Tumbling Solid bullets?

[coldboremiracle]

A lot of you guys may have seen my thread about my recent pronghorn antelope hunt, after recovering the bullet I was left with some questions. I'm hoping to appeal to those with some good opinions to discuss the topic with. I have put a lot of my thoughts down here:

Bullet Penetration and Tumbling

A discussion on what happens when bullets hit living targets

coldboremiracle.com

Let me know what you think, and if you think I'm wrong, why.

 

[dirtybores]

My opinion would be for shot placement being king. ALL things considered.

The article has a few different questions, but here's me thoughts on one area:

I have been interested in solids of late and was following your pronghorn thread because of that. I can only speak anecdotally, as I tried out about 140 rounds of Fort Scott 123gr TUI (tumble on impact) bullets from a 6.5 Creed. Targets were all pigs and pests.

I needed a lower grain weight in both rifles than what I usually use to see the same accuracy standards. So they could be pushed a little faster, probably extending the effective range some.

At supersonic speeds, I saw no appreciable difference in killing effect from bonded bullets. They did not put down an animal if shot poorly, or do more consistent and identifiable damage when placed well, as compared to something like Terminal Ascent or Bearclaw. I would place it above bthp and jacketed cartidges and alongside ballistic tips like AMAX or TGK.

I guess I spent less time looking for bullets to recover and mostly just looking at the damage. Should probably redo that. It appeared to tumble as advertised, stay together, and from what I saw it generally stayed inside rather than exiting (at least on the hogs). I'm not sure it was "tumbling" so much as following a jagged path of least resistance while dumping its energy.

The two areas where I was unable to try that sample of monolithic copper rounds, which I'd love to see real data on, was through barriers (glass mostly) and at subsonic speeds. A stressed jacket ripping through tall grass can be a real problem, much less glass. When I see the damage from a jacketed round that came apart, its bloodshot wide but not deep and the animal generally ran. I'm not saying they all do, all the time...I'm just saying its pretty obvious when that happens. It'd be nice to know beyond advertisements, if the solid rounds are peer or superior to bonded bullets in that arena.

If they get out to subsonic distances and just pencil through like pretty much every SMK or "match" type bullet does, then I'm not sure the price point is at a place where I'll seek them out. But if they tumble and create a better permanent cavity, even without the remaining energy for more temporary cavity, then I'm definitely interested. I think its worth knowing.

In conclusion: shot placement still mattered mostest.

 

[Baron23]

Shot placement is primo, in my limited opinion.

 

[coldboremiracle]

Shot placement is promo, in my limited opinion.

For sure that is the case, I sorta outlined that in the post. I was more thinking of performance outside of that objective truth.

 

[shields shtr]

I have been fortunate enough to shoot quite a few elk in about the last 15-20 years. On average, where I live, I can get two a year. Some years I shoot them with my bow, but I always get a cow with a rifle. I have shot them with numerous kinds of bullets from several different calibers. I think I have come to the conclusion that objects moving that fast shot into something that is not static (like an animal) are just wildly unpredictable. I have recovered a berger VLD 190 out of the far side shoulder of an elk that I probably could have loaded again. Those bullets were famous for exploding inside an animal and being unrecoverable. I have seen ELD-x bullets literally blow up on impact fired from a .300 win mag. I have personally killed at least 6 cow elk with the little 108 ELDm. Of those, I probably recovered 5 that were a perfect mushroom and retained 80% of their weight. I have also seen them hit ribs and "blow up" for lack of a better term.

I have been shooting Hammer Hunters as of late, and I really liked them so far because they were about the only bullet I have shot that produced a substantial blood trail. I thought I had found the perfect bullet and then had a weird instance last year where I caught the front of both lungs and the bullet lodged in the offside shoulder. The elk just kind of laid down and took a while to expire, despite being double lunged technically.

I think some bullets tumble, some expand rapidly (or don't), and some do both depending on the situation. It's all a bit of voodoo to me. I just have focused on shooting behind the shoulder and trying to hit vitals every time. More often than not, that results in a dead critter no matter what projectile I am shooting.

 

[coldboremiracle]

I have been fortunate enough to shoot quite a few elk in about the last 15-20 years. On average, where I live, I can get two a year. Some years I shoot them with my bow, but I always get a cow with a rifle. I have shot them with numerous kinds of bullets from several different calibers. I think I have come to the conclusion that objects moving that fast shot into something that is not static (like an animal) are just wildly unpredictable. I have recovered a berger VLD 190 out of the far side shoulder of an elk that I probably could have loaded again. Those bullets were famous for exploding inside an animal and being unrecoverable. I have seen ELD-x bullets literally blow up on impact fired from a .300 win mag. I have personally killed at least 6 cow elk with the little 108 ELDm. Of those, I probably recovered 5 that were a perfect mushroom and retained 80% of their weight. I have also seen them hit ribs and "blow up" for lack of a better term.

I have been shooting Hammer Hunters as of late, and I really liked them so far because they were about the only bullet I have shot that produced a substantial blood trail. I thought I had found the perfect bullet and then had a weird instance last year where I caught the front of both lungs and the bullet lodged in the offside shoulder. The elk just kind of laid down and took a while to expire, despite being double lunged technically.

I think some bullets tumble, some expand rapidly (or don't), and some do both depending on the situation. It's all a bit of voodoo to me. I just have focused on shooting behind the shoulder and trying to hit vitals every time. More often than not, that results in a dead critter no matter what projectile I am shooting.

Obviously both yours and my experience are somewhat anecdotal, but something to evaluate for sure. Thanks for your input!

 

[RTH1800]

In 50 years of shooting animals from the size of Squirrel to Elephant and most things in between I have never seen any evidence of "tumbling bullets". I have read about it since I was young. It was very prevalent in conversations with he advent and use of the M16 in Vietnam.
Until I see evidence to the contrary I will class it as myth like the ".22 LR bullet the bounces around in the skull. I have no doubt that bullets change direction or possibly tumble on the vary rare occasion but it is not anything to rely on or worry about. Similar to being struck by lightning on a sunny day.

 

[Taylorbok]

In 50 years of shooting animals from the size of Squirrel to Elephant and most things in between I have never seen any evidence of "tumbling bullets". I have read about it since I was young. It was very prevalent in conversations with he advent and use of the M16 in Vietnam.
Until I see evidence to the contrary I will class it as myth like the ".22 LR bullet the bounces around in the skull. I have no doubt that bullets change direction or possibly tumble on the vary rare occasion but it is not anything to rely on or worry about. Similar to being struck by lightning on a sunny day.

He's referring to tumbling after impact, not while in flight. Bullets definitely can tumble after they impact.
Also they can tumble in flight if they aren't properly stable but you'll see this on target at 100 yards.

I also rely on good shot placement if you take out the heart or lungs it's gonna die. High shoulder shot taking out the CNS has been a new favorite lately. Just shuts them off

 

[RTH1800]

I see tumbling bullets on target when bore is gone or twist is inadequate. Please show evidence that well stabilized bullets tumble after impact.
In tens of thousands of impacts I have never seen it nor has any reliable hunter I know among thousands seen it. I maintain it's an internet myth perpetuated by people who have shot 5 or ten animals. Just saying it happens is not evidence.

 

[Taylorbok]

I see tumbling bullets on target when bore is gone or twist is inadequate. Please show evidence that well stabilized bullets tumble after impact.
In tens of thousands of impacts I have never seen it nor has any reliable hunter I know among thousands seen it. I maintain it's an internet myth perpetuated by people who have shot 5 or ten animals. Just saying it happens is not evidence.

What? There is literally thousands of videos of bullets tumbling in ballistic gel.
literally the first one I pulled up shows the bullet tumble

 

[RTH1800]

I ask about bullets tumbling in game. Drive on. I am sure you will not understand.

 

[Taylorbok]

@RTH1800 There is plenty enough evidence to show they can/ do tumble.
If you've shot so many animals you have to by now witnessed an exit wound that didn't make sense.

 

[dirtybores]

I can't confirm they were "tumbling", but the wound paths weren't icepick linear. Maybe the bullet yawed from catching bone or it slowed enough the temporary cavity collapsed and it traveled differently through different organs. Some exited. Most didn't. The ones I dug out were basically together. Either way, I stand by them being good enough...maybe it was a tumble, maybe not.

What I do know is my sample size was adequate for what I was trying to see. The hog ticker had an even 40 from Jan-Apr. I stopped messing with it when we started offering those on a guided hunt basis. There's probably a date stamp in the hog thread about that. Some MLD whitetail and coyotes in there and by Sept I swapped truck rifles. You can draw whatever conclusion you like as to truth or fiction. FWIW I'm carrying P308TT2 without plans to go back.

 

[RTH1800]

I ask for evidence that bullets tumble in game. You showed me a target. I ask again. You showed a video of a gelatin. I ask again, you stated that there is plenty of evidence.
I am sure that on a rifle with a poor twist rate to bullet length ratio a bullet can tumble in flesh. I do not use such rifles. On a well set up barrel twist/bullet combination tumbling is a non issue.

The less experience you have the more you believe the bullets tumble.

 

[Taylorbok]

I ask for evidence that bullets tumble in game. You showed me a target. I ask again. You showed a video of a gelatin. I ask again, you stated that there is plenty of evidence.
I am sure that on a rifle with a poor twist rate to bullet length ratio a bullet can tumble in flesh. I do not use such rifles. On a well set up barrel twist/bullet combination tumbling is a non issue.

The less experience you have the more you believe the bullets tumble.

You've got the worst case of Dunning–Kruger effect I've ever seen.

 

[RTH1800]

I really do not have more time to waste with you. You are a player of word games. You have shown no evidence of bullets tumbling in game. I have ask about it several times. Post another laughing emoji and more bullshit. It beats experience and substitutes for facts and evidence.

 

[dirtybores]

You've got the worst case of Dunning–Kruger effect I've ever seen.

Idk. Maybe he's right in a way. The AB guys have some interesting mapping of gyroscopic stability on longer bullets where the pressure center and gravity center are further apart. I do recall trying some 130 grains that shot poorly but the 123s looked good, so I bought those out. Both rifles I used were 1:8 24", a Weatherby and an AI. Maybe the bullets weren't all the way stable. Interesting take.

 

[Taylorbok]

I really do not have more time to waste with you. You are a player of word games. You have shown no evidence of bullets tumbling in game. I have ask about it several times. Post another laughing emoji and more bullshit. It beats experience and substitutes for facts and evidence.

You wont be happy until they engineer a see through animal. Ballistic gel is about as close you can get. Those torso with organs they tumble in their also. It may not be irrefutable proof but it is certainly enough evidence to suggest that it's likely.
You are the one denying the evidence.

noun: evidence

1. the available body of facts or information indicating whether a belief or proposition is true or valid

 

[Long Range 338]

I really do not have more time to waste with you. You are a player of word games. You have shown no evidence of bullets tumbling in game. I have ask about it several times. Post another laughing emoji and more bullshit. It beats experience and substitutes for facts and evidence.

I’m here to learn so I’m taking no sides here. You are demanding evidence while providing none of your own. If you wish to disprove a theory simply providing evidence to the contrary does that…

 

[coldboremiracle]

I’m here to learn so I’m taking no sides here. You are demanding evidence while providing none of your own. If you wish to disprove a theory simply providing evidence to the contrary does that…

Excellent point. I think finding a bullet backwards (boat-tail forward and opened meplat to the rear of direction of travel) in an animal is more than enough evidence to show that at least some bullets, tumble sometimes.

 

[cas6969]

I've seen a white-tailed doe shot with a 220 gr Sierra Match King HPBT from a 300 Whisper pistol. Ice pick like entrance wound. But a 2+" wide wound through the heart and lungs, shaped like it had been stabbed with a broad sword, or shot with a REALLY wide two blade broadhead.

But I didn't photograph it, so I can't prove I guess. I've shot them with all sorts of things, handguns, rifles and shotguns, I didn't photograph those either. So I can't prove what they did either.

We looked and looked, never did find that SMK. Didn't exit, didn't show signs of coming apart, but we couldn't find it in the gut pile. We even went back the next day to look again with no luck.

I'm not saying that would be my first choice to hunt with, not saying it's 100% (but no bullet is).
I don't know if the Doc is still online ("WVHitman"), but IIRC he did lots of deer culling work with them.

 

[Ledzep]

What is even going on here?

Of course bullets sometimes tumble once they hit an animal. We design expanding bullets to produce a reliable uniform frontal expansion. That is done to cause tissue damage while keeping the bullet traveling straight through the target, instead of veering off at random directions (tumbling bullets like to veer). A lot of times that will be uniform enough for the bullet to maintain a point-forward orientation through the entire penetration of gel/animal/whatever, but often enough one side of the jacket tears down asymmetrically or an object inside the animal (different organs, bones, etc.) causes the bullet to yaw and it starts to tumble. Sometimes right away, sometimes almost at the end of the wound channel. Bullets are generally not dynamically/gyro stable in flesh/water/gel, on top of the fact that they're almost always damaged/deformed from the impact.

If a copper solid were to maintain a point-forward orientation and not expand, its wound channel would look just like an FMJ that did the same thing (pencil hole). Meplat frontal area being larger will cause more damage to tissue but robs you of aerodynamic efficiency. Relying on yaw/tumbling for tissue damage is generally not a great plan because it's not as consistent as expansion. Expansion causes tissue damage in a radius of up to 3-5" away from the actual bullet path and buys you "error budget" on shot placement while still destroying tissue/organs.

After all, the intent is to destroy organs, tissue, and circulatory/nervous systems to ultimately remove oxygen supply from the brain as quickly as possible.

 

[RTH1800]

Post proof that well stabilized bullets do not tumble? Exactly how would that be done? Post proof that something did not happen?

Poorly stabilized bullets tumble in the air. They could possibly tumble in flesh.

Well constructed and stabilized bullets do not.
Every instance I am told about tumbling bullets from a good set up come from inexperienced people making excuses for poor shooting.
Bullets that hit the ground and bounce into the animal etc.

Shoot good bullets at high velocity and watch them maintain their course.

 

[coldboremiracle]

Post proof that well stabilized bullets do not tumble? Exactly how would that be done? Post proof that something did not happen?

That seems like your making Taylor's point, if you can't prove that bullets tumble, then you cannot prove that they don't either. There are countless videos of stabilized bullets hitting ballistic targets and they are clearly tumbling. If you don't accept that because its not flesh and bone, how could anyone expect to believe your opposing position that they don't when it can't be show or proven either?

 

[coldboremiracle]

If a copper solid were to maintain a point-forward orientation and not expand, its wound channel would look just like an FMJ that did the same thing

This is the same point I outlined in the link; if the bullets aren't tumbling, then how are they causing so much impressive damage?

 

[dirtybores]

I am now dead set on filling all my remaining management tags by bouncing bullets into animals.

 

[Ledzep]

This is the same point I outlined in the link; if the bullets aren't tumbling, then how are they causing so much impressive damage?

You can see the same results in gel from upset thick-jacket BTHP or FMJ bullets. The problem is that the tissue damage is in-plane with the orientation of tumble. You get a wide swath of tissue damage/disruption in one direction and barely-over-bullet-caliber 90 degrees from that. Additionally once you start a bullet tumbling, all bets are off as to the direction it will take.

With expanding bullets it tends to be more uniform disruption radially, and tends to be more of a straight shot into the tissue. With decent quality hunting bullets you typically only see tumbling at the very end of the wound channel, if at all.

 

[WB300]

I am now dead set on filling all my remaining management tags by bouncing bullets into animals.

I haven't had coffee come out of my nose in a while, but you got me.

 

[Taylorbok]

Post proof that well stabilized bullets do not tumble? Exactly how would that be done? Post proof that something did not happen?

Poorly stabilized bullets tumble in the air. They could possibly tumble in flesh.

Well constructed and stabilized bullets do not.
Every instance I am told about tumbling bullets from a good set up come from inexperienced people making excuses for poor shooting.
Bullets that hit the ground and bounce into the animal etc.

Shoot good bullets at high velocity and watch them maintain their course.

I'll quote myself here.

You've got the worst case of Dunning–Kruger effect I've ever seen.