The Accurate Reloading Forums
The use of Sectional Density
The use of Sectional Density
.
19 July 2012, 00:35
465H&HGerard,
the dictionary definition of static is "standing still, characterized by stability and lack of change".
For dynamic it is "having to do with energy or force in motion".
Mass and bullet length change over the penetration incident, therefore, they are dynamic.
To believe otherwise is junk science.
465H&H
19 July 2012, 14:37
SR4759Statics - An engineering course dealing with objects that are not accelerating. Either they are motionless or they do not accelerate if in motion.
Dynamics - The same thing for objects that undergo acceleration.
25 July 2012, 01:28
GerardAlf,
The last time you came up with this point of view, I asked you a couple of questions. You never gave any answers so, can I ask them now? Will you reply?
26 July 2012, 12:27
GerardLets try again.
Alf, may I please ask some questions about your post that starts with 'Just a thought?'. Previously I asked questions about certain aspects of the points you mention but I accept that you suffer from fits of rage and delete your posts. I know and accept that this makes it difficult to continue a discussion but the opportunity seems right now. Please, pretty please.
Thank you.
26 July 2012, 19:15
GerardIt's ok Alf, I understand. You are not going to answer the questions I have, you can stop avoidance tactic now.
It's kinda like wind chill.
Yes it is meaningless as an absolute. But can be used as a generality.
There is no universal variable that works with internal ballistics, external ballistics and terminal ballistics. Construction matters.
There are two types of people in the world: those that get things done and those who make excuses. There are no others.
27 July 2012, 01:00
465H&Hquote:
Originally posted by Gerard:
It's ok Alf, I understand. You are not going to answer the questions I have, you can stop avoidance tactic now.
Gerard;
Is that sort of like you avoiding providing the stopping power data information that you claimed to have and were asked for on the 350 grain thread?
465H&H
27 July 2012, 01:14
RMillerSectional density is simply another factor in the the performance of bullets.
Just a couple other factors which can be more important are bullet construction and velocity.
There are no absolutes in hunting.
There is nothing I would shoot with a 220 30-06 load that I would not shoot with a Barnes TTSX 130 grain from a 308 win on up (although the bigger the critter the faster I would want my bullet to go). Simply looking at sectional density would be pointless in this comparison. Even then it would have a lot to do with the critter too. Just cause its big doesnt mean as much as if its big and mean.
--------------------
THANOS WAS RIGHT!
27 July 2012, 02:14
Gerard465H&H,
quote:
465H&H: Is that sort of like you avoiding providing the stopping power data information that you claimed to and were asked for on the 350 grain thread?
Unless you provide a quote where I claimed to have stopping power data in the 350gr thread, I must conclude that you have stooped to bald faced lying now.
27 July 2012, 02:49
465H&Hquote:
Originally posted by Gerard:
465H&H,
quote:
465H&H: Is that sort of like you avoiding providing the stopping power data information that you claimed to and were asked for on the 350 grain thread?
Unless you provide a quote where I claimed to have stopping power data in the 350gr thread, I must conclude that you have stooped to bald faced lying now.
Gerard:
Since you made the statement that stopping power doesn't exist, I naturally assumed that you had some data to support that position. Is it like you to make statements with out having any data to supprt it? It seems your only "data" is what some PHs have told you if that is even the case. In a court of law that is called "Second hand information" and it is not admissible. You made this dogmatic statement now back it up with some hard data, not your opinion. If it is just your opinion then say it and I can respect that. I can't believe that many if any PHs with elephant hunting experience would believe that stopping power doesn't exist. I have never run into a DG PH that was looking for a smaller caliber throwing a lighter bullet. In fact the majority have been looking for bigger guns. If you know of some let me know and I would like to hear their reasoning for thinking that stopping power doesn't exist. . I'm always willing to learn.
465H&H
27 July 2012, 03:18
Gerardquote:
Unless you provide a quote where I claimed to have stopping power data in the 350gr thread, I must conclude that you have stooped to bald faced lying now.
27 July 2012, 03:31
465H&Hquote:
Originally posted by Gerard:
quote:
Unless you provide a quote where I claimed to have stopping power data in the 350gr thread, I must conclude that you have stooped to bald faced lying now.
Avoiding answering the question again. Typical Gerard behavior. If you can't produce the data, attack! I am done with you.
465H&H
27 July 2012, 04:28
GerardYou are asking for data which I have stated several times does not exist. Now you say that I have said that I have this data. I am asking you to show me where I said this. You cannot. Where is the logic in repeatedly asking for data that does not exist and me repeatedly saying it does not exist. We could be here for months.
So show me where I have said that I have the data. Simple.
Any perception of an attack is in your mind. Just show me my quote and we are done. If you cannot show me my quote............
27 July 2012, 05:25
465H&Hlet me restate the question. You have said that stopping power doesn't exist. Show me your evidence that proves it.
465H&H
27 July 2012, 11:54
Gerardquote:
ATTORNEY: This myasthenia gravis, does it affect your memory at all?
WITNESS: Yes.
ATTORNEY: And in what ways does it affect your memory?
WITNESS: I forget.
ATTORNEY: You forget? Can you give us an example of something you forgot?
However, let us approach this logically and structured: What is your definition of 'Stopping Power'?
27 July 2012, 13:37
SR4759
27 July 2012, 20:43
465H&Hquote:
Originally posted by Gerard:
quote:
ATTORNEY: This myasthenia gravis, does it affect your memory at all?
WITNESS: Yes.
ATTORNEY: And in what ways does it affect your memory?
WITNESS: I forget.
ATTORNEY: You forget? Can you give us an example of something you forgot?
However, let us approach this logically and structured: What is your definition of 'Stopping Power'?
Gerard,
Please add the following to the list I sent you:
8. If you dont want to or can't answer a question, then you counter by asking one yourself.
I would define stopping power as "the ability to stop or turn a charging animal".
465H&H
27 July 2012, 21:00
465H&HGerard,
What definition of stopping power did you use when you came up with the "fact" that it doesn't exist?
465h&H
28 July 2012, 11:47
Gerard465H&H
quote:
What definition of stopping power did you use when you came up with the "fact" that it doesn't exist?
Why must I repeat everything?
quote:
All indices that list stopping power from 'good' to 'bad' are just so much nonsense. What they actually attempt to list is the ability of a caliber/bullet/cartridge to track deep and straight and do the most permanent damage within the wound track.
Alf, give us your definition of 'stopping power'.
28 July 2012, 19:19
Cross L“In theory, theory and practice are the same. In practice, they are not.”
― Albert Einstein
28 July 2012, 19:32
465H&Hquote:
Originally posted by Gerard:
465H&H
quote:
What definition of stopping power did you use when you came up with the "fact" that it doesn't exist?
Why must I repeat everything?
quote:
All indices that list stopping power from 'good' to 'bad' are just so much nonsense. What they actually attempt to list is the ability of a caliber/bullet/cartridge to track deep and straight and do the most permanent damage within the wound track.
Alf, give us your definition of 'stopping power'.
Gerard,
No you didn't answer the question! You changed the question by answerering an unasked question about stopping power indices, that was not the question. How many times do I have to repeat it? Now Alf answered your question to define stopping power directly. Now I wonder how you will fail to answer the question again!
465H&H
28 July 2012, 21:02
Gerard465H&H,
Are you reading some other post and then answering here?
quote:
No you didn't answer the question!
My answer was: "All indices that list stopping power from 'good' to 'bad' are just so much nonsense." How could you miss that unless you did not read it or, read it but did not understand it?
quote:
You changed the question by answerering an unasked question about stopping power indices, that was not the question.
I know that was not the answer to your question, I qualified my answer with the explanation of indices.
quote:
How many times do I have to repeat it?
I do not know. You keep asking me for my data on 'stopping power' and I keep telling you that I have none because 'stopping power' is a myth. I guess that, if you have not figured it out by now, you are going to keep on asking and I will just have to keep on saying that 'stopping power' is a myth.
quote:
Now Alf answered your question to define stopping power directly.
Alf said: ""Stopping power" is not my term nor would I use it." That is a good definition and I am glad that you agree with it. Does that mean that you are changing your definition of 'stopping power'?
quote:
Now I wonder how you will fail to answer the question again!
This is quite the detailed answer I think. The question is, in PM I asked you some questions and you failed to answer. I have answered every question you asked me. That is a basic courtesy. How about you?
As a matter of interest. Earlier in another thread you directed this at me: "You have made statements saying that you have measured stopping power." Where did I make such statements?
Alf,
Agreed on everything, except: "or someone says my bullet has a flat nose and therefore it is more incapcitating than a RN, or velocity is the key to incapacitation." But that is a discussion for another day, I need to get some stuff done here.
28 July 2012, 21:30
465H&Hquote:
Originally posted by Gerard:
465H&H,
Are you reading some other post and then answering here?
quote:
No you didn't answer the question!
My answer was: "All indices that list stopping power from 'good' to 'bad' are just so much nonsense." How could you miss that unless you did not read it or, read it but did not understand it?
quote:
You changed the question by answerering an unasked question about stopping power indices, that was not the question.
I know that was not the answer to your question, I qualified my answer with the explanation of indices.
quote:
How many times do I have to repeat it?
I do not know. You keep asking me for my data on 'stopping power' and I keep telling you that I have none because 'stopping power' is a myth. I guess that, if you have not figured it out by now, you are going to keep on asking and I will just have to keep on saying that 'stopping power' is a myth.
quote:
Now Alf answered your question to define stopping power directly.
Alf said: ""Stopping power" is not my term nor would I use it." That is a good definition and I am glad that you agree with it. Does that mean that you are changing your definition of 'stopping power'?
quote:
Now I wonder how you will fail to answer the question again!
This is quite the detailed answer I think. The question is, in PM I asked you some questions and you failed to answer. I have answered every question you asked me. That is a basic courtesy. How about you?
As a matter of interest. Earlier in another thread you directed this at me: "You have made statements saying that you have measured stopping power." Where did I make such statements?
Alf,
Agreed on everything, except: "or someone says my bullet has a flat nose and therefore it is more incapcitating than a RN, or velocity is the key to incapacitation." But that is a discussion for another day, I need to get some stuff done here.
Well now we know how you will fail to answer the question again! Gerard, I have never gotten personal with someone on this forum but for you I am going to make an exception and suffer Saeed's rath.
"Your an idiot."465H&H
28 July 2012, 21:45
GerardThis is something that I have encountered before. When logic and facts run out, your kind turns to insult.
"It is the mark of an educated mind to entertain a thought without accepting it." -– Aristotle
30 July 2012, 03:20
GerardAlf,
quote:
In terms of incapacitation a FN bullet for instance increases the probabiility of the bullet actually getting to say the brain when compared to a RN bullet
Why would this be?
30 July 2012, 11:21
GerardAlf,
quote:
Because the RN may actually come to a stop before getting to the brain.
If an FN is more likely to reach the brain than a RN, because the RN stopped short of the brain, why would an RN do that? Remember that all things are equal.
quote:
ie someone claiming a bullet did a 90 degree turn in the body.
How do you explain this?
30 July 2012, 18:46
GerardHow about explaining this one.
30 July 2012, 21:19
465H&Hquote:
Originally posted by 465H&H:
quote:
Originally posted by Gerard:
How about explaining this one.
Without being able to follow the bullets path through the animal and only seeing this picture it seems to me that the most likely scenario was that the animal was at a steep up hill angle form the shooter causing the bullet to go from the entry wound out the top. Also if you like to eat what you shoot, whatever the bullet used, it was a piss poor choice.
465H&H
30 July 2012, 21:46
GerardThese two springbok were shot in the Kendrew area in the Karoo. The shooter was sitting down with the rifle on a bipod, both animals were at rifle level and the ground was virtually flat. The first one was shot quarter from behind and the second one was very close to side-on. The rifle was a 270Win with factory 150gr ammo with jacketed lead core bullets. Shooting distance was about 120m for both and the rifle was zeroed at 200m. The pictures show the only holes found on both animals and fragments of jacket material was found in the carcasses and some, but no significant core material fragments could be found.
In the first photo the incoming bullet direction is shown with the bottom left arrow. The exit direction is conjecture on my part but the hole is not. It is very real. The second picture shows the entrance wound in the yellow square and, again, the direction of the bullet exit is guessed at but the exit hole is real enough to make the direction a moot point. A lot of meat was lost on the first animal but the second one fared much better.
Are these not excellent examples of what theoretically should not happen, does not happen in testing and can be put down to a curve ball thrown by a practical set of circumstances?
IIRC these two animals were part of a bag of about 150 animals shot by 14 of us over a four day ambush hunt (voorsitskiet).
31 July 2012, 01:01
465H&HHaving shot several hundred animals ranging in size from moose to javelina over the past 50+ years with a 270 with mostly 150 grain bullets I have only once seen one turn in an animal. That was a bull moose walking at around 125 yards. It was walking above me on a medium size hill. The bullet took it behind the shoulder on an upward angle behind the shoulder. It traveled up and hit the spine glanced off the spine and deflected downward exiting at about the same height as the entrance wound. If all happened as you detailed then this is a very rare occurrence without hitting a large bone. Still think it was a piss poor bullet. I doubt that a Nosler Partition or Woodleigh soft would do that.
Almost all deflections are caused either by glancing off of rounded bone surface of hitting a flat bone such as a shoulder bone at a steep angle, in my opinion. Imagine a steel plate being hit by a metal piercing bullet. If hit straight on, it penetrates. If it is hit at a steep angle it will glance off.
465H&H