You Sr are a great man to listen to. You explain to people in ways that are easy to understand. I have been a gunsmith over 10 years and a competitive shooter. And I can not explain things to the simplicity that you have. My hats off to you.
I think a good example of how kinetic energy does not represent killing power is the simple arrow. Most of the time it will travel clean through a deer with comparatively much slower velocity and with not that much weight (or mass) but because it has tremendous sectional density combined with tissue destruction from the broad head will easily dispatch a deer. When talking about bullets it must have enough velocity to mushroom at impact velocity and that velocity must be enough to penetrate the vitals of the animal. Yes an exit is desirable for a blood trail but the animal will go down with a well placed shot. Shooting a block of ballistic gel at 10 yards does not represent what happens at 200 or 300 yards. It's fine for handgun calibers but NOT big game hunting bullets.
Denis LeBlanc if anyone ever wants to argue this fill up a 5gallon bucket with sand. Shoot an arrow 250+FPS (maybe even slower) into it then shoot your average deer rifle (270, 30.06, 308) into another bucket of sand and see which penetrates farther. The arrow wins every time
In sweden, weapons are divided into classes (1-4 and shotgun). Klass 1, the highest, are 9 gram bullet with 2700j or 10 gram at 2000j (at 100m), the bullet also has to be expanding. If either weight, energy or bullet composition is wrong it will be klassed lower, probably just klass 2 or even 3. So even if a 8gr bullet has the energy at 100m and is expanding, it will never be klass 1. Klass 1 is all game in sweden, bear, moose etc.
A good comment but please translate into normal units of measurement. We use grains, feet per second, yards and so on because they are all perfectly fine enough and interconnected to make calculations easier. And this is coming from someone who uses metric for other purposes. It is not “old fashioned” to use imperial, it is perfectly adapted to ballistics.
These lectures are so much better presented and researched than the ones I spent big $$ on when getting my degree in college. This man is in it for the love of the game. You da man GB490
Just had a discussion with a TH-camr about the six five Creedmoor versus the 308 Winchester. He was trying to tell me that the 139 grain 6.5 Creedmoor had more kinetic energy then the 308 Winchester at a thousand yards. I was trying to explain to him about sectional density and the actual bullet Construction and they got all bent out of shape. Thanks for the competent explanation of kinetic energy. I always learn something new when watching you and your videos. Keep up the good work, hope Benny's doing great!
Let's just say you run a 6.5 creed 140gr at 2750 and a .308 168 gr at 2600 fps that is a preaty accurate idea on velocity give or take 50 fps depending on temp and barrel length the 6.5 creed averages more than 100 ft pounds more ke at 1k.
@@xxshooterxxdm kinetic energy does not kill tissue damage does. The 168 grain is a heavier bullet with greater sectional density which will penetrate bone and Hyde an inner thorax tissue easier and do more damage.
Great treatise on this topic sir! For anyone wanting the skinny on calculating bullet kinetic energy, the basic formula is: KE = 0.5*m*(v^2). You have to keep your units sorted out in the imperial system, so: m = mass in slugs ( for a bullet in grains, m = (gr/7000)/32.2 yielding the slug unit of: (lb*s^2)/ft; and for velocity: v = velocity in units of ft/s.
This is an EXCELLENT presentation. "do not look at energy in a vacuum." A very fast small diameter bullet does less damage than a slower moving, heavier, larger diameter bullet. That's why a 9mm doesn't compare in any way to a 357 magnum round. Similar diameter but the magnum is going faster and is often times heavier.
There are a number of these videos that should be required for every shooter, especially the hunters. I would love to spend a week or two following Mr GunBlue around and listening to his take on what he knows about firearms that hasn't yet been put into a video. Yeah, that would be a blast!
I always thought ft. pounds was more for math nerds than hunters. These were great comparisons. I was just reading an article. It was a comparison of the .308 Winchester to the 6.5 Creedmoor. They said the Creedmoor had a trajectory advantage at 400 and 500 yards. I couldn’t help but laugh. Ive never hunted big game, but I’ve always enjoyed shooting at practical hunting distances at the range. I worry that many gun writers are encouraging irresponsible behavior. Thank you for the video!
I agree with you. A big moose at 400 meters is still a very far target. With any firearm, including big ones, a good wind will carry the bullet out of vital area and wound with lots less energy. Too much publicity made on sniper performances and half-mile kills.
Energy is the ability to do work. Think of an electrical analogy: 2kW-hrs is enough energy to exert 2kw power for an hour. Or 120kW for a minute. Or 7200kW for a second. Now, which of those will cook a steak the fastest? What we care about is power-not energy. Power is the rate at which work is done. In our case, the “work” of crushing and displacing tissue. Whichever bullet “does more work” is the more effective hunting choice. The more work done in less time, the more power. This is why 5.56 ball rounds that fragment can be so deadly even compared to larger calibers: fragmentation is a much more efficient means of tissue damage than crushing is. Slicing is also far more efficient, which is why a bow hunter can easily take deer despite having half the energy of a 9mm handgun.
a 45 A.C.P. with a at 5" barrel has about 100 miles per seconds over a 3 inch barrel (800 vs 900) how much difference would that make in the case of a black bear or cougar? ( these are the largest pistols I have) Thanks
KE=1/2*m*v^2 units of KE is joule or newton*meter or foot*pound Force=m*a units of force is newton, kilogram or pound Energy deposited by the bullet is KE initial minus KE final. An armor piercing bullet has a less likely chance of slowing down compared to a jacketed hollow point. As a bullet mushrooms, it slows down meaning Energy lost by the bullet is not uniform through the the object. Look at ballistic gel and see a small entry hole then as the bullet mushrooms it slows down quickly and gives significant energy to the surrounding medium. The pressure drop across the bullet (front to back) is also part of the damage caused. You can’t cause tissue damage without energy but you can damage a whole lot of tissue an do no significant damage. If the bullet misses target and does not slow down significantly then little energy is deposited and little damage is created. Thats where bullet design is very important. You need to deposit the energy (cause tissue damage) in the animal for the energy a bullet has to be effective. Conclusion, energy is important and the more you have, the more damage you can do. Also, just because you have energy doesn’t mean you put that energy where you want it.
May I ask, is there a downside to having a rifle barrel longer than standard, if one does not want to use magnum cartridges? I've been lurking, watching dozens of your videos, and digesting your comments about magnum powders needing to be slower-burning and therefore being incompletely burnt when shot through, say, 16" barrels. But what about the converse? If a regular cartridge's powder is completely consumed in a 22" barrel, what happens if one uses the equivalent rifle with a 26" barrel, or to be absurd, a 36" barrel? And BTW, kudos for your courage in sharing your faith!
Bill Karkow I'm no expert or theorist but I'd suspect that at the point all powder has been burned in a barrel, that then begins a slight slowing&loss of energy from friction within the barrel, increasing incrementally with each inch of excess length. I'd like to hear someone truly knowledgeable explain if this is indeed the case.
I know of velocity tests done with .22 long rifle ammunition. The tests resulted in showing the optimum length barrel for best velocity was 16 inches. The small amount of powder involved had spent its expansion of gases by then and after 16 inches the bullet began to slow down. I would suspect the same to happen in any other firearm.
I have to agree with him. Family member inherited my grandfather's 243 win. And for years he used a 308 Remington 760. he has killed many deer with it. In the area we hunt it is fairly thick and you can't see past 75 yds. He usually had the same shot year after year precise shot in the the right area the deer would get hit and run about 20 to 50 yds. and drop. tried all different loading the effect was the same with complete pass through of course. Well he decided to take out the old 243 which was grandpa's favorite round to reload. Same shot and area, he pulled the trigger, the deer instantly dropped in it's tracks. He thought well just a fluke. So he did it several more times in years to come needless to say that 100 gr. bullet never ever exited. less meat damage, more on the table. The 308 is now in the cabinet to be passed down, and collecting dust. One would think the killing power would be greater due to the damage we seen to the meat. This explains it to me know thanks for the understanding Sir.
Although kynetic bullet energy is not the end-all of killing power, the wound channels that we see in ballistic gel are quite telling in showing that tissue destruction is not created by the bullet alone. The shock wave sent out by the energy can in fact destroy tissue that would not be bruised by the bullet itself. Energy per se can induce bleeding and shock, quite apart from bullet sectional density. The point here is well taken that energy will not compensate for bad bullet placement, but with similar bullet placement, energy will make a big difference. That's the point with African calibers. You do not stop a charging bull without big energy. Stopping power can be very useful.
Recently started following your channel for great content. Would you be able to do a video discussing 308 vs 6.5 Creedmoor specifically for large game? I'm in Alaska and hunt primarily moose and caribou and would like to get a new hunting rifle. I would still use my 300 win mag for things with claws and sharp teeth. Thanks so much and have a great day!
I would take both those rounds off the list. Neither are particularly great for your game and hunting ranges. The only two rounds I could possibly recommend for you are either the 270 Winchester or 280 Remington, loaded with 130 or 140 grain bullets respectively. Either have the range of your 300 Magnum, with the correct sectional density for deep penetration. Knowing that you have no issues with the 300 Winchester, I'd go with the 280 Remington, hands down, and wouldn't look back at little brass cases. Big moose? Use 150 or 160 grain bullets in the 280.
If there was ever a time that the outdoor sports and shooting fraternity was in serious shame and jeopardy, it is the present. We need a serious campaign engine that can set the records straight, police the shooting industry's manufacture and marketing practices, including the NRA's responsibilities need to be re-defined entirely. I do believe you have the power to connect with today's respected and published shooting and hunting icons and form a band to combat the irresponsible nonsense and recklessness that has entered our hobby, our livelihood and the future of the entire shooting sports arena. We know you can do it..and we are all behind you in supporting this effort. You are one of the very few masters left, albeit, we can't defeat the capitalism that energizes and feeds the reckless of today, but we can at least start a national coast to coast campaign to rid our shooting sports of recklessness abandon. And we can not count on the NRA's support of this mission...which should be one of our first targets of change. All the Best-
Deer may only be taken with a legal firearm using a minimum legal firearm calibre of not less than 6mm, which is capable of delivering a projectile having kinetic energy of 1350 joules at a distance of 100 metres from the rifle. It is suggested a calibre .243 or greater be used. This is straight from the Department of Primary Industries Parks Water and Environment website here in Tasmania, Australia. Now looking at the figures for my .44 Mag 16in barrel lever action firing a 240g xtp @ 1600fps 3 yards from the muzzle produces only 1229 joules @100m! Base on this, it is not legal to use on Fallow Deer as it does not meet the minimum requirements. So the old .44 mag is a wounding round.....just like the 30-30 Winchester lol 🤔 Another good incite into ballistics Gunblue490 😊
Sounds like you need the new 350 Legend from Winchester lol hello from QLD 🦌 classic greeny legislation. Funny isn't it 44 MAG has been plenty of cartridge on deer forever I've taken reds with it easy under 100m. Have fun
Here in colorado the firearm must be .244 caliber or greater and produce 1000 foot pounds of energy at 100 yards to legally hunt with. I have hunted elk with a .357 magnum pistol because it was legal to hunt with a handgun with less power but I could not hunt the elk with my .357 rifle that produces more power.
Point taken. Energy values are meaningless if not discussed in the context of the other directly related critical data. However, the killing potential of any projectile or shot can be more thoroughly analyzed if energy enters into the discussion. For example, if you fix all other parameters then energy alone could be used to describe the killing potential. The fixed parameters would still have to be known and considered.
I just found your channel last week. Thank you for all the work you've put into these videos, the history parts I enjoy the most. And thank you for all the mistakes you admit to ,to get to this level of knowledge. P.s Being from NH? and mentioning central Ma, do you know Ted from Cabelas? He's been a wealth of knowledge thus far for me. You both have this vast Historical knowledge of Firearms and it's possible you've cross paths.
Been trying to tell all my buddy’s this is why my little 6.5 Grendel that’s velocity challenged is still dropping deer at 300yds just as good as their full size cartridges. I’ve heard so many times that thing only has 1600ft lbs of energy and you need 1000ft lbs to kill a deer. In the right conditions I’d be confident in shooting a deer out to 450-500yds with it. But I like to keep it inside 300yds if possible
It's good to hear you want to keep your shots within 300 yards. I believe if you have to shoot further than that you are not a hunter you are just a shooter.
Energy value is a "measurement" of potential power at a given distance. Different bullets and velocities absolutely have different potential energy which is a part of the tissue destruction necessary for a quick kill. You have good points but in comparing the energy of a number of cartridges you were not comparing their energy all at the same distance. All the points you made such as destructive potential are viable and necessary but even an expanding bullet must have enough velocity and energy to create the potential for tissue destruction, otherwise you may as well be throwing rocks. Any bullet, no matter what caliber, must impart its energy into the target, otherwise you have low or no penetration or a pass through with little tissue damage and small or no temporary cavity. So, whether you have a 22-250 humming at 4000 ft/sec or a 30-30 scootin' at 2400, each has a time in space with approximately the same potential energy but not necessarily the same potential for tissue damage. Energy is a huge factor when it comes to the killing potential of a bullet. While it may be just a number on paper, when you consider target mass and density, distance, velocity and bullet mass, energy speaks volumes about a bullet's performance. For Instance: I carry a 9mm handgun for personal protection. While a 115gr bullet at standard pressure might have a higher velocity than a 124gr, I am certain beyond a doubt that the 124gr will impart more energy into the target causing greater tissue damage to an attacker potentially ending the fight sooner. Although bullet energy may be misunderstood by most, and I very likely, do no understand it completely, it is a big part of how a bullet does its job.
I'd like to add that many hollow points have a minimum threshold of fps in order to expand properly... without the neccessary energy it'll fail to completely mushroom.
Dear Sir, I completely understand your argument about energy and "killing power". I do however have an argument somewhat different. Here goes; If I were to throw a baseball at you from say 20 yards and hit you in the head it would probably knock you down and possibly knock you out. Then if I were to take the same baseball and shot it from a cannon increasing velocity a lot, when it hit your head it would remove your head." In this case it is shown velocity creates more energy thus more knock down power. In the history of the US all the dangerous game were harvested by black powder firearms with low velocity but they used mass of the bullet for knock down power. This applies to this day. The mass much like sectional density, increases penetration upon impact with the target causing a deep wound channel. One law of physics shows the faster a projectile goes the faster it slows down. So a light bullet traveling rapidly will be surpassed in velocity at some point down range by a heavy bullet started at a slower velocity. Thank You, I very much enjoy your sight. I have loaded and hunted for around 52 years and still have much to learn.
Enjoyed it, cleared up some misgivings about foot lbs energy stats. P.S. You need a "on air" sign so the cleaning lady holds off until the end of the video ;)
What .380 auto guns do you recommend? Easy to rack, least recoil. I am asking for older female - recoil sensitive, arthritic hands. Also what .380 self defense rounds do you recommend? Thats why I asked before if .22 magnum in kel-tec pmr30 would be good for self defense.
That's really a personal decision she must make, because it must fit her and be comfortable to grasp, with correct length of pull. The larger the better, especially in the grip, but it absolutely must fit her. Most 380s are blowback design of light weight, and smaller ones can be quite uncomfortable to shoot due to their tiny grip frames and low mass. I consider a safety absolutely mandatory, especially if carried in a handbag, but even then, it should not be loose with other articles.
For an elderly person I would recommend a revolver in 38 Special. Any semiautomatic is going to be tough for anyone with weak hands. Revolvers are easier to understand as well. Open the cylinder, fill it with cartridges, close it and it's ready to fire. Just pull the trigger. You could get a revolver chambered for 22 long rifle for her to start with. Then work her way up. If she's too sensitive to handle the 38 special, try to find a revolver chambered in 32. 32 H&R Magnum is mild, and the same gun could use the 32 S&W Long, which is lighter still. A revolver in 22 Magnum would be a possibility, but keep in mind that any pistol bullet smaller than .35 caliber tend to take multiple shots to stop a determined attacker. The good news is that most baddies aren't that determined and will turn tail and run at the sight of a gun, especially if a couple bullets go their direction, so ultimately a 22 is better than nothing... just make it a revolver.
I really have been enjoying your videos and I can’t help but think of your TH-cam name. I’m curious, the 490 in your name is that related to your police officer number when you graduated from the academy?
I understand the difference between a small caliber lighter bullet at a high velocity and a larger and heavier bullet at a lower velocity. But if you have two bullets of the same caliber and even the same type, is there any particular difference in tissue destruction between the lighter bullet at a higher speed which has approximately the same certain kinetic energy as a heavier one at a lower speed?
Energy is defined as "the ability to do work". Higher energy means the bullet has the potential to do more "work", but it's only one aspect of what kills. The work that bullets do is tissue destruction, so a bullet with more energy, it has more potential to damage tissue. However, if you gave a needle 1,000ft/lbs of energy, it will obviously damage less tissue than a baseball with 50 ft/lbs. Bullet design, and therefore how that energy gets TRANSFERRED is obviously the most important factor.
Is there a reason for repeating my comments? All energy is transfered from one mass to another, but it's only traumatic energy that kills. A six pound pillow that strikes a child and transfers it's entire energy is child's play. A 32 ounce hammer blow swung at the same speed transfers much less energy, but when struck upon the skull can be a fatal blow to a five hundred pound beast, because of its destructive effect upon tissue, and for no other reason. Bullets only kill because they destroy living tissue because of the energy that drives them into tissue AND renders trauma while doing so, not because they simply transfer energy to tissue. It's what work the energy accomplishes that makes all the difference in the world.
Got my Ballistic training for the evening. I like to find any humor that I can in the vids. "The Kinetic energy of a 195 lb. basketball player with his shorts on". LOL.. Like if he didn't have them on people would notice his kinetic energy is less.
In other video you say do not recommend glock. There is after market safety for glock, do you recommend to put that on the gun and after that do you recommend glock ?
A 180 grain target bullet has the same energy as a 180 grain hunting bullet.. out of the same barrel..if energy killed game i guess id use target bullets and save a little money
Jesse Busby Ima have to save this quote. Really dumbs it down. I know this, just never thought about using this comparison when explaining to others. Now I got a little ammo next time someone wants to argue that Kinetic energy is what kills. Thanks
Apples to oranges --- A match bullet is a full metal jacket. The purpose of a full metal jacket is to penetrate. The purpose of a soft point/hollow point hunting bullet is to expand. I can see how you would be confused after watching this video. The simple question is will a 180 grain hunting bullet with a HIGH energy have more or less killing power than another 180 grain hunting bullet with LOW energy? The answer is obvious. Bullet energy is an excellent way of measuring killing power, if you keep everything else constant. If you keep the energy constant and compare apples to oranges, like you did above and he did in the video, it becomes nonsensical. Good luck!
@@conebread711 well. Think you missed the point..a match bullet of 180 grains has the SAME energy as a 180 grain hunting bullet..which will kill more efficiently? You simply don't know what your arguing here
@@jessebusby7685 I get it. If you measure two different things, and they measure is the same, they will still be as different as they were before you measured them. That is what GunBlue490 said repeatedly. The title of the video, Understanding Bullet Energy ~ It's Not a Measure of Killing Power!, is not always true. For example -- energy is an excellent measurement of killing power, when comparing the exact same bullet at different velocities.
I loaded countless thousands of nickel plated 38 Special cases on a Star Universal reloading press that went through one single carbide die for my department. Full length rifle dies are protected by the case lube. The plating is not hard chrome; it's nickel. Plated cases don't respond well to annealing. However, it makes no difference, because plated cases have a much shorter reloading life. Standard brass cases are the best for reloading. Plated cases serve well for police service because they don't tarnish in daily use, but have no particular value apart from that, as they cost more. I did a video on annealing that will answer all your questions.
Hello @GunBlue490 i'm new to the channel and an avid 22. lr shooter. I'm doing my research into defensive arms and would love to hear yours or anyone elses thoughts on the 5.7x28mm used by the Fn five-seven. As a defensive carry gun. I realize its a new round and most of the rounds designed for special use have over the years been proven non sense. I was considering it for its low recoil - high capacity - good penetration. I realize being such a small round at such high velocity, its likely to simply pass threw a target. In some sense that is its intended purpose. One big con is the price of ammo is very high.
If sectional density, bullet weight and bullet velocity is what matters most does that mean 300 blk at 50 yds with 160 grain expanding bullets is just as good for deer as an expanding 158 grain 357 magnum bullet fired from a rifle at the same 50yds with the same velocity? I realize there's a slight difference in diameter, but besides that they should be relatively equal or am I wrong? I reload both calibers and the velocities are almost identical along with case capacities and types of gun powders that can be used. That's why I often nickname the 300 blk as my semi auto 357 magnum carbine.
The 30 caliber bullet has greater sectional density, and will penetrate deeper if bullet construction and velocity are equal. But I consider neither to be anything more than absolute minimum for deer, which should be confined to 50 to 60 yards. Unless you are averse to even small degrees of recoil, I don't recommend minimizing deer cartridges, because there are vastly better rounds.
Yep all things equal the 300blk will penetrate deeper. If you want to deer hunt with it I recommend using the Barnes VOR-TX or tsx round. You can get them from 110gn to 130gn. This is what my 7year old son deer hunts with. These rounds will fully expand to half an inch to 300yds and still penetrate deep enough to hit vitals. I would never use it that far but 150yds and closer if you put it anywheres in the vitals you got yourself a dead deer. I know for a fact. We use the 110gn out of the 11.5 inch gun and the 120gn out of the 16’ gun
I respect your opinion, sir. And have a simple question. I am proficient with a handgun, and so can execute an accurate kill shot at about 50 yards. Question: Do you have an opinion of the .480 Ruger for whitetail bucks?
The .480 Ruger has ample power for deer and greater game, with massive frontal area and plenty of bullet mass and velocity to at least 50 yards. It's not limited by it's power; but one must always be able to deliver such power accurately, which is entirely about your capability. Recoil and muzzle blast of the .480 is considerably higher than the .44 Remington Magnum and is truly a veteran handgunner's revolver. If you can handle it with confidence and accuracy, it's more than sufficient. Personally, I consider it unnecessarily potent and expensive for deer, as the .44 Magnum is absolutely sufficient to 50 yards with proper bullets, and has many advantages of lower weight, lower cost, and compatibility with .44 Special target and plinking loads.
GunBlue490 I can’t believe you got back to me so fast! Thank you. I live in NH and want a little more challenge after harvesting many deer with 12ga slugs, but I want humane kills. I bought a 9.5 inch .480, but don’t want the animal to run too much. Again, thank you!!
Not sure I agree. What about the energy wave and subsequent tissue cavitation from a GSW? This can result in significant damage to surrounding tissues that the bullet never touches. The more energy upon impact, the greater the energy wave and cavitation. Meaning, the bullet can penetrate causing no direct lethal injuries, but impart massively destructive peripheral injury to vital structures. A real life example of this was demonstrated during the infamous 1986 Miami FBI shootout. Officer Gordon McNeil was temporarily paralyzed when a bullet lodge close to the spine. The resultant energy wave from the bullet shocked the spinal cord leading to loss of function as if the bullet had directly severed the spinal cord. He was functionally paralyzed (for several hours!) and out of the fight. Thankfully, he fully recovered. So, yes, shot placement kills, but you CANNOT discount kinetic energy which can also kill and seriously maim. You're essentially saying the kinetic shock wave of a bomb cannot kill without debris or shrapnel. Put another way, yes, a 22LR can kill just as easily as a 45-70. However, WHO here would rather take a non-lethal shot to the abdomen with a 45-70 vs a 22LR. Answer: no one in their right mind. This video demonstrates book smarts sans real world application.
Agreed, but I would be willing to bet that the rifle and cartridge you take to go deer hunting meet or exceed the 800ft-lbs advised, at your intended maximum shooting range. And similarly for elk, I bet you would take a combo that will provide 1200 or more ft-lbs (at range) for elk. So it does mean something. Hunters just need to also know the sectional density required/advised for the size of game they are after, and it doesn't hurt to know that there are several reasons why it's better to kill with caliber and not velocity. The most important of which you mentioned: prem bullets can fail at too close or too far from the target. There would be a distance at which a 22-250 would be fine for a shot on deer, but why would you take a gun with such range restrictions deer hunting? Take one that works for all expected ranges. notes on cxp & hits ratings with game wt and sectional density cxp1
I look forward to every new video you post. I sincerely appreciate your frank common-sense approach. I have a suggestion for a new video. What is your opinion of the Remington 700 Walker trigger controversy. I've owned several older 700's with the Walker triggers and still use two heavy barrel varmint 700's for Prairie Dogs. I've adjusted those triggers down to just over 1 pound and they are rock solid safety wise--no amount of severe jarring will cause a fire. I've always loved the Remington 700's and have the opinion that the factory Walker triggers were among the very best of factory original triggers, especially for varmint shooters that wanted a really good trigger adjustable down to suitable weight for precision varmint shooting. However, the last one I purchased, a youth model with the X-Mark trigger in .243 for my grandson, is a piece of junk. I finally replaced the trigger with a Timney that cost me nearly half what I paid for the rifle/scope promo package. Unacceptable! I now recommend Savage rifles to friends, my kids, and grand-kids. I'm afraid the Walker trigger controversy and 60 minutes has dealt a death-knell to Remington. A travesty to say the least!
Well, it's rather a moot point at this time, as Remington has made the change. However, the Walker trigger was made correctly and never had any safety issues, other than the ones that were created by improper maintenance and unsafe trigger pull reduction. As a factory trained Remington Armorer, I must inform you that the Walker trigger should NEVER be reduced below 2.5 pounds under ANY circumstances. Despite the performance to date of your rifle, it is categorically unsafe. The reason is simply that your sear is holding only by friction, rather than spring retention, which is mandated to insure that the trigger won't trip. My current Remington 700 CDL has the new sealed trigger and it works fine, though it maintains a pull of no less than 3 lbs., which is well within precision limits for a field varminter. It is the same pull weight that my precision Model 70 Winchesters have in their MOA trigger at full reduction. Both rifles are easily capable of 3/8" accuracy with the right ammo. Understand what your rifle is being used for. It's not a bench rifle. A safe rifle trumps a 1/4 inch any day. Thanks for sharing.
I did discuss that issue in last year's video on shot placement. It's not a myth, but it is not a recommended practice. It's based on a number of flawed premises and misunderstandings of game animal anatomy, field conditions, and contrary expectations that a varmint bullet, purposely engineered to have zero to nil penetration on impact, engineered to vaporize on contact with small varmints, will somehow behave in a pridictable manner on thick skinned game, and somehow survive passage through hair, hide, muscle tissue, rib cage, and then dense, fluid filled lungs. They delude themselves further to imagine also that game animals present themselves in picturesque broadside poses for square-on lung shots. Such bullets are incapable of penetrating though the more typical acute rear angles that game animals give when they are escaping danger. Moreover, they engage in bad medical science. Such bullets most often manage to destroy only the first lung, if it gets that far. Game animals are tenacious of life and will run very long distances on a single lung. Similarly, they can escape for three minutes on a dead run with a perfect heart shot. They have silly expectations that a lung shot deer can be tracked, but the reality is that, if a varmint bullet manages to get into the thorax, the entry wound closes and all bleeding is internal, with nothing to track, with a deer that is literally flying, leaving one set of prints buried in fall leaves every 15 feet that don't go in the same direction twice in a row, and can't be found unless you were brought up as an Indian scout. Panicked deer are masters at survival and will head for swamps or high ridges; anywhere that man can't go, where they will die, unfound by the stupid hunter. The correctly constructed bullet is engineered for the specific purpose of traversing flesh and bone until all energy is exhausted, with the ideal of full and complete penetration, exiting the other side. The bullet that exits the thorax with a wide wound allows air to enter the vacuum of the lung compartment, and cause immediate collapse. Lungs are inflated in that vacuum and cannot billow when the vacuum escapes. Bullet designers do not program termination depths into game bullets.
No. The 22 Magnum has greatly reduced velocity in short barrelled handguns that is severely lacking in frontal area. I consider the 380 Auto (it's a true 9mm bore) to be the least sufficient round for a self defense handgun, and there are many very good ones, and ammo is highly developed and effective for self defense. The 22 Winchester Magnum is a small caliber varmint round that requires a long barrel for effective velocity, and it was never intended or structured for performance in handguns or for self defense.
The example of the girl and baseball player running around the bases are not a good analog in my opinion because the energy required includes the energy necessary to move those people, so there isn't much energy left over to match the remaining energy of a bullet which is astronomically lighter & faster and only needs to travel through the air and the portion of flesh and bone it comes into contact with determined by its circumference. Put another way, how much energy would a bullet have have to move a person like that? We have to consider all the variables that break down or use up energy (which is a measurement expressed by 1/2 mass x velocity squared). Think of energy as a bank account. You start out with a thousand dollars (ft. lbs.). Now withdraw how much energy you'll need determined by the energy required to move the bullet through the air and body (assuming mass, velocity, ballistic coefficient, sectional density, etc.). It's all about energy.
Momentum is the correct "yardstick" for power not kinetic energy. Comparing cartridges momentum is much revealing of their actual power. If we think about simply what power is we find that it's simply the ability to move any given amount of mass. If for example you shoot a steel plate on a sliding rail to stop the bullet from multiple calibers you will realize the distance moved is linear with the momentum of the caliber. Therefore, it's ability to move the mass (tissue, metal, water, etc) equals it's power
Thanks! I took out my Model 54 .257 Roberts yesterday and it still shoots 1" groups . I last fiddled with it's Tasco maybe 25 years ago. I have been using Hornady Super performance 117 grain. My rañge friend wants to reload for it. I have a lot of brass. Do you have any heavy bullet loads that you would care to share? This gun takes the high pressure factory stuff with no issues. Built in 1936. Thanks for your videos.
I shoot mostly the lighter loads, and have lots of data developed for 75, 85, 87, and 100 grain bullets. I have one load for 117 grain Hornady Interlock Spire Boat Tail, and while I never played with different loads, I immediately found one that gives 3/4 MOA consistently in my limited edition Model 70 Featherweight. Be sure to check it against laboratory load data before using it, and work up to it in increments of .4 tenths grain. R-P cases, WLR primers, Hornady 117 SPBT (I prefer flat base but bought what I could get), 42.6 grains of IMR-4350. Seat to cannelure depth, or as your rifle prefers. It gives about 2,910 fps. That powder will perform well with any of the Roberts loads. My rifle loves an old batch of H-4831 that I still have with 100 grain Sierra match bullets, and I am sure it would be great with 117 or 120, but I have not tried it yet.
@gunblue490 I would love to see you do a video on long range bullet performance or lack thereof. I believe Nosler explains this best with there minimum bullet velocity recommendations, such as 1800fps as a minimum for most hunting bullets. People taking extreme range shots (500y or more ) at deer sized game when their bullet is close too or subsonic is ludicrous! The bullet lacks the correct terminal velocity to expand correctly and cause sufficient tissue damage. Even with a magnum caliber, the time of flight is long enough to allow a grazing deer to move, as that so call perfect shot is released. This results in a wounded deer taking several days to die. I believe with your teaching methods, you could shed some light on the subject and dispel the myth. Cheers 😊
The Lyman 47th edition reloading manual has what they call Optimum Game Weight. This states the least bullet weight and energy you should be using for listed big game animals. Most of the small caliber firearms touted today do not pass muster, especially at longer ranges.
An arrow is a good example to illustrate that energy does not equal killing power. Magazine writers and maketing ploys are what started the false notion of energy equaling killing power. The whole concept of killing power itself is shaky. The magnum craze is still alive.
I like your videos. But I think this one is misleading. Obviously shot placement, bullet construction and so on are important. But energy is still probably the best single number metric that will tell you the most about killing power. Try to choose a grizzly protection gun based on bullet diameter or velocity alone, it's clearly not gonna work. But something with 3500 joules of energy will most likely be adequate. Taking everything into consideration will be the best approach, I agree, but if you are limited to providing a single number, energy is still the king.
Did you actually watch the full video? I made your points specifically clear. But, energy is absolutely not the best indicator, or one might be mislead to believe that a 50 grain 22-250 at 100 yards is equal to a 300 grain 375 H&H Magnum at 500 yards, which is clearly not the case. I don't recommend using a 375 at such range, but manufacturers play with energy for promotional purposes that are often VERY misleading. Such is the case with the 350 Legend. A 150 grain 357 diameter bullet is NOT the penetration equal of a 150 or 170 grain 30-30 bullet at 200 yards, and they know it, because they conveniently compared energy at that range but didn't compare their penetration values, where the Legend with it's weak sectional density could not possibly compete with the far greater sectional density of the longer 30 caliber. Neither does a comparison of energy within bullet weights inform anything about their killing value, because it's not uncommon for heavier bullets to yeild less energy than lighter ones, as is true with most 375 H&H loads. All great bear cartridges have big energy, but big energy out of context with bullet weight, sectional density, diameter and construction are 100 worthless. Kinetic energy is NOT a reliable indicator of killing value. But the manufacturers appreciate that you think so. Please watch my videos in context. I've been involved with ballistics most of my life, much of as a professional in police work who devoted lots of my own energy working with authorities in law enforcement and the gun industry. I'm not selling anything. I'm not competing in a marketplace for your money. I'm not a 28 year old marketing graduate working at fancy company booth at the Shot Show who will be selling golf shoes next month. I'm an experienced professional, with no slanted positions. I'm here to separate folks from much of the circulating gun nonsense that contaminate truth, so that you may learn what I wish to pass on before I die.
No. I said that I do not recommend or approve of guns without a safety. I am a certified, experienced police firearms instructor since the early 70s, and I have seen numerous accidents with very capable, trained and experienced officers and private persons. I articulated my reasoning quite clearly in my video. If Mr. Glock and others desire to omit that feature, it's their stupidity, but my moral duty is to present facts, not support for what I know is absurd and factually unsafe. I own striker fired handguns that have safeties and they present no hindrance to swiftness in the least. A safety is quickly disengaged, but a bullet sent unintentionally is not returned.
GunBlue490 thank you. I asked same question in a forum and almost all replies tell me safety is inbetween my ears And a thumb safety is not needed! Btw what striker fired pistols have thumb safeties. Smith and wesson?
Engineering view: What you are describing as tissue destruction is the effects of a supersonic shock wave inside the body cavity. The effect seems most dramatic in the lung cavity. This does take energy, but a fairly small bullet has plenty of energy to remain supersonic after penetrating into the body, which is why a 75 grain bullet strong enough to penetrate does just about as well as a 200 grain one. A smaller bullet may not have the speed required after breaking through bone, or may not hold together well enough if lightly constructed. I had a heart shot once from close range that blew up the heart and the bullet to such an extent that the bullet did not exit. The deer ran off and there was not a drop of a blood trail so I thought, incredulously, that I might have missed. He dropped behind a blackberry patch, just out of sight from the stand, so was easily recovered, but there were a few doubtful moments.
I have a question off topic of this video. I am new to reloading. And i am having trouble finding load data for 38special and 357magnum. Where i can use the same powder. For the 110g xtp bullet. What would you suggest?
Geez, buy a reloading manual. .38 is the most widely reloaded handgun cartridge out there. Any manual will have data for it. Once you buy the manual read the whole thing, not just the loading data. The manual will also have data for both pistol and rifle in the .357.
outstanding video with proper examples - i have been thinking on this for a while and was starting to have the starry eyed affect on a few cartridges myself. You've cleared it up partially with this video... I'm hoping you have more videos including the other variables of a bullet's flight. - Mike.
Doesn’t the energy transfer into and cause the tissue destruction thereby causing potential death? And so therefore it seems the energy is the catalyst that affects the end result.
No, it is the combination of bullet frontal area and speed through tissue that causes tissue destruction. Energy is simply the force that drives it. To put it simply, a very small, lightweight bullet of expanding design driven at high velocity can easily effect greater tissue destruction than a far heavier bullet of much greater physical energy that doesn't expand. Similarly, any given cartridge delivers approximately the same energy with every bullet weight, due to the equalizing effects of velocity and weight, though each weight has different sectional density, with different penetration, and may have far different expansion characteristics. There's not much difference in energy between a 110 grain 30-06 and a 220 grain 30-06, but they are used for vastly different size animals from blowing up woodchucks to taking down brown bear. No, energy is the driving force, but it has nothing to do with killing effect.
VERY WELL DONE SIR! CORRECT ME IF I'M WRONG, BUT I SEE MANY ARCHERY HUNTERS THAT RELY ON TISSUE DAMAGE RATHER THAN KINETIC ENERGY TO BAG THEIR GAME, SAME FOR A HUNTING BULLET DESIGN... ITS BOILS DOWN TO TISSUE DAMAGE!
You’re comparing energy values at differing distances. Some are 300, 400, and 500 yards. Energy dissipates over distance. Let’s compare apples to apples and look at the different bullets. That said, so glad you pointed out the real issue when selecting a hunting round, lethality (tissue damage).
I was not making comparisons. I was illustrating that energy alone has no value, and can distort performance. What I was illustrating is that the 22-250 and 375 H&H can each have the same energy value, but that the energy does not describe their killing value. At ANY range, the 22-250 is never a 300 grain 375 H&H at any range, despite deceptive energy numbers that some might infer from it. I put this video up because such implications that raw energy numbers can be compared are being made by some manufacturers. I want folks to remember that energy apart from bullet specifications has no relative relationship whatsoever. Moreover, energy can be very misleading and are not good means of comparisons. Larger bullets require more energy to penetrate, but smaller diameter bullets can effect terrific penetration and destruction without having such high energy. A 6.5 or 270 diameter bullet of high sectional density that fully penetrates can be far more effective than a 308 bullet of low sectional density that has a significantly higher energy figure but can't drive through. Arrows create massive tissue damage with little energy, because they have fantastic sectional density combined with lacerating knives that do exactly what a good bullet must do; get through as far as possible and tear up tissue on the way. Whatever energy does that for a given bullet is a nebulous factor that cannot be ascribed to a chart. The more important value is knowledge of a particular cartridges performance. If a 300 Winchester Magnum is a good 350 yard elk and moose round, it is that. If a 30-30 is a good 150 yard deer round, it is that. If a 223 is a good 300 yard varmint round, it is that. We need not contemplate nebulous numbers on a page that have no functional reality.
I love your channel, but I might have to disagree about energy not being a "killing value", but let me preface this by saying that there is no such thing as a killing value which I am aware. You can't point to any one thing that I am aware of to determine the killing power, or incapacitation power for that matter (as it matters for self-defense and perhaps dangerous game). I think we can arrive at a combination of values (variables) that will determine the effectiveness of the round, but I think there are a few points germane to a much longer discussion. One, self-defense, and possibly dangerous game (bears and lions), is more about incapacitation because a person or a dangerous animal can do a lot of damage in a second or two. As one doctor who studies ballistics put it, a persona can continue to fight for up to 15 seconds (some "people" say 30)-without a heart. In other words, there have been documented cases where someone's heart was destroyed but the person continued to shoot, stab or otherwise fight without a working circulatory system. But again, that's mostly self-defense or dangerous game animal. Second, before I fake deep knowledge of physics I don't possess, in my defense, all physics is theoretical despite it being treated as fact. That said, I'm sure you probably know this but merely misspoke, you said kinetic energy is the mass and the volume squared, but this is incorrect and it might have skewed your thinking if you're remembering it in these terms. Kinetic energy is 1/2 mass times velocity squared. In other words, the mass counts, but the velocity matters exponentially more as we are cutting the mass in half (by multiplying it by 1/2) and we're multiplying that by the exponentially raised velocity to the second power (velocity squared). This probably isn't a big deal in this discussion, but it's worth noting when considering the way mass and velocity work together. I find it fascinating because both mass and velocity do nothing on their own. A particle of light hitting our skin does nothing, yet a bolder does nothing if doesn't move (or move much). Lastly, the kinetic energy is the potion of mechanical energy that dominates ballistics. It is a component of "mechanical energy" which does the work. Mechanical energy is a combination of potential energy and kinetic energy. A classic example of the former is a bolder hoisted above the ground. While it is suspended in the air, it contains potential energy equal to the force required to raise the bolder to whatever height is achieved. That's not really applicable in a practical way to ballistics as the potential energy stored in a round is an abstract (how much mechanical energy was required to make it? Do we look at the handloader? Do we consider the forces of nature that created the elements found in the powder, lead, etc...? It's kind of like the particle of light. I am sure there is a mindblowing number that could be arrived at theoretically of how much work was necessary to create that particle of light shooting out of the sun and towards the earth, but it's not exactly a practical man stopper for hunting or self protection. Therefore, we're concerned with the component of mechanical energy responsible for doing the work when an object is in motion (kinetic energy). It is the kinetic energy, and not merely one of its components (mass or velocity) that is responsible for everything. It is what both moves the bullet and its what enables that bullet to have the mechanical energy to destroy tissue. By the way, I head one trauma room surgeon contradict something the Yankee Marshal said which I knew was utterly false when he said it. He believed that to incapacitate a person rapidly the bullet needed to pass through the body to give the blood somewhere to go (to rapidly reduce blood pressure so the person quickly becomes unconscious). The surgeon said that is absolutely false because there is more than enough volume in the body cavity for the blood to rush into making an exit wound completely unnecessary. Add to that the fact that the subcutaneous fat deposits of a bear can often plug the hole and minimize blood loss outside the body and it's easy to understand the surgeon is likely right. So energy is everything, but as I left in a post earlier today as I binge watch your wonderful channel-just because you start out with a sort of potential energy (muzzle energy, which I doesn't satisfy the definition, but speaking as a lay person, we judge how much energy a round has potentially as it leaves the barrel)-that doesn't mean that whatever is left of that kinetic energy by the time it reaches the animal is going to be absorbed by the animal's tissue. If too powerful of a round is used, it will zip through the animal through and through and do significantly less damage than if the entire payload had been delivered. This is why I wrote that a .44 Magnum is not any more effective than a 9mm because it passes through a person so easily that half of its energy leaves along with it. But even though the energy we can expect still exists by the time the bullet reaches its mark can be quantified, it is far from the end of the story. The bullet's design, where and what it hit, and how easily the bullet passed through the animal (if it did at all) all factor into it. Like you said, having it pass through both lungs is ideal, but better yet, I'd rather it not exist the animal's skin once passing through the ribs, or at least not leave the animal's body with much energy which is just wasted energy. So energy is everything, but muzzle energy is not, but neither is velocity. It is less of a determinate than muzzle energy in my opinion just the way a particle of light traveling approximately 300000 km/s, or 186000 miles per second can't stop an animal. Although I don't have a great answer, what might provide a profile for a good hunting round for a particular application is the amount of kinetic energy expected to arrive at a given distance coupled with the sectional density of the bullet to predict penetration (borrowing your definition of sectional density from earlier today). Although the ballistic coefficient (which you and I both refer to as how aerodynamic a bullet is) helps predict how much energy is delivered at a given distance (remember, velocity is nothing without mass, so we're not trying to determine velocity. We want to know the kinetic energy which is going to deliver the mechanical energy needed to do the damage [since the potential energy is too much of an abstract to be a concern). You said "bullets don't kill by energy, they kill by bullet destruction." You also said that it is a bullet's diameter, sectional density, weight, etc. that allows the bullet to go into the tissue. This is not true in my opinion as it is the mechanical energy (which includes both kinetic & the illusive potential energy) that does the work. What those variables you spoke of do is help us understand how enough energy remains for the bullet to do its job. Take for example ballistic gel tests. A permanent wound channel with a 9mm or .45" diameter isn't considered very good. It's not the diameter, bullet weight/sectional density, or velocity that does the damage, it is all these things together that helps us understand how much mechanical energy is there to tear tissue beyond the diameter of the bullet. In other words, as a 9mm diameter bullet starts cutting through the tissue, what makes a 2.5" PWC? The answer is energy. The energy is released by a combination of potential energy (whatever that is) and kinetic energy (which is 1/2 x m x v²). Velocity by itself, sectional density by itself, mass by itself, etc. are nothing as none of these things can exist without the other (speaking of mass and velocity in particular). These things working together is what we refer to as energy. It's about how much energy you end up with which starts by knowing how much energy the bullet starts with to have the mechanical energy necessary to do the work (destroy tissue in the most way for taking an animal down quickly and cleanly). So we use certain variables like mass (just a variable of energy), ballistic coefficient (how aerodynamic the bullet is [to help conserve energy]), sectional density (how heavy & thin the bullet is to conserve energy [to allow the bullet to penetrate deeply]), and velocity (just another variable of energy) to help predict what energy will remain and where to allow a bullet to do its job (we don't want this energy to exist outside of the animal anymore than may be necessary to do the damage it needs to do).
Can I stop reading Your novel when you misquote the speaker? Good because I stopped reading when you said he was wrong when he said ".. mass x volume.." ; he never said that. He said kinetic energy "... is mass x velocity squared." Which is correct.
It would seem that, other than a 'lung shot', the ideal is to have the bullet expand rather quickly, after penetrating just 20 cm (4"), or so, producing the largest amount of energy transfer, into the largest amount of tissue, in the middle of the targeted area? Of course, the 'middle' is at different distance in different animals(even different parts of the anatomy), so that penetration and expansion profiles would be different for game with large size differences? As Mr. GB seems to be saying, it's not the energy, per se, but how the energy is dissipated, that equates to 'killing power'. Oh, and, shot placement ;-)
You apparently were schooled in the energy transfer myth. Apart from possibly being momentarily taken off stride by the punch, game animals suffer no consequence from the so-called transfer of energy. It's false science of the highest. It was born in the 70s in the search for police cartridges that would penetrate minimally to prevent bullet pass through that would endanger innocent bystanders. That quest was misinterpreted by many including some police gun writers that we were trying to "anchor" with all available bullet energy, with the belief that bullets that passed through wasted energy. That had nothing to do with it whatsoever. The game field offers no restrictions on bullet pass through. The goal is to fully penetrate both sides of the thorax to allow outside air into the vacuum of the sealed chest cavity, thereby collapsing the lungs immediately, which is the swiftest means of stopping all activity. Entrance holes seal up, preventing that air entry. Exit wounds are large and the vacuum immediately is lost, as in the reverse of popping a balloon. Most folks have heard of collapsed lungs, but are not aware of what it is. In the military, one is taught to arrest "sucking chest wounds" by sealing the holes of ones compatriot with the plastic wrapper of a field bandage before the lung collapses and breathing ceases.
When assessing a cartridge for a particular application, I tend to look at the historical record of that particular cartridge. What worked in the past should work today. I have a lot of respect for the hunters of old, they needed to put food on the table and didn't have a lot of extra spending money, so they were very realistic and practical. That works for me. Thank you GunBlue!
Great videos. .243 What is the maximum range for Fallow for example and why? don't understand why they coudn't (theoretically )be taken at a mile but people say only 250 yds. I'm just shoot at 100 yds Just trying to understand. Thanks for all the info. Do occasional reloading. Down to earth stuff.
If you're speaking of local laws regarding fallow deer, I cannot help you. Good sportsmanship and ethical hunting for the preservation of game demands that every hunter keep his shots within the range that he can strike an animal's vitals (lungs, thorax) with virtual certainty under the existing conditions. That does not mean what his gun is capable of. It means what the hunter knows he or she is capable of. Secondly, that hunter must have an understanding of the cartridge, and killing ability at various distances. Hunting is not target shooting, where a miss is inconsequential. Wounding game that runs off to die is a needless waste of a precious resource. I hear a lot of loose talk, videos, and stupid advertising that suggests long shots on game beyond 400 or 500 yards, which is asinine beyond all measures of good sportsmanship, and is indeed reflecting poorly on the sport. When a property owner discovers carcasses that were wasted by idiotic pot shots and posts his property in anger, it's the hunter's fault, not his. Most experienced hunters will tell you that they have rarely taken game beyond 250 yards, and if it's longer than 300 yards, they work closer, which is why it's called hunting, not shooting.
Watch my sectional density video. Deer and other hunting requires no formulas. Any deer bullet should ideally have a sectional density of .240 and a minimum caliber of .243. Deer don't require heavy calibers, and 7mm diameter is more than sufficient and offers less recoil than larger bores for the same sectional density. Watch my caliber selection video.
I'de say your the one that has missunderstood kinetic energy. It is important and it makes a difference. In fact I'de say its the most represental for killing value out of anything you can find as long as you know what you are talking about. Sectional density also makes a big difference ofcourse but only up to a certain point. How much energy you plant at your target matters and you can whine all you want about it but that doesnt change the fact
@@conebread711 He compared 22-250 100 yd. energy to the other caliper's 300 & 500 yd, energy's. I'm sure he knew better and I'm not sure why he did it. The energy levels that are given in ballistic charts give a good general idea of the power of the cartridge. I think all of us know that it isn't a good measure of killing power but if you're going to compare energy levels, do it at the same distance. I wish it was him that made the reply that you did, so I could tell him I much I enjoy his channel and the privilege to debate some of the issues he presents. I sit here with a big smile on my face watching his videos and listening to his opinions. Not to mention all the stuff I've learned. Since we're at it here. What is the point of a 250 yd. zero on a 243 with a 4 power scope ?
Yeah. I think that scope is designed for a bow gun, AR-15, 22lr or something that needs a 25 yard zero. It had a small objective lens that won't let much light in and very little magnification, so it is just a little better than iron sights. He was saying that scope companies are selling you something you don't need. Maybe, whoever sold him the 243 should have sold him a bow gun.Back to the energy ---- the 22-250 Hornady 50 gr Superformace Varmint will drop a deer at 250 yards like a 22lr will drop a rabbit at 25 yards. Hornady got it right and that is a fact!They don't make ammo or scopes like they use to --- they make them better. I enjoy listening to GunBlue490. I also enjoy the new modern ammo and scopes.
@@conebread711 I liked the scope & rifle combo he had. I just didn't agree with the 250 yd. zero he had on it. He's over 2 inches high at 100 yards with that setting. If he tries to send a bullet down the opposing sniper's scope tube, he'll do nothing more than plug the bugger's barrel.
But it is easier to make stuff up than it is to do all of this logic and thinking. Next thing you will tell up is the bigger the splash in ballistic gel the better a killing bullet it will be. I refuse to believe that all deer and bad guys are not full of ballistic gel. Now on a serious note, which would be a better black bear defence choice, .357 mag six shot, 6" revolver or 15 round 10mm semi-auto 4.5" barrel?
Black bear live in my neighborhood, and they visit us regularly. I would be a fool to hunt one with any handgun. No experienced guide I know would even allow handguns on a hunt. I know of a circumstance where four bear dogs were killed when a large black bear came scurrying down a tree and wiped them out after being shot several times with a 44 Magnum. The bear finally was taken down with five dead hits at point blank range with a rifle fully loaded with 180 grain 308 bullets before it killed people. He did not wish to die and it was only by Providence that it did. One does not hunt black bear with toys. A 357 or 10mm or any handgun is as good as a cap gun to a nasty, scared black bear. One swipe or bite and you're dead.
This is a very good instructional video. I'm just starting to get interested in fire arms [at 69 yrs old] . Do you have a video about bullet shapes [ hollow point, FMJ, ] in relation to; the game your hunting, distance, velocity, caliber and so on. Thank you again for such great videos.
I'm afraid that you're a bit confused on this topic and you're failing to consider alot of factors into all of your examples. Tissue damage is produced by transfer of kinetic energy. Doing so is affected by weight, bullet type/construction (Such as hollowpoint/soft point VS full metal jacket/speer point), etc. A bullet can have a ton of velocity, but if the bullet is a full metal jacket it will not expand and transfer that kinetic energy instead it will pass through causing minimal damage. However you can have a bullet with less velocity that expands to transfer the kinetic energy and it will cause greater damage. How ever if I toss a good expanding bullet at you it will not have the velocity to penetrate nor expand to transfer the kinetic energy.
With your name, you should not be afraid. No, I am not confused. This is not my first time out of the gate, and as a teaching ballistics authority for over 45 years, practical hunter and factory certified firearms armorer, public lecturer, having witnessed many autopsies of shooting victims, and facts derived from medical personnel, I can say that I am not confused. I can say with authority however that the analysis you gave is a combination of misinformation and failure to listen to what I stated. Kinetic energy does not transfer. It gets used up in the process of penetrating though a medium. Bullet expansion and tissue destruction occurs with velocity and the bullet mass that drive it through by kinetic energy. The goal of a bullet is not to punch with kinetic energy. The sole purpose of a bullet is to effect tissue damage that ceases life. An expanding bullet driven through lung tissue through and through stops breathing, and it's stopped quicker if it exits the opposite side of the chest cavity and leaves a hole that evacuates the vacuum around the lungs. Lungs cannot billow without that vacuum and immediately collapse. No sir, I am not confused. I'm attempting to correct lots of myths that have been perpetuated by stupid writers for decades that have infected readers who trusted stupid writers.
I have always wondered these things about energy didn’t always make sense but you put some light into it. I hunt mostly with a bow and with 40 lb kinetic energy my arrow can blow through deer and 1 1/2 hole clean through. Different projectile but it does put thought into the energy and projectile types.
This is a great thing about being a gun and caliber nut like me. I own about 30 guns, from bolt action, lever actions, pumps, and a few semi autos and some of these guns are in the same calibers and gauge. I own calibers any were from a 22 LR up to the 444 Marlin, up to the 45-70 and up to the 338 Win mag. So I am for sure covered to hunt anything in North America and Canada, if not Africa or the rest of the world. Not unless I have to use something like a 375 Ruger or a 375 H&H which I do not have no plans to go on an African hunt. But hoping someday I will get to shoot the 6.5 CM or the 243 Win.
@@vincef5832 I actually use about half of them for hunting. About the other half of them were handled down to me from my grandpa, dad etc...and just only keep them cause they were part of them. I just cannot believe I am one of the few in my family that loves guns and weapons this much.
A formula 1 car doing 300km/hr into a wall has a lot of kinetic energy. But it’s the change in momentum in a given time which matters. So it’s the rate the bullet can dump the energy which matters
I'll preface by saying that I have a master's in mechanical engineering, and worked as a spacecraft engineer, so I understand the difference between momentum and kinetic energy quite well, and the topic of bullet damage is an important one. For a given bullet diameter, let's take 357 magnum for example, you can have light bullets that travel very fast, and have high ft-lb of muzzle energy. A heavier 357 magnum bullet, with less muzzle energy, can have more muzzle momentum than the lighter bullet with more muzzle energy. Upon hitting the target, both momentum and energy are conserved. However, energy and momentum are conserved in different ways. Kinetic energy when penetrating the target, can be lost in a number of different ways, including heat. Bullet momentum when hitting the target, must be conserved by both the weight of the bullet+target. It would be interesting to see ballistic gel tests on this subject. For an apples to apples test, the bullets would have to be the same design, such as a round nose FMJ. Two bullets of different weights, but with the exact same muzzle energy, could be fired into the ballistic gel. However, while those bullets may have the same kinetic energy when hitting the ballistic gel, they will each have different momentum upon penetration. The heavier bullet will have more momentum. I don't know, because I've never seen an apples to apples ballistic gel test. But, my guess would be that the bullet with higher momentum, will penetrate farther, and do more damage. I don't know if this is true, but it seems logical. When purchasing bullets, I would recommend choosing a 180-200 gr bullet, with decent muzzle energy, as opposed to a 135 gr bullet with higher muzzle energy. I also wouldn't recommend buying the heaviest bullets. Distance is a factor. A heavier bullet will drop more with distance. I'd also compare the momentum of a heavy bullet, against the momentum of a 180-200 gr handgun bullet. The heavier bullet is likely to have less momentum. All that said, without apples to apples ballistic gel test comparisons, we can't really know which factor is more important, muzzle energy or muzzle momentum.
You Sr are a great man to listen to. You explain to people in ways that are easy to understand. I have been a gunsmith over 10 years and a competitive shooter. And I can not explain things to the simplicity that you have. My hats off to you.
I think a good example of how kinetic energy does not represent killing power is the simple arrow. Most of the time it will travel clean through a deer with comparatively much slower velocity and with not that much weight (or mass) but because it has tremendous sectional density combined with tissue destruction from the broad head will easily dispatch a deer. When talking about bullets it must have enough velocity to mushroom at impact velocity and that velocity must be enough to penetrate the vitals of the animal. Yes an exit is desirable for a blood trail but the animal will go down with a well placed shot. Shooting a block of ballistic gel at 10 yards does not represent what happens at 200 or 300 yards. It's fine for handgun calibers but NOT big game hunting bullets.
Denis LeBlanc if anyone ever wants to argue this fill up a 5gallon bucket with sand. Shoot an arrow 250+FPS (maybe even slower) into it then shoot your average deer rifle (270, 30.06, 308) into another bucket of sand and see which penetrates farther. The arrow wins every time
@@justa3v619 Try the same test at distance, say 200 yards.
Russell Keeling just tried I lost all 17 of my arrows and never hit the bucket lol
Gunblue explains firearms and bullets like no other. Keep em coming
In sweden, weapons are divided into classes (1-4 and shotgun). Klass 1, the highest, are 9 gram bullet with 2700j or 10 gram at 2000j (at 100m), the bullet also has to be expanding. If either weight, energy or bullet composition is wrong it will be klassed lower, probably just klass 2 or even 3.
So even if a 8gr bullet has the energy at 100m and is expanding, it will never be klass 1.
Klass 1 is all game in sweden, bear, moose etc.
A good comment but please translate into normal units of measurement. We use grains, feet per second, yards and so on because they are all perfectly fine enough and interconnected to make calculations easier. And this is coming from someone who uses metric for other purposes. It is not “old fashioned” to use imperial, it is perfectly adapted to ballistics.
These lectures are so much better presented and researched than the ones I spent big $$ on when getting my degree in college. This man is in it for the love of the game. You da man GB490
He is very knowledgable on almost all aspects of reloading. I tend to recommend his videos to all sorts of folks getting into reloading.
I agree
College is a straight up scam the vast majority of the time. And/or is not the best and usually not worth it.
Just had a discussion with a TH-camr about the six five Creedmoor versus the 308 Winchester. He was trying to tell me that the 139 grain 6.5 Creedmoor had more kinetic energy then the 308 Winchester at a thousand yards. I was trying to explain to him about sectional density and the actual bullet Construction and they got all bent out of shape. Thanks for the competent explanation of kinetic energy. I always learn something new when watching you and your videos. Keep up the good work, hope Benny's doing great!
Let's just say you run a 6.5 creed 140gr at 2750 and a .308 168 gr at 2600 fps that is a preaty accurate idea on velocity give or take 50 fps depending on temp and barrel length the 6.5 creed averages more than 100 ft pounds more ke at 1k.
Just for record I'm not a 6.5 creed junkey but it is a good round for lots of applications. You can run the data
@@xxshooterxxdm 308 Nosler partition and I'm pushing it right under 2700 feet per second with 168 grain bullet so I'm getting semi compressed loads.
@@echosreloadingchamber7306 that bullet does not come close to the ke a 6.5 creed has at 1k .
@@xxshooterxxdm kinetic energy does not kill tissue damage does. The 168 grain is a heavier bullet with greater sectional density which will penetrate bone and Hyde an inner thorax tissue easier and do more damage.
Great treatise on this topic sir! For anyone wanting the skinny on calculating bullet kinetic energy, the basic formula is: KE = 0.5*m*(v^2). You have to keep your units sorted out in the imperial system, so: m = mass in slugs ( for a bullet in grains, m = (gr/7000)/32.2 yielding the slug unit of: (lb*s^2)/ft; and for velocity: v = velocity in units of ft/s.
This is an EXCELLENT presentation. "do not look at energy in a vacuum." A very fast small diameter bullet does less damage than a slower moving, heavier, larger diameter bullet. That's why a 9mm doesn't compare in any way to a 357 magnum round. Similar diameter but the magnum is going faster and is often times heavier.
5.56 does more damage than 44 magnums .
Starts at 16:00. Everything before are examples.
There are a number of these videos that should be required for every shooter, especially the hunters. I would love to spend a week or two following Mr GunBlue around and listening to his take on what he knows about firearms that hasn't yet been put into a video. Yeah, that would be a blast!
I always thought ft. pounds was more for math nerds than hunters. These were great comparisons.
I was just reading an article. It was a comparison of the .308 Winchester to the 6.5 Creedmoor. They said the Creedmoor had a trajectory advantage at 400 and 500 yards. I couldn’t help but laugh. Ive never hunted big game, but I’ve always enjoyed shooting at practical hunting distances at the range. I worry that many gun writers are encouraging irresponsible behavior. Thank you for the video!
Ft/lbs describes the projectile's ability or potential.
I agree with you. A big moose at 400 meters is still a very far target. With any firearm, including big ones, a good wind will carry the bullet out of vital area and wound with lots less energy. Too much publicity made on sniper performances and half-mile kills.
@@jeanmorin3247just say you cant shoot for shit .
@@Dcm193--Well I never aim at shit. No wonder! You seem to be someone who likes to shoot the shit. Good hunting!
Energy is the ability to do work. Think of an electrical analogy: 2kW-hrs is enough energy to exert 2kw power for an hour. Or 120kW for a minute. Or 7200kW for a second. Now, which of those will cook a steak the fastest?
What we care about is power-not energy. Power is the rate at which work is done. In our case, the “work” of crushing and displacing tissue. Whichever bullet “does more work” is the more effective hunting choice. The more work done in less time, the more power. This is why 5.56 ball rounds that fragment can be so deadly even compared to larger calibers: fragmentation is a much more efficient means of tissue damage than crushing is. Slicing is also far more efficient, which is why a bow hunter can easily take deer despite having half the energy of a 9mm handgun.
Someone finally gets it.
a 45 A.C.P. with a at 5" barrel has about 100 miles per seconds over a 3 inch barrel (800 vs 900) how much difference would that make in the case of a black bear or cougar? ( these are the largest pistols I have) Thanks
I generally keep my bullet construction simple, lead, or lead tin mix for a hard cast. Never failed me yet .
KE=1/2*m*v^2 units of KE is joule or newton*meter or foot*pound
Force=m*a units of force is newton, kilogram or pound
Energy deposited by the bullet is KE initial minus KE final. An armor piercing bullet has a less likely chance of slowing down compared to a jacketed hollow point. As a bullet mushrooms, it slows down meaning Energy lost by the bullet is not uniform through the the object. Look at ballistic gel and see a small entry hole then as the bullet mushrooms it slows down quickly and gives significant energy to the surrounding medium. The pressure drop across the bullet (front to back) is also part of the damage caused. You can’t cause tissue damage without energy but you can damage a whole lot of tissue an do no significant damage. If the bullet misses target and does not slow down significantly then little energy is deposited and little damage is created. Thats where bullet design is very important. You need to deposit the energy (cause tissue damage) in the animal for the energy a bullet has to be effective.
Conclusion, energy is important and the more you have, the more damage you can do. Also, just because you have energy doesn’t mean you put that energy where you want it.
May I ask, is there a downside to having a rifle barrel longer than standard, if one does not want to use magnum cartridges? I've been lurking, watching dozens of your videos, and digesting your comments about magnum powders needing to be slower-burning and therefore being incompletely burnt when shot through, say, 16" barrels. But what about the converse? If a regular cartridge's powder is completely consumed in a 22" barrel, what happens if one uses the equivalent rifle with a 26" barrel, or to be absurd, a 36" barrel?
And BTW, kudos for your courage in sharing your faith!
Bill Karkow I'm no expert or theorist but I'd suspect that at the point all powder has been burned in a barrel, that then begins a slight slowing&loss of energy from friction within the barrel, increasing incrementally with each inch of excess length. I'd like to hear someone truly knowledgeable explain if this is indeed the case.
I know of velocity tests done with .22 long rifle ammunition. The tests resulted in showing the optimum length barrel for best velocity was 16 inches. The small amount of powder involved had spent its expansion of gases by then and after 16 inches the bullet began to slow down. I would suspect the same to happen in any other firearm.
I have to agree with him. Family member inherited my grandfather's 243 win. And for years he used a 308 Remington 760. he has killed many deer with it. In the area we hunt it is fairly thick and you can't see past 75 yds. He usually had the same shot year after year precise shot in the the right area the deer would get hit and run about 20 to 50 yds. and drop. tried all different loading the effect was the same with complete pass through of course. Well he decided to take out the old 243 which was grandpa's favorite round to reload. Same shot and area, he pulled the trigger, the deer instantly dropped in it's tracks. He thought well just a fluke. So he did it several more times in years to come needless to say that 100 gr. bullet never ever exited. less meat damage, more on the table. The 308 is now in the cabinet to be passed down, and collecting dust. One would think the killing power would be greater due to the damage we seen to the meat. This explains it to me know thanks for the understanding Sir.
Although kynetic bullet energy is not the end-all of killing power, the wound channels that we see in ballistic gel are quite telling in showing that tissue destruction is not created by the bullet alone. The shock wave sent out by the energy can in fact destroy tissue that would not be bruised by the bullet itself. Energy per se can induce bleeding and shock, quite apart from bullet sectional density. The point here is well taken that energy will not compensate for bad bullet placement, but with similar bullet placement, energy will make a big difference. That's the point with African calibers. You do not stop a charging bull without big energy. Stopping power can be very useful.
What was the make, model, and energy performance of the vacuum cleaner I heard at the end?
Recently started following your channel for great content. Would you be able to do a video discussing 308 vs 6.5 Creedmoor specifically for large game? I'm in Alaska and hunt primarily moose and caribou and would like to get a new hunting rifle. I would still use my 300 win mag for things with claws and sharp teeth. Thanks so much and have a great day!
I would take both those rounds off the list. Neither are particularly great for your game and hunting ranges. The only two rounds I could possibly recommend for you are either the 270 Winchester or 280 Remington, loaded with 130 or 140 grain bullets respectively. Either have the range of your 300 Magnum, with the correct sectional density for deep penetration. Knowing that you have no issues with the 300 Winchester, I'd go with the 280 Remington, hands down, and wouldn't look back at little brass cases. Big moose? Use 150 or 160 grain bullets in the 280.
300 Win Mag is the good stuff. If you have $5-6K, you can buy an AR-10 style 300 Win Mag. I would love one of those!
If there was ever a time that the outdoor sports and shooting fraternity was in serious shame and jeopardy, it is the present. We need a serious campaign engine that can set the records straight, police the shooting industry's manufacture and marketing practices, including the NRA's responsibilities need to be re-defined entirely. I do believe you have the power to connect with today's respected and published shooting and hunting icons and form a band to combat the irresponsible nonsense and recklessness that has entered our hobby, our livelihood and the future of the entire shooting sports arena. We know you can do it..and we are all behind you in supporting this effort. You are one of the very few masters left, albeit, we can't defeat the capitalism that energizes and feeds the reckless of today, but we can at least start a national coast to coast campaign to rid our shooting sports of recklessness abandon. And we can not count on the NRA's support of this mission...which should be one of our first targets of change.
All the Best-
Deer may only be taken with a legal firearm using a minimum legal firearm calibre of not less than 6mm, which is capable of delivering a projectile having kinetic energy of 1350 joules at a distance of 100 metres from the rifle. It is suggested a calibre .243 or greater be used. This is straight from the Department of Primary Industries Parks Water and Environment website here in Tasmania, Australia. Now looking at the figures for my .44 Mag 16in barrel lever action firing a 240g xtp @ 1600fps 3 yards from the muzzle produces only 1229 joules @100m! Base on this, it is not legal to use on Fallow Deer as it does not meet the minimum requirements. So the old .44 mag is a wounding round.....just like the 30-30 Winchester lol 🤔 Another good incite into ballistics Gunblue490 😊
Sounds like you need the new 350 Legend from Winchester lol hello from QLD 🦌 classic greeny legislation. Funny isn't it 44 MAG has been plenty of cartridge on deer forever I've taken reds with it easy under 100m. Have fun
Yep, keep the .44 mag within its limits and you have venison on the table. Another Aussie who watches Gunblue490 ;)
Here in colorado the firearm must be .244 caliber or greater and produce 1000 foot pounds of energy at 100 yards to legally hunt with. I have hunted elk with a .357 magnum pistol because it was legal to hunt with a handgun with less power but I could not hunt the elk with my .357 rifle that produces more power.
@@LoneWolf-zw5yn The 350 legend is no more than the .357 maximum just recycled with another name.
Thank you for sharing your knowledge with everyone. I found you a few days ago and your reloading videos have helped me tremendously.
Point taken. Energy values are meaningless if not discussed in the context of the other directly related critical data. However, the killing potential of any projectile or shot can be more thoroughly analyzed if energy enters into the discussion. For example, if you fix all other parameters then energy alone could be used to describe the killing potential. The fixed parameters would still have to be known and considered.
If you somehow condensed all of the information you have provided in your videos into a series of books I would buy them all.
Thankyou sir.
I just found your channel last week. Thank you for all the work you've put into these videos, the history parts I enjoy the most. And thank you for all the mistakes you admit to ,to get to this level of knowledge.
P.s Being from NH? and mentioning central Ma, do you know Ted from Cabelas? He's been a wealth of knowledge thus far for me. You both have this vast Historical knowledge of Firearms and it's possible you've cross paths.
Id like too hear your thoughts and experiences with the .348 Winchester & the Winchester model 71
Been trying to tell all my buddy’s this is why my little 6.5 Grendel that’s velocity challenged is still dropping deer at 300yds just as good as their full size cartridges. I’ve heard so many times that thing only has 1600ft lbs of energy and you need 1000ft lbs to kill a deer. In the right conditions I’d be confident in shooting a deer out to 450-500yds with it. But I like to keep it inside 300yds if possible
good man
It's good to hear you want to keep your shots within 300 yards. I believe if you have to shoot further than that you are not a hunter you are just a shooter.
Energy value is a "measurement" of potential power at a given distance. Different bullets and velocities absolutely have different potential energy which is a part of the tissue destruction necessary for a quick kill. You have good points but in comparing the energy of a number of cartridges you were not comparing their energy all at the same distance. All the points you made such as destructive potential are viable and necessary but even an expanding bullet must have enough velocity and energy to create the potential for tissue destruction, otherwise you may as well be throwing rocks. Any bullet, no matter what caliber, must impart its energy into the target, otherwise you have low or no penetration or a pass through with little tissue damage and small or no temporary cavity. So, whether you have a 22-250 humming at 4000 ft/sec or a 30-30 scootin' at 2400, each has a time in space with approximately the same potential energy but not necessarily the same potential for tissue damage. Energy is a huge factor when it comes to the killing potential of a bullet. While it may be just a number on paper, when you consider target mass and density, distance, velocity and bullet mass, energy speaks volumes about a bullet's performance. For Instance: I carry a 9mm handgun for personal protection. While a 115gr bullet at standard pressure might have a higher velocity than a 124gr, I am certain beyond a doubt that the 124gr will impart more energy into the target causing greater tissue damage to an attacker potentially ending the fight sooner. Although bullet energy may be misunderstood by most, and I very likely, do no understand it completely, it is a big part of how a bullet does its job.
I'd like to add that many hollow points have a minimum threshold of fps in order to expand properly... without the neccessary energy it'll fail to completely mushroom.
Dear Sir, I completely understand your argument about energy and "killing power". I do however have an argument somewhat different. Here goes; If I were to throw a baseball at you from say 20 yards and hit you in the head it would probably knock you down and possibly knock you out. Then if I were to take the same baseball and shot it from a cannon increasing velocity a lot, when it hit your head it would remove your head." In this case it is shown velocity creates more energy thus more knock down power. In the history of the US all the dangerous game were harvested by black powder firearms with low velocity but they used mass of the bullet for knock down power. This applies to this day. The mass much like sectional density, increases penetration upon impact with the target causing a deep wound channel. One law of physics shows the faster a projectile goes the faster it slows down. So a light bullet traveling rapidly will be surpassed in velocity at some point down range by a heavy bullet started at a slower velocity. Thank You, I very much enjoy your sight. I have loaded and hunted for around 52 years and still have much to learn.
Enjoyed it, cleared up some misgivings about foot lbs energy stats. P.S. You need a "on air" sign so the cleaning lady holds off until the end of the video ;)
That was the hot water heater kicking in.
@@GunBlue490 My frozen water freezer does the same thing. So does my cold water cooler. :-)
What .380 auto guns do you recommend?
Easy to rack, least recoil. I am asking for older female - recoil sensitive, arthritic hands.
Also what .380 self defense rounds do you recommend?
Thats why I asked before if .22 magnum in kel-tec pmr30 would be good for self defense.
That's really a personal decision she must make, because it must fit her and be comfortable to grasp, with correct length of pull. The larger the better, especially in the grip, but it absolutely must fit her. Most 380s are blowback design of light weight, and smaller ones can be quite uncomfortable to shoot due to their tiny grip frames and low mass. I consider a safety absolutely mandatory, especially if carried in a handbag, but even then, it should not be loose with other articles.
For an elderly person I would recommend a revolver in 38 Special. Any semiautomatic is going to be tough for anyone with weak hands. Revolvers are easier to understand as well. Open the cylinder, fill it with cartridges, close it and it's ready to fire. Just pull the trigger. You could get a revolver chambered for 22 long rifle for her to start with. Then work her way up. If she's too sensitive to handle the 38 special, try to find a revolver chambered in 32. 32 H&R Magnum is mild, and the same gun could use the 32 S&W Long, which is lighter still. A revolver in 22 Magnum would be a possibility, but keep in mind that any pistol bullet smaller than .35 caliber tend to take multiple shots to stop a determined attacker. The good news is that most baddies aren't that determined and will turn tail and run at the sight of a gun, especially if a couple bullets go their direction, so ultimately a 22 is better than nothing... just make it a revolver.
I really have been enjoying your videos and I can’t help but think of your TH-cam name. I’m curious, the 490 in your name is that related to your police officer number when you graduated from the academy?
I understand the difference between a small caliber lighter bullet at a high velocity and a larger and heavier bullet at a lower velocity. But if you have two bullets of the same caliber and even the same type, is there any particular difference in tissue destruction between the lighter bullet at a higher speed which has approximately the same certain kinetic energy as a heavier one at a lower speed?
Energy is defined as "the ability to do work". Higher energy means the bullet has the potential to do more "work", but it's only one aspect of what kills.
The work that bullets do is tissue destruction, so a bullet with more energy, it has more potential to damage tissue. However, if you gave a needle 1,000ft/lbs of energy, it will obviously damage less tissue than a baseball with 50 ft/lbs.
Bullet design, and therefore how that energy gets TRANSFERRED is obviously the most important factor.
Is there a reason for repeating my comments? All energy is transfered from one mass to another, but it's only traumatic energy that kills. A six pound pillow that strikes a child and transfers it's entire energy is child's play. A 32 ounce hammer blow swung at the same speed transfers much less energy, but when struck upon the skull can be a fatal blow to a five hundred pound beast, because of its destructive effect upon tissue, and for no other reason. Bullets only kill because they destroy living tissue because of the energy that drives them into tissue AND renders trauma while doing so, not because they simply transfer energy to tissue. It's what work the energy accomplishes that makes all the difference in the world.
Got my Ballistic training for the evening. I like to find any humor that I can in the vids. "The Kinetic energy of a 195 lb. basketball player with his shorts on". LOL.. Like if he didn't have them on people would notice his kinetic energy is less.
Or the woman that is jogging, before she goes to work. Cause an unemployed woman has less energy? Funny, and unnecessary details
In other video you say do not recommend glock. There is after market safety for glock, do you recommend to put that on the gun and after that do you recommend glock ?
Glocks don't need safeties. Offer the weapon safety rules and you'll be fine without one. If you can't do that, you shouldn't own firearms.
A 180 grain target bullet has the same energy as a 180 grain hunting bullet.. out of the same barrel..if energy killed game i guess id use target bullets and save a little money
Jesse Busby Ima have to save this quote. Really dumbs it down. I know this, just never thought about using this comparison when explaining to others. Now I got a little ammo next time someone wants to argue that Kinetic energy is what kills. Thanks
Apples to oranges --- A match bullet is a full metal jacket. The purpose of a full metal jacket is to penetrate. The purpose of a soft point/hollow point hunting bullet is to expand. I can see how you would be confused after watching this video. The simple question is will a 180 grain hunting bullet with a HIGH energy have more or less killing power than another 180 grain hunting bullet with LOW energy? The answer is obvious. Bullet energy is an excellent way of measuring killing power, if you keep everything else constant. If you keep the energy constant and compare apples to oranges, like you did above and he did in the video, it becomes nonsensical. Good luck!
@@conebread711 well. Think you missed the point..a match bullet of 180 grains has the SAME energy as a 180 grain hunting bullet..which will kill more efficiently? You simply don't know what your arguing here
@@conebread711 do you know how to measure energy?
@@jessebusby7685 I get it. If you measure two different things, and they measure is the same, they will still be as different as they were before you measured them. That is what GunBlue490 said repeatedly. The title of the video, Understanding Bullet Energy ~ It's Not a Measure of Killing Power!, is not always true. For example -- energy is an excellent measurement of killing power, when comparing the exact same bullet at different velocities.
Thank You GB for your labor and love of our great hobby...The Hunting Rifle for Hunters Only (Snipers Not Allowed)
God Bless You & Yours- AlltheBest-
Another excellent work Sir, thank you!
I have a question. Is annealing brass a plus and is it hard on dies. I was told chrome casings were hard on dies.
I loaded countless thousands of nickel plated 38 Special cases on a Star Universal reloading press that went through one single carbide die for my department. Full length rifle dies are protected by the case lube. The plating is not hard chrome; it's nickel. Plated cases don't respond well to annealing. However, it makes no difference, because plated cases have a much shorter reloading life. Standard brass cases are the best for reloading. Plated cases serve well for police service because they don't tarnish in daily use, but have no particular value apart from that, as they cost more. I did a video on annealing that will answer all your questions.
Hello @GunBlue490 i'm new to the channel and an avid 22. lr shooter. I'm doing my research into defensive arms and would love to hear yours or anyone elses thoughts on the 5.7x28mm used by the Fn five-seven. As a defensive carry gun. I realize its a new round and most of the rounds designed for special use have over the years been proven non sense. I was considering it for its low recoil - high capacity - good penetration. I realize being such a small round at such high velocity, its likely to simply pass threw a target. In some sense that is its intended purpose. One big con is the price of ammo is very high.
If sectional density, bullet weight and bullet velocity is what matters most does that mean 300 blk at 50 yds with 160 grain expanding bullets is just as good for deer as an expanding 158 grain 357 magnum bullet fired from a rifle at the same 50yds with the same velocity? I realize there's a slight difference in diameter, but besides that they should be relatively equal or am I wrong? I reload both calibers and the velocities are almost identical along with case capacities and types of gun powders that can be used. That's why I often nickname the 300 blk as my semi auto 357 magnum carbine.
The 30 caliber bullet has greater sectional density, and will penetrate deeper if bullet construction and velocity are equal. But I consider neither to be anything more than absolute minimum for deer, which should be confined to 50 to 60 yards. Unless you are averse to even small degrees of recoil, I don't recommend minimizing deer cartridges, because there are vastly better rounds.
Yep all things equal the 300blk will penetrate deeper. If you want to deer hunt with it I recommend using the Barnes VOR-TX or tsx round. You can get them from 110gn to 130gn. This is what my 7year old son deer hunts with. These rounds will fully expand to half an inch to 300yds and still penetrate deep enough to hit vitals. I would never use it that far but 150yds and closer if you put it anywheres in the vitals you got yourself a dead deer. I know for a fact. We use the 110gn out of the 11.5 inch gun and the 120gn out of the 16’ gun
I respect your opinion, sir. And have a simple question.
I am proficient with a handgun, and so can execute an accurate kill shot at about 50 yards.
Question: Do you have an opinion of the .480 Ruger for whitetail bucks?
The .480 Ruger has ample power for deer and greater game, with massive frontal area and plenty of bullet mass and velocity to at least 50 yards. It's not limited by it's power; but one must always be able to deliver such power accurately, which is entirely about your capability. Recoil and muzzle blast of the .480 is considerably higher than the .44 Remington Magnum and is truly a veteran handgunner's revolver. If you can handle it with confidence and accuracy, it's more than sufficient. Personally, I consider it unnecessarily potent and expensive for deer, as the .44 Magnum is absolutely sufficient to 50 yards with proper bullets, and has many advantages of lower weight, lower cost, and compatibility with .44 Special target and plinking loads.
GunBlue490 I can’t believe you got back to me so fast!
Thank you. I live in NH and want a little more challenge after harvesting many deer with 12ga slugs, but I want humane kills.
I bought a 9.5 inch .480, but don’t want the animal to run too much. Again, thank you!!
Not sure I agree. What about the energy wave and subsequent tissue cavitation from a GSW? This can result in
significant damage to surrounding tissues that the bullet never touches. The more energy upon impact, the greater the energy wave and cavitation. Meaning, the bullet can penetrate causing no direct lethal injuries, but impart massively destructive peripheral injury to vital structures. A real life example of this was demonstrated during the infamous 1986 Miami FBI shootout. Officer Gordon McNeil was temporarily paralyzed when a bullet lodge close to the spine. The resultant energy wave from the bullet shocked the spinal cord leading to loss of function as if the bullet had directly severed the spinal cord. He was functionally paralyzed (for several hours!) and out of the fight. Thankfully, he fully recovered. So, yes, shot placement kills, but you CANNOT discount kinetic energy which can also kill and seriously maim. You're essentially saying the kinetic shock wave of a bomb cannot kill without debris or shrapnel. Put another way, yes, a 22LR can kill just as easily as a 45-70. However, WHO here would rather take a non-lethal shot to the abdomen with a 45-70 vs a 22LR. Answer: no one in their right mind. This video demonstrates book smarts sans real world application.
Agreed, but I would be willing to bet that the rifle and cartridge you take to go deer hunting meet or exceed the 800ft-lbs advised, at your intended maximum shooting range. And similarly for elk, I bet you would take a combo that will provide 1200 or more ft-lbs (at range) for elk. So it does mean something. Hunters just need to also know the sectional density required/advised for the size of game they are after, and it doesn't hurt to know that there are several reasons why it's better to kill with caliber and not velocity. The most important of which you mentioned: prem bullets can fail at too close or too far from the target. There would be a distance at which a 22-250 would be fine for a shot on deer, but why would you take a gun with such range restrictions deer hunting? Take one that works for all expected ranges.
notes on cxp & hits ratings with game wt and sectional density
cxp1
I would like you to do a segment on Point Blank Range kind of in the format you did on recoil .
Starting at 22lr up to 338 lapua.ish
Would be awesome
I look forward to every new video you post. I sincerely appreciate your frank common-sense approach.
I have a suggestion for a new video. What is your opinion of the Remington 700 Walker trigger controversy. I've owned several older 700's with the Walker triggers and still use two heavy barrel varmint 700's for Prairie Dogs. I've adjusted those triggers down to just over 1 pound and they are rock solid safety wise--no amount of severe jarring will cause a fire. I've always loved the Remington 700's and have the opinion that the factory Walker triggers were among the very best of factory original triggers, especially for varmint shooters that wanted a really good trigger adjustable down to suitable weight for precision varmint shooting. However, the last one I purchased, a youth model with the X-Mark trigger in .243 for my grandson, is a piece of junk. I finally replaced the trigger with a Timney that cost me nearly half what I paid for the rifle/scope promo package. Unacceptable! I now recommend Savage rifles to friends, my kids, and grand-kids. I'm afraid the Walker trigger controversy and 60 minutes has dealt a death-knell to Remington. A travesty to say the least!
Well, it's rather a moot point at this time, as Remington has made the change. However, the Walker trigger was made correctly and never had any safety issues, other than the ones that were created by improper maintenance and unsafe trigger pull reduction. As a factory trained Remington Armorer, I must inform you that the Walker trigger should NEVER be reduced below 2.5 pounds under ANY circumstances. Despite the performance to date of your rifle, it is categorically unsafe. The reason is simply that your sear is holding only by friction, rather than spring retention, which is mandated to insure that the trigger won't trip. My current Remington 700 CDL has the new sealed trigger and it works fine, though it maintains a pull of no less than 3 lbs., which is well within precision limits for a field varminter. It is the same pull weight that my precision Model 70 Winchesters have in their MOA trigger at full reduction. Both rifles are easily capable of 3/8" accuracy with the right ammo. Understand what your rifle is being used for. It's not a bench rifle. A safe rifle trumps a 1/4 inch any day. Thanks for sharing.
I'd like to see you do a vid explaining pneumothorax wounds and the myth of the fragile bullet that "explodes" in the chest cavity.
I did discuss that issue in last year's video on shot placement. It's not a myth, but it is not a recommended practice. It's based on a number of flawed premises and misunderstandings of game animal anatomy, field conditions, and contrary expectations that a varmint bullet, purposely engineered to have zero to nil penetration on impact, engineered to vaporize on contact with small varmints, will somehow behave in a pridictable manner on thick skinned game, and somehow survive passage through hair, hide, muscle tissue, rib cage, and then dense, fluid filled lungs. They delude themselves further to imagine also that game animals present themselves in picturesque broadside poses for square-on lung shots. Such bullets are incapable of penetrating though the more typical acute rear angles that game animals give when they are escaping danger. Moreover, they engage in bad medical science. Such bullets most often manage to destroy only the first lung, if it gets that far. Game animals are tenacious of life and will run very long distances on a single lung. Similarly, they can escape for three minutes on a dead run with a perfect heart shot. They have silly expectations that a lung shot deer can be tracked, but the reality is that, if a varmint bullet manages to get into the thorax, the entry wound closes and all bleeding is internal, with nothing to track, with a deer that is literally flying, leaving one set of prints buried in fall leaves every 15 feet that don't go in the same direction twice in a row, and can't be found unless you were brought up as an Indian scout. Panicked deer are masters at survival and will head for swamps or high ridges; anywhere that man can't go, where they will die, unfound by the stupid hunter.
The correctly constructed bullet is engineered for the specific purpose of traversing flesh and bone until all energy is exhausted, with the ideal of full and complete penetration, exiting the other side. The bullet that exits the thorax with a wide wound allows air to enter the vacuum of the lung compartment, and cause immediate collapse. Lungs are inflated in that vacuum and cannot billow when the vacuum escapes. Bullet designers do not program termination depths into game bullets.
Been done g2 rip bullets on paul harrel video
Is .22 magnum from kel tec pmr 30 a good self defense round?
No. The 22 Magnum has greatly reduced velocity in short barrelled handguns that is severely lacking in frontal area. I consider the 380 Auto (it's a true 9mm bore) to be the least sufficient round for a self defense handgun, and there are many very good ones, and ammo is highly developed and effective for self defense. The 22 Winchester Magnum is a small caliber varmint round that requires a long barrel for effective velocity, and it was never intended or structured for performance in handguns or for self defense.
The thumbnail put a smile on my face haha!
You are the best, very educational 👍 God bless.
Great video. Keep them coming!
The example of the girl and baseball player running around the bases are not a good analog in my opinion because the energy required includes the energy necessary to move those people, so there isn't much energy left over to match the remaining energy of a bullet which is astronomically lighter & faster and only needs to travel through the air and the portion of flesh and bone it comes into contact with determined by its circumference. Put another way, how much energy would a bullet have have to move a person like that? We have to consider all the variables that break down or use up energy (which is a measurement expressed by 1/2 mass x velocity squared). Think of energy as a bank account. You start out with a thousand dollars (ft. lbs.). Now withdraw how much energy you'll need determined by the energy required to move the bullet through the air and body (assuming mass, velocity, ballistic coefficient, sectional density, etc.). It's all about energy.
You really didn’t understand it.
Would be nice if ballistics charts had a field for sectional density.
It would be, but I think the omission is intentional, or much ammo would go stale on shelves.
Momentum is the correct "yardstick" for power not kinetic energy. Comparing cartridges momentum is much revealing of their actual power. If we think about simply what power is we find that it's simply the ability to move any given amount of mass. If for example you shoot a steel plate on a sliding rail to stop the bullet from multiple calibers you will realize the distance moved is linear with the momentum of the caliber. Therefore, it's ability to move the mass (tissue, metal, water, etc) equals it's power
no
Thanks! I took out my Model 54 .257 Roberts yesterday and it still shoots 1" groups . I last fiddled with it's Tasco maybe 25 years ago. I have been using Hornady Super performance 117 grain. My rañge friend wants to reload for it. I have a lot of brass. Do you have any heavy bullet loads that you would care to share? This gun takes the high pressure factory stuff with no issues. Built in 1936. Thanks for your videos.
I shoot mostly the lighter loads, and have lots of data developed for 75, 85, 87, and 100 grain bullets. I have one load for 117 grain Hornady Interlock Spire Boat Tail, and while I never played with different loads, I immediately found one that gives 3/4 MOA consistently in my limited edition Model 70 Featherweight. Be sure to check it against laboratory load data before using it, and work up to it in increments of .4 tenths grain.
R-P cases, WLR primers, Hornady 117 SPBT (I prefer flat base but bought what I could get), 42.6 grains of IMR-4350. Seat to cannelure depth, or as your rifle prefers. It gives about 2,910 fps. That powder will perform well with any of the Roberts loads. My rifle loves an old batch of H-4831 that I still have with 100 grain Sierra match bullets, and I am sure it would be great with 117 or 120, but I have not tried it yet.
@@GunBlue490 thanks and I will report back
@gunblue490 I would love to see you do a video on long range bullet performance or lack thereof. I believe Nosler explains this best with there minimum bullet velocity recommendations, such as 1800fps as a minimum for most hunting bullets. People taking extreme range shots (500y or more ) at deer sized game when their bullet is close too or subsonic is ludicrous! The bullet lacks the correct terminal velocity to expand correctly and cause sufficient tissue damage. Even with a magnum caliber, the time of flight is long enough to allow a grazing deer to move, as that so call perfect shot is released. This results in a wounded deer taking several days to die. I believe with your teaching methods, you could shed some light on the subject and dispel the myth. Cheers 😊
The Lyman 47th edition reloading manual has what they call Optimum Game Weight. This states the least bullet weight and energy you should be using for listed big game animals. Most of the small caliber firearms touted today do not pass muster, especially at longer ranges.
An arrow is a good example to illustrate that energy does not equal killing power. Magazine writers and maketing ploys are what started the false notion of energy equaling killing power. The whole concept of killing power itself is shaky. The magnum craze is still alive.
I like your videos. But I think this one is misleading. Obviously shot placement, bullet construction and so on are important. But energy is still probably the best single number metric that will tell you the most about killing power. Try to choose a grizzly protection gun based on bullet diameter or velocity alone, it's clearly not gonna work. But something with 3500 joules of energy will most likely be adequate. Taking everything into consideration will be the best approach, I agree, but if you are limited to providing a single number, energy is still the king.
Did you actually watch the full video? I made your points specifically clear. But, energy is absolutely not the best indicator, or one might be mislead to believe that a 50 grain 22-250 at 100 yards is equal to a 300 grain 375 H&H Magnum at 500 yards, which is clearly not the case. I don't recommend using a 375 at such range, but manufacturers play with energy for promotional purposes that are often VERY misleading. Such is the case with the 350 Legend. A 150 grain 357 diameter bullet is NOT the penetration equal of a 150 or 170 grain 30-30 bullet at 200 yards, and they know it, because they conveniently compared energy at that range but didn't compare their penetration values, where the Legend with it's weak sectional density could not possibly compete with the far greater sectional density of the longer 30 caliber. Neither does a comparison of energy within bullet weights inform anything about their killing value, because it's not uncommon for heavier bullets to yeild less energy than lighter ones, as is true with most 375 H&H loads. All great bear cartridges have big energy, but big energy out of context with bullet weight, sectional density, diameter and construction are 100 worthless. Kinetic energy is NOT a reliable indicator of killing value. But the manufacturers appreciate that you think so. Please watch my videos in context. I've been involved with ballistics most of my life, much of as a professional in police work who devoted lots of my own energy working with authorities in law enforcement and the gun industry. I'm not selling anything. I'm not competing in a marketplace for your money. I'm not a 28 year old marketing graduate working at fancy company booth at the Shot Show who will be selling golf shoes next month. I'm an experienced professional, with no slanted positions. I'm here to separate folks from much of the circulating gun nonsense that contaminate truth, so that you may learn what I wish to pass on before I die.
You say you want thumb safety in striker fired guns? Reasoning?
No. I said that I do not recommend or approve of guns without a safety. I am a certified, experienced police firearms instructor since the early 70s, and I have seen numerous accidents with very capable, trained and experienced officers and private persons. I articulated my reasoning quite clearly in my video. If Mr. Glock and others desire to omit that feature, it's their stupidity, but my moral duty is to present facts, not support for what I know is absurd and factually unsafe. I own striker fired handguns that have safeties and they present no hindrance to swiftness in the least. A safety is quickly disengaged, but a bullet sent unintentionally is not returned.
GunBlue490 thank you. I asked same question in a forum and almost all replies tell me safety is inbetween my ears And a thumb safety is not needed!
Btw what striker fired pistols have thumb safeties. Smith and wesson?
Engineering view: What you are describing as tissue destruction is the effects of a supersonic shock wave inside the body cavity. The effect seems most dramatic in the lung cavity. This does take energy, but a fairly small bullet has plenty of energy to remain supersonic after penetrating into the body, which is why a 75 grain bullet strong enough to penetrate does just about as well as a 200 grain one. A smaller bullet may not have the speed required after breaking through bone, or may not hold together well enough if lightly constructed.
I had a heart shot once from close range that blew up the heart and the bullet to such an extent that the bullet did not exit. The deer ran off and there was not a drop of a blood trail so I thought, incredulously, that I might have missed. He dropped behind a blackberry patch, just out of sight from the stand, so was easily recovered, but there were a few doubtful moments.
I have a question off topic of this video. I am new to reloading. And i am having trouble finding load data for 38special and 357magnum. Where i can use the same powder. For the 110g xtp bullet. What would you suggest?
Geez, buy a reloading manual. .38 is the most widely reloaded handgun cartridge out there. Any manual will have data for it. Once you buy the manual read the whole thing, not just the loading data. The manual will also have data for both pistol and rifle in the .357.
outstanding video with proper examples - i have been thinking on this for a while and was starting to have the starry eyed affect on a few cartridges myself. You've cleared it up partially with this video... I'm hoping you have more videos including the other variables of a bullet's flight. -
Mike.
Doesn’t the energy transfer into and cause the tissue destruction thereby causing potential death? And so therefore it seems the energy is the catalyst that affects the end result.
No, it is the combination of bullet frontal area and speed through tissue that causes tissue destruction. Energy is simply the force that drives it. To put it simply, a very small, lightweight bullet of expanding design driven at high velocity can easily effect greater tissue destruction than a far heavier bullet of much greater physical energy that doesn't expand. Similarly, any given cartridge delivers approximately the same energy with every bullet weight, due to the equalizing effects of velocity and weight, though each weight has different sectional density, with different penetration, and may have far different expansion characteristics. There's not much difference in energy between a 110 grain 30-06 and a 220 grain 30-06, but they are used for vastly different size animals from blowing up woodchucks to taking down brown bear. No, energy is the driving force, but it has nothing to do with killing effect.
GunBlue490 thanks for taking the time to explain. 😃
VERY WELL DONE SIR! CORRECT ME IF I'M WRONG, BUT I SEE MANY ARCHERY HUNTERS THAT RELY ON TISSUE DAMAGE RATHER THAN KINETIC ENERGY TO BAG THEIR GAME, SAME FOR A HUNTING BULLET DESIGN... ITS BOILS DOWN TO TISSUE DAMAGE!
That's entirely correct. High sectional density, complete penetration, and massive wound cavity.
You’re comparing energy values at differing distances. Some are 300, 400, and 500 yards. Energy dissipates over distance. Let’s compare apples to apples and look at the different bullets. That said, so glad you pointed out the real issue when selecting a hunting round, lethality (tissue damage).
I was not making comparisons. I was illustrating that energy alone has no value, and can distort performance. What I was illustrating is that the 22-250 and 375 H&H can each have the same energy value, but that the energy does not describe their killing value. At ANY range, the 22-250 is never a 300 grain 375 H&H at any range, despite deceptive energy numbers that some might infer from it. I put this video up because such implications that raw energy numbers can be compared are being made by some manufacturers. I want folks to remember that energy apart from bullet specifications has no relative relationship whatsoever. Moreover, energy can be very misleading and are not good means of comparisons. Larger bullets require more energy to penetrate, but smaller diameter bullets can effect terrific penetration and destruction without having such high energy. A 6.5 or 270 diameter bullet of high sectional density that fully penetrates can be far more effective than a 308 bullet of low sectional density that has a significantly higher energy figure but can't drive through. Arrows create massive tissue damage with little energy, because they have fantastic sectional density combined with lacerating knives that do exactly what a good bullet must do; get through as far as possible and tear up tissue on the way. Whatever energy does that for a given bullet is a nebulous factor that cannot be ascribed to a chart. The more important value is knowledge of a particular cartridges performance. If a 300 Winchester Magnum is a good 350 yard elk and moose round, it is that. If a 30-30 is a good 150 yard deer round, it is that. If a 223 is a good 300 yard varmint round, it is that. We need not contemplate nebulous numbers on a page that have no functional reality.
Excellent explanation 🙏🏻
I love your channel, but I might have to disagree about energy not being a "killing value", but let me preface this by saying that there is no such thing as a killing value which I am aware. You can't point to any one thing that I am aware of to determine the killing power, or incapacitation power for that matter (as it matters for self-defense and perhaps dangerous game). I think we can arrive at a combination of values (variables) that will determine the effectiveness of the round, but I think there are a few points germane to a much longer discussion. One, self-defense, and possibly dangerous game (bears and lions), is more about incapacitation because a person or a dangerous animal can do a lot of damage in a second or two. As one doctor who studies ballistics put it, a persona can continue to fight for up to 15 seconds (some "people" say 30)-without a heart. In other words, there have been documented cases where someone's heart was destroyed but the person continued to shoot, stab or otherwise fight without a working circulatory system. But again, that's mostly self-defense or dangerous game animal.
Second, before I fake deep knowledge of physics I don't possess, in my defense, all physics is theoretical despite it being treated as fact. That said, I'm sure you probably know this but merely misspoke, you said kinetic energy is the mass and the volume squared, but this is incorrect and it might have skewed your thinking if you're remembering it in these terms. Kinetic energy is 1/2 mass times velocity squared. In other words, the mass counts, but the velocity matters exponentially more as we are cutting the mass in half (by multiplying it by 1/2) and we're multiplying that by the exponentially raised velocity to the second power (velocity squared). This probably isn't a big deal in this discussion, but it's worth noting when considering the way mass and velocity work together. I find it fascinating because both mass and velocity do nothing on their own. A particle of light hitting our skin does nothing, yet a bolder does nothing if doesn't move (or move much).
Lastly, the kinetic energy is the potion of mechanical energy that dominates ballistics. It is a component of "mechanical energy" which does the work. Mechanical energy is a combination of potential energy and kinetic energy. A classic example of the former is a bolder hoisted above the ground. While it is suspended in the air, it contains potential energy equal to the force required to raise the bolder to whatever height is achieved. That's not really applicable in a practical way to ballistics as the potential energy stored in a round is an abstract (how much mechanical energy was required to make it? Do we look at the handloader? Do we consider the forces of nature that created the elements found in the powder, lead, etc...? It's kind of like the particle of light. I am sure there is a mindblowing number that could be arrived at theoretically of how much work was necessary to create that particle of light shooting out of the sun and towards the earth, but it's not exactly a practical man stopper for hunting or self protection. Therefore, we're concerned with the component of mechanical energy responsible for doing the work when an object is in motion (kinetic energy). It is the kinetic energy, and not merely one of its components (mass or velocity) that is responsible for everything. It is what both moves the bullet and its what enables that bullet to have the mechanical energy to destroy tissue. By the way, I head one trauma room surgeon contradict something the Yankee Marshal said which I knew was utterly false when he said it. He believed that to incapacitate a person rapidly the bullet needed to pass through the body to give the blood somewhere to go (to rapidly reduce blood pressure so the person quickly becomes unconscious). The surgeon said that is absolutely false because there is more than enough volume in the body cavity for the blood to rush into making an exit wound completely unnecessary. Add to that the fact that the subcutaneous fat deposits of a bear can often plug the hole and minimize blood loss outside the body and it's easy to understand the surgeon is likely right.
So energy is everything, but as I left in a post earlier today as I binge watch your wonderful channel-just because you start out with a sort of potential energy (muzzle energy, which I doesn't satisfy the definition, but speaking as a lay person, we judge how much energy a round has potentially as it leaves the barrel)-that doesn't mean that whatever is left of that kinetic energy by the time it reaches the animal is going to be absorbed by the animal's tissue. If too powerful of a round is used, it will zip through the animal through and through and do significantly less damage than if the entire payload had been delivered. This is why I wrote that a .44 Magnum is not any more effective than a 9mm because it passes through a person so easily that half of its energy leaves along with it. But even though the energy we can expect still exists by the time the bullet reaches its mark can be quantified, it is far from the end of the story. The bullet's design, where and what it hit, and how easily the bullet passed through the animal (if it did at all) all factor into it. Like you said, having it pass through both lungs is ideal, but better yet, I'd rather it not exist the animal's skin once passing through the ribs, or at least not leave the animal's body with much energy which is just wasted energy.
So energy is everything, but muzzle energy is not, but neither is velocity. It is less of a determinate than muzzle energy in my opinion just the way a particle of light traveling approximately 300000 km/s, or 186000 miles per second can't stop an animal. Although I don't have a great answer, what might provide a profile for a good hunting round for a particular application is the amount of kinetic energy expected to arrive at a given distance coupled with the sectional density of the bullet to predict penetration (borrowing your definition of sectional density from earlier today). Although the ballistic coefficient (which you and I both refer to as how aerodynamic a bullet is) helps predict how much energy is delivered at a given distance (remember, velocity is nothing without mass, so we're not trying to determine velocity. We want to know the kinetic energy which is going to deliver the mechanical energy needed to do the damage [since the potential energy is too much of an abstract to be a concern).
You said "bullets don't kill by energy, they kill by bullet destruction." You also said that it is a bullet's diameter, sectional density, weight, etc. that allows the bullet to go into the tissue. This is not true in my opinion as it is the mechanical energy (which includes both kinetic & the illusive potential energy) that does the work. What those variables you spoke of do is help us understand how enough energy remains for the bullet to do its job. Take for example ballistic gel tests. A permanent wound channel with a 9mm or .45" diameter isn't considered very good. It's not the diameter, bullet weight/sectional density, or velocity that does the damage, it is all these things together that helps us understand how much mechanical energy is there to tear tissue beyond the diameter of the bullet. In other words, as a 9mm diameter bullet starts cutting through the tissue, what makes a 2.5" PWC? The answer is energy. The energy is released by a combination of potential energy (whatever that is) and kinetic energy (which is 1/2 x m x v²). Velocity by itself, sectional density by itself, mass by itself, etc. are nothing as none of these things can exist without the other (speaking of mass and velocity in particular). These things working together is what we refer to as energy. It's about how much energy you end up with which starts by knowing how much energy the bullet starts with to have the mechanical energy necessary to do the work (destroy tissue in the most way for taking an animal down quickly and cleanly). So we use certain variables like mass (just a variable of energy), ballistic coefficient (how aerodynamic the bullet is [to help conserve energy]), sectional density (how heavy & thin the bullet is to conserve energy [to allow the bullet to penetrate deeply]), and velocity (just another variable of energy) to help predict what energy will remain and where to allow a bullet to do its job (we don't want this energy to exist outside of the animal anymore than may be necessary to do the damage it needs to do).
Can I stop reading Your novel when you misquote the speaker? Good because I stopped reading when you said he was wrong when he said ".. mass x volume.." ; he never said that. He said kinetic energy "... is mass x velocity squared." Which is correct.
I appreciate and enjoy your videos and certainly agree that tissue and nerve damage and blood loss are what kill animals.
Where’s the bullet get it’s velocity from?
It would seem that, other than a 'lung shot', the ideal is to have the bullet expand rather quickly, after penetrating just 20 cm (4"), or so, producing the largest amount of energy transfer, into the largest amount of tissue, in the middle of the targeted area? Of course, the 'middle' is at different distance in different animals(even different parts of the anatomy), so that penetration and expansion profiles would be different for game with large size differences? As Mr. GB seems to be saying, it's not the energy, per se, but how the energy is dissipated, that equates to 'killing power'. Oh, and, shot placement ;-)
You apparently were schooled in the energy transfer myth. Apart from possibly being momentarily taken off stride by the punch, game animals suffer no consequence from the so-called transfer of energy. It's false science of the highest. It was born in the 70s in the search for police cartridges that would penetrate minimally to prevent bullet pass through that would endanger innocent bystanders. That quest was misinterpreted by many including some police gun writers that we were trying to "anchor" with all available bullet energy, with the belief that bullets that passed through wasted energy. That had nothing to do with it whatsoever. The game field offers no restrictions on bullet pass through. The goal is to fully penetrate both sides of the thorax to allow outside air into the vacuum of the sealed chest cavity, thereby collapsing the lungs immediately, which is the swiftest means of stopping all activity. Entrance holes seal up, preventing that air entry. Exit wounds are large and the vacuum immediately is lost, as in the reverse of popping a balloon. Most folks have heard of collapsed lungs, but are not aware of what it is. In the military, one is taught to arrest "sucking chest wounds" by sealing the holes of ones compatriot with the plastic wrapper of a field bandage before the lung collapses and breathing ceases.
When assessing a cartridge for a particular application, I tend to look at the historical record of that particular cartridge. What worked in the past should work today. I have a lot of respect for the hunters of old, they needed to put food on the table and didn't have a lot of extra spending money, so they were very realistic and practical. That works for me. Thank you GunBlue!
Excellent explanation as always.
Great videos. .243 What is the maximum range for Fallow for example and why? don't understand why they coudn't (theoretically )be taken at a mile but people say only 250 yds. I'm just shoot at 100 yds Just trying to understand. Thanks for all the info. Do occasional reloading. Down to earth stuff.
If you're speaking of local laws regarding fallow deer, I cannot help you. Good sportsmanship and ethical hunting for the preservation of game demands that every hunter keep his shots within the range that he can strike an animal's vitals (lungs, thorax) with virtual certainty under the existing conditions. That does not mean what his gun is capable of. It means what the hunter knows he or she is capable of. Secondly, that hunter must have an understanding of the cartridge, and killing ability at various distances. Hunting is not target shooting, where a miss is inconsequential. Wounding game that runs off to die is a needless waste of a precious resource. I hear a lot of loose talk, videos, and stupid advertising that suggests long shots on game beyond 400 or 500 yards, which is asinine beyond all measures of good sportsmanship, and is indeed reflecting poorly on the sport. When a property owner discovers carcasses that were wasted by idiotic pot shots and posts his property in anger, it's the hunter's fault, not his. Most experienced hunters will tell you that they have rarely taken game beyond 250 yards, and if it's longer than 300 yards, they work closer, which is why it's called hunting, not shooting.
Thank you for making it understandable.
Very well put!! In my younger years, I was very much misled. Your analogy is spot on. Thank you for sharing. God Bless. And a treat for Benny! 👍
Thank you very much for your videos, sir.
Dead on once again GunBlue490. The energy figures are meaningless if you don't have any other data. God Bless. And keep posting!
I'm still searching for that gun that's quiet as mouse, can knock down a tree, and has no recoil.... that exists right?
I'm thinking lasers.
@@axe609 FRICKIN LAZERS!!
Flame thrower
Yes, It’s called “time”.
Great information. Thank you for sharing it.
Great video. I learn more and more every episode.
I wonder if there’s a formula that incorporates sectional density and could give a better apple to Apple’s comparison.
Watch my sectional density video. Deer and other hunting requires no formulas. Any deer bullet should ideally have a sectional density of .240 and a minimum caliber of .243. Deer don't require heavy calibers, and 7mm diameter is more than sufficient and offers less recoil than larger bores for the same sectional density. Watch my caliber selection video.
I'de say your the one that has missunderstood kinetic energy. It is important and it makes a difference. In fact I'de say its the most represental for killing value out of anything you can find as long as you know what you are talking about. Sectional density also makes a big difference ofcourse but only up to a certain point. How much energy you plant at your target matters and you can whine all you want about it but that doesnt change the fact
Thank you for your service, and these excellent videos. I've learned so much from you. I wish I'd known about you sooner.
What type of gun is able to fire a 14 pound Canadian goose? Has Ruger developed one of their Hawkeyes in this caliber? :)
I'd recommend a punt gun for geese. Or toss some frag grenades at em. Geese are dangerous, horrible creatures. Kinda like feds.
One thing is for sure. The difference between 100 yd's and 500 yd's is 400 yd's !
Yeah. What was his point?
@@conebread711 He compared 22-250 100 yd. energy to the other caliper's 300 & 500 yd, energy's. I'm sure he knew better and I'm not sure why he did it.
The energy levels that are given in ballistic charts give a good general idea of the power of the cartridge. I think all of us know that it isn't a good measure of killing power but if you're going to compare energy levels, do it at the same distance.
I wish it was him that made the reply that you did, so I could tell him I much I enjoy his channel and the privilege to debate some of the issues he presents.
I sit here with a big smile on my face watching his videos and listening to his opinions. Not to mention all the stuff I've learned.
Since we're at it here. What is the point of a 250 yd. zero on a 243 with a 4 power scope ?
1.5 power or what ever it was. For deer hunting no less.
Yeah. I think that scope is designed for a bow gun, AR-15, 22lr or something that needs a 25 yard zero. It had a small objective lens that won't let much light in and very little magnification, so it is just a little better than iron sights. He was saying that scope companies are selling you something you don't need. Maybe, whoever sold him the 243 should have sold him a bow gun.Back to the energy ---- the 22-250 Hornady 50 gr Superformace Varmint will drop a deer at 250 yards like a 22lr will drop a rabbit at 25 yards. Hornady got it right and that is a fact!They don't make ammo or scopes like they use to --- they make them better. I enjoy listening to GunBlue490. I also enjoy the new modern ammo and scopes.
@@conebread711 I liked the scope & rifle combo he had. I just didn't agree with the 250 yd. zero he had on it. He's over 2 inches high at 100 yards with that setting. If he tries to send a bullet down the opposing sniper's scope tube, he'll do nothing more than plug the bugger's barrel.
But it is easier to make stuff up than it is to do all of this logic and thinking. Next thing you will tell up is the bigger the splash in ballistic gel the better a killing bullet it will be. I refuse to believe that all deer and bad guys are not full of ballistic gel. Now on a serious note, which would be a better black bear defence choice, .357 mag six shot, 6" revolver or 15 round 10mm semi-auto 4.5" barrel?
Pepper spray... :)
Black bear live in my neighborhood, and they visit us regularly. I would be a fool to hunt one with any handgun. No experienced guide I know would even allow handguns on a hunt. I know of a circumstance where four bear dogs were killed when a large black bear came scurrying down a tree and wiped them out after being shot several times with a 44 Magnum. The bear finally was taken down with five dead hits at point blank range with a rifle fully loaded with 180 grain 308 bullets before it killed people. He did not wish to die and it was only by Providence that it did. One does not hunt black bear with toys. A 357 or 10mm or any handgun is as good as a cap gun to a nasty, scared black bear. One swipe or bite and you're dead.
This is a very good instructional video. I'm just starting to get interested in fire arms [at 69 yrs old] . Do you have a video about bullet shapes [ hollow point, FMJ, ] in relation to; the game your hunting, distance, velocity, caliber and so on. Thank you again for such great videos.
Whats better a bullet that dumps all its energy and doesnt exit or one that goes right thru ?
Great data cleared up a lot many thanks.
Good one.
I'm afraid that you're a bit confused on this topic and you're failing to consider alot of factors into all of your examples. Tissue damage is produced by transfer of kinetic energy. Doing so is affected by weight, bullet type/construction (Such as hollowpoint/soft point VS full metal jacket/speer point), etc. A bullet can have a ton of velocity, but if the bullet is a full metal jacket it will not expand and transfer that kinetic energy instead it will pass through causing minimal damage. However you can have a bullet with less velocity that expands to transfer the kinetic energy and it will cause greater damage. How ever if I toss a good expanding bullet at you it will not have the velocity to penetrate nor expand to transfer the kinetic energy.
With your name, you should not be afraid. No, I am not confused. This is not my first time out of the gate, and as a teaching ballistics authority for over 45 years, practical hunter and factory certified firearms armorer, public lecturer, having witnessed many autopsies of shooting victims, and facts derived from medical personnel, I can say that I am not confused. I can say with authority however that the analysis you gave is a combination of misinformation and failure to listen to what I stated. Kinetic energy does not transfer. It gets used up in the process of penetrating though a medium. Bullet expansion and tissue destruction occurs with velocity and the bullet mass that drive it through by kinetic energy. The goal of a bullet is not to punch with kinetic energy. The sole purpose of a bullet is to effect tissue damage that ceases life. An expanding bullet driven through lung tissue through and through stops breathing, and it's stopped quicker if it exits the opposite side of the chest cavity and leaves a hole that evacuates the vacuum around the lungs. Lungs cannot billow without that vacuum and immediately collapse. No sir, I am not confused. I'm attempting to correct lots of myths that have been perpetuated by stupid writers for decades that have infected readers who trusted stupid writers.
I have always wondered these things about energy didn’t always make sense but you put some light into it.
I hunt mostly with a bow and with 40 lb kinetic energy my arrow can blow through deer and 1 1/2 hole clean through. Different projectile but it does put thought into the energy and projectile types.
This is a great thing about being a gun and caliber nut like me. I own about 30 guns, from bolt action, lever actions, pumps, and a few semi autos and some of these guns are in the same calibers and gauge. I own calibers any were from a 22 LR up to the 444 Marlin, up to the 45-70 and up to the 338 Win mag. So I am for sure covered to hunt anything in North America and Canada, if not Africa or the rest of the world. Not unless I have to use something like a 375 Ruger or a 375 H&H which I do not have no plans to go on an African hunt. But hoping someday I will get to shoot the 6.5 CM or the 243 Win.
Sounds good as long as you use them all properly when hunting.
@@vincef5832 I actually use about half of them for hunting. About the other half of them were handled down to me from my grandpa, dad etc...and just only keep them cause they were part of them. I just cannot believe I am one of the few in my family that loves guns and weapons this much.
Now I wanna go skiing and to the circus
A formula 1 car doing 300km/hr into a wall has a lot of kinetic energy. But it’s the change in momentum in a given time which matters. So it’s the rate the bullet can dump the energy which matters
Hello Sir! Thanks for this very detailed, informative and easy to understand Vid! God bless you, your family for and friends and Benny, of course!
I'll preface by saying that I have a master's in mechanical engineering, and worked as a spacecraft engineer, so I understand the difference between momentum and kinetic energy quite well, and the topic of bullet damage is an important one. For a given bullet diameter, let's take 357 magnum for example, you can have light bullets that travel very fast, and have high ft-lb of muzzle energy. A heavier 357 magnum bullet, with less muzzle energy, can have more muzzle momentum than the lighter bullet with more muzzle energy. Upon hitting the target, both momentum and energy are conserved. However, energy and momentum are conserved in different ways. Kinetic energy when penetrating the target, can be lost in a number of different ways, including heat. Bullet momentum when hitting the target, must be conserved by both the weight of the bullet+target. It would be interesting to see ballistic gel tests on this subject. For an apples to apples test, the bullets would have to be the same design, such as a round nose FMJ. Two bullets of different weights, but with the exact same muzzle energy, could be fired into the ballistic gel. However, while those bullets may have the same kinetic energy when hitting the ballistic gel, they will each have different momentum upon penetration. The heavier bullet will have more momentum. I don't know, because I've never seen an apples to apples ballistic gel test. But, my guess would be that the bullet with higher momentum, will penetrate farther, and do more damage. I don't know if this is true, but it seems logical. When purchasing bullets, I would recommend choosing a 180-200 gr bullet, with decent muzzle energy, as opposed to a 135 gr bullet with higher muzzle energy. I also wouldn't recommend buying the heaviest bullets. Distance is a factor. A heavier bullet will drop more with distance. I'd also compare the momentum of a heavy bullet, against the momentum of a 180-200 gr handgun bullet. The heavier bullet is likely to have less momentum. All that said, without apples to apples ballistic gel test comparisons, we can't really know which factor is more important, muzzle energy or muzzle momentum.
very good info