I'm trying to make my mind up about which close range grizzly blaster I'll buy. Choice #1 Remington Custom Shop stainless kevlar stock 22" barrel price=$1900 Candian. Choice #2 A used Bruno action 24" barrel 416 Rigby with Lyman dies and about 60 brass thrown in. It also has an old quick detachable 4x zeiss scope. Price=$1300 Candian. I'm edging toward the Rigby and would like to hear other people's thoughts on this
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
416 Opinions Required
- Thread starter alremkin
- Start date
Help Support Long Range Hunting Forum
G
Guest
Guest
close range?? How close ya wanna get???
We carry 45-70's in the hills for camp protection. should, would and does stock the big Griz's
you going hunting for ole griz or just worried about getting eaten...
We carry 45-70's in the hills for camp protection. should, would and does stock the big Griz's
you going hunting for ole griz or just worried about getting eaten...
sniper2
Well-Known Member
Are you looking for the one with the most energy? The .338/300RUM with a 250gr pill going 3100fps will produce more energy than either with their 400gr pill going
2407fps or 2360fps.Or you could be wanting to make a bigger hole with a slower less powerful bullet?
2407fps or 2360fps.Or you could be wanting to make a bigger hole with a slower less powerful bullet?
I have a 338 Wim Mag and 338/378, I want to use a bigger bullet with a higher Taylor knockdown value. I live and hunt in BC. Last year there were 5 different grizzlies around our remote camp, 100 miles west of Fort Nelson and then a 10 mile horse back ride into the bush. I figure either of the two rifles I mentioned would be ok. I think the 45-70 is a little short on penetration and if I were to go with 45 caliber I'd use the 458 Win Mag.
I'll be putting in for the draws for griz depending on which unit I go for the odds can be from 3:1 to 15:1. /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/frown.gif In the meantime I'd like to keep from being chewed on each year the are several maulings in BC.
sniper2
Well-Known Member
Please educate me about taylor knock down value???
Taylor Knockdown Formula
Great White Hunter John "Pondoro" Taylor suggested the Taylor Knockdown formula (TKO), sometimes called "Taylor Index", which integrates calibre and momentum to generate a relative value that is a guide to the potential of a round to incapacite a target.
TKO value = [ Weight (gr) x Terminal Velocity (fps) x calibre (in) ] ÷ 7000
This obviously does not take into account any factors such a bullet shape, construction, design or tendency to tumble, mushroom or fragment. In this respect the basic TKO offers a indication of the minimal performance one could expect from a round. It is, however, still a useful tool for comparing loads and gaining some idea how a round may perform if it fails to mushroom. I don't think the TKO is exact enough to let you say that, for example, a round with a TKO of 15 has twice the likelihood of stopping someone as a round with a TKO of 7, but a load with a higher TKO will usually be a better choice for defensive applications.
Taylor Index and suggested levels for hunting
Most pistol hollowpoint rounds are designed to expand to 150% of their original diameter, so one can multiply the calibre by 1.5 to get an idea of how the round will perform if it mushrooms. Since we don't know the likelihood of mushrooming we must express the bullet's TKO value as a range rather than an average. Therefore a 230gr Hollowpoint .45 at 850fps has a TKO of 12.57-18.85 and a 124gr 9mm Hollowpoint at 1200fps has a TKO of 7.55-11.32.
Some argue that TKO is only useful for comparing pistol bullets to pistol bullets or rifle to rifle. Some hunters that have used both handguns and rifles assert that TKO is relevant for comparison. A 44 magnum 240gr at 1400fps with a TKO=20.6 is more likely to drop a deer more often than a .270 Win 130gr at 3100fps with a TKO=15.9.
John Linebaugh on TKO
If there is a discrepancy, it is in comparing bullets with a high tendency to tumble with those that do not. One factor I don't think TKO figures in is the tumbling of modern spitzer bullets. I suspect that many of the hunting weapons Taylor used used round nose ammo –this would certainly be true of the large calibre big game weapons.
If a bullet tumbles then at some time during its rotation it will present its lateral areas, which will be larger than its frontal area. Suppose we multiply a bullet's length by its calibre, and use a correction factor of, say, 0.75 to allow for the shape not being a rectangle. This gives us an approximate area for the side of bullet. If we divide that area by π , take the square root and multiply by 2 then we have the equivalent bullet diameter that would have the same area. For a 62gr 5.56mm round of 0.224 x 0.906 area is equivalent to a 0.44 bullet, and for a 150gr 7.62mm bullet of 0.30 x 1.28 area is equivalent to 0.60 calibre. As a "Quick and Dirty" calculation we can simply double the calibre.
TKO of a 5.56mm 62gr at 3100fps will therefore range from 6.15-12.08 and for a 7.62mm NATO 150gr at 2750fps as 17.68-35.36.
This would seem to agree with the observation that the 5.56mm often displays very variable stopping power. For the 5.56mm I think the true TKO is in fact much higher, since the round causes extra damage if it fragments. I've not idea how to quantify this, however.
As I've stated earlier, comparison of a bullet's momentum is only really relevant when calibers are similar, and the TKO illustrates this. If two rounds have the same TKO, then by definition they will have the similar performance when it comes to incapacitating a target. The smaller calibre round would have a higher momentum to give it the same final TKO. A .45 with a TKO of 12.57 has a momentum of 28ftlb/sec. A 180gr .357 at 1369fps has the same TKO and a momentum of 35.2ftlb/sec. The smaller, higher momentum round should move an object it hits at a higher speed than the larger, but the TKO is the same, illustrating the effect the larger calibre has. A higher momentum is therefore only an indication of a better round if the round is of the same or larger calibre.
The Taylor Index - A Measure of Stopping Power
We sometimes get a question such as "How do I compare the effectiveness, of one cartridge, say a .450 Marlin over a 30-06? I want to purchase a deer/bear rifle for woods and need some guidance."
Hunters and shooters have been searching a long time for the magic formula that will predict what is needed to drop an animal in his tracks, every time. No such formula has been developed, but this doesn't keep people from trying. Many thought that the kinetic energy of the bullet was a reasonable measure of the stopping power of the bullet and most bullet and ammunition manufacturers catalogs provide charts that show the velocity and kinetic energy of a given bullet anywhere along its trajectory.
The equation for this energy calculation is:
KE = m*v2/2 = bw*v2/450436 (1)
Where:
KE = Kinetic Energy, ft-lbs
m = bullet mass, slugs
v = bullet velocity, f.p.s.
bw = Bullet weight, grs.
Noted big game hunter and writer John Taylor thought that the kinetic energy equation gave too much credit to the new high velocity cartridges. Taylor, who spent a good many years in Mozambique, did a great deal of shooting and some commercial ivory hunting. He wrote a book entitled African rifles and Cartridges in which he pushed the British big-bore viewpoint. He thought these new cartridges, which fired a lightweight bullet at high velocity, gave too much importance to bullet velocity. Looking at the kinetic energy equation it can be seen that a small increase in velocity means a large increase in the kinetic energy because this energy increases as the square of the velocity. He thought that this would lead the hunter to believe that a small bullet, at high velocity, would be more effective on big game than a slower, heavier bullet. He stated that based on his hunting experience this was not so.
In an article in the November, 1947 issue of the American Rifleman magazine, Taylor gave several examples of how the heavier bullet knocked big game animals cold while the lighter faster bullet, in many cases, only dazed the animal for a few seconds. Taylor's energy equation is listed below:
TI = bw/7000*v*DI (2)
Where:
TI = Taylor Index
bw = Bullet weight, grs
v = bullet velocity, f.p.s.
DI = Bullet diameter, inches
Taylor's equation includes the bullet diameter, velocity and bullet weight. Since the velocity term is not squared it has less impact on TI energy as compared to the kinetic energy equation.
Table 1.0 shown below lists several popular cartridges and the generated kinetic energy (K.E.) and Taylor Index (TI).
Table 1.0
Cartridge
Bullet Wt.
(grains) Muzzle Vel.
(f.p.s.) 100 yd. Vel.
(f.p.s.) 100 yd. K.E.
(ft.-lb.) 100 yd.
Taylor Index
22 Long Rifle 40 1150 976 85 1.2
223 Rem. 53 3330 2865 966 4.9
7mm Rem. Mag. 154 3200 2966 3008 18.5
308 Win. 150 2820 2593 2239 17.1
30-06 180 2700 2484 2466 19.7
416 Rigby 400 2400 2184 4236 51.9
450 Marlin 350 2100 1710 2272 39.2
470 N.E. 500 2150 1907 4037 64.6
50 BMG 750 2769 2681 11965 146.5
Note: All velocities and energies shown were calculated using the LFDW program.
From Table 1.0 it can be seen that the 450 Marlin develops only about 92% of the 30-06's kinetic energy at 100 yd, but the Taylor Index for the 450 Marlin is almost double that of the 30-06. Based on this information and the fact that heavier bullets usually work better in brush, the 450 Marlin looks like a winner. The last cartridge listed, the 50 BMG, is not considered a sporting cartridge, but was included to show how much energy this military cartridge can develop in comparison to other cartridges.
The Taylor Index is a relative value, which means the value has no units of measurement like ft.-lbs. or feet per second. It is more of an indicator of how one cartridge stacks up against another. This assumes, in all cases, that a well placed shot will be delivered to the vital area using a properly constructed bullet that will transfer all its energy to the game animal.
So, you might ask, "How do I use this information?" What we need is a chart of the Taylor Index figures rated against different type/size game. Listed below is my evaluation of such a table. Your ideas may differ and that's fine, but it is a starting place.
Table 2.0
Taylor Index
Game Animal
1-3 Crows, Squirrels, rabbits and skunks
3-5 Prairie dogs, ground hogs and coyotes
6-17 Antelope, mule deer and sheep - Open country
17-20 White tail deer, black bear - Brush/Woods
20-40 Elk, moose, Grizzly bear
40-50 Lion and other thin skinned dangerous game
50-125 Rhino, elephant or other thick skinned dangerous game
125-200 Any animal that roams the earth
Great White Hunter John "Pondoro" Taylor suggested the Taylor Knockdown formula (TKO), sometimes called "Taylor Index", which integrates calibre and momentum to generate a relative value that is a guide to the potential of a round to incapacite a target.
TKO value = [ Weight (gr) x Terminal Velocity (fps) x calibre (in) ] ÷ 7000
This obviously does not take into account any factors such a bullet shape, construction, design or tendency to tumble, mushroom or fragment. In this respect the basic TKO offers a indication of the minimal performance one could expect from a round. It is, however, still a useful tool for comparing loads and gaining some idea how a round may perform if it fails to mushroom. I don't think the TKO is exact enough to let you say that, for example, a round with a TKO of 15 has twice the likelihood of stopping someone as a round with a TKO of 7, but a load with a higher TKO will usually be a better choice for defensive applications.
Taylor Index and suggested levels for hunting
Most pistol hollowpoint rounds are designed to expand to 150% of their original diameter, so one can multiply the calibre by 1.5 to get an idea of how the round will perform if it mushrooms. Since we don't know the likelihood of mushrooming we must express the bullet's TKO value as a range rather than an average. Therefore a 230gr Hollowpoint .45 at 850fps has a TKO of 12.57-18.85 and a 124gr 9mm Hollowpoint at 1200fps has a TKO of 7.55-11.32.
Some argue that TKO is only useful for comparing pistol bullets to pistol bullets or rifle to rifle. Some hunters that have used both handguns and rifles assert that TKO is relevant for comparison. A 44 magnum 240gr at 1400fps with a TKO=20.6 is more likely to drop a deer more often than a .270 Win 130gr at 3100fps with a TKO=15.9.
John Linebaugh on TKO
If there is a discrepancy, it is in comparing bullets with a high tendency to tumble with those that do not. One factor I don't think TKO figures in is the tumbling of modern spitzer bullets. I suspect that many of the hunting weapons Taylor used used round nose ammo –this would certainly be true of the large calibre big game weapons.
If a bullet tumbles then at some time during its rotation it will present its lateral areas, which will be larger than its frontal area. Suppose we multiply a bullet's length by its calibre, and use a correction factor of, say, 0.75 to allow for the shape not being a rectangle. This gives us an approximate area for the side of bullet. If we divide that area by π , take the square root and multiply by 2 then we have the equivalent bullet diameter that would have the same area. For a 62gr 5.56mm round of 0.224 x 0.906 area is equivalent to a 0.44 bullet, and for a 150gr 7.62mm bullet of 0.30 x 1.28 area is equivalent to 0.60 calibre. As a "Quick and Dirty" calculation we can simply double the calibre.
TKO of a 5.56mm 62gr at 3100fps will therefore range from 6.15-12.08 and for a 7.62mm NATO 150gr at 2750fps as 17.68-35.36.
This would seem to agree with the observation that the 5.56mm often displays very variable stopping power. For the 5.56mm I think the true TKO is in fact much higher, since the round causes extra damage if it fragments. I've not idea how to quantify this, however.
As I've stated earlier, comparison of a bullet's momentum is only really relevant when calibers are similar, and the TKO illustrates this. If two rounds have the same TKO, then by definition they will have the similar performance when it comes to incapacitating a target. The smaller calibre round would have a higher momentum to give it the same final TKO. A .45 with a TKO of 12.57 has a momentum of 28ftlb/sec. A 180gr .357 at 1369fps has the same TKO and a momentum of 35.2ftlb/sec. The smaller, higher momentum round should move an object it hits at a higher speed than the larger, but the TKO is the same, illustrating the effect the larger calibre has. A higher momentum is therefore only an indication of a better round if the round is of the same or larger calibre.
The Taylor Index - A Measure of Stopping Power
We sometimes get a question such as "How do I compare the effectiveness, of one cartridge, say a .450 Marlin over a 30-06? I want to purchase a deer/bear rifle for woods and need some guidance."
Hunters and shooters have been searching a long time for the magic formula that will predict what is needed to drop an animal in his tracks, every time. No such formula has been developed, but this doesn't keep people from trying. Many thought that the kinetic energy of the bullet was a reasonable measure of the stopping power of the bullet and most bullet and ammunition manufacturers catalogs provide charts that show the velocity and kinetic energy of a given bullet anywhere along its trajectory.
The equation for this energy calculation is:
KE = m*v2/2 = bw*v2/450436 (1)
Where:
KE = Kinetic Energy, ft-lbs
m = bullet mass, slugs
v = bullet velocity, f.p.s.
bw = Bullet weight, grs.
Noted big game hunter and writer John Taylor thought that the kinetic energy equation gave too much credit to the new high velocity cartridges. Taylor, who spent a good many years in Mozambique, did a great deal of shooting and some commercial ivory hunting. He wrote a book entitled African rifles and Cartridges in which he pushed the British big-bore viewpoint. He thought these new cartridges, which fired a lightweight bullet at high velocity, gave too much importance to bullet velocity. Looking at the kinetic energy equation it can be seen that a small increase in velocity means a large increase in the kinetic energy because this energy increases as the square of the velocity. He thought that this would lead the hunter to believe that a small bullet, at high velocity, would be more effective on big game than a slower, heavier bullet. He stated that based on his hunting experience this was not so.
In an article in the November, 1947 issue of the American Rifleman magazine, Taylor gave several examples of how the heavier bullet knocked big game animals cold while the lighter faster bullet, in many cases, only dazed the animal for a few seconds. Taylor's energy equation is listed below:
TI = bw/7000*v*DI (2)
Where:
TI = Taylor Index
bw = Bullet weight, grs
v = bullet velocity, f.p.s.
DI = Bullet diameter, inches
Taylor's equation includes the bullet diameter, velocity and bullet weight. Since the velocity term is not squared it has less impact on TI energy as compared to the kinetic energy equation.
Table 1.0 shown below lists several popular cartridges and the generated kinetic energy (K.E.) and Taylor Index (TI).
Table 1.0
Cartridge
Bullet Wt.
(grains) Muzzle Vel.
(f.p.s.) 100 yd. Vel.
(f.p.s.) 100 yd. K.E.
(ft.-lb.) 100 yd.
Taylor Index
22 Long Rifle 40 1150 976 85 1.2
223 Rem. 53 3330 2865 966 4.9
7mm Rem. Mag. 154 3200 2966 3008 18.5
308 Win. 150 2820 2593 2239 17.1
30-06 180 2700 2484 2466 19.7
416 Rigby 400 2400 2184 4236 51.9
450 Marlin 350 2100 1710 2272 39.2
470 N.E. 500 2150 1907 4037 64.6
50 BMG 750 2769 2681 11965 146.5
Note: All velocities and energies shown were calculated using the LFDW program.
From Table 1.0 it can be seen that the 450 Marlin develops only about 92% of the 30-06's kinetic energy at 100 yd, but the Taylor Index for the 450 Marlin is almost double that of the 30-06. Based on this information and the fact that heavier bullets usually work better in brush, the 450 Marlin looks like a winner. The last cartridge listed, the 50 BMG, is not considered a sporting cartridge, but was included to show how much energy this military cartridge can develop in comparison to other cartridges.
The Taylor Index is a relative value, which means the value has no units of measurement like ft.-lbs. or feet per second. It is more of an indicator of how one cartridge stacks up against another. This assumes, in all cases, that a well placed shot will be delivered to the vital area using a properly constructed bullet that will transfer all its energy to the game animal.
So, you might ask, "How do I use this information?" What we need is a chart of the Taylor Index figures rated against different type/size game. Listed below is my evaluation of such a table. Your ideas may differ and that's fine, but it is a starting place.
Table 2.0
Taylor Index
Game Animal
1-3 Crows, Squirrels, rabbits and skunks
3-5 Prairie dogs, ground hogs and coyotes
6-17 Antelope, mule deer and sheep - Open country
17-20 White tail deer, black bear - Brush/Woods
20-40 Elk, moose, Grizzly bear
40-50 Lion and other thin skinned dangerous game
50-125 Rhino, elephant or other thick skinned dangerous game
125-200 Any animal that roams the earth
sniper2
Well-Known Member
Interesting read but you'll fare better sticking with modern ballistics programs...
duckinalaska
Well-Known Member
You might as well go with the .416 weatherby
ricka0
Well-Known Member
[ QUOTE ]
<font color="purple"> In an article in the November, 1947 issue of the American Rifleman magazine,
[/ QUOTE ]
[/ QUOTE ] </font> </font> </font>
1947 pretty much sums it up. Just as I stated before, no modern bonded bullets. The physics, while still high school level, is slightly more complicated. If the bullet doesn't exit the animal – you take the KE of the bullet when it hits the target and subtract the KE left from momentum transfer. Conservation of momentum guarantees the bullet touching the animal has the same momentum when it stops inside the animal. You need to subtract out the KE from the momentum left (the algebra is left as an exercise for the student).
Taylor's Index is a joke with modern ballistics & bullets. It's not consistent with experimental data on soft tissue and wound channels from hi velocity bullets. [ QUOTE ]
<font color="purple"> If there is a discrepancy, it is in comparing bullets with a high tendency to tumble with those that do not.
[/ QUOTE ] </font> </font>
Who shoots bullets that tumble? The best quote I have ever heard on TI is from the guy on LRH who wrote the ballistics software. He said something like; it at least tells you not to hunt Griz with a .243
Compare the TI of the Abrams Tank vs. the T-72 and the T-72 looks better while the Sabot DU Abrams round has penetrated two T-72 side by side. Most T-72 projectiles bounced off the Abrams. (OK, so that's because of superior amour, but I can get to brag about our superior tanks, rounds, amour ad optics)
Get a 375 RUM and don't look back. Cheaper, more/better components, far superior long range killing power.
<font color="purple"> In an article in the November, 1947 issue of the American Rifleman magazine,
[/ QUOTE ]
[/ QUOTE ] </font> </font> </font>
1947 pretty much sums it up. Just as I stated before, no modern bonded bullets. The physics, while still high school level, is slightly more complicated. If the bullet doesn't exit the animal – you take the KE of the bullet when it hits the target and subtract the KE left from momentum transfer. Conservation of momentum guarantees the bullet touching the animal has the same momentum when it stops inside the animal. You need to subtract out the KE from the momentum left (the algebra is left as an exercise for the student).
Taylor's Index is a joke with modern ballistics & bullets. It's not consistent with experimental data on soft tissue and wound channels from hi velocity bullets. [ QUOTE ]
<font color="purple"> If there is a discrepancy, it is in comparing bullets with a high tendency to tumble with those that do not.
[/ QUOTE ] </font> </font>
Who shoots bullets that tumble? The best quote I have ever heard on TI is from the guy on LRH who wrote the ballistics software. He said something like; it at least tells you not to hunt Griz with a .243
Compare the TI of the Abrams Tank vs. the T-72 and the T-72 looks better while the Sabot DU Abrams round has penetrated two T-72 side by side. Most T-72 projectiles bounced off the Abrams. (OK, so that's because of superior amour, but I can get to brag about our superior tanks, rounds, amour ad optics)
Get a 375 RUM and don't look back. Cheaper, more/better components, far superior long range killing power.
Since there is a lot of talk about Taylor why not a 416Taylor get any magnum action rifle and have it chambered in 416 taylor and fit a synthetic stock have it teflon painted to protect it i would have a muzzle break added and about a 22" barrel would not use the Brno as i have encounted problems with the bolts locking up and then you are in the SH** if you are looking for a reliable bomb proof 416 look at the Ruger Safari in 416 Rigby they are very strong and ruggard but i would go with a custom gunsmith on a remington action or a Mauser Magnum if you have to have control round feed i dont believe you need it. You could have a custom 416 made for under the price of a Custom Remington but a 416 Rem Mag from the custom shop would be a verry nice rifle just get a muzzle break added at the factory.
Cheers Bil
Australia
Cheers Bil
Australia
Frist let me say I agree there's been a lot of progress in bullet design especially in the last 20 years. Regarding the tumbling bullets I think the author was refering to the 223 when it first came out in the M-16 it was reputed to have "awesome" killing power because the bullets would tumble in their target.
I agree the 375 RUM is a great caliber for long range shooting, but I'm looking for a short range stopping rifle.
I'd like to see the science agree with experience. The conclusion Taylor reaches: He thought that this would lead the hunter to believe that a small bullet, at high velocity, would be more effective on big game than a slower, heavier bullet. He stated that based on his hunting experience this was not so.
I agree the 375 RUM is a great caliber for long range shooting, but I'm looking for a short range stopping rifle.
I'd like to see the science agree with experience. The conclusion Taylor reaches: He thought that this would lead the hunter to believe that a small bullet, at high velocity, would be more effective on big game than a slower, heavier bullet. He stated that based on his hunting experience this was not so.
You've had personal experience with having problems with the Brno bolt locking up? Not what I'd like to have happen when at close range with Mr. Horriblis /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/shocked.gif If you have any written refernce material regarding this could you post it here?
Yes i have and i know of others here in Australia im lucky it didnt happen with dangerous game juse feral pigs with a 375H+H have a good look at the Brno and twist the bolt out to the side when cykling you will feel where they can bind they are a verry strong action but for dangerous game i would not touch one as a matter of fact i dont own any anymore and will never own a nother one.
Cheers Bill
Australia
Cheers Bill
Australia
Similar threads
Recent Posts
-
-
What is the the most flat shooting cartridge yall can think of?- Latest: 340Wby-4-everything
-
There’s something about a .308 Win and 168 SMKs- Latest: FireFlyFishing
-
End of an Era - Remington leaves NY and moves to GA- Latest: Coyote Shadow Tracker
-