Big and slow VS Small and fast = Knockdown Power

James1873

James1873

CGN Regular
Rating - 100%
112   0   0
Location
McLennan, Alberta
So i recently got in a disagreeable discussion with a friend about calibers for big game hunting. I personally think bigger caliber is more effective overall if used within reasonable ranges. He thinks small and smoking fast is better overall. For example i brought up 45-70 as a brush gun, and he kind of scoffed at the caliber and said 243 wssm would be a better choice for the same purpose, as it wouldn't deflect off branches and such, as much as a 45-70 would (what? i thought it would be other way around?)

Now I was wondering what actually is more effective at killing big game? big heavy bullets moving relatively slow, or a small, light, super fast bullet? are big bore rifles a dying breed that have no purpose anymore?
 
All bullets will deflect when they hit brush. Period. The beauty if a fast bullet in a flat trajectory in the brush, is being able to thread the needle through a small hole, as opposed to lobbing a big bullet, hoping that you miss the brush and make contact.

As to killing stuff, each has merit. A big bullet with a big flat meplat has a tremendous amount of whump to it. But a light and relatively fragile bullet that is travelling at ridiculous velocity has some rather impressive killing to it as well.
 
I was a small and fast guy. I just bought a 375 for my everyday hunting gun. Actual hunting ranges have modified my wants. Brush deflects anything. Recoil is the issue with big and fast(378/460 Weatherby.
 
I'd like to see a comparative deflection test.

Maybe set up a target at 100 yards and put a piece of 1/4 inch plywood angled at a 45deg at about 50 yards. Put a rifle in a vise and take a shot without the plywood as a control, then a few with the plywood in place to see the deflection. Put a bunch of calibers through the test and see what the results look like.

Conventional lore says the big boys will do better and I'd tend to agree. A slower moving bullet is less likely to deform while passing through a branch/plywood. Whereas a Mach 4 .243 WSSM might even disintegrate as it passes through, or at least shed part of its jacket and destabilize.

Who's up for doing a test?? :)
 
A BIG heavy bullet will maintain it's ballistic curve a lot further than a small one at the same velocity, and bring a lot more energy to target - obviously.

For deer sized game, either works, but i think the big and slow hold a lot of merit, having see far too much tissue damage and waste from the fast light crowd.

There are 2 old sayings about the 45/70.

You can eat right up to the hole.

There's no cover from buffalo hunters. Aka (#$#$ that tree, i'm going to shoot right through it).
 
kodiakjack said:
I'd like to see a comparative deflection test.

Maybe set up a target at 100 yards and put a piece of 1/4 inch plywood angled at a 45deg at about 50 yards. Put a rifle in a vise and take a shot without the plywood as a control, then a few with the plywood in place to see the deflection. Put a bunch of calibers through the test and see what the results look like.

Conventional lore says the big boys will do better and I'd tend to agree. A slower moving bullet is less likely to deform while passing through a branch/plywood. Whereas a Mach 4 .243 WSSM might even disintegrate as it passes through, or at least shed part of its jacket and destabilize.

Who's up for doing a test?? :)
Click to expand...

Been done..... Why not posted it..... The myth of the "brush buster" is bogus.....
 
James1873 said:
So i recently got in a disagreeable discussion with a friend about calibers for big game hunting. I personally think bigger caliber is more effective overall if used within reasonable ranges. He thinks small and smoking fast is better overall. For example i brought up 45-70 as a brush gun, and he kind of scoffed at the caliber and said 243 wssm would be a better choice for the same purpose, as it wouldn't deflect off branches and such, as much as a 45-70 would (what? i thought it would be other way around?)

Now I was wondering what actually is more effective at killing big game? big heavy bullets moving relatively slow, or a small, light, super fast bullet? are big bore rifles a dying breed that have no purpose anymore?
Click to expand...


Hey you are resurrecting the old Jack O'Connor versus Elmer Keith feud!
The basic question was unresolved then, so don't expct too much here.
 
kodiakjack said:
I'd like to see a comparative deflection test.

Maybe set up a target at 100 yards and put a piece of 1/4 inch plywood angled at a 45deg at about 50 yards. Put a rifle in a vise and take a shot without the plywood as a control, then a few with the plywood in place to see the deflection. Put a bunch of calibers through the test and see what the results look like.

Conventional lore says the big boys will do better and I'd tend to agree. A slower moving bullet is less likely to deform while passing through a branch/plywood. Whereas a Mach 4 .243 WSSM might even disintegrate as it passes through, or at least shed part of its jacket and destabilize.

Who's up for doing a test?? :)
Click to expand...

I have seen a couple of tests posted where wooden dowels of various sizes were used to more closely replicate branches. Some of the bigger caliber bullets did no better than some of the smaller caliber bullets. Pointed bullets often did better than flat or round points, and faster bullets did better than the same bullet with less velocity.
 
Last edited:
Depends on how much of it you want to eat. You will be able to eat closer to a .45-70 wound channel than a super fast hole maker. All depends on terrain, animal hunted, average expected shot distance. No right or wrong answer as it isn't a one size fits all answer.
 
stubblejumper said:
I have seen a couple of tests posted where wooden dowels of various sizes were used to more closely replicate branches. Some of the bigger caliber bullets did no better than some of the smaller caliber bullets. Pointed bullets often did better than flat or round points, and faster bullets did better than the same bullet with less velocity.
Click to expand...

Hmmm. I don't like it...


While a dowel absolutely does a better job of simulating a branch, it does a terrible job of allowing an even comparison between tests. The infinite angles of the dowel's radius makes it all but impossible to replicate the same amount of deflection twice. If you hit a 1 inch wooden dowel an 1/8 inch right of center, the deflection angle would be 45 degrees. Another 1/4 of an inch to the right and the deflection is 135 degrees. That's a change of 1 degree of deflection for every 2.1 thousands of an inch you miss the aiming point by. I can assure you that I'M not good enough to do that test.

The angled flat board, while nothing like a twig, would at least provide even, repeatable deflection to each and every shot.
 
I like both 45-70 and 243wssm and wouldn't hesitate hunting moose with either one if hunting big bears or Buffalo the 45-70 is the only choice between the two
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom