Shot distances kept to under 300 yards. Is there any tangible difference/gain (in terminal performance) in driving a bullet 200 fps faster? 130 gr bullet at 2,900 fps vs the same bullet at 3,100 fps.
Would you see more of a blood trail, knock an animal down, etc, etc.
Same question holds for a 100 gr 257 at 2,800 vs 3,000??? 308 at 2,600 vs 2,800???

To clarify, I'm only asking about terminal performance, not trajectory or bullet integrity.

Perry

terminal performance is bullet integrity.
speeding up a soft cored thin jacketed bullet will make it act like a varmint bullet.
slowing it down will allow it to act like a big game bullet.

The 270 Win is already loaded strong from the factory.

IMO the way to gain velocity is to get A .270 Weatherby or a .270 WSM.

It would be a rare hunter that could actually use the gains of these cartridges. If you have a .270 Winchester, use it as is.....it's one superb round.

quote:

Originally posted by perry:
Shot distances kept to under 300 yards. Is there any tangible difference/gain (in terminal performance) in driving a bullet 200 fps faster? 130 gr bullet at 2,900 fps vs the same bullet at 3,100 fps.
Would you see more of a blood trail, knock an animal down, etc, etc.
Same question holds for a 100 gr 257 at 2,800 vs 3,000??? 308 at 2,600 vs 2,800???

To clarify, I'm only asking about terminal performance, not trajectory or bullet integrity.

Perry

Yes, there is a difference as long as bullet integrity is guaranteed.

One person who was involved in thousands of deprivations claimed that there was a higher incidence of DRT when the IMPACT velocity was 2600fps or higher. For the 270 and 130 grain bullets that basically computes to a "DRT range" of 285 yards for 3100fps but "only" 170 yards for 2900 fps, still pretty good.

As for bullet integrity, I prefer monometals and would look at 129gn LRX Barnes, 110gn or 117gn GSC, and 117gn HammerHunters. The GSC can probably be run at 3275fps and will give you over-2600fps all the way to 350 yards. Kawabunga.

nah, not really at least not for me - i limit my range to under 250 for unspooked, uninjured hunting, and usually way less-- if you look at maximum point blank range, 2800 vs 3200 there's about 0.25 difference in 100 yard zero height and 29 yards difference in PBR range -

but, hey, here you go
http://www.shooterscalculator....oint-blank-range.php

I believe what 416Tanzan is alluding to is “hydrostatic shock”, caused by hydrostatic shockwave. These are evidenced by bloodshot jellyfied meat. I’ve often read that DG rounds at 2400fps kill better than slower rounds, due to a shockwave factor, but do not produce much bloodshot tissue effect, if any at all. I have never seen a deer or hog shot with a 150gr 30-30 pill going 2400 FPS have any bloodshot, even when shot at 15 yards. The Hydrostatic shock factor was part of Roy Weatherby’s sales pitch. I can’t dispute it.

quote:

Originally posted by 416Tanzan:

quote:

Originally posted by perry:
Shot distances kept to under 300 yards. Is there any tangible difference/gain (in terminal performance) in driving a bullet 200 fps faster? 130 gr bullet at 2,900 fps vs the same bullet at 3,100 fps.
Would you see more of a blood trail, knock an animal down, etc, etc.
Same question holds for a 100 gr 257 at 2,800 vs 3,000??? 308 at 2,600 vs 2,800???

To clarify, I'm only asking about terminal performance, not trajectory or bullet integrity.

Perry

Yes, there is a difference as long as bullet integrity is guaranteed.

One person who was involved in thousands of deprivations claimed that there was a higher incidence of DRT when the IMPACT velocity was 2600fps or higher. For the 270 and 130 grain bullets that basically computes to a "DRT range" of 285 yards for 3100fps but "only" 170 yards for 2900 fps, still pretty good.

As for bullet integrity, I prefer monometals and would look at 129gn LRX Barnes, 110gn or 117gn GSC, and 117gn HammerHunters. The GSC can probably be run at 3275fps and will give you over-2600fps all the way to 350 yards. Kawabunga.

Excellent info.
Many thanks to all responses

Perry

It can work either way, but I guarantee bullet choice and performance is the more important..

Its one of the reason I don't put much faith any in caliber comparisons of any kind.

I load the 165 TTSX in my 06 and I keep thinking about getting something faster.

Playing around with JBM ballistics, looks like that bullet at 2800fps with a 200 yard zero drops 7.9", at 3300fps, it drops 5.4". Once I did that math, the idea of flat shooting (for hunting) did not hold much water with me.

No question more speed drives penetration but I'm not sure that 200fps makes that much of a difference within 300 yds. Like others have referenced, I'd focus on the bullet. The barnes monolithics penetrate incredibly well.

To clarify, I'm talking about bullets that could handle the higher velocities. For example the TSX, Accubond, Scirocco, etc.
Within a bullets capable integrity.
I have noticed it a bit, that's why I ask. I went from 3,000 to 3,150 in my Roberts and 3,000 to 3,115 in my 270. The results are kinda mixed.
in the 270 I'm having more bang flops, Roberts not so much.

Perry

If you're hunting deer, black bear or hogs no noticeable difference except less recoil. For elk, I load my 150g partitions to 3000 fps, always have. Works great.

I have hunted with various 270 rifles for years.

Shot literally hundreds of AFRICAN plains game.

It all depends on the particular animal.


3 animals from the same species shot in a similar manner would exhibit three different ways of dying.

Hit them in the right place, with a bullet that has enough penetration to get to the vitals, and they will all die.

Velocity and energy is immaterial otherwise.

quote:

Hit them in the right place, with a bullet that has enough penetration to get to the vitals, and they will all die.

True with any caliber.

I shot deer and had bang flops with a 22 hornet and had them run 50 yards with a double lung and my 416.

Saeed has answered that before. Size of the hole matters in buffalo and he prefers more impact speed than the h&h offers. He shoots his buffalo rifle well enough for any size game and I would guess he loves that rifle.
No controversy there.

quote:

Originally posted by ALF:
SAEED:

So why did you stop hunting with the 270 and go with the 375-404 ?
And in the same trend why not a 375 H&H in lieu of a 375-404 ?

ALF,

This is my own experience, and have no idea how it might be compared to others.

I have had a few 375H&H magnums pass by my hands.

Not a single one was able to go much more than 2400 FPS with factory loads.

I did hunt with one of these on my first AFRICAN safari in the early 80’s.

Worked great.

Shot an elephant and two buffalo with it, in addition to a lot of plains game.

I gave that rifle to Peter Johnstone of Rosslyn Safaris.

Next I used a 416 Weatherby.

Again, worked like a charm.

Shot elephants and buffalo with it.

I used to take two rifles.

One for plains game and one for dangerous game.

Hunted with several 270 calibers.

These include an Ackley, a 270/404 and a 270/404 Short.

Both were developed and built here.

No complaints on their performance whatsoever!

Shot an end at over 500 yards with one.

I was given several steel suitcases full of every imaginable type of ammo RWS made.

Apparently they were samples.

1-4 boxes of each type.

Most of these calibers I have never seen.

The 404 got me interested.

So I developed several wildcats on it.

270, 30, 338 and 375.

I took the 375/404 to Zimbabwe, together with a Lazzeroni 7.21 Firehawk.

First day we wanted to shoot several impala for leopard bait.

I kept missing!!

We discovered that the action screws were loose.

We did not have an Alan key to tighten the action.

So that rifle went into the truck, and I picked the 375/404.

A while later, after 4 shots were fired, we had 4 impala for bait.

One was at a measured 430 yards.

I decided then that as soon as I got home, I would build another 375/404 and take both hunting.

Solves the ammo problem.

Ever since, I have been doing that.

My friends hunt with my second rifle.

And I never feel I am carrying the wrong gun.

Once in Zimbabwe, we were following a sable.

We came across the tracks of a lion.

I said “we have the wrong gun!”

Roy said “The lion doesn’t know!”

The 375/404 is only better than the 375 H&H at the longer ranges, which we sometimes have to shoot at.

And ultimately, nothing compares to caliber one has developed himself, and built a rifle for.

Using our own made bullets just add icing on the cake.

quote:

Originally posted by ALF:
SAEED:

Going over your answer you are addressing two or more entities as one which it is not !

One one side we have the bullet and its attributes fired from this or that gun.

on the other you address the target..... but here also you lump two basic entities into one... the effect ( which is the wound ) but then you add the third player which is the animal and its physiological reserve and "state of mind "

It is simple:
The bullet has energy
The bullet strikes the target it exchanges energy and the target reacts to the receipt of energy by creation of a wound .

The wound kills the animal in two ways only !
if the wound destroys the central nervous system or the wound causes a collapse of the cardio vascular system either immediately or late.

( we are excluding late effects of non fatal wound like infection etc)

This in essence is where arguments in wound ballistics fail. The inability to discern between Effectiveness ( bullet attributes) and Effect !

Effect being Primary which is the wound and how it was created and Secondary effect which has to do with the physiological response to the trauma ( wound ) as well as the psychological aspects of the animal

And in layman’s terms, use a bullet that gets to the vitals, place it there and that is it.

Dead animal!

People ask where to aim.

I tell them the middle of the chest.

Regardless what position the animal is in.

Works every time.

Yes, Saeed, a bullet in the center of the chest works wonders,
but that was not the OP's question.

The question became why do you personally prefer to shoot a .375" about 200 fps faster than normal 375H&H ?
I think that you have personal experience that bears on the issue.

The OP asks, Why would someone want to shoot a 270 at 3100fps when 2900fps works?
Is there an advantage in terminal effects once the bullet arrives?

Why do any of us shoot a cartridge that is larger than "entry level" for the bore size? A 375/404 instead of a 375H&H, a 338WM (your favorite , sort of like Michael McCourrey's 375 [we all have pet shadow areas on the caliber scale]) instead of a 338 Federal, a 7mmRM instead of a 7-08, etc.? They all do a great job of getting the bullet to the target when hunting is only 300 yards, maybe 400 once in a blue moon.


Haven't you noticed an accumulative effect of faster velocity?
Or do you like the 375/404 because it is easier to remember that the bullet fired?
Maybe we all own shares in powder companies.

quote:

Originally posted by 416Tanzan:
Yes, Saeed, a bullet in the center of the chest works wonders,
but that was not the OP's question.

The question became why do you personally prefer to shoot a .375" about 200 fps faster than normal 375H&H ?
I think that you have personal experience that bears on the issue.

The OP asks, Why would someone want to shoot a 270 at 3100fps when 2900fps works?
Is there an advantage in terminal effects once the bullet arrives?

Why do any of us shoot a cartridge that is larger than "entry level" for the bore size? A 375/404 instead of a 375H&H, a 338WM (your favorite , sort of like Michael McCourrey's 375 [we all have pet shadow areas on the caliber scale]) instead of a 338 Federal, a 7mmRM instead of a 7-08, etc.? They all do a great job of getting the bullet to the target when hunting is only 300 yards, maybe 400 once in a blue moon.


Haven't you noticed an accumulative effect of faster velocity?
Or do you like the 375/404 because it is easier to remember that the bullet fired?
Maybe we all own shares in powder companies.

No factory, making either rifles or bullets, can make them better FOR ME!

Than myself!

PS: when I choose a caliber, I like to find something comfortable with a big(ger) hole that keeps the terminal velocity up around 2500-2600fps.
That's just me.

Sometimes comfort, velocity, and big hole form a conflict of interest, like a .510" or .458" for buffalo.

I settled on the .375 because it is the minimum required.

If .30 was allowed, I have absolutely, positively, no doubt whatsoever that is what I would hunt with.

And get precisely the same results as I am getting with the 375.

quote:

Originally posted by Saeed:
I settled on the .375 because it is the minimum required.

If .30 was allowed, I have absolutely, positively, no doubt whatsoever that is what I would hunt with.

And get precisely the same results as I am getting with the 375.

and do we read between the lines, correctly,
that the extra speed of the 375/404 is only for trajectory and has no enhanced terminal effects at any one point?

For a person hunting at 0-300 yards, in your opinion, would they get equal terminal effects from a 308 (or even 30-30?) and a 300 RUM?

quote:

Originally posted by 416Tanzan:

quote:

Originally posted by Saeed:
I settled on the .375 because it is the minimum required.

If .30 was allowed, I have absolutely, positively, no doubt whatsoever that is what I would hunt with.

And get precisely the same results as I am getting with the 375.

and do we read between the lines, correctly,
that the extra speed of the 375/404 is only for trajectory and has no enhanced terminal effects at any one point?

For a person hunting at 0-300 yards, in your opinion, would they get equal terminal effects from a 308 (or even 30-30?) and a 300 RUM?

I would not hunt with anything less than a 30/404.

That is why I built one with a 27.5 inch barrel.

I used it with 180 grain bullets at velocities approaching 3500 FPS.

Absolutely deadly on everything I shot.

Even with Sierra Match King bullets.

These disintegrated completely, but made instant kills.

An example was a zebra.

Shot at less than one hundred yards.

Hit on the shoulder.

Dropped right where he stood.

The bullet created a very shallow cavity almost a foot across.

Did not penetrate into the chest at all.

I like speed, it takes a lot of the guess work at distances out of the equation.

I can get a lot more speed from the 375/404, but found that best penetration with our bullets occur at 2700-2800 FPS.

Hunted with Barnes X bullets at 3140fps muzzle velocity.

Penetration was bloody awful!

Alf,
Size of the hole = energy exchange = projectile effectiveness. Agreed.
Keeping the projectile effective on its trip through the buffalo is a practical issue beyond theory. Saeed addresses that by slowing his handmade .375 projectile down to 2700-2800 FPS to get the penetration he needs to maintain his happiness with his projectile effectiveness.
Others of us travel a different path to the same results.

quote:

No factory, making either rifles or bullets, can make them better FOR ME!

Than myself!

And that, gentlemen, sums up the whole reason for this forum, in one succinct statement. Well said. Mr. Administrator!

quote:

Originally posted by Saeed:
I settled on the .375 because it is the minimum required.

If .30 was allowed, I have absolutely, positively, no doubt whatsoever that is what I would hunt with.

And get precisely the same results as I am getting with the 375.

Saeed, Knowing how fond you are with 338s would you have settled on a 338 caliber if it was the minimum required?

quote:

Originally posted by smallfry:

quote:

Originally posted by Saeed:
I settled on the .375 because it is the minimum required.

If .30 was allowed, I have absolutely, positively, no doubt whatsoever that is what I would hunt with.

And get precisely the same results as I am getting with the 375.

Saeed, Knowing how fond you are with 338s would you have settled on a 338 caliber if it was the minimum required?

Yes.

The reason I don’t see any advantage with the 338 because it has no advantage over the 30.

Anytime I want something bigger, I would go for the 375.

It all depends on the starting reference.

From 270 I saw no real advantage in a 30 and jumped right to the 338.

The 338 is a remarkably balanced caliber for bullet weights, velocity, penetration, and recoil. Simply sweet.

But I can appreciate a 375, too. Nice caliber, even at "standard" velocities of Ruger/H&H. And from a 375 a natural light downstep would be 30 cal, just like the natural pair to the 416 is 338. There is something very balanced with a 338 and 416, especially the nice feel of the 416 Rigby round in the palm of one's hand.

And for 338: For many years in the 80's I would use the 250gnNP at 2700fps for great African ranging. Now I prefer the 225gn and 210gn monometals at 2800--2950fps.

They all work if a fine rifle shoots straight.

quote:

Size of the hole?
What causes the size of the hole?


The answer in short is ENERGY EXCHANGE

The bullet is a passive kinetic energy penetrator! ( it has no added energy source after leaving the barrel, it does not contain any explosive to aid in penetration once it contacts the target)

The ability to penetrate the target is dependent on two physical properties only:

1. The striking kinetic energy and
2. The ability to transfer energy to the target. ie energy exchange ! if no energy exchange occurs there is no penetration !

This is all that the bullet has and no more !

This is what is called PROJECTILE EFFECTIVENESS

Alf,
Yep. It's what you said, I just put the = signs in-between your points. Yes it can be further explained and you always do a fine job of that but your summery was just as you wrote the first time.
Nothing wrong with either the summary or the further explanation except or unless one tries to explain away other's more simple understanding and stating of what we know is true in the killing of in this case game animals. One must hit a vital area to have an acceptable rate of death. The bullet that hits that vital area must adhere the the Physical laws of nature to do it's work. That work must be sufficient to either cause cessation of the Electrical system or the Hydraulic system that causes death. That work can be accomplished in a wider range of bullet and velocity choices than most people are comfortable acknowledging.
We have a wide range of experiences that builds our personal bias.
Best regards to you Sir,

quote:

Originally posted by Saeed:

quote:

Originally posted by smallfry:

quote:

Originally posted by Saeed:
I settled on the .375 because it is the minimum required.

If .30 was allowed, I have absolutely, positively, no doubt whatsoever that is what I would hunt with.

And get precisely the same results as I am getting with the 375.

Saeed, Knowing how fond you are with 338s would you have settled on a 338 caliber if it was the minimum required?

Yes.

The reason I don’t see any advantage with the 338 because it has no advantage over the 30.

Anytime I want something bigger, I would go for the 375.

Agree we (my sons and I) jump from our beloved 270s up to a 375 Weatherby see no need for anything in between though there are lots of lovely calibers.

quote:

Originally posted by ALF:
So addressing the original question:
277 cal 130g gr @ 2900 fps vs the same @ 3100 fps:
The question says nothing about what animal is shot or where on the animal the shot was taken.

So in essence all we are comparing is the effects of increase in velocity with provision that the bullet remains intact and we assume it remains stable... ( in the latter we can argue that as drag is the driver of instability in target and drag has a strong velocity dependence in certain tissues the intact bullet would be more unstable at 3100 fps than at 2900 fps)

The author of the question further asks questions about secondary biologic effects such as "bang flops" bleeding etc.

So in keeping with wound ballistics science teaching we can say that the 200 fps increase in velocity buys us increased projectile efficiency but not necessarily greater effect. Then even more tenuous difficulty in predicting secondary biologic effect, such as death and incapacitation.

A and B are linked, B is linked to C under certain variable conditions..... trying to prove that A causes C all the time under all conditions cannot be done !

This was one of the fallacies of late 60's and 70s teachings in war surgery.

Because of this inability to link biologic effect ( secondary effect) with bullet efficiency military and trauma surgeons are now taught to treat the wound and not the bullet and its efficiency. Linked to this the "Geneva convention" or ICRC rules on what bullets are permissible in warfare now demand that bullet makers show evidence of their bullet behaviour in tissue and energy deposit profiles.

Agreed again. Completely. As always, thanks for adding the detail to the conversation.

quote:

I used it with 180 grain bullets at velocities approaching 3500 FPS.

Absolutely deadly on everything I shot.

Well, I think that you are admitting that more velocity helps, and helps a lot.
Not just for trajectory, which is vary rarely any problem at all in Africa where most shots are under 300 yards.

The 300 RUM (AKA 30/404) is especially devastating because it screams into its target with hyper velocity and starts to generate all sorts of secondary effects. Roy W. couldn't have been more proud.

In this specific case of 2900 as opposed to 3100 FPS. I would go with 3100 fps, and .270 bullets that Ive used can handle both velocity, the 3100 is somewhat flatter shooting and should kill better since those bullets are made to react properly in game and they do..

If I wanted a 270 that shot 2900 fps I just shoot a 7-08 or 7x57..but even my 7x57 will shoot a 130 gr Speer at 3100 plus.

I think the question is valid but the choice of caliber and velocity was not..2900 FPS is an underloaded .270...3100 fps is a proper 270.. I think one should expect any caliber of choice should be shoot at its best performing ability for accuracy and power.