pass thru shots

[tna]

i have read on the forum that a shot that passes thru a target (deer, bear, whatever) is not as good as one that does not. the logic being that when a bullet exits it still has energy that is not being expended in the target. where as a shot that does not pass through expends all it's energy into the target. i may be wrong but this logic seems flawed to me. i'd like some input. rest up cause this may take a while.

lets say it takes 100ft/lbs to go completly thru a target (just for example.) a bullet strikes the target with 75ft/lbs of energy and does not pass through. this means it has transferred 75ft/lbs of force into the target. (yes i know about things like friction loss and unpredictables like bone and such. once again, just an example). then lets say a bullet strikes the same target with 150ft/lbs of energy. it will pass through transferring 100ft/lbs to the target and retain 50. yes this 50ft/lbs is wasted but it still transferred 100ft/lbs to the target when it passed through vs. the 75ft/lbs that was totaly expended on the target.

this is what i came up with with my highschool level physics knowledge. what do you guys think? any input agreeing or disagreeing? i've been wrong before...once.

 

[tg]

I don't think you can kill an animal with math... the only advantage of a pass thru would be another hole to produce a blood trail, the big issue with a pass thru or one that does not, is what the ball hit inside the animal.

 

[jtmattison]

You will certainly get varied opinions on this subject.
Many like a pass-through shot because the animal will bleed much more leaving a good trail to follow (if it doesn't drop on the spot).
The shot that does not pass through is probably a shoulder or other heavy body mass shot and they can drop an animal in it's tracks. If it doesn't you may have a tracking job on your hands that could be tough.
I think most roundball shooters will go for the boiler room and a pass-through shot.
Conical shooters can go for the shoulder shot and try to anchor the animal where it stands.
If I shoot roundball, I aim for the boiler room.
If I shoot conicals, I aim for the boiler room.
That's just me. I'm talking deer here.
For bear, I would go for the shoulder with a conical and the boiler room with roundball.
:m2c:

Huntin

 

[roundball]

I am of the personal belief that a passthrough shot is the best for two reasons:

1) The obvious one is that there's a far greater chance of a good blood trail with both entry & exit holes if a blood trail is ever needed;

2) But the more important one is when a weak to moderate load stops inside the target, it means it is delivering an ever declining amount of energy transfer into the target from the moment it enters, and falls off to nothing somewhere still within the target...resulting in less and less energy transfer, less and less tissue damage, less and less shock damage across the width of the target.

By contrast, while a more powerful load's energy is also declining as it moves through the target, the overall amount of energy in that more powerful load is delivering a far greater amount of energy transfer, greater amount of tissue damage, and greater amount of shock damage than the weak or moderate projectile...and this greater amount of energy transfer, tissue damage, and shock damage is delivered across the entire width of the target's vitals, not stopping part way through.

I personally use stout hunting loads for the express purpose of carrying higher energy out to longer distances, increasing the probability of acheiving a complete passthrough of the vitals when doing so.

:imo:

 

[biliff]

A rifle kills either by a)destroying the central nervous system which in turn shuts everything else down, or by b) destroying a significant portion of the cardiovascular system, resulting in rapid blood loss and death. You can dump a whole lot of energy into an animal and not do either. I've personally proved that, in Alaska when I made a frontal shot on a caribou with a 375 H&H. That critter traveled forever (well over a mile) before it laid down and it still stood up and was gonna take off, until I put a second round into it. Field dressed it and found the first slug had entered just inside the right shoulder, passed thru the chest, stomach, intestines and was lodged in the back left hip. All that energy from a cartridge that can only be considered as complete overkill for the game in question and I was still lucky I recovered the animal. The point is, it didn't do either (a) or (b).
On the other hand I've shot deer, boar, bear and caribou with various cartridges as well as round ball. Some passed completely thru, some didn't. All died very quickly as long as either (a) or (b) occurred.

 

[Stumpkiller]

I go with the pass through being best school of thought. Double the blood and also perforating the chest 100% more so the lungs collapse (with lung shots).

Even a round ball has a shockwave, though much less than the hydrostatic shock of a long, thin bullet. A faster ball has more tissue damage to the region around the wound channel. This can matter in a near-spine shot, or the difference between nicking the heart and tearing the heart.

But . . . if you're afraid of the recoil so that you don't practice with the gun, or worse, wound an animal instead of dropping shots in the vitals, it will not be to your advantage to drag a powerhouse rifle around.

No matter how large a rifle ball you can't miss a deer to death. Hitting them square in the lungs with a gun that doesn't pass completely through is better than a full penetration gut shot.

 

[tna]

exactly round ball. just what i was trying to say. i guess your a bit more articulate that i.
i understand that what you hit inside the deer matters as much as if not more than everything else. i'm talking hypothetical. all other things being equal. both bullets hitting the exact same things. just the energy being diffrent. i'm curious.

 

[Rat]

I would prefer to shoot through the animal. I don't think a full wound channel and an entry and exit hole is "wasted energy".

But some calibers and loads are more likely to do that than others.

Insisting that a rifle and load shot through everytime, or never shot through and "wasted" any energy, would both be kind of unreasonable, but again I'd rather err on the side of shooting through.

Rat

 

[noah]

I've been overkilling deer for years,.54 cal.huge exit wounds,easy bloodtrails.My buddy Don has been killin them just as dead with a flinter in .40 cal.Little pill enters the chest cavity and rips around inside the rib cage tearin lungs apart.No exit wound,but deer don't go 15-20 yrds.Shot placement,the smaller the cal. the less forgiving it is.I'm downsizing this season,going to .45 cal.Same target,heart-lungs we'll see?I've always got Old Mabelene in hot standby,but I'm confident the .45 will do just fine.Exit wound or not.The level of aggitation in the deer has a lot to do with it also.Get one commin in all fired up,they take a lot more killin than one just moseyin along.God,I can't wait till Monday Morning.YEHAWW Noah

 

[Java Man]

I would really like to try deer with my .40cal flinter. Its a 36" barreled Early Lancaster, that is 1" at the breech and tapers to 7/8" at the muzzle. Figured 60-70gr fffg would do the trick. 50yd shot max, broadside only.

Been hunting with trad archery equipment mostly for several years, so I know how to stay within limitations. Thanks for the indirect encouragement, Noah.

Java Man