Heavy for caliber vs. high velocity monos

[FEENIX]

Right, I was just using extreme examples to make the point clearer. I was not saying that caliber size and bullet weight are not important, because they are, they just need to be appropriate for the type of game. And I'm talking about similar bullet types in each caliber. If you're talking about a 50 cal muzzle loader, or pistol bullet, that bullet is probably designed to expand and create a larger wound channel at slow velocity.

Some real life numbers:
A 22 cal 55 gr bullet has about 1535 ft-lbs energy at 3540 fps.
A 7mm 180 gr has about 1535 ft-lbs energy at 1960 fps.
A 338 cal 300 gr has about 1535 ft-lbs energy at 1520 fps.
A 50 cal 750 gr Amax has 1535 ft-lbs energy at 960 fps. Yes a well placed shot will kill most animals with that, but if you miss the vitals by an inch, good luck.
The 7mm and 338 are both good calibers for game such as elk, but so many people say that you want "x" amount of energy to kill. But both at 1500 ft-lbs energy, the 7mm bullet will perform and kill better than the heavier 338, simply because it has enough velocity for the bullet to do its job, I don't care if it's a 180 Berger or a 177 Hammer

If you present a piece of information for us to synthesize, please provide the POI ranges (see #109) to at least triangulate.

 

[memtb]

I think that many of you place far too much value on ft/lbs. energy! While it is certainly part of the equation....it's just a small part! There are many factors that contribute to a bullets ability to destroy the organs of an animal to hasten it's demise!

A 400 grain, non-expanding bullet from my handgun provides approximately 1745 ft/lbs. of "energy" at the muzzle!

A 55 grain bullet (expanding or otherwise) from a 22-250 cartridge provides approximately 1760 ft/ lbs of energy at the muzzle!

Several factors should be considered.....ft/lbs. is just a small, though not totally insignificant, part of the lethality equation!

If confronted with a very large, very hungry carnivore at point blank distance....which would you prefer to have in your hands? I'll take several feet of broken bones, tissue and organ damage over a wound channel of possibly 12".....I think the slow mover trumps the high velocity bullet, in this narrow parameter! memtb

 

[esshup]

I think that many of you place far too much value on ft/lbs. energy! While it is certainly part of the equation....it's just a small part! There are many factors that contribute to a bullets ability to destroy the organs of an animal to hasten it's demise!

A 400 grain, non-expanding bullet from my handgun provides approximately 1745 ft/lbs. of "energy" at the muzzle!

A 55 grain bullet (expanding or otherwise) from a 22-250 cartridge provides approximately 1760 ft/ lbs of energy at the muzzle!

Several factors should be considered.....ft/lbs. is just a small, though not totally insignificant, part of the lethality equation!

If confronted with a very large, very hungry carnivore at point blank distance....which would you prefer to have in your hands? I'll take several feet of broken bones, tissue and organ damage over a wound channel of possibly 12".....I think the slow mover trumps the high velocity bullet, in this narrow parameter! memtb

I'll take one bullet, any caliber, even .17 cal., in the brain. Lets not forget that bullet placement trumps everything. As long as the bullet can get to the CNS, that's all that really matters.

 

[memtb]

I'll take one bullet, any caliber, even .17 cal., in the brain. Lets not forget that bullet placement trumps everything. As long as the bullet can get to the CNS, that's all that really matters.

Assuming that you can get the bullet into the brain pan or CNS, a great plan....until you don't! memtb

 

[codyadams]

I'll take one bullet, any caliber, even .17 cal., in the brain. Lets not forget that bullet placement trumps everything. As long as the bullet can get to the CNS, that's all that really matters.

Unless your target animal is an elephant, hippo, cape Buffalo or similar, then a 17 simply won't penetrate enough.

As I stated in an earlier post, all things are relative and there is no one right answer. Well rounded knowledge in proper cartridge and projectile choice, in conjunction with firearm marksmanship and good judgement is what is generally needed. Whether your using a light fast 40 grain bullet to explode prairie dogs from a 22-250 at 300 yards, a slow heavy 290 grain cast bullet from a .44 carbine lever action to kill a timber elk at 50 yards, a fast and flat mono from a 7 mag to flatten a big mulie at 475 yards, a heavy 245 grain bullet from a 300 rum to kill a red stag at 1100 yards, or a 416 Taylor to drop a charging cape Buffalo at 45 yards and closing, they all are very different combos, and they are all appropriate, and many of them overlap to a certain extent. I wouldn't use the 44 carbine on the 1100 yard red stag, and I wouldn't use the 7 mag on the charging cape buffalo, reguardless of how good of a shot I am. Use good judgment and pick the right one, and you will have game down. Velocity does kill, if it didn't we would be throwing bullets by hand, but it also has to be considered against things like bullet weight, penetration needed, game choice, cartridge selection, range of your game, how much wind drift if longer distances come into play, minimum expansion velocity, frontal area of the bullet, vital zone size, and several other factors.

 

[dug]

Well that sums it up and now whats left to kick around in the thread now ? Lol

 

[FEENIX]

Unless your target animal is an elephant, hippo, cape Buffalo or similar, then a 17 simply won't penetrate enough.

As I stated in an earlier post, all things are relative and there is no one right answer. Well rounded knowledge in proper cartridge and projectile choice, in conjunction with firearm marksmanship and good judgement is what is generally needed. Whether your using a light fast 40 grain bullet to explode prairie dogs from a 22-250 at 300 yards, a slow heavy 290 grain cast bullet from a .44 carbine lever action to kill a timber elk at 50 yards, a fast and flat mono from a 7 mag to flatten a big mulie at 475 yards, a heavy 245 grain bullet from a 300 rum to kill a red stag at 1100 yards, or a 416 Taylor to drop a charging cape Buffalo at 45 yards and closing, they all are very different combos, and they are all appropriate, and many of them overlap to a certain extent. I wouldn't use the 44 carbine on the 1100 yard red stag, and I wouldn't use the 7 mag on the charging cape buffalo, reguardless of how good of a shot I am. Use good judgment and pick the right one, and you will have game down. Velocity does kill, if it didn't we would be throwing bullets by hand, but it also has to be considered against things like bullet weight, penetration needed, game choice, cartridge selection, range of your game, how much wind drift if longer distances come into play, minimum expansion velocity, frontal area of the bullet, vital zone size, and several other factors.

Agreed! Well said, Brother. Sometimes peeps try to make it a simple comparison, but the bottom-line, whether they like it or not, is more to it than what it appears, as you eloquently noted.

 

[Send it 284]

If there were ever a perfect thread for this meme..

 

[SammySTW]

I dont know if i agree with that. What am I missing? The 338 would have a greater effective range even if muzzle velocity for the 338 is slower. If both calibers were shoot at same velocity the difference is tremendous. Wouldn't your example mean the 22 cal would kill better than the 7mm and the 338? I understand velocities value, but somethings not right. Is this apples to apples? Or only relative to monos and velocity vs other? Or are you saying the 180 would kill better at the range where the 7mm reaches 1535lbs compared to the range where the 338 reaches 1535lbs. Trying to learn something here.

I'm not comparing effective ranges, that depends on the cartridge, BC, and muzzle velocity. A high BC cup and core bullet will have a farther effective range than a fast mono. I'm just talking about how impact velocity relates to a bullets terminal performance, and that energy isn't everything. Listen to the podcast, they know more than I do and they explain it better. The point is that energy isn't everything, velocity isn't everything, and caliber isn't everything. You have to have all 3. The fast 22 has the energy and velocity, but it's not going to get the job done because of bullet size and weight won't penetrate. The super slow 50 cal has the bullet size and weight, and energy, but its not going to get the job done because it doesn't have enough velocity, but it will have penetration.
If you are only concerned with killing effectiveness inside of 500 yards or so, the lighter faster mono probably wins, and can probably be considered a better all-purpose hunting bullet since 98% of your shots will be inside of that range.

 

[Goldengun]

I'm not comparing effective ranges, that depends on the cartridge, BC, and muzzle velocity. A high BC cup and core bullet will have a farther effective range than a fast mono. I'm just talking about how impact velocity relates to a bullets terminal performance, and that energy isn't everything. Listen to the podcast, they know more than I do and they explain it better. The point is that energy isn't everything, velocity isn't everything, and caliber isn't everything. You have to have all 3. The fast 22 has the energy and velocity, but it's not going to get the job done because of bullet size and weight won't penetrate. The super slow 50 cal has the bullet size and weight, and energy, but its not going to get the job done because it doesn't have enough velocity, but it will have penetration.
If you are only concerned with killing effectiveness inside of 500 yards or so, the lighter faster mono probably wins, and can probably be considered a better all-purpose hunting bullet since 98% of your shots will be inside of that range.

I agree with what your saying and wasn't trying to indicate that energy is more important, as it is a by-product of velocity and weight and BC. Trying to understand if a faster and lighter bullet kills more effectively, all things being equal except weight and BC, generally speaking(ie, does a 7mag shooting 120's kill better at 200 yards than a 7mag shooting 170's at 200 yards does? What role does bullet type play in this if any? I don't dispute the argument for speed as it relates to flat shooting and point of aim out to a specific distance either. I like zeroing at a point where my bullet neither rises above or falls below 3" out to 300yds. I'm not very good at range estimation so this gives me a little more room before i have to grab the range finder, and usually i have time for that if their that far away. I will try to listen to podcast and appreciate your responses.

 

[chris ross]

I'm shooting the 169 HH at 3270 in my .28 nosler. I like the speed, but I can notice the lack of energy out around 700 yards for sure. The 195 Berger's at 3030fps swing a plate better at 1000 than the HH's do at 700. But I really like that extra speed for say, around 500 yards. If only they had a better BC .

I'm working up loads on my new 28 Nosler . I'm using Berger 190 Hybrid Targets with RL 33. I'm trying to hold them between 3000- 3050 fps, hoping to keep a little more life on the barrel.

 

[Paladin300]

My personal experiences i love light fast mono bullets 300 yards and under. 130s in 30 cal and 120 in 7mm but for long range shooting I want some weight and ballistic coefficients.

Same! Light fast bullets do great and carry great energy to about 400 yards, but beyond that I prefer the big boys.

 

[Paladin300]

Why choose one over the other when you can have the best of both worlds. 30 cal 198 grain Flatliners (Warner tool) solids .862 BC 3000 fps 300 WM 2300+ yards supersonic, 1500+lbs to 1200 yards.

 

[19 Badger]

Why choose one over the other when you can have the best of both worlds. 30 cal 198 grain Flatliners (Warner tool) solids .862 BC 3000 fps 300 WM 2000 yards

Are they a hunting bullet?