quote:

Originally posted by RMiller:
Dont forget that the cartridge is useless unless it has MAGNUM in the title.

What does that have to do with this conversation???
In my opinion it is not needed or a factor in the subject at hand.

quote:

Originally posted by Redhawk1:
You leave out the most important factor, bullet construction. The construction of a bullet determines how it will and how much energy gets transferred. Also the velocity at which the projectile is driven also plays a factor in the equation.

Alf, is this the statement you some what agree with?

As stated previously FPE is Not Conserved In Collisions and is transformed into other forms of energy mostly thermal energy

Momentum is conserved in real collisons and it is the dierect applied force that is the important part of the equation .
Force is calculated in NEWTONS and 1 Killagram accelarating at 1 meter per secound is equal to 1 Newton
Mass and wieght are not the same thing, mass is a constant any where in the universe and wieght changes depending on the speciffic gravity..

I have stayed out of this! They way some explain it is that nothing kills without MASSIVE amounts of energy. Maybe this would be a good read.
http://www.americanairgunhunter.com/africa2006.html

How about this?
http://www.quackenbushairguns.com/

READ this AND the last post completely before responding and I would do so several times.
Where do you “get off†jpw475?
Why won’t you scrap with someone your own size?
Are you afraid of being wrong?
Do you just like letting Redhawk piss you and himself off?

You have asked ALF to weigh in on this he has. ALF brought the whole picture into a sharp focus for the layman. Why has this all been ignored?

Why hide behind a book and quote the same figures which are a part of the total picture which you claim to possess.

Redhawk- I would revise that quote to say: bullet construction determines how much energy is transferred, when. Velocity is also important. Before I were to post it again.
Maybe (I do not know) RMiller, was commenting on the size of hole that I had just made.

Now that is a big boy’s pellet rifle! (Quackenbush) The difference between men and boys is the horsepower of their toys.

quote:

Originally posted by Rex Rat: The difference between men and boys is the horsepower of their toys.

I have a .450 Ackley, so I win!

I see nothing wrong with this debate as long as the oposing sides stay away from insulting one another.

Keep it clean, gentlemen.

So true and when are all of you going to admit that everything enters into the equation and to circle around and around trying to say only one thing is important and the other isn't and then in the next word, agree with the other makes me wonder what is being said.
I also have worked out an equation that works every time. No, it is not on paper. When I shoot a deer and the boolit/bullet doesn't do what I expect, I change it. Simple! I don't care if it is 800 fps or 1600 fps, the boolit itself must do the job.
Now that big thing that will cause more disputes here then anything else I can say is that the slow balls from muzzle loaders, cap and ball revolvers, good boolits from the .44 on up in a revolver will put deer on the ground faster then most small caliber rifles with tons more energy.
Energy and velocity works together with the PROPER boolit creating flatter trajectory, longer distance, a larger primary wound channel and more penetration.
To watch you guys argue, agree, then argue again makes me pour another drink.
Energy dump is crap! Plain and simple. To make use of the energy to make the proper boolit do what needs to be done is different and all of you go back and forth saying it, then denying it.
A perfect hit from a cowboy action load from a .45 can drop a deer in it's tracks while a shot to the guts from a .375 magnum with all of it's power can lose a deer. Of what use was the power and energy? Go bigger, like the .50 BMG and blow the deer parts into the next county.
There is a balance between blowing an animal to pieces and making a nice clean kill with little meat damage.
If you look at the wound channel through a deer with a lower power gun and compare it to one in a large game animal shot with a higher power gun, how much difference is there? Yeah, I know, a deeper hole! Bigger bones busted, etc.
I just don't understand what all the friction is about here.
Energy does not do much unless it is put to work. I can make a little wind throwing my arm in a circle but if I throw a ball, I make that energy do some work. Once a boolit uses what it needs, anything left over is wasted. Either creating heat, a temporary wound, a big hole in the ground on the other side of an animal or blowing the animal into mush.
Balance the energy to the size of the game with the proper bullet and the distance shot, that can utilize the energy without too much waste and dead is dead. I DON'T like 4" holes in my deer.

I think I said that a long time ago, it is not just one thing.

BFRshooter, you have agreed and disagreed as much as the rest of us in the other thread.

This is how I measure killing power, speed, bullet weight, bullet construction and energy. Everyone of them play a role in how bullets kill, plain and simple.

You all keep saying energy has nothing to do with it. That is what I disagree with.

Redhawk- What exactly do you mean.

quote:

You all keep saying energy has nothing to do with it. That is what I disagree with.

I read the whole thing over, all three pages of confusion. NO ONE EVER said that energy had nothing to do with it!!!

After you got done pissing him off by bringing up a topic that was obviously discussed in detail at an other point (no I will not read that mess) he launched directly into what I would guess to be his main point in the afore mentioned riot. Referencing an authority on “Bullet Penetration Modeling Rhe Dynamics And The Incapacitatiom Resulting From Wound Trauma†(sp) has been a blatant error because news print can not be neither wounded nor incapacitated! He and you veer all over ballistics while some members (Out of frustration?) put on the table valuable opinions, that you two take the points most convenient to enrage the other in a fresh way. All the while harping on the same CRAP.

Why don’t you guys just write letters or PMs to each other so that the rest of us can go to the topic at the head of the list without fear we may stumble on a pile of BILE.

You already know what is here, so why not just not read it, if it bothers you. Seems simple enough.

My energy comment is from the other thread and was not directed to you.

I never stated or insinuated that shooting bullets into wet paper had any relevance to Actual Wound Trauma in Actual tissue.
Shooting the wet news print only gives a measure of hydraulic resistance and compares different bullets expansion and penetration against each other on that day and in the particular batch of paper and that is all it does..

I stated scientific fact as to why Foot Pounds Of Energy is irelevant.. and this fact is indisputable......

JWP, I'm going to take Whitworths advice here and not get "personal" or call names but I do wonder where you're getting this information. According to the laws of physics, velocity and pressure vary inversely. In other words if a mass is moving at light speed with little or no resistance, there is no pressure (energy) expelled. That would seem to mean that a fast moving projectile striking an animal would immediately slow the velocity which would, by physical law, expell lots of energy.

In an earlier post, you ridiculed "hydraulic shock" but now you're saying, "Shooting the wet news print only gives a measure of hydraulic resistance" Am I missing something here?

The transfer of momentum is what is being mistakingly called transfer of kinetic energy.. Hydraulic pressure is what is being mistakingly called hydraulic shock. Force is mass times acceleleration.

We must not forget this law of thermodynamics;

"The first law of Thermodynamics requires conservation of total energy in any collision, but this information is not useful in analysis of the collision because there is no direct way to determine what fraction of the kinetic energy is transformed into other forms of energy (usually most of this is heat or thermal energy)"

What we are left with is a transfer of momentum. Remember Newton's Laws Of Motion' are of "Mass", "Motion" and "Force" and not of "Kinetic Energy"

In a collison the projectile hits the tissue and by transfer of momentum the tissue is hurled out of the wound channel area.The tissue now has momentum. The Transfer of "Momentum" is the wounding mechananisum by which this is accomplised. Although the Hydraulic pressure that is created in a Soft Solid (Tissue) is also important and cannot be ignored. The hydraulic pressure primarily contributes to the temporary wound cavity unless the tissue expansion is greater than the tissues elasticity.

We must keep in mind that Newtons Laws Of Motion have remained unchanged since Sir Issac Newton stated them in the 17th Century.

Actually Newton only had three laws of motion, none of which have anything to do with this issue. (1. An object in motion tends to stay in motion unless effected by some external force; 2. Force is the measurement based on mass times acceleration; and 3. For every action, there is an equal and opposite reaction.) Law #2 will give you a formula to calculate that energy but the equation is fluid. By changing either the mass or the velocity or both, you change the energy. Yet this "energy" cannot be defined by the equation, just how it is calculated.) Energy transfer is simple physics and again, heat (thermodynamics) is a byproduct of any changes in the physical qualities of matter. I don't recall anything in thermodynamics which would explain how a groundhog hit with a .22-250 vaporizes. The hydraulics of the mass being expanded by the energy exerted on the target will pop it just as a straight pin will pop a balloon. Conversely, if you sit on a balloon, there is some unmeasurable increase in the heat of the air from compression from being forced against the balloon wall prior to it's bursting, but it's certainly not the heat that's causing the catastrophic failure.

George, okay I'll bite. A .22-250 is travelling at what velocity? 4,000 fps with a 40 grain bullet? We're dealing with rounds that are travelling 1,400 fps on the high side (handguns). Where does hydrostatic shock/hydraulic pressure come into play? Can't blow a ground hog up with a handgun due to the subdued speeds. On the same token, if I shoot a squirrel with my .450 Ackley that is generating a calculated 6,000 ft-lbs of M.E., it too won't blow a squirrel to pieces like a .22-250 at 1,420 ft-lbs. My Ackley shoots a 550 grain bullet........

quote:

Originally posted by george roof:
Actually Newton only had three laws of motion, none of which have anything to do with this issue. (1. An object in motion tends to stay in motion unless effected by some external force; 2. Force is the measurement based on mass times acceleration; and 3. For every action, there is an equal and opposite reaction.) Law #2 will give you a formula to calculate that energy but the equation is fluid. By changing either the mass or the velocity or both, you change the energy. Yet this "energy" cannot be defined by the equation, just how it is calculated.) Energy transfer is simple physics and again, heat (thermodynamics) is a byproduct of any changes in the physical qualities of matter. I don't recall anything in thermodynamics which would explain how a groundhog hit with a .22-250 vaporizes. The hydraulics of the mass being expanded by the energy exerted on the target will pop it just as a straight pin will pop a balloon. Conversely, if you sit on a balloon, there is some unmeasurable increase in the heat of the air from compression from being forced against the balloon wall prior to it's bursting, but it's certainly not the heat that's causing the catastrophic failure.

Newtons Laws Of Motion Have Every thing to do with it.

1- An object in motion tends to stay in motion unless effected by some external force
This is momentum and momentum is conserved in real collisions, not kinetic energy

2-Force is the measurement based on mass times acceleration;

Correct, and 1 Kiligram accelerating at 1 Meter per secound equalls one Newton

3-For every action, there is an equal and opposite reaction

Correct

The 22-250 with its much greater velocity (than handguns) will stretch the body tissue of the ground squirrel past its elastic limits (due the the great amount of HYDRAULIC PRESSURE) not a factor in normaly in revolvers and Semi Auto handguns.

The fact that Kinetic energy is not conserved in real collisions is of paramount impartance as is the fact that Momentum is conserved. The transfer of momentum to the tissue is very much part of Newtons Laws Of Motion that deal with Momentum, Mass and Acceleration, not Kinetic Energy. These laws are the basis for all calculations in Physics related problems..

The only thing I have ever said in any of my posts is that to think shooting any animal with a bullet that stays in the animal, therefore DUMPING all of it's energy is wrong and doesn't kill any faster then if the bullet went all the way through. I have stated many times that I don't care if the boolit has enough energy left to go through 2 more deer but some here say the energy was wasted. Of course it was, but did I NEED it after the boolit did it's work?
There is the thought of over kill like using a .300 Weatherby on an 80# doe. The 30-30 would be too powerful!
A .475 or .500 revolver with it's heavier boolit does not make a huge wound channel. It won't be much larger then one from a .44 but will penetrate deeper, bust larger bone and lose a bunch of energy in the ground somewhere. However, if used on the 80# doe with a quick expanding bullet, it will make mush of her. It won't make her any deader, just messy. Energy that was not needed. Slow the big boolit to 800 fps and it will kill her just as fast.
How many here have bragged about getting 1500 fps from the .44? Guys work loads with a chrono, looking for the highest velocity. I have stated a thousand times to leave the chrono home, find the accurate load with the right boolit and forget about another 300 fps because it will not make the gun more deadly but hitting the animal right WILL. But the quest for energy continues unabated.
Take a soft point 180 gr .44 bullet at 1500 fps, then take a 320 gr hard cast WFN and load it to a velocity to exactly match the energy of the light bullet. Which kills faster? Which will waste energy outside the animal? Which mangled meat? RIGGGGGHT, it was not the energy that killed but how the proper amount was applied and utilized by the boolit.
I see no difference with a good hit on deer with the .44 or a larger caliber. The reason for the larger calibers is a slightly larger hole, a slightly larger primary wound channel FOR A LONGER DISTANCE in larger game. If that were not true, why isn't everyone using 150 gr bullets in the .475 and .500? IMAGINE the energy!!!!!

quote:

Originally posted by Redhawk1:

quote:

Originally posted by RMiller:
Dont forget that the cartridge is useless unless it has MAGNUM in the title.

What does that have to do with this conversation???
In my opinion it is not needed or a factor in the subject at hand.

There are many other non factors being given great consideration why not cartridge name?

I believe HOW the energy is transfered has much more to do with causing tissue destruction than what the numbers are in the ballistics book.

Wide meplat flat nose bullets seem to give much better wounds that the paltry 900 footpounds at impact would seem to imply. Refering to my 454 and a 340 grain bullet (.410 meplat) I shot a deer and with a bad shot to the leg took a tennis ball sized hole out of the rear leg.

A motion for the RAIL!

Since position in space is a vector quantity, momentum (being the canonical conjugate of position) is a vector quantity as well it has direction. Thus, when a gun is fired, the final total momentum of the system (the gun and the bullet) is the vector sum of the momenta of these two objects. Assuming that the gun and bullet were at rest prior to firing (meaning the initial momentum of the system was zero), the final total momentum must also equal 0.
Momentum is defined as the product of mass times velocity. It is a vector quantity. The momentum of a system is the vector sum of the momenta of the objects which make up the system. If the system is an isolated system, then the momentum of the system is a constant of the motion and subject to the principle of conservation of momentum. The symbol for momentum is p. The SI unit for momentum is kg m/s.
An “explosion†occurs when an object is divided into two or more fragments due to a release of energy. Kinetic energy in a system of explosion is not conserved because it involves energy transformation. The system begins with 0 momentum and ends with 0 momentum plus distance.
A perfectly inelastic collision is when two bodies collide and stick together. This describes the conservation of momentum which does describe, perfectly the result of a bullet strike and no exit.


Joule: a unit of work or energy equal to the work done by a force of one newton acting through a distance of one meter.
Kinetic energy is energy of motion expressed in Joules. The kinetic energy of an object is the energy it possesses because of its motion.

Kinetic energy is an expression of the fact that a moving object can do work on anything it hits; it quantifies the amount of work the object could do as a result of its motion. The total mechanical energy of an object is the sum of its kinetic energy and potential energy.
For an object of finite size, this kinetic energy is called the translational kinetic energy of the mass to distinguish it from any rotational kinetic energy it might possess the total kinetic energy of a mass can be expressed as the sum of the translational kinetic energy of its center of mass plus the kinetic energy of rotation about its center of mass. This assumes that the speed is much less than the speed of light.

In physics, mechanical work is the amount of energy transferred by a force. Like energy, it is a scalar quantity, with SI units of joules. Heat conduction is not considered to be a form of work, since there is no macroscopically measurable force. The mechanical work done by an external force acting upon a body is proportional to the square of the change in velocity of that body.

The mechanical energy of a body is that part of its total energy which is subject to change by mechanical work. It includes kinetic energy and potential energy.
Both concepts may be brought to bare with a balistic problem. Momentum is conserved while velocity is not. The momentum of the projectile, as referenced from the target is then directly proportional to the momentum acquired by the target following the collision. YET, our dear projectile will be possessed of kinetic energy and it will do work on the target in proportions relative to its speed and weight and the rapid rotation will do much work, to boot.
While it seems that the arrogantly spoken McP is an ass, that sadly is not true. The ability of the concept of momentum to take into account systems gives it great advantage over attempting to use Kinetic energy to explain the result of a collision. This is illustrated by complex math and is of NO USE TO US HERE to kill a deer or even select a better style of bullet and cartridge type.

Whitworth, if you recall, I didn't start the issues of bringing Sir Isaac into this discussion. I agree that with a handgun, those issues aren't as relevant as they would with hypervelocity rounds. Yet those are "Laws" simply because they've been proven in laboratory testings and because of that are inviolate. Though you don't see as dramatic results with a pistol round doesn't mean they aren't working.

JWP seems to be taking a few liberties with his use of those laws. His statements may or may not be true, but that has nothing to do with those laws themselves. Newton's first law also applied to a body "at rest tends to stay at rest unless effected by some outside force". Potential and kinetic energies are applications of that law, but hardly what the law states.

Rex Rat has some very good physics comments there, but I am assuming (possibly incorrectly) that neither JWP nor most of us are that deep into "rocket science" for that to make a damn when we go to the range and pull that trigger. If we use a specific bullet and it doesn't penetrate or perform as we desire, we either add/delete/ or change the powder we're using. You don't need a laboratory to do that and you don't have to understand the theory behind it to get the desired results.

What started out as a fun penetration test turned into a can of worms.
Now it has come full circle and I am reading about the best thing to do! Shoot the animal and see how the boolit performs and then change something if it isn't right.
Some guys carry a math book and computer for the autopsy.

If the animal is not dead yet, I prefer to ask it how it felt about my shot placement and bullet performance............

Hey relax, I was just kidding!

That's what I do, I use what works and has worked for many years, the right velocity, big bullets, proper bullet construction and shot placement. All that equals a dead animal.

Field experience beats the pants off all the book knowledge and speculation of theory.

quote:

Originally posted by someoldguy:
Hmpf! If you're going to be sensible, sir, I'll just go elsewhere!

LOL!! Yes indeed! Sensibility is discouraged and pragmatism is against the rules! So there!

jwp475 I think I see where your position lies. I do agree with the statement that energy is not the concept to use when trying to explain the CONSIQUENCES of a collision, that as much is true. I do not agree that the projectile’s energy has nothing to do with terminal ballistics. It is not capable of producing a reliable model but energy when used relative to bullet “type†and velocity can be used as an end all for the educated shootist to choose a projectile that will suit his needs.

You stuck by your guns. For intestinal fortitude I applaud you.

I know I'm going to regret posting this........

Now that the smoke has cleared, I have to put this example on the table. The .454 Casull on paper looks to be a lot more effective that the .480 Ruger -- particularly when examinining the muzzle energy figures. You've heard people on this forum call the .480 a glorified .44 magnum -- all based on M.E. figures. The Casull is certainly the more effective hunting round, or is it? I think not at all and in fact I think the .480 loaded heavily (heavy bullets) has the .454 handily covered. This is where these M.E. arguements start....... Despite the higher velocities and bigger M.E. figures, the Casull is not the more effective round (all things being equal).

I am not trying to stir anything up with my last post, but without delving into the science determining bullet performance, you can hopefully see where I am coming from with this proclamation. Again, no intended......

Just had to do that.....

Whitworth, there are a lot more things to consider than muzzle energy. In my opinion there are a lot of things each have to offer and that is mostly personal preferences. I like anything over 44 Mag, because I like big holes and heavy bullets.

When I think of the 44 Mag, 480 and 454 Casull, I look more at the recoil, as to where they relate to each other, not really the performance levels. Yes the performance is important, but when the 480 Ruger came out, people were saying if you don't like the recoil of the 454 Casull, but the 44 Mag is not enough, the 480 will be just about right.

I was never a 480 fan, until recently I have expressed an interes,t because of my interest for the 475.

When you reach the 44 Mag and above, I don't think it is a real issue with performance, but recoil. Some of use are recoil junkies, some guys just plain don't like it.

At revolver hunting ranges, let say under 100 yards. Any animal shot with a 44 Mag and above, and a good constructed bullet and the right velocity and shot placement is going to die.

But if all things being equal, I would go with a bigger hole...

quote:

Originally posted by Rex Rat:
jwp475 I think I see where your position lies. I do agree with the statement that energy is not the concept to use when trying to explain the CONSIQUENCES of a collision, that as much is true. I do not agree that the projectile’s energy has nothing to do with terminal ballistics. It is not capable of producing a reliable model but energy when used relative to bullet “type†and velocity can be used as an end all for the educated shootist to choose a projectile that will suit his needs.

You stuck by your guns. For intestinal fortitude I applaud you.

You've got a handle on it.....

Still does not mean you were right though...lol

Like I said, all things being equal, bigger is better!

quote:

Originally posted by Redhawk1:
Still does not mean you were right though...lol

But I am and thats the problem for some...Kinetic energy is important, becuse without it we would not have the force to accelerate the projectile, it's just once the collision occurs the transfer of momentum is the primary factor... Kinetic energy must be figured in the equation and it is in JOULES, which is a measurement of thermal energy.. which is?

But you're still wrong!



No I'm not!



Yes you are!


That's it, I picking up my ball and going home.........

Oh no, your not leaving. None of us has beat on you yet!

Short and Sweet.
WHAT equation? I can handle it, Lay it on in all of its glorious complexity. Your model, Your calculations, No Quotes. It is always beneficial to have a peer review if your findings.

STOP THE MADNESS!! please????

quote:

Originally posted by Rex Rat:
Short and Sweet.
WHAT equation? I can handle it, Lay it on in all of its glorious complexity. Your model, Your calculations, No Quotes. It is always beneficial to have a peer review if your findings.

As I said you have a complete grasp of it IMHO