Come on now, George. I do believe in the laws of physics, but I have never seen an animal react differently when struck with a bullet travelling 1,400 instead of 1,100 fps -- all else being equal. I have taken game with a rifle that "generates" over 5,000 ft-lbs of ME and they didn't get knocked off of their feet. No drama.

The .475 Linebaugh is not a wildcat, nor is the .500 Linebaugh or .500 JRH. They are all commercially loaded and offered in production weapons (except for the .500 Linebaugh). They have all been used in Africa with success on the biggest of DG.

Redhawk -- the only longer cylinder ever used on a .475 Linebaugh is the BFR. It is not that much longer than the cylinder of an SRH. There is no reason to seat bullets deeply in the SRH -- granted, there are some bullet designs that you can use in a BFR that won't quite fit an SRH-length cylinder nor the Freedom Arms -- but the FA is even shorter. Again, Reeder is way off base with this.

quote:

Originally posted by Redhawk1:

quote:

Originally posted by jwp475:

quote:

Originally posted by Redhawk1:
But I am under the understanding from a custom gun maker that I talk to about the conversion, the 475 Linebaugh is not a good idea in the Super Redhawk. And here are his exact words to me. But the cylinder is still too short, which causes one to seat the bullet way down when it is chambered to 475, which causes the pressures to skyrocket and then you end up with a blown cylinder.
Not my words but the word of a well know gun maker.

This is shocking, for Reader to make such an inaccurate statement as this is numbing. The SRH cylinder can only be considered short if one were trying to chamber a 45/70 in it...

Edited to add, the shrtest cylinder factory revolver chambered for the 475 Linebaugh that I am aware of is the Freedom M-83. The case lenght of the 475 Linebaugh was originaly shortened by Jack Huntington inorder to fit in the Freedom Arms revovler and Buffalo Bore officialy adopted this case length for there fatory loaded ammo and now that is the standard lenght.
Also if one does seat the bullets deeper into the case for a shorter COAL then one should also adjust the powder charge accordingly to allow for the lesser case capacity. That is reloading 101 and for Reader to not understnd this is simply amazing IMHO.

There you go assuming once again, he said that because people still try to put the max powder in the case and compress the charge to get the longer bullets to fit in the cylinder. That was what he was referring to.

You like to jump to conclusions without knowing the full story. If you were not so quick to criticize, you might actually learn something one of these day JWP.

Maybe you should contact Mr Reeder yourself and see what he has to say. I am sure being a custom gun smith for 30 years, he has quit a bit of knowledge on handguns. What is your back round to tell us Mr Reeder does not know what he is talking about?

Like I said, I am not a gunsmith or gun maker, and don't claimed to be, and I dam sure am not qualified to tell a custom gunsmith, he doesn't know what he is talking about. You call him and tell him, I am sure you can quote someone to back your findings...

1-I have jumped to no conclusions at all. Fact is the lack of and or safe reloading practices has nothing to do with cylinder lenghts

2- Anyone that can purchase and read a didgital dial caliper can measure cylinder and cylinder window lenghts.

3- The fact that a gunsmith makes a claim that is as inaccurate as to claim that a Redhawk or Super Redhawk cylinder is short is not only shocking but unacceptable. You would expect someone that claims to be an expert to know the lenghts

4- Measure them yourself....

Whitworth, I will grant you that using the analogy you did, you are perfectly correct. I've seen a man hit with a rocket propelled grenade and he wasn't knocked off his feet ala Dirty Harry either. In those cases, velocity trumps resistance hands down. I was truly seeing if that round had taken those animals. I asked you since I felt I might get an answer without being insulted. I'll check Reeder's site.

And as a purist, you may not consider those rounds "wildcat", but if you can't buy them at Cabelas or Bass Pro, the rest of us certainly do. LOL

Reeder's site shows two Cape buffalo shot with his guns, the .475 Linebaugh and the .475 Maximum which claimed to have a "complete penetration", whatever that means other than the buff was in the dirt.

quote:

Originally posted by george roof:
And as a purist, you may not consider those rounds "wildcat", but if you can't buy them at Cabelas or Bass Pro, the rest of us certainly do. LOL .

Cabelas sells 475 Linebaugh

Even Hornady loads .475 Linebaugh ammo -- you know you are mainstream if Hornady offers your caliber!

George -- is the .500 Smith more "powerful" than let's say a .500 Linebaugh? I guess it is in that it burns more powder, it'll achieve more velocity with the same bullets, it'll make more noise and kick more as a result, and it definitely produces more muzzle energy, but again, it doesn't seem to equate to quicker kills or cause any dramatic reaction to the quary because of the ME. I'm not discounting the laws of physics at all.........

so....i'm just curious when velocity matters. i realize no one sees a difference when a 500 smith kills vs. a 500 linebaugh. but then again, i've never seen a difference b/w the 500 and the 475 and i've yet to see a difference b/w that and a 454.

at some point velocity helps. i'm not sure anyone thinks a 500 linebaugh is further up the food chain than a .458 win mag, or a 460 weatherby and the difference being the velocity b/w the above rounds, despite being a little bigger around. so is the 45/70 further up the food chain when shot of a rifle? how's this work? i've never seen a diff b/w effect of my 454, my 475, and to my disappointment the 500 smith on hogs or bison. they'll all break every shoulder i shoot through and keep going out the other side.

and...........anyone that's ever shot in a stiff wind in west texas at UNKNOWN distances would disagree heavily that velocity and trajectory don't matter when target shooting or hunting. i've got a scoped 454 with a 10" barrel and it sends out 240 grain reloads at just over 2100 fps. this gives remarkeably less drop and drastically increased hits on silhouettes at unknown distances over 100 yards over my 475 bfr with loads running 400gr at 1350. (both are incredibly accurate guns) if the velocity doesn't matter then the 480 is perfect and the 475 is the round that is not needed.

The .500 Linebaugh higher up on the food chain than the .458 win mag? Most probably not, but I have seen the .475 Linebuagh out penetrate the .458 Lott. So does that make the Linebaugh higher up on the food chain, or just more effective -- in certain instances? This probably has more to do with the lousy round-nosed solids that for some unknown reason are still en vogue with big-bore rifle hunters........

We will never get the velocity of the rifles with our handguns and the heavy flat-nosed bullets that the more serious handgun hunters use just don't need a whole lot of velocity to punch through animals -- that was the point that I am obviousy struggling to make here. All you get with more velocity is more muzzle blast and recoil.

Perhaps the .480 is all that is needed, but keep in mind that it came along long after the .475 Linebaugh, so the .475 didn't come about as an act of oneupmanship.

trademark, I think velocity matter's as much as I think fpe matter.

Most handgun rounds (straight wall cartridges) were designed for shot distance shooting (under 100 yards). By increasing the velocity of the bullet, it extends the range of a handgun. That was the whole idea of the S&W460 Mag. From your post, I believe you understand this concept well.

Now if someone decides to use the rounds with more velocity at a closer distance, it will not affect the out come of game being shot, dead is dead.

Now I understand about penetration well, but we have some guys that use penetration as the killing potential of a handgun. I also understand penetration is just one factor in how bullets kill.

But that is why we have guys saying we don't need higher velocity to kill. They use the argument that a bullet will only penetrate so far and the extra velocity will not get you more penetration. And they are right to a point, after a certain point resistance plays a factor in slowing down a bullet, allowing it to only penetrate a certain distance.

Now is where energy transfer comes into play here. Increased velocity give more energy transfer, but is the extra energy really needed? probably not at shorter distances, but it is a factor that other believe does not matter. But at further distances increased velocity matters for both penetration and fpe.

Now I wait for the experts to come on, and tell me I am full of crap.

quote:

Originally posted by Whitworth:
The .500 Linebaugh higher up on the food chain than the .458 win mag? Most probably not, but I have seen the .475 Linebuagh out penetrate the .458 Lott. So does that make the Linebaugh higher up on the food chain, or just more effective -- in certain instances? This probably has more to do with the lousy round-nosed solids that for some unknown reason are still en vogue with big-bore rifle hunters........

We will never get the velocity of the rifles with our handguns and the heavy flat-nosed bullets that the more serious handgun hunters use just don't need a whole lot of velocity to punch through animals -- that was the point that I am obviousy struggling to make here. All you get with more velocity is more muzzle blast and recoil.

Perhaps the .480 is all that is needed, but keep in mind that it came along long after the .475 Linebaugh, so the .475 didn't come about as an act of oneupmanship.

Whitworth, I agree with most of what you said, but you keep leaving out energy and I know you are one of the guys that does not think it is important.

Yes with more velocity you get more recoil and muzzle blast, but you also increase the effective range of the handgun. Penetration is not the ONLY determining factor on how a bullet kills.

And that is where I think some of us disagree, I look past normal handgun range, and wanting more is not bad in my opinion.

Just because Mr. Linebaugh says you don't need anything more than his 500 Linebaugh, does not make it the golden rule of hand gunning.

Jack Huntington shot a huge Longhorn with a 500 grain round nose solid to test his loads for Africa. The 450 Nitro #2's bullet hit the shoulder and the bullet took a hard left hand turn and came to rest in the rear hip. Despite the well over 5000 FPE the animal acted as if he was not even hit and started off wiiht out even a limp. The 500 JRH went through both shoulders and exited, taking out vital organs in it's path. Despite the huge advantage in FPE the Longhorn was not fazed.

quote:

Yes with more velocity you get more recoil and muzzle blast, but you also increase the effective range of the handgun.

I am very interested to know where the effective range limits of the 454, 475 Linebaugh, 500 Linebaugh & JRH are and at what yardage they are no longer effective and how much farther out are the 460 & 500 S&W effective?

quote:

Originally posted by jwp475:
Jack Huntington shot a huge Longhorn with a 500 grain round nose solid to test his loads for Africa. The 450 Nitro #2's bullet hit the shoulder and the bullet took a hard left hand turn and came to rest in the rear hip. Despite the well over 5000 FPE the animal acted as if he was not even hit and started off wiiht out even a limp. The 500 JRH went through both shoulders and exited, taking out vital organs in it's path. Despite the huge advantage in FPE the Longhorn was not fazed.

Come on JWP, you should know you can't hit an animal in the ass and think energy is going to kill it.
This is my point about you, for some reason, you have to come up with some story to debunk what others post. Always trying to make yourself look like you have all the answers.

SHOT placement is key and nowhere did I say energy "only" was going to kill an animal, if it was not shot correctly. Also shot placement is as important as bullet choice, velocity and energy.

I was not there when Jack Huntington shot the long horn, we you there. What angle was he shooting that caused the bullet to deflect? And how does this relate to what we are talking about? Oh your point was about energy.... You only look at one aspect of the equation.

There is more to it than energy or just penetration, it is a combination of things that make bullets work, are you ever going to learn that or are you just going to keep picking peoples post apart to try to make yourself look better or smarter than you actually are?

quote:

Originally posted by jwp475:

quote:

Yes with more velocity you get more recoil and muzzle blast, but you also increase the effective range of the handgun.

I am very interested to know where the effective range limits of the 454, 475 Linebaugh, 500 Linebaugh & JRH are and at what yardage they are no longer effective and how much farther out are the 460 & 500 S&W effective?

Well hell JWP you always have all the answers, why don't you tell us all.

I was not talking about any specific cartridge when I posted (Yes with more velocity you get more recoil and muzzle blast, but you also increase the effective range of the handgun. Penetration is not the ONLY determining factor on how a bullet kills. )

I was not comparing one cartridge to another, again you pick a sentence apart and add you normal BS.

So come on JWP you have all the answers, teach us all something here.

Yes I was there, shot placement was perfect, the bullet entered the right shoulder the animal was at about an 80 to 85 degree angle (nearly broad side the bullet took a hard left turn. The shooter can not control that. Despite all of that energy he was not in the least fazed. This is the point that the energy theorist want to ignore, is that the bullet did not exit and the animal soaked it all up with little effect. A bullet that destroys the vitails, will kill very effectively reguardless of its energy. I have posted several picutres of a low enrgy bullet creating larger wounds than bullets of greater energy did in the same animal and the energy fans fail to explain how energy is killing when the wounds are smaller

quote:

Originally posted by Redhawk1:

quote:

Originally posted by jwp475:
Jack Huntington shot a huge Longhorn with a 500 grain round nose solid to test his loads for Africa. The 450 Nitro #2's bullet hit the shoulder and the bullet took a hard left hand turn and came to rest in the rear hip. Despite the well over 5000 FPE the animal acted as if he was not even hit and started off wiiht out even a limp. The 500 JRH went through both shoulders and exited, taking out vital organs in it's path. Despite the huge advantage in FPE the Longhorn was not fazed.

Come on JWP, you should know you can't hit an animal in the ass and think energy is going to kill it.
This is my point about you, for some reason, you have to come up with some story to debunk what others post. Always trying to make yourself look like you have all the answers.

SHOT placement is key and nowhere did I say energy "only" was going to kill an animal, if it was not shot correctly. Also shot placement is as important as bullet choice, velocity and energy.

I was not there when Jack Huntington shot the long horn, we you there. What angle was he shooting that caused the bullet to deflect? And how does this relate to what we are talking about? Oh your point was about energy.... You only look at one aspect of the equation.

There is more to it than energy or just penetration, it is a combination of things that make bullets work, are you ever going to learn that or are you just going to keep picking peoples post apart to try to make yourself look better or smarter than you actually are?

Redhawk, you took a very nice Asian Buffalo with I believe your 416, did you shoot any handgun bullets into him to test performance? I have done this many times as has Jack Huntington and we observed the results and I am only reporting what was found out. I once believed in the so called "energy dump", but over the years and lots of dead animals to observe wounds I no longer worship at that alter. Shoot more than one type of round into some of the game that you take and photograph your results. I thought that these boards were to exchange information and that real world results trumped therory

Redhawk, it is a fact that bullet nose shape can cause bullets to veer off course in an animal. Even one shot towards the heart can miss it. That is why the flat meplat is so good, it tracks straight. So does a bullet that expands evenly. The non expanding round nose or pointed bullet can wind up anywhere or even tumble.
It is also true that more velocity with a revolver boolit means enough down range velocity for penetration at long range but that does not make it a better killer at close range. All it does is destroy more meat. Shooting a deer at 200 yd's with the .475 will have the same effect as shooting a deer at 150 yd's with the .480. That does not make the .475 better at 25 yd's then the .480.
To shoot a deer close with the .460 with the 200 gr bullet means total meat destruction and even at 150 yd's meat is a mess.
My question is, how many here shoot deer at 200 yd's with a revolver? How many at 100 yd's? How many limit shots to 25 yd's? How many want even closer?
How many shoot cape buffalo at 200 yd's? How many think the .460 with a 200 gr bullet will kill cape buf every time if at all?
We have to be realistic when talking about hunting. I have killed to just a little over 100 yd's but prefer 50 or under. The .480 is just as good as anything else within hunting distance. Ruger wanted it's own name on a cartridge and did't want to make their guns larger. It does not detract from the effectiveness of the cartridge when used as designed.
Yes the SRH will take larger boolits then the Freedom that is so highly touted with killing power. The BFR will fit even more boolits. But all will do the job. The Freedom will not kill any less then the BFR. But I can shoot much larger boolits as can the SRH. Is it needed? NO!
However, it is easier to find accuracy when a gun will take a larger selection of boolit weights and lengths. THAT is where the SRH and BFR's shine. I am not limited to a certain nose length and overall length.
Even in the .500's, longer brass in a cylinder that limits length does nothing to aid accuracy or killing power.

quote:

Originally posted by jwp475:

quote:

Originally posted by Redhawk1:

quote:

Originally posted by jwp475:
Jack Huntington shot a huge Longhorn with a 500 grain round nose solid to test his loads for Africa. The 450 Nitro #2's bullet hit the shoulder and the bullet took a hard left hand turn and came to rest in the rear hip. Despite the well over 5000 FPE the animal acted as if he was not even hit and started off wiiht out even a limp. The 500 JRH went through both shoulders and exited, taking out vital organs in it's path. Despite the huge advantage in FPE the Longhorn was not fazed.

Come on JWP, you should know you can't hit an animal in the ass and think energy is going to kill it.
This is my point about you, for some reason, you have to come up with some story to debunk what others post. Always trying to make yourself look like you have all the answers.

SHOT placement is key and nowhere did I say energy "only" was going to kill an animal, if it was not shot correctly. Also shot placement is as important as bullet choice, velocity and energy.

I was not there when Jack Huntington shot the long horn, we you there. What angle was he shooting that caused the bullet to deflect? And how does this relate to what we are talking about? Oh your point was about energy.... You only look at one aspect of the equation.

There is more to it than energy or just penetration, it is a combination of things that make bullets work, are you ever going to learn that or are you just going to keep picking peoples post apart to try to make yourself look better or smarter than you actually are?

Redhawk, you took a very nice Asian Buffalo with I believe your 416, did you shoot any handgun bullets into him to test performance? I have done this many times as has Jack Huntington and we observed the results and I am only reporting what was found out. I once believed in the so called "energy dump", but over the years and lots of dead animals to observe wounds I no longer worship at that alter. Shoot more than one type of round into some of the game that you take and photograph your results. I thought that these boards were to exchange information and that real world results trumped therory

JWP, yes I did take an Asian Water Buffalo with my Encore in 416 Rigby, I did not bring a handgun along when I was on that hunt.
Yes real world experience is a great way to give information. But to me shooting a dead animal on the ground is not a real test of effectiveness of bullet performance, now let me explain why. A bullet will not react the same as one shot on an animal standing up and walking around.

You can take 10 of the same animals and put them in a field, and shoot them all with the same gun using the exact load and get different bullet performance in them. You will get different reactions from the animals as well, you may have one drop dead in it's track and shoot the next one in the same spot, but have it run 100 yards before it expired.

I have seen your pictures and find them educational. But I don't expect the exact same performance time after time and shot after shot. Bullets do funny things. I have shot deer with the exact same load and gun and have one with a big hole and one with a bullet diameter size hole. To many variables to think every bullet is going to cause the exact same damage.

Now, you were saying how slower bullets cause more damage, on the hog hunt you and Whitworth went on, his hog shot with his 475 Linebaugh was a nice small hole, now your hog was half blown apart with a higher velocity bullet, was it not?

I did not think that the wounds in Whitworths hog were small.

The nose shape of a bullet and are its expansion charateristics and whether or not it hits a lot of bone have more to do with the size of the wound than does FPE in my experience
Case in point is the exits in the rib cage of this 6X7 bull Elk

exit from 300 win with 2700FPE




Exit from a 440 grain wide flat point hard cast with 882 FPE



It is apparent that the largest wound was created by the bullet with the least amount of FPE. Obviously 882 FPE was more than enough

I shot 2 hogs with the 300 win at 350 yards. The one that you refer to the bullet foolwed the rib cage and simply removed them, that was the largest wound that I have ever seen a 300 win produce with the 180 TSX

Now the second hogs exit was what I have come to expect from many head of game and was typical

the exit is just above the tail

quote:

Originally posted by bfrshooter:
Redhawk, it is a fact that bullet nose shape can cause bullets to veer off course in an animal. Even one shot towards the heart can miss it. That is why the flat meplat is so good, it tracks straight. So does a bullet that expands evenly. The non expanding round nose or pointed bullet can wind up anywhere or even tumble.
It is also true that more velocity with a revolver boolit means enough down range velocity for penetration at long range but that does not make it a better killer at close range. All it does is destroy more meat. Shooting a deer at 200 yd's with the .475 will have the same effect as shooting a deer at 150 yd's with the .480. That does not make the .475 better at 25 yd's then the .480.
To shoot a deer close with the .460 with the 200 gr bullet means total meat destruction and even at 150 yd's meat is a mess.
My question is, how many here shoot deer at 200 yd's with a revolver? How many at 100 yd's? How many limit shots to 25 yd's? How many want even closer?
How many shoot cape buffalo at 200 yd's? How many think the .460 with a 200 gr bullet will kill cape buf every time if at all?
We have to be realistic when talking about hunting. I have killed to just a little over 100 yd's but prefer 50 or under. The .480 is just as good as anything else within hunting distance. Ruger wanted it's own name on a cartridge and did't want to make their guns larger. It does not detract from the effectiveness of the cartridge when used as designed.
Yes the SRH will take larger boolits then the Freedom that is so highly touted with killing power. The BFR will fit even more boolits. But all will do the job. The Freedom will not kill any less then the BFR. But I can shoot much larger boolits as can the SRH. Is it needed? NO!
However, it is easier to find accuracy when a gun will take a larger selection of boolit weights and lengths. THAT is where the SRH and BFR's shine. I am not limited to a certain nose length and overall length.
Even in the .500's, longer brass in a cylinder that limits length does nothing to aid accuracy or killing power.

BFRshooter, I like to handgun hunt, I like up and close handgun hunting and I chose my handguns for the distances I like to hunt. But I also like to use handguns for longer distance shooting and again I choose what I fell will give me the best performance.

Up close, I like big holes and heavy bullets, that is why I mostly used the 500 Mag and before that the 454 Casull. When I got into shooting deer at longer ranges, I went with the S&W 460 Mag, and no I don't use that 200 gr. shit bullet either.

And no I don't think my velocity at closer range makes it a better killer, shot placement and bullet choice is the factor there.

What destroys meat is, poor shot placement and poor bullet performance. Also weather you hit bone plays a roll in how a bullet reacts and how much meat get destroyed.

Do I hunt deer at 200 yards, not if I can help it, I prefer a closer shot, but if I have the handgun capable of doing it and the shot presents itself, I will take it.

I would say 90% of my handgun hunting happens under 50 yards, that is why I am buying gun that work great in that range and, I am not saying that the guns I use will not be effective at longer ranges. I am setting guns up for that range, iron sights and red-dots.

As for Cape Buffalo, I don't have any plans and I dam sure would not choose a S&W 460 Mag with a 200 gr. bullet. I doubt the 200 gr. bullet would have much effect at 200 yards on a cape buffalo.

But I do agree with you, realistically, handgun hunting is a up close sport. That is why my up coming black bear hunt is on the ground and 20 yards is the max distance I will be shooting. So my 510 GNR is going to be my choice. And yes I will be using 350 gr, bullet at 1200 fps and I know it will do the job.

I don't think I've ever seen such a bunch of people who suffer from denial and tunnel vision in my life. As someone who doesn't eat and breathe pistol shooting, some of you guys continue to make this segment of the forum unbearable to the AVERAGE HANDGUN H-U-N-T-E-R!

The laws of physics are irrefutable, whether you want to accept them and live in a vaccuum is up to you, but nevertheless, irrefutable.

1. You cannot increase energy without changing either velocity or mass (bullet weight) or BOTH. You can rationalize all you want but you ccan't change or modify the laws of PHYSICS. KE = 1/2m x v2 That means that if you know the weight of your bullet and have chronographed it at the muzzle, you can divide the bullet weight in half and multiply it by the speed of the chronograph squared to find out how many "joules" of energy you have at the muzzle. Move the chronograph and calculate that energy at any distance you like, but it is irrefutable.

2. Recoil is not based on velocity. Recoil is based on Newton's Third LAW of Motion. For every action, there's an equal and opposite reaction. If you fired a rocket or a laser beam out of your pistol, there would be little or no recoil. Since you're simply confining an explosion at the breech of the pistol or the shell casing, however, the explosion is creating massive amounts of energy in order to get the projectile moving. The more powder it takes to move the bullet, the heavier the recoil.

3. No matter how you wish it or how you'd like to believe it, a pistol, by design, will never EVER perform to the same expectations of a long gun.

The fact that many of you would challege some of the worlds most dangerous creatures is noteworthy and I'm impressed (truly I am). But the fact remains that Smith & Wesson can tell me all day long that my 500 Mag can kill elephant, rhino, Cape buffalo, hippo and Kodiak bear with no problems is irrelevant. I'm too old and too chickenshit to ever be tempted into trying to do that intentionally. In a bind, sure - in a heartbeat. But in a BIND, I'd use my pen knife if that was all I had. I'd try to scratch its eyes out or bite its balls off if it came to that. I've always admired the comment of the PH that Ruark asked why he used a 600 Nitro on elephant. "Because they don't make a 700", he said. Now that they do, I'm sure he'd be using one as would I in similar circumstances.

Of course velocity makes a difference...to say otherwise ignores a couple hundred years of firearms advancement.
If it didn't, why are rifles shooting 3-4K fps being made?
If it didn't, why don't we use a heavy bullet at 800 fps for handgun hunting?

Take the same projectile and (assuming it holds together ok) compare it at 3,000 fps, 2,000 fps, and 1,000 fps. The trajectories are going to be different and the wounds are going to be different. Given a reasonable set of asumptions, the animal will be dead in all 3 scenarios but there are going to be differences with each...

A 325 gr bullet travelling at 1,200 is not the same as that bullet travelling at 2,000. I understand that they both will work, but get tired of hearing there is no difference, or no advantage to the added velocity. dvnv

quote:

Originally posted by dvnv:
Of course velocity makes a difference...to say otherwise ignores a couple hundred years of firearms advancement.
If it didn't, why are rifles shooting 3-4K fps being made?
If it didn't, why don't we use a heavy bullet at 800 fps for handgun hunting?

Take the same projectile and (assuming it holds together ok) compare it at 3,000 fps, 2,000 fps, and 1,000 fps. The trajectories are going to be different and the wounds are going to be different. Given a reasonable set of asumptions, the animal will be dead in all 3 scenarios but there are going to be differences with each...

A 325 gr bullet travelling at 1,200 is not the same as that bullet travelling at 2,000. I understand that they both will work, but get tired of hearing there is no difference, or no advantage to the added velocity. dvnv

Thank You...

quote:

Originally posted by dvnv:
Of course velocity makes a difference...to say otherwise ignores a couple hundred years of firearms advancement.
If it didn't, why are rifles shooting 3-4K fps being made?
dvnv

But of course thier is a difference, but how does the difference effect wound channel size. There are more factors at play than just velocity as these photos readily show


440 grain flat point hard cast from the 500 JRH with a muzzle velocity of 950 FPS




180 grain from a 300 winn impct velocity approximately 2600 FPS



It is apparent to even the casual observer that the most velocity projetile, with by far the most FPE did not create the larger of the 2 wounds and these wounds are in the same 6X7 Bull Elk

I have been working that is why I have been out of the fray -- but here I am now!

Hello George!

Redhawk -- you are indeed correct that no two animals will act the same to a bullet all things being equal. Unfortunately it is easier (and less costly) to test bullets on a dead animal, but a dead animal, in my experience, is harder to penetrate than a live one.

I don't think that penetration i the only issue in play, but think about this, if you cannot reach the vitals with your bullet, that means you have inadequate penetration and you won't kill your animal, that is why it is a huge percentae of the equation. That is particularly so regarding DG.

dvnv -- we will never see 2,000 fps out of our handguns with a 325 grain bullet, nor anywhere near it with most "normal" sized cartridges, soit is a bit of a moot point. We are talking maybe 200 fps differences here and not drastic velocity spreads like you example. Is there a difference in killing power between a 400 grain bullet travelling 1,200 fps and one travelling 1,350 fps? Not that I have seen. This is why I am discounting the velocity arguemnet as we are not talking about huge increases that could rally affect the outcome of the bullet's strike (and the possibility of failure comes into playparticularly if it strikes a heavy bone).......

Precisely, Whitworth

jpw475: Better example now that the right picture has been posted...I think a picture of the soft tissue would be more telling.

Regarding wound channel...I'll opine that, without bullet failure, the same projectile will create a larger wound channel with increased velocity.

I remember a while ago someone posting several different calibers and bullets being shot through some kind of paper (I can't remember if it was wet or dry). This same subject of velocity came up and the pics were used to support the lack of effect velocity had. I remember thinking the .41 mag results looked quite a bit more devastating than the .45 acp...

Whitworth:

Never is a long time...perhaps 300 gr would have been a better example: In .45 colt it can easily do 1,250 fps, but can easily do 1,800 fps in a 454 (someone got up to 2,000 fps in the old days). Both animals will die, but there is a difference. If 200 fps doesn't matter, why don't you shoot the 400 gr 1,200 fps load at 1,000 fps, or better yet 800 fps?...Less recoil and I bet it would still work on most of the animals shot with handguns.

I am not trying to tell you wide meplats, heavy for caliber bullets aren't good, I am just saying velocity is one of the components to performance, terminal and otherwise and am tired of hearing that is has no value. dvnv

Welcome back Whitworth. It's always a pleasure debating you on this one. LOL

ACTUALLY, the projectile reaching the vital is as much a matter of the materials used to make the projectile as it is the speed and velocity. If I were shooting a 300 grain ballistic tip versus a 300 grain FMJ being pushed by the same powder at the same distance, you KNOW which one is going to penetrate farther. That's why arrows kill by hemmorhaging and bullets kill by shock.....OH, that's a different argument, isn't it?

Go look at the hole that .500 JRH knocked through the rib cage at a lumbering 800 fps or so. I have seen that load knock the snot out of animals.

I too have pushed bullets fast and slow in my .454, but you know where you really start seeing effect? It's when you move up to heavier bullets -- at least that has been my observation.

Let's not get into the arrow argument again -- PLEASE!

well, the point is that at some point velocity matters. what that point is is beyond me. i just know that i don't see a lick of difference b/w a 420 gr 475 at 1350 and a 320 grain casull at 1650, sorry but i just never have seen the difference. the biggest differences i've seen have to do with bullet type and less with caliber. doubt a 510 gnr with 350 grain bullet at 1250 fps or whatever is gonna be any different on game than a 370 grain 480 ruger at 1200 fps or a 360 grain 454 at 1450 fps or a 340 grain 44 mag at 1340 fps. whatever you shoot is gonna die if you hit the vitals. pick your favorite caliber and learn to shoot it well. if i was you redhawk i'd leave the gun a 480 and if you felt the need you could move up to a 475 if there was a reason to. sounds like you don't have the need with your other guns, but "want" is a different story.

and no hog has ever told a difference on me shooting it with a hardcast pistol round, a 375 h&h, an .06 or my 460 weatherby. now, there was a huge difference in the animal's body. not with solids mind you but with a barnes 500 grain x bullet the wound channels were unreal and the animals didn't move much once hit at all, though they all died.

this is where you get crucified on the african board and they are just behind the times big time. all of these weapons whether pistols or a 45/70 will kill whatever walks, period.

if you want more range than 100 yards there's better picks than big and slow, medium and fast is perhaps better. the 200 grain 460 has been pretty good on deer and doesn't damage meat so bad if you shoot real well and hit the right spot.

this is an interesting test showing the effect on penetration/velocity and bullet type.
http://www.gunsandammomag.com/ammunition/make_111405/index1.html

[QUOTE]Originally posted by tradmark:
this is where you get crucified on the african board and they are just behind the times big time. all of these weapons whether pistols or a 45/70 will kill whatever walks, period./QUOTE]

LOL! This is why we argue this point here instead of there! They all think we drink Koolaid anyhow....... Without 5,000 ft-lbs of ME, how can we possibly kill big game, and I say as long as I can reach and destroy the vitals, it's a dead animal no matter what conventional wisdom says. On a charging cape buffalo you will need a CNS hit to stop it and that will be a function of penetration -- getting to the CNS, no matter what the diameter of the projectile........

Of all of the big-bore handgun calibers I have hunted with, the .44 mag has been the least impressive even compared to my Casull.......but maybe I'm just a real observant fella.......

i think the test i showed illustrates what many of us missed for years and that is matching the bullet type and weight for the given caliber and velocity is probably more important than just simply what caliber a bullet is. who'd have thought that the buffalo bore would actually penetrate less out of the rifle at a higher velocity than out of the pistol. of course, a pistol is what is was designed for and look at the pictures of it's deformation and you can easily see why it pentrated less. i believe this is what was happening when the weatherby cartridges were ridiculed in the 60's and 70's. none of the bullets were capable of handling the velocity the cartridges produced. now with modern bullets they are phenomenal performers. a casull with the proper bullets can be made to get the most out of the cartridge as can a 500 smith. most people i know that feel the .44 mag under performs haven't experimented nearly as much with their loads in .44 mag as they do with the larger glamour calibers. if you look at all the linebaugh seminars you'll see plenty of loads for the 500 that didn't penetrate particularly well compared to some of the other rounds but they seem to test so many. old express rifles with round nose solids didn't represent well and neither did the soft points in some of the big classic african calibers, whereas those same calibers with the flat point monometal rounds performed unbelievebly well. problem is this only allows the shooter to kill additional elephants and doesn't ad a bit to killing the target animal. at a certain point it turns into overkill and ads nothing.

Yes indeed there are limits to hardcast bullets, hence no need to pushthem hard as they work well at low velocities. Bullet quality during the early years of the Weatherby is exactly why they had such a reputation for poor performnance. This changd with the advent of monometal bullets that could actually withstand the velocities. Still don't know that a .460 Wby kills better than a .458 Lott with the same bullet........

I have done quite a bit of experimenting with my .44 magnums and in every respect my .475 out performs it, as does my Casull -- the only place the .44 wins is in the recoil department!

Tradmark, I think we agree on more than we disagree........

oh, i very much think we do as well. don't ever get me wrong, i love my 475. i do love my 44's adn my 454. most of my favorite calibers are my favorites for sentimental reasons and not necessarily b/c it's "the best" reason. i grew up reading about this "caliber" a 454 that was perfectly adequate for everything from grizzly to elephant and left the 44 in the dust. got one, and have just never found a reason to change as i feel it's the most versatile round in a packable pistol. kills everything with the best trajectory. however, i feel like the 475 is ideal in a bfr, with the transfer bar and able to carry 5 loads in house in an easy recoiling 400+ grain bullet at about 1100 fps or so is perfect to be on my hip in alaska. in new mexico when elk hunting and not sure if the shot i'm gonna get is gonna be 250 or 50, it's the 454's niche. however, each will cover the other's territory nicely. when fly fishing or hiking with the boys or on the bikes in the mountains, there's nothing finer than a scandium 44 mag.

bottom line is i feel i can drop a buff with all, in fact i have done on north american buff, plan to use all 3 on water and cape buff in the next couple years.

i'm saving the 500 smith for the pump action 500 smith prototype i was shooting last week which will be available soon. seriously the fastest rifle i've shot next to a double and in reality in may be the perfect stopper imho.

Trademark, you claim not to see the difference but if you don't it's simply because you're not seeing the forest for the trees. Are you trying to tell me that the trajectory of those two rounds are identical? In order to flatten trajectory, you have to increase velocity. When you increase velocity, you increase energy. Simply physics.

george i think i was pretty clear. at least i tried to be. trajectory is what i see a big difference in. that's what matters when the shooting is at unknown ranges.
when i don't see a difference i mean that they all die, there's a big hole, and blood everywhere. they just run a few yards and fall dead. there's no pistol or rifle that offers the bang flop everytime. i've gotten as many bang flops on big hogs out of a 44 as i did out of a 375HH. in fact,on the bison i've shot, it didn't matter a lick whether it was the 475, the 454 or the 375. same result, same dead animal in about the same time. that's what i mean by the same.

quote:

Originally posted by tradmark:
george i think i was pretty clear. at least i tried to be. trajectory is what i see a big difference in. that's what matters when the shooting is at unknown ranges.
when i don't see a difference i mean that they all die, there's a big hole, and blood everywhere. they just run a few yards and fall dead. there's no pistol or rifle that offers the bang flop everytime. i've gotten as many bang flops on big hogs out of a 44 as i did out of a 375HH. in fact,on the bison i've shot, it didn't matter a lick whether it was the 475, the 454 or the 375. same result, same dead animal in about the same time. that's what i mean by the same.

That's my point about muzzle energy. Many folks tout how many foot-pounds of ME their cartridges produce, but whether I shoot an animal with my .416 Rem or my .454 Casull, there is no reaction to the ME. Bullet placement is still king, and if the bullet pentrates to the vitals, the result is a dead animal -- 5,000 or 1,500 ft-lbs, it just doesn't seem to matter a lick.

Why do I use a certain velocity in any of my revolvers? This is the important question nobody has stated.
I leave the chronograph in the basement when working a load. Once the accuracy is found, then I might check velocity or not. If it is 1000 fps or 1400 fps, it doesn't matter to me. I don't need flatter trajectory at hunting distances and even if I want to shoot 400 yd's for fun I just learn the holdover.
The point is, the boolit goes where I want it to at any range and any misses are my fault only.
I see no point in loading for as high a velocity the gun can handle UNLESS that is where the accuracy is. Blowing a larger hole or creating more bloodshot meat does not insure a quicker kill as long as boolit placement is proper. Once penetration with the proper boolit is attained, no more is needed and to compare a .475 to a .500 or a .454 in some pile of paper will not prove one is better. To keep making brass longer and longer for more velocity does not add a thing. However longer, heavier boolits can be shot with the resulting lower velocities and penetration will be increased for the largest game.
Redhawk says it right when he says he doesn't use a light boolit in the .460. He is using the longer case for a heavier boolit but will it kill any better then the same boolit out of the .454???? Not unless he goes to 200 yd's! Retained velocity for long range so penetration out there is as good as a smaller case at closer range. Flatter shooting? Why? It can be measured in inches not feet when there is only a small difference in velocity.
My .475 only drops 18" at 200 yd's with a 420 gr WFN, do I need a .475 super mag?
I expect any .500 to be comparable and it probably shoots flatter then the .44.
Does anyone have the drop of the .500's at 200 yd's with say a 50 to 100 yd setting? Has anyone shot all of them that far after talking about flatter trajectories? It would make interesting reading.