Foot Pounds of Energy Question
#21
Boone & Crockett
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: River Ridge, LA (Suburb of New Orleans)
Posts: 10,918
RE: Foot Pounds of Energy Question
My wife would rather go to the dentist than hunt. But she likes deer meat, will eat rabbit - but it's not her favorite, won't touch squirrel or duck.
#22
Nontypical Buck
Join Date: Mar 2004
Posts: 2,445
RE: Foot Pounds of Energy Question
Mine has hunted some. She likes hunting when she's doing it, but it's tough to convince her to go. She shot a deer on her first day out.Must havespoiled her.
Oh, and the 1000 FPE thing. I know I've heard that with centerfire rifles, but I'm not sure it applies directly with MLs which generally firelarge, slow-moving projectiles. A deer won't know the difference between 800 and 1200 FPE if hit properly. If you think you are on the light side with FPE, select a bullet that will stay together and penetrate, and be a little fussy with shot selection.
Oh, and the 1000 FPE thing. I know I've heard that with centerfire rifles, but I'm not sure it applies directly with MLs which generally firelarge, slow-moving projectiles. A deer won't know the difference between 800 and 1200 FPE if hit properly. If you think you are on the light side with FPE, select a bullet that will stay together and penetrate, and be a little fussy with shot selection.
#23
RE: Foot Pounds of Energy Question
My ex-wife was a ruthless hunter. She'd head out early in the morning, no concern for weather conditions,and track down every bargin and shopping mall in a 100 mile area. And that woman had no idea of the meaning of a bag limit either.
Now is the woods was another matter. I took her deer hunting once. She stood there in the blind and finally when she saw a buck walking towards me, stood and yelled "run for your life, he's got a gun..." She then looked at me with this look of Shock on her face and told me she'd be at the house. I agreed that might be a real good idea.
Now is the woods was another matter. I took her deer hunting once. She stood there in the blind and finally when she saw a buck walking towards me, stood and yelled "run for your life, he's got a gun..." She then looked at me with this look of Shock on her face and told me she'd be at the house. I agreed that might be a real good idea.
#25
Nontypical Buck
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location:
Posts: 1,408
RE: Foot Pounds of Energy Question
To add a close real-world example, I spent years hunting with a sidelock and the old 240gr HTP (predecessor to the XTP) over 80gr pyrodex. I killed dozens of deer with that load, most 30-100 yards but a few longer out to 200 yards. I never had a bullet not pass-thru on a broadside shot. Power was more than adequate.
These numbers are sometimes deceiving and hard to make firm cut-offs. 1000 ft-lbs with a bullet that hardly expands means something different than one that over-expands -- the energy transfer and resulting penetration are both affected.
While I like to deliver sufficient theoretical energy on target, I've yet to shoot anything out of a ML that made me think I was under-gunned for deer and I've tried as little as 70gr of powder at shorter ranges.
These numbers are sometimes deceiving and hard to make firm cut-offs. 1000 ft-lbs with a bullet that hardly expands means something different than one that over-expands -- the energy transfer and resulting penetration are both affected.
While I like to deliver sufficient theoretical energy on target, I've yet to shoot anything out of a ML that made me think I was under-gunned for deer and I've tried as little as 70gr of powder at shorter ranges.
#26
Giant Nontypical
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: PA.
Posts: 5,195
RE: Foot Pounds of Energy Question
ORIGINAL: cayugad
You could always load 80 grains and a powerbelt. The recoil with 80 grains would be light, and it would have a lot of energy. You might want to limit the range, but it would be an easy load for a CVA.
If you wanted to shoot an XTP try a .430 grain and go to a 300 grain. The recoil should not be too bad and the accuracy should be exceptional. Then there is alway the 200 grain Shockwave. Also I would forget the .45 caliber and go to a .50 caliber but that is just me.
You could always load 80 grains and a powerbelt. The recoil with 80 grains would be light, and it would have a lot of energy. You might want to limit the range, but it would be an easy load for a CVA.
If you wanted to shoot an XTP try a .430 grain and go to a 300 grain. The recoil should not be too bad and the accuracy should be exceptional. Then there is alway the 200 grain Shockwave. Also I would forget the .45 caliber and go to a .50 caliber but that is just me.
i ONLY use 80 grs of 2f in my T/C HAWKINS .50 CAL flintlockWITH A POWERBELT hollowpoint.
real light recoil,bullet will open, less smoke, less flinching,less noise,easy to load and will open up on whitetail deer just fine.
take a 370 MAXI-BALL ,used to be my FAVORITE,load it with 80 grs and you will see difference in the KICK.
to me, the POWERBELT bullet used way i do on deer is BEST SET-UP I HAVE EVER USED.
but use that same bullet at 90/100/150 grs,dont do it
#27
RE: Foot Pounds of Energy Question
I'd second the opinion about not getting hung up on the 1000 fpe thing. If you look back 25 years or more, the recommended minimum fpe for deer was 800. Then at some point, someone in the hunting/writing community decided that the deer must be getting bigger and tougher from eating all that genetically modified corn so now they recommend 1000. I've seen some writers starting to recommend 1200.
First of all, this relates more to high-power rifle cartriges that rely more on shock to kill. A slow moving ML bullet generally kills by direct tissue damage- large wound channels, etc. So IMO the foot-pounds rule doesn't apply as directly.
What matters is #1- shot placement, #2- good bullet performance (expansion) #3- adequate penetration.
If you have those, it's not going to matter if you hit a deer with 750 fpe or with 1200 fpe - it's going to be just as dead either way. My hunting buddy's daughter started hunting with a .410 shotgun slug - which is woefully underpowered for deer, but legal in Ohio. But it was what she could shoot comfortably and accurately. She took several does cleanly with the .410 (close range shots, good shot placement) before she moved up to the .50 cal ML.
For the recoil sensitive, (and since you said you would like to stick with the XTP) - I would highly recommend the .40 cal 200 grain XTP with a .40/.50 sabot in front of 70 - 80 grains of T7. That is a really nice, light recoiling load that is deadly on deer out to 100 yards or so.
First of all, this relates more to high-power rifle cartriges that rely more on shock to kill. A slow moving ML bullet generally kills by direct tissue damage- large wound channels, etc. So IMO the foot-pounds rule doesn't apply as directly.
What matters is #1- shot placement, #2- good bullet performance (expansion) #3- adequate penetration.
If you have those, it's not going to matter if you hit a deer with 750 fpe or with 1200 fpe - it's going to be just as dead either way. My hunting buddy's daughter started hunting with a .410 shotgun slug - which is woefully underpowered for deer, but legal in Ohio. But it was what she could shoot comfortably and accurately. She took several does cleanly with the .410 (close range shots, good shot placement) before she moved up to the .50 cal ML.
For the recoil sensitive, (and since you said you would like to stick with the XTP) - I would highly recommend the .40 cal 200 grain XTP with a .40/.50 sabot in front of 70 - 80 grains of T7. That is a really nice, light recoiling load that is deadly on deer out to 100 yards or so.
#28
Giant Nontypical
Join Date: Feb 2003
Posts: 9,175
RE: Foot Pounds of Energy Question
I'd second the opinion about not getting hung up on the 1000 fpe thing. If you look back 25 years or more, the recommended minimum fpe for deer was 800. Then at some point, someone in the hunting/writing community decided that the deer must be getting bigger and tougher from eating all that genetically modified corn so now they recommend 1000. I've seen some writers starting to recommend 1200.
I've watched the same theory at work in bowhunting and ML's for the past 20 years.
I make no secret of the fact that I'm a traditionalist. I shoot a .490 prb with 80 gr of Pyrodex RS for about 1200 fpe at the muzzle. No way it will have 1000 fpe left at 100 yards, but I wouldn't have any qualms about busting a cap on a clear shot at a deer at 100 yards. I wouldn't shoot beyond that, but that's due to my shooting ability at that range with iron sights rather than the effectiveness of the load.
Maybe you NEED 1,000 fpe to make jacketed bullets expand when they hit a deer. I don't know because I don't mess with such things. Buffalo Ball-ettes, Mini's and Maxi's are as far as I've ever gone down the conical road, and they're all made from dead soft lead. But that's the only reason I'd see for needing that much retained energy.
By the way, I've got a seriously bad back so recoil is something I avoid like the plague. That load in my rifle kicks less than the .243 I used to have.
#29
Banned
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: Boncarbo,Colorado
Posts: 9,186
RE: Foot Pounds of Energy Question
ft lbs of energy IMO "And this is just my opinion" is nothing more than a modern term that doesnt mean jack squat to me. that 530 round ball did one hell of a job on my elk this past year and i guarantee you that it didnt have no 800ft lbs behind it at 140 yards.