RE: Velocity verses Energy. (the debate)
 

I'm not ignoring any of this, (except the TKO) yes it all plays into the animals demise. this whole debate was whether energy kills or not. I just think to many people emphasise on energy. energy sells guns but it doesnt knock anything down.

RE: Velocity verses Energy. (the debate)
 

never did I mention hyper velocity, only velocity whether it be from a
30-06 at 2700fps or a 30-30 at 2400fps. or a 45 at 1100fps.
now lets compare the killing power of all three. All three are using the same bullet weight 180 gr., we all agree the 30-06 will have the most killing power followed by the 30-30 then the 45.
Do you see a pattern ? yep velocity. They all use the same bullet weight but the one with the most velocity has the most killing power. even though the .45 has the bigger bullet and frontal area. the speed is what gives the 30-06 the edge.
I'm not saying a 17 rem has killing power because it has speed (4000fps). Its just that the speed of a projectile gives it the killing power. If that same 17 only shot 1900 fps second it wouldnt have near the same killing power it does at 4000 fps. A given projectile will have more killing power the faster it goes.

RE: Velocity verses Energy. (the debate)
 

Again,

".... "Killing power" has many components: shock, energy, penetration, expansion, "momentum" (per Ackley), and TKO. Anyone who picks just one aspect of the overall equation and chooses to pretend the others do not exist, exposes his ignorance of the equation as a whole, IMHO...."

RE: Velocity verses Energy. (the debate)
 

OK, obviously this guy really understands nothing about physics.

RE: Velocity verses Energy. (the debate)
 

My head hurts

RE: Velocity verses Energy. (the debate)
 

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
and wont listen either-----stop the thread

RE: Velocity verses Energy. (the debate)
 

zrex, just because it flies fast doesnt mean its good. It's velocity and mass. you can have a heavy bullet with no velcoity, or a light bullet with plenty of velocity, and neither of them will get the job done as well as the one with good velocity with a good mass tomatch. take a physics class dude

slayer

RE: Velocity verses Energy. (the debate)
 

I would think that a bullet with the highest combination of energy and velocity would be the most lethal. To me they kind of go hand in hand.

RE: Velocity verses Energy. (the debate)
 

I aggree .

RE: Velocity verses Energy. (the debate)
 

Your example of the 17 Rem should tell you that just velocity is no more a killer than just energy. This if you still think you can seperate velocity from energy from bullet mass from sectional density from all the other things that make up the equation.