Alternatively stated: Do different animals "respond" differently to velocity or penetration?

One of the most common arguments seen on the web is the classic Velocity (O'Connor) vs. Big Bullets (Kieth). I'm not going to rehash this - what we do know is that dead is dead.

Most of the arguments I've read about velocity typically use thin-skinned game animals as the target. "The .270 kills deer better than the .45-70" - or whatever. The common denominator almost always seems to be the game animal: Deer, Elk.

I can't say I've ever read an article that stated that Bear are better killed by a "light - fast bullet" than a "heavy-slow" bullet with maximal penetration. I read one article about a guy who wanted to hunt Grizzly with a 7mm-Mag - things got dicey there for a while before the bear decided to lay down.

So, do different animals respond better to Velocity? Or to Taylor KO (for lack of anything better to call it)?

Am I making any sense here? Assume for a moment that a "perfect" bullet exists - you know, perfect expansion, weight retention, etc. I mean, I wouldn't want to hunt Big Bear with a .270...regardless of the velocity!

Let's say you were going to hunt that big bear. Which would you choose? A 150gr. bullet at, say, 4,000 fps or a Whelen with a 250gr. bullet at 2400fps.

Sure, if it's a deer that hyperfast bullet is gonna kill like lightning...but what about the bigger, tougher animals? Do they respond "better" (ie: die faster) punched with a light, fast bullet or a heavy, slower bullet?

I sure don't have enough experience to even remotely offer a firm guess. I am sure that some of you out there actually DO have a real opinion here. Conventional wisdom would simply dictate that the bigger the game, the bigger the bullet. O'Connor said to use more velocity. Kieth said to go Big.

But is this convention dictated more by the actual game animal than velocity?

Discussion?

.. For big bear the Whelan is preferred , But the 358 STA with a 250 gr bullet @ 2900 fps has a more dramatic affect than the slower velocity round ..for non cns shots , a combination of diameter speed and bullet expanded integrity is the best combo .... Like a 458 300 gr TSX @ 2700 fps or a .416 3oo gr TSX @ 2900 fps are great combos for bear ...

one way to look at is that a bigger heavier bodied animal will be able to absorb more impact and that a bigger bullet with better penetration will make a better wound channel so the animal bleeds out faster rather than be shut down by hydraulic shock from a faster, smaller bullet. with game of deer size, i don't think it makes much difference if considereing the more commonly used sizes of hunting rounds. obviously, reguardless of caliber and power, a good heart shot will put down whatever it hits quickly, so the best caliber is one that is placed the best.

The FPS of a big enought bullet is what says how big of an animal You can kill.And shot placement Thats how I see it.

Big, heavy bullets of high sectional density, even at modest velocity, are, in most instances, the most suitable for large, heavy game. They carry a lot of momentum, drive deeply, make large wound channels, insuring a quicker, more humane kill.

Well, I've killed plenty of mule deer and elk with both a 270 (130gr & 150gr at 2750 to 3100) and 9.3x62 (233gr & 286gr at 2350 to 2700) and my observation is that the 9.3 does a profoundly better job. Yes, dead is dead and I've seen some pretty good DRT shots with a 270. But for any angle out to 300yds, I'll take the 9.3.

On your bear question, I'll defer to those in AK, but if I had to make the call, 9.3x62 with 286gr Nosler Partitions would make me feel a lot more comfortable than a child of the 06.

I think that if you are going to go bigger you need to increase bore diameter. Faster just puts a small hole in something quicker. Yes, I've never owned a Wheatherby and don't intend to.

Velocity or bore size ? As long as you use a stout bullet and hit them in the right place it really doesn't matter.

quote:

Originally posted by 458Win:
Velocity or bore size ? As long as you use a stout bullet and hit them in the right place it really doesn't matter.

I think bore/bullet size does matter. As game wt./size goes up, they seem less impressed w/ the speed of the bullet, especially if you don't get complete penetration. Smaller animals seem more impressed w/ high vel. strikes, but I would defer to someone that has a lot more hunting exp.

quote:

Originally posted by 458Win:
... a stout bullet ... in the right place...

Given the above, I believe you can lump all cartridges between .25cal - .35cal in the same class. Same goes for the group from .35+ to .45.

Unless you're trying to sell something new...

?.

For the most part, I go along with what 458WIN stated.

The only difference I make is with the individual reactions of the animal being shot.

That is a variable that never ceases too amaze many folks.

Where one animal will fall dead on the spot as if struck by lighting, regardless of the bullet or caliber, the next animal of the same species, with the exact same bullet and placement, may run a half mile and put up one hell of a fight before realizing it is dead.

As I have stated elsewhere, I tend to be a proponent of the Keith school of thought as far as calibers and bullets to use on game, normally larger than normal for the species.

My reasoning comes from the aspect, that a larger bullet, both heavier and larger diameter, gives me a small amount of error room in case I am slightly off of "Dead Center" with a shot.

The larger/heavier bullet has the potential to travel thru more tissue and break bones, and more important, to me personally, provide a good exit wound, which will allow air and fluid to exit the body thereby shutting the critters motor down a little faster.

With the OP dealing with the shooting of one of the big bears, while I am quite sure there are folks that have killed them with 270's and possibly even a 22 LR.

If it were my decision on what rifle to use, even though I have a 35 Whelen that I do use a lot and really like, I would opt out for my 375 H&H and 250 grain Barnes "X" bullets, and my first shot would be placed to try and break one or both front shoulders and get the critter on the ground for a finisher. JMO.

The magic bullet thread revised.
I guess a 7mmRem Mag w/ a 160gr solid would work on big bear, but I would not like to be pulling the trigger on that one. I am not a Bear hunter. But big hogs are the same deal. If you find a big pig you better be packing some serious firepower. I always hear about the 9.3x62, but I shoot a 9.36x57. It still has enough thump at proper ranges for big game even at 2000fps. I would rather my tried and true 8x57 w/ a 200gr partition at 2600++fps. The combination of Velocity, and bullet weight equal a great transfer of energy and penetration.

quote:

Originally posted by rnovi:
Let's say you were going to hunt that big bear. Which would you choose? A 150gr. bullet at, say, 4,000 fps or a Whelen with a 250gr. bullet at 2400fps.

Perhaps your example includes a typo; there is no rifle that starts a 150 @ 4000 fps that I would care to shoot let alone hunt with. Otherwise count me with the others; put a stout bullet in the right spot on a relaxed animal and it's time for pictures and field-dressing.

quote:

Originally posted by nordrseta:

quote:

Originally posted by rnovi:
Let's say you were going to hunt that big bear. Which would you choose? A 150gr. bullet at, say, 4,000 fps or a Whelen with a 250gr. bullet at 2400fps.

Perhaps your example includes a typo; there is no rifle that starts a 150 @ 4000 fps that I would care to shoot let alone hunt with. Otherwise count me with the others; put a stout bullet in the right spot on a relaxed animal and it's time for pictures and field-dressing.

It was a theoretical point. The question being: Is a big animal, Grizzly for instance, more affected by Velocity or by a Big Bullet.

Are we overlooking the reaction of velocity and the animal on the bullet? Outside of neural damage and shock, an animal must lose blood pressure for it to die. Generally, this means a sizable wound channel and its location. If a small, high-velocity caliber fully penetrates while making a huge wound channel, it does the same job as a large caliber fully penetrating in a similar location. Comparing bullet size to velocity doesn't paint a complete forensic picture.

Of course I would prefer a .416 over .300mag for bear or lion, and also prefer a faster moving 330gnHv over 400gn cupcore. and over a slower .375-350gnWL
Lighter and faster bullets apply to any calibre and all game.

In the current rehash you've left out the African contention that with more water available to American game there's less water in some animals for their "hydro" to be "statically shocked". Ergo perhaps both sides are possibly correct from observed results. African game does seem to bleed less.

A little off topic, but to state that O'Conner was all about velocity is not alltogether true.

In many instances, he argues that the 220 gr. bullet in 30-06 (or the 300 magnums) is preferrable.

What's more, he makes the point on more than one occassion that bullet action, without proper penetration, is worthless; conversely, using a bullet too heavily contructed on game that is too light is also asking for trouble.

Some of the best reading on O'Conner can be found in a compilation of Outdoor life articles--edited by...jeeze, I can't remember his name off hand...maybe Casada (history Ph.D from Vanderbilt).

Most would agree that an effective bullet must marry penetration & expansion. Velocity is secondary to these (assuming a person is not of the KE camp).

friar

As animals are individuals, there are no 100% guarantees; however, its always good to increase the odds in your favor.

That being said, some animals have weak CNS (central nervous systems) and hydrostatic shock drops them as if struck by lightning. Some animals could be struck by lightning and walk away. The bad news, few if any calibers can do it all. The good news is you have my permission to print this out and show it to your wife as proof you need that new rifle for your upcoming hunt.

Examples are always fun, so here are some. I started hunting with a 300 win mag. Deer would often flopped over as if they reached old age in milliseconds. On pigs, I would often have to go looking for them as they would meander 100 yds or so. Moving on to the 338 win mag, pigs would flop like they won the lottery, but occasionally the bullets would punch through deer without expanding.

Your mileage will, of course, vary. If you want one gun to do it all, 458 win mag (of course, we're talking about killing, not preserving furbearer pelts).

First, you need to hit the animal in the right place and get enough penetration to reach the vital organs.

If you do that, the animal will die.

So, for me, the question is not about how best to kill a game animal. That is not so hard to figure out. The question for me is how to kill one very quickly, and figuring out what is more important in that equation: Speed or bullet size?

On a big animal, I doubt that speed in excess of around 2,400 to 2,500 fps impact velocity matters very much.

In other words, 2,400-2,500 fps IV has worked about as well for me on a big animal as anything faster.

But at that impact velocity, I have found that larger caliber bullets, i.e., those that are larger both in diameter and weight, do seem to kill faster than smaller caliber bullets.

And I have found that larger caliber bullets at that velocity kill more quickly than faster smaller caliber bullets - again on big animals.

Also, I prefer to shoot for bone. A good hit in the shoulder joint can immediately incapacitate an animal. Larger caliber bullets can break bones and still penetrate very well, whereas smaller caliber bullets often cannot.

All of this (except the part about hitting the animal in the right place) is unscientific, of course, and based only on my limited experience.

All depends what two cartridges you are comparing. For instance if you are looking a 300 winch mag. vs 3006 the difference is only like shooting 70 yards closer.

Depends on the situation.

I have known old poachers (after they got out of jail) who took a lot of deer with a .22. I know a guy who shot a small doe with a 45-70 and she ran off, never to be tracked down.

The thing a big bore gives you is penetration. A big slow bullet plowing through can do more damage than a smaller bullet at times. And has a better chance to break down bones.

Would anyone on this forum argue against the fact that a 7mm mag. should/would out perform a 280 Rem. with a like bullet that behaves like it should. Wait - don't answer that!!! (LOL)
And a 300 mag. out perform a 30-06, a 378 mag. out perform a 375 H&H, a 460 Wthy. mag. out perform a 458 Lott? The point is not whether or not a WeatherRemWinRug magnum is needed for a particular game but that the faster you push a projectile of the same weight the more energy and momentum it will have. (Of course the bullet must do it's job at that velocity) If you launched a solid bullet at 2000 fps. and the same bullet at 3000 fps., I promise you the bullet starting at 3000 fps., will have more of everything when it reaches it's target than the one starting at 2000 fps. including energy going in the other direction, (RECOIL)
Me personally, I prefer to balance a good reliable bullet with a good caliber for the game intended, and push it as fast as I safely can to achieve good reliable accuracy.
As an example, for any deer out to as far as 250yds. I would choose either a 270 Win. w/130 gr. Rem.Corelokt, or for anything farther I would opt. for 140 to 150 gr. with all of them starting out at least 3000 fps. since the heavier bullets would have more energy/momentum at the longer distances.
Did I mention the other part of the balancing act is how much recoil/rifle weight one is willing to endure?

?

At the risk of killing my own thread, I wanted to chime back in with the original thought:

"Do different animals "respond" differently to velocity or penetration?"

It's well accepted that, for a given bullet diameter, more velocity (in general) does more damage. So (assuming all other things held equal) a .30 cal Barnes TSX would kill "better" at 3,400fps than at 2,400fps.

The question is, taking two extremes, does velocity or a big-heavy bullet at moderate velocity kill BIG ANIMALS better?

Yes, you can brain a Grizzly with a .22 LR. I'm not sure I'd take that shot! So, setting the stage: Heart-Lung broadside shot, at 40 yards. Let's use a TSX for the bullet and further assume that we get expected bullet expansion and results.

A .270 MegaBoomer: 150gr. bullet at 3,500+ fps (pic your velocity...) vs. say, a 35 Whelen w/ a 250gr. bullet at 2,400 fps.

The question revolved around the Animal. Which would kill "better"?

The advantage i see with xtra vel. [eg; 7mmRm vs 280rem], is that it will allow bullets like the GScHv too shear its petals at a longer range, [ie another 100yds or so],... those 3 secondary projectile petals radiate out to cause damage to lungs beyond the expanded diameter & permament wound channel zone of more traditonal bonded cupcore bullets....yet the HV dont "birdshot"frament like the NP or other lesser design bullets.
The HV fragments stay of sufficient size & momentum to be of real world advantage on medium & large game.

?

quote:

Originally posted by rnovi:
The question is, taking two extremes, does velocity or a big-heavy bullet at moderate velocity kill BIG ANIMALS better?

See above for my answer, which is an anecdotal and unscientific YES - as long as moderate velocity is defined as 2,400-2,500 fps MV.

Regardless of what any theories suggest, I will give my experience in terms of hundreds of game animals. The only times that I have seen velocity play a roll in the game animals reaction was on small animals such as sub 200lb deer, antelope, wild boar, and vermin. With the smaller critters velocity accompanied by bullet construction is a huge factor in reaction, IE the smaller animals that I have shot or witnessed shot with heavy slow bullets often never had a reaction at impact if structural bones were not impacted. The same size critters more often than not have a dramatic reaction to a light, blazing fast bullet when structural bones are not impacted. The animals shot with HV expired in less time or traveled less distance nearly every time. On larger animals, I see no difference in reaction, but I do see more internal damage with expansive HV bullets. At the same time in large animals, the faster lighter pills penetrate less. A smaller example would be varmints, when shot with FMJs, they tend to not have much of a reaction. OTOH, expansive varmint bullets give a very dramatic reaction on vermin.

The "Speed Kills" theory that many have does have some merit, but only in terms of the expiration and reaction of smaller animals IME.

It all boils down to using the proper bullet for the intended target and placing that bullet in the proper place. Shot placement is more important than anything IMO.


Have a Good One,

Reloader

quote:

Posted 17 June 2009 11:59 Hide Post
At the risk of killing my own thread, I wanted to chime back in with the original thought:

"Do different animals "respond" differently to velocity or penetration?"

It's well accepted that, for a given bullet diameter, more velocity (in general) does more damage. So (assuming all other things held equal) a .30 cal Barnes TSX would kill "better" at 3,400fps than at 2,400fps.

The question is, taking two extremes, does velocity or a big-heavy bullet at moderate velocity kill BIG ANIMALS better?

Yes, you can brain a Grizzly with a .22 LR. I'm not sure I'd take that shot! So, setting the stage: Heart-Lung broadside shot, at 40 yards. Let's use a TSX for the bullet and further assume that we get expected bullet expansion and results.

A .270 MegaBoomer: 150gr. bullet at 3,500+ fps (pic your velocity...) vs. say, a 35 Whelen w/ a 250gr. bullet at 2,400 fps.

The question revolved around the Animal. Which would kill "better"?

This I can speak to from direct experience. 300 WM Barnes 130 TTSX, kill distance <50 yards with MV of 3480. 30-06 Barnes TTSX 130 grain MV of 3150, Kill distance 140 yards.

Both broadside shots, Both hit ribs on the way in. The difference was only notable in that there was a little lung tissue left in the '06 deer's chest and none in the 300 deer's chest. Pretty comparable otherwise. Dead deer both cases, no run off. Just a little more margin with the 300 if you judge by the tissue destruction. Drop the velocity further and you lose tissue destruction with the decreased cavitation.

But... If you accept that a properly placed chest shot will destroy the heart and both lungs thereby dropping blood pressure to zero instantly and need not break down the front end. And if you accept that animals so hit can and frequently do manage fifty or so yards before they lose conciousness, with maybe half going a little further and half not going so far, then you have a point from which to make a choice about what to do.

Example: I can without question run a bullet through a big bear's chest with a .243 that will destroy the heart and lungs and kill the bear every bit as fast as any other rifle with a similar shot. That's a done deal. Try a stunt like that with less than 100 yards between you and the bear and you might not make it even if you do it perfectly. Try to take out shoulders with a .243 and you might well be betting you can outrun a pissed off three legged bear with his heart and lungs more or less intact.

There is no difference between the 300 WM or 338 WM for that matter and the .243 until you need to do more work. ie: take out both shoulders. Put one through the chest and destroy the heart and lungs and the results will be more or less the same. Give or take a little the critter will die in the time it would take to move fifty yards. Less than complete drop in blood pressure can let them go very surprising distances though. So, again margin for error needs to be considered.

I will take the extra cavitation you get with speed every time, that's what destroys tissue. So long as I have a bullet tough enough to hold together going through what it needs to at that speed and the bullet has sufficient mass to carry through the bone it needs to go through, I am good with it. Equal weight bullet and construction, the advantage goes to speed every time when construction is adequate.

Like Crazyhorse, I ALWAYS want exit hole. However, in a perfect scenario where deer is broadside, soft bullet like cor-lok thru RIBS makes greatest wound channel and quicker death. But theres chance of no exit. Animal runs five seconds [25-50 yards] and you have no red trail leading to it. Strong quartering away you may need two feet penetration to reach vitals. Whether bullet or arrow, I want to 'get thru' animal. High velocity can kill like lightning; soft bullet at hv can act like varmint bullet - splat. I'll take wound channel that is not as wide, but longer.

Just to complicate matters, I once shot a wounded wild pig with a shotgun. On butchering, we found that none of the individual pellet wounds could be considered remotely fatal yet the critter expired in an instant. This thing had taken a bum shot which shattered both rear leg bones but it ran off. When we found it it was lying down but got up and squealed and thrashed when my 44mag bullet missed its skull and lodged in its neck. The first shotgun shot glanced off its neck hide, the second missed (due its thrashing) and the third just turned off its lights! (The 44mag did not have enough penetration to break the neck - very unimpressive).

Another wild pig I shot with a 303 Brit was hit mid shoulder, split the heart wide open, liver damage and exit behind the rib cage - it just flopped over sideways and did not twitch. The lights just turned out.

I have seen a few possum just turn off the lights with 22LR subs but usually they are very tenatious of life and take a lot of killing.

The United States military showed long ago that total tissue destruction and, thus, killing power are directly related to total kinetic energy - the more kinetic energy the more killing power. I don't understand why this debate continues.

Balance is needed. Kinetic energy- (ft/lbs) can be deceptive: a one grain bullet traveling 10,000 fps is might "kinetic", but likley will be worthless unless used against mice.

On the other hand, a 18 lb bowling ball at 10 fps is might "kinetic" as well. Worhtless unless your quarry or adversary is a wooden pin....

There seems to be a balance for each caliber range-most of the work is already done, our hunting and killing forebears figured it out pretty well. 25-30 cal 120-180 grainer at 2700-2900 kills very well for medium game, 400-45 cal 400-500 grain at 2000-2400 kills well for large/dangerous game, the other calibers in between, below and above, all have niches where they work marvelously.

That is why the 30/06 is the most popular caliber in North America, I am certain Europe has it's wunder caliber (probably a 7mm something or other?) and the 375-47 caliber fills virtually all the bulk in Dark Africa, no?

Too much reliance on one physical factor leads to failures, ie bullet velocity over weight or caliber.

Choose a middle to heavy weight bullet in your favorite caliber, built for the game you seek, and practice shot placement until you know your game from every angle and are capable of hitting the center from field positions, it will work out well 99% of the time, the last one percent is for head scratching (or hitting twigs enroute to the top of the heart!)

quote:

Originally posted by rnovi:
..."Do different animals "respond" differently to velocity or penetration?" ...

Absolutely, positively yes they do.

I see alf dragging humans into the discussion "as usual", and humans have ZERO to do with Killing Game or Varmints "as usual". Pitiful!
-----

There have been some excellent examples provided to your question. The trick is separating the good info from the chaff.

1. Faster Kills better than Slower.
2. Bigger Kills better than Smaller.
3. Big and Fast Kills the best of all.

Nothing tricky about it, just the way Physics works.

That said, I agree with those who believe it is appropriate to formulate a "Balancing" Act when selecting an Adequate Cartridge(Bullet Design, Caliber and Velocity) for the Game being persued and the shot placements which the Hunter considers acceptable.

HC: very good points. And a lot of superb discussion in this thread in general.

Here's where my head's been on this. I didn't want to "bias" the discussion, hence why I kept things a bit generic.

I'm going to go for a "walk in the woods" this winter looking for Bear. I'm in SoCal guys - I didn't call this hunting! I called it a "walk in the woods" for a reason - I truly don't expect to see much of anything.

Hunter success rates on bear are in the Single digits...if I even see a bear in the woods, chances are it's going to be a relatively close shot.

In the safe are a number of Tools. I've boiled it down to two - mainly because I don't want to lug a .375 H&H through the hills...

1. .257 Roberts with 117gr. bullets at 2800fps.
2. .35 Remington with a 200gr. / 2000fps load.

Given that distances are likely not to exceed 75 yards...and that the bears I do see are likely to be hungry...and also known that bears have been known to kill people in the area...the question becomes quite valid.

Statistically, the .257 pretty much wins any competition...except TKO.

If one subscribes to the Velocity approach, then the Bob would be enough...and if one subscribes to the Mass approach, the .35 Rem would work.

I've pretty much decided that I'm going to carry the .35 Rem this year. Nostaliga seems to be winning me over for the levergun. That, and I like a bigger bullet for heavier game. Both rounds have killed bear effectively. Still...it's an interesting perspective.

PS: Yeah, a .375 with 270's at 2700 kills better...but that's not quite the point. Bigger and Faster will always beat the alternative!

No, I would not like the 35rem200gn2000mv load.

Look at this and it wont take much to figure out why;
http://www.gunsandhunting.com/Bullethitsbone.html

The article supports the larger bullet. More wound volume = faster bleed out. Every increase in diameter resulted in an increase in woynd channel volume, even as velocity of the larger projectiles dropped.

BTW, I'm in the balance camp. Neither too fast nor too light nor too small in diameter.

JPK

quote:

Originally posted by JPK:
The article supports the larger bullet. More wound volume = faster bleed out. Every increase in diameter resulted in an increase in woynd channel volume, even as velocity of the larger projectiles dropped.

BTW, I'm in the balance camp. Neither too fast nor too light nor too small in diameter.

JPK

Agreed. It also basically supports that a TSX with it's petals sheered off has the best penetration - but may leave a very small exit wound that does not support much bleed out. Further, the .257 wound is notably smaller in capacity (measured in ML) and again would not support logically a fast bleed out.

Another part of the question yet unanswered by the article is that they use deer bones. The question isn't about deer - it's about larger, more dense animals. Bear for instance, or perhaps hogs...and how a small-fast bullet would perform vs. a slower, heavier bullet.

BTW, this question isn't necessarily about picking the "optimal round". The .35 Rem is what, 100 years old and has been eclipsed by many other rounds. And yet, year after year, the .35 Rem and .30-30 still account for a very significant number of game taken (Including black bear).

quote:

Originally posted by JPK:
The article supports the larger bullet. More wound volume = faster bleed out. Every increase in diameter resulted in an increase in woynd channel volume, even as velocity of the larger projectiles dropped.

BTW, I'm in the balance camp. Neither too fast nor too light nor too small in diameter.

JPK

I dont feel the article supports anything in particular,..to me it just shows different results...that may better suite people differently in different circumstances.
There are times one might better appreciate or need the higher penetration of .257r100tsx over the 358win200NF....larger volume wound channels that may not reach the boileroom/vitals are not worth near as much to me as a smaller one that does.
and like you, im in the balance camp too,...so something like 308win-150hv 2950mv will give adecent wound channel with decent penetration and the secondary projectile effect out to 200yds(ie around the approx. minimum 2500fps petal sheering impact vel.)

quote:

Another part of the question yet unanswered by the article is that they use deer bones. The question isn't about deer - it's about larger, more dense animals. Bear for instance, or perhaps hogs...and how a small-fast bullet would perform vs. a slower, heavier bullet.

Rnovi,
true, the article is about .358win200NF 2660mv penetration on deer bone (faired 12.25"),so what would your 35rem200gn2000mv fair in regards to penetration on bear?
You mention hogs & bears in the same context;
http://www.gsgroup.co.za/galalvaro112gr.html