I just stumbled across a chart I put together After reading John Taylor's "Big Game and Big Game Rifles" about 20 years ago. Basically, the idea is that penetration is equal to momentum divided by cross-sectional area.

Here's what I came up with sorted by the end result of those calculations:

.460 Wtby. 36.6
.378 Wtby 35.5
.416 Rigby 31.9
.318 WR (250 gr.) 31.3
.375 H&H (300 gr.) 30.3
.256 Mann. (160 gr.) 30.0
.400-3 1/4" 29.8
.458 WM 29.4
.400 Jeffery 29.0
.425 WR 28.9
.450 No. 2 28.7
.500/.450 28.7
.500 Rimless 28.1
.450 28.0
.275 (173 gr.) 28.0
.476 27.7
.404 (400 gr.) 27.2
.505 Gibbs 26.9
.465 26.9
.500-3 1/4" 26.4
.475 26.2
.600 25.8
.475 No. 2 25.7
.577 25.5
.404 (300 gr.) 25.0
.423 (10.75 mm) 24.2
.440 (11.2 mm) 24.0
.475 No. 2 Jeffery 23.7
.45-70 (400 gr.) 21.7

I just threw in the .45-70 to relate to something American. J.T. roundly criticized the 10.75 mm and 11.2 mm for lacking penetration and you can see this chart confirms this numerically. Some criticized the .600 for lack of penetration also, but J.T. vehemently defended it, but you can see it is at the low end of the list.

I would hope it is obvious that we are talking here about using perfectly non-deformable bullets with the same profile here.

I dont think these formulas mean anything in the real world.

Bullet design and stability come first. I dare say that if JT had used some North Fork, CEB or GS Customs he may have drawn a different set of rules to judge calibers on.

If you load any of these with a North Fork FN Solid and put the bullet in t he right place it is going to kill the animal. Yes, thats right, even an Elephant with a 45-70.

Note the .375 is on the top of the list. No wonder it is the number 1 choice. .375 cal proven again.


dale

But also note that 460 Wby is at the very top of the list
I have seen charts showing the 45-70 out penetrating the 460 on actual live fire tests. That turns this table on its head.

what about the 9,3s ????

And the 333's,
since they included the 318WR.

I'll try to remember my formula and do the .333, the 9.3 x 62, and the .458 Lott. Any other requests?

They must all use the exact same type bullets. Depending on the makeup of soft point bullets the faster the velocity the quicker they will expand causing them many times to penetrate less than a bit slower bullet. Solid bullets would be a better test for comparison.

Well, exactly, that's why I said "I would hope it is obvious that we are talking here about using perfectly non-deformable bullets with the same profile."

quote:

Originally posted by postoak:
I just stumbled across a chart I put together After reading John Taylor's "Big Game and Big Game Rifles" about 20 years ago. Basically, the idea is that penetration is equal to momentum divided by cross-sectional area.

Here's what I came up with sorted by the end result of those calculations:

.460 Wtby. 36.6
.378 Wtby 35.5
.416 Rigby 31.9
.318 WR (250 gr.) 31.3
.375 H&H (300 gr.) 30.3
.256 Mann. (160 gr.) 30.0
.400-3 1/4" 29.8
.458 WM 29.4
.400 Jeffery 29.0
.425 WR 28.9
.450 No. 2 28.7
.500/.450 28.7
.500 Rimless 28.1
.450 28.0
.275 (173 gr.) 28.0
.476 27.7
.404 (400 gr.) 27.2
.505 Gibbs 26.9
.465 26.9
.500-3 1/4" 26.4
.475 26.2
.600 25.8
.475 No. 2 25.7
.577 25.5
.404 (300 gr.) 25.0
.423 (10.75 mm) 24.2
.440 (11.2 mm) 24.0
.475 No. 2 Jeffery 23.7
.45-70 (400 gr.) 21.7

I just threw in the .45-70 to relate to something American. J.T. roundly criticized the 10.75 mm and 11.2 mm for lacking penetration and you can see this chart confirms this numerically. Some criticized the .600 for lack of penetration also, but J.T. vehemently defended it, but you can see it is at the low end of the list.

I would hope it is obvious that we are talking here about using perfectly non-deformable bullets with the same profile here.

Interesting chart as far as discussions as concerned.

But, like JT Knockdown Values for calibers and bullets, it is has absolutely nothing to do with reality.

Just as one will get different results by using different types of bullets, no two animals will react the same way to being hit by any specific bullet.

quote:

Originally posted by Saeed:
Just as one will get different results by using different types of bullets, no two animals will react the same way to being hit by any specific bullet.

...

WDM Bell extensively proved that precise shot placement, coupled with proper bullet construction, trumps caliber.
Bell had much at stake; his life, his african assistants lives, and the extreme value of ivory he was harvesting.
Some say he choose the small bores because the ammo was much cheaper,
If he was really such a scrouge trying to desperately save money,
- then why did he buy 6 rather expensive bespoke Rigby rifles in 7x57..?
and if he loved money so much,
why would he risk loosing the extreme value of ivory by shooting elephants with a cal. that would regularly allow his profits to escape?
Bell could in one day collect ivory to the value of near 900BP [in those days values!]...23,000BP he made in one season.
when the average weekly wage for a worker in England was 5BP or roughly 250BP, annually.

He efficiently terminated some 700 CapeBuff and over 800 elephant, with solids in 6.5mm & 7mm bore.

quote:

Originally posted by daleW:
Note the .375 is on the top of the list. No wonder it is the number 1 choice. .375 cal proven again.

Mathematical formulas are one thing,
Imperical evidence is another.
The .375 bore is no more exceptional than the .358 or 9,3 bore

In African Rifles and Cartridges, Taylor wrote[concerning the 350 rigby]:
[quote]"There is nothing spectacular about this cartridge; it has never had the write-up that the .318 and .375 Magnum get from time to time;
nevertheless, it is a splendidly effective shell and at ranges of up to at least 150 yards kills as instantaneously as the .375 Magnum.
In addition, it has an appreciably lighter recoil."[endquote]

Personally, I am an advocate of the 9,3X64B. for its easy fit in a std. length action.

quote:

.256 Mann. (160 gr.) 30.0

Sectional Density --Baby

to quote Austin Powers

Okay, here is a redone chart with the requested calibers added:



These are relative figures, not meant to be taken as inches of penetration.

Name Dia. Grains ft/sec slug Area slug x speed slug x speed/area




.460 Wtby .458 500 2600 0.002664081 .2098 6.92 33.0

.378 Wtby .375 300 2925 0.001332041 .1406 3.89 27.7

.416 Wtby .416 400 2700 0.001776054 .1730 4.7 27.7

.333 Jeffery .333 300 2200 0.001332041 .1109 2.93 26.6

.416 Rigby .416 400 2515 0.001776054 .1730 4.47 25.8

.333 Jeffery .333 250 2500 0.001110034 .1109 2.78 25.3

.500 Jeffery .510 600 2468 0.002664081 .2601 6.57 25.3

.375 H&H .375 300 2645 0.001332041 .1406 3.52 25.0

9.3 x 64 Brnk. .366 293 2580 0.001300960 .1340 3.36 25.0

.318 WR .330 250 2400 0.001110034 .1089 2.66 24.4

.458 Lott .458 500 2300 0.002220068 .2098 5.11 24.3

.375 HH Flang .375 300 2550 0.001332041 .1406 3.39 24.1

7 x 57 .284 173 2500 0.000768143 .0806 1.92 23.8

9.3 x 62 .366 293 2428 0.001300960 .1340 3.16 23.5

.458 WM .458 500 2192 0.002220068 .2098 4.87 23.2

.465 H&H .468 480 2375 0.002131265 .2190 5.06 23.1

.256 Mann .264 159 2170 0.000705982 .0670 1.53 22.9

.450/400 3 1/4" .408 400 2150 0.001776054 .1665 3.81 22.9

.425 WR .435 410 2350 0.001820456 .1892 4.27 22.6

.400 Jeff 3" .408 400 2100 0.001776054 .1665 3.72 22.4

9.3 x 74 .366 286 2360 0.001269879 .1340 3.00 22.4

11.2 x 72 .440 401 2438 0.001780494 .1936 4.34 22.4

.450 NE 3 1/2" .458 480 2175 0.002131265 .2098 4.63 22.1

.505 Gibbs .505 600 2100 0.002664081 .2550 5.59 21.9

.450 NE 3 1/4" .458 480 2150 0.002131265 .2098 4.58 21.8

.476 NE .476 520 2100 0.002308871 .2266 4.84 21.4

.600 NE .620 900 2050 0.003996122 .3844 8.19 21.3

.470 NE .475 500 2150 0.002220068 .2256 4.77 21.2

.404 Jeffery .423 400 2125 0.001776054 .1789 3.77 21.1

.500 NE .510 570 2150 0.002530877 .2601 5.44 20.9

.577 NE .585 750 2050 0.003330102 .3422 6.83 20.0

10.75 x 68 .423 347 2250 0.001540727 .1790 3.46 19.4

.405 Win .411 300 2204 0.001332041 .1690 2.94 17.4

.45/70 .458 405 1330 0.001798255 .2098 2.39 11.4

About 30 odd years ago I went on my first African safari.

I knew it all, as I have read everything there was to read.

From Jack O'Connor to Elmer Keith. From Taylor, Bell to Neumann.

After having spent quite a bit of time hunting all sorts of game animals, shooting several hundreds in the process.

I found practically all the great things I knew then from reading books fly off my head like feathers in an open top Toyota.

That old saying "the more I learn, the more I discover how little I knew" is very true of hunting.

Just for the record check out how much of the African game Hemingway shot [DG or otherwise] was with his .30/06....
...including Rhino, Buff and lion.

Just for the record and in defense of the lowly 45-70, the calculation in the table is based on the original 130+ year old black powder loading for the old "Trapdoor Springfield" rifles and nowhere close to what is loaded or loadable in modern falling block (Ruger #1's) and bolt action rifles.

Case in point we take 45-70 and 450 Marlin bolt actions to Namibia every year for PG. Wife's 45-70 (Custom Siamese Mauser) hunting load is a 300gr TTSX at 2300fps and carries a few 325gr CEB #13 solids at the same velocity - just in case. Could load her's higher but the recoil starts getting to be a bit much for her.

My 450 Marlin load (Custom Pre 64 Win 70) is a 350gr TSX at 2400 fps with 325gr CEB #13's at the same 2400 fps - just in case.

All loads are over 4000 foot pounds at the muzzle and in Michael458's testing, that 325gr #13 solid at 2250 fps went 62 inches into his wet pack paper trap.

The chart is a good conversation starter but there are way toooooooo many variables to draw absolute conclusions from.

quote:

Originally posted by Trax:
Just for the record check out how much of the African game Hemingway shot [DG or otherwise] was with his .30/06....
...including Rhino, Buff and lion.

It's kind of "ironic" that you would post this DIRECTLY under Saeeds post. This one.....

quote:

About 30 odd years ago I went on my first African safari.

I knew it all, as I have read everything there was to read.

From Jack O'Connor to Elmer Keith. From Taylor, Bell to Neumann.

After having spent quite a bit of time hunting all sorts of game animals, shooting several hundreds in the process.

I found practically all the great things I knew then from reading books fly off my head like feathers in an open top Toyota.

That old saying "the more I learn, the more I discover how little I knew" is very true of hunting.

Interesting statistics, and one most marketing companies would use.

As a PH of 25 years, I have, for many seasons, used two of the top 3, all for personal reasons, so to see them ranked where they are, justifies my choice.

The 460 is a powerhouse, not widely liked, but in my position a no nonsense talker. That said, it has its limitations, and bullet deflection at close range is one of them, and whilst I have never had a bad situation because of it, it certainly is something foremost on my mind. I have had instances where hitting a buffalo quartering front on, the round deflected off the front leg bone.

The 416 Rigby, in my opinion, is the most balanced, most effective and ballistically superior calibre out there. Its hitting power and penetration is as good as is ever required at the distances we hunt dangerous game. If I were asked by a prospective client on calibre choice for big game - this is it.

At the end of the day it's all about personal taste and confidence. It's what makes our sport so great.

Saeed, if we didn't post about what we read, life wouldn't be any fun here.

The one firm conclusion to be made from these charts is that any cartridge firing a bullet of about .325 SD or greater at 2150 fps or greater, with a stout FMJ bullet has the penetration to be an elephant killer on brain shots.

Proper placement will do it every time
How many DVDs we've all watched where big guns shot and chase was on
Ultimately practice, placement and solid gun and ammo will do it every time

Proper bullet placement, proper bullet construction, and a reasonable velocity.

Those are the ones I find work.

Wrong bullet placement and it makes no difference what caliber or bullet weight you are using.

Wrong bullet construction and you are in the same boat.

The velocity has to be optimum for that bullet.

At least in the 375 and our own Walterhog lathe turned bullets, we have found that a velocity of around 2750-2850 fps is the best for penetration.

Go too far below or above that and the penetration gets less.

Here are some penetration tests done by a fellow with the 375 H&H (DWJs and plywood) with various expanding bullets. Note these velocities are for some of the bullets (the Woodleigh 350g) slower than normal. None approach the velocities of Saeed's 375 wildcat. Most of the penetration tests I see are with solids, unfortunately most of us (at least I) don't get to hunt elephant. So it's expanding bullets that interest me most.

http://forums.gunboards.com/sh...&p=122864#post122864

A lot of misunderstandings are caused by bullets made in the past.

Before the decent bullets were made available, one only had two choices.

Either a thin jacketed soft point or a FMJ bullet.

Old hunters discovered that the soft points did do so well because of lack of penetration and jacket separation.

So they used FMJ.

Since the advent of the partition, then bullets with a solid copper shank, then bullets made wholly of copper with a hollow point for expansion, things have become different.

Apart from using them on varmints, I would not use any of the soft points bullets made today for any hunting.

The copper made hollow point bullets meet all the requirements of expansion and penetration.

I was re-reading parts of "Any Shot You Want", A-Square's loading manual. Alphin described the three types of velocity: Forward, rotational, and recessionary. The last is the wobble that occurs prior to the bullet stabilizing, that is the rear end of the bullet rotating around the axis. Alphin stated that this was responsible for erratic bullet paths in the target.

Despite his troubles, Alphin was a real expert on ballistics and was frequently hired as a professional witness on ballistics. I highly recommend the book if you can find it.

quote:

Originally posted by Brice:
I was re-reading parts of "Any Shot You Want", A-Square's loading manual. Alphin described the three types of velocity: Forward, rotational, and recessionary. The last is the wobble that occurs prior to the bullet stabilizing, that is the rear end of the bullet rotating around the axis. Alphin stated that this was responsible for erratic bullet paths in the target.

Despite his troubles, Alphin was a real expert on ballistics and was frequently hired as a professional witness on ballistics. I highly recommend the book if you can find it.

I like the book, but some of the things Alpin wrote in there make absolutely no sense at all.

Read his description of how he started the 577 T.Rex.

quote:

Originally posted by Brice:
Alphin described the three types of velocity: Forward, rotational, and recessionary. The last is the wobble that occurs prior to the bullet stabilizing, that is the rear end of the bullet rotating around the axis. Alphin stated that this was responsible for erratic bullet paths in the target.

IIRC, the rear end of a bullet rotating[wobbling] about its direction[line] of travel,
translates into the bullets -'angle of attack'- on impact. {diagram courtesy of GScustom}

The 'AOA' if the measure of degrees between the bullets direction of travel and the bullets axis.

Momentum [mass x vel.].. has both amplitude (an ‘amount’ value) and a direction.
Because any measurement of momentum has a specified direction it quantifies the net force acting in that single, straight line, direction.
Momentum is, therefore, known as a linear function, and is a measurement of the force of forward movement of an object.
The slower momentum is arrested/washed off[in target]typically means more penetration.

ie; If you have both a soft and non-deforming solid, of same weight,speed an diameter,
The NDS will travel further through game, partly because it better retains momentum, as it travels through the animal.
With the expanding[& possibly weight shedding] soft, the bullets forward motion[momentum] is reduced/arrested more rapidly.

JUst because a 'solid' delivers more penetration, does not necessarily mean it will create less wound channel volume than the soft.
The solids wound channel may just take a different form ie; more narrow & more elongated.

quote:

Originally posted by Saeed:

Interesting chart as far as discussions as concerned.
But, like JT Knockdown Values for calibers and bullets, it is has absolutely nothing to do with reality.

+1

Penetration in What?
Animal tissue?
ballistic gel?
Wood?
Honey?
Wet newspapers?
If you want comparisons you need:-

a.) the same bullet profile and construction
b.) the same weight to cross sectional area ratio
c.) the same medium
d.) the same angle of attack

Otherwise all the results are completely meaningless.
I know the 505 Gibbs with Woodleigh solids will go through 37cm of gum tree, but it is quite irrellevant when it comes to hunting. I recovered a couple of Woodleigh 600gn PPSN bullets from under the skin on the other side of buffalo. Never measured the penetration, because it killed the animal, and that is what matters.

quote:

Originally posted by Saeed:
A lot of misunderstandings are caused by bullets made in the past.

Before the decent bullets were made available, one only had two choices.

Either a thin jacketed soft point or a FMJ bullet.

Old hunters discovered that the soft points did do so well because of lack of penetration and jacket separation.

So they used FMJ.

Since the advent of the partition, then bullets with a solid copper shank, then bullets made wholly of copper with a hollow point for expansion, things have become different.

Apart from using them on varmints, I would not use any of the soft points bullets made today for any hunting.

The copper made hollow point bullets meet all the requirements of expansion and penetration.

THIS. The only time/reason I still use Woodleighs is because my 450NE likes them and they look cool otherwise, it's TSXs and CEBs for me..

Jorge you might want to try some of the Woodleigh Hydroshock bullets. Solid turned copper and it is very hard to make them deviate off their course. One of those rare bullets that the harder it is driven the better it works.

A mate using them in a 404 at standard velocity go from one end of a Buffalo to the other.

Yeah I heard they are excellent bullets! I still use Woodelighs in my 450NE along with CEBs and in my 303 Brit, those long, heavy for caliber 215gr RNs will shoot through anything.

quote:

Originally posted by Brice:
I was re-reading parts of "Any Shot You Want", A-Square's loading manual. Alphin described the three types of velocity: Forward, rotational, and recessionary. The last is the wobble that occurs prior to the bullet stabilizing, that is the rear end of the bullet rotating around the axis. Alphin stated that this was responsible for erratic bullet paths in the target.

Despite his troubles, Alphin was a real expert on ballistics and was frequently hired as a professional witness on ballistics. I highly recommend the book if you can find it.

A while back I got an email advertisement from Midsouth Shooters Supplies saying that they had a pallet of these books available. I just checked it out on their website. The books are still in the shrink wrap and the price has been reduced to $44.44. This may be the last of these books to be available. If you want one, you should check it out soon!