Firearm Forums - Arms Locker banner
1 - 8 of 8 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
9,117 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
ya know. :) he was NOT happy with having a mere 800-900 fps with .44 Special swc's. He wanted 1200 fps, for several good reasons.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
9,117 Posts
Discussion Starter · #2 ·
Elmer said you had to have 1000 fps to get even a DEAD SOFT lead .44 hp to expand well in flesh. SOMEHOW, tho, magical JACKETED hp, with MUCH smaller nose cavities, in 9mm and .38 special, "work fine" at 900 fps. :) Not on any animals I've shot with them, they don't. Sometimes they work OK at 1100 fps, if aluminum or nylon jacketed, but I want 1300 fps for copper jackets. In .45, 1100 fps seems to work ok with copper jackets, but 1200 fps is better. That's why, especially in the alloy compact 1911's, the 160gr bullets are the way to go. You can get them to 1100 fps in the ccw guns, and still control them at high ratesof fire.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,944 Posts
While you were on ice, a new breed of jacketed hollowpoint came into general use. They work well at most normal velocities.

Some things have changed since the days of Elmer Keith.






 

·
Registered
Joined
·
6,336 Posts
Absolutely true that more velocity is better for more expansion, but HP's, especially modern HP's will absolutely expand better in flesh than the same weight/diameter/velocity LRN or LFP, if we're talking about "expansion in flesh".

Living flesh is over 90% liquid, which is the basis for "hydrostatic shock" in wounds ("Hydro" = "water"). With a HP bullet, unless it's cavity is plugged with cloth, etc, you get violent hydraulic pressure pushing on the insides of the cavity, forcing it out and open. As it opens, it becomes more dimensionally susceptible to these pressures and the opening 'cycle' continues as long as it's moving with decent velocity. With enough velocity, the pressure on the outside of the bullet is actually less than on the inside, due to the elasticity of tissue; the 'shock' ripple helps reduce exterior pressure on the bullet. As it expands (and slows) to the point where directional momentum is overcome by bullet-base momentum (it basically ends up unstable, as an arrow flying feathers-first would) it generally veers or "detours" from its original path until its energy is spent.

[This is why things that maximize hydraulic effects (such as the post in the Hydra-shock that helps 'push' liquid toward the cavity sides, the thin-wall striations of the Black Talon, and the larger, more straight-inside-wall designs of even more traditional HP designs) work better than the older, smaller-cavity ones.]

This is assuming no bone impact, obviously. With a bone hit, an HP will become deformed and actually expand less overall than if it just travels through "flesh". With a bone hit, though, you do get the additional trauma of multiple bone fragment "projectiles", so it offets (at least somewhat) the reduced performance of the HP itself.


A LRN or LFP bullet is certainly softer and easier to deform manually, but hydraulically (as in flesh) an HP bullet has advantages a solid (even SP) bullet doesn't. (Especially at the velocity lead bullets are generally driven.) The LRN or LFP is almost literally being 'held' in it's original form, prevented from violent deformation, by the existence of equal hydraulic pressure on all sides, unless/until it encounters bone or some other "non-flesh" impediment. Then its deformed shape allows response to hydraulic pressures, and it either deforms (or detours) until its energy is spent.

This hydraulic component must be recognized and accepted in bullet design and choice. Even Glasers (with their FMJ profile) use hydraulic force to do their work; they just reverse certain parts of the equation. Instead of the body's liquid acting on the resisting metal walls of an HP design, the Glaser bullet brings with it its own hydraulic component to the situation. As the flesh drags at the outside of the bullet jacket (in the first inch or so of penetration), the liquid inside the jacket (because it's a liquid) begins to act separately of the jacket. It then forces itself out the front of the bullet's decelerating jacket, carrying with it its shot payload. That's why a Glaser works so well on flesh, but not on "hard" targets; concrete block, sheet metal airplane skins, etc. On a hard target, the hydraulic effect is very much (if not completely) diminished, and while the bullet itself naturally has the same "energy" (same mass and velocity), it wastes that energy in a non-productive way.

I guess what I'm saying, is that while energy (i.e. 'velocity') is definitely a very important factor, it's not the only factor. The effects on a given target type can very greatly, even with the same caliber/energy combination.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
9,117 Posts
Discussion Starter · #5 ·
so HOW is their LEAD core, ANY softer than DEAD SOFT lead cast bullets, <font color=red>*</font><font color=red>*</font><font color=red>*</font><font color=red>*</font><font color=red>*</font>? you are fos, suckered in by the jhp makers. What they claim is NOT true, and I can PROVE it, on animals.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
6,336 Posts
I'm going to assume this is directed toward me. If not, please correct me.

andy said:
so HOW is their LEAD core, ANY softer than DEAD SOFT lead cast bullets,
Never said it was. I said the action of the fluid acts differently in a hollow point than on a solid lead point. Visualize it this way: pinch the small end of a funnel shut so you've got a closed cone, and then hold it up to a full-running garden hose. If you hold it with the small end toward the hose, the fluid ("hydraulic pressure") will flow around the funnel with little resistance on your hand. Turn the funnel around, with the big (open) end to the water jet, and it WILL push back much harder on your hand. Simple physics; the water is being redirected much more this way than when it hits the small end first.

Yet the "energy" involved is identical, isn't it..? Same volume of waterflow, same speed of waterflow, and same funnel weight. The only difference between this example and a bullet's path is that with a bullet, you have a moving object and still water, instead of a still object and moving water.

Please point out problems with this example/analogy. Never claimed I was omniscient, and I'm always happy to learn.


andy said:
...<font color=red>*</font><font color=red>*</font><font color=red>*</font><font color=red>*</font><font color=red>*</font>?
Wonder what you called me, and why, exactly...?


andy said:
you are fos, suckered in by the jhp makers.
So now I'm full of $hit? About what, specifically?

And fwiw, I'm not "suckered in" by anyone. I've used hollowpoint and softpoint ammo myself. You're not the only person who's used weapons on animals, you do realize; both in hunting and defensive formats (and in putting down hurt animals as well). I do confess to a lack of experience in killing people's pets to see if my bullets work, though. Feral dogs, you bet; I've killed quite a few of them. But not just some unfamiliar, inoffensive animal I happened see while driving down the road.


andy said:
What they claim is NOT true, and I can PROVE it, on animals.
I hold ammo makers' claims right up there with auto makers' claims; neither means that much to me. I never said anyone's claims were true or not.

Let me ask this. In the pics that mrostov posted, even if we allow that the test medium and conditions were optimized to maximize expansion, do you honestly believe LRN or LFP ammo would expand like that? Of course not; and that's all I said. Fluid dynamics affect HP ammo differently than they affect non-HP ammo. As I said:

John in AR said:
Absolutely true that more velocity is better for more expansion, but HP's, especially modern HP's will absolutely expand better in flesh than the same weight/diameter/velocity LRN or LFP, if we're talking about "expansion in flesh".
Surely you're not saying that LRN or LFP ammo WILL expand as well as a modern HP round, are you?


And as I concluded:

John in AR said:
I guess what I'm saying, is that while energy (i.e. 'velocity') is definitely a very important factor, it's not the only factor. The effects on a given target type can very greatly, even with the same caliber/energy combination.
So what, specifically, am I fos about; and what, specifically is wrong with those statements?

As I said, I'm always happy to learn.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,944 Posts
Expansion is not always a matter of softness, but a matter of metalurgy and design.

You can actually make a bullet a tad harder and pre-stress, pre-frag it, so it has uniform, rapid expansion at a lower ballistic effort than older style bullets.

The pre-frag pattern in the jacket, computer designed and precision machine made, also is a significant factor, as is the jacket's bond to the core. The jacket helps peel the core back so it flowers.

Notice in the pictures shown the repetetive, almost perfect flowering pattern? You couldn't get that with simply an old fashioned softlead core.

The machinery required to make these bullets is very expensive and to reliably get these relatively uniform results, especially with homemade bullets, would be dicey at best.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
5,890 Posts
As I remember, Federal put an enormous amount of money making the Hydra-Shok work when it bought the Hydra-Shok company. The same went with all the other major makers, a snot load of engineering and testing went into these bullets. They are NOT the late-60's, early-70's (where you happen to be stuck) drilled hole in the end of a bullet design.
 
1 - 8 of 8 Posts
Top