Your question demonstrates a refusal to learn so by your own words you are being "stupid" by choice. Congratulations?
I don't know... But I do know that I work with wound ballistics as part of my occupation.
Congratulations. Then you should know that without mass there is no wound channel.
How big a wound channel will VELOCITY make? Kind of depends on a lot of other factors, doesn't it? Like mass and construction of the projectile, and the types and amount of target material encountered?
I don't know how big of a wound channel velocity will make. Just like I don't know how big of a wound channel energy will make. Which is why using either to determine "effectiveness" is stupid.
Nowhere have I ever stated that velocity or energy can be used to determine “effectiveness” or the size of a wound channel that will be created. To the contrary, I’ve often stated that neither is a good predictor. What I have stated is that with all other factors being equal, a bullet of a given construction and mass and significantly higher energy is capable of and can be expected to produce greater damage than the same bullet with significantly less energy. And since mass and construction are fixed, velocity and energy can be used somewhat interchangeably.
I DO know what wound channel a bullet will make at a particular impact velocity by MEASURING the wound channel that is created.
Then you also can make a reasonable prediction of the wound channel your particular bullet type, which has a particular mass and velocity (i.e. energy) and construction, will make in an identical target. Velocity alone tell you nothing.
Velocity alone does not determine how much damage a projectile can do. A projectile's energy defines how much damage (work) is ***possible***, not how much will be done nor what the damage will look like.
"Possible" like "theoretical". I don't care about theoretical, I care about reality. If energy won't tell me "if" the bullet will upset, and it won't tell me "how" the bullet will upset, and it won't tell me how big the wound will be.... Why do I care what it is?
I have a bullet in my hand. What velocity will guarantee it will upset, how will it upset and how big will the wound channel be?
You cannot answer that because you don’t have enough information. Knowledge of the velocity alone is not sufficient.
When you examine a wound channel you are examining the result of work done by an amount of energy equal to or exceeding that determined by a particular bullet with a particular mass and velocity (energy) and construction impacting a particular target.
As far as velocity- do manufacturers list what "ft-lbs energy" a bullet takes to expand/upset? Or Velocity?
I put that question to Speer just last week regarding their 235g .375” bullet. The tech responded with ft-lbs. When I asked (because I was driving) for the corresponding velocity the tech had to pull out a calculator.
Many/most specify a velocity, but in doing so they are also referring to a specific bullet construction and mass. As I have stated before, if you are talking about a specific bullet mass and construction you can use velocity or energy somewhat interchangeably when trying to predict terminal results – but only because both are then known quantities with one and only one possible combination.
Talking about "ft-lbs energy" with regards to wound ballistics is mental and ballistic masturbation.
Denying that energy determines the amount of work that **can*** be done (potential destruction of tissue and bone) is ignorance on display. How much work is actually done is dependent on other factors as well.
