Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast
Results 1 to 20 of 45

Thread: velocity and ft/lbs

  1. #1
    Member akrstabout's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Anchorage
    Posts
    2,291

    Default velocity and ft/lbs

    At what point does velocity and ft/lbs outweight each other? It is that much of a significance if a heavy bullet travels a bit slower and hits with less ft/lbs, compared to bullet a little lighter but with 100 more ft/lbs? Compare a 230gr hardcast to a 200gr hardcast.

    Which in 10mm would be a better bear round? I carry the 230gr, but seems odd it has less ft/lbs than 200gr.

  2. #2
    Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    Anchorage
    Posts
    505

    Default No answer that I know of, but this principle:

    Quote Originally Posted by akrstabout View Post
    At what point does velocity and ft/lbs outweight each other? It is that much of a significance if a heavy bullet travels a bit slower and hits with less ft/lbs, compared to bullet a little lighter but with 100 more ft/lbs? Compare a 230gr hardcast to a 200gr hardcast.

    Which in 10mm would be a better bear round? I carry the 230gr, but seems odd it has less ft/lbs than 200gr.
    It is an oversimplification to say this but it is illustrative of my point:

    "Energy shreds flesh, but momentum breaks bone."

    A high-speed lightweight bullet may have more energy than a lower speed heavier bullet because energy is proportional to the square of velocity and momentum is proportional to simple velocity (and both are proportional to simple mass). Momentum favors the heavier bullet.

    Do a web search on "John Linebaugh" and read what he has to say about large, heavy bullets at moderate speed and their ability to penetrate to vital organs. Then consider your average bear who will not be deterred by even a massive flesh wound (imparted by a lightweight expanding bullet or a lightweight solid that fails to disrupt anything vital). Heavily muscled, thick-skinned animals require heavy bullets to get deep enough to be effective.

    That's the conventional wisdom.

    Lost Sheep


    Remember, only believe half of what you see and one quarter of what you hear. That goes double for what you get from the internet. Even this post.

    Do your own independent, confirming research when ANYONE gives you new facts on the web.

    Also remember, even the idiotic stuff might have a kernel of truth buried in there somewhere.

  3. #3
    Member AKsoldier's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Wasilla
    Posts
    1,555

    Default

    Ditto Lost Sheep. I've read countless volumes on the subject, and to over-simplify it: For light to medium sized game, small caliber high-velocity bullets designed to expand are the ticket. (Nosler partition, Barnes X series, etc.) These work well at extreme distances, given proper equipment and a skilled shooter.

    For heavy, dangerous critters, nothing beats a big, heavy chunk of lead with a large frontal surface (meplat) for ultimate stopping power. The heavier the object in motion, the more difficult it is to stop said object, even at relatively low velocity.

    The other 299,300,000 people can have it.

    Noone has a more intimate understanding of, or deeper appreciation for freedom, than a soldier who has fought for it in a country where it does not exist.

  4. #4
    Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    SwampView AK, Overlooking Mt. Mckinley and Points Beyond.
    Posts
    8,805

    Default

    The best "bear round", or best for any purpose, isn't determined by how much energy in Foot Pounds can be calculated.

    I don't know which is better in the 10 mm. The lighter bullet might expand better, and the heavier one might penetrate better.

    I've wondered myself.
    In my 44 Mag, for example, will 30 grains more bullet weight penetrate that much better than the lighter one?

    Assuming hard cast bullets, that do not expand., heavier bullets, and the slower velocities should both work towards increasing penetration, but there's gotta be a point when things start going the other way.

    ???? Good Question ????

    Smitty of the North
    Walk Slow, and Drink a Lotta Water.
    Has it ever occurred to you, that Nothing ever occurs to God? Adrien Rodgers.
    You can't out-give God.

  5. #5
    Member arizonaguide's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    Arizona/Alaska
    Posts
    1,523

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by akrstabout View Post
    At what point does velocity and ft/lbs outweight each other? It is that much of a significance if a heavy bullet travels a bit slower and hits with less ft/lbs, compared to bullet a little lighter but with 100 more ft/lbs? Compare a 230gr hardcast to a 200gr hardcast.

    Which in 10mm would be a better bear round? I carry the 230gr, but seems odd it has less ft/lbs than 200gr.
    Use the FASTEST 230gr. bullet you can find for it.
    Use the fastest AND heaviest, since it's a product of both.

    With close range PISTOL rounds, it's not quite as important how much "volocity and ftlbs" it might still have at 200yds, so you can use Slightly HEAVIER (and slightly slower) of the two. (IMHO).
    But still...use the FASTEST 230gr. bullet you can find for it.

    Quote Originally Posted by akrstabout View Post
    At what point does velocity and ft/lbs outweight each other?
    THAT is the question that's been argued since the 1880's...and continues to this day, with everyone having their OWN (passionate) opinions. My feelings are volocity/energy are more important at ranges exceeding 150yds, and large mass (at slow volocities) is OKAY for CLOSE range (pistol) distances.

    Best choice: FAST and HEAVY!

  6. #6
    Member arizonaguide's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    Arizona/Alaska
    Posts
    1,523

    Default

    But, where exactly the lines cross, and volocity/energy become more important than caliber/bullet weight is an argument that will continue for another 100years...or until someone creates an accurate simulated BEAR-like "test medium" (ie: heavy, tough, and MOVING!) and actually does comparisons at 50, 100, 200, and 300yards.

  7. #7
    Moderator hunt_ak's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    Wasilla--Cantwell Transplant
    Posts
    4,600

    Default

    I'm sure Murph will chime in, but IIRC, he said something like the heaviest bullet going near 1000 fps yields great penetration results. I would have to defer to his experience...

  8. #8
    Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Eureka MT
    Posts
    3,048

    Default

    Heavier slower will give up its energy over a longer distance than a lighter faster. In an animal with light resistance such as deer a light fast bullet gets far enough in to explode vital organs and is very effective. In a frontal shot on a big bear an explosive bullet will shed its velocity before it gets to vitals and not be effective. Few handguns have enough velocity to explode cast bullets or even expand them much. Mass and momentum is what gets deep penetration in heavy bone and tissue so heavier will get the bullet deeper. A 10mm is a questionable minimum for the penetration necessary to to get through to the vitals. But , use the heaviest bullet you can load and push it as fast as you can in that order.

  9. #9
    Member akrstabout's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Anchorage
    Posts
    2,291

    Default

    Thanks everyone. Everything said confirms what I have read and heard. It is just that when I looked at the ft/lbs I got confused. I have chronoed the 230gr WFNGC at average of 1160fps. That is what I have carried mostly in bear country. I like how it shoots close in, out to 25yards. Will test it out to 50 yards. Trying some 200gr XTP to see if I like those for black bear hunting.

    If it came down to the 200gr WFNGC being the better round for protection since it has more ft/lbs I would switch. I like the idea and feel comfortable though with the heaviest for caliber, 230gr hardcast with a very wide meplat.

    Other reason for asking is I get customers asking what they should carry in bear country. Just wanted to make sure I passing on the correct info. Although I think if they chose the 200gr hardcast with the same meplat that it would do plenty of damage too. I let them make the call. Thanks again.

  10. #10
    Member akrstabout's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Anchorage
    Posts
    2,291

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by arizonaguide View Post
    But, where exactly the lines cross, and volocity/energy become more important than caliber/bullet weight is an argument that will continue for another 100years...or until someone creates an accurate simulated BEAR-like "test medium" (ie: heavy, tough, and MOVING!) and actually does comparisons at 50, 100, 200, and 300yards.

    I found the perfect "test medium". I am gonna shoot a black bear with the 230gr load!

  11. #11
    Member arizonaguide's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    Arizona/Alaska
    Posts
    1,523

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by akrstabout View Post
    I found the perfect "test medium". I am gonna shoot a black bear with the 230gr load!
    Pictures! It didn't happen unless there are pictures!
    (include the wound channel if you can!)

    ps: shoot him with one of each!!!

  12. #12
    Member akrstabout's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Anchorage
    Posts
    2,291

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by arizonaguide View Post
    Pictures! It didn't happen unless there are pictures!
    (include the wound channel if you can!)

    ps: shoot him with one of each!!!

    That is what I am thinking! Oh yeah there will pics of course. The bear last year I shot with the rifle almost got the hardcast 10mm, but light was too dim and couldn't define where I was aiming. The .375ruger on the other hand with luepold 1.75-6 VXIII showed that bear just fine and down she went. Glock almost had her!

  13. #13
    Member arizonaguide's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    Arizona/Alaska
    Posts
    1,523

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by akrstabout View Post
    That is what I am thinking! Oh yeah there will pics of course. The bear last year I shot with the rifle almost got the hardcast 10mm, but light was too dim and couldn't define where I was aiming. The .375ruger on the other hand with luepold 1.75-6 VXIII showed that bear just fine and down she went. Glock almost had her!
    Sweet! so pictures of the Ruger THEN! (WHOOPS, SORRY...HANDGUN section!)

  14. #14
    Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Wasilla
    Posts
    161

    Default Good article

    Quote Originally Posted by akrstabout View Post
    Thanks everyone. Everything said confirms what I have read and heard. It is just that when I looked at the ft/lbs I got confused. I have chronoed the 230gr WFNGC at average of 1160fps. That is what I have carried mostly in bear country. I like how it shoots close in, out to 25yards. Will test it out to 50 yards. Trying some 200gr XTP to see if I like those for black bear hunting.

    If it came down to the 200gr WFNGC being the better round for protection since it has more ft/lbs I would switch. I like the idea and feel comfortable though with the heaviest for caliber, 230gr hardcast with a very wide meplat.

    Other reason for asking is I get customers asking what they should carry in bear country. Just wanted to make sure I passing on the correct info. Although I think if they chose the 200gr hardcast with the same meplat that it would do plenty of damage too. I let them make the call. Thanks again.
    This is an article by Glen Fryxell re: penetration.

    http://www.lasc.us/Fryxell44OverWeight.htm

    He states that as the bullet weight for a given caliber goes up, the meplat size goes up, and the bullet velocity goes down. The meplat size getting larger combined will the slower velocity will adversely affect penetration. Around 330 grains for the .44 mag seems to be the breakover point in his experiments.


    Anyhoos, it is a good read.

  15. #15
    Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Eureka MT
    Posts
    3,048

    Default

    Don't let energy numbers confuse you. Higher energy numbers do not necessarily mean better killing power. If the energy is dumped early and the bullet does not get in far enough to damage the vitals it will not do the job. This is espicially true on heavy built animals like bear. The bullet has to have enough mass and momentum to get into the kill zone. This is where the light weight bullets do not perform as well as the heavier ones. For an extreme example, a 223 55gr will show better energy numbers than your 230gr 10mm but would be a very poor choice for frontal shots on a bear because the energy would be used up long before the bullet got far enough in to kill the bear. The 10mm 230gr probably would get far enough to do its job. Energy numbers can be deceptive. Go heavy for big tough critters.

  16. #16
    Member arizonaguide's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    Arizona/Alaska
    Posts
    1,523

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by needcoffee View Post
    http://www.lasc.us/Fryxell44OverWeight.htm

    He states that as the bullet weight for a given caliber goes up, the meplat size goes up, and the bullet velocity goes down. The meplat size getting larger combined will the slower velocity will adversely affect penetration. Around 330 grains for the .44 mag seems to be the breakover point in his experiments.


    Anyhoos, it is a good read.
    At LAST. Thank you. I can't wait to read it. Thank you Needcoffee.

    And I agree with Rbuck for pistol rounds with limited volocity anyway...
    Go heavy for big tough critters.
    Just make them HEAVY slugs as FAST as you can get 'em.

  17. #17
    Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    SwampView AK, Overlooking Mt. Mckinley and Points Beyond.
    Posts
    8,805

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by akrstabout View Post
    If it came down to the 200gr WFNGC being the better round for protection since it has more ft/lbs I would switch. I like the idea and feel comfortable though with the heaviest for caliber, 230gr hardcast with a very wide meplat.
    Yeah, and the heavier bullet will have greater Sectional Density, which aids penetration too. I would always err on the side of penetration with a 10 mm.



    Needcoffee:

    Thanks, Iíll read the article.

    Smitty of the North
    Walk Slow, and Drink a Lotta Water.
    Has it ever occurred to you, that Nothing ever occurs to God? Adrien Rodgers.
    You can't out-give God.

  18. #18

    Default

    Yeah, here is another very GOOD read. It has a lot of info as well as alot of additional links.....good stuff.

  19. #19

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by OATS View Post
    Yeah, here is another very GOOD read. It has a lot of info as well as alot of additional links.....good stuff.
    Duh, would help if I included the link:


    http://www.angelfire.com/art/enchanter/terminal.html

  20. #20
    Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    California
    Posts
    335

    Default It seems to me that there is too much mix of media

    every one is trying to come up with an answer making a question a common denominator that has an abundance of variables.
    taste
    skill
    chance
    details known
    details unknown
    variables of wind
    air densety
    target variables
    muscle
    muscle tone
    muscle relaxed
    bone
    which bone
    fat
    hair
    skin
    dirt in the hair
    mood
    movement
    Killing something,no matter what it, is takes both luck skill, and a plan.
    I see lots of talk about having the biggest gun taking on the biggest critter,
    BUT what of the really skilled hunter ,that takes out the polar bear with a .22 or a spear. Any of those out there? Where's the Daniel Boone takin on th bear with just a knife ?
    I can hear the comment , "yer welcome to it" have a camera handy.
    Just havin fun.

Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •