Hammer bullet failure

Ruggedsportsman said:
You could see the shockwave through the pig and a clear hollow impact sound. If it was a miss I wouldnt have been able to follow a blood trail for so long. At the start every 15 feet or so was about a 4" puddle of bright red foamy blood which turned into tiny drops for the remainer of the track.
Click to expand...

I should have finished reading your post before watching the video with no audio.
 
Ruggedsportsman said:
Thought it would be interesting to let AI analyze the video frame by frame to get a better idea of the impact location.
Click to expand...
That is very fascinating. I don't know anything about AI, but hypothetically if AI is dead on about this, I have seen hogs disappear from shots in that area, usually with FMJ 223. It is not fun to see big bubbly pools of blood slowly get smaller and smaller and then disappear. Probably a combination of a hard bullet (or bullet failure) and less-than-ideal shot placement. Good bullets put into that area will put them down pretty quick, smashing up both lungs and the liver. I know you're in California so you have to use monos. I've only ever used the 138 and the 154 30 caliber hammers, they worked fine for me on the ~20 hogs I shot with them, but that was before the whole tip change fiasco. I'm not trying to shill you on another bullet, but have you tried or heard of Apex? I have not used their stage 3 yet, but their old stage one afterburners have produced good results on hogs and deer for me.
 
Im not going to comment on the shot but i have shot quite a few animals with hammer bullets. in my experience the wounds are typically pretty small
 
No hog in the fight for me. I woulda swore it was hit high at 0.25x playback speed until the zoomed in vid at the same where you can see bullet/trace and it looks like it hit mid body. Good example of how easy it is for spotters to call it wrong.
 
Bummed I had to spend so long making this video to prove the impact location. Here is frame by frame bullet flight including screenshots. The shot was actually significantly better than I thought. The AI analysis was almost spot on. Right between the two front legs.
 
Ruggedsportsman said:
Bummed I had to spend so long making this video to prove the impact location. Here is frame by frame bullet flight including screenshots. The shot was actually significantly better than I thought. The AI analysis was almost spot on. Right between the two front legs.
Click to expand...
I'm not at all trying to be antagonizing here, serious question: how many hogs have you killed?
 
Ruggedsportsman said:
Bummed I had to spend so long making this video to prove the impact location. Here is frame by frame bullet flight including screenshots. The shot was actually significantly better than I thought. The AI analysis was almost spot on. Right between the two front legs.
Click to expand...

Look, if it was a good hit on both lungs, you wouldn’t have tracked the hog as far as you did without recovering it. From that angle, with that mid-body hit, you, at best, clipped his right lung, high. High lung shots generally don’t bleed as well and take longer to incapacitate the animal. I’ve done that on a deer, with a “good bullet” that exited. And then tracked the deer 500 yards on the ground (only 350 as the crow flies) before recovering him. One lung was wrecked, but the bleeding was mostly internal and it took a while for the tension pneumothorax (sucking chest wound) to kill him.

The ideal shot placement for your angle was slightly lower and slightly more forward.
 
Q_Sertorius said:
Look, if it was a good hit on both lungs, you wouldn’t have tracked the hog as far as you did without recovering it. From that angle, with that mid-body hit, you, at best, clipped his right lung, high. High lung shots generally don’t bleed as well and take longer to incapacitate the animal. I’ve done that on a deer, with a “good bullet” that exited. And then tracked the deer 500 yards on the ground (only 350 as the crow flies) before recovering him. One lung was wrecked, but the bleeding was mostly internal and it took a while for the tension pneumothorax (sucking chest wound) to kill him.

The ideal shot placement for your angle was slightly lower and slightly more forward.
Click to expand...
On top of this, that ai drawing of the hogs vitals isn't perfect. Their hearts are smaller, lower, and farther forward. And their lungs are also farther forward.
 
Q_Sertorius said:
Look, if it was a good hit on both lungs, you wouldn’t have tracked the hog as far as you did without recovering it. From that angle, with that mid-body hit, you, at best, clipped his right lung, high. High lung shots generally don’t bleed as well and take longer to incapacitate the animal. I’ve done that on a deer, with a “good bullet” that exited. And then tracked the deer 500 yards on the ground (only 350 as the crow flies) before recovering him. One lung was wrecked, but the bleeding was mostly internal and it took a while for the tension pneumothorax (sucking chest wound) to kill him.

The ideal shot placement for your angle was slightly lower and slightly more forward.
Click to expand...
Regardless, the 45gn Tsx from earlier this year clipped a singular lung and I found the pig less than 40 yards from where I shot it. Yet a bullet weighing more than 4x as much and traveling 1000fps faster at impact than the 45 did at the muzzle performed worse. This isn’t an argument about shot placement because I’ve proved you wrong. Go watch the video of the 110ttsx shot again. Under your logic and with that pig broadside I would have entirely missed both lungs yet that pig dropped on the spot with no spinal damage. Now full transparency that pig got back up and died 30 yards from where it “dropped”. But regardless if all 3 of the shots I am referring to are “marginal” shots, the one that should have had the absolute most margin of error failed. It shouldn’t matter whether I lost the blood trail 10 yards or 10 miles. The bullet didn’t do what it was supposed to do
 
Ruggedsportsman said:
Probably around 20. About 2-3 a year but take part in 6-7 pig hunts a year.
Click to expand...
Well it's not a dick measuring contest at all, we're all here to learn, but if I kill less than 40 hogs a year then it's a slow year for me. You don't have to believe me, I'm just a guy on the internet but I'm happy to prove to a moderator the land that I manage. I'm telling you that your bullet choice was less than ideal, as was your shot placement. You can blame bullet failure all you want, but you don't have a recovered bullet to prove that assertion one way or another. I've lost hogs with that same shot placement and great bullets, and I've lost hogs with perfect placement and great bullets. If you shoot enough hogs, these things happen. But you're not stacking the odds in your favor.
 
1000yards said:
Well it's not a dick measuring contest at all, we're all here to learn, but if I kill less than 40 hogs a year then it's a slow year for me. You don't have to believe me, I'm just a guy on the internet but I'm happy to prove to a moderator the land that I manage. I'm telling you that your bullet choice was less than ideal, as was your shot placement. You can blame bullet failure all you want, but you don't have a recovered bullet to prove that assertion one way or another. I've lost hogs with that same shot placement and great bullets, and I've lost hogs with perfect placement and great bullets. If you shoot enough hogs, these things happen. But you're not stacking the odds in your favor.
Click to expand...
Hey if you think my bullet choice was less than ideal we stand on some common ground. Things happen and flukes also happen. But I’ve had people reach out into my DMs claiming the same experience as me with the 199s and hammers alone. I built this load for elk. I just tested it on a pig and even gave it a second chance to perform. But if I was on a once in a lifetime elk hunt and had the bullet performance that I’ve seen twice in a row now that caused me to lose an elk I’d be devastated. And if I can prevent this happening to someone else then great that was the point of this whole post.
 
Ruggedsportsman said:
Regardless, the 45gn Tsx from earlier this year clipped a singular lung and I found the pig less than 40 yards from where I shot it. Yet a bullet weighing more than 4x as much and traveling 1000fps faster at impact than the 45 did at the muzzle performed worse. This isn’t an argument about shot placement because I’ve proved you wrong. Go watch the video of the 110ttsx shot again. Under your logic and with that pig broadside I would have entirely missed both lungs yet that pig dropped on the spot with no spinal damage. Now full transparency that pig got back up and died 30 yards from where it “dropped”. But regardless if all 3 of the shots I am referring to are “marginal” shots, the one that should have had the absolute most margin of error failed. It shouldn’t matter whether I lost the blood trail 10 yards or 10 miles. The bullet didn’t do what it was supposed to do
Click to expand...
I honestly don't know what point you are trying to make.

I am not casting aspersions on you as a hunter, shooter, tracker, whatever.

I am not defending the Hammer bullet. I don't care what bullet you use.

Some animals will die more easily and quickly than others. Anyone with a large sample size of killing will see some anomalies. "Good bullets" are those that perform more consistently in producing massive damage to the vitals. But even "good bullets" in the right spot don't guarantee a DRT hit. A 10-second death sprint is pretty usual for a good hit on a deer. And some percentage of animals are tougher, have more will to live, get a bigger adrenaline spike, whatever, and go further.

I am just calling it like I see it. That wasn't a traditional broadside angle like we would all love to get every time. Assuming that your hit is exactly where it appears to be on slow motion (and where AI thinks it hit), it wasn't where I would have tried to put the bullet on a hog. I would like to put my shot lower and more forward on a hog. Particularly at that angle. At best, the shot clipped that hog's right lung, high. I've seen animals hit through only one lung run a long way. I've seen animals hit high through both lungs run a surprising way (not 1.3 miles though). Worst case scenario, the shot narrowly missed the lung. I cannot say that for certain, one way or the other, without looking at the wound.

What I can say, however, based on all the indications - from the video, to the description of the reported blood trail, to the 1.3 mile track without recovering him - is that you definitely didn't get both lungs. Even a 62-grain .224 FMJ through both lungs will kill something like a hog in less than the time it takes a lung-shot animal to run 1.3 miles (unless he had a Corpsman get to work on him within a couple of minutes). I rate the possibility of a Corpsman patching him up as highly unlikely. So, he must not have been hit through both lungs.
 
Ruggedsportsman said:
Hey if you think my bullet choice was less than ideal we stand on some common ground. Things happen and flukes also happen. But I’ve had people reach out into my DMs claiming the same experience as me with the 199s and hammers alone. I built this load for elk. I just tested it on a pig and even gave it a second chance to perform. But if I was on a once in a lifetime elk hunt and had the bullet performance that I’ve seen twice in a row now that caused me to lose an elk I’d be devastated. And if I can prevent this happening to someone else then great that was the point of this whole post.
Click to expand...
I posted my last response while you were posting this one. I just want to say that I think this was a great post.
 
Ruggedsportsman said:
Hey if you think my bullet choice was less than ideal we stand on some common ground. Things happen and flukes also happen. But I’ve had people reach out into my DMs claiming the same experience as me with the 199s and hammers alone. I built this load for elk. I just tested it on a pig and even gave it a second chance to perform. But if I was on a once in a lifetime elk hunt and had the bullet performance that I’ve seen twice in a row now that caused me to lose an elk I’d be devastated. And if I can prevent this happening to someone else then great that was the point of this whole post.
Click to expand...
But if you shoot enough hogs with the barnes you're going to start having the same issues (although less issues with the lighter bullets at closer range). I'll try to post a video later of a 200 lb boar my brother-in-law shot through the heart and lungs with a 130 grain barnes, 3,000 ft per second impact velocity. The hog fell over, and 18 seconds later stood up and required a follow-up shot.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

coast range
May have just witnessed my first copper bullet failure…
2 3 4
Replies
72
Views
4K
TimberRunner
T
PLhunter
Wind, caliber, bullet weight, and ballistic coefficient
2
Replies
28
Views
1K
Dave Thomas
D
huntsd
Argument against small caliber? Blood trail/exit wounds?
5 6 7
Replies
124
Views
8K
K9kodi
K
B
.264 123 grain ELDM terminal performance pictures
2
Replies
21
Views
2K
Stinky Coyote
S
B
6mm ARC 108 ELDM review.
2
Replies
20
Views
2K
Brandon_SPC
B

Latest posts

Featured Video

Latest Articles

Back
Top