Since Energy is Mass X Velocity squared, couldn't the same performance be had with a heavier bullet moving at a more sedate speed? Big velocity numbers are impressive, but come at the expense of barrel life and can be hard on the brass.

Do not read this as a personal attack on anyone. I also have an obsession with big numbers, but mine is with the bigger cases like the .378Wby and .416 Rigby/.338 Lapua. Despite advice from people who have forgotten more than I will ever know about long-range shooting, I'm sure I'll one day have a .338-.378, or some other Loudenboomer.

quote:

---

Originally posted by LongDistanceOperator:
Since Energy is Mass X Velocity squared, couldn't the same performance be had with a heavier bullet moving at a more sedate speed?

---

Lee buddy, nope. Roy Weatherby was partly right in his old "velocity kills" adage. You could have the same energy, no doubt, but not the same energy transfer, or 'performance'. Me and a buddy ran Lapua's 105 gr HP at 1080 mps (3550 fps) from a .30-06 and the performance on seagulls were incredible - just a bunch of feathers to pick up... No way you could do that with a 180 gr pill @ 2750 fps, even if energy is alike.

On big game this type of performance is neither wanted or attainable, at least not with common shoulderfired arms, so there the "velocity kills" line of thinking really goes down the drain. Punch a hole straight through their lung/heart area and they'll die for sure, but the energy levels and bullet constructions capable of blowing their intestines over a 100 sq.ft. area wouldn't leave much edible meat - neither on the animal or on the poor fellow stupid enough to fire such an arm without securing it to Mt McKinley first...

And my cravings for a .416 Rigby, 6.5/300 Wby and a .577 Tyrannosaur are totally ridiculous, but who gives a..?

-- Mats

6.5/300Wby, eh???? I had an online discussion with a guy who had one of those "back in the day". He said that they would set back the barrel at least once a season.

I read about the .257 Banshee (parent is 6.5x68) in the PS Reloading Guide. Sounds pretty wild, but since there are many more quality bullets available in 6.5mm, maybe some type of 6.5x68IMP would be a good thing to try.

The .30BooBoo is getting a lot of talk since that new record for 5-shot group size. I've been interested in that one for a while.

Decisions, decisions.

I am a big wienie on recoil, don't like it never will. and the other guy is right about using smaller bullets on larger animals, BUT with todays bullets that are able to stay together a such high rotational speeds and deliver good accuracy you have to place your shots. These small rounds are not bone crushers, but can allow people that are sensistive to recoil to shoot better. I have a 7mmSTW using 150gr BT's @ 3200fps with a Ruger#1 that weighs 10-11 pds recoils is not that bad, but it is also not much fun just shooting deer in the shoulder anymore. Lately I have been using the high shoulder shot it is a little more challenging because I wait for them to turn just so, so there will be no meat damage just slip it in under the tenderloin and above the shoulder. I bowhunt and muzzleload hunt for the extra that it brings. Personally I try not to shoot any deer with a centerfire anymore that is not a least 200yds. away, I shoot out of box stands with a very good rest. My next challenge is head shooting, the STW kinda messes'em up when you do that. I wanted something that is small and accurate but goes like hell yeah I could have used a 6br or ppc, but I also like reloading very much and trying different things and the 6br just ain't fast enough. I hunt with a guy who uses a 300Win mag with 220gr pills our deer are 150lbs max most 135, but if that is what he wants then fine.
But speed does kill just from the shock if the bullet is placed right. Anyway I have taken no offense you like'em big and slow and I fast and little as long as the animal does not suffer it is still dead and gives us something to talk about. May you hit all that you shoot at.

Wayne

quote:

---

Originally posted by Montana:
LDO,

Personally I try not to shoot any deer with a centerfire anymore that is not a least 200yds. away, I shoot out of box stands with a very good rest. My next challenge is head shooting, the STW kinda messes'em up when you do that.

Wayne

---

Small wavy target surrounded by jaws and things that if hit result in lingering and agonising death and from more than 200m? Surely not...

Maybe I should clarify, I only head shoot now if it is under a 100yds. The 200yds is the high shoulder shot, with a bit more room for error and 99% of the time the deer drop in their tracks. No I do not want anything to suffer because of my actions, but I do like to shoot'em.

1894 why do you not have your e-mail listed so that I could send this directly to you.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Mats:
Lee buddy, nope. Roy Weatherby was partly right in his old "velocity kills" adage. You could have the same energy, no doubt, but not the same energy transfer, or 'performance'. Me and a buddy ran Lapua's 105 gr HP at 1080 mps (3550 fps) from a .30-06 and the performance on seagulls were incredible - just a bunch of feathers to pick up... No way you could do that with a 180 gr pill @ 2750 fps, even if energy is alike.

-- Mats

---

Maybe so but i don't like picking up feathers - i'd pull out one of the handy seventeens and then i'd have to pick up 1 thing - a seagull that makes a sloshing noise when you move im

------------------
A well regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed !!

[This message has been edited by Wildcat (edited 08-23-2001).]

I like speed because it brings a lot of good stuff along with it. Trajectories flatten, wind drift reduces, time of flight is less and, providing the right bullet is chosen for the job at hand, results are better.

------------------
Gerard Schultz
GS Custom Bullets

quote:

---

Originally posted by AKI:
E=mc2 is Einsteins formula for the relationship between energy and mass. c i the speed of light. To use this formula to calculate the energy of a bullet the mass of the bullet would have to be converted to energy, pure energy. This is what is utilised in nuclear reactions e.g. bombs. The effect would be truly spectacular. A 100gr bullet would deliver 583,200,000,000,000 Joules (600 trillion Joules). That�s ENERGY! What you are discussing is cinetic energy that lacks some punch in this context. Take care! AKI

---

oops!