Thread: Bullet shockwaves

Here on the forum there has been quite a bit of discussion lately regarding different projectiles, soft frangible vs harder bonded or locked types. I am in the bonded camp and bullet pass through. The following short vid has photography of high velocity and subsonic projectiles in flight and the shockwave they create. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BPwdlEgLn5Q
Provided the animal is close enough to strike with good velocity, the pass - through actually does more damage than the blow to pieces type projectile where the shockwave dissipates. So in normal ranges it is the shockwave doing the damage (think 22-250 on rabbit) not the actual projectile. Subs are a different matter with very limited shockwave

Very interesting.

To add to the questioning mind, if you look at the US military's testing on steel plates for gongs, velocity is the killer of steel gongs, not projectile design or weight. Their conclusion was that if you want to stop cratering for reasons of safety on Bis 500 plate, keep your velocity below "x" (can't recall what x is off the top of my head).

The other factor that comes into play is the Dwell time; the time the projectile is in the body a longer time span delivers more energy
along the wound channel, High velocity and fragile bullets only delivers energy close to the surface and throws shrapnel all though the body
destroying perfectly good meat,
A controlled expansion bullet that expands in the classic mushroom and sheds little of it's weight and exits the body aids in the animal bleeding out
faster and damages less meat,
Depends on wether you want hamburger Patties or Steaks.

Originally Posted by hotbarrels

Very interesting.

To add to the questioning mind, if you look at the US military's testing on steel plates for gongs, velocity is the killer of steel gongs, not projectile design or weight. Their conclusion was that if you want to stop cratering for reasons of safety on Bis 500 plate, keep your velocity below "x" (can't recall what x is off the top of my head).

My mates 22 250 carved the hell out of my plate where the rem mag didn't make an impression, was surprised and gutted.

Originally Posted by Fisherman

My mates 22 250 carved the hell out of my plate where the rem mag didn't make an impression, was surprised and gutted.

Plasma Rifle !

Originally Posted by Moa Hunter

Plasma Rifle !

In the 40watt range

Originally Posted by Moa Hunter

Plasma Rifle !

Velocity is everything in this regard weight hardly has any bearing. The kinetic energy of the projectile turns to heat which melts the steel in a localised area and its splashed out so it looks like one of the craters on the moon

Originally Posted by Marty Henry

Velocity is everything in this regard weight hardly has any bearing. The kinetic energy of the projectile turns to heat which melts the steel in a localised area and its splashed out so it looks like one of the craters on the moon

Until the Mimetic Polyalloy reforms the T1000

Originally Posted by Marty Henry

Velocity is everything in this regard weight hardly has any bearing. The kinetic energy of the projectile turns to heat which melts the steel in a localised area and its splashed out so it looks like one of the craters on the moon

The mechanism is plastic deformation of metals, it's a similar (in effect) process to cold drawing alloy cylinders with a massive press pushing onto a disc of ali alloy. The pressure gets to a point where the alloy turns plastic and just flows back up the punch - very weird to watch in operation.

If you get up over a certain velocity and energy level, the metal just deforms and flows around the thing hitting it. It's the effect for which the sabotted tungsten anti-armour penetrators are designed to achieve 'kills' on armoured vehicles.

the theory of a big flat metplate vs a pointy projectile holds merit too..... it sure isnt origonal thinking,Elmer Kieth worked on it years ago for the 44 magnum etc think it was highland branded factory stuff had really weird projectile design with pointy front then a fatter section part way back,allmost like...and NO I cannot think of less rude way to describe it...a semi pulled back foreskin.....