RE: Velocity verses Energy. (the debate)
 

243 hahaha i got more hiting power with a homemade slingshot and a good coal ball

RE: Velocity verses Energy. (the debate)
 

ZREX i guess u aint gonna answer my question u know im right......u should make a slingshot and come to canada for some coal do better then ur 243

RE: Velocity verses Energy. (the debate)
 

I hate to reply to this since it turned into a pissing contest, but what about bows? They shoot around 300 fps. Haha :D

RE: Velocity verses Energy. (the debate)
 

ding ding ding!!!
Colin wins the debate.
You see it doesn't matter how fast the projectile is going....It doesn't matter (completely) how heavy the projectile is....It is the combination of the velocity, the construction of the projectile, it's penetration on the animal, and the resulting damage to the vital tissues in the animal (or human) that kills.
Case in point....my 21 yr old wheel bow....shoots slow, 29 " arrows (weight?) and I usually get complete pass throughs including blowing through ribs. The deer are defitnitely dead. The projectile killed them. The projectile was going damn slow by todays standards for bows.

I have a .243, and it is one of my favorite deer rifles and has accounted for many deer...but I don't load it to screaming velocities...just around 2850 fps.

I also have a 50 caliber 24" barreled CVA Frontier percussion cap blackpowder rifle shoting a ROUNDBALL (weight?) It has taken a few deer. They were definitely dead when I started field dressing them moments after being shot with a HEAVY, SLOW-MOVING projectile....soft projectile.

It's the correct combination of Velocity + Projectile construction + Projectile weight + placement

It is not anything vs anything ...Its several things in conjuction with each other.
Now go do your homework and clean your room.

RE: Velocity verses Energy. (the debate)
 

Here is a scenerio that was put in front of a number of hunters in a popular hunting magazine a few years ago. Let's say you were invited to go on an Elk hunting trip with a friend. You would be hunting in heavy timber with shots no more than 75 yards. You are given a choice of a .22-250 with a 55 gr. spitzer boattail or a .45-70 using a 270 gr. round nosed bullet. Which would you choose and why? 100% of the hunters said that they would use the .45-70 (common sense). Then when most of them were asked why they chose that caliber/bullet combination, over 1/2 of them stated "more knockdown" or "more energy" from the larger bullet.

OK lets look at the ballistic on these 2 calibers: at 100 yards both projectiles deliver almost identical energy numbers. The thing you have to look at here is the fact that the 55 gr. bullet is traveling twice the speed of the larger bullet therefore delivering more energy per square inch due to the smaller impact area of the .22 caliber.

In this case neither speed nor energy kills but bullet construction is the key. The larger bullet with it's blunt design and heavier core/jacket combination is what creates a significant wound channel to effeciently lower the animals blood pressure causing trauma and immediate death.

Shot placement and matching the bullet to the game being hunted is also a major factor here.

I totally agree with 8mm/06 on this one.

RE: Velocity verses Energy. (the debate)
 

Looks like the slow, fat woman wins this one!

Git 'er dun!!!!

RE: Velocity verses Energy. (the debate)
 

I sorta feel responsible for this debate, Now lets think about it in a way as to where you hunt. A light faster bullet will perform poorly in heavy dense woods like up in Maine or Nothern NH. A heavy bullet will be more stable traveling through brush. so to end this debate all bullets have their purpose and functionality ( thats why there are different calibers and weights and designs) depending what and where you are hunting. So I hope I didnt open another can of worms but made you realize there is no debate and that its all about prefrence.

RE: Velocity verses Energy. (the debate)
 

8mm/06 is right back on page 2 of this debate. It's a combination of velocity and mass. You can't argue that it's just velocity, and that power doesn't exist, because you are wrong. Velocity and mass together great a FORCE, or power. One without the other leaves you with either a near massless object moving at extremely high velocity (but delivers no force), or a motionless mass (again, no force). I don't see what's so hard to grasp here folks.

RE: Velocity verses Energy. (the debate)
 

ORIGINAL: Twong-on
Never depend on ANY bullet to be stable traveling through brush. It's a crap shoot at best that will eventually end poorly in some regard.

A bullet and broadhead tipped arrow kill by two TOTALLY different mechanisms. They should not be compared as though they are NOT the same.

Browning.308 - consider selling your "man's gun" so you can buy yourself some maturity with the proceeds.

RE: Velocity verses Energy. (the debate)
 

Archery depends on cutting and bleeding. Bullets create shock and tissue damage. I haven't looked at the two wound webpages mentioned earlier, but I haven't seen any mention of this on this thread. Doesn't the speed affect the ability of the bullet to mushroom, thus allowing the tranfer of kinetic (or potential) energy to surrounding tissue? There are certain speeds that the bullet would fail to fully mushroom. Our discussion would depend on several variables, speed of bullet, type of bullet, type of target.

RE: Velocity verses Energy. (the debate)
 

AHAHAHAHA ZREX I WINNNNNN

RE: Velocity verses Energy. (the debate)
 

Looks like some of you guys need to be introduced to Jack O'Connor...
This is the old Elmer Keith vs Cactus Jack debate...

RE: Velocity verses Energy. (the debate)
 

SeaHunter,
Thanks for the diagram, you've made it clear enough for me. I want the Viagra bullet in Figure B. :D

RE: Velocity verses Energy. (the debate)
 

.308 if you's of stayed in school you would have comprehended what has been said here.
#1--- energy is not what kills.
#2--- wound channels do
#3--- bigger bullets leave bigger wound channels.
#4--an expanded bullet leaves a bigger wound channel, and what expands a bullet ? VELOCITY.

So you see my little grass hopper, on a whitail deer my little 100 gr bullet traveling faster than your 165 gr bullet is going to expand more leaving a bigger wound channel. At a 100 yds the difference will not be noticable, but at 3-4- 5 hundred yds when your pea shooting .308 is falling off the scale and hitting dirt my .243 with 2200 fps velocity@500 yds is gonna mushroom and blow right through a whitail and kill better.

Ha Ha ! your wrong.

RE: Velocity verses Energy. (the debate)
 

Wow, this is stupid. 3 different forums about the same thing, with the same people arguing the same argument. What a waste of hard-drive space!

RE: Velocity verses Energy. (the debate)
 

heres the comparo again little grass hopper.
-----velocity---------- muzzle----100----200----300----400---500
243 85 gr Sierra------3320-----3070--2830---2600--2380--2180
.308 150 nos Partition-2840-----2600--2380---2170--1960--1770
----energy-
243----------------------2080------1770--1510--1280---1070---890-
308----------------------2680------2255---1880--1560--1285---1050

bullet drop@ 200 yd zero-----300yds---400yds---500yds-
243-------------------------------5.5------16.1-------32.8
308--------------------------------8-------23.4-------47.9
wind drift----------------------300yds----400yds---500yds
.243 85gr-------------------------6.3-----11.6-------18.8
.308 150 gr-----------------------8.1-----15.1-------24.8
So you see the choice is obvious for whitail deer. At the longer ranges the .243 surpasses the .308 by far,with its velocity and accuracy . the bullet will expand more leaving a bigger wound channel and killing faster. the .308 drops significantly more,making longer shots harder.
Remember enrey is not what kills , wound channels do. Bigge wound channels with increased velocity will create hydro staic shock and kill even quicker.
Ya you better sell it and buy some education. LOL.

RE: Velocity verses Energy. (the debate)
 

you have a choice of not coming back to this thread you know.
Just having some fun with Br.308 thats all.

RE: Velocity verses Energy. (the debate)
 

ENERGY (ft-lbs)
Cartridge Type Bullet Muzzle 100 200 300 400 500
Premier Core-Lokt Ultra 100 PSP CLU 1945 1629 1356 1120 917 745
Premier Core-Lokt Ultra 150 PSP CLU 2648 2159 1744 1394 1102 864


ZREX u have a little more velocity but have no energy to do anything when it hits....if its such a great long distance rifle why dont the snipers use them.....i think they use my 308 dont they

RE: Velocity verses Energy. (the debate)
 

just incase u didnt see my question i asked u 2 days ago here it is again


ok ZREX i have a question to ask u if it is velocity that kills not energy what would u rather take on a big game hunt ur .243 or a 308 or a 30-06 id like to see u shoot a 1000+lb bull with ur 243.....the thing will probly laugh at u...............I REST MY CASE ITS ENERGY NOT VELOCITY


u miswell shoot a buffalo too with all ur velocity

RE: Velocity verses Energy. (the debate)
 

Yeah, but zrex, it’s still funny to listen to you rant and rave, and call people little grasshoppers.

RE: Velocity verses Energy. (the debate)
 

up untill the late 70's more elk had been killed with the .243 than any other caliber. But after that every one got magnumtitis.

RE: Velocity verses Energy. (the debate)
 

you should read this article. This guy claims the .243 to be the best drop'em in their tracks caliber. "The ultimate deer cartridge"

and heres some testamonials.

http://www.udarrell.com/ultimate_deer_cartridge.htm

RE: Velocity verses Energy. (the debate)
 

Rather than enter into this argument about velocity vs. energy ect. I choose a rifle on the application. Heavy brush or pine thickets, I use a Marlin 444. In semi open fields or extended shooting lanes .308. For open long distance hunting like Montana I think a 270 would do the trick.
I have no scientific data to back this up but it just seems logical to me.

RE: Velocity verses Energy. (the debate)
 

and heres some more testamonlials
http://www.udarrell.com/ultimate_deer_cartridge_guests.htm

RE: Velocity verses Energy. (the debate)
 

zrexpilot, sorry for telling you to shut it the other day...I feel bad now [&o]

The .243 is an EXCELLENT round for deer, I have seen enough kills to support .243 users!

RE: Velocity verses Energy. (the debate)
 

like remington said b4 i can get more hittin power with a sling shot and a good coal ball

RE: Velocity verses Energy. (the debate)
 

A bow shooting a 380gr. arrow at 270 fps has around 65 ft-lbs. of KE. Your telling me that 1000 ft-lbs is needed to take down a whitetail?

Cmon, shot placement is the key.

RE: Velocity verses Energy. (the debate)
 

this is a exit wound from a 100 gr.243 win.power point this deer was shot at 100 yards.Distance measured with range finder.The deer fell dead in her tracks .

RE: Velocity verses Energy. (the debate)
 

Velocity is just part of the energy just as bullet weight is. You can't seperate or pick between the two. Big slow bullets kill as do fast smaller bullets assuming that there is enough sectional density to promote penetration. Big fast bullets was Roy Weatherby's answer to this debate. Recoil was the down side. To me of all the vaiables, sectional density is what controls the result. That is its one of the most critical components to the equation. I pick my bullet by matching the sectional density of the bullet to the size and tennacity of the target animal. About 210 to 260 for deer size game. 260 to about 300 for Elk and moose size game and 300 on up for bigger heavier game. This is a rule of thumb but it works well for me. I have killed game with rifles from the 22-250 to the 45-70. The common denominator is always, SHOT PLACEMENT.

RE: Velocity verses Energy. (the debate)
 

BAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHA THAT Deer has gangrene BAHAHAHAHA I WOULDNT EAT IT ITS FLESH IS EATING AWAY IT SURE AS HELL AINT NO EXIT WOUND BAHAHAHAHHAHAHAAAHAHAHAHAAHAHHAAHAHAA

RE: Velocity verses Energy. (the debate)
 

the only reason it fell is b/c u broke its legs thats the worse shot i ever seeen

RE: Velocity verses Energy. (the debate)
 

This debate could be solved just by using momentum instead of velocity or kinetic energy.

The 17 was compared to the 44 mag earlier. The 44 kills a hog quicker:
Mometum=mass*velocity
KE=mass*(velocity)^2

17 rem 25gr@4040fps KE=906foot pounds Momentum=14.428 pounds feet per second
44 rem mag 300gr@1200fps KE=960 foot pounds Momentum= 51.428 pounds feet per second
30-06 180gr@2700 fps KE=2913 foot pounds Momentum= 69.428 pounds feet per second
243 100gr @2850 fps KE=1803 foot pounds Momentum= 40.71 pounds feet per second

An oldie but a goodie
45/70 500gr@1200 fps KE=1598 foot pounds Momentum=85.714 pounds feet per second.

RE: Velocity verses Energy. (the debate)
 

hahahaha that aint no exit wound...

RE: Velocity verses Energy. (the debate)
 

-------------------------------------------------------------------------
thats what i say, - --- get hit in the head once with a small rock size and weight of a pea out of a wrist rocket slingshot then get hit with hit with a 54cal lead ball the same way you will agree---"knockdown power"---

goverenment issue 45-70 winchester john???? you must be a big fella ta carry that!!!! but o so sweet of a gun(heavy though) my uncle dutz(doots) has one-he said " i am 77 years old and i dont track em no more -knock em down where they stand"

ONEBULLET THATS WHAT ITS ABOUT

RE: Velocity verses Energy. (the debate)
 

[/quote]

the picture of the 243 at 100yds
it looks more like a tear to me than an entrance or exit wound-"WHERES THE HOLE"----------onebullet

RE: Velocity verses Energy. (the debate)
 

--------------------------------------------------------------------
:):):D:D;);)[8D] oh yeah -----there is intellegent life on this planet---
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
to zrex- if you like your gun- shoot it- personal preference mean anything to you, stop trying to beat the other guns to death because you THINK YOUR RIGHT- keep an open mind, the 7mm wsm is not your grandfathers gun, new and improved ya cant dismiss it either as a deer gun
but its all about terrain,weight and preference, and shooting distance blah blah-- put simple KILL EM CLEAN AND FAST--onebullet

RE: Velocity verses Energy. (the debate)
 

[quote]ORIGINAL: woody7

I agree. A single torso shot from a 9mm handgun is many times survivable unless the heart ,BOTH lungs or a major artery is hit. The same shot from a .45 will not be so kind, and will put an exit wound the size of a fist out the other side carrying with it all that was in its path.
[/quote--------

another intellegent life:):):):D[8D][8D]--onebullet

RE: Velocity verses Energy. (the debate)
 

---------------------------------------------------------------
won ??????? won what ???

RE: Velocity verses Energy. (the debate)
 

--------------------------------------------AMEN

RE: Velocity verses Energy. (the debate)
 

------------------------------------------------------------------
we had horse and buggys at one time too---i am glad people got smarter--------the times they are a changin