Does velocity really contribute to wounding/disabling/"stopping" an animal (hunting) or threat (OIS/Self defense/Military)? Sure, after 1800fps, you can begin counting on the TC to be an actual wounding mechanism, but will a rifle bullet be much more destructive at 2500fps than at 2100fps, provided it opens/expands just the same at either velocity, and through/through's the target at either velocity?
Last edited by Chuck Haggard; 03-15-2016 at 03:20 PM. Reason: typo in title of thread
Depends.
Facts matter...Feelings Can Lie
In hunting, velocity can contribute in two ways:Originally Posted by Unobtanium
1) in flattening trajectory, helping to place a bullet in the vitals.
2) having sufficient velocity to penetrate the skull, or penetrate other vitals after first passing through intermediate structure.
Likes pretty much everything in every caliber.
That sounds like a profound "depends". So lets start with generalities and "does it ever".
In general, does it matter with pistol/revolver cartridges? If in general, no, are there instances or examples that it ever does? Barring, of course, one off instances where "anything can happen".
In general, does it matter with rifle cartridges? If no, ever?
I would imagine additional velocity would "help" with "wounding" from the function of, in general, the higher velocity the cartridge, the flatter its trajectory, which facilitates marginal improved accuracy or precision. But that would be a guess. This strikes me as an initially interesting topic.
It depends on the size of the TC that the projectile generates relative to the size of the organism impacted. For instance a .22magnum will blow apart the torso of a squirrel with a good high velocity HP, but against a hog it is a hole punch(been there, done that many times). A 6.8 SPC will drop a mule deer with good shot placement, but my .270 Weatherby Magnum with the same projectile size and weight will drop an elk or moose in their tracks with the right shot placement. I will also say that I have observed better results against white tail deer with a long barrel full power .357magnum than with even the best 9mm loads from a service pistol.
Let's put some parameters on this.
62gr Gold Dot and 75gr Gold Dot. They both expand identically, but one leaves the barrel at 2400fps, and one at 2700fps. They both have enough SD and energy to through/through a Whitetail deer in my area. However, the 75g COULD offer more assurance on a non-broadside shot. Is it giving up anything terminally due to the likely 2200fps impact velocity vs. 2500fps impact velocity?
In the case you mention, velocity is adequate with both bullets. The greater sectional density of the heavier bullet is what gets results. Velocity isn't everything and an obsessive quest for it can lead to diminishing returns, especially as you get above 3,000 fps. Along with velocity, I'd include sectional density, bullet construction, and target characteristics (at a minimum) in a good set of parameters.
For instance, the old Africa hands tended to believe firmly in keeping velocity between 2,100 fps and 2,400 fps with FMJ bullets that had SD over about .280 for dangerous game with thick skin, heavy layers of muscle, and hard, dense bone. Bore diameter didn't matter much as long as it was over about 0.375", though decisive results tended to be more common as bore diameter increased IF the other variables remained roughly the same. What emerged was a class of stopping rifles with bullets of about 500 grains and muzzle velocity of about 2,100 fps. The mediums (375 H&H, 416 Rigby, 425 Westley Richards, etc.) tended to have lighter bullets (300-400ish grains) at about 2,400 fps, and were considered almost as effective given good placement. And even the more highly regarded smallbores (7x57 Mauser, 318 Westley Richards, 333 Jeffery, etc.) tended to have about the same SD and velocity.
In the end, it's as much art as it is science. The art lies in how you adjust each parameter for your situation. For whitetails, I'd go for velocity from 2,300-2,800 fps, bullet diameter from .257" to .358" and bullet weight from 125-220 grains. To allow for the type of shots I'd expect, I could set the various indicators for open country and get the 25/06, the 270 and 280. Set them for brush and I get the 35 Remington and the 348 Winchester. Set them in the middle and I get the 30-30, 308 and the 30/06.
In each case, if I got to the point where a few hundred feet per second meant the difference between success and failure, I'd go back and bump up one or more of the other variables. Overkill never fails.
Okie John
Last edited by okie john; 03-15-2016 at 11:26 PM.
“The reliability of the 30-06 on most of the world’s non-dangerous game is so well established as to be beyond intelligent dispute.” Finn Aagaard
"Don't fuck with it" seems to prevent the vast majority of reported issues." BehindBlueI's
Not to get into a hunting de-rail, but I've heard of people harvesting white tail using .223/5.56 without too much trouble. So long as they're using modern JSPs or OTMs. That seems to contradict what you're stating about that particular game. Unless of course you're simply stating that what you've specified is the "sweet spot" for that particular game.
My 11 year old son dropped his first 2 whitetail deer last fall with a .223 out of a mini 14. I was concerned about using a .223, but chose it due to low recoil and the fact the gun is very similar to the 10/22 he shoots a lot. The Winchester 64gr soft points completely passed through both deer angling downward from 50-65 yards. Both were 1 shot kills that dropped where they were hit... I know a 30-06 would be better, but in these cases the little/fast bullet was certainly effective.
Deer ain't really deer - down here, .223 would be fine. A 200 lb. whitetail in Nebraska is different as is a 250 lb. whitetail in Maine. Add in some differences in topography and that south Texas deer (while small) may be much better harvested with a very flat shooting rifle/cartridge based solely on shooting down a sendero....That seems to contradict what you're stating about that particular game.
Reply With Quote