Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 18

Thread: Big,'light','fast' vs big,heavy,slow

  1. #1
    SD Regular Greener Jim's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2014
    Location
    Yorkshireman in Darkest Cornwall
    Posts
    2,572

    Big,'light','fast' vs big,heavy,slow

    This is totally hypothetical, for reasons you'll soon see, but which do you think would be best in UK quarry (and similar quarry internationally) in a woodland setting.

    Here is is my thinking. Both bullets would be soft lead, .620", and have the same nose profile.

    'Fast and 'light': 550gr@1425fps

    'Heavy and slow': 1000gr@1050fps

    So we have rapid expansion, less retained weight, less penetration, and MAYBE more energy transfer VERSUS greater penetration, greater retained weight, more recoil, worse trajectory.

    Bit of a fun one so go wild
    Any Questions Feel Free to PM me

  2. #2
    MV is irrelevant
    impact velocity is the key to this discussion

    what range?
    any bc details?

    be a good test in a gelatine block

  3. #3
    By your definition then I'd say "fast and light" but those figures are themselves "heavy and slow" by any definition in my view.

  4. #4
    SD Regular Greener Jim's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2014
    Location
    Yorkshireman in Darkest Cornwall
    Posts
    2,572
    Quote Originally Posted by bewsher500 View Post
    MV is irrelevant
    impact velocity is the key to this discussion

    what range?
    any bc details?

    be a good test in a gelatine block
    Woods ranges so well under 100 yards. Realistically it would be a 75 yard rifle at the top end simply due to trajectory and likely open sights.

    As for BC, no idea although the heavier bullet would be higher as they share the same nose profile. At the close range I would say that the faster bullet would remain that way. However external ballistics isn't my biggest interest so wouldn't know.
    Any Questions Feel Free to PM me

  5. #5
    SD Regular Greener Jim's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2014
    Location
    Yorkshireman in Darkest Cornwall
    Posts
    2,572
    Quote Originally Posted by VIGILAIRE View Post
    By your definition then I'd say "fast and light" but those figures are themselves "heavy and slow" by any definition in my view.
    Couldn't agree more. The cartridge in mind can push both bullets faster but those MV's give just under 2500ft-lbs which is sensible.
    Any Questions Feel Free to PM me

  6. #6
    Range is short, I would definitely go with the lighter (so to speak) faster pill. With that diameter weight, and velocity, it has a sectional density of .204...that puts it far ahead of most shotgun slugs which rarely go beyond an SD of about .15 so all else being relatively equal, it should penetrate better than a shotgun slug which has plenty of penetration on typical game at woods ranges. We are not talking about having to shoot stem to stern on a rhino or worry about ballistic coefficient at these ranges so no need for the longer, heavier pill. Lastly, the increased velocity of the lighter projectile should obturate more/faster and transfer more energy and provide a bigger wound channel.

    That said, I think all game subject to a hit with either would definitely be in silent agreement about their "equal" efficacy....how dead is dead?

    Ha..good times....ready to have my opinion torpedoed!

  7. #7
    SD Regular
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    East Midlands M1/M69 Junction 21
    Posts
    5,401
    By your definition then I'd say "fast and light" but those figures are themselves "heavy and slow" by any definition in my view.
    In ballistic terms NEITHER are fast. As others have also noted. So any supposed advantage given to one by its greater velocity over the other is irrelevant.

    Therefore the only relevant factor will be weight and with its greater weight the heavier projectile will retain its initial energy and momentum for longer than the lighter projectile. And eventually surpass in those values the quicker stepping light load you have mentioned.

    So as you can't, as I've argued along with others, go truly "fast", you must go heavy. If they've the same diameter and same nose profile then the heavier will, ballistically, out perfprm the other in retaining its initial energy and momentum.

    One is pretty near a lead ball? The other is more a bullet? Bullets of heavy weight at a lower velocity are better than balls of lighter weight at higher velocity!

    It's why the "farmer's clause" allowing shot guns on deer specifies, for the single projectile, a calibre size slug" and (by its terms) outlaws a calibre size ball.

    Yes fast and light IS better than slow and heavy but your "fast" isn't fast enough to be a relevant factor. 1425 fps isn't fast, it's slow! 2425 fps is about where fast begins.
    Last edited by enfieldspares; 19-02-2016 at 23:06.

  8. #8
    SD Regular Greener Jim's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2014
    Location
    Yorkshireman in Darkest Cornwall
    Posts
    2,572
    Backstraps, I agree with your points. The lighter bullet would creat a larger wound channel I think but would it lose to much weight in certain circumstances or with certain (non UK) deer/antelope species? I truely don't know. I guess the heavier bullet could be hollow pointed to expand more. At 1000 grains even if losing 90% of its weight it'd still be the weight of a typical .243 bullet!

    Enfieldspares, I know neither is fast, hence the apostrophes I was leaning towards heavy simply due to personal biase but thanks for actually giving me a reason to justify it!!
    However, for sake of debate, at such close range would the heavier bullet actually overtake the light one? Obviously hard to say without BC.
    Last edited by Greener Jim; 19-02-2016 at 23:11.
    Any Questions Feel Free to PM me

  9. #9
    SD Regular
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    East Midlands M1/M69 Junction 21
    Posts
    5,401
    Well I did try to use one of the air gun trajectory calculators, but, problem was they can't adjust for your .620" diameter and, of course, I don't know the ballistic coefficient of the two bullets.

    Certainly perceived wisdom is that .444 Marlin, .375 Winchester and .356 Winchester all pretty much arrive at 100 yards with the same velocity...so the difference, I am guessing, is the bullet weight and its sectional density. So presumably the bullet with the better sectional density (for you, your 1000 grain bullet) will penetrate better?

  10. #10
    SD Regular Greener Jim's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2014
    Location
    Yorkshireman in Darkest Cornwall
    Posts
    2,572
    I very much think the heavy bullet will penetrate better, the high SD and massive momentum would see to that.

    When I first thought of the cartridge I immediately thought of the big 1000gr, maybe paper patched if I chose to run it hotter. That's my bias, heavy for calibre.

    So I thought I'd see about the other side of life, the light for calibre camp.
    Any Questions Feel Free to PM me

Similar Threads

  1. slow and fast burning powders
    By s8mdevo in forum Ammunition, Reloading & Ballistics
    Replies: 18
    Last Post: 08-06-2014, 07:50
  2. nerves of steel and big, big gun!
    By Bill Bartlett in forum Videos
    Replies: 13
    Last Post: 08-05-2014, 12:39
  3. Replies: 2
    Last Post: 26-01-2013, 19:40
  4. Sika age from teeth? (big photo so quite bandwidth heavy)
    By caorach in forum Deer Stalking General
    Replies: 8
    Last Post: 17-02-2009, 16:37
  5. Big gun, fast dog, sharp knife...
    By doghound in forum Introductions
    Replies: 7
    Last Post: 02-11-2008, 16:12

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •