How much fps, weight or diameter does it take to make a difference?

bcsteve

bcsteve

CGN Ultra frequent flyer
Rating - 100%
120   0   0
Location
BC
You hear it all the time "no animal in the wood will know the difference" whether we're talking about ammo that's 100-200fps less than advertised, 165gr vs 180gr bullets or 7mm-08 Rem vs .308 Win.

At what point do you believe it starts to make a difference?:stirthepot2:
 
Lol this wont end well..... In my experience with bullet construction being equal and at a reasonable distance,diameter makes a bigger difference tht an extra 100fps or so.Everyone has there own experiences though, and all mine have been on large critters yukon moose and bears mostly .
 
bcsteve said:
You hear it all the time "no animal in the wood will know the difference" whether we're talking about ammo that's 100-200fps less than advertised, 165gr vs 180gr bullets or 7mm-08 Rem vs .308 Win.

At what point do you believe it starts to make a difference?:stirthepot2:
Click to expand...
Good post I would like to hear peoples thouts on this as well. I know within 50 yards my .300 savage knocks the deer over with 180's and not pass though. The 150's under 50 yards seem to pass through and they run 20-50 yards with the same shot placements. Not very scientific just an observation. I might add the 180's were federal factory and the 150's are nosler accubonds. BTW for those who are going to say you don't need accubonds for .300 Savage velocities but I find them extremely accurate and reliable. Wound channel is superb and exit holes are 2-3 times the diameter of the entry hole. I'm getting off topic. That's about 200 to 250 fps difference. I also know that I have had mixed results on deer with my 7mmsaum and 140gr accubonds. Some run a bit and some drop. That bullet is traveling almost 600fps faster so I really don't know what to make of it all?
 
Well Steve, none of us can really give an definitive answer. It would take a massive, scientific study to determine the many variables you threw out there.
We can go by what we know has happened.
Many years ago in Manitoba some men were working on a road in the winter. A moose appeared in an opening a 1/4 mile away. One of the workers, a Native, said he would bring his rifle the next day and if the moose came back, he would shoot him. The fellow came next day with a 44-40 and as if on schedule, the moose appeared. The Native aimed, shot and a bit later the moose stumbled and then went down. This is a true story, but I write it without further comment.
I am dead ceratin of all the facts in the following. A very good hunter and excellent shot with his 32 Winchester Special, was getting a load of hay from his haystack in a field, with his team and sleigh. He pitched a load of hay on the rack, got on the load to go, when a cow moose appeared just off the end of the field. He said he knew the hay stack was 300 yards from the end of the field and the moose was about thirty yards into the scrub. He layed down on his load of hay, held for what he thought it would drop in 330 yards, fired and killed the moose.
In each of these cases ballistic tables would show that neither bullet had the neccessary power to kill a moose, especially the 44-40. But the moose didn't know this, so they just died.
Who can answer your question?
 
I have a very well proven scientific answer, when the speed, size of bullet, weight of bullet and weight of rifle all factor together and you begin flinching and missing, that is when it makes a difference.

A .338 250 grain @ 3100 ft/sec over the back of an animal is WAY less effective than a .260 120 grain @2600 ft/sec into the vitals of an animal.

In a nut shell if the animal is hit in the vitals it makes no difference, especially if you are factoring in only a couple hundred feet/sec difference.If your goal is two destroy both shoulders while killing the animal then maybe, but IMO it makes do difference within reason.
 
H4831 said:
In each of these cases ballistic tables would show that neither bullet had the neccessary power to kill a moose, especially the 44-40. But the moose didn't know this, so they just died.
QUOTE]



In both cases a round or flat nose bullet was used, which will penetrate deep and in a straight line at very, very low velocities.

And that's all you have to do is poke a hole in vitals so the animal bleeds out.


If you take a pointed bullet and try the same thing at very low velocities there is a good chance penetration would not be as deep or as straight, meaning it may not even reach the vitals and the animal only receives a flesh wound which may not result in it bleading out.
Click to expand...
 
bcsteve said:
You hear it all the time "no animal in the wood will know the difference" whether we're talking about ammo that's 100-200fps less than advertised, 165gr vs 180gr bullets or 7mm-08 Rem vs .308 Win.

At what point do you believe it starts to make a difference?:stirthepot2:
Click to expand...

It never will make a difference. A deer will die, whether you are using a .30-30 or a .375 H&H. We banter all the time about cartridges here, but in the end, they all do the same thing, kill stuff.
 
blargon said:
It never will make a difference. A deer will die, whether you are using a .30-30 or a .375 H&H. We banter all the time about cartridges here, but in the end, they all do the same thing, kill stuff.
Click to expand...

that is because a 30-30 has ample power/energy/mass/bla/bla to kill a deer, and a 375 will not kill any better.

Adding a few fps, a bit of weight, or a bit more frontal diameter will only begin show a difference when you are using too small a cartridge for the size of animal.

That is what makes the "270 vs 30-06 for 150 pound whitetail deer" a foolish discussion, like arguing whether a 1-1/2 lb hatchet or a 2-3/4 lb axe is better for chopping kindling.
 
rgv said:
Adding a few fps, a bit of weight, or a bit more frontal diameter will only begin show a difference when you are using too small a cartridge for the size of animal.
Click to expand...

Exactly.

If there's not that much difference between the .30-30 and the .300 Savage, and not that much between the .300 Savage and .308 Win, and really what can a .30-06 can do that a .308 Win can't, and the difference between the .30-06 and the .300 Win Mag is negligable, then the .30-30 Win and the .300 Win Mag are in the same category, right?:stirthepot2:
 
Steve, you're funny...you CAN say that the 30-30 and the 300 WM are both big game cartridges...but the 30-30 should only be used on moose at well under 100 yards, and the 300 WM can take moose cleanly at 400 yards. The other calibres are located in between...now the 30.06 with Hornady Superformance Interbonds in 165 grain doesn't give up much to the 300 WM ballistically, when the latter is firing a standard factory cartridge.
 
Same category as "What is the best way to clean my gun?", and "Will my .308 kill a moose at 500 yards?". Everybody talks and nobody listens. So I'll only offer one post.

First lets eliminate the wild cards. Assume we have a bullet like a Nosler Partition that effectively uses energy, and NOT a Barnes that likely as not will pass right through and keep on going. Also lets assume the gun is pointed correctly for a heart and lung shot.

With that given, the bore size means nothing, as it is all about bullet energy. Energy is proportional to bullet weight, and to velocity squared. There is your answer. Velocity is the most significant factor due to the square. Double the velocity and the energy is increased four times. Just figure out how much energy you want to deliver to the target, and that will answer your question about how much velocity you can afford to lose.
 
Ron I agree with most of what you're saying, the physics are bang on... however when applied to the physiology of killing an animal, the quicker blood can exit the vascular system (unless its a headshot) the quicker an animal will succumb. Therefore, the bigger the hole in the vascular system means a quicker kill, whether by larger bore or by expansion of a smaller bore bullet. I think a shot from a 22 centerfire that expands to 35 cal is just as deadly as a slower moving 35 cal bullet that doesnt expand IF they hit the great vessels or heart.
The energy produced can rip and tear soft tissue and make for huge wounds, and make the process quicker - at the expense of lotsa meat damage if its not square in the lungs.
But if the bullet energy doesnt make the blood leave the vascular system, it wont kill any faster than a bullet that does poke a hole... for example, a good solid bodycheck transfers a lot of energy - but a little penknife stab (no energy)to the right artery will kill you
Now having said that, I shoot a fast heavy whizzum cause I like both a big hole and the associated energy - but like previously mentioned, its all in the shot placement... but the energy does give one the added edge IMHO...

food for thought and a great discussion!
Chris
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom