Forums
New posts
Search forums
What's new
Articles
Latest reviews
Author list
Classifieds
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles and first posts only
Search titles only
By:
New posts
Search forums
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Forums
Hunting
Long Range Hunting & Shooting
How Much energy is too little?
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="memtb" data-source="post: 3070043" data-attributes="member: 75451"><p>Just to attempt to clarify my stand on ft/lbs energy.</p><p></p><p> The OP was pertaining to ft/lbs energy, which has been a term used, IMO, incorrectly for many years. </p><p></p><p> I will continue to contest the term ft/lbs as incorrect, a misuse of the energy value of a projectile imparted upon a target….be it flesh or inanimate. And yes, today's modern bullets pushed at high velocities impart a lot of energy onto/into the target……it's just not ft/lbs energy.</p><p></p><p> I, in my original response, even presented a link to a good source of information debunking the use of the term ft/lbs……not energy. I even, though perhaps not the best form of discussion, in a later post stated that the tearing apart of vital organs with your bare hands will kill. There is still energy imparted upon the organ or material……just not ft/lbs.</p><p></p><p> My "heartburn" comes from the use of ft/lbs as an "end all" method/value to determine the potential lethality of a given cartridge, caliber, bullet, ect…..when there are and have been better terms/methods to describe the potential lethality of a given cartridge. Kinetic Energy or even the Taylor KO Values would be better descriptions of a bullets potential lethality.</p><p></p><p> So, I'm not a denier of energy…..only the use of ft/lbs energy as the method currently used in our firearm terminologies. memtb</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="memtb, post: 3070043, member: 75451"] Just to attempt to clarify my stand on ft/lbs energy. The OP was pertaining to ft/lbs energy, which has been a term used, IMO, incorrectly for many years. I will continue to contest the term ft/lbs as incorrect, a misuse of the energy value of a projectile imparted upon a target….be it flesh or inanimate. And yes, today’s modern bullets pushed at high velocities impart a lot of energy onto/into the target……it’s just not ft/lbs energy. I, in my original response, even presented a link to a good source of information debunking the use of the term ft/lbs……not energy. I even, though perhaps not the best form of discussion, in a later post stated that the tearing apart of vital organs with your bare hands will kill. There is still energy imparted upon the organ or material……just not ft/lbs. My “heartburn” comes from the use of ft/lbs as an “end all” method/value to determine the potential lethality of a given cartridge, caliber, bullet, ect…..when there are and have been better terms/methods to describe the potential lethality of a given cartridge. Kinetic Energy or even the Taylor KO Values would be better descriptions of a bullets potential lethality. So, I’m not a denier of energy…..only the use of ft/lbs energy as the method currently used in our firearm terminologies. memtb [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Forums
Hunting
Long Range Hunting & Shooting
How Much energy is too little?
Top