Using the TSX gives an unfair comparaison as I mentioned earlier. What about if you were going to use your custom .300WSM on a grizzly with the Nosler Accubond. Which one would you choose? 150gr, 165gr, 180gr or 200gr?
How much fps, weight or diameter does it take to make a difference?
- Thread starter bcsteve
- Start date
Using the TSX gives an unfair comparaison as I mentioned earlier. What about if you were going to use your custom .300WSM on a grizzly with the Nosler Accubond. Which one would you choose? 150gr, 165gr, 180gr or 200gr?
I'm going to interrupt the TTSX love-in, because I don't buy any of it, and certainly don't think that using a .22 cal. bullet that doesn't expand much is a good idea for shooting deer!
Killing power(not muzzle energy) increases with heavier bullets and larger diameter, to a much greater extent then velocity. Elmer Keith himself said that he would gladly exchange velocity for more bullet weight, he was either talking about his 338/378 OKH or the .375 H&H.
Killing power(not muzzle energy) increases with heavier bullets and larger diameter, to a much greater extent then velocity. Elmer Keith himself said that he would gladly exchange velocity for more bullet weight, he was either talking about his 338/378 OKH or the .375 H&H.
Put bullet in the boiler room and any resonable cartridge with a decent bullet will kill well.again we all have different hunting experiences, and not really many bad choices out their within reason.I have never had a moose or bear take a step after taking a a big bullet in the boiler room and the reaction after recieving a large diameter bullet is dramatic.I have used 7 mags and 300's and they kill well, and dead is dead but I have not seen the same reaction after taking a smaller bullet.Not that my choice is any better than the hunter who uses 270's and 308's and such..
Velocity is the single biggest factor in killing power, always assumeing that you have enough bullet of suitable construction to get the penetration and expansion chores done as well. Velocity is also so intertwined with both penetration and expansion that it has to be regarded as a system.
Does anyone really believe that a .308 kills the same at 500 yards as it does at 50? How about dropping a bullet on one foot and shooting yourself in the other one? That's a good velocity test too. Or are we supposed to beleive that a .30 Carbine is the equal of a .300 Weatherby? Sorry, I ain't buyin' it.
Does anyone really believe that a .308 kills the same at 500 yards as it does at 50? How about dropping a bullet on one foot and shooting yourself in the other one? That's a good velocity test too. Or are we supposed to beleive that a .30 Carbine is the equal of a .300 Weatherby? Sorry, I ain't buyin' it.
tylerjwitty
CGN frequent flyer
- Location
- Northern Ontario
Good Morning
Funny you all have yet to learn this but I learned that Difference is indeed measured with a measuring device.
You all may be saying, "Yes yes kind sir that is implied what is tool required for measuring this difference?"
Being that I am highly educated it may come as somewhat profound discovery when I inform you this is only measured in one of the "crudest" measurements known to mankind.
It just so happens that it is a simple carpenters tape measure.
First:
Measure from the shooters point to the area of the animal shot
Second:
Measure back to where the shooter stood to the shot animal.
Third:
Subtract these two figures. this leaves you with a common denomatior
Fourth
Return back to the location of the area of impact.
Fifth:
Throw as hard as possible the tape measure into the thickest brush FROM the point of impact.
Sixth:
Pace off the distance to the tape measure. Add this number to your common denomatior
Seventh
This measurement now determines the radius of the area that the animal should be in with the proper caliber choice.
Sincerely
Dr Tyler j. Witty
Funny you all have yet to learn this but I learned that Difference is indeed measured with a measuring device.
You all may be saying, "Yes yes kind sir that is implied what is tool required for measuring this difference?"
Being that I am highly educated it may come as somewhat profound discovery when I inform you this is only measured in one of the "crudest" measurements known to mankind.
It just so happens that it is a simple carpenters tape measure.
First:
Measure from the shooters point to the area of the animal shot
Second:
Measure back to where the shooter stood to the shot animal.
Third:
Subtract these two figures. this leaves you with a common denomatior
Fourth
Return back to the location of the area of impact.
Fifth:
Throw as hard as possible the tape measure into the thickest brush FROM the point of impact.
Sixth:
Pace off the distance to the tape measure. Add this number to your common denomatior
Seventh
This measurement now determines the radius of the area that the animal should be in with the proper caliber choice.
Sincerely
Dr Tyler j. Witty
It's not really unfair to discuss TSX bullets, as they *do* exist.
For the WSm they should all work,but the 150 might shed too much weight at close range shots, 165 would work fine, 180 or 200 woudl be better options.
Sounds like you have no real experience with the subject.
It may not be possible to say without throwing in a disclaimer like "it depends." Take an easy and common example likea .308 with 150s. For the sake of argument say the velocities are:
0 yards..............................2900 fps
100 Yards..........................2700 fps
200 Yards..........................2500 fps
300 yards .........................2300 fps
400 Yards..........................2100 fps
Observation tells me that between 2900 and 2500 there isn't a heck of a lot of difference, so you could conclude that that first 400 fps didn't matter much. At 300 things are still looking good, but by 400 I'm wishing I'd brought something else. From that I'd conclude that the last 200 fps is noticeable. You could also conclude that an extra 200 fps gives equal results 100 yards farther out.
I'm fond of cartridges that start bullets from 3100 to 3600 fps, partly for the trajectory and partly for the hurtin' they lay on animals.
Northman999
CGN Ultra frequent flyer
- Location
- Southern Yukon
A never ending discussion, really.
This is why people have been always been doing things like trying to develop numerical formulas, and TKO ratings etc to try and mathematically quantify killing power.
But it can't be done. Energy levels, for example, are basically useless in determining lethality.
Any projectile that can cause failure on one major organ, or the CNS, or enough blood loss is going to kill your animal, period.
And dead is dead...there's no such thing as more dead or less dead.
That leaves a lot of wiggle room for hunters to pick their favorite catridge.
Want to shoot your moose with a 30-378 in the neck and have hydrostatic shock turn the thing's brain into goop on the spot. Fine. It's dead.
Want to shoot your moose with a 243 in the heart and have organ failure drop it in three steps. Fine. It's dead.
Want to shoot your moose with 44-40 through the lungs so the animal cannot circulate oxygen to it's organs. Fine. It's dead.
Want to shoot your moose with a 221 fireball through the brain and shut down it's CNS on the spot. Fine. It's dead.
....
This is why people have been always been doing things like trying to develop numerical formulas, and TKO ratings etc to try and mathematically quantify killing power.
But it can't be done. Energy levels, for example, are basically useless in determining lethality.
Any projectile that can cause failure on one major organ, or the CNS, or enough blood loss is going to kill your animal, period.
And dead is dead...there's no such thing as more dead or less dead.
That leaves a lot of wiggle room for hunters to pick their favorite catridge.
Want to shoot your moose with a 30-378 in the neck and have hydrostatic shock turn the thing's brain into goop on the spot. Fine. It's dead.
Want to shoot your moose with a 243 in the heart and have organ failure drop it in three steps. Fine. It's dead.
Want to shoot your moose with 44-40 through the lungs so the animal cannot circulate oxygen to it's organs. Fine. It's dead.
Want to shoot your moose with a 221 fireball through the brain and shut down it's CNS on the spot. Fine. It's dead.
....
Last edited:
The reliance on velocity is wrong period, weight, diameter and BC are far more important for large game hunting.....the only advantage to velocity is flatter trajectory, which means very little for my big game hunting as I try to get within about 150 yds or so.
In my experience, large cal. heavy bullets kill much better then lighter high vel. cals. at the ranges I hunt, .45 and .50 cal. 400-600gr. bullets perform better for me then any .30 cal., TTSX or otherwise.
In my experience, large cal. heavy bullets kill much better then lighter high vel. cals. at the ranges I hunt, .45 and .50 cal. 400-600gr. bullets perform better for me then any .30 cal., TTSX or otherwise.
Northman999
CGN Ultra frequent flyer
- Location
- Southern Yukon
I think one factor that favors larger diameter, heavier bullets is their predictablity. The size of the wounds they create is very consistent, as is their penetration, and also (mostly) the direction of their wound channel.
Smaller/faster bullets tend to rely more on shock to destroy organs, or hydrostatic shock to overwhelm the CNS. This works great when it works, but it's much less predictable. From the research I've seen on hyrdrostatic shock (for instance), as well as my own experience, it's not reliable. Shoot two animals in the same area at the same range with the same rifle and one will crumple immediately from hyrdrostatic shock and one will wander off and die from orgran failure that had nothing to do with a shockwave. Smaller/faster bullets also tend to have a much less predictable trajectory of wound channel, and are generally more affected by hitting big bones.
I wouldn't really consider .30 call small, though, more middle ground, at least for the game I shoot.
At the 150 yards you're talking about a stiff loaded muzzleloader is quite effective. Oh, and Elmer Keith was wrong a lot.
He was right a he!! of a lot more than he was wrong, given the bullets of the day.
I'm not entirely sure.
But in light of the continual .308 vs. .30-06 argument, I have seen differences. But the comparison is so apples-to-oranges it's not even funny. a 22" barreled .308 vs. a 24" .30-06. The .308 shooting Federal blue-box factory 180gr soft points. The .30-06 shooting stoked handloads with 180gr TSX. The .308 advertised velocity being 2570 fps, minus a bit for the shorter barrel, let's call it 2500. The .30-06 using a hefty charge of RL22 and a chronographed average of 2822 fps. That is not an insignificant difference in velocity (resulting in flatter trajectory) and bullet construction, and I'd take that .30-06 over that .308 in all honestly. But like I said, that's an apples-to-oranges comparison (well, maybe more apples-to-shorter-apples-with-less-gunpowder) because on the flip side, the .308 was about 2 pounds lighter and just that little bit more svelte and quick-handling.
But in light of the continual .308 vs. .30-06 argument, I have seen differences. But the comparison is so apples-to-oranges it's not even funny. a 22" barreled .308 vs. a 24" .30-06. The .308 shooting Federal blue-box factory 180gr soft points. The .30-06 shooting stoked handloads with 180gr TSX. The .308 advertised velocity being 2570 fps, minus a bit for the shorter barrel, let's call it 2500. The .30-06 using a hefty charge of RL22 and a chronographed average of 2822 fps. That is not an insignificant difference in velocity (resulting in flatter trajectory) and bullet construction, and I'd take that .30-06 over that .308 in all honestly. But like I said, that's an apples-to-oranges comparison (well, maybe more apples-to-shorter-apples-with-less-gunpowder) because on the flip side, the .308 was about 2 pounds lighter and just that little bit more svelte and quick-handling.
Ben, if you believe that bullet weight and diameter is the key. How much?
I'll use bigger bullets since this is what you're familiar with, let say shooting a moose with a Marlin lever in .44Mag. Will you notice a difference if you shoot it with a 250gr instead of a 240gr? What about jumping to 265gr, 300gr, 325gr? A what point will you be able to say "now there's a difference!"
