If pass-throughs on big game are common/desired with Hammer Hunters of most calibers….

Airedale56

Airedale56

Active member
why wouldn’t a hunter just always select/shoot the smallest legal caliber/lightest bullet weight for big game animals?

Assuming vital organ strikes on a calm animal, broadside, there are two holes, in and out, leaking blood, critter exsanguinates and dies.

Hunter recovers dead critter.

Does bullet weight/energy matter if a lot or even most of it is expended on the far side of an animal?

Maybe a better way to inquire is: If both perforate (two holes) a deer, is a deer more dead with a .243 Winchester 70 grain HH vs a .338-06 A-Square 175 HH?


I’m no mathematician, energy figures and theories hurt my head.
I’m a predator hunter Major, Big game hunter Minor.
I have only recovered 2 solid copper bullets from two big game animals, one an elk (.340 Weatherby 225 TSX 1998) and the other a mule deer (.25-06 Remington 115 TSX 2006). Both animals died, first ran and required a finishing shot (!), second collapsed.

I’m in search of education from real world users of the HH on the why of two vs one hole desirability when selecting a Hammer Hunter bullet. Or can one even be stopped and contained on a broadside shot?

From extensive reading here on Hammertime it seems few HH bullets are recovered post-mortem. They definitely kill critters!

I’m looking forward to the reasoning of folks far more experienced than I with the Hammer Hunter bullets.
Specifically in .224/.243/.257/.264/.308/.338 calibers.


Thanks for reading.
 
Last edited:
Airedale56 said:
why wouldn’t a hunter just always select/shoot the smallest legal caliber/lightest bullet weight for big game animals?

Assuming vital organ strikes on a calm animal, broadside, there are two holes, in and out, leaking blood, critter exsanguinates and die.
Click to expand...
Because you cant always assume you will get a vital organ strike on a calm animal broadside. Thats not a realistic metric for choosing caliber.
 
Hammers are the mechanical broadheads in the bullet industry. Those who understand the importance of a wide cutting diameter (hyperbole) love and use them. But the old school traditional archers still shoot single bevel or three blade fixed broadheads, because they work.

There’s an old technical article no longer available online (at least I can’t load it) on Cutting and Wounding Theory by Rathcoombe that Steve and Brian relied on a lot in building the Hammer Bullet.
If anyone has an active link post below.

If you can work yourself through the document, it will answer your questions. Also Ballistic Studies by Nathan Foster is a good read he focuses on a lot of CC bullets but you can extrapolate the technical details from his read.
 
I’m not sure what you are getting at, though I would like to offer my two cents as it pertains to terminal performance of hammers.

Some folks like light and fast, most appear to like fast and moderate weight bullets that are matched to the game they are hunting. Example….in my 300wsm, using a cup and core bullet, I really liked 180-200 grain bullets. With hammers (monolithic) bullets, I like to balance speed with weight, thus the 168 grain HHT. Why….some may ask??? Well because the hammer line of bullets require 1700-1800 fps to perform like they are designed to, so speed is king. The speed also provides a flatter trajectory to most hunting ranges.

As for one hole vs. two….its my belief two is always better, though not required of a bullet with good terminal performance. The real reason i like the design of hammers, is because the shank maintains a lot of the original bullets weight and acts as a bone crusher on entrance and exit. It breaks the animal down on less than ideal shots (ideal for high shoulder shots on bear). Lesser bullets, such as ELD-X and Berger’s, explode on bone and often don’t deliver good down range terminal performance on less than ideal shots.

The pedals, on hammers, deliver an unreal amount of damage / terminal performance to vital organs and vasculature. It’s really the best of both worlds!!

For the guys who like light weight and ultra fast….the bubble effect is real. In this case, internal damage is devistating….and you get a shank that still acts like a bone crusher. Lots to love with hammer, in my opinion.

Point being….you don’t need ultra light bullets in the hammer line to accomplish down range terminal performance. Different strokes for different folks.

Simply saying two holes in an animal kills….is a not accurate. If it were that simple, fmj’s would rule.

I also think hammers are becoming very popular because the ease of loading. Hands down the easiest bullet I have ever loaded for and terminal performance is great. Not to mention they are very accurate.
 
Last edited:
jrebel said:
I’m not sure what you are getting at, though I would like to offer my two cents as it pertains to terminal performance of hammers.

Some folks like light and fast, most appear to like fast and moderate weight bullets that are matched to the game they are hunting. Example….in my 300wsm, using a cup and core bullet, I really liked 180-200 grain bullets. With hammers (monolithic) bullets, I like to balance speed with weight, thus the 168 grain HHT. Why….some may ask??? Well because the hammer line of bullets require 1700-1800 fps to perform like they are designed to, so speed is king. The speed also provides a flatter trajectory to most hunting ranges.

As for one hole vs. two….its my belief two is always better, though not required of a bullet with good terminal performance. The real reason i like the design of hammers, is because the shank maintains a lot of the original bullets weight and acts as a bone crusher on entrance and exit. It breaks the animal down on less than ideal shots (ideal for high shoulder shots on bear). Lesser bullets, such as ELD-X and Berger’s, explode on bone and often don’t deliver good down range terminal performance on less than ideal shots.

The pedals, on hammers, deliver an unreal amount of damage / terminal performance to vital organs and vasculature. It’s really the best of both worlds!!

For the guys who like light weight and ultra fast….the bubble effect is real. In this case, internal damage is devistating….and you get a shank that still acts like a bone crusher. Lots to love with hammer, in my opinion.

Point being….you don’t need ultra light bullets in the hammer line to accomplish down range terminal performance. Different strikes for different folks.

Simply saying two holes in an animal kills….is a not accurate. If it were that simple, fmj’s would rule.

I also think hammers are becoming very popular because the ease of loading. Hands down the easiest bullet I have ever loaded for and terminal performance is great. Not to mention they are very accurate.
Click to expand...
Ditto 🤘
 
I am one of the "speed demons" referenced above. I've seen first hand the devastation of hyper velocity impacts many times. You get massive internal organ damage, copious (broadhead type) bleeding, petal damage and a wonderful permanent wound channel as the shank passes through - which vents blood on the ground for easy tracking (if necessary).
 
“Cliff Notes" on Shooting Holes In Wounding Theories”

Thanks, GL, I have read that post this afternoon during further studying of the forum. Learning more….



“I’m not sure what you are getting at,”.

jrebel and LightTheTower, when I was composing it, I was afraid of that! Grin.

Still not sure what I’m conveying is what I’m trying to ask. And English (American) is my mother tongue! (I do speak fluent Okie and broken Texan on occasion.)
 
He lost me @ “… 4th order Runge-Kutta numerical integration…”

I read a lot of this when it came out. I had forgotten about it.
Thanks for bringing it back up.
 
Airedale56 said:
Does bullet weight/energy matter if a lot or even most of it is expended on the far side of an animal?

Maybe a better way to inquire is: If both perforate (two holes) a deer, is a deer more dead with a .243 Winchester 70 grain HH vs a .338-06 A-Square 175 HH?
Click to expand...
I can only speculate, that is if a caliber has enough power to reach the farside of an animal it doesn't matter how big or small the bullet is.
If thats true, then it explains why many people over the years have had great success with small bore calibers on big game. The only question I have is if a smaller (than usual) caliber hits heavy bone will it punch thru or deflect and ruin its potential to kill?
 
Gday Airedale
Here’s the link to what Ed asked
Very good read
I also like Ed reference to Nathan foster
Frackler is another good source

The issue is a lot of this information is outdated as bullet technology has improved & so many quote these without understanding improvements have been made but the basics are still one that haven’t changed & delving into the solid world ones like foster obviously haven’t delved deep enough to understand the virtues of a flat meplat eg hydro vrs bbw13 vrs a rounded solid

Now I haven’t read anything of fosters for a very long time so he may have had done more research on the monos of today but he wasn’t a fan & seemed anti monos unless really biggame eg bovines , pachyderm etc but his information was sound until you see where / what his research didn’t include and that’s when things go pear shape & that’s the big bone part turns /tumble part yep what ea of the bullets do when things go wrong ( finding weaknesses although his research showed one pill is better over another) not what they are good @ as that’s where we should be looking imo as so many pills today kill with good shots & only a few cover a lot of bases hammers have covered the most I’ve seen

To your question Airedale

2 holes or 1 is one that gets a lot of different opinions
( I like jrebel analogy so just adding more to that )

On the whole if we can get 2 holes in a big game animal we get better consistency of impact to tip ( fur calculator)
But it’s not broadside it’s on the hard quarters as overall most species taken are never fully broadside so I like a pill that will penertrate around 2/3 to 3/4 of that critter then we will get that exit on most shots hence good preformance occurs
But it’s not as simple as penertration length re the fmj comment 👍& this is where rathcoombe excelled @ his observations on wound channels
Cheers

So what we need to look @ imo is those wound channels on ea pill to give us the best results over varying resistances
Basically a good balanced pill will give us a long wide wound channel & this is on most size critters going to be in the midweight pills yet for certain people the lightweight due to critter size ( smaller critter) will be the best consistency pill
I’m really yet to see where the real heavy pills offer any advantages over the midweights unless you start shooting to long long range or a optimal velocity for weight of pill some chamberings can push the heavies really fast & nearly as quickly as the midweights & if a balanced pill is used then the heavy can outperform the midweight
Really it’s a velocity impact thing as the highest velocity impact is king
Also we need to just make sure a pill meets the triangles requirements

Jm2cw

Cheers
 
Gday
Koda beat this Slovakian to rathcoombes terminal ballistics
Nice work koda 👍

I also noticed that it has been updated as it’s now too 2023 where previously it was only valid to 2013/14 if my memory is correct ( I also note that’s buggered lately 😜)

So be interesting to read that work once again to see what has been going on with his research & the new shedding monos
I think he was just getting into the gs custom which were not really a true shedding as it took some velocity to shed them on the ones I’d tested & it always puzzled me he never referenced the gpa as they were around when he started that work & their flat meplat after shedding was the first I’d seen them & my penny drop moment for me personally but as a guess I’d say because they are a European pill & they weren’t probably available where he’s from 🤷‍♂️
Cheers
 
Koda said:
The only question I have is if a smaller (than usual) caliber hits heavy bone will it punch thru or deflect and ruin its potential to kill?
Click to expand...
Gday koda great question & one that we need to understand the planes & slip of the alloy or a more simpler understanding of it in plane terms

The way the alloy itself behaves under the pressures of hitting these hard resistances will dictate if it can get through or not
( you’ve heard me say hammers are the best alloy @ “ biting bone “ ) as depending on the alloy it in c&c case will not get through & why the need for more weight is needed to hopefully !!!?? get the job done which lessons on the whole the velocity impact & reduction in killing ability

We can also see that going to a harder alloy like say brass & here is another issue as brass can be more brittle & like some of the copper alloys fracture is also a issue & you also won’t get reliable penetration when that happens

The original hmantel & partition also solved some of those issues but not to the level we have pills @ now

There has been no alloy that bites bone like the hammers alloy & still retain a very good meplat ( & has a ability to go straight line due to its forgiving alloy nature if we get a balanced pill included in it ) yet that alloy is useless as a true solid that needs no deformation but good for a expanding solid so it’s not a holy grail of a alloy but for a shedding mono I’ve not seen any better

So I guess the only thing we need to understand is what size caliber or weight of pill becomes too small to give us reliable results & that’s understanding the triangle for one’s needs that gives us that
( including multiple angles & resistances)

Howz that head spinning now oh yes that’s a bit cryptic 😜 as spinning is also part of what we have learnt

Cheers
 
gltaylor said:
I am one of the "speed demons" referenced above. I've seen first hand the devastation of hyper velocity impacts many times. You get massive internal organ damage, copious (broadhead type) bleeding, petal damage and a wonderful permanent wound channel as the shank passes through - which vents blood on the ground for easy tracking (if necessary).
Click to expand...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
 
No holes turned me onto Hammers! :ROFLMAO: Leave it to me to be the weirdo, but the first animal I shot (Whitetail doe) with a 120HH 708 was flopped dead bug on its back instantly. The most perfect example of "Bang Flop" I ever saw.
Couldn't find the entry or exit. Chest cavity sloshed, gallon of blood out her mouth.
I stood there dumbfounded, bewildered, and in pure amazement. I was already pretty jazzed with the ease of handloading and precision I was getting, combined with the first result...chasing that Hammer dragon ever since! :p
 
Hammers are unique in many ways; light laser fast? Heck yeah! Heavy fast? Heck yeah! Hammers provide multiple options to consider. I believe this is one of the best attributes of Hammers is having these options. I have a .243 70gr laser load at 3950 that needs to bite some hair along with a .270 90gr laser load at 4K that needs to eat as well. But betting @joe16 will take care of that. I shoot a fast twist .270 with 156HH at 3200 that is devastating, have a 117HH at 3470 in old Savage 110 .270 that also needs to eat. My son shoots 700 ADL 22" brl 180HH at 2875 which is also devastating on deer. Sendero 300WM with 196HH @3100 or 154HHT @3600? The question on which bullet is really the most fun with Hammers.

My point is to keep mind open on what Hammers can provide for options. Interesting thread on this.

Thread 'Light Fast and Heavy Fast'
https://hammerbullets.com/hammertime/threads/light-fast-and-heavy-fast.296/
 
Muddyboots said:
Hammers are unique in many ways; light laser fast? Heck yeah! Heavy fast? Heck yeah! Hammers provide multiple options to consider. I believe this is one of the best attributes of Hammers is having these options. I have a .243 70gr laser load at 3950 that needs to bite some hair along with a .270 90gr laser load at 4K that needs to eat as well. But betting @joe16 will take care of that. I shoot a fast twist .270 with 156HH at 3200 that is devastating, have a 117HH at 3470 in old Savage 110 .270 that also needs to eat. My son shoots 700 ADL 22" brl 180HH at 2875 which is also devastating on deer. Sendero 300WM with 196HH @3100 or 154HHT @3600? The question on which bullet is really the most fun with Hammers.

My point is to keep mind open on what Hammers can provide for options. Interesting thread on this.

Thread 'Light Fast and Heavy Fast'
https://hammerbullets.com/hammertime/threads/light-fast-and-heavy-fast.296/
Click to expand...
Something me and @kneedeep remind each other after we get near analysis paralysis is, "If you are shooting a Hammer, you are still in the best pocket of performance of a bullet on the market." In essence, a hammer can go wonky, but still be delivering better terminal performance than a cup & core lead bullet. "Still in the pocket" we shortened the phrase...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top