hydrostatic shock or not?

Muzzleloading Forum

Help Support Muzzleloading Forum:

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.
Maybe if you carry a the ballistic table and a slide rule in your pack you can convince a reluctant deer that it really should lie down and die rather than scamper off after the shot.

I use the 'ol Shoot Big Enough From Close Enough formula.

How do I know it's big enough? I figure bison and elk take at least as much killing as a whitetail, so I go with a .530" patched rifle ball or a 0.662" smooth ball. :wink:
 
My buddy shot a doe from his tree stand, the distance was about 15 feet. The .600 cal. ball entered the back between the shoulders and exited the bottom of the chest. We found no blood to track. We made ever widening circles and found the doe about 100 yards from where it was shot. The heart and lungs were damaged and the chest was full of blood. Why it didn't leave a blood trail is a mystery, but thats hunting. Another friend shot a deer with a modern short magnum, he found pieces of lung on the bushes, but never got the deer. He was no novice.
 
I'm interested for two reasons:

1) There are a not insignificant number of people who think that the roundball is ineffective and inhumane, and it would be nice to be able to explain exactly why the actual results of the roundball seem to be so much better than they should be in theory.

2) Previous generations seem to have gotten by with significantly smaller calibers than we shoot today, and while modern hunting ethics put more of a premium on a quick kill than in the past, I can't help but think that there is a certain amount of "magnumitis" influencing the desire for heavier calibers. It would be interesting to know how much of that extra power is really necessary or even effective.
 
Elnathan said:
I'm interested for two reasons:

1) There are a not insignificant number of people who think that the roundball is ineffective and inhumane, and it would be nice to be able to explain exactly why the actual results of the roundball seem to be so much better than they should be in theory.

2) Previous generations seem to have gotten by with significantly smaller calibers than we shoot today, and while modern hunting ethics put more of a premium on a quick kill than in the past, I can't help but think that there is a certain amount of "magnumitis" influencing the desire for heavier calibers. It would be interesting to know how much of that extra power is really necessary or even effective.

I think this is spot on. I've been told that shooting a .535 PRB for elk would be "unethical" by a wildlife officer at Colorado Parks and Wildlife and the state just outlawed PRBs smaller than 54cal for elk.

I don't know what to call it scientifically (and am a real life scientist!) but I know that a PRB out of my 54cal rifle is absolutely deadly on whitetail and mule deer (no shots on an elk yet). It would be interesting to know WHY it's so effective on game IMO.
 
bud in pa said:
My buddy shot a doe from his tree stand, the distance was about 15 feet. The .600 cal. ball entered the back between the shoulders and exited the bottom of the chest. We found no blood to track. We made ever widening circles and found the doe about 100 yards from where it was shot. The heart and lungs were damaged and the chest was full of blood. Why it didn't leave a blood trail is a mystery, but thats hunting.
Sometimes the flesh, fat and skin seal up the hole and little blood is found.
 
It would be interesting to know WHY it's so effective on game IMO.

The 1911 is a VERY effective round and slow. I am guessing BP is deadly for the same reason.....Big ol bullet hits HARD and alot of "push" when it hits (Kinetic energy?)
 
Actually, since the velocities at impact with black powder are probably, most often poducing too little of a jump in internal pressure, the projectile is doing the work by damage, and any neural overload is from the nervous system be overloaded with damage signals, not pressure.

I was taught, for example, that 00 buckshot works so well as a defense round because the multiple wounds inflicted at the same time act on the nervous system in an exponential manner. So instantly hit a target with 3 of 12 00 pellets at 20 yards overwhealms the target as though it was hit with say 9 rounds of .22 Mag. The pathologist who told me this said this conclusion was based on targets going down from what were not necessarily mortal wounds, sometimes recovering a level of consciousness, sometimes dying of symptoms characterized as systemic shock.
:idunno:

So I think they used what they knew by observation, worked..., and it worked because it inflicted serious damage alone, which may have overloaded the nervous system, without any overpressure help from HS.

LD
 
azmntman said:
It would be interesting to know WHY it's so effective on game IMO.

The 1911 is a VERY effective round and slow. I am guessing BP is deadly for the same reason.....Big ol bullet hits HARD and alot of "push" when it hits (Kinetic energy?)

Think about the 45ACP ball round that established the rep. It's the equivalent of a non-expanding "alloy" ball from a muzzleloader traveling at ONLY 700fps from a muzzleloader, compared to a soft lead ball at more than twice that velocity. Yet lotta guys get their knickers in a knot about 45 caliber rifles for deer, saying they're not sufficient. Heck, suggest going after deer with an alloy ball in your rifle traveling only 700fps, and their knickers would be all they way up around their kneck. :grin:

Not to go far into it and away from muzzleloaders, I've shot a fair number of deer with 45ACP ball, and it's a rotten killer at hunting ranges, even as a pure lead roundball load from a rifle is a very reliable killer.

Howcum???? :confused:
 
But are they similar enough to Spence? Can’t say I’ve seen a water bottle over 5 gals and I’m guessing Spence isn’t quite so round... :rotf:
 
Very odd that Frank gets messed up meat with a .45 at longer ranges and less powder. Like I said I have yet to see more than about 1" max meat waste from BP.

My "messed up" meat was with a heavier charge under 100 yards. Reduced load the blood shot loss was no bigger than a fist. Yes, I have seen other hunters lose almost the front half of a whitetail when using things like a 7mm mag. I have hunted with my 30-06 but I used reduced loads I hand loaded with controlled expansion bullets. Now, I'm gonna get mod slapped for going :eek:ff
 
Skychief said:
A couple of weeks ago, I shot some water bottles similar to Spence. I was using my 45 flinter. Shots were from 25 and 50 yards at gallon bottles, lined up 5 deep.

The 25 yard shot penetrated the first bottle and was found inside the second. The first bottle was blown to smithereens while the second less so. The recovered ball looked so like a miniature pancake.

The 50 yard shot also penetrated and blew up the first bottle, though not as dramatically as the 25 yard shot. Again the ball was found inside the second bottle. It nearly penetrated through though at this distance, denting the far side. The ball resembled something between a pancake and an igloo.

What I took away from the results of these shots, was, blowing up water bottles is a good way to spend one's time. :haha:

Best regards, Skychief

Today I lined up 5 more gallon water jugs and shot them with my 20 gauge smoothbore. 80 grains of 2f ruined my plan of capturing another pancaked ball. The dead soft sphere made it through all 5 jugs. :shocked2:

I really didn't expect that. Talk about some old school power! The first two jugs resembled VWs which had tangled with a locomotive. The fifth in line looked as though the ball just eeked it's way out. So much so, I took several minutes looking for the ball on the ground beyond the setup. No luck.

Best regards, Skychief
 

Latest posts

Back
Top