Questions about the irrelevance of energy (ft-lbs)

[BCDJR]

Yes, he was also shooting people much further away than any of us should be shooting at game. My weapon of choice was a 155mm Excalibur round (we called it “the world’s biggest sniper rifle”), but that doesn’t make it the best choice for hunting.

Guess you didn’t read the post. The gentlemen was asking “ what would you want to be shot with? “

 

[Q_Sertorius]

Guess you didn’t read the post. The gentlemen was asking “ what would you want to be shot with? “

A water pistol? It’s a dumb rhetorical question.

 

[BCDJR]

A water pistol? It’s a dumb rhetorical question.

Then your beef is with him

 

[Q_Sertorius]

Then your beef is with him

I don’t have a beef with anyone.

These debates are often dumb and always always pointless, because people either understand how bullets kill or they don’t.

 

[BCDJR]

I don’t have a beef with anyone.

These debates are often dumb and always always pointless, because people either understand how bullets kill or they don’t.

You called his question dumb

 

[HandgunHTR]

Seems like CHRIS KYLE shot a 338 Lapua

So?

I would venture to guess that most of the time he was using a 300WM, but I am sure he probably did use the 338L when the possibility of having to disable a vehicle or shoot through barriers was a possibility.

The sniper overwatch provides quite a few different functions, not just shooting people.

 

[BCDJR]

So?

I would venture to guess that most of the time he was using a 300WM, but I am sure he probably did use the 338L when the possibility of having to disable a vehicle or shoot through barriers was a possibility.

The sniper overwatch provides quite a few different functions, not just shooting people.

So?

I would venture to guess that most of the time he was using a 300WM, but I am sure he probably did use the 338L when the possibility of having to disable a vehicle or shoot through barriers was a possibility.

The sniper overwatch provides quite a few different functions, not just shooting people.

I was replying to a question posed by another gentleman who asked what would you want to be shot with? It was about bullets. I replied that CPO Chirs Kyle favored the .338 Lapua. Just assumed folks knew that round was the FMJBT.

 

[hereinaz]

I was replying to a question posed by another gentleman who asked what would you want to be shot with? It was about bullets. I replied that CPO Chirs Kyle favored the .338 Lapua. Just assumed folks knew that round was the FMJBT.

As always, in context it was what bullet TYPE… not caliber. Copper or highly fragmenting lead, that is the choice, assuming the bullet performs as designed.

Highly fragmenting lead will do far more damage all of the time, when of the same caliber and velocity.

 

[BCDJR]

As always, in context it was what bullet TYPE… not caliber. Copper or highly fragmenting lead, that is the choice, assuming the bullet performs as designed.

Highly fragmenting lead will do far more damage all of the time, when of the same caliber and velocity.

As always, in context it was what bullet TYPE… not caliber. Copper or highly fragmenting lead, that is the choice, assuming the bullet performs as designed.

Highly fragmenting lead will do far more damage all of the time, when of the same caliber and velocity

 

[BCDJR]

As always, in context it was what bullet TYPE… not caliber. Copper or highly fragmenting lead, that is the choice, assuming the bullet performs as designed.

Highly fragmenting lead will do far more damage all of the time, when of the same caliber and velocity.

FMJBT is a bullet

 

[hereinaz]

FMJBT is a bullet

Assuming the truth about the bullet, I have questions:

Are military and hunting applications the same?
Did he actually choose FMJBT for the same reason we choose hunting bullets?
Did the Army give him the choice of bullets?

Lastly, and on point, what is the difference in performance between an FMJBT and a highly fragmenting lead bullet?

 

[Formidilosus]

Assuming the truth about the bullet, I have questions:

Are military and hunting applications the same?
Did he actually choose FMJBT for the same reason we choose hunting bullets?
Did the Army give him the choice of bullets?

Lastly, and on point, what is the difference in performance between an FMJBT and a highly fragmenting lead bullet?

There were no FMJ .338 bullets used by US Military snipers. Everything he writes is laughably incorrect.

 

[hereinaz]

There were no FMJ .338 bullets used by US Military snipers. Everything he writes is laughably incorrect.

Yeah, figured as much. He was so wildly off the point that even assuming the truth of his statement he was still very wrong…

 

[BCDJR]

Assuming the truth about the bullet, I have questions:

Are military and hunting applications the same?
Did he actually choose FMJBT for the same reason we choose hunting bullets?
Did the Army give him the choice of bullets?

Lastly, and on point, what is the difference in performance between an FMJBT and a highly fragmenting lead bullet?

First you are the one who asked the highly inappropriate question “ what would you want to be shot with?” Very ill timed in general and should have deleted. You show your lack of knowledge by asking about the Army. The hero Chris Kyle was Navy Seal…rip. I just spend time with a sniper who was deployed 4 times in Iraq. They did shoot .338 L FMJ BT.

 

[Formidilosus]

First you are the one who asked the highly inappropriate question “ what would you want to be shot with?” Very ill timed in general and should have deleted. You show your lack of knowledge by asking about the Army. The hero Chris Kyle was Navy Seal…rip. I just spend time with a sniper who was deployed 4 times in Iraq. They did shoot .338 L FMJ BT.

No. They didn’t.

 

[BigCountry49]

Thank you. I actually just finished reading it and it was helpful. But...two responses to the article:

1) Spomer says: "The quantity of energy in a bullet sent toward your game is the same as the energy sent back into the rifle — and your shoulder behind that rifle. So, if the energy in the recoiling rifle didn’t instantly kill you, how can the energy in the bullet instantly kill your target animal of the same or larger size? You absorbed all that energy. Why aren’t you dead?" ...This is false/misleading. The recoil energy of a .243 against my shoulder is only 10 ft-lbs. The energy of the 95 gr NBT at an impact of 100 yards is 1700 ft-lbs (or 340 ft-lbs if we assume that only 25% gets transferred to the animal, and there's no valid reason to assume that it is only 25%). My shoulder is not absorbing 340 -1700 ft-lbs of energy, it's only absorbing 10 ft-lbs. However, the deer is absorbing 340-1700 ft-lbs of energy. That's a huge difference...right?

2) Even the article concedes that energy matters, even if it only matters a little.

A couple of quotes from the article...

"The bullet stayed inside, too, so the little coyote absorbed all that killing-energy."

"Honestly, bullet energy matters. A little. Our problem is conceptual."

I haven't claimed any more than this. I've never said energy alone matters, or energy matters a lot more than velocity, etc. I've simply questioned the accuracy of the claim that energy is irrelevant. And I'm not sure why that claim has to be so zealously defended. And I don't see how the case for small calibers rises or falls on defending that claim.

Correct, the shooter does not get the same energy the bullet does because the shooter is much heavier than the bullet. First post I’ve seen in a good minute that doesn’t directly oppose laws of physics.

 

[WhatToHunt]

 

[HandgunHTR]

Correct, the shooter does not get the same energy the bullet does because the shooter is much heavier than the bullet. First post I’ve seen in a good minute that doesn’t directly oppose laws of physics.

Yeah, that is not how physics work. The mass of the shooter doesn't matter at all.

The reason why rifles don't blow through peoples shoulders when shot is the fact that the rifle is magnitudes heavier than a bullet (For example a 9# rifle is 350X the weight of a 180 grain bullet). So, using the principal of inertia, it takes more force to move a 9# rifle than a 180 grain bullet. Given that, the directional force that is left over once inertia is overcome is what the bullet carries one way and the rifle carries the other way.

Using my 9# gun with a 180 grain bullet, assuming 2600 fps muzzle velocity, you end up with a bullet energy of 2702 ft-lbs and a recoil energy of 17.66 ft-lbs.