Energy

[Steve Davis]

gltaylor Global Moderator Global Moderator Posts: 1,784

Jun 22, 2022 at 6:49am via mobile harperc, riceman, and 1 more like this QuoteEdit Post by gltaylor on Jun 22, 2022 at 6:49am​ Jun 22, 2022 at 6:22am joe16 said: Fellas Speakn to Farleg as I post. He apolagizes for absence, hes getn ready for his trip. He has one comment though. "ENERGY IS CRAP" He thinks the term is incomplete. TPIA Joe Joe, This conversation is getting TRULY interesting. Some EXCELLENT thought processes are evolving. Given some time, this group may well come up with some incredible insight as to how Hammers do their magic. These guys are presently flirting with validating Farleg's velocity brackets. I am sitting here in awe. They're way passed my headlights. You would do well to put your $hit stirring stick away for now Let this evolve....

 

[Steve Davis]

Steve Davis Administrator Posts: 3,501 Member is Online

Jun 22, 2022 at 6:58am via mobile riceman, gltaylor, and 4 more like this QuoteEdit Post by Steve Davis on Jun 22, 2022 at 6:58am​ Energy plays a role. If the bullet has no energy it it remains stationary. It takes energy to get to the target and to penetrate the target. I have little concern about what those energy numbers are other than to compare one cartridge to another. Bullets kill by tearing a hole through vital tissue causing the animal to bleed out, shutting off the central nervous system. For the moment we will leave bang flop out of the discussion. The permanent wound that is torn through the vital tissue is a function of the speed of travel through the vital tissue and the form of projectile passing through said tissue. If a bullet arrives on target with 2000 ft/lbs of energy and then blows up with very shallow penetration, the energy was all "used", but useless. So if I could make a magic bullet... It would fly to the target and instantly deform on contact into it's terminal form. Then pass through the animal without losing any velocity. This would create the largest permanent wound possible. We don't have magic bullets, but you get the point. Bigger caliber bullets have larger frontal area causing larger wounds. Now, mix in vel. Remember the wound is a function of speed and form. The faster the bullet is traveling through the tissue the bigger the hole it will make. A big slow bullet will make "x" amount of wound. A smaller faster bullet will make "x" amount of wound. In my mind the real question is "Which one makes the larger wound?". Yes both bullets use energy to get the job done, although it is likely the bullet with less energy traveling faster will make the larger wound. This makes energy far down the list of what makes quick humane kills. Proper bullet performance plus impact velocity are much more important than kinetic energy. This is why energy numbers, to me, are fairly useless. A 30-06 vs 300 rum running the same 180g bullet. The rum has much more energy giving it the nod for killing power. That is pretty much my only use for energy numbers.

Steve Hammer Bullets [email protected]

 

[Steve Davis]

gltaylor Global Moderator Global Moderator Posts: 1,784

Jun 22, 2022 at 7:07am via mobile harperc and riceman like this QuoteEdit Post by gltaylor on Jun 22, 2022 at 7:07am​ Steve, Well said! Love this stuff and this place!!!

 

[Steve Davis]

richcotte Platinum Member Posts: 590

Jun 22, 2022 at 8:16am harperc and gltaylor like this QuoteEdit Post by richcotte on Jun 22, 2022 at 8:16am​ I love this place!!!!

 

[Steve Davis]

cbjr Senior Member Posts: 448

Jun 22, 2022 at 8:19am via mobile Steve Davis, riceman, and 3 more like this QuoteEdit Post by cbjr on Jun 22, 2022 at 8:19am​ Jun 22, 2022 at 7:07am gltaylor said: Steve, Well said! Love this stuff and this place!!! X2 Steve's explanation is exactly why I jumped into Hammer head first. Not because of him having said it, but because of prior understanding and seeing that it is exactly how Hammer strives to design their projectiles to work. Thank you, Steve and Brian!

"I need a bigger hammer" J.R.B. (My grandfather)

 

[Steve Davis]

easttennjed Full Member Posts: 119

Jun 22, 2022 at 8:21am Steve Davis, riceman, and 3 more like this QuoteEdit Post by easttennjed on Jun 22, 2022 at 8:21am​ I'm so happy I found these bullets and the community. The dialogue, experience and plain open and honest conversation based on facts and real world experience is awesome. Thank you to everyone!

 

[Steve Davis]

joe16 Platinum Member Posts: 1,665

Jun 22, 2022 at 8:23am via mobile harperc, riceman, and 2 more like this QuoteEdit Post by joe16 on Jun 22, 2022 at 8:23am​ Yes sir George, I totally agree, this is a very thought-provoking thread. I, like cbjr, my provocation was to simply get farleg and Edd to come to a consensus on such a vital topic. When greater minds wrap their brains together we can all learn something. Well I apologize and I'll go sit in the corner. I was just trying to poke the bear. I wasn't aware that I was poking the little .

 

[Steve Davis]

lou270 New Member Posts: 25

Jun 22, 2022 at 10:20am via mobile Steve Davis, riceman, and 3 more like this QuoteEdit Post by lou270 on Jun 22, 2022 at 10:20am​ Interesting discussion. I agree with what Steve said. I like to understand how this works so based on my understanding. The higher the impact velocity the faster the energy transfer the wider the wound. This is due to the target resistance effecitvely being higher at higher impact velocity. When we talk about min impact velocity for expansion we are really talking about target resistance. For ex, hit a deer at 1800 fps and a bullet may not expand. Hit a steel plate at 1800 fps and bullet will deform nicely. The energy is there to expand the bullet in either case but there needs to be an equal and opposite force greater than the structural integrtiy of the bullet. So at higher impact velocity we get more energy but there is also more resistance. The higher resistance means more energy is transferred to target doing work. So, energy that is not applied to doing work destroying something vital doesnt really do anything additional. High impact velocity facilitates the energy tranfer. You can very easily have a more severe wound in the vital area with a light fast bullet than a heavy slow bullet even if heavy slow bullet has more energy. Lou

 

[Steve Davis]

cbjr Senior Member Posts: 448

Jun 22, 2022 at 1:00pm via mobile QuoteEdit Post by cbjr on Jun 22, 2022 at 1:00pm​ Agreed, nicely put.

 

[Steve Davis]

gltaylor Global Moderator Global Moderator Posts: 1,784

Jun 22, 2022 at 1:23pm via mobile harperc, riceman, and 3 more like this QuoteEdit Post by gltaylor on Jun 22, 2022 at 1:23pm​ Had a very good conversation with joe16 earlier today. Maybe I was a bit too snippy, and I apologized if so. Main point is how well this discussion is progressing. Joe has some very good analogies on energy transfer. Hope be posts his examples. It seems there is more than basic energy involved. It's how bullets transfer energy Into the object receiving the bullet that seems most critical. This whole discussion is flirting around validating Farleg's impact velocity tables. I for one believe in them. I've personally seen the difference in damage done, penetration and degree of/or lack of tissue destruction. Bullet construction and impact speed seem to have some bearing on this. So does stability factor. You guys keep on. This is getting better and better!

 

[Steve Davis]

joe16 Platinum Member Posts: 1,665 Member is Online

Jun 22, 2022 at 3:24pm QuoteEdit Post by joe16 on Jun 22, 2022 at 3:24pm​ Fellas Not sure where this fits in but I thought it was pretty neat and I hung on to it for close to 20 years now. I spent a summer teaching my youngest son how to hand load.(seems like dad did all the loading) We shot an awful lot of golf balls that year with 223s and 45 70s. This golf ball was shot with that bullet (405 plated bullet by Ranier) using approximately 11 to 14 grains of Unique Powder out of a lever gun. Muzzle velocity would have been no more than 1150fps. Energy at the muzzle would have been approximately 1250 ft lbs. I tried to locate ( the 223 golfball) but could not I'm pretty sure it went to the Wayside because of the neat factor or lack of but if you shoot a 223 with a 55 grain soft point at approximately 3250 it will completely pass through a golf ball and barely make it wobble hanging from masking tape. Energy at muzzle is approximately 1250 ft lb. At what point and what parameters is energy applied? It was asked .Are we over penetrating? Or can we over-penetrate? I can't come to that conclusion. A bullet that works for me might not work for the next due to the fact that the animals I'm chasing have a chest cavity the size of a 5 gallon bucket and the next might be chasing an animal with the chest cavity the size of the galvanized trash can holding my dog food. The timing of the bubble is the hard part to workout. Or can I say the TIMING of the energy TRANSFER is hard to work out. jm2cw I hope I didn't combine two topics, I'll return to my corner. Joe

 

[Steve Davis]

Steve Davis Administrator Posts: 3,501 Member is Online

Jun 23, 2022 at 7:02am via mobile riceman, jb338, and 2 more like this QuoteEdit Post by Steve Davis on Jun 23, 2022 at 7:02am​ Bullet energy is a tough topic. I engage in it daily. What makes it so tough, is the pre conceived notions that we all have, that are not based on fact / science. I think the min energy numbers for hunting various game, that were developed years ago, served well. Thing is, there was pretty much one kind of bullet. Exposed lead tip, non bonded, bullets. If they weren't run heavy and slow, they would fail. By using these energy guidelines, they helped hunters avoid bullet failure. Kind of the same as we do, trying to make sure hunters have enough twist for their chosen bullet, in order to ensure proper terminal performance.

Steve Hammer Bullets [email protected]

 

[Steve Davis]

harperc Global Moderator Global Moderator Posts: 2,680

Jun 23, 2022 at 1:39pm Steve Davis, riceman, and 3 more like this QuoteEdit Post by harperc on Jun 23, 2022 at 1:39pm​ I would respectfully disagree steve Davis. I don't think it served all that well, and we have had other attempts to qualify effectiveness. Pounds Feet, and KO values come to mind. I was just reading articles to freshen my failing memory, and came across the following paragraph from Craig Boddington. Not his biggest fan, but while initially seeming to accept the ft/lbs theory this nugget appears. "To my knowledge, we have not found a way to properly evaluate, let alone measure, the transfer of kinetic energy from a projectile to a living target". Arguments for KE always preface with qualifying "if's". While energy absolutely exists when a bullet moves, assuming it's transferred to the animal has been, and continues to be misleading. Bullet technology has evolved constantly, largely with the goal of more effectively transferring energy, but I remain ignorant of a method that accurately represents energy transfer in a meaningful way. Multiple factors, such as farleg triangle must be considered, energy for me, remains far enough down the list to not be a factor in my choices of hunting implements.

 

[Steve Davis]

farleg Platinum Member Posts: 3,794

Jun 23, 2022 at 4:34pm gltaylor, cbjr, and 2 more like this QuoteEdit Post by farleg on Jun 23, 2022 at 4:34pm​ Gday Going to be brief as still a lot of work to do & only roughly read the thread but I need to re read to allow this to sink in so I’ll come back later when I can Wow go away for a few days & look what the cat dragged in ( Steve good to see got your attention & when’s that magic bullet coming ) others thanks for a little more insight & your thoughts are one I welcome No worries on poking the bear here I love these discussions Summary so far Glad I call energy crap in the whole but when you break it down it has a place & i agree with edd just wish you would broaden out your thoughts to help us some more but thanks for your input I like them transfer of energy is key if I read correctly lou270 man where have you been hiding Glad to see gl & joe have kissed & made up Others keep stirring the pot as it’s entertaining & productive Catch you guys when I can Great conversations Love this place Cheers

 

[Steve Davis]

edd Full Member Posts: 210 Member is Online

Jun 23, 2022 at 7:10pm QuoteEdit Post by edd on Jun 23, 2022 at 7:10pm​ Jun 23, 2022 at 1:39pm harperc said: Multiple factors, such as farleg triangle must be considered, energy for me, remains far enough down the list to not be a factor in my choices of hunting implements. Would you list those multiple factors, including energy, in what you consider the order of importance.

 

[Steve Davis]

richcotte Platinum Member Posts: 590	Jun 23, 2022 at 10:16pm harperc, gltaylor, and 3 more like this QuoteEdit Post by richcotte on Jun 23, 2022 at 10:16pm​
Rich Cotte Connecting Heroes & Hunters

 

[Steve Davis]

Steve Davis Administrator Posts: 3,501 Member is Online

Jun 24, 2022 at 4:14pm harperc, riceman, and 2 more like this QuoteEdit Post by Steve Davis on Jun 24, 2022 at 4:14pm​ Jun 23, 2022 at 7:10pm edd said: Jun 23, 2022 at 1:39pm harperc said: Multiple factors, such as farleg triangle must be considered, energy for me, remains far enough down the list to not be a factor in my choices of hunting implements. Would you list those multiple factors, including energy, in what you consider the order of importance. Impact velocity and bullet performance. Pretty much ends there for me.

 

[Steve Davis]

harperc Global Moderator Global Moderator Posts: 2,680

Jun 24, 2022 at 5:37pm gltaylor likes this QuoteEdit Post by harperc on Jun 24, 2022 at 5:37pm​ Jun 23, 2022 at 10:16pm richcotte said: <button disabled="" class="c-attachment-insert--linked o-btn--sm">Attachment Deleted</button> Wasn't sure if you're stirring the pot, or contemplating having just one bullet to make good with.

 

[Steve Davis]

harperc Global Moderator Global Moderator Posts: 2,680

Jun 24, 2022 at 7:02pm riceman, gltaylor, and 3 more like this QuoteEdit Post by harperc on Jun 24, 2022 at 7:02pm​ For me it begins choosing bullet construction based on parameters in pre-hunt planning. Species, habitat, the type of shot I'm willing to take. I'm not a long range hunter, so BC rarely enters my mind. I prefer exits, and will take shots from the rear. Sorry gltaylor. Velocity, bullet has to move or nothing happens. Impact velocity more important than MV, as this will dictate bullet selection/performance Placement and penetration are hard to separate. Choice of placement will dictate penetration needs, and vice versa. Hunting coastal elk, range 100 yards rear quarter shot, choices .300 RUM, 180 grain partition, roughly 3700 ft/lbs. .30-06, 220 grain partition, roughly 2500 ft/lbs. My money is on the .30-06 to make it to the vitals. Not a big fan of sectional density as other differently constructed bullets (Hammer's) can be effective in lighter for caliber projectiles. Elk in the alpine at range, would change my choice. Not based on energy, but something with better exterior ballistics for improved hit probability. Shape is a factor, if not needed ballistically, or firearm function a full caliber meplat gives the best results terminally. steve and I mildly disagree on the role of the petals, but I can accept his view of this. Bullets such as bonded core with 3x expansion won't penetrate well at equal weights. Length of wound channel is important to me. Caliber. No replacement for displacement. Within their range limits, even low velocity/energy kill well. Stability, the bullet has to track true. I like exits they help with recovery. In spite of "wasting energy". I've seen antelope with a big chunk of lung hanging out the offside from better than 3000 ft/bs from a .338 run from the blast before falling. Also have seen the same from "energy dump" from frangible bullets. Experimentation, I sometimes like to try something new. Energy?

 

[Steve Davis]

gltaylor Global Moderator Global Moderator Posts: 1,784

Jun 24, 2022 at 7:46pm via mobile gltaylor likes this QuoteEdit Post by gltaylor on Jun 24, 2022 at 7:46pm​ Jun 24, 2022 at 4:14pm Steve Davis said: Jun 23, 2022 at 7:10pm edd said: Would you list those multiple factors, including energy, in what you consider the order of importance. Impact velocity and bullet performance. Pretty much ends there for me. Pretty much my sums too. I would only add consistent accuracy (grouping). No problem there.