Why Ballistics Gel Works and Caliber Arguments are Dumb

All I know is that after shooting coyotes with a 243 & 55 grain ballistic tips going around 4000 fps, my results have been anchored, or dead coyote. After watching many, many getting a good hit with a 223, they still can travel a bit. As long as there is a good amount hydrostatic effect, the vote is down. After having several not die instantly with a 88 varmint bullet, after good hits, I think all of it matters. Speed, design, and placement. I have had knock-down hits on coyotes with a 270, and then have them run like they weren't even hit. 110 Vmaxes, 130 VLD's.
For coyotes and at distance, I'll keep using a 6mm of some type.
 
Last edited:
In other words, my .22-250 with 50gr Sierra's will drop a home
invader faster than my Ruger in Colt 45 with 250gr bullets.
Head shots not included. Totally agree.

I'm not much of a coyote hunter, but the ONE shot was hit with
a 33gr .204 bullet @ 4100fps at the muzzle. It was hit at the
rear part of the lungs, grenaded into the liver and the 'yote
dropped DRT. The lungs were liquified. Have seen the same
effect on lungs of a deer many times. Hydrostatic shock trumps
all, if it's in the lung or front spinal area.
 
Originally Posted By: RustydustI found this to be very interesting and informative.

Good stuff, thanks for posting RD.

I particularly found the last couple minutes interesting where they talked about not getting hung up on any particular caliber being better than another with regard to carry guns and as common sense should dictate, using the one you shoot best, kinda trumps everything else.
 
Back
Top