The Bullet Weight thing again

[Glanceblamm]

Has been excellent reading and very interesting as I will take the .45 colt along for the ride next deer season. Have never done this before.

Kind of reminds me of the old Small bore, Large bore arguments the rifle shooters have had for years. I always belonged to the large bore shooters point of view untill I popped a few coyotes with the .22-250. If you double the bullet weight, you double the energy. If you double the velocity, you quadruple the energy.

Large bore theory can be demonstrated using equipment as simple as the air rifle. The .177 has more velocity, and energy than the same brand in the .22 cal. The latter will bend or break the air rifle targets while the .177 wont though.

I am out of my league on the Handgun though. Velocity's seem to be much closer ranged whether one uses the 180gr, 240-250gr, or even a 300gr.
I know that shot placement is #1 and we want the bullet to stay together but would like your thoughts on these weights, velocitys, and principals.

[Larry Gibson]

glanceblamm

"Has been excellent reading and very interesting as I will take the .45 colt along for the ride next deer season. Have never done this before."


You provide lots of good thoughts however, to answer your question will require the need to know which handgun in .45 Colt you have.  There are three different power ranges depending on whether it is an older SAA type, a Ruger or S&W,  or whether it is in the league of a Freedoms Arms or TC Contender.  Your options will vary accordingly.

Larry Gibson

[Glanceblamm]

Mine is the Ruger Vaquero 7-1/2" Barrel .45 Colt

My reloading manual does cover the power range, and has a page for T/C, Ruger, Colt Anaconda, Dan Wesson & Freedom arms Revolvers.

[crawfish]

I always smile when I see posts by our long gun hunting brothers/sisters talking about pushing bullets fast. We as handgun hunters operate at a very upper level and mostly much less than hardly any self-respecting long gun hunter would even consider as adequate yet we kill animals very dead very quick in large sizes and numbers. All things being equal I rather shoot 250g bullets in my .41s’ than 210g bullets. The reason being that even though I haven’t shot a deer in anyplace other than center shoulder broad side and have gotten pass through and both shoulders broken with all bullets from 170g-285g at the 25 yards or less range I have set for myself there will come a day when I will have to shoot through 40 inches of animal and that big old 250g .41 has a much better chance than a 210.
You speak of your.22-250 and coyotes and I see that like a birthday candle and boiling water. Put that candle under a thimble full of water and you will boil it dry in short order. Take that candle put it under a 1 gallon bucket (small bullet very fast against big critters) and you may get warm before the candle burns up. So looking at that 1700fps safe upper end with a 170g or a 250g at 1500fps maybe and still being safe I’ll go with the heavy just in case I run up against that rogue 1 gallon water bucket.
:eek:

[WD45]

For the 45 colt I would go no lower than 250 gr. I like the motto of ( heavy and slow is the way to go and big and flat is where its at    )
I have killed a lot of game and have seen a lot of game killed and one thing I have seen is the heavier moderate speed bullets work on a consistent basis.

[Larry Gibson]

glanceblamm

"Mine is the Ruger Vaquero 7-1/2" Barrel .45 Colt. My reloading manual does cover the power range, and has a page for T/C, Ruger, Colt Anaconda, Dan Wesson & Freedom arms Revolvers.[/quote]"

Well you are certainly going to be able to push several types of bullets around at decent velocities with that revolver which will suffice for deer.  You didn't mention whether the sights were regulated for a particular load.  If you have a mild type cowboy load that you've regulated the sights to then try several different bullet weights and powders to regulate a load to the sights.  You are not going to kill them if you can't put the bullet where it needs to go regarless of the bullet used.

The 250 SWC Keith type cast are always a decent choice for your revolver as mentioned.  Take a look at the 200 gr XTP and Gold Dots along with the 250 gr Gold Dot.  Any of those will do fine on deer also.  Go with the recommended powders and loads in your manual for the Ruger and you'll do fine.  Again, the important thing is to regulate the loads to the sights for the zero you want, having the group hit just above the front sight at 25 yards isn't a bad zero for a fixed sight handgun out to 50 or so yards.  If you haven't filed down the front sight to adjust the elevation for another load and think you may stick with this "hunting" load then that is an option.  Regulating a load to the sights sounds harder to do than it really is and besides it's fun and provides you with practice.  

Let us know what you do and, of course, how you did.

Larry Gibson

[Glanceblamm]

Good Answers!

Crawfish
You hit common sense right on top of the head when you spoke of the 25yd range for hunting. The weights and velocitys will definatly insure clean kills here and I dont have to worry about a heavy 300gr running out of energy somewhere out past 50yds

LMG
Your bullet weight for fixed sights was right on. I started with a box of 20 Win factory 255gr lead rd nose. The ruger loved them and I could have cleanly taken six deer with the first six shots!
I then took the same 20 and reloaded them five times with the 185gr sierra's. They printed too low. Started with 8.5gr Unique and worked up to 10gr hoping the extra velocity & recoil would raise the point of aim. No such luck. Good groups but I will not do any filing to sight in a 185gr when the 250gr class shot so well.
What I was trying for here was two different loadings. One for plinking & one for hunting.

Further Developments:
I had been itching to shoot this gun and was glad to get away from the more tedius task of trying to put them all through the same hole, five shots at a time, all on paper.
What I did was to have the Maint dept at work build me a crossmember out of 1" black angle iron. Top horizontal was drilled so as to attach industrial quality stainless steel plates. The plate handles were drilled and I used wire to attach them. I shot at these with 250gr XTP's with my load being just 1gr above the starting point. (Range was 35yds)

I Darn Near Destroyed Everything! Wire Was Often Wrapped Around The Top Crossmember With The SS plates Sailing 10 to 15ft Away!
These plates were just a (ten schedual) but were badly damaged after just a few hits. The crossmember suffered one hit and was almost broken off.
I Think That I Have Badly Underestimated The Power Of This Handgun.
That 250gr poking along at 950fps (1gr powder beyond starting load) sure doesnt look so puny anymore.

[Larry Gibson]

glanceblamm

"I Think That I Have Badly Underestimated The Power Of This Handgun.
That 250gr poking along at 950fps (1gr powder beyond starting load) sure doesnt look so puny anymore.[/quote]"

I sure would be interested to know what the Speer 250 gr Gold Dot does "poking along at 950fps " if you decide to try them.  I push the Lyman 452424 260gr SWC at 850 out of my Uberti SAA with a 5.5" barrel.  I know they work but have not used the Gold Dots at the lower velocity.  A friend runs them at a little over 1200 fps in his Ruger 7.5" BH and they work very well for him out to 50 yards.  Looks like your on your way to a good hunt.

Larry Gibson

[444encore]

Glanceblamm,
   Good topic to post about, However I'm concerned that you're putting too much faith in this whole "energy" thing. I'm not trying to start an argument here or anything, but "energy" figures are more or less theoretical calculations used by ammunition manufacturers to market their products and really have no place in real world situations.
     As an example, If I could propell a sewing needle to 25,000 fps it might show extremely high energy levels, but will it prove as effective on a soft target as a typical .44 magnum hunting load which shows much less energy? Chances are it won't. I'm not at all discounting small caliber rounds, just proposing that you be weary of these "energy" figures.
For energy is nothing without resistance and vice versa. This is why we must search for a healthy balance between the two while ignoring the manufacturer's marketing gimmics and going with actual field testing instead.

[Captainkev]

I would imagine if you could get a needle to got that fast, it would pass clean through the vitals of a deer.
 Of course it wouldn't leave much of a blood trail...................................................

Kevin

[Black Jaque Janaviac]

Yeah, energy is only one piece of the puzzle.

I like to think of it in terms of energy governs the width of the wound channel.  Momentum governs the depth of the wound channel.

And of course all this depends on the performance of the target media and the bullet material.

Imagine holding a piece of cardboard in your hand.  If your buddy throws a marble at it, you will certainly feel it hit, but it won't penetrate.  Shoot the marble out of a gun at 3,000 fps and you probably won't feel a thing as the marble whizzes right through.  Shoot the marble with a wristrocket and you'll feel it hit, AND it will penetrate the cardboard.  

I'm just illustrating how mysterious all this stuff can be.  And how challenging.  Hunter's simply don't have the luxury of taylor-making the ammo for a particular target media.  Sometimes you're shooting at skin and lungs, other times you're shooting at shoulder muscle and bone.

There is a happy medium.

Just don't be so macho as to think you need the Hammer of Thor all wrapped up in 3 pounds of steel.  Hit 'em in the boiler room, let 'em run 20 yards, and gut 'em.  Works fine for me.

[444encore]

I like to think of it in terms of energy governs the width of the wound channel. Momentum governs the depth of the wound channel.

Um, Black Jaque,
     I must correct you on this one,  energy and momentum are one in the same and have no baring on width of wound channel. But more or less diameter of the projectile translates into resistance through interference which is then converted into energy transference to the target which is solely dependant on projectile weight and velocity.  So in a sense if you rearrange your quote you could say," Width of wound channel governs energy transference." But energy  equates to penetration  only when weight is multiplied by velocity and devided by mass.   Or something like that.

[HHI 812]

.45 Colt/AR/ACP alloy bisley, built from a bunch of parts, and have decided on the LBT 325 LFN GC(also have a backup LBT 340 XWFN GC I designed) at 900-1000fps out of its 3 3/4" FA barrel. Hurt my right elbow at work, so don't shoot much heavy stuff lately. Moderate, but I think enough punch for my needs, although any gun looks wimpy with the bears up here in Alaska. Like its been said before, bullet placement.

[Blitz]

The heavier the better in a big-game hunting handgun bullet.  Something that is not taken into account enough in figuring what is best to hunt with is something called "MOMENTUM". A large heavy object is simply harder to stop than a small light object!  Actual velocity is secondary to mass
in this respect. Also, a jacketed bullet is probably more of a hinderance
than a help at big bore handgun velocities. The purpose of a jacket is to control expansion and decrease fouling build-up in the bore. I don't think that most big-bore hunters really need to control expansion, the velocity just is not there to get a great deal of explosive expansion anyway.

The Keith type lead semi-wadcutter is probably the best if cast from medium to hard alloy. Use a gas check if you start playing in the realm of Higher Velocity big bores!

[HHI 812]

How do you post photos? I could send them to whoever does the postings? Not just smart enough for this computer stuff.  :lol:

[444encore]

Something that is not taken into account enough in figuring what is best to hunt with is something called "MOMENTUM".

Here we go again.  Ok, Blitz please explain to us the difference between
"MOMENTUM" and "ENERGY"  also explain to us how velocity is secondary to mass.
  Somewhere in my memory banks I seem to recall that momentum and energy are just 2 different words describing the same thing. I also recall that velocity, mass, and weight all must work together to achieve any sort of lethality. After all a bowling ball make's a mighty fine projectile if you have a means to propell it. But as Newton once described, as a stationary object it's not very intimidating. Hence velocity can never take a back seat to mass, but must ride shotgun, with weight riding bitch on that extra wide bench seat. However when you consider in that whole Newton's Law thing the device to which that bowling ball would be propelled begins to take on an intimidating aura.

[HHI 812]

not sure how much it plays, but buddy Jack Huntington said he shot some arrows into wet newspapers(typical test media for bullets), and it hardly even penetrated the wet newspaper. But I've seen first hand what an arrow can do on game, and it is devastating! There was no problems going through the game, along with internal wounds that really bled the animals out quickly.

[S.S.]

WET NEWS-PRINT  cannot be compared to tissue to get an idea
of what a projectile will do when it strikes a live target!
The water to solid ratio is not even close.(No Bone Either)
The MOMENTUM VS. ENERGY question is a complicated one.
The momentum that blitz was referring to I think should be referred
to as "MASS LOSS"  for example, If you fire a lighter high velocity
bullet into a big game animal it will instantly start to expand (VIOLENTLY in most cases) and fragment. Therefore it will loose mass as it goes
along. SO in theory it will eventually fragment to the point where the velocity can no longer push it foreward efficiently.
If the projectile is larger, it will of course penetrate (Key Word)
more deeply because it simply has more mass to shed before it gets to the point to where the velocity can no longer push it foreward efficiently.
I think there is a mix up here with the momentum and energy question. Momentum has more to do with penetration than energy.
Energy should be judged by how efficiently the projectile creates
Hydrostatic-Shock to the target.  I don't care how fast a bullet
is moving or how big it is, if it cannot transfer that "energy" to
the meat it is hitting, it makes no difference.
The arrow is an interesting point in the above post.
Arrows have almost no kinetic energy on impact they transfer almost
no shock effect to a FLESH target. They kill by Hemorage alone.
a bullet on the other hand kills by Impact shock to the nervous system and Hemorage!

[444encore]

There is simply no "momentum vs. energy" question to complicate.
There is no measurement for what effect a bullet will have on any given target. Some bullets are better than others. Some go faster, some go slower, some are lighter while others are heavier. We can go on and on about which one is better till we turn blue in the face, but there is simply no way to seperate energy from momentum........veloctiy squared and multiplied  by weight and devided by twice the ecceleration of gravity is the method currently excepted by the industry to calculate  energy, momentum, force, push, umph, whoop-ass,,,, whatever you want to call it.
Back at the turn of the century ammuntion manufacturers would just hang a cadaver by the neck, shoot it and measure the swing imparted by the bullet transfering said energy, momentum, force, push, umph, whoop-ass to said target. While this might not be considered reasonable by todays moral standards, it was no doubt a more scientifically accurate means of measuring energy, yet didn't seem to offer an industry standard to apply to such a wide variety of designs.
  Bottom line,, there is a difference between measurment and calculation
of forces contained within a moving object, but there is no difference in the forces applied that depend on the name you give them.
Furthermore , this MASS LOSS reference is governed by bullet design, not bullet weight and speed.