Energy

[Steve Davis]

richcotte Platinum Member Posts: 590

Jun 24, 2022 at 9:25pm Steve Davis, harperc, and 1 more like this QuoteEdit Post by richcotte on Jun 24, 2022 at 9:25pm​ Jun 24, 2022 at 5:37pm harperc said: 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. I’ll go with stirring the pot…Steve said he hasn’t found the magic bullet yet.

Rich Cotte Connecting Heroes & Hunters

 

[Steve Davis]

kneedeep Senior Member Posts: 256

Jun 24, 2022 at 10:38pm harperc, gltaylor, and 1 more like this QuoteEdit Post by kneedeep on Jun 24, 2022 at 10:38pm​ 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. Bullet performance/mechanics way above all else for me. But it takes velocity and mass to make this happen and that's energy. I Do Not believe more energy equals better, quicker kills. I believe in finding a good balance of mechanics, velocity and mass. Run a bullet at too high velocity for it's design and there's not enough penetration. Example: the 308/101gr Blackout in the 30 cal magnums. Run a bullet under 1800fps and you run the risk of penciling through. No example I'm aware of with hammers. If the mechanics of the Bullet fail, it doesn't matter how fast, slow, light or heavy the bullet, it's a failure and potentially lost animal. An exit or pass through is second on my list but it takes a balance of the above items to make this happen. Especially on quartering animals or poor shot placement. I'm all for the wasted energy that comes with a pass through. To what degree is my question. Velocity is next and seems to be measurable by farleg's velocity brackets. BC comes into play somewhere above or below velocity. Depends on animals hunted, shot distances and wind conditions. Energy comes in last as I know I need it to make everything work, but there's no good tried and true method to know what level I need. I see huge advantages with high velocity hammers. Only because most hammer designs can withstand the velocity and mechanics. I also believe you can get excellent performance at lower velocities (1800fps minimum). rh300um's two elk kills at long distance sticks in my mind. Not a one off, not high velocity on impact, no high SF (if my memory serves well) but enough energy and bullet mechanics to get two complete pass throughs on quartering elk and bang flops. Also snox801 getting pass throughs and quick kills with the 6.5 grendels at somewhat reasonable ranges and appropriately sized animals per caliber. No powerhouse of velocity or energy there. He is also not shooting the lightest weight 6.5 bullet for max velocity out of that cartridge. I know there are plenty more examples on this forum, these are two that stick in my mind. No offense intended for those not included. I have been thinking of about the slower calibers and bullet selection. Mostly the 308 win but others as well. If I can't get into Farleg's Velocity Brackets, is there a more optimum weight bullet to shoot other than the lightest 30 cal bullets? Not a heavy for caliber bullet, but a little heavier than the 124HH or 120LH/SH. Is there merit in having more shank weight for slower moving bullets? Does energy come into play here? I haven't run the numbers yet. BTW richcotte I do love your question about frontal diameter of two different bullets with the same energy/velocity. I agree with Edd as long as there's a pass through but feel it is the frontal diameter over energy. Change the 6.5 to higher velocity against the frontal diameter of the 30 cal. Where's the trade off? kneedeep

 

[Steve Davis]

kneedeep Senior Member Posts: 256

Jun 24, 2022 at 11:08pm harperc, riceman, and 2 more like this QuoteEdit Post by kneedeep on Jun 24, 2022 at 11:08pm​ A boat paddle was needed

 

[Steve Davis]

gltaylor Global Moderator Global Moderator Posts: 1,784

Jun 25, 2022 at 7:24am via mobile Steve Davis, harperc, and 2 more like this QuoteEdit Post by gltaylor on Jun 25, 2022 at 7:24am​ Jun 24, 2022 at 10:38pm kneedeep 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. Bullet performance/mechanics way above all else for me. But it takes velocity and mass to make this happen and that's energy. I Do Not believe more energy equals better, quicker kills. I believe in finding a good balance of mechanics, velocity and mass. Run a bullet at too high velocity for it's design and there's not enough penetration. Example: the 308/101gr Blackout in the 30 cal magnums. Run a bullet under 1800fps and you run the risk of penciling through. No example I'm aware of with hammers. If the mechanics of the Bullet fail, it doesn't matter how fast, slow, light or heavy the bullet, it's a failure and potentially lost animal. An exit or pass through is second on my list but it takes a balance of the above items to make this happen. Especially on quartering animals or poor shot placement. I'm all for the wasted energy that comes with a pass through. To what degree is my question. Velocity is next and seems to be measurable by farleg's velocity brackets. BC comes into play somewhere above or below velocity. Depends on animals hunted, shot distances and wind conditions. Energy comes in last as I know I need it to make everything work, but there's no good tried and true method to know what level I need. I see huge advantages with high velocity hammers. Only because most hammer designs can withstand the velocity and mechanics. I also believe you can get excellent performance at lower velocities (1800fps minimum). rh300um's two elk kills at long distance sticks in my mind. Not a one off, not high velocity on impact, no high SF (if my memory serves well) but enough energy and bullet mechanics to get two complete pass throughs on quartering elk and bang flops. Also snox801 getting pass throughs and quick kills with the 6.5 grendels at somewhat reasonable ranges and appropriately sized animals per caliber. No powerhouse of velocity or energy there. He is also not shooting the lightest weight 6.5 bullet for max velocity out of that cartridge. I know there are plenty more examples on this forum, these are two that stick in my mind. No offense intended for those not included. I have been thinking of about the slower calibers and bullet selection. Mostly the 308 win but others as well. If I can't get into Farleg's Velocity Brackets, is there a more optimum weight bullet to shoot other than the lightest 30 cal bullets? Not a heavy for caliber bullet, but a little heavier than the 124HH or 120LH/SH. Is there merit in having more shank weight for slower moving bullets? Does energy come into play here? I haven't run the numbers yet. BTW richcotte I do love your question about frontal diameter of two different bullets with the same energy/velocity. I agree with Edd as long as there's a pass through but feel it is the frontal diameter over energy. Change the 6.5 to higher velocity against the frontal diameter of the 30 cal. Where's the trade off? kneedeep kneedeep, Excellent questions all. I'm still wading through Rathcoomb's articles "linked" previously. If ya'll haven't read this yet, I Highly recommend it. Some info isn't germaine to our discussion here - but a bunch is directly applicable! He also isn't heavily interested in energy alone and discredits the many other attempts at measuring lethality of a bullet (Knock Out, etc., etc.). Some great info and data on penetration, bullet upset, cavitation damage from flat meplates (exactly like the Hammer shanks which become blunt ended cylinders), effects of velocity (higher and lower) and on and on. There is scant data on monos. He has somewhat evaluated Barnes and GS from South Africa. GS is a forefunner design to Hammer. Hammers are significantly improved from what I gather. He is very much in favor of blunt ended shanks and notes that blunt meplates do greater damage (mechanically superior to rounded mushroomed slugs). The use/transfer of energy is more efficient. This is all validated in penetration tests-not opinion. Still much to read, study and absorb. Farleg - why don't you print this (it's long) and carry it with you for reading on your trip! I really love this place and you guys!

 

[Steve Davis]

harperc Global Moderator Global Moderator Posts: 2,680

Jun 25, 2022 at 7:35am Steve Davis, riceman, and 2 more like this QuoteEdit Post by harperc on Jun 25, 2022 at 7:35am​ Jun 24, 2022 at 9:25pm richcotte said: Jun 24, 2022 at 5:37pm harperc said: …Steve said he hasn’t found the magic bullet yet. FBI locked it up after Dallas.

 

[Steve Davis]

makwa New Member Posts: 18

Jun 25, 2022 at 8:27am Steve Davis, harperc, and 7 more like this QuoteEdit Post by makwa on Jun 25, 2022 at 8:27am​ Interesting read. As I think most know or have figured out, energy is just part of the formula to a quick kill on a big game animal. Energy is essential to the equation, as is penetration, shot placement and tissue disturbance/damage. Each thing on its own is not the magic pill. I always see guys saying that shot placement is everything, and to that I always say yes it is a critical, but only if you are using a bullet that penetrates sufficiently and creates enough damage along its path to cause sufficient hemorrhaging and/or central nervous system shut down. The bullets path may be simple soft tissue penetration with a chance of minor bone penetrating requirements, or it may require soft tissue penetration and major bone destruction...all of which determine whether a bullet choice for the job at hand is a good one or a bad one. The other argument I see all the time is about energy transfer/dumping and its impact on the animal. If there is enough retained energy when the bullet impacts, so that the desired depth of penetration is achieved with the bullet performing as designed, then the energy dump believers want to see all of the energy transferred to the target...which means there is no exit wound. If the bullet penetrates completely and exits the far side, the energy crowd believes energy was wasted and lost on the far side of the target. BUT...then there are those of us who really like an exit hole as two holes are better than one for a number of reasons. After many years of hunting I find that what works best for me is using a "premium" bullet that will destroy tissue, smash through big bone and provide deep enough penetration for my worst case scenario. It also needs to be a cartridge/bullet selection choice that will provide a clean kill on the biggest target I may be after. In other words if I am hunting mule deer, but may also have a tag in my pocket for bull moose or have a strong chance of running into problems with a grizzly, then I will be packing something that will handily do the job on moose or a grizzly if required...which means it will quite likely be more horsepower and a "tougher" bullet than I need just to bring about the demise of a mulie buck. It may also mean that I will see a less dramatic take down on the deer than if I was using a bullet that was designed to put the lights out quickly on a deer sized game animal. I believe that I have the world by the tail when I am using bullets that provides all things...speed for flat trajectory and high impact energy, deep penetration and bone smashing capabilities, massive hemorrhaging, AND a high probability of a decent exit wound. Not asking for much am I? But I believe that, with the right selection, the modern monometal bullets with petals that separate to provide additional wound channels, while the remainder of the bullet drives through and provides deep penetration are usually the best choice. There are of course hunts when a good conventional cup and core or bonded bullet will do the job just fine, but as time goes by I find I lean towards the monometal bullets more and more. Hence my interest in the Hammer Bullets...as that sort of bullet performance is expected and focused towards the additional benefits of high velocity and its resulting impact energy. Speed and energy are always seductive.

 

[Steve Davis]

Steve Davis Administrator Posts: 3,501 Member is Online Jun 25, 2022 at 9:23am via mobile harperc, gltaylor, and 4 more like this QuoteEdit Post by Steve Davis on Jun 25, 2022 at 9:23am​ I'll add to my previous one liner. Bigger (cal) heavier bullets going as fast as smaller (cal) lighter bullets win the day. Sometimes you need a bigger tool for the job. It is very tough to beat a 300 rum with the 199g Hammer Hunter running at 3400 fps. 0-1000y the horsepower is stunning. Run the 124g Hammer Hunter in the rum at 4200 fps, farleg, does it out perform the 199g Hammer Hunter inside 100y? Possibly. I haven't run the numbers, but would say this is a function of impact vel not energy. Now, run the 124g Hammer Hunter in a 308win at 3400 fps. Same as the rum and the 199g Hammer Hunter. From 0-infinity the 199g Hammer Hunter will have the advantage. Is this because it has more energy? Starting at the same vel, the 199g will have an impact velocity advantage at every range due to significantly higher bc. Comparing these bullets of the same construction and similar form using energy as the differentiation, probably works. I still think it is more of a function of impact vel. In this comparison the 199g Hammer Hunter has the ability to shed larger nose petals and more mass in the retained shank, giving it more edge in terminal performance. This is not because it has more energy, it's because of the function of the bullet. We are starting to work in the big bore world. Building a 416 Wby mag and a 500 Jeffrey. These are capable of off the charts energy with heavy slow bullets. Inside 100y these big bores will likely out perform the 300rum and the 199g Hammer Hunter for terminal performance. Energy? I think more of a difference in frontal dia and impact vel. Despite the displacement diff, after 200y the rum with the 199g Hammer Hunter will have a distinct advantage. Energy or impact velocity? Traditionally the big bore dangerous game world run very heavy bullets at 2200-2400 fps. Hmmm... It is time to bring this thinking out of the dark ages. Steve Hammer Bullets [email protected]

 

[Steve Davis]

edd Full Member Posts: 210 Member is Online

Jun 25, 2022 at 11:11am Steve Davis, joe16, and 1 more like this QuoteEdit Post by edd on Jun 25, 2022 at 11:11am​ Some of you guys are dodging that "E" word by talking about bullet weight and velocity.

 

[Steve Davis]

Steve Davis Administrator Posts: 3,501 Member is Online

Jun 25, 2022 at 11:36am via mobile harperc, riceman, and 2 more like this QuoteEdit Post by Steve Davis on Jun 25, 2022 at 11:36am​ Jun 25, 2022 at 11:11am edd said: Some of you guys are dodging that "E" word by talking about bullet weight and velocity. How much energy is needed for good terminal performance? Point is energy is necessary but not quantifiable. Putting it low on the list of reasons to choose a particular projectile, cartridge, rifle combo.

Steve Hammer Bullets [email protected]

 

[Steve Davis]

richcotte Platinum Member Posts: 590

Jun 25, 2022 at 12:38pm joe16 and kneedeep like this QuoteEdit Post by richcotte on Jun 25, 2022 at 12:38pm​ Jun 24, 2022 at 10:38pm kneedeep said: I have been thinking of about the slower calibers and bullet selection. Mostly the 308 win but others as well. If I can't get into Farleg's Velocity Brackets, is there a more optimum weight bullet to shoot other than the lightest 30 cal bullets? Not a heavy for caliber bullet, but a little heavier than the 124HH or 120LH/SH. Is there merit in having more shank weight for slower moving bullets? Does energy come into play here? I haven't run the numbers yet. BTW richcotte I do love your question about frontal diameter of two different bullets with the same energy/velocity. I agree with Edd as long as there's a pass through but feel it is the frontal diameter over energy. Change the 6.5 to higher velocity against the frontal diameter of the 30 cal. Where's the trade off? kneedeep I wonder the same quite often as I’ve spent the majority of my hunting with short action cartridges. A few ‘06’s here and there, but usually .308 and .243. Then I got into the long range steel game and started tinkering with the 6.5 Creedmoor, so other than my 300 Win Mag and some lever guns, everything his a short action. yeah, those are the questions that keep me awake at night. Right now, I think my search is for the best bullet option in .308Win, under 500 yds. Then, it’s on to the same question for my 6.5 CM AR-10.

 

[Steve Davis]

joe16 Platinum Member Posts: 1,666 Member is Online

Jun 25, 2022 at 12:46pm via mobile harperc, riceman, and 1 more like this QuoteEdit Post by joe16 on Jun 25, 2022 at 12:46pm​ They may have locked it up. But I've got a sneaky feeln that Steven and Brian got a peek before they did

 

[Steve Davis]

kneedeep Senior Member Posts: 256

Jun 25, 2022 at 1:00pm harperc, riceman, and 4 more like this QuoteEdit Post by kneedeep on Jun 25, 2022 at 1:00pm​ Jun 25, 2022 at 11:11am edd said: Some of you guys are dodging that "E" word by talking about bullet weight and velocity. edd, you are the king of one liners. I for one am not afraid to talk about the "E" word (see my previous posts). So let's talk about it. I do agree that some are walking a tight rope not calling weight and velocity energy or is it momentum (mass x velocity) after initial impact? Either way none of us have a way to qualify how much energy is needed or where a slow moving heavy hammer outperforms a fast moving light hammer, other than observation. If a fast moving object collides with a stationary object, don't the two objects want to cancel each other out? The bullet wants to accelerate the animal to it's speed but the animal wants to stop the bullet. Because of the size and density of the animal in relation to the bullet, the bullet can not affect the entire animal but instead accelerates a given area around where the bullet enters the animal. Simultaneously the animal matter is greatly reducing the the speed of the bullet. Increased velocity increases the size of the wound channel. The velocity brackets. Please correct me if I'm wrong. No scholar here. Increased velocity makes perfect sense to me as long as there's enough energy to make the mechanics of the bullet work and to allow for the shank to pass through (arguably momentum for the shank at some point). These are just my opinions. Why is energy an important number to you and how do you use it to select a bullet or predict performance? Respectfully, kneedeep

 

[Steve Davis]

kneedeep Senior Member Posts: 256

Jun 25, 2022 at 1:05pm gltaylor likes this QuoteEdit Post by kneedeep on Jun 25, 2022 at 1:05pm​ Jun 25, 2022 at 12:38pm richcotte said: Jun 24, 2022 at 10:38pm kneedeep said: I have been thinking of about the slower calibers and bullet selection. Mostly the 308 win but others as well. If I can't get into Farleg's Velocity Brackets, is there a more optimum weight bullet to shoot other than the lightest 30 cal bullets? Not a heavy for caliber bullet, but a little heavier than the 124HH or 120LH/SH. Is there merit in having more shank weight for slower moving bullets? Does energy come into play here? I haven't run the numbers yet. BTW richcotte I do love your question about frontal diameter of two different bullets with the same energy/velocity. I agree with Edd as long as there's a pass through but feel it is the frontal diameter over energy. Change the 6.5 to higher velocity against the frontal diameter of the 30 cal. Where's the trade off? kneedeep I wonder the same quite often as I’ve spent the majority of my hunting with short action cartridges. A few ‘06’s here and there, but usually .308 and .243. Then I got into the long range steel game and started tinkering with the 6.5 Creedmoor, so other than my 300 Win Mag and some lever guns, everything his a short action. yeah, those are the questions that keep me awake at night. Right now, I think my search is for the best bullet option in .308Win, under 500 yds. Then, it’s on to the same question for my 6.5 CM AR-10. I may be looking at the wrong bullet choices, but none of my ballistic printouts get me to 500 yards with the 308 win. 400 yards and under is where I looking.

 

[Steve Davis]

harperc Global Moderator Global Moderator Posts: 2,680

Jun 25, 2022 at 2:46pm gltaylor and joe16 like this QuoteEdit Post by harperc on Jun 25, 2022 at 2:46pm​ Jun 25, 2022 at 1:00pm kneedeep said: Jun 25, 2022 at 11:11am edd said: Some of you guys are dodging that "E" word by talking about bullet weight and velocity. edd, you are the king of one liners. I for one am not afraid to talk about the "E" word (see my previous posts). So let's talk about it. Why is energy an important number to you and how do you use it to select a bullet or predict performance? Respectfully, kneedeep Beat me to it. edd I've seen you expand on your thoughts a couple of times. I know you're capable of contributing more to this, and any other firearm related topic at a very high level. So when you don't it comes off as just trolling.

 

[Steve Davis]

edd Full Member Posts: 210 Member is Online

Jun 25, 2022 at 3:29pm Steve Davis, gltaylor, and 1 more like this QuoteEdit Post by edd on Jun 25, 2022 at 3:29pm​ This has gotten borderline silly so I’m probably done after this four line hypothesis. I'm going hunting for some medium size creature in an area where I think I might have to defend myself from some larger creature, and I have two rifles to choose from. One is a 260 Remington loaded with 110 gr Hammer Hunter bullets. The other is a 338-06 loaded with 223 gr Hammer Hunter bullets.The rifle I’m going to choose is not going to be the one with the highest velocity.

 

[Steve Davis]

Steve Davis Administrator Posts: 3,501 Member is Online

Jun 25, 2022 at 6:36pm via mobile harperc, joe16, and 1 more like this QuoteEdit Post by Steve Davis on Jun 25, 2022 at 6:36pm​ Jun 25, 2022 at 3:29pm edd said: This has gotten borderline silly so I’m probably done after this four line hypothesis. I'm going hunting for some medium size creature in an area where I think I might have to defend myself from some larger creature, and I have two rifles to choose from. One is a 260 Remington loaded with 110 gr Hammer Hunter bullets. The other is a 338-06 loaded with 223 gr Hammer Hunter bullets.The rifle I’m going to choose is not going to be the one with the highest velocity. So you must be choosing the one with the most frontal area.

Steve Hammer Bullets [email protected]

 

[Steve Davis]

edd Full Member Posts: 210 Member is Online

Jun 25, 2022 at 6:54pm Steve Davis and joe16 like this QuoteEdit Post by edd on Jun 25, 2022 at 6:54pm​ Jun 25, 2022 at 6:36pm Steve Davis said: Jun 25, 2022 at 3:29pm edd said: This has gotten borderline silly so I’m probably done after this four line hypothesis. I'm going hunting for some medium size creature in an area where I think I might have to defend myself from some larger creature, and I have two rifles to choose from. One is a 260 Remington loaded with 110 gr Hammer Hunter bullets. The other is a 338-06 loaded with 223 gr Hammer Hunter bullets.The rifle I’m going to choose is not going to be the one with the highest velocity. So you must be choosing the one with the most frontal area. Area and oomph.

 

[Steve Davis]

Steve Davis Administrator Posts: 3,501 Member is Online

Jun 25, 2022 at 8:07pm via mobile harperc, gltaylor, and 2 more like this QuoteEdit Post by Steve Davis on Jun 25, 2022 at 8:07pm​ Jun 25, 2022 at 6:54pm edd said: Jun 25, 2022 at 6:36pm Steve Davis said: So you must be choosing the one with the most frontal area. Area and oomph. In all seriousness. It would be interesting to test those two bullets at 50y impacts from their respective rifles in gel. If gel wasn't so expensive!

Steve Hammer Bullets [email protected]

 

[Steve Davis]

farleg Platinum Member Posts: 3,794

Jun 26, 2022 at 7:17am Steve Davis, gltaylor, and 2 more like this QuoteEdit Post by farleg on Jun 26, 2022 at 7:17am​ Jun 25, 2022 at 8:07pm Steve Davis said: Jun 25, 2022 at 6:54pm edd said: Area and oomph. In all seriousness. It would be interesting to test those two bullets at 50y impacts from their respective rifles in gel. If gel wasn't so expensive! im with you on that Steve be very interesting. I don’t believe either would be sufficient on a 10 yard charge unless a cns shot was executed & i for one don’t count on that being reality in my world ea time I am getting a 6.5 soon & a also few 338 pills here hmmm Any suggestions edd on dare I say what velocities the 2 rifles would be running @ the muzzle also what twists please cheers

 

[Steve Davis]

gltaylor Global Moderator Global Moderator Posts: 1,784

Jun 26, 2022 at 7:49am via mobile farleg, joe16, and 1 more like this QuoteEdit Post by gltaylor on Jun 26, 2022 at 7:49am​ Yes, it would be interesting to test these two. The 338/06 and the 260 are like comparing apples and oranges. Back to Harper's earlier example. If you're deer hunting, and might come up on a bear, you carry a cartridge capable of dealing with the worst potential. Of course in doing this, you know that your outcome if you shoot a deer is going to be less desirable than it could be. The 338 will give far more penetration than needed and likely less spectacular tissue damage. Your deer is likely to run. But at least you'll have a good blood trail. It's all a compromise. For those of us who don't have to worry about running in to a bear, I'd take the lighter projectile and velocity hands down with Hammers. I still want full penetration and a blood trail, should I need it (not highly likely). No offense intended.