Round ball min expansion velocity

[Col. Batguano]

Remember what hydrostatic shock is all about. It's the creation of a temporary wound channel due to the incompressibility of the liquids in the tissues due to the velocity of the incoming foreign object. A bullet that mushrooms creates a big wide blunt object going through the medium than a bullet that retains a more streamlined shape, and thus, will disrupt more fluids in and around its' path. After the shock is gone, an elastic medium (like liquids) will return to re-fill the temporarily disrupted space, leaving behind only the direct path of the bullet as it plowed through the solid part of the tissue.

A visual depiction of it can be see with slo-mo's in ballistic gelatin, but also with bomb blasts from aerial bombs. It's a quick shock wave and then it's gone, but the (temporary) disruption is enough to rupture internal structures, like blood vessels. It's the principle behind why depth charges work against submarines. Yes, in that instance, close counts.

 

[smoothshooter]

Hello all,

I hope all are doing well and not sick with the flu that seems to be everywhere!
i have been wondering what the minimum velocity would be for a pure lead round ball to expand would be? I know that they say that 800 ft/lbs of energy is needed to kill a deer humanly. I don’t know if that’s correct or not and don’t care. I do care about my 62 caliber Leman flintlock will produce enough velocity and energy to expand though. Expansion equals damaged soft tissue which equals protein on my table! And that’s a win!

thanks, Don M
From Pittsburgh, Pa

With a .62, I don't think it matters whether it expands or not.

 

[Loyalist Dave]

i have been wondering what the minimum velocity would be for a pure lead round ball to expand would be? I know that they say that 800 ft/lbs of energy is needed to kill a deer humanly. I don’t know if that’s correct or not and don’t care. I do care about my 62 caliber Leman flintlock will produce enough velocity and energy to expand though. Expansion equals damaged soft tissue which equals protein on my table! And that’s a win!

I don't know who told you 800 ft/lbs. was needed to humanely kill a deer. (I have successfully dropped a deer in it's tracks with a bullet impact of under 500 ft./lbs. on more than one occasion.) I think somebody was pontificating without real knowledge. In my state I have to use a minimum load of 60 grains of Black Powder when hunting with my .54 rifle. According to the numbers from GOEX, at the muzzle that load is starting out at about 775 ft/lbs.

Also beware of those that talk about "energy transfer" and wanting the ball to stop within the animal to "transfer 100% of the energy to the deer". They don't understand physics nor terminal ballistics. Two identical round ball striking identical media, the first stopping 1/4" before exiting out the other side of the media, and the second exiting that same media, the second ball "shed" as much energy as the first ball, but had enough remaining energy to exit. The first ball did not "transfer" more energy to the media because it stopped, be it ballistic gel or the body of a deer.

"Energy" doesn't kill a deer...damage does.

In soft tissue...that round ball likely isn't going to expand much due soft tissue alone. Don't expect it to expand. Don't think you need to have it expand.

They've done revolver tests of all lead round ball at point blank range in ballistic gel...even when it goes through one block and is recovered in the second...the balls whether .36 or .44 did not deform... at all. Not a bit.

They've done tests with round ball from long guns..., you get some expansion but the tests I saw they put bone into the gel to simulate ribs. At five meters, this is the amount of deformation.



At the impact speeds of most of our rifle ball, or smoothbore ball vs. deer, the results should be similar.

Count on your bullet placement and your bullet diameter to do the job...in fact a .600 or .610 ball is the same diameter at the start, which a modern .45 hollow points expands

If you hit bone, that's a benefit. That gets you your deformation. Since it's very difficult not to hit some bone when you hit the "vital areas", you're fine.

LD

 

[PastorB]

Don't know about expansion, but i got a .50 cal. CVA rifle with a 24" barrel (sidelock percussion, wood stock, $69@ walmart 20+ years ago) that I let kids hunt with. I use one load in it, 60 grains Pyrodex P or Goex FFFg, and a .490 PRB, at a chronographed 1200fps. Kills deer dead, no problems, and have never recovered a ball. Hit them right, they die. Never understood the 800 ft./lbs. logic, this load gives just over 500 ft./lbs. at the muzzle and has no problem on deer out at 125 yards, though due to my worsening eyesight, I prefer much closer. Just as an added example, my .44 cap and ball revolvers do just fine on deer (legal where i live!) at bow range. They get 1050fps with a hot load. Call me nuts, but ballistic charts dont kill deer, well placed bullets/ balls do.

 

[hanshi]

I know from experience that a .440" or larger lead ball will kill deer quickly or even DRT whether or not it manages to expand. I've had pass-throughs up to around 100 yards drop them as quickly as wafer-flat recoveries from shots at 35 yards. Internal damage is what kills game. An arrow can kill quickly as can a thrust from a spear and neither generates enough energy to remark about. And forget about "hydro-static shock" as muzzleloaders seldom reach those velocities. Hit the vital zone and the deer will end up in your freezer...period!

 

[Howard Pippin]

The deer and one antelope that I have shot with muzzleloader was pretty much with a 50 caliber flintlock shooting RBS and either 50 or 55 grains powder, mainly 3F black. Being I had some 777 thought I should use it in my new percussion, and I like it. Finally got around to setting up my chronograph a couple of days ago, and discovered that 50 grains is as fast as 60 grains triple F Goex, and about the same as 70 grains of FF, right at 1450 FPS. 45 grains of 777 FF are equivalent 50 grains black FFF, 1350 FPS. I had noticed that the recoil was heavier than black, and now I know why. I'm due for another shoulder replacement on my left shoulder, and recoil worries me. I did put on a wider recoil pad since I shot, but the percussion rifle I have is fairly light so it's a wait and see proposition. Tried shooting 50 grains 777 from my replaced shoulder on the right, and it seemed to kick like a mule. I am left-handed, but shooting with a rest from the right side works very good. This might mean going back to my flintlock as it is noticeably heavier. The reason I'm shooting the percussion is because it is light. My reference book is Lyman, the second edition. Of course this is going to mean starting all over as the 50 grains triple seven were fairly accurate. I have no idea what 45 will do.
Squint

 

[M. De Land]

The deer and one antelope that I have shot with muzzleloader was pretty much with a 50 caliber flintlock shooting RBS and either 50 or 55 grains powder, mainly 3F black. Being I had some 777 thought I should use it in my new percussion, and I like it. Finally got around to setting up my chronograph a couple of days ago, and discovered that 50 grains is as fast as 60 grains triple F Goex, and about the same as 70 grains of FF, right at 1450 FPS. 45 grains of 777 FF are equivalent 50 grains black FFF, 1350 FPS. I had noticed that the recoil was heavier than black, and now I know why. I'm due for another shoulder replacement on my left shoulder, and recoil worries me. I did put on a wider recoil pad since I shot, but the percussion rifle I have is fairly light so it's a wait and see proposition. Tried shooting 50 grains 777 from my replaced shoulder on the right, and it seemed to kick like a mule. I am left-handed, but shooting with a rest from the right side works very good. This might mean going back to my flintlock as it is noticeably heavier. The reason I'm shooting the percussion is because it is light. My reference book is Lyman, the second edition. Of course this is going to mean starting all over as the 50 grains triple seven were fairly accurate. I have no idea what 45 will do.
Squint

I'm thinking I remember reading some where that the preponderance of bore diameter east of the Mississippi was under 50 caliber in colonial times and they didn't seem to have any trouble killing bear,elk and even buffalo as I recall. The mountain and plains rifles (Hawken) where generally in the 52-53 caliber range if I got that straight. They mainly needed the bigger bore diameters for Grizzly protection and it was handy for buffalo and elk as well.
The long hunters in the East needed enough bore diameter to get the job done but light enough to have more shots as most every thing they needed to carry for months at a time was on their backs or a pack animal if they were well off.
I have 58,54, and 45 caliber rifles and as I get older I find the smaller bores more appealing particularly for target work.

 

[Tom A Hawk]

I shoot rather hefty charges in my ,54 Hawkens. I don't have a chronograph ( yet ) but estimate velocity at 1800- 2000 FPS. These balls were recovered from white tails just under the hide on the off side. The hide seems to act as a expanding catchers net to trap the expanded ball.

 

[Billy Boy]

Without expanding a near half inch hole through lungs or heart or even a liver will do in most anything in America. Blood flowing in to lung tissues stops them lungs from working pretty quick. Old hunters used to try to shoot a charge to leave a ball in the animal so it could be recovered.

They would put the recovered ball in their mouth and ’chew it round’. We do it with chewing gum and can make them almost perfectly round, round enough..

 

[Col. Batguano]

They would put the recovered ball in their mouth and ’chew it round’. We do it with chewing gum and can make them almost perfectly round, round enough..

One of the "old methods" that I for one and glad to forego!

 

[smoothshooter]

Hello all,

I hope all are doing well and not sick with the flu that seems to be everywhere!
i have been wondering what the minimum velocity would be for a pure lead round ball to expand would be? I know that they say that 800 ft/lbs of energy is needed to kill a deer humanly. I don’t know if that’s correct or not and don’t care. I do care about my 62 caliber Leman flintlock will produce enough velocity and energy to expand though. Expansion equals damaged soft tissue which equals protein on my table! And that’s a win!

thanks, Don M
From Pittsburgh, Pa

With a .62 caliber, who needs expansion?

 

[smoothshooter]

They would put the recovered ball in their mouth and ’chew it round’. We do it with chewing gum and can make them almost perfectly round, round enough..

Wouldn’t it be easier to lay the deformed ball on a flat rock or downed tree limb and tap it back to shape with the side of a knife blade or belt axe, or even another rock?
I know there is old documentation for chewing, but other methods would be easier.

 

[Loyalist Dave]

Wouldn’t it be easier to lay the deformed ball on a flat rock or downed tree limb and tap it back to shape with the side of a knife blade or belt axe, or even another rock?
I know there is old documentation for chewing, but other methods would be easier.

Good point,

I think perhaps the folks that reported having done the chewing-round technique may have been doing so as it allowed them to harvest the meat and then move, and they were re-shaping their last projectile while moving and while also staying relatively quiet.

LD

 

[Sparkitoff]

The OP asked what velocity it takes to get a soft lead ball to expand. Not many answers to that questions above. Really, it depends. First, are you asking muzzle velocity or impact velocity? Then are you hitting bone or soft tissue? OP is also asking about 62, so there is more density than a smaller ball that also needs to be accounted for. I have limited experience to share. I've never recovered a ball from my 62's (one shoots .610 and the other .626) but the exit holes appear larger than .62. I've shot .454's at 700ish FPS MV and some expanded and some didn't. Again, the range at impact and shot placement were slightly different. However, (and I literally just tried this) if I throw one of my 62 balls at a cinderblock wall as hard as I can, it expands a little bit - gets a big flat spot. If I throw it as hard as I can at the back of an old couch in the garage, it remained in perfect shape. So if you're shooting cinderblocks I guess about 55 FPS will expand the ball. If your shooting couch cushions you're gonna need it to go faster.

 

[hanshi]

These were taken from deer I shot with .45s and .50s. Some exited but quite a few didn't.

 

[Old Hawkeye]

Isn't a 62 caliber ball already expanded? How much bigger do you need? Talk about overthinking it!

 

[nkbj]

A .62 rifle barrel can push a ball at over 1500FPS, way way beyond needing expansion.

 

[ADK Bigfoot]

"The OP asked "what velocity it takes to get a soft lead ball to expand." Not many answers to that question above.

Sparkitoff has hit the nail on the head. Not looking for anecdotal evidence of what did or did not expand, or in what medium a round ball did or did not expand, and certainly nor asked if a round ball was recovered or "passed through", or who killed a deer or did not kill a deer, or if a round ball will kill a deer (we all know they will), or if expansion is necessary above X caliber, but "at what velocity does a round ball expand?"

Collaboratively, we should agree on some parameters; What caliber, what distance, what expansion medium, what atmospheric conditions? I would assume the when my balls are frozen in sub-zero weather, they might react differently than when exposed to Georgia summers. Having never exposed my balls to Georgia Summers, I cannot add any evidence.

What we need here is a brave soul to either provide velocity/expansion evidence or an offer to create an experiment to determine the answer to the question. I have the next two week off; I would offer to do the experiment if the corpus agreed upon the particulars.

Any takers?

ADK Bigfoot

 

[Griz44Mag]

"The OP asked "what velocity it takes to get a soft lead ball to expand." Not many answers to that question above.

Sparkitoff has hit the nail on the head. Not looking for anecdotal evidence of what did or did not expand, or in what medium a round ball did or did not expand, and certainly nor asked if a round ball was recovered or "passed through", or who killed a deer or did not kill a deer, or if a round ball will kill a deer (we all know they will), or if expansion is necessary above X caliber, but "at what velocity does a round ball expand?"

Collaboratively, we should agree on some parameters; What caliber, what distance, what expansion medium, what atmospheric conditions? I would assume the when my balls are frozen in sub-zero weather, they might react differently than when exposed to Georgia summers. Having never exposed my balls to Georgia Summers, I cannot add any evidence.

What we need here is a brave soul to either provide velocity/expansion evidence or an offer to create an experiment to determine the answer to the question. I have the next two week off; I would offer to do the experiment if the corpus agreed upon the particulars.

Any takers?

ADK Bigfoot

You mean like answering the question "How long is a piece of rope?"

 

[Col. Batguano]

The question is really not about velocity needed, but one of deceleration and the G-forces involved. And then, as a secondary issue; one of "how much expansion is actually expansion?" The issue from there is one of hydrostatic shock that is generated by this mini barn door of a bullet going through the medium. A blunt front end is going to generate a wider shock wave than a more streamlined one. It will also deform more easily. In a case like that, the physical size of the bullet is of secondary importance to the size and shape of the shock wave in determining the wound channel it leaves in its' wake.

If a ball hits an immovable object like a steel plate, it will take far less velocity (to deform) than if it hits a more elastic decelerent like liquid, or soft tissue. A bigger ball like a 62 will deform more caliber numbers than a small one like a 32. That's because of the greater mass of the projectile. But the percentage of original caliber will be the same. The physical projectile will actually shred the medium it goes through, whereas a shock wave may leave no visible traces of trauma. That's why people inside the blast radius of a bomb often show no outward signs of injury, but their insides are jello.