Picking the RIGHT hunting caliber/cartridge for the job. By the numbers

[Formidilosus]

So, which of these three factors would you say is "stupid" to consider?
1) The energy?
(that factors in the weight and velocity of the bullet...)

How much energy does it take to create a 3 inch wide, 20 inch long wound in an elk?

2) the sectional density?
(Any argument about why a 10mm out of a G20 is an adequate bear stopping firearm inevitably includes a lengthy dissertation on the importance of Sectional Density related to the penetrating capacity of a bullet...)

You mean sectional density that only remains static until the moment the bullet touches something? The sectional density that can and does massively vary once penetration has started?

3) or the frontal area of the bullet...? maybe you think it is stupid to consider the size of the bullet into the equation? Maybe you think Its just silly to think that a .17 diameter projectile has any different properties or effect on target than a .338, .45, or even a .5 inch diameter projectile...

Front area, that once again is only static until the touches something. You realize that aa non expanding FMJ and a sintered frangible of the same SD and frontal diameter at the same impact velocity have exactly the same “KPS” score and none of that tells you a single thing about what those bullets actually do in tissue?

 

[bsnedeker]

How much energy does it take to create a 3 inch wide, 20 inch long wound in an elk?






You mean sectional density that only remains static until the moment the bullet touches something? The sectional density that can and does massively vary once penetration has started?




Front area, that once again is only static until the touches something. You realize that aa non expanding FMJ and a sintered frangible of the same SD and frontal diameter at the same impact velocity have exactly the same “KPS” score and none of that tells you a single thing about what those bullets actually do in tissue?

I was wondering how this thing got to almost 3 pages without Form blowing it all to hell....lol!

 

[mxgsfmdpx]

Is... Is this... Is this another "energy is king" thread? Did the guy make an alt account? Here we go again...

 

[zion zig zag]

This is going about like the vaccine thread....

 

[260madman]

This is going about like the vaccine thread....

Not enough links and excerpts of articles.

 

[Wrench]

I'll tell you what didn't work on elk,

I watched my 11 year old shell an elk with a 300rum and I was dad enough to make sure he had plugs in....but I didn't.

That didn't work very well.

 

[260madman]

I'll tell you what didn't work on elk,

I watched my 11 year old shell an elk with a 300rum and I was dad enough to make sure he had plugs in....but I didn't.

That didn't work very well.

Rrreeeeeeeee....

 

[Wrench]

Rrreeeeeeeee....

+P.

 

[Steve O]

Doing the math, and comparing both at point blank range (MV to MV) the 300wm with 2850fps and a 200gr bullet scores about 80 on the KPS scale, the 500S&W with a 500gr bullet at 1475fps scores in the mid 120 range (about the same as a 12 guage shotgun 1oz slug). Ive never personally witnessed point blank tissue damage from any of the 3 options, all would be instant death for pretty much any critter I would suppose... however, anecdotally, when I think about what alaskan hunters and guides tend to prefer for immediate (up close and personal) big bear defense, I think you would see more favoring a 12 guage, 45/70, 500S&W magnum (all with big wide heavy bullets) for "stopping power" at close range over a more long range suited rifle caliber like the 30-06, 300 win, 300 rum, etc. That is not to say that some dont pack a 30-06 at the ready when hiking through close in alaskan brush...

However, here we are talking about the killing power of a particular bullet from a particular cartridge at range. Beyond a certain point, even a 500gr bullet will lose enough velocity to not do much other than leave a bruise... and certainly it will reach that threshold LONG before the sleeker bullets of the 300wm. But the KPS score gives us a chance to compare known (from the experience of hunters who have gone before us) killability with otherwise lesser known quantities. If good ole Jack O'Connor and his beloved 270win were taking any and all North American game successfully out to 350 yards, with a 130gr projectile... then we can identify the terminal effectiveness of that particular bullet choice and extrapolate it out to other yardages with otherwise dissimilar characteristics (lighter or heavier bullets, different velocities, etc). It does no disservice to Jack to suggest that a 130-145gr .277 projectile has the same relative killing capacity at 250-300 yards (with 2500-2600fps velocity retained) as would a 200-220gr .30 diameter projectile at 600 yards with 2050fps velocity retained. Otherwise, if you have two bullets, one smaller diameter 130 and one larger diameter 200 grains, and they are both doing 2000fps at the target... it doesnt take a rocket scientist to discern that the heavier/larger projectile has the capacity to do more "damage"... The KPS score merely gives us a way to compare their relative umph on target in spite of dissimilar weight and bullet size. Its a tool.

Chief, have you ever been to Alaska? Nobody with ANY experience in Alaska is going to pick a handgun, even the mighty 500 S&W over any rifle especially a 300 Win. You use a pistol for protection in Alaska when you are bow hunting mostly. Yeah, I know all about Phil Shoemaker and his 9mm brown bear bear. We enjoyed a couple beers together at the brewery on Kodiak Island a few years ago discussing that and many other “Alaska” things.

It’s a tool, a poor tool; many here are trying to save you from your tool. It’s so ridiculous it’s impossible to have a discussion about it because field experience disproves it 100%

 

[260madman]

I looked up this KPS thing. Using OPs rationale I used the 30-06 because everyone hates it and the same bullets I posted on page 1.

OP minimum KPS 35 at 600 yards

30-06 168 NBT KPS 31

30-06 178 ELD-X KPS 33

pretty close to his self imposed limit of 35.

If you’re running into these I’d suggest that 20mm a few posts back.

 

[Ryan Avery]

@packgoatguy

You're giving pack goats a bad name

 

[bsnedeker]

@packgoatguy

You're giving pack goats a bad name

We are only 10 days in and Avery just won Post Of The Year!

Sent from my SM-G998U1 using Tapatalk

 

[Lawnboi]

I thought reading that, man this thread needs that 6.5 Grendel guy. 4 posts later there he was!

 

[mxgsfmdpx]

@packgoatguy

You're giving pack goats a bad name

There’s dozens of us goat packers!

 

[backcountry_hunter]

This is pure gold

 

[z987k]

Doing the math, and comparing both at point blank range (MV to MV) the 300wm with 2850fps and a 200gr bullet scores about 80 on the KPS scale, the 500S&W with a 500gr bullet at 1475fps scores in the mid 120 range (about the same as a 12 guage shotgun 1oz slug). Ive never personally witnessed point blank tissue damage from any of the 3 options, all would be instant death for pretty much any critter I would suppose... however, anecdotally, when I think about what alaskan hunters and guides tend to prefer for immediate (up close and personal) big bear defense, I think you would see more favoring a 12 guage, 45/70, 500S&W magnum (all with big wide heavy bullets) for "stopping power" at close range over a more long range suited rifle caliber like the 30-06, 300 win, 300 rum, etc. That is not to say that some dont pack a 30-06 at the ready when hiking through close in alaskan brush...

People don't pack a 300wm because it's a rifle. It's big. Have you ever hiked a mountain with a rifle in your hands ready to fire? It's a PITA. Unless you're hunting, where you are rather sure you're going to use this big pile of steel, you don't carry around dead weight that snags on every alder in existence.
Very few people, except on hunts, carry a 12Ga or 45-70 in any fashion they could draw on a charging bear. It's just not done. You have to actually live your life. Bears aren't out there hunting you. The head on your shoulders is better initial protection than any gun. The sidearm is a last resort.

And no, no one uses a 45-70 to 500sw with hard cast, mostly non expanding bullets for stopping power. They use them because with those bullets and the inertia they have, they penetrate extremely well. Into a CNS hit ideally. Ideally they go through all 12 feet of the thing.
300 win mag mono vs 500sw hard cast for self defense? Well if I'm sitting there not packing anything anywhere, which isn't ever the case, give me the 300wm every single time.

 

[204guy]

@packgoatguy

You're giving pack goats a bad name

As a new goat wrangler I was thinking the same.

 

[204guy]

I'm enjoying the train wreck but anyways,

With like starting velocities, .308 155 fmj and .308 155 eldm are going to have nearly identical kps scores at any range. You could sub a 150 e-tip or 150 ttsx in there if you're having spasms over the fmj. Kps will still be nearly identical. Wound channels would be anything but nearly identical.

 

[packgoatguy]

Yes, all three of those, multiplied and turned into a number that has no actual meaning are stupid.
You're taking what is essentially a fossil's old wives tale's and assigning a number to them, and then declaring a larger number better.

I'll make my own scale. We'll call it Z's BS, or ZBS.
It takes muzzle velocity * BC / powder charge.
And we'll get some numbers that mean absolutely nothing when talking about killing an animal, but all the modern short fat cartridges shooting long for caliber/high twist rates would come out ahead.

Now let me do what you're doing -

But what part would be wrong? Do you disagree that high BC bullets putting more energy and velocity down range is bad? Do you disagree that a higher muzzle velocity is detrimental to killing animals? Do you think doing that with the smallest powder charge and least recoil would be bad for hunting?

Im sorry, now Im confused... it feels like you are arguing, but at the same time proving my point? I think I have been clear that I prefer higher BC bullets (all else being equal) and more energy (all else being equal) and more velocity... and once I have met my minimum threshold for cartridge capability for my needs, I dont want "more powder" in the form of an even bigger cartridge than I need. (certainly a 300wm is going to have a lot less powder than a 338LM right?)

As far as BCs go... lets talk about the difference between the 6.5 options and 30 cal options. Take the 143 ELDX vs the 200 ELDX and the 212 ELDX. The 143 has a G1 BC of .625, the 200 (not at the top end the the 300wm capabilities) has a .597, and the 212 (handloads only for the 300win) has a G1 BC of .663. Comparing the Berger EOL line, the highest BC available for the 6.5 class is .679 (156 EOL) , but the highest BC available for 30 cals is .807 (245 EOL) (.807 is higher than .679). Seems like if I want the highest BC possible (and of course more energy) I should choose a rifle chambered in a 30 cal cartridge rather than a 6.5 cartridge... all else being equal of course.

The least amount of recoil possible is better. Yes, I agree with this. Never said I didnt. Whether you like to or not, I hunt with brakes on my rifles because a good side brake makes my 28 nos and 300 win rifles kick like a creedmoor, and my kids shoot them better. However, my optimal "one rifle" scenario, including larger game like elk, does not fully tell the whole story. As ive pointed out, we hunt with a variety of calibers, especially for deer. If I send one of my older boys out on their own, they have their pick of rifles... one prefers my tikka 300win, the other a ridgeline 6.5cm. Both are capable with either, and within their own max yardage capability, either will do the job adequately on deer. Likewise, as I own rifles in 223, 243, 6.5, 7mm, 308, 270, 280ai, 300win, 28nos, not to mention short range or muzzleloader options. I encourage a lot of less experienced hunters to come join our deer camp from time to time, and sometimes I have a lot of my rifles being lent out. Take this year for example, we had 16 new hunters in our camp this year, between myself and 5 other dads and grandpas, all of varying experience and capabilities. I ended up supplying all but 3 of the rifles needed. So, there were hunters from our camp with 308s and 7mms, and 243s. But each knew the capabilities of their particular rifle system. For example, I have a 308 that some of my youngest hunters love, partly because it weighs a ton and has extremely low perceived recoil... but it has a relatively low power scope on it, and I ask the hunters using it in particular to keep shots under 200-250 yards. In fact, under most situations, I dont let my first time hunters shoot beyond 150 yards with any of our rifles... so any hunting caliber will do... (unless I have all the other variables under control, good prone position, I have time to get an accurate range, scope is dialed, kid is comfortable, etc... and even then I will be putting them behind my rifle, and not behind one of our "backup/lender" rifles). So... yes recoil matters, and yes, when yardage constraints dictate shorter ranges due to inexperience, then a 6.5 or other sub 300wm options are excellent choices. However, for ELK at 600 yards, I want to have my 28 nos or 300win with the right bullets.

 

[packgoatguy]

I'm enjoying the train wreck but anyways,

With like starting velocities, .308 155 fmj and .308 155 eldm are going to have nearly identical kps scores at any range. You could sub a 150 e-tip or 150 ttsx in there if you're having spasms over the fmj. Kps will still be nearly identical. Wound channels would be anything but nearly identical.

Yep. No argument there. Bullet selection is important. We have had excellent results with the ELDX bullets on deer and antelope over the years. Mixed results on elk, with the ELDX and Berger EOL. Im thinking about switching the HH or Terminal Ascent for elk this next year. Other great bullets (and cheap) that my Tikkas love are the Fed Fusion.