Non-magnums

[catnthehat]

Originally Posted by Traps

The reasons why I would turf the 25-06

1) its velocity range is +3000 fps for most bullet weights. This can mean poor penetration with conventional bullets and to minimize this you can't really step up in weight to bring that velocity down to around 2800 fps or lower.

2) shooting at high velocities would limit me to only loading expensive premium bullets which would improve performance but at a cost.

3) the number of choices for bullets available to you is limited

4) the ballistic coefficients aren't typically that great in this caliber. The bullets available in the 277, 284, 308 are more, and many have high ballistic coefficients. If its recoil that you don't want to put up with then the 270 or 7mm-08 would have my vote. If its trajectory, they all drop and wind drift but within sane shooting distances there isn't a whole lot of difference between the 270, 7mm-08, and the 25-06. If you handload the 7mm-08 would be at the top of my list, if not then the 270.

Forget about BC and SC, and "available bullet weights"
Shoot the danged thing with a 120 grain Hornady BTHP and you're done .
You don't need a different bullet for big game, the Hornady isn't a premium bullet so it's cheap, and they shoot well.
The 120 was designed by Hornady for elk, so it will certainly kill moose with no problem - I have a buddy who has killed 4 with his, and many deer.

If you want a premium bullet, there are several out there that one can buy.
Antlers on the ground and hooves in the air is what matters, nothing else, and if you shoot the animal where you are supposed to , all things will go well.
Cat

[Pines]

Originally Posted by chuck

Prove it then. I'm so sick and tired of you slandering me for entertainment. Put up or shut up.

Okie dokie ..u asked for it and I shall deliver...

[Pines]

Originally Posted by chuck

Prove it then. I'm so sick and tired of you slandering me for entertainment. Put up or shut up.

U have been on here for about 3 or more years bragging about ur experience and well I CAN prove u copied and got the idea of cartridge selection is moot ...from CGN..then u take the praise and act like u did the field studies ..yaaaa right ...OH Oh sorry u are 34 and full of ..internet BS like I said a long atime ago ...

[Pines]

Originally Posted by Pines

U have been on here for about 3 or more years bragging about ur experience and well I CAN prove u copied and got the idea of cartridge selection is moot ...from CGN..then u take the praise and act like u did the field studies ..yaaaa right ...OH Oh sorry u are 34 and full of ..internet BS like I said a long atime ago ...

....

[Pudelpointer]

Huh, surprized it took so long.

[Pathfinder76]

I'm mildly disapointed.

[HunterDave]

Originally Posted by chuck

I'm mildly disapointed.

You must be a pretty important guy to have your very own stalker.

[Traps]

Originally Posted by 7 REM MAG

i dont need to be told how a bullet penetrates or that a non expanding bullet will penetrate more than an expanding bullet,

Then don't read it and beat it.

[Traps]

Originally Posted by Arn?Narn.

Traps...

You know your thread is nothing but a troll...and foolish enough you have been fed...


on about your way troll...

by the way, what penetrates further an expanding or non expanding bullet?

Your telling me off and then coming back and asking me a question????? The series of events with that error is a little ironic don't you think?

Fish?
Yes one.

[ishootbambi]

^^^ arns question was rhetorical dude.

[Pudelpointer]

Originally Posted by Traps

Your telling me off and then coming back and asking me a question????? The series of events with that error is a little ironic don't you think?

Fish?
Yes one.

The fact you thought he was seriously asking for your opinion is very telling.

Duck?
No two.

[Arn?Narn.]

Originally Posted by Traps

Momentum by definition is the measure of motion and is mass x velocity. Take a bullet, say for example the 338 160 grain TTSX bullet that I recovered this year. Expanded diameter was 0.612" and its impact velocity was estimated to be 2689 fps. Lets say the same bullet stops expanding at 1800 fps. Knowing these two points lets compare them side by side using frontal area and momentum, something I call momentum intensity, its the amount of momentum divided by frontal area. I use area because it takes more force to penetrate a medium if the area increases on a cylinderical rod. Its a crude measurement of the amount of resistance encountered by the bullet but it describes in general terms the end result.

Expanded Bullet - mass 160 grains (160 grains equals 0.0229 lbs)
Area is 0.294 square inches
Velocity is 2689 ft/s
Momentum is 61.46 lb-ft/s
Momentum intensity is 209 lb-ft/s/sq. inch

Non Expanded Bullet - mass 160 grains
Area is 0.0897 square inches
Velocity is 1800 ft/s
Momentum is 41.14 lb-ft/s
Momentum intensity is 459 lb-ft/s/sq. inch

The ability to penetrate (momentum intensity) at 2689 ft/s is only 209 while at 1800 ft/s is more than double at 459. What this shows is at 1800 ft/s although slower it encounters less resistance than if driven at 2689 ft/s because of the expanded diameter.

[Traps]

Fish?
Now we have three.

[hardy]

One thing to add too about your magnum theory Traps, is that I dont have to load my 300RUM very hot to get 28-2900 fps. All the other cartridges you mentioned you have to load a little hotter to get the same velocities, i have found that most guns i shoot are more accurate when they don't have to be loaded to max. IMO i like accuracy and shot placement over penetration. Thats why i shoot for the heart not the shoulders, you wreck a lot of meat doin double shoulder shots don't you think? Now if it was a huge bull elk at 500yards i would probably shoot for the shoulder because im not much of a tracker! Oh my mag wouldn't have a problem at 500 yards it would be traveling 1800+fps at that range. Just for the record (again) it DEPENDS on the bullets CONSTRUCTION at which speed it will expand and penetrate the best.

[nanuk-O-dah-Nort]

Originally Posted by Arn?Narn.

I'm sorry to inform you...

Your oppinion is wrong.


As you were gentleman.

arn?Narn; actually I think you may not be wholly correct.

when you read about PH's and their vast experience, Penetration is paramount.

a small hole through the heart, or both lungs will kill a lot better then a missing shoulder.

[nanuk-O-dah-Nort]

Originally Posted by hardy

IMO i like accuracy and shot placement over penetration. Thats why i shoot for the heart not the shoulders, you wreck a lot of meat doin double shoulder shots don't you think?

I remember reading an older article by a forgotten writer and his point was a standard C&C bullet impacting a 2000-2400 fps cannot be beat. So it only matter how you get there. Most decent SD bullets will penetrate very well under those parameters.

personally, I like a complete pass through. I don't always get it, but that is what I hope for.

Originally Posted by nanuk-O-dah-Nort

personally, I like a complete pass through. I don't always get it, but that is what I hope for.

You should shoot mono metal bullets then.

[209x50]

Originally Posted by Arn?Narn.

Tooooo perfect!!

[Unregistered user]

Originally Posted by nanuk-O-dah-Nort

arn?Narn; actually I think you may not be wholly correct.

when you read about PH's and their vast experience, Penetration is paramount.

a small hole through the heart, or both lungs will kill a lot better then a missing shoulder.

If that was true we'd be allowed hunting with FMJ.

[Pudelpointer]

Originally Posted by nanuk-O-dah-Nort

arn?Narn; actually I think you may not be wholly correct.

when you read about PH's and their vast experience, Penetration is paramount.

a small hole through the heart, or both lungs will kill a lot better then a missing shoulder.

Apples and oranges, Nanuk.

You are bringing "dangerous game" into the mix, and that is not what this thread was about. PHs want to be sure their bullet makes it to a lethal area (heart / lungs) which can be very difficult with many African species. Except for Walrus (and possibly wild boar / pigs), there are not NA species whose heart / lungs can not be destroyed with a well placed cup and core bullet. A controlled expansion bullet out of almost any high powered (bigger then 22-250) rifle is capable of efficiently killing most NA big game, even the big bears and bison.

[jim-bo]

This thread seems kind of irrelevant, theoretical penetration? does this account for preformance outside of ballistic gelatin and soft tissue? How about dense bone, tumbling bullets, bullet materials and construction? Not to poop on you're parade Traps, but dead is dead, would you not agree?

Maximum penatration occurs at 1800 fps with the auspice of perfect bullet preformance, have you taken into account the amount of resistance it would take to have a have a spitzer point bullet to properly mushroom and penetrate at 1800 fps, let alone the distance that a bullet travelling at 2800+ fps will travel/penetrate before it hits your magical 1800 fps. Resistance is crucial.

Almost every hunting caliber (cartridge) will provide more than sufficent penetration if not a pass thru under 200 yards without hitting significant bone or experiencing bullet failure.

Ballistic theory testing is one thing, real world preformance is another thing all together.

[Traps]

Originally Posted by hardy

One thing to add too about your magnum theory Traps, is that I dont have to load my 300RUM very hot to get 28-2900 fps. All the other cartridges you mentioned you have to load a little hotter to get the same velocities, i have found that most guns i shoot are more accurate when they don't have to be loaded to max. IMO i like accuracy and shot placement over penetration. Thats why i shoot for the heart not the shoulders, you wreck a lot of meat doin double shoulder shots don't you think? Now if it was a huge bull elk at 500yards i would probably shoot for the shoulder because im not much of a tracker! Oh my mag wouldn't have a problem at 500 yards it would be traveling 1800+fps at that range. Just for the record (again) it DEPENDS on the bullets CONSTRUCTION at which speed it will expand and penetrate the best.

Hardy
You should be able to get 2900 out of all the cartridges mentioned, just have to step down a wt class or two. I believe accuracy is a good thing too. There are times though where I hunt if it wasn't a shoulder shot it would be a lot more work. I haven't had any meat damage on my last shoulder shot but it was a TTSX that I was shooting and it retained 100% of its wt. Your entirely right that on the last part about bullet construction, its just when you get to the upper end of the velocity spectrum it starts to limit your choices as far as good bullets go. When its not a common caliber even more so. Picking a cartridge that most bullets are designed for you have more options available. If peope have something that works and they are happy there is no point in changing.

[Traps]

Originally Posted by Pudelpointer

Apples and oranges, Nanuk.

You are bringing "dangerous game" into the mix, and that is not what this thread was about. PHs want to be sure their bullet makes it to a lethal area (heart / lungs) which can be very difficult with many African species. Except for Walrus (and possibly wild boar / pigs), there are not NA species whose heart / lungs can not be destroyed with a well placed cup and core bullet. A controlled expansion bullet out of almost any high powered (bigger then 22-250) rifle is capable of efficiently killing most NA big game, even the big bears and bison.

Nanuk didn't bring in "dangerous game", you did. He said PH's, which can be any professional hunter on any continent. I would say that making sure their bullet makes it to the lethal area can be said of any hunter on any given shot, especially on non-broad side shots.

[Traps]

Originally Posted by Arn?Narn.

You devised an outdated formula that is orginally based on an outdated interest in the sectional density equation. You took the long away around by changing two variables, both speed and bullet shape, to prove nothing more than that a solid aerodynamic bullet with little frontal area will meet less resistance at a given fps than if the same grain bullet was shot as a pancake at the same fps.

pssstt...not your theory.

Your error was captured in the statement "solid aerodynamic bullet with little frontal area will meet less resistance at a given fps than if the same grain bullet was shot as a pancake at the same fps".

It is not the same velocity for both. It was 1800 fps versus 2689 fps with the 1800 fps penetrating more than 2689 fps. This seems counterintuitive at first glance but its not as it is sectional density with a twist - it incorporates penetration as it relates to expanded diameter.

[Traps]

Originally Posted by jim-bo

This thread seems kind of irrelevant, theoretical penetration? does this account for preformance outside of ballistic gelatin and soft tissue? How about dense bone, tumbling bullets, bullet materials and construction? Not to poop on you're parade Traps, but dead is dead, would you not agree?

Maximum penatration occurs at 1800 fps with the auspice of perfect bullet preformance, have you taken into account the amount of resistance it would take to have a have a spitzer point bullet to properly mushroom and penetrate at 1800 fps, let alone the distance that a bullet travelling at 2800+ fps will travel/penetrate before it hits your magical 1800 fps. Resistance is crucial.

Almost every hunting caliber (cartridge) will provide more than sufficent penetration if not a pass thru under 200 yards without hitting significant bone or experiencing bullet failure.

Ballistic theory testing is one thing, real world preformance is another thing all together.

Your comments on ballistic gellatin, bone, tumbling etc - it wouldn't matter - if a 7mm-08 penetrates more than a 270 in ballistic gel then the same should hold true for any other medium it was shot into.

I would say that as the distance decreases on impact your chances of it not passing through or experiencing bullet failure increases. This would depend on a lot of things of course.

You can use ballistic theory to make broad generalizations about a cartridge. Its like saying a 338-06 should penetrate because it uses bullets that were designed around the 338 Win Mag, because they don't open up. A hypothetical situation a potential buyer of a gun would say, you know what I want something that is going to inflict more damage (not saying lethal here) so I am going to choose the 338 Win Mag cause I'm in grizz country. People make these decisions all the time. This is meant to rationalize the decision making process for the potential buyers. If at the end of all this a guy thinks he wants the 338 RUM then all the power to you, go out and buy what suits your wants and needs. Its food for thought.

[ishootbambi]

4 pages and still throwing the troll some scraps huh? no harm done as it has been pretty clean i reckon.

[Traps]

Bambi, I'm still hungry....

[Arn?Narn.]

Originally Posted by Traps

Your error was captured in the statement "solid aerodynamic bullet with little frontal area will meet less resistance at a given fps than if the same grain bullet was shot as a pancake at the same fps".

It is not the same velocity for both. It was 1800 fps versus 2689 fps with the 1800 fps penetrating more than 2689 fps. This seems counterintuitive at first glance but its not as it is sectional density with a twist - it incorporates penetration as it relates to expanded diameter.

It is not penetration based on expanded diameter,...it is penetration based on two different bullets... one acting like a FMJ and the other as mushrooming pancake.

Do you not get what I am saying!!!!!!!

You have changed two variables....

One being the bullet, two being the FPS....

Of course the 1800 fps penetrated further and it is not counter intuitive, YOU ARE SHOOTING TWO DIFFERENT BULLETS !!!! yes the same grain, but the frontal areas are completely different.

WHAT DO YOU NOT UNDERSTAND!!!

Is it supposed to be surprising, enlightening, mind boggling or something to the rest of us, that you have developed a theory that a 160 grain non expanding bullet with a small frontal area will out penetrate a 160 grain bullet with a giant frontal area, and do such with less force, push, momentum, speed, speed impact momentum, or whatever term you come up with....,????

That is as simple as it gets...people understand this.... or at leat I think they do.


You didn't need to use 1800 fps at all.

at 2689 fps you simply compare a bullet with a giant frontal area, to one with a minute frontal area, and the same simple point is proven....but you changed the speeds in an attempt to manipulate the information to support your oppinion that less speed is better .... the folly of it all, is that the point you are proving is outdated, of little real world use and 99% moot.

Here's my theory...

If I throw a dart at my dartboard side ways, but very hard.
and then throw another dart pointy end first, but only half as hard, the pointy dart throw, though only thrown half as hard, will dig in further....


Look At me everyone...Look at me...I have a new theory...!!!!!

Ta ddaaaaaaa!

Darts thrown at dartboards sideways don't dig in as well as darts thrown horizontally pointy end first!!!! even with less power behind the throw, they still dig in further...

I call this the " pointy endy thingy of the dart" theory....

BOW TO ME>>>BOW TO ME I SAY !!!!!!

I am a physics master!!!!


Seriously guys, if you believe my point that Traps' theory is not actually some new theory or new formula,... just a very simple physics lesson in penetration, ...mainly that an aerodynamic non expanding bullet with little frontal area can out penetrate a non aerodynamic mushroom with large fronatal area at a given or even less fps, can ya gibve me a "X2"
cause i really think that most of us somehow inherently know this,...don't we?

This comparison is of two different bullets, the only thing in common is the grains,....moot to the power of moot...

[Traps]

As I've said before its the same bullet construction driven at two different speeds, not two different bullets.

Nice tirade, who is looking at who.....

[Traps]

Honey lets go to bed! Hold on, someone's wrong on the internet.