Why switch to a different weight bullet? What does a bullets energy give us?

[Koda]

The other day I was comparing ballistics estimates to my handloads to see if I wanted to change to a lighter or heavier bullet and found the energy values didn't vary that much. So I asked myself is the hassle of load development worth the squeeze if I already have a good handload for hunting. Velocity benefits are more obvious, but what exactly does more energy give us?

Another way to ask this is what factor makes you decide to switch to a different weight bullet?


Note: Im not asking about switching to a different bullet type, just weight change only. Hunting deer and elk size game.

Read More

 

[lucusloc]

This is a pretty easy ting to answer when you know how velocity and mass impact ballistics and terminal ballistics. Assuming equal energy and bullet design between two loads, the load with a lighter bullet will shoot flatter, lose energy faster and will not penetrate as deep as the heavier bullet. The benefits of velocity (flatter ballistics) are traded for worse energy retention over range. The difference in terminal ballistics is entirely dependent on use case. If you want deep penetration or good barrier penetration you want a heaver bullet. If over penetration is a concern you want a lighter bullet.

Once you understand these basic characteristics it is pretty easy to decide if you want a load that is heavier or lighter. Just match the bullet weight and design to the intended application. Once you have that you can further tune the setup by choosing different bullet designs like solid, FMJ and controlled expansion of various types. Mixing and matching between all three of theses variables (velocity, mass and bullet type) lets you really dial in a load for a specific application.

Is this a varmint load? You probably want as fast and light a bullet as you can manage, with maximum expansion/fragmentation to reduce the chance of stray bullets going where you do not want them too and minimizing cleanup via misting of the target. Do you intend to hunt hogzilla in one of the southern states by diving into the bush? You probably want as heavy a bullet as you can get in solid brass or copper to maximize penetration and brush-busting capability. Do you just want a general purpose hunting round? You want as fast as you can get but still maintain good penetration and expansion in the most common/largest target species you plan to take. Is this a self defense load? You want as fast and light as you can get with a top tier controlled expansion bullet to maximize terminal performance at the right depth in bad guy while also minimizing penetration in other harder materials for maximum safety.

There are tons of other use cases that you can really dial in on. You can develop multiple loads for wide open farm/plains hunting and another load for the woods where shots are unlikely to be more than 100 yards and branches may be a problem. Or you can have self defense loads for home and out an about (where, for example, penetrating a vehicle door with effective terminal performance beyond may be desirable). You just have to look at your use case and decide what you want to optimize for. If you have a load that already does everything you want there is obviously no reason to change it, but "everything you want" can really expand once you understand how all the variables play together to give you loads that can be very specifically tailored to specific tasks.

And of course when you start down that road you have to ask yourself if it is worth it to re-dial in your equipment for every load you want to use when you want to use it, or if it is easier to just build a new gun to dedicate to that roll. . . Then you have to figure out where you are going to store your 50th firearm. . . . Isn't this a wonderful hobby?

 

[357 MAX]

more energy means nothing. energy does not mean more killing power. penetration, exspansion ,tissue destruction kills game. i know we have been depending on foot pounds of energy forever but who decided this was important.? knock down power is a myth! "it takes minimum xxxxx ft pounds of energy to kill a deer elk etc. who came up with this and why? a 22 long rifle will kill a deer under ideal conditions. ft pounds of energy is a feel good term to make you feel like you are doing a better job with a bigger bullet.

 

[357 MAX]

with todays super bullets why would anybody care about ft. pounds of energy? a meaningless term that should be put to bed.

 

[P7M13]

If you have a dialed-in load, going to a different bullet makes little sense.
When that bullet does not kill effectively with well placed shots, experimenting with other bullets does.

 

[oremike]

Well it just depends on what you want to do. For me in my 300 Win Mag I want to use either 180 or 200 gr Nosler Partitions so I'm making loads for both to see which one shoots better.

 

[Spitpatch]

Do you intend to hunt hogzilla in one of the southern states by diving into the bush? You probably want as heavy a bullet as you can get in solid brass or copper to maximize penetration and brush-busting capability.

If you want deep penetration or good barrier penetration you want a heaver bullet. If over penetration is a concern you want a lighter bullet.

with todays super bullets why would anybody care about ft. pounds of energy? a meaningless term that should be put to bed.

1) "brush busting capability". THIS is the phrase that needs to be "put to bed". There is no such thing, and there never has been any such thing. As far as traveling through a barrier of brush and arriving at the point of aim (and undamaged toward terminal performance), heavy bullets are NO advantage. Solid bullets are NO advantage.. Large caliber bullets are of NO advantage. Numerous tests have been accomplished regarding this phrase. All conclude that ALL bullets are severely affected by ANY impact on the way to the target. The most comprehensive of these tests (done by Jim Carmichael) came to that conclusion, but did name a "better loser" as to calibers/bullets tried. It was the .264 Winchester magnum with a 140gr hollowpoint. This result illustrates the fallacy of "brush busting capability" best. DON"T shoot through brush.

2) In "olden times" weight of the bullet was the primary factor in penetration. Not today. Bullet design can override a weight advantage toward penetration easily.

3) Energy is CERTAINLY a factor in killing power and is not "meaningless". Never an "acid test" for killing power (as was done frequently in the past, even by Game Commissions writing caliber regulations) it is only a segment of the characteristics of a projectile that result in a kill. Energy contributes to penetration. Energy contributes to expansion. "Super bullets" enjoy no magic exemption. Energy's contribution to the killing process cannot in any way be written off as without meaning.

No charge for this service, Drive Safely.

 

[scrumpystyle]

This is a pretty easy ting to answer when you know how velocity and mass impact ballistics and terminal ballistics. Assuming equal energy and bullet design between two loads, the load with a lighter bullet will shoot flatter, lose energy faster and will not penetrate as deep as the heavier bullet. The benefits of velocity (flatter ballistics) are traded for worse energy retention over range. The difference in terminal ballistics is entirely dependent on use case. If you want deep penetration or good barrier penetration you want a heaver bullet. If over penetration is a concern you want a lighter bullet.

Once you understand these basic characteristics it is pretty easy to decide if you want a load that is heavier or lighter. Just match the bullet weight and design to the intended application. Once you have that you can further tune the setup by choosing different bullet designs like solid, FMJ and controlled expansion of various types. Mixing and matching between all three of theses variables (velocity, mass and bullet type) lets you really dial in a load for a specific application.

Is this a varmint load? You probably want as fast and light a bullet as you can manage, with maximum expansion/fragmentation to reduce the chance of stray bullets going where you do not want them too and minimizing cleanup via misting of the target. Do you intend to hunt hogzilla in one of the southern states by diving into the bush? You probably want as heavy a bullet as you can get in solid brass or copper to maximize penetration and brush-busting capability. Do you just want a general purpose hunting round? You want as fast as you can get but still maintain good penetration and expansion in the most common/largest target species you plan to take. Is this a self defense load? You want as fast and light as you can get with a top tier controlled expansion bullet to maximize terminal performance at the right depth in bad guy while also minimizing penetration in other harder materials for maximum safety.

There are tons of other use cases that you can really dial in on. You can develop multiple loads for wide open farm/plains hunting and another load for the woods where shots are unlikely to be more than 100 yards and branches may be a problem. Or you can have self defense loads for home and out an about (where, for example, penetrating a vehicle door with effective terminal performance beyond may be desirable). You just have to look at your use case and decide what you want to optimize for. If you have a load that already does everything you want there is obviously no reason to change it, but "everything you want" can really expand once you understand how all the variables play together to give you loads that can be very specifically tailored to specific tasks.

And of course when you start down that road you have to ask yourself if it is worth it to re-dial in your equipment for every load you want to use when you want to use it, or if it is easier to just build a new gun to dedicate to that roll. . . Then you have to figure out where you are going to store your 50th firearm. . . . Isn't this a wonderful hobby?

Great top level explanation without getting too far in the weeds, thanks!

 

[Bobbygun]

Well it just depends on what you want to do. For me in my 300 Win Mag I want to use either 180 or 200 gr Nosler Partitions so I'm making loads for both to see which one shoots better.

I've always used the 180's in my .300 Wby. Mag. And with the price of Partitions these days, my curiosity on how well the 200's might work instead, well, it's not at a very high level. (Okay, so I'm cheap. Or maybe just happy with the lighter bullets.)

 

[Bobbygun]

1) "brush busting capability". THIS is the phrase that needs to be "put to bed".

Oh I must disagree. I have a couple of nephews who always displayed great "brush busting capability". They were always the first choice to send through the brush while we older gents waited on the stand for the deer to come out.

But, when you're talking about bullets, there I would agree with you.

 

[scrumpystyle]

1) "brush busting capability". THIS is the phrase that needs to be "put to bed". There is no such thing, and there never has been any such thing. As far as traveling through a barrier of brush and arriving at the point of aim (and undamaged toward terminal performance), heavy bullets are NO advantage. Solid bullets are NO advantage.. Large caliber bullets are of NO advantage. Numerous tests have been accomplished regarding this phrase. All conclude that ALL bullets are severely affected by ANY impact on the way to the target. The most comprehensive of these tests (done by Jim Carmichael) came to that conclusion, but did name a "better loser" as to calibers/bullets tried. It was the .264 Winchester magnum with a 140gr hollowpoint. This result illustrates the fallacy of "brush busting capability" best. DON"T shoot through brush.

2) In "olden times" weight of the bullet was the primary factor in penetration. Not today. Bullet design can override a weight advantage toward penetration easily.

3) Energy is CERTAINLY a factor in killing power and is not "meaningless". Never an "acid test" for killing power (as was done frequently in the past, even by Game Commissions writing caliber regulations) it is only a segment of the characteristics of a projectile that result in a kill. Energy contributes to penetration. Energy contributes to expansion. "Super bullets" enjoy no magic exemption. Energy's contribution to the killing process cannot in any way be written off as without meaning.

No charge for this service, Drive Safely.

 

[orygun]

I've shot nothing but 180gr bullets out of my '06, both before and after converting it to AI.
Well, I may have shot a few 150's, but only at paper and mostly to "make cases" for what I am going to reload.
However, the 165-8gr bullets will fly faster and flatter to a point well beyond what I will shoot game at.
I've thought about giving the lighter bullets a try, but I've only gotten as far as accumulating the bullets.
I have a very dialed in load with 180gr bullets and it's difficult to round up the time involved for testing anything else.
If I have that time, I really want to work with a different rifle that I've never loaded for.

 

[Spitpatch]

Oh I must disagree. I have a couple of nephews who always displayed great "brush busting capability". They were always the first choice to send through the brush while we older gents waited on the stand for the deer to come out.

But, when you're talking about bullets, there I would agree with you.

I played the role of a "brush-busting slug" for a large portion of my childhood as well. My sister (another projectile tested) always resented Dad telling people he was too poor to afford a bird dog.

 

[ilikegunspdx]

1) "brush busting capability". THIS is the phrase that needs to be "put to bed". There is no such thing, and there never has been any such thing. As far as traveling through a barrier of brush and arriving at the point of aim (and undamaged toward terminal performance), heavy bullets are NO advantage. Solid bullets are NO advantage.. Large caliber bullets are of NO advantage. Numerous tests have been accomplished regarding this phrase. All conclude that ALL bullets are severely affected by ANY impact on the way to the target. The most comprehensive of these tests (done by Jim Carmichael) came to that conclusion, but did name a "better loser" as to calibers/bullets tried. It was the .264 Winchester magnum with a 140gr hollowpoint. This result illustrates the fallacy of "brush busting capability" best. DON"T shoot through brush.

2) In "olden times" weight of the bullet was the primary factor in penetration. Not today. Bullet design can override a weight advantage toward penetration easily.

3) Energy is CERTAINLY a factor in killing power and is not "meaningless". Never an "acid test" for killing power (as was done frequently in the past, even by Game Commissions writing caliber regulations) it is only a segment of the characteristics of a projectile that result in a kill. Energy contributes to penetration. Energy contributes to expansion. "Super bullets" enjoy no magic exemption. Energy's contribution to the killing process cannot in any way be written off as without meaning.

No charge for this service, Drive Safely.

Re #1 this test shows a difference in traditional brush gun bullets vs spritzer type bullets. It's a 2 part video.

View: https://youtu.be/P5dve7vAY9I?si=v9j93poT4mMTODdC

 

[Spitpatch]

Re #1 this test shows a difference in traditional brush gun bullets vs spritzer type bullets. It's a 2 part video.

View: https://youtu.be/P5dve7vAY9I?si=v9j93poT4mMTODdC

This video shows nothing. It is an invalid test.

He shoots at the same target from the same position (through the same brush) with multiple guns.

Entirely unscientific procedure. Did each projectile impact a comparable number of obstructions on its way to target? Impossible. (This was one of Carmichael's required criteria for equal evaluation amongst projectiles.) He constructed a box holding vertical, equal sized dowels randomly situated as a "gauntlet" of "brush", and required that each bullet tested impact at least one dowel on its way. In this video, we have no way of knowing if ANY of those bullets hit ANY brush or not, and certainly after a couple guns "cut" some brush, the chance of significant brush impact by a subsequent bullet would decrease.

Carmichael's unsubstantiated "theory" on the miserable "success" (only when compared to others) of the .264 was the length of the bullet and the high velocity.

There are no brush-busting calibers or bullets. Don't shoot through brush. This kind of faulty "experiment" (with no consistency or controls) sadly fuels much of today's misunderstandings about firearms.

 

[357 MAX]

1) "brush busting capability". THIS is the phrase that needs to be "put to bed". There is no such thing, and there never has been any such thing. As far as traveling through a barrier of brush and arriving at the point of aim (and undamaged toward terminal performance), heavy bullets are NO advantage. Solid bullets are NO advantage.. Large caliber bullets are of NO advantage. Numerous tests have been accomplished regarding this phrase. All conclude that ALL bullets are severely affected by ANY impact on the way to the target. The most comprehensive of these tests (done by Jim Carmichael) came to that conclusion, but did name a "better loser" as to calibers/bullets tried. It was the .264 Winchester magnum with a 140gr hollowpoint. This result illustrates the fallacy of "brush busting capability" best. DON"T shoot through brush.

2) In "olden times" weight of the bullet was the primary factor in penetration. Not today. Bullet design can override a weight advantage toward penetration easily.

3) Energy is CERTAINLY a factor in killing power and is not "meaningless". Never an "acid test" for killing power (as was done frequently in the past, even by Game Commissions writing caliber regulations) it is only a segment of the characteristics of a projectile that result in a kill. Energy contributes to penetration. Energy contributes to expansion. "Super bullets" enjoy no magic exemption. Energy's contribution to the killing process cannot in any way be written off as without meaning.

No charge for this service, Drive Safely.

so how did your hunt with 256 win mag turn out?

 

[Bobbygun]

Don't shoot through brush.

This is the way.

A buddy of mine had a nearly 300" 6X6 bull laying on the ground with an arrow protruding from its side tight behind the shoulder. He recounted the tale of how he had just a narrow gap in the brush to sneak an arrow through. He hit the release and the bull ended up falling about 60 yards away. What appeared to be a near perfect shot, turned out to be anything but. While skinning then deboning the bull, we flipped it over to discover the entry hole was just ahead of the ham. The arrow had apparently tickled the brush, sending it corkscrewing up through the body and exiting in such a manner it appeared to be a perfect broadside hit. That was only my second year of bowhunting and the first time I got to examine up close the effect a broadhead could have. That corkscrew action really tore things up inside. As always, it is better to be lucky than good.

 

[Koda]

If your intentionally shooting thru brush at game you need to stop hunting and go take an ethics class. Lots of great replies here but want to nip the brush shots in the bud as off topic.

 

[Bobbygun]

Lots of great replies here but want to nip the brush shots in the bud as off topic.

C'mon Koda. Off topic is what we do best around here.

 

[Koda]

more energy means nothing. energy does not mean more killing power. penetration, exspansion ,tissue destruction kills game. i know we have been depending on foot pounds of energy forever but who decided this was important.? knock down power is a myth! "it takes minimum xxxxx ft pounds of energy to kill a deer elk etc. who came up with this and why? a 22 long rifle will kill a deer under ideal conditions. ft pounds of energy is a feel good term to make you feel like you are doing a better job with a bigger bullet.

Energy is a component of ballistics and does affect terminal performance thats just science. You can have the best bullet design for penetration but at some point there is a minimum amount of energy required to punch thru heavy bone for example.

I dont really want to go down the rabbit hole of whats the least amount of energy or caliber to ethically hunt with. Im more interested in learning if differences in energy have a significant impact on terminal performance to influence choosing a bullet to handload and hunt with. It may very well be in most big game calibers energy will always be above a certain threshold, but then why do people often choose a heavier bullet?