WildRose
Well-Known Member
Ahh, misread it. I was using a 200gr bullet in my example.What? 0grs at any velocity is going to produce ZERO energy. M x V^2 when M = 0 is still 0.
Yes, zero would give you zero.
Ahh, misread it. I was using a 200gr bullet in my example.What? 0grs at any velocity is going to produce ZERO energy. M x V^2 when M = 0 is still 0.
Yes, i understand physics. But, when it comes to large (and especially dangerous game) there is more at play than simply foot pounds of energy. I trust the words of people who hunt dangerous game regularly, e.g. Craig Boddington & Phil Shoemaker (to name a couple), and wider heavier bullets at a given level of kinetic energy simply "put down" large game faster than their smaller bullets at the same (or similar) level of kinetic energy. Case in point: if you had a 1,000 pound kodiak brown bear charging you from 50 yards, would you prefer a 6.5x300 Weatherby (~3,500 ft/lbs energy) or a 45-70 (also ~ 3,500 ft/lbs energy w/ certain loads)? I know which one i'd prefer, and it ain't the weatherby. This is where Taylor Knock Out factor comes into play. One exception (at least w/ regards to the Big Bears) is the 30-06 loaded with 220 Grain Nosler Partitions. Phil Shoemaker said this load really punches far above it's weight class in terms of penetration and killing power on the big bears.The easiest way to get more energy on target is to increase the velocity, not the diameter of the projectile.
M X V2=Energy. In English, it is the velocity which is squared not the Mass.
The major concern with dangerous game is deep penetration because their vitals can be very deep which is why generally solids are the choice rather than expanding cup and core bullets.Yes, i understand physics. But, when it comes to large (and especially dangerous game) there is more at play than simply foot pounds of energy. I trust the words of people who hunt dangerous game regularly, e.g. Craig Boddington & Phil Shoemaker (to name a couple), and wider heavier bullets at a given level of kinetic energy simply "put down" large game faster than their smaller bullets at the same (or similar) level of kinetic energy. Case in point: if you had a 1,000 pound kodiak brown bear charging you from 50 yards, would you prefer a 6.5x300 Weatherby (~3,500 ft/lbs energy) or a 45-70 (also ~ 3,500 ft/lbs energy w/ certain loads)? I know which one i'd prefer, and it ain't the weatherby. This is where Taylor Knock Out factor comes into play. One exception (at least w/ regards to the Big Bears) is the 30-06 loaded with 220 Grain Nosler Partitions. Phil Shoemaker said this load really punches far above it's weight class in terms of penetration and killing power on the big bears.
Yep a freight train is a lot harder to stop than a light car. Momentum.The major concern with dangerous game is deep penetration because their vitals can be very deep which is why generally solids are the choice rather than expanding cup and core bullets.
Momentum comes into play in that equation and it simply takes more resistance to stop a heavier projectile vs a light one.
Even in those cases you're hoping to transfer as much of the energy as possible to the animal from the bullet so that it will drive as deeply as possible.
With a lighter bullet you end up with a dangerous possibility of the bullet stopping before it ever gets to the vitals especially on the largest game such as Rhino, Buff, Elephant and Hippo.
For that energy to do you any good it first has to get to structures it can interrupt such as pelvis, shoulders, heart, lungs, and liver and that requires a good bit of momentum.
yeah, thats what i was thinking, waiting to see if someone with the knowledge wanted to qauntify that relationship with facts!I'm no mathematician but I think you'll find there is not a direct 1:1 relationship but a logarithmic relationship between the two.
Pull up load data for any round you choose that includes both velocity and energy and look at how they both increase or decrease proportionally.
Well there's a number of online ballistic calculators you can use to compute it using different velocities and bullet weights.yeah, thats what i was thinking, waiting to see if someone with the knowledge wanted to qauntify that relationship with facts!
You reduced the velocity by 100fps and increased the mass by only 10gr.3000(fps) x 3000(fps) x 150(gr) = 1,350,000,000(before conversion) or roughly 2,997 ft. lbs.
2900(fps) x 2900(fps) x 160(gr) = 1,345,600,000(before conversion) or roughly 2,988 ft. lbs.
Based on this overly simple example I don't think there is much difference (neither being more important than the other) if any between velocity and mass as its overall impact to energy. This difference doesn't account for the value relationship between velocity/energy as compared to the value relationship between mass/energy.
What is obvious to us all is there is a counter-balance relationship between velocity and mass, as one goes up and the other down, energy can remain the same, if the correct relationship is maintained. I don't know what the correct relationship is. If we have the correct values of velocity and mass as they relate to the energy equation will the counterbalance always be equally offset (meaning velocity and mass have an equal bearing on energy output).???
Keep in mind I failed algebra in high school and the "first" time I took it in college!!
I know we all run these calculations all the time, it shows 100fps is not equal to 10 grains(10:1), relative to energy output, but close. What "I" think it shows is that velocity and mass are relatively if not absolutely equal in their relations to energy output at the barrel. Pick your poison, they both have benefits after the barrel, and a whole new group of inputs and arguments.You reduced the velocity by 100fps and increased the mass by only 10gr.
View attachment 345814
View attachment 345815
The increase in velocity shows an expected much higher impact on energy over simply increasing the mass.
View attachment 345816
View attachment 345817
Bullet Energy Calculator (Foot Pounds)
This reloading article provides a ballistic calculator that helps you compare different weight bullets, at any velocity, to see which one will hit harder.larrywillis.com
10gr=1/15th of the massI know we all run these calculations all the time, it shows 100fps is not equal to 10 grains(10:1), relative to energy output, but close. What "I" think it shows is that velocity and mass are relatively if not absolutely equal in their relations to energy output at the barrel. Pick your poison, they both have benefits after the barrel, and a whole new group of inputs and arguments.
Wait, isn't 100 fps = 1/30th?10gr=1/15th of the mass
100fps=1/300th of the velocity.
Not exactly apples to apples.
Good catch, my fat fingers got me again. I'll fix that.Wait, isn't 100 fps = 1/30th?