Home Forums Hunting & Shooting General Big Game Bullet weight??

I think the 150 grain 308 and any 358 bullet over 180 grain should receive honorary mention.

The ranking of velocity was

125 gr 260. 2946. Fps

140 gr 708

140 gr 260

150 gr 708

165 gr 308

160 gr 708

180 gr 308

200 gr 308. 2384. Fps

Any of them traveling at the speed of light will overpenetrate.

Fixed it for you.

Angus1895,

After pouring over your results I conclude any will work in an Eastern hardwood forest.

You obviously don't understand physics.

In full context, what I wrote was "If you have a particular bullet and want to insist its velocity matters, only then are you correct because you are also talking about a particular mass as well as velocity - i.e. energy."

Energy = 1/2 * m * v * v

I would also add that for a particular mass and velocity, momentum is also a known quantity.

It seems the less a cartridge is " necked " down the more efficiently it transfers energy to the bullet. And a larger bore would also mean a lighter barrel.

Although mass is divided in half, there is more variability in mass between bullets than velocity. Hence more energy for larger heavier bullets.

But smaller bores will allow superior sectional density and hence Ballistic Coefficient also. With less recoil.

There is so much wrong here it's ridiculous.

Agreed, the very reasons I'm just gonna go material rifle 50-20-30mm.

Or maybe if you're talking about velocity you're just using it as an indicator to make sure you're operating within the design parameters of the bullet for maximum wounding. You know, that stuff Formidilosus keeps bringing up. But what does he know?

Too slow and the bullet doesn't open. Too fast and it disintegrates and doesn't penetrate into the vitals. Pretty simple stuff really and no equations needed to understand it.

Starman -

You are correct.

For a bullet to be effective (kill something quickly) it has to disrupt vital function. A bullet that expends all its energy blowing up in a shoulder may or may not disrupt vital function. A bullet with less energy that destroys the heart certainly does.

And that is where people like smokinrope go wrong. A bullet's energy defines the MAXIMUM energy if can transfer to a target, doing work in the process. What it does NOT define is how much energy will ACTUALLY be transferred to the target or in what time period; if or how much the bullet will expand; or whether it becomes a blunt mushroom, a shrapnel cloud or a shank with rotating petals that combines both blunt-force with cutting action as the petals rotate.

In other words, the energy of a bullet does not predict the efficiency with which or time frame in which it will transfer some or all of that energy to a target. What can be said is that for two identical bullets with the same mass but different velocities (i.e. different energy levels), and all other factors being equal, the bullet with the greater energy has greater POTENTIAL to do damage.

But since it is "such an easy-to-quantify commodity", smokinrope should let us know how much velocity is needed for a bullet to be effective. He won't provide it because he cannot.

LOL, I said KE is easy to quantify. As far as the velocity needed for a bullet to be effective, it depends on the bullet. I thought that much was obvious, but I suppose things aren't obvious when you have your head up your ass.

Velocity is easy to quantify - even easier than KE.

But you say "... it depends on the bullet." In other words, velocity alone tells you nothing, as I've stated from the start.

If that is not correct, just tell us how much velocity is needed for a bullet to be effective?

Give us a table...

Look it up yourself. Every bullet manufacturer has the data.

Not true. Not a one of them does.

All the manufacturer velocities are tied to specific bullets, which means a specific construction, mass (or range of masses), etc. Which means KE or at least a range of KE is known.

No one says "Irrespective of any other factors, velocity 'X' is enough to ensure a bullet will be effective."

Nobody knows what velocity 'X' is except you.

Please enlighten us.

No sh** Sherlock. That's why I said "it depends on the bullet."

Are you really that dense?

Obviously he is...

As I said in the beginning- Dorky engineers and math obsessed people are the ones that wax on and on about "energy". Not that there aren't some great engineers, there are, and I definitely need the math nerds because I'm not figuring out external ballistics without them....

However, it's ALWAYS those two groups that wax on and on about energy, and math, and equations and try non stop to justify their bs. In the end, we still have to shoot the bullets at different impact velocities into tissue simulate and correlate that with live tissue results to know what the bullet will do.

None of their equations give us any info, and is a huge waste of time, money, and resources.




Shoot bullets into properly calibrated tissue simulate. Measure. Done.

Ahhh, so it depends on energy. Got it.