Hydraulic shock

I suppose a fun thought: car accidents can cause instant death, even for folks that don't have any tissue trauma. In general, this is perceived by the medical community to be caused by the massive sudden compression of the body as it slams to a stop. Considering our bodies as a system not so dissimilar to a water balloon, the momentum of our blood and tissue crushes itself, and the weak points rupture, and the nerves get overloaded. The CNS impact causes the instant death, but also the hydro-dynamic pressure spike of the tissue and blood's momentum causes the heart to stop, vessels in the brain to rupture - and everywhere else in the body, lungs to bruise/bleed, etc etc.

This isn't so different than when folks use too short of bungies and the blood slams into their head as they jump and knocks them out.

As a kickboxer, I've also witnessed guys get hit so hard in the liver that it knocked them out instantly, which is not so different, as the liver is a highly vascular area also with a high nerve density.

So whether it's a CNS overload, or a hydrodynamic, or rather hemodynamic effect, instant death CAN happen with bullets, but cannot happen with arrows.

That said, a bullet has to be moving quickly to deliver it. A slow traveling bullet that doesn't expand much won't generate a great enough pressure wave to cause instant shutdown of either CNS or cardiovascular systems. BUT, a penetrating bullet will usually cause more tissue damage than an arrow anyway, so if it misses the pressure wave cut off, it still has the opportunity to kill via hemorrhage.

Or we can talk about ruptured diaphragms, drowning in blood, severed spines, etc etc that will all kill quickly as well, but are different than either of the above discussed.
 
Originally Posted By: RockyMtnHunterA bullet that opens up to around .970" like this one, sure plants them fast
thumbup1.gif

247Thor-Test2001.jpg

247Thor-Test2005.jpg



What media did you fire that into to recover it? Absolutely beautiful mushroom/star. Pretty rare day when you get a bullet back that looks just like the ones in the advertisements!!!
 
6mm06 just posted a video in the baiting thread of a coyote kill shot last night using the 17 Rem and a 25 gr. Hornady hp at a little over 3,900 fps. I think we would all have to agree it wasn't the size of the bullet that hit him like the Hammer of Thor. Looks like a pretty good testimony of hydrostatic shock to me.
 
Below is a link to last nights coyote, which contains a video of the shot.

DoubleUp knows as I do, the effectiveness of the tiny 17 caliber bullet at over 3900 fps. I have shot a lot of different rifles / calibers during my life, hunted with most of them and can tell you that I have never seen the likes of a 17 Remington for pure drop-dead performance. The only other cartridge that has given me the same performance is a 7mm STW.

This is the third coyote I have taken with the .17 Rem. I have also taken 4 fox, numerous possums and a couple of skunks. Performance has always been the same - drop dead on the spot.

http://www.predatormastersforums.com/for...058#Post2686058


 
come on guys keep it civil and open minded,

I think what Steve154 was trying to say before this mess got out of hand (which he himself caused and started) was that death is caused by on of two ways,

1- blood pressure dropping to zero
2- the shut down or major disruption of the CNS (central nerves system)

In This aspect both bullets and arrows kill exactly alike. a bullets temporary cavity I.E.(Pressure wave or what ever you want to call it) simply tears and destroys more tissue resulting in a quicker death by one of the two ways above. this is also why a High Velocity fragmenting round kills faster than a slower larger non expanding round as the temporary wound cavity caused by the faster round is much larger and destroys more tissue than the slower round again resulting in death by one of the two ways listed above.
 
I admittedly stooped to a level that I normally don't and assisted in perpetuating this non sense. I will be more exacting in my articulation in the future and not assume that someone knows what I am trying to say, which is obvious to me, but sometimes not so much to others.
 
I have skipped bullets off the head of the little gophers heads and killed them without breaking their head . The thing is to a gopher the size of a brat....even a .17 cal. bullet is like a howitzer compared to a .30 cal bullet to an elk ,ect. Jim
 
Originally Posted By: 6mm06
Below is a link to last nights coyote, which contains a video of the shot.

DoubleUp knows as I do, the effectiveness of the tiny 17 caliber bullet at over 3900 fps. I have shot a lot of different rifles / caliber during my life, hunted with most of them and can tell you that I have never seen the likes of a 17 Remington for pure drop-dead performance. The only other cartridge that has given me the same performance is a 7mm STW.

This is the third coyote I have taken with the .17 Rem. I have also taken 4 fox, numerous possums and a couple of skunks. Performance has always been the same - drop dead on the spot.

http://www.predatormastersforums.com/for...058#Post2686058




Nice video 6m. I remember when you were a bit unsure if the 17 would work for you or not.
 
Thanks K22. After using the .17 Remington since last summer, I can say that all doubt has been fully erased with regards to killing power. The scene with that coyote has been repeated over and over. DoubleUp and I purchased the same rifles from the same dealer at the same time. He too has drop-dead experiences with his 17. It is an amazing cartridge.

A few years ago I was contemplating an AR build in .17 Remington, but at the last minute talked myself out of it and went heavier with a 6x45. I don't have regrets for the 6x45. It (Dtech) is a fine shooter and has several coyotes, bobcats and fox to its credit. But, I do wish I had a .17 Rem AR.

The speed of that tiny bullet is the only thing I can think of that causes such performance.

 
Originally Posted By: VarminterrorOriginally Posted By: RockyMtnHunterA bullet that opens up to around .970" like this one, sure plants them fast
thumbup1.gif

247Thor-Test2001.jpg

247Thor-Test2005.jpg



What media did you fire that into to recover it? Absolutely beautiful mushroom/star. Pretty rare day when you get a bullet back that looks just like the ones in the advertisements!!!

That was water jugs I fired into with damp sand bucket to catch it.

This bullet we recovered from a mule deer shot 1/4ing towards us. Shot was 175 yards
100_8538.jpg
 
Originally Posted By: steve154I admittedly stooped to a level that I normally don't and assisted in perpetuating this non sense. I will be more exacting in my articulation in the future and not assume that someone knows what I am trying to say, which is obvious to me, but sometimes not so much to others.


No harm done steve154, it is the internet, and your comments helped take the thread...somewhere..lol
I like spidermans post, the one directly after the one I quoted.
I don`t know how to put multiple quotes in the same post
frown.gif
 
Originally Posted By: ChickenthiefPonder this:

How can something that moves at 2-3000fps be static?

Would it not be more correct to talk about a hydrodynamic shock?


Hydrostatic does not relate to the bullet, it relates to the transmission of energy through a fluid based medium, without perceptible movement of the fluid itself (ergo, Static).

Hydrodynamic relates to that actual motion of a fluid medium... like waves.

Bullets fired into the swimming pool make hydrodynamic waves at the point of impact that travel very slowly across the pool.... and hydrostatic waves that travel at ~4,500 feet per second, that are not visible, but transfer pressure to anything they encounter.
 
http://www.ar15.com/ammo/project/Fackler_Articles/effects_of_small_arms.pdf

One of the premier articles on the subject. Bullets do not kill through hydrostatic shock, although it is a factor in the temporary wound cavity. Penetration coupled with expansion which creates a temporary wound cavity that either shuts down the central nervous system, shuts down essential organs, or causes enough blood loss to shut down essential organs is what kills something. I know that's not the perfect way to put it, just trying to sum it up.

Steve is not as wrong on the subject as many of you have accused him of being, his wording was perhaps a little unclear.
 
Originally Posted By: coyotekillerNEhttp://www.ar15.com/ammo/project/Fackler_Articles/effects_of_small_arms.pdf

One of the premier articles on the subject. Bullets do not kill through hydrostatic shock, although it is a factor in the temporary wound cavity. Penetration coupled with expansion which creates a temporary wound cavity that either shuts down the central nervous system, shuts down essential organs, or causes enough blood loss to shut down essential organs is what kills something. I know that's not the perfect way to put it, just trying to sum it up.

Steve is not as wrong on the subject as many of you have accused him of being, his wording was perhaps a little unclear.



Why is it that when someone looses a debate because they got lost in their own rhetoric, someone else comes back days later with something off topic to try to make an irrelevant point.

It is an article, but not in the "premier" class... it is so old, as to have moss on it. It is NOT a definitive work, and not relevant to the origianl question..


The original question was...

Quote:"OK - So as I understand it bullets kills through shock, unlike an arrow which kills through blood loss. Keeping in mind both do tissue damage and that is a factor as well.

My question is what will deliver more Hydraulic shock, a small bullet going fast or a big one moving slower?

Just wondering, while I should be working."



Your reference has nothing to do with the discussion.

Go shoot some animals with your bow and arrow, and try to drop your animal in it's tracks like a well designed hunting bullet at 3,500 fps.

Let us know how it works out for you.

Steve was dead wrong because he did not stick to the original question, and tried to prove a point that was not on the table, using terms and definitions that were erroneous... as you have also done.

Let us know how the arrow thing works out for you.
 
i kill more big things with arrows than bullets, the ONLY time an arrow drops an animal in its tracks is if it hits the spine or brain. THE ONLY TIME! everything else is blood loss, usually very quickly. archery spine shots, contrary to many hunting shows, do not kill the animal.
 
I stopped believing in hydraulic shock last year. The year before I shot a 10 point buck with a .243 using 85 grain Sierra Gameking @ 3300 fps. Took it clear off its feet... I sat there a minute and then started to gather my stuff and walk up to it as I stood up and shouldered my rifle the deer jumped up and ran off. I was sure I hit so hard that it would die from hydraulic shock even if i didn't find it. Last year I killed that buck with my bow... His shoulder was full of copper fragments. If a force big enough to take him off his feet was not enough hydraulic shock to kill it I don't believe the shock a big enough force to kill an animal...
 
Originally Posted By: CatShooterOriginally Posted By: coyotekillerNEhttp://www.ar15.com/ammo/project/Fackler_Articles/effects_of_small_arms.pdf

One of the premier articles on the subject. Bullets do not kill through hydrostatic shock, although it is a factor in the temporary wound cavity. Penetration coupled with expansion which creates a temporary wound cavity that either shuts down the central nervous system, shuts down essential organs, or causes enough blood loss to shut down essential organs is what kills something. I know that's not the perfect way to put it, just trying to sum it up.

Steve is not as wrong on the subject as many of you have accused him of being, his wording was perhaps a little unclear.



Why is it that when someone looses a debate because they got lost in their own rhetoric, someone else comes back days later with something off topic to try to make an irrelevant point.

It is an article, but not in the "premier" class... it is so old, as to have moss on it. It is NOT a definitive work, and not relevant to the origianl question..


The original question was...

Quote:"OK - So as I understand it bullets kills through shock, unlike an arrow which kills through blood loss. Keeping in mind both do tissue damage and that is a factor as well.

My question is what will deliver more Hydraulic shock, a small bullet going fast or a big one moving slower?

Just wondering, while I should be working."



Your reference has nothing to do with the discussion.

Go shoot some animals with your bow and arrow, and try to drop your animal in it's tracks like a well designed hunting bullet at 3,500 fps.

Let us know how it works out for you.

Steve was dead wrong because he did not stick to the original question, and tried to prove a point that was not on the table, using terms and definitions that were erroneous... as you have also done.

Let us know how the arrow thing works out for you.



Wow Cat; I usually have the utmost respect for your posts, but find myself in great disagreement with you. Dr. Fackler's work has always been highly respected.
I'll sum it up, bullets do not kill by shock, period. It's been proven time and time again.
 
Back
Top