The great 6.5mm vs. .308 Bullet Debate, but with TERMINAL BALLISTICS

[LRShooter101]

A video of a kid shooting a 7mm Rem Magnum equates to a 243, 260 or 308 exactly how again?

Application!

Plenty of people singing the praises of the 6mm & 6.5mm, and using the PRS data to support those arguments. Great if you are shooting something like the PRS. If on the other hand you are going to try and take a shot at an Elk at 1,000+ yds with a 6mm or 6.5mm, totally different application and totally different results. Likewise plenty of people singing the praises of a .308 as the master of all. Once again best of luck with that 1,000+ yard shot using a .308.

This topic was about terminal ballistics, and you can't talk terminal ballistics without qualifying the application. Deer at 100 yards or or Elk at 1,000+ yards? You can obviously use anything from a .243, .260, or .308 for the 100 yard Deer. On the hand, if you want to use a .30 cal bullet for the 1,000 yard elk, then you are going to have to launch a 200+ grain bullet out of a magnum, totally different story.

Per above, a 7mm bullet is about as "optimal" as you can get in terms of both External and Terminal Ballistics for many applications. However, it is obviously not truely optimal for every application.

Yes, I would agree Mauser was headed in the right direction long ago!

 

[Ring]

6mm on a running ostrich head at close to 300 yards

http://www.snipershide.com/shooting/showthread.php?t=226617


Sent from my Nexus 4 using Tapatalk

 

[LRShooter101]

What you choose to shoot, is your call. I am not praising or condemning that shot on the Elk, it is simply an example.

Once again, Terminal Ballistics, is not solely about shot placement. Shoot any 2 or 4 legged target in the heart or brain, and it doesn't matter if it is a 6mm or 7.62mm. Put that shot somewhere else, and it is all about Terminal Ballistics!

 

[steve123]

Gentlemen,

Does any one have any knowledge, data or links regarding the terminal ballistics between these two bullets? When I say "terminal ballistics" I mean this definition: Terminal ballistics - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia = "the study of the behavior and effects of a projectile when it hits its target."

I get that the 6.5 mm or even 6.0 mm bullets have better ballistics coefficients and perform better at longer ranges over the .308 (I have personal experience myself), but what about when they actual impact a soft bodied target, such as an animal or even a person? Are there any ballistic gelatin tests between the two? Is a bigger hole more devastating? Is more mass better or do you want more speed?

I wouldn't be able to give you a link but I've seen a few threads over at LRH on this subject with tests done in various media from wet newspaper to ballistic gelatin. Of course the same arguments come up about ethics, bullet construction, energy, etc, etc which will never be avoided.

Personally I'd want to use a cartridge with the least wind drift and the most energy on target. Aimsmall's example is a good one. High BC, less wind drift + copious amounts of devastating energy coupled with hydro-static shock.

 

[desert101]

terminal ballistics

Gentlemen,

Does any one have any knowledge, data or links regarding the terminal ballistics between these two bullets? When I say "terminal ballistics" I mean this definition: Terminal ballistics - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia = "the study of the behavior and effects of a projectile when it hits its target."

I get that the 6.5 mm or even 6.0 mm bullets have better ballistics coefficients and perform better at longer ranges over the .308 (I have personal experience myself), but what about when they actual impact a soft bodied target, such as an animal or even a person? Are there any ballistic gelatin tests between the two? Is a bigger hole more devastating? Is more mass better or do you want more speed?

I have spent a year following Snipers Hide and have learned a great deal from the members excellent database. I have never posted as I am still on the learning curve of long range skills. After years of handgun competition...I am now addicted to long range. I felt compelled to comment on the terminal ballistics discussion,however, as I am a neurosurgeon with 20 years experience at a university trauma center and a year as an Army neurosurgeon in the MidEast. My interest in terminal ballistics parallels this experience.

Internal and external ballistics are controlled by the laws of near pure physics....accordingly, they are complex but reliable predictable and studied. Terminal ballistics, i.e. the study of interaction between a projectile and biologic tissue is a less predictable event and emphasizes the variability of biologic tissue....which is what makes biologic tissue so beautiful but so complex.

Terminal ballistics are in essence composed of two predominating events:

1) A permanent wound track the size of the projectile itself (arrow, knife, bullet etc). The size of the bullet (i.e. caliber) determines the size of the permanent wound tract. While larger clearly has some impact on tissue destruction in the path..it is debatable that small changes in wound tract are the "player' in outcome. Perforation of major vasculature...such as we see in brain aneurysm surgery, is subject to the laws of fluid dynamics. Small changes in perforation (<10% for example) have similar flow gradients etc. Obviously, large differentials in diameter of permanent tract is a different event (2 inch pipe versus a small arrow etc)

2)A stretch cavity (cavitation injury)...This is the stretch of tissue as the energy transfer takes place between the moving projectile (kinetic energy) and the nearby biologic tissue. Given that kinetic energy is Ke=mass x velocity SQUARED...velocity is a key determinate of the amount of Ke to be transferred, and accordingly. the size of the stretch cavity. That being said..as has been noted in a prior post...the effectiveness of energy transfer is important and this is a function of bullet design. For example..a baseball bat strikes the ball and the Ke of the bat is rapidly transferred to the ball. The greater the bat velocity...the greater the energy transfer. In human tissue, the transfer is more complex. As the bullet strikes, each bullet will transfer its energy dependent on the rate of slowing of the bullet (hence penetration designs to favor different depths of "energy dump") and sectional density (the larger heavier bullet may go slower with less Ke...but it may transfer its energy to the tissue more effectively etc). An often ignored factor is the ELASTICITY of the tissue struck. As the stretch cavity occurs..some tissues are very inelastic...they reach their coefficient of stretch and tear. Brain and liver are two examples of tissue that tolerate stretch very poorly. Accordingly, liver and brain "explode" functionally when hit with rifle level Ke. Lung and bowel, which have an inherent elasticity, are less damaged relatively (although lung is rich in vasculature which poses its own inherent risk).

For me, all of the above rifle options deliver a level of momentum, Ke and sectional density to yield a fatal or critical wounding potential with similar anatomic shot placement. It is difficult to argue for being "more dead". The logistics then become important (availability, weight cost etc etc) as does the envelope of employment (400 yes, 800 yds 1000 etc ).

Thanks for Sniper Hide and each day I try to educate myself from the vast array of posts provided.

 

[NevadaZielmeister]

I wouldn't be able to give you a link but I've seen a few threads over at LRH on this subject with tests done in various media from wet newspaper to ballistic gelatin. Of course the same arguments come up about ethics, bullet construction, energy, etc, etc which will never be avoided.

Personally I'd want to use a cartridge with the least wind drift and the most energy on target. Aimsmall's example is a good one. High BC, less wind drift + copious amounts of devastating energy coupled with hydro-static shock.

Steve,

Thank you for this post. It would be great if you could look a little bit harder over at Long Range Hunting. I did some searching over the internet prior to starting this thread. I found very limited information. If you could assist with a link, that would be awesome!!!

I agree, there are a lot of physics involved with numbers for "energy" and "wind drift", but this all breaks down when you interact physics with biology. I might be getting a truly awesome post here shortly from an expert, but I await his permission. I hope it gets posted shortly because his comments are AMAZING. I will keep you posted.

 

[Powermac]

If you want a good read about hunting bullet performance and terminal ballistics.
Terminal Ballistics Research

 

[NevadaZielmeister]

I have spent a year following Snipers Hide and have learned a great deal from the members excellent database. I have never posted as I am still on the learning curve of long range skills. After years of handgun competition...I am now addicted to long range. I felt compelled to comment on the terminal ballistics discussion,however, as I am a neurosurgeon with 20 years experience at a university trauma center and a year as an Army neurosurgeon in the MidEast. My interest in terminal ballistics parallels this experience.

Internal and external ballistics are controlled by the laws of near pure physics....accordingly, they are complex but reliable predictable and studied. Terminal ballistics, i.e. the study of interaction between a projectile and biologic tissue is a less predictable event and emphasizes the variability of biologic tissue....which is what makes biologic tissue so beautiful but so complex.

Terminal ballistics are in essence composed of two predominating events:

1) A permanent wound track the size of the projectile itself (arrow, knife, bullet etc). The size of the bullet (i.e. caliber) determines the size of the permanent wound tract. While larger clearly has some impact on tissue destruction in the path..it is debatable that small changes in wound tract are the "player' in outcome. Perforation of major vasculature...such as we see in brain aneurysm surgery, is subject to the laws of fluid dynamics. Small changes in perforation (<10% for example) have similar flow gradients etc. Obviously, large differentials in diameter of permanent tract is a different event (2 inch pipe versus a small arrow etc)

2)A stretch cavity (cavitation injury)...This is the stretch of tissue as the energy transfer takes place between the moving projectile (kinetic energy) and the nearby biologic tissue. Given that kinetic energy is Ke=mass x velocity SQUARED...velocity is a key determinate of the amount of Ke to be transferred, and accordingly. the size of the stretch cavity. That being said..as has been noted in a prior post...the effectiveness of energy transfer is important and this is a function of bullet design. For example..a baseball bat strikes the ball and the Ke of the bat is rapidly transferred to the ball. The greater the bat velocity...the greater the energy transfer. In human tissue, the transfer is more complex. As the bullet strikes, each bullet will transfer its energy dependent on the rate of slowing of the bullet (hence penetration designs to favor different depths of "energy dump") and sectional density (the larger heavier bullet may go slower with less Ke...but it may transfer its energy to the tissue more effectively etc). An often ignored factor is the ELASTICITY of the tissue struck. As the stretch cavity occurs..some tissues are very inelastic...they reach their coefficient of stretch and tear. Brain and liver are two examples of tissue that tolerate stretch very poorly. Accordingly, liver and brain "explode" functionally when hit with rifle level Ke. Lung and bowel, which have an inherent elasticity, are less damaged relatively (although lung is rich in vasculature which poses its own inherent risk).

For me, all of the above rifle options deliver a level of momentum, Ke and sectional density to yield a fatal or critical wounding potential with similar anatomic shot placement. It is difficult to argue for being "more dead". The logistics then become important (availability, weight cost etc etc) as does the envelope of employment (400 yes, 800 yds 1000 etc ).

Thanks for Sniper Hide and each day I try to educate myself from the vast array of posts provided.

You know Doctor, for a first post, you certainly picked a great way to introduce yourself and your expertise to us. Thank you so much for this kind of input. THIS IS what I am looking for gentlemen. This is the direction I want the thread to proceed towards the truth.

 

[desert101]

terminal ballistics

Thank you very much. I am indebted to Sniper Hide for all I have learned here over the last year. The absolutely outstanding instructors at Academi (aka Blackwater) are getting me up to speed on the long range skills....I give ballistics talks as a small mode of appreciation!!

 

[scottyr44]

Just like precision shooting requires the shooter to do his part to shoot a 1/2 moa group, hunting requires the hunter to get close and take a accurate shot to ensure a kill. Dick measuring the way of 1000 yrd polar bear shots with a .223 is counter productive to ethical hunting.

Sent from my SCH-I605 using Tapatalk

 

[LRJammer]

I own 2 rifles chambered in 260 Rem. One is a dedicated heavy LR rifle and the other is a medium game hunting rifle. I have used the 260 to devastating effect on deer, antelope, hogs, and steel. I am planning a trip to Wyoming for Elk & Mule Deer next year. While I am confident in the 260s penetration capabilities with the proper selection and placement, I wont even entertain the idea of shooting an elk with it. There is going to be a lot of money and time invested in this trip to take chances on a caliber that is marginal for the application. If I were in a survival situation and that was my only option, it would certainly get the job done, but that is just not the case in this case, or many other for that matter.

My elk rifle is to be a 300 WSM. Not because of some slavish devotion to a cartridge, but becuase that is what I already have, along with brass, dies, powder, etc for loading it. Given an accurate load, a good controlled penetration bullet, and proper shot placement, it will very effectively do the job that I need of it. Just becuase something can be done, doesnt necessarily mean that it is a good idea. For example, I have witnessed far to many wounded deer that were lost or required one hell of a lot of tracking to find becuase they were shot with a caliber that is entirely inadequate for the job at hand (223, 22-250, 220 swift, etc..) Yes it can be done, but the error of margin is small and the thought of wounding an animal just sickens me. Unfortunately, far too many dont hold a quick, humane kill in high regard.

 

[LRShooter101]

. . . . . This is the direction I want the thread to proceed towards the truth.

Per the good Doctor above, Terminal Ballistics is about science/physics, and as such the "fundamentals" were written long ago, and they are out there for anyone to read:

Understanding Firearm Ballistics: Robert A. Rinker: 9780964559844: Amazon.com: Books

Wound Ballistics, Ballistic Injury, Stopping Power, Gunshot Wounds

Terminal Ballistics

Hunting Bullet Terminal Ballistics

Have you read any of that material, and if so, what exactly is missing from it, or what is the "TRUTH" that you are specifically trying to get at?

Sorry I am not tracking with this, not sure if you are having trouble digesting the info that is out there, just looking for the "cliff notes" version of it all, or if there is a specific question that you are trying to answer?

 

[NevadaZielmeister]

Per the good Doctor above, Terminal Ballistics is about science/physics, and as such the "fundamentals" were written long ago, and they are out there for anyone to read:

Understanding Firearm Ballistics: Robert A. Rinker: 9780964559844: Amazon.com: Books

Wound Ballistics, Ballistic Injury, Stopping Power, Gunshot Wounds

Terminal Ballistics

Hunting Bullet Terminal Ballistics

Have you read any of that material, and if so, what exactly is missing from it, or what is the "TRUTH" that you are specifically trying to get at?

Sorry I am not tracking with this, not sure if you are having trouble digesting the info that is out there, just looking for the "cliff notes" version of it all, or if there is a specific question that you are trying to answer?

LRShooter,

These are excellent resources. Thank you. I have not read these resources. Here is what I found after only a brief review regarding your links:

"Understanding Firearm Ballistics" seems to focus more on external ballistics, based on this comment left on Amazon.com: "The terminal ballistics section is a small part of the book and a very cursory discussion, although it was a large part of another reviewer's complaint. The subject of terminal ballistics is so full of debate and emotion that no treatment of the subject is going to go by without criticism."

"Wound Ballistics, Ballistic Injury, Stopping Power, Gunshot Wounds" is an EXCELLENT source, which contains many primary sources for review. I will look into this a bit as I have not had time to review now. However, it is somewhat short.

"Terminal Ballistics" is an AMAZING resource. It contains a lot of research and study, including wound track plots of various calibers (none in 6.5mm unfortunately) but it contains a lot of information to supply answers to the argument, "which is better, a faster 6.5mmm bullet or a moderate .308 bullet?"

"Hunting Bullet Terminal Ballistics" is more of a summary page but without source links. Still a good way to go regarding direction in initial research.

Posters, these are ALL really great posts and I am gathering information as we speak. I will reach out to Pat Sinclair today and see if he wants to add a word or two. His name was mentioned several times in the thread.

The purpose of the thread is to assist new shooters who are not sure which caliber to get. Yes, there are certain preferences and always application analysis (picking the right tool for the job) but it would be nice for someone to be able to point to good references in supporting their decision to get the best "overall" round regarding terminal ballistics. We may indeed also discuss the positive benefits to assist good shot placement, but really we want to know which bullet diameter is best for "most" situations. The search for more information continues.

Thank you LRShooter, you are very helpful. The links are very very helpful.

 

[AK264]

A soft bullet ala SST with a 6.5 in the heart/lungs puts deer size game down inside of ten steps in my experience. Ive never shot one at over 300 yards. Elk I go to a 7 and a bonded bullet, .308 is adequate. Matching the bullet to the animal AND where you hit the animal is very important if you want them to go down inside ten steps. If you hit dense bone you need a harder bullet, if you dont a harder bullet through both sides does not put them down near as fast in my experience.

 

[KYpatriot]

I have spent a year following Snipers Hide and have learned a great deal from the members excellent database. I have never posted as I am still on the learning curve of long range skills. After years of handgun competition...I am now addicted to long range. I felt compelled to comment on the terminal ballistics discussion,however, as I am a neurosurgeon with 20 years experience at a university trauma center and a year as an Army neurosurgeon in the MidEast. My interest in terminal ballistics parallels this experience.

Internal and external ballistics are controlled by the laws of near pure physics....accordingly, they are complex but reliable predictable and studied. Terminal ballistics, i.e. the study of interaction between a projectile and biologic tissue is a less predictable event and emphasizes the variability of biologic tissue....which is what makes biologic tissue so beautiful but so complex.

Terminal ballistics are in essence composed of two predominating events:

1) A permanent wound track the size of the projectile itself (arrow, knife, bullet etc). The size of the bullet (i.e. caliber) determines the size of the permanent wound tract. While larger clearly has some impact on tissue destruction in the path..it is debatable that small changes in wound tract are the "player' in outcome. Perforation of major vasculature...such as we see in brain aneurysm surgery, is subject to the laws of fluid dynamics. Small changes in perforation (<10% for example) have similar flow gradients etc. Obviously, large differentials in diameter of permanent tract is a different event (2 inch pipe versus a small arrow etc)

2)A stretch cavity (cavitation injury)...This is the stretch of tissue as the energy transfer takes place between the moving projectile (kinetic energy) and the nearby biologic tissue. Given that kinetic energy is Ke=mass x velocity SQUARED...velocity is a key determinate of the amount of Ke to be transferred, and accordingly. the size of the stretch cavity. That being said..as has been noted in a prior post...the effectiveness of energy transfer is important and this is a function of bullet design. For example..a baseball bat strikes the ball and the Ke of the bat is rapidly transferred to the ball. The greater the bat velocity...the greater the energy transfer. In human tissue, the transfer is more complex. As the bullet strikes, each bullet will transfer its energy dependent on the rate of slowing of the bullet (hence penetration designs to favor different depths of "energy dump") and sectional density (the larger heavier bullet may go slower with less Ke...but it may transfer its energy to the tissue more effectively etc). An often ignored factor is the ELASTICITY of the tissue struck. As the stretch cavity occurs..some tissues are very inelastic...they reach their coefficient of stretch and tear. Brain and liver are two examples of tissue that tolerate stretch very poorly. Accordingly, liver and brain "explode" functionally when hit with rifle level Ke. Lung and bowel, which have an inherent elasticity, are less damaged relatively (although lung is rich in vasculature which poses its own inherent risk).

For me, all of the above rifle options deliver a level of momentum, Ke and sectional density to yield a fatal or critical wounding potential with similar anatomic shot placement. It is difficult to argue for being "more dead". The logistics then become important (availability, weight cost etc etc) as does the envelope of employment (400 yes, 800 yds 1000 etc ).

Thanks for Sniper Hide and each day I try to educate myself from the vast array of posts provided.

Good post sir. Given that your experience bears directly on the subject, I'd like you to comment on the non-scientific observations I have from hunting. My experience has led me to believe that "hydrostatic shock" is not much of a factor in determining how quickly an animal dies even when the shot is well placed. I believe that an animal goes down for the count when the O2 stat in the brain is insufficient to function, and that this occurs as soon as blood pressure is down enough due to massive blood loss. The only time I have seen animals drop near instantly are central nervous system hits. In fact, I have seen marginal difference in time until death between deer well hit with rifles or arrows, leading me to believe that the massive energy transfer from the rifle round (the stretch cavity as you describe) is only useful in so far as it causes more bleeding, and that it usually doesn't cause much additional bleeding relative to the permanent would channel. Perhaps it would if I shot deer in the liver, but I don't. Therefore, it seems to me that the permanent wound channel does the vast majority of the killing, which would explain why we don't see as much difference between a hit with a 300WM and a broad head as we would expect. So, do you agree hydrostatic shock is the gun-magazine red herring I believe it is, or if not how is it a critical factor in terminal ballistics?

 

[sandwarrior]

Who considers a .22 Hornet good enough for Grizzly? How about the worlds largest polar bear? What was the worlds largest polar bear shot with? Thanks right, a .22 Hornet right down the ear channel.

So, do "REAL HUNTERS" shoot .22 Hornets when bear hunting?

It was actually at that time, 1953, a .22 LR. And, it was the worlds largest grizzly, killed near Slave Lake. One shot down the ear channel. It is still very high on the list of big bears killed.

I am more inclined to believe the Polar Bear was killed by a .222 as that is what most Eskimo (and Athabaskan) and Inuit prefer. The 30-06 made it's way straight up to Alaska, but many natives preferred lower recoiling rounds and less damage done to meat and hide. .22 Hornets are perfect for seal but unless the right shot presents itself not much killing power with it. The .222 on the other hand pushed the same weight bullet twice as fast. Still not much killing power in my book, (nor would I count on it) but that is why most of them prefer it. BTW, when I worked in Bethel, AK, it was the only place since the early seventies where I saw .222 Rem stocked on the shelves like 30-06 or .308 down here in the lower 48.

In any case, it doesn't matter with 500 yds. which caliber you choose of any of the 'full power' cartridges. They will kill with good shot placement. Beyond that range you aren't really in a dangerous situation so take your time and shoot as best you can for the perfect spot. At that point it depends on the shooters limitations. The 6.5 is going to give better ballistics at that range and beyond. But, as often noted, the shooter needs to check his headspace (ego) and make sure he knows the shot he's making.

Or, compromise, get a .270.

 

[Papa Zero Three]

Good post sir. Given that your experience bears directly on the subject, I'd like you to comment on the non-scientific observations I have from hunting. My experience has led me to believe that "hydrostatic shock" is not much of a factor in determining how quickly an animal dies even when the shot is well placed. I believe that an animal goes down for the count when the O2 stat in the brain is insufficient to function, and that this occurs as soon as blood pressure is down enough due to massive blood loss. The only time I have seen animals drop near instantly are central nervous system hits. In fact, I have seen marginal difference in time until death between deer well hit with rifles or arrows, leading me to believe that the massive energy transfer from the rifle round (the stretch cavity as you describe) is only useful in so far as it causes more bleeding, and that it usually doesn't cause much additional bleeding relative to the permanent would channel. Perhaps it would if I shot deer in the liver, but I don't. Therefore, it seems to me that the permanent wound channel does the vast majority of the killing, which would explain why we don't see as much difference between a hit with a 300WM and a broad head as we would expect. So, do you agree hydrostatic shock is the gun-magazine red herring I believe it is, or if not how is it a critical factor in terminal ballistics?

You're on the right track, blood loss is the main reason for death in humans and animals. The more bleeding that is created, the quicker/faster the death. The Dr. in the video I posted on page 1 of this thread explains this entire process from the wound mechanism and causation for death, specifically with regards to rifle rounds,not just pistol. If you or anyone else in this thread hasn't watched the video, I highly suggest you do, the Dr. address this issue right above knuckle dragger level but not full on medical speak so even bubba should be able to understand given the presentation and the pictures/video. It expounds even more on what desert101 just posted above.

I understand this is in regards to hunting 4 legged animals and that some people want something to hang on a wall but a head shot answers the shot placement and caliber issue unless you're hunting elephants and or grizzlies with a 22. If you're after it for the meat and not something to hang on a wall and the circumstances permit an ethical shot, then a head shot answers the bill. Granted it is a harder shot and a potentially smaller target but the outcome is very predictable for any caliber as long as you are not at the low end/limit of the bullets velocity range. I am not advocating head shots at unrealistic hunting distances that an average hunter typically takes game at, I say this because I am aware that common sense is not common. If your situation dictates shots from 500m and further as a norm then by all means aim appropriately at the upper torso/body of the animal.

The observation I have made when it comes to this topic is that most people want a black and white 6th grade level answer as to what the right answer is and often rely on others experiences/suggestions based on their experiences with a certain caliber/situation. While real world field results are very relevant, they do not cover every scenario/situation. Likewise, falling back on videos of gelatin being shot and number crunching is not an end all be all. There also seems to be a lack of interest in general to fully look at and understand the medical explanations and or any in depth inclusion of this data with results from the field and laboratory tests. It is either one or both but not all three when it comes to hunting game animals. The only place I have seen it come close has been in military briefings related to battlefield injuries and medical training, much like the video I posted but that focus is on calibers commonly encountered on the battlefield. What I have concluded is that there is no "magic bullet" answer so to speak. Use the right tool for the job comes to mind and that means look at all the variables you foresee yourself being in from type of animal, ranges expected, terrain and vegetation, weather conditions, etc and choose the caliber and type of bullet as needed. Given the numerous calibers available to the average hunter, that means pick one that best fits the bill for all the criteria I mentioned above and hunt within your median hunting skills, not your max.

 

[desert101]

terminal ballistics

Some great points and good observations above. To go a bit further on the surgical side of ballistics:

Incapacitation is a function of one of two, or a combination, of the following mechanisms. (We see this daily from motor vehicle accidents as well as the gunshot wound events so the data base is extensive):

a)Central nervous system impact: Once the skull bone is penetrated..the remaining Ke (kinetic energy)is transferred to the brain. As noted above, the brain is quite Inelastic and the destruction extends far beyond the permanent wound tract. In the case of the brain, this rapid expansion of tissue and subsequent rapid elevation of intracranial pressure, is a KEY to the rapid brain dysfunction seen in GSW of the brain. CAT scans on even small caliber wounds document the much larger region of brain damage along the permanent tract. In the case of the brain, the stretch cavity and the associated pressure wave is actually important in the pathophysiology of incapacitation. Example: I had a pt who walked into the ER with a scissors stuck through the thin temporal bone of the skull up to the handles. As fate would have it…no large bleeders occurred and the permanent tract involved areas of cognition but not locomotion etc..We removed the scissors and long term deficits were minimal. The only area of the brain involved in her case was the permanent tract. I operated on a police officer recently shot with a .22cal rifle from behind at approx 25yds. I removed virtually the entire half of his skull to deal with the tremendous pressure from diffuse insult from the stretched and inflamed brain. Fortunately, he did very well and I had dinner with him several weeks ago. Obviously, the scissors permanent tract is larger, but no area of brain around it is involved in the event. Note: The concept that you need a brainstem shot placement is not based on fact. The inelasticity of brain will transmit the event rapidly widely and any cranial vault penetration with adequate residual Ke will "do the job"..perhaps not fatal but that days activities clearly will be coming to a halt.

b)Blood Loss(exsanguination): Blood loss of 10% causes an increase in pulse but pressure is unchanged. The hunting example above is correct in that as long as blood pressure is adequate to perfuse the brain with oxygen and glucose, the animal can continue and the felon can direct 5 rounds into your person. Once blood loss equals 20% of volume, pulse and respiratory rates increase but pressure remains stable. Once again, animal or felon are "making tracks". Once blood loss equals 30%….blood pressure begins to fall, cerebral perfusion drops, and t is "lights out" Keep in mind that human blood volume id 70cc per kg of body weight (one kilo equals 2.2lbs). 10% of volume in a 70kg man is 500cc…this is an impressive amount of blood and requires a fairly substantial injury. 30% obviously is 1500cc…this takes time dependent on the vasculature involved. Very nice studies have shown that a complete transection of the aorta would leave the brain with adequate pressure for 4.6 to 5 seconds of activity.Small woman and children have much smaller blood volumes (see above formula) and get into trouble much more quickly.

Biology is beautifully complex. The Ke/cavity as above is key in brain…less so in more elastic and less vital tissues. For example, a lung wound where stretch is a normal function of the tissue in life, is primarily a vascular injury/pneumothorax event and both arrow and many calibers of weapon provide similar yields. I would not, however, dismiss the immediate physiologic dysfunction from nonelastic tissue events with the cavitation injury. Although not so relevant in hunting…a survivable but critical injury plays out in the ICU over weeks. The badly damaged liver, kidney, extensive loss of bowel etc all can become a surgical nightmare as things try to heal.

For me, all of the calibers were designed with a purpose far beyond their respective incapacitation capabilities. What is it we are trying to incapacitate (bear, prairie dog, human etc). What is the envelope of engagement, How much can we carry, does anyone have the supplies we need etc. Note: Martin Fackler MD provided beautifully documented caliber / wounding studies diagrammatically in the surgical literature. I highly recommend them for review.

sorry for the long posts. !!!!Tragically I love my job!

 

[ridenrunwv]

Thanks so much for your detailed posts. Myself and many others on the forum enjoy and appreciate reading such intelligent and detailed descriptions of things. I have learned so much from this forum because of posts like yours.

 

[Forgetful Coyote]

Ive never killed a man before with any caliber, so for those that have the experience and also hunt, please correct me if Im wrong. But, Ive always been of the opinion that most game animals (eg: WT Buck, Bull Elk, Moose, etc) are quite a bit harder to kill than a human. Something about a animals facing life/death situations daily seems to give them the motivation to SURVIVE at all costs and put more effort into doing so than a human. I know a lot of people will call BS right away, so let me provide some context. For one, a CNS shot to anything will put em down, period. Youre not moving with an obliterated brain stem so all bets are off in those cases. Two, drugs. Same thing, if the human in question is wacked out on heroin/opium or other drugs for that matter, but I mentioned heroin/opium because thats the main thing our troops would see in Afghanistan/SW Asia. If they are on something like heroin, all bets are off once again, anything could happen. They could turn into superman or drop like a sack of bricks at the thought of the foe, you never know.

So strictly talking NO DRUGS, and no CNS hits. Id stand by my reasoning that similar sized animals are overall tougher than humans when shot. Think about it for a second. Ive seen deer run past 100 yards with their heart completely shredded to bits. I am NOT taking into account American troops in this. For one its disrespectful and I dont feel comfortable seeing vids of my fellow countrymen being shot. Obviously that introduces some bias because Im not considering men like Marcus Luttrell and his will to live. Reason being is that I dont think men like that represent your mean(aka average) will to live for a human. They are obviously a cut above average in that department. But take your average hadji, or any human for that matter. From everything I can gather, if theyre just lollygagging around unsuspecting, and they get hit out of nowhere, theyre going down. Its gonna hurt and scare em bad. Id have to say any average person, after being shot anywhere in the torso, will go down and most probably not get back up. Obviously if theyre already in a gunfight, and adrenaline running a million miles per hour, things are different once again. They can take a few shots and keep going, for example 1986 FBI Miami shootout. But overall, a Bang>Flop on a deer or any game animal is not the majority result. More often than not, it takes off running. Even on double lung+heart shots, Ive seen them take off like they didnt even feel it. Must insert here that Berger bullets have started to change this. Cant say enough about Berger terminal performance.

Regarding 6.5 vs .308. At short range, the .308 will obviously hit harder. That begins to change the farther out you gnce you get past 500 yards, Id much more readily trust a 6.5-284 to kill an Elk than a .308. The Scandinavians have been using 6.5x55 for Moose for a long while. Overall, the sectional density is better with 6.5 bullets unless you start talking like 210+ gr .308 bullets. And in that case, the advantage will be lost to the 6.5 in velocity. Just look at some of the game/distances the crew at Best of The West has shot with the 6.5-284, along with the guys at Gunwerks. Other than that though and you start to get into bullet construction which imo, is outside of the debate of .308 vs 6.5.

 

[desert101]

Humans have the option of intellectualizing the event. One option is always to "call it a day" and go down. The remainder of the mammal kingdom has no option to "talk their way out" so instinct and running rule the day. The converse rule is, however, that an animal knows to run at the first sign of trouble….humans intellectualize the situation and conclude…."he probably really doesn't want to carjack me"….thereby missing the opportunity to move on. And after that, it all comes down to terminal ballistics!

 

[sandwarrior]

desert101,

Excellent post. I want to say that your a) section of your post and elasticity refers to what "hydrostatic shock" does. It's transference of energy through a medium-like substance. Sometimes it works better, sometimes worse. One of the points made in the video Papa zero three provided us show most of the vitals right along the centerline of the body. Anytime you can hit something that transfers full energy through hyrdaulic transmission, it's going to wreak the damage you describe in your a) paragraph. As you said though it depends on what is affected. If it's the brain/CNS it's going to affect a lot. If it's the liver, pancreas, bowels etc, that shows up over time in the ICU as the pt. heals. The body ridding itself of the refuse through natural channels. I think even the body goes, "OMG!" sometimes.

Added: As far as laying down, fighting or running. It's the classic 'fight or flight' in all of us. Laying down is the intellectualizing that you can 'talk your way through this'. Therefore, following instinct to conserve energy.

 

[psinclair]

Grizzly taken with one shot from a .260 from 339 meters.

Black Bear taken with one shot from a .308 from 530 meters. Shot placement was identical on both shots. The results were also the same. Both bears ran about 25 meters after being hit broadside through the lungs.

This mature, large bodied mule deer buck was taken with a .308 from 320 meters in the very last minutes of shooting light. I intentionally shot him through the shoulders to anchor him on the spot.

Another mature, large bodied mule deer buck taken with a .260 from 309 meters. This shot was a raking shot that entered the last rib on his right side, and angled forward, breaking his left front shoulder. The bullet was lodged under the hide and didn't quite exit. He dropped at the shot, kicked a few times and was done.

I've always felt that shot placement trumps headstamp and or bore diameter. This is a small example of .260/.308. Not a hell of a lot of difference, if the shots are placed equally. I have to admit the past few years, the 6.5's in the stable have been getting most of the action as far as big game hunting goes.....most of you know it's just easier to place those shots with less recoil, and a little less holdoff for the wind....

 

[6.5BR]

Nice shooting, nice animals, agree wholeheartedly, lower recoil all else equal gives me a hedge on best shot placement. Not much a properly loaded 6.5 cannot accomplish when steered thru vitals.

 

[Ring]

Hydrostatic shock would be better translated as permanent stretch cavity and the damage done by it..


kind like this..

Sent from my Nexus 4 using Tapatalk

 

[BoilerUP]

All I needed to know about the terminal ballistics of 6.5mm bullets I learned from pictures of animals killed by Pat Sinclair.

...yep

 

[Graham]

I agree with Pat: Between the two, shot placement is everything.

 

[Forgetful Coyote]

Grizzly taken with one shot from a .260 from 339 meters.

Black Bear taken with one shot from a .308 from 530 meters. Shot placement was identical on both shots. The results were also the same. Both bears ran about 25 meters after being hit broadside through the lungs.

This mature, large bodied mule deer buck was taken with a .308 from 320 meters in the very last minutes of shooting light. I intentionally shot him through the shoulders to anchor him on the spot.

Another mature, large bodied mule deer buck taken with a .260 from 309 meters. This shot was a raking shot that entered the last rib on his right side, and angled forward, breaking his left front shoulder. The bullet was lodged under the hide and didn't quite exit. He dropped at the shot, kicked a few times and was done.

I've always felt that shot placement trumps headstamp and or bore diameter. This is a small example of .260/.308. Not a hell of a lot of difference, if the shots are placed equally. I have to admit the past few years, the 6.5's in the stable have been getting most of the action as far as big game hunting goes.....most of you know it's just easier to place those shots with less recoil, and a little less holdoff for the wind....

BEAUTIFUL Grizzly you got there sir!! Ive never seen one so light-colored. Then again Ive never been up to Grizz country, just pictures from LRH. May I ask what your preferred bullet is in 6.5 for the big stuff? Also, must say I agree. Obviously shot placement is everything, and if you trust your bullet to do the job, a good shoulder-busting anchor shot is where its at. Like I said though, especially with 6.5, you gotta have the right bullet for the job on the shoulder shots. Also, you think we could see some pictures and specs of the 6.5 and .308 you used? Never a bad time for rifle pics if I must say so myself..

Thank you sir.

 

[desert101]

terminal ballistics

The first law of terminal ballistics: The terminal ballistics can only play out in the anatomic area in which the projectile is placed…..if you do your job..the bullet will do its job.

Each envelope of engagement will have a "menu" of calibers that are appropriate. Big game at >600 will have a reasonable menu of calibers that will do the job…each one of the menu selections having its "plus and minuses". CQB engagements are a completely different envelope with totally different considerations…which will have a different "menu" of caliber options that are appropriate. Whenever one is asked for an opinion of the most effective round with regards to terminal ballistics…the answer should always be.."what is it you are trying to accomplish, with what type of target and at what distances?" There is no "magic round", but rather a wonderful menu of effective option dependent on the task.

It is why they make screw drivers, hammers and chain saws. All of them have a proper role at a proper time.

 

[ridenrunwv]

What caliber and bullet did that damage Ring?