Deleted User

[Deleted by Admins]

Deleted User

[Deleted by Admins]

Nomercy

This is kinda off topic, but some of these posts have argued that any rifle can get the job done since "indians" did it with a bow, but I'd like to confront the "a bow can do it, why can't a rifle?" debate, a bow can get it done because of a few reasons. One, you measure bullet weight in grains, a grain is one seven thousandths of a pound, while arrows are measured in ounces, or sixteenths of a pound. The bow is also shot from much closer, 25 yrds rather than 125 or 225 yrds. The arrow doesn't have to push itself through the animal either, it cuts it's way though, while a bullet simply barges through. Think about what we consider in bullets called sectional density, the weight in pounds of the bullet, divided by the diameter of the bullet squared. Basically, that means the longer the "bullet" the better it does for penetration. Picture this, slow down time as our bullet or arrow impacts the animal. The animal's body doesn't want to move very quickly, so it slows the bullet. Since the bullet is so short, the tip slows down, and pushes on its tail fairly quickly to slow down as well. Since an arrow is so long, it takes so much more time for the tip of the arrow to slow the tail down, that it will often times be out the other side of the animal before the tail slows down. That's why wooden shafted arrows shatter when you shoot the barn with them. The tail doesn't want to slow down, and the tip already has, therefore, they push so hard on the middle of the shaft, that it buckles outward and splinters. Think about it, a .300 mag cannot shoot through a 5 gallon bucket of sand, while an arrow will pass though everytime.

Nate58102

I personally would go for a bigger caliber.