Community
Guns Like firearms themselves, there's a wide variety of opinions on what's the best gun.

Minimum ft/lbs./velocity

Thread Tools
 
Old 11-15-2006 | 01:03 AM
  #11  
 
Joined: May 2006
Posts: 1,616
Likes: 0
From: Tri Cities, Washington
Default RE: Minimum ft/lbs./velocity

Sorry, double post.
cascadedad is offline  
Reply
Old 11-15-2006 | 01:09 AM
  #12  
elgallo114's Avatar
Thread Starter
Nontypical Buck
 
Joined: Oct 2003
Posts: 1,050
Likes: 0
From: Sierra Nevadas., Ca
Default RE: Minimum ft/lbs./velocity

[quote]ORIGINAL: BrutalAttack

Let me clarify my answer as best I can from reading what some of the "experts" think.

From what I've read, to make a reasonable kill on a thin skinned animal such as you have mentioned, would IMO require around 1k ft/lbs retained energy. This is assuming that this takes place in a vaccum but we know that in hunting situations it does not. Read on.

Of course much of that is dependent on bullet design. Would it have enough velocity to expand sufficiently to transfer said retained energy at that distance? That is a whole nother set of variables.

There are bullets designed for rapid expansion at long distances and lower velocities.

That's what I'm asking. What would the minimum combination of velocity and foot pounds be. Then again, you bring up a good point, depends on the type of bullet. Let's assume a co-efficient of .500 and a muzzle velocity of 3240. Now there are not too many left over variables to consider.

In the end, the real question would depend on the animal itself. Given that most species would be similar enough to each other that an "average" could be made, then what type of velocity and foot pounds of energy would the "average" adult male hog require to penetrate the chest cavity with a bullet with the above mentioned ballistics?

I just wondered. Is there a formula for density vs. velocity and energy? Or is there some chart made up by a hunting fanatic? I just wondered. That's all.
elgallo114 is offline  
Reply
Old 11-15-2006 | 09:41 AM
  #13  
BrutalAttack's Avatar
Nontypical Buck
 
Joined: Apr 2004
Posts: 1,572
Likes: 0
From:
Default RE: Minimum ft/lbs./velocity

ORIGINAL: elgallo114

You read my response before I went back and re-read mine, then deleted my answer and re-posted. Follow that college grad?

This is just a light hearted question that doesn't mean anything in the long run.

By the way, which college did you go to? I went to MCRD in San Diego. My diploma blows yours away!
Yeah you edited your post while I was writing mine. But I captured your jerky reply before you could edit and I'm sure you didn't like that. Follow?

Oh and yes I'm sure you're very special. At least your mom thinks so.
BrutalAttack is offline  
Reply
Old 11-15-2006 | 09:53 AM
  #14  
BrutalAttack's Avatar
Nontypical Buck
 
Joined: Apr 2004
Posts: 1,572
Likes: 0
From:
Default RE: Minimum ft/lbs./velocity

ORIGINAL: cascadedad

elqallo, This is the internet, Brutal can be whoever he would like to be. Professional hunter here, probably a cross stitching expert on some other board. His condescending attitude gets old real fast. Then when someone challenges him, he just replies with something like, "Who are YOU to challenge ME?".

I would just like to see some pictures of some of his successes, but I doubt it. He doesn't have to prove anything to anyone.[:'(]
lol,

you might dig up my first big bull if you look hard enough.








I'm sure that's how you imagine me anyway lol.









BrutalAttack is offline  
Reply
Old 11-15-2006 | 09:55 AM
  #15  
BrutalAttack's Avatar
Nontypical Buck
 
Joined: Apr 2004
Posts: 1,572
Likes: 0
From:
Default RE: Minimum ft/lbs./velocity

ORIGINAL: elgallo114

That's what I'm asking. What would the minimum combination of velocity and foot pounds be. Then again, you bring up a good point, depends on the type of bullet. Let's assume a co-efficient of .500 and a muzzle velocity of 3240. Now there are not too many left over variables to consider.

In the end, the real question would depend on the animal itself. Given that most species would be similar enough to each other that an "average" could be made, then what type of velocity and foot pounds of energy would the "average" adult male hog require to penetrate the chest cavity with a bullet with the above mentioned ballistics?

I just wondered. Is there a formula for density vs. velocity and energy? Or is there some chart made up by a hunting fanatic? I just wondered. That's all.
Here just might be what you're looking for:

http://www.eskimo.com/~jbm/calculations/calculations.html


BrutalAttack is offline  
Reply
Old 11-15-2006 | 03:47 PM
  #16  
bigcountry
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default RE: Minimum ft/lbs./velocity

ORIGINAL: BrutalAttack

ORIGINAL: elgallo114

Let me clarify something before I piss people off. I'm not shooting anything at distances of more than a couple hundred yards. '

My buddy and I are shooting at 800 yards. We know the remaining foot pounds of energy and velocity at the impact on paper. We just got curious as to whether, if it did hit an animal, it would have enough left on it to do any damage.

It's more a question of curiosity than anything else. We work nights together and now we are too curious to let it go. I'm gonna find out somehow!
The type of numbers you are looking for are somewhat arbitrary in nature.

I hesitate to give you advice of any kind since you are obviously not interested ina responsible and reasonable kill.

Based on what the experts say I would go with something with around 1k ft/lbs retained energy.
First, you need to get some experience, and then you can come back. Dad gone man, sounds like nobody believes your fantasies.
 
Reply
Old 11-15-2006 | 04:01 PM
  #17  
 
Joined: Feb 2003
Posts: 5,293
Likes: 0
From: Blissfield MI USA
Default RE: Minimum ft/lbs./velocity

Deer are pretty simular to people in size and construction, so if it would pentitrate a person it will most likely do it to a deer. If you are asking if you could kill a deer by accident when shooting at 800 yards, most likely if you are shooting anything that will reach that distance it will still have enough energy to injure an animal. A .308 will kill a human at 1000 meters with a well placed shot. Deer are not that hard to kill, they just don't respond the same to pain and will run farther when hit, and they have a better circulatory system then we do obviously. So it seems like they are harder to kill. The truth is they are dead, they just don't know it yet.

Hogs are bit tougher, but not bullet proof by any means.

The figures you see are what some so called experts say you need to make an effecient, ethical kill. And it varies quite a bit depending on what you read and who you talk to. That does not however mean a projectile moving much slower can't kill an animal. If it punctures a lung or severs an artery it will die. I mean people can kill moose with a bow and arrow.

How far the bullet would penitrate an animal would really depend on the weight of the bullet, the speed at impact and how the bullet was designed. A FMJ bullet would penitrate more than a bullet disigned to expand on impact. Unless however it it didn't have enough speed to expand.

And for the record some of the dumbest people I have met were college educated, and some of the smartest were high school drop outs. I know a few engineers that are plenty book smart, but I honestly don't know how they dress themselves in the mornings they are so out of touch with reality.

Paul
Paul L Mohr is offline  
Reply
Old 11-15-2006 | 04:04 PM
  #18  
bigbulls's Avatar
Boone & Crockett
 
Joined: Feb 2003
Posts: 10,679
Likes: 0
Default RE: Minimum ft/lbs./velocity

Bullet construction will play a major role but the bottom line is that a few hundred foot pounds is all it takes to cleanly kill a deer sized animal. Most of the so called experts that come up with the charts are far from experts. Most reccomend 1000 for deer and 1500 for elk. Hogwash. You don't need anywhere that amount of energy.

Remember that you only need to get half way in to put a bullet through the heart of an animal.
bigbulls is offline  
Reply
Old 11-15-2006 | 04:26 PM
  #19  
BrutalAttack's Avatar
Nontypical Buck
 
Joined: Apr 2004
Posts: 1,572
Likes: 0
From:
Default RE: Minimum ft/lbs./velocity

ORIGINAL: bigbulls

Bullet construction will play a major role but the bottom line is that a few hundred foot pounds is all it takes to cleanly kill a deer sized animal. Most of the so called experts that come up with the charts are far from experts. Most reccomend 1000 for deer and 1500 for elk. Hogwash. You don't need anywhere that amount of energy.

Remember that you only need to get half way in to put a bullet through the heart of an animal.
So you'd feel comfortable hitting an elk at 400 yards with a .243 (Sierra GameKing 1021 ft/lbs)?? If it doesn't take "near 1500" ft/lbs then I guess you would be.

You're irresponsible to even suggest that. I hope you're joking.
BrutalAttack is offline  
Reply
Old 11-15-2006 | 04:27 PM
  #20  
BrutalAttack's Avatar
Nontypical Buck
 
Joined: Apr 2004
Posts: 1,572
Likes: 0
From:
Default RE: Minimum ft/lbs./velocity

ORIGINAL: Paul L Mohr

Deer
How far the bullet would penitrate an animal would really depend on the weight of the bullet, the speed at impact and how the bullet was designed. A FMJ bullet would penitrate more than a bullet disigned to expand on impact. Unless however it it didn't have enough speed to expand.

Paul
Wow look out we have a MENSA appilcant here. Thanks Captain Obvious.
BrutalAttack is offline  
Reply


Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service -

Copyright © 2026 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.