Heavy for Caliber?

[Catpop]

i saw this statement in another thread and wondered what is the exact mathematical formula to make a boolit “heavy for caliber”.

 

[gotboostvr]

It just means that it's heavier than the "standard" loading.

180gr is heavy for a 357, but light in a 44.

 

[StrawHat]

It can be difficult to define “standard” loads but usually the load a fixed sighted revolver is tuned to, from the factory.

Kevin

 

[CraigC]

Sectional density is used to quantify a bullet's weight relative to its diameter. Typically "standard weight" handgun bullets are around .17 to .19. The following are what 'may' be considered standard weights for their caliber:

.357 - 158gr
.44 - 240-250gr
.45 - 250-260gr

Anything heavier would be considered "heavy for caliber". Typically:

.357 - 180-200gr
.44 - 300-355gr
.45 - 300-360gr

It tends to be bullets in the .25 to .27 range that exhibit the deepest penetration. This is where the .357 and .41Mag's fall short because they just don't have the capacity for a bullet that heavy.

 

[BobWright]

Craig put it very well. Look at old ammunition catalogs, those new enough to include .357 and .44 Magnum cartridges, and note the bullet weights listed for factory ammunition. These are nominal weights for each cartridge. Anything more, or less, than weights shown are considered either light or heavy.

Bob Wright

 

[StrawHat]

Sectional density is used to quantify a bullet's weight relative to its diameter. Typically "standard weight" handgun bullets are around .17 to .19. The following are what 'may' be considered standard weights for their caliber:

.357 - 158gr
.44 - 240-250gr
.45 - 250-260gr

Anything heavier would be considered "heavy for caliber". Typically:

.357 - 180-200gr
.44 - 300-355gr
.45 - 300-360gr

It tends to be bullets in the .25 to .27 range that exhibit the deepest penetration. This is where the .357 and .41Mag's fall short because they just don't have the capacity for a bullet that heavy.

Never seen it explained in that way. It makes a bit of sense.

Kevin

 

[SharpDog]

My preference depends on caliber:

A 9mm 'heavy-for-caliber' 9mm 147gr Fed, Tactical HST +p performs very similarly to a .40 S&W 165 gr Fed HST standard pressure load. So these are my GOTO loads for EDC / HD and even general field use

In .357 I like the ole standard 125 gr 'light for caliber' load to mitigate recoil and possibly gain a little extra range and accuracy. these are field use

For .44 mag I like the medium for caliber 210 gr loads to reduce recoil and still pack a punch for our eastern bears.These are GOTO for field use when hunting.

 

[Catpop]

So sectional density needs to be known prior to figuring light or heavy weight for caliber?

What is the formula for computing sectional density of a given boolit? Is it hard to compute?

Never mind, I think I found it on Internet.

Now I wonder how certain grain weights were found as standard for caliber?

 

[Waveski]

Error deleted

 

[.455_Hunter]

I have no idea what constitutes a heavy "boolit".

 

[Catpop]

Now I’ve got more questions than my original post asked? Light or heavy to standard weight.

Who/why/how derived the “standard for caliber weight” in the beginning? Gun manufacturers?Ammo manufacturers? I’m sure there is much more to this than arbitrary picking a number?

 

[CraigC]

It wasn't arbitrary. Mankind learned long ago that a conical bullet was more effective than a round ball. What is considered "standard" weight or "nominal" now was pretty much determined 150yrs ago or more. It's only really been in the last 30yrs that we've learned the utility of very heavy bullets and that your big bore cartridges are most efficient with heavy for caliber bullets.

 

[murf]

a standard weight was used so manufacturers could regulate fixed-sighted guns to a specific weight bullet (not a lot of bullet shapes back in the day), and ammo makers could regulate their ammo to those fixed-sighted guns. still a good idea with some cartridges, imo.

murf