Read 223 and 6mm thread before arguing these points
500 easy energy on 6 creed shorty here
Reposting to fix spelling errors
Sure well the point I was trying to make is that kinetic energy and velocity or inextricably linked. More velocity means more energy, and velocity has much greater influence on kinetic energy than mass since its mass * velocity ^ 2, or mass times velocity squared. So I think we are oversimplifying the problem and creating a false dichotomy by saying it has to be one or the other, when there’s a causal relationship between the two that doesn’t make sense. Anyways I’m not convinced we should be throwing out energy from the analysis here, they’re two different ways of looking at the same thing. Does this make sense?
To exaggerate my point even either, if velocity is the only thing that mattered, you’d see people taking down bull elk with .17 HMR all day. Mass and consequently energy do play a role. Again this is just my opinion, if have not actually looked to see if there is a .17 HMR thread of people taking down bull elk.
Now let’s look at the opposite end of the spectrum. Something very heavy and relatively slow, like a 12 guage slug. I think we can both agree a well placed slug will take down a bull. But it’s slow compared to 6.5 creed, or 223, even 17 hmr, so how is it able to kill the bull if only velocity matters? Again this makes me think energy does have influence, not just velocity IMO.
So to sum it up, velocity and energy are inextricably linked. You raise velocity you get more energy. Also very light and fast rounds can kill elk, so can slow and heavy rounds. What do both of those have in common? Lots of kinetic energy.
Terminal ballistics is a complicated, nuanced subject though and I wouldn’t use energy or velocity as the end-all-be-all way to determine if a round is good enough to kill an elk. It’s just one data point of many to help decide the optimal load.
