24hourcampfire.com
24hourcampfire.com
Previous Thread
Next Thread
Print Thread
Hop To
Page 4 of 6 1 2 3 4 5 6
Joined: Jun 2010
Posts: 1,411
S
Campfire Regular
Offline
Campfire Regular
S
Joined: Jun 2010
Posts: 1,411
While my experience is dated (80's), I had a Colt Delta Elite in 10mm and I was using the Norma Factory loads (200 gr. I think) on Hogs around Tallahassee and a small whitetail on the lease over in Quincy. It always worked pretty well, nothing needed to be shot twice and nothing ran far.

It had a little kick, and shooting it near dusk was a treat, big fireball.

I sold it to a friend who sent it back to Colt I think in 2005 for a refresh and it was reblued; it's still his truck gun.

Last I heard he still shoots hogs and the occasional gator with it.

Last edited by StarchedCover; 04/22/14. Reason: missed word

Semper Fi
BP-B2

Joined: Jun 2005
Posts: 27,500
Campfire Ranger
Offline
Campfire Ranger
Joined: Jun 2005
Posts: 27,500
That is about how I treat my 1911 in 10mm, an all around GP daily carry, in the truck, fun shooting handgun. It will be seeing less trail and stream fishing outings now that I have another 329PD 44 Magnum that is much lighter, though.


LOVE God, LOVE your family, LOVE your country, LIKE guns and sports.

About 2016 team "R" candidates "We definitely need a crew with a sack of balls the size of hot water bottles, bloviated estrogen leaking feel-gooders need not apply." Gunner 500
Joined: Feb 2010
Posts: 2,484
Campfire Regular
Offline
Campfire Regular
Joined: Feb 2010
Posts: 2,484
Originally Posted by jwp475
The 475 Linebaugh with a 420 grain bullet at 1400 fps has 11.6 Newtons forces. The 300 win mag with a 180 grain bullet at 3000 fps has 10.665 Newtons force.

When converting to force the handgun does not take a back seat to 300 win mag rifle in fact the handgun takes the front seat.


Originally Posted by jwp475
Force is indeed a factor in producing the wound channel.


JWP, this concept is alien to me. Can you explain? Forgetting whether relevant or not, one can calculate the momentum (MxV) of a moving bullet or the kinetic energy of a moving bullet (1/2xMxV^2) at any point along its flight path up to (and even after impact if you can measure that). Those two physical concepts involve only mass and velocity of the bullet.

Force, however, is mass times acceleration. The flying bullet after it leaves the barrel, does not have force. It does not accelerate after it leaves the barrel. So, there is no A in the MxA calculation. When it hits something of a certain mass, it may cause it, as a whole, to accelerate in one direction, but usually not very much. It can cause numerous particles (like an exploding water jug, watermelon, or tissue inside of an animal) to collectively accelerate with the individual masses of each particle in countless directions. But I have never heard how that can be calculated.

A cartridge's powder charge does exert force on a bullet in a barrel, but that can't be what you mean. In the end, it results in a given velocity muzzle velocity, which, for a given bullet, is (whether high or low, good or bad) what matters. For example, if you have a cartridge in a gun with a 10" barrel that can accelerate a 300gr bullet to a given velocity (say 2,000fps) it must exert twice the average force on the bullet than a load in a 20" barrel that achieves the same velocity must exert (in the shorter barrel, it accelerates from 0fps to 2,000fps twice as fast). But it can't matter how quickly a bullet accelerates to its muzzle velocity in terms of its effect on game after it exits the barrel. And you can't calculate the force a bullet will impart on an animal.

So, forgive me if I a misunderstanding, but how are you getting the Newtons-of-force results above?

I think you might be referring to momentum, which favors slower, heavier bullets (because the velocity is not squared as in the KE calculation), but I'm not sure.

EDIT: I think you are talking about momentum, not force. And the units are Newton-seconds (Newtons times seconds).

Joined: Apr 2005
Posts: 30,812
J
Campfire 'Bwana
Offline
Campfire 'Bwana
J
Joined: Apr 2005
Posts: 30,812

Newton's force is is 1 KG times 1 meter per second. Convert FPS to meters per second then convert bullet weight in grains to KG and multiple together.

http://m.wikihow.com/Calculate-Force


http://csep10.phys.utk.edu/astr161/lect/history/newton3laws.html




I got banned on another web site for a debate that happened on this site. That's a first
Joined: Sep 2013
Posts: 11,260
G
Campfire Outfitter
Offline
Campfire Outfitter
G
Joined: Sep 2013
Posts: 11,260
Fig Newtons would be a good bait for Wild Hogs IMHO.


Gun Shows are almost as comical as boat ramps in the Spring.
IC B2

Joined: Sep 2013
Posts: 11,260
G
Campfire Outfitter
Offline
Campfire Outfitter
G
Joined: Sep 2013
Posts: 11,260
Those original Norma loads were hot. Real hot. Did not mate up very well with the early Delta's. The S&W 1006 could take a steady diet of them.


Gun Shows are almost as comical as boat ramps in the Spring.
Joined: Apr 2005
Posts: 30,812
J
Campfire 'Bwana
Offline
Campfire 'Bwana
J
Joined: Apr 2005
Posts: 30,812
Originally Posted by Gibby
Fig Newtons would be a good bait for Wild Hogs IMHO.



Probably would.



I got banned on another web site for a debate that happened on this site. That's a first
Joined: Sep 2013
Posts: 11,260
G
Campfire Outfitter
Offline
Campfire Outfitter
G
Joined: Sep 2013
Posts: 11,260
The best bait (in traps)for hogs that I have found is:

Cracked corn with Tang or powdered Gatorade sprinkled on top. They will work hard to get all that powder. They fight over it.

To stay on topic, a 10mm works wonders in hog trap clearing.


Gun Shows are almost as comical as boat ramps in the Spring.
Joined: Aug 2013
Posts: 2,462
M
Campfire Regular
Offline
Campfire Regular
M
Joined: Aug 2013
Posts: 2,462
Was hoping to report on shooting a hog today, and whether or not it's stomach contents contained Fig Newtons, but, alas, the 10mm did not get to speak today. Smelled hogs in the woods at one point, and got lots of pictures off the trail cams of hogs (and deer) at night, but no shots with the pistols. My wife will be out of town this weekend, though, and I really hope to give my 10mm a baptism in hog killing.

By the way, snakes are out. Hardly ever see them on my place - think the hogs keep them thinned down, but almost stepped on the same one twice today. Both times he was evidently more afraid of me than I of him, and beat a very hasty retreat.

Joined: Sep 2013
Posts: 11,260
G
Campfire Outfitter
Offline
Campfire Outfitter
G
Joined: Sep 2013
Posts: 11,260
Mike-

If you kill a hog that has eaten Fig Newton's. Report back in meters not yards for distance of shot. Before you shoot, yell
E=(mc)^2. Make sure they understand or they won't die.

I do not know if Speer makes shot capsules for the 10mm. Better take your model 60 or a bulldog with shot for them snakes. Just saying. Follow your nose with hogs. Through some powdered Tang upwind. They will come to you. Yea Right! Good luck.

For the braniac's, do not take offence. I did learn from you guys.



Gun Shows are almost as comical as boat ramps in the Spring.
IC B3

Joined: Feb 2010
Posts: 2,484
Campfire Regular
Offline
Campfire Regular
Joined: Feb 2010
Posts: 2,484
Originally Posted by jwp475

Newton's force is is 1 KG times 1 meter per second. Convert FPS to meters per second then convert bullet weight in grains to KG and multiple together.

http://m.wikihow.com/Calculate-Force


http://csep10.phys.utk.edu/astr161/lect/history/newton3laws.html



Okay, it's not Newton's force. Newton was a guy, and they named the unit of force after him.

No. A Newton of force is not "1 KG times 1 meter per second." It is 1 KG times 1 meter per second-SQUARED.

I'm sure the Newtons above you are referring to are Newtons x seconds, which is a unit of Momentum, not force. You cannot measure the "force" of a bullet.

http://www.physicsforums.com/showthread.php?t=191493

m = meters
M = Mass
Kgs = kilograms
s = seconds
V = velocity (m/s)

Momentum = Mass (in kgs) x Velocity (in m/s)
Thus, Momentum is measured in (kg x m)/s.

Force = Mass x Acceleration = kg x m/s^2
One Newton of force is 1 kg x 1m/s^2

Newton times the number of seconds (or Newton x s) = (kg x m/s^2) x s = (kg x m)/s

Thus, Momentum = (kg x m)/s = Newton x s

Thus, the metric units for momentum is Newton x seconds or more simply: (kg x m)/s.

No one ever has attempted, as far as I know, to measure the "force" of a bullet, which is a meaningless concept. At any given moment in time, it has diameter; sectional density; ballistic coefficient; velocity; mass; momentum; and energy (and any other formula that is a composition of some of the above). But it has no force because it is not accelerating after leaving the barrel.

Joined: Feb 2010
Posts: 2,484
Campfire Regular
Offline
Campfire Regular
Joined: Feb 2010
Posts: 2,484
In case there is any doubt:

Converting the 180gr .300 WM load you referenced above at 3,000 fps to metric units:

1 kilogram = 15,432.3584 grains. So there are 1/15,432.3584 kilograms per grain.
Thus, a 180gr .300 WM bullet has 180/15,432.3584 kilograms of mass = 0.0117 kgs.
Also 3,000 fps = 914.36 m/s.

Remember: Momentum = Mass (in kgs) x Velocity (in m/s) which translates to units of Newton x s OR (kg x m)/s.

For the 180gr/3,000fps .300 WM load referenced above, in metric units of momentum, you have:

0.0117 kgs (Mass) x 914.36 m/s (Velocity) = 10.665 (kg x m)/s (Newton x s). Exactly the same as you said above: �The 300 win mag with a 180 grain bullet at 3000 fps has 10.665 Newtons force.�

Only it is not �Newtons [of] force,� but Newton-seconds of Momentum.

You�re saying �Newtons of force,� but meaning �Newton-seconds of momentum.�

Joined: Feb 2010
Posts: 2,484
Campfire Regular
Offline
Campfire Regular
Joined: Feb 2010
Posts: 2,484
Originally Posted by Gibby
Mike-

If you kill a hog that has eaten Fig Newton's. Report back in meters not yards for distance of shot. Before you shoot, yell
E=(mc)^2. Make sure they understand or they won't die.

I do not know if Speer makes shot capsules for the 10mm. Better take your model 60 or a bulldog with shot for them snakes. Just saying. Follow your nose with hogs. Through some powdered Tang upwind. They will come to you. Yea Right! Good luck.

For the braniac's, do not take offence. I did learn from you guys.



I'm not saying momentum matters or that it doesn't, but "force" has nothing to do with it, and is not the same thing as momentum.

Joined: Jun 2005
Posts: 27,500
Campfire Ranger
Offline
Campfire Ranger
Joined: Jun 2005
Posts: 27,500
Marine Hawk...

Wow, cool posts! I am no math wizard by any stretch, so cannot claim to understand fully all that you wrote or posted, but you made it clear enough in your writing style and presentation that I got the gist of it.

You shed much light on the topic, IMO.

As for me, I will stick with what my experience and that of others has shown. Holes through vital pieces/parts and critical bones (always) plus hydraulic effects from very high velocities at impact (sometimes, and only with fairly high velocity rifles) are reliable indicators or predictable killers of large game. And the bigger and more dangerous the game animal, the less reliable is the Hydraulic overload part of the equation.


LOVE God, LOVE your family, LOVE your country, LIKE guns and sports.

About 2016 team "R" candidates "We definitely need a crew with a sack of balls the size of hot water bottles, bloviated estrogen leaking feel-gooders need not apply." Gunner 500
Joined: Jun 2005
Posts: 27,500
Campfire Ranger
Offline
Campfire Ranger
Joined: Jun 2005
Posts: 27,500
Also, a few gunwriters have written good articles in fairly recent years about momentum being a much more critical or important part of the equation. And momentum is lost rapidly with the loss of weight, which is why the new breed of super bullets are so superior to what we had a (very!)few decades ago. i.e they maintain much more momentum after impact to do more disruption, damage and penetration.

Last edited by safariman; 04/22/14.

LOVE God, LOVE your family, LOVE your country, LIKE guns and sports.

About 2016 team "R" candidates "We definitely need a crew with a sack of balls the size of hot water bottles, bloviated estrogen leaking feel-gooders need not apply." Gunner 500
Joined: Feb 2010
Posts: 2,484
Campfire Regular
Offline
Campfire Regular
Joined: Feb 2010
Posts: 2,484
Safariman, I agree. And note I was just correcting minor terminology. There are sooo many variables. One bullet/velocity combination might work better on larger game with a bone impact. Others might work better with smaller animal; others might work better on both when no bone is hit; some may work better at longer ranges where you need a sleek bullet to get out there without mortar-like trajectory; others (like a flat nose HC larger diameter handgun bullet) might work better at shorter ranges when you are not planning to shoot (or capable or shooting) hundreds of yards with a handgun, etc ...

No one has all the answers, but there is some interesting data here, including a lot of actual penetration data and the theory behind it: http://www.rathcoombe.net/sci-tech/ballistics/methods.html

More generally, the same guy has some conceptual ideas here: http://www.rathcoombe.net/sci-tech/ballistics/myths.html

I really like the guy's approach (in that last link) to the various theories. For example, the Taylor Knock Out, though given credibility by various accomplished writers, is completely silly for normal hunting:

Taylor Knockout (TKO)

I almost hate to comment on this one because it happens to be a favorite of one of my favorite gun writers, a man of outstanding skill and a reputable hunter whose guidance in such matters should not be taken lightly (and I don't refer to Taylor!). Taylor himself was also a man of unimpeachable experience and his views on rifles and calibers, especially for dangerous game, is taken as gospel on the subject.

However, this formula has got to go.

I'm sympathetic to the motivations which brought about its creation. The "smallbore cranks" were a cult phenomenon at the time, preaching vehemently about high velocity and kinetic energy. A number of this following ventured to Africa, and like their predecessors in the heyday of blackpowder "express" cartridges, experienced miserable failures in the field, sometimes with fatal consequences to the shooter or guides. Taylor was attempting to counter this "scientific" kind of argument with a kind of scientific methodology. Applying his many years of experience to the problem (and it must be confessed, his biases as well), he developed a formula which favored the kind of bullets and cartridges he knew to work reliably:

TKO = Bullet Weight (lbs) x Impact Velocity (fps) x Bullet Diameter (in)

Regrettably, this formula is as misleading as any kinetic energy figures or OGW or any other I've seen. For example, a hand-thrown baseball would have roughly twice the TKO of the standard nitro express load. I doubt if anyone would argue that bouncing a baseball off the noggin of an elephant would produce any positive result. Taylor himself acknowledged that there wasn't any appreciable difference in the killing performance of the various .400s, .416s, .450s, .465s, .470s, .475s, and .500s on dangerous game when loaded with reliable bullets of sound construction. But his TKO formula (as generally interpreted) exaggerates any difference that might exist because it makes the bore diameter equally as important as the velocity; thus a .488 caliber .475 Jeffery No. 2 is seen to be 7% more potent than a .458 caliber .450 NE even though they both have the same ballistics. The comparison becomes even more exaggerated between a .450/.400 NE and a .500 NE in which the larger bore is calculated to be 55 % more potent, even though Taylor regards them as being very similar in killing performance. In fairness to the author, the TKO value is generally misinterpreted (notice that the table he provides only includes loads for solid bullets). Taylor himself said of it:

I do not pretend that they [TKOs] represent "killing power"; but they do give an excellent basis from which any two rifles may be compared from the point of view of the actual knock-down blow, or punch, inflicted by the bullet on massive, heavy-boned animals such as elephant, rhino and buffalo. (African Rifles and Cartridges, pg. xii)

There seems to be a lot of misunderstanding about this word "shock"; men seem to be under the impression that it implies killing power. But that is erroneous. (African Rifles and Cartridges, pg. 58)

Elaborating, the author indicates that this stunning effect truly applies for the most part to near misses of the brain on elephant, enabling a more leisurely dispatch with a follow-up shot (possibly of lesser caliber) or, especially, permitting the shooting of other nearby elephants, while the first is down. Such tactics are no longer permissible and were never ethical in my view (Taylor was a self-acknowledged poacher). Indeed, whether his TKO is true even in this sense is a highly contentious matter, disputed by some very experienced African hunters (I will not pretend to be highly experienced in this regard, but I have seen a Cape buffalo shot between the eyes, within millimeters of its brain, with a .500 NE which did not produce any effect whatsoever). More recently, Craig Boddington has voiced a similar doubt on the basis of his observations and those of other contemporary hunters and game control officers ("Like a Freight Train", Rifle Shooter, November - December 2009, pgs. 38 - 42). But the point here is that Taylor never offered this formula as an indicator of killing or even "shocking" performance for hits on the body. That is an American gun pundit extrapolation of thought. Taylor includes TKO values for everything down to the .256 Mannlicher, but not with a view to offering the relative merits of one small-bore or medium-bore against another for general hunting use - its to show how puny these are relative to the big-bores for stopping an elephant. Still, Taylor also made the point that even a stopping rifle was ineffective with poor shooting:

"Both barrels from a .600 in the belly will have little more apparent effect on [an elephant] than a single shot from a .275 in the same place." (African Rifles and Cartridges, pg. 59)

American hunters and gun writers use terms like "stopping power", "shock" and "killing power" to describe how quickly a deer (elk, antelope, etc.) falls when hit. Practically no one hunts elephant anymore and I can't remember the last time I saw an article on that subject. Promotion of the TKO is indicative of the careless way in which any quasi-scientific method is seized upon, even though the originator of it may reject that purpose to which it is put (though, again, I am not endorsing or placing validity on Taylor's TKO calculation, even for the purpose he intended).

Incidentally, if there is a "knockout" effect it will almost certainly be a function of bullet shape, presented area and velocity. Bullet mass will not matter greatly, but a separate calculation would be necessary to assess whether sufficient penetration was provided.


http://www.rathcoombe.net/sci-tech/ballistics/myths.html

Joined: Nov 2008
Posts: 4,187
Campfire Tracker
Offline
Campfire Tracker
Joined: Nov 2008
Posts: 4,187
Good night, this feels like an early 90's time capsule in here with all the Taylor/Fackler stuff. Is Shawn Dodson going to post next? When will Marshall and Sanow or the Strasbourg goat tests be drug out. I suppose it is fun to talk about, but for me the bottom line is this.

All other things equal...
Bigger bullets kill game better than smaller bullets.
Faster bullets kill game better than slower bullets.

In the handgun realm, the 10mm slings a fairly big bullet along at a fairly high velocity. Sounds good to me.

Joined: Apr 2005
Posts: 30,812
J
Campfire 'Bwana
Offline
Campfire 'Bwana
J
Joined: Apr 2005
Posts: 30,812



en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Force



I got banned on another web site for a debate that happened on this site. That's a first
Joined: Dec 2013
Posts: 1,124
C
Campfire Regular
Offline
Campfire Regular
C
Joined: Dec 2013
Posts: 1,124
Originally Posted by K1500
All other things equal...
Bigger bullets kill game better than smaller bullets.
Faster bullets kill game better than slower bullets.

Unfortunately, it's a lot more complicated than that. Things are never equal and they cannot be. Big doesn't need to expand and it doesn't have to be fast to work. Small has to be fast and it has to expand to work. Two completely different dynamics.

Joined: Jun 2005
Posts: 27,500
Campfire Ranger
Offline
Campfire Ranger
Joined: Jun 2005
Posts: 27,500
Originally Posted by K1500
Good night, this feels like an early 90's time capsule in here with all the Taylor/Fackler stuff. Is Shawn Dodson going to post next? When will Marshall and Sanow or the Strasbourg goat tests be drug out. I suppose it is fun to talk about, but for me the bottom line is this.

All other things equal...
Bigger bullets kill game better than smaller bullets.
Faster bullets kill game better than slower bullets.


In the handgun realm, the 10mm slings a fairly big bullet along at a fairly high velocity. Sounds good to me.


I LOVED reading of the Strasbourg goat tests! You are treading on holy ground there, mister! wink grin

More seriously, your interpretation of the killing power of the 10mm matches with my thoughts. And, being a 40 cal, it does not have to expand to work well. I plan to experiment with some 215gr HCFN bullets for it one of these days soon coming. That said, starting the very reliable expanding Gold Dot 180's at a chronographed 1375, gives me a good set of killing power theories at work, simoultanasly. A fairly large bullet to begin with, capable of pretty deep penetration, hitting at about as high of a velocity as handgun bullets can be expected to generate. I have some 155gr solid copper Barnes hollow point bullets to try in this gun, I should be able to start them at around 1500fps, they might be a real deadly combo. Those and some 215gr FNHC pills will be next up in my experiments when I get a little bit of play money in my hands for more bullets.


LOVE God, LOVE your family, LOVE your country, LIKE guns and sports.

About 2016 team "R" candidates "We definitely need a crew with a sack of balls the size of hot water bottles, bloviated estrogen leaking feel-gooders need not apply." Gunner 500
Page 4 of 6 1 2 3 4 5 6

Moderated by  RickBin 

Link Copied to Clipboard
YB23

Who's Online Now
152 members (35, 257 mag, 10Glocks, 2UP, 300_savage, 160user, 14 invisible), 1,855 guests, and 840 robots.
Key: Admin, Global Mod, Mod
Forum Statistics
Forums81
Topics1,187,728
Posts18,400,778
Members73,822
Most Online11,491
Jul 7th, 2023


 







Fish & Game Departments | Solunar Tables | Mission Statement | Privacy Policy | Contact Us | DMCA
Hunting | Fishing | Camping | Backpacking | Reloading | Campfire Forums | Gear Shop
Copyright © 2000-2024 24hourcampfire.com, Inc. All Rights Reserved.
Powered by UBB.threads™ PHP Forum Software 7.7.5
(Release build 20201027)
Responsive Width:

PHP: 7.3.33 Page Time: 0.105s Queries: 15 (0.004s) Memory: 0.9142 MB (Peak: 1.0953 MB) Data Comp: Zlib Server Time: 2024-03-29 10:06:14 UTC
Valid HTML 5 and Valid CSS