Larger diameter bullets allow more room for error?

[FIGJAM]

Why don't the ballistic apps list momentum? They always have velocity and energy.

 

[Elkeater]

Use what you want. Whatever you are most accurate and confident with. If you are shooting a particular type of critter with a particular gun with a particular bullet at a particular speed and getting the results you want by all means use it and don't worry about what other people think. Just make sure you are killing things as fast as you possibly can while hopefully doing as little meat damage as possible. But Please whatever you do use enough gun to get the job done ethically and if you find yourself not getting quick ethical kills please reevaluate what you are doing. The "you" in this case isn't aimed at anyone in particular.

Now as to the question of a 150 gr .264 bullet and a 150gr .308 bullet arriving at the target with the same amount of energy having one bullet kill better than the other well....

Maybe one would maybe one wouldn't but I doubt providing equal placement that any critter would notice.

 

[Varminator 911]

This really isn't worth debating. Hundreds of yrs experience killing large animals says that large caliber bullets kill large animals better than small caliber bullets. No one in their right mind hunts elephants, cape buffalo, and similar animals with a 264. The 264 is great for deer sized game, and adequate/marginal depending on who you listen to for elk. But it's no 338 and don't show up at a brown bear hunt with a 264. Most guides will say no way.

 

[FIGJAM]

This really isn't worth debating. Hundreds of yrs experience killing large animals says that large caliber bullets kill large animals better than small caliber bullets. No one in their right mind hunts elephants, cape buffalo, and similar animals with a 264. The 264 is great for deer sized game, and adequate/marginal for elk. But it's no 338 and don't show up at a brown bear hunt with a 264. Most guides will say no way.

First off, we aren't talking about elephants and cape buffalo are we? Also, That statement is being ignorant to the fact that there have been significant advancements in bullet construction and cartridges isn't it?

 

[Varminator 911]

We are talking elk right? They are big animals that take a lot of killing.

Everything that's been mentioned plays a part in killing efficiency. Velocity does kill. But only if the resulting energy is delivered to the vital organs. When you rely on velocity bullet performance can and does become erratic. It's well known that cup and core bullets penetrate less as velocity increases past a certain point, often above 2000-2400 fps. This is because the bullet expands rapidly at high velocity or even disintegrates. The frontal area increases, bullet weight decreases, and penetration stops. A 220 swift at 4000 fps can be deadly on deer but on elk the penetration often won't be adequate to reach the vitals.

So if we could shoot a small bullet like a 140 gn 264 at 4,000 or 5,000 fps it's performance on big game might become very erratic depending on bullet construction. Get it into the lungs/heart and it would be deadly. If it blows up on the shoulder you've got a wounded animal.

 

[shaughn]

The momentum measure is more suited to the big heavies, bullets that aren't so reliant on expansion to do damage...a 900 gr .622 diameter bullet at a MV 1950 from the 600 Nitro Express has historical evidence that even with an off the mark brain/head shot on an Elephant would still knock it down..ME was about 7600 ft lbs...the Ftlbs measure is just a way to quantify the modern expanding bullet which relies on mass, velocity and expansion to do damage...a .264 bullet expands to .70 cal..while the .622 diameter bullet won't shrink and based on how the bullet was built at the time, probably won't expand either and unless it strikes something solid...it is still going.

Both are subjective measures....using different means to quantify bullet performance

 

[Alibiiv]

So I have heard this said multiple times on multiple threads. Do larger diameter bullets really allow more room for error?

I am genuinely curious what everybody's opinion is. Lets talk elk and deer calibers, no need to bring up the 50 BMG.

For example, do you guys believe bullets in 308 expands the kill zone in a game animal vs a 264 or 284?

I am not sure I buy into it...what are your thoughts?

*I edited this to take out specific cartridges and focus on bullet diameter. Trying to avoid cartridge bias

Hi FIGJAM, well you've picked a hot one here!! We're talking.264 , 7mm and.30 cal, all Holy Grails!!! How many posts!!????

 

[FIGJAM]

Hi FIGJAM, well you've picked a hot one here!! We're talking.264 , 7mm and.30 cal, all Holy Grails!!! How many posts!!????

Lol - people keep trying to bring the 338 and 50 cals into it too.

 

[FIGJAM]

The momentum measure is more suited to the big heavies, bullets that aren't so reliant on expansion to do damage...a 900 gr .622 diameter bullet at a MV 1950 from the 600 Nitro Express has historical evidence that even with an off the mark brain/head shot on an Elephant would still knock it down..ME was about 7600 ft lbs...the Ftlbs measure is just a way to quantify the modern expanding bullet which relies on mass, velocity and expansion to do damage...a .264 bullet expands to .70 cal..while the .622 diameter bullet won't shrink and based on how the bullet was built at the time, probably won't expand either and unless it strikes something solid...it is still going.

Both are subjective measures....using different means to quantify bullet performance

That makes sense to me. Thanks for the explanation

 

[Alibiiv]

I'm thinking that there's three variables that have to be concidered to make a yes or no here. One is bullet design FMJ vs non monolithic, weight and speed of the bullet. I believe that all three calibers, with all three having the same sectional density, same bullet design and speed, all three ought to give similar results???

 

[Alibiiv]

And now I'm thinking "maybe not "!! Thanks FIGJAM, good job

 

[257Tony]

This whole discussion reminds of the 1/2 ton vs 3/4 ton pick up argument. 3/4 ton owners think their trucks can tow literally anything, and that a 1/2 ton is maybe, barely adequate for a single place ATV trailer. They fail to realize that todays 1/2 tons are far more capable than the 3/4 ton trucks of yesteryear.

Fast 6.5's with high BC bullets are todays 1/2 ton truck. Far more capable than most people give them credit for.

 

[Varminator 911]

Yes 338 because that's what's definitively better than 264. The differences between 264/284/308 are real but not huge. Bullet size, weight, and momentum are more reliable factors in determining bullet performance than velocity. The question was which allows more room for error. That's size over speed. Size doesn't change with distance. Velocity is variable with distance and velocity has a huge impact on bullet expansion and terminal ballistics, ie how well it penetrates and kills.

 

[FIGJAM]

I own 1 6.5 right now, it's a 260 Rem. I own a few 300 mags and a 7mm RM. I only bring this up because I don't want everybody to think I am a big 6.5 supporter...having said that, the more research I do, the more I am liking them. Funny part is, its a lot of the statements like there is no replacement for displacement and larger diameter bullets allow for larger margin of error, that motivated my research. There was a time I would have blindly agreed with those statements...now I am not so sure I do.

Also - For the sake of this whole thread we should just assume proper shot placement and bullet selection....actually lets assume mediocre shot placement since we are talking about compensating for the imperfect shot.

That being said I am feeling like energy is king not bullet diameter and if anything is going to compensate for any amount of error I would say its energy not bullet diameter (bullets construction being equal) maybe I am crazy