Landowner texted me and said she shooed 6 piglets that were by the barn hanging with the cows. I think I've mentioned these orphaned six before, and based on my cameras it seemed that the six were essentially living on/near the farm. Knowing they'd still be around, I headed out. I pulled onto the barn and saw the six next to the barn by the cows. I pulled past out of sight. As I pulled my case out of the car I heard that telltale warning sound....from the darn cow! Crap! Better hurry. Instead of going around the west side of barn south to the creek they headed east- towards me as I was unpacking the rifle. They stopped about 20 yards ( no double opportunity), tagged one there after remembering to take my scope cover off 😳 Two runners from a standing position. .308 168gr Hornady BT Match bullets. [Image uploader not working 😠]
What happened to the one in the first pics? I have used a variety of ammo on hogs but have never had a exit wound look like that.
Blowouts like that happen most commonly on smaller sized animals where the hydraulic shock (not hydrostatic shock) or water hammer overwhelms the integrity of the tissue. Smaller animals have less ability to expand with the force. ALSO, typically happens when you have a secondary means of wounding occur, most notably striking heavier bone and so you get not just expansion from the bullet, but expansion from the point at which the bullet struck the bone and bone shrapnel expands from the point of impact, outward, usually (often) in a conical pattern and can create huge wounds.
In other words, the result is what you are apt to see based on what is struck by the ammo and not just by the ammo itself. Size of the animal can matter and what the bullet strikes inside of the animal can matter.
What happened to the one in the first pics? I have used a variety of ammo on hogs but have never had a exit wound look like that.
Blowouts like that happen most commonly on smaller sized animals where the hydraulic shock (not hydrostatic shock) or water hammer overwhelms the integrity of the tissue. Smaller animals have less ability to expand with the force. ALSO, typically happens when you have a secondary means of wounding occur, most notably striking heavier bone and so you get not just expansion from the bullet, but expansion from the point at which the bullet struck the bone and bone shrapnel expands from the point of impact, outward, usually (often) in a conical pattern and can create huge wounds.
In other words, the result is what you are apt to see based on what is struck by the ammo and not just by the ammo itself. Size of the animal can matter and what the bullet strikes inside of the animal can matter.
I wonder if my (up to this point) go-to 150 gr. SP would have blown through them like the 168 did (as far as expansion, etc.) on such a small animal. My lead round in the magazine was a 175 BTHP but I think I missed or grazed on the runners with it. The rest were 168s. Aside from the 175 gr. big gottaway boar several weeks ago, I haven't had any comparison on performance of either of these. Stay tuned.
What happened to the one in the first pics? I have used a variety of ammo on hogs but have never had a exit wound look like that.
Blowouts like that happen most commonly on smaller sized animals where the hydraulic shock (not hydrostatic shock) or water hammer overwhelms the integrity of the tissue. Smaller animals have less ability to expand with the force. ALSO, typically happens when you have a secondary means of wounding occur, most notably striking heavier bone and so you get not just expansion from the bullet, but expansion from the point at which the bullet struck the bone and bone shrapnel expands from the point of impact, outward, usually (often) in a conical pattern and can create huge wounds.
In other words, the result is what you are apt to see based on what is struck by the ammo and not just by the ammo itself. Size of the animal can matter and what the bullet strikes inside of the animal can matter.
I wonder if my (up to this point) go-to 150 gr. SP would have blown through them like the 168 did (as far as expansion, etc.) on such a small animal. My lead round in the magazine was a 175 BTHP but I think I missed or grazed on the runners with it. The rest were 168s. Aside from the 175 gr. big gottaway boar several weeks ago, I haven't had any comparison on performance of either of these. Stay tuned.
Answered my own question. From earlier this year - small pigs this is typical i think.
What happened to the one in the first pics? I have used a variety of ammo on hogs but have never had a exit wound look like that.
Blowouts like that happen most commonly on smaller sized animals where the hydraulic shock (not hydrostatic shock) or water hammer overwhelms the integrity of the tissue. Smaller animals have less ability to expand with the force. ALSO, typically happens when you have a secondary means of wounding occur, most notably striking heavier bone and so you get not just expansion from the bullet, but expansion from the point at which the bullet struck the bone and bone shrapnel expands from the point of impact, outward, usually (often) in a conical pattern and can create huge wounds.
In other words, the result is what you are apt to see based on what is struck by the ammo and not just by the ammo itself. Size of the animal can matter and what the bullet strikes inside of the animal can matter.
OK That makes sense. I have shot raccoons with my .308 that have been pretty much disemboweled in a similar fashion. I never really thought about it.
