Over Kill
 

Today Woodseye stopped by my shop and after looking at a picture of a deer I shot comented that I did not seem to like shooting big deer. It is not that, you see I do not have enough rifle for the big deer.
I analyze everything, I noticed that probably the most popular small game rifle is the .22 Long rifle. Now for rabbits, squirrels and other such game this little cartridge is considered fine but the minimum. Hmmmm, 140 foot pounds for up to two pound animals, lets translate this. That is 70 pounds of energy for every pound of animal weight, so a 100 pound deer requires 7000 foot pounds of energy. Like I said, I do not have a big enough gun, My .366 D.G.W. has only a paultry 5775 to 6100 foot pounds depending on load. In reality even the little 100 pounders are too big for my rifles even right off the muzzle. What am I to do? Even the .585 Nyati with over 10,000 foot pounds of energy is only good for deer in the 145 pound class. I know, I will go to the WW2 57mm, now thats the ticket, and for the black powder hunting a 6" Parrot rifle should do the trick.
After all, what is over kill? You guys ever notice every time I think I get myself into trouble?

RE: Over Kill
 

I knew I never should have commented on the deer :DI was only joking,and a pellet rifle will kill rabbits so I think your safe with the above mentioned rifles for deer.Thanks for the use of the range and help on the rifle.Accu trigger was all the way light [:' (]need to figure out how to make it lighter [:o]I know what,I' ll take you in where you will shoot a big deer this fall to redeme myself [:-]

woods

RE: Over Kill
 

That sounds like a good deal!!!! How will we get w 1335 pound 57mm gun into a tree stand???
If I use my .366 you have to remember I only have 3995 foot pounds of energy at 300 yards,(my limit) and almost 2600 at 500 yards. If I have to use the .366 the deer will have to be close and then I am pushing things with my under powered rifle and shooting ability.
Enough kidding around, that Savage with that new trigger impressed me!! Factory Rem ammo and touching bullet holes at 100 yards!! I will say after shooting two rifles with those Kipplinger single set triggers the pull on your Savage seemed a bit heavy! However, I am spoiled!!! Being serious, best damn trigger on a factory rifle I have ever tried bar none!!!! I Was not a Savage fan but they are coming to the front!! Watch out Remington and Winchester.

RE: Over Kill
 

No such thing as overkill!!!!

RE: Over Kill
 

I' ve been living underneath a big rock here in TeXaS, could someone explain to me what a 366 DGW is? With that kind ft/lbs of energy it must have some serious velocities and or bullet weight.;)

AA

RE: Over Kill
 

The .366 D.G.W. is a direct neck down of the .416 Rigby. It is flatter shooting with a 250 grain bullet then the .300 RUM with a 180 grain slug. As a matter of fact it is flatter then the .338/378, .338 Lapua or the .378 Weatherby. I have to check but due to the ballistic cof and sectional density of 9.3 slugs I think it even beats the .30/378. However there is no dispute, it will bullet for bullet out penitrate any sporting cartridge in the world!!! All this from a 24" barrel, I am trying to get the balistics posted so bare with me. All figures are at Rigby pressures, in other words high 40s to low 50s.

RE: Over Kill
 

RE: Over Kill
 

Judson, you would be right if what we call a ft/lb of energy was really a foot/pound! That is, if a .22 could actually move a pound 147 feet, which we all know is B.S. This is merely an expression of an arbitrary value which allows some comparison of the energy output of various cartridges. They had to call it something, but maybe " ORGS" or " GRONKS" or some such would have kept people from making erroneous assumptions, like the one which asserts that the .45 ACP 230-grain ball round will pick a person up and physically throw him back for several feet!

BTW, that .366 is certainly impressive!!

RE: Over Kill
 

eldeguello, I' m no expert, but getting there (double majoring in chemical engineering and physics), yes, ft.lbs. ARE in fact a direct manipulation of mass and velocity, in this case, weight and position, kind of a tricky manipulation, since pounds isn' t a mass, it' s a weight, in which the acceleration of gravity plays a part, so basically you' re multiplying mass*feet/second/second by the distance traveled/sec. In an ' ideal environment' , yes, the pressure exerted in a .22lr round would be sufficient to heave a one pound object 147ft, BUT, remember, we don' t shoot in an ideal environment, we have friction. Without air resistance, barrel friction, energy loss of impacts (energy is lost in any impact as a result of static friction, heat generation, even sound generation, impact surface depression and rebound, etc.), and a million other variables that the ' real world' imposes upon our rounds, the published data would be virtually an exact representation of the capabilities of the cartridge. The biggest factor, I' m sure, when you go shooting a 1# block of anything with a .22lr as to why it won' t fly 150ft is that the bullet is going to explode upon impact, it' s easier for the bullet to rebound so quickly as to destroy itself than to overcome the static friction of the block and the air surrounding it, the rest of the variables above would attribute to this loss, but this would be the major factor I' m sure. If you could get a .22lr bullet to retain 100% of it' s mass and exact original shape upon an impact, I guarantee that it would throw that block a goodly distance, maybe not 147ft because the air resistance on the block would be massive (although it would in an ideal environment for sure).

Picture this, this is probably the easiest way to describe published energy tables. Don' t think of it as lifting and throwing the block, put both on an ice rink<---' frictionless' plane, then shoot the block with a bullet that doesn' t explode on impact OR penetrate at all, the impact is perfectly elastic, and in an exactly straight vector. If you could actually accomplish this, the resultant movement of the block should be a bit less 147ft, because it doesn' t have to fight MUCH friction, the air resistance would be almost as much as the friction exerted by the ice.

Where they actually derived the standard for ft.lbs. was experimentation in a vaccuum at sea level (since you acutally weigh less on a mountain than you do in the valley, long story there), they released known ' weight' objects from known heights, i.e. a 1# block of steel from 1ft, the resultant energy was 1ft.*1#=1ft.lb.

RE: Over Kill
 

Thanks for the compliment on the .366. You are right about the FP thing what we are really talking about is kinetec energy. Muzzle energy is in reality a very poor way of judging cartridge performance. For example look at the M.E. of the .45/70 and the 30-30, on paper both are rather close energy wise. Shoot a deer with them at say 50 yards and what a difference. Also your point about the 45 ACP is partially true. Bullets with a large frontal area do exert more force against the target then smaller diameter bullets. The faster a bullet is going the less this becomes a factor. This is why African P.H.s like " Big and slow" Under 2300 F.P.S. and over 40 cal. The vast majority of the energy released by a bullet hitting is released inside the target, not against it. Unless one is wearing a bullet proof vest it ain' t going to throw you across the room. Think about this for a second. I am sure we have all shot a woodchuck or somthing simular in size with somthing like a 30-06. If you look at the energy per pound of critter then that woodchuck should have been knocked into the next county if bullets knocked things backward.

RE: Over Kill
 

The reason your woodchuck stays where it is is because the bullet doesn' t actually ' hit' it, it goes through it, were the entire energy of the bullet transferred into the woodchuck at the same instant, then your WC' s going a LONG way, but it' s easier for the skin to rupture and organs to explode than to move the entire animal. One of my physics professors took us out to the Union square to demonstrate this one, he took his truck, an egg, and a football, had one of us drive at 35mph, then tossed the egg up in-front of the truck as it drove by, the egg splattered, longest spray was 6.5ft, then he took the football, and did it again, could have been a record field goal, it held intact. When a bullet hits something, it' s like the egg, it ruptures, and energy is wasted, whereas if the two objects reacted like billiard balls, a " perfectly" elastic collision following which both object move on at 100% present mass and condition (i.e. no new dents that would have acted like cushions, increasing the period of time over which the impact occurs, ever heard of collision cushion quarter panels?). Basically the bullet never really ' hits' anything (bone excluded, which hardly counts because it only acts as an instantaneous cushion), it changes between media, it can travel relatively easily through air, but when it enters the ' water' of the body, it slows down greatly, it' s kind of like a collision, but it' s buffered, the skin holds together a bit more than air, and the meat/organs do a little less, but they still let the bullet travel through, slowing it, not instantaneously stopping it.

If you shoot something hard, like a boulder, giving a billiard type rebound, it is possible that you could move it slightly, but then a system of frictions come into play. Ever notice how it is a whole lot easier to move something once you get it moving or rolling? These frictions are called static friction, rolling friction, and sliding friction. When you push on a box on the floor, everything is stuck together like velcro basically=static friction, once you get it moving, it doesn' t have time to rebond as well and the inertia of the box helps you move it, but friction is still present=sliding friction. When you start pushing your truck, it doesn' t want to move=static friction, once it gets rolling, the inertia of the truck helps you, and it becomes much easier=rolling friction...even the inertia of the wheels rolling aids you...that' s why you don' t usually see boulders shift at all when you ricochet a .22lr round off of them, it' s much easier to restart the bullet in the opposite direction against virtually nill friction, only that of air resistance, than to start the boulder moving against the ground, even if it isn' t sunk in a foot or two. Not to mention that your bullet ' expands' , acting as a cushion.

Physicists LOVE billiard balls and ice, the above is why.

RE: Over Kill
 

Nomercy you are right, that is why I mentioned the Bullet proof vest. With the vest the energy is transfered to the vest not shed as the bullet passes through the target. By the way as with the foot ball analigy that vest has to give. If you wrap a vest around somthing hard and unyelding like a log even a .22LR will penetrate most of them.

RE: Over Kill
 

Does anybody chamber this round (.366) in a factory rifle? ..Bill

RE: Over Kill
 

I read a magazine article awhile back, it might have been by Carmichael, but I can' t remember, where they made a wooden box about the size of a deer' s torso, put 4 wooden legs on it about the same length and diameter as a deer' s legs, and filled the box with sand and rags to make it weight about 125 lbs or about what an average deer would weigh. They then shot the box with popular deer cartridges such as 30-30, 44 magnum, 30-06, 300 magnum 45-70, 12 guage slug and even a few much more powerful cartridges such as the 375 H&H. If I remember right, the box of sand stopped most if not all of the bullets, and none of the bullets knocked the contraption over even though it absorbed all of the bullet' s energy. A few of the more powerful rounds made the thing tip a little but did not knock it over. hitting the thing with a sledge hammer would have alot less ft-lbs of energy but could knock it over. Ft-lbs of energy is a good comparison but really has no bearing on what really happens in the terminal performace of a bullet in the real world.


BTW do a comparison with the amount of energy a squirrel absorbs when shot with a 12 guage in comparison with what a deer takes. It would be interesting to see how much energy it would take to take the head and neck completely off a deer with no remnants left behind:D

RE: Over Kill
 

Briman,

You are right. There is more to measuring killing power than just Energy (ft lbs)!
Most folks are fond of arguing Energy Numbers because it a simple, numerical indicator but it certainly doesn' t tell the whole story.

We kicked this around earlier and discussed 4 different components to " killing power" :
1. Energy Theory (Again, Ft. Lbs.)
2. Momentum Theory (bullet weight, speed, and DIAMETER) i.e The Taylor Knock Out Index
3. Hydrostatic Shock (high velocity and preferrably not " punching through" )
4. Bullet Performance: Penetration, Expansion, Weight Retention, and Wound Channel

Of course now we don' t have a simplistic argument, er I mean " discussion" anymore -- people hate that....

Never Go Undergunned,
EKM

RE: Over Kill
 

what do you guys think of the triggers on the browning rifles?i like them alot but im not spoiled like you all.my ruger has the crappiest trigger of anything i' ve ever shot. i have had pellet rifles with better triggers!

RE: Over Kill
 

At present there are no factory rifles chambered for the .366 D.G.W. but we are working on that. The .366 is writen up in the tenth eddition of Cartridges of The World and an article just came out on it in the Safari Club magazine. We will have to see where it goes from here.

RE: Over Kill
 

thanks judson .. I have the 8th eddition .. I will get the 10th .. I think it' s time to get that custom gun I always wanted .. What did you start with? ..Bill

RE: Over Kill
 

Iowa,
I' m not sure how we got on over onto the subject of triggers. I can' t say anything about Browning; however, I would have to concur with you about Ruger. It is a mystery to me why one of the premier rifle makers in the USA would put such POS triggers on an other wise great rifle.

I had a Ruger Varmit rifle in the 70' s -- bad trigger -- gunsmith couldn' t help it out -- sold it. When I was looking at 416 Rigby' s I looked at the Ruger again, 25-30 years later trigger felt the same -- couldn' t believe it -- went with a CZ, ah.... much better (trigger)!

Judson,
I' m getting fond of the 416 Rigby as of late and I noticed that your 366 DGW is a necked down 416 Rigby case, interesting.... did they maintain the same 45 degree shoulder or did they give it a little more gradual taper? Ought to be quite the little " hammer" ! By the way, DGW.... Dangerous Game _________ what?

Never Go Undergunned
EKM

RE: Over Kill
 

Ok, Here we go, D.G.W. stands for David G. Walker. He is the customer and friend I developed the cartridge for. It is a direct neck down of the .416 Rigby 45 degree shoulder and all. .366 is just about the optimum bore diameter for the Rigby case for efficiancy and the bullet weights 250, 270, 286, 300, all work well with this case. With Rigby pressures a 250 grain bullet will go around 3253 out of a 24" barrel and the 300 grain slug at better then 2900. If you run up to the pressures of the ultras (.338 &.375) The .366 D.G.W. will reach velosities of 3450 with a 250 and over 3100 with a 300 grain bullet. These pressure levels though defeat the purpose of the cartridge. The hole idea was to develop a cartridge that could be used at any temperature anywhere in the world, and you would not be under gunned no matter what you were hunting from deer sized game to the big five!!
As a custom rifle maker and the creator of this cartridge I will confess to being rather partial to it. But even so, its track record speaks for it self. Over 40 one shot kills on game from 100 pounds to pushing 1000 pounds both in the U.S. and South Africa. If you guys are intrested, the cheepest way to go is to get the dies from Hornady and rebarrel a Ruger #1 or go with the CZ 550.
By the way it is not a big deal to get a Ruger trigger down to around 3 pounds with little or no creep. You can also replace the trigger with a Timney or a Kiplinger single set trigger.


Thank you for your intrest in this cartridge.

Your Friend
Jud

RE: Over Kill
 

I orderd the 10th eddition of COTW .. I will receive it when published. I also looked in to the CZ rifle and it looks like it will be pretty inexpensive to build .. I will talk to my local gun smith and see what he wants to rebarrel it .. With the 250 bt this should be one hell of a whitail wacker .. And black bear too ..Bill

RE: Over Kill
 

PS. Where can we get a reamer ? Or is it possible for you to do it and send the barrel ? ...Thanks Bill

RE: Over Kill
 

I can do the action and barrel work, for that matter I can build you a complete rifle if you want. By the way one of my customers has a Ruger #1 witha 29" octagon barrel, the first 2 1/2" are the muzzle brake. it also has octagon scope rings, kind of neat. The rifle is chambered for the .366 D.G.W. and it shoots under 1/2" . If you are intrested he is selling it to get money for a bolt action .366 based on the CZ action.
If you are intrested in having me do some work for you then Email me your mailing address and I will send you one of our brochures.
Thanks for your intrest.
Your Friend
Jud

RE: Over Kill
 

Even in cases in which the entire energy of a bullet is expended within a target, there is nothing like the effect we would expect from, say, 147 ft/lb of energy in a 1-pound target. i actually once watched an Army sergeant catch 230 grain .45 ACP GI Hardball bullets fired from 15' into a " catcher' s mit" made of Kevlar that he was wearing on his right hand! This thing was just about the size of a baseball catcher' s mit, but I have no idea how many layers of bullet-stopping and shock-absorbing material it contained. When the bullet hit, his hand was shoved back with about the same violence and about as far as the pistol moved the firer' s hand. No penetration into the glove at all! Then the guy would open his hand, palm-up, and hold the caught bullet out for all to observe. When it impacted, the bullet was carrying over 300 ft/lb of kinetic energy, but there was no obvious commensurate effect on the guy' s hand/arm!! 300 foot/pounds of REAL energy?? I don' t think so!!