Is the 308 the best rifle for all purposes

That's if hydrostatic shock actually exists!!!!!!! and if it does the old .600 jeffires needs dobbing in for a hot 243 when one is hunting elephant in Africa! lol :stir:

At the end of the day, you are trying to create the biggest wound channel possible so that blood loss is as great, fast and catastrophic as possible... a projectile that opens up to 1/2 and inch is going to do a better job of that than one that opens up to 1/4"... realistically, 'hitting' power is only important when dealing with bone and tough skin (pigs etc)


Hydrostatic shock is commonly considered as a factor in the selection of hunting ammunition. Peter Capstick explains that hydrostatic shock may have value for animals up to the size of white-tailed deer, but the ratio of energy transfer to animal weight is an important consideration for larger animals. If the animal’s weight exceeds the bullet’s energy transfer, penetration in an undeviating line to a vital organ is a much more important consideration than energy transfer and hydrostatic shock.[SUP][60][/SUP] Jim Carmichael, in contrast, describes evidence that hydrostatic shock can affect animals as large as Cape Buffalo in the results of a carefully controlled study carried out by veterinarians in a buffalo culling operation.
Whereas virtually all of our opinions about knockdown power are based on isolated examples, the data gathered during the culling operation was taken from a number of animals. Even more important, the animals were then examined and dissected in a scientific manner by professionals.
Predictably, some of the buffalo dropped where they were shot and some didn't, even though all received near-identical hits in the vital heart-lung area. When the brains of all the buffalo were removed, the researchers discovered that those that had been knocked down instantly had suffered massive rupturing of blood vessels in the brain. The brains of animals that hadn't fallen instantly showed no such damage.


— Jim Carmichael[SUP][61][/SUP]​
Nathan Foster of Terminal Ballistics Research found that it is possible to induce hydrostatic shock in Bovines providing impact velocity is above 2600fps, using controlled expanding projectiles of appropriate weights. Furthermore, using hunting cartridges between 6mm and .338 bore diameters, a nominal velocity of 2600fps or higher produces the same results on most mammals where bullet weights and bullet construction are again appropriately matched to game body weights for optimum energy transfer. During tests, wider bores were capable of producing hydrostatic shock at lower impact velocities than the small bores on medium game- but not heavy game, showing the subtle relationships between bullet frontal area and energy transfer and bullet weights versus game weights.
Tests revealed that Hydrostatic shock produces an immediate loss of consciousness. This often appears to the viewer as an 'instant kill' But it is the action of loss of consciousness combined with rapid blood loss to the point that life can no longer be sustained, that results in what can be better described as fast, humane killing. Mr Foster also found that results with Hornady TAP ammunition (frangible A-Max projectile) can produce neural trauma on medium sized game at much lower impact velocities than traditional hunting projectiles.[SUP][62][/SUP]
Dr. Randall Gilbert describes hydrostatic shock as an important factor in bullet performance on whitetail deer, “When it [a bullet] enters a whitetail’s body, huge accompanying shock waves send vast amounts of energy through nearby organs, sending them into arrest or shut down.”[SUP][63][/SUP] Dave Ehrig expresses the view that hydrostatic shock depends on impact velocities above 1,100 ft (340 m) per second.[SUP][64][/SUP] Sid Evans explains the performance of the Nosler Partition bullet and Federal Cartridge Company’s decision to load this bullet in terms of the large tissue cavitation and hydrostatic shock produced from the frontal diameter of the expanded bullet.[SUP][65][/SUP] The North American Hunting Club suggests big game cartridges that create enough hydrostatic shock to quickly bring animals down.[SUP][66][/SUP]
 
Maybe there's a typo here. The bullet weight you quote isn't available in 'expanding' so not legal? ;)

I don't think anyone is arguing that the .308 lacks stopping power. The detractors are saying that you rarely need that clout most, if not all, of the time.

Berger do a 168g hunting vld.
 
"The Diaphragm's Role in Breathing
Inhalation and exhalation are the processes by which the body brings in oxygen and expels carbon dioxide. The breathing process is aided by a large dome-shaped muscle under the lungs called the diaphragm.

When you breathe in, the diaphragm contracts downward, creating a vacuum that causes a rush of fresh air into the lungs.

The opposite occurs with exhalation, where the diaphragm relaxes upwards, pushing on the lungs, allowing them to deflate."

Imagine putting a balloon in a plastic bottle so the end of the balloon seals the top. Because there is air in the bottle if you squeeze it and let it go the balloon won't do an awful lot. Now, remove the air from the bottle, thus creating a vacuum between the balloon and the inside of the bottle. The balloon will expand to fill the bottle. Now when you squeeze the bottle and release it the balloon will in turn also deflate and inflate as the bottle is squeezed. Pierce the bottle and leave unsealed then air will enter between the balloon and bottle and return you to the orignal state. For "balloon" read "lungs", for "bottle" read "chest". The diaphragm acts as the bottle squeezer (though kind of in reverse!).

Wolfie
 
Last edited:
Hydrostatic shock is commonly considered as a factor in the selection of hunting ammunition. Peter Capstick explains that hydrostatic shock may have value for animals up to the size of white-tailed deer, but the ratio of energy transfer to animal weight is an important consideration for larger animals. If the animal’s weight exceeds the bullet’s energy transfer, penetration in an undeviating line to a vital organ is a much more important consideration than energy transfer and hydrostatic shock.[SUP][60][/SUP] Jim Carmichael, in contrast, describes evidence that hydrostatic shock can affect animals as large as Cape Buffalo in the results of a carefully controlled study carried out by veterinarians in a buffalo culling operation.
Whereas virtually all of our opinions about knockdown power are based on isolated examples, the data gathered during the culling operation was taken from a number of animals. Even more important, the animals were then examined and dissected in a scientific manner by professionals.
Predictably, some of the buffalo dropped where they were shot and some didn't, even though all received near-identical hits in the vital heart-lung area. When the brains of all the buffalo were removed, the researchers discovered that those that had been knocked down instantly had suffered massive rupturing of blood vessels in the brain. The brains of animals that hadn't fallen instantly showed no such damage.


— Jim Carmichael[SUP][61][/SUP]​
Nathan Foster of Terminal Ballistics Research found that it is possible to induce hydrostatic shock in Bovines providing impact velocity is above 2600fps, using controlled expanding projectiles of appropriate weights. Furthermore, using hunting cartridges between 6mm and .338 bore diameters, a nominal velocity of 2600fps or higher produces the same results on most mammals where bullet weights and bullet construction are again appropriately matched to game body weights for optimum energy transfer. During tests, wider bores were capable of producing hydrostatic shock at lower impact velocities than the small bores on medium game- but not heavy game, showing the subtle relationships between bullet frontal area and energy transfer and bullet weights versus game weights.
Tests revealed that Hydrostatic shock produces an immediate loss of consciousness. This often appears to the viewer as an 'instant kill' But it is the action of loss of consciousness combined with rapid blood loss to the point that life can no longer be sustained, that results in what can be better described as fast, humane killing. Mr Foster also found that results with Hornady TAP ammunition (frangible A-Max projectile) can produce neural trauma on medium sized game at much lower impact velocities than traditional hunting projectiles.[SUP][62][/SUP]
Dr. Randall Gilbert describes hydrostatic shock as an important factor in bullet performance on whitetail deer, “When it [a bullet] enters a whitetail’s body, huge accompanying shock waves send vast amounts of energy through nearby organs, sending them into arrest or shut down.”[SUP][63][/SUP] Dave Ehrig expresses the view that hydrostatic shock depends on impact velocities above 1,100 ft (340 m) per second.[SUP][64][/SUP] Sid Evans explains the performance of the Nosler Partition bullet and Federal Cartridge Company’s decision to load this bullet in terms of the large tissue cavitation and hydrostatic shock produced from the frontal diameter of the expanded bullet.[SUP][65][/SUP] The North American Hunting Club suggests big game cartridges that create enough hydrostatic shock to quickly bring animals down.[SUP][66][/SUP]

So the first paragraph is one based on conflicting opinions of two people who believe in hydrostatic shock and the other is pulled from Nathan Foster's website...

NF and Terminal Ballistics is a joke. He constantly contradicts himself and is a disciple of the high velocity/energy "school". I would rather take advice from a gun rag than read his preposterous claims about "killing power." He is anything but the final word of terminal ballistics.

Lastly, there is no censor on the internet. You or I can post whatever we want. This is both a blessing and a curse. However, a little critical foresight is appreciated before posting videos or lifted text from wiki or other websites and citing them as "proof".

Hydrostatic shock is largely a myth.
 
So the first paragraph is one based on conflicting opinions of two people who believe in hydrostatic shock and the other is pulled from Nathan Foster's website...

NF and Terminal Ballistics is a joke. He constantly contradicts himself and is a disciple of the high velocity/energy "school". I would rather take advice from a gun rag than read his preposterous claims about "killing power." He is anything but the final word of terminal ballistics.

Lastly, there is no censor on the internet. You or I can post whatever we want. This is both a blessing and a curse. However, a little critical foresight is appreciated before posting videos or lifted text from wiki or other websites and citing them as "proof".

Hydrostatic shock is largely a myth.


I am not siteing them a proof just examples and this is one artical and its not from Nathen Fosters site

I have no idea who your are or your qualifications relating to balistics. For all I know you could be a proffesor in applied physics sand a profesional balistics resercher but your keeping that under your hat.

TBR is government funded resersh establishment specificly set up for testing balistics and explosives so forgive me for giveing them a bit of cred.

Do you have any links to your clinical reserch that has debunked this theory?

ATB

Chasey
 
One thing is for sure the pressure created inside an animal be it hydraulic or pneumatic is larger when the speed of a bullet goes up.
Those who don't believe it just shoot a rabbit with a 40gr 22LR and compare with a 40gr 223 or 22-250.
If the temporary cavity has so much pressure that often the complete rabbit just bursts to bits (want to see pictures??) then this pressure is of course also equally high as a hydraulic pressure going away from the wound channel.
I have also shot rabbits with 165grain 308, they explode similar to the 223. A larger animal has more internal volume, can stretch more and take up the temporary cavity but there is still pneumatic and hydraulic pressure which can effect the way an animal dies.
Like that goat in the video I have seen several Sika drop on the spot with chest shots (frontal or side on) from a 22-250 52-55gr. Often no exit wound.
edi
 
I love discussions about 'hydrostatic' shock.

I have absolutely no understanding of terminal ballistics, and no particular axe to grind, but trying to work out exactly what goes on when a bullet hits something is fascinating - and I enjoy a good internet handbag battle.

For a while I'd been lead to completely discount 'hydrostatic' shock. But I think that's a mistake. Clearly - as pointed out above - there is a huge difference between the effects of a 40gr .22LR bullet and a 40gr .22-250 bullet, and that difference must be due very largely to the different energy imparted by the two.

I suppose the sensible way to think about it is to ask whether there is a difference in the effect of two bullets of equal size and construction, fired at targets of the same size, but where the speed of the two bullets differs. It seems to me that in most discussions about it, more than one variable gets changed, so it's much harder to really work out what's going on.
 
In nearly all cases where the bullet head enters the body at a high enough velocity the instantaneous transfer of energy will start to create a wound channel, as the bullet head continues it's journey this channel will increase in size, in doing so it will cause expansion of surrounding tissue, if this pressure is high enough it will create additional damage and in some case this in it's own right is sufficient to put an animal down due to non local damage to nervous system or the vascular system. The possibility of this energy transfer to fracture & break bone, cause dislocations and separate internal organs is also true.
Those who shoot a good number of beast will have seen this 'transfer' played out many times, they will also be aware of 'wound channel ballistics' an area that in my opinion far to many recreational hunter have no idea about, choosing the right bullet for the animal & the gun can have very a significant impact on this whole process, combine this knowledge with good shot placement & you will get better results.
 
In nearly all cases where the bullet head enters the body at a high enough velocity the instantaneous transfer of energy will start to create a wound channel, as the bullet head continues it's journey this channel will increase in size, in doing so it will cause expansion of surrounding tissue, if this pressure is high enough it will create additional damage and in some case this in it's own right is sufficient to put an animal down due to non local damage to nervous system or the vascular system. The possibility of this energy transfer to fracture & break bone, cause dislocations and separate internal organs is also true.
Those who shoot a good number of beast will have seen this 'transfer' played out many times, they will also be aware of 'wound channel ballistics' an area that in my opinion far to many recreational hunter have no idea about, choosing the right bullet for the animal & the gun can have very a significant impact on this whole process, combine this knowledge with good shot placement & you will get better results.

a very big +1 on this but I would also add the expected range into the equation. If a longer range shot is expected I will choose a more frangible design than if a sub 50 yard shot is expected.
 
So the first paragraph is one based on conflicting opinions of two people who believe in hydrostatic shock and the other is pulled from Nathan Foster's website...

NF and Terminal Ballistics is a joke. He constantly contradicts himself and is a disciple of the high velocity/energy "school". I would rather take advice from a gun rag than read his preposterous claims about "killing power." He is anything but the final word of terminal ballistics.

Lastly, there is no censor on the internet. You or I can post whatever we want. This is both a blessing and a curse. However, a little critical foresight is appreciated before posting videos or lifted text from wiki or other websites and citing them as "proof".

Hydrostatic shock is largely a myth.

I must agree with Canadian on 'NF', just can't understand where he gets some of his claims about some calibres from.

As for 'hydrostatic shock', I do believe it does exist but perhaps should be described and named differently.
 
If you hit the lungs they cannot breath and drop quickly.

SS

Just a side note...a world class human sprinter running the 100m will not breath during the 10.5 seconds or less it takes them, transfer this to an animal in the flight mode and 100m from point of impact is quite possible and if as others say in reach of thick cover can become a real PITA
 

Largely anecdotal evidence and nothing that hasn't been stated before. I'm not getting into this stupid debate once again. My experience in conjunction with the scientific consensus has put this issue to bed. Go on to jstor and check it out for yourself. I'm not saying remote wounding effects do not happen. However, I tend to believe that such "phenomena" is not so-called "pressure waves" and is actually closer to what rick6point5 alludes to. However, I think in practice this is largely fluff and completely irrelevant to our goals. Out of the many animals I have culled, big and small, with good shot placement the difference in killing power between a 300 win mag and a 7mm-08 is nil. The difference in salvageable meat, however...

I still think it is funny that the user who uploaded that goat video attributes the instant kill to "hydrostatic shock", yet also states that the bullet passed through and broke the spine. :doh:

Edit*** Don't take this as me being gruff. Please, go on Jstor and review the literature yourself. There are many people who disagree with the authors of that paper you cited.
 
Last edited:
Anyone look at the boar video that comes up on Youtube following the goat video? They seem to be the same or similar ammo but with totally different reactions. The goat went down as if poleaxed yet the boar ran off. I would be interested to hear the various comments on how people view this.



 
Last edited:
Largely anecdotal evidence and nothing that hasn't been stated before. I'm not getting into this stupid debate once again. My experience in conjunction with the scientific consensus has put this issue to bed. Go on to jstor and check it out for yourself. I'm not saying remote wounding effects do not happen. However, I tend to believe that such "phenomena" is not so-called "pressure waves" and is actually closer to what rick6point5 alludes to. However, I think in practice this is largely fluff and completely irrelevant to our goals. Out of the many animals I have culled, big and small, with good shot placement the difference in killing power between a 300 win mag and a 7mm-08 is nil. The difference in salvageable meat, however...

I still think it is funny that the user who uploaded that goat video attributes the instant kill to "hydrostatic shock", yet also states that the bullet passed through and broke the spine. :doh:

Edit*** Don't take this as me being gruff. Please, go on Jstor and review the literature yourself. There are many people who disagree with the authors of that paper you cited.



I find it odd that you feel a Harvard Profesor working for Balistics Testing Group at West Point can be providing a summery of available reserch into hydrostatic shock, yet you think a mear engenear like me can do my own reserch and debunk hers?

ATB

Chasey
 
If the original question had been- I only want one rifle so one calibre would the 308 come out on top.
Because I'm getting old and senile the thought has crossed my mind about one rifle.
 
Out of the many animals I have culled, big and small, with good shot placement the difference in killing power between a 300 win mag and a 7mm-08 is nil. .

I recon you really believe we Europeans are totally stupid, or?
Just because you are not able to notice a difference between a 7-08 and a 300WM does not mean that it does not exist.

A larger bullet in weight and diameter travelling at a higher speed has overall more killing power and on an average it will kill faster.
There is only one reason why an animal dies after a gunshot, that is through damage done to the animal. More damage = quicker die.
Very simple.
Of course this extra killing power is not needed on smaller animals, however on larger or more dangerous game it is an advantage as it
would lead to a more humane quicker kill and less runners.

edi
 
Back
Top