# Velocity vs. Energy



## KineKilla (Jan 28, 2011)

It seems to me that the majority of info provided for factory and reloading data all use FPS instead of Energy to "sell" or tout their particular bullet's performance.

This past wee while elk hunting we were chatting about long distance shooters and it got me to wondering....even if I could get my bullet to land accurately at a distance, how do I know there is enough energy left to effectively do the job?

Does someone have an easy calculation that can be used to determine retained energy @ yardage and what do you feel is enough to effectively kill an Elk? How about a Muley?

This is assuming absolute perfect shot placement...is 1,400 ft. lbs. too little? 1,000?

I'd like to hear your thoughts....


----------



## BPturkeys (Sep 13, 2007)

The energy calculations are easy, most loading tables provide this.

As to what's enough to kill...this question has been unsuccessfully debated since the dawn of time...


----------



## derekp1999 (Nov 17, 2011)

I have seen ~900ft/lbs used as the minimum on light skinned game by some manufacturer's and publications.


----------



## DallanC (Jan 13, 2009)

Well... bows kill plenty of deer and elk with under 70ft/lbs of energy.

GoldTip recommends 25ft/lbs of energy for deer, 55ft/lbs of energy for anything walking on North America.


-DallanC


----------



## Bax* (Dec 14, 2008)

BPturkeys said:


> The energy calculations are easy, most loading tables provide this.
> 
> As to what's enough to kill...this question has been unsuccessfully debated since the dawn of time...


Sounds like people don't want to believe the 45-70 is still a relevant cartridge today.


----------



## CPAjeff (Dec 20, 2014)

Bax* said:


> Sounds like people don't want to believe the 45-70 is still a relevant cartridge today.


^^^ This! It must be nice being a big game animal now - being impervious to calibers such as the 45-70, 30-30, etc. 

Thank goodness the animals pre-2000's were wimps compared to animals today - mankind may have starved to death!


----------



## High Desert Elk (Aug 21, 2012)

Keep in mind that bullets kill via hemorrhagic shock(wave) and arrows (broadheads) kill by clean slicing and extreme hemmorhage bleeding.

As far as effective kill energy for a bullet, my rule is nothing over 600 yds with under a 140 gr bullet going less than 3,000 fps muzzle velocity.


----------



## KineKilla (Jan 28, 2011)

BPturkeys said:


> The energy calculations are easy, most loading tables provide this.
> 
> As to what's enough to kill...this question has been unsuccessfully debated since the dawn of time...


I haven?t seen this data in my loading tables, thus the question.

I did download a ballistics calculator that shows energy at distance but I struggle with ?enough is enough?

Looks like Barnes? 30-30 ammo begins at 1800ft lbs. which is nowhere near what my 7mm offers at the muzzle...wonder what the 30-30 is at when it gets to 175-200yds.? Not having hunted with one, I?m just speculating on what distance I?d feel comfortable using at.


----------



## High Desert Elk (Aug 21, 2012)

I think most people go with keeping it above 900 ft lbs if they can at impact whether it is 200 or 800 yds.

Of course, I have nothing to back that claim up...

I just know that a 160 gr bullet from a 7 mm WSM will knock a cow elk in her hiney at 606 yds.


----------



## Critter (Mar 20, 2010)

High Desert Elk said:


> I just know that a 160 gr bullet from a 7 mm WSM will knock a cow elk in her hiney at 606 yds.


But if you hit her in the wrong location she will run to the next county.

But then that will happen with just about any round except for a 75mm howitzer.


----------



## colorcountrygunner (Oct 6, 2009)

http://archerycalculator.com/archery-kinetic-energy-and-momentum-calculator/

This is for archery but the calculator will work just fine for rifles as well. Where it says arrow weight, plug in the weight of your projectile and where it says arrow speed plug in the velocity of your projectile and it will give you your kinetic energy figures.


----------



## DallanC (Jan 13, 2009)

Soooooo, what about energy transfer into the animal? A FMJ has as much energy as a soft point bullet of the same weight, but transfers very little energy to the target in the way of damage. The whole 1 hole vs two holes debate. 

Do you want a bullet that expends 30% of its energy making two holes (in one side, out the other) vs a bullet that expands, causes a larger wound channel but expends all its energy in the animal? I've seen deer with massive entrance and exit holes that ran a crazy distance, and I've seen many many deer DRT from a 22-250 that goes off like a bomb inside.

Raw energy is only one consideration with regards to making an ethical kill. Bullet construction and more importantly where you put it, IMO outweigh energy.


-DallanC


----------



## Longgun (Sep 7, 2007)

o-||


----------



## KineKilla (Jan 28, 2011)

Good point Dallan.

Though I have no data to support it, I?d suspect that a soft point would expand better at the lower speeds and energy levels while a bonded or solid would not. 

I wonder then why most ?Long Range? bullets are bonded? Why not just shoot regular core lokts?


----------



## High Desert Elk (Aug 21, 2012)

Hemorrhagic shockwave is what is created as the bullet expends it's energy through soft tissue. The more mass it can retain as it mushrooms is best. This expansion, or mushrooming, is best when done past the hide and shoulder/rib cage.

Critter - 600 yds is as far as I would ever shoot anything. Reason being, too much can go wrong beyond that. The only time I made that shot was a follow-up to keep her from going to the next county up and over a mountain in the process.


----------



## BPturkeys (Sep 13, 2007)

I will say this although...Some place between bouncing off the game and total vaporization is "enough to kill".


----------



## derekp1999 (Nov 17, 2011)

"Shooting Holes in Wounding Theory" - http://www.rathcoombe.net/sci-tech/ballistics/wounding.html

Pretty interesting read. Sections I, II, and III are excellent... read those first. Then read the section specific to your caliber of choice.


----------



## DallanC (Jan 13, 2009)

Longgun said:


> o-||


Hahaha you saw what I did right there :mrgreen:

-DallanC


----------



## BPturkeys (Sep 13, 2007)

derekp1999 said:


> "Shooting Holes in Wounding Theory" - http://www.rathcoombe.net/sci-tech/ballistics/wounding.html
> 
> Pretty interesting read. Sections I, II, and III are excellent... read those first. Then read the section specific to your caliber of choice.


This is interesting and for the most part agrees with just about every argument ever put forth. Every hunter that has killed a lot of big game animals will agree with some part of this article at some point and will recall "kills" matching nearly every example given.

Good read.


----------



## moabxjeeper (Dec 18, 2012)

I've always enjoyed the writing of Chuck Hawks. This is what he's said on the subject;

"Kinetic energy, the ability to do work (or in this case damage), is the most common measure of killing power for rifle bullets. And it is, in fact, a reasonable indicator. But it is by no means the only factor, or even the most important factor. Energy gives us an idea of how much power there is to initiate things like bullet expansion and penetration, but does not guarantee that they will occur.

It is generally recommended that a small bore (.24-.32 caliber) rifle bullet suitable for medium size (CXP2 class) game be carrying about *800 ft. lbs. of kinetic energy when it hits*. Energy is greatest at the muzzle, and diminishes as the bullet loses velocity. When the velocity reaches zero, so does the energy. But long before that the bullet has fallen below the recommended level of energy for reliably killing deer size animals. So the practical hunting range of any cartridge is ultimately limited by how much energy remains. (It is also limited by other factors, for example trajectory, but that is another subject.)

As an example, let's take a .30-30 rifle firing a Federal factory load with a 150 grain bullet at a muzzle velocity of 2,390 fps. At the muzzle that bullet carries 1,900 ft. lbs. of energy. At 100 yards the energy has fallen to 1,355 ft. lbs. At 200 yards the energy is down to 945 ft. lbs. At 300 yards the energy has fallen to only 650 ft. lbs., which is below our 800 ft. lb. minimum. The velocity, by the way, is down to 1400 fps at 300 yards. One could conclude that the .30-30 is about a 200+ yard deer cartridge, based on its energy, and one would be right."

Source: http://www.chuckhawks.com/rifle_bullet_killing_power.htm

I highlighted the part that I think helps answer your question best.

We can assume that a bullet should have bare minimum 800 ft lbs of energy upon impact of deer-sized game to initiate reliable expansion. A standard Winchester Super X 243 100gr bullet delivers 882 ft lbs of energy at 400 yards. We could call that the maximum effective range for that particular bullet. This is not taking into account other factors such as velocity and bullet drop.

I hunt with a 7mm Rem Mag and the bullets I use still retain about 1300 ft lbs @ 500 yards. I'm sure I'd probably be good out to 700 yards or so if we're following the 800 ft lb rule, but my personal comfort zone is limited to about 400 yards. I've shot many big game animals within that range and haven't had one go further than maybe a few steps.


----------



## swbuckmaster (Sep 14, 2007)

This year I spent alot of time at lee k shooting and perfecting little groups of holes at 300 yards. One thing I noticed is the majority of the guys shooting wizzim mags suck! They can't hit a pie plate at a 100 yards and have no buisness shooting any further. I saw so many guys resting their barrel on the carpet blocks or other crap. I saw flinching yanking triggers ect. I can't tell you how many times I heard where did that one go.

These are the same guys that will tell you that you need a 300 wizzim mag to kill anything. My guess is these guys need the wizzims for follow up shots on missed or previous gut shot animals. Mean while my little 
.243 keeps dropping elk, deer, antelope ect with one shot drt results. So i guess I'll take shot placment, knowing my rifle drop, wind, energy charts and terminal bullet characteristics over those guys caliber and goober rifle knowledge. 



Sent from my SM-G900V using Tapatalk


----------



## moabxjeeper (Dec 18, 2012)

swbuckmaster said:


> .243 keeps dropping elk, deer, antelope ect with one shot drt results. So i guess I'll take shot placment, knowing my rifle drop, wind, energy charts and terminal bullet characteristics over those guys caliber and goober rifle knowledge.


What bullets do you use for the 243 and what are your normal ranges? My dad and I went in on a 243 together a few years ago but haven't taken it deer hunting yet for fear of seeing a nice buck a little further out and not feeling confident in taking it down. I'm sure the very first deer we end up shooting with it will change our minds however.

But I wholeheartedly agree. My old boss used a 300 Remington Ultra Mag... for deer... and would repeatedly knock the tried and true 30-06 as "old technology". His gun has a heavy bull barrel with a scope so large it stretches the length of the entire gun. He told me it weighs about 20 pounds. He shot a deer at 300 yards with it and pretty well ruined an entire quarter. It wasn't long after that that he started asking me about the 30-06 again.


----------



## High Desert Elk (Aug 21, 2012)

There have probably been more animals kilt with less than a magnum load than with, and out of those, a tremendous amount with a 30-30.


----------



## middlefork (Nov 2, 2008)

derekp1999 said:


> "Shooting Holes in Wounding Theory" - http://www.rathcoombe.net/sci-tech/ballistics/wounding.html
> 
> Pretty interesting read. Sections I, II, and III are excellent... read those first. Then read the section specific to your caliber of choice.


Thanks for that link. Shot placement has a lot to do with end results.


----------



## swbuckmaster (Sep 14, 2007)

moabxjeeper said:


> What bullets do you use for the 243 and what are your normal ranges? My dad and I went in on a 243 together a few years ago but haven't taken it deer hunting yet for fear of seeing a nice buck a little further out and not feeling confident in taking it down. I'm sure the very first deer we end up shooting with it will change our minds however.
> 
> But I wholeheartedly agree. My old boss used a 300 Remington Ultra Mag... for deer... and would repeatedly knock the tried and true 30-06 as "old technology". His gun has a heavy bull barrel with a scope so large it stretches the length of the entire gun. He told me it weighs about 20 pounds. He shot a deer at 300 yards with it and pretty well ruined an entire quarter. It wasn't long after that that he started asking me about the 30-06 again.


It's a .243AI 108 grain hornady eld match going 3106 fps. 1 Deer and 2 antelope have been taken with this combo at 200, 295 and 300. Bang flop results

When it was a regular .243 my kids shot 95 grain federals at deer and I believe a 100 grain soft point at cow elk. They killed 3 bucks and one cow elk. Shots on deer were out to 350 yards. Elk was 100 yards. Elk was bang pause nose dive. One of the deer took more then a step and It was a 2 point buck shot at 310 yards. It was shot right as it crested a steep hill and the bullet went just in front of its junk. I did not advise the shot! One of the teenage boys in our group said shoot and my 10 year old daughter shot. Luckily the buck turned and came across the hill. My daughter hit it in the face at 350 yards on a dead run and stopped it. Missed the third shot and heart shot it on the last shot. Not that many girls at that age could work the bolt and hit anything at that distance but my girls shoot alot.

Without wind I wouldn't hesitate to shoot an antelope out to 600 to 700 yards with this gun and deer out to 600. I would keep elk under 200 yards because their so big.

My energy chart for the 108 grain bullet still has 822 foot pounds at a 1000 yards. I've verified the drops out to 1256 yards. Took second place in a long range competition at my first tournament I've ever shot in shooting moa targets out to 1000 yards.

Sent from my SM-G900V using Tapatalk


----------



## DallanC (Jan 13, 2009)

moabxjeeper said:


> What bullets do you use for the 243 and what are your normal ranges? My dad and I went in on a 243 together a few years ago but haven't taken it deer hunting yet for fear of seeing a nice buck a little further out and not feeling confident in taking it down. I'm sure the very first deer we end up shooting with it will change our minds however.


Thats pretty much all my wife shoots, its been a very impressive fantastic caliber. We load up 100gr Nosler Partitions, ranges have been thus far, under 250 yards. Big exit holes in everything including caribou.

PS: if you are worried about longer distances, not that I advocate long shots, closer = better, nor am I saying a 243 is fine for elk.... but well just say'n...






243 on a cow elk at 688 yards.

-DallanC


----------



## High Desert Elk (Aug 21, 2012)

Partitions and AB's are really all I use anymore.


----------



## KineKilla (Jan 28, 2011)

My son shot his first muley (actually every deer he?s ever shot) with his .243 slinging 100gr. Core-Lokts. Shot it at 325 yards and it didn?t go more than 20 yards before it fell dead.

I?ve since loaded up some 90gr Accubonds for it but he isn?t going hunting this year.

No clue what the retained energy is at any range for that load.


----------



## Longgun (Sep 7, 2007)

300 wizzim? I like it, mind if I use the term when I build my next 30Cal Mag? :mrgreen: 



Shot placement...
Shot placement...
Shot placement...
Shot placement...
Shot placement...
Shot placement...
Shot placement...
Shot placement...


----------



## BPturkeys (Sep 13, 2007)

When I hunt deer, I always use my ranger finder and creep to a prescribed distance from the deer before I shoot. I feel it is vitally important to get to one of the distances defined in the loading tables so I know how fast that bullet is traveling when if smashes into the deer. I have often wondered what happens in the distances in between the steps on the tables. On occasion I have found it better to back up a few paces if the terrain going forward is prohibitive. This is particularly the case since I have jumped up to a little lighter weight bullet in the old 38-55...the added velocity affords a much flatter shooting rifle(the deer seem to prefer the higher velocities also). One of the biggest challenges in hunting is to get them dammb deers to hold still long enough for me to get into place. I just get the ballistics calculated and they invariably move...dammb their hides. I recall 4 years ago down in the Book Cliffs, Bobby Lacque, Frank Seez and myself had been chasing a true monster for almost 6 days, a real game of cat-in-mouse. He'd move, my spotter(frank) would re-calc, and he'd move again...dammb his Roman nose...and we'd start all over again. Well, to make a long story short, after days of this foolishness, I finally had him at an exact known distance, broadside for perfect shot placement...and click...Bobby had handed me an empty gun. Off he ran, never to be seen again.


----------



## moabxjeeper (Dec 18, 2012)

DallanC said:


> Thats pretty much all my wife shoots, its been a very impressive fantastic caliber. We load up 100gr Nosler Partitions, ranges have been thus far, under 250 yards. Big exit holes in everything including caribou.
> 
> PS: if you are worried about longer distances, not that I advocate long shots, closer = better, nor am I saying a 243 is fine for elk.... but well just say'n...
> 
> ...


Haha, I knew this video would come up eventually. That is really impressive. But man, so much can go wrong at that range and especially with that small of a caliber for elk. I always see videos like that, shooting deer and elk at ridiculous ranges, and I hear hunters brag about their amazing shooting abilities. But I always think, what they don't tell you is how many they hit in the leg or gut shot or whatever the case may be and never saw them again.


----------



## Pumpgunner (Jan 12, 2010)

moabxjeeper said:


> Haha, I knew this video would come up eventually. That is really impressive. But man, so much can go wrong at that range and especially with that small of a caliber for elk. I always see videos like that, shooting deer and elk at ridiculous ranges, and I hear hunters brag about their amazing shooting abilities. But I always think, what they don't tell you is how many they hit in the leg or gut shot or whatever the case may be and never saw them again.


I've been thinking about this a lot lately. I'm not ever going to tell anyone how to hunt, I think that we all have the freedom to hunt however we choose and in a way that suits our abilities. For me, the satisfaction in hunting comes from getting as close to my target as possible, even when my rifle is capable of much more. My personal longest kill ever was about 240 yards, which is a chip shot for a lot of guys. Most of my rifle kills with a .30-06 have been right around 200, some as close as 30 yards, and my cow elk this year was right at 65. I consider myself an average rifle shot at best. I do have to wonder though at what point it goes from "hunting" to "shooting". In my opinion if you are taking 500+ yard shots then you're a lot more on the shooting side than the hunting side. Not saying that's wrong, if you have the skill to reliably make those shots then go for it. That gal in the video made quite an impressive shot, and from what I could see they couldn't get a whole lot closer with those elk where they were. Too much margin for error for me to be comfortable though!

On another note, I don't think I'll ever fully understand the mechanics of what it takes to reliably kill game. Obviously both energy and velocity are important, but who knows which in what measure? Think about a shotgun vs. small game-the pellets are dumping very little energy into the body and mostly kill through puncturing vitals and causing blood loss and nervous system interruption, but ducks shot with a shotgun still die pretty reliably. However I wouldn't want to rely on a bullet that on a big game animal that didn't carry a lot of energy into the animal's body! The first elk I ever shot was at about 40 yards, the bullet went straight through the heart, tearing it in half and exiting out the other side. When we gutted it the liver was completely liquified due to the hydrostatic shock-that made quite an impression on me!


----------



## RandomElk16 (Sep 17, 2013)

moabxjeeper said:


> But I always think, what they don't tell you is how many they hit in the leg or gut shot or whatever the case may be and never saw them again.


This literally happens at all ranges.

I am not advocating long range.. but this always comes up. There is a big difference between someone shooting at a range that they are comfortable with, using equipment that they know works; and someone just shooting further than they are comfortable with and knowing little about ballistics.

Someone who is proficient at shooting long distances and has a great understanding of ballistics doesn't have all these issues that get brought up in long range hunting threads (or bashing distance threads). It is people who are simply put, "slingin lead".

We talk about how much orange you need in Utah, people shooting eachother, bullets wizzing by us, people using scopes as binos, wanton waste, poaching... Just like politics, sometimes something that is the small issue gets pointed at the most. Long range isn't the issue, ethics is. Now distance might be an ethic for some, but I think we probably can all agree it is ethically wrong to shoot an animal at distances further than you shoot a target.

If you haven't practiced shooting much past 200, but post you shot this deer at 300, no one bats an eye. If you have practiced shooting out to 1700 yards with multiple weapons all the time, and shoot an animal at 6-700 yards, everyone loses their mind.

I ethically think it's wrong for people to hunt year after year without going to the range to check their weapon. "It was fine last year"... However, I don't push at this. To each their own. I just believe the larger issues that we face with hunting, and bad practices, are where focus should be. I read far more threads with negative focus on long range hunting then I do on poaching....


----------



## DallanC (Jan 13, 2009)

moabxjeeper said:


> Haha, I knew this video would come up eventually.


Lol, yea I look for an excuse to link it about once a year. :mrgreen:



> That is really impressive. But man, so much can go wrong at that range and especially with that small of a caliber for elk. I always see videos like that, shooting deer and elk at ridiculous ranges, and I hear hunters brag about their amazing shooting abilities. But I always think, what they don't tell you is how many they hit in the leg or gut shot or whatever the case may be and never saw them again.


Or that the shooter's dad owns gunworkz and the entire company of engineers was there to make the calculations and set the gun up for her. Did you see how far the drop was on that bullet? Wowzers... look at the shot frame by frame and you can see the bullet trail.

-DallanC


----------



## RandomElk16 (Sep 17, 2013)

DallanC said:


> Or that the shooter's dad owns gunworkz and the entire company of engineers was there to make the calculations and set the gun up for her. Did you see how far the drop was on that bullet? Wowzers... look at the shot frame by frame and you can see the bullet trail.
> 
> -DallanC


Isn't that GreyBull? Which is John Burns, still a recognizable name in long range.

Gunworks video that always gets posted is when his 12 year old shoots an elk at almost 1400 yards.

Here is the thing, the rangefinders they use alone are around 2k, not to mention the rifle scope combo's going up to near 10 grand. Add in the years of experience not only shooting long range, but actually building these custom rifles to perfect long range.

They literally remove so many variables its insane. That 12 year old has shot more than most 50 year olds. Same with this gal, she has seat time and as mentioned, every calculation is complete.

Again, far different than Bob and the boys holding over 4 feet and hoping it hits.


----------



## Packout (Nov 20, 2007)

What all the long range banger videos fail to show are the mishaps and lost critters. It does them no good to show a lost, gut shot elk at 720 yards with a 6.5 creedmore. Unfortunately, in my business I see and hear way too many stories about loss and the behind the scenes goings-on.... But back to the original topic--

I am all about transfer of energy. But velocity can have some real effects too. A 22-250 shot deer can jellify the organs like no other caliber I have ever seen.

What does a gut shot elk with a 25-06 and a gut shot elk with a 338 Mag have in common? They are both just gut shot elk.....

..


----------



## LostLouisianian (Oct 11, 2010)

Packout said:


> What all the long range banger videos fail to show are the mishaps and lost critters. It does them no good to show a lost, gut shot elk at 720 yards with a 6.5 creedmore. Unfortunately, in my business I see and hear way too many stories about loss and the behind the scenes goings-on.... But back to the original topic--
> 
> I am all about transfer of energy. But velocity can have some real effects too. A 22-250 shot deer can jellify the organs like no other caliber I have ever seen.
> 
> ...


BINGO !!!!


----------



## Longgun (Sep 7, 2007)

er um, shot placement...


----------



## KineKilla (Jan 28, 2011)

Longgun said:


> er um, shot placement...


My original post included the caveat that shot placement was perfect in all instances.

I was just curious how much energy everyone felt was sufficient to get the job done. Sounds like some say 900-1,000ft lbs. is the lowest they'd go...I'd say for me it is still a bit higher than that.

My Nosler Accubonds say they are designed to expand at speeds between 1,800 and 3,000fps +, so maybe for me using that bullet the energy doesn't matter as much as the velocity.


----------



## Longgun (Sep 7, 2007)

I saw that... just reinforcing the obvious.  


I agree, a good controlled expansion type bullet is the norm for me also but that being said, anything on this continent can be killed with a 22LR.


----------



## swbuckmaster (Sep 14, 2007)

https://www.outdoorlife.com/why-hun...h-and-why-its-all-wrong?src=SOC&dom=fb#page-2

Sent from my SM-G900V using Tapatalk


----------



## colorcountrygunner (Oct 6, 2009)

RandomElk16 said:


> Isn't that GreyBull? Which is John Burns, still a recognizable name in long range.
> 
> Gunworks video that always gets posted is when his 12 year old shoots an elk at almost 1400 yards.
> 
> ...


All that money and time spent just so someone can go out there and forego hunting and have a nice little "shoot." Okay. Self-righteous comment made. I'm out.


----------

