Bullet theories relative to heavy cover???

07 March 2002, 10:12

I would like to hear your comments based on the following.

Theory: would a good big game SOLID serve as the best bullet selection for heavy cover or heavy timber? I base this on the claims of others at this site on the performance of solid bullets in big bodied game by maintaining a straight wound channel after encountering heavy bone mass. These appear to be some of the most popular bullets for elephant/buffalo/etc. because of this performance trait.

Old theory: use a ï¿½brush busterï¿½ caliber such as 45-70, 30-30, 35 Whelan, etc. with a heavy-for-caliber bullet to bust through the brush. Lighter bullets will be deflected more easily than heavier bullets, etc.

Newer theory: the ï¿½brush busterï¿½ school of thought is incorrect and one should use a bullet with HIGH RPM when hunting in heavy cover/heavy timber to minimize deflection from point of aim.

Why do I ask? I didnï¿½t witness the following but heard the story first hand from where it took place.

My deer hunting buddy had a relatively rare chance (for this year) at a nice big-bodied/large racked deer when he was hunting next to a river with fairly heavy timber all around. The deer was walking along the other side of the river and presented a shot of about 100 yards distance. He was using a 308 Win with soft point bullets for sure and my recollection is that the bullet weight was 150 grains. He took the shot and after pulling the trigger saw a tree branch of about 1ï¿½ diameter fall into the river. The deer ran away into an open wheat field and appeared not to be hit and fully healthy.

Would he have hit the deer with a solid?

Thanks in advance should you take the time to respond.

Reed

07 March 2002, 11:01

DB Bill

Probably not...I think you have a better chance of shooting through a solid object like a big branch rather than a smaller branch that would move with the impact.

07 March 2002, 12:24

<P H Barker>

Reed,
About 20 years ago, an article was published by one of the gun writers concerning his tests on bullet deflection in brush. He made a setup with several wooden dowels of different diameters in front of his target. He shot numerous calibers and bullet weights at different velocities thru this (real extensive tests). All bullets showed deflection and/or breakup, if I recall correctly.

07 March 2002, 12:29

<shall>

NRA just did a study. It was in American Hunter. All diameters did the same. Round nose heavies showed no advantage.

07 March 2002, 12:33

Paul H

Modern theory is don't hit the branches, as the bullet will deflect unpredictably.

Now, if your bullet deflects, would you rather your wounding shot be from a light small bore bullet, or a large heavy bore bullet?

07 March 2002, 15:20

<Patrick>

Large calibers and heavey bullets are useful in the thick woods because ranges are short and they tend to anchor game better, thereby preventing searchs in difficult circumstances. No bullet, large or small, can effectively avoid being deflected.

07 March 2002, 15:48

<Don Martin29>

I did a test and found that the more "powerful" the round the less it deflected. The .375 H&H was very good and the 7mm Mag, 30/06 and .358W were good. The 12 ga Foster slug broke into pieces and a .243 75 gr at 3500 fps blew up also.

Every bullet that hit something keyholed but if something was close it might get hit but now where you aimed or with the nose of the bullet.

This is the first I have heard of the high rpm theory. I don't think it makes sense. I think it's kinetic engergy that will tear the bush away and momentum that will push it aside.

07 March 2002, 16:21

<P H Barker>

I can think of 3 whitetails that I have shot with an 06 where the bullet obviously hit brush. Each of these were normal, quick kills, but each deer had several entrance holes (3 or 4), as if it had been shot with buckshot.

07 March 2002, 16:23

Robert D. Lyons

quote:
Originally posted by shall:
NRA just did a study. It was in American Hunter. All diameters did the same. Round nose heavies showed no advantage.

This article was also in Handloader magazine. If I can find it, I will let everyone what issue it was and who wrote it.

07 March 2002, 16:58

Saeed

Reed,

Once a bullet hits ANYTHING on its way, its directions are unpredictable.

There is absolutely no hard and fast rule what one bullet would do as compared to another.

------------------
saeed@ emirates.net.ae

www.accuratereloading.com

07 March 2002, 19:38

8MM OR MORE

quote:
Originally posted by Paul H:
Modern theory is don't hit the branches, as the bullet will deflect unpredictably.
Now, if your bullet deflects, would you rather your wounding shot be from a light small bore bullet, or a large heavy bore bullet?

I couldn't have said it better. Assuming you couldn't see the obstructions when you took the shot, I'd take the large heavy bore bullet.

------------------
Good Shooting!

07 March 2002, 20:46

Steve Redgwell

Absolutely! A 105 fired at a target 50 yards away will stand more of a chance of finding the target than 5.56!

I just had to say that...sorry

Safe Shooting!
Steve Redgwell
303british.com

07 March 2002, 22:22

carcano91

quote:
Originally posted by Robert D. Lyons:
This article was also in Handloader magazine. If I can find it, I will let everyone what issue it was and who wrote it.

Gary Sciucchetti.
One of the better US gunwriters, I daresay :-)

Carcano

08 March 2002, 00:28

dogtagger

I use 180 grain round nose bullets in 308 and 30-06 in brush. Not because they get through brush better, but because they are reliable at close range. Round nose bullets mushroom well at lower velocity and penetrate deep. Light bullets have a tendency to do too much damage, and can have trouble when you have to shoot through bone. I see no advantage to using very high velocity light weight bullets in close cover.

08 March 2002, 03:30

rickt300

I like bullets that penetrate deep as in hunting the thick you don't have the option of perfect broadside shots all the time and I make every effort not to hit any brush. I have used solids and will admit they track better through brush but terminal effect is lacking. So its heavy for caliber soft points in 30 cal or bigger and nosler partitions in anything smaller for my thick cover hunting.

08 March 2002, 04:42

<George Hoffman>

I do not think there is such a thing as a
BRUSH, BULLET. The closest thinh to a brush bullet would have to be a solid(something that would not start to mushroom on contact)
with a faster than normal twist. If you take a childs top and spin it as fast as possible, then barely touch it, it will wobble then right itself. Conversely take a top that has slowed and touch it it will fall over. A faster twist will help the stability, but probably not enough.

08 March 2002, 05:12

beemanbeme

My question is: did he cross the river and check to see? Did he track the deer for a ways even without a blood trails to make sure he had missed?
The path of the bullet is highly unpredictable but it could well have hit the deer kinda depending on how far from the deer the branch was.

08 March 2002, 06:11

Reed

The open wheat field on the other side of the river was rather large. He was able to watch the deer run for well over 1/2 a mile, probably close to 3/4 mile before it rounded the bend in the river.

No, he didn't go to the other side which will probably be viewed rather poorly here, but he felt very confident that the deer was healthy. Had he the slightest inclination that the deer might have been hit we would have been after it as it was apparently a nice deer.

A visceral feeling on his part but he's 67 and I'm 37 so I don't tend to tell him much...

Reed

08 March 2002, 07:42

Recono

quote:
Originally posted by P H Barker:
Reed,
About 20 years ago, an article was published by one of the gun writers concerning his tests on bullet deflection in brush. He made a setup with several wooden dowels of different diameters in front of his target. He shot numerous calibers and bullet weights at different velocities thru this (real extensive tests). All bullets showed deflection and/or breakup, if I recall correctly.

I don't know whether we read the same article (probably did), but in the one I remember, the author reported as you said, but when you looked at the data, the .416 or .404, I forget which, was NOT much or at all deflected, but he didn't make anything of it because he didn't consider it a realistic cartridge for the North American audience he was writing for. Or didn't want to make their organs shrivel up when they realised they were using sub-caliber weapons.

Never forgot that selective reporting.

08 March 2002, 08:12

Reed

Thanks for the responses so far.

I wasn't so much looking for a "solution" to the problem as much as a way to reduce any deflection relative to the target.

I typically carry a 308 Norma w. 165gr HPBT GK's. I'm very happy with that setup for my "typical" Kansas whitetail hunting. I've been thinking that when I hunt the heavier cover/timber, like this past season, that I now have yet another reason (excuse) to get a heavier hitter...375 H&H, 338 Lapua, or perhaps something else.

Thanks again,

Reed

08 March 2002, 13:59

beemanbeme

Reed, yup, us 60+ old farts can get kinda short with you young whipper snappers.

08 March 2002, 17:56

Eterry

I have to agree that no bullet is a good brush bullet. It does seem that the closer the brush is to target the less deflection there is, but it is there nonetheless.

Good luck and good shooting

08 March 2002, 18:46

<Slamfire>

If you hit wood, something no good will happen. The best you can hope for is a miss.

09 March 2002, 04:30

tarbe

Reed:

If I could illustrate/expand on what George Hoffman posted...

I shot a buck in 2000 up in northern WI with my 375. I was in a really thick boggy area and the deer was at about 40 yards, the limit of my ability to see. According to the 1.7 nanosecond look I got through the scope, I had (I thought) a clear shot at the shoulder and took it. The deer went down with a spine shot about 18" from my point of aim.

Upon inspection of the now dead deer, I find a perfect silhouette of a 235gr X-bullet in the hide on the entrance side.

My bullet hit something, but stayed together enough to kill. Would a 235gr Speer done as well? Don't know for sure, but I doubt it. The integrity of the X-bullet had to help.

Tim