Velocity v. Bullet weight....bagging elk?

[Northslope Nimrod]

This is the age old debate...but I want to re-think it again.
A buddy tells me that he likes to shoot 140 grain out of his 7mm at elk. I think the bullet has a muzzle velocity of something like 3500 fps. He likes to shoot a hole straight through the elk so they bleed out. (One caveat is that he likes to shoot them in the shoulders) He prefers more velocity.

I generally have subscribed to the theory of transferring as much energy as possible and hence not shooting clean through the animal. I generally aim for the heart or neck region. Thus I have traditionally shot 180 grain out of my 30-06. One difference between my buddy and myself is that most of my shots are under 100 yards. Some can be 300 but rare. Many are only 40-60 yards.

Question 1: What is your theory/practice?
Question 2: I am thinking about going to 165 grain for elk and deer...keeping everything the same. Which bullet to use and why? How fast to load & why? (I reload)

 

[Harve Curry]

I like your heart/lung area shot. Why would anybody want to hit a big animal like an Elk in the muscle bound and big boned shoulder?

Most of my 30 cal ammo are loaded with the same 165gr bullet weight in my .308's and 30-06 for simplicity.

 

[Vern Humphrey]

My elk rifle is Bigfoot Wallace, a custom '03 Springfield in .35 Brown-Whelen (the most radical form of the Whelen.) I like a 225 grain Nosler Partition Jacket at around 2800 fps from this rifle. Some would call this a little on the light side -- but I have never recovered one of these bullets. They go right on through, no matter what they hit.

I definitely like shoulder shots. Tracking an elk can be a miserable exerience, only made worse by packing the meat out from whereever he decides to expire. The Nosler has what it takes to punch through -- I once shot a bull and broke both shoulders, one going in and one coming out.

 

[~z]

Ok, you asked for it...
Shoot throughs offer a better blood trail as we all know, so I prefer them, EXCEPT in fur bearers, less hole = better hide.
But, ....to my understanding.... The projectile in flight has only a certain amount of enengy to offer. Concider a "perfect world" example:
2 bullets same weight, same target, one penetrates one dosent. The difference is in velocity. Now if the velocity is the same, both bullets will either remain in the target or both will exit, (they will behave the same). A bullet that exits does not waste energy in exiting, it simply had more to offer than the bullet that remains with the target (again assuming a homogeneous target).

Again, thats the way I see it, I'm here to learn, so please someone shoot my views down.
~z

 

[Vern Humphrey]

2 bullets same weight, same target, one penetrates one dosent. The difference is in velocity. Now if the velocity is the same, both bullets will either remain in the target or both will exit, (they will behave the same). A bullet that exits does not waste energy in exiting, it simply had more to offer than the bullet that remains with the target (again assuming a homogeneous target).

Think of the bullet as a parachute. When it begins to expand, the parachute is opening, and the bullet is slowing down. A bullet that opens very wide would not penetrate as much as one that doesn't expand at all.

Now, expansion is good -- it makes a big hole (and it's the hole that kills.) But too much expansion may result in the bullet not reaching the vitals in some shots -- say at the rear end of an elk that's leaving the country at high speed. You might find this elk dead days later, with a fully-expanded bullet in its paunch, having never reached the vitals.

In some cases, the bullet can open so violently that it disintegrates -- I've had .30 caliber 165-grain Sierra boattail softpoints come apart on white tail deer. A friend had the same thing happen, with the same bullet, on black bear.

That's why I like the Nosler Partition Jacket. The nose portion opens, guarenteed, no matter how low the velocity (from say, a long range shot) and no matter what it hits. If it sheds the front part (which if often does) the back part plows on and exits.

 

[RyanM]

Energy has as much to do with wounding effect as does the kind of hat you wear when you make the shot.

If anything, energy is the exact opposite of a useful number, since doubling velocity will quadruple energy, but results in less than double the amount of penetration. The extra velocity can also contribute additional wounding effect by creating a larger temporary cavity and by crushing more efficiently, but you still won't quadruple the effect by doubling velocity.

Just to show how utterly ludicrous energy is as a measure of effectiveness; imagine how much damage a medieval knight on horseback could do with a couched lance. Not one of those goofy, barberpole-striped toothpicks you see on TV, but an actual war lance; solid, thick hardwood topped with a hardened steel spearhead.

Well, according to the Royal Military College in Shrivenham, UK, a couched lance with graper and arret, at full gallop, "transfers" 60 joules of energy when it runs into you. That's 44.25 foot-pounds.

 

[killzone]

use 300 win mag

to simply put, Just use enough gun. If you are close to the target use a type of bullet that expends real fast ----if the target is at over 250 to 350 yards use a type of bullet that expends slow ----- 350 - 475+ yards use a type of bullet that expends real fast again. I have had good luck with 300mag since Aug. It will do the job at any distance if you consider what I just said.

 

[Coltdriver]

I am going to use a .450 Marlin this season. With a 350 grain bullet.

It punches a big hole clean through.

Bullet technology allows the use of lighter bullets at high speed. A lot of elk have fallen to .270's and 30 30's.

I am just opting for the bigger is better approach this year.

 

[Sunray]

A through and through does not expend the energy in the beastie.
Working up one load that shoots well in your rifle is a good idea. Saves having to keep the loads separate. Have a look at the 165 grain Hornady's.

 

[Vern Humphrey]

A through and through does not expend the energy in the beastie.

It isn't the energy that kills, it's the hole -- and the tissue destruction that occurs when the hole is made. A through-and-through lets a lot of daylight in and a lot of blood out.

And not all shots at big game are ideal -- sometimes you have to penetrate a long ways to reach the vitals. A load that won't punch through from side to side may not do what you need on a quartering away shot.

 

[dairycreek]

I like your heart/lung area shot. Why would anybody want to hit a big animal like an Elk in the muscle bound and big boned shoulder?

Because I hunt in northwest Oregon! That means the country is covered heavily with brush and timber and elk hunting season here is often wet, wet, wet! With all the brush and timber getting a clear shot is often very difficult so when I do get a clear shot I don't want the elk to run and hide. I want him to drop NOW and to not be able to run. Hence, for me, a shot through the shoulder is the best way to go.

 

[Vern Humphrey]

I want him to drop NOW and to not be able to run. Hence, for me, a shot through the shoulder is the best way to go.

In my experience, elk are evil, vindicative creatures who will try to get revenge by dying in the most inaccessable place they can find -- apparently in the hopes the hunter will have a heart attack while packing them out.

Put me down as a man who favors breaking bones -- a good shoulder shot is best, if you get the right presentation. On a quartering-away shot, I like to "shoot through" -- aim to break fhe far side front leg on exit.

And therefore I choose a cartridge and bullet that can handle that chore.