Guest
BS,.... http://www.angelfire.com/mo2/rifleroom/taylor.html,.... :thumbsup: :redthumb: I like it to, as it is much more realistic !! :applause: ::
YMHS
rollingb
YMHS
rollingb
-
Friends, our 2nd Amendment rights are always under attack and the NRA has been a constant for decades in helping fight that fight.
We have partnered with the NRA to offer you a discount on membership and Muzzleloading Forum gets a small percentage too of each membership, so you are supporting both the NRA and us.
Use this link to sign up please; https://membership.nra.org/recruiters/join/XR045103
CVS .58 Mountain Rifle
- Thread starter rodymartin
- Start date
Help Support Muzzleloading Forum:
- Joined
- Jan 27, 2004
- Messages
- 1,715
- Reaction score
- 526
rollingb,
According to my old Lyman Book a 32" 58cal. with 100-110FF has a velosity of 1300-1350, so ME would be much less. But as we know, even a 60-70 grain charge will do deadly damage to a whitetail!
Yes, Bigger is Better!
BS
According to my old Lyman Book a 32" 58cal. with 100-110FF has a velosity of 1300-1350, so ME would be much less. But as we know, even a 60-70 grain charge will do deadly damage to a whitetail!
Yes, Bigger is Better!
BS
Guest
I'll definitely git back with you on this in a couple'a weeks (after I git a new battery for my chrony).
The last "science project" for my daughter involved different powder-charges in a Early Hawken fullstock with 1"x36" .54 Green Mountain barrel, and a 110gr. charge of FFG produced a velocity of 1900+FPS,.... so, Lymans stated velocity for the .58 sounds a bit slow (to me).
I've since built a "big sister" (.58) to the .54 mentioned above, and I'll check the .58/110 FFG velocity soon. :thumbsup:
YMHS
rollingb
I am not up on what the Taylor Index is all about. What are you trying to achieve? What is considered good or bad? Also does the shape of the projectile and design of the nose come into play at all here, such as roundball VS concial?
thanks
- Joined
- Jan 27, 2004
- Messages
- 1,715
- Reaction score
- 526
It is all about comparing Diameter, Weight and velosity. It will work best if you compare Round Ball to Round Ball. Ounce you develope a data base, you will really start to see how they all compare.
I will do a search and find more info, and try to explain it!
BS
my web page
I will do a search and find more info, and try to explain it!
BS
my web page
There is no quantifiable measure of killing power nor "stopping power", much as we may want one.
The nature and condition of the animal, physical and mental state as well as the exact course of the shot through the critter, the exact condition of the bullet, ect. all introduce too many variables to boil down into a simple number.
Kenitic energy is the measure of a projectile's ability to do work but is just one factor. We pay a lot of attention to it because it happens to be the only factor we can quantify and control. It is not a measure of killing powder nor stopping power because no such measure exists, nor can exist for the above mentioned reasons.
Those who favor momentum as a measure are always advocates of the "big, heavy and slow" school of thought. They hate the fact that a light, fast moving projectile can show as much or more energy than their favorite big bore. So, to suport their choice, they turn to momemtum. THAT"S THE ANSWER!! Yeah--that's more like what I think it should be.
Just consider this. The recoil momentum of the firearm will always be GREATER than the impact momentum of the projectile even at the muzzle. Often as much as 50% greater.
Now, I've shot some pretty nasty kicking firearms but would never fire one if I truly believed it more deadly at the butt than at the muzzle! That's what momentum tells you.
I respect John Taylor's experience and opinion on African game. Those who appropriate his "Knock Out Values" in part or in whole do the greatest of disrespect to him by using his formula in precisely the way he said it was NOT to be used. Taylor stated that his values were only an indication of how long an elephant would be knocked out by a head shot that missed the brain!! He said it was NOT to be used as a measure of killing power and especially did not apply to light game, which, in the African context would include elk and moose. He declined to publish his formula expressly because he did not want it misapplied.
Well, it wasn't hard to figure out and now people apply it even as a measure of handgun stopping power on humans!
Those who borrow and sully John Taylor's name just to add credence to their own pet theory are pathetic frauds.
--- Taylor ain't here to say it so I just did!
Energy does not translate to killing power, neither does any magic formula someone dreamed up to support their opinion, but energy is the only valid number we have. :curse: :curse: :curse: :curse: :curse:
The nature and condition of the animal, physical and mental state as well as the exact course of the shot through the critter, the exact condition of the bullet, ect. all introduce too many variables to boil down into a simple number.
Kenitic energy is the measure of a projectile's ability to do work but is just one factor. We pay a lot of attention to it because it happens to be the only factor we can quantify and control. It is not a measure of killing powder nor stopping power because no such measure exists, nor can exist for the above mentioned reasons.
Those who favor momentum as a measure are always advocates of the "big, heavy and slow" school of thought. They hate the fact that a light, fast moving projectile can show as much or more energy than their favorite big bore. So, to suport their choice, they turn to momemtum. THAT"S THE ANSWER!! Yeah--that's more like what I think it should be.
Just consider this. The recoil momentum of the firearm will always be GREATER than the impact momentum of the projectile even at the muzzle. Often as much as 50% greater.
Now, I've shot some pretty nasty kicking firearms but would never fire one if I truly believed it more deadly at the butt than at the muzzle! That's what momentum tells you.
I respect John Taylor's experience and opinion on African game. Those who appropriate his "Knock Out Values" in part or in whole do the greatest of disrespect to him by using his formula in precisely the way he said it was NOT to be used. Taylor stated that his values were only an indication of how long an elephant would be knocked out by a head shot that missed the brain!! He said it was NOT to be used as a measure of killing power and especially did not apply to light game, which, in the African context would include elk and moose. He declined to publish his formula expressly because he did not want it misapplied.
Well, it wasn't hard to figure out and now people apply it even as a measure of handgun stopping power on humans!
Those who borrow and sully John Taylor's name just to add credence to their own pet theory are pathetic frauds.
--- Taylor ain't here to say it so I just did!
Energy does not translate to killing power, neither does any magic formula someone dreamed up to support their opinion, but energy is the only valid number we have. :curse: :curse: :curse: :curse: :curse:
- Joined
- Jan 27, 2004
- Messages
- 1,715
- Reaction score
- 526
Coyote Joe,
I had never read the part about knocking out an elefant till I did a search on "taylor knockout", very interesting!
Some of what I found:
" What is Bullet Energy vs. Momentum vs. Taylor Factor ?
Bullet Energy is equal to kinetic energy (KE), which = 1/2 * mass * velocity2.
To calculate the KE of a bullet, use the following formula:
KE = (1/2 * (mass in grains / 7000) * velocity2)/32.185
Bullet Momentum is just = (bullet mass (grains) / 7000)* bullet velocity
The Taylor 'knockdown' Factor = (bullet mass (grains) / 7000) * bullet velocity * bullet diameter (inches)
The Taylor Factor was developed by a famous African Hunter to try to explain why larger diameter bullets were more effective on game than smaller diameter bullets, even when kinetic energies or momentum calculations for both loads were essentially equal.
Knockdown Power
Some caliburs always seem to flatten game. Here's why.
By Jim Carmichel
No doubt about it, the odds-on favorite debate of big-game hunters (and certainly the longest lasting) is about the so-called
I had never read the part about knocking out an elefant till I did a search on "taylor knockout", very interesting!
Some of what I found:
" What is Bullet Energy vs. Momentum vs. Taylor Factor ?
Bullet Energy is equal to kinetic energy (KE), which = 1/2 * mass * velocity2.
To calculate the KE of a bullet, use the following formula:
KE = (1/2 * (mass in grains / 7000) * velocity2)/32.185
Bullet Momentum is just = (bullet mass (grains) / 7000)* bullet velocity
The Taylor 'knockdown' Factor = (bullet mass (grains) / 7000) * bullet velocity * bullet diameter (inches)
The Taylor Factor was developed by a famous African Hunter to try to explain why larger diameter bullets were more effective on game than smaller diameter bullets, even when kinetic energies or momentum calculations for both loads were essentially equal.
Knockdown Power
Some caliburs always seem to flatten game. Here's why.
By Jim Carmichel
No doubt about it, the odds-on favorite debate of big-game hunters (and certainly the longest lasting) is about the so-called
Guest
I've read accounts of two buffalo be'n kilt with a single shot use'n the big buffalo guns,.... I really doubt thet a 220 Swift could have done the same thing!! ::
How'd the slow heavy bullets do thet without use'n "weight as momentum"?? ::
YMHS
rollingb
- Joined
- Jan 27, 2004
- Messages
- 1,715
- Reaction score
- 526
rollingb,
Wish I still had the article about Culling a western herd of buffalo with modern guns. I don't remeber the numbers, only that there weren't many one shot kills. We must give a lot of respect to the 'old timers' with there big 45s and 50cal guns.
It's not what you shoot, but how well you shoot it!
no-bs
Wish I still had the article about Culling a western herd of buffalo with modern guns. I don't remeber the numbers, only that there weren't many one shot kills. We must give a lot of respect to the 'old timers' with there big 45s and 50cal guns.
It's not what you shoot, but how well you shoot it!
no-bs
Guest
I think the big heavy bullets (wether roundball or conical) also deserve a lot more respect then some folks give'em!! :imo:
I fully agree with yore earlier comment,.... "bigger is better"!! ::
YMHS
rollingb
-- :agree:--If all else remains the same, the bigger ball will inflict more tissue damage and transmit more hydrodynamic shock. Since the bigger ball is heavier it also will carry more energy--weight(mass)is a factor in the kinitic energy formula.
It is true that a heavy, slow moving projectile will deliver more penetration in water or animal tisue than a light fast projectile expressly because it does LESS tisue damage and transmitts Less hydrodynamid shock, thus preserving it's energy to pass on through the animal and beyond, where it does no good that I can think off.
That is why expanding bullets are prefered over FMJ's. All else remains the same except that as the expanding bullet grows "bigger" it does more damage and doing that damage will exhaust it's energy and limit it's penetration. The FMJ passes through, leaving a much smaller wound and expends it's energy on a rock or tree. When penetration becomes "enough", more is not better.
Jeff Cooper once devised a "stopping power formula" which he though was the perfect answer. It was based on Taylor's formuls with some additional factors for bullet shape and type to make things fit the way he thought they should. A reader pointed out that by Cooper's own formula, a well pitched softball would have considerably greater stopping power than a .44 mag. Cooper replied "that only shows that anything can become ridiculous if carried to ridiculous extreems". That is not true in mathematics. If a formula is valid, it remains valid no matter the size of the numbers. Pi-r-square (I know, pie are round) works as well for a planet or a pin head because it is a valid formula. That letter to the editor exagerated Cooper's formula to make the flaws obvious.
Taylor was an elephant hunter, he favored big bores for elephant and "thick skinned gane" which require a lot of penetration, that has nothing to do with the humane taking of North American game. If those who quote Taylor would actually READ Taylor they would notice that Taylor had great praise for the small bore, high velocity rifles for use on the general run of African plains game for which they were intended.
I repeat: RECOIL MOMENTUM OF THE FIREARM IS ALWAYS GREATER THAN THE MOMENTUM OF THE PROJECTILE!! If you choose to believe that momentum is a valid indicator of killing power then you must also accept that your gun is more deadly at the rear than at the front.
Believe that if you like but it would make me very nervous about pulling a trigger. :: :: ::
It is true that a heavy, slow moving projectile will deliver more penetration in water or animal tisue than a light fast projectile expressly because it does LESS tisue damage and transmitts Less hydrodynamid shock, thus preserving it's energy to pass on through the animal and beyond, where it does no good that I can think off.
That is why expanding bullets are prefered over FMJ's. All else remains the same except that as the expanding bullet grows "bigger" it does more damage and doing that damage will exhaust it's energy and limit it's penetration. The FMJ passes through, leaving a much smaller wound and expends it's energy on a rock or tree. When penetration becomes "enough", more is not better.
Jeff Cooper once devised a "stopping power formula" which he though was the perfect answer. It was based on Taylor's formuls with some additional factors for bullet shape and type to make things fit the way he thought they should. A reader pointed out that by Cooper's own formula, a well pitched softball would have considerably greater stopping power than a .44 mag. Cooper replied "that only shows that anything can become ridiculous if carried to ridiculous extreems". That is not true in mathematics. If a formula is valid, it remains valid no matter the size of the numbers. Pi-r-square (I know, pie are round) works as well for a planet or a pin head because it is a valid formula. That letter to the editor exagerated Cooper's formula to make the flaws obvious.
Taylor was an elephant hunter, he favored big bores for elephant and "thick skinned gane" which require a lot of penetration, that has nothing to do with the humane taking of North American game. If those who quote Taylor would actually READ Taylor they would notice that Taylor had great praise for the small bore, high velocity rifles for use on the general run of African plains game for which they were intended.
I repeat: RECOIL MOMENTUM OF THE FIREARM IS ALWAYS GREATER THAN THE MOMENTUM OF THE PROJECTILE!! If you choose to believe that momentum is a valid indicator of killing power then you must also accept that your gun is more deadly at the rear than at the front.
Believe that if you like but it would make me very nervous about pulling a trigger. :: :: ::
Coyote Joe:
" RECOIL MOMENTUM OF THE FIREARM IS ALWAYS GREATER THAN THE MOMENTUM OF THE PROJECTILE!!"
I think this is only true because the weight of the powder (even though it is a gas) is also being ejected from the guns muzzle and contributes nothing to the energy of the projectile.
If one ignores this, I think old Newtons idea about action/reaction=1 still holds true.
As for killing power, I kinda like the formulas which multiply velocity times bullet weight times bullet diameter.
As a comparitive figure between loads, it seems to reflect exactly what hunters have known for a long time.
" RECOIL MOMENTUM OF THE FIREARM IS ALWAYS GREATER THAN THE MOMENTUM OF THE PROJECTILE!!"
I think this is only true because the weight of the powder (even though it is a gas) is also being ejected from the guns muzzle and contributes nothing to the energy of the projectile.
If one ignores this, I think old Newtons idea about action/reaction=1 still holds true.
As for killing power, I kinda like the formulas which multiply velocity times bullet weight times bullet diameter.
As a comparitive figure between loads, it seems to reflect exactly what hunters have known for a long time.
-- :agree:--Zonie you are absolutely right. I t is the powder gas which gives the firearm more momentum than the projectile.
But the fact remains that the firearm does have more momentum and so any theory of killing power based on momentum (bullet weight times velocity NOT SQUARED) must accept that the gun is more deadly behind than before. If that has been your experience I wonder how you can still be with us, but glad you are.
Now if we look at energy numbers, (velocity squared) we find the recoil energy is a small percentage of the bullet energy. I'm sure that more closely corresponds to my experience with firearms.
As to what hunters have long known; Teddy Roosevelt felt well equipped with his 45/75 but when he first hunted with a 30/30 and a 30/40 he exclaimed "the new small bore high velocity rifles kill like lightning! while there is no recoil to disturb the aim". High velocity at the time ment only about 2000fps + or - a bit.
The 30/30 very quickly pushed the 44-40 and 45-70 out of the hunting fields, except for us weirdo's who just like to fool around with old stuff.
If you don't like energy as the measure of a bullets power then just say "there are no relevant numbers" rather than concocting numbers you like but are obviously :bull:
But the fact remains that the firearm does have more momentum and so any theory of killing power based on momentum (bullet weight times velocity NOT SQUARED) must accept that the gun is more deadly behind than before. If that has been your experience I wonder how you can still be with us, but glad you are.
Now if we look at energy numbers, (velocity squared) we find the recoil energy is a small percentage of the bullet energy. I'm sure that more closely corresponds to my experience with firearms.
As to what hunters have long known; Teddy Roosevelt felt well equipped with his 45/75 but when he first hunted with a 30/30 and a 30/40 he exclaimed "the new small bore high velocity rifles kill like lightning! while there is no recoil to disturb the aim". High velocity at the time ment only about 2000fps + or - a bit.
The 30/30 very quickly pushed the 44-40 and 45-70 out of the hunting fields, except for us weirdo's who just like to fool around with old stuff.
If you don't like energy as the measure of a bullets power then just say "there are no relevant numbers" rather than concocting numbers you like but are obviously :bull:
