quote:

Originally posted by Jon Beutler:
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. ...

Hey Jon, Yes there is.

1. Big(diameter and weight) is better at Killing than Small.
2. Fast is better at Killing than Slow.
3. Bigger and Faster is significantly greater at Killing than Small and Slow.

This applies to "all" Bullet/Cartridge Designs, not one against the other.

So, yes there is a Magic Formula.
-----

I agree that proper shot placement is a great asset in Killing when compared to a poorly placed shot. But proper shot placement needs to be done with an Adequate Cartridge, or a person will eventually need Tracking skills.

Good Hunting and clean 1-shot Kills.

If I said it once, I'll say it million times: it's all good. Use what you like. Just make sure to aim straight and hit your target in the vitals.

quote:

Originally posted by Jon Beutler:
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.

Alas! There is NO REALLY RELIABLE method of determining "knock-down power" (which really does not exist anyway) or the killing power of a particular cartridge. The reason for this is that there are just too many variables involved to mke a relatively simple formula work.

For example, you asked about the difference between two cartridges that are very close in foot-pounds of energy. But one is using a 130-grainbullet, and the other a 180-grain bullet. Here the 130-grain is carrying more energy, and one would suppose it would be a better killer. However, the other, even though delicvvering slightly less energy, is doing so with a 180-grain bullet. So, for an elk load, it is likely that the 180-grain bullet will kill better than the 130-grainer, despite the slight disparity in foot-pounds in favor of the lighter bullet! However, if your target was a much more lightly constructed whitetail deer (assuming good hits with both bullets), it is possible that the 130 grain woud result in a quicker kill than the 180-grain bullet. BUT, if so, it would be because the 130-grain bullet expanded faster and did more damage than the 180, without regard for which one had the greater energy level.

How much a bullet expands when it hits, and how deeply it penetrates vitalorgans after expansion, are much more important factors in killing game than some esoteric number that is not predictive of terminal bullet performance.

For example, it is possible that you could drive that 130-grain bullet to speeds where it would deliver twice the energy of the 180-grainer. What would happen? That dep[ends on how the bullet is constructed-it might just blow up on contact, making a big shallow wound which would allow th animal to run off.

1865 foot-pounds vs 2065 fot-pounds is not a significant difference anyway. In your example, I would prefer the 180-grain, .30/'06 load for shooting my elk.

quote:

Originally posted by Jon Beutler:
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

You have made a GOOD choice of a load for shooting elk with that rifle. I use the 175-grain Nosler Partition bullet in my 7mm Rem. Mag. for shooting elk.

Avoid that 130-grain bullet; at least don't use it on an elk!

quote:

Originally posted by Stonecreek:
However, there is a big difference between KINETIC ENERGY (measured in ft.lbs. or joules), and MOMENTUM.

I can see that I failed to differentiate between the two, or to understand that the momentum is the thing that both rifle and bullet have in equal quantities while the energy will be different and as it depends on the square of velocity it will be very velocity sensitive.

However, that has given me more things to think about and I learn something every day.

quote:

Originally posted by Hot Core:

quote:

Originally posted by Jon Beutler:
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. ...

Hey Jon, Yes there is.

1. Big(diameter and weight) is better at Killing than Small.
2. Fast is better at Killing than Slow.
3. Bigger and Faster is significantly greater at Killing than Small and Slow.

This applies to "all" Bullet/Cartridge Designs, not one against the other.

So, yes there is a Magic Formula.
-----

I agree that proper shot placement is a great asset in Killing when compared to a poorly placed shot. But proper shot placement needs to be done with an Adequate Cartridge, or a person will eventually need Tracking skills.

Good Hunting and clean 1-shot Kills.

Nope, not quite. It depends to a large extent how the bullet behaves and that relates to the construction of the bullet, which inter alia brings factors in such as weight retention (ability to resist shattering/fragmentation) and expansion of diameter to create a larger wound track to crush and severe tissue. That can only be done with a "push" and for that we need momentum (mass x velocity).

Too fast with a weak construction = bullet failure

Warrior

nothing holds priority over placement.
the smallest bullet into the brain will kill faster than a .50 in the haunches.
placement placement placement!
it is key above all else.
i dont care what bullet type or caliber if you dont shut down the CNS, death will only result from blood loss.
when a hit in a vital organ occures death will be quicker depending on the importance of that organ to sustaining life, graduated on the most obvious scale.
the stomach is needed to sustain life, yes, but no immidiatly.
the heart more quickly.
the brain or spinal network in the most needed system.
you can shut it down with ANY BULLET capable of entering the skulls thickness.
even 17 caliber pellets will kill a whitetail deer if fast enough to penetrate the skull.

Quoted from a different website with pictures etc, thought you big bore guys would like this one and it sort of pertains to the thread. This was 45 cal 250grners at 2375 impact speed:

quote:

The neat thing is that when you hit one of these 15 pound blocks, it launches in the air and lands about 3 feet back.

The "blocks" are ballistic gelatin blocks.

Have a Good One,

Reloader

All I can really compare with is my 45-70 vs my 7mm Rem Mag, on both Deer & Elk. They both produce nearly the same energy at the muzzle and by 200yds there is a big energy advantage to the 7mm. Comparing the 45-70 with 350gr bullets and my 7mm with 160gr bullets, the hands down winner it knock down is the 45-70,by a mile.

Jon...irt your question about the 300 wsm 180 gr tsx for elk....

I have had tremendous performance from my 7mm mag using 160 gr tsx...killed a nice muley buck this november at about 100 yds...I think he was dead before he hit the ground. Good bullet placement works most every time...
You should have no problems with the 300 wsm in 180 gr TSX...

Good hunting.

It is hard to imagine anyone losing deer shot with 200 gr. Partitions, I have been using them for 40 years in my 06 and 300 H&H and found them to be a proven killer..but I suppose some folks could wound a deer with a 20 MM...

quote:

Originally posted by Warrior:
...Nope, not quite. It depends to a large extent how the bullet behaves and that relates to the construction of the bullet, which inter alia brings factors in such as weight retention (ability to resist shattering/fragmentation) ...

Hey Warrior, Who makes a BIG Bullet that shatters and fragments on Game?

Conventional lead-core bullets in 458 Lott. They are thin-jacketed, lead core is not bonded and separates from the jacket, lead is brittle due to 3% antimony mix and thus fragmentation and shattering happens with relative ease at that momentum level.

Warrior

quote:

Originally posted by Warrior:
thus fragmentation and shattering happens with relative ease at that momentum level.

I would imagine that as energy is the potential to do work then it is the energy rather than the momentum that governs whether a bullet will shatter or fragment. This sort of fits with the general view that very fast light bullets tend to break up more readily than slow ones. Is this indeed the case or am I missing something again?

quote:

Originally posted by Warrior:
Conventional lead-core bullets in 458 Lott. They are thin-jacketed, lead core is not bonded and separates from the jacket, lead is brittle due to 3% antimony mix and thus fragmentation and shattering happens with relative ease at that momentum level.

Warrior

Ah yes, using a Bullet at too high of a velocity when it was designed for smaller Game or a lower Velocity. I agree that could be a problem if the user doesn't take the Design into consideration.

quote:

Originally posted by Jon Beutler:
...I will be hunting elk this year for the first time...

Do you think the problem would exist, outside a handfull of African animals? What 45cal Bullet do you believe will do that on Elk(subject of the thread) from a Lott?

Just a thought: think about the difference in diameter between a 7mm (.284), 8mm (.325) and 9mm (.366). They are 14% (between the 7 & 8) and 12.6% (between the 8 & 9).

Also, take a step back and think about how small 1 millimeter (0.041 inches) really is.

Now I'm all for bigger bullets. Always have. But dangerous game aside, I really don't think there's too much to argue over anything.

Use what you like and shoot it well.

quote:

Originally posted by Hot Core for Warrior:
...Do you think the problem would exist, outside a handfull of African animals? What 45cal Bullet do you believe will do that on Elk(subject of the thread) from a Lott?

I'll take it that the lack of a response means that "none exist".

/

Koos Barnard commented various times on conventional bullets in the Man Magnum magazine. I will give just a few examples of what he experienced. He used 220 gr PMP bullets in his 30-06 Spr at 2,354 fps on an Impala and the bullet retained 51% and on a Gemsbok two chucks of lead was recovered - together they weighed only 70 gr or 32%. With regard to the 375 H&H he states ... "I found that the 300 grainers broke up completely on Reedbuck and Blesbuck."

Manufactures of conventional bullets are making the bullets too frangible for use in bigger and faster calibers. They use the same thickness of copper jacket from a .243 Win through to .375 H&H with a far higher energy value - quite stupid in my opinion. This conventional bullet design is basically the same as a 100 years ago and velocities way back then were fairly modest. Jacketed bullets were invented by Captain Rubin of the Swiss Army in 1889. During the Spanish War of 1898 and the second Anglo Boer War of 1899, the 7 x 57 mm Mauser came into its own by shooting at a much higher velocity offering the soldier a flatter trajectory than the opposition - The 303 Br was doing 2,050 fps, the 7.9 mm Mauser was doing 2,100 fps whilst the 30-40 Krag could do 2,150 fps. The 7 mm Mauser was considered fast at 2,300 fps and out performed its rivals.

Today we shoot with faster calibers, but we use the same bullet design which were for the velocities of a 100 years ago. It effectively changes them from a hunting bullet to a varmint bullet. Also the energy levels of those calibers mentioned above were far lower than those bigger calibers that came afterwards, such as the various .300 Magnums, .338 Magnums and up to the .458 calibers. It just does not make any sense to use these outdated thin-jacketed and thus frangible bullets when we have so many better options today. It is like shaving with a Minora blade when we can use modern twin-blades, etc.

Warrior

So, let's see if I have this correct. If the 45cal Bullet is something other than a Solid, or Expanding Solid, it won't work on Elk at Lott Velocities?

Feel free to quote me on

/

quote:

Originally posted by ALF:
So, let's see if I have this correct. If the 45cal Bullet is something other than a Solid, or Expanding Solid, it won't work on Elk at Lott Velocities?



Where was that implied or stated?

Hey ALF, I was replying to Warrior's comments. Due to his lack of mentioning a Specific Bullet then I'd say it was implied. You only have to read back a few posts to see all of it unless you have Warrior on Ignore.

quote:

No ! a heavy 45 cal, whatever the make would in all likelyhood knock the snot out of an elk. Whether the bullet stays together or not; dead it's going to be, very, very dead ! That is if you are a hunter who uses a Lott on Elk, something I do not quite get?

For once, we seem to be in agreement, I don't understand why Warrior would say those things when they are obviously not true.

The thread started on 30cal Deer and Elk Hunting and then Jon(the thread originator)mentioned he would be Hunting Elk for the first time this year.

I've never Hunted Elk, but I doubt it is Legal to use "Solids" on them in the USA. And though I did not see all the Kills ever made, I hear there were a "Lot" of Elk killed before Expanding Solids ever came along. Don't know if any of that "Lot" were made with a Lott though.

But it does look like we are finally in agreement on one thing - I don't get Warrior's posts either.

quote:

It just does not make any sense to use these outdated thin-jacketed and thus frangible bullets when we have so many better options today. It is like shaving with a Minora blade when we can use modern twin-blades, etc.

Hot Core

I guess the above is clear on my position; it is a question of CHOICE and what works better.

More specifically, I have never referred to if any bullet CAN or CANNOT kill. We all know that bullets normally kill given a shot that enters the brain or causes enough blood flow, till final perspiring.

As eloquent hunters, we normally seek better bullets for a specific application, and as such, a frangible old fashioned, out-dated, thin-jacketed, non-bonded bullets with the propensity of break-up/fragmentation/shattering at magnum velocities, and being able to withstand high energy levels on contact, is not our bullet of choice when we are after game that weighs 1,500 lbs plus. The cause of most bullet failures are due to exceeding the threshold strength of the bullet, and in conventional bullets it happens by way of core/jacket separation which leads to further fragmentation of tiny lead particles as the lead is brittle and so deep straight-line penetration is impaired.

We should thus regonize, given the evidence of many hunters that abound, including the well respected Koos Barnard, that bullet types work to different degrees and effectiveness. In this regard I have quoted Kood Barnard as one of our leading authors who test many different bullets, and he has shared his experience with us for more than a decade. Koos Barnard also reported in the Man Magnum of September 2000 that the jacket walls are too thin on the 286 gr bullets of the relatively slow (2,296 fps) 9.3 x 62 mm, as it is intended for larger game like Eland.

I far as I am concerned there can be no doubt and no argument.

Warrior

Energy and knock down are nebulas terms at best. They have no meaning in the scheme of things.

Mostly I believe in keeping this killing business simple unless you just don't have anything better to do, then if seems to stimulate some and thats OK..

An animal is like a can of beer, you poke a hole in it and when all the juice pours out you gotta dead soldier! end of story, at least that is my take..

No but there is a dist that shows the tejectory
of different velocity bullets and that will explane all about ft. Lbs.

quote:

unless you have Warrior on Ignore.

quote:

I don't understand why Warrior would say those things when they are obviously not true.

quote:

But it does look like we are finally in agreement on one thing - I don't get Warrior's posts either.

Hot Core you are expecting normal reasoned thinking where there is none.

quote:

Warrior posted: It is like shaving with a Minora blade when we can use modern twin-blades

If you think a twin blade is modern you are as outdated shaving as you are in your hare brained theories about bullets.

quote:

Warrior: till final perspiring.

Dont sweat it bro dont sweat it. Just stick around keep quiet and try to learn something.

quote:

Warrior: As eloquent hunters........propensity......given the evidence of many hunters that abound.......I have quoted Kood Barnard

Hey Warrior - Kood Barnard? Kood? You must watch out for these big words they obviously confuse you.

quote:

Warrior: I far as I am concerned there can be no doubt and no argument.

I see you are open minded and receptive to other opinions than your own as usual.

quote:

one of our leading authors

Talking about Koos Barnard - Do you remember the article he wrote on the centennial of the 30-06? He tested the expansion and penetration of 200gr jacketed bullets and some 150gr GS Custom HV bullets and the HV bullets went something like 5cm deeper and made a bigger mess of the wetpack. Do you respect that opinion as well?

Hey Rat Motor, Apparently you have an advantage on me when it comes to Warrior's posts. I'm just not familiar with his thinking and thought perhaps he knows something concerning Bullets that I don't know. So far, I haven't learned anything.

quote:

Originally posted by Warrior:
...As eloquent hunters, we normally seek better bullets for a specific application, and as such, a frangible old fashioned, out-dated, thin-jacketed, non-bonded bullets with the propensity of break-up/fragmentation/shattering at magnum velocities, and being able to withstand high energy levels on contact, is not our bullet of choice when we are after game that weighs 1,500 lbs plus. The cause of most bullet failures are due to exceeding the threshold strength of the bullet, and in conventional bullets it happens by way of core/jacket separation which leads to further fragmentation of tiny lead particles as the lead is brittle and so deep straight-line penetration is impaired.

I understand your argument as you seem to be Grandizing Monolithic Bullets. I've no argument that there are some fine Bullets designed that way. At the same time, if the proper "old fashioned, out-dated, thin-jacketed, non-bonded bullets" are selected, they still Kill just fine - as they always have. Killing BIG animals was in vogue looooooong before the Monolithic Bullets were dreamed of.

Oh yes, I doubt "eloquent" is a proper adjective for my Hunting.

quote:

the well respected Koos Barnard, ..

Don't know him and never heard of him. However if you had mentioned John Ray, Don Stines, Dick Greenwell, Zeke Morgan, Raymond Jefferies, Frank Hale, Albert Cook, Paul Roberts, Ralph McCamy, Jim Ruland, Chuck Dickey, Vic Smith, Bob Johnston, Phillip Dechene, etc. as a reference as some of the World's Finest Big Game Hunters, then I would know them. But I've really no desire to go into a Name Dropping match.

Best of luck to you.

Hot Core,

quote:

I'm just not familiar with his thinking

He does not have any of his own. He copies everything from his surfing of google and his opinions are just so much

He is good for a laugh sometimes.

quote:

Don't know him and never heard of him. However if you had mentioned John Ray, Don Stines, Dick Greenwell, Zeke Morgan, Raymond Jefferies, Frank Hale, Albert Cook, Paul Roberts, Ralph McCamy, Jim Ruland, Chuck Dickey, Vic Smith, Bob Johnston, Phillip Dechene, etc. as a reference as some of the World's Finest Big Game Hunters, then I would know them. But I've really no desire to go into a Name Dropping match.

Hot Core,

Yeah !!! and did you not drop these names, as if that was the centre point of our discussion.
It seems we can't reach an understanding, so let us differ then on conventional bullets that are prone to shattering.

"The speer 270 gr. bullets are soft as marshmellow and come apart on everything I ever shot with them at over 2200 FPS M.V." - Ray Atkinson (Nov 20, 2002) when Ray answered Curtis in another thread (What velocities should I expect w/9.3x62 loads?)


What do we see here ....

1) soft as marshmellow
2) come apart on everything
3) over 2200 FPS M.V

That is pretty FRANGIBLE I would say for a hunting bullet on game, such as Elk.

Good luck and happy hunting.

Warrior

Hey Warrior, I have no problem with agreeing to "disagree" on conventional Bullet Design.

And though I believe there is a nitch market for Expanding Solids, they also have problems ...

1. Occasionally "pencil" through like a regular Solid without ANY Expansion. Excellent for Wounding and Loosing Game when that happens.
2. Accuracy can be minute of Barn, or it may be fine. No way to know until the Cash is spent.
3. Cost is a HUGE detriment to proper amounts of actual Shooting Practice. Long Practice sessions with $1-$3 Bullets is really only for the fools.
4. The Super Premium Performance(?) is completely un-necessary for 99.9999999999999% of the Worlds Game. If the "proper" Standard Grade Bullet is selected for the Game being Hunted, the Game will die quickly and cleanly.
5. People who have made lots of actual Kills simply "smile" at the Super Premium Marketing Agenda structured to enter the billfold of some people who believe, "It costs more, so it must be better". (But not on everything!)

On the positive side ...
1. They do keep the Economy stimulated.
2. They do provide discussion topics.
-----

A long time ago I tried to discuss Bullet Performance with ALF. I got a similar "lack of responses" to the questions I'd asked him. And it told me what actual first-hand experience he had in Killing Game with the Bullets in question that he was degrading.

Though the thread is about 30cal and Elk, you continue to avoid the subject. And when you originally shifted to the Lott, I shifted the question to the Lott, which you have still avoided answering.

Soooooo...., the above telles me everything I need to know about your actual "On-Game, First Hand Experience" when you choose to deride Standard Grade Bullets. That makes it easy to understand your posts.

Best of luck to you.

I, for one, do not believe in knock down power. Maybe tilt over power, but not knock down power.

I've been fortunate to have harvested quite a few whitetails. I've had deer fall away from me when shot, fall toward me when shot, and run off when shot. Normally, all would be hit the same spot and often the same cartridge and bullet.

If there was knock down power, it would seem they would ALL fall away from me.

Joe A.

quote:

Though the thread is about 30cal and Elk, you continue to avoid the subject. And when you originally shifted to the Lott, I shifted the question to the Lott, which you have still avoided answering.

Hot Core,

If you had read my posts carefully, you would have noticed that I have not shifted the discussion per se to the Lott. My comment is about a specific genre of bullet .... namely the conventional lead-core bullet .... and .... that goes from .243 to .458, and so it includes the .458 Lott, as it just gets worse as the energy level goes up due to the fact that the design is frangible. Now here is the punchline ..... I am not degrading the bullet .... as I have explained that when this design originated, we had "slow" calibers so to speak - the problem is that we apply this genre of bullet outside its original design parameters .... and, so we get bullet failure more often than not than with any other premium-grade bullet. That is pretty simple.

For me it is not about "killing" per se, but that we have better bullets today and that we have a choice.

Warrior

Hot Core,
Warrior says you are afflicted with poor reading comprehension. Everyone who disagrees with Warrior suffer from poor reading comprehension. Watch out next he will tell you you create smoke and twist his words around.


Hey Warrior

quote:

Warrior says: My comment is about a specific genre of bullet .... namely the conventional lead-core bullet .... and .... that goes from .243 to .458

Jacketed bullets smaller than .243 and bigger than .458 no longer contain lead? That is astounding news. Where did you google that from?


But I am glad to see that you are starting to accept the idea of improved performance by increasing speed.

/

Alf
Cant say I am qualified to answer your questions. I just know what I have seen with one caliber I use and what a couple of my mates have done. Warrior is the great guru on ballistics and he said:

quote:

During the Spanish War of 1898 and the second Anglo Boer War of 1899, the 7 x 57 mm Mauser came into its own by shooting at a much higher velocity offering the soldier a flatter trajectory than the opposition - The 303 Br was doing 2,050 fps, the 7.9 mm Mauser was doing 2,100 fps whilst the 30-40 Krag could do 2,150 fps. The 7 mm Mauser was considered fast at 2,300 fps and out performed its rivals.

I am sure he will be able to expand on the theory for you.

A friend of mine was hunting with me once in the early nineties with his 30-06 Spr in the Phalaborwa/Gravelot area on WP van der Merwe's farm, using the Sierra Game King bullet on that occasion. He shot a kudu broad-side on the shoulder standing about 80 or so paces from us. It just ran off to our amazement. Some ours later that same kudu passed us again, and he shot it in the head, this time some 40 paces away. Then we discovered that the first shot was only a superficial wound no deeper than 4 inches. The bullet shattered completely and never reached the vitals. A lesson well learned by my friend that luckily turned out well in the end for him.

The Sierra Game King bullet is a misnomer in my opinion, as it is everything but a bullet intended for game and definitely not to a king's taste. Then years later, I did some wetpack testing with it in my 7x57 mm with the 175 grain bullet. The lead-core disappeared and disintegrated completely - all I could find was a peace of jacket - 28.5% retained weight @ 2,370 fps. Penetration was shallow (3.5 inches), as it lost most of its weight and thus its momentum. What remained of the thin petals were folded back close to the shank. What would happen at 7 mm Rem Mag velocities? In game we notice the same trend and the lead disintegrates and just contaminates the surrounding wound track and that is why premium-grade bullets are better especially the mono-metals. See the Sierra bullet on the far right (all 7 mm bullets):



Then last year I hunted Eland on Dr Levenstein's picturesque hunting farm in the Eastern Cape in the mountains. He told me that various hunters wounded game on his farm with bullets that break up. He mentioned to me that a .277/130 gr Sierra Gameking bullet out of a 270 Win at 3,100 fps goes no more than 3 to 4 inches into the shoulder of an Eland and just causes superficial damage and it should never be taken, save for headshots only. I echoed his sentiment as I had already experienced it before with a friend. Shot into an Eland's head, this bullet explodes inside the head without an exit wound. The entrance wound was pencil thin and even though the bullet shattered, the eyes of the Eland did not even pop.

Warrior

Hey Warrior

quote:

Above Warrior says:
The Sierra Game King bullet is a misnomer in my opinion, as it is everything but a bullet intended for game and definitely not to a king's taste.

quote:

26 November Warrior said:
The Sierra Game King bullet is a misnomer in my opinion, as it is everything but a bullet intended for game and definitely not to a king’s taste.

You google and copy and paste your own posts?

quote:

Originally posted by ALF:
Rat Motor:

Could you please elaborate on how increased impact velocity increases "bullet performance" and what exactly do mean by " bullet performance" ?

Alf,

You are expecting too much from this man.
His last post is jet again proof of what I am saying.
He is not making any contribution here, so I have him on a "flat ignore".

Warrior

Warrior said:

quote:

The 7 mm Mauser was considered fast at 2,300 fps and out performed its rivals.

I said:

quote:

But I am glad to see that you are starting to accept the idea of improved performance by increasing speed.

Alf asked:

quote:

Could you please elaborate on how increased impact velocity increases "bullet performance" and what exactly do mean by " bullet performance" ?

I said:

quote:

Cant say I am qualified to answer your questions. Warrior is the great guru on ballistics and I am sure he will be able to expand on the theory for you.

Warrior said:

quote:

You are expecting too much from this man.

Translation: "I dont know how to explain why I said that so I will make some lame ignore excuse. It will side track them and they will not notice that I am contradicting myself. I am so clever and all the other 29 999 member here are stupid anyway."

Hang in there Rat Motor - I'm pulling for you!