Bullets Too Fast

08 May 2002, 16:19

Pecos41

Bullets Too Fast

I feel a little silly for bringing up this question and I've thought for several days about just which forum would be proper to start.

Let me begin with a brief story. Many years ago I was chatting with my local gunsmith when one of the town's hunting blowhards came in yapping about a recent varmint hunt he went on. In the course of all the yadda, yadda, we were trying to tune out, he made a remark about how a lot of critters got away from his whateverthehell rifle he was hunting with because his bullets were simply going TOO FAST to open up! When he left we had a good laugh and ever afterwards when one of us missed we claimed it was because our bullets were going TOO FAST.

My experience with bullets not performing is always a case of wrong, tough-jacketed bullets used on the wrong animals. Conversely, if a bullet was going to expand at all, the faster it went the more it expanded until it reached a point where it virtually exploded on impact.

Then late last week I was half asleep and reading something about ballistics on the internet...(danged if I can relocate it) and I thought it started talking about how sometimes the wound created by a bullet could be ENHANCED by actually SLOWING the bullet down!

Since then I feel all confused and kinda like I just learned there is no easter bunny.

Have I missed something about bullets and ballistics all these years? I confess I don't always pay attention like I should...but does anyone have any facts about this phenomenon or even know what I'm talking about here? WHEN is slowing a bullet down more deadly than speeding a bullet up? Or have I just been working too hard and need some time off? HELP.

------------------
A well placed bullet is worth 1,000 ft/lbs of energy.

08 May 2002, 17:12

stubblejumper

The faster a bullet is tavelling the quicker it will open up.The person trying to tell you that the bullet was going too fast to open up is full of B.S.and does not have a clue as to what he is talking about.A very fragile bullet can come apart at higher speeds and in this case slowing it down could improve performance by helping it hold together.

08 May 2002, 18:38

<Pa jim>

I have encountered the same misinformation
on a suprisingly frequent basis, most recently was a outfitter from Wyoming telling
a client the reason he lost a muley was because he used a nosler ballistic tip in a 7
rem mag and they are going too fast to expand. I advised the person otherwise and got re educated on "real world ballistics".
There is alot of ignorance out there!

09 May 2002, 09:10

<Kimmo E>

-pecos 45

"WHEN is slowing a bullet down more deadly than speeding a bullet up? Or have I just been working too hard and need some time off? HELP. "

If you use soft bullets designed for slow cal. like 308w in a 300wheat. it may (expload) in the bow of a big animal before it penetates the vitals.

The problem with varmint bullets may be what thin jacketed varmint bullet are driven to extreme speeds so they open up in the air and only a small part hitting the animal

09 May 2002, 00:32

Pecos41

Well, so far you guys are confirming what I've always believed about bullets and my original question may seem a little stupid. But the reason I posted it here was I've never hunted anything larger than big mule deer and I got to wondering if on really BIG game, on up to African critters, if maybe there was a little different bullet philosophy. You may NOT want to smack a buffalo with bullets going 3,800 fps. Perhaps there is some conscious thought to driving heavy bullet slower and letting them rattle around inside a big animal for a bit. Naturally we don't want bullets exploding on impact for large dangerous game.

Curious minds want to know.

------------------
A well placed bullet is worth 1,000 ft/lbs of energy.

[This message has been edited by Pecos45 (edited 05-08-2002).]

09 May 2002, 01:31

Pecos: Speed will definitely make a bullet open up and possibly explode. This can be deadly on smaller thin skinned game. When the game is elk size or larger, speed may be a detriment if frangible bullets are used. The only way to kill these larger animals is to penetrate through the vitals or shut off the central nervous system. If the bullet expands violently on a rib or shoulder bone, there is no penetration, and the animal runs off.

------------------
JD

09 May 2002, 01:49

Zero Drift

Anyone who has ever hunted varmints understands the difference between frangible bullets and controlled expansion bullets. While the "going too fast" comment is not accurate, punching holes through varmints can have less than spectacular effects.

Prairie dogs are largely bags of fat with little bullet resistence. Most controlled expansion bullets simple pass through them sometimes with little effect. However, take a Nosler Ballistic Tip Varmint bullet or better yet a Berger MEF and you get explosive expansion. The rats suddenly seem to have been feasting on nitro when you hit them. We refer to is as the red mist. This is exactly what you see.

Follow the simple rule - The correct bullet, traveling at the correct velocity, delivered to the correct area of the vitals.

09 May 2002, 01:49

Pecos41

I agree, JD. This has always been my experience. I'm starting to think I was dreaming when I read whatever I thought I read.

Obviously I'm working too hard. I'll take this matter up with the boss today.

Thanks guys for telling me I'm not losing my mind.

------------------
A well placed bullet is worth 1,000 ft/lbs of energy.

09 May 2002, 03:02

Pumpkinheaver

Pecos45

Maybe you were reading about FMJ military bullets on the net, don't they tumble, thus creating a bigger wound channel when they slow down?

------------------
Walk softly and carry a big bore!

09 May 2002, 05:34

redial

Whaddya mean there's no Easter Bunny?

Whatchoo talkin bout, Willis?

My faith in this board is shattered. *sniff*

09 May 2002, 06:24

Atkinson

Yes, your gunsmith is incorret in that the bullet was going to fast to open up..

But, don't let that lead you into the trap that slowing a bullet down cannot be benificial to bullet performance and killing effect, because in 99% of the cases slowing a bullet down will indeed protect the integrity of the bullet.. Slowing a 375 H&H 300 gr. bullet down from 2650 to 2400 FPS for use on Buffalo is a real good idea. The lower velocity is just more reliable on Buffalo as the you normally get more penitration and better bullet performance even with monolithics..Velocity is the enemy of penitration and bullet performance, in fact its only redeeming factor is trajectory and trajectory is the least important factor in hunting.

------------------
Ray Atkinson

ray@atkinsonhunting.com
atkinsonhunting.com

09 May 2002, 06:37

EXPRESS

I had some strange thing happen twice and someone gave me the same explanation about the too fast theory. I put it down to freak bullet(non)performance. I shot a boar that came trotting along with a 7mm rem mag, just behind the shoulder. 160gn nosler partition. My X girlfriend was with me and she said I had missed.(and that he was only a little one) I agreed that he had showen no sign of a hit, never slowed down or sped up his trot. But the shot had seem perfect. The next morning I went to look and he was some 100m away with a 7mm diameter hole either side of his shoulders.(he was one of the big boars in the photos in an earlier post and too big to wiegh) Later a friend using the same rifle and bullets took a shot at a small boar. The boar ran off showing no signs of a hit. 2 days later in a totaly different place, about 1km from where he had taken the shot was a dead boar with the same tiny entry & exit holes in the shoulders.
Both shots were very close - 50 - 70 m and I'll assume that nither hit any ribs or shoulders. I can see the "too fast myth" beeing born out of such experiences.

09 May 2002, 07:01

<FarRight>

Pecos, it is my philosophy that given bullets of proper construction for the game you are hunting, velocity is usually a good thing. But this has its limits.
I beleive the reason you don't read of bullets going 3000+ fps in African hunts is because larger bullets, usually FMJ, of 300 grains or higher are used for larger wound channel and enhanced penetration. Properlling these bullets at those velocities would hurt like a bitch and quite frankly they seem to work well they way they are.
I had a friend who will remain nameless who also tried to convince me his dislike of the 7mm Rem stems from the fact he's witnessed deer shot with a NBT going too fast to expand! Some people are truely clueless! He wouldn't let us convince him he was full of crap...
You are right to assume more velocity will cause bullets to expand faster. This is not necessarily a bad thing if you choose the right bullet for the job. A toughly constructed bullet can work wonders on elk at fast velocities. Problem is the mass of the bullet should go up according to the size of the game and propelling big bullets fast starts to get annoying.

09 May 2002, 07:25

Express: You probably had a bad batch of partitions. I have had partitions that did no more damage than a solid. There were shot out of 30-06 at modest velocity. They failed to expand, although they went straight through the vitals of moose at close range.

------------------
JD

09 May 2002, 07:43

Mark G

PECOS45, I think what you read may have been on the Huntamerica forum in the deer hunting section, in a thread called physics question.
I think it was one of LeeM(s) posts. He talks about the bullet staying in the body longer, being more lethal or some stuff.
I disagree and believe it is a matter of bullet integrity first, then velocity. In other words if you were forced to hunt Elk (where you want good penetration) with a .308 dia. 165gr Hornady Interlock. Wich rifle cartridge would you feel would work best with this bullet; A 30-06 or a 300Rum? Lets pretend we know are shot will be less than 100yards. In my mind I want the 30-06 so my 165gr pill doesn't become a 4,000fps grenade, like it might out of the 300Rum. Now switch the bullet to a 165gr swift A-frame, or TBBC, or X bullet, and it's a whole new ball game. Velocity is only your friend if the bullet's integrity can hold up enough at "X" velocity.

------------------
Thanks, Mark G

"Everything that lives and moves will be food for you. Just as I gave you the green plants, I now give you everything." Genesis 9:3

09 May 2002, 08:15

Pecos41

Thanks guys for the additional input on a strange subject. I believe the guy who wrote whatever I was reading was named McPherson and it started out with him talking about FMJ's tumbling on impact etc.
I always knew they did tumble to some degree but never understood WHY. Then I stumbled into this stuff about slower bullets being more deadly...I believe they were mostly talking about pistol bullets.

My experience over the years agrees with what most of you have expressed. Faster can be good up to the point bullets start exploding on impact...unless you are hunting some small varmint that you don't care about a body count. Sorting the issue of bullet performance out can be a frustrating one. I ran into this years ago with a .243 and Sierra bullets. At that time, their 6mm bullets were eratic as hell. Hunting jackrabbits, one would explode and the next would go thru like an AP. You never knew what to expect. I'll have to say as a whole Sierra bullets have been the most erratic and Hornady the most consistent with their expansion characteristics.

Atkinson, you pretty well hit the nail on the head of what I'm fishing for in this thread...and you confirmed what I only guessed at, i.e. that velocity was NOT the sacred cow for killing very large, very dangerous animals. And as you very wisely stated, the only advantage to velocity is improved trajectory...and this is the least important factor in hunting.

I like that, Ray, and wish I'd said it first.
It's every bit as good as my signature line that:

------------------
A well placed bullet is worth 1,000 ft/lbs of energy.

09 May 2002, 08:38

parshal

Reading this entire thread makes me think about bullet performance and speed. I've often wondered if shooting 140 grain barnes-x's out of my .264 at 3300 fps would actually be detrimental to the bullet performance. At those speeds, can an up-close shot (less than 50 yards) actually "peel off" the petals during expansion and just leave you with a .264 diameter exit wound? I would think that a partition at those speeds would lose the front half and keep the back partition. Each result can't be ideal.

09 May 2002, 10:05

Pecos41

Par, that's the tricky thing about bullet performance. It's sometimes hard to know what to expect until you've tried somethng a few times. And the faster a bullet is traveling, I'd say the more likely something wacky can happen to the projectile.

While this may not be too important on some of the lesser varmints, it can be a serious concern on larger hunts. The good thing about this website is there is a lot of experience out there to ask about this bullet or that.

Know thy bullet

------------------
A well placed bullet is worth 1,000 ft/lbs of energy.

09 May 2002, 11:42

parshal

quote:
Originally posted by Pecos45:
simply going TOO FAST to open up!

One other thought, and correct me if I'm wrong here, but if a bullet is of very heavy construction and shot at a light-skinned animal such as a pronghorn, isn't it possible that it won't open if no bones are hit? It makes sense on paper!

09 May 2002, 11:56

EXPRESS

Parshal: I rekon so - I've shot several duiker and klipspringer with .375H&H soft points, some quartering, but always aiming a little "too" far back to avoid the shoulder. None of the bullets ever left an exit wound any bigger than you could expect from a solid. But all the animals did flop to the ground very very dead.

09 May 2002, 12:01

beemanbeme

Parshal, I had that very thing happen on an antelope. I thought my pilgrim had missed as the goat started a slow trot acrost our front after the shot but in a couple of yards or so he just seemed to get tired and lay down. .270win, 140gr nosler partition @2900fps. totally bled out inside with a little .277 sized hole on each side of the chest. It was a well placed shot, it just happened to slide between the ribs on each side.

09 May 2002, 12:33

<Harald>

You cannot judge the effect inside the animal by the size of the exit wound. Think about it. In the case of the most explosive bullets, the exit wound diameter is zero because it does not exit at all. Skin is extremely elastic and, depending on the exit velocity and the bullet shape, the exit wound can be significantly smaller than the diameter of the bullet. It is no accident or coincidence that bullets are frequently recovered just under the hide. A large number also just barely squeak through and make tiny holes doing so.

As far as not expanding is concerned, at any velocity over 2200 fps I can't think of a bullet made that will fail to expand (unless it hits sideways or is damaged in such a way to inhibit its normal functioning). The toughness of the game animal has very little to do with it for high velocity impacts.

09 May 2002, 12:57

elmo

There is a good explanation of this phenomena in Robert Rinkers book,"Understanding Firearms Ballistics" There is a strange phenomena of terminal ballistics when a projectile impacts a viscous medium such as water or muscle tissue which has a high percentage of fluid. Given two equal projectiles, the one moving at a slower velocity will penetrate farther.

If this sounds like hogwash, then consider this.

One guy jumps of the diving board into the hotel pool. A second guy jumps off the 35th floor balcony into the same pool. First guy gets out and has a drink. Second guy makes a big SPLAT noise like he landed on concrete. The difference is just velocity.

Viscous mediums are funny like that.
Remember what Newton said," For every action, there is an equal and opposite reaction."

It's just water, fighting back

As far as the blowhard's concerned, I have a theory. His loads must be so hot, that his bullets are exceeding the speed of light. When this happens, his bullets cease to exist as Matter and become pure energy, which passes harmlessly through the vermits, and then slows down below litespeed, where it becomes a bullet again, and hits the dirt with a poof of dust, appearing to be a missed shot.

[This message has been edited by elmo (edited 05-09-2002).]

09 May 2002, 13:45

RogerK

There is a very technical term for varmints that get away after the shot, a term that does not seem to be common knowlegde across of the these forms. It's called M.I.S.S. That's when the bullet makes contact with nothing but ait until gravity reacts on it's forward motion make makes it drop to the ground. Am I the only one that MISSES, or am I the only one that will admit it?

09 May 2002, 15:40

Washington Hunter

I shot a bull elk at 35 yards in the shoulder with a 264 Win Mag and 140 grain x bullet, muzzle vel. approx. 3200 fps. Recovered the bullet just inside the hide on of the far shoulder. It didn't expand at all...the tip was bent slightly and that was it.

09 May 2002, 15:42

pallladium2506

While I don't have enough experience of my own to comment (just opinions) There is an article? or whatever putting forth this theory on the e. arthur brown website

https://www.eabco.com/Reports/report03.html

it sounds interesting but I dont have any idea if there is anything to it.

10 May 2002, 03:37

Dutch

Parshal, I have shot both deer and elk at very close range (30 yards) with a 7 mag and 140 gr. XLC's going close to 3300. The petals did not break off, and the animals did not walk away.

Exits wounds were very, very small. I tend to believe that exit wounds are smaller than the expanded diameter of the bullet. When I shot my moose with my Whelen, I could barely put my pinky finger in the exit wound, but I know the 250 Gr. Hot Core expanded just fine. Hide is funny stuff. FWIW, Dutch.

10 May 2002, 05:10

BigNate

Several good points have been brought up and I just want to respond to a couple statements.
I have some experience with military ammo and the "tumbling bullet" is hot air these days. When the M-16 was introduced the twist rate was wrong for the bullet length at velocity. And yes they "tumbled" or more correctly they were unstable. Modern issue for the M-16 A2 varies ( I've gotten 55gr.and some heavier) it is generally 55gr. ( or was as I got out a while ago)
The bullet travelling to fast thing doesn't make much sense unless they were FMJ or very fragile as the Blitz, TNT, ect. I did have some out of a .22-250 that disintigrated in flight and some out of a .223 that seperated. ( wrong twist for velocity) We got very poor results shooting FMJ bullets at coyotes. The idea was to minimize pelt damage. Major blunder in my opinion.
I have never seen a 175gr. 7mm Rem Mag "blow up" on anything! Even with the so called sub-standard conventional bullets.

Bigger animals deserve to be taken with a bigger bullet. I don't understand those who want to use a light bullet at varmint speeds to take big game. It generally proves to be way less than ideal.
Each of us have experiences that form our opinions. I also believe that some folks believe to much of what they hear or read and accept it as truth. The internet can be helpfull but also seems to be the fastest way to spread B.S.

10 May 2002, 09:09

Pecos41

Nate, I'm afraid I'll have to respectfully differ with you about bullets "tumbling."
Although this may not be the best term for it. Swapping ends might be a more accurate phrase. (I do not refer to bullets tumbling thru the sky once they leave the muzzle. Let me clarify that. I am speaking of a "tumbling effect" once the target/animal is hit.)

The way the ballistics people explain it to me is this: You have a bullet flying thru the air, point first hopefully, and stabalized by the twist imparted via the rifling. All is well. Then the bullet strikes the target and once this occurs things start getting a wee bit unstable.
Since the center of gravity on any bullet and most of the mass is way towards the REAR of the bullet, the result of this instability is that the heavier (rear) part of the bullet starts taking over and begins swinging around towards the front. Obviously various occilations and yawing around can occur as the bullet tries to achieve this end-first result.

This phenomenon is probably not nearly so drastically seen in expanding bullets simply because in an expanding bullet the front of the bullet largely MOVES to the rear and they become one and the same.

The effect is going to be more clearly seen in FMJs and bullets that don't expand or do all this "shape shifting."

One of my favorite places to mess around and test loads used to be in old deserted junk yards where I could shoot at all sorts of THINGS. I've seen with my own eyes how bullets sometimes make a round hole going into something and leave a perfect silhouette of a bullet going absolutely side-ways on their way out the other side!
The only way to achieve this is "tumbling," swapping ends, violent yawing and such.

Bullets can and do sometimes perform some strange wanderings as they pass thru an animal and are acted upon by various mediums. Whether we call this "tumbling, yawing or square dancing," I'm convinced it exists. I've seen too many examples of it to deny it. Recovered lots of cast bullets that were somewhat mushroomed on the nose of the bullet and then "mushroomed" again SIDEWAYS as they hit the next hard object going sideways.

But your right, shooters shouldn't believe everything they hear or read. If something sounds goofy, it may BE goofy. This is why we talk about them and hash them out and compare notes.

Good hunting!

------------------
A well placed bullet is worth 1,000 ft/lbs of energy.

[This message has been edited by Pecos45 (edited 05-10-2002).]

10 May 2002, 11:54

<Harald>

WA Hunter, I have had a similar experience with a .308-200 gr X-Bullet. The recovered bullet had a bent tip. I was about to get disgusted with bad performance (never mind the dead warthog) when the PH mentioned that the entrance wound looked funny. We checked it out and sure enough the entrance was a classic keyhole lesion, indicating that the bullet was fully sideways at impact. It may have gotten a bent tip en route, hitting a twig, or it may have occurred after impact. I don't know, but I would hazard that the same thing happened in your case.

As far as "tumbling" bullets are concerned, the cause is rightly described as instability. Instability is introduced by hitting the target first of all and aggravated by the density of tissue, which is 1000 times greater than air. The rotational velocity of the bullet is generally insufficient to stabilize long (especially pointed) projectiles, so unless they deform they will typically begin to gyrate or yaw in an effort to achieve a stable flight orientation. This is a bigger problem (obviously) for non-deforming spitzer FMJ military bullets than for soft points or round nosed bullets (although very long round nosed bullets can be unstable too if the twist rate is slow). The impact velocity also plays a role. Below about 2000 fps, the tumbling does not occur, even for the pointed types.

10 May 2002, 12:51

Atkinson

Actually on a bullet that does not exit you will find many of them facing the entrance hole...the will turn over at the end of their velocity more times than not. I have found many as I said and they were perfectly expanded.

Noslers and monolithics will blow off the front from time to time, in which case it means you were too close and velocity was too high or you should have been using a heavier bullet.

I have seen many failures with BarnesX as described and I think the bend the nose shut from time to time...I know this, when a X bullet works it works beatifully, when it fails, fails miserably...I believe it is pure quality control, happens when companies get to big and have to rush production.

One thing you can take to the bank and animals up to and including elk, moose, Kudu and that is there is no such thing as 250 or 300 grs. of failure. Use enough gun and when the bullets come apart the still kill'em quick.

High velocity is very deadly 95% of the time on high strung light antelope and deer. 5% of the time it is a disaster. Velocity kills like lightening when all works well and it is impressive to watch...on the other hand I like a tough bullet capable of shooting through what I am hunting from any angle and my kills are not spectacular, but they leave good blood trails and are 100% every time if I shoot well.

I have absolutly no use at all for velocity on big mean tough animals like Buffalo, Elephant Eland it fails most of the time on these bad boys.

Ideal to me is about 3000 FPS or 2800 FPS is perhaps better in the med. caliber rifles and 2200 FPS to 2400 FPS in the big bores..Never have much trouble with these velocities. Bullet integrity is preserved at these speeds with good bullets and bullet integrity is the holy grail of the hunter, not caliber...

It took me 55 years of extensive hunting and many, many animals to come to this very simple conclusion and all the math and theoretical jargon goes out the window. Worse yet I knew the answer all the time.

------------------
Ray Atkinson

ray@atkinsonhunting.com
atkinsonhunting.com

10 May 2002, 14:18

elmo

Hey Ray
What would you consider the ideal weight/velocity combination for a .375 bullet on buff? And does your experience lead you to believe that for a given bullet, that lower velocity equals better penitration

10 May 2002, 15:12

Pecos41

quote:
Originally posted by Harald:
Below about 2000 fps, the tumbling does not occur, even for the pointed types.

Harald, WHY does tumbling never occur below 2,000 fps. What's magical about this velocity? I am not arguing, just genuinely curious. And I've seen pistol bullets with the "double mushroom" effect I mentioned above. However, pistol bullets are often not the most aerodynamic of shapes anyhow.
AND, now that I think of it, I can't recall if the "double mushroom" was a double impact on a bullet TRYING to travel straight or if it was a richochet inside some of the crazy things I used to delight in shooting at junk yards? Can't honestly say.

But I'll say this much, I never expected to get this many replies to my thread and the discussion has been interesting.

I think Atkinson makes a good point when he states HV bullets kill with spectacular results (when they work)...but good heavy hunting bullets are going to be more reliable on game elk size on up.

So many shooters in the southwest worship at the shrine of High Velocity because it's possible to get some very long range shots. (If we are foolish enough to take them.) But as a result of all the "velocity at any cost" mentality, there are a lot of crippled animals not cleanly killed because of poor bullet performance of one kind or another. I believe for sure any hunter going after anything from an elk sized animal on up, we should select a GOOD bullet and forget the velocity quest.

If we think about having a rifle that would shoot 5,000 fps and perfectly flat out to 600 yds......what sort of hunt would we have? We might bring home the bacon but what sort of hunt would it be? I suggest NOT MUCH FUN. We would have just about taken the HUNT out of hunting. It would be more like drive...shoot and go home.
IMHO

I totally believe in my "signature post" below.

------------------
A well placed bullet is worth 1,000 ft/lbs of energy.

11 May 2002, 03:19

<JerrBear356>

In my opinion the only time a bullet can be considered "Too Fast" is when accuracy suffers. That includes bullet disintegration which doesn't really happen to often with larger bullets but happens in the smaller ones. If bullets can do better by going slower then don't try to tell that to the guy who is famous for going Bear hunting with a .17 Mach IV, because he has had some good results with 20gr bullets at 4 grand ft/sec. If he backed off those loads he might have gotten killed.

11 May 2002, 03:56

Pecos41

Hunting bear with a .17? Well, yeah, I can see it happening....just the same as someone hunting bear with a slingshot. I reckon you can kill anything with about anything...IF you are lucky and IF everything is JUST RIGHT and a few other IF's.

But somewhere along this "IFY" road it gets sort of like going over Niaagra Falls in a whiskey barrel. I know people have gone over the falls and lived to tell the tale.
But most of them woke up dead!

Are we talking hunting or circus stunts? I personally think we owe enough respect to the animals to try to kill them as surely and certainly and painlessly as possible.
And I've seen some spectacular failures with the wrong bullets. Doing the job when it arrives is VASTLY more important for a bullet than just getting there QUICK...and then mucking things up for the animal and the hunter. IMHO

------------------
A well placed bullet is worth 1,000 ft/lbs of energy.

11 May 2002, 04:07

<JerrBear356>

I definatly agree with you! I am a big fan of firepower, because I hate to see animals suffer. That is why every big game animal I have shot has immediatly dropped. And that is why I make sure that my shot will be in the lungs or somewhere where the animal won't suffer long or hopefully at all. When I heard about that guy with the .17 my thoughts were that it could be done, but that doesn't make it a good idea. I was just proving that velocity kills. Just remember Kinetic Energy = ï¿½ mv2. Velocity is squared therefore if velocity is doubled, energy is 4 times as much. Whereas, if mass is doubled and V is constant KE is only doubled.

11 May 2002, 04:39

parshal

quote:
Just remember Kinetic Energy = ï¿½ mv2. Velocity is squared therefore if velocity is doubled, energy is 4 times as much. Whereas, if mass is doubled and V is constant KE is only doubled.

If that formula is correct, and I'm not saying it's not, then why is there so much arguing about velocity? I'd have to say, as most are here, that it's bullet choice for said velocity and not too much speed.

11 May 2002, 04:58

Brad

Elmo had a great post, and I think it's worth a second look.

Game animals have a LOT of water in them... let's say we have two identical .308" 180 gr. Nosler Partitions... same weight and sectional density... one impacts an elk at 2,600 fps and the other an identical elk in the identical spot (my, aren't these cyber-elk cooperative!) at 3,000 fps... the bullet going 2,600 fps will generally out-penetrate the faster bullet for all the reasons Elmo listed, and may do a better job killing. I believe Ray, through hard-won experience, is saying the same thing in a different way.

Obviously there's a lot of other factors like rotational speed, etc. BUT, I believe the above is the most critical aspect of performance... on big animals in particular, a bullet MUST penetrate deeply to be a reliable, year-in-year-out big game killer... that's probably part of the reason the 30-06 works so well on elk though most of us are loathe to admit it!

Me, I like the 338 Win Mag and Partitions!

Brad