1. Animals fall down reliably if a vital organ is destroyed, regardless of sectional density of the bullet.
But I prefer using something like lead copper or even depleted uranium to plastic or wood... Why? Because it's more likely to achieve the desired vital organ destruction..
2. Animals fall down reliably if the bullet retains enough weight and has enough speed to penetrate to a vital organ
regardless of sectional density. This is interesting, weight and speed are the factors that determine momentum and energy values.
So my favorite 150 grain .308 projectiles will work just as well if they were the size of a football (and weighed the same 150 grains)? Retaining enough weight and has enough speed to penetrate to a vital organ is only possible if the projectile has sufficient SD.
3. The sectional density value seems to be of no importance at all, providing it did not disappear completely.
OK so anything heavier than air will do?
4. The post impact sectional density of a bullet is almost always less than the starting sectional density.
?
This leaves only one question unanswered. Who first came up with the theory of sectional density?
Some idiot that decided it was better to use lead instead of stones for musket balls Was it some ballistician with a macabre sense of humour?
No but the Military seem to like it https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GBU-28 Did he put forward this theory as a joke and it got out of control?
No it's physics. Sectional density seems to be the ballistic equivalent of an internet chain letter.
No it's physics. No matter how illogical or outdated or disproved it is, it keeps on popping up.
Maybe for a reason?Almost like the concept of hydrostatic shock, but that is another story.
To your success,
With VERY LOW SD bullets... Yeah right.
Gerard Schultz
Bookmarks