Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Ask The Gunwriters Lethality Index, which one is the best/

which one is it, I want to compare a 338federal 210gr2600fps against others like.

Is 'none of the above' an option?

First I must say that I have no idea which one is best. That said, I don't put much store in the so called indexes/charts other than to be for my entertainment or for comparison. I consider them to be somewhat irrelevant and inaccurate in this era of super bullets where a lesser cartridge can accomplish as much or more than was expected previously of more potent rounds. Of course true premium bullets can do the same for these cartridges as well.

Cup and core projectiles are usually treated the same as the supers in these models. If you are comparing like bullets,"apples to apples", then the charts may still have some utility for you.

I have a difficult time wrapping my mind around the concept that a model can attribute a like value in terms of power or knock-down to a light high velocity projectile vs. a heavy slower one without regard to the projectiles construction.

My opinion only. YMMV.

Maybe someone will direct you to a truly useful formula. I'd be interested as well. I like entertainment like the next guy.

This is a question I would like answered as well. We use these charts/equations and other "gak" quite a bit, so why does one not look at the energy numbers? Is this not usefull info? Is there not a number out there (800ft/lbs?) that is considered minimum for effective deadness? Just wonderin'.

R.

Shot placement, is the best!

The problem with 'energy' as a measure is that the velocity is squared - which means lighter faster bullets get much higher scores. For example, if you halved the bullet weight and doubled the velocity the energy would double. This produces results that seem counterintuitive or contrary to 'real world' experience. Other measures are based on 'momentum', where the velocity is not squared. These measure seem 'biased' in the opposite 'direction' (i.e. favours slower, heavier bullets). Yet other measures seek to 'split the difference' by using a power between 1 and 2 for velocity. None of them are entirely satisfactory, as keys in the 'real world' such as shot location, bullet construction and performance (beyond terminal velocity) are often not considered.

I think the whole "killing power" thing is more "mechanical" than anything else;having bogged down in math eons ago,I don't know how you quantify it,but...

Something happens when you go up in velocity,although it takes a big jump to tell the difference; an example might be what a 257 Weatherby does to a woodchuck at 250 yards that a 25/20 doesn't.

Something happens when you go up in bullet weight and bore diameter,although,again, it takes a big jump to see a difference.Even professional hunters in Africa distinguish between "hunting cartridge/bullets" and "stopping" cartridges and bullets.See Ganyana's article on Dangerous Game Cartridges in the recent Rifle magazine.

As cartridges and bullets remain "close" in velocity,weight,and diameter,the differences become a bit obscured.Don't know that the whole process lends itself to quantification by mathematical formula,not reliably anyway.Seems you can't compare anything unless bullet structure is equal across the board.JMHO.

All or nothing.A STW at mach 7 is pretty lethal.

I would be willing to bet that there is not a statistically measureable difference between 100 grain .243 soft point bullets and 210 grain 338 soft point bullets of the same manufacture fired at under 3000 fps hitting the same types and rough body weight of animals in the chest cavity at under 100 yards.

Maybe not perfect, but a formula that I've found has a lot of merit is the Taylor's Knock Out value (TKO). This is arrived at by multiplying

bullet weight (grains) x velosity (FPS) x Caliber (inches) and dividing the total by 7000

The .338 federal load mentioned above works out such: (210 x 2600 x .338) / 7000 = 26.36

Some rounds comparitivly are the:
165gr .30-06 @ 2850 = 20.69
130gr .270 @ 3050 = 15.69
200gr .358 @ 2600 = 26.59

The TKO values seem to some to give excess credit to heavy bullets and large bore size and penalize small bore light bullet rounds.

For instance the 100gr .243 @ 3000fps gives a TKO value of just 10.41 while the .44 Mag with a 240 gr bullet at 1750fps is rated at 25.74 (a higher value than the .30-06 at the muzzle)

This doesn't ring true if one considers such thing as energy alone (as is common), but in the real world it is very close to what I have observed over the years.

Remember, all reasonable rounds are equaly "lethal" when the bullet is placed perfectly (dead is dead and can't be improved on).....but the real value of a particular round is when things go wrong and the animal is NOT hit right.

That's where the TKO values shine. An animal hit too far back tends to get "sick" and stop a lot quicker (if not "pushed") when hit with a heavier slug that penetrates and "punches" it harder.....and the bigger the bullet (diameter) the harder it hits and more it bleeds.....leading to a qicker recovery by the hunter and better trail to follow.

You will often read things like "a gut shot deer with a .358 is the same as a gut shot deer with a .243 and will travel just as far". While this is true if the animal is pushed, but in practice an undisturbed deer does tend to lay down quicker with the bigger round and bleed out quicker becoming too sick to get away (basically gives up).

While a "gut shot is a gut shot" (just like "dead is dead") there definitly IS a difference in the reaction to the shot with a bigger gun. That's why statements like "DRT" and "hit 'em in the lungs and stuff dies" mean so little when judging a round......they all work when things are perfect....but the TKO is very meaningful when thing go wrong.

By the way, even though it doesn't seem right, the .44 Mag at ranges of 50 yards or so actually IS more effective than the .30-06 in my experience. That "50 yards" distance is important.....the TKO value changes as velosity drops and the .30-06 will soon overtake the slower .44 at longer range and become a better choice. Figure the TKO at the range you intend to use it to get a clear picture.

As to the .338 Fed......it should perform almost exactly like the .358 Win and that's not bad. A great round at it's intended range (250-300 yards or less).

I thought TKO was used for solids.

As I understand it....the TKO "was" originally used to compare solids.

In fact, it was designed to compare solids for use against elephant and the "knock out" value was supposed to be a relative value eqivalent to the time an elephant would be "knocked out" with a round fired into the head, but missed the brain. The higher the value, the longer you supposedly had to place a follow-up shot before the elephant regained his feet and proceeded to stomp the hunter into a bloody pulp.

In practice, I have found that the TKO values of various rounds are very close to what I've observed in the field as far as the reaction of thin-skinned game to expanding bullets.

Once again, I repeat, almost any round will "kill" an animal if the shot is through the lungs, heart or into the nervous system, but there is a definite difference in how the animal reacts to the shot.....particularly if the shot is less than perfect.

Just as when hunting dangerous game......sometimes it is more important to "stop" the animal (and "perfect" DRT shots don't figure into this) than it is to "kill". The TKO values come a close as anything I've seen to predicting the animal's reaction to a particular round.

my experience is in general that they all are very similar regards kiling deer when shot in the same place and you would be hard pressed to make a case for one or the other. The .270Win with 130 grain softpoints "seems" a little better to me, but that could be my imagination.

Velocity junkie.......

No idea... my POV is pick a cartridge/rifle combo you like and get on with it. The bulk of BG cartridges are more alike than different and all work if actually used and pointed correctly.

Velocity is what matters most to me. So long as there is adequate velocity to properly expand XYZ bullet at the distances I'm likely to shoot then all is golden.

It occurs to me that the results may be more "valid", or at least somewhat more correlated, if we had multiple indices based on shot placement and game species. For instance: Comparing a 243/100 against a 30-06/180 placing all bullets from both in the ribcage of a whitetail deer, or; Comparing a 243/100 against a 30-06/180 placing all bullets from both in the center of the shoulder of a whitetail deer.

The same caliber/bullet combinations would likely produce yet different results if the game were elk or woodchuck. Since the quantity of literal combinations is too numerous to make testing feasible, maybe we could reduce the game species variable to a small number of classes, such as small game (ground squirels to woodchucks), medium game (coues deer to caribou), large game (elk to moose and bison), and large dangerous game.

I would love to do this testing. I anyone wants to hire me and finance the necessary gear and accomodations, I would probably do it.

-

I have noticed that the 30-06,35 Remington,and 44 mag all seem to perform very much alike on deer and hogs. They are all quick killers and the wound channels were pretty much identical.

This made no sense to me because their kinetic energy varies a lot. When I discovered that they had similar TKO,it made more sense.

There are two ways to get there, you can make bullets go faster,or you can make them bigger.

Based on what I've seen with a 350 Rem Mag,I'll bet your 338 Federal will be a great killer at most any reasonable range.

A lot of varibles comed into play here and that is why it is a never ending discussion..At 100 yards there is little if any difference from the 30-30 to the 300 magnums and the results are the same if properly constructed bullets for each are placed in a vital zone...You will probably start seeing a difference at the .375 H&H in my opinnion, but only then on the larger stuff.

The bottom line is placing a proper bullet in the right spot, but like most things, one needs to add a little common since to this scenario and too often that's not done on the internet hunting blogs.

What won't that kill? (Aside from Elephantopottamuses)

BMT