Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Hunting Rifles killing efficiency

ok, not energy, or "knockdown" or "Taylor theory" or bullet weight/diameter question exactly.

does a 30-06 with a 150 grain cup and core bullet at 2900 fps have a decided edge over a 6.5x55 with a 140 partition, or a 257 weatherby with a 100 ttsx at 3500fps?

I am kicking around some ideas and the energy figures are close, and the "mythic power" of the "kills better than it should on paper" type observations are all there.

and let's say elk or bear. does the diameter of the 06 offset the velocity of the 257, or the penetration of the swede come in higher or lower on the "what's important in killing efficiency" scale?

to boil it down...does it make sense to have the recoil and possibly the weight of a larger rifle, or is it just as effective to use something else?

and yes, we will be putting each bullet in the right place and using a decent bullet.

I am showing my ass here and admitting I don't know much. which is ok, because I don't know much

you guys with decades of experience putting holes in animals tell me how to quantify this stuff.

Overthinking it. Just go shoot [bleep].

Actually we are all waiting for a definitive case study on this very issue. All we need are tens of thousands of hunters to keep detailed statistics of their kiltkritters, and send them in.

My vote for most efficient killing machine is; any human worried about being eaten by their wounded prey. That person will almost certainly succeed..., those who don't succeed, of course, their votes will not be counted.

+1 on the reply above

well people here obsess about such gack all the time. and some cite science and bc and sd and spindrift and Doppler and some say daddy's old 06 is all that's ever needed.

wouldn't we all like to know the unknown, unexplained in this question?

and shooting damn near any animal in the lungs or heart with any of those, would lead to it dying. but what of stopping a charge, or keeping it from crossing a property line or etc?

so we are, in effect, measuring efficiency, not whether they will lead to the end, specifically, killing an animal.

so, if we are talking about efficiency...how do we measure it and what variables actually matter?

Mostly about where you put any decent bullet. miles

Basically I have come to believe that most of the midsized rounds we have shooting 100-200 gr bullets have plenty of power to kill the game we normally hunt in North America that weigh up to 600 lbs or so. This covers 90% of the game we kill so most of the variations you see depend on the individual animal or circumstance. In other word when someone shares that he had a deer run off with a 243 thats probably true as is the story from the guy using a 30-06 or 7x57 or 270. But so are the ones where the individual has dozens of DRT stories. In other words you probably won't see much difference between rounds effectiveness as all are more than adequate. If you begin to shoot a lot of game larger than 600 lbs as in moose, bears, or large bull elk then you might want to look to the heavier end of the range and up as deeper penetration may help on the heavier bodied animals

Most of the "dead right there" animals I have seen have been shot with higher velocity rounds with most of those being from a 257 weatherby. Either way those animals aren't any more dead than ones shot with 6.5 swede or the 30-06 that stumbled for 40 yards. Put the bullet in the right place and good things happen.

A study by a game biologist in Sweden including over 8000 moose taken with cartridges, from the 6.5 X55 Swede to the 375 H&H Magnum showed that the 6.5X55 swede was competitive with all the usual big game cartridges including the 30/06, 300 win mag,and 338 Winchester Magnum.

My own personal experience over the last three years is I have consistently produced quicker kills with my 270 with 150 partitions than my brother has with his 338 win mag and a 225 gr barnes when hunting together. The kills include mule deer,elk, and black bear. In fact I've produced faster kills with my 270 and the 150 partition than any other rifle I've hunted in the last 30+year's.

From what I hear the 6.5 Swede is rather impressive with the 140 partition. I've not tried it yet but I did recently aquire a 6.5 Swede. My 270 works so well for elk sized critters I'll likely use my Swede for a different task. I'm planing to use my Swede for Eastern Montana antelope and deer out to 600 ish yds.







Shod

Jack O'Connor wrote an article in an old Gun Digest titled "It's where you hit'em, not what you hit'em with" or something like that. When questioning an Indian guide of some experience about which guns work best, the Indian replied, "any gun good gun shoot'em good!"

I agree with those sentiments 100%.

I don't have the experience of sheer numbers of many here but have dropped a few head of game over the years. From what I've observed, bullet placement is far and away the biggest factor in killing efficiency - that's assuming any of a number of decently constructed bullets with sufficient ability to penetrate to the vitals.

A 270 grain Swift A-Frame from a .375 H&H in the guts of an impala lets it run away to die overnight. That same bullet in the right place on a larger zebra drops it within seconds. A 180 gr. Nosler Partition from a .30-06 too far back on a deer lets it run a ways, that very same bullet from the very same rifle at the juncture of the neck and body drops a much larger elk on the spot. I could cite example after example of this where animals large and small displayed very different reactions and longevity after the hit by the exact same bullet brand and type from the exact same rifle at similar impact velocities, all based on where the bullet entered and what it hit on its path.

Certain uncontrollable factors may influence the rapidity of anchoring the animal - whether it was breathing in or out, perhaps, but that's just conjecture, I couldn't prove it by empirical evidence. Bullets that expand very rapidly in the heart/lung region do tend to produce more visible reactions.

But day in and day out, put the bullet where it's supposed to go and you won't see a lot of difference in killing efficiency between most of them.

In that moose study IIRC they measured to the best of their ability how far the animals went after being hit. Over thousands of examples there wasn't but about 15 yards difference between the .375 and the 6.5x55, it all came down to good bullet placement.

In my late teens, from ignorance, I thought that the 6mm sierra 85 bthp was a varmint bullet, due to the hollow point. And i used it well on a lot of coyotes, a few fox, and a couple of Carolina whitetails. One time on leave from Ft. Bragg I killed a pretty fair sized hog that was rooting up rice levees at home.

I mentioned this to a shooting mentor who told me that the 85 bthp was actually a bullet meant for game. From that point thru my early 30s I blithely used it for all kinds of whitetails, mulies, pronghorn, and even one black bear. And a fair few more hogs, too...

IMO/IME it is a super accurate bullet which drops game quickly and cleanly. If well used...
Eventually I read enough and heard enough from other sources that I was convinced that i needed tougher bullets for game.

I can actually recall one instance where a tougher bullet was to my advantage, and I started using them nearly 30 years ago.

What was the question???

This has often been the accepted philosophy on the Campfire, more so than the cartridge. As much as shot placement is vital, there is more to killing than light bullets with high BC and fast twist.

The Campfire does seem to push fast twist and fails to recognize that heavier bullets with high velocity does provide more killing energy. Where the threshold of enough is, doesn't ever seem to be a consensus.

I will still stick with medium bullets with velocity, as heavy slow bullets can provide lots of momentum, a 405 grain bullet from a 45-70 doesn't kill as well as a 30 caliber 165 grain bullet at 2900 fps. I also hold to the idea that same 165 grain bullet at 2900 fps is a better killer than a 22 caliber 75 grain bullet from a fast twist twist 223 at 2900 fps.

If larger caliber bullets weren't better killers, there wouldn't be caliber limitations on African game...

Too many variables, impossible to quantify.

Worry about somethng else.

Shrapnel...common sense laws are an oxymoron lol

There was a good article a few years ago which documented the results of several seasons worth of deer at a club somewhere in the south. Someone will be along shortly with more specifics.

The results showed fast 25 cals to kill quickest. Can't remember shot placement that was most efficient for quick kills. Cup & cores killed faster than monos.

I've had great experiences with deer-sized game and the 30-30, 30-06, 338-06, 6-250, 257 AI, and a couple others but my favorite is the 257 AI.

The Bob or a 25-06 would be close enough. Probably significant that I shoot my 257 AI a lot and am totally confident that I can hit when the trigger is pulled.

I tend to think Shrap's are great points if we're speaking as broadly as all of NA or it and African plains game. If we're just talking deer you're heard my (very) limited experience.

It takes a lot of experience to determine what a cartridge can do in a lot of hunting situations. After many experiences with hunting with a variety of calibers it comes down to the size of game and the typical distances that one expects to shoot at. I have grown found of using the largest caliber whose recoil is the easiest to handle. Whitetail deer can be taken down with a 243 and a 95 to 100 grain bullet. Shoots flat - and will reach out there for 300 yards and possibly more. The 30-06 is best with a 165 grainer and will provide velocity, carry and relative flatness of trajectory to 325 yards. A 300 WM and 180 grainer has sufficient power to knock down a bull moose out to 600 yards. So there are variables that come from experience and one can learn such things by way of real life experience. I study ballistics on a regular basis to provide additional data to my hunting experiences. Lots of calibers for given conditions, and using a tuned rifle and ammo goes a long way in bettering ones successes out in the field.

OK an example. A 2506 for instance shows the same energy at 500 yards that a 3006 does. So does that mean the 100 grain bullet is equally a good killer regardless of the game? Or is a 150 grain bullet with a bigger diameter but less SD better even at that range and if so why and how?

Many years ago I asked at least a hundred hunters who hunted more than two continents over more than twenty years with different calibers. I asked if there was any noticeable killing difference in different calibers. The general consensus was there is not much difference between 6.5 up to .375. Above the .375 things change drastically. Back then about the only good bullet was the Nosler.

Yeah but given equal energy and experience would you shoot a charging bear with a swede and feel as good as if you had an 06? Now is there an edge? And why

All the sub caliber fast twist guys will shoot anything at 1000 yards with small calibers claiming everything dies with a good shot, but you bring up a valid point that they may not admit, but I doubt their 6.5 Grendel would be their weapon of choice for that charging brown bear or Cape Buffalo...

Don't think the 25/06 will yield the same energy at 500 as an '06, unless you cherry pick loads. I ran the '06 with a 165 NP at 2800 (easily bettered) and the .25/06 with a 120 NP at 3100 (pushing it), with BCs within about 20 points, and the '06 came out a couple hundred pounds ahead. Also ran your 100gr NP at 3400 and the 150 NP at 3000, and the '06 was still on top. With both bullets still above the threshold for proper expansion, and by making a bigger hole the '06 theoretically should kill "better", but I wouldn't bet much on it. Too many other variables (that you can't measure or even detect) may come into play.

Make a hole in the right place with a bullet that will penetrate through all the works and cause enough damage to disrupt the vital life processes and you will make meat. Fall short of that and you may have trouble. Accomplishing that will get more difficult as the body weight goes up and bones, muscles, and hide get tougher. Until you have your own experience to guide you you have to rely on the experience of others as to what works. There will be times when everything seems to be just right, and you'll stiil end up with a chase on your hands. Another time, a poor shot with a marginal load may drop a critter like a hammer. There may be an explanation for both scenarios, but you'll likely never figure it out.

Trying to come up with some magic formula to measure killing power is and always has been a waste of time that would be better spent fishing or watching dancing girls.

Edit: or watching dancing girls fishing!

Frankly, this sort of thread is getting a lot ridiculous... projectile location, location, location...

Anecdotal evidence is about as weak as it comes and very unlikely to lead to valuable insight on shooting anything.

Frank Glaser is quoted in his book by Jim Rearden saying the Swift was the best killer he ever found for everything up to big bears.

In shooting a charging Bear I feel the 06 would have the edge for several reasons.The 25/06 max load with a 120 produces about 2600 ft-lbs of energy. The 06 loaded to max with a 220 gr projectile produced over 3300 ft-lbs of energy. The 25/06 is a great lung puncher. The 06 is a much better bone crusher. When shooting dangerous game up close you can lung punch if you wish to.....I'll choose the bone crusher method and feel ill likely live longer for doing so. One could always load the 06 down and compare but why? If shooting to crush bone effectively one can ask. Do I want to crush with 2000 ish pounds or would 3000 ish pounds of crush be more effective. If taking a head on shot and neither bullet exit which bullet do you believe created the greater wound channel. The one that had 2600 lbs or 3300?

On the other hand if I'm shooting game where lung punching is appropriate I feel the 25/06 would be more efficient and effective than the 06.


IMO ft-lbs of energy work better and is more effective for bone crushing and Velocity is more effective for lung punching.

There really is no one right answer but the individual circumstance has to be taken into consideration.






Shod

Stopping a charge or keeping it from crossing a line is accomplished with a CNS shot.

A CNS shot is accomplished by having intimate familiarity with your weapon.

The variables for that, and a heart/lung shot are only two:


1) A bullet constructed to do the job and....

2) your ability to surgically place it if necessary.


Caliber/cartridge are pretty secondary considerations...ask Shrap, he killed a grizzly with a .25-35 I believe.
I do a lot of " stunt shooting"- shooting deer sized critters with centerfire .22s...they don't leave a blood trail worth a crap, so it is incumbent to shoot them in such a way that there will be no trail to follow.

There is no substitute for trigger time.

The physics side is predictable. The animal side isn't, so I don't see how x vs y is better. One bullet might act a certain way in theory, and even if the ballistic gelatin looks the same everytime its hit, you still can't predict what something with a brain is going to do when hit with a bullet.

Having said that, there was some recent article about how RN had a noticeable effect at impact. Who the hell knows. Sounds like more BS.

If a 100 grain bullet sheds 50%, then there's 50 grains of schrapnel. 150 grain bullet, then there's 75 grains. Does it mean more tissue damage? I guess so.

I've never lost a deer I poked a hole in, so they all work.



Two things matter the most: not much and very little.

This is true I think.

As to the OP's question I'd pick a 30/06 as an all around BG rifle for 500 yard (or any other shots) over a 25/06.

It just makes sense that at some level the added bullet weight, and bore diameter makes breaking bones and penetration easier on heavy animals, and creates a bigger wound, bullet structure being equal.

If this were not true, 25/06's would be good Cape Buffalo rifles. They aren't. OTOH the 30/06 has laid out a zillion of them.

At some level bigger gets better.



Edited to add: This does not mean I dislike the 25/06 and have used it, and the 257 Roberts on lots of western deer and antelope. They are both solid cartridges but not in the class of a 30/06 IMHO.

Sometimes on here people think that if you prefer one cartridge (or bullet) over another it means you think other choices suck, and that's not so; frequently lost in the message.

What Bob is saying is "270"

I'm convinced that a well built, well placed bullet will take care of 99% of all your meat gathering needs and that things are more similar than different. So as of late, placement is about all I really care about and I think a BC from .425 to .485 with a MV of 2,900 to 3,000 FPS is perfect. Plus the added benefit and a free wind chart. Huh?

Run the numbers on any combo within those parameters at a 100 yard zero. Figure your drop chart to around 500 +/- yards and whatever you dial in MOA, is your 5 MPH wind drift in inches at that distance. Double that number and its 10 mph, and so on. It starts to come apart a little over 500, depending on the BC, but I don't shoot any further than that. And it's so damn close I'll hang my hat on it.

Granted there are angles and atmospheric things that can come into play and the wind never blows at an exact speed from left to right. But it's a damn easy way to do it...

Always figgered a guy with a .270 had little need for a .25/06, myself. The .25/06 makes a nice filler for someone with say, a .223 and an '06.

The OP mentioned SD, but recently I read somewhere that the SD that really matters is the SD remaining after expansion. Good point I think.

Something else that occurred to me is that the heavier slugs have more weight to "give" in the form of fragments to fly around inside tearing stuff up. Math ain't my strong point, but I believe 20% of 150gr is pretty much 50% more than 20% of 100.

A few of us here remember the days before all of the great bullets we have today when Vernon Speer was taking empty 22 casings and reforming them and filling them with lead. In those days the 30-30 was a reliable killing machine (and still is) primarily because the bullets were made for that particular cartridge velocity and performed predictably and rarely if ever came apart.
Today with premium controlled expansion bullets the caliber/cartridge question is just about moot. I prefer a medium caliber at around 2800fps because if I screw up a shot (and I do) there will be less meat damage but that is certainly not the only way to roll.

As it pertains to the original post I would say it depends greatly on the animal being shot. For instance moose are pretty easy to kill, but sometimes take awhile to tip over and velocity isn't going to do much for you. Deer OTOH are pretty impressed by velocity. Same with cats from what I understand,although have no expiereance with.

Damned if I know what "killing efficiency" is.

They are either dead or not dead. Now they can be DRT, or DOT(Down Over There). Over There can be a few feet or a few miles, and depends mostly on placement, rather than other factors, tho, as BWalker mentioned, it may possibly also involve bullet speed and animal weight when using hear/lung placement behind the shoulder. In my experience, bang-flops with boiler room placement behind the shoulder is slightly more likely to occur with fast bullets (MV up around 3,000 or higher), than those "poking along" in the mid 2K range, tho many of those IME were also bang/flops.

IME (21) moose take awhile to tip over no matter what they are hit with, unless placement is into the CNS, or at least one front shoulder is broken down. And then not always with that shoulder shot. I have had a sphincter experience with it, and now prefer CNS on moose if I can get it.

Here is some anecdotal "evidence".

I shot my first caribou with a 308 Norma Mag 180 gr. factory load at about 200 yards, and misplaced the shot slightly forward through the shoulder, rather than behind it. DRT.

The next 23 were with a Ruger 77V .25-06, using mostly 120 grain Speer C&C hand loads to near max book loads (Speer manual #8). Them 87s?? just weren't up to it. Never did try those in the 100 gr. range, the 120s working so well (MOA). Ranges from 70 to over 500, mostly 200 to 400. All bang flops except the first one, which was dead but didn't bang-flop until the second round. First round on him went from base of neck to lodging against opposite rear-leg bone at about 150 yards. The rest were either neck shots, but mostly behind the front leg shots.

We'll skip the .260 and .338WM takes- all boiler room bang-flops. (That pecker-shot with the .260 just made him walk funny until I hit him right with the second shot....a little wind drift, range mis-estimation, and embarrassment there!)

I've taken in excess of 25 caribou with 3 different rifles in .30-06, with barrel lengths of 17, 22, and 27 inches. Mostly with the 180 gr. bullet, some premium, some C&C, some hand loads, some factory. Not all were bang-flops. Some were stand until tip-over, or traveled a few yards (less than 50). I can't tell a lick of difference in "killing efficiency" among the various factors..... but the non-bang-flops were all with 180 grain loads until this last season.

Currently I am using a 27" heavy barreled M98 using 150 grain factory loads. Started with Corelokts in 2013 (all bang-flop, boiler room placements from 300 to 450 yards, estimated. 2700fps MV?

In 2014 3 caribou and 1 moose were bang/flops using the 150 gr. Hornady SST Super-Performance factory loads (3080fps MV) at ranges from 70 or so to 300 yards(RF) in a 2 day time frame. The 300 yard caribou was neck shot, the moose (30 yards) head-shot, the 200 yard walking 'bou broadside behind the shoulder, the 70-80 one quartering toward, base of neck entry, exit just behind ribs. Wound channels started with immediate expansion at the skin, and very large exit wounds. Especially the quartering shot.

In 2015 3 caribou were taken, same load/rifle. The @ 150 yard caribou was spine-shot, DRT, of course. Several inches of back-strap on each and both sides of the wound were lost- not really as much as I expected with a bone hit like that. The 290 yard (calculated after RF the carcass) and 433 (prior to shot ranged) yard kills came several weeks later, a couple minutes apart, behind shoulder, standing almost broadside. I waited until the first went down before whacking the second. Both traveled 100 yards or so before tipping over. Wound channels were much less meat damaging than experienced in the prior year, with nickel sized entry, quarter and half-dollar size exits at rib cage using the same load. The only bone hit was a rib bone on exit on one. Perhaps Hornady changed the bullet construction? After hitting the rib, that bullet also shattered the stem of the off-side shoulder blade, resulting in a base-ball size exit on the leg. And the animal still stayed on it's feet for 30 seconds to a minute, but was obviously gimping. Can't say there was any inefficiency in killing power, tho....

I often wonder if the 6.5 swede punches so well above its weight in Sweden is that the hunters are forced to pass a rigorous accuracy test before getting a hunting license.

Excellent point, but no fair injecting logic and reason into a otherwise perfectly silly thread.

Not just Swedes, but Europeans in general routinely pull off shots I wouldn't even think of trying. They get lots of field practice, and like you said, have to prove their ability before they get to play.