You are correct � energy isn�t the only thing that matters. Nevertheless, other factors being equal, energy levels can make a huge difference.
At the end of the day, ALL the damage done to an animal is done via energy transferred from the bullet to the animal. It�s kind of like free falling at 125 mph � it isn�t the velocity that kills you, it is the sudden stop (energy transfer) at the end of the fall.
CH: In some respects I think we are saying/thinking the same things....and when it comes to formulas I must admit to being something of a dolt,because charts and formulae induce me into a deep coma.....
I look at it this way and am sure you will understand because you and I share similar views in the type bullets we like to use.
I have noticed, for example, that (say)Bitterroots (like Northforks and Aframes)make more severe and extensive wounds,the faster they are driven;tend to work "better" at distance from magnum cartridges as distance increases,than from standard cartridges...although they kill well from both,but expansion is more dramatic from (say) those started at 3200 fps than those started at say 2800 fps.
The broad frontal area from higher velocity is what seems to do the damage,coupled with the penetration from good weight retention.
But if we take the same bullet,make it a solid,so that it does not expand,damage is less severe....yet,if started at the same velocity,that solid bullet has the same "energy" as the Aframe or Northfork;yet the wounding effect of the two is dramatically "different".....
No doubt there is "energy" at work here butit always seemed to me that the "energy" has been used in expanding the bullet and in overcoming the resistance presented by the flesh, muscle and bone of the animal;and within limits the broader frontal area of the expanded bullet is what administers the damage,and creates the wounding effect we all see.
My problem with all of this is that I view it all as being a mechanical function,and whether it can all be set forth in a quantitative formula, to predict killing power from a chart or table,is difficult for me to follow,because I can envision circumstances where a 140 gr bullet,from a 7x57 (as an example),can inflict more sheer "damage" to a deer, than a stoutly constructed 250 gr bullet from a 338,which possesses a much higher "paper energy" level...
This may well be because I am a bit lacking in quantitative matters.....and I may be falling down in expressing myself here, but I think you get my drift
Which is why I say that the formula is not of much use in predicting "killing power"(which has been the major reason for the energy tables use over the years),and why I say that much more depends on bullet action (and placement) than construction....but maybe something has gone completely over my head here, which is entirely possible!
