of the bullet is much less than that of the shooter there is more kinetic energy transferred to the bullet than to the shooter. Once discharged from the weapon, the bullet's energy decays throughout its flight, until the remainder is dissipated by colliding with a target (e.g. deforming the bullet and target).

So my conclusion, would be:
Get a pass through and enjoy the wound channel trauma.
I can post the math associated with this fact, if anyone is interested.
 

justr_86

Long Time Member
Messages
4,359
If energy transfer has nothing to do with it, why dont we save money and just shoot fmj? Imo I would rather the animal soaks up the energy (not a pass through) in the vitals, causing shock to stun the animal and taking out vital organs so it is unable to recover and not worrying about a track job.

A pass through is wasted energy, the harder you get hit the longer it takes to recover....

4b1db2ac644136c4.jpg
 

BIGJOHNT

Long Time Member
Messages
4,940
I don't have a dog in this fight and didn't really want to get into this. But here goes.
I just wish you guys would watch the video !!! There is a lot that goes into this. But what it boils down to. It is what the bullet hits and damages or tares that causes death. So yes a large diameter bullet that reliable expands. Hitting or taring vital organs or vessels. Is what kills. So bullet placement is critical.
It is unreliable to hope or wish a large wound cavity, bullet shock or energy transfer to kill a animal. Yes you do need energy to get to the vitals .
In a few cases I have seen a elk get hit high, above the vitals and below the spine go down. But get up after a while and run off. I believe this a case of shock to the spine causing temporary paralyzing of the animal . Shoot it in the heart with a 22 long rifle and it will die. Not a lot of energy. But hit in the right spot. I hope this helps a little in understanding what it takes to kill a animal.
 

sigboy66

Active Member
Messages
152
LAST EDITED ON Oct-31-13 AT 08:34AM (MST)[p]Ok your hit with a 5 pound pillow going 75 feet per second you completely stop the pillow with your body. You just absorbed 437 ft-lbs of energy does it kill you? No. But you still got the full 437 ft-lbs absorbed by your body?

Your hit with a 135 grain bullet going 1200 fps, your body absorbs the 432 ft-lbs of energy. Can it kill you? You bet.

Whats the difference? It is not the energy transfer that kills you. Can it shock you? Well maybe you go into shock because you panic and/or blood loss.

Again energy is just a measure of work. A measure of how much work the bullet did to tear up flesh, bone, and what ever got in it's way. The pillow and the bullet did about the same amount of work on the body. Force is one body of one object acting on another. With the pillow the force is spread a wider area so the force of the pillow is unable to over come the structural integrity of the body it is hitting pushing back on the pillow. Equal and opposite reaction. You stand on the ground your exerting 180 pounds of force on it, it is exerting 180 pounds of force back at you, else you sink into the ground. The bullet has the same force as the pillow, because bullet is harder than the body and all the force is focused on a small single point it is able to over come the the force the body is exerting back on the bullet. Its all about pounds per square inch. Result the bullet penetrates tears up flesh, breaks bones, causes you to bleed, inflicts pain, panic, blood loss leading to circulatory shock and/or death.

The jello junkies, the guys who like to shoot gelatin to prove ballistics, like to get hung up on energy transfer because of the way the jello expands and jiggles, and there is this big temporary cavity in the jello. It really does not take a lot of force to get jello to jiggle and move, or much force to put a hole through it, hell you can do it with you hand. Most bodies are made up of water like the ballistic jello, but our bodies are not uniformly dense. There are bones and lots of hollow spaces in there.
 

Zeke

Long Time Member
Messages
9,223
We all agree that shot placement is king.

We all agree that animals die from a disruption in the critical organs etc in the body.

What we're having a hard time with is how and why this disruption takes place.

Here are my thoughts:
It's not just energy or momentum or a FMJ would be fine.... they are not fine.
It's not just energy or the super light , fast bullets would work fine on elk... they don't because they don't penetrate to the vitals reliably.
It's kind of a combination of ballistic characteristics which produce the results which we all desire.

A bullets needs speed, mass, construction properties, expansion to produce the desired result.

If you bullet penetrates though the vitals, tears stuff up etc the animal will die. How quickly depends on too many factors to even quantify so we can leave it at that.

I'm not a jello junkie but you cannot discount the "primary" wound channel. (that's the wound that you cannot see when you walk up to the critter because you can only see the remnants or the secondary wound channel)

The primary wound channel is caused by the expansion, twisting, energy transfer etc of the bullet. This primary channel does far more damage than the obvious secondary channel (the one we can see when we examine or animals). Some call this primary channel hydrolic shock. Call it what you want but it's a scientific fact that the primary channel is much larger and does far more damage. Otherwise, most bullets have about the same frontal area as a arrow field point (FMJ) and we all know how well that would work!

The goal should be a combination of penetration and expansion to achieve the desired outcome.

The path to arrive at the desired result is quite varied. Hence, you have quite a choice of calibers, cartridges, bullet weights, construction, shapes etc.

It's a wonder any animals hit the dirt with so many things to think about! LOL

Carry on,
Zeke
 

Mallards_Only

Active Member
Messages
722
>LAST EDITED ON Oct-31-13
>AT 08:34?AM (MST)

>
>Ok your hit with a 5
>pound pillow going 75 feet
>per second you completely stop
>the pillow with your body.
>You just absorbed 437 ft-lbs
>of energy does it kill
>you? No. But you still
>got the full 437 ft-lbs
>absorbed by your body?
>
>Your hit with a 135 grain
>bullet going 1200 fps, your
>body absorbs the 432 ft-lbs
>of energy. Can it kill
>you? You bet.
>
>Whats the difference? It is not
>the energy transfer that kills
>you. Can it shock you?
>Well maybe you go into
>shock because you panic and/or
>blood loss.
>
>Again energy is just a measure
>of work. A measure of
>how much work the bullet
>did to tear up flesh,
>bone, and what ever got
>in it's way. The pillow
>and the bullet did about
>the same amount of work
>on the body. Force is
>one body of one object
>acting on another. With the
>pillow the force is spread
>a wider area so the
>force of the pillow is
>unable to over come the
>structural integrity of the body
>it is hitting pushing back
>on the pillow. Equal
>and opposite reaction. You stand
>on the ground your exerting
>180 pounds of force on
>it, it is exerting 180
>pounds of force back at
>you, else you sink into
>the ground. The bullet has
>the same force as the
>pillow, because bullet is harder
>than the body and all
>the force is focused on
>a small single point it
>is able to over come
>the the force the body
>is exerting back on the
>bullet. Its all about pounds
>per square inch. Result the
>bullet penetrates tears up flesh,
>breaks bones, causes you to
>bleed, inflicts pain, panic, blood
>loss leading to circulatory shock
>and/or death.
>
>The jello junkies, the guys who
>like to shoot gelatin to
>prove ballistics, like to get
>hung up on energy transfer
>because of the way the
>jello expands and jiggles, and
>there is this big temporary
>cavity in the jello. It
>really does not take a
>lot of force to get
>jello to jiggle and move,
>or much force to put
>a hole through it, hell
>you can do it with
>you hand. Most bodies are
>made up of water like
>the ballistic jello, but our
>bodies are not uniformly dense.
>There are bones and lots
>of hollow spaces in there.
>
Nice try, but WRONG! You cannot compare the effects of blunt force trauma from a pillow to the hydrostatic effects of a bullet. Obviously, some guys will always refuse to accept that they're wrong and be resistant to being educated. Bottom line--penetration kills(just like an arrow) and hydrostatic shock kills(this is what a well-designed bullet does). Any bullet that penetrates without expansion and passes through expending part of its energy into the hillside is no more effective than an arrow. If it's properly placed, it will kill. Personally, if I'm going to hunt with gun, I'll take a well-designed bullet and the hydrostatic shock.
 

sigboy66

Active Member
Messages
152
>>LAST EDITED ON Oct-31-13
>>AT 08:34?AM (MST)

>>
>>Ok your hit with a 5
>>pound pillow going 75 feet
>>per second you completely stop
>>the pillow with your body.
>>You just absorbed 437 ft-lbs
>>of energy does it kill
>>you? No. But you still
>>got the full 437 ft-lbs
>>absorbed by your body?
>>
>>Your hit with a 135 grain
>>bullet going 1200 fps, your
>>body absorbs the 432 ft-lbs
>>of energy. Can it kill
>>you? You bet.
>>
>>Whats the difference? It is not
>>the energy transfer that kills
>>you. Can it shock you?
>>Well maybe you go into
>>shock because you panic and/or
>>blood loss.
>>
>>Again energy is just a measure
>>of work. A measure of
>>how much work the bullet
>>did to tear up flesh,
>>bone, and what ever got
>>in it's way. The pillow
>>and the bullet did about
>>the same amount of work
>>on the body. Force is
>>one body of one object
>>acting on another. With the
>>pillow the force is spread
>>a wider area so the
>>force of the pillow is
>>unable to over come the
>>structural integrity of the body
>>it is hitting pushing back
>>on the pillow. Equal
>>and opposite reaction. You stand
>>on the ground your exerting
>>180 pounds of force on
>>it, it is exerting 180
>>pounds of force back at
>>you, else you sink into
>>the ground. The bullet has
>>the same force as the
>>pillow, because bullet is harder
>>than the body and all
>>the force is focused on
>>a small single point it
>>is able to over come
>>the the force the body
>>is exerting back on the
>>bullet. Its all about pounds
>>per square inch. Result the
>>bullet penetrates tears up flesh,
>>breaks bones, causes you to
>>bleed, inflicts pain, panic, blood
>>loss leading to circulatory shock
>>and/or death.
>>
>>The jello junkies, the guys who
>>like to shoot gelatin to
>>prove ballistics, like to get
>>hung up on energy transfer
>>because of the way the
>>jello expands and jiggles, and
>>there is this big temporary
>>cavity in the jello. It
>>really does not take a
>>lot of force to get
>>jello to jiggle and move,
>>or much force to put
>>a hole through it, hell
>>you can do it with
>>you hand. Most bodies are
>>made up of water like
>>the ballistic jello, but our
>>bodies are not uniformly dense.
>>There are bones and lots
>>of hollow spaces in there.
>>
>Nice try, but WRONG! You
>cannot compare the effects of
>blunt force trauma from a
>pillow to the hydrostatic effects
>of a bullet. Obviously,
>some guys will always refuse
>to accept that they're wrong
>and be resistant to being
>educated. Bottom line--penetration kills(just
>like an arrow) and hydrostatic
>shock kills(this is what a
>well-designed bullet does). Any
>bullet that penetrates without expansion
>and passes through expending part
>of its energy into the
>hillside is no more effective
>than an arrow. If
>it's properly placed, it will
>kill. Personally, if I'm
>going to hunt with gun,
>I'll take a well-designed bullet
>and the hydrostatic shock.


It's not the energy transfer that kills. Your not shooting lightning bolts. Again energy is a measurement of work. How much work the bullet did. An fmj has less resistance than an soft nose bullet. The fmj has less frontal mass when it hits because it does not expand. It has less resistance. It does not have to work as hard to penetrate, because it has less drag. There is more pounds per square inch behind it because its frontal area is smaller. Basically more force focused on a smaller area. It can kill, but not as effective as a soft point obviously because of reduced surface area. The pillow is just spreading the force out over a wider area. Both the pillow and the bullet transfer the same energy. But one does not penetrate because there is not enough force in one small spot to penetrate or cause any damage. the body has enough force pushing back on the pillow to resist damage. A bullet that expends all it's energy inside the body and kills is just more efficient than one that expends some of its energy causes enough damage to kill and exits.

Hydro static shock only comes into play when a bullet hits an organ full of fluid, the organ tends to explode.

You sound like a liberal can't argue so you result to insults.
 

Mallards_Only

Active Member
Messages
722
>
>You sound like a liberal can't
>argue so you result to
>insults.


Now those are fightin' words.
Incidentally, a pillow traveling at 75 ft/sec can INDEED kill you as a result of the energy imparted. It's called blunt force trauma and is the same mechanism that results in bodily injuries in MVA's. The internal injuries to the liver, brain, spleen and other bodily organs that contain a lot of fluid result in death--not to mention the broken bones and skeletal injuries. Try shooting a 1 gallon milk jug with an expanding high caliber bullet as opposed to .22. Which one do you think is going to be more destructive to the milk jug? Does penetration kill? Sure it does. Otherwise, no one would bowhunt. But it kills by a different mechanism than an effective bullet. Keep shooting bullets that impart little energy into the animal and eventually you'll get burned by a non-lethal hit. An expansile bullet creates a larger wound channel resulting a higher likelihood of causing damage to the vital organs or causing hemorrhage. You may as well use .22's for every game animal based on your logic.
 

andrew12gauge

Active Member
Messages
494
I love accubonds, shot several deer and 1 elk with them out of my .300 wsm. Only had one pass through that was on a bad shot that hit the guts on a deer, every other animal I have shot with them I've found the bullet under the hide on the exit side but no blood trails were required, every time I've hit the vitals the animal has been DRT. With the amount of energy that the 180 gr accubond delivers from my gun the vitals come out looking like pink jello.
 

dz

Very Active Member
Messages
1,059
Here is my 2 cents. I have had this kind of conversation with some of my hunting friends. I think that bullet placement is 1st and foremost. When I was just starting to hunt I had a friend that shot a forky with a 25-06. He hit it high in the shoulder above the spine. It knocked it about 10 feet back and it never moved. When I walked up to it and saw where it was hit I was amazed as the shot placement was not in the vitals. The deer was dead. That buck was killed by shock. So hence I picked up a 25-06 that year and have used it to shoot many game animals. (way to small for elk, but I have killed many with it) I shot a cow once right in the lungs. It stayed on its feet and only moved a few feet. I waited a minute and give her another one in the same place, actually the holes were about an inch apart. I saw her feet go through the scope. Bull barrel so I get to watch. What I think happened is the first started to fill the lungs with blood and when the second one hit it was Hydro shocked. I also think it matters where the animal is in a breath of air. That is the only reason why some flip over and some don't, hit in the same area. I have seen hundreds of big game animals shot and each one is different.

DZ
 

sigboy66

Active Member
Messages
152
LAST EDITED ON Nov-05-13 AT 06:35PM (MST)[p]>>
>>You sound like a liberal can't
>>argue so you result to
>>insults.
>
>
>Now those are fightin' words.
>Incidentally, a pillow traveling at 75
>ft/sec can INDEED kill you
>as a result of the
>energy imparted. It's called
>blunt force trauma and is
>the same mechanism that results
>in bodily injuries in MVA's.
> The internal injuries to
>the liver, brain, spleen and
>other bodily organs that contain
>a lot of fluid result
>in death--not to mention the
>broken bones and skeletal injuries.
> Try shooting a 1
>gallon milk jug with an
>expanding high caliber bullet as
>opposed to .22. Which
>one do you think is
>going to be more destructive
>to the milk jug?
>Does penetration kill? Sure
>it does. Otherwise, no
>one would bowhunt. But
>it kills by a different
>mechanism than an effective bullet.
> Keep shooting bullets that
>impart little energy into the
>animal and eventually you'll get
>burned by a non-lethal hit.
> An expansile bullet creates
>a larger wound channel resulting
>a higher likelihood of causing
>damage to the vital organs
>or causing hemorrhage. You
>may as well use .22's
>for every game animal based
>on your logic.

you ever hit a potato with a .22 it explodes. Shoot a water melon with a 223 it explodes (22 not so much). Its not the energy that explodes it it is the force. TOnce a bullet hits a uniformly dense object the force of the material being displaced by the bullet over comes the force of the container holding it in. This is hydrostatic shock like shooting a milk jug full of water which contains a uniformly dense liquid. The 22 does not hit with enough force to bust the milk jug because the force holding it in is greater than the force pushing it out.

Shoot a 10 pound pumpkin with a .30-06 with it just makes a small hole in the front and a bigger one out the back, because it is hollow. The problem with the hydro static this theory is it does not hold true for elk, or other animals, they are hollow in some parts and not in others. Hit it in the heart the with one of the chambers full of blood it explodes, hit it empty it just tears a nasty hole through it. Still ends up dead. There are too many factors. Shot placement is the most important.

What part about enough force don't you get? Like I would not use a .22 to shoot an elk, there is not enough horsepower behind it to get the job done. Energy is not some magical killer like shocking the animal like a lightning bolt it relies too much on velocity.(1/2mv squared). A 115 grain from a 9mm has the same energy as a standard velocity .45 acp with a 230 grain bullet. Use a 9mm in a bowling pin competion. Most of the time a 9mm will just knock over the pins, a 45 picks up the pin and knocks it off the table. But they both dump the same amount of energy in the pin. The 45 has more force behind it. Force is mass x acceleration. One body hits another and causes it to accelerate off the table. Energy squares the velocity so it makes you think that a bullet is more powerful than it is.
 

BLooDTRaCKeR

Very Active Member
Messages
1,568
Once again guys, these are ENTRY holes on an elk I shot with my 300 ultra mag. 180 grain accubonds. first shot nocked it down. It stood up, second shot killed it. major internal damage, no exit holes. hunt with what you want, I now shoot the 200 grain accubond and killed two for two animals this year with devistating results. 100 yard kill shot on an elk and 289 yard kill shot on a deer. no need to argue, just go with what has produced good results. Research and experience will lead you to the right bullet for your hunting style.

83522010_elk_hunt_013.jpg
 

sigboy66

Active Member
Messages
152
>You clearly need to go back
>and take high school physics
>again because you just don't
>get it. I tried
>to find the most simple
>proof so even your simple
>mind could understand it.
>Try reading it.
>http://arxiv.org/abs/0803.3051
>I think we've established who the
>"liberal"

I have had over 1 year of physics at a Major university. How much of you had?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Martin_Fackler

He was the first researcher to demonstrate that fragmentation was the most effective means of inflicting wounds in a modern military rifle round. He asserted that yawing and cavitation do not typically cause severe tissue trauma. Or, that the "permanent wound cavity" or actual damage caused by a projectile is the primary "stopping power" mechanism and that the "temporary wound cavity" or shock wave produced by the projectile is at best a secondary mechanism, if not irrelevant

"A myth is an assertion which has either been disproven by careful experiment or for which there is no historical or scientific evidence in cases where it is reasonably expected. Belief in remote effects of penetrating projectiles may have originated with hunters and soldiers, but their reality is now well established in a broad body of scientific literature..."

? Neurosurgery



http://blogs.howstuffworks.com/2009/05/12/how-does-a-bullet-carry-such-enormous-power/


Lots of studies that say it is lots of studies that say it is not.
 

bowhunt

Long Time Member
Messages
3,402
I have a Masters in Engineering
A Bachelors in Physics and Mathematics
I also have a PHD in BS

Conclusions:

-Accubonds are a good bullet for elk
-Your shot was altered by the bone.
 

Mallards_Only

Active Member
Messages
722
>>You clearly need to go back
>>and take high school physics
>>again because you just don't
>>get it. I tried
>>to find the most simple
>>proof so even your simple
>>mind could understand it.
>>Try reading it.
>>http://arxiv.org/abs/0803.3051
>>I think we've established who the
>>"liberal"
>
>I have had over 1 year
>of physics at a Major
>university. How much of you
>had?
>
>http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Martin_Fackler
>
>He was the first researcher to
>demonstrate that fragmentation was the
>most effective means of inflicting
>wounds in a modern military
>rifle round. He asserted that
>yawing and cavitation do not
>typically cause severe tissue trauma.
>Or, that the "permanent wound
>cavity" or actual damage caused
>by a projectile is the
>primary "stopping power" mechanism and
>that the "temporary wound cavity"
>or shock wave produced by
>the projectile is at best
>a secondary mechanism, if not
>irrelevant
>
>"A myth is an assertion which
>has either been disproven by
>careful experiment or for which
>there is no historical or
>scientific evidence in cases where
>it is reasonably expected. Belief
>in remote effects of penetrating
>projectiles may have originated with
>hunters and soldiers, but their
>reality is now well established
>in a broad body of
>scientific literature..."
>
>? Neurosurgery
>
>
>
>http://blogs.howstuffworks.com/2009/05/12/how-does-a-bullet-carry-such-enormous-power/
>
>
>Lots of studies that say it
>is lots of studies that
>say it is not.

I have had as much physics(if not more) and I remember enough to know that Force is not the reason for the killing effects of bullets. It is the K.E. that is imparted on the animal and is the reason that velocity of the projectile is so important in terms of its effectiveness. Theories regarding the supposed ineffectiveness of hydrostatic shock have been disproven many times.
A bullet that travels nearly the entire width of the body cavity, through the vitals or close to them, and imparts all of its energy into creating collateral damage to the surrounding structures in proximity without wasting its energy into the hillside beyond the animal is more effective than one which travels a very confined course leaving only a small wound channel and causing very little damage to the surrounding structures. End of story. I'm done.
 
D

DnkyPunch

Guest
A couple of us in my hunting crew shoot accubonds in several calibers from 257 WBY up to 300 wsm with nothing but 1 shot kills on deer and antelope over the last 4 years. Shots have been 200-450 yds.
I think the biggest reason is that they shoot really well through our guns so we make good shots, hence a dozen 1 shot kills.

My opinion is find a good bullet that your gun shoots well and stick with it then take shots you can ethically make.
 

sigboy66

Active Member
Messages
152
Stating over and over that it has been proven without providing proof, proves nada. It is just stating your opinion.

So by your logic I can shoot an elk in the ass and as long as it does not penetrate and transfers all its energy to the elk it will die. Hmmmmmm Anyway I am done with you.
 

Click-a-Pic ... Details & Bigger Photos
Top Bottom