Testing the Brush Gun Myth
Vložit
- čas přidán 29. 08. 2024
- Are brush guns just rifles that handle well in thick brush, or are they also better at shooting through brush? And why are brush guns so often associated with lever action rifles? Those are the questions we're tackling today as we continue our series on lever action rifles.
Check out the rest of the lever action series here: • Lever Action Rifles
Support our channel. Buy ammo from Lucky Gunner!
![Why Won't the Ruger Mini-14 Just Die? [Part 2]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/0XnOImrmh8I/mqdefault.jpg)
Iv8888 tested this on actual heavy brush and it showed significantly better performance from flat nose rounds. This is showing barrier penetration more than anything else...
While its true that heavier flat nosed projectiles showed LESS bullet deviation at the end of the day they still deviated somewhat, therefore, intentionally shooting through brush should be avoided. I'm glad some people remember that old video though.
in his attempt to disprove the myth he proved it, the brush gun calibers had significantly less deflection and destablisation and due to the heavier wieght of the caliber any loss in velocity wouldn't effect the impact on the target as much.
@@brandonalsop1281, the key word in your statement is LESS. At the end of the day there was some bullet deviation anyway therefore one shouldn't shoot through brush if it can be avoided. Brush just reduces the chance of getting an ethical/vital shot.
@Jonathan Spier, both videos also discuss whether it was ethical to rely on that or should one try and get a better shot.
@Jonathan Spier, the myth was made by hunters trying to justify shooting through brush to kill their prey but sure man, if you're protecting something/someone then feel free to shoot through anything as long as you know where your target is and whats beyond it.
From a hunters perspective, the term brush gun refers to a weapon's ability to be maneuvered and manipulated quickly in close quarter hunting scenarios. As you touched on, shorter barrels, but also heavier, slower rounds with good short range energy. Also, IMHO, brush guns should be iron sights, or at least very low magnification scopes with wide field of view. This is because in heavily wooded or brush areas, target acquisition needs to be fast. Love your stuff, huge fan!! Thanks
Lpvo is low mag. As low as it gets
35 Remington
Same I use a sawed off 12 with slugs as a brush gun, loss of range is better than getting caught up in smilax vines by the balls.😂😂 I use a single shot as a brush gun. I use 45/70 Marlin in more open areas and 270 and 306 and 338 win mag in long wide areas.
@@chrisinvestigateschrisinve3249 Agree with all of it and smugly look down on people who deer hunt with .223 unless they're less than 10 years old.
If the brush is really heavy, often requiring use of both hands, a large caliber long barreled revolver is a good choice. My favorite was a Ruger Super Blackhawk with 10 5/8 inch barrel in 44 magnum.
Lesson: don’t shoot through a thing to hit a thing.
Exactly what I came here to say.
Depends on how far the thing you are intending to hit is behind the thing you are shooting through. The farther the distance the more deflection.
That's the least practical advice one can give. Besides, that's how you get to the soft creamy center... Necessity dictates actions. I learned more shooting through things to hit other things than your nearsighted "lesson" could ever teach.
@@TheCowboyfromhell87 for me, it depends if it's shooting back. Otherwise, not a good idea. Too much collateral damage, paperwork, and penance.
though in fairness, often seeing that twig between you and your target? Isn't always a thing. If you do know? For sure, you don't take the shot.
I think this is obvious... if wind is enough to change the impact of a bullet, why would any other thing touching it be different
How dare you use common sense, dont you know this is the internet?!
right, or why wouldn't a real object be totally worse than air?
"I think this is obvious..." could pretty much be said about any firearm video nowadays. People making videos "for science" but just shooting random shit; watermelons, sculpting clay, wood...This is on par with "you know how to not die in a plane crash? Don't ride in a plane" thing... This is common in the PC community here where folks compare random things to thermal paste and are shocked when it kinda works (as in it's better than nothing) but is still trash in comparison.
@@RexKramerDangerSeeker I just like seeing the effects different barriers have on different rounds. Because, you just never know when you'll have to shoot through cinder blocks, milk jugs, sculpting clay, car doors, etc. in order to kill a communist...
🖒😎
too much common sense, get out.
5/8ths inch pine isn't exactly _brush_
I'd like to see the same performed with 1/8ths inch balsa to emulate actual twigs & _sunflower_ _stalks_
I agree! A flat consistent obstruction is very different from hitting a rhododendron twig.
Or just use actual thick brush, and a lot of rounds. They aren't called wood strip guns.
Agree with the other comments in that 5/8 inch pine slat fired flat on is NOT representative of brush. Anything being fired through that material will deflect unless perhaps it is a 50BMG. See the video from Iraqveteran8888 for a better definition and test of the so-called "brushgun". In addition, the 30-30 is generally considered to be a bit light for a brushgun, with the 35 Remington being more popular for that genre.
This was more of a barrier penetration test than a brush busting test.
Maybe use a wood yardstick that is thinner and flat all of the way across the wood.
My Marlin 336 30-30 has always worked for me in any situation even across wide open areas, I can't understand why people think a 30-30 can't shoot in the open 🤨
People are too easily susceptible to myths and hearsay. 30-30 has everything you need, and nothing you don’t (for 99.9% of applications) - especially in regards to my area.
My Glenfield 30A will shoot half dollar size groups all day long at 150 yards.
Too big for squirrel
@@johnyjohns4271 Only if you plan to eat it
@@johnyjohns4271
Not if you shoot it in the head.
Stop this you're going to make me buy a lever gun. My wallet already hates me lol.
Same except I can’t find any!
I have 2, a Marlin .357 and a Browning .22. They're both so much fun to shoot. Do it!
And lever actions can be affordable, as long as you're not looking at a Henry.
I really want a 45 70 lol
Do it!
Love my Henry Big Boy 357
I inherited grandads 3030 '94. It's my favourite rifle, but ive got a ross on its way as a challenger
I've hunted nearly my whole life (38 years) in WV which is almost exclusively brush country. My favorite rifle is a Marlin lever action in Remington .35 with optics. I've read many but not all comments. I use the gun for both reasons stated here. It's short and easy to move with through the woods. I believe it also gives me my best opportunity for clean harvest should I miss seeing a stray twig in the target path. Honestly, even though I have other rifles, I don't have a lot of experience hunting with them. I depend on my .35 because it always gets the job done. I do know I get 75-150 yard shots, yes, through the woods. I don't take risky shots and have probably passed on shots I should have taken but didn't. Good video but I don't remember if you said how far the sapling was from your friend and the deer. A twig close to you but far from the target has much more impact on success than one close to the target. Stay safe y'all and happy hunting!
It was about halfway between me and the deer.
I grew up shooting the same gun in the dense woods and swamps of Louisiana. It had a scope, but I found that using open sights in brush gave me more light in exchange for magnification. The rifle and it's ammunition were excellent for penetrating brush and not be knocked off course by much at those distances.
also final energy at the the target "deer" would be much greater with a 35 or 4570 then a little 223 ... large caliber just buys you much more lee way for a harvest imo ... which he kinda mentions ... 1 in from center and a 4570 now doing 1300fps lets say... has a much better chance to kill the target then a 223 now at 1300 fps..
@@chuckhaggard1584 Chuck would you be willing to put in a request for a caliber review? 35 remington.
If not that's fine I can keep sending comments
Enjoying the lever action series!
No but the heavier bullet will cause more destruction when I animal is hit
Even given the seemingly obvious flaws in equating 5/8" wood strips to light, intervening brush, or occasional plant stalks between the shooter and the target, let's take the results actually found by the test and see if they are significant.
I'd say that a consistent 2/3 LESS deflection rate from the 30/30 to the other rounds is something the take note of for sure.
If the other rounds are deflecting by 4" consistently, while the typical 'brush gun round' is deflecting by less than 2" consistently, then you are certainly getting a measurably better result through 'brush' and the claims can be said to stand up, in my opinion.
Don't forget, this is very close so the deflection could be more pronounced at a longer distance, or through multiple obstructions. But, it's more something to keep in mind than it is something to dissuade someone from using a brush gun.
@@hulbertparsons7396 The level of deflection from individual pieces probably also gets worse at range as the bullet loses speed and piercing power
If you shot through a short "field" of dowel rods, I think you would have a better representation. Testing various thicknesses and distances with each caliber would give even better data.
I concur. I think the curved nature of a round twig or dowel would lead to more deflection.
I seem to remember that Guns and Ammo did a dowel rod based test back in the 80's.. Might have been Mike Ventirino? Ross Seyfried? I don't remember but it I do remember it was a pretty extensive test. I think that one of the better results was with round ball.
@@slowpokebr549 What's old is new again 😁. I might check that out. Merry Christmas.
I agree. Another idea is to use your Christmas tree branches cut into bundles to represent "brush"
Yeah I don't think his test was designed very well to test what he wanted to test
That friend saying he hit a sunflower stalk and that's why he missed his mark would've been a much less convincing story without it still hitting the target, and that kinda says a lot about people and our willingness to believe others
Growing up I thought brush guns were just fast handling rifles with iron sights meant for quick shots at close range. Didn't know it was a literal thing to shoot through brush. Seems to violate safety rules to me.
I'm glad you are a grown up now. Hope this video help with that.
@@secretsquirrel4773
All Outdoors's comment seems to indicate to me that he wouldn't shoot thru brush as it was a safety issue. And this was while he was still young and WAY before he saw this video. Your comment seems to put him down, but it REALLY puts YOU in a bad light! And rightfully so. Too quick to a wrong conclusion! All Outdoors sounds to me like he has a good head on his shoulders, and has since his youth! Many of us are not so fortunate.
Yes, it seems that this video is confusing the purpose of blunt-tipped rounds used in tube magazines. In all reality, the shape had more to do with the state of the art of metallurgy and other technology at the time they were designed; a blunt tip didn't deform (or risk setting off the primer of an adjacent round) in a tube magazine, and offered slightly better round density inside the tube. There's no evidence that the _shape_ of a wadcutter slug deflects any better or worse, but my kin who served in Vietnam were partial to calibers with more _mass_ (and therefore inertia) because that inertia kept them more on course through foliage.
Brush guns are for protection against dangerous animals charging at you through the brush at short distances.
No 'seems' to it. It violates safety rules to shoot at something you haven't visually identified. And for the dangerous game comments, if a Cape Buffalo or Grizzly Bear is charging you through brush. You are probably going to know it.
I was doing some varmint hunting 2 days ago, and took several shots at fairly close range through tall grass with a .222. Two out of three missed. I am fairly certain a 45-70 would have hit.
When I think of 'brush' I am thinking there are some leaves or tall grass between me and the target, not limbs or boards. I have seen 22-250 bullets explode when shooting through willow leaves. 30-30's don't do that...
You nailed the point. All of these new rounds you see coming out are the product of nerds on keyboards doing models and playing with spreadsheets. I like Ron Spomer's channel for explaining this nerd shit, I'm a nerd too and enjoy the data. What he does is tells you where they fit in the stack of established rounds. What I *will* say is none of these new rounds have displaced any of the established classics sitting in the safe... If anything, I respect a .357 through a lever gun more than before after seeing a ballistics model. Would I buy a 300 blackout or another .357 which I already have? I'm going with the gun which has plenty of rounds on the shelf.
The rough holes from the Carbine calibers could simple be partial deformation of the soft nose. Other test have shown how sensitive Spitzers are to even *very light* obstacles. The intent isn't to be able to shoot through a BRANCH, but through leaves and very light twigs.
My thoughts as well, he left a lot of questions unanswered, and disappointed
For all the safety patrols commenting...watch the whole video please. He clearly states he would never take a shot without a clear path to the animal, says hunters should consider better optics so they can make better decisions, says he doesn’t actually believe the marketing of these rifles was ever to encourage hunters to shoot through brush...watch the whole video...the video is about ballistics, trajectory, and WHY we shouldn’t shoot without a clear path...well done Lucky Gunner, as always!
I went to the range on a windy day recently, and with a 40 mph headwind, I got vertical stringing with my AR.
I always thought “brush gun” refers to a gun that is easy to handle walking through thick brush. For example a short carbine instead of a rifle with a 30 inch barrel.
That is the real meaning behind the term. Unless your life is at risk you shouldn't blindly shot thru brush
Same
I never heard it in that context when I grew up hunting. It was to be able to go through brush. The larger caliber would facilitate this. Kinda like the ones now that think "flat shooting" refers to no muzzle flip on firing.
years ago, I think it was Berretta that made a move on what happens when you shoot through brush. Wish I still had it. They pretty much showed that a "brush" busting bullet simply does not exist.
Just going to point out: 30/30 still hit 3 out of 3. The goal was to be able to shoot in the woods, which he covers well at about the 12 minute mark.
My favorite gun is an old Glenfield 30A in .30/30. Best 100-150 yard shooter I’ve ever used.
Love the 30/30, an old lever gun is near and dear to my heart
@@peternorton5648 Mine as well. My Dad had a Winchester ‘94 in .30/30 from the 30’s that belonged to my grandfather. It was supposed to go to me eventually, but someone decided to liberate it from Dad’s house. I prefer the Marlin action as a shooter, but I would have liked to have had that Winchester, too.
@@corneliuscrewe677 I hear that. Similarly I had a pre ‘64 Winchester 30/30 that I inherited from my father-in-law that ended up in someone else’s house too. Makes me angry every time I think about it. Anyway, Happy New Year to you!
@@peternorton5648 ...and you as well.
Reminds me of that cop sniper who couldn't understand why his bullets weren't hitting the perp, he was hitting the wall in front of him but looking through the optic he thought he had it high enough to clear it
To get to the bottom of the brush gun history, we need to get Walter “Manny” Mansfield’s take on it.
Don't forget that the 'Brush Guns' ammo also is flat or rounded due to the fact it usually is loaded in a tube fed magazine. A pointed bullet could cause the ignition of the primer of the cartridge in front of it when the gun recoils.
Its been tested quite a bit I believe and its not the case, I believe its more of a space saver than anything
Um no. That’s false.
@@blkfld7850 well everything can happen, Just like your action can explode right in your face, but having pointed cartridges in your lever action rifle isn't going to explode every time you shoot it, it's more of a "once in a blue moon" occurrence under some pretty nasty recoil and fmj style projectiles
@@blkfld7850 It's much less likely than many say, but it's not completely wrong. Buffalo Bore uses small rifle primers in their 45-70 Magnum rounds because they had a problem with hard flat nose rounds setting off the round in front of it under hard recoil when the rounds angled just right.
I agree that there is a danger. The real probability of those pointed rounds hitting a primer too hard will not likely be due to recoil as much as dropping you gun from some height (perhaps a tree stand) at the precise angle, on something hard. The explosion of 4-5 rounds in the tubular charger would be quite nasty. I wouldn't take chances.
This is a great test, and that first round of 45-70 that nicked the barrier is the most telling. My money is that the most deflection would be found when a bullet in flight hits the edge of a barrier. The asymmetrical effect on the external ballistics would cause the most exaggerated deviation. That said, a test like that sounds like it'd be an exercise in frustration to get it done as the margin of error is as little as .224"
As you note, uneven forces on the bullet make things more random.
Good video, interesting concept. While I generally agree that the concept of a "brush busting caliber" is moot, it is definitely true that heavier projectiles will be acted upon less by general brush.
In this test you're shooting through a solid board. Even knowing that the board is not going to be completely uniform by means of density and makeup, the projectile is still being acted upon on all sides by the board as it passes through.
However, if a projectile were to just nick the edge of the board to where it was only acting on say 50% of the surface area of the projectile, I would bet you would see your lighter projectiles deviate much further than heavier projectiles. At least my understanding of physics would imply so as the heavier projectile only being acted on on a single side would have more mass to exert it's own inertial forces against the edge of the board. Basically, the heavier an object is the hard it is to accelerate, decelerate, or change its direction.
And 300 grains is light for 45-70. I think a hardcast flat nose would be the most likely to cut through light vegetation with little deflection, for the same reasons they're used for dangerous game.
That's because heaviness is a function of mass and gravitational pull. Inertia is a function of mass and velocity. So it's not the _shape_ that creates inertia, it's mass.
@@StringerNews1 I'm fairly certain you either misunderstood my point or are just restating it.
I'm aware of what inertia is and its relationship to mass and velocity. However, as to the point of this video, if a small portion of the object in motion is acted upon then the inertia in that portion is all that is directly disrupted, causing tumbling or yaw as the connective forces within the object cause slowing and pulling on the portion unaffected by said barrier. However, an object of greater mass would maintain that energy better while being in contact with this partial area of friction and would therefore maintain a course closer to its original path, in general. Velocity would also play into it as well as the materials of which the moving object and barrier are made up of.
But as a general observation, with a projectile striking a small piece of wood such as a thin branch or twig at a glancing point, a heavier projectile will be deviated much less than a lighter projectile.
@@TheBamidd sorry but it's you who seems to misunderstand now. If an object in motion changes path after a collision, it's not because it lost energy, it's because its energy was directed in another direction. The elastic collision is literally Physics 101. You could have a projectile of infinite mass, and if we ignored the fact that it would never accelerate to leave the barrel, a collision with _any_ mass would indeed alter its path. The moral of the story is not to use black holes as bullets, it's that you shouldn't try to make bank shots with guns.
@@StringerNews1 the object in motion itself has indeed lost energy. If it comes into contact with anything else, a portion of the inertial energy is transferred into whatever it comes into contact with. And that is physics 101. The law of conservation of energy states the energy is not lost, which is true within the total system, but that energy can be transferred. In this case it is transferred into the colliding object.
Hell, a projectile in motion in the environment if our planet will transfer energy into its environment in the form of heat naturally over the course if its flight due to drag. Impact with an object causes a sudden transfer of inherent energy in a portion of the object. Look at it this way: if you had a model plane balanced and suspended from a string and you pushed on one wing, it would rotate to that side rather than being pushed directly backwards right? That would be because you are imparting a force, and therefore energy, on single point of the object which is not equally distributed across the entirety of the object. And thus, rotation.
Good to know if I'm ever in a pasture covered in dry 5/8" pine strips. How does one of those strips compare to the sunflower stalk?
Tree branches aren't planed planks of wood. The shot that best represents actual field conditions is the shot on the edge of the board with the .45-70, and that does it poorly. The idea of a brush gun isn't to shoot through 5/8ths inch of wood, you're trying to shoot around the trees and branches. The idea of the brush gun is to give an edge while shooting though the inevitable tangle of twigs in thick brush that you can't even see while taking the shot. Go hunting in the woods where you can't see 50 yards for the brush and this concept becomes obvious.
"The idea of the brush gun is to give an edge while shooting though the inevitable tangle of twigs in thick brush"
But i think the concept is the same, If the bullet is made of soft metal, like lead, It Will have some kind of deformation when It hit the branch, or any other material, and the caliber wouldn't change much either, because the deformation would happen anyways
The better solution, in my mind, would be using FMJ rounds
@@bpcantizani FMJ is unlawful for hunting in every jurisdiction I know of.
@@jameschristensen1055 Oh, my bad then, i'm not from the USA, so there are many specifications that i do not know. But i get why it would be bad to use FMJ for hunting, many accidents could happen
Awesome video. The overall advice at the end is great. I hunt in the woods with a 22" .308. I've seen the results of other hunters having taken marginal shots with "brush guns" that resulted in having to track a wounded animal for hours. No caliber is magic. It's mostly about the Indian, not the arrow.
I'm a hunters ed instructor. Never in my ten years of teaching I have never once recommended shooting through an object. A brush gun is a short barreled, close to medium range rifle that allows for quick target acquisition, because in the thick woods of western Montana where I hunt. They're there then gone.
I see you have 2.6 stars on Yelp.
I’ve taking over 180 deer in the brush, when we say A brush gun generally talking about when deer stop, they generally stop behind a small piece of brush, therefore if the bullet struck anything it would be within 1 to 3’ of the deer and generally in one or 3 feet the bullet won’t stray much, in my test pointed bullets tend to deflect much more than flat nose bullets and I used about 15 to 20 pieces of brush for each bullet to impact, sometimes you have to shoot through the brush if you want to eat
Agreed, 90% of my deer hunting is done in thick eastern woods. If you are waiting for "the perfect shot", meaning NO possible obstructions then you and your family are going to go without. How many people become idiots behind the wheel knowing an accident can happen but still choose to do so. Putting their family and other families at risk. Take the shot.
This is what I came to the comments to say. The "brush busting" part is the brush that is directly in front of the deer. Any brush between the hunter and the deer that is not within 30 feet of the deer can easily be avoided by the hunter side stepping before taking a shot when in ranges that these "brush guns" are designed for (25 - 125 yards). Also, the "brush" being talked about is the thin, latest new growth of junipers typical in the Eastern North American woods. Heavy flat nosed bullets are going to deflect a lot less than lighter pointed bullets.
@@sophiefreshwater6040 I agree
It's "brush busting" not tree busting. I would have used balsa wood instead of pine. If you have a significant limb in your way you're going to adjust your aim.
Having lived in both Missouri and Alaska, I have come to know two wildly different, yet valid definitions of what a "brush gun" is.
In MO, most people mean something compact, light weight, with protected sights and positive chamber safety. Normally that means a lever action due to the easy decocking of the hammer and relatively save "live chamber".
In AK, however, a brush gun is specifically something short with good iron sights that can stop at least a black bear with ok shot placement at short to close range. Aka a "bear thumper".
Iraqveteran8888 did a nice part 1 and 2 few years back!
This video is remarkably well made. Your post production skills have evolved nicely. Great work!
The deer died, tree branches are rounded and move. My favorite brush gun is the 12 ga. Slug and my ar style 450 bsm.
Ditto
I think you missed the point.
@@chuckhaggard1584 No, test is flawed.
@@rustybayonetcom test is fine, your logic is flawed.
@@chuckhaggard1584 please explain?
This was a good experiment, the only thing I didn't like about the test is that the wood sticks had a flat surface that was placed perpendicular to the bullets flight path, you could add another variable by using round dowel rods or angling the flat strips that you already have.
Or you could fire a bunch of rounds through, you know, actual brush. Larger, slower, flatter-nosed bullets do better through brush than fast spitzers. Its a fact, and this experiment proved it, once again. In many heavily wooded places, one doesn't have time to use a scope and line up on the target, that's why peep sights are so common on brush guns. Also, a simple leaf will deflect a light, fast moving spitzer much more than a round or flat nosed brush gun bullet. Iraq veteran 8888 does some pretty comprehensive testing of many more calibers: czcams.com/video/P5dve7vAY9I/video.html
The shot that clipped the edge of the wood already showed what would happen if the bullet hit the radius of a twig or stick......greater amount of deflection.
To me personally the definition of a brush gun would be a rifle that's only effective at less than 100yds. Not a long range rifle like a .243 or something.
And short
@@HutchCA guess you never hunted in a state where you are required to wear 50% blazed orange🤷♂️
Francis E. Sell in his book, “Advanced Deer Hunting” did exhaustive test shooting through brush and Alders. The results are quite interesting. The winners were cartridges with a muzzle velocity of between 2100 and 2500 feet per second. Some examples are: 30-30, .300 Savage, .30-40 Krag, .444 Marlin. There are a number of new cartridges that fall into that velocity range such as the .350 Legend. Very interesting 🤔.
I love that your intro clip is so short and simple.
It's always been about handling well in thick brush. I remember growing up reading stacks of old hunting magazines, dating all the way back to the early 30's that had been passed down from my grandfather to my dad then to me. The topic of brush guns would come up every so often, and it was always about lightweight carbines that carried well in dense brush. I think the myth of "shooting through brush" came from a few advertisements about "brush busting" bullets. The old timers really knew their stuff and there was multiple articles about not shooting through brush. There was even an article where they shot through a raspberry bush at a target to demonstrate the effects of brush on bullets.
I was told that the bullet shape was to prevent the accidentally setting off the next round due to the tubular magazine, pointy tip to primer. True ?
True to my knowledge anyway
That's what I've always heard, but I did also watch a Mythbuster's video (or something similar) where they tried to make that happen and were unable to.
The bullets were upsized revolver bullets which were flat or round to cycle in a cylinder. It also made more sense for capacity since you'd fit fewer Spitzer bullets in a tube. Weapons designers of the time were not as concerned about safety unless there were common cases and demand for change. The lack of a transfer bar on the old single action revolvers and lever gun are proof, because a little bump on a loaded chamber was way more likely than Spitzers setting each other off in a tube.
I have a marlin 1895 GBL. It has a 6+1 tube. But I've recently switched to hornady "leverevolution" ammo due to the big coof ammo shortage. And they have plastic tip points. It is still a 6+1, but it's a pain to load it. Need to use another round to get the last cartridge in if I know I am going to be in a spot with lots of deer.
it takes a spring loaded hammer to set off the primer to begin with, so that only might be an issue after being dropped
About two decades ago I remember reading in one of the major hunting publication magazines that a standard high-powered bottleneck rifle cartridge, such as the 30-06, was a better platform to actually go through brush than the standard commonly believed cartridges such as the 30-30 or 45-70.
So, Newton's first law of motion is still true ... every object will remain at rest or in uniform motion in a straight line unless compelled to change its state by the action of an external force.
This right here!
Not only is Newton still the Deadliest Sonovabitch In The Galaxy,
he's a sane hunter's best friend.
At a certain point, a dude shooting through brush isn't hunting, he's playing freaking billiards.
Exactly. Don't try to play pool with firearms.
Meaning a 30 30 would shoot better through sticks than a .22 woooooooooow :D
This debate is more in regards to Newton's 2nd law, in that greater mass requires more force to accelerate.
Another reason for the truncated end of the heavier rounds is that they're used in tubular magazines, and the nose of the slug is pressed up against the primer of the next round. The thought was that they're less likely to cause a discharge from the recoil. Superb analysis of the data and experimental evidence in examining this subject. Merry Christmas!
Interesting tests. Thanks. My grandfather was an Adirondack guide. He took wealthy hunters (usually NYC people) into the thick foliage of the mountains to hunt. He'd get a chuckle at their invariable choice of 30-06. He used a 35 Marlin. Hunting deer in the Adirondacks was almost always close range and through brush. His claim was that the 35 worked much better through the brush than a 30-06 or even a 30-30. My father however had a different tactic. He used a 22LR and shot the dear in the head. As a teen my dad was a great hunter. His claim to fame was taking his shots at under 10' :p Ultimately my dad became USAF special opps. One more story. My dad (18yrs old at the time) ran down a large buck in deep snow (on skis). I've got a photo of it somewhere - my grandfather took the picture. He grabbed the deer by the antlers and pulled it down into the snow. The deer submitted and just kind of gave up. He spent a bit of time face to face with the deer. To my grandfather's dismay my dad let the deer go. My dad was affected by this event and never hunted again. My grandfather was not moved by it at all. Always a hunter.
I know for a fact that a .35rem will bust through small brush tips and continue on to it's intended target without much viarance in target.
Dude, the reason why lever calibers are flat noses is so the bullets won’t touch off the primer on the bullet in front of it in the magazine tube.
Dood, ofc buts he's talking about how that is thought to help with brush
I think you should use the center of your clear shot group to measure the "brush" shot group from. In other words if your gun is shooting clear of obstacles an inch low on average, then use the inch low point to determine how far off the other groups are. But when hunting you want to make sure you have a clear shot. I think a good brush gun might be better defined as a carbine or short barrel rifle just to be handy and light in the woods. But this is interesting just because it's been an argument for so long.
Really digging the lever series!!
Good video, got a chuckle out of it. Heard plenty of stories of shots thrown off by blades of grass, bullet mass definitely a major factor. Very well done
Thanks for your work on these videos. Greatly appreciated.
my brush gun is a bolt action, wood stock with a metal but plate, 303 british that can take a beating and shoot a heavy enough bullet to minimize deflection. A bush gun (for me) has to be tough enough to get knocked around, cheap enough to not worry about, and durable enough of a chamber/cartridge to handle a little dirt/grass in the chamber.
and by minimize deflection, I'm talking shooting through tall grass, not sticks.
You should have shot dowels since that would more accurately represent the round shaoe of most branches and brush reeds. Theres a big difference in penetration capability and deflection resistance
This is what I was thinking as he showed the flat strips.
Made a couple magazine purchases from lucky gunner, worked out well and made it here in no time!
That Marlin Dark at the end with the LPVO looks cool as heck.
just missing an offset red dot and a light
That Marlin Dark is pure hotness.
@@Matthew-zb3iw ew what the hell??? You shouldn't even have an offset red dot on anything let alone a nice lever gun.
My 30-30 is my favorite rifle. Open sights. I've had almost every common caliber and its still the one I would grab in any situation.
The soft nose rounds likely also deformed in addition to yawing. Try looking up the Buick o truth for pistol caliber test on windshields. Slow heavy always shows less deviation.
Iraq veteran 8888 had two videos also testing this. They tested quite a few calibers. Their tests suggested big and slow non-spitzer design worked better.
I'm of the opinion that a 'brush gun' is shorter, lighter, and handier in thick cover than a longer open field/plains rifle, and you can get away with a steeper-trajectory cartridge because the ranges will be short. Nothing to do with resisting bullet deflection.
In my travels I've found some people think it's both.
Talked with the owner of HAWK bullets. He said they all get deflected no matter how big, heavy and slow. But the typical brush gun cartridges mention, which he also metronidazole, did do a little better then non-traditional brush cartridges.
3 years ago I shot through a 2" sappling, not on purpose, and heart slapped a nice 6 point at 40 yards. Was using a 44mag out of an 18" barrel. I've spent this entire time thinking it was the ammo, now I'm thinking it was just luck.
The reason brush gun bullets are flat nosed is because the guns that use them have tubular magazines and a spritzer bullet with the pointy nose could fire the round I front of it in the mag under recoil. I agree with those says a brush gun just means a carbine type gun that is short, light and thus makes it easier to use in brush that a fill size rifle. It does not mean you can or should shoot thru brush at game.
When I think brush gun, I think of shooting through a collection of small twigs/sticks. Not sure this captures that, but nonetheless I like your videos.
The ideal brush gun is chambered in .45-70, loaded with LeveRevolution .45-70 Monoflex, and sporting a 1.5x-2x optic. Get yourself a Marlin 1895 SBL, send it off to an aftermarket shop to clean up the action to get the 'grit' and 'crunch' out of there, and when you get it back, practice, practice, practice.
I would guess (common sense) that any kind of “deflection” would do just that..deflect. Like you said, hitting anything on its way to the target will destabilize the bullet and from there on, its anyones guess..it would also have something to do with the distance between the twig/branch and the final target..the further the target is from the deflection, the more distance the deflection. A branch closer to the target may not be that big of a deal, however if that branch is closer to the shooter, you might miss the target all together!
Yep!
In 2006 I shot a whitetail buck with my Ithaca 37 Deerslayer in 16 gauge with rifled slugs. The first shot hit the buck in the right side, breaking the offside shoulder at about 35 yards. The deer started running and I fired a second shot, the slug hit a sapling, and never hit the buck at all and I can still see in my mind the sapling falling over after the slug hit it. This year, I shot a Winchester 1894 in .32-40 and shot a buck at about 60 yards. I shot the deer in the neck because he was standing behind a few small scrub pine trees a couple feet tall and I didn't want to take a chance the shot would be deflected. The sapling that completely deflected that 16 gauge slug wasn't much bigger around than 1/2" so it doesn't take much to alter the course of a round, especially if it can alter a 1 ounce slug.
My brush guns is a .50 BMG-works well,punches through mild vegetation and usually drops my prey on the 1st shot
Usually?
Lmao, prolly dropping Moose through a full size pine tree
I'm sure you are kidding! There could be a cabin on the other side of that heavy brush. Or your hunting buddy.
you still have prey after you hit it with 50 BMG especially deer?
@@gomimaninoakland yeah, skins, quarters and kills it all in one shot
I do have a question, particularly since the ammo used was all hunting type loads, which was perfectly appropriate for the test. But, my question is, "How much of the effects of the rounds hitting the targets, and perceived "destabilization" is due to deformation of the bullet, expansion from hitting the wood, etc? I wouldn't expect any of these bullets to have gone through those "strips" without some level of expansion/deformation which in turn would have an effect on the bullet's trajectories.
Should have used round dows to see how much deflection.
The density of the thing is important as is the thing to target distance. Denser and farther increase the problem. "Accurate" intentional shooting through bushes, trees, and barriers with internal structure the size of "pine furring" would require a visual "bullet path". Every shot carries some technical consideration from how stable is the hold, cartridge dynamics, distance and environment. You addressed much of that. In the great plains of the world, shooting through tall grass is often accepted as a given - a minor barrier. Woods deer hunting requires picking a path and magnification is a help. Dense brush can be penetrated when close to the target. All that said, I have seen African solids from a 9.3x62 perforate 24 inches of oak tree and continue in a straight line and I have used solids in Africa among furring sized barriers close to my target path. Chris you are one of the most accomplished in video presentation and material. Thanks for what you do and I fully agree with your content today. But you ought to spend more time hunting. Killing is not required for a great experience.
I would advise to test 12 gauge steel or brass slugs, kind of wadcutter profile. For example, DDupleks Monolit. They are advertised to cut brush, it would be really interesting to see in comparison to rifles.
It was learned a number of years ago, about a year or so after Quigley Down Under came out. When the Black Powder cartridge rifle became better known, that the bullets fired by these guns act completely differently than the Spitzer bullets that had before been used for long range shooting competition. When they were shooting 10 inch groups at 12 yards with iron sights they had to completely understand the physics of the way those bullets flew compared to the Spitzer's and high-speed bullets of the smokeless powder rifles. I would suggest you look up the physics of that. Because it also explains why they deflect Less in Brush then do bullets that frequently fragment in Brush. Which the 223 was well known for.
The claim was never that the bullets didn't deflect, but the claim was that you could still hit the intended target even through brush.
Back in my navy days, we never noticed any deflection of our 16” gun rounds..... btw how many grains is 3200lbs?
7000 grains in a pound
The heavier of the two main projectiles (the AP) doesn't weigh 3200 lbs.
It's 2750 lbs, so its weight in grains is 19250000.
I believe you had to deal with the deflection of the earths curvature and rotation though...
@@robertmcbride6931 Actually, you're not stretching the truth one bit.
I was a Gunner's Mate (Guns) in the navy, and our gun had a range of 12 nautical miles (15 statute miles), and our Fire Controlmen had to compensate for those two factors when we fired our own 5"/54 caliber gun.
The 16"/50 caliber guns on the battleships could go out to over 23 statute miles.
@@Gunners_Mate_Guns When ever I want to give my Army cannon cockers shit, I just ask them if they can throw a Volkswagen. My ship ( the Worden) was near the Wisconsin when she fired a fire mission. I think my spleen switched places with my liver and we were 2000yds out.
Chris, I have had too many discussions about this all my life. You nailed it. You should have a clear path to the target.
Personally I always thought of a brush gun as something light easy to hike with and quick to get on target in limited space in a caliber capable of taking large animals same as a “guide gun” you should never hunt expecting to punch through obstacles that’s irresponsible IMO.
Never shoot through bushes.
My dad told me about accident that happened on the range when he was serving in army.
They moved from old AKM's in 7.62 to pretty new AK-74 chambered in 5.45.
They still were getting used to new round and it was winter.
One of the bullet hit twig and went up,knocking snow off pine.
No-one got injured,but it went high enough to fly over pile of sand that is supposed to catch the bullet.
There was and maybe still is a road in ~2 kilometers
Makes sense that most of those studies occurred during and right after Vietnam.
The ability to "shoot through brush." is an deer camp card table theory.
The theory that slower, heavier, round or flat nose bullets will pernitrate brush better than fast pointed bullets, sounds good, but that has been disproven time and time again.
Every deer camp has that one cowboy who tells the tale of killing that monster buck that was standing behind the mulberry bush and "dropping him with one skillful shot" from his 30-30.
I have no time or respect for hunters who believe that shooting through brush doesn't carry a risk of altering the bullet flight and that a magic bullet will eliminate the concern.
There is no substitute for the patience to wait for a clear shot or the self control to not take the shot at all.
Good stuff and I like your content. I have subbed.
I would be curious to see the test repeated with a 35 Remington, or 45-70 loaded with hard-cast lead, shooting through brush rather than flat dry wood. Seems like a better test.
Ok! I have gone hunting plenty of times. I do not particularly enjoy hunting, but I’ve done so with multiple types of guns and calibers including black powder. And here is what I’ve found, a glancing shot is never a good thing even if you did not see a sapling between you and your target. Secondly, I’ve found the use of a gun scope, can actually cause you to think you have a clear shot even when you don’t. Thirdly: yes there are some guns and rounds that will maintain better stability if you hit a twig, but will never maintain 100% stability after hitting something. Those are usually armor piercing rounds for extremely high caliber guns, that are over kill for hunting.
Heck, the SlowMo Guys confirmed that a watermelon can deflect a full on tank round significantly!
1).45-70 or .444 Marlin
2)Short barreled lever gun with a side loading gate.
3)Iron sites or low power optic.
4)Composite furniture with good recoil pad.
5)Stainless or weather resistant finish on metal parts.
6) Comfortable, good quality sling.
Just my opinion.
Anecdotal I know but I was hunting with my father when I was a child in the hills of West By God Virginia. We snuck up on a pretty nice buck who was chasing his does. My father took his opportunity, shot the 12 gauge slug. What he didn't notice was the large vine in the way, threw the slug off course, and the wad following behind smacked the deer. We had thought we hit because of the Deers actions. But we looked, and no blood, no hair, and a little flatter than usual wad. I saw the chunk out of the vine and we figured out.
A long winded way to say I agree, don't shoot through things to shoot things.
Iraq veteran 8888 has a 2 part series on this and its determined that big heavy bullets win hands down and he shoots at a lot longer range and about 25 yards of very thick brush.
Any amount of 'brush' will cause issues with accuracy. You need a clear shot to be a success. if you're hunting in the brush don't take the shot unless you have a clear shot.
Had a 400 gr 416 JSP completely miss a buck, at 40 ish yards. It hit a small dry twig about 15 yds from the muzzle, that wasn’t visible in the 2.5 power scope.
Personally I find buckhorn sites accurate and easier to use than other types.
Just a couple of quick notes: The blunt nose of bullets designed for tube-fed guns are made so the point of the bullet can't set off the primer of the cartridge ahead of it in the magazine as the gun recoils, or cause a chain reaction of all the rounds in the magazine tube. It has nothing to do with bucking brush. Also, I recently read a study where even a raindrop is enough to deflect a bullet off its course, so even hunting in the rain can be a bad idea. Sometimes ya gotta do whatcha gotta do, but apparently hunting game is best done when you have a clear shot and it isn't raining. Otherwise it's always a roll of the dice.
You should do this same test with a slow motion camera. It would be cool to see.
Magnified optics make target identification easier, but also make it harder or impossible to see these type of obstructions between you and the target. Small obstructions might be entirely out of focus and invisible due to a shallow depth of field. And if “brush” is close to the shooter it could obstruct the bore without even being in front of the optic at all. I think irons or a red dot would be better for brush (but worse for target ID) for these reasons.
Great video! I live in China, and these videos help me get my firearm "fix"!
Move to the U.S or Canada to get your fix!
@@timsim1940 he sounds like he really shouldn't then, drug addiction seems to be no good.
Interesting stuff. Funny how many gun myths stay alive by word of mouth or a post these days. Nice to see you actually test them. About 15 years ago I was told by shooting instructors that sights on handguns were set to actually aim high (from where the barrel was actually pointing) to compensate for recoil. That is, recoil from the gun caused the barrel to tip up before the bullet left it and thus hit high on the target. That sounded fishy to me but they were the instructors so who was I to argue? A few years later super slow motion video of guns shooting became common and it became obvious this was just another gun myth kept alive by word of mouth.
Is it possible that the round expanded slightly going through the strips and that's why you're getting ragged holes? I mean, considering you're using soft point ammo that seems more likely without something like high speed footage to prove one way or another
I would be interested if Chris had the time and ammo available to do this test many, many more times. I think once you threw out the flukes you'd definitely see the slow, old timey lever calibers do better post-barrier on average. Either way though, Chris' point still stands, responsible shot placement is key no matter what.
Hands down the best gun related channel on CZcams. Thankyou Sir.
Happy Holidays, everyone!
You too
Same to you
Some of us old school types do not see the 5.56 as an appropriate round for Deer and larger game, especially in growth areas, otherwise it is always about Shot Placement. Nice to change barrels with the 350 legend and my favorite 450 Bushmaster.
Again it comes back to the same thing I've been saying for thirty years. Just get get a .308.
Problems solved. Just get a .308.
LOL. Like the good old days when we went hunting with hunting rifles, not assualt rifles. Something like that? LOL Was it a zombie dear?
@@aliceking2350 - I'm not exactly sure what you're talking about. You don't seem to have the ability to articulate yourself through written form and also provide intonation at the same time.
However, I can tell you that .308 Winchester has been around since the late 40's and is the most popular hunting cartridge in North America.
@@aliceking2350 AsSaUlT RiFLeS bruh please get out
I've got .308s. .308 bullets are not exempt from the laws of physics.
@@aliceking2350 That AR15 is my hunting rifle, so that makes it a hunting rifle. I was born in the good old days so I know stuff like that.
A long time 30-30 pistol & carbine deer hunter in Oklahoma (150 gr), the bane of which is the ever-growing, invasive Western Cedar trees, I found the 454 Casull in the heavy grains works really well, again in either a revolver (9.5”) or carbine.
Faster Heavier = Less deviation
I've been busted by brush two times. The first was with a 32 Winchester Special that hit a twig a few inches from the muzzle that was out of my line of sight resulting in a complete miss at a doe 30 yards away. The second was with a 170 gr. Hornady RN from an 8x57 that clipped a sapling a few feet in front of a buck. What was a double lung shot turned into a spine shot that dropped the deer, but required a finishing round. No intentional shooting through brush for me.