This might have been discussed before on this forum but here goes anyway. Will deer more likely die on the spot if the impact velocity is very high? What are your real life experiences?
Will a deer die quicker if hit by a bullet doing 3000fps compared to a 2000fps bullet if the bullet expanded the same? Is there a shock effect that can kill a deer in an instance? If so at what velocities do you feel this starts to happen. Personally i think it starts to happen at around 2800fps but i have shot to few animals at high velocity to be sure there is a effect at all. It might have been chance alone.

I have herd from people hunting with shot gun slugs that most/all deer run very far even after a heart shot. This must indicate that velocity does kill?

I have used high velocity rounds for most of my hunting career(257wby,7mmstw,300wbymag,300ultramg)and find that they have on average provided quicker kills than most other chamberings.When used with ballistic tips of lighter to medium for caliber weights most animals drop on the spot and not one has covered 50 yards after being hit.I use only lung shots and have witnessed many kills by other hunters using various cartridges such as 30-30,303british, 7mm-08,308,270,30-06 and on average the game shot with these cartridges ran more after being shot than my own kills.

The cartridges Stubble uses are more powerful!

Harald says it's the size of the hole that causes a blood pressure drop. The faster the blood pressure drop the faster the quarry succumbs.

Take a nice broadside or quartering shot at 100yds with a 308 and then if you have a second tag, try that again with a 300mag using the same bullet. I think you'll see pretty quickly what "hydrostatic shock" can do.

John, exactly.

To take the idea to its extreme... take a 30 cal, 180 grainer and throw it at your next deer... then shoot another with the same bullet at 3,00 fps... the difference will be dramatic

Igor,

For such a comparison to be valid you must have bullet energy.

So we could have a 130 grain 270 at 3150 f/s for 2865 ft/lbs.

Or a 220 grain bullet at 2415 f/s for the same 2865 ft/lbs

The results now on our light animal will be very much determined by the rate of bullet expansion and hence rate at which energy is released.

In the above two examples the 220 grain bullet has 30 more momentum than the 130 grain 270.

In my experience, if expansion is quick, then for equal energy the larger bullet going slower and with equal energy but more momentum will kill better.

The closest I have used to the above ballistics where lots of animals were shot is the 270 with 130 grain and the 375 H&H loaded to around 2500 to 2600 with the 220 grain Hornady flat nose. On kangaroos and pigs the 375 is way out in front of the 270.

A 308 with 130 Speer Hollow point at 3000 will also beat the 270 with 110 Sierras at 3400 and 100 grain Hornadys at over 3500.

Just recently a friend of mine tried the GS 110 grain bullets from a 264 Winchester and he deliberately shot roos with low chest shots so as to compare them to 100 grain Nosler ballistic tips. Also on the trip was a 458 winchester loaded with 400 grain Speers at a bit over 2000 f/s. The 458 had more energy at the muzzle, but probably not much difference out at 200 yards with that 458 bullets poor ballistic coefficient.

The 458 was easily the most deadly. In this case we have not only a soft bullet but a very brooad flat point.

My general feeling on light game is that once bullet expansion is adequate then peak killing power seems to come with calibers that do around the 2600 to 2800 area.

This was seen very much in Australia in the 1960s and early 1970s when we moved from 218 Bees on Martinis to 222s and from 303/25 (87 grainer at about 2700) to 243 and from 303/270 (100 grainer at around 2700) to the 270 Winchester.

Just about anyone who did much shooting back then on roos will tell you that the slower caliber killed better.

Leaving aside big bangers with soft bullets like the 458, the best killers I have seen on roos and average size pigs have been the 303 when it was factory loaded out here with a 140 grain semi spitzer soft point at 2600 and the 308 with 130 grain bullets which with 52 grains of Win 748 usually does around 2950 f/s.

Mike

I believe that quicker kills are the result of hydrostatic shock and the volume of the wound channel.I used 100gr ballistic tips in the 257wby and it killed much quicker than 170gr bullets out of the 30-30 or 180gr bullets out of the 303.Even though the 257" bullet is much lighter and of smaller diameter the wound channels were much larger and the game usually fell on the spot while those shot with slower heavier bullets usually ran a bit sometimes quite a bit.I have now taken four elk and two moose with the 300ultramag and 180gr ballistic tip and all the elk and one moose dropped almost instantly while the other moose took a few steps then fell over dead.Up until I started using this combination I was used to seeing elk and moose take a few steps or in some cases just stand there requiring another shot to put them down.Even the 338 win mag with 250gr bullets my partner uses does not seem to drop moose as quickly.

stubblejumper: I have shot a few moose with my .338WM and 230-grain Fail Safe bullets that have dropped like hit by lighting. I also shot one last year that took maybe a step before it dropped, to a 250-grain Nosler Partition. Most of the shots I have taken on moose have been through the lungs, but low enough to sometimes hit the heart or at least close enough to it. I believe that when moose become aware of my presence and spook, that's when they may walk a few steps after a good shot through the center of the lungs. Most of the moose I have killed have dropped to one shot, the closest taken from 100 yards, and the farthest 250 (last year's).

I handload the 230-grain FS to attain a little over 2,800 fps, and the 250-grainer I used last year "clocked" around 2,770 fps at the range.

I saw a hunting partner of mine shooting a moose that was broadside to him, 150 yards away. He emptied his .300WM on the moose, each shot through the lungs. He was using Federal (premium) ammo with 180-grain bullets. The moose stood there taking lead, so he reloaded his rifle and finally dropped it with a 5th. shot. From my personal experiences, (a) moose have walked farther when shot with smaller and faster bullets, unless shot through the heart, or shot to break the neck or spine, and (b) when moose become aware of one's presence and spook.

Almost forgot: One of my coworkers shot a moose two years ago with a borrowed .45/70. He shot it one time through the lungs at about 100 yards, and the moose dropped almost instantly.

I think that what kills animals is proper shot placement with the right bullet, and the right speed at the right distance. By the way, a guy from Anchorage killed a young moose with his BB-gun last year. The pellet passed between two ribs and hit the lungs, and the moose died sometime after. It bedded in the backyard of the guys home and died there.

[ 12-30-2002, 07:32: Message edited by: Ray, Alaska ]

My experience on this subject is related to the 30/06 & 45/70 rounds. At the muzzle both have similar energy levels, now I am talking within 120 yards here and I realise the 30/06 at long range will have more energy. But within these ranges the slower heavier .458 cal bullet at 2150 fps kills much quicker and produces greater wounds on the game I shoot than the 165 gr Nos BT from my 30/06. In fact all my big bores with a slower bullet kill better than my smaller guns with a faster bullet.

Ray the 300win mag of your friends only has a listed muzzle velocity of around 2950fps and his particular gun may produce even less, so it is barely faster than your 338 if at all.Then again if he is using the 180gr partition they don't expand nearly as much as most other bullets which reduces the energy tranfer into the moose.If you reread my last post you will see that I stated that until I started using this bullet, load combination I was used to seeing moose and elk walk a few steps or just stand there like your partners moose did.All I can say is that the extra 400fps or so and the bullet that I am using do seem to make quite a noticeable difference time it takes the moose and elk I shoot to die.

PC-The 30-06 is hardly considered a high velocity round so I am not at all surprised by your results.

speed kills quicker(speed kills,the old saying goes).

A 12 gauge shot gun slug has a very large diameter and causes a great wound channel but the deer still seem to run a long way. I have never shot anything with a slug, this is just something i herd from a slug hunter.

The impact velocity of a slug should be somewhere near 1500 fps or so. Any slug users here that can testify to slow kills? If this is really the case there should be something like a shock effect because the wound channel of a slug should easily be as large as that from a 7mm high velocity premium bullet.

Igor,

Like you, I have never shot anything with shotgun slugs but I have also heard that they are poor killers.

My father use to say that the very process of bullet expansion could have been a key factor.

I do know that the 218 Bee and 22 Hornet will chop things up a lot more than a 375 300 grain Hornady FMJ and impact velocities would be similar.

Mike

I don't like the word "hydrostatic" in this context. It's misused here. Hydrostatic is basically a static (column of) fluid, I don't think that is the point you're trying to make.

Since I'm a believer in Energy rather than Velocity I was glad to see Mike 375 introduce the term. Greater velocity means greater energy for any given round, but energy to me is what kills; velocity just generates the energy I want.

I see three related positions; some people believe in velocity, others penetration, others energy.

Guys that shoot game from any angle want maximum penetration. If you are jump-shooting game or shooting at driven game, I can understand it.

Guys that are patient and wait for standing/broadside shots want energy dump. If I can penetrate into the offside lung what more damage needs to be done? (I certainly won't need the old double-blood-trail so many people desire.)

There is probably more focus and discussion of Velocity, but I value it the least. If I select a round with the energy I desire, the velocity will be there.

I've noticed these discussions never change anyone's opinion, except maybe a novice. All of us that have a large amount of hunting experience have developed our self-confidence based on certain beliefs. It is difficult if not impossible to throw those beliefs away and try something totally different.

When I settle over a shot I don't want any shadow of a doubt in my mind that I'm about to make a mistake. That's why I stay with what's proven to be effective, for me.

Friend of mine hit one in the back of the head with a 12 guage slug. It died rather quickly.
Point?
Forget about all this velocity crap, and concentrate on bullet placement. ( I prefer heart lung myself)

Energy = the ability to do work.

Velocity squared x projectile weight = energy.

Obviously, you have to have both "significant" velocity and "significant" mass to produce energy, which is the ability to do work; work in this instance meaning the traumatization of the vital organs of the game quarry.

Animals can behave very differently to identical trauma. Generally, trauma to only the heart and/or lungs is fatal, but does not result in an animal instantly loosing its feet. On the other hand, animals sometimes do "drop in their tracks" to a shot from a low-energy caliber to the thorax. Normally, to produce and instant fall, a shot must either damage a nerve center (brain or spine) or induce enough shock (hydrostatic, hydraulic, tissue trauma; call it what you will) to disrupt the nervous system enough for the animal to be unable to stand. If the trauma is great enough, the animal may not regain conscienceness and be able to rise before succumbing. In other instances, the animal may fall, then rise and run a distance before succumbing.

So the question becomes: Which bullet/caliber/velocity results in the most trauma to the vital organs (lungs, heart, major blood vessels)? The answer is the one which is (1) able to reach the vitals through the overlying skin, muscle, and possibly bone, (2) has sufficient energy to traumatize the vitals, and (3) has a projectile which expands in a manner that allows its energy to be transferred to the vitals in order to do "work".

So long as a bullet is capable of reaching the vitals, the higher velocity, more rapidly expanding projectile will typically result in more rapid death to the animal. However, there are certainly other factors to consider in bullet/caliber selection such as the ability of the bullet to penetrate tough bone and heavy muscle in some species. And some hunters, recognizing that game with even fatal thoracic wounds is likely to run a significant distance prefer to trade "work" done on the vitals for additional penetration to ensure a freely bleeding exit wound for tracking purposes.

Remember, while there are certainly anecdotal instances of an elk shot in the chest with a .44 Special dropping like a rock and a whitetail with the heart and lungs turned to jelly by a .300 Weatherby/150 grain bullet at 3450 FPS running 100 yards, these are (frequent) exceptions.

Higher velocity and rapid expansion tend to drop animals faster (although there may be made a good case for moderation in both of these qualities).

Animals die as a result of two things: disruption of the central nervous system through either direct impact of a bullet on the spine or brain, hydrostasis ( hydraulic effects of the shock wave caused by the bullet striking tissue which is over 80% liquid on the same organs) or exanguination. On DEER SIZED animals, I have found that high velocity calibers, coupled with soft bullets produced the most dramatic kills.

I haven't killed many deer ( probably 80 or so) from calibers ranging from the 250 Savage to the 375 H&H ( hey, I was practicing ofr Africa!). It is my sincere belief that nothing, but nothing drops deer like a 257 Weatherby with factory 100gr Hornady bullets ( about 3500fps).

On animals larger than deer, velocity does not seem to matter much unless of course the CNR is disrupted directly. I stil have a preference for higher velocity for most hunting, as it affords me a bit more trajectory and in some cases greater penetration at longer ranges. My rifle of choice you ask? Any 300 ( except those nonsense RUMs)but preferably a Weatherby. jorge

When I'm selecting a potential hunting rifle/bullet combination, I judge them on accuracy, bullet performance, and velocity in that order. I like the faster bullets not because of the hydrostatic shock they generate (although that is a added "bonus"), but rather they shoot flatter and therefore are more forgiving on misjudge ranges than slower velocities.
In short, I'm more interested in having the bullet mushroom, yet stay together, than I am on the shock they generate.

This is a classic and enduring argument.

Haven't had much time to hunt in the years I was working for a living. In the last three years I have had more time and have checked some 15 deer.

I look for a good clean kill ... dropping in their tracks is nice ... without so much meat damage. (Nice to make use of the meat on the table.)

Given that I try very hard to get a good impact point, I find that the wrong bullet for the velocity, range, and frontal area causes problems.

I have not been happy with the hypervelocity stuff or too high a velocity at too short a range with too fragile a bullet.

The best (instantaneous drop with little meat damage) combinations have been with muzzle loaders and pistols. Energy dump has been almost complete with good wound channels but without the massively blooded meat.

Next best has been heavier but sturdily constructed rifle bullets of good diameter (.308 to .375) driven at reasonable velocities.

Nothing helps a lousy shot ... caliber, velocity, or bullet construction.

Question.....at what velocity is a 180 Swift Scirocco .308 caliber impacting at "high velocity" resulting in an instantaneous kill versus the same bullet at a more sedate speed resulting in a clean kill but the animal runs "x" feet or yards? Let's assume that bullet placement is identical. For further discussion let me ask the question at what velocity does the bullet cease to be effective not killing the game with the exact bullet placement but only wounding and the animal is lost. This mythical animal is a 225# deer of some persuasion.

mike aw
A cns hit with both bullets will have the same effect. The rest of your question is impossible to answer, other than to say:

The more momentum the expanded and broken bullet retains, the deeper it will go.

The more energy it has in broken form, the bigger the volume of the temporary cavity.

The more effective the broken bullet nose shape is, the higher the rate of success.

Momentum is weight x speed
Energy is Half weight x speed squared
Worst nose shape is smooth and round
Best nose shape is flat fronted cylinder
All other shapes fall in between these two

There is no substitute for bullet placement.

I tend to shoot high velocity calibers, ie 22-250, 25-06... the high velocity calibers due seem to drop them in their tracks more times than not, but my 7x30 waters 14" barrel with a 120 bt at a screaming 2400 fps also seems to drop just as many right in there tracks.

Does velocity kill? MAYBE, but proper bullet placement kills even better!

[ 01-02-2003, 20:22: Message edited by: sjf ]

A shotgun slug is like throwing a bowling ball--huge mass (1 oz.!) at probably 1300 fps at 50 yds or so. As for its ability as a killer, it punches a huge hole, and a good heart shot will have the animal down within 5 yds. Lung shots arent quite as effective, but no more than 50 yds of travel is the usual. CNS shots are, of course, definitive. Despite their low velocity, but because of their huge mass, they penetrate quite well. I dug one out of the spine of a doe I shot at about 80 yds, head on. Slug entered at the throat, took out about 14 inches of spine, and lodged in the spinal column about 20-22 inches, I estimate, from the entry wound. Obviously, a missed neck shot, but as you can imagine it dumped that deer flat on its butt without a quiver.

Like anything else, as we've heard so many times before, it's shot placement with an adequate round.

I would have to add that since shooting .416, .585 and now .375 calibres, on smaller game that these rifles are not intended for a hit in the right spot is absolutley devastating and there is certainly a bige difference over say my high velocity 22/250 rounds, bar a shot to the brain as the result here is the same across the spectrum from .22 lr through to .700 nitro. But a body shot with a big bore, heavy bullet at moderate velocity has an awsome killing abilty on game they were not intended for.

Taking the argument to its extreme, you and I are currently being hammered by cosmic rays: electrons and protons, which are charged and have masses of 9.1x10^{-31} and 1.67x10^{-27} kg respectively and are moving at velocities approaching the speed of light.

kk

kk
Good point, and one that underlines the need for momentum and an efficient projectile nose shape if the energy and momentum is to be applied effectively.

There are so many variables in this subject that this debate is sure to live longer than Chevy vs Ford.

A bullet should be a suitable performer for a given cartridges capabilities, and both should be proportional to the task at hand. After that much is in place what else matters? Dead is dead.

It doesnt have to be a fast gun, it doesnt have to be a BIG gun, but it ought to be "enough" gun. Choose your poison and like it!

The best article ive read on the subject. Look in the last section for pictures of wound channels with different bullets at different velocites. The main idea i got from the article was that velocity isnt that important, so long as it is within the working velocity range of the bullet. In some most cases high velocity results in less penatration (within reason). Its a good read.

http://www.mindspring.com/~ulfhere/ballistics/wounding.html

I, too, have read Harald's treatise on bullet performance. It is excellent. My reason for posting the hypothetical questions on my earlier post is that it is my observation that velocity may have a role to play with light game animals when using frangible bullets and penetration is not necessarily an issue. What velocity truly does is extend the range of any given bullet caliber/weight. You simply move minimum terminal velocity further out from the end of the barrel. The 180gr 308 scirocco is suitable for whatever that caliber and weight is suitable for be it from a 308 winchester or a 3oo rum.

I've yet to drop a deer with my .338 win mag. and its 225 grain bullet moving at 2800 fps. I have droped deer with 150 grain bullets moving at 3000 fps with my 30/06 and yes in there tracks . I have dropped more deer in there tracks with my 45/70 using 350 grain bullets moving at 1900 fps.And even more with a 12 gauge rifled slug weighting in at 438 grains and moving around 1500 fps. I myself like the slower heavier bullets for close range. My next rifle will hopefully be a .338 RUM using heavy bullets( 225-250) in tyhe area around 3000-3200 fps. Heavy bullets at high velocity for Heavy game at long range. Later Tanoose

I know it does not work on heavy game, speed is less important

That was Roy Weatherby's philosophy. I'd say he was somewhat right.

In Scandinavia we use rifles to hunt beaver in the spring, right after the ice is gone. The beaver is shot very close to water, and if they don�t drop imediately they are lost, since they head for water when spooked or wounded. My experience, and that of every other experienced hunter I have talked to is that a varmint type bullet at more than 3200fps mv is just the ticket. It makes a huge difference. The beaver drops like hit with a huge hammer. But these animals are rather small and very light/thin in the shoulder area an does not offer the bullet much resistance, on larger animals I think sufficient penetration and wound channel is a lot more important than velocity. Tron

I have shot several deer that hit the ground liked they were sacks of rocksalt dropped from above. I have also witnessed several such shots made by others. Some were spine or head shots, these I will not count (once had a deer drop like this when I shot it with an arrow in the spine).
My shots and cartridge used. All were within 50 yards.
1] walking buck with .30-06 150 grain.
2] walking buck using 265 grain .444.
3] standing buck using .45-70 with 405 grain.
4] standing doe with 405 grain .45-70.
5] standing doe with .375H&H 270 grain.
6] standing doe with .375H&H 270 grain.
7] running doe with 12 gage sabot (running across my front, never knew I was there, actually cartwheeled).
8] standing buck with 12 gage sabot.
9] standing doe with 20 gage foster slug.
11] standing buck with .30-40 Krag using 220 grain.
12] walking doe using 00 buckshot.
13] walking buck using 00 buckshot.
I have witnessed the following:
1] standing doe with .270 Win using 130 grain.
2] standing buck with .300 Win Mag using 180 grain.
3] walking buck with 12 gage 00 buckshot.
In my opinion, shot placement, distance and the deer's condition at the time of shot all enter into the equation. My experience does not indicate that high velocity is essential. However, the .300 Win Mag shot made by my buddy was actually just over 100 yards. He typically is a tree stand hunter whereas I am a still hunter. My longest ever shot on a deer was just under 300 yards, after that the longest was just over 100 yards (neither of which dropped per the above description). So, I would qualify my tale with the following. For still hunting and its relatively close shots I do not need high velocity. In fact, it appears that larger calibers with good frontal areas are useful. If I was in a tree stand where longer range shots are likely (as my .300 Win Mag friend shoots), I would use my .270 or get an even higher velocity/larger bore cartridge like my buddy's .300 Win Mag.

[ 01-10-2003, 18:00: Message edited by: targshooter ]

I think more important is the disruption of the CNS of the animal. If you've placed the shot for Maximum CNS damage your going to get the results you want- I use what I know works- good bullet, suficent energy, placed in the vitals dead animal!!! What more do you want? I'm tried of getting rap aroung the axle over this stuff it serves no purpose. You all can loose sleep on this subject I'm not. If you need this to justify a new toy more power to ya- just tell the wife your going to buy a new gun and get it

[ 01-10-2003, 21:23: Message edited by: Gunnut45/454 ]

"Hydrodynamic shock" is a better discription of the event that occurs in deer size animals, when hit at about 2100 fps.

I also suspect that initial temporary wound channel, caused on impact by velocity and metplat, and bullet diameter, have a lot to do with how MUCH hydrodynamic shock is generated.

Light weight bullets, driven at very high velocities, made of overly soft materials have explosive expansion, causing a large initial temporary wound channel, and, transfer energy in
solid or liquid mediums.

I strongly suspect that a large caliber rifle, loaded with a very soft, jacketed bullet, light for caliber, driven at similar high velocities, would be more devastating on game.

In other words, compare the effect on game of a speer flying ashtray 45 caliber bullet, 165 to 200 grains, at 3000+ feet a second, against a similar, light for caliber, 270 grain bullet, say 130 grains, at similar velocities. I suspect inside 200 yards, if you want a one shot stop, my money would be on the 458 Lott. Same velocity, much bigger metplat on initial contact, and, with soft lead, very violent expansion, even more so then the 270. Result is a huge initial, temporary cavity, and, plenty of shock. Not to mention the nearly double the weight of the 200 grain will penetrate better, expanded out to near one inch, then the lighter slug...

One other factor. Heavy caliber bullets are usually designed to penetrate life threatening, car size or better animals. Even the softpoints are not nearly soft enough to open up like a 270 bullet designed for 2600 fps, driven to 3400 fps, ala WBY. In other words, WBY is using bullets beyond their design ability, to create explosive expansion, and a huge wound channel, on initial impact. This wound channel, temporary, is difficult to document, since in game, it stretchs back down to minimum size after the bullet passes.

It is possible to document in gelatin, where you end up with a cone shaped wound channel, large at the beggining, tapering down as the bullet penetrates further.

Just a bit of theory here....



DR S

PS That 458 Safari Magnum is looking better and better as a short barreled, home defense gun.

You really are Socrates, aren't you?

What you say makes sense to me. (Keep in mind that may mean only that you and I are both in the minority.)