a poll to settle an argument on terminal ballistics

[Oldtrader3]

Bill, what you have related from the actual phsical testing of bullets is very close to what I have read before in books and other case studies where someone did an actual study, using wet media or some sort to represent animal tissue for physically testing ballistic performance.

Thanks for reposting the report that you had for us to read. I do not think that much has changed in the interim and I would expect similar results with any of these bullets which are still being marketed.

 

[caribouhunter]

So who won the argument????? Did I miss that part?

Good point, Bill. Yeah, let's hear the final results of the poll! :grin:

Well i just showed him this Thread and he beamed at RR' s post :roll:
But he had to admit from all of the opinions,that it was more of an anomaly than the norm.
So i won :mrgreen:

 

[Polaris]

My vote is for 2 given that the bullet is an expanding type of bullet generally suited to hunting game.

That being said, there are many variables when a 100-200 grain projectile constructed of a maleable material contacts tissue, fluids and bone at 2000-4000 fps carrying tons of kinetic energy. Sometimes strange things happen and it wouldn't surprise me to see #1 given unique circumstances.

Take for example the Soviet 7N1 7.62X54mm sniper round. It is a fmj bullet in compliance with the Hague conventions on small arms but at a certain velocity impact range (conveniantly the velocity range of the round fired from an SVD at 300-1000 meters) it acts very much like a soft point hunting round. Too fast or slow it punches straight through like 762 NATO L2A2 ball.