Do you need premium bullets/ammo for hunting?

[elkhunter11]

Originally Posted by leo

I'm easing into one. I got a 6.5 PRC to finish playing with first.

Once you have a 6.5prc, there is no point looking at a 6.5CM.

[leo]

Originally Posted by elkhunter11

Once you have a 6.5prc, there is no point looking at a 6.5CM.

Very true. And I have a new 280AI I like even better than the PRC. Oh my, it never ends.

[waldedw]

Originally Posted by elkhunter11

Once you have a 6.5prc, there is no point looking at a 6.5CM.

Amen, you can close the book on this puppy now

[Stinky Coyote]

Originally Posted by elkhunter11

Once you have a 6.5prc, there is no point looking at a 6.5CM.

easy now, the 6.5CM is pretty dang special too, posted this ages ago it seems

6.5 cm 147 gr vs 300 win mag 200 gr
Factory Hornady Loads
Exact same penetration (sd.301)

6.5 cm has 55.4% less recoil
6.5 cm has 26.5% less bullet weight
6.5 cm has 5.4% less velocity

That is a shat ton less recoil energy giving up very little everywhere else that matters. Basically maintain same velocities at same distances all the way out.

This is the magic of of the 6.5’s...

The Grendel 123 gr does this to the 308 168 gr, almost identically the above.



And just so happens i did this factory ammo compare of the PRC to the Lapua also...here ya go...

The PRC 147 does this to the 338 Lapua 250 gr. Not as close as the two examples above but still so close as to compare.

147 gr vs 250 gr
Factory hornady again.

PRC = 64.5% less recoil
PRC = 42.2% less bullet weight
PRC = same velocity 2910/2900
Close sd .301/.312
Impact velocities mirror all the way out.

It's hard to ignore the efficiencies of the 6.5's...all three of these 21st century 6.5's are awesome!

One could almost say these 21st Century modern 6.5's are the new 30 cals.

[Salavee]

Originally Posted by Stinky Coyote

easy now, the 6.5CM is pretty dang special too, posted this ages ago it seems

6.5 cm 147 gr vs 300 win mag 200 gr
Factory Hornady Loads
Exact same penetration (sd.301)

6.5 cm has 55.4% less recoil
6.5 cm has 26.5% less bullet weight
6.5 cm has 5.4% less velocity

That is a shat ton less recoil energy giving up very little everywhere else that matters. Basically maintain same velocities at same distances all the way out.

This is the magic of of the 6.5’s...

The Grendel 123 gr does this to the 308 168 gr, almost identically the above.



And just so happens i did this factory ammo compare of the PRC to the Lapua also...here ya go...

The PRC 147 does this to the 338 Lapua 250 gr. Not as close as the two examples above but still so close as to compare.

147 gr vs 250 gr
Factory hornady again.

PRC = 64.5% less recoil
PRC = 42.2% less bullet weight
PRC = same velocity 2910/2900
Close sd .301/.312
Impact velocities mirror all the way out.

It's hard to ignore the efficiencies of the 6.5's...all three of these 21st century 6.5's are awesome!

One could almost say these 21st Century modern 6.5's are the new 30 cals.

There is no doubt about the 6.5's efficiency but I'm thinking if the 30-06 used a 123 gr bullet or generated 60% less recoil you might become a fanboy. Learn to manage recoil.

[obsessed1]

Originally Posted by Stinky Coyote

easy now, the 6.5CM is pretty dang special too, posted this ages ago it seems

6.5 cm 147 gr vs 300 win mag 200 gr
Factory Hornady Loads
Exact same penetration (sd.301)

6.5 cm has 55.4% less recoil
6.5 cm has 26.5% less bullet weight
6.5 cm has 5.4% less velocity

That is a shat ton less recoil energy giving up very little everywhere else that matters. Basically maintain same velocities at same distances all the way out.

This is the magic of of the 6.5’s...

The Grendel 123 gr does this to the 308 168 gr, almost identically the above.



And just so happens i did this factory ammo compare of the PRC to the Lapua also...here ya go...

The PRC 147 does this to the 338 Lapua 250 gr. Not as close as the two examples above but still so close as to compare.

147 gr vs 250 gr
Factory hornady again.

PRC = 64.5% less recoil
PRC = 42.2% less bullet weight
PRC = same velocity 2910/2900
Close sd .301/.312
Impact velocities mirror all the way out.

It's hard to ignore the efficiencies of the 6.5's...all three of these 21st century 6.5's are awesome!

One could almost say these 21st Century modern 6.5's are the new 30 cals.

All those # are fine but the bullet still has a much smaller frontal diameter and way less weight. Results are bigger hole and deeper larger deeper wound channels with bigger heavier bullets as stated SD is similar. Physics state that after a bullet hits a hard surface two bullets with same given sd will both penetrate but the lighter one will slow down faster thus penetrate less.

[marky_mark]

First hand knowledge
There is no comparison in terminal performance between a 6.5 and a 338 going the same speed

[catnthehat]

Trying to do something as stupid as drawing a comparison between the 6.5PRC and a 338 mag is completely ridiculous.
6.5 140 doing 3,150FPS at 1,000 yards makes aa nice mark on steel at 1,000 meters.
A 338 with a 225 gain bullet doing 3,000 FPS DENTS the steel on my range!
BIG difference in terminal ballistics....
Cat

[marky_mark]

Originally Posted by catnthehat

Trying to do something as stupid as drawing a comparison between the 6.5PRC and a 338 mag is completely ridiculous.
6.5 140 doing 3,150FPS at 1,000 yards makes aa nice mark on steel at 1,000 meters.
A 338 with a 225 gain bullet doing 3,000 FPS DENTS the steel on my range!
BIG difference in terminal ballistics....
Cat

Exactly

If your thinking that a 6.5 cal performs as well as a 338 going the same speed. You might want to check out the other threads about tracking game in the timber, and losing animals

[Andrzej]

[QUOTE=Stinky Coyote;4302830]easy now, the 6.5CM is pretty dang special too, posted this ages ago it seems

6.5 cm 147 gr vs 300 win mag 200 gr
Factory Hornady Loads
Exact same penetration (sd.301)

You should read this about SD

http://www.gsgroup.co.za/articlesd.html
Sectional Density - A Practical Joke?
In conclusion
1. Animals fall down reliably if a vital organ is destroyed, regardless of sectional density of the bullet.

2. Animals fall down reliably if the bullet retains enough weight and has enough speed to penetrate to a vital organ regardless of sectional density. This is interesting, weight and speed are the factors that determine momentum and energy values.

3. The sectional density value seems to be of no importance at all, providing it did not disappear completely.

4. The post impact sectional density of a bullet is almost always less than the starting sectional density.

This leaves only one question unanswered. Who first came up with the theory of sectional density? Was it some ballistician with a macabre sense of humour? Did he put forward this theory as a joke and it got out of control? Sectional density seems to be the ballistic equivalent of an internet chain letter. No matter how illogical or outdated or disproved it is, it keeps on popping up. Almost like the concept of hydrostatic shock, but that is another story.

To your success,

Gerard Schultz

Some more ragging on SD

[birdseye]

I witnessed a 6.5 creed,300wby,30378wby,338rum and a 378wby all hitting a 12”x15” 44W 3/4” steel gong,there was is no comparison,I’ll ask my son and his buddy’s to duplicate the test again and I’ll video it.The gong weighs 50 lbs ish maybe a bit more

[birdseye]

Oops 40 lbs ish

[Salavee]

That article certainly backs up the case for using a heavy for caliber bullet ,doesn't it Stinky ?

Sectional density is useful, but only when it is applied to obtaining a ballistic coefficient value for a particular bullet profile. On impact, it all goes out the window and momentum takes over.

[Bushrat]

Originally Posted by Salavee

That article certainly backs up the case for using a heavy for caliber bullet ,doesn't it Stinky ?

Sectional density is useful, but only when it is applied to obtaining a ballistic coefficient value for a particular bullet profile. On impact, it all goes out the window and momentum takes over.

A small car has about the same sectional density as a much larger heavier full sized SUV. I know which one I would rather be in when they hit head on.

[Phil McCracken]

Back to the topic.

Without getting into the "physics" and the 6.5 saga, during most typical shooting scenarios, being a shot between 0-200 yards, any big game bullets will perform. Premiums or blue boxes makes no difference. The trick is, "you" have to perform. If the scenario is not good, make it good. Called hunting.

Wait until you have a decent broadside shot, aim about 6 inches above the belly line, right behind the front leg (think like you are shooting a paper plate at that location). ALL vitals are located there. All big game type bullets will perform well.

Pull the trigger, and enjoy supper. Further, minimal meat destroyed if shot as above.

Long range shooting is different. I don't do it so won't comment.

[BC7stw]

Biggest performance fail I’ve seen was with a premium bullet that failed to expand. 6 plus, foot black bear my friend shot at 80 yards, front chest, slight quartering shot from a 160 grain 7MM at 3200 fps

Went through the bear like a FMJ, 7MM hole in and 7MM hole out the back, Pencil hole through one lung.

Best argument I have for using premium bullets also happened with this bear.

Bear left no blood trail, I guessed at where he went, downhill and into the thickest cover. I eventually caught up to it about 100 yards back in the thick stuff. It was late in the day so very dark shadows in the shaded older growth and thick alder. I caught movement through a small opening and saw the bear get up. I was in a small clearing but the bear was under a couple large spruce. His outline was clear and I literally had a 5 gallon pail sized hole to shoot through about halfway between me and the bear just as he disappeared. When I fired he went down rolled and went out of sight.

I was also using a premium bullet. A 140 grain TSX in a 7 STW. It was a quartering away shot ( yep, terrible place to shoot any animal), bullet entered the back ham, and stopped in the front shoulder. It also hit a lung.

This was not a shot I would have ever taken under normal circumstances , it was a quick, centre of mass shot on a moving wounded animal in very dense cover.

Bear was dead at the bottom of a small embankment 20 feet or so from where he was hit. The swamp that he was headed into would have made tracking and recovery extremely difficult.

There are few shots I’ve taken since I started hunting in the early 1970’s that required a premium bullet. Moose, bears, deer, wolves, running shots, and ranges from 15 to 400 yards, all would have been reliably dispatched with a good quality well selected cup and core bullet. Would a standard old cup and core have worked on this wounded bear, maybe??? I’m not certain a standard run of the mill bullet, given the less than ideal shot opportunity I was faced with would have anchored this bear.

This is likely the only shot I’ve actually needed a premium bullet in nearly 50 years of hunting, and you are correct, with good shot placement there is no need for anything beyond a good quality cup and core.

I’ve helped track a couple wounded animals over the years, bears and moose, a wounded cougar in impossibly thick brush. I’ve come to believe, your first shot doesn’t require anything more than good shot placement with any decent bullet. If things go wrong, any shot taken after that first one is where premium bullets really shine, with these, shot placement will be less than ideal.

[elkhunter11]

Originally Posted by Phil McCracken

Back to the topic.

Without getting into the "physics" and the 6.5 saga, during most typical shooting scenarios, being a shot between 0-200 yards, any big game bullets will perform. Premiums or blue boxes makes no difference. The trick is, "you" have to perform. If the scenario is not good, make it good. Called hunting.

Wait until you have a decent broadside shot, aim about 6 inches above the belly line, right behind the front leg (think like you are shooting a paper plate at that location). ALL vitals are located there. All big game type bullets will perform well.

Pull the trigger, and enjoy supper. Further, minimal meat destroyed if shot as above.

Long range shooting is different. I don't do it so won't comment.

If you are willing to wait for the perfect shot, and are willing to pass up all but the perfect shot, then yes you are correct. But you don't always get the perfect shot. I have hunted all week , and called a nice elk into under 50 yards, only to have the bull quartering towards me. It's either take the shot, drive the bullet through the shoulder into the vitals, or risk the elk spooking as you wait for it to turn broadside. It can happen with moose as well , they come in, hold up for a few seconds, then realize that something is wrong and spin and run . When I see them stop and hesitate at close range, I am going to shoot, so I want a bullet that can make it through a shoulder to the vitals.

[sns2]

Originally Posted by BC7stw

Biggest performance fail I’ve seen was with a premium bullet that failed to expand. 6 plus, foot black bear my friend shot at 80 yards, front chest, slight quartering shot from a 160 grain 7MM at 3200 fps

Went through the bear like a FMJ, 7MM hole in and 7MM hole out the back, Pencil hole through one lung.

Best argument I have for using premium bullets also happened with this bear.

Bear left no blood trail, I guessed at where he went, downhill and into the thickest cover. I eventually caught up to it about 100 yards back in the thick stuff. It was late in the day so very dark shadows in the shaded older growth and thick alder. I caught movement through a small opening and saw the bear get up. I was in a small clearing but the bear was under a couple large spruce. His outline was clear and I literally had a 5 gallon pail sized hole to shoot through about halfway between me and the bear just as he disappeared. When I fired he went down rolled and went out of sight.

I was also using a premium bullet. A 140 grain TSX in a 7 STW. It was a quartering away shot ( yep, terrible place to shoot any animal), bullet entered the back ham, and stopped in the front shoulder. It also hit a lung.

This was not a shot I would have ever taken under normal circumstances , it was a quick, centre of mass shot on a moving wounded animal in very dense cover.

Bear was dead at the bottom of a small embankment 20 feet or so from where he was hit. The swamp that he was headed into would have made tracking and recovery extremely difficult.

There are few shots I’ve taken since I started hunting in the early 1970’s that required a premium bullet. Moose, bears, deer, wolves, running shots, and ranges from 15 to 400 yards, all would have been reliably dispatched with a good quality well selected cup and core bullet. Would a standard old cup and core have worked on this wounded bear, maybe??? I’m not certain a standard run of the mill bullet, given the less than ideal shot opportunity I was faced with would have anchored this bear.

This is likely the only shot I’ve actually needed a premium bullet in nearly 50 years of hunting, and you are correct, with good shot placement there is no need for anything beyond a good quality cup and core.

I’ve helped track a couple wounded animals over the years, bears and moose, a wounded cougar in impossibly thick brush. I’ve come to believe, your first shot doesn’t require anything more than good shot placement with any decent bullet. If things go wrong, any shot taken after that first one is where premium bullets really shine, with these, shot placement will be less than ideal.

Great post.

Out of curiosity, what bullet failed to expand?

[Salavee]

When discussing bullet terminal performance, why not leave out the accuracy thing and simply apply proper placement as a gimmee ? We all know accuracy plays an important role but it has no bearing on actual bullet terminal performance unless all bullets were planted in the same place, and at the same angle and velocity while meeting the same resistance. Its simpler that way.

[Phil McCracken]

Originally Posted by elkhunter11

If you are willing to wait for the perfect shot, and are willing to pass up all but the perfect shot, then yes you are correct. But you don't always get the perfect shot. I have hunted all week , and called a nice elk into under 50 yards, only to have the bull quartering towards me. It's either take the shot, drive the bullet through the shoulder into the vitals, or risk the elk spooking as you wait for it to turn broadside. It can happen with moose as well , they come in, hold up for a few seconds, then realize that something is wrong and spin and run . When I see them stop and hesitate at close range, I am going to shoot, so I want a bullet that can make it through a shoulder to the vitals.

I said decent, not perfect. Bit of a difference there.

At under 50 yards, doesn't matter what you shoot if going for the shoulder. It will do the job. The animal won't know the difference.

[elkhunter11]

Originally Posted by Phil McCracken

I said decent, not perfect. Bit of a difference there.

At under 50 yards, doesn't matter what you shoot if going for the shoulder. It will do the job. The animal won't know the difference.

At under 50 yards the velocity is the greatest , so the greatest chance of a lightly constructed bullet fragmenting and not penetrating.

[Stinky Coyote]

Originally Posted by Salavee

That article certainly backs up the case for using a heavy for caliber bullet ,doesn't it Stinky ?

Sectional density is useful, but only when it is applied to obtaining a ballistic coefficient value for a particular bullet profile. On impact, it all goes out the window and momentum takes over.

and by Andrzej:

"You should read this about SD

http://www.gsgroup.co.za/articlesd.html
Sectional Density - A Practical Joke?
In conclusion
1. Animals fall down reliably if a vital organ is destroyed, regardless of sectional density of the bullet.

2. Animals fall down reliably if the bullet retains enough weight and has enough speed to penetrate to a vital organ regardless of sectional density. This is interesting, weight and speed are the factors that determine momentum and energy values.

3. The sectional density value seems to be of no importance at all, providing it did not disappear completely.

4. The post impact sectional density of a bullet is almost always less than the starting sectional density.

This leaves only one question unanswered. Who first came up with the theory of sectional density? Was it some ballistician with a macabre sense of humour? Did he put forward this theory as a joke and it got out of control? Sectional density seems to be the ballistic equivalent of an internet chain letter. No matter how illogical or outdated or disproved it is, it keeps on popping up. Almost like the concept of hydrostatic shock, but that is another story.

To your success,

Gerard Schultz

Some more ragging on SD"

Gentlemen, may i direct you to here and go ahead and explain your theory of how this was possible?

https://www.chuckhawks.com/bell_elephants.htm

800 of his 1011 elephants shot with a 173 gr solid from a .275 rigby at 2300 fps. Sectional Density .306

Now i know everyone here understands that we hunt with expanding bullets varying from rapid to delayed controlled expansion rates. So if we would like to talk ballistics then assume each bullet being compared has the exact same construction and expansion rate as the one being compared to it. You don't compare a ballistic tip to an accubond for example, you compare a ttsx to a ttsx between two different cartridges shooting same SD at same velocities. I know we're clear on this.

Anyway, the below information and pretty common that most stuff used for dangerous game are solids and always have and will be so the SD will change very little if at all. You could consider that max potential for penetration. Our options will vary as the frontal area opens up the SD shrinks, if it loses weight it shrinks even faster...you all get the picture.

And from this link: https://www.rifleshootermag.com/edit...n_200912/84161

"We--Boddington, Carter, Jones--have now seen multiple elephant not only fail to go down but fail to show any reaction whatsoever upon receiving fair in the skull the 1,000-grain bullet and 9,000 ft.-lbs. of energy delivered by the .700. This is not just surprising, it's stunning (pun intended), but it's real. Only Jones' ability to get on the second trigger fast prevented a problem.

Once again, I'm convinced the culprit with the .700 is inadequate velocity in relation to the frontal area. This is a continuing theme with all the ultra-large bores. I am convinced none of them penetrate as well as, for example, a 400-grain .416 at 2,400 fps (more velocity, less resistance). But if you had more velocity the recoil would be off the page."

So lets discuss how momentum has a single thing do with anything? How are the 600/700 nitros with ungodly amounts of ft/lbs and momentum not getting into the brain pans of elephants then? The answer folks is not enough SD. There was more than enough energy there to drive a much higher SD bullet there quicker and to achieve penetration necessary. Amazes me we still have to cover this.

As a final say about what you see on the steel plate between the two...i'm sorry but a 147 gr bullet with SD of .301 vs a 250 gr bullet at .312 given same construction...land on game intended with appropriate impact velocity of say 2000 fps or whatever, they are going almost the same depth (difference of .301 and .312 as the difference) and the animal is dead if hit where you were aiming. The amount of 'extra damage' the larger bullet may or may not display(and is often opposite what is expected) doesn't equal 'extra dead'. Only on steel fellas...only on steel.

[Phil McCracken]

Originally Posted by elkhunter11

At under 50 yards the velocity is the greatest , so the greatest chance of a lightly constructed bullet fragmenting and not penetrating.

So what you are saying is a "Blue Box" Federal .30/06 with a 220 gr. bullet will fragment and not penetrate a moose shoulder under 50 yards?

I agree about the velocity, but it also has the most energy.

[Stinky Coyote]

Originally Posted by Salavee

When discussing bullet terminal performance, why not leave out the accuracy thing and simply apply proper placement as a gimmee ? We all know accuracy plays an important role but it has no bearing on actual bullet terminal performance unless all bullets were planted in the same place, and at the same angle and velocity while meeting the same resistance. Its simpler that way.

yes, agree, have said this for ages

also, we must assume we are comparing bullets of same construction and expansion rate (ie; not ballistic tips vs ttsx)

because as front area goes up, SD goes down, if any weight is lost (bullet breaking up) then SD goes down even more...so assume we compare ttsx or accubond to ttsx or accubond since we do not use solids here where the SD is unlikely to change at all through it's journey

[Stinky Coyote]

Originally Posted by BC7stw

Biggest performance fail I’ve seen was with a premium bullet that failed to expand. 6 plus, foot black bear my friend shot at 80 yards, front chest, slight quartering shot from a 160 grain 7MM at 3200 fps

Went through the bear like a FMJ, 7MM hole in and 7MM hole out the back, Pencil hole through one lung.

Best argument I have for using premium bullets also happened with this bear.

Bear left no blood trail, I guessed at where he went, downhill and into the thickest cover. I eventually caught up to it about 100 yards back in the thick stuff. It was late in the day so very dark shadows in the shaded older growth and thick alder. I caught movement through a small opening and saw the bear get up. I was in a small clearing but the bear was under a couple large spruce. His outline was clear and I literally had a 5 gallon pail sized hole to shoot through about halfway between me and the bear just as he disappeared. When I fired he went down rolled and went out of sight.

I was also using a premium bullet. A 140 grain TSX in a 7 STW. It was a quartering away shot ( yep, terrible place to shoot any animal), bullet entered the back ham, and stopped in the front shoulder. It also hit a lung.

This was not a shot I would have ever taken under normal circumstances , it was a quick, centre of mass shot on a moving wounded animal in very dense cover.

Bear was dead at the bottom of a small embankment 20 feet or so from where he was hit. The swamp that he was headed into would have made tracking and recovery extremely difficult.

There are few shots I’ve taken since I started hunting in the early 1970’s that required a premium bullet. Moose, bears, deer, wolves, running shots, and ranges from 15 to 400 yards, all would have been reliably dispatched with a good quality well selected cup and core bullet. Would a standard old cup and core have worked on this wounded bear, maybe??? I’m not certain a standard run of the mill bullet, given the less than ideal shot opportunity I was faced with would have anchored this bear.

This is likely the only shot I’ve actually needed a premium bullet in nearly 50 years of hunting, and you are correct, with good shot placement there is no need for anything beyond a good quality cup and core.

I’ve helped track a couple wounded animals over the years, bears and moose, a wounded cougar in impossibly thick brush. I’ve come to believe, your first shot doesn’t require anything more than good shot placement with any decent bullet. If things go wrong, any shot taken after that first one is where premium bullets really shine, with these, shot placement will be less than ideal.

Great post and i lean with this. I'm happier with what i see on game with moderate velocities with more rapid expansion bullets with higher than normal or at adequate SD's for game intended as that gives that great internal work while still carrying enough mass for penetration depths required.

i notice shorter faster recoveries and more drt's this way

and the numbers and construction can easily help look at it and understand what to expect from any bullet cartridge combinations and SD is 100% one of the most credible numbers to consider, start with the bullet, bc/sd/construction type for game intended appropriate and then can figure out what cartridges will propel it to the impact velocities that would work best for that bullet and the distances you like to hunt in....do this study/apply this formula and you will end up with exactly the performance you want

[Salavee]

Originally Posted by Stinky Coyote

and by Andrzej:

"You should read this about SD

http://www.gsgroup.co.za/articlesd.html
Sectional Density - A Practical Joke?
In conclusion
1. Animals fall down reliably if a vital organ is destroyed, regardless of sectional density of the bullet.

2. Animals fall down reliably if the bullet retains enough weight and has enough speed to penetrate to a vital organ regardless of sectional density. This is interesting, weight and speed are the factors that determine momentum and energy values.

3. The sectional density value seems to be of no importance at all, providing it did not disappear completely.

4. The post impact sectional density of a bullet is almost always less than the starting sectional density.

This leaves only one question unanswered. Who first came up with the theory of sectional density? Was it some ballistician with a macabre sense of humour? Did he put forward this theory as a joke and it got out of control? Sectional density seems to be the ballistic equivalent of an internet chain letter. No matter how illogical or outdated or disproved it is, it keeps on popping up. Almost like the concept of hydrostatic shock, but that is another story.

To your success,

Gerard Schultz

Some more ragging on SD"

Gentlemen, may i direct you to here and go ahead and explain your theory of how this was possible?

https://www.chuckhawks.com/bell_elephants.htm

800 of his 1011 elephants shot with a 173 gr solid from a .275 rigby at 2300 fps. Sectional Density .306

Now i know everyone here understands that we hunt with expanding bullets varying from rapid to delayed controlled expansion rates. So if we would like to talk ballistics then assume each bullet being compared has the exact same construction and expansion rate as the one being compared to it. You don't compare a ballistic tip to an accubond for example, you compare a ttsx to a ttsx between two different cartridges shooting same SD at same velocities. I know we're clear on this.

Anyway, the below information and pretty common that most stuff used for dangerous game are solids and always have and will be so the SD will change very little if at all. You could consider that max potential for penetration. Our options will vary as the frontal area opens up the SD shrinks, if it loses weight it shrinks even faster...you all get the picture.

And from this link: https://www.rifleshootermag.com/edit...n_200912/84161

"We--Boddington, Carter, Jones--have now seen multiple elephant not only fail to go down but fail to show any reaction whatsoever upon receiving fair in the skull the 1,000-grain bullet and 9,000 ft.-lbs. of energy delivered by the .700. This is not just surprising, it's stunning (pun intended), but it's real. Only Jones' ability to get on the second trigger fast prevented a problem.

Once again, I'm convinced the culprit with the .700 is inadequate velocity in relation to the frontal area. This is a continuing theme with all the ultra-large bores. I am convinced none of them penetrate as well as, for example, a 400-grain .416 at 2,400 fps (more velocity, less resistance). But if you had more velocity the recoil would be off the page."

So lets discuss how momentum has a single thing do with anything? How are the 600/700 nitros with ungodly amounts of ft/lbs and momentum not getting into the brain pans of elephants then? The answer folks is not enough SD. There was more than enough energy there to drive a much higher SD bullet there quicker and to achieve penetration necessary. Amazes me we still have to cover this.

As a final say about what you see on the steel plate between the two...i'm sorry but a 147 gr bullet with SD of .301 vs a 250 gr bullet at .312 given same construction...land on game intended with appropriate impact velocity of say 2000 fps or whatever, they are going almost the same depth (difference of .301 and .312 as the difference) and the animal is dead if hit where you were aiming. The amount of 'extra damage' the larger bullet may or may not display(and is often opposite what is expected) doesn't equal 'extra dead'. Only on steel fellas...only on steel.

As you didn't mention the caliber of the .301 and the 312 SD Bullets, I will take the the bullet that carries most of it's weight forward, (similar to 6.5 /160 gr) and the other being a larger cal with the .312 SD with most of it's weight carried behind center, , I'll take the one with the most weight forward to win the penetration battle if the impact velocity is equal.. That was Bells "ace in the hole". with the 6.5 and Elephants. Dunno anything about .700 nitro's and 1000 gr bullets. I'll leave that to you.

[Stinky Coyote]

Originally Posted by Salavee

As you didn't mention the caliber of the .301 and the 312 SD Bullets, I will take the the bullet that carries most of it's weight forward, (similar to 6.5 /160 gr) and the other being a larger cal with the .312 SD with most of it's weight carried behind center, , I'll take the one with the most weight forward to wins the penetration battle if the impact velocity is equal.. That was Bells "ace in the hole". with the 6.5 and Elephants. Dunno anything about .700 nitro's and 1000 gr bullets. I'll leave that to you.

well i was expecting you to show the momentum importance as i'm not sure there's more momentum than what a 700 nitro would provide so was hoping for explanation to why it wouldn't get in the brain? a train has plenty of momentum also, even at 2 mph it would certainly push that elephant right off the track but it won't kill it...too much frontal area for the velocity

the .301 is the 147gr 6.5 eld-m from 6.5 PRC at 2910 fps vs the .338 lapua 250gr hpbt match at .312 at 2900 fps...yup they have similar bc also so they mirror trajectory all the way out, yup the 250gr will smack the steel harder with all the extra energy, on game given same construction and expansion rates you can expect the same depth of penetration (minus the added .011 sd advantage of the 250gr)

in otherwords on an elk at 1000 yards, the elk will be dead with either on same shot placement, not semi-dead with the PRC and extra dead with the Lapua

the only lottery is how many ft/lbs per inch either may dump along the journey, if they don't open up much and retain most sd then easy pass through for both and most work is done in the side of the hill, but if they both open up same rates and dump good portions of their ke in the first 16" of penetration then more damage likely to be seen with the 250gr but the 147gr still kills the critter too with more than adequate performance

[catnthehat]

"As a final say about what you see on the steel plate between the two...i'm sorry but a 147 gr bullet with SD of .301 vs a 250 gr bullet at .312 given same construction...land on game intended with appropriate impact velocity of say 2000 fps or whatever, they are going almost the same depth (difference of .301 and .312 as the difference) and the animal is dead if hit where you were aiming. The amount of 'extra damage' the larger bullet may or may not display(and is often opposite what is expected) doesn't equal 'extra dead'. Only on steel fellas...only on steel. "

I have personally seen the difference between large caliber (.338) cartridges and bullets and small caliber ( 6.5)cartridges and bullet at ranges out to 1,000 meters on animals, not just steel and paper targets, and the the difference is dramatic.
very Dramatic. So much so that anybody who THINKS there is a difference is a fool.
I am done here, not going to participate in this circus thread anymore.
Cat

[Stinky Coyote]

oh you'll be back Cat, a song is coming to mind here

we both said same thing, the animal may certainly register the hit more dramatically, just as the steel does...hello ft/lbs, but it's good you didn't say one kills and one doesn't because that would be false, you hit both scenarios same place you get same result in terms of dead or not dead, same penetration depth, same expansion ratio, same ratio of energy dump per inch, but dead is dead, maybe the lapua knocks it off it's feet, maybe the prc it runs 50 yards, but dead is dead, the work necessary of either was done, one just far more efficient than the other in terms of the work it puts reversely into your shoulder

we are saying the same thing, just differently, and one possibly believing it slightly differently than the other too

[elkhunter11]

Originally Posted by Phil McCracken

So what you are saying is a "Blue Box" Federal .30/06 with a 220 gr. bullet will fragment and not penetrate a moose shoulder under 50 yards?

I agree about the velocity, but it also has the most energy.

Not everyone uses a factory 30-06 load with a 220 gr bullet. In fact very few people use that load in a 30-06, because of the rainbow trajectory. Many people are now using smaller calibers, with much lighter bullets, and that is where a controlled expansion bullet really shines. .