fknipfer, the difference is the stopping power. Most of which has to do with the meplat of the 38-55 being wider, with more exposed lead. Loosely translated, meaning the 38-55 and its wider bullet with exposed lead starts by making a larger hole and expanding quicker than the faster arrival of the .308. Kind of like trying to push a quarter through a deer vs pushing a cleaning rod through one. The quarter will stop it quicker because of the larger dia entry and internal wound channel. The .308 works with internal hydraulic shock because of the high speed. Dead is dead. The much touted .308MX will be a great round, albeit the .300 Savage has been around for years and is very close to the same case capacity, range, and fps, the good part being it is chambered in Marlins. A plus for levergunners.

 

"The big question is what is missing from these formulas".Mass my boys ,Mass and wt.would you rather be hit in the chest with 46 grs moving at 4000fps or a Bowling ball moving at 500fps.

 

Neither - as Swany said, "Dead is dead"!

 

IntrepidWizard,
what kind of question is that? I would rather not be hit in the chest at all. Either of the two options you give sound fairly deadly.

fknipfer- looks like the 50 yard energy figure is wrong on the 38-55. I dont know what value to place on stopping power formulas. I hope to take some deer this year with my 307win and 375win and compair the time it takes for the deer to fall over dead using a stop watch. Anyone ever done that?

 

PB,
You are right the 50yd 38-55 energy level should read 1882 not 2882 looks like I transposed a number. But I got the others correct.

fknipfer

 

I've never seen a deer that could read a stopping power chart. I don't think they really care what the experts say, how much deader than dead is dead enough? Placement is still king. High-velocity loads will flatten trajectory, but I'm still partial to a heavy-for-caliber bullet at moderate velocity.

I've never heard of the Thornily Stopping Power System, who came up with that? Most of the charts use muzzle energy, which is horribly skewed towards the higher-velocity loads. Is TSP more momentum-based?

Papajohn the Uninformed

 

Not sure about how the system compares to the others, but Pete Thorniley builds some great Hard cast and semi-soft bullets. I have bought a number of his bullets, he has great customer service and a number of articles that are very helpful. His favorite seems to be the 444 Marlin. He may be able to tell you more about his system if you email him.

thorniley3@msn.com

:wink:

 

papajohn,

The Thornily formula asks you for three things 1) bullet dia, 2) bulle weight, 3) velocity at a given range so two out of the three calculation items are weight and diameter. I would think the formula is more based on weight and diameter than speed. But I don't really know for sure.

fknipfer

 

I guess I am to old to understand the Thornily formula it smells to much like a marketing ploy used to sell bullets. What I do know is that I have killed deer just as dead with a 95 gr 243 going 3100 fps through the lungs as I have with a 405 gr 45-70 going 1500 fps. It doesn't seem to matter to the deer with the bullets placed in the same location they both run about 50 yards and fall dead.

Pete Thorniley probably does built great bullets and he seems to talk a good line.

 

I believe the TSP formula is more about stopping power of big game animals not killing power. What does it take to stop an animal of certain weight or aggressive attitude? You can see all the big game animals like gbear or african dangerous animals are all in the 150 and above rating and all the lesser animals are anywhere between 80 to 120. I think this is more true than we would like to believe. A deer starts at around 80 with a 30-30 and a 375H&H rates at 175 and above now which one would be and overkill for a deer?

fknipfer

 

I've never seen a deer that could read a stopping power chart. <snip>

Neither have I.

Deer seem to be keen on where you hit them, what got penetrated (i.e., what angle the shot entered the body and where the bullet went after that).

 

Stopping power vs. energy is pretty tough to compare in my humble opinion. Energy tends to over-reward velocity in terms of stopping power. When I visualize stopping power, I think of momentum and the surface area.

 

Remember none of these calculations are perfect. the Taylor Knock Out factor (TKO) is a good measurement but when you factor extreem things it can make weapons look better or worse than they are. My son has a toy catapult that he shoots beach balls from, if I put the data from that in to a TKO calculator it would be a good weapon for large African game because of the diameter of the projectile. (550 gains, moving 60FPS and 14 inch caliber)

Energy factors leans heavily on speed. It has no calculation for bullet size.

 

For the hunter, the "numbers" give a very basic idea of what the ability of a cartridge and load will produce...compared to other cartridges/loads performance. The calculations/formulas for the "numbers" are mostly theoretical, because the "true" performance of a bullet and load cannot be measured and proven by "scientific method".....it has been tried since the beginning of firearm development, but "proven" results have never been obtained. This is all we have, so we should use it....its better than nothing at all....it will give us a general, but not scientific idea of what our loads will do.

Again, for the hunter: The process of taking game is a two part affair. The load needs to penetrate. The load also needs to produce "terminal impact force". Animals have two specific areas that need to be affected when the bullet strikes...... the cardiovascular system, and the central nervous system. The bullets "penetration" will bleed the animal of blood supply and the oxygen that is carried by that blood....this is necessary for "life". The terminal impact force of the bullet affects the central nervous system and the "motor skills" of the animal which are necessary for physical motivation. The whole idea in searching out a suitable hunting load, is to use a bullet and load the will affect both areas. The penetration "kills" and the terminal impact force "stops". Having a load that does both will better a hunters chance of success.

Case in point: The deer I took this year was taken with my Peashooter 444. I had a 325 grain BTB loaded to 2100 fps. This load produces 3183 ft lbs, with a TKO of 42, and a Thorniley of 184. Way "too much" for deer? Here is what happened. The deer approached and angled to my right. I was hunting a very, very thick patch of wooded cover. As the deer walked, I saw a clear spot between two medium sized saplings of about 4" and decided that is where I would send the bullet. I followed the deer with my open sights on his neck (the foliage was so thick that a body or shoulder shot would have been impossible to see or judge), put pressure on the trigger, pulled it, and followed through. At the spot of the shot, the deers legs flew out from under him "away" from the shot, and he crashed to the ground instantaneously! His ear twitched, his rear leg rose a bit and fell, and he moved no more....about 5 seconds most and it was over. Upon skinning of the deer, it was found that the bullet did NOT hit anything major in the neck...not the spine, nor the artery to the brain. the bullet path was a bit low of anything that would be considered "vital", but, the artery to the brain had burst, and by the reaction of the deer at the spot of the shot, the central nervous system had been affected...instant immobility and death seconds later!

Many folks put great emphasis on penetration. I could have used a much lesser load, and I would have probably/eventually had a dead deer....but maybe not! It was the terminal impact force of the bullet that did the damage, and stopped that deer in his tracks. If need be, I would have had an easy second shot to finish him off, but, that was not needed. Terminal impact force is what TKO references....."knock out, stun, immobilize, incapacitate"....call it what you will, but, combined with penetration, it plays a major roll in taking game.

Read my signature line...it says it all. When working up a load for any game animal, load up as if you were expecting everything to go wrong. The "numbers" will put you in the ballpark, and help you develop a load that will penetrate (kill) and deliver terminal impact force (stop). In my opinion that combination is a game getter!!!!

 

Tatersoup :top: You went back in the archives on this one:biggrin:... Swany and Papajohn my have some changes in thinking these days about new fangled formulas. There seems to be a new one all the time.

I know , I know placement is still king :biggrin:.

I don't think you can get a theory of hand gunners, to hold water with rifle gunners:dontknow:

Nor the cast bullet guys with big malplates vs pointy little bullets.

I'd be bad to point out the dia. of bullets in comparison to size of animal :biggrin: 460 Wea to elephant vs 22lr on a sage rat (biggest being 3x9" )

I suppose we would nee a 5" dia bullet to shoot that elephant ? to = the dia going through that rat :hmmmm: I bet I seen more than one rat go 30 yards on 2 legs or with guts hanging out:ahhhhh:... I'd like to try some 22 lr with large melplate please :biggrin:

Might resolve this with a herd of cows , at a 27,000 member BBQ of M/O members:hmmmm:

 

Hey Tatersoup Paco Kelly makes and sells (you to can have one LOL) a 22lr flatpointer.

T-o-m

Tatersoup... I'd like to try some 22 lr with large melplate please :biggrin:

Might resolve this with a herd of cows , at a 27,000 member BBQ of M/O members:hmmmm:

 

As most here should know, "knockdown" with bullets is against the laws of physics. I always find it odd, that in the movies, a guy gets hit with a shotgun blast, and they get knocked back 12 feet, but the last rabbit I shot with any gun, simply fell over on the spot.

I know serious hunters, that travel out of state, and take several big game critters a year, from deer to elk, to moose. Some want the bullet to go all the way through, and that way blood leaks out both sides, some want the bullet just to stay inside the critter and expend all energy internally.

I lucked into an antelope tag this last fall, I hit one with a 30 338 magnum, at a range finder measured 390 yards. It was a picture book side view shot, the bullet went in and took out the top of the heart and lungs, and the exit hole was literally the size of an orange.

That antelope STILL made a circle and a half, like a dog getting ready to lie down, before it hit the dirt. I could have used a 460 with a meplat the size of a basketball, lead, or JHP, or FMJ, and it still would not have "knocked" the antelope, nor rabbit, nor moose, nor elephant down.

 

Kinetic Energy = half the mass X velocity squared times 1ft. lbf over 7000gr X 32.163ft squared /sec. squared.

in short all the above mentioned. weight in grains.

 

but one has to also factor in the hydro static shock value. The bigger the rock the bigger the splash in the pond.

 

Flat Top ---

Way to much for deer ? How much meat was lost due to bruising on the animal you write about ? I'm not trying to be a smart-elec here. I personally think we are all looking at all of this and making things way to complicated. Yes--you need to size your loads to game being harvested--that's a given. I see post after post about " will my XYZ caliber kill this or that ". I think we are missing the main point here. Learn to hunt just as you would teach yourself how to shoot, reload, drive a car, anything else. We have LARGE whitetails here--over 400 pds.--I consistently harvest them with a bow and arrow, always under 40 yds. shooting a 125 gr. broad head at 300 fps. A large man is 350 lbs.--suppose a .444 would take him out ? An average black bear is 350 lbs., an average hog is 300 lbs., and so on. BTW--I own 2 .444's so I'm not picking on them or you, also 45-70's and .450's.

It just seems funny to me all the attention that gets paid to TKO and other such theories when if things are put into perspective it's more the ability to hunt and shot placement that is the key. Hope I haven't offended anyone--just my 2 cents.:tee:

Steve

 

.

fk, how does one over kill an animal?

PJ, You haven't seen these educated deer that can read? I saw one reading a local paper that someone had tossed out a car window. Our deer also carry tape measures and lasers to assure that they are at least 100 yards from the hunter. They have read that the lever gun is only good for 100 yards, therefore, they feel safe beyond that range..:biggrin:

.

 

ia1727; it was a low neck shot.....meat loss, maybe the size of my fist. When I hunt, my #1 priority is to "kill" quickly, and "if" I lose some meat in the process, so be it. If meat loss was a big deal for me, I would go back to hunting deer with my .224 centerfires...head shots, of course that rules out brains and eggs for breakfast!!!

I never said anything about "hunting skills", and, I never said anything about "shooting skills". I take it that on this forum, with what I have seen of it, that the members put great pride in their ability to "hunt" and "shoot"...thats a given. My comments were intended to share my (and others) opinion that killing and stopping go hand in hand, and that TKO, Thorniley, etc, although not scientific, can be a general guide to performance.....works for me!

 

JBledsoe; If "fk" was directed to me...............ok, I give up. How does one over kill an animal?

 

FT, it was for the OP........not you.

And despite this thread being dredged up after nearly five years, nothing has changed. Placement is still necessary for clean kills, and Missouri deer still can't read. We're using the Obummer Educational Model.

 

PJ--

YOU DA MAN !!!!!!!

Steve

 

Calculations such as this Thornily knock down power are essentially one man's opinion, the numbers are manipulated to coincide with his opinion. Muzzle energy is a formula from physics which doesn't really translate to killing power either. Think of it this way. Any bullet that gets adequate penetration and disrupts enough critical flesh will kill as well as any other provided the bullets perform. Bullet with broader meplats seem to kill better than sharp pointed bullets of same weight and velocity - probably because they aren't deflected as easily upon impact and reach their intended vital organ more reliably. If a bullet is too hard it doesn't disrupt as much vital flesh, and if too soft it might come apart with the same result. Add in the many gimmicks to expand pointed bullets and you have to account for their failures on any particular shot. A classic case is the .577Nitro express vs the original .600 Nitro express bullets. The .577 performed better because the bullet performed better and achieved superior penetration. Half a century later the .600 with an improved bullet performs virtually identically. With many of our rifles, performance on deer sized game is hardly tested because the animal is too thin in cross section to really make use of the bullet used. A deer hit broadside with a .30-30 is actually damaged more than the same deer with a .375H&H. Pointed bullets are ballistically more efficient so they give you a flatter trajectory for long shots - which we probably shouldn't be taking anyway. Bullet selection for appropriate performance on your game is more critical than mathematical calculations.

 

Daly; I really dont think that Taylor, Thorniley (whom I know), Ackley, Powley...or, any of the rest "manipulated" numbers....but, in their own way tried to give up some idea of how internal/external/terminal ballistics worked....but, it was of course according to how they perceived the results of their tests. The point I try to make is that although none of this is "gospel" (it cannot be proven by scientific method), it still gives us "something" to work with....which is better than "nothing" to work with. In the 50 years or so that I have been associated with the "numbers", at times I have found some amazing correlations between them, and the results of my experience using them. I try to be open minded...use all the tools at my disposal, and only place faith in the reality of the outcome.........

 

This is by far the best treatise and most scientific investigation I have found into this subject. It is really long and pretty technical, but it makes sense:
Terminal Ballistics