The Accurate Reloading Forums THE ACCURATE RELOADING.COM FORUMS Rifles Small Calibers just a question about energyGo | New | Find | Notify | Tools | Reply | |
| just a question about energy | Login/Join |
| One of Us |
When I am trying to figure out a load for a rifle or when deciding on a new rifle. I try to look up bullet size and speed and then to see the ft pounds. Of energy it will have at the yardage I plan on shooting the deer at. My question is what would be the minimum ft pounds of energy to consider using. Thanks for any input | ||
|
One of Us |
Not sure a a magic number to answer your question but Colorado's numbers are as follows: Must be .24 caliber and use a bullet of 70 grains minimum and at 100 yards develop 1000 ft pounds of energy. This is their minimums for Deer, Bear, Bighorn Sheep, Mountain Goat and Antelope. With that said .223's and 22/250's kill boatloads of deer with ease and using 50 grain bullets, I would have to check the ft pounds of a 50 grain .223 bullet going 2800 fps but those seem to do it. I'm just guessing but try to stay above 600-700 ft pounds at 100 would be fine Good luck with yours. | |||
|
| One of Us |
I am not sure if I rember correctly. But I think my 223 still had 950 at 200 yds | |||
|
| One of Us |
One thing I like about Hornady and Sierra reloading manuals is that they have charts showing energy,drop, velocity at various ranges. I'm sure some other manuals do as well. The Hornady shows 748 ft pounds for a .223 at 200. If you have enough penetration to take out a deers heart, lung, or liver or a combination thereof--energy, bullet weight, velocity none of that matters much, that animal is going to die. Bullet placement is the trump. | |||
|
One of Us |
Like Snellstrom posted, there isn't a magic energy number. Some Game Departments, like Colorado, have set minimums to cover the once a year shooting nimrods who barely know which end of the cartridge goes into the chamber. With proper bullet placement, a .22 rimfire will kill a deer. That's a 36 grain bullet with a muzzle velocity of 1260 fps and a 100 yd energy of 80 ft-lbs. I have several friends that hunt almost exclusively with their .22-250's shooting 55 gr bullets. I know they have used them for years to kill their black bears, deer, elk, bighorn sheep, mountain goats, antelope, and at least 3 buffalo with them. Like carpetman1 posted, it's all in bullet placement. However, velocity is needed to get the bullet to its target, and velocity squared times bullet weight determines the energy which is required to get that bullet into the animal's vital organs, and the bullet's construction determines whether or not it will stay intact long enough to reach the animal's vital organs. A 50 grain bullet going 2800 fps is producing about 870 ft-lbs of energy. NRA Endowment Life Member | |||
|
| One of Us |
I decided against the 22/250 and bought a 243 . Now I can get on .with the shooting | |||
|
One of Us |
 /////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////// "Socialism is a philosophy of failure, the creed of ignorance, and the gospel of envy, its inherent virtue is the equal sharing of misery." Winston Churchill | |||
|
One of Us |
Energy, schmnergy....as long are your bullet is designed to expand reliably at the velocity for furthest distance you are comfortable shooting, you are good. Oh, and make sure you use an appropriate bullet for the game you are hunting. Bullets kill game, not schmnergy.  | |||
|
| One of Us |
Scott--You forgot to tell them that you can tell what is appropriate by what is pictured on the box. | |||
|
| One of Us |
I thought that was common knowledge.  | |||
|
| one of us |
 Bullets do not kill ! Just as sure as guns do not kill ! I have boxes and boxes of bullets sitting on my load bench and not a single one of them have the ability to kill ! The bullet per se whether in the box or loaded as part of a cartridge cannot and does not kill ! Not unless they are given one important quality and that is kinetic energy ! It is the energy imparted to the bullet by accelerating it's mass to a certain velocity that does the killing and the wound that is created by that bullet in motion is the result of the transfer of energy to the target. Bullet as missiles, just like spears, arrows or stones flung from a catapult are simply vehicles that transport energy and it's the physical amount of energy that they transport that is important in the ability to kill. Believing or claiming otherwise is false science, in fact it is a denial of the very principles of how firearms work and function ! As such there has to be sufficient energy imparted to that bullet to firstly breach the target and then also sufficient energy to actually penetrate the target, without it no wound will be created nor would the animal die ! The reaction of the target to the reciept of that energy is what causes death of the target. It is as simple or as complicated as that ! | |||
|
| One of Us |
How much energy is generated without the bullet? | |||
|
| one of us |
As much as you want ! You can create wounds using energy without the use of bullets ! Point is that it's a misconception to deny that energy is not a factor when in fact it is all about energy ! The fact is that we use solid granular energetic propellants to impart kinetic energy to our projectiles in order to effect wounds on living tissue ! That in essence defines the gun and cartridge as a mechanical entity. All we do in terms of shooting and hunting revolves around this central fact. We wilfully manipulate the internal combustion process to accelerate the projectile to a certain velocity. The projectile in itself is a manipulation by design and construction of how energy is to be deposited to the target. This is the fundamental mechanism of how our ballistics system function. | |||
|
| one of us |
I agree with you that energy is required to kill animals, but energy isn't exactly the final measure of killing power. A typical arrow has less than 100 ft-lbs of kinetic energy, but arrows have been used to kill everything on earth, including African dangerous game. Even if we restrict things to firearms, energy still doesn't tell the whole story. Most .44 magnum loads generate around 1000 ft-lbs of muzzle energy, but the .44 is consider adequate for most North American game. A .222 is about the same, energy-wise, but would you consider the .222 equally effective on big game? | |||
|
| One of Us |
Sorry Alf, I was referring to the mythical magical foot pound measurement that is so popular. I obviously stated the bullet would be traveling fast enough on target to reliably expand. I figured most people would connect the dots and know that it takes energy to launch a bullet. | |||
|
| One of Us |
Without sufficient momentum, how is one going to get that energised bullet to reach through an animal and transfer its energy to the correct part[s] of the animal to effect a kill? Momentum can be defined as "mass in motion." All objects have mass; so if an object is moving, then it has momentum - it has its mass in motion. The amount of momentum that an object has is dependent upon two variables: how much stuff is moving and how fast the stuff is moving. Momentum depends upon the variables mass and velocity. In terms of an equation, the momentum of an object is equal to the mass of the object times the velocity of the object. | |||
|
| One of Us |
I'm ging to save money this year and go bulletless. Just give em a kinetic blast. | |||
|
| one of us |
Mass = energy! | |||
|
| One of Us |
Mass= Catholic church services | |||
|
one of us |
read my sig line. -------------------- THANOS WAS RIGHT! | |||
|
One of Us |
Nicely done !  rogerOld age is a high price to pay for maturity!!! Some never pay and some pay and never reap the reward. Wisdom comes with age! Sometimes age comes alone.. | |||
|
| One of Us |
Using energy numbers as the sole criteria can be misleading. As an example, you're about to be hit in the head with one of 2 projectiles. They weigh the same and impact velocity are the same, so same ft lbs of energy, correct? One is a raw egg, the other is a golf ball. Which do you choose to be hit with? A 243 with an 80gr Barnes TTSX would likely work better than a 270 with a 110gr Vmax on a frontal shot on a bull elk at 20yds. Just as ft lbs has it's place, so does bullet construction, if not more so than ft lbs. | |||
|
| Powered by Social Strata |
 | Please Wait. Your request is being processed... |
|
The Accurate Reloading Forums THE ACCURATE RELOADING.COM FORUMS Rifles Small Calibers just a question about energy
Visit our on-line store for AR Memorabilia