Mono Wound Channels vs Match Bullets

[zdc1775]

I cant compare to a TMK but here is the meat loss I had on the front shoulder of a deer with a .223 55gn TTSX. The bullet was a pass thru with a tiny .223 hole on the entry side and a perfect near .5" hole on the exit side indicating full mushroom as designed.
View attachment 749518

I have shot the 62 grain ttsx with a mv of 2950 quite a bit over the past 4 or 5 years, and have seen similar damage on shots at less than about 50 yards if it hits any bones, beyond that I don't notice much meat damage unless it actually hits the shoulder and even then it is much less. But based on what I have seen I wouldn't want to use it at more than 250-275 yards on deer because I don't know if it would have any expansion beyond that. I do know that it has no detectable expansion at 400 on coyotes, the entry and exit wound on that one were both roughly caliber sized and I didn't notice any real internal damage when I skinned it, though I didn't actually open up the chest cavity.

In my experience any of the Barnes bullets I have used cannot compare to match bullets when it comes to wound channels unless the match bullets don't expand or fragment at all, which I have only seen happen once with a 142 SMK out of a 6.5x55 at 350ish yards.

 

[Koda_]

But based on what I have seen I wouldn't want to use it at more than 250-275 yards on deer because I don't know if it would have any expansion beyond that.

Agree with that. I played around in a ballistic calculator to estimate my velocity at range and to stay above 2000fps, 275 maybe 300 seems about max if i recall....
The 223 is effective, but I dont think of it as a long range hunting rifle.

 

[hibernation]

I've been very happy with our results shooting TTSX and LRX's in 10 different cartridges.
I prefer not to ruin a bunch of meat and have had no problem killing with the Barnes......no masses of bloodshot meat and no drama..I will say I don't shoot beyond 500 yards.

What cartridges and distances? I've used the TTSX out of a 30-06 a decent amount, looking to downsize and wondering how well they work out of smaller cartridges.

 

[KHntr]

I would be curious for one of the folks on here that have a hot rod rifle hurling monos at 3400 fps and what wound channels they get. I still doubt they make channels like a fragmenting bullet.

I used to shoot moly’d 168 TTSX out of a 300 RUM at 3450fps as my moose and elk rifle. I killed a lot of bulls in the rut at around 100 yards or less, and could typically count on losing less than 5lbs of meat even on square broadside shots through shoulders.
Shooting elk that close though, they typically got shot more than once because they would still be kicking and flopping when I walked up to them.

Now I use a 223AI with 88gr ELD m’s.
85% less recoil, 75% less powder, 48% less bullet, to get 200% of the wound channel for 85% of the penetration length. And I shoot them half as many times because they are dead faster.

 

[PistolPete]

I used to shoot moly’d 168 TTSX out of a 300 RUM at 3450fps as my moose and elk rifle. I killed a lot of bulls in the rut at around 100 yards or less, and could typically count on losing less than 5lbs of meat even on square broadside shots through shoulders.
Shooting elk that close though, they typically got shot more than once because they would still be kicking and flopping when I walked up to them.

Now I use a 223AI with 88gr ELD m’s.
85% less recoil, 75% less powder, 48% less bullet, to get 200% of the wound channel for 85% of the penetration length. And I shoot them half as many times because they are dead faster.

Now there's a testimonial!

I'm going to add this info to my presentation to my state agency's committees in attempting to legalize 223s for deer and bear...

 

[KHntr]

Now there's a testimonial!

I'm going to add this info to my presentation to my state agency's committees in attempting to legalize 223s for deer and bear...

Back when the kids were still home, my gf at the time and her daughter plus my 2 all shot deer at the same feeder from the same blind. They all had the exact same shot presentation, at the exact same distance (91 yards).
All 4 of them were coached to the same shot placement. 3 kids broke onside shoulders and had the little 50gr GMX break the last rib on the offside. Two exits, one caught in the hide.

GF used a 139 SST from her 7/08 (about as middle ground of a whitetail cartridge and bullet combo as it gets) in the same presentation and bullet placement and that buck wobbled to the middle of where the other 3 tipped over, and died. That bullet didn’t break the last rib, but it was superficially stuck to it on the inside.

Bullets and twist rates and construction matter. Headstamps do not.

 

[Sundodger]

Wow, some people sure are taking a very reasonable question by the OP (that’s phrased quite elegantly) to some very strange places.



Bullets apply kinetic energy (if looking at the whole event) or force (if looking instantaneously via position) or power (if looking respect to time) to tissue. How much and how they apply that results in the wound cavity.



Maybe phrased this way will help some people:

If you take a projectile X that is very good at converting KE into maximum tissue damage and replace it will projectile Y that converts a lower percentage of it’s KE into tissue damage, how much more KE will it need to have similar total tissue damage as projectile X.

 

[wind gypsy]

Wow, some people sure are taking a very reasonable question by the OP (that’s phrased quite elegantly) to some very strange places.



Bullets apply kinetic energy (if looking at the whole event) or force (if looking instantaneously via position) or power (if looking respect to time) to tissue. How much and how they apply that results in the wound cavity.



Maybe phrased this way will help some people:

If you take a projectile X that is very good at converting KE into maximum tissue damage and replace it will projectile Y that converts a lower percentage of it’s KE into tissue damage, how much more KE will it need to have similar total tissue damage as projectile X.

 

[mtnbound]

Wow, some people sure are taking a very reasonable question by the OP (that’s phrased quite elegantly) to some very strange places.



Bullets apply kinetic energy (if looking at the whole event) or force (if looking instantaneously via position) or power (if looking respect to time) to tissue. How much and how they apply that results in the wound cavity.



Maybe phrased this way will help some people:

If you take a projectile X that is very good at converting KE into maximum tissue damage and replace it will projectile Y that converts a lower percentage of it’s KE into tissue damage, how much more KE will it need to have similar total tissue damage as projectile

OK, yall got me on board with the smaller match bullets; gonna shoot them this fall. The evidence is just too overwhelming, and I'm confident they'll work for me just like they have for all of you. I'm even working on a 223/77 2200 fps load for my younger kids to hunt with - should be the lightest recoiling 200 yd deer gun around.

So, out of curiosity, I've heard that copper bullets produce less tissue damage than match bullets (and I believe it). But how much less? To eliminate variables, let's compare a TTSX to an TMK. What caliber and weight TTSX would it take to produce the wounding of a 77 TMK, impact velocities equal (say 2200 fps)?

I'm working on getting 223s legalized for deer in a certain eastern state where I'm a biologist for the state agency, and this forum has given me TONS of valuable information to that end. I have a large and growing presentation based on the 223 thread.

Thanks,

Pete

I do not think any caliber TTSX running at 2200fps will match the tissue damage of the TMK at the same velocity. The bullet construction and designed function are not comparable between the two. I hope your efforts to get the 223 legalized will be successful.

 

[Sundodger]

View attachment 780106

Haha, it's not my fault. I am an engineer, so all my brain wants to do is model the world with math.

I do not think any caliber TTSX running at 2200fps will match the tissue damage of the TMK at the same velocity. The bullet construction and designed function are not comparable between the two. I hope your efforts to get the 223 legalized will be successful.

I don't know if you are right, but that's a fair answer. But you bring up a good point, and it's something I sort of snuck in there by not mentioning cal and just going with KE in my last post, but we just might as well turn this into a multivariate problem.

So what impact velocity would you need projectile Y to have to match the cumulative tissue damage of projectile X (with a fixed low velocity like 2200 FPS). Huge numbers of potential answers here, but I bet they could be put into a reasonable number of buckets.

 

[Marshfly]

Haha, it's not my fault. I am an engineer, so all my brain wants to do is model the world with math.


I don't know if you are right, but that's a fair answer. But you bring up a good point, and it's something I sort of snuck in there by not mentioning cal and just going with KE in my last post, but we just might as well turn this into a multivariate problem.

So what impact velocity would you need projectile Y to have to match the cumulative tissue damage of projectile X (with a fixed low velocity like 2200 FPS). Huge numbers of potential answers here, but I bet they could be put into a reasonable number of buckets.

You have to remember that animals are only so wide/thick. There is a limit to how much tissue damage a 1-1.5" wound channel from a TTSX will generate. Most of the "energy" goes out the back of the animal and is useless in that scenario. (I personal don't give a crap about energy. Velocity only for me. Just like the bullet manufacturers, ironically.)

 

[KHntr]

So what impact velocity would you need projectile Y to have to match the cumulative tissue damage of projectile X (with a fixed low velocity like 2200 FPS). Huge numbers of potential answers here, but I bet they could be put into a reasonable number of buckets.

That cartridge hasn’t been invented yet.
The fastest I pushed mono’s was 3450 mv, 3400 impact velocity, and it was nowhere even close to the tissue damage that I get from an ELD m at 2200 impact velocity.

 

[pods8 (Rugged Stitching)]

I don't know if you are right, but that's a fair answer. But you bring up a good point, and it's something I sort of snuck in there by not mentioning cal and just going with KE in my last post, but we just might as well turn this into a multivariate problem.

So what impact velocity would you need projectile Y to have to match the cumulative tissue damage of projectile X (with a fixed low velocity like 2200 FPS). Huge numbers of potential answers here, but I bet they could be put into a reasonable number of buckets.

The bullets don't behave the same way and I already addressed that in the very first reply. No TTSX regardless of caliber and velocity will act like a 77gr tmk at 2200fps which is what the OP asked as a hypothetical.

That doesn't mean ttsx can't kill or anything but they will not act the same since one peels petals and is like a broadhead with some hydrostatic shock involved and the other fragments. so the premise is flawed off the get go.

 

[SDHNTR]

I do not think any caliber TTSX running at 2200fps will match the tissue damage of the TMK at the same velocity. The bullet construction and designed function are not comparable between the two. I hope your efforts to get the 223 legalized will be successful.

True, yet both animals will die quickly and easily. Just one without excessive meat loss and lead spray. Why do we want to destroy our food?

 

[Sundodger]

You have to remember that animals are only so wide/thick. There is a limit to how much tissue damage a 1-1.5" wound channel from a TTSX will generate. Most of the "energy" goes out the back of the animal and is useless in that scenario. (I personal don't give a crap about energy. Velocity only for me. Just like the bullet manufacturers, ironically.)

This is a lot more fun if you think of it as an interesting thought experiment and adjust the variables to see where the plotted lines cross.

 

[Marshfly]

This is a lot more fun if you think of it as an interesting thought experiment and adjust the variables to see where the plotted lines cross.

Fun? Who cares? Monos suck. Some just suck less. Theoretical impossibilities aren't fun. They are a waste of time and energy IMHO.

True, yet both animals will die quickly and easily. Just one without excessive meat loss and lead spray. Why do we want to destroy our food?

Why are you shooting animals in the food parts intentionally?

 

[Formidilosus]

This is a lot more fun if you think of it as an interesting thought experiment and adjust the variables to see where the plotted lines cross.

“Fun” for an engineer maybe. Mental ballistic masturbation for functional use.

 

[WeiserBucks]

1st time using a mono on game in about 15+ years. 7mm 160 Cutting Edge Lazer impact velocity about 2000 fps. Directly through both shoulders and lungs were destroyed. I'm not saying they're better than anything else but from a sample size of 1 I can't complain.

Side note, I've been shooting Bergers forever and I'm not switching, this particular barrel is significantly more accurate with the CE vs Bergers for whatever reason.

 

[Sundodger]

Seems like a real lack of appreciation for my people up in this thread.

We might be a bit quirky, but don’t forget, everything good in your life comes from us; your phone, car, the computer you are currently viewing this on, hell even the alpha glass we all cherish.

You don’t get all these neat things without autistic STEM people questioning everything and running all possible scenarios to ground. Have to take the good with the annoying.

 

[pods8 (Rugged Stitching)]

Seems like a real lack of appreciation for my people up in this thread.

We might be a bit quirky, but don’t forget, everything good in your life comes from us; your phone, car, the computer you are currently viewing this on, hell even the alpha glass we all cherish.

You don’t get all these neat things without autistic STEM people questioning everything and running all possible scenarios to ground. Have to take the good with the annoying.

I am your people. I just realize your listing criteria out that won't result in "plotted lines crossing". I'm not really sure how it isn't clear that a bullet with bent petals and frontal area pushing through an animal will NEVER have the same effect on tissue as one that has fragmented and is cutting through tissue in tension due to the hydrostatic shock thus damaging more tissue in a pattern a petal peeling mono will never replicate.

This isn't bagging on monos, I hunt monos, I just accept what they are and how they perform and deploy them accordingly.