quote:

Originally posted by ALF:
Ah Taylor and his formula

Another bit of meaningless ballistics tomfoolery
No logical basis in physics and even less in practical wound ballistics.

Please let me know when you have killed as much or more African game as Taylor did and I'll fall at your feet and idolise you for life. Until then you can join all the rest of us wannabes'on this and any other hunting forum on the net today

What crbutler said is what I was going to say only cr put it in prettier words than I.

Eagle 27
dont get your panties in a wad ! I did not in any way infer that somehow Taylor was somehow a bad guy.

I attacked his formula, no more no less.

No matter ho many animals Taylor was purported to have killed it still does not make his or any other mathematical formula valid !

Taylor's formula falls within the Momentum group of formulae albeit the addition of bullet diameter as multiplier.

His formula reads KO = V x M x D or simply momentum X d

There is no law that says momentum = killing ability ! there is no law that says momentum = penetration.

pure Momentum per se has mathematically been discounted as a valid player in the "killing equation". Simply because of the fact that it places velocity and mass on equal footing and we know that velocity and mass are not equal players in collision science.

A ping pong ball going fast can have the same momentum as billiard ball going slow.

On impact with a target however the two will have a vastly different effect !

It then leaves us with the energy group of equations. ie those mathematical equations that place credence on the available potential energy of a missile in flight to do the killing !

Simply put Muzzle energy !

Many hunting laws adopted by conservation authorities will place minimum muzzle energy requirements in combination with bullet caliber as minimum requirements for species of animals hunted. Again as a matter of physical science this can be challenged.

Sadly these to fall short when it comes to collision mechanics in that we know that not all of the energy is converted to meaningful work.

by meaningful work we can say that part of energy that has the ability to transport tissue.
in terms of the wounding process we can safely assume that only mechanical energy plays a role in the creation of the wound, Heat (thermal energy) and sound (acoustic energy) are present but do not contribute in any meaningful way. Just as ultrasound ( acoustic energy) does not damage living tissue and projectile contact with tissue is to short for heat to actually burn the tissue during projectile passage.

What is more these formulae totally disregard the fact that the targets reaction to receipt of energy may differ based on the mechanical properties of the target. The reactio portion of the interaction is not accounted for in any of the formulae.

The last group of formulae are based on observation of target reaction.

Examples include studies based on observations of reactions of shooting into simulants, live animals ( La Garde)or documentation of actual human shootings .

In each group the validity of observation can be subjected to scrutiny and sadly all fall short.
it is very difficult or impossible to make a universal formula from a observational study. There are simply too many variables and to many observations that fall outside the boundaries of what we believe to be the norm.

ALF, like many including our forum host,you miss the point that Taylor did not come up with his knock out formula in isolation. I would likely concur with you, Saeed or any others that his formula is just another mathematical attempt to categorize cartridges for use on African game, but he backed up his formula with real life observations of the cartridges used on dangerous game. He does recognise that certain cartridges 'fell outside' his formula as they performed better than his formula indicated e.g. the 375 H&H, 9.2 Mauser. Most of the cartridges of his era threw heavy bullets at moderate velocities, not much between the cartridges, other than bullet weight and frontal area, velocities being much of a muchness.

We have to remember that he was only comparing the cartridges of the day, he did not know that in the future we would see cartridges like Saaeds favourite the 404/375. Had that cartridge been around in his day he would no doubt have acknowledged that it performed better than his formula indicated it should and so it would be with some of the other developments since his passing. But he did not hunt or live in our era. Nevertheless many of the cartridges still very popular and continuing to be used to good effect today were used by him, and his formula hand in hand with his observations from shooting more game than Saeed, yourself, or anyone else alive today still hold sway for me.

Taylor was not interested in any law that said this or that, in fact he deliberately avoided saying how his formula was derived because he said that was not relevant to the process. He could have used his experience on game killing to produce a comparative system using - super, excellent, v. good, good, moderate, poor, useless, f..ing useless, had he so desired but at least he did come up with a formula that was less subjective, repeatable and fitted most of the African cartridges in use in his era.

Nobody today or ever in the future has or will have the credentials to question his knowledge and experience of African game hunting and killing or the formula he used to categorise those cartridges of his era.

I have got some weatherbys, in fact come to think of it, seems I have got them all right up to and including the wildcats .510 wells version for one

fun to shoot and they seem to be killers

absolutely without question better killers with hard bullets

cause they're a bit and really just a bit faster than most of the stuff out there, but not all of it --so

the 9.3 x 62 mm packing a 285 grain warhead running 2,250 is going to africa with me this year

and it's enough of a killer to pack up anything needing shot dead

may not be all that fast may not even be the best but it is enough bad dog to get the job done

and quite likly to be in my hands a well shot rifle

why why better shot than the 378 wby well it's lighter so may be a bit quicker to battery

it's almost no recoil on the scale of heavy rifle s

and has been so cheap to load for and shoot that we loaded up 2,000 rounds for 15 rifles

which we made from old 9.3 x 57 husqvarnas by opening them up to 62mm

cheap enough that the whole family can join in and shoot a standard rifle standard bullet so get the trigger time necessary

and the ladies standing upright on their hind legs are out shooting the little boys more often than not

so what about that- where are you going to find a fit like that- in any other caliber

the slow running 9.3 x 62 mm Mauser has been since it first came out, a 110 years ago, the general solution to big game in africa which in most cases includes dangerous game --- better to shoot straight than to shoot fast I would think

quote:

Originally posted by DOPPELGANGSTER:

quote:

Originally posted by lavaca:
Doppel:

One piece of advice. Your wife should never find out about your girlfriend. If my wife did, I wouldn't have to even see the truck before it hit me.

I have neither, I'm FREEEEEEEEEEEEE!!!!!!!

Mate, you need a couple...let em fight it out..Knives in female hands kill

quote:

Originally posted by ALF:
Velocity kills ! more velocity more "killing power"

The ballistics lie of the century !

There is no physical law that links velocity to killing power !

Velocity is a mathematical entity denoting the rate of change a body's position when in motion. No more no less !

"Killing power" on the other hand a nebulous undefined , multi factorial entity denoting the capacity of a projectile to induce death. The Induction of the process of death itself a purely biological process free of any mathematical modelling.

On the one side a pure mathematical formula and on the other a biologic and physical process that leads to death. Trying to link the two tenuous at best ! If not impossible.


This prompted the following editorial on the subject in the Journal of Trauma
The Idolatry of Velocity, or Lies, Damn Lies, and Ballistics !

Drop a .30 cal bullet on one of your feet. After noting result, shoot yourself in the other with a 300 RUM or Saeed's 300/404. Next, to leave no bases uncovered take an appropriate sized nail and nail the first foot to the floor. You won't need a slide-rule to compute the results.

Well if velocity was the only element in killing power I would have necked down a 50 BMG to a phonograph needle..Please don't make me explain what a phonograph is...just ask your grandpaw!!

If big slow moving bullets were the solve all, then I would have built myself a 20 MM with a half dozen recoil brakes on it...

It takes a combination of both reason, truth and experience to figure it out I suppose. As usual the truth and reason lie somewhere in the middle. The experience just allows you to accept the other two..

If you are of the opinion velocity plays no part in killing effectiveness, you are either in denial or are being obtuse. Seyfried validated it, Randy & Connie Brooks did as well and hell, I have. Given the proper bullet, (let's use a 400r TSX out of a 416) a MV of 2700 fps will have more effect than the same bullet traveling at 2350(assuming striking in the SAME place, let's call it center of the shoulder). And even more dramatic are the effects on the big cats.

quote:

Please don't make me explain what a phonograph is...just ask your grandpaw!!

Is that anything like a gramaphone?

“The truth is that any good modern rifle is good enough. The determining factor is the man behind the gun.”

Excerpt From: Roosevelt, Theodore. “African Game Trails.”

quote:

Drop a .30 cal bullet on one of your feet. After noting result, shoot yourself in the other with a 300 RUM or Saeed's 300/404. Next, to leave no bases uncovered take an appropriate sized nail and nail the first foot to the floor. You won't need a slide-rule to compute the results.

jack a d 9 blade down on your toe go slow, real slow, it won't kill you cause it's just a poorly placed shot, a bit better positioned and it would, but you will at some point wish it could ---- sloppy thinking begets-- sloppy argument

quote:

Originally posted by stradling:

quote:

Drop a .30 cal bullet on one of your feet. After noting result, shoot yourself in the other with a 300 RUM or Saeed's 300/404. Next, to leave no bases uncovered take an appropriate sized nail and nail the first foot to the floor. You won't need a slide-rule to compute the results.

jack a d 9 blade down on your toe go slow, real slow, it won't kill you cause it's just a poorly placed shot, a bit better positioned and it would, but you will at some point wish it could ---- sloppy thinking begets-- sloppy argument

Hunting with a D9, there's an idea.

quote:

Originally posted by ALF:

quote:

It's not complicated. All else being equal, high velocity bullets kill faster and better than low velocity bullets.

A very brave statement indeed !

Again I will wager the statement is not true !

You made the statement "all else equal" ie only the velocity is the variable.

If that is so the bullet by definition has to be non frangible, non deformable and above all has to be ballistically stable. That negates all bullets but very hard steel spheres.

The all else equal provision is a "problem " because we have to account for the physics of collisions. Actio vs Reactio ! There is under our hunting conditions using usual hunting bullets no "all else equal" not unless we hunt with steel pellets

So if you now fire this bullet ( steel sphere) at varying velocity into the animal does the statement still hold true? No it does not !

This experiment has actually been done !

Fackler did this and not only did they do it at "normal" velocities they went hyper velocity ie shots fired at targets in a hyperbaric chamber where air pressure has been eliminated to attain hyper velocity impacts.

Sorry, ALF. I thought you knew. All of my hunting bullets are steel spheres.

quote:

Originally posted by stradling:

quote:

Drop a .30 cal bullet on one of your feet. After noting result, shoot yourself in the other with a 300 RUM or Saeed's 300/404. Next, to leave no bases uncovered take an appropriate sized nail and nail the first foot to the floor. You won't need a slide-rule to compute the results.

jack a d 9 blade down on your toe go slow, real slow, it won't kill you cause it's just a poorly placed shot, a bit better positioned and it would, but you will at some point wish it could ---- sloppy thinking begets-- sloppy argument

Its examples of:

1) mass without energy or penetration,

2) mass with high velocity and penetration

3) penetration without much energy. ( with a degree of "anchoring" thrown in for free.) Much like the D9.

quote:

Originally posted by Michael Robinson:

quote:

Originally posted by ALF:
[QUOTE]It's not complicated. All else being equal, high velocity bullets kill faster and better than low velocity bullets.

A very brave statement indeed !

Again I will wager the statement is not true !

You made the statement "all else equal" ie only the velocity is the variable.

If that is so the bullet by definition has to be non frangible, non deformable and above all has to be ballistically stable. That negates all bullets but very hard steel spheres.

The all else equal provision is a "problem " because we have to account for the physics of collisions. Actio vs Reactio ! There is under our hunting conditions using usual hunting bullets no "all else equal" not unless we hunt with steel pellets

So if you now fire this bullet ( steel sphere) at varying velocity into the animal does the statement still hold true? No it does not !

This experiment has actually been done !

Fackler did this and not only did they do it at "normal" velocities they went hyper velocity ie shots fired at targets in a hyperbaric chamber where air pressure has been eliminated to attain hyper velocity impacts.

There's untold millions of steel spheres shot at game every year.Its called steel shot, perhaps you've heard of it?

It was pretty sorry stuff for years until the velocity was cranked up to ever higher and higher levels. Its quite effective now.

quote:

Originally posted by Dogleg:

quote:

Originally posted by stradling:

quote:

Drop a .30 cal bullet on one of your feet. After noting result, shoot yourself in the other with a 300 RUM or Saeed's 300/404. Next, to leave no bases uncovered take an appropriate sized nail and nail the first foot to the floor. You won't need a slide-rule to compute the results.

jack a d 9 blade down on your toe go slow, real slow, it won't kill you cause it's just a poorly placed shot, a bit better positioned and it would, but you will at some point wish it could ---- sloppy thinking begets-- sloppy argument

Its examples of:

1) mass without energy or penetration,

2) mass with high velocity and penetration

3) penetration without much energy. ( with a degree of "anchoring" thrown in for free.) Much like the D9.

D9 is actually a medium bore, gotta step up to a D11 to hunt DG.

Too many variables to control, so folks love to concentrate on their favorite(s) and preach its virtues or vices.

But it sure is fun to watch the antics.

KINDA LIKE
a Democrat framing the argument so he is right or you are stupid

we need to be on the watch here on this forum to seek information, enlightenment, and discovery through debate, argument, and discussion, not deliverance from integrity, hard work, hard minded thinking, clarity and ambition

just to make a few ill earned freinds, unworthy fame, Hillary Clinton kind of support

preaching is not all that useful either, so should shut up at some point

As prep leading up to my Sep safari, I have been watching old hunting VHSes. In "Sudden Death", a client hits an old dugga boy in the shoulder and the old bull takes off.

Mark Sullivan and the client follow up on the buff. At one point, the buff is lying down under a tree. Mark Sullivan and the client get in position. MS is talking about the buff, when suddenly it gets to its feet, grunts and charges. The client shoots one time without any noticeable effect on the buff's charge. MS shoots when the buff is only a few feet away. The shot misses the brain, but causes the buff's head to go down and literally jerk the buff to a stop. The buff IS shaking his head tries to remain on his feet but then collapses. Another follow-up shot by MS kills the buff.

Although I don't know the caliber the client was using, it was certainly less effective then the shots made by MS, who was using his trademark .600 NE.

MS looked at the camera and repeated the famous words "always, always use enough gun".

No doubt in my mind, if MS had been using a .375 on that charging buff, the buff would have taken someone out with him.

BH63

quote:

Originally posted by BuffHunter63:
As prep leading up to my Sep safari, I have been watching old hunting VHSes. In "Sudden Death", a client hits an old dugga boy in the shoulder and the old bull takes off.

Mark Sullivan and the client follow up on the buff. At one point, the buff is lying down under a tree. Mark Sullivan and the client get in position. MS is talking about the buff, when suddenly it gets to its feet, grunts and charges. The client shoots one time without any noticeable effect on the buff's charge. MS shoots when the buff is only a few feet away. The shot misses the brain, but causes the buff's head to go down and literally jerk the buff to a stop. The buff IS shaking his head tries to remain on his feet but then collapses. Another follow-up shot by MS kills the buff.

Although I don't know the caliber the client was using, it was certainly less effective then the shots made by MS, who was using his trademark .600 NE.

MS looked at the camera and repeated the famous words "always, always use enough gun".

No doubt in my mind, if MS had been using a .375 on that charging buff, the buff would have taken someone out with him.

BH63

Or as another person said "Shoot straight" Then the buff would not of been a problem

quote:

“The truth is that any good modern rifle is good enough. The determining factor is the man behind the gun.”

quote:

Originally posted by Vaquero:

quote:

“The truth is that any good modern rifle is good enough. The determining factor is the man behind the gun.”

If that were true, then I would go out and buy a brand new Ruger 10/22 and use if for all my hunting needs. LOL

quote:

Originally posted by Rule 303:

Or as another person said "Shoot straight" Then the buff would not of been a problem

Not necessarily true with buff. Make a perfect lung shot or a perfect heart shot and it might still decide to take you out before it dies.

Using a caliber/bullet combination with enough juice to break shoulder bones and smash through spines usually slows the animal down.

I'm sure one-shot bang-flops occur with buffalo, but I would expect they are the exception rather than the rule.

BH63

quote:

Originally posted by Rule 303:

quote:

Originally posted by BuffHunter63:
As prep leading up to my Sep safari, I have been watching old hunting VHSes. In "Sudden Death", a client hits an old dugga boy in the shoulder and the old bull takes off.

Mark Sullivan and the client follow up on the buff. At one point, the buff is lying down under a tree. Mark Sullivan and the client get in position. MS is talking about the buff, when suddenly it gets to its feet, grunts and charges. The client shoots one time without any noticeable effect on the buff's charge. MS shoots when the buff is only a few feet away. The shot misses the brain, but causes the buff's head to go down and literally jerk the buff to a stop. The buff IS shaking his head tries to remain on his feet but then collapses. Another follow-up shot by MS kills the buff.

Although I don't know the caliber the client was using, it was certainly less effective then the shots made by MS, who was using his trademark .600 NE.

MS looked at the camera and repeated the famous words "always, always use enough gun".

No doubt in my mind, if MS had been using a .375 on that charging buff, the buff would have taken someone out with him.

BH63

Or as another person said "Shoot straight" Then the buff would not of been a problem

Amazing how many of MS's clients wound so many buffaloe

But then again, he does say that all his clients are awful shots

I have shot, and seen being shot, several hundred buffaloes, never had a single charge!

95% of those buffalo were killed with a 375

quote:

Originally posted by Saeed:

quote:

Originally posted by Rule 303:

quote:

Originally posted by BuffHunter63:
As prep leading up to my Sep safari, I have been watching old hunting VHSes. In "Sudden Death", a client hits an old dugga boy in the shoulder and the old bull takes off.

Mark Sullivan and the client follow up on the buff. At one point, the buff is lying down under a tree. Mark Sullivan and the client get in position. MS is talking about the buff, when suddenly it gets to its feet, grunts and charges. The client shoots one time without any noticeable effect on the buff's charge. MS shoots when the buff is only a few feet away. The shot misses the brain, but causes the buff's head to go down and literally jerk the buff to a stop. The buff IS shaking his head tries to remain on his feet but then collapses. Another follow-up shot by MS kills the buff.

Although I don't know the caliber the client was using, it was certainly less effective then the shots made by MS, who was using his trademark .600 NE.

MS looked at the camera and repeated the famous words "always, always use enough gun".

No doubt in my mind, if MS had been using a .375 on that charging buff, the buff would have taken someone out with him.

BH63

Or as another person said "Shoot straight" Then the buff would not of been a problem

Amazing how many of MS's clients wound so many buffaloe

But then again, he does say that all his clients are awful shots

I have shot, and seen being shot, several hundred buffaloes, never had a single charge!

95% of those buffalo were killed with a 375

FWIW, That is precisely why I am going to hunt with him next year. I'm a terrible shot and scared shitless of buffalo. I feel much better having a proven back-up like MS with me.

A lot of talk about KE, velocity and energy. Not a lot about how that energy is dissipated or transferred.
KE from a moving projectile will be reduced or transferred by friction/heat, plastic deformation, elastic deformation or fracture and any combination.
The only way any projectile can deliver all its KE (100%) into a target is if the projectile itself does not deform and stays in the target. The deformation of a soft; typically plastic or fractured spends up quite a lot of the KE in that transition.
So softs that stay in an animal or target do not expel all the energy in them. Some of that KE was spent in their own deformation
My experience is a higher velocity round with a bullet that stays fairy intact( controlled expansion) is most effective.
In most of my hunting (North American) I find it is difficult to beat Nosler NP's or Barnes TSX because much less energy is displaced on deformation and broad expansion.
I have limited African experience and found little difference.
All good info on these discussions.
Might load for the terrain and the quarry in lieu of a one load fits all. That is half the fun.

quote:

Originally posted by BuffHunter63:

quote:

Originally posted by Rule 303:

Or as another person said "Shoot straight" Then the buff would not of been a problem

Not necessarily true with buff. Make a perfect lung shot or a perfect heart shot and it might still decide to take you out before it dies.

Using a caliber/bullet combination with enough juice to break shoulder bones and smash through spines usually slows the animal down.

I'm sure one-shot bang-flops occur with buffalo, but I would expect they are the exception rather than the rule.

BH63

True but a hit in the spine or brain would stop them there and then.

quote:

Originally posted by Saeed:

I have shot, and seen being shot, several hundred buffaloes, never had a single charge!

95% of those buffalo were killed with a 375

Just curious - how many of these buffalo died in their tracks (i.e. bang-flops) and how many ran off for at least 20 to 40 yards?

I have been watching several MS videos over the last couple of days and I agree it appears most of those buffalo are set up to charge, either by poor shooting, or accurate shooting deliberately meant to wound.

When a wounded buffalo stands up and faces them, MS deliberately moves in to get the buffalo to charge, rather than just shoot the animal. His rationale, as stated in his videos "is to let the animal decide how it will die". Obviously this is staged drama, but it does show the tenacity of the beast when it comes to stopping a charge.

I have also heard that some populations of buffalo (and elephants for that matter) are more aggressive and more likely to charge then others.

BH63

quote:

Originally posted by Rule 303:

quote:

Originally posted by BuffHunter63:

quote:

Originally posted by Rule 303:

Or as another person said "Shoot straight" Then the buff would not of been a problem

Not necessarily true with buff. Make a perfect lung shot or a perfect heart shot and it might still decide to take you out before it dies.

Using a caliber/bullet combination with enough juice to break shoulder bones and smash through spines usually slows the animal down.

I'm sure one-shot bang-flops occur with buffalo, but I would expect they are the exception rather than the rule.

BH63

True but a hit in the spine or brain would stop them there and then.

Provided you have enough juice to get the bullet to the spine and still have enough horsepower to smash it. I use to effectively kill cattle with a .22 long when I worked in a slaughterhouse as a kid, but using it to hunt cattle-sized game would be a crime in my mind.

I once hit a buck mule deer with a broadhead at about 20 yards. I was using a bow with about 83 lbs of draw weight. Unfortunately I hit the buck right on his upper leg bone where it connects with his shoulder. The arrow knocked the buck down, but the deer was able to get up and run off, never to be found. The arrow did not have enough energy to break the bone.

BH63

quote:

Originally posted by Saeed:

quote:

Originally posted by Rule 303:

quote:

Originally posted by BuffHunter63:
As prep leading up to my Sep safari, I have been watching old hunting VHSes. In "Sudden Death", a client hits an old dugga boy in the shoulder and the old bull takes off.

Mark Sullivan and the client follow up on the buff. At one point, the buff is lying down under a tree. Mark Sullivan and the client get in position. MS is talking about the buff, when suddenly it gets to its feet, grunts and charges. The client shoots one time without any noticeable effect on the buff's charge. MS shoots when the buff is only a few feet away. The shot misses the brain, but causes the buff's head to go down and literally jerk the buff to a stop. The buff IS shaking his head tries to remain on his feet but then collapses. Another follow-up shot by MS kills the buff.

Although I don't know the caliber the client was using, it was certainly less effective then the shots made by MS, who was using his trademark .600 NE.

MS looked at the camera and repeated the famous words "always, always use enough gun".

No doubt in my mind, if MS had been using a .375 on that charging buff, the buff would have taken someone out with him.

BH63

Or as another person said "Shoot straight" Then the buff would not of been a problem

Amazing how many of MS's clients wound so many buffaloe

But then again, he does say that all his clients are awful shots

I have shot, and seen being shot, several hundred buffaloes, never had a single charge!

95% of those buffalo were killed with a 375

Saeed,

You've missed the point once again. Mark says often "Not having Buffalo charge isn't a problem, if that is your goal"

There is absolutely nothing wrong with how you hunt Buffalo, there is also nothing wrong with how MS prefers it. Offensive vs Defensive hunting.

quote:

Originally posted by BuffHunter63:

quote:

Originally posted by Saeed:

I have shot, and seen being shot, several hundred buffaloes, never had a single charge!

95% of those buffalo were killed with a 375

Just curious - how many of these buffalo died in their tracks (i.e. bang-flops) and how many ran off for at least 20 to 40 yards?

I have been watching several MS videos over the last couple of days and I agree it appears most of those buffalo are set up to charge, either by poor shooting, or accurate shooting deliberately meant to wound.

When a wounded buffalo stands up and faces them, MS deliberately moves in to get the buffalo to charge, rather than just shoot the animal. His rationale, as stated in his videos "is to let the animal decide how it will die". Obviously this is staged drama, but it does show the tenacity of the beast when it comes to stopping a charge.

I have also heard that some populations of buffalo (and elephants for that matter) are more aggressive and more likely to charge then others.

BH63

Just want to touch on two points you have mentioned above.
Regarding Cape Buffalo bulls that bang-flop, I think I can only think of one ever that we have hunted that reacted like this. He was an old, old Bull, and not sure if he would have made the end of the week, never mind the end of the winter. Shot placement was straight in the chest, with my .375H&H, firing a 200gr GS Custom HV bullet at around 3200fps. After that, the closest Bull that went down was 10 yds, same rifle.
With other rifles, they all seem to run about 40-60yds from Heart/Lung shots.

To get to your point regarding Buffalo being more aggressive in some areas than others, absolutely seen this with my own eyes. Had a bull chase one of our trackers in an area we hunted for the first time, and subsequently heard that he was not the first tracker to be chased in this area. This was also unprovoked. I would certainly say that this theory carries some weight to it.

Last year, 3 of the buffalos I shot dropped straight down where they were, and only one was head shot. Rifle was our 375/404 and our 300 grain Walterhog bullets, muzzle velocity about 2850 fps.

i was running a 270 grain bullet

soft

at 2,500 on the buffalo in australia

and i am not what folks would call a surgical shooter but i was with that lightweight bastard


most dropped like a rock

enough energy and one and done might be one way to do the calculus

In my opinion, big heavy bullets seem to work best at about 2200 to 2400 FPS on Buff, Hippo, and elephant..Lighter bullets at 2700 to 3000 FPS work best on Kudu, Eland etc.

I believe a 458 at 2300 FPS is a better killer on buff etc. than the 460 Wby, at least what Ive seen seems to work that way..

Bottom line is high velocity is detrimental to bullets, even monolithics as I have seen many times wherein all the petals have blown off or one has failed to expand because the hollow point squeezed shut on rib. Ive also seen them work perfect...Its all relative to the situation and there is no pat answer just BS..What counts is bullet placement and a reasonable expectation of proper bullet construction, they all work and they all fail, howeve bullet today are the best ever...

This blog is as old as the 270 vs. the 30-06 and the best of experts have varied opinnions.