Questions about the irrelevance of energy (ft-lbs)

[Stinky Coyote]

Nearing 80, less recoil was the number 1 reason for selling my magnums. At the same time though, I'm not happy compromising external & terminal performance. Hence, my keeping my 30-06.

This thread has been a real eye-opener. For me anyway, No one will ever convince me to hunt Grizzly with a 223 / 243 of any kind. That said - after reading all these posts - it seems my 6.5 PRC will effectively handle all the rest of my NA hunting. The cartridge being a nice balance of recoil, external and terminal ballistics.

Hunt safe ya'll.

yup, you've chosen well and have a very high versatility option for most anything in North America from 0-1000-ish yards with plenty of insurance built in, enjoy every minute out there

 

[Stinky Coyote]

And just to round out all possibilities.

Some element of ‘fear of potentially changing the game’ splashed in also, for whatever reasons, because that’s normal. Industry/Manufacturers may fear it will reduce sales if we realize we don’t need 1200 options to constantly spend money on and try, that we may see too much overlap etc? Some of it may be ego related. Thinking they know what’s best and more than most etc. Or that we’ve taken it as far as we can and won’t allow the thought of possibility that we are still actually crawling in diapers because they personally can’t see it.

Can't ignore the cheerleader effect either. Those just standing with their forum studs regardless their stance. Easy to see lots of that in threads, especially in certain forums. Like the people who watch the msm and parrot it word for word, no thinking required, someone else does it for them.

I could give a fack about the feelers or ego stuff, and or potential industry fear either as if one door closes others open. I don’t understand why a selfish reason needs to stand in way, I’m not driven by money or ego. I have no fears. I just ask questions and connect dots on what would be better for the team.

 

[Stinky Coyote]

gel picture

fbi example - what is given for info, impact velocity, 16" travel, finished diameter and weight, bunch of work along that travel represented visually by damage of various types

what I want to know is...

at the 7" mark what was the velocity, bullet weight, and sd...so from there we could see the work being transferred, and again what was it at the 8" mark, 9" mark???? and every damn inch of that travel, ie; what is the rate of bullet change in relation to the rate of work transferred, and more, where is the bulk of the workload along the travel, how much is that workload

what's the work transfer curve of that option? the dyno? what work output is it doing at this particular swim speed? or that swim speed? is it all at the front end where most useful? or do I need a linear option because the game is much larger than normal and need to get deeper as a 1st priority?

and I wanna see it at all useful impact velocities whether by doing every 200 fps and filling in the blanks from the deltas between and v-lookup tables feeding the outputs from the background etc....whatever it takes

we can't see any of that yet, but the info is there, we just need to learn how to get it

I hear those Garmin zero's are the sh1t...can they measure through gel? haha

we have only begun starting to ask the right questions on this

 

[Billogna]

gel picture

fbi example - what is given for info, impact velocity, 16" travel, finished diameter and weight, bunch of work along that travel represented visually by damage of various types

what I want to know is...

at the 7" mark what was the velocity, bullet weight, and sd...so from there we could see the work being transferred, and again what was it at the 8" mark, 9" mark???? and every damn inch of that travel, ie; what is the rate of bullet change in relation to the rate of work transferred, and more, where is the bulk of the workload along the travel, how much is that workload

what's the work transfer curve of that option? the dyno? what work output is it doing at this particular swim speed? or that swim speed? is it all at the front end where most useful? or do I need a linear option because the game is much larger than normal and need to get deeper as a 1st priority?

and I wanna see it at all useful impact velocities whether by doing every 200 fps and filling in the blanks from the deltas between and v-lookup tables feeding the outputs from the background etc....whatever it takes

we can't see any of that yet, but the info is there, we just need to learn how to get it

I hear those Garmin zero's are the sh1t...can they measure through gel? haha

we have only begun starting to ask the right questions on this

Sounds like you have your methodology pretty much worked out! All that's left is for you to get some gel and a Garmin and get to testing!! Perhaps a super high speed camera to measure the deceleration rate of the bullet as well so you can accurately know how fast the projectile is shedding energy. You can sit here and postulate until the cows come home... But I think it's time you get busy!! Time's a wastin!!

 

[Stinky Coyote]

It’s all good. Part of the plan. It’s seating in the minds. People need time to digest.

Let it go a couple pages at a time and who knows how much further we can take it.

We’re on a roll now boys.

 

[Seeknelk]

WTF! Less screen time, more shooting.

 

[HandgunHTR]

and we can math also why the 700 nitro stops short despite 5x the energy of the manlicker as it's sd is too low and so is the impact velocity

There was a reason why the 700 nitro didn't penetrate and it had nothing to do with SD.

 

[HandgunHTR]

yup, if we had dyno curves of work output along impact velocity range we could see those differences objectively but we don't have this sort of information, we might find relationships in front areas to ogive profiles to jacket thicknesses that allow us to see for goals we may have what options offer the work over what distances in the game that we are looking for, there may be plenty of small stuff that does more of this over the right distance than the big normals....well obviously there is, but since we don't know how to measure it yet to make it actually comparable we just 'like to think'

You keep bringing up "dyno curves". How good is your dyno curve when the car is on a slick road? Until you can understand why I even asked that question, you won't be able to have a meaningful discussion about this subject.

As for finding relationships in front areas to ogive profiles to jacket thicknesses to determine how a bullet will perform in game, what the hell do you think bullet manufacturers do when they design a bullet? Do you really think that they just figure out the in-flight ballistics profiles? And additionally, don't you think that if they had developed a way to "math" their way to adequately predicting how a bullet will perform in game they would use it? Are you so conceited that you think that you are the first person to have this "idea" and now that you have had it, some brilliant mathematician is going to come along, figure out your magic formula and then give you all the credit for thinking of it?

 

[bmart2622]

^yes, thats exactly what he thinks!!! But you should thank him because hes doing it for all of us!!!

 

[The Fish Box]

 

[D Lee]

Have read this thread 2 times now and will say this: not happy with my findings. I'm standing here looking at my rifle inventory and wondering "why?"

For everything short of DG - own 1 good "medium" rifle / cartridge?

Thanks a lot.

 

[Stinky Coyote]

Have read this thread 2 times now and will say this: not happy with my findings. I'm standing here looking at my rifle inventory and wondering "why?"

For everything short of DG - own 1 good "medium" rifle / cartridge?

Thanks a lot.

Oh come on, take a deep breath. Yes we only ‘need’ one...but how much fun is that? It’s your money...play as much as you like.

 

[Fujicon]

Energy/terminal energy is not irrelevant. It's just physics, not religion. That said, I'd worry more about, and certainly place more of my own energy on, shot placement.

 

[Maverick1]

 

[Fujicon]

I remember reading in another thread that a mere 10 ft-lbs. of recoil from a .243 Win. causes enough force on the head/neck of an 80 lb. child to approach TBI levels. I've also been told by my doctors/surgeon that I need to minimize recoil to avoid further injury to my neck/shoulder.

So...I'm still trying to wrap my head around how 10 ft-lbs of energy can cause TBI in an 80 lb. child, create issues for my cervical fusion, cause further damage to my shoulder joint/rotator cuff, etc...but 1700 ft-lbs of energy on an 80 lb. deer is irrelevant.

What you read may give you perspective, but careful not to take what other people write as gospel. Fact is that people are very different when it comes to tolerating recoil. I've been shooting rifles well above .308 my whole life, mostly .375 and .338, but also 416RM with no problems at all. Same with pistols, with 44 being my go to, but always enjoy the 480 and 475. Others might think the 243Win is intolerable, or even a 45ACP. That's just a reflection of our differences, both psychological and physical. And it goes far beyond shooting sports. I used to play football as a running back and can't number how many of my friends have knee problems now from playing sports. Not me, still solid as ever. But then almost all my friends love onions, while I can't stand them. The bottom line is we're all different in our tolerances and recoil is just another way to size-up those differences. Nobody is better or worse than others based on their differences, they just are what they are.

 

[Stinky Coyote]

You keep bringing up "dyno curves". How good is your dyno curve when the car is on a slick road? Until you can understand why I even asked that question, you won't be able to have a meaningful discussion about this subject.

As for finding relationships in front areas to ogive profiles to jacket thicknesses to determine how a bullet will perform in game, what the hell do you think bullet manufacturers do when they design a bullet? Do you really think that they just figure out the in-flight ballistics profiles? And additionally, don't you think that if they had developed a way to "math" their way to adequately predicting how a bullet will perform in game they would use it? Are you so conceited that you think that you are the first person to have this "idea" and now that you have had it, some brilliant mathematician is going to come along, figure out your magic formula and then give you all the credit for thinking of it?

I’d like to think the hunting community could be thanked for it. It’s all the threads over the years of the interweb that inspired me to even try to see if we are missing something as that was clear. Especially in the early days when the amax was smashing sh1t and the majority were still all ‘delayed controlled expansion’. How many times I tried to bring folks up to speed with my subjective interpretations from actually doing it. I figured at some point there has to be a better way...we need to make this objective. So ‘we’ need the credit as clearly we are asking for an objective way to do this. All I’m doing as part of that is looking for solutions, nothing else. This is where I’ve gotten to. ‘What are we missing? What will it take to make this work? And to an objective level similar to inflight?’ The first time I went down this path was spring 2020 on a local forum re; let’s start looking at the bullet for answers, the thing that does the work. The finished bullet to start.

And the dyno curve is just as good of analogy that again, came up 5 years later during yet another thread. Because we haven’t changed the focus of studying the wound rather than the engine. But most of us understand engines enough and the work potential that comes from the curve. From there we apply it however we wish for our goals intended. The slippery road doesn’t matter. Put it in 4wd and learn how to gear down is my best advice there lol. Used to be easy with a manual...now you got buttons and modes to work with. In my Chevy I can gear down with buttons, in my maverick commuter I use the tow haul mode when it’s slick as it’s the only way to get increased engine breaking for slick hills etc. The go isn’t an issue when slick it’s the stopping that’s the trick. The curve really doesn’t matter for slick driving conditions, maintaining traction is and vehicle specific features on how to maintain traction are what you have to learn about. The work curve let’s us choose the right power levels for our personal goals intended...which is pretty much same thing we’re trying to do here with terminal ballistics.

If we break through...would some acknowledgement be nice? Sure. But I’d also be fair in explaining that the entire community inspired it. I tried to share my experience and people struggle to understand and worse they attack it lol. ‘You can’t hunt with match bullets’

Here though most are on board with that and continue to bring others along.

But as I pointed out about the tmk vs eldm vs eh thread where guys were now trying to split c-hairs of ‘killing match bullets’ in a single diameter and weight class.

There is no way to get the best answers for each of them unless we take another path which will remove the subjective on game experiences. They all look to be a good choice by their collective subjective interpretations of what they’ve done. Other than the op or future op’s who haven’t tried it all yet and chose what they like...we could/should be able to take this further so that for the newer shooters just trying to get into the ballpark right through to experienced guys trying to split c-hairs.

But this doesn’t end with match bullets for long range hunting. These same arguments happen on all types of forums. Varmints to Africa DG. They would all benefit from this. The entire hunting community.

I’m a team player, but also polarizing in a finger in bum kind of way, awkward for many and won’t hang out again, or a pleasant surprise and we will get along famously.

 

[BigEd36]

Have read this thread 2 times now and will say this: not happy with my findings. I'm standing here looking at my rifle inventory and wondering "why?"

For everything short of DG - own 1 good "medium" rifle / cartridge?

Thanks a lot.

I agree. But, this is information I'm NOT going to be sharing with my wife after "needing" all these rifles!

 

[The Fish Box]

 

[D Lee]

OK Form and others on this new thinking. Awhile back, I posted an article on cartridge "insurance." NOT saying we can get sloppy with bullet placement but let's say our bullet placement or bullet itself wasn't exactly textbook. It's here where I personally draw the line on matters of cartridge and bullets. Animals move at the trigger pull and many offer us shots other than broadside. When hunting, it NEVER hurts to have some insurance when that trigger is pulled because we OWE that animal a clean kill.

How low can we go on the cartridge / bullet list and still maintain that insurance?? Many are saying the various 6mm's are plenty for BG hunting. Smaller cartridges as well. Me? Wish I could, but I just can't get there.

In spite of what you read above - I'm NOT closed to learning about new & improved. We all agree...we don't "need" a 300 Win to kill a deer. I'm looking at my current rifle / cartridge inventory (No magnums of any kind) - for Coyotes to Elk / Moose and when each rifle is matched to the game animal, the cartridge and bullet carry a bit of insurance for Ethics and peace of mind.

It seems, to me anyway, many of us differ on where that "insurance" minimum line might be.

Just my $.02 worth.

 

[eric1115]

OK Form and others on this new thinking. Awhile back, I posted an article on cartridge "insurance." NOT saying we can get sloppy with bullet placement but let's say our bullet placement or bullet itself wasn't exactly textbook. It's here where I personally draw the line on matters of cartridge and bullets. Animals move at the trigger pull and many offer us shots other than broadside. When hunting, it NEVER hurts to have some insurance when that trigger is pulled because we OWE that animal a clean kill.

How low can we go on the cartridge / bullet list and still maintain that insurance?? Many are saying the various 6mm's are plenty for BG hunting. Smaller cartridges as well. Me? Wish I could, but I just can't get there.

In spite of what you read above - I'm NOT closed to learning about new & improved. We all agree...we don't "need" a 300 Win to kill a deer. I'm looking at my current rifle / cartridge inventory (No magnums of any kind) - for Coyotes to Elk / Moose and when each rifle is matched to the game animal, the cartridge and bullet carry a bit of insurance for Ethics and peace of mind.

It seems, to me anyway, many of us differ on where that "insurance" minimum line might be.

Just my $.02 worth.

My response would be, better men than me have spent a lot of time and energy tracking what *actually* happens on a large number of big game kills.

"I feel like it offers insurance" is where I used to be. Data that says "smaller cartridges correlate with lower time/distance to incapacitation and fewer rodeos" convinced me to make the switch and my experience has tracked with those accounts of folks that keep better notes than me.