I think "Wallop" is a thing

Are we using "Whollup" in place of mechanical kinetic energy transfer? If so ya its real and exists AKA physics... But it still does not tell you how a bullet will perform or correlate to wound channel. I cant remember off the top of my head but I believe it was Dr. Fackler that did research on this using metal or lead disks.. Also there is a paper in the link provided. The fact that "whollup" is "knockin em off their feet" just isn't true...
I don't consider whollup to be compared to knocking an animal down necessarily. Adequate whollup means a wide wound channel, easily breaking all bones it it's way and leaving a 1 1/2" to 3" exit hole that sucks innards and blood out the other side.
 
I don't consider whollup to be compared to knocking an animal down necessarily. Adequate whollup means a wide wound channel, easily breaking all bones it it's way and leaving a 1 1/2" to 3" exit hole that sucks innards and blood out the other side.
Again this is bullet dependant. For EXTREME example only lets say we have a .224 and .50 cal BMG both constructed like a heavy for caliber thin jacketed cup and core bullet IE TMK. both impacting at the same velocity in identical tissue/matter/animal. Yes by nature the 50 cal has more jacket to fragment and more lead core do drive the projectile deeper. But why? The .224 will most likely be caught and fully fragmented or "done" by the time it hits the off side of say a mule deer.. The 50 will still be going for say 10 mule deer deep. (I really don't know how many deer a 50 will penetrate) But what is the advantage? So you put a football size permanent wound channel in 1 deer vs a buick sized wound channel in 1 deer plus how ever many more. Furthermore the .224 will have realized its full potential inside 1 deer but the .50 will have never realized its full potential and at said hypothetical velocity may not have even began to fragment in the first 3/4 of the deers body. So I agree the heavy for caliber fragmenting bullets are way way more destructive than their lighter counterparts. But it begs the questions how much is too much? What am I gaining? Do I want the permanent wound channel to be fully inside the animal or just blow the back half out? So we find the happy medium. I want the Nalgene sized wound channel fully contained inside the animal, delivered from the lightest recoiling rifle it can, and effective out to what I deem MY range is.. I also have seen a photo from a big 30 that was using a heavy for caliber fragmenting match bullet on a deer. It was almost literally blown in half. A little hide below the spine and some belly is all that was left. Thoughts?

EDIT. Now if we are comparing a solid copper mono to a solid copper mono that is just a matter of do you want a knitting needle sized hole or #2 pencil sized hole...
 
Yes, this is what was lost in the "kill everything with a .223" (i got one by the way) convo. I like my bullets to exit. I just do. I think it makes for better blood trails, and I think that matters. that doesn't make the .223 less deadly, it just means it will often not meet a criteria that I HAVE. Medium construction bullets that expand and still fully penetrate do a lot of both. I prefer that. I like a good .243 interlock in 100 gr.
However, man do larger calibers destroy a lot of meat on a deer. It can be gruesome. This last year I swore I was done hitting whitetails with a 3006.
I really don't see any difference at all between my 6.5 Creedmoor and the .338 Win Mag I owned for two decades in terms of exits. Both seem to exit just fine.

However, it often felt as if the butt of that .338 Win Mag often exited my shoulder after pulling the trigger.
 
Back
Top