Hammer bullet failure

[Ruggedsportsman]

You had better luck with the 110’s & 45’s not because of the bullets, but because you put them where they needed to go.

Personally, I’d ditch the .300PRC and stick to a .223-6mm based off of what I’ve seen and you’ve said.

Nah the 110 didnt even hit lungs it was so far back, the 45 clipped the rear left lobe. But I would agree a 223-6 with a different bullet would certainly outperform this 300prc load.

 

[Steve300xcw]

. If it was a miss I wouldnt have been able to follow a blood trail for so long.

if it had hit anything important, you wouldnt have had to follow a blood trail for so long

 

[Ruggedsportsman]

Thought it would be interesting to let AI analyze the video frame by frame to get a better idea of the impact location.

 

[Montana Slim]

Thought it would be interesting to let AI analyze the video frame by frame to get a better idea of the impact location.
View attachment 1014930View attachment 1014931View attachment 1014932

Oh boy

 

[RancherJohn]

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.

I should have finished reading your post before watching the video with no audio.

 

[1000yards]

Thought it would be interesting to let AI analyze the video frame by frame to get a better idea of the impact location.

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.

 

[Steve300xcw]

" hey guys so this happened today"

Entire forum..."actually.."

"Well AI says yall are wrong"

 

[Gstew1930]

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

 

[Long Cut]

Nah the 110 didnt even hit lungs it was so far back, the 45 clipped the rear left lobe. But I would agree a 223-6 with a different bullet would certainly outperform this 300prc load.

Read the bold words again.

 

[Jason Snyder]

Read the bold words again.

There’s a trend.

 

[wind gypsy]

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.

 

[Ruggedsportsman]

Read the bold words again.

Whether you want to admit it or not all you’re proving is the Barnes bullets at almost 1/2 and 1/4 the size performed with a less than optimal shot placement, moving slower, and the hammer did not.

 

[Ruggedsportsman]

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.

 

[1000yards]

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.

I'm not at all trying to be antagonizing here, serious question: how many hogs have you killed?

 

[Q_Sertorius]

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.

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.

 

[1000yards]

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.

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.

 

[Ruggedsportsman]

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.

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]

I'm not at all trying to be antagonizing here, serious question: how many hogs have you killed?

Probably around 20. About 2-3 a year but take part in 6-7 pig hunts a year.

 

[1000yards]

Probably around 20. About 2-3 a year but take part in 6-7 pig hunts a year.

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.

 

[Ruggedsportsman]

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.

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.