Thanks for the carnage

[ElPollo]

@Ryan Avery
@Formidilosus

I wanted to thank you guys and all the people who are posting post-mortem wound channel pictures on this site. It seems to have started with the 223 thread and match bullet threads and extended into the 243-6 mm, 6.5/260, and 22 CM threads. The result, if you take the time to dig through it, is a heck of a good resource for determining what a given bullet is likely to do to game at a given speed. The result helps people make informed decisions about what bullets and calibers they want to use and understand their limitations for use in the field such as minimum impact velocity. Bullet manufacturers tend to either avoid discussing things like that or, in the case of monos, tend to be a bit overly optimistic.

I don’t want to steal from the thunder from those successful threads. But I think we could expand and improve on this crowd-sourcing effort for ballistics data. by creating a bullet performance sub-forum with guidelines for posting to promote consistent information (the bullet type, weight, estimated impact speed, and suggestions for photos). Then break it up into categories by caliber range (.22-24, .25-.27, .28-30, and 32+). Threads within those forums could be information for specific bullet types.

I’d appreciate thoughts on this from you and others. From a data dredging perspective, it makes sense to be. Do you think enough people would weigh in to make it viable?

 

[sierracharlie338]

I love this idea with the exception of grouping multiple calibers together. Give each caliber (not cartridge) its own thread. There are way too many variables in cartridges in each caliber that throwing multiple calibers together could make it harder to source info the person is looking for.

There is a thread on SH for Ackley Imp cartridges and it’s a pain to sort through as an example.

 

[SloppyJ]

I have an entry for a .308 ready to post. Let me know where and when!

 

[ElPollo]

I have an entry for a .308 ready to post. Let me know where and when!

Based on the response here, I’d say you should start a “308 for killing” thread like the 223, 6 mm, and 6.5 threads and post your results. I’d love to see more info posted on the 30s here.

 

[wind gypsy]

To me the .223 and 6mm threads are most interesting because they are bore sizes that were often discounted as being undersized for big game. Once you get to .264+ it's like "yeah, no kidding, they work". But I do like the idea of having a resource to characterize performance of bullets of all shapes and sizes.

 

[Wapiti1]

To me the .223 and 6mm threads are most interesting because they are bore sizes that were often discounted as being undersized for big game. Once you get to .264+ it's like "yeah, no kidding, they work". But I do like the idea of having a resource to characterize performance of bullets of all shapes and sizes.

This is what I would prefer. More of an encyclopedia of what to expect with different bullet designs coupled to caliber and velocity. I can figure out if a particular combination fits my needs or not.

Actually, I would want calibrated gel tests of each design at two velocities. Wound channels are nice, but require a lot of interpretation and you up the amount of noise. I like controlled testing.

Jeremy

 

[DangerRanger]

I like it

Maybe separate by caliber and then by impact velocity window

 

[hereinaz]

If you want to start it for a couple of popular ones, give it a try and prove the concept.

PNWGATOR started the .223 thread. He maintained it and then people contributed. It started a powerful trend. That attracts attention. And, it is novel so there is that too.

Cost/benefit wise, I don’t think there is enough interest to get submissions at the granular level of caliber and bullet for a sub forum and maintain it, but I could be wrong. It is s lot to maintain it as a series of threads, and the effort for individuals to contribute is too great for most. Most posts and comments come from a small group of individuals. A sub forum isn’t needed.

Sierra makes a good point about organizing it. It can be a pain to look for information unless it is organized into a nice database. This just makes the sub forum a ton of work.

WG is on to something. If the match bullet, .223, and 6mm thread mentioned above aren’t enough to satisfy with evidence then they won’t be satisfied with more of the same like a 6.5, 270, etc.

I can’t see how there would be enough interest for the specific bullet by caliber when we know how bullets perform.

The reality in the end is that it would be boring, because match bullets produce X carnage, bonded X carnage, etc. it doesn’t really change much except by degree.

The real answer to bullet carnage performance is to educate how animals die.

Show animal behavior when hit double lung with a match vs. mono vs. bonded vs. interlock.

Show behavior when hit in the shoulder
Show behavior when hit in the heart

Provide additional evidence that choosing a bullet for exits, blood trail, punch through bone, etc. are correlated to bad shots, less destructive bullets and point of aim (shot choice).

The carnage is indisputable. Adding a thread with video to show how fast the animal drops with would convince many more who are still stuck in the old paradigm.

Having had the conversation dozens of times in person, it’s feelings vs. evidence. Feelings will always win until they can feel the new evidence after it becomes overwhelming.

 

[woods89]

To me the .223 and 6mm threads are most interesting because they are bore sizes that were often discounted as being undersized for big game. Once you get to .264+ it's like "yeah, no kidding, they work". But I do like the idea of having a resource to characterize performance of bullets of all shapes and sizes.

This is a valid point, but one of the big questions that was circulating a couple years ago when I started the 6.5 thread was related to their use specifically on elk. That question is still certainly debated, but there's quite a few elk in that thread now, to the point that we can draw the conclusion that they work. I also like it from just a general bullet performance across bullet types perspective, as you mentioned.

I also spend a lot of time in the 6mm and 223 threads, though, and if I were building today it just might be a 6mm of some flavor.

 

[SloppyJ]

I think I will start the .308 thread because it's more than just about quantifying if they work, it's about how they work and the specific results. My goal this year was to test a handful of different bullets because I like to see the results myself. I know 30cals work, but I wanted to see how. Now if I can find some time to start that dude within the next day or two.

 

[ElPollo]

If you want to start it for a couple of popular ones, give it a try and prove the concept.

PNWGATOR started the .223 thread. He maintained it and then people contributed. It started a powerful trend. That attracts attention. And, it is novel so there is that too.

Cost/benefit wise, I don’t think there is enough interest to get submissions at the granular level of caliber and bullet for a sub forum and maintain it, but I could be wrong. It is s lot to maintain it as a series of threads, and the effort for individuals to contribute is too great for most. Most posts and comments come from a small group of individuals. A sub forum isn’t needed.

Sierra makes a good point about organizing it. It can be a pain to look for information unless it is organized into a nice database. This just makes the sub forum a ton of work.

WG is on to something. If the match bullet, .223, and 6mm thread mentioned above aren’t enough to satisfy with evidence then they won’t be satisfied with more of the same like a 6.5, 270, etc.

I can’t see how there would be enough interest for the specific bullet by caliber when we know how bullets perform.

The reality in the end is that it would be boring, because match bullets produce X carnage, bonded X carnage, etc. it doesn’t really change much except by degree.

The real answer to bullet carnage performance is to educate how animals die.

Show animal behavior when hit double lung with a match vs. mono vs. bonded vs. interlock.

Show behavior when hit in the shoulder
Show behavior when hit in the heart

Provide additional evidence that choosing a bullet for exits, blood trail, punch through bone, etc. are correlated to bad shots, less destructive bullets and point of aim (shot choice).

The carnage is indisputable. Adding a thread with video to show how fast the animal drops with would convince many more who are still stuck in the old paradigm.

Having had the conversation dozens of times in person, it’s feelings vs. evidence. Feelings will always win until they can feel the new evidence after it becomes overwhelming.

I get what you are saying about work related to a sub-forum and my intention was to keep this simple and searchable. The animal behavior part would be super helpful, but is harder to document visually unless people have a spotter. I also agree with Wapiti that gel tests are more repeatable, but most people aren’t going to mess around with doing that. Also, a thorough layer by layer necropsy like Form does is beyond most people. The photo evidence in the threads we have is definitely subjective, but I think we all find it interesting and informative. The key thing your getting out of it is really the probability of upset at a given speed and the general size of the wound channel.

The important things that I think have come out of the existing threads are:
1) the importance of fragmenting bullets,
2) the fact that wound channel size and shape is more related to bullet construction than diameter,
3) real world information about minimum upset velocities for given bullets,
4) the fact that high levels of penetration are not always beneficial and can result in rodeo tracking extravaganzas, and
5) exits are not as important as most people think.

My initial thought was that it would be beneficial to expand what Rokslide was doing with these threads into the larger calibers. Form’s comment on the bullet ballistics podcast about having to throttle back bullet performance in the larger calibers at the cost of recoil tells me that bullet optimization is just as important in the big boys. But the fact that you can get comparable wound channels out of both a 338 mag and a fast 6 mm while avoiding detached retinas and shooting more accurately with the latter may be information that a lot of people don’t want to hear.

It’s possible that you already have the best formula with individual threads for calibers lead by members like Pnwgator did with the 223 thread. It may not be perfect in terms of being searchable, but it also doesn’t blow the wad on time and resources for Rokslide. Interest in individual calibers will drive views and the amount of work. I definitely see space for 7 mm and 308 threads. It sounds like Sloppyj may be willing to start the latter.

 

[hereinaz]

I get what you are saying about work related to a sub-forum and my intention was to keep this simple and searchable. The animal behavior part would be super helpful, but is harder to document visually unless people have a spotter. I also agree with Wapiti that gel tests are more repeatable, but most people aren’t going to mess around with doing that. Also, a thorough layer by layer necropsy like Form does is beyond most people. The photo evidence in the threads we have is definitely subjective, but I think we all find it interesting and informative. The key thing your getting out of it is really the probability of upset at a given speed and the general size of the wound channel.

The important things that I think have come out of the existing threads are:
1) the importance of fragmenting bullets,
2) the fact that wound channel size and shape is more related to bullet construction than diameter,
3) real world information about minimum upset velocities for given bullets,
4) the fact that high levels of penetration are not always beneficial and can result in rodeo tracking extravaganzas, and
5) exits are not as important as most people think.

My initial thought was that it would be beneficial to expand what Rokslide was doing with these threads into the larger calibers. Form’s comment on the bullet ballistics podcast about having to throttle back bullet performance in the larger calibers at the cost of recoil tells me that bullet optimization is just as important in the big boys. But the fact that you can get comparable wound channels out of both a 338 mag and a fast 6 mm while avoiding detached retinas and shooting more accurately with the latter may be information that a lot of people don’t want to hear.

It’s possible that you already have the best formula with individual threads for calibers lead by members like Pnwgator did with the 223 thread. It may not be perfect in terms of being searchable, but it also doesn’t blow the wad on time and resources for Rokslide. Interest in individual calibers will drive views and the amount of work. I definitely see space for 7 mm and 308 threads. It sounds like Sloppyj may be willing to start the latter.

I think you are on track, and I don’t think it would be a waste of time to try. I would love to see it gain momentum.

I sent you a PM with an idea.

Maybe we come up with a way to name threads to invite pics and contributions, and give an example of how to list the details you want in a form to follow.

I like the idea enough to be helpful and not seem like I am crapping on the idea.

Maybe something like this to make them uniform:

Thread title:
Wound Channel: 7.62 mm and .308 caliber bullets

Please enter the information below and include a description paragraph if you want. Attach pictures below:

Technical Specifications and Information

Brand:
Bullet type:
Grains:
Terminal velocity:
Cartridge:

Other specs about your load and rifle:

Description of shot and effect on animal:

Attach pictures below:

 

[hereinaz]

I think that a few of the threads exist in some form.

Someone could start the caliber threads by linking to pages in the posts. Lots of work…

.25 Cal (Quarter Bore) / Big Game Success - 25 Creed, 25-284, 25-06, 25 PRC, 25 SAUM

Killing me smalls! I want to build a 25-284 so bad. I need to win the lottery lol I guess the 25cm that’s in the works will suffice. . . For the time being Until the reamer is stuck down the bore it can still be whatever you want. Hell, even if it's already been chambered you can still have it...

rokslide.com

 

[TaperPin]

I enjoy the pictures when they mention velocity at impact. The bullet doesn’t know what yardage or cartridge it was fired out of, only how fast it was going.

I will try to not point out that most “acceptable” cartridges are only about 300 yards away from “excessively” destructive ones. A 308 killing at 200 yards is essentially the same velocity as the 300 win mag 300 yards further out.

 

[hereinaz]

I enjoy the pictures when they mention velocity at impact. The bullet doesn’t know what yardage or cartridge it was fired out of, only how fast it was going.

I will try to not point out that most “acceptable” cartridges are only about 300 yards away from “excessively” destructive ones. A 308 killing at 200 yards is essentially the same velocity as the 300 win mag 300 yards further out.

Agreed, terminal velocity is all that matters to me. Some shooters aren’t to the point of understanding that the win mag and winny are only a few hundred yards apart based on velocity. Hope we can help them figure it out and learn.

That’s why I want terminal velocity and left off MV off my list of details.

 

[grfox92]

I was thinking about starting a thread for wound channels from everything else. I would love to see it.

Sent from my SM-G990U2 using Tapatalk

 

[ID_Matt]

I was thinking about starting a thread for wound channels from everything else. I would love to see it.

Sent from my SM-G990U2 using Tapatalk

Digging up an older thread, but came here to say the same. How about a Barnes/Nosler terminal performance thread? Then we would have something to compare to the match bullets that don't work and aren't meant for hunting