Shooting through brush?

[JAM70]

Interesting Video.
As a matter of interest game farms in North of South Africa (Limpopo province) where there is dense brush most game farmers will not allow anything under a .30 cal rifle to be used. Arrive looking at taking springbuck or Impala with something like a .270 or similar they not going to allow you to hunt. they may offer you a rifle to use....

 

[Mungo]

The Norma Academy has a few videos, mostly about boar, buty here's one about roe

they have others on their website

Isn’t this mainly about what’s left behind, not where the bullet ends up?

 

[Mungo]

You don't want to know

Why not?

 

[moeggesit]

Interesting- IMO it really wasn't consistent enough to show some calibres being better than others at it. More that any bullet can get deflected really easy and we should avoid clipping anything unless the branch is right next to the animal.

The whole point is that it is inconsistent. No calibre is “more suited” to shoot through brush. As a rule however, the faster and lighter bullets will be affected the most, slower and heavier less, but still not acceptable

ps. Slow and heavy, 600-1000gr at 1000-1200fps

 

[Namman]

Interesting Video.
As a matter of interest game farms in North of South Africa (Limpopo province) where there is dense brush most game farmers will not allow anything under a .30 cal rifle to be used. Arrive looking at taking springbuck or Impala with something like a .270 or similar they not going to allow you to hunt. they may offer you a rifle to use....

Never come across that.
270, 7mm are quite popular in Limpopo.

 

[Deermanagement]

Why not?

I think there was a video posted ref backstops a little while ago that showed bullets that looked intact leaving somewhere around 90 degree with so significant speed reduction, filmed through a thermal device. I've seen my shots splash onto a sloped field behind a chest shot, somewhere like 15 degrees from original flight path, again with what looked like plenty of velocity. So what we may think of a suitable backstop may be completely useless and we all trust to luck and maybe not knowing what can happen is the best way

From the posted video however, it brings to light the fact that bullets tumble after defection which will slow their ongoing progress through the countryside

I've had the opportunity to watch a couple of videos recently and it shows how lucky some can be. One guy for instance was shooting CWD on flat open large fields and that they had to circumnavigate the field to get a better angle, but in reality, it didn't look to me as if there was any place where shots could be taken without significant risk. Another was a well known guy in the cotswolds, who visted a farm yard after the cattle had been put out and all went quiet. Just a short distance away, a thin wood stood where he shot a roe buck with a .308. It was flat and even I could see from the video that there was a high chance of the copper bullet leaving the buck and the couple of trees around, for whatever was beyond. Would I have taken that shot....... no chance.......would I have posted the video had I become struck with a disorder at the time....... no way

 

[TringSaint]

There was an article a few years in a German hunting magazine on what happens to bullets once they go through a boar. Quite a lot of shrapnel comes out the far side - bits of bullet, bone fragments etc in pretty much a 45° cone from the exit hole centred on the line of the bullet pathway.

The conclusion was that to avoid potential injury of boar in a herd / group you should shoot the furthest one away, rather than the closest when there are others close by.

A lot of the “shrapnel” would inflict non lethal injuries but sufficient to cause nasty wounds such as loss of an eye.

It was a German Hunting Magazine from 2018 - I remember reading it and discussing it when I was over there.

Not on boar, but I have inadvertently killed two deer with one shot - first deer was c50m iirc and the second deer initially was about 6m to the side. But when I pulled the trigger I hadn’t seen the second deer in the scope wander diagonally to the rear of the first deer and as the bullet exited a chunk of shrapnel hit it in the head and killed it!
Ended up with 3 deer, two spent cartridges and a very heavy deer sack to lug back up the hill!

 

[RCS Deer Management]

He was using a big calibre firing heavy slow bullets, through a considerable distance of standing corn.
I forget which calibre, but I seem to recall that it was something larger than most of us would generally use for stalking.

I’m guessing it was a .577 martini Henry as I know Patrick shoots one, he is a neighbour of mine

 

[VSS]

I’m guessing it was a .577 martini Henry as I know Patrick shoots one, he is a neighbour of mine

Give him my best regards.

 

[weblyish]

I’m guessing it was a .577 martini Henry as I know Patrick shoots one, he is a neighbour of mine

presumably you know each and every time he shoots it as the glasses rattle on the shelves just like in mary poppins

 

[billy_boyle_2010]

The whole point is that it is inconsistent. No calibre is “more suited” to shoot through brush. As a rule however, the faster and lighter bullets will be affected the most, slower and heavier less, but still not acceptable

ps. Slow and heavy, 600-1000gr at 1000-1200fps

I skimmed the video- there was too much waffle for me. But I'm pretty sure they were cautiously advising that a blunt nosed bullet is deflected less than a very angled bullet.

But I agree- totally unpredictable.

As to slow & heavy- I do not think that it has to be slow- just that heavier is deflected less and typically heavy means slow.

 

[Morkai]

This was covered years ago in a quite informative video called "Deadly weapons" (careful if you google that as, it shares the title with a film that does not involve shooting, well not shooting guns ) by a retired FBI officer, covered lots of calibres in lots of scenarios

Deadly Weapons: Firearms and Firepower.

It's a classic isn't it. The first thing that came to mind when reading this thread was that film.

Busts a few myths in that film.

 

[Morkai]

For anyone who is interested, here is Deadly Weapons: Firearms and Firepower.

The test of shooting through cover is at 40mins.

 

[geoshot]

Isn’t this mainly about what’s left behind, not where the bullet ends up?

Yeah, i think so right enough

 

[moeggesit]

I skimmed the video- there was too much waffle for me. But I'm pretty sure they were cautiously advising that a blunt nosed bullet is deflected less than a very angled bullet.

But I agree- totally unpredictable.

As to slow & heavy- I do not think that it has to be slow- just that heavier is deflected less and typically heavy means slow.

There was a few trials a long to ago which included a 50BMG, it was still greatly affected by small twigs. On the other hand very heavy black powder projectiles deflected a lot less.

It might have something to do with the long shape of the bullet but I expect it has more to do with the amount of stability required for the bullet to maintain its flight path. Long unstable bullets tumble, shorter ones also do, but may deviate less spectacularly? Same with fast and slow.

 

[Tazz]

An interesting little video shooting 30-30 and 308 through brush at a deer sized target. For those who think you can, or you have had an unexplained miss

Could have been a useful pice but too many variables not least freehand shooting. Someone needs to do a more “ scientific “ trial using stable rests and vary the distance that the twigs/grass interference is from the target. We all “ feel” that slower heavier rounds deflect less but I have seen little in the way of facts to support that

 

[Heym SR20]

Could have been a useful pice but too many variables not least freehand shooting. Someone needs to do a more “ scientific “ trial using stable rests and vary the distance that the twigs/grass interference is from the target. We all “ feel” that slower heavier rounds deflect less but I have seen little in the way of facts to support that

It might not have been done to full scientific standards with all the variables taken into account so you get the ability lots of statical analyses etc etc.

But basic physics and mathematics will tell you that a projectile weighing 10 grams going along at 750 metres per sec that hits a glancing blow on a stationary twig that weighs 100 grams will result in an equal and opposite reaction that will cause that bullet to veer off course. By how much will really depend on the angles of impact, the construction of the bullet etc etc. etc.

And the physics will change if it is a 50 gram bullet going 600 metres per sec out of a big bore rifle hitting the same twig.

If I could remember my A Level physics you could produce the mathematical answers to all of this - its a question of vectors and forces.


My take on all of this is that it’s probably not worth adding all these variables into the equation unless you absolutely have to. Make the first shot count, and if its not an absolutely clear shot then just wait a while until it is a clear shot, or move until it is a clear shot.

You can have the same argument on the road.

If you are on a motorbike and you hit a traffic cone at speed you are going to come off, in car you will swerve and do quite a bit of damage to the front of the car and might well swerve into oncoming traffic, if you in a big truck you will damage the paintwork.

Make that traffic cone into a six inch diameter tree or lamppost and you hit it at any speed the results are not going to be good.

We can postulate endlessly on best vehicle to be in when you hit a tree.

But the best answer perhaps is not to risk hitting a tree in any vehicle and drive accordingly.

 

[sh1kar]

It might not have been done to full scientific standards with all the variables taken into account so you get the ability lots of statical analyses etc etc.

But basic physics and mathematics will tell you that a projectile weighing 10 grams going along at 750 metres per sec that hits a glancing blow on a stationary twig that weighs 100 grams will result in an equal and opposite reaction that will cause that bullet to veer off course. By how much will really depend on the angles of impact, the construction of the bullet etc etc. etc.

And the physics will change if it is a 50 gram bullet going 600 metres per sec out of a big bore rifle hitting the same twig.

If I could remember my A Level physics you could produce the mathematical answers to all of this - its a question of vectors and forces.


My take on all of this is that it’s probably not worth adding all these variables into the equation unless you absolutely have to. Make the first shot count, and if its not an absolutely clear shot then just wait a while until it is a clear shot, or move until it is a clear shot.

You can have the same argument on the road.

If you are on a motorbike and you hit a traffic cone at speed you are going to come off, in car you will swerve and do quite a bit of damage to the front of the car and might well swerve into oncoming traffic, if you in a big truck you will damage the paintwork.

Make that traffic cone into a six inch diameter tree or lamppost and you hit it at any speed the results are not going to be good.

We can postulate endlessly on best vehicle to be in when you hit a tree.

But the best answer perhaps is not to risk hitting a tree in any vehicle and drive accordingly.

Challenger tank?

 

[Deermanagement]

For anyone who is interested, here is Deadly Weapons: Firearms and Firepower.

The test of shooting through cover is at 40mins.

That was obviously interesting. So at a distance of only 3 feet behind the "brush", all calibres including 50 bmg were tumbling, some of them may have even done complete or multiple tumbles. It says to me that a 30 cal is no better at going through cover compared to a 22 calibre, because they both deflect and tumble to the point that they are unreliable.

I distinctly remember 2 deflected shots, the first about 10 years ago from a .243 at a muntjac some 70 yds away under dark conifers, missed, and on investigation, a small fallen branch maybe 1/4" but only 20yds from the rifle was found to be cut. Could have missed this one by yards

The second was last November, Sika hind at 50yds from a high seat, going for a head on neck shot. Deer ran off, obviously not injured. Light was fading a little but I gould see a branch of an oak some 20 yds from the rifle moving that I had not seen. The following morning a checked the area and found a strike on the trunk of an oak and from memory, knew that this tree was around 8 to 10 inches off to the side. Went back to the high seat and lined up the impact and shooting position and could clearly see a hole through a 1" branch, the bramch I saw moving following the shot. So, on this occassion I hit 2 oak trees and whatever else the bullet hit. Lucky that it was not one of the other hinds stood next to the one I targeted.

Obviously as light fades, it gets more difficult to identify odd branches in woodland and pretty well impossible to identify them consistently with a thermal scope. Good glass and good light is the key to shooting in woodland without risk of injuries from deflected bullets.

 

[wytonpjs]

The second was last November, Sika hind at 50yds from a high seat, going for a head on neck shot. Deer ran off, obviously not injured. Light was fading a little but I gould see a branch of an oak some 20 yds from the rifle moving that I had not seen. The following morning a checked the area and found a strike on the trunk of an oak and from memory, knew that this tree was around 8 to 10 inches off to the side. Went back to the high seat and lined up the impact and shooting position and could clearly see a hole through a 1" branch, the bramch I saw moving following the shot. So, on this occassion I hit 2 oak trees and whatever else the bullet hit. Lucky that it was not one of the other hinds stood next to the one I targeted.

Obviously as light fades, it gets more difficult to identify odd branches in woodland and pretty well impossible to identify them consistently with a thermal scope. Good glass and good light is the key to shooting in woodland without risk of injuries from deflected bullets.

Happened to me the weekend before last whilst sat in a high seat tracking a fallow doe slowly walking to my right. It paused, I fired but it was only afterwards in the scope that I saw the broken branch swinging..........

Post in thread 'A GREAT Weekends' Fallow with R&R Sporting'

Mar 24, 2025

Good result there, well done

Assume by the screen shot that one was white? Just interested

Yup, but it lived to see another day - bullet struck the branch! I was tracking it along until it paused - sadly too late.



Out at the weekend where white fallow are not "on the menu" and I fully understand now why they are left as they do provide damn good markers of where the group is!

• wytonpjs