Form,
why is there such a significant difference in reliable terminal effects between 5.56 and 338 Lapua? Let's pick an equal distance for both, say 800m.
You can play that game a couple of different ways. Consider two bullets with identical kinetic energy. The first is a 105 grain Berger VLD shot out of a .240 Weatherby at 10 feet from the muzzle.
The second is a 155 grain full metal jacket non-expanding bullet out of a .308, X distance downrange.
Identical kinetic energy but there's no doubt in my mind which one I'd rather be shot with. How about you?
You are comparing two bullets with distinctly different construction and each engineered to perform very differently. Given the choice, most people would wisely choose the .308 because it will be much slower (roughly 2552fps vx 3100fps) but also - and often primarily - because it is designed not to expand while the Berger is designed to spew up to 85% of its weight as shrapnel. I'd rather be hit with the .308/155g FMJ at 3100fps than the Berger at the same speed, even though the KE would be much greater.
As I've said before, using KE to compare bullets of vastly different construction is something of a fool's game. In this case, both bullets have the same maximum possible capability for destruction, based on identical KE, but their efficiency in transferring that KE to a flesh and bone target is very, very different.
Instead of shooting flesh and bone, suppose you want to pierce armor? I'll place my bets on a 150g AP round with identical KE to that of the .240WM/105g Berger.
