Velocity & Energy levels

[Ol Thing]

I see alot of debate on this subject here and ran across this artical. May be of help to some folk.
It seems in Europe they don't worry much about energy level figures, instead it's bullet weight and velocity "isen't that energy levels"? While in some countrys and states it's the in thing. Here in Montana they say, match the gun and ammo to the game hunted, no restictions, although there use to be. They kinda pick on the .45 in here, say it shoulden't be used past 40 Yds. on deer. I have a friend who takes deer with an 1841 .45 that was his great grand pappys rifle. He always brings home what he shoots at.
Here's the site...http://www.hpmuzzleloading.com/TraditionalBallistics.html Ol Thing

 

[roundball]

I don't have any problems or confusion about what it takes to kill a deer with a muzzleloader, and that article is just the same old manure and propaganda from toby bridges about requiring some mythical minimum 800 ft lbs of energy to kill a deer...its all hogwash.

His articles and retoric all seem oriented against time honored traditional muzzleloading, appearing that he is only interested in putting traditionalist out of business in favor of advancing his commitment to modern high tech employers who he writes articles for.

I see that you're new here...theres no "debate on this subject here" as you claimed...no controversy here about energy levels so I'm curious why one of your first posts on this forum is a big long article by toby bridges and holding him up as some sort of authority?

 

[paulvallandigham]

RoundBall: The article is by a Tony Dean, and is a letter he wrote complaining about Toby Bridges. I almost thought the same thing you did when I first saw the name in the title. I took the time ot read it. It is not very informative about BP ballistics, but at least states a case against the proposed regulations that Bridges is pushing.

 

[Ol Thing]

Sorry there Roundball;
I diden't mean to get anyone fired up. I just posted this piece for food for thought, or sake of argument. I'm not new to muzzle stuffer shooting, but am to hunting with them. Since I have been reading you folks posts on here, I've decided to hunt this next season with the .54 T/C caplock I have. Rather than the .45 or .50. As a matter of fact some of your posts also swayed me in that direction. Also, I haven't a clue who that person is your talkin about.
Had I knowen that two bit piece was gonna cause a spitting match, I woulden't of posted it!! :surrender:

 

[PreglerD]

Hi Ol Thing,

you are right with your opinion about Europe where ebergy is only seen as a relation of bullet weight and velocity. The german hunting law say it similar and allows only riflecartridges for biggame that have .264 cal.and a 100 m energy of 2000 J/1468 flps. It is the luck that energy for other bullets is not ruled, so the rule is not valid for ML and shotguns. So you can hunt biggame with a ML which has much less energy. but the kinetic energy is not the key for a clean kill. It is necessary that the game is able to "take" the energy and that the shotplacement is right, so that the taken energy reaches the right place of the deeers vitals. What use has a 2000 J hit in the legs?- nothing as pain for the animal. But a well placed .50 PRB, which ahs "only" about 700 J at 100 m in the boilerroom or in the neck is much better and much more deadly.

Regards

Kirrmeister

 

[roundball]

Sorry there Roundball;
I diden't mean to get anyone fired up. I just posted this piece for food for thought, or sake of argument. I'm not new to muzzle stuffer shooting, but am to hunting with them. Since I have been reading you folks posts on here, I've decided to hunt this next season with the .54 T/C caplock I have. Rather than the .45 or .50. As a matter of fact some of your posts also swayed me in that direction. Also, I haven't a clue who that person is your talkin about.
Had I knowen that two bit piece was gonna cause a spitting match, I woulden't of posted it!! :surrender:

I appreciate your clarification and acknowledge I was intentionally very direct. There has been an occasional individual or two in the past who have joined then acted like trolls on behalf of the bridges' positions on traditional muzzleloading...glad that's not your situation and welcome to the Forum.

It seems that modern ballistics programs are all based upon the notion that ballistics coefficients and high velocity are the key to success...and none of them produce energy results that tell the tale of effectiveness of a patched round ball...or a Muzzy 4 blade broadhead...but either one of them through the heart/lungs of a deer kill it as dead as dead can be of course.

And I'm sure you know that a lead ball does not produce hydrostatic shock like a high speed .30-06 delivers either...a lead ball is nothing more than extended bow hunting...put it through the heart/lungs like you do a broadhead and go collect your deer...all the energy that's needed is enough to get through a rib and into the heart/lungs...far, far, far less than the 800 ft lbs minimum that bridges and the modern muzzleloader crowd is trying to establish as a 100yd minimum with the state game commissions so the PRB would become obsolete...

 

[Rat Trapper]

Man has been trying to explain how bullets perform on paper ever since they first made bullets. Problem is none of programs are perfect.
Current ballistics programs favor high speed modern center fire ammo. Even some of the better writers on the subject of modern center fires are now saying larger dia means something, just no one seems to know how to express it in a formula on paper. Of course traditional muzzle loaders are also different. May be Roundball explained it best as being "extended bow hunting". Put a large dia hole in the vitals with something made out of lead, and you should be eating well tonight! Animals with small dia holes in vitals end up dead, just won't leave as good a blood trail.

 

[Britsmoothy]

Now my two bits :grin: I hate foot pounds! To me it is nothing more than a mathmatical number.In England you have to have a min of 1700 foot pounds for the large deer including roe at the muzzle :youcrazy: In Scotland the same except for roe @ 1000 pounds :youcrazy: Just how did the "experts" come to these figures? Whats the differance between English roe and Scotish roe?
Whats more there is no law against using a ML on deer but the idiots won't let you do it, legally anyways! I hate ft/lbs :barf: A tiny hornet pill down a fallow earhole still works though :wink:
It makes me laugh, over here a patched round ball of lead is deemed inhumane :shake: but shotgunning small game with any kind of shotgun is accepted everywhere but how do they kill? Answer; by placing a tiny lead ball/s in the vitals of a bird or squirrel etc Whats the bloody differance.
Another reason I hate ft/lbs is due to an experiance I had once. We were charged with shooting some sheep in a forest once, I used a 243 and a friend his 222. We were only shooting at 60yds but my sheep would walk 30-40yds before keeling over! The ones shot with the 222 just took a couple of steps! Forget all the variables for a mo, my point is ft/lbs are no judge of circumstance, bullet construction and placement. In other words valueless!
Thankyou I'm done now :redface:

 

[Ol Thing]

I agree Britsmoothy;
Back in the mid. 50's, when I was about 11 years old. My father fell upon hard times, it was a hard winter and he was out of work. And so was my sisters husband and they had 4 kids to feed.
We all ended up living on venison and spuds, for the most part. My dad killed 8 deer with 9 shots from an old .22 rim fire Stevens rifle, never lost a deer. He'd wait till the deer was broadside and stepping forward, then slip the little pill into the heart.
This just gos to show you that there's alot of educated idiots out there, whos figures on paper don't amount to a hill of sand :bull: . If a 40 Gr. bullet with 400 ft/lb of thump at the muzzle can do that. A PRB from various M/L rifles surly can.

 

[Britsmoothy]

Yep, your pa would probs laugh his socks off at all the :bull: that rabbles out off the gun jounals today. :hatsoff:

 

[Stumpkiller]

I recall reading that when the 250/3000 came out (aka 250 Savage) there was much hype about the 3,000 fps level being broken for the first time in a medium game caliber. But then the "boys in the field" started to notice the bullets were failing and producing very shallow wound channels.

Velocity can be nice but does not make up for poor bullet construction. Mass and velocity correspond to energy, but energy release/transfer is also a factor of time. Release it all at once and it's a shallow wound. Release it into the ground or a tree behind the animal and it hasn't done all it can.

All I ask of a round ball on deer sized game is to exit the offside of an animal and let a lot of blood from the damaged organs and blood vessels out of the resulting two holes and to violate the lungs so the animal cannot breathe. That's not physics so much as biology. ;-)

 

[pennsyltucky]

If a 40 Gr. bullet with 400 ft/lb of thump at the muzzle can do that. A PRB from various M/L rifles surly can.

a regular 22lr has about 100 ft/lb or so at the muzzle :grin: a good one like the velocitors or stingers have about 150. a 40gr bullet with 400ft/lb would be traveling at 2122fps. just wanted to clarify, since i have seen deer killed with 22lr remington subsonics that have 88ft/lbs at the muzzle.

dont ask... :surrender:

 

[BrownBear]

I always get a hoot out of discussions like this. Among the proponents of modern techniques and equipment, we've got a whole lot of supporters for the round ball point of view, if it comes down to pure velocity/energy calculations. Those guys fire only a few rounds a year through modern zipguns, just to get access to the primitive weapon seasons.

But many more are real holy about their handguns and handgun hunting. Do the velocity/energy calculations on those arms!

I've done a mess of deer killing with handguns myself. Two of the better deer rounds I've found are the 44 Special and the 44 Long Colt. Both of those launch a 250 grain bullet at no more than 800 fps, but do a splendid job on deer. Even the much vaunted 44 mag is only launching a 240 grain bullet at around 1400 fps.

Seems to me like quite an opportunity to find a bunch of allies and turn the ranks of the handgun crowd against TB every time he opens his pimpster pie hole!

I can see the headlines now: "Tony Bridges is Trying to Shut Down Handgun Hunting!"

 

[Bon Sauvage]

:thumbsup:

 

[BrownBear]

BTW-

The 44 Long Colt is a brand new traditional handgun caliber. It's so new that it only exists on my computer.

Give me three more years and I promise to type better:

45 Long Colt :redface:

 

[Ol Thing]

If a 40 Gr. bullet with 400 ft/lb of thump at the muzzle can do that. A PRB from various M/L rifles surly can.

a regular 22lr has about 100 ft/lb or so at the muzzle :grin: a good one like the velocitors or stingers have about 150. a 40gr bullet with 400ft/lb would be traveling at 2122fps. just wanted to clarify, since i have seen deer killed with 22lr remington subsonics that have 88ft/lbs at the muzzle.

dont ask... :surrender:

pennsyltucky;

I know nothing, nothinggg!

 

[Ol Thing]

I always get a hoot out of discussions like this. Among the proponents of modern techniques and equipment, we've got a whole lot of supporters for the round ball point of view, if it comes down to pure velocity/energy calculations. Those guys fire only a few rounds a year through modern zipguns, just to get access to the primitive weapon seasons.

But many more are real holy about their handguns and handgun hunting. Do the velocity/energy calculations on those arms!

I've done a mess of deer killing with handguns myself. Two of the better deer rounds I've found are the 44 Special and the 44 Long Colt. Both of those launch a 250 grain bullet at no more than 800 fps, but do a splendid job on deer. Even the much vaunted 44 mag is only launching a 240 grain bullet at around 1400 fps.

Seems to me like quite an opportunity to find a bunch of allies and turn the ranks of the handgun crowd against TB every time he opens his pimpster pie hole!

I can see the headlines now: "Tony Bridges is Trying to Shut Down Handgun Hunting!"

I've taken 3 deer with my Dan Wesson .357 8" W/180 gr. cast G.C. Made um weak in the knees right now!
My Bro. took an elk in the Bob Martial Wilderness, when he was packing and guiding up there. One shot one elk!
The .36 PRB ought to take deer just fine too, as it has alot more going for it than the rimfires. Specialy with conicals. Seems I read where there leagle in the S.E. some where.
Who is this "Tony Bridges," Is he kin to that ol commi Lloyd Bridges?............Ol Thing........

 

[roundball]

I always get a hoot out of discussions like this. Among the proponents of modern techniques and equipment, we've got a whole lot of supporters for the round ball point of view, if it comes down to pure velocity/energy calculations. Those guys fire only a few rounds a year through modern zipguns, just to get access to the primitive weapon seasons.

But many more are real holy about their handguns and handgun hunting. Do the velocity/energy calculations on those arms!

I've done a mess of deer killing with handguns myself. Two of the better deer rounds I've found are the 44 Special and the 44 Long Colt. Both of those launch a 250 grain bullet at no more than 800 fps, but do a splendid job on deer. Even the much vaunted 44 mag is only launching a 240 grain bullet at around 1400 fps.

Seems to me like quite an opportunity to find a bunch of allies and turn the ranks of the handgun crowd against TB every time he opens his pimpster pie hole!

I can see the headlines now: "Tony Bridges is Trying to Shut Down Handgun Hunting!"

I've taken 3 deer with my Dan Wesson .357 8" W/180 gr. cast G.C. Made um weak in the knees right now!
My Bro. took an elk in the Bob Martial Wilderness, when he was packing and guiding up there. One shot one elk!
The .36 PRB ought to take deer just fine too, as it has alot more going for it than the rimfires. Specialy with conicals. Seems I read where there leagle in the S.E. some where.
Who is this "Tony Bridges," Is he kin to that ol commi Lloyd Bridges?............Ol Thing........

He writes magazine articles for money from the modern high tech ML manufacturers and his style has been to put down traditional muzzleloading in an effort to keep pumping up sales of the modern high tech stuff

 

[Walks with fire]

I started hunting whitetails with my father at the age of 12. My first rifle was a 30-30 Winchester lever action with a 20" barrel and open sights. I took many a deer with that rifle and all of them dropped in their tracks; I never had one do anything but go down.

I traded it for a scoped model 30-06 and many of the deer did not go right down; sure they were dead on their feet but they didn't drop in their tracks. I tried other calibers with the same results. I think the heavy and moderate speed projectile is much better than the fast stepping rounds.

I also went thru a period where I hunted exclusively with handguns and took enough deer at ranges out to 100 yards with open sights to know that a .357 with a 180 grain bullet is far better in performance than a 44 mag. is. Same situation with 8 whitetail taken with a Colt Python 6" barrel. Never had one take a step and one shot each.

The roundball is a fine preformer as long as it's not pushed too fast. It expands well at shot range but may not exit; at long range it puts a bore size hole in the vitals and generally exits. It has plenty of shock at ranges under 50 yards.

 

[CoyoteJoe]

Here in Colorado they set a minimum energy requirement for centerfire rifles at 1000 ft.lb. at 100 yards. Handguns only require 550 ft.lb at 50 yards. Those are by ammo manufacturer's claims. So you have the situation where a 4" barreled .357 mag revolver is legal but an 18" barreled .357 carbine is not.
On muzzleloaders they don't use energy figures at all but set a minimum caliber of .40 for deer and antelope and .50 caliber for elk. But then it gets complicated because they also require a minimum bullet weight of 170 grains for calibers of .50 or less and a minimum or 220 grains for over .50 caliber. So anything under .50 caliber would require a conical bullet. A .50 caliber round ball is legal for all game, as is a .54, but a .51,.52, or .53 would have to use a conical to meet the 220 grain minimum weight for over .50 caliber!
It's not about caliber, weight, nor energy, it's all about clueless bureaucrats!