collapse
For when you only get one shot! Advertise on Hunting-Washington

Author Topic: Effective velocity  (Read 794 times)

Offline baker5150

  • Site Sponsor
  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Sourdough
  • *****
  • Join Date: Feb 2012
  • Posts: 1371
Effective velocity
« on: September 07, 2017, 06:13:40 PM »
Looking for input on long range shooting and hunting

When choosing a long range caliber, what velocity does a bullet need to be at to make an ethical kill on a deer or elk?
What other things are there consider? 
I've seen, read, been told all kinds of different answers and wanted a take from this forum.
1800 fps seams to be a common trend, but I'd think expansion would make some difference.
I doubt I'll ever take a long range shot at game, I'm not a steady shooter, but I'm interested in learning the ins and outs.
Any thoughts?

Offline h20hunter

  • Global Moderator
  • Trade Count: (+4)
  • Explorer
  • *****
  • Join Date: Jan 2010
  • Posts: 15733
  • Location: Lake Stevens
Re: Effective velocity
« Reply #1 on: September 07, 2017, 06:18:10 PM »
Funny you say 1800. I load 165 gr accubonds for my 308. Once I verified my gun likes the bullet and powder combo i emailed Nosler.  Right away they got back to me and suggested a minimal impact velocity of 1800. My loads, avg velocity at 500....per the dope I'm at 1803 at 500. Done.
Yes, my FJ is pink, I'm all about Team Jacob, beer is not for the horses nor is whiskey for the men, they are both for me.

Offline baker5150

  • Site Sponsor
  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Sourdough
  • *****
  • Join Date: Feb 2012
  • Posts: 1371
Re: Effective velocity
« Reply #2 on: September 07, 2017, 06:42:07 PM »
Funny you say 1800. I load 165 gr accubonds for my 308. Once I verified my gun likes the bullet and powder combo i emailed Nosler.  Right away they got back to me and suggested a minimal impact velocity of 1800. My loads, avg velocity at 500....per the dope I'm at 1803 at 500. Done.

I load 180 accubonds for my 300 wsm. It loves them with h4350.  700 yards its at 1802.
Hopefully this weekend I'll been hitting plates at that distance. I'm comfy at 400 off a bench. Anything more has been hit or miss. (Pun intended).

Offline cboom

  • Virtual Campfire
  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Longhunter
  • *
  • Join Date: Nov 2008
  • Posts: 750
  • Permanently Banned!
Re: Effective velocity
« Reply #3 on: September 07, 2017, 07:35:05 PM »
I believe Nosler is advertising velocities down to 1300. Most other bullets seem to call for 1800. I would feel more comfortable going slightly under that velocity with bigger calibers like the big 338's or 375's. Even if complete expansion doesn't happen it's still a big hole with lots of energy.

Offline Bob33

  • Global Moderator
  • Trade Count: (+2)
  • Explorer
  • *****
  • Join Date: Apr 2009
  • Posts: 16472
  • Groups: SCI, RMEF, NRA
Re: Effective velocity
« Reply #4 on: September 07, 2017, 08:02:32 PM »
I believe Nosler is advertising velocities down to 1300. Most other bullets seem to call for 1800. I would feel more comfortable going slightly under that velocity with bigger calibers like the big 338's or 375's. Even if complete expansion doesn't happen it's still a big hole with lots of energy.
They advertise the Accubond Long Range as having a minimum effective velocity of 1300 fps. The Accubond is rated as requiring at least 1800 fps.
Nature. It's cheaper than therapy.

Offline cboom

  • Virtual Campfire
  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Longhunter
  • *
  • Join Date: Nov 2008
  • Posts: 750
  • Permanently Banned!
Re: Effective velocity
« Reply #5 on: September 07, 2017, 08:06:05 PM »
I believe Nosler is advertising velocities down to 1300. Most other bullets seem to call for 1800. I would feel more comfortable going slightly under that velocity with bigger calibers like the big 338's or 375's. Even if complete expansion doesn't happen it's still a big hole with lots of energy.
They advertise the Accubond Long Range as having a minimum effective velocity of 1300 fps. The Accubond is rated as requiring at least 1800 fps.

Good catch. Meant to say ABLR.

Offline carpsniperg2

  • Site Sponsor
  • Global Moderator
  • Trade Count: (+71)
  • Legend
  • *****
  • Join Date: Sep 2009
  • Posts: 25494
  • Location: Goldendale,WA
Re: Effective velocity
« Reply #6 on: September 07, 2017, 08:08:02 PM »
I try to stay at 1800 fps but I have killed more then a couple critters with less then that. Bullet design has a lot to do with it and what the bullet will do at different impact velocity's.
Owner: SPLIT DIAMOND TACTICAL
Firearms/Transfers/Parts/Optics
2011 HW Head Competition Winner

Offline crabcreekhunter

  • Virtual Campfire
  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Scout
  • *
  • Join Date: Aug 2007
  • Posts: 455
  • Location: Wenatchee
Re: Effective velocity
« Reply #7 on: September 07, 2017, 09:40:13 PM »
I wouldnt worry about velocity as much as energy at a certain distance.  I like to keep energy above 1000 ft/lbs at a mimimum for big game.
"Courage is simply fear that has said its prayers"

Offline cboom

  • Virtual Campfire
  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Longhunter
  • *
  • Join Date: Nov 2008
  • Posts: 750
  • Permanently Banned!
Re: Effective velocity
« Reply #8 on: September 07, 2017, 10:10:00 PM »
When looking for bullets that will preform and long range you will also need to consider what they do at short range. A bullet that will expand at 1400 fps may blow up at 200 yards moving at 3000 fps. Lots of things to consider when choosing a bullet.

Offline Magnum_Willys

  • Trade Count: (+1)
  • Sourdough
  • *****
  • Join Date: Nov 2009
  • Posts: 2230
Re: Effective velocity
« Reply #9 on: September 08, 2017, 04:55:45 AM »
A 30-30 has about 1400 ft lbs energy at 100 yards.  I would want at least that on elk.  It has 1000 ft lbs at 200 yards .  I would consider that a minimum on deer. 

Offline jaymark6655

  • Off-Topics
  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Sourdough
  • *
  • Join Date: Aug 2009
  • Posts: 1669
  • Location: Bedford, IN
Re: Effective velocity
« Reply #10 on: September 08, 2017, 05:34:40 AM »
Energy is important. There were some standards depending on game, but I forgot the numbers (1400 and 1000 sounds right).  180gr interbond .308 at 2600 fps muzzle was good for deer at 800 and elk at 400 or 500.  Speed is important, but projectile specific.  Too fast and it will come apart and not penetrate when it hits an animal.  Too slow and it wont expand.  It all relative, I have killed more deer shooting round ball which at 100 yards only has 428 ft-lbs of energy and doesn't expand at all as far as I can tell since both the entry and exit holes are 1/2" diameter.
"That's the reason we pay $25 for a recoil lug made by a professional instead of one for $0.50 made by Micheal J Fox using a dremel!"

"Women should be treated the same as a French Rifle, dropped at the first sign of trouble."

Offline h20hunter

  • Global Moderator
  • Trade Count: (+4)
  • Explorer
  • *****
  • Join Date: Jan 2010
  • Posts: 15733
  • Location: Lake Stevens
Re: Effective velocity
« Reply #11 on: September 08, 2017, 06:31:49 AM »
A 30-30 has about 1400 ft lbs energy at 100 yards.  I would want at least that on elk.  It has 1000 ft lbs at 200 yards .  I would consider that a minimum on deer.

This thread mimics the bro in law and I's duscussion the last few weeks as we shoot a,bit before modern. I handload for his 30 30. He confirmed his 100 yard zero then moved to the 6 inch plate at 200. Hit 3 for 3, smacked it good, done and ready. He is now confident to 200 all day and willing to extend to 250 max if things are perfect or maybe follow up.
Yes, my FJ is pink, I'm all about Team Jacob, beer is not for the horses nor is whiskey for the men, they are both for me.

Offline BeWitty

  • Virtual Campfire
  • Trade Count: (+1)
  • Tracker
  • *
  • Join Date: May 2013
  • Posts: 77
  • Location: Covington
Re: Effective velocity
« Reply #12 on: September 08, 2017, 06:38:38 AM »
I wouldnt worry about velocity as much as energy at a certain distance.  I like to keep energy above 1000 ft/lbs at a mimimum for big game.
Yes this.

1000 ft/lbs for deer
1400 for Elk.

You shouldn't simply generalize a velocity because bullet weights vary so much.

Offline jaymark6655

  • Off-Topics
  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Sourdough
  • *
  • Join Date: Aug 2009
  • Posts: 1669
  • Location: Bedford, IN
Re: Effective velocity
« Reply #13 on: September 08, 2017, 06:49:11 AM »
Velocity is important for proper projectile performance, you need to look at both velocity and energy.
"That's the reason we pay $25 for a recoil lug made by a professional instead of one for $0.50 made by Micheal J Fox using a dremel!"

"Women should be treated the same as a French Rifle, dropped at the first sign of trouble."

Offline yorketransport

  • Off-Topics
  • Trade Count: (+1)
  • Sourdough
  • *
  • Join Date: Apr 2009
  • Posts: 2089
  • Location: Yelm
Re: Effective velocity
« Reply #14 on: September 08, 2017, 07:10:07 AM »
Velocity is only a one part of what makes a bullet reliably expand. Proper stability has a much greater influence on terminal performance of a bullet that a lot of people think. This is even more important with all of the extra long high BC bullets that are popular right now.

Just because you shot a 140gr 6.5mm bullet from a 1-8" twist barrel doesn't guarantee that it's going to actually give good expansion at 1800-2000 fps. Photobucket pulled all my photos from the bullet expansion thread that I had on here, but there were a lot of surprises with how bullets expanded at relatively low velocity. The vast majority of poor expansion results could be traced back to under stabilized bullets.

Bullets with higher stability factors (usually described with a SG value)  penetrate more predictably and expand more reliably. Just because you have an SG of 1.4 and the bullets shoot straight out to 1000 yards doesn't guarantee that they'll give you expect at a lower impact velocity.

The best way to know how they'll expand at a certain velocity is to test them at that velocity. My testing a few months back changed how I recommend bullets for a lot of hunting applications.  :twocents:

Offline CP

  • Trade Count: (+3)
  • Frontiersman
  • *****
  • Join Date: Mar 2008
  • Posts: 4395
  • Location: Everett
Re: Effective velocity
« Reply #15 on: September 08, 2017, 07:12:58 AM »
Here's a long winded but good read on the subject:

http://www.ballisticstudies.com/Knowledgebase/Effective+Game+Killing.html


Offline theleo

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Longhunter
  • *****
  • Join Date: Sep 2013
  • Posts: 832
  • Location: Kennewick
Re: Effective velocity
« Reply #16 on: September 08, 2017, 07:28:12 AM »
There's no hard and fast rule. You need enough velocity for the bullet to expand and enough energy that it can reach the vitals. Some bullets need more velocity (like Barnes X bullets) while others don't require as much while others need less (like Ballistic Tips or Bergers). The best thing to do is call and ask the manufacture instead of listening to us internet experts. Personally my next elk tag, whenever I draw it, I'll be using a load that generates 1,570 ft/lb at the muzzle and will shoot it out to 300 yards, hopefully, (the rifle is a work in progress) where it will only generate 814 ft/lb of energy. Internet experts will call that down rite unethical, guys that actually have a clue, now that with the rite bullet it will topple an elk just fine.

Offline Magnum_Willys

  • Trade Count: (+1)
  • Sourdough
  • *****
  • Join Date: Nov 2009
  • Posts: 2230
Re: Effective velocity
« Reply #17 on: September 08, 2017, 07:38:15 AM »
Yep York's testing turned me away from Bergers completely. I know blasphemy - but I like to minimize the risk of losing game.   Im pretty confident at least 1500+ ft lbs and 1700 fps with SMK's will get the job done.

Offline birddogdad

  • Trade Count: (+1)
  • Longhunter
  • *****
  • Join Date: Jun 2014
  • Posts: 771
  • Location: kitsap WA
    • https://www.facebook.com/bruce.wallin.1
  • Groups: LMAC, NRA
Re: Effective velocity
« Reply #18 on: September 08, 2017, 07:47:22 AM »
not sure if velocity is what you should ask, rather calculated energy down range may be better with all the other variables.. staying supersonic is necessary for the traj. math to remain accurate and the others can vary so much that its more opinion than anything else..

Consider this thought:
if you take a 45cal pistol and put it against the side of a deer and shoot directly into vitals, will it kill it? Elk? if you think so, look at the data table for muzzle energy for the 45 and then bounce with your rifle ballistics table.. that would be the absolute worst I would argue as limits, and frankly would say that is too far but math would support effective kill if you hit effective kill area on game... this is just an example. the further out you go the angle of incoming projectile will affect how vitals are impacted as well.
MMCM/SS USN retired
1981-2011
my girls- Large Munsterlander's Molly, Candy and Abbie.

Offline Magnum_Willys

  • Trade Count: (+1)
  • Sourdough
  • *****
  • Join Date: Nov 2009
  • Posts: 2230
Re: Effective velocity
« Reply #19 on: September 08, 2017, 07:55:46 AM »
Interesting thought Birddog. Thats only 400-500 ft lbs.

Offline birddogdad

  • Trade Count: (+1)
  • Longhunter
  • *****
  • Join Date: Jun 2014
  • Posts: 771
  • Location: kitsap WA
    • https://www.facebook.com/bruce.wallin.1
  • Groups: LMAC, NRA
Re: Effective velocity
« Reply #20 on: September 08, 2017, 08:04:34 AM »
Interesting thought Birddog. Thats only 400-500 ft lbs.

just a spitball but I feel its fairly accurate, though not recommended for the "standard" shooter..
MMCM/SS USN retired
1981-2011
my girls- Large Munsterlander's Molly, Candy and Abbie.

Offline baker5150

  • Site Sponsor
  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Sourdough
  • *****
  • Join Date: Feb 2012
  • Posts: 1371
Re: Effective velocity
« Reply #21 on: September 08, 2017, 08:49:09 AM »
Great info guys, thanks.

Offline yakimanoob

  • Virtual Campfire
  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Scout
  • *
  • Join Date: Jun 2016
  • Posts: 412
  • Location: Naches
Re: Effective velocity
« Reply #22 on: September 08, 2017, 09:17:42 AM »
Great discussion (it's nice to read a thread on this subject that doesn't turn into a flame war!).  I got the same 1800 fps minimum from Berger when I talked to their rep, so that's apparently the industry standard.  Anyone heard from Hornady on the subject? 

It seems a bit counterintuitive, but Berger and Hornady have both told me that it's velocity, not energy, that should be used to gauge how the bullet will expand. Not sure exactly why this is the consensus, but I haven't do any testing myself so  :dunno:


Baker, another thought to keep in mind is that, especially at long ranges, you should be using the G7 ballistic coefficients instead of the G1.  The G1 BC of a modern boat-tail hunting bullet changes with velocity, and it's impossible for the models to predict those changes exactly.  The G7 BC is constant (or close enough to constant, anyway) at all relevant shooting velocities.  Most high-quality hunting bullets will have a G7 BC listed in the specs, and all the good calculators will allow you to specify that you're using G7 (although sometimes you have to open the advanced features to do so).

Offline h20hunter

  • Global Moderator
  • Trade Count: (+4)
  • Explorer
  • *****
  • Join Date: Jan 2010
  • Posts: 15733
  • Location: Lake Stevens
Re: Effective velocity
« Reply #23 on: September 08, 2017, 09:25:08 AM »
Velocity provides the oompf for expansion which in turn results in energy into the target. Like mentioned, its a dance between velocity, expansion aka bullet performance, and the resulting trasfer of energy. I find it fascinating.
Yes, my FJ is pink, I'm all about Team Jacob, beer is not for the horses nor is whiskey for the men, they are both for me.

Offline Bob33

  • Global Moderator
  • Trade Count: (+2)
  • Explorer
  • *****
  • Join Date: Apr 2009
  • Posts: 16472
  • Groups: SCI, RMEF, NRA
Re: Effective velocity
« Reply #24 on: September 08, 2017, 09:33:07 AM »
Read the article that CP referenced. Killing efficiency is more than simply velocity or energy.

A 100 mph baseball has about 1700 ft/lbs of energy but isn't likely to kill an elk.

Here's a long winded but good read on the subject:

http://www.ballisticstudies.com/Knowledgebase/Effective+Game+Killing.html
Nature. It's cheaper than therapy.

Offline 7mmfan

  • Virtual Campfire
  • Trade Count: (+2)
  • Sourdough
  • *
  • Join Date: Nov 2008
  • Posts: 2351
  • Location: Marysville
    • https://www.facebook.com/rory.oconnor.9480
Re: Effective velocity
« Reply #25 on: September 08, 2017, 09:38:57 AM »
Velocity provides the oompf for expansion which in turn results in energy into the target. Like mentioned, its a dance between velocity, expansion aka bullet performance, and the resulting trasfer of energy. I find it fascinating.

This. And Bob33's comment is spot as well. The larger/heavier the object, the more energy it is going to carry regardless of its velocity. You need that velocity to provide proper penetration and expansion to transfer that retained energy into the animal to ensure a good ethical kill.
I hunt, therefore I am.... I fish, therefore I lie.

Offline h20hunter

  • Global Moderator
  • Trade Count: (+4)
  • Explorer
  • *****
  • Join Date: Jan 2010
  • Posts: 15733
  • Location: Lake Stevens
Re: Effective velocity
« Reply #26 on: September 08, 2017, 09:51:50 AM »
Perfect example....your 7mm and my 308. Same distance, similar bullet size,  NOT the same impact results. Yours put the hurt on for sure.
Yes, my FJ is pink, I'm all about Team Jacob, beer is not for the horses nor is whiskey for the men, they are both for me.

Offline 7mmfan

  • Virtual Campfire
  • Trade Count: (+2)
  • Sourdough
  • *
  • Join Date: Nov 2008
  • Posts: 2351
  • Location: Marysville
    • https://www.facebook.com/rory.oconnor.9480
Re: Effective velocity
« Reply #27 on: September 08, 2017, 09:58:52 AM »
It packs a wallop, that's for sure. Ask your  steel, it'll tell you. That is, if it will still talk to you after letting my dad and I shoot it.
I hunt, therefore I am.... I fish, therefore I lie.

Offline h20hunter

  • Global Moderator
  • Trade Count: (+4)
  • Explorer
  • *****
  • Join Date: Jan 2010
  • Posts: 15733
  • Location: Lake Stevens
Re: Effective velocity
« Reply #28 on: September 08, 2017, 10:04:55 AM »
One younger shooter last weekend snuck a 223 round between the ear and the bolt. Sheared the bolt clean in half. Very cool. You could hear the difference in impact timing as well. Those few extra hundred fps make a difference. The steel is good, we have an understanding. I gave two plates a fresh coat if orange just this morning.
Yes, my FJ is pink, I'm all about Team Jacob, beer is not for the horses nor is whiskey for the men, they are both for me.

Offline yakimanoob

  • Virtual Campfire
  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Scout
  • *
  • Join Date: Jun 2016
  • Posts: 412
  • Location: Naches
Re: Effective velocity
« Reply #29 on: September 08, 2017, 10:11:52 AM »
Velocity provides the oompf for expansion which in turn results in energy into the target. Like mentioned, its a dance between velocity, expansion aka bullet performance, and the resulting trasfer of energy. I find it fascinating.
I'm with ya on finding it fascinating.  I don't even have a long-range setup (nor the necessary skills to think about shooting past 350 or so) but I'm so much of a nerd I still like to learn about it (cf. the thread on the Coriolis effect in virtual campfire  :chuckle:).

There's no way to untangle velocity from energy -- it's not as if mass changes for a bullet in flight, so velocity is really the only variable in external ballistics anyway.  But it's literally energy that makes the bullet deform/expand so you think that would be the baseline metric that's used.  But apparently velocity is more handy?   :dunno:

Offline bobcat

  • Global Moderator
  • Trade Count: (+6)
  • Legend
  • *****
  • Join Date: Mar 2007
  • Posts: 33701
  • Location: Rochester
    • robert68
Re: Effective velocity
« Reply #30 on: September 08, 2017, 10:12:46 AM »
Foot pounds of energy is just a calculated number, personally I don't pay much attention to it. If you have the velocity needed, and the right bullet, that's all that matters.

Offline 7mmfan

  • Virtual Campfire
  • Trade Count: (+2)
  • Sourdough
  • *
  • Join Date: Nov 2008
  • Posts: 2351
  • Location: Marysville
    • https://www.facebook.com/rory.oconnor.9480
Re: Effective velocity
« Reply #31 on: September 08, 2017, 10:19:36 AM »
Velocity provides the oompf for expansion which in turn results in energy into the target. Like mentioned, its a dance between velocity, expansion aka bullet performance, and the resulting trasfer of energy. I find it fascinating.
I'm with ya on finding it fascinating.  I don't even have a long-range setup (nor the necessary skills to think about shooting past 350 or so) but I'm so much of a nerd I still like to learn about it (cf. the thread on the Coriolis effect in virtual campfire  :chuckle:).

There's no way to untangle velocity from energy -- it's not as if mass changes for a bullet in flight, so velocity is really the only variable in external ballistics anyway.  But it's literally energy that makes the bullet deform/expand so you think that would be the baseline metric that's used.  But apparently velocity is more handy?   :dunno:

EDIT: Energy is not what makes the bullet expand, velocity and target resistence is. The velocity the bullet is traveling at, and the density of the target the bullet hits are what determine the amount of energy that is transferred at impact.

Consider this. I'm using fabricated numbers on the fly, these have no real life bearing on anything, just an example. A bullet is traveling at 2500 fps, and at the speed, carries a 2000 FP of energy. If, when the bullet hits it's intended target, it expands, plows through the target, and is found just under the skin on the far side. The bullet expended all 2000 FP of its retained energy given its velocity.

However, take the the same speed/energy, but the bullet design doesn't allow for full expansion at that speed. When this bullet hits the intended target, it zips through and disappears over the horizon. How much energy did it release on its target? 50% of it? 25% of it?

It's a lot of calculus and algebra and cosigns, and other stuff that I haven't played with in a long time, but the end result is, energy is a direct result of mass x velocity, and transferred energy is a direct result of bullet design and how much of the energy it expends on its target.

My understanding is that energy is a product of mass (weight) x velocity. The lower the velocity, the lower the energy. Take a 180 gr accubond and throw it as hard as you can at thing, its not going to expand or deform other than superficially. Fire it at 2000 fps, and it penetrates/expands, and destroys. The mass of the bullet needs to be traveling at a minimum velocity to perform.

What the minimum velocity is seems to be up for debate, but 1800 fps depending on the bullet design, seems to be the benchmark.
« Last Edit: September 08, 2017, 10:28:17 AM by 7mmfan »
I hunt, therefore I am.... I fish, therefore I lie.

Offline yakimanoob

  • Virtual Campfire
  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Scout
  • *
  • Join Date: Jun 2016
  • Posts: 412
  • Location: Naches
Re: Effective velocity
« Reply #32 on: September 08, 2017, 10:30:02 AM »
My understanding is that energy is a product of mass (weight) x velocity. The lower the velocity, the lower the energy. Take a 180 gr accubond and throw it as hard as you can at thing, its not going to expand or deform other than superficially. Fire it at 2000 fps, and it penetrates/expands, and destroys. The mass of the bullet needs to be traveling at a minimum velocity to perform.


That's the gist of it. 

Technically (kinetic) energy is half the product of the mass and the square of the velocity, so small changes in velocity have a much larger effect on the energy than small changes in mass.  Mass times velocity is the quantity we call momentum and is a slightly different idea. 

The oddity for me in using velocity over energy is that if you know one (and the mass of the bullet, which you always should) then you know the other.  E = 0.5*m*(v^2).  Or, v = sqrt(2E/m).  It must be that velocity is just a more convenient metric because maybe an 85gr bullet with 2000 ft-lbs of energy expands much differently than a 180gr bullet with the same energy, but they expand similarly if they're both moving at 1800 fps.   :dunno:

Offline 7mmfan

  • Virtual Campfire
  • Trade Count: (+2)
  • Sourdough
  • *
  • Join Date: Nov 2008
  • Posts: 2351
  • Location: Marysville
    • https://www.facebook.com/rory.oconnor.9480
Re: Effective velocity
« Reply #33 on: September 08, 2017, 10:33:48 AM »
My understanding is that energy is a product of mass (weight) x velocity. The lower the velocity, the lower the energy. Take a 180 gr accubond and throw it as hard as you can at thing, its not going to expand or deform other than superficially. Fire it at 2000 fps, and it penetrates/expands, and destroys. The mass of the bullet needs to be traveling at a minimum velocity to perform.


That's the gist of it. 

Technically (kinetic) energy is half the product of the mass and the square of the velocity, so small changes in velocity have a much larger effect on the energy than small changes in mass.  Mass times velocity is the quantity we call momentum and is a slightly different idea. 

The oddity for me in using velocity over energy is that if you know one (and the mass of the bullet, which you always should) then you know the other.  E = 0.5*m*(v^2).  Or, v = sqrt(2E/m).  It must be that velocity is just a more convenient metric because maybe an 85gr bullet with 2000 ft-lbs of energy expands much differently than a 180gr bullet with the same energy, but they expand similarly if they're both moving at 1800 fps.   :dunno:

That equation tipped me over. I have baby brain, and lack of sleep and only 4 cups of coffee today. I'm bowing out. Carry on.  :salute:
I hunt, therefore I am.... I fish, therefore I lie.

Offline yakimanoob

  • Virtual Campfire
  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Scout
  • *
  • Join Date: Jun 2016
  • Posts: 412
  • Location: Naches
Re: Effective velocity
« Reply #34 on: September 08, 2017, 10:35:36 AM »

EDIT: Energy is not what makes the bullet expand, velocity and target resistence is. The velocity the bullet is traveling at, and the density of the target the bullet hits are what determine the amount of energy that is transferred at impact.

Consider this. I'm using fabricated numbers on the fly, these have no real life bearing on anything, just an example. A bullet is traveling at 2500 fps, and at the speed, carries a 2000 FP of energy. If, when the bullet hits it's intended target, it expands, plows through the target, and is found just under the skin on the far side. The bullet expended all 2000 FP of its retained energy given its velocity.

However, take the the same speed/energy, but the bullet design doesn't allow for full expansion at that speed. When this bullet hits the intended target, it zips through and disappears over the horizon. How much energy did it release on its target? 50% of it? 25% of it?

It's a lot of calculus and algebra and cosigns, and other stuff that I haven't played with in a long time, but the end result is, energy is a direct result of mass x velocity, and transferred energy is a direct result of bullet design and how much of the energy it expends on its target.

My understanding is that energy is a product of mass (weight) x velocity. The lower the velocity, the lower the energy. Take a 180 gr accubond and throw it as hard as you can at thing, its not going to expand or deform other than superficially. Fire it at 2000 fps, and it penetrates/expands, and destroys. The mass of the bullet needs to be traveling at a minimum velocity to perform.

What the minimum velocity is seems to be up for debate, but 1800 fps depending on the bullet design, seems to be the benchmark.

I agree with the concepts you're getting at, just not the technicalities.  It is only energy that makes the bullet expand, but I should have clarified that there are more types of energy than the kinetic energy measured in ft-lbs that we normally talk about.  Technically it's mechanical energy between the target and the bullet that causes the bullet to deform -- the target is literally pushing the bullet into that shape.  This mechanical energy ultimately comes from the kinetic energy of the bullet in flight of course, but like you said there's a LOT going on when it comes to terminal ballistics, and it doesn't necessarily make sense to measure the mechanical energy that deforms the bullet in terms of the kinetic energy it has right before impact. 
« Last Edit: September 08, 2017, 10:42:02 AM by yakimanoob »

Offline yakimanoob

  • Virtual Campfire
  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Scout
  • *
  • Join Date: Jun 2016
  • Posts: 412
  • Location: Naches
Re: Effective velocity
« Reply #35 on: September 08, 2017, 10:43:11 AM »

That equation tipped me over. I have baby brain, and lack of sleep and only 4 cups of coffee today. I'm bowing out. Carry on.  :salute:

Haha, yeah I should leave the physics for another time and place.  Sorry to side-track your thread, Baker! 

Offline Bob33

  • Global Moderator
  • Trade Count: (+2)
  • Explorer
  • *****
  • Join Date: Apr 2009
  • Posts: 16472
  • Groups: SCI, RMEF, NRA
Re: Effective velocity
« Reply #36 on: September 08, 2017, 11:02:10 AM »
Velocity provides the oompf for expansion which in turn results in energy into the target. Like mentioned, its a dance between velocity, expansion aka bullet performance, and the resulting trasfer of energy. I find it fascinating.
I'm with ya on finding it fascinating.  I don't even have a long-range setup (nor the necessary skills to think about shooting past 350 or so) but I'm so much of a nerd I still like to learn about it (cf. the thread on the Coriolis effect in virtual campfire  :chuckle:).

There's no way to untangle velocity from energy -- it's not as if mass changes for a bullet in flight, so velocity is really the only variable in external ballistics anyway.  But it's literally energy that makes the bullet deform/expand so you think that would be the baseline metric that's used.  But apparently velocity is more handy?   :dunno:

EDIT: Energy is not what makes the bullet expand, velocity and target resistence is. The velocity the bullet is traveling at, and the density of the target the bullet hits are what determine the amount of energy that is transferred at impact.

Consider this. I'm using fabricated numbers on the fly, these have no real life bearing on anything, just an example. A bullet is traveling at 2500 fps, and at the speed, carries a 2000 FP of energy. If, when the bullet hits it's intended target, it expands, plows through the target, and is found just under the skin on the far side. The bullet expended all 2000 FP of its retained energy given its velocity.

However, take the the same speed/energy, but the bullet design doesn't allow for full expansion at that speed. When this bullet hits the intended target, it zips through and disappears over the horizon. How much energy did it release on its target? 50% of it? 25% of it?

It's a lot of calculus and algebra and cosigns, and other stuff that I haven't played with in a long time, but the end result is, energy is a direct result of mass x velocity, and transferred energy is a direct result of bullet design and how much of the energy it expends on its target.

My understanding is that energy is a product of mass (weight) x velocity. The lower the velocity, the lower the energy. Take a 180 gr accubond and throw it as hard as you can at thing, its not going to expand or deform other than superficially. Fire it at 2000 fps, and it penetrates/expands, and destroys. The mass of the bullet needs to be traveling at a minimum velocity to perform.

What the minimum velocity is seems to be up for debate, but 1800 fps depending on the bullet design, seems to be the benchmark.
That information is essentially accurate but misses a few key points.

First, a bullet that lodges on the far side and doesn't exit is much less likely to leave a blood trail for tracking.

Secondly, the issues of wound channel size, bullet cavitation, and hydrostatic shock also play roles in how quickly an animal dies.

A simple formula for the kinetic energy of a bullet is ( bullet_grains x velocity x velocity ) / 450,800.

Example of a 180 grain bullet at 2700 ft/second: (180 x 2700 x 2700) / 450800 = 2910 foot pounds of energy.
Nature. It's cheaper than therapy.

Offline yakimanoob

  • Virtual Campfire
  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Scout
  • *
  • Join Date: Jun 2016
  • Posts: 412
  • Location: Naches
Re: Effective velocity
« Reply #37 on: September 08, 2017, 11:45:17 AM »
A simple formula for the kinetic energy of a bullet is ( bullet_grains x velocity x velocity ) / 450,800.

Example of a 180 grain bullet at 2700 ft/second: (180 x 2700 x 2700) / 450800 = 2910 foot pounds of energy.

I just tried to figure out how this was the same as E = 1/2 m v^2 and got hit in the face by how incredibly *&$%ing stupid the imperial system is. 

7000 grains = 1 lb(mass) = 32.2fps*1lb(force).  Kinetic energy is measured in ft*lbs(force).  So if you start with grains, you have to divide by 7000*32.2, which is 225,400.  Once you apply the 1/2 part of the kinetic energy equation, you get the 450,800 in Bob's equation. 

OR if we measured everything in metric, there would be no conversions to do at all.  Mass of the bullet in grams, velocity in meters per second, plug into the equation and we're done.  F&^%ing British units  :bash:

Offline kselkhunter

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Scout
  • ****
  • Join Date: Jun 2014
  • Posts: 345
  • Location: United States
Re: Effective velocity
« Reply #38 on: September 08, 2017, 02:02:17 PM »
And the Brits don't even use the imperial systems anymore. The US, Myanmar, and Liberia are the last ones still using it. 

To the Op:  Find out what the minimum impact velocity is for your chosen bullet from the manufacturer and how it performs at varying velocities (some manufacturers supply photos of recovered bullets at various velocities).  And test them out at those ranges (Yorketransport did some good reviews on bullet performance).  A low velocity impact that pencils through will still kill an animal if it hits the heart/nervous system....but that shot at long ranges in hunting conditions can challenge even the most experienced long range shooters.

I've witnessed wannabe long range shooters lobbing bullets at a bull over a half a mile away and missed so badly they killed the calf standing next to it.    :bash:    Not factoring how far wind can drift their bullet at those ranges. 

A 168gr ABLR out of my 7mmRM will have over 1800fps of velocity at 800 yards and thus the bullet will perform and my custom ballistic turrets take the guesswork out of bullet drop calculations.....but if that bullet encounters a 10mph cross wind halfway across the canyon it will drift multiple feet.  Lower BC bullets out of other calibers can drift 4 ft or more at those ranges.   I'm not skilled enough to make those wind estimations, so don't take such shots myself.

But, there are plenty of guys on this forum that can make a long range shot and have the gun, caliber, bullet, and years of experience and regular practice range time to pull it off every time.  They can give much better advice than I.  But, I'd expect a bigger 338 caliber variant would give the best of all worlds in velocity and higher BCs to better resist wind drift at longer ranges, as long as bullet stability (ie twist rate vs. bullet selection, etc.) is also factored in.











 

* Recent Topics

My boys first deer. by elkoholic1
[Today at 12:17:15 AM]


Daughter got it done-First buck is a good one! by elkoholic1
[Today at 12:15:24 AM]


Capitol Forest? by fishnfur
[Today at 12:06:46 AM]


Getting Discouraged by fishnfur
[Yesterday at 11:35:01 PM]


Wife's opening day Mulie by JWEBB
[Yesterday at 11:20:41 PM]


WDFW issues permit for Cooke Aquaculture to bring in 1.8m eggs from Iceland by j_h_nimrod
[Yesterday at 11:10:59 PM]


Opening day mulie by Mfowl
[Yesterday at 11:08:00 PM]


338-378 Weatherby Questions by Magnum_Willys
[Yesterday at 11:07:49 PM]


Lyman trade rifle .54 cal recoil!! by Mudman
[Yesterday at 11:02:53 PM]


First Time Hunting Muleys in Washington by ADBuck24
[Yesterday at 10:45:18 PM]


Washington State Mule Deer Hunting Future (poll) by huntnphool
[Yesterday at 10:41:39 PM]


Vortex Cross Fire II scope by Utah
[Yesterday at 10:39:22 PM]


WY Solo DIY Public Land Antelope Success by Brushbuster
[Yesterday at 10:08:17 PM]


Pack out pics by dreamingbig
[Yesterday at 09:59:18 PM]


Sitka Kelvin Lite Hoody vs First Lite Uncompahgre Jackets by SemperFidelis97
[Yesterday at 09:52:23 PM]


WTS: Gen 3 Glock 26/w night sights and extras (Graham) by Stinkyrat
[Yesterday at 09:51:47 PM]


2017 Prime Centergy Hybrid by Vandal44
[Yesterday at 09:46:41 PM]


Elkfever's Peaches Ridge Hunt by Crunchy
[Yesterday at 09:40:27 PM]


3nails opening day blacktail by fishnfur
[Yesterday at 09:35:39 PM]


GMU 655, 654 or 653 by fishnfur
[Yesterday at 09:25:25 PM]