Minimum ft/lbs./velocity
11-15-2006, 04:37 PM
#21
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location:
Posts: 1,345
RE: Minimum ft/lbs./velocity
BA, Paul and BigBulls can fend for themselves but I'd really like to know where you get off being, and making, a complete jerk of yourself to other forum members?
Nobody suggested a .243 except for YOU
And sometimes, just sometimes a
hints as some humor. Way to try and make yourself look cool/smart/superior or whatever it is you're going after.
Nobody suggested a .243 except for YOU
And sometimes, just sometimes a
hints as some humor. Way to try and make yourself look cool/smart/superior or whatever it is you're going after.
11-15-2006, 04:39 PM
#22
Nontypical Buck
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location:
Posts: 1,572
RE: Minimum ft/lbs./velocity
ORIGINAL: bigcountry
First, you need to get some experience, and then you can come back. Dad gone man, sounds like nobody believes your fantasies.
First, you need to get some experience, and then you can come back. Dad gone man, sounds like nobody believes your fantasies.
Is that experienced enough for you?
I'm not trying to brag but I'll also not allow you to insult me. You're from back east for crying out loud and you question my experience?
Sheesh....
11-15-2006, 04:47 PM
#23
Guest
Posts: n/a
RE: Minimum ft/lbs./velocity
ORIGINAL: BrutalAttack
Experience huh? I bet I've killed more elk this year than you have your whole life. I do it for a living. I have two bulls over 300 B&C. Do you?
Is that experienced enough for you?
I'm not trying to brag but I'll also not allow you to insult me. You're from back east for crying out loud and you question my experience?
Sheesh....
ORIGINAL: bigcountry
First, you need to get some experience, and then you can come back. Dad gone man, sounds like nobody believes your fantasies.
First, you need to get some experience, and then you can come back. Dad gone man, sounds like nobody believes your fantasies.
Is that experienced enough for you?
I'm not trying to brag but I'll also not allow you to insult me. You're from back east for crying out loud and you question my experience?
Sheesh....
One thing you crack me up. Listen man, nobody believes you. Give it up. Graduate high school and come back
11-15-2006, 05:09 PM
#24
Boone & Crockett
Join Date: Feb 2003
Posts: 10,679
RE: Minimum ft/lbs./velocity
DidI mention anything about a .243?
I certainly don't recall it.
There is a lot more to clean kills than just saying that you need "X" ammount of energy. I can take a .357 magnum with a 180 grain cast core bullet and kill any elk that walks this planet. It generates a whopping 450 foot pounds of KE at the muzzle. And yes, someone that knows what they are doing could take a .243 with a barnes TSX and cleanly kill elk at 400 yards
You know I (others as well)try and try to be nice and not talk bad about you or post things in a derogatory manner and even offer advice to you concerning your own thread but it seems that you just like to piss folks off here.
I certainly don't recall it.
There is a lot more to clean kills than just saying that you need "X" ammount of energy. I can take a .357 magnum with a 180 grain cast core bullet and kill any elk that walks this planet. It generates a whopping 450 foot pounds of KE at the muzzle. And yes, someone that knows what they are doing could take a .243 with a barnes TSX and cleanly kill elk at 400 yards
You know I (others as well)try and try to be nice and not talk bad about you or post things in a derogatory manner and even offer advice to you concerning your own thread but it seems that you just like to piss folks off here.
11-15-2006, 05:17 PM
#25
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Blissfield MI USA
Posts: 5,293
RE: Minimum ft/lbs./velocity
ORIGINAL: BrutalAttack
Wow look out we have a MENSA appilcant here. Thanks Captain Obvious.
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
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
Thanks Captain Obvious.
Not everyone is a college professor or expert ballistician ( probably spelled that wrong, but then you are probably the only person that cares).
What I posted really had nothing to do with you nor required your input. You added nothing by trying to make me look foolish, which most likely backfired on you. I gave my opinion, which is really all it is and tried to help someone. All you seem to be interested in is making every one else look bad and you smarter. When in reality it just makes you look like an ass. Just give your opinion and be done with it already, because that is all it really is, your opinion.
I look for this thread to locked soon since it really has nothing to do with the topic anymore.
Paul
11-15-2006, 06:54 PM
#27
Nontypical Buck
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location:
Posts: 1,572
RE: Minimum ft/lbs./velocity
ORIGINAL: Paul L Mohr
Actually you would be suprised at the amount of people that don't know basic information like this. I really didn't post it for you, I figured you knew it as do some others. However there are hundreds of people that visit this site and read the posts that never comment. They are just looking for information.
Not everyone is a college professor or expert ballistician ( probably spelled that wrong, but then you are probably the only person that cares).
What I posted really had nothing to do with you nor required your input. You added nothing by trying to make me look foolish, which most likely backfired on you. I gave my opinion, which is really all it is and tried to help someone. All you seem to be interested in is making every one else look bad and you smarter. When in reality it just makes you look like an ass. Just give your opinion and be done with it already, because that is all it really is, your opinion.
I look for this thread to locked soon since it really has nothing to do with the topic anymore.
Paul
Actually you would be suprised at the amount of people that don't know basic information like this. I really didn't post it for you, I figured you knew it as do some others. However there are hundreds of people that visit this site and read the posts that never comment. They are just looking for information.
Not everyone is a college professor or expert ballistician ( probably spelled that wrong, but then you are probably the only person that cares).
What I posted really had nothing to do with you nor required your input. You added nothing by trying to make me look foolish, which most likely backfired on you. I gave my opinion, which is really all it is and tried to help someone. All you seem to be interested in is making every one else look bad and you smarter. When in reality it just makes you look like an ass. Just give your opinion and be done with it already, because that is all it really is, your opinion.
I look for this thread to locked soon since it really has nothing to do with the topic anymore.
Paul
Sorry about that my post was unecessary and rude. I apologize.
11-15-2006, 06:56 PM
#28
Nontypical Buck
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location:
Posts: 1,572
RE: Minimum ft/lbs./velocity
ORIGINAL: bigbulls
Most reccomend 1000 for deer and 1500 for elk. Hogwash. You don't need anywhere that amount of energy.
Most reccomend 1000 for deer and 1500 for elk. Hogwash. You don't need anywhere that amount of energy.
Well, if it's hogwash and you don't need anywhere near 1500 ft/lbs to drop an elk then I guess a .243 at 400yards has over 1k ft/lbs so that should be ok for elk right? That's what I'm getting from what you said.
As hunters I don't think we should never reccomend to someone something like that. Just because something is possible doesn'tmean we should reccomend it.
So I suppose you're out with your .357 trying to bag an elk? Of course not don't be silly.
I feel it's much better to err on the side of caution. That is, if you're interested in providing as quick and clean a kill as possible, which I'm hoping you all are if you're hunters.
11-15-2006, 08:16 PM
#29
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: NW Arkansas
Posts: 1,673
RE: Minimum ft/lbs./velocity
For a bunch of grown men ya'll act like children, actually, I don't there are many people on this forum over the age of 12, Brutal made a statment that brings up a very good point, who cares if its "possible", it should be a humane and very clean kill, and i don't think too many people are lining up to kill an elk at 400 yards with a .243, or a .357 for that matter, bigulls, I want you to go and kill an elk at 200 yards with your .357 magnum, and then post the pics on here, after all its possible right?
11-15-2006, 08:42 PM
#30
Giant Nontypical
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Kountze, Texas
Posts: 5,400
RE: Minimum ft/lbs./velocity
I used to be allcaught up into the1000 pound of energy rule for whitetails until I saw how quickly a deer will die from my .50 cal roundball. My velocity is about 1800 or so fps, with energy well below 1000 foot pounds. Many elk are and have been taken with .50 cal round balls or .54 cal, and I can guarantee you that 1500 foot pounds is completely out of the equation.
I don't guess deer were cleanly taken until magazines with ballistics tables hit the newstands. Really to become an expert on the matter, all you would have to do is write an article, or a book. The ones that really consider themselves experts are the people who read the articles.
As far as the 800 yard shot...I think the question is can you hit where you are aiming. Just one little gust of wind, and instead of hitting the vitals, you might hit the deer in the butt. Then the bigger question is will the bullet perform the way it should with the velocity drop you would have.
I personally wouldn't consider it, but it is fun to talk about.
C. Davis
I don't guess deer were cleanly taken until magazines with ballistics tables hit the newstands. Really to become an expert on the matter, all you would have to do is write an article, or a book. The ones that really consider themselves experts are the people who read the articles.
As far as the 800 yard shot...I think the question is can you hit where you are aiming. Just one little gust of wind, and instead of hitting the vitals, you might hit the deer in the butt. Then the bigger question is will the bullet perform the way it should with the velocity drop you would have.
I personally wouldn't consider it, but it is fun to talk about.
C. Davis