Fun with  ballistics

I won’t post any pics with ths post because there some sensitive types that read this post,(besides, I didn’t take any pics.) but your incorrigible blogger Diogenes had a little fun this weekend.

My dads buddy slaughtered a pig last week, and my dad, in one of his endless macabre humor fits, left its head near my shooting range as a joke.  Being used to 49 years of this sick humor, I was unfazed, but got-ta thinking “what will XXXX do to a pig skull?”  If you are not aware, a pig has one tough head.  Nearly as thick as the skull of a mountain goat.  So,,,,

First assault was with arrows.  A couple from the recurve, one target point, one bodkin styled broadhead.  Repeat with the compound. (All shots made at 20yds)  Effect: little difference.  Penetration was about 3″(7.5cm) on each, depending on location of hit.  Deep enough to be crippling, not enough to kill quickly.  I was impressed that the recurve showed little variation from the compound despite the speed differences. (140fps avg for recurve vs 195fps of the compound.  Each arrow weighed within 10grains of each other.)

Second assault.  .22lr from my Ol Henry Lever action.  Again 20yds but speed and weights are obviously different. 1/10th projectile weight, 5X+ the speed. Recall this: E=mvSq/2 (sorry, no superscript on my phone, that is velocity squared for those not familiar with it.)

Well,,,,  long story short, that little .22 did oodles more damage.  Pass through on both shots.  Small entrance, bigger exit by a factor of 4 or more in both instances.   

At this point, said skull was looking a bit worse for wear and I could tell that my experiments weren’t going to be as conclusive, so I brought out the last two ‘curious speculation’ guns.  The .44 cap n ball revolver, and the coup de grace, the AK.

The cap n ball surprised me in the most underwhelming fashion.  Big hole, similar exit (factor 2-3)  Deadly? Yes. But no where near the damage I was expecting. (Must be the slower speed, despite the much heavier round.)  But of course, the results from the AK weren’t at all surprising.  Pink cloud is the only description needed.  (For the curious, I was shooting 123gr soft point, not ball.) 

Of course, my experimental target was pretty much destroyed at this point, but I proved some things to myself and eliminated some myths as well.  Yes, an arrow will kill, but it won’t, in all likelihood, be a merciful kill. The only advantage in hunting is opening up large wound channels for a rapid bleed out of the game, but you are more likely to have to track down your target (DUH!).  Using the simple .22 is more likely to be quick and merciful, so long as the trigger puller does his/her job correctly.  The cap n ball will do so as well, and with less need of accuracy, but may be a bit messier, whereas the AK,,, Well, lets just say I won’t be using it for hunting deer.  Maybe Bears, Dragons, or other vermin, but not deer.. 

There were other guns I wanted to test too, bit the cost of ammo and lack of target (not much left after all the other holes made) made that not possible.  I can extrapolate what I learned with that little equation above and well imagine the end results.  

Anyway, a bad joke turned into an educational afternoon for me and thats what really counts.

Addendum: as survival choice, the little. .22 is plenty.  It may not be a ‘ranged’  weapon, but the ammo can be carried in quantity, is effective in properly trained hands, and is (relatively) inexpensive to train with.  In some instances, it can even be virtually silent: I use the CB shorts when squirrel hunting and the round is so silent I can hear the impact on the squirrel. I do know the poachers ’round these parts like the shorts for getting deer, because they can make a head shot and not alert the wardens of their location.  From a tactical view, think about the implications of what that means.  (Note, semi-auto .22’s do not like shorts, they require LR for proper action and LR are NOT quiet at all.)  I’ll leave those thoughts unwritten here but they will apply when things get stranger than they are.