I just dont get it.

[The deerslayer]

I dont understand why you cant go hunting things with a small caliber handgun like a 9mm when you can with a bow. I just got done calculating the energy of a bow with a verry hevy tip and a verry high speed for a bow. The energy is 40 for the bow and around 300-400 for the 9mm. So why do they say a 357 is a minimum for deer when a 9mm is a lot stronger than a bow?

[jhalcott]

fred ,how do they kill(bow-gun) the arrow kills by hemorrage thebullet by shock. A dull arrow is like a 9mm bullet. Both might kill a deer,but a sharp broadhead will cut deeper. A 44 will deliver more shock. It MUST be put in the right place no matter what weapon is used.  jh

[Zeus]

Its not all about energy.  I personally don't pay energy much attention at all.  You can kill deer with a 9mm but its not very practical when there are so many better calibers out there and most guns are fairly cheap overall.  I will not hunt with a caliber that small due to the fact that the game you hunt deserve your respect.  As the hunter, I think you should choose equipment that best serves you.  In other words, choose the gun (not necessarily the largest out there) that you shoot the most accurately to help ensure good hits and quick humane kills in the field.  If the 357 is the largest that you can handle, choose good bullets and keep your shots within bowrange.  However, when you master that size, move up and get a 41 or 44 or 45 or 454, whatever you can handle and feel comfortable with.

Sorry for the rant but the arrow vs bullet argument is a sore spot.  The arrow does not in any way kill the same as a bullet.  The slow moving blunt handgun bullet can/may push arteries and other things out of the way as it goes through whereas the broadhead will slice these arteries that may have been pushed to the side by the blunt nosed bullet.  The cutting causes massive hemmoraging and usually quick death.  Just my opinions.  GS

[ihuntbucks]

Zeus.......well put :lol: ....Rick

[Mikey]

fred722:  as larry3screws put it in another reply just down this forum, there aren't any 9mm cartridges designed for hunting.  That is true and although some 'named' writers have used different 9mms to take game and I have followed suit, I do not recommend it.  

The 38 Super Automatic has been used to hunt with before, by at least Col. Charles Askins and I followed exactly what and how he managed to do and although successful, was not satisified with the result and did not consider it an ethical practice.  I will not do it again.

In truth, the 38 Super/9x23 Winchester can be loaded to duplicate the preferred 357 magnum's 1 shot fight stopper, a 125 gn bullet at 1425'/sec, but that is really too light for whitetail at anything but point blank range and I do not advocate using performance levels for police work on game.  

To do so, in my perspective, is like running across the highway during rush hour - yes, you may succeed, for a while, but it is neither wise or considering the possible effects on others involved, ethical.  I would not again and do not advise or recommend it.  Mikey.

[Black Jaque Janaviac]

Frankly, I think the question has merit.

The difference between bullets and arrows is that it is possible for a bullet to incapacitate by shock.  Not every bullet does this though, in fact quite frequently the bullet kills by hemorage the same way an arrow does.

Another slight difference between bullets and arrows, is that arrows cause hemorraging by laceration.  Bullets just crush and destroy tissue.

The larger the wound channel, the more hemorraging.  With a broadhead, you will always get a 1" channel.  For a 9mm bullet to make the same wound channel, you need good mushrooming.  But mushrooming can compromise the penetration.

So an arrow can consistently make a 1" wide wound channel all the way through the deer.  The key here is the difference in momentum.  If you figure out the momentum of the arrow and the momentum of the bullet - you will find the arrow has it all over the 9mm.  Momentum is what dictates penetration.   Arrows almost always pass through unless hitting major bone.  

I don't buy the bullets kill by shock arguement, because many bullets can and do kill by hemorrage - you just have to track like you do with an arrow.

[Will]

As a really avid 9mm shooter and bowhunter, I have to agree with what these guys are telling you. The 9 is a good round for varmint and small game hunting out of an accurate pistol, like my 92FS. However, it just doesn't carry the bullet mass and velocity needed to humanely kill deer. Yes, it does carry loads more energy than an arrow, but as these folks have said, an arrow kills in a completely different way than does a bullet.

It's my belief that an arrow through the lung/heart area that doesn't hit any bone is the most humane death possible when hunting. Think about it. If you've ever cut yourself with a really sharp knife, you'll notice it doesn't hurt, but man it bleeds. That arrow goes through those organs and cuts them cleanly with little drag and almost no shock. It simply passes through and sticks in the ground on the other side. Deer hit with this usually do not know what is going on. I've seen many of them run a few feet and stop to look around, wondering what is happening. Then they pass out and that is it.

A bullet hits and it immediatly transmits shock; the more the better. It destroys bone and tissue and does some bad things once inside. Some bullets, like most high-powered rifle bullets, are designed specifically to penetrate deeply and expand in a controlled fashion. Others, like varmint rounds and most rounds for the 9mm, expand very quickly, but don't penetrate very deeply. The 9mm will expand quickly, but since it still doesn't have nearly the speed of a heavy varmint round, like say a .243 (which I think is a little light for deer) with the same sized bullet, it just isn't adequate. I've hunted deer with a .357 revolver, and it is adequate under ideal conditions, but I would probably opt for something larger still. Hope this helps.

[handirifle]

I have to throw my .02 in on this one.  As was pointed out the difference is momentum and comparing bullets to arrows is really apples and oranges.

Yes the arrow kills by hemmorage, BUT if one were to compare a target head arrow, now we are on the same page with the gun boys.  This is THE reason state game laws state (or should, since I am not familiar with all 50) the legal size and minimum number of blades and in some cases type of arrowhead that can be legally used for hunting big game.

A target point or blunt head both kill by shock and hemmorage.  Sometimes a blunt will penetrate but most often not.  The target point shot from a 60# bow will probably penetrate both lungs of a deer if no bones are hit.  just like a 9mm bullet, it will do some hemmoraging, but big arteries will most likely be pushed aside, especially as the arrow slows.  A bullet is the same way no matter what size.  If it is of a light enough caliber to not completely penetrate it will slow down inside the animal with less and less damage as it does.

In the case of a 9mm, I'd wager that would happen in 6 - 8".  A target head arrow weighs considerably more and the momentum would push it farther into the animal, but causing only a hole slightly smaller than the arrow shaft.  In addition, the wound would most likely seal most of itself around the shaft and bleeding would be VERY slow.

A razor sharp broadhead, is a whole different animal.  Those razor blades will CUT everything they touch.  Don't believe me?  Run one over your arm with just the weight of the arrow on it, slow or fast doesn't matter.  make sure you have band-aids handy before you do cause if it is sharpend as it should be for hunting, it WILL cut you.

This does many things, first if cuts a much larger wound channel that cannot seal against the arrow.  Next since the channel is larger, this causes the tissue to offer LESS resistance to the shaft and concentrates almost all the momentum into the head only, causing even deeper penetration.

All this with minimal or NO shock to the animal but, when properly placed causes rapid loss of blood and death within seconds.  That is why a double lung shot is SOOO important.

The KEY differences in the comparrison is the TYPE of head used on a hunting arrow vs bullet.

[Questor]

It's all been so easy for me. I just looked up what works, and I use that. Keeps things simple.

[Robert357]

Dear Fred722;

I guess I will put my 2 cents in as well.  There is an interesting website that discusses wounding theory in more detail than most ever want to know.

http://www.mindspring.com/~ulfhere/ballistics/wounding.html

I would like to draw your attension to a section on Mechanics of Lethal Wounding.

"Other than hits to the central nervous system (brain and spine) or the mechanism of pulmonary embolism, the only reliable cause of rapid death is through hemorrhaging produced by cutting a hole through major blood-bearing organs (heart, lungs, liver) or major blood vessels. The dimensions and especially the location of the cavity produced by the bullet will determine the rate of hemorrhaging and in turn the rapidity of the onset of death. It is actually more lethal to sever the arteries directly above the heart, than to penetrate the heart itself. If these arteries are cut, blood pressure instantly drops to zero and death will follow in seconds (this is one reason why an arrow can kill as fast as a bullet). Lethal hemorrhaging does not depend upon how much blood exits the body, but only upon the loss of blood pressure..."

The author/engineer/research scientist then later in the website goes on to discuss the pros & cons of all the major wounding theories.  It is a long technical read, but worth a few days of effort.

I have found this website to be one of the best discussions of what should work and what should not work in killing with the use of firearms.

I think that the correct answer to your question is that a 9mm with the right bullet could be used for hunting in very marginal circumstances.  However, in practical terms, finding the right bullet and insuring that it would be used only in the right circumstances would preclude most hunting opportunities.

The biggest problem I would see would be in finding the right bullet/powder load.  The reason is that most (not all) firearms that shoot 9mm bullets only operate reliably over a very narrow range of bullet size and momentum (i.e. recoil characteristics).  That in turn puts you at a huge handicap.  

The only exception would be something like a Ruger Blackhawk convertible revolver with both 357 and 9mm cylinders.  There you might be able to work something up using a heavier and specialized 357 mag bullet in a 9mm cartridge with compressed powder load.

[Questor]

Here's another two cents from me: Stuff either works well in the field or it doesn't. It doesn't take long to learn either. But it takes some study and perhaps a few mistakes if you're trying something new.  Otherwise you can just learn from what works for many others. I don't pay much attention to the ballistic medium tests, but the stopping power and penetration tests in actual hunting situations count for a lot.

[WD45]

I have killed several deer that still had broadheads in them found while skinning them out. It just proves that there is much less margine for error with a bow.  A couple of those were festering wounds that had to be painful to the deer.   I am not downing bow hunting here just an observation. I like to bow hunt myself
Light cals can or could do the same... Just something to chew on

[handirifle]

WD45
Yes arrows have to be placed properly and of equal if not more importance is the sharpness of the blades.  Dull blades do not cut arteries, they move them aside.

[Connecticut Yankee]

An interesting side note.  Back in the early 1970's I was working with kevlar for canoe and kayak hulls.  It was originally developed as belting for tires.  Kevlar vests soon followed. Though the vests are much different today, we were involved in some of the early testing.  
     Vests that would regularly stop handgun bullets from 9mm to 357's were easily stopped by the vests. Even 44 mag would usually be stopped.  BUT, an arrow with a broadhead from a 60lb compound bow (also relatively new at the time) would easily penetrate the vest. Granted the arrow is only going ~200fps but the total hunting arrow weight  with broadhead , shaft etc. usually weighed 500+ grains. But all that energy/momentum  was concentrated on the one tiny point at the tip of the broadhead.  The broadhead would simply slip through the weave of the kevlar fibers and the razor sharp blades would cut the kevlar fiber.
     The new vests that were sent over to the Connecticut National guard in iraq are far superior to older models but were rushed through and were delivered in woodland camo.  The bad guys are using firearms a lot more lethal than 9mm and 357's over there, I wish our guys all the best.
     John M.  A Connecticut Yankee