Tell me what animals are “easy to kill” and just fall over dead fast. Focus on the hypothesis and the points below. It doesn’t need to be a big/small caliber debate. Pick your caliber/bullet and tell me about easy/hard to kill.
Focus on the animals much as possible, just choose your preferred variables to make your point.
Of course, there are many variables, so when you make a claim, state the variables you think are important.
It’s common to say, X animal is “tough”. I have heard it said about everything from coyote, javelina, deer, elk, moose and bison.
Hypothesis: I don’t believe that there are tough/wimpy animals in North America that can’t be explained by blood volume.
Regardless of bullet size and velocity, say between 77-220 grains, tough animals soak them up equally.
The saying exists and is commonly used to justify the need for bigger bullets, but having listened to many “traditional hunting podcasts” I can’t discern any real difference between them. It’s only the conclusion about what bullet changes.
1) Seems to me that all animals have a will to live, some individual animal more than others.
2) Toughness by species depends on blood volume.
3) The skin, muscle, ribs and shoulder blades aren’t “five times” as hard to penetrate even if the animal is five times as big. A coyote skin/shoulder blades vs an elk aren’t materially harder to penetrate when it comes to a hunting bullet at high velocity. Meat isn’t “more” dense by animal.
4) My anecdotal evidence is that time to death relates directly to tissue damage (bullet size, type, velocity and shot placement) and blood volume.
5) A CNS shot has the same effect on all animals, so there is no tough animal to survive CNS destruction. Obviously hitting a small brain or penetrating the skull can vary with difficulty, that is outside the scope, because once hit, the brain/spine/nerves obviously kills immediately.
Focus on the animals much as possible, just choose your preferred variables to make your point.
Of course, there are many variables, so when you make a claim, state the variables you think are important.
It’s common to say, X animal is “tough”. I have heard it said about everything from coyote, javelina, deer, elk, moose and bison.
Hypothesis: I don’t believe that there are tough/wimpy animals in North America that can’t be explained by blood volume.
Regardless of bullet size and velocity, say between 77-220 grains, tough animals soak them up equally.
The saying exists and is commonly used to justify the need for bigger bullets, but having listened to many “traditional hunting podcasts” I can’t discern any real difference between them. It’s only the conclusion about what bullet changes.
1) Seems to me that all animals have a will to live, some individual animal more than others.
2) Toughness by species depends on blood volume.
3) The skin, muscle, ribs and shoulder blades aren’t “five times” as hard to penetrate even if the animal is five times as big. A coyote skin/shoulder blades vs an elk aren’t materially harder to penetrate when it comes to a hunting bullet at high velocity. Meat isn’t “more” dense by animal.
4) My anecdotal evidence is that time to death relates directly to tissue damage (bullet size, type, velocity and shot placement) and blood volume.
5) A CNS shot has the same effect on all animals, so there is no tough animal to survive CNS destruction. Obviously hitting a small brain or penetrating the skull can vary with difficulty, that is outside the scope, because once hit, the brain/spine/nerves obviously kills immediately.
