6.5's for elk

[ARK_Ginger]

You can say it as many times as you’d like man, but the FACT is velocity doesn’t deform material.

I’m not really sure why college textbooks is in quotations or why that somehow discredits science

If you don’t understand the science, that doesn’t make it untrue.

I agree that tissue damage kills. I think every hunter understands that fact.

I guess where I missed where he said velocity deforms material? I'm understanding him to say is that bullet designers design bullets to operate within a velocity range.

Back to your table from the 243 thread, it's hard to disprove the manufacture's claimed minimum expansion velocity when we don't know the geometry and material composition (such as jacket thickness).

I would theorize that KE would be a useful measurement if a manufacturer designed a bullet that was the same geometry and material composition across calibers

 

[bhylton]

 

[mtmuley]

I've been killing elk for 40 years. I have never needed any of the information presented here to get one dead, regardless of cartridge used. Glad I'm not smart enough to give a shit. mtmuley

 

[Birdman88]

All the animals I've shot eldm at have died but the bullet performance has left something to be desired. This was 168 gr 308 at 305, frontal on s whitetail this fall. He was dead before he hit the ground but the bullet didn't do much to give me faith in it.

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G930A using Tapatalk

Sub par for sure. Glad it took care of the job

 

[Newtosavage]

I agree that tissue damage kills. I think every hunter understands that fact.

I'm still trying to understand the difference between a 100-grain bullet at 1800 fps vs. a 180-grain bullet at 1800 fps. as it pertains to tissue damage.

The best explanation I've heard in all of this discussion is the "big grenade vs. little grenade" meaning the larger bullets have more to fragment and can send those fragments further in order to create more tissue damage.

 

[Ryan Avery]

******* Nerds! One day soon you bastards will build AI that will kill us all because you want to prove you're the smartest person in the room. A lot like this thread.

I am off to bear hunt before the droids get me....

 

[Wrench]

The statement was made that a 6.5mm cartridge is outperforming a 300wsm. Which is total bullshit. I have both calibers. And have compared shooting heavy bullets out of each.

My 6.5 Creedmore shooting a 140 Berger VLD at 2900 doesn't even come close to the performance of my 300wsm shooting a 210g Berger VLD at 2850. Bullet drop, wind drift, energy delivery, blah blah blah.

Same bullet, similar velocity, the 30cal has a lot more mass to delivery energy. So If someone is getting magical performance out of a 6.5 Creed, 260Rem, even a 6.5 SAUM that can outperform a short mag Id love to see the chrono data and ballistic tables to back it up.

That was me, and I said MY dope on MY rifles favors my 260ai vs my 300WSM's. My wsm shoot the 215 like shit but does great with the 180gr. It doesn't shoot it at dream speeds. Some do, mines isn't one of them.

My backyard is rolling fields for about 12 miles. I've got more than enough opportunity to stretch them out.

I would love my little wsm's to drive the 215 at 3500 and not punch me in the face in the process, but in my collection of rifles they just don't do it.

 

[Wrench]

I'll chuck up a few of the bullets discussed in my mill and we can compare the core and jackets. Perhaps that can shed some light on how the upset at various velocities occurs.

 

[Shraggs]

I thought it was Remington or Winchester marketing that started using a KE energy as a way to compare different calibers on their tables back when print existed.

The formula values speed more right...

Luke is right. Look thru those old tables and you’ll see small high speed calibers with big KE vs slower mid or big bores.

I just can’t be convinced that a 22-250 can kill an elk better than a 45-70 at say a hundred yards.

At 400 yards, the 45/70 may not penetrate (if you elevate enough to hit), the 22-250 may certainly do so - but I’m betting the wounding would be quite meager.

I’m not a long range shooter yet... but I value terminal damage above ballistics, ballistics and technology get me to the animal. Speed seems to be a primary factor for Bullets to do their wounding, ie open. Mass and energy matters certainly and to me is readily apparent in archery using cut on contact BHs, ie drive thru animal regardless of speed.

KE is something I look at cause it’s fun. But I don’t think it really says much. Rather get hit by a blunt arrow ( in shoulder) with 75 ft lbs or a 15 bowling ball of same KE?

 

[ARK_Ginger]

Good thing I have young kids and I’m used to repeating myself

That theory is incorrect. KE leads to stresses. Strain results from stresses. Extent of strain is per geometry & material properties. Facts rooted in science....no trial & error needed.

When folks talk about how bullets are ‘designed’, their referring to guys & gals like me with the technical background & understanding of the associated physical sciences.

Feel free to read up on the sciences if you’re interested or shake your head & stomp your feet. I’m out of this one.

Back to 6.5’s & wapiti!!!

Maybe my theory is incorrect, but just so I'm certain of your opinion, are you saying people with technical backgrounds and a understating of associated physical sciences are incapable of creating a system equation where the bullet deforms and then solve that equation for velocity? You seem to be talking as if you actually know what bullet designers are solving for. Do you work in the industry? You also seem to forget that observation is apart of science. FEA analysis are great and definitely shorten the design cycle, but after they produce the bullet the manufacturer will do exactly as From describes to test the bullet.

Neither Form or I have disagreed about how KE deforms bullets. Form has stated it is a meaningless metric when describing when the bullet will perform. You seem to be hung up on this somehow, and instead of describing why you think KE would be a better metric of bullet performance, you talk about science as a means of insulting our intelligence. To me it just makes it sound as if you're more of a physicist than an actual engineer

EDIT: I reread all of your previous posts and it seems as though you're implying that every bullet will perform differently because of all the different variables as shown in your table in the 243 thread. Which I agree with. But why you can't acknowledge that velocity is the best metric for the manufacturer to use to communicate if the bullet is still effective for their customers' application is beyond me. Maybe the 143gr ELDx will actually expand down to 1400 fps under some conditions, but it is more useful to hunters (that typically don't have the means to test bullets at those velocities) to know at 1600 fps they can rely on it to expand.

 

[granite7]

How can you talk about kinetic energy and exclude velocity? Kinetic energy varies with the square of velocity. You don’t even need a textbook to figure that out. In other words, energy increases exponentially as velocity increases. As you well know, velocity is important.

How much of that kinetic energy gets transferred to the animal plays a large part in killing an animal. If a bullet doesn’t transfer energy, it pencils.

How does a bullet transfer energy? By expanding or fragmenting. Bullet manufacturers give a guideline for minimum velocity to expand on game animals. This way you don’t have to do all of your manual calculations. It has already been modeled and ballparked by the designer and expressed in an easily accessible value that is directly related to kinetic energy. That magic value? Velocity.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Newtosavage]

Okay, we get it. minimum velocity matters.

So then let's talk about - assuming the same construction - bullet WEIGHT and DIAMETER.

That's what I'm asking. Nobody yet has addressed that.

 

[granite7]

It’s right there. More mass (weight) means more energy. Larger caliber means larger mass. Where people get tripped up is in understanding that long for caliber Bullets retain more velocity. Since KE = 1/2 mass x velocity^2, the extra velocity has more effect than extra weight. Bigger is not always better.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Wrench]

There is SO MUCH more to it than simply velocity and weight.

Jacket thickness, shape, meplat size, open vs closed, core fill volume, density.....on and on.

You could write a zillion algorithmsto try and figure it out, or you could spend a few hundred bucks and a few weekends making bullets land where you want....then go push them into shit and see what happens.

You have a whole bunch of successful hunters right here that can save you some heartache. You're gonna have to wade through some opinions and bullshit to get there....but it's not hard to find.

 

[ARK_Ginger]

Okay, we get it. minimum velocity matters.

So then let's talk about - assuming the same construction - bullet WEIGHT and DIAMETER.

That's what I'm asking. Nobody yet has addressed that.

More penetration and potentially larger wound tracks depending on how the bullet was constructed as Form has already pointed out.

 

[Will_TXHunter]

All the animals I've shot eldm at have died but the bullet performance has left something to be desired. This was 168 gr 308 at 305, frontal on s whitetail this fall. He was dead before he hit the ground but the bullet didn't do much to give me faith in it.

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G930A using Tapatalk

Wow, that is really bad bullet performance and at 305 yards, there is no mushroom hardly at all. That is odd for sure. I wonder if you sent that over to the bullet manufacturer with photos of the animal and shot placement if they would have an explanation.

 

[sram9102]

Wow, that is really bad bullet performance and at 305 yards, there is no mushroom hardly at all. That is odd for sure. I wonder if you sent that over to the bullet manufacturer with photos of the animal and shot placement if they would have an explanation.

This setup is 8/8 on deer the past 2 seasons from 6 to 350. This is the only bullet that has stayed in the animal. The densest part of the animal it hit was the ham I found it in. I'm not thrilled with this performance but it blew through the top of his heart. For the most part the rest of the animals have been broadside and haven't gone very far. I'm getting slower than average velocities running a 16.5 inch barrel. Running it suppressed I wanted as short of a setup as possible. Going to shoot these until I run out of the bullets I have to load and I'll find something that is a little more reliable at a lower impact velocity. I'll probably work on pushing the pressure up a bit to get all the velocity I can out of the shorty also.

 

[Newtosavage]

More penetration and potentially larger wound tracks depending on how the bullet was constructed as Form has already pointed out.

So, more penetration because it's carrying more weight at that velocity, and larger wound tracks because of more fragments to offer plus the deeper penetration. Is that about it?

 

[ARK_Ginger]

So, more penetration because it's carrying more weight at that velocity, and larger wound tracks because of more fragments to offer plus the deeper penetration. Is that about it?

Yes

 

[Alaskanopolis]

By Chuck Hawks

Having spent the time and effort to devise a rifle cartridge killing power formula that has a positive correlation with actual results in the field, it seemed appropriate to use that formula to compare the killing power of various hunting rifle cartridges and loads. Here is the G&S Online Killing Power Formula used to compile this list:
Energy at 100 yards (in foot pounds) x Sectional Density (taken from reloading manuals) x cross-sectional Area (in square inches) = Killing Power Score at 100 yards.

• E x SD x A = KPS

Round off to one decimal place for convenience. (For more information, see The G&S Online Rifle Cartridge Killing Power Formula and List.)
100 yards was chosen as a reasonable distance at which to compare rifle cartridges and loads, since most big game is killed within or around that distance. Switching to a heavy for caliber (high sectional density) bullet generally, but not always, increases the killing power score.
Long experience has shown the .44-40 200 grain/1310 fps MV load (KPS 11.0) and traditional .25-35 117 grain/2230 fps MV load (KPS 11.9) are adequate 100 yard deer cartridges, provided the hunter drives the bullet directly into the vitals. Consequently, I have inserted a line of demarcation between the Class 1 (animals weighing less than 50 pounds) and Class 2 (animals weighing up to 300 pounds) cartridges based on a minimum KPS of 11.0 at 100 yards. Consider cartridges/loads scoring below KPS 11.0, at whatever you consider their maximum effective range to be, as small game and varmint cartridges.
However, the Remington Managed Recoil .30-30 125 grain/2175 fps MV (100 yard KPS 12.9) and .357 Magnum (Rifle) 158 grain/1830 fps MV (100 yard KPS 12.7) loads are probably better guides to the minimum practical killing power for Class 2 game with more modern cartridges. Remington specifically states that their Managed Recoil .30-30 load is a 100 yard deer cartridge.
Therefore, I have chosen to use a minimum KPS of 12.5 for Class 2 game in many of my articles. For similar reasons, and being more conservative, Guns and Shooting Online Cutlery Editor Gary Zinn uses a minimum KPS of 15.0 for hunting Class 2 game in most of his rifle articles.
When it comes to hunting larger game, a great many Class 3 animals have been taken by careful shots using cartridges/loads such as the .30-30/170 grain, 6.5x55/140 grain and 7x57/160 grain. On the other hand, most experienced North American elk hunters would probably suggest full power .270 Winchester loads (KPS 35+) as a practical minimum.
A 100 yard KPS score somewhere in the 30s is probably a reasonable figure for most Class 3 game, although less powerful cartridges/loads have long been used successfully. A KPS of 30 corresponds well with a Hornady HITS score over 901, which the experts at Hornady consider the minimum for use on large game.
The Alaskan Game Department considers the .30-06 shooting 220 grain bullets (100 yard KPS 54.6) a reasonable minimum for hunting Alaskan grizzly and brown bears, which are Class 4 (dangerous) animals. In most sub-Saharan African countries where dangerous game is still hunted, the 9.3x62mm/286 grain load (100 yard KPS 88.2) or the .375 H&H Magnum/270 grain load (100 yard KPS 106.2) are the recommended minimum for hunting lion, yet the big cats are about 1/2 to 1/3 the size of the great bears. Obviously, even among vastly experienced game departments, there is plenty of disagreement about rifle cartridge killing power!