Is there a magic formula for determining the effectiveness of a lighter bullet moving faster, or a heavier bullet moving slower. I understand that the caliber (width) would come into effect because of the bigger hole, but what if there the same caliber.

Case in point. A 180 gr. 30.06 at 300 yds produces 1865 ft pounds of energy.
The 130 gr. From a 300WSM at 300 yds produces 2053 ft pounds of energy. Lets say this is pointed at an elk. Is the smaller 130gr pill from the 300WSM that more effective? Does the size of game matter.

To me, all things equal, as in diameter, bullet expansion, it wouldnt matter if you are shooting a whitetail or an elk, the one with the greatest energy is the best.

Don't get hung up on foot pounds as an indicator of lethality... I can get a lot of foot lbs, out of a fast moving full metal jacket, but it doesn't necessarily have a lot of lethality potential...

you need to have the right bullet, and performance characteristic for the game selected and the velocity being used....

velocity is good for shooting at longer ranges, but In my opinion, 90% of its use ends there...

I rely on sectional density more than velocity any day ( heavier bullets)...

as far as matching the bullet to the game...
a ballistic tip is a poor choice for close range from a rifle that is shooting at 3300 fps MV....a partition or the like is a better choice..

for an MV of say 2200 fps, a partition is a poor choice this time.. but a ballistic tip or similar is a good bullet choice in this instance...

Smallest bullet I'd use at 300WSM velocities is a 165 grain.. and preferably a 180 grainer or better...and it wouldn't be a ballistic tip...

and the bigger the game the heavier the bullet and the heavier the sectional density....

I've tested 175 grain Corelokts, with a lowly MV of 1800 fps, and at 100 yds had them penetrate thru and leave 18 inches of wood!...

meanwhile 120 grain ballistic tips at 3500 fps MV at 100 yds, just created a softball sized hole in the wood, and just a few inches deep...

.........Would you really shoot an animal like an elk with such a small amount of power ..............Things like diameter of the wound ,, what was in the bullets path ,,"bone" muscle ,fat ,guts ect .The depth of the wound ,,,,,,,,The speed of the projectile .The diameter and front shape ....How many rpms it is going ...........There are so many variables .......There has been so much data written down and still we have to make generalities ....IE. the 338 win mag is a good elk rifle but the 416 is better for Brown bear ect ............. ......... ..Jon ,., If you havn,t been on the GS Custom web site I absolutely recommend it ..Gerard has done a huge amount of testing and experimenting and trying new possibilities ........He made a bullet that will expand but still stay in one primary piece and keep penetrating....with that technology he experimented with blowing the sides out of terminal ballistic theory ....Barnes has done the same or similar thing with the X bullet technology ..................I,m kind of bull headed when it comes to certain assumptions .....One of the axes that I grind is the light for caliber monometal expanding bullets on the SACRED COW OF A R , the cape buffalo.....People say [the 375 H&H is great on cape buffalo ] but some , insist the 458 win mag with a 300 gr X bullet @ 2700 fps just won,t work .......Now havening used this load on big animals I know how wide and deep a hole it makes and how fast it kills ......Faster and much more dramatic than a 375 does I,ll tell ya .............I can,t find any Africa hand to justify or quash my assertion tho ................If I ever go there ,,,,,,I will bring my little SpruceKing 458 with this load and see for myself if it works ...............I bet it will

A major league pitcher can throw a nerf ball 250 MPH a baseball 95 MPH. What one would you rather be hit with?

What is a nerf ball?

quote:

Originally posted by Gerard:
What is a nerf ball?

A lite weight sponge thing for indoor use.

Thanks, I understand now. That is a good way to illustrate the importance of projectile construction and how the projectile reacts when it strikes. When considering projectile construction and making a similar comparison, one could ask: Which one would you prefer to try and stop with any part of your body - A nerf ball going 250mph, a baseball going 95mph or a golf ball going 250mph? Even if a baseball is something like a cricket ball, I would avoid the golf ball at all costs.

I am much more concerned with shot placement than knock down.

John Taylor figured this out a long time ago, for solids, and also recognized the importance of bullet construction when softs are at high velocities.

For solids, it is just bullet momentum times bullet diameter. I have found this to be quite relevant on game for solids. Some guy will always come up with some anecdotal exception, but generally speaking, Taylor's Knock Out factor correlates as well as anything, for comparing solids.

If a soft doesn't exit, they probably act similarly to solids as far as "knockdown." At least for comparison purposes between softs.

quote:

Is there a magic formula for determining the effectiveness of a lighter bullet moving faster, or a heavier bullet moving slower.

No.

However, you should remember that kinetic energy as expressed in "foot pounds", "joules", or any other unit represents the ability to do work. In the case of a bullet, its "work" is to traumatise vital organs and thus cause the death of the animal as quickly as possible.

ALL THINGS BEING EQUAL, the bullet with the higher energy has the greater ability to do work. All things are, of course, not equal. If the bullet is non-expanding and just pencils through, then it will cause minimal trauma, no matter its energy. On the other hand, if the bullet is extremely frangible and does not penetrate to a vital organ, then the superficial wound (or "work" it does), no matter how great, will not be quickly fatal.

A bullet requires energy to do work. After all, it won't kill anything just sitting there. However, if the energy is not applied in a way that damages vital organs, then simply adding more energy will make no difference.

"Is there a magic formula?" No. Is energy necessary for the bullet to be effective? Yes.

Thanks everyone for the input, I will spend some more time reading up on this based on your input/suggestions.

One last question and I will put this topic to rest. I will be hunting elk this year for the first time with a rifle (300WSM). It loves the Federal Premium 180gr. TSX. I have shot almost 100 rounds, and the recoil is what I consider mild (not what I was expecting from a magnum). I don’t anticipate my shot to be over 200yds, based on hunting this area for years w/ a bow. Is the TSX a good choice or should look at another type of bullet like partition, or accubond.

Thanks

Take 2 180gr 30 caliber bullets at 3000 fps. While they will have the same numerical value in foot pounds of energy they will have a huge difference in true terminal performance if one is a full metal jacket and the other is say a nosler partition. Do not get hung up in numbers. The shooter also has to be able to deliver the goods.

quote:

Case in point. A 180 gr. 30.06 at 300 yds produces 1865 ft pounds of energy.
The 130 gr. From a 300WSM at 300 yds produces 2053 ft pounds of energy. Lets say this is pointed at an elk. Is the smaller 130gr pill from the 300WSM that more effective? Does the size of game matter.

I like to throw the heaviest bullet I can accurately for the caliber I'm using when hunting elk. I've killed a few with 150 grain bullets out of my .270 Win but have never even considered the 130 for elk even though I'm sure they will work. Heavier bullets may not impact with the same amount of energy but they will give up less energy during and after the initial impact. Using the same bullet type a heavier bullet has a better chance of penetrating deeper than a light bullet.

........I think your combo ,300 WSM 180 TSX@3000 fps will do fine .....Make sure your field accuracy is up to snuf and you will do great ..........

Jon Beutler Posted ; Case in point. A 180 gr. 30.06 at 300 yds produces 1865 ft pounds of energy.
The 130 gr. From a 300WSM at 300 yds produces 2053 ft pounds of energy. Lets say this is pointed at an elk. Is the smaller 130gr pill from the 300WSM that more effective? Does the size of game matter.

NO & YES . As SeaFire stated ; Don't get hung up on foot pounds as an indicator of lethality.

I'm sure we all have made miracle shots at 900 Yd. on Elk !.
Truth is Most Elk are taken inside of 175 yd. according to guides I've hunted with . Rarely do they exceed 250 yd. even for trophy hunts !.

IMO I believe projectile weight along with placement is more important for an Animal of size !. Deer and down are pretty soft skinned and just about any .224 and above will take one out with in 250 yd. ( I'm speaking generally !) How ever to do a consistent humane job again IMO 100 grains and above are better suited traveling 2K FPS or better . Like a .243 for an example .

Elk are different in different areas , I've seen HUGE ones that required two 180 Grainers from an 06 at less than 75 Yd. . My hunting partner followed up one his first shot with a second , 2" from the first entry wound , not more than 5" from the front shoulder on a quartering shot just in front of his leg . The next one slightly behind the first .
I've NEVER seen anyone I've hunted with group like that with a moving animal . The way that Elk took off he thought he had some how missed the first shot . It's lung,half a heart and far leg were toast , yet it managed to move 30 Yd. before dropping !.

An Old boy in NM told me , remember to bring enough gun to do the Job . It pisses me off when city slicker types bring a .243 to do a .300's Job !. Then make me track it because they can't find their way out of a wet paper bag with a hole in it !.

He simply smiled when I showed up with the 7 RM. We went to a make shift shooting range . I then popped an old beer can around 200 yd with 160 grain then a little further a 8" dia. rock with a 175 grain off hand . He then had a Big Ear too Ear grin . Told me life was going to be easier !.

Shoot Straight Know Your Target . ...

Stonecreek,

+1 Well stated!

quote:

Originally posted by buffybr:
Stonecreek,

+1 Well stated!

+2 roger

quote:

Is the TSX a good choice or should look at another type of bullet like partition, or accubond.

I only shoot handloads.. and the TSX is the first bullet I'd reach for...

and I always following that, with I am not normally a Barnes Fan.. I think they are overpriced and are usually not that Accurate...

however in the case of the TSX, they hit a grand slam with that one!

quote:

Originally posted by Jeff Sullivan:
I am much more concerned with shot placement than knock down.

same here

quote:

quote:
Originally posted by Jeff Sullivan:
I am much more concerned with shot placement than knock down.



same here

Isnt shot placement a given? I cant imagine that someone goes hunting and says "Hey, I am gonna shoot that there deer in the arse and see if it keels over"

I should have been a bit more clear on my original post. I should have just asked what you would use a 130gr TTSX out of a 300WSM for.

I reckon I would not use for Brown bear. and would be picky on my shots with anything else. Deer are the only thing I would try shoulder shots on.

In your elk example I would expect the 30-06 180 to be more effective. I think it has a better chance of making two holes. I like to have exits.

Energy is great but it's how that energy is transferred to the animal that makes the difference.

A couple of things that aren't good:

A soft bullet at high energy that transfers all of its energy into the first inch of penetration and just blows a softball sized crater in the skin and muscle.

A very hard bullet that penetrates completely and does minimal damage and exits the animal with high energy levels. (Think about shooting a needle at 10,000 fps)

In both of these cases the energy of the projectile may be perfectly adequate for the animal hunted but neither projectile's performance is satisfactory.

In a 300WSM 180gr bullets make sense if they have lead cores. With monos, rather drop the weight a notch to 160gr and speed it up some. Recoil is less, trajectory is flatter and time of flight is reduced. This translates to better shot placement and, on larger animals, a mono 160gr will do everything a lead core 180 can do and more. If the momentum levels of a 180 and a 160 are about equal, the lighter bullet has more energy and the volume of the wound channel will increase.

quote:

Originally posted by Gerard:
If the momentum levels of a 180 and a 160 are about equal, the lighter bullet has more energy and the volume of the wound channel will increase.

While the energy of the lighter bullet will be greater, your supposition is not true. The muzzle energy of the 180 and 160 gr. bullets from the same cartridge will be approximately the same and hence the bullet momentums are not equal.

Assuming the two softs expand the same, the 180 gr. bullet will always be better, with its greater momentum.

if you were standing at the intersection of a road and a RR and a train was coming at 35 MPH and the only way to avoid it was to jump off the tracks and into the pach of a motor cycle coming at 195 MPH which would you choose?
i can tell you injury is certain but with one death is absolute.

Hey Jon

Here is some excellent reading on the subject. To me sectional density is very important. Like the difference in throwing 2 objects of the same size at a wall at the same speed, one a ping pong ball and the other a ball bearing, big difference.

The load I use for a 300 WSM is a 200 gr Accubond with 66 gr RL22 for 2850 fps. Amazingly accurate and the energy at 300 yards is 2582 fpe.

Originally posted by Jeff Sullivan:
[QUOTE] I am much more concerned with shot placement than knock down. [QUOTE]

[QUOTE]Originally posted by Jon Beutler:
.. I cant imagine that someone goes hunting and says "Hey, I am gonna shoot that there deer in the arse and see if it keels over" [QUOTE]

If hunting Sambar deer, a fleeting shot up the rear on a speedy animal may be all thats on offer...it can simply be a take it or leave it oportunity...due to the mountainous heavy cover they inhabit, calibres like 9.3 are not uncommon to anchor those beasts.....as the name suggests, the .35Sambar(35wsm)250gnWL@2700,was created specifically for the task...though I believe the 220gnHV monometal would be a superior choice,specially for those 300yd oportunities.

35 Sambar Rifle. ( ClicK photo to enlarge)

and I believe Ray Atkinson dont mess around,
he drives heavy woodleighs from his .338win to drill Elk end to end in thick timber.

I'm with you, Woods. I was wondering why everyone was hung up on 180's and even 160's (which I consider a light for calibre when fired from a .300), when there are some excellent 200's out there.

Will,
Agreed if we are limited to cup and core (cac) bullets. When comparing lighter mono bullets to cac bullets, as I did above, the mono arrives with slightly less momentum but more energy, if run at typical factory speeds. Given that most monos can be run a bit faster than cac bullets of the same weight, the scenario of lighter mono bullet that equalls the momentum of the heavier cac bullet is easily done. Also consider that the cac bullet will shed a higher percentage of weight than the mono and, the more weight is shed, the less momentum and energy remains.

Woods,
The link is to a wealth of good information indeed. This illustration towards the bottom of the page you linked, shows that bullet construction takes preference over SD. Note the penetration depth of the 120gr mono at the top which equalls the penetration of the 175gr cac bullet at the bottom. Best penetration in this example is with a 140gr bullet.



On this page of the same work, there is the finding that: " The following parametric study of the effect of sectional density on bullet performance should largely lay to rest the off-quoted generalization that heavy for caliber bullets or bullets of some particular sectional density penetrate deeper and retain more mass."

If you are looking for a do-all short distance, high impact tough bullet, or a flat shooting, longer distance bullet, all of it can be done with a lighter than 180gr mono. One bullet meets all the criteria.

I'm not sure how my view matches with that of others but...

I don't buy into the "knock down" thing just because the bullet can never have any more energy than the recoil I experience when I fire it. If it doesn't knock me down then it seems unlikely that it will knock something of a similar size to me down.

Unless you disrupt the central nervous system, possible but requires accurate shooting on an unpredictable target, then a bullet "knocks down" the target by causing a dramatic reduction in blood pressure, in effect the animal faints and then dies. It is possible for a FMJ round to do this if you get very lucky and hit exactly the right spot but in general you want to launch a projectile that will make the best use of its energy by disrupting heart, lungs and major blood vessels. With this in mind I suspect that we come back to bullet construction and performance. A bullet that causes massive tissue damage isn't causing death, or knock down, by "dumping energy" it is causing it by dropping blood pressure to the brain of the animal involved. This is the very reason why we sometimes hear reports of people being very successful in taking large game with a .22LR and it is also why it makes much more sense to use something a lot bigger that will do a lot more damage on large game. The bigger round has the potential to do a lot more damage in the chest cavity and so there is a much higher probability that it will kill the game in a timely fashion. However, if the recoil didn't knock the hunter down then it is extremely unlikely that it is going to knock the game over.

So, my take on this is that "knock down" ability isn't a function of the energy of the bullet but a function of its ability to disrupt the supply of blood to the brain and this comes down to bullet performance in tissue. I accept that it takes a certain amount of energy to realise performance of this nature but I do not accept that this energy in itself knocks animals over any more than I accept that there are people shooting rifles that normally knock them off their feet when fired.

quote:

I don't buy into the "knock down" thing just because the bullet can never have any more energy than the recoil I experience when I fire it.

You are correct on the "knock down" power being an erroneous and irrelavent concept. However, there is a big difference between KINETIC ENERGY (measured in ft.lbs. or joules), and MOMENTUM. Both the rifle and the bullet will have equal MOMENTUM when fired ("for every action there is an equal and opposite reaction"). However, the bullet will have vastly more ENERGY than the recoiling rifle (rifle recoil energy is usually in the 15 ft lb range for a .30-06-type cartridge, whereas the bullet will be in the 3000 ft. lb range). This is due the the difference in mass of the two "projectiles", the gun and the bullet. (Disregard for a moment the effects of the mass of the gas ejecta.)

If a lighter bullet and a heavier bullet have equal MOMENTUM, then the lighter bullet must have more ENERGY to match the heavier bullet's momentum. By the same token if bullets of two different weights have the same ENERGY, then the heavier of the two will have more MOMENTUM.

MOMENTUM has profound influence on penetration (but of course so does bullet deformation or gyroscopic instability, ie. tumbling.) ENERGY has more to do with the amount of work done, which of course translates into the potential to traumatise vital organs.

All things being equal in terms of diameter and construction, a bullet with more momentum will penetrate more deeply. This tends to favor the heavier bullet as the deeper penetrator. All things being equal, the bullet with the greater energy creates the greater trauma to the target. Killing an animal requires some amount of momentum to provide penetration and some amount of energy to inflict trauma.

If a lighter bullet (perhaps a monometal) penetrates more deeply than a heavier bullet (perhaps one with a lead core), and both have equal energy, then it is because of the relative terminal behaviour of the bullets and either the delayed or restricted expansion of the lighter bullet or the more rapid expansion of the heavier bullet.

Ain't this great. One has a whole range of fairy tales to pick from to suit themselves!

quote:

Originally posted by Stonecreek:
..If a lighter bullet (perhaps a monometal) penetrates more deeply than a heavier bullet (perhaps one with a lead core), and both have equal energy, then it is because of the relative terminal behaviour of the bullets and either the delayed or restricted expansion of the lighter bullet or the more rapid expansion of the heavier bullet.

The lighter monometal may also penetrate more deeply when, in certain circumstances(higher velocities) it sheds it petals and performs along the lines of a FNsolid. http://www.gsgroup.co.za/02hv.html
Some folk prefer that over a heavier premium bonded leadcore bullet that MAY exhibit excessive mushroom/parachute effect for the task at hand, and as a result not give the required and/or prefered penetration.
On the other hand, a weak construction lead core may not penetrate enough,simply due to excessive weight loss/reduced momentum.

.358win200gnNf created a larger wound channel, but .257rob.100tsx had greater penetration.
based on similar case size,I would much prefer 308win with 150-160gn monometal.


Thanks to the past courtesy of ARmember "500grains"(IIRC)we can note difference in mushrooms.

Technical niceities notwithstanding...I used two bullets in a Winchster 348....one was a 200gr Silvertip and the other a
200gr CoreLokt...I ice picked this deer with 5 of the Silvertips and reloaded with one CoreLokt and it dropped at the shot...all shots hit within a 4 inch circle...some bullets expend their energy efficiently and accomplish their work and the desired result and the rest ice pick and do not work effectively...I know I will never use SilverTips ever again...

quote:

Originally posted by Gerard:

Note the penetration depth of the 120gr mono at the top which equalls the penetration of the 175gr cac bullet at the bottom. Best penetration in this example is with a 140gr bullet.

Certainly a recommendation for your bullets. How would you explain the secondary wound channel enlargement peculiar to the 120 GS and the 140 Lost River?

Also I found it very informative and counterintuitive that the Swift Scirrocco penetrated deeper at 2440 fps than at 3195 fps.

You know, You always hear people telling you..
"Use enough gun.."

I really think that should be corrected, and say instead... " Use enough bullet..."

I just settled on using a .458 Win Mag to make sure I can blast a nice big and deep hole in whatever I shoot.

It's hard to argue with a 450 grain A-Frame at a bit over 2100 fps.

quote:

One has a whole range of fairy tales to pick from to suit themselves!

Very true Will. Which fairy tales do you believe in? Sectional Density? Hydrostatic shock?


woods,
The enlargement of the latter part of the "wound channel" with the 120gr HV was caused by the remaining shaft of the bullet tumbling at that point. The test was done with a 7-08 with a slowish twist and the 120gr HV could have used a little more mv than 2910fps to get the rotational speed and the stability factor a little higher. I will take the test result without complaint though, it is good.

From the picture of the recovered 140gr mono one can see that the expansion was inhibited, probably by the insert in the nose. This left the bullet too long for too deep (the initial wound track is quite narrow) and tumbling was almost inevitable, causing the wider wound track in the latter section. The depth of penetration and small initial wound track is the result of a small cross section in relation to the momentum. Total wound track volume would be similar to that of the 120gr HV.

The deeper penetration of the Swift bullet at lower speed is a function of momentum / cross section. At the much higher speed the bullet expands in a shorter distance to a much larger area and that is enought to put the brakes on penetration depth.

expansion has less to do with creating a larger wound chanel and more with creating a larger frontal area of the bullet thereby exposing it to more friction, slowing it down and emparting the whole of the bullets potential energy to the target and not the trees beyond.
this idea that somehow a 25-06's 100 grain bullet can expand to .35 and the 1 10th of an inch is going to cause so much more damage is absurd. sure you can kill alot of deer by poking a clean hole thru the right place. you can kill just as many by setting of a BT grenade in thier torso.
1/2 of 1 6 of the other.
what is be be appreciated is the bullet that flies true and shoots best in your rifle, allowing you to make the best shots.
i have a buddy who hunts w/ 168 BTHP in 308 @ 2650. i have seen him kill alot of deer becasue he and his weapon hit exactly were he wants.
As well i know if other shooters pumping 200 gr partitions @ 3K MV who continue to lose deer.
you guys need to realize that 95% of the kill is the man whos finger pulls the trigger. not the bullet, brass, primer scope rifle ect.
those are just things for poor marksmen to use as excuses when they make bad shots.