.223 for bear, deer, elk and moose.

CTXhunter

Junior Member
Joined
Feb 3, 2021
Messages
26
Guns and ego go together like peas and carrots. Few areas of male life feature quite the same status based incentive to speak with authority... regardless of experience or expertise. We are all naturally prone to generalize our own experience - our sample of one becomes representative of the whole. While that is a flawed approach in itself, we often fail to understand our sample of one. We don't know why something works... but, we know it did (at least once, anyhow). Superstitions, routines, and rituals are often manifestations of this.

I've taught a bunch of folks to shoot, primarily pistol. It never ceases to amaze that after more or less the same basic instruction women are punching holes out of the center and dudes are loading shit in the magazine backwards.
Man, well said.
 
OP
P

PNWGATOR

Senior Member
Joined
Oct 14, 2014
Messages
1,439
Location
Rathdrum, ID
The video is interesting, but his conclusions are not accurate. Foot pounds of energy has zero correlation with terminal performance.
 

juddrparson

Junior Member
Joined
Feb 2, 2017
Messages
15
Location
Alaska
The video is interesting, but his conclusions are not accurate. Foot pounds of energy has zero correlation with terminal performance.
Yeah, it helps show that the bullets discussed in this thread are what make the difference. I think one would come to a similar conclusion to his given the bullets available at the time. Kinetic energy notwithstanding.

How do we get Kimber to make a .223 Montana again but with a 1/7?
 

Formidilosus

Senior Member
Joined
Oct 22, 2014
Messages
1,923
Relevant case study, this thread is basically the same thing with updated bullets.

I do not mean this to be rude, however that video is a perfect example of an incomplete and/or faulty base of knowledge, leading to a misinterpretation of evidence, causing an incorrect conclusion. The main issue, like most, is that there are enough correct parts in it, to make people believe the whole.
Nine animals is a not enough to determine the performance of one bullet at similar impact velocities, let alone the same bullet at varying impacts velocities, nor even close to to determine multiple different projectiles at varying impacts speeds.

The real point to the video is- bullets matter.
 

juddrparson

Junior Member
Joined
Feb 2, 2017
Messages
15
Location
Alaska
The real point to the video is- bullets matter.
I agree, and agree with your point that nine caribou with different bullets, at different velocities, isn't exactly a lot of data to go off.

What did you think of the "wound volume" calculation from the video? I've never seen it anywhere else but thought it was interesting. And about how would a 77gr TMK compare using this kind of metric?
 

Formidilosus

Senior Member
Joined
Oct 22, 2014
Messages
1,923
What did you think of the "wound volume" calculation from the video? I've never seen it anywhere else but thought it was interesting. And about how would a 77gr TMK compare using this kind of metric?

The problem with “wound volume” in newspaper, is that it way overestimates the permanent cavity that is caused by the temporary stretch cavity. As an example is that a large caliber with a bonded or mono bullet would have a significantly larger “wound volume” than a fast .224 with a heavy fragmenting bullet in newspaper. However, the actual permanent damage could be way more with the .224 in live tissue.

In properly calibrated ballistics gel, the 77gr TMK produces significantly larger (read- wound volume) wounds in the first 14-16” inches of penetration than most 30cal magnums with conventional bullets.
 

Fartrell Cluggins

Senior Member
Joined
Dec 20, 2019
Messages
297
Nine animals is a not enough to determine the performance of one bullet at similar impact velocities,
What would you consider to be enough to determine the the performance of one bullet at similar impact velocities?

Is there a testing medium that you consider to be a reliable predictor of how a bullet will behave on game.
 

Formidilosus

Senior Member
Joined
Oct 22, 2014
Messages
1,923
What would you consider to be enough to determine the the performance of one bullet at similar impact velocities?

Somewhere around 20-30 with varying impact locations and similar impact velocities if there are no properly conducted ballistics gel tests before hand. Samples of one is not “data”.


Is there a testing medium that you consider to be a reliable predictor of how a bullet will behave on game.

It’s not an “I” consider. Properly calibrated 10% ballistic ordnance gel has proven to correlate with in tissue performance for tens of thousands of data sets. I used to say that with a full test on a bullet in gel, that I would be comfortable with 10-15 animals to confirm performance. Having seen so many at this point, I’m comfortable with what the bullet will do with a handful.
 

Fartrell Cluggins

Senior Member
Joined
Dec 20, 2019
Messages
297
It’s not an “I” consider. Properly calibrated 10% ballistic ordnance gel has proven to correlate with in tissue performance for tens of thousands of data sets.


Is there a way for the lay person to access that kind of information. You have an incredible body of knowledge, data, experience etc. I pick your brain as often as possible and appreciate your considered responses, but I'd love to be able to get the info without bugging you.
 

Adam Gibbs

Senior Member
Joined
Aug 28, 2017
Messages
279
I'm sure it's been said in here, but what's everyone's pet load for the TMK in an AR? I'm having a hard time finding published load data for that particular bullet.
 

amassi

Senior Member
Joined
May 26, 2018
Messages
1,117
I'm sure it's been said in here, but what's everyone's pet load for the TMK in an AR? I'm having a hard time finding published load data for that particular bullet.
You can use matchking data to start a workup

Sent from my SM-G991U using Tapatalk
 

Formidilosus

Senior Member
Joined
Oct 22, 2014
Messages
1,923
Is there a way for the lay person to access that kind of information. You have an incredible body of knowledge, data, experience etc. I pick your brain as often as possible and appreciate your considered responses, but I'd love to be able to get the info without bugging you.

Google “Dr. Gary K Robert’s terminal ballistics”, “Martin Fackler terminal ballistics”, Duncan McPherson Terminal ballistics”. Even though it is about human terminal performance, that will get you started on the why and how of terminal ballistics. Then Hornady in their Law enforcement section has gel shots/data available, as well as Blackhills. If you have any questions on how to translate the gel shots to correlation to animals, give me a shout- it would be educational for a lot of people.
 

wind gypsy

Senior Member
Joined
Dec 30, 2014
Messages
4,583
I'm sure it's been said in here, but what's everyone's pet load for the TMK in an AR? I'm having a hard time finding published load data for that particular bullet.

I used to shoot 24.0 varget @2.29x” COAL (as long as ASC mags allow) in a RRA predator pursuit a lot. Gets pretty compressed at that COAL.
 

Fartrell Cluggins

Senior Member
Joined
Dec 20, 2019
Messages
297
I spent the past hour reading several articles and then I downloaded the Hornady TAP application. All of what I read made perfect sense. The two methods of incapacitation (how a bullet kills) simply stand to reason. The temporary cavity, hydraulics, permanent wound channel and fragmentation all make perfect sense.

Dumb question #1: I have chest shot and killed deer that never moved another muscle where post mortem indicated no apparent CNS damage and a heart still relatively intact. Is it possible that the hydraulic effect shocked the CNS or the heart? Or is this a case where the animal "psychologically" (if that's even possible in an animal) checked out immediately, rather than physiologically.

Dumb question #2: After looking over the various rifle gel tests, is there really an appreciable difference between the lethality of the common chamberings from 223-308?

I'll leave the questions at that for now. As a general comment, I was surprised to see how glass dramatically affected the bullets and the wound cavity. I would have never thought that.
 

Shraggs

Senior Member
Joined
Jan 24, 2014
Messages
784
Location
Zeeland, MI
Maybe some of the medical folks can chime in, but I’ve dropped many a deer with double lung just above the heart shot which should not incapacitate instantly -

if I understand this; if the heart was on the down stroke when shot and next beat would be filling the heart (ie it’s empty) and the top two veins are damaged, a instant drop in blood pressure in total body “may”occur.
 
Top