Long Range Hunting Online Magazine


Go Back   Long Range Hunting Online Magazine > Hunting > Long Range Hunting & Shooting

Long Range Hunting & Shooting Nightforce Optics


Reply

Minimum Velocity Clarification

 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
  #15  
Old 09-12-2013, 12:10 PM
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2013
Posts: 23
Re: Minimum Velocity Clarification

Quote:
Originally Posted by MontanaRifleman View Post
Also, as far as I'm concerned, KE is an abstract measurement of energy and no one can quantify just how that translates to killing power.
All my research, experience and intuitive thought mirrors this statement exactly.

IMHO, making a hole in an animal is fatal. The bigger the hole, the better. The more vital organs you punch your hole through, the better.

I would suggest that momentum would be a better figure to refer to, but still largely useless alone. Caliber diameter, flesh toughness, whether or not you strike a bone, bullet expansion rate, bullet toughness....There are so many variables it's very hard to break down what works best for what reasons.

I'm under the impression that this forum is chock-full of reliable information that generally supports the 1800fps minimum figure in most circumstances.

If you really want to know what a given bullet will do at 1800, 1600, 1300, etc... Shoot some media like homebrew ballistics gel or wet phonebooks. I'm hoping to do some of that myself in the near future.
Reply With Quote
  #16  
Old 09-12-2013, 12:47 PM
Platinum Member
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: South of Canada and North of Wyoming
Posts: 5,954
Re: Minimum Velocity Clarification

[quote]
Quote:
Originally Posted by Talkyn View Post
IMHO, making a hole in an animal is fatal. The bigger the hole, the better. The more vital organs you punch your hole through, the better.
Exactly

Quote:
I would suggest that momentum would be a better figure to refer to, but still largely useless alone. Caliber diameter, flesh toughness, whether or not you strike a bone, bullet expansion rate, bullet toughness....There are so many variables it's very hard to break down what works best for what reasons.
Bingo again and I agree that momentum is a better measurement of killing power but it too is just a mathematical number that only takes into account 2 of a dozen or more factors involved.
__________________
- Mark

You will never know how much it has cost my generation to preserve your freedom. I hope you make good use of it.
~ John Quincy Adams
Reply With Quote
  #17  
Old 09-12-2013, 01:34 PM
Silver Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Posts: 353
Re: Minimum Velocity Clarification

Seems like a guy has got to kinda come up with your own system or mentality, and do the best you can to apply it in an ethical matter. Seems there is probably not entirely right or wrong way. There's the guys with the 338's that won't shoot a deer over 500yds and something like that Davidson kid shooting an elk at 1376yds with a 7RM. To each their own, they all seem to work.

If there is one thing that from what I can gather out of all this conversation, is that shot placement trumps all. As far as the bullets performance, outside of a couple control factors, is on the honor system. But the key is practice, put whatever bullet you got where it belongs, and go collect your animal.
Reply With Quote
  #18  
Old 09-12-2013, 02:00 PM
Gold Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: Houston, Texas
Posts: 888
Re: Minimum Velocity Clarification

Im not trying to be argumentative or offend anyone, but i want to clarify where my stance on projectile energy because i think im being misunderstood.

I do not disagree that there are way too many variables on defining a bullets lethality on game, to say energy alone can sum them all up. However the same statement applies to velocity.

We have yet to specify a bullet to represent this 1800 fps mark, i assumed we were all leaning toward bergers. Please correct me if we are in fact discussing another bullet.

I disagree that energy is a ball park measurment. I will agree it is technically abstract, since it is a figure of bullet weight and speed, but it is no less accurate.
Momentum cannot be any better determining factor because it describes the same quality of a projectile and is calculated in the very same manner.

M=m x v
kE=1/2m x v^2

I like to use energy because it gives me a good idea of the range i have for a particular caliber/bullet weight, and its potential to inflict damage.

Just like velocity, energy is completely dependant on bullet performance. If the bullet hits soft tissue and pin holes you just wasted whatever velocity and energy you had.

If the bullet strikes bone, you just dumped whatever velocity and energy into the body of the animal and will cause a lot of damage. Energy in my mind is an accurate description in this type of shot.

I in no way advocate the use of any one measurment to describe performance of a large variety of bullets in a large variety of animals in a large variety of situations. I think a shooter should pick a bullet to suit their own personal needs. Work to understand to external and terminal ballistics of said bullets, and apply them in a responsible manner.

On a personal note i did read a forum where eric stecker specifically stated the berger bullets opened up much more consistantly above the 1800 fps mark, and i am in no way debating this. Im simply advising to use energy to make sure you have the requirement to quickly dispatch your game. It should also be stated that berger bullets can have unpredictable results if contacting the animal too fast. I dont know a round about number but i have pin holed a good number of feral hogs with very close range shots. As well as having them grenade inside and drop them on their belly.

Thanks for hearing me out
Reply With Quote
  #19  
Old 09-12-2013, 02:38 PM
Silver Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Posts: 353
Re: Minimum Velocity Clarification

You make some very good points and I agree with your judgement as far as the type of bullet you are using.

There are people like a lot of us long range shooters that are using bullets relying on expansion.

Then there are the guys that like to shoot some of those bullets like the partitioins and some of the others that swear less expansion is better and penetration is key.

You are right, there are a lot of ways to figure out the bullets capabilities, and everyone just has to do what they have confidence in and go from there.
Reply With Quote
  #20  
Old 09-12-2013, 03:07 PM
Platinum Member
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: South of Canada and North of Wyoming
Posts: 5,954
Re: Minimum Velocity Clarification

Quote:
Originally Posted by Canadian Bushman View Post
Im not trying to be argumentative or offend anyone, but i want to clarify where my stance on projectile energy because i think im being misunderstood.

I do not disagree that there are way too many variables on defining a bullets lethality on game, to say energy alone can sum them all up. However the same statement applies to velocity.

We have yet to specify a bullet to represent this 1800 fps mark, i assumed we were all leaning toward bergers. Please correct me if we are in fact discussing another bullet.

I disagree that energy is a ball park measurment. I will agree it is technically abstract, since it is a figure of bullet weight and speed, but it is no less accurate.
Momentum cannot be any better determining factor because it describes the same quality of a projectile and is calculated in the very same manner.

M=m x v
kE=1/2m x v^2

I like to use energy because it gives me a good idea of the range i have for a particular caliber/bullet weight, and its potential to inflict damage.

Just like velocity, energy is completely dependant on bullet performance. If the bullet hits soft tissue and pin holes you just wasted whatever velocity and energy you had.

If the bullet strikes bone, you just dumped whatever velocity and energy into the body of the animal and will cause a lot of damage. Energy in my mind is an accurate description in this type of shot.

I in no way advocate the use of any one measurment to describe performance of a large variety of bullets in a large variety of animals in a large variety of situations. I think a shooter should pick a bullet to suit their own personal needs. Work to understand to external and terminal ballistics of said bullets, and apply them in a responsible manner.

On a personal note i did read a forum where eric stecker specifically stated the berger bullets opened up much more consistantly above the 1800 fps mark, and i am in no way debating this. Im simply advising to use energy to make sure you have the requirement to quickly dispatch your game. It should also be stated that berger bullets can have unpredictable results if contacting the animal too fast. I dont know a round about number but i have pin holed a good number of feral hogs with very close range shots. As well as having them grenade inside and drop them on their belly.

Thanks for hearing me out
I want to make clear that I am not jumping on anyone and I mean no one any offense. Just trying to be objective and realistic about the facts.

OK, so if we look at the KE formula, we see that the "mass" input is reduced by half and the velocity input is squared. This obviously would not be able to predict penetration. So my question is, just how does KE translate to destructive killing power? The KE number rises exponentially with velocity implying that velocity is a much greater factor in destruction than mass. That is simply not accurate. I will agree that higher velocity lighter bullets can cause significant damage but at the same time slower and larger bullet penetrate better.

IMO, although momentum is not a perfect indicator of "destructive" force, it is a good indicator of potential "penetrating" force. I say potential because the expansion performance of the bullet will have a great affect on penetration. It takes mass and velocity equally into account.

Bottom line is that there are just too many variables and mathematical formulas that don't factor those variables in are not great indicators of potential terminal performance.

The popular KE number for killing "elk" is 1500 ftlbs. I will say that there are bullets that in some circumstances that are very capable of killing a bull elk down to 1000 ftlbs of KE. And when hunting cows, most cartridges suitable for deer are also suitable for cow elk.

Know your game, know your bullet's external and terminal ballistics and place your shot well.
__________________
- Mark

You will never know how much it has cost my generation to preserve your freedom. I hope you make good use of it.
~ John Quincy Adams
Reply With Quote
  #21  
Old 09-12-2013, 04:08 PM
Gold Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: Houston, Texas
Posts: 888
Re: Minimum Velocity Clarification

Im not sure if i agree with your reasoning but i most certainly agree with your conclusion and i think thats what the purpose of this thread was aimed at. If not we have sure drawn attention to some particular characteristics of terminal ballistics that will give others something to think about.

Montana rifleman i enjoyed the discussion, if you would like to continue in pm or another thread im always honored to hear your opinions. For the time being i wouldnt mind hearing others comments and honestly im a little tired of typing.

Thanks again ill be watching the thread.
Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools
Display Modes


Current Poll
Do you archery hunt for elk?
YES - 34.48%
120 Votes
NO - 48.28%
168 Votes
Not yet, but I plan to. - 17.24%
60 Votes
Total Votes: 348
You may not vote on this poll.

All times are GMT -5. The time now is 01:25 AM.


Powered by vBulletin ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Content Management Powered by vBadvanced CMPS
All content ©2010-2014 Long Range Hunting, LLC