My thinking for a first hunting rifle
- Thread starter afish29
- Start date
How much elk hunting have you done?got much background in it?
How 'bout you two take it to PM's & stop derailing this thread?
----------
NAA.
I still would prefer the Speer 120 Gold or the 100-125 Partition .RJ
Another Barnes bullet that’s supposed to be good in a Grendel is the 115 gr TAC-TX. I Think might be a GOOD. Creedmoor bullet also .RJ
I have loads to SHOOT made up But still have not shot the G rifle for a while - or Others - being on the FClass kick for a WHILE now. RJ
tactical lever
CGN frequent flyer
- Location
- Fox Creek, Alberta
Its not that complicated. Cavitation through organs that make them stop working kills.
A wide slow bullet like a 45-70 hard cast going slow enough to see it in the air kills fine. Does it need speed or energy? Nope.
The 223...I'd hunt elk with it with the right bullet. Its tougher with monos because they don't open wide enough. In that case yeah the heavier lead core fragmenting bullet combines wound width and depth.
The 77gr tmk is an arguably better killer than 44 mag.
But what I am saying is a mono opens up wide enough, goes deep enough and destroys tissue enough to kill well if its within the velocity window its designed for. "They need to be driven fast" is not true be because they are designed differently for different cartridges.
A bullet that loses a lot of itself in fragmentation needs to be heavy since its loss of weight changes its SD and its ability to penetrate.
This does not happen with larger caliber monos that open wide enough to damage more tissue than the 22 cals. Hqence momentum does not make the heavier lead coqred bullet advantageous at all. Maybe if you compare a 130gr lead core 30 cal to a 180gr lead core 30 cal.
How much physics have you done?
At couple more years of physics than you I suppose. Not counting the physics related courses I've taken after to qualify for employment. Lol! KE might matter on steel, but fluid dynamics are different. How many foot pounds a fly weight bullet is driven to is absolutely immaterial. If you had done some physics you'd know that a large part of understanding it, is proving it, and it may or may not go as expected.
I suppose you haven't heard of the Taylor knock-out factor? It's not a perfect system, but it does give a more accurate real world measure that naturally favors big bullets, as he developed it killing thousands of African animals.
The .44 Magnum is light for it, but it's been used out of a Blackhawk to stop a charging elephant. That's not happening with a .204. Or a .223!
I used to think that caliber restrictions were a bit silly, but apparently there's some folk with a limited understanding of how things work. Do you think it's some mistake that cape buffalo minimums are 9.3x62 or .375 H&H? Or to hunt bison in the Yukon, it's a minimum 180 gr. bullet? Going at at certain speed to hit the power level, and .308+ diameter too.
You seem like the kind of guy who bought/buys a lot of stuff from comic book advertisements.
Please film knocking over an elk with .223 body shot so we can all be "educated".
tactical lever
CGN frequent flyer
- Location
- Fox Creek, Alberta
I say the opposite. Had a Gunsite Scout in my hands on a fantastic sale some years back. Unfortunately I bought a different rifle and left the Ruger there.
I sold the other rifle not too long after, but I think I would've hung onto the scout.
Just mount the scope normally on it.
GOOD! Hahaha I'm happy to talk with someone who has an actual physics background and not someone who throws it out there and hasn't actually done any since high school 30 years ago. Pathfinder might think I was mocking you but he's wrong, I was looking for common ground lol. I've done several physics classes at both college and university level as well, so it can be an irk when people say "oh, so we ignore the laws of physics now". Jebus H. This is more something I think would be a lively fun convo over beers. Please feel free to reference anything you like.
That said I don't think you're tracking here RE physics whatsoever. The amount of KE needed depends on work done. Heavy, wide bullets have different wounding mechanisms than faster lighter bullets which are different from heavy, fast, prone to fragmenting bullets, which are different from....you get the idea.
The attributes that matter for each, like weight, width, velocity etc are not going to be the same, when it comes to producing their wound trail. Which will also be different. This is why a heavy for caliber 223 bullet like a 77gr TMK which causes a 13" long very wide wound track before slimming down to the width of the projectile much wider and bigger than that from a 405gr 45/70 hard cast or hollow point in the lungs of an animal, is simply comparing two different mechanisms. You often bring this back to varmint bullets, which I have no interest in discussing. A good 77+ grain 223 bullet (not all) can produce wounds you'd never guess came from a 22 cal rifle and are honestly probably too much for deer at ranges within 150+ yards, unless you really wanna mangle some meat. For my tastes at least.
The Taylor KO factor is about braining things. I agree its a relevant measure within its use, but it has to be pointed out, its use is actually punching a giant animal hard enough to make its brain blink and crash the ol' CPU. Outside of that context? Not sure how much it applies. Certainly a lot less if you're shooting something through the chest broadside. A 400 grain solid of .416 cal may not be the quickest and most effective killer in that case but I'm sure it impresses the 3-4 small trees behind the animal, too! lol.
I'mma say that again. You're referencing a metric designed for measuring the ability to immediately stop the giant brain of an animal behind a very thick, honeycombed bone skull that can actually turn and stop the bullets we're talking about using in North American big game. It has near zero relevance in this discussion. And yep, I've read Taylor's book.
44 magnum on elephant: Was it a shot to the brain? If so, once again, no relevance in killing medium to large Canadian game by shooting it in the chest and damaging enough heart/lung tissue to make a fast kill. But if we're talkin "bust through a big ol animal skull and scramble its egg enough"....yeah lol.
Otherwise I'm pretty sure we can agree that 44 mag and 223 are both just lame choices when it comes to body shooting a several ton animal charging you lol.
Caliber restrictions in Africa....again, we're talking African dangerous game hunting on animals that weigh one to several tons and have much different physiology and temperment than game animals here in Canada.
If I buy things based on comic book ads, perhaps you buy things based on Capstick novels? lol. Put the African books back on the shelf, Bwana!
Elk and 223...well, I talk with people who do it pretty reguarly, and I have videos, in my inbox right now, of moose being dropped very quickly with 88gr ELD-M and similar bullets from CGN members. If they want to chime in, they can feel free.
Perhaps there is video in the Rokslide thread dedicated to killing big game with the 223. Its over 314 pages now lol.
ht tps://rokslide.com/forums/threads/223-for-bear-deer-elk-and-moose.130488/
When it comes to North American animal physiology, I should point out I study some large ungulates for a living and have been paid to both control hunt them and do post-mortem examinations on them, take bone, organ, tissue samples, count parasites on and in etc as part of studies. Not just look at em. I have a pretty fair professional opinion of what makes em tick and what it takes to stop one from ticking. Including how much tissue, bone etc is in the way from different angles. They certainly ain't cape buff or elephants.
That said I don't think you're tracking here RE physics whatsoever. The amount of KE needed depends on work done. Heavy, wide bullets have different wounding mechanisms than faster lighter bullets which are different from heavy, fast, prone to fragmenting bullets, which are different from....you get the idea.
The attributes that matter for each, like weight, width, velocity etc are not going to be the same, when it comes to producing their wound trail. Which will also be different. This is why a heavy for caliber 223 bullet like a 77gr TMK which causes a 13" long very wide wound track before slimming down to the width of the projectile much wider and bigger than that from a 405gr 45/70 hard cast or hollow point in the lungs of an animal, is simply comparing two different mechanisms. You often bring this back to varmint bullets, which I have no interest in discussing. A good 77+ grain 223 bullet (not all) can produce wounds you'd never guess came from a 22 cal rifle and are honestly probably too much for deer at ranges within 150+ yards, unless you really wanna mangle some meat. For my tastes at least.
The Taylor KO factor is about braining things. I agree its a relevant measure within its use, but it has to be pointed out, its use is actually punching a giant animal hard enough to make its brain blink and crash the ol' CPU. Outside of that context? Not sure how much it applies. Certainly a lot less if you're shooting something through the chest broadside. A 400 grain solid of .416 cal may not be the quickest and most effective killer in that case but I'm sure it impresses the 3-4 small trees behind the animal, too! lol.
I'mma say that again. You're referencing a metric designed for measuring the ability to immediately stop the giant brain of an animal behind a very thick, honeycombed bone skull that can actually turn and stop the bullets we're talking about using in North American big game. It has near zero relevance in this discussion. And yep, I've read Taylor's book.
44 magnum on elephant: Was it a shot to the brain? If so, once again, no relevance in killing medium to large Canadian game by shooting it in the chest and damaging enough heart/lung tissue to make a fast kill. But if we're talkin "bust through a big ol animal skull and scramble its egg enough"....yeah lol.
Otherwise I'm pretty sure we can agree that 44 mag and 223 are both just lame choices when it comes to body shooting a several ton animal charging you lol.
Caliber restrictions in Africa....again, we're talking African dangerous game hunting on animals that weigh one to several tons and have much different physiology and temperment than game animals here in Canada.
If I buy things based on comic book ads, perhaps you buy things based on Capstick novels? lol. Put the African books back on the shelf, Bwana!
Elk and 223...well, I talk with people who do it pretty reguarly, and I have videos, in my inbox right now, of moose being dropped very quickly with 88gr ELD-M and similar bullets from CGN members. If they want to chime in, they can feel free.
Perhaps there is video in the Rokslide thread dedicated to killing big game with the 223. Its over 314 pages now lol.
ht tps://rokslide.com/forums/threads/223-for-bear-deer-elk-and-moose.130488/
When it comes to North American animal physiology, I should point out I study some large ungulates for a living and have been paid to both control hunt them and do post-mortem examinations on them, take bone, organ, tissue samples, count parasites on and in etc as part of studies. Not just look at em. I have a pretty fair professional opinion of what makes em tick and what it takes to stop one from ticking. Including how much tissue, bone etc is in the way from different angles. They certainly ain't cape buff or elephants.
Last edited:
tactical lever
CGN frequent flyer
- Location
- Fox Creek, Alberta
GOOD! Hahaha I'm happy to talk with someone who has an actual physics background and not someone who throws it out there and hasn't actually done any since high school 30 years ago. Pathfinder might think I was mocking you but he's wrong, I was looking for common ground lol. I've done several physics classes at both college and university level as well, so it can be an irk when people say "oh, so we ignore the laws of physics now". Jebus H. This is more something I think would be a lively fun convo over beers. Please feel free to reference anything you like.
That said I don't think you're tracking here RE physics whatsoever. The amount of KE needed depends on work done. Heavy, wide bullets have different wounding mechanisms than faster lighter bullets which are different from heavy, fast, prone to fragmenting bullets, which are different from....you get the idea.
The attributes that matter for each, like weight, width, velocity etc are not going to be the same, when it comes to producing their wound trail. Which will also be different. This is why a heavy for caliber 223 bullet like a 77gr TMK which causes a 13" long very wide wound track before slimming down to the width of the projectile much wider and bigger than that from a 405gr 45/70 hard cast or hollow point in the lungs of an animal, is simply comparing two different mechanisms. You often bring this back to varmint bullets, which I have no interest in discussing. A good 77+ grain 223 bullet (not all) can produce wounds you'd never guess came from a 22 cal rifle and are honestly probably too much for deer at ranges within 150+ yards, unless you really wanna mangle some meat. For my tastes at least.
The Taylor KO factor is about braining things. I agree its a relevant measure within its use, but it has to be pointed out, its use is actually punching a giant animal hard enough to make its brain blink and crash the ol' CPU. Outside of that context? Not sure how much it applies. Certainly a lot less if you're shooting something through the chest broadside. A 400 grain solid of .416 cal may not be the quickest and most effective killer in that case but I'm sure it impresses the 3-4 small trees behind the animal, too! lol.
I'mma say that again. You're referencing a metric designed for measuring the ability to immediately stop the giant brain of an animal behind a very thick, honeycombed bone skull that can actually turn and stop the bullets we're talking about using in North American big game. It has near zero relevance in this discussion. And yep, I've read Taylor's book.
44 magnum on elephant: Was it a shot to the brain? If so, once again, no relevance in killing medium to large Canadian game by shooting it in the chest and damaging enough heart/lung tissue to make a fast kill. But if we're talkin "bust through a big ol animal skull and scramble its egg enough"....yeah lol.
Otherwise I'm pretty sure we can agree that 44 mag and 223 are both just lame choices when it comes to body shooting a several ton animal charging you lol.
Caliber restrictions in Africa....again, we're talking African dangerous game hunting on animals that weigh one to several tons and have much different physiology and temperment than game animals here in Canada.
If I buy things based on comic book ads, perhaps you buy things based on Capstick novels? lol. Put the African books back on the shelf, Bwana!
Elk and 223...well, I talk with people who do it pretty reguarly, and I have videos, in my inbox right now, of moose being dropped very quickly with 88gr ELD-M and similar bullets from CGN members. If they want to chime in, they can feel free.
Perhaps there is video in the Rokslide thread dedicated to killing big game with the 223. Its over 314 pages now lol.
ht tps://rokslide.com/forums/threads/223-for-bear-deer-elk-and-moose.130488/
When it comes to North American animal physiology, I should point out I study some large ungulates for a living and have been paid to both control hunt them and do post-mortem examinations on them, take bone, organ, tissue samples, count parasites on and in etc as part of studies. Not just look at em. I have a pretty fair professional opinion of what makes em tick and what it takes to stop one from ticking. Including how much tissue, bone etc is in the way from different angles. They certainly ain't cape buff or elephants.
Shhh! You had me at "beers"!
I did think you were being condescending (that means talking down to someone) there, but it's all good
I presume it was a brain shot, as I know of no other shot that will turn the lights out on an elephant quick enough, because let's face it, nothing shoulder fired rises much above the level of "Lilliputian" in relation to such large animals. A bull can top 20 000 lbs, so I feel it's fairly unlikely that any rifle can shock it enough for a "knock down" by body shot.
I was not speaking of varmint bullets at all. No value in comparing cartridges while using wildly differing bullet construction. And actually the .204 Ruger is equal to the .44 Magnum by kinetic energy. The .44 Mag might not be the be-all to end-all in the world of big game cartridges, but it has killed big game all over the world which the tiny, but speedy .204 cannot match.
You know there's a difference, yet you will not acknowledge it... Doesn't matter the scale of animal or cartridge; I deliberately picked polar opposites to highlight the disparity and make it obvious. But yet, failing, I persevere.
And I also included Yukon woods buffalo. Most of NA has caliber restrictions for big game.
And I suspect that you should be able to articulate it quite well if you applied your considerable education.
Think of it thusly: You fire a bullet out of a barrel which then travels the distance to the target through a fluid exerting a resistive force exponential to the speed of the projectile. Whereupon striking the target, the bullet encounters a mixture of solids and roughly 75% fluid content which is non compressible, about 800 times as dense as the first fluid, and has about 100 times the drag resistance.
Were a fella to graph it out, you'd see an inverse bell curve of energy expended over distance traveled or energy over time. A fast, lightweight bullet uses up a great deal of energy to overcome the initial resistance and the energy rapidly drops with less needed to penetrate as the bullet slows.
Comparatively speaking the high speed round has traded mass for velocity. On paper KE is the same, but it loses a great deal of velocity initially, and the light bullets energy quickly drops as it encounters fluid resistance. On the other hand the heavy, slow bullet encounters less early resistance, and loses a lower percentage of energy in the early stage of penetration. Thus driving deeper.
nicely put fellow pureblood
then there's the .223 thread on rokslide where they run 77gr tmk's up to 400 yard elk and get their 16-19" of penetration with maybe 29 gr of bullet scraps to be found and an ugly explosion of damage in that window
agree that for construction type there are windows of impact velocity that make sense to have most predictable window of performance, as in I think the 6.5 grendel 123gr eld-m is perfectly matched for hunting as it's in that window perfectly from muzzle to 500 but the 108gr 6mm arc pushes that window out to 200-700 yards and therefore like all 6mm vs 6.5's becomes 'niche'...targets, long range, some hunting, I feel the first 200 yards then become deer favour as you already have a lighter pill that's going to shed much quicker, where you could expect the same 18-22" window from a grendel from muzzle to 500 and recover more bullet than the .223 example starts with lol, if you recover a bullet, most broadside stuff I've shot and even quartering deer to 420 have been exits, you need a steep quartering or much larger animal to recover these .25 sd eld-m in the grendel muzzle to 500 window
terminal ballistics is fun, how fast we lose the sd, for construction type, for class of game...we subjectively make our choices and feel our way through it all, one day perhaps we will focus on finished bullets and start coming up with the numbers we aren't using yet to build terminal ballistics calculators that can rival our inflight ballistics calculators and these discussions would become super short
sectional density reduction rate (sdrr), energy reduction rate (err), inches of penetration to apply those over, possible spin rates one day to show the expected internal bomb or lack thereof in case of delayed controlled expansion options or solids?, etc. the way I see it we are at least a quarter century behind where we should be on the subject, we can lob bullets into milk jugs at 2 miles now with our inflight calculators and understandings but terminally we go 60 pages deep often trying to objectify the subjective
I dream of the day the calculators and standards come so one can choose the best coyote loads for a given cartridge, ie; 35 gr Berger from .204 as a benchmark performance, the perfect grenade for that critter like 6-7" penetration with 30 ft/lbs per inch, to when someone is asking about their alaskan hunt we suggest they should be looking for 24-30" penetration with ~80 ft/lbs per inch dump or Africa aiming for 3'+ and 100 ft/lbs per inch...just hypothetical numbers I'm throwing out but someday we will be able to speak like this perhaps instead of 'just throw a 180 out of 30 and you Robert is your fathers brother'.
wouldn't it be nice to objectively see why the 270 win 130 flattens the goat and the 416 just poked an unimpressive hole? or why bell could hit the brain pan of elephants with 6.5 man licker and 160 gr solids vs the 700 nitro with it's nearly 10,000 ft/lbs energy that sometimes only knocks them out (Taylor ko factor flies out the window imo)...the sledgehammer vs the spear, same weight, same impact velocity, these examples don't change their sd so no fancy math but gives the visual, the sd of the spear is through the roof and goes through critter, the hammer just pizzes it off, what we do is a bunch of stuff in the middle of that lol
then there's the .223 thread on rokslide where they run 77gr tmk's up to 400 yard elk and get their 16-19" of penetration with maybe 29 gr of bullet scraps to be found and an ugly explosion of damage in that window
agree that for construction type there are windows of impact velocity that make sense to have most predictable window of performance, as in I think the 6.5 grendel 123gr eld-m is perfectly matched for hunting as it's in that window perfectly from muzzle to 500 but the 108gr 6mm arc pushes that window out to 200-700 yards and therefore like all 6mm vs 6.5's becomes 'niche'...targets, long range, some hunting, I feel the first 200 yards then become deer favour as you already have a lighter pill that's going to shed much quicker, where you could expect the same 18-22" window from a grendel from muzzle to 500 and recover more bullet than the .223 example starts with lol, if you recover a bullet, most broadside stuff I've shot and even quartering deer to 420 have been exits, you need a steep quartering or much larger animal to recover these .25 sd eld-m in the grendel muzzle to 500 window
terminal ballistics is fun, how fast we lose the sd, for construction type, for class of game...we subjectively make our choices and feel our way through it all, one day perhaps we will focus on finished bullets and start coming up with the numbers we aren't using yet to build terminal ballistics calculators that can rival our inflight ballistics calculators and these discussions would become super short
sectional density reduction rate (sdrr), energy reduction rate (err), inches of penetration to apply those over, possible spin rates one day to show the expected internal bomb or lack thereof in case of delayed controlled expansion options or solids?, etc. the way I see it we are at least a quarter century behind where we should be on the subject, we can lob bullets into milk jugs at 2 miles now with our inflight calculators and understandings but terminally we go 60 pages deep often trying to objectify the subjective
I dream of the day the calculators and standards come so one can choose the best coyote loads for a given cartridge, ie; 35 gr Berger from .204 as a benchmark performance, the perfect grenade for that critter like 6-7" penetration with 30 ft/lbs per inch, to when someone is asking about their alaskan hunt we suggest they should be looking for 24-30" penetration with ~80 ft/lbs per inch dump or Africa aiming for 3'+ and 100 ft/lbs per inch...just hypothetical numbers I'm throwing out but someday we will be able to speak like this perhaps instead of 'just throw a 180 out of 30 and you Robert is your fathers brother'.
wouldn't it be nice to objectively see why the 270 win 130 flattens the goat and the 416 just poked an unimpressive hole? or why bell could hit the brain pan of elephants with 6.5 man licker and 160 gr solids vs the 700 nitro with it's nearly 10,000 ft/lbs energy that sometimes only knocks them out (Taylor ko factor flies out the window imo)...the sledgehammer vs the spear, same weight, same impact velocity, these examples don't change their sd so no fancy math but gives the visual, the sd of the spear is through the roof and goes through critter, the hammer just pizzes it off, what we do is a bunch of stuff in the middle of that lol
Last edited:
Shhh! You had me at "beers"!
I did think you were being condescending (that means talking down to someone) there, but it's all good
I presume it was a brain shot, as I know of no other shot that will turn the lights out on an elephant quick enough, because let's face it, nothing shoulder fired rises much above the level of "Lilliputian" in relation to such large animals. A bull can top 20 000 lbs, so I feel it's fairly unlikely that any rifle can shock it enough for a "knock down" by body shot.
I was not speaking of varmint bullets at all. No value in comparing cartridges while using wildly differing bullet construction. And actually the .204 Ruger is equal to the .44 Magnum by kinetic energy. The .44 Mag might not be the be-all to end-all in the world of big game cartridges, but it has killed big game all over the world which the tiny, but speedy .204 cannot match.
You know there's a difference, yet you will not acknowledge it... Doesn't matter the scale of animal or cartridge; I deliberately picked polar opposites to highlight the disparity and make it obvious. But yet, failing, I persevere.
And I also included Yukon woods buffalo. Most of NA has caliber restrictions for big game.
And I suspect that you should be able to articulate it quite well if you applied your considerable education.
Think of it thusly: You fire a bullet out of a barrel which then travels the distance to the target through a fluid exerting a resistive force exponential to the speed of the projectile. Whereupon striking the target, the bullet encounters a mixture of solids and roughly 75% fluid content which is non compressible, about 800 times as dense as the first fluid, and has about 100 times the drag resistance.
Were a fella to graph it out, you'd see an inverse bell curve of energy expended over distance traveled or energy over time. A fast, lightweight bullet uses up a great deal of energy to overcome the initial resistance and the energy rapidly drops with less needed to penetrate as the bullet slows.
Comparatively speaking the high speed round has traded mass for velocity. On paper KE is the same, but it loses a great deal of velocity initially, and the light bullets energy quickly drops as it encounters fluid resistance. On the other hand the heavy, slow bullet encounters less early resistance, and loses a lower percentage of energy in the early stage of penetration. Thus driving deeper.
Honestly it feels like I have explained it, several times. I'm not sure how to make it clearer at this point.
Blakeyboy is doing a very good job of explaining how proper bullet weight and construction relative to diameter can do more than enough damage out up to 500 yards to lay out big game, which he also has, and make anything bigger simply unneccesary.
Its a mix of bullet size, construction, SD, how the SD changes. Looking at any one component therein does not tell the story.
Honestly within 200 yards I'd rather shoot deer or moose with a 30-06 and tougher constructed bullet because they do LESS damage than the 77gr TMK or the 123gr ELD-M lol
Perhaps, I think my issue was that I perceived him as saying that bigger calibers will kill better than say the 77r TMK, 123gr ELD-M and are needed on big game, etc which I strongly disagree with. Especially if tougher bullet construction comes into play.
Once you reach a certain degree of blowing the heck out of something inside, I am good with it lol.
gotcha, betting the assumptions are more similar than not, just how one words it but understands it same, agree, bigger caliber with crap sd and construction for game intended will easily get outside of a good performance window for game intended, there's more to the subject than just a couple points like caliber...so that I agree with, he's right and worded it great on that sd retention and exponential increase of sd reduction with higher velocity, I think it's similar on inflight ballistics also correct? been a minute since I looked at it but like hot water freezes faster than cold, faster bullets are quicker to slow than launching them slower, same idea on when swimming starts, and what we're talking about with construction type for impact velocities and sd reduction rates
and around we go with this subjective dumpster fire we call terminal ballistics lol, I think good inputs by all so far, the mass consciousness is growing the right direction
and around we go with this subjective dumpster fire we call terminal ballistics lol, I think good inputs by all so far, the mass consciousness is growing the right direction
