Help Support Long Range Hunting Forum
The opinions are so varied on the energy thing it's almost laughable. According to a chart in a Lymans reloading manual, my 220 swift doesn't have enough energy at 100 yards to kill a woodchuck!. I've shot deer at over 500 with it and killed em deader'n a stick. So many things come in. The whole match bullet thing is funny too. The main reason companies don't want people shooting game with match bullets is because there's nothing left to eat, not because they won't kill. They kill stuff a lot better. Anyone who has shot a deer with an Amax 22 or Nosler BT Varmint will tell you, there's a lot of trimming done to get past the jello. 100% of the energy ends up in the animal, that's for sure. A larger Amax bullet just wrecks a deer at any range. Especially those old ones with the great big tips on em.
An energie has nothing to do with a penetration. Shooting my 460WM 500/2725fps into paint 3litre steel cans filled with water would ripped the cans into 6-8 pieces, if a 2-3kg rock was set on the lid it was thrown some 6-10metres into the air and the metal lid would have molded itself around the rock that even the slightest dent/bump of the rock was imprinted to the metal lid as if a cast was taken. Siting the can in the middle of 4x4" softwood 3 feet long and it broke into two.
Repeating the same tests with .375HH 300/2650fps and the results were nowhere as spectacular, yet the .375 penetrated deeper in every medium that we've tested.
Peter
Repeating the same tests with .375HH 300/2650fps and the results were nowhere as spectacular, yet the .375 penetrated deeper in every medium that we've tested.
Peter
devildoc
Well-Known Member
Well like alot of other things, science cannot fully explain what happens in the real world. It can explain parts of any given phenomena, but rarely does it explain the whole thing.
Energy is a good indicator, of terminal performance, provided you're using good bullets designed for your intended use. That's the tricky part for us, since we want our projectiles to perform optimally across a broad range of conditions, and that's one heck of a tall order. The properties that would optimize performance at 200yds @ 2800fps are completely different than the ones needed at say 700yds @ 2000fps. And both those conditions are both likely to be encountered on the same day with the same gun.
What kills is enough trauma to the right place, that takes both energy and placement. I've seen racoons take a cylinder full of .22's right between the eyes and growl, you can't tell me it was poor shot placement, cause we dug a quarter sized hunk of lead out from between his eyes when we skinned him. Sure bullet design played a role, but if that .22 would have been a .22 mag with the same bullet I'd bet my life savings that the coon would've dropped on the spot.
On that note, I'm sure there has been a whole lot of big game taken with a .22 mag in this country. But that is not to say that any .22mag cartridge is an ideal big game killer. But if you punch an animal through the ears at 25yds with one, you got a better than average chance of putting meat in the freezer.
but I digress, the point I'm trying to make here is that energy is a good indicator of lethality because we as relatively informed hunters have a good deal of control over what bullet we're using and our shot placement. So if those two things are relatively equal, a guy who chooses a proper bullet for the game and range he's shooting at, and has done the practice and has the discipline to make well placed shots will be more effective with more energy. Obviously there is a ceiling on this, and you don't need 4000ftlbs to kill antelope. But more importantly there is a floor in that you do need enough energy to penetrate the body cavity from the presentation you have, even if there is large bones in the way on the given animal you're shooting at.
Energy is a good indicator, of terminal performance, provided you're using good bullets designed for your intended use. That's the tricky part for us, since we want our projectiles to perform optimally across a broad range of conditions, and that's one heck of a tall order. The properties that would optimize performance at 200yds @ 2800fps are completely different than the ones needed at say 700yds @ 2000fps. And both those conditions are both likely to be encountered on the same day with the same gun.
What kills is enough trauma to the right place, that takes both energy and placement. I've seen racoons take a cylinder full of .22's right between the eyes and growl, you can't tell me it was poor shot placement, cause we dug a quarter sized hunk of lead out from between his eyes when we skinned him. Sure bullet design played a role, but if that .22 would have been a .22 mag with the same bullet I'd bet my life savings that the coon would've dropped on the spot.
On that note, I'm sure there has been a whole lot of big game taken with a .22 mag in this country. But that is not to say that any .22mag cartridge is an ideal big game killer. But if you punch an animal through the ears at 25yds with one, you got a better than average chance of putting meat in the freezer.
but I digress, the point I'm trying to make here is that energy is a good indicator of lethality because we as relatively informed hunters have a good deal of control over what bullet we're using and our shot placement. So if those two things are relatively equal, a guy who chooses a proper bullet for the game and range he's shooting at, and has done the practice and has the discipline to make well placed shots will be more effective with more energy. Obviously there is a ceiling on this, and you don't need 4000ftlbs to kill antelope. But more importantly there is a floor in that you do need enough energy to penetrate the body cavity from the presentation you have, even if there is large bones in the way on the given animal you're shooting at.
Let's see Mcphearson states quite plainly that energy is a non factor. Apparently some believe that an Engineering degree from MIT Honors course and doesn't qualify him to understand the different forms of energy and how they are transfered.. Interesting
MagnumManiac
Well-Known Member
IMHO,I feel that there is a very important factor that has been lost in all this talk about energy,I don't mean on this forum,but in general,gun magazines etc.
Energy is a wonderful thing,without it,a bullet can't do it's 'work'.
For it to do it's work,it must have a Sectional Density that allows it to 'plough' through animal tissue,with the energy we are talking about to impart as much destruction allowable.Too much,and the bullet may over expand causing the wound to be too shallow,not enough,and the bullet may not expand and pass through with little tissue destruction.
Sectional Density HAS to be the first thing you look at,in any cartridge,to see if it's capable of taking the game you're after.
If you look at the formula used to get energy figures,it is afterall only a mathematcal equation.
It's a hypothetical number that doesn't take into account bullet performance,only it's weight,which really means nothing,and doesn't calculate in the bullet's SD.
All that said,this is my favourite saying:It doesn't matter what you hit 'em with,it's where you hit 'em,and what BULLET you hit 'em with!
The bullet does ALL the work,not the energy imparted to it by the gun.
On a side note,when Roy Weatherby was designing his cartridges,he ran into a lot of problems with bullet failures,the only reason for this was the fact that his cartridges pushed 'em TOO FAST for them to handle it!
This a good lesson we should all take on board.
CHOOSE THE RIGHT BULLET!
gun)
MagnumManiac
Energy is a wonderful thing,without it,a bullet can't do it's 'work'.
For it to do it's work,it must have a Sectional Density that allows it to 'plough' through animal tissue,with the energy we are talking about to impart as much destruction allowable.Too much,and the bullet may over expand causing the wound to be too shallow,not enough,and the bullet may not expand and pass through with little tissue destruction.
Sectional Density HAS to be the first thing you look at,in any cartridge,to see if it's capable of taking the game you're after.
If you look at the formula used to get energy figures,it is afterall only a mathematcal equation.
It's a hypothetical number that doesn't take into account bullet performance,only it's weight,which really means nothing,and doesn't calculate in the bullet's SD.
All that said,this is my favourite saying:It doesn't matter what you hit 'em with,it's where you hit 'em,and what BULLET you hit 'em with!
The bullet does ALL the work,not the energy imparted to it by the gun.
On a side note,when Roy Weatherby was designing his cartridges,he ran into a lot of problems with bullet failures,the only reason for this was the fact that his cartridges pushed 'em TOO FAST for them to handle it!
This a good lesson we should all take on board.
CHOOSE THE RIGHT BULLET!
gun)
MagnumManiac
There is a lot more to this than Sectional Density or energy. A 416 Rigby (mine) 400 grain round nose solid at 2380 FPS penetrated 46" in wet news print at the Linebaugh Seminar in Jackson, Miss. last year. The 475 Linebaugh with a 420 grain Flat Point Hard Cast at 1382 FPS penetrated 49" a 450 grain Flat solid copper at 1252 FPS from a 500 Linebaugh pentrated 51"
So much for sectional density...Projectile shape seems to be more important
So much for sectional density...Projectile shape seems to be more important
devildoc
Well-Known Member
well to tell you the truth I don't know much about McPhearson, but I do know that terminal ballistics is a subject that is still being actively studied today and there is a great deal of current literature out there discussing the subject. I would agree that energy is not always proportional to trauma. However, in controlled expansion bullets I do think it is a good indicator of trauma. Obviously in FMJ and even Frangible ammunition this is not the case. But in cases where a great deal to all (bullet stops under skin or rib cage) of a bullets energy is transferred to the target trauma would be roughly proportional to energy, provided the projectile adequately penetrates vitals. A recent (2004) scientific review of literature released by Detroit Receiving Hospital (RAS) and Wayne State University School of Medicine discusses terminal ballistics if you'd care to review it. I don't know about your McPhearson guy, but I'd bet these guys have seen more gunshot wounds than he has. (and these guys are MD's and PHD's)
Citation: RICHARD A. SANTUCCI and YAO-JEN CHANG. 2004. BALLISTICS FOR PHYSICIANS: MYTHS ABOUT WOUND BALLISTICS AND GUNSHOT INJURIES. The Journal of Urology. Volume 171, Issue 4.
Last edited:
Many Doctors have seen more gunshot victoms than a thermodynamicist have and without the proper technical training make assumptions that are incorrect. Kinetic Energy is not conserved and is transfered as heat. it is direct force of projectile collision that casuse the wound channel and it is the pre concieved miss understanding of the differences between kinetic energy and direct force and the oversimplification of useing kinetic energy as a ballistic model that is the down fall of such use.
Example in my 4" M-57 I can shoot a 230 grain flat point hard cast bullet at 1338 FPS that equals 914 FPE. My 500 JRH shooting a reduced load behind a 440 grain flat point hard cast bullet at 950 FPS equals 882 FPE.. The wound channel created by the 440 grain 50 Cal. bullet creates a large diameter wound channel because of a greater amount of direct applied force even though it has less FPE. The 440 grain also out pentrates the 230 grain 41 Cal. bullet as well
Example in my 4" M-57 I can shoot a 230 grain flat point hard cast bullet at 1338 FPS that equals 914 FPE. My 500 JRH shooting a reduced load behind a 440 grain flat point hard cast bullet at 950 FPS equals 882 FPE.. The wound channel created by the 440 grain 50 Cal. bullet creates a large diameter wound channel because of a greater amount of direct applied force even though it has less FPE. The 440 grain also out pentrates the 230 grain 41 Cal. bullet as well
RockyMtnMT
Official LRH Sponsor
This stuff is fascinating, I can loose hours reading about it. If you google "Shooting Holes in Wounding Theories", it will pull up an essay that is a terrific read. Scientifically proves and disproves the different myths about bullet performance. It is pure physics. If you are a techno nut you will enjoy the essay.
Steve
Steve
A lot of good ideas here, but I am NOT in the camp that wants a bullet to stop in the animal!
To say that energy is WASTED because the bullet exited is not in my vocabulary!
A bullet does work by destroying tissue and with most hunting bullets by deforming!
The slower a bullet goes the less damage it is doing.
At the point that it stops, it is just a bullet, or the remains of one and can't hurt the animal any more than one still in your pocket!
So let's work backward from the instant the bullet stopped INSIDE the animal:
If total penetration is 15 inches, then the last inch of travel was very slow and most likely the hole is caliber size or SMALLER.
Every inch you move toward the entrance wound the damage is more severe. Why would you choose a small wound when you could have a larger one?
Personally I would not bowhunt a deer with a field pointed arrow because this shape does little damage, but this arrow is probably more lethal than the bullet in its last inch of penetration!
My goal is to put a reasonably sized hole through the vitals of big game. I do not know if the animal will present a shot at 20 yards or 1000 yards. I don't know if the animal will be broadside or quartering or worse.
While I might say that I will only shoot at a standing broadside deer @ 700 - 900 yards and therefore I need 12 inches to destroy both lungs and not exit the animal, BUT
I do know that this is long range hunting, and no matter how good the equipment or the shooter, the animal can still move from the time the trigger breaks and the bullet impacts!
That 12 inches of penetration needed to destoy the vitals might turn into 25 inches if the animal turns away, or what if I hit the front leg bone or the hip!
IMO, anyone that does not want a bullet to exit on big game better hunt inside of fences or at short range!
edge.
To say that energy is WASTED because the bullet exited is not in my vocabulary!
A bullet does work by destroying tissue and with most hunting bullets by deforming!
The slower a bullet goes the less damage it is doing.
At the point that it stops, it is just a bullet, or the remains of one and can't hurt the animal any more than one still in your pocket!
So let's work backward from the instant the bullet stopped INSIDE the animal:
If total penetration is 15 inches, then the last inch of travel was very slow and most likely the hole is caliber size or SMALLER.
Every inch you move toward the entrance wound the damage is more severe. Why would you choose a small wound when you could have a larger one?
Personally I would not bowhunt a deer with a field pointed arrow because this shape does little damage, but this arrow is probably more lethal than the bullet in its last inch of penetration!
My goal is to put a reasonably sized hole through the vitals of big game. I do not know if the animal will present a shot at 20 yards or 1000 yards. I don't know if the animal will be broadside or quartering or worse.
While I might say that I will only shoot at a standing broadside deer @ 700 - 900 yards and therefore I need 12 inches to destroy both lungs and not exit the animal, BUT
I do know that this is long range hunting, and no matter how good the equipment or the shooter, the animal can still move from the time the trigger breaks and the bullet impacts!
That 12 inches of penetration needed to destoy the vitals might turn into 25 inches if the animal turns away, or what if I hit the front leg bone or the hip!
IMO, anyone that does not want a bullet to exit on big game better hunt inside of fences or at short range!
edge.
The more energy, the right bullet,the same hit the better the kill
The bullet energy is released and eventually has to stop somewhere. Preferably while it's still in the animal. The placement, the construction of the bullet and the velocity play very big part in the killing department. The same bullet, the more velocity, the more energy, the bigger the internal damage, the better the kill.
Don't believe me? So compare how spectacular are your effective kills at 100yards and not so at 1000yards with the same hit/bullet. The internal damage at 100yards is much more than the damage at 1000yards.
If your ***** a heart with a 1/4" screwdriver it will eventually kill without a doubt, but not as quickly as with a bullet at 3000fps.
Peter
The bullet energy is released and eventually has to stop somewhere. Preferably while it's still in the animal. The placement, the construction of the bullet and the velocity play very big part in the killing department. The same bullet, the more velocity, the more energy, the bigger the internal damage, the better the kill.
Don't believe me? So compare how spectacular are your effective kills at 100yards and not so at 1000yards with the same hit/bullet. The internal damage at 100yards is much more than the damage at 1000yards.
If your ***** a heart with a 1/4" screwdriver it will eventually kill without a doubt, but not as quickly as with a bullet at 3000fps.
Peter
Last edited:
