zimmerstutzen
70 Cal.
- Joined
- Apr 2, 2009
- Messages
- 5,848
- Reaction score
- 1,215
While I agree that too much emphasis is placed on ft pounds of energy, keep in mind that energy is also a factor of velocity squared. On the chart 80 grains may not be much faster than 60 grains, the energy may be nearly double at that distance. I use 80 grain hunting charges in nearly every gun, from 45 to 58 and never had a problem knocking them down. While the charts seem in line with my experience, I also take issue with computer calculated distance velocities.Thanks guys. Especially Art C. That charts relieves my brain. Not all that much difference between 60 and 80 grains. I have tried .015 patches. Even with a clean bore it is very difficult to get a 490 ball rammed home. 495 ball requires a mallet.
There was a famous bull crap study done in PA that allegedly found shot gun slugs, centerfire rifles and muzzle loaders all had similar terminal ranges. The alleged scientist took a hefty pay check for his study, the study was published in lots of places, even magazines. The man made some crucial errors. He assumed that every shot was fired level at 36 inches above the ground. (which would mean all hunters shoot from a sitting position), that all guns are fired level with no mid range trajectory to account for bullet drop and he totally ignored air resistance. In fact, he never fired a shot to even test his conclusions. The study was full of holes and yet some people still quote the study as gospel. His velocity and travel figures were all generated based on manufacturers muzzle velocity. Nothing else.