Warning

 

Close

Confirm Action

Are you sure you wish to do this?

Confirm Cancel
Member Login
Site Notices
Posted: 6/2/2003 6:53:30 AM EDT
Given the same grain size and velocity, which would usually transfer more of it's energy to the target?

62 grain hollow point or 62 grain soft point?
Link Posted: 6/2/2003 7:29:48 AM EDT
WTF is 'Transfer more if its engery" mean? With bullets you are not looking to 'Transfer Energy' your looking to cause the 'Most dammage possible'. That does not neccisarrily mean the most energy nor the most 'transfer of energy' Dr Fackler points out a .22 round will 'transfer' more energy than a typical broadhead arrow. Yet which causes the most dammage and is commonly used to take down most all North American game? Energy is only a baseline for 'potential' dammage - bullet construction is more important. Have you looked into the 68gr Black Hills (or heavier)?
Link Posted: 6/2/2003 7:52:13 AM EDT
Originally Posted By Forest: WTF is 'Transfer more if its engery" mean? With bullets you are not looking to 'Transfer Energy' your looking to cause the 'Most dammage possible'. That does not neccisarrily mean the most energy nor the most 'transfer of energy' Dr Fackler points out a .22 round will 'transfer' more energy than a typical broadhead arrow. Yet which causes the most dammage and is commonly used to take down most all North American game? Energy is only a baseline for 'potential' dammage - bullet construction is more important. Have you looked into the 68gr Black Hills (or heavier)?
View Quote
I'm sorry that my question seemed to bother you so much Forest. Maybe if I explained why I am asking the question you'll see why I asked. I need a backup gun this year for deer hunting. My main gun is a .308 but I'm only 80% sure it will function properly for me (that's another issue all together). I can't afford another gun right now so just in case I have a major problem with my .308 I want to bring along my AR15 as a backup. Nebraska's law states that to legally hunt deer the round must produce 900 ft lbs of energy at 100 yards. I know that the .223 Winchester 64 grain [b]soft point[/b] (called power point) produces 1296 ft lbs at 100 yards out of a 24 inch barrel. I currently have 2000 rounds of .223 62grn [b]hollow point[/b] silver bear (works great in my gun BTW). I am trying to figure out if it would be producing the 900 ft lbs of energy at 100 yards out of my 16 inch barrel. If it does then I don't have to spend more money on more ammo and I don't have to re-sight the AR for a different round.
Link Posted: 6/2/2003 8:02:50 AM EDT
What is bothering me? You asked a faily meaningless question. The second questions (which is better for hunting 64gr PP or 62gr Silver Bear is much better). The difference in point of impact from 62gr Silver Bear and 64gr Power point are small at 100 yards. But if it bothers you it should only take 6 rounds to reset the zero - 3 to confirm current group point - measure how far it is off - adjust the scope/irons the appropriate # of clicks then fire a group of 3 to confirm. Spend the $18 and get a box of Winchester Power Point. The Silver bear is Russian junk and I wouldn't expect it to expand nor fragment. Silver Bear is plinking ammo - nothing more.
Link Posted: 6/2/2003 8:11:35 AM EDT
Originally Posted By Forest: What is bothering me? You asked a faily meaningless question. The second questions (which is better for hunting 64gr PP or 62gr Silver Bear is much better). The difference in point of impact from 62gr Silver Bear and 64gr Power point are small at 100 yards. But if it bothers you it should only take 6 rounds to reset the zero - 3 to confirm current group point - measure how far it is off - adjust the scope/irons the appropriate # of clicks then fire a group of 3 to confirm. Spend the $18 and get a box of Winchester Power Point. The Silver bear is Russian junk and I wouldn't expect it to expand nor fragment. Silver Bear is plinking ammo - nothing more.
View Quote
Ok, so your opinion is based on a round that I'm guessing you probably have never fired or done balistic testing on. Thanks for your feedback. I will take it into consideration.
Link Posted: 6/2/2003 10:41:57 AM EDT
If you're looking for Ordanence Gelatin testing then as far as I know there are only 3 people on this board with the resources and equipment to do it. One is a professional who doesn't post often, the other two are very talented amatures who are not running any tests currently. If all your looking for is an energy level to satisfy some state regulation then just chrono the SB in your rifle then run the numbers through some ballistic calculator software to get the numbers you want. Its so easy a 3 fingered monkey could do it (to paraphrase another poster). The software is free is available for download off the web - or use one of the several online calculators. However if you're really a hunter then I'd think you'd want to use a proven round to get a clean kill - rather than wound an animal with an round that (as far as I know) doesn't have a hunting 'history' nor scientific testing of its terminal ballistics. The Winchester Power Point 64gr and the Federal 62gr Trophy Bonded Claw are both used for hunting deer sized game with .223s. They meet your states 'energy' requirement, and they have proven terminal performance in the field and from published tests in ordenance gelatine. The Power Point is the better performer if barriers are not an issue (and they shouldn't be with deer hunting). Now my question is why are wanting to dismiss spending a measly $20 for a round with proven performance (both in the lab and in the field) for an unproven bargain basement round?
Link Posted: 6/2/2003 10:57:55 AM EDT
Originally Posted By Forest: Now my question is why are wanting to dismiss spending a measly $20 for a round with proven performance (both in the lab and in the field) for an unproven bargain basement round?
View Quote
All very good points you've made. I haven't dismissed spending $20 for the power points yet. It would be great to see some Ordinance Gelatin testing of the SB and Wolf HP just to see how they perform. Remember, the chance of me having to use the .223 on a deer this year is only 20% (my guess). It's only coming along as a backup (well, maybe for some plinking also). Thanks for the comments. Gives me something to think about. By the way, would a 1 in 9 twist 16 inch barrel stabilize a 68grn Black Hills round? I think the 1 in 9 is good for up to the mid 70 grain sizes but I can't remember!?!
Link Posted: 6/2/2003 11:33:10 AM EDT
I've had very good results with the 68gr Black Hills in both my 14.5" & 20" 1:9 twist ARs. I really like this round. If you look back a week or so I posted group sizes I got with the round in my carbine. IMHO it's a bargain at $18 for 50 rounds. However the 68gr does fragment (some 53% according to Dr Roberts) so you will get some meat 'tenderizing' if you use it on deer.
Link Posted: 6/2/2003 12:02:39 PM EDT
Originally Posted By Forest: However the 68gr does fragment (some 53% according to Dr Roberts) so you will get some meat 'tenderizing' if you use it on deer.
View Quote
Thanks. Not sure if I want to be picking little bits of bullet fragments out of my deer jerky. B^)
Link Posted: 6/2/2003 1:42:42 PM EDT
Originally Posted By DaPhotoGuy:
Originally Posted By Forest: However the 68gr does fragment (some 53% according to Dr Roberts) so you will get some meat 'tenderizing' if you use it on deer.
View Quote
Thanks. Not sure if I want to be picking little bits of bullet fragments out of my deer jerky. B^)
View Quote
Again, I would think a little money for this would be a good idea, with the added thought that the left-over rounds would be good to have around anyway. The PowerPoint has a really good reputation with deer and such. How does it do feeding into ARs?
Link Posted: 6/2/2003 1:50:35 PM EDT
Originally Posted By Ohio: Again, I would think a little money for this would be a good idea, with the added thought that the left-over rounds would be good to have around anyway. The PowerPoint has a really good reputation with deer and such. How does it do feeding into ARs?
View Quote
Ok, ok, y'all talked me into it. I just ordered a box of .223 Winchester 64 grain Power Point for the trip. Just trying to save $20 I guess. If I knew more about the expansion properties of the Silver Bear I'd go with it but there is no data on it and I don't have the ability to test it myself. Where do I get a block of Geletin? B^)
Link Posted: 6/2/2003 8:34:04 PM EDT
Ohio, I had no feeding problem with it. The only problem I have with the ammo is its tough to find in the shops. Glad there is mail-order. DaPhotoGuy, I can point you to sources for the gel mix and instructions for making it. It aint cheap and requires stringent controls on its temperture and such. I looked into it myself - I could handle the cost, but I don't have the refridgeration capacity for storage or transportion to the range.
Link Posted: 6/3/2003 7:39:38 AM EDT
Originally Posted By Forest: DaPhotoGuy, I can point you to sources for the gel mix and instructions for making it. It aint cheap and requires stringent controls on its temperture and such. I looked into it myself - I could handle the cost, but I don't have the refridgeration capacity for storage or transportion to the range.
View Quote
Though I don't know if I can afford the costs or if I have the refrideration capacity it would be interesting to see how to do this.
Link Posted: 6/3/2003 10:12:56 AM EDT
You can get Ballistic Gelatine from [b]Kind & Knox[/b] or from [b]The Vyse Gelatin Co.[/b]. The Vyse gelatin is 66% cheaper, but according to Firearmstactical.com its not as clear. ([url]http://www.firearmstactical.com/tacticalbriefs/volume4/number2/toc.htm[/url]). Here is how to Mix the Vyse Gelatine: [url]http://www.vyse.com/gelatin_for_ballistic_testing.htm[/url] Here is a simplified procedure for the Knox product:[url]http://www.firearmstactical.com/tacticalbriefs/volume3/number2/article1.htm[/url] About halfway down this page is the procedure to calibrate the Gelatine: [url]http://www.firearmstactical.com/briefs9.htm[/url] Here is the FBI handgun round test procedure: [url]http://www.vyse.com/FBI%20PENETRATION%20TESTING.htm[/url] After reading this you will get a real appreciation for the time, money, and effort that Tatjana and Brouhaha put in to do their tests for the board. Dr. Roberts has indicated on other boards you can use water to conduct tests onrounds for penetration and expansion. Though the expansion would be 'optimal' and now what you would really expect. IIRC in water you would get 2x what the real penetration would be. Ok I looked up the Dr Roberts quotes:
Water is a good test medium to assess bullet upset; many crime labs use water recovery tanks for that purpose. Be aware that water generally reveals the maximum upset which can occur to a projectile in soft tissue—your actual result in living tissue may be somewhat less. .... Remember that the bullets will penetrate up to 2 times farther in water, so make sure your recovery tank is has sufficient length to capture the bullet you intend to shoot. .... Typically results are 1.6 to 2 times as far in water as in tissue or 10% gelatin.
View Quote
BTW if you look at the briefs on FirearmsTactical.com you will find one for testing handgun bullets using water filled paper milk cartons (IIRC they mention you'll need about 30). There is also an old SWAT magazine article on building a 'Fackler Box' to test handgun rounds in water - you can download the back issue from the website (www.swatmag.com) for $5 (I did - it should make a good summer project).
Link Posted: 6/5/2003 11:47:43 AM EDT
Wet newspapers can be used as well. Supposedly closer to gelatin than water. I don't know if there's a "conversion factor" for penetration depth, but my tests (all pistol rounds) came up quite a bit less than the same round in the gelatin tests I've seen. Maybe I didn't have them wet enough?
Link Posted: 6/5/2003 11:57:06 AM EDT
Mike, I'm unaware of any professionals suggesting the use of wet newsprint. Without a 'conversion factor' penetration and expansion would meaningless. Also can you calibrate the newprint (variances in how much water its holding could effect results)? If you've got an article or reference on this I'd very much like to see it. It would make things easier than getting a long trough full of water.
Link Posted: 6/5/2003 12:40:31 PM EDT
For professional testing the medium has to be properly calibrated 10% ballistic gelatin. That's the only way to get repeatable results, and results that can be compared from tester to tester. From what I've read, wet newspaper gives a more realistic idea of expansion than the "optimal" qualities of plain water. It has to be very wet, and you have to remove the glossy ads. I don't know of any way to calibrate it, but maybe you could use the same method as for gelatin? Even if you can't, you can still compare bullets fired into the same stack against each other. I'm sorry I can't point you to a reference as it's been quite a while since I read about it (and performed my tests) but I do know that I was reading firearmstactical.com and the forums on [url]www.ammolab.com[/url] a lot back then so the idea probably came from one (or both) of those sites.
Link Posted: 6/5/2003 1:40:46 PM EDT
Thanks Mike! Firearmstactical.com is one of my favorites. I'll go back and see if I cant find something.
Link Posted: 6/5/2003 2:26:14 PM EDT
I did a quick look and couldn't find anything. Must have come from ammolab.com or one of the linked sites. I just went back to ammolab.com's forums and it appears that some computer problems ate most of the old posts. I found quite a few posts on newspaper tests, but nothing authorative about how it compares.
Link Posted: 6/6/2003 6:33:47 AM EDT
Mike, I was at the IWBA's website looking to order some back issues. One of the back issues Volume 3 #1 has an article on the use of wet newsprint for ballistic testing. That back issue made my list of 'must purchase'. Thanks for the heads-up! -Forest
Link Posted: 6/6/2003 6:37:13 AM EDT
Originally Posted By Forest: Dr Fackler points out a .22 round will 'transfer' more energy than a typical broadhead arrow. Yet which causes the most dammage and is commonly used to take down most all North American game?
View Quote
I hear ya and agree but this is a terrible analogy. The .22 takes more American game each year than any other cartridge.
Link Posted: 6/6/2003 6:50:13 AM EDT
Originally Posted By bvmjethead: I hear ya and agree but this is a terrible analogy. The .22 takes more American game each year than any other cartridge.
View Quote
If your including rabbits, squirrels and such I'd agree. However with 'Game' I'm sure the Dr meant LARGE game (I know I did). elk, deer, boar, etc. Now some poachers my be taking some of those animals with a .22lr to the head - but I'd bet the vast majority are being hunted properly by archery or a centerfire firearm.
Link Posted: 6/6/2003 9:57:48 AM EDT
Originally Posted By Forest: Mike, I was at the IWBA's website looking to order some back issues. One of the back issues Volume 3 #1 has an article on the use of wet newsprint for ballistic testing. That back issue made my list of 'must purchase'. Thanks for the heads-up! -Forest
View Quote
If it contains a conversion factor for approximating newspaper-to-gel, let me know. I've got a ton of newspapers and a big list of ammo I want to test.
Link Posted: 6/6/2003 10:51:32 AM EDT
We shot some 55 gr .223 and some 122 gr 7,62X39 Russian HP's into wet phone books. None expanded very well. In contrast, the 64 gr Win and 70 gr Speer SP's expanded quite well in the wet paper. I wouldn't trust the Russian HP's to hunt with. Just my opinion.
Top Top