30-06....again

[Rick]

First of all,there is no such thing as "knock down" power. Its physics,if the bullet had enough power to knock an animal over,it would knock the shooter over as well.

As far as ammo goes,I'd pick the ammo that shoots the best in your rifle. An Accubond,Partition,TSX,or Trophy Bonded will all kill elk easily.

I shoot 165gr Accubonds out of my '06. The last elk I shot ran about 20 yds and died. A 180 wouldn't have killed it any faster.

IMO the 165 is the best all around weight for an '06.

[bobcat]

I like two holes, gives a much better chance of a good blood trail. If you use a Barnes bullet you will almost always have an entrance hole and an exit hole. I don't believe in the theory of a bullet that stays in the animal transferring more energy. A hole through the lungs or heart is a dead animal. It's not going to be any deader with a bullet that does not exit.

[JimmyHoffa]

I don't believe in the theory of a bullet that stays in the animal transferring more energy. .

Called conservation of energy.  The total stays the same---before the impact equals the exited bullet plus what was transferred to the animal. 

[twistiron]

buy a box of each shoot a group and find what works for you and your gun! i have an A-bolt with boss in .06 and i shoot federal it works great and the money i save a the range pays for lunch! 

[bobcat]

I don't believe in the theory of a bullet that stays in the animal transferring more energy. .

Called conservation of energy.  The total stays the same---before the impact equals the exited bullet plus what was transferred to the animal. 

Yeah, I know. I've read a lot of theories on that subject, but I just don't believe in the "transfer of energy" from a bullet to an animal. I like a hole all the way through an animal and a good blood trail.

[C-Money]

I would try the regular old federal classic in a 165 or 180, should be fine. The Accubond and Partition are made with elk in mind. Cant go wrong.

[Ridgeratt]

I don't believe in the theory of a bullet that stays in the animal transferring more energy. .

Called conservation of energy.  The total stays the same---before the impact equals the exited bullet plus what was transferred to the animal. 

Yeah, I know. I've read a lot of theories on that subject, but I just don't believe in the "transfer of energy" from a bullet to an animal. I like a hole all the way through an animal and a good blood trail.

Well if a 06 180 grain leaves the @ 2700 with approx. 2913 ft. lbs of energy and it contacts it's target @ 200 yards with 2217 ft pounds of energy and doesn't pass thru just were does that force go?

[bobcat]

That "energy" is just a number, it means nothing. Again, just my opinion. I have my theories and you're all welcome to yours.

[hub]

My favorite 06 load in the timber for elk has long been the 200 grain partition at 2600 fps. I load my own however there is factory ammo available. On large animals nothing like a heavy bullet at a moderate velocity for bone breaking ability and causing two leak holes. 

[Ridgeratt]

That "energy" is just a number, it means nothing. Again, just my opinion. I have my theories and you're all welcome to yours.

Dang I always thought physics was involved as well.   

[bobcat]

This kind of explains the way I feel about the whole energy transfer theory:

http://www.firearmstactical.com/briefs3.htm

[jackmaster]

its simple, no math needed which is a good thing for people like me, shoot the animal right and you wont have to worry about energy tranfer or mathmatical solutions.. quarting away 4 ribs back on your side along an imaginary line straight to the ball socket on the otherside and the critter goes right down...  actually i have done that with my 06 twice on elk shootn 165gr bullets, the elk didnt go 20 ft both times.. 

[magnanimous_j]

This kind of explains the way I feel about the whole energy transfer theory:

http://www.firearmstactical.com/briefs3.htm

I've read this argument before, it makes sense and I believe that energy transfer is overblown in comparison to shot placement, but I don't believe that its the whole story.

The writer of the article basically argues that the bullet is like the tip of a rapier. It's only a kill shot if it hits a vital organ or blood vessel.

Which makes logical sense, but if that is all there is to it, then why does a rifle hit harder than a pistol? On a human target, why would a 7.62x39 fmj that made a clean exit wound do more damage than a 9mm fmj that made a clean exit wound (assuming the same shot placement)?

[GoldTip]

First of all,there is no such thing as "knock down" power. Its physics,if the bullet had enough power to knock an animal over,it would knock the shooter over as well.

As far as ammo goes,I'd pick the ammo that shoots the best in your rifle. An Accubond,Partition,TSX,or Trophy Bonded will all kill elk easily.

I shoot 165gr Accubonds out of my '06. The last elk I shot ran about 20 yds and died. A 180 wouldn't have killed it any faster.

IMO the 165 is the best all around weight for an '06.

No offense but that is a totally flawed argument.  Lets take it to very basic principles with "knock down power".  If a lineman has enough energy to knock over a running back, by your argument, the line man would have to be knocked down as well.  You are correct that it is very simple physics, and that for every action there is an equal and opposite reaction, but you are not acounting for the fact that there is recoil energy absorbed by the rifle prior to it being transferred to the person holding the rifle.

I think one of the problems everyone has is with the formula used to create a number known as Kinetic energy which gives a great proportion of it's value to velocity.  I prefer to feel the Taylor Knock out formula gives a better picture of what a bullet will do when it encounter flesh. This uses diameter of bullet, length of bullet, weight of bullet and velocity to determine the energy it will transfer to flesh.

[littletoes]

Try this little experiment of mine....

Have a buddy climb a 10 foot ladder, stand under it, and have him drop a penny on your head from the top...next, have him drop a silver dollar on your head.

Feel the difference? Next try a bowling ball....is the energy different??? They aren't actually traveling at much different speeds....