Bullet lethality: energy and velocity

[HARPERC]

.,,,;;; I've had to watch 3 6x6 bulls walk away from me at an estimated 600 yards because I didn't have the equipment or skills to pull of that kind of shot.....

I think this is where the correct question lies. A good range finder, and a solid position will be worth more than a few hundred ft. pounds.

 

[Cuz]

I would rather have a bullet over penetrate than under penetrate. Even if you shoot an animal through both shoulders and drop him on the spot he will live until his brain runs out of oxygen. I totally agree that an animals demeanor and whether he gets hit on an intake or exhale has a lot to do with how quickly they die. A good bullet or broadhead through the heart/lungs may take 10-12 seconds for them to expire, but it's still the most humane way they are likely to die.

 

[MagnumManiac]

Inaccurate and a very poor example.


Gunshot Wounds: Management and Myths
Hanlon and Srivastava, TraumaReports, January 1, 2012

In your example the 1lb ball would have to have a velocity of around 400 FPS and at that velocity the blunt force trauma would be very deadly.

Trying to estimate what amount of energy is needed to kill is pointless, the amount needed is completely dependent upon so many factors beyond our control that it's impossible to find a specific number. A generalized value is the best that we can do and I doubt if anyone could provide a number that everyone would agree with.

Ummmmm...ok a very poor example.
Show me PROOF of a bullet killing WITHOUT velocity.
SMH in disbelief.

 

[fiftybmg]

The concept of a bullet dumping energy is a logical one, makes for interesting energy dissipation theory discussion, and by itself has no bearing on hunting effectiveness.

Stating a minimum energy number to kill a game animal under hunting conditions assumes the hunter understands the concept of proper hunting bullets, and has chosen the correct bullet for the application.

Energy on it's own is not a criteria.

Energy is dissipated in many ways.

The way the energy is dissipated depends on the bullet construction, impact velocity and shot placement.

A bullet can "dump" all it's energy on the animal, and the animal keeps walking for weeks with an ugly surface wound for next year's hunter to find it's skull somewhere.

What all hunters should strive for, is a quick kill under all conditions, not an energy number.

This is by using a properly constructed hunting bullet at the right velocity, that is certain to kill quickly with proper shot placement.

That is a whole science, matching bullet types to game type, correct placement and velocity at any given range for a clean kill. The energy number is a by-product of the result, not a pre-condition.

Don't justify how you hunt by how much energy your bullet carries on paper. Rather state your bullet type, and the velocity it's at when it reaches the target - and then add the energy number to the end of the statement. That is all implied when energy numbers are used in the context of harvesting game.

That is why the minimum velocity for expansion of the correct bullet type needs to be known. You make sure it reaches the target going faster than that.

The energy number is never predicted, it always follows observed effect.

 

[MTbackwoods]

The concept of a bullet dumping energy is a logical one, makes for interesting energy dissipation theory discussion, and by itself has no bearing on hunting effectiveness.

Stating a minimum energy number to kill a game animal under hunting conditions assumes the hunter understands the concept of proper hunting bullets, and has chosen the correct bullet for the application.

Energy on it's own is not a criteria.

Energy is dissipated in many ways.

The way the energy is dissipated depends on the bullet construction, impact velocity and shot placement.

A bullet can "dump" all it's energy on the animal, and the animal keeps walking for weeks with an ugly surface wound for next year's hunter to find it's skull somewhere.

What all hunters should strive for, is a quick kill under all conditions, not an energy number.

This is by using a properly constructed hunting bullet at the right velocity, that is certain to kill quickly with proper shot placement.

That is a whole science, matching bullet types to game type, correct placement and velocity at any given range for a clean kill. The energy number is a by-product of the result, not a pre-condition.

Don't justify how you hunt by how much energy your bullet carries on paper. Rather state your bullet type, and the velocity it's at when it reaches the target - and then add the energy number to the end of the statement. That is all implied when energy numbers are used in the context of harvesting game.

That is why the minimum velocity for expansion of the correct bullet type needs to be known. You make sure it reaches the target going faster than that.

The energy number is never predicted, it always follows observed effect.

I mentioned all of that information towards the beginning of this post. As for shot placement, since I have chosen to use the ELD M, it would be directly behind the shoulder in the crease. So no massive dump into the hard bone of the shoulder. I know that there is no magic number. However, some people claim a minimum of 2,000 ft/lbs while others have had success down to or below 1,000 ft/lbs. That's why I'm seeking data. What have people seen be effective at the extreme end?

 

[LaHunter]

The concept of a bullet dumping energy is a logical one, makes for interesting energy dissipation theory discussion, and by itself has no bearing on hunting effectiveness.

Stating a minimum energy number to kill a game animal under hunting conditions assumes the hunter understands the concept of proper hunting bullets, and has chosen the correct bullet for the application.

Energy on it's own is not a criteria.

Energy is dissipated in many ways.

The way the energy is dissipated depends on the bullet construction, impact velocity and shot placement.

A bullet can "dump" all it's energy on the animal, and the animal keeps walking for weeks with an ugly surface wound for next year's hunter to find it's skull somewhere.

What all hunters should strive for, is a quick kill under all conditions, not an energy number.

This is by using a properly constructed hunting bullet at the right velocity, that is certain to kill quickly with proper shot placement.

That is a whole science, matching bullet types to game type, correct placement and velocity at any given range for a clean kill. The energy number is a by-product of the result, not a pre-condition.

Don't justify how you hunt by how much energy your bullet carries on paper. Rather state your bullet type, and the velocity it's at when it reaches the target - and then add the energy number to the end of the statement. That is all implied when energy numbers are used in the context of harvesting game.

That is why the minimum velocity for expansion of the correct bullet type needs to be known. You make sure it reaches the target going faster than that.

The energy number is never predicted, it always follows observed effect.

good post

 

[Quintus]

I mentioned all of that information towards the beginning of this post. As for shot placement, since I have chosen to use the ELD M, it would be directly behind the shoulder in the crease. So no massive dump into the hard bone of the shoulder. I know that there is no magic number. However, some people claim a minimum of 2,000 ft/lbs while others have had success down to or below 1,000 ft/lbs. That's why I'm seeking data. What have people seen be effective at the extreme end?

One thing I will say on the 'hard data' of experience. For all the success reports, there is a very small percentage people bragging up the failures. It is easy to bash a scope brand for a blown erector, or brass for poor longevity, but few people mention their own failure or poor judgement, the first shot 'spotter' or the hit in the grass bag or for that matter the perfect hit at closer range with a the quick kill, but completely destroyed shoulder. We did make it to the moon, but a lot of astronauts and monkeys died in the process. By definition "pushing the envelope" will result in failure, or your not really pushing the envelope are you?

 

[Muddyboots]

This is one heck of a thoughtful thread to consider when pulling the trigger on an animal based upon your choice of caliber. I agree with a lot of the replies there are far too many variables to result in a definitive answer for minimal energy in all situations.

1. the minimum velocity to reliably expand the bullet for enough expansion to provide sufficient hydrostatic/hydraulic (take your pick) shock to disrupt/destroy vital tissue for quick humane kill may not be similar to the bullet manufacturer's stated performance depending upon scenario.
2. we like to think there is consistent bullet construction that is repeatable for expected minimal velocity expansion.
3. bullet design on secant, cup and core, bonded, mono, partitioned style, tipped, hollow point, soft point, boattail, flat base and so on will all have different results to certain degree on an animal under different shot scenarios.
4. bullet location on animal cannot be expected to be same results shot to shot.
5. hard to have one bullet meet all hunting scenarios for reliable expansion and penetration for all distances for all types of animals. What may work for a whitetail or muley may not for a moose or an elk within the scenario you are within.
6. was the animal calm, alert, on edge, possibly on adrenalin or hormoned up chasing his ladies? Sometimes they act like a crackhead and take multiple lethal hits without effect.
7. some animals are just tougher than others which is why a smaller buck/bull knocks the snot out of a larger bigger rack just because of their built in attitude. I've seen does run from a coyote and others stand ground and go after them. Why does one buck run 250 yards after a 12X hit with a 300WM 200 AB hit at 200 yards and another go down hit like lightening? Same location of hit within similar hunting scenario with both bullets performed as expected and desired.
8. I always autopsy the animal I killed to visibly inspect the wound channel to provide feedback on bullet placement, organ damage, blood loss, and even bone damage. Was I able to recover the bullet and did the bullet look like it performed as designed?

Hunting either with bow or rifle is a summation of your experiences of how animals react to certain hits based upon the variables within the kill scenario. You make shot/no shot decisions based upon your success or failure within the hunting scenario you are experiencing which encapsulates all the variables that you have encountered. Animals can be killed with virtually anything we shoot but it is our responsibility to strongly believe that when we pull the trigger we are HIGHLY confident the end result will be a quick humane kill no matter what caliber, bullet, animal or distance we are shooting. So from my perspective, I take the shot based upon my experiences (which includes all the variables that I have encountered) for minimal energy/velocity within a certain degree of confidence that I will kill the animal quickly and humanely. I do not believe there is a standard answer based upon this thought.

 

[fiftybmg]

So my question is this; at what point does velocity become moot and we have to set our limits based on energy?

Never.

It's not about energy alone.

It's always velocity, bullet construction, range and type of game.

To illustrate my point, there are reports of police officers that shot a suspect in the thigh with a hollow point and the energy transfer into his blood traveled to his brain and killed him instantly. That's energy transfer.

That is ridiculous.

In Roy Weatherby's time there was a theory that velocity alone was sufficient to kill, based on this "shock", termed "hydrostatic shock". That theory is out of fashion now, and was never proven.

 

[MTbackwoods]

I understand that lethality is not due to one factor. It's a culmination of all things that go into making a good shot. So if we pretend that we have the right bullet, placed in the right spot, with adequate velocity so that the bullet penetrates and expands inside the chest cavity, what is a safe energy number. You can say it's 1,500 for elk and 1,000 for deer. But I want DATA not opinions. If you were to say "I shot this bullet at this mv and this was the result" I can punch the numbers into my calculator and look at the energy number and begin collecting the data to draw my own conclusion. And we can say hydrostatic shock isn't real. That's fine. Hydraulic effects are still present and measureable in liquids when they are disrupted by a projectile. Six of one, half dozen of the other. I personally believe the writings of Nathan Foster and strongly believe more people should give his before mentioned article a look

 

[Ronald W Schaefer]

I usually refer to Optimum Game Weight charts by Ed Matunus, Lymans 47th Reloading Manual
or the Taylor index. A lot of brain bytes went into those concepts. There is a lot of discussion out there based on anecdotal evidence, often supported and sometimes poo-poohed that says you need to hit an animal with enough velocity to have the bullet expand to create a sufficient wound channel ( a lot of mfgr these days tell you what that velocity is) and 1000 ft Lbs of energy on deer sized animals and 1200 ft. pounds on Elk size animals to impart the necessary hydrostatic shock to "drop" the animal. So you can figure out the range that corresponds to those numbers for the cartridges you're using and when you get down to those numbers that is supposedly your max range then for an ethical kill. There are, as well posted here, a lot of variables and easy to get over analytical so that's why I stick to the "common sense" rules above. For the record, I try to get as close to the critter as I can and wait for a good steady shot...so far I have an Elk at 500 yds with 7mmRM using 180 gr Berger (that's as close as I could get due to canyon between us) and 475 yds on Mule deer same situation with 7mm-08 and 145 gr Barnes LRX. I would have preferred a 100 yd shot! FYI, for most of the rifles I shoot these days I hit the "minimums" at about 600yds. I have bigger, just don't like carryin' 'em anymore.

 

[fiftybmg]

You keep looking for an energy number before you have the ballistic data, as if you could extrapolate the latter from the former.

Go the other way, which is much easier . Get the observed and verified ballistic data and calculate the energy.

It may be the same point is being viewed from opposite sides.

For example, if a hunter says he took an elk broadside at 1200 yards, clean kill, heart shot, using a 130 grain ELDX from a 6.5 Creedmoor. There is enough info there to calculate the energy. And don't believe everything people post on the internet.

There is a ton of data on this forum, where people have specified the range at which game was taken, what game it was, and the load they used. Parse it, filter the minimum energies and there's your answer.

 

[MTbackwoods]

You keep looking for an energy number before you have the ballistic data, as if you could extrapolate the latter from the former.

Go the other way, which is much easier . Get the observed and verified ballistic data and calculate the energy.

It may be the same point is being viewed from opposite sides.

For example, if a hunter says he took an elk broadside at 1200 yards, clean kill, heart shot, using a 130 grain ELDX from a 6.5 Creedmoor. There is enough info there to calculate the energy. And don't believe everything people post on the internet.

There is a ton of data on this forum, where people have specified the range at which game was taken, what game it was, and the load they used. Parse it, filter the minimum energies and there's your answer.

That's exactly what I just stated and have been saying from the beginning. But like I said before, I know that not everyone will receive my message the way I intend. And I have no problem with saying it 12 times in different words. But what you just stated is exactly what I'm after. If someone can't post all of the data to include energy, if they can at least include the basic information for me to calculate it out, we're in business. And I know there's fluffers out there that make these amazing claims of incredible shots. But we can call those out when we see them. But right now I just want data. But I appreciate your input. I understand that you're just trying to make sure that we remain ethical and respectful as hunters and I have the upmost respect for that

 

[bigngreen]

I'll try to trickle in some data points as I pull them up, I've lost many of the pictures from years ago when we we in discovery mode which bums me out.

We've shot probably 20-25 antelope and white tail between 60 and 625 yards with a 22-250 and Berger 60gr bullets running 3500 fps. Closest and farthest were both antelope, 60 yards quartering to us on the point of the shoulder, bullet was under the hide in the of side, shoulder broken and heart and lungs shredded with large clotted blood, dead within 5 feet. Farthest was perfect broadside right behind the shoulder at the colored change line, 1.5-2 inch hole through lungs with 3/4 exit, ran 100 yard ish and tipped over. A doe antelope at 150 broadside same shot as the longer one above inside of chest was like she snorted a grenade, she stayed on her feet but could not move then dropped within a couple seconds, very interesting to see an antelope not physically be able to run but still on its feet.
Antelope 325 yards, 338 RUM with 300 gr Berger at 2832 fps, held middle of the ribs to make dang sure the shoulder was missed, ran 100 yards and tipped over, entrance was 4 inches and exit about 8, nothing forward of the diagram was in the chest, everything had been blown out both the entrance and exit holes, the ribs on the entrance were actually broken out.
Same gun and load antelope just over 1100 yards, perfect broadside hit behind shoulder not even hitting a rib, 1/2 hole with 1.5 inch radiating bruising, ran in a 200 yard circle and tipped over.
Those are the closest and farthest on antelope with the 22-250 and 338 RUM.