03-07-2019, 03:17 PM
Don't beat yourself up on this DNS. You took a good shot with a round you thought was a good enough round, and it didn't work. By publishing the data and your experience, you may have converted at least a handful of future hunters to elect to use a more appropriate round; and prevent more of this. Scientifically, I actually want you to do this again, and gather more data; but I understand if your'e done by now. Here's what the data you've gathered is saying so far.
Out of Wolf-6.5 Testing N=3
N#1: two hit dual-shot, the terminal shot-placement shot (shot N#1a) resulted in terminal results, as expected since it was a perfect shot. The accompanying non-terminal soft-tissue shot (shot N#1b; in the rear, that was fired from a second gun at the same time on purpose), was noted to have fairly limited tissue damage, vs what is seen with your more purpose made hunting bullets such as 90 gr TNT's.
N#2: (first hog of this video). DRT (dead right there), due to a headshot that would have been a DRT even if it were a simple steel ice-pick. Data did show the round was sufficiently accurate to hit where aimed, and to penetrate and deliver enough energy to go into an obvious instant DRT shot.
N#3: A should-be-terminal shot, with no reason to believe didn't impact where aimed; failed to drop the hog. By your reaction, you've taken that shot, or similar, enough times with hunting bullets, that in your experience it should be a dead-on-location shot, if not a DRT shot even. It did not, and the Hog ran for quite some time, and escaped, and was not trackable. It either completely escaped, or it died quite some time later, neither were really the goal
From this body of data, we are starting to see that Wolf Steel is considerably less effective of a hunting round, than a purpose made hunting bullet; despite gel tests (and as you note: animals are not made of gel). Given the choice, the $0.70 upcharge per shot is a small added expense, considering the time and all other expenses involved in the endevour. Or in other words, Wolf Steel is starting to appear to not be just as good as any other hunting round, for dropping hogs. Good to know, thanks for investing the ~20+ man hours of testing, data compilation, and professional quality presentation of the findings, to let us know.
Keep up the good work - you sir, are an asset that makes being a member of this forum worth doing! The data-density of your posts for making decisions in purchases and practices is invaluable!
Out of Wolf-6.5 Testing N=3
N#1: two hit dual-shot, the terminal shot-placement shot (shot N#1a) resulted in terminal results, as expected since it was a perfect shot. The accompanying non-terminal soft-tissue shot (shot N#1b; in the rear, that was fired from a second gun at the same time on purpose), was noted to have fairly limited tissue damage, vs what is seen with your more purpose made hunting bullets such as 90 gr TNT's.
N#2: (first hog of this video). DRT (dead right there), due to a headshot that would have been a DRT even if it were a simple steel ice-pick. Data did show the round was sufficiently accurate to hit where aimed, and to penetrate and deliver enough energy to go into an obvious instant DRT shot.
N#3: A should-be-terminal shot, with no reason to believe didn't impact where aimed; failed to drop the hog. By your reaction, you've taken that shot, or similar, enough times with hunting bullets, that in your experience it should be a dead-on-location shot, if not a DRT shot even. It did not, and the Hog ran for quite some time, and escaped, and was not trackable. It either completely escaped, or it died quite some time later, neither were really the goal
From this body of data, we are starting to see that Wolf Steel is considerably less effective of a hunting round, than a purpose made hunting bullet; despite gel tests (and as you note: animals are not made of gel). Given the choice, the $0.70 upcharge per shot is a small added expense, considering the time and all other expenses involved in the endevour. Or in other words, Wolf Steel is starting to appear to not be just as good as any other hunting round, for dropping hogs. Good to know, thanks for investing the ~20+ man hours of testing, data compilation, and professional quality presentation of the findings, to let us know.
Keep up the good work - you sir, are an asset that makes being a member of this forum worth doing! The data-density of your posts for making decisions in purchases and practices is invaluable!