Go Back  HuntingNet.com Forums > General Hunting Forums > Whitetail Deer Hunting
 Velocity verses Energy. (the debate) >

Velocity verses Energy. (the debate)

Community
Whitetail Deer Hunting Gain a better understanding of the World's most popular big game animal and the techniques that will help you become a better deer hunter.

Velocity verses Energy. (the debate)

Thread Tools
 
Old 12-13-2004, 08:03 PM
  #121  
Nontypical Buck
Thread Starter
 
zrexpilot's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Texas
Posts: 2,695
Default RE: Velocity verses Energy. (the debate)

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.

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.
zrexpilot is offline  
Old 12-13-2004, 08:25 PM
  #122  
Nontypical Buck
Thread Starter
 
zrexpilot's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Texas
Posts: 2,695
Default RE: Velocity verses Energy. (the debate)

BTW, the bullet on the far right is "only" doing 2700 fps so apparently did NOT need hypervelocity to function well....

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.
zrexpilot is offline  
Old 12-13-2004, 10:13 PM
  #123  
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Rocky Mountains, Colorado
Posts: 1,964
Default 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...."
ELKampMaster is offline  
Old 12-14-2004, 08:43 AM
  #124  
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Minneapolis, MN
Posts: 618
Default 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.
OK, obviously this guy really understands nothing about physics.
minnesotahunter is offline  
Old 12-14-2004, 12:12 PM
  #125  
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Houston, Texas
Posts: 118
Default RE: Velocity verses Energy. (the debate)

My head hurts
Jluke04 is offline  
Old 12-14-2004, 12:36 PM
  #126  
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: minnesota USA
Posts: 411
Default RE: Velocity verses Energy. (the debate)

ORIGINAL: minnesotahunter

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.
OK, obviously this guy really understands nothing about physics.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
and wont listen either-----stop the thread
onebullet is offline  
Old 12-14-2004, 03:33 PM
  #127  
 
Deerslayer_37's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Posts: 1,846
Default 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
Deerslayer_37 is offline  
Old 12-14-2004, 04:32 PM
  #128  
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: TEMPLE TX USA
Posts: 11
Default 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.
GLENNH is offline  
Old 12-14-2004, 04:33 PM
  #129  
Nontypical Buck
Thread Starter
 
zrexpilot's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Texas
Posts: 2,695
Default RE: Velocity verses Energy. (the debate)

ORIGINAL: Deerslayer_37

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
I aggree .
zrexpilot is offline  
Old 12-14-2004, 07:31 PM
  #130  
Boone & Crockett
 
James B's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Wall SD USA & Jamestown ND
Posts: 11,474
Default 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.
James B is offline  


Quick Reply: Velocity verses Energy. (the debate)


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

Copyright © 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.