Forums
New posts
Search forums
What's new
Articles
Latest reviews
Author list
Classifieds
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles and first posts only
Search titles only
By:
New posts
Search forums
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Forums
Hunting
Long Range Hunting & Shooting
Bullet retained energy - minimums for game
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
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
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="winmag" data-source="post: 597392" data-attributes="member: 22166"><p>The standard for energy is 1500 ft lbs for Elk size game, & 1000 ft lbs for deer size game......</p><p>Ok, now some argue "less energy" in favor of full "bullet expansion". That's a different view, but not nesicarily a wrong view.</p><p>Then there's those that argue Sectional Density is the better judge, as an example, a 277 cal 140 gr bullet with a .261 ish s.d. in comparison to a 168 gr 30 cal with a .253 ish s.d.</p><p></p><p>Then there is bullet construction itself, frags like burgers, NBT's, SST's AMax, etc. Vs Accubonds, partitions, TBBC, A Frame, Scirocco, IB, etc, VS. solids like TSX, GMX, Etip....</p><p></p><p>Then there's the momentum arguement... 168 7mm going very fast, vs bigger heavier bullets 200 gr 30 cal going slow...</p><p></p><p>Then range & velocity, & B.C ...... Sooo many variables it just never ends in anything less than arguements.</p><p></p><p>I use a combination of all those points of view & try to keep it within an 1800 fps/1500 ft lbs window for everything I load for & shoot. That way I don't have to guess or wonder, I just go with what has proven to work for me. I know where my cutoff is with any rifle I'm using that way, & choose my rifle accordingly to the country & critter I'm hunting.</p><p>But that's my personal preferance. I live in Oregon, & you never know what your gonna bump into. I never have to wonder if I have enough gun at "X" range.</p><p></p><p>IMO there's no such thing as overkill. If your gonna take game at long range, its better to KNOW its gonna work, & leave some room for insurance. I don't like walking on thin ice, wondering if I'm gonna make it...</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="winmag, post: 597392, member: 22166"] The standard for energy is 1500 ft lbs for Elk size game, & 1000 ft lbs for deer size game...... Ok, now some argue "less energy" in favor of full "bullet expansion". That's a different view, but not nesicarily a wrong view. Then there's those that argue Sectional Density is the better judge, as an example, a 277 cal 140 gr bullet with a .261 ish s.d. in comparison to a 168 gr 30 cal with a .253 ish s.d. Then there is bullet construction itself, frags like burgers, NBT's, SST's AMax, etc. Vs Accubonds, partitions, TBBC, A Frame, Scirocco, IB, etc, VS. solids like TSX, GMX, Etip.... Then there's the momentum arguement... 168 7mm going very fast, vs bigger heavier bullets 200 gr 30 cal going slow... Then range & velocity, & B.C ...... Sooo many variables it just never ends in anything less than arguements. I use a combination of all those points of view & try to keep it within an 1800 fps/1500 ft lbs window for everything I load for & shoot. That way I don't have to guess or wonder, I just go with what has proven to work for me. I know where my cutoff is with any rifle I'm using that way, & choose my rifle accordingly to the country & critter I'm hunting. But that's my personal preferance. I live in Oregon, & you never know what your gonna bump into. I never have to wonder if I have enough gun at "X" range. IMO there's no such thing as overkill. If your gonna take game at long range, its better to KNOW its gonna work, & leave some room for insurance. I don't like walking on thin ice, wondering if I'm gonna make it... [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Forums
Hunting
Long Range Hunting & Shooting
Bullet retained energy - minimums for game
Top