I shot the target below today, at 40Y. Four-shot groups. The first two, left-right, are the Wildcat I shooting JSB 33.95gr. Each group is about .2" CTC. The next two are the III shooting the JSBs - ugh. Nowhere near what the I can do. The final (bottom-left) "group" is four FX Hybrids from the Wildcat III. As you can see, it's very nearly one hole. (The gun is not consistently *this* accurate, but it's incredibly accurate. Oh, by the way, I'm virtually certain that removing all o-rings from the liner made it a little more accurate.)
Quote from: PaulFWI on December 19, 2021, 06:15:04 PMI shot the target below today, at 40Y. Four-shot groups. The first two, left-right, are the Wildcat I shooting JSB 33.95gr. Each group is about .2" CTC. The next two are the III shooting the JSBs - ugh. Nowhere near what the I can do. The final (bottom-left) "group" is four FX Hybrids from the Wildcat III. As you can see, it's very nearly one hole. (The gun is not consistently *this* accurate, but it's incredibly accurate. Oh, by the way, I'm virtually certain that removing all o-rings from the liner made it a little more accurate.)Wait - WHAT?
So the o rings were letting the liner vibrate?What do you replace them with? Surely not "nothing?" - Or is it held tight via compression?
Quote from: nervoustrigger on November 08, 2021, 12:17:32 AMIf neither pellet nor slug expand, the one that tumbles does more damage.If neither expands nor tumbles, the pellet does more damage on account of its poorer BC (more energy dissipated = more tissue damage). These comments assume both slug and pellet have sufficient energy for a passthrough, as would likely be the case for small game at close range that is being discussed here.No, that's not all there is to it. Think about momentum (MV).Neither projectile is tumbling for a long way past these ranges."If neither expands nor tumbles, the pellet does more damage on account of its poorer BC (more energy dissipated = more tissue damage)." This is interesting - and not really true. You are implying that a projectile's BC is air has some relationship to it's BC *in tissue.* That generally isn't the case at all. In particular, a projective might have excellent ballistic coefficient in air but "horrible" BC in tissue precisely because it expands.The theory on this stuff is pretty simple - I'm looking for other peoples' experiences.
If neither pellet nor slug expand, the one that tumbles does more damage.If neither expands nor tumbles, the pellet does more damage on account of its poorer BC (more energy dissipated = more tissue damage). These comments assume both slug and pellet have sufficient energy for a passthrough, as would likely be the case for small game at close range that is being discussed here.
For the record: I'm a bit cautious about accepting the energy dump theory of killing quarry the firearm ballisticians I have read all seem to agree that the "hydrostatic shock" (wounding beyond the actual HOLE in the quarry) is only possible at impact velocities in the thousands of fps....
Here's another thought, directly related to the thread title:We all know that pellets lose much more velocity than slugs, as they travel through the air.Does the same thin happen inside the body of an animal?If so, that might have a significant effect of overall "killing power vs fps." This is another topic that just makes my head hurt.