Terminal performance test standards applied to big game rounds

[Jason_W]

Just a bored at work musing here:

It's more or less agreed upon that a round intended for personal defense against human adversaries should provide at least 12" of penetration in properly calibrated ballistics gel.

Is there a similar standard for rounds intended for the various classes of big game?

 

[climbnjump]

One such "standard" - subject to the usual controversy of who believes what - is called the Optimum Game Weight Formula.

One discussion of it can be found here: http://firearmshistory.blogspot.com/2012/12/measuring-cartridge-effectiveness.html
http://firearmshistory.blogspot.com/2012/12/measuring-cartridge-effectiveness.html
Or you can do a web search for it to find other opinions of it.

 

[Jason_W]

Interesting. However, I fall in the camp of those who assert the formula does not account for a number of Important factors (bullet diameter, bullet construction, etc.).

It seems there is more to what a projectile can do that its numbers.

I've been curious for a while to know if there are any industry standards for hunting bullets tested in gelatin.

It's probably irrelevant for the most part in that most common big and medium game rounds pack enough punch to kill what they need to kill and then some.

It's the testing of rounds considered to be marginal or inadequate foredium to large game where a test performance standard could be useful.