22 vs 460 Wtby


March 11, 2010, 01:16 PM
Blame it on the rain. I've been doing some number crunching and I came up with the following theories. A 22 is as effective against a man as a 460 wtby mag is against an elephant.
Here goes my reasoning.The 460 develops 8100 ft lbs of energy with a 500gr bullet at 2700 fps. A large bull elephant can weigh up to 16000 lbs. So roughly 1 ftlb of energy for 2 lbs of elephant. I think that everyone will say that the 460 is enough gun for an elephant.
The lowly 22 develops 100 ft lbs [more in some loads but keeping the math easy] . A large man weighs around 200 lbs. So roughly 1ft lb of energy for every 2lbs of man. I dont think that many will say that the 22 is enough gun for a man. Are men tougher than elephants?

If you enjoyed reading about "22 vs 460 Wtby" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!
March 11, 2010, 01:21 PM
I think people agree that shot placment on an elephant is key. And shot placment with a .22 on a man would also be key.

A single shot 460 on an elephant, well placed, probably has the same affect as a single .22 on a man, well placed.

March 11, 2010, 01:26 PM
Energy is a meaningless measurement to attempt any comparison like that.

Penetration might prove more meaningful when it comes to elephants.


March 11, 2010, 01:26 PM
I have thought abouth the same thing, roughly.

I rescue inner City Birds who are sick, hurt or as may be, provide first aid and or other procedures, care, convelescence, release when possible...and, I deal with quite a few Pellet Gun injuries and perforations.

Most of these Birds weigh from 140 to 350 Grammes....some lighter, depends on species.

Pellets range from the .177 to maybe .20, Wadcutters and BBs.

Dunno attributed Ft Lbs.

But, more like if a man were shot with something the size of an old 35mm Film Can, proportion wise.

March 11, 2010, 01:50 PM
Non-linear relationship.

March 11, 2010, 01:52 PM
That comparison would hold more water if you were hunting a man with a .22 and waited to line up the perfect shot on his vitals.

March 11, 2010, 02:55 PM
What about knockdown isn't anyone going to say there is no such thing.

March 11, 2010, 03:24 PM
Try thinking in terms of thickness of skin and distance from surface to vital organs, rather than pure mass.

March 11, 2010, 03:35 PM
By that same logic, a 600# man would receive 3x less "effect" than I would (me being 200#) from being shot by the same bullet.

March 11, 2010, 03:51 PM
If energy was everything, then you would be right. Bullet placement, size, weight, etc are all factors. What if you fired a bullet the size of a bucket of paint with 100ft-lbs of energy at a guy...it wouldn't penetrate or kill him.

March 11, 2010, 04:01 PM
They do have one thing in common. I dont want to be shot by either-

March 11, 2010, 06:16 PM
Non-linear relationship

Exactly. Too many other factors, it's not a simple equation.

Also to consider, as with many things (biological and inorganic alike), as size goes up, structural integrity/strength goes down. Pound for pound, a man is much stronger than an elephant; A man in good shape can lift at least his own weight with relative ease, while an elephant could not stand up with 5 tons on it's back. Similarly, a cat 1/15th our size has strength disproportionate to that ratio (try holding one that's pissed off). Then consider an ant...........

March 12, 2010, 04:58 PM
So a man is tougher than an elephant propotionatly.

March 12, 2010, 10:19 PM
never hunted elephant, but isn't the recommended shot placement on one a brainshot rather than vitals?
with an appropriate caliber it still usually requires a follow-up shot.
i'd think a couple rounds in the melon with a .22 would have similar effect on a man.
that being said, i'd have to agree with the apples-to-oranges sentiment.

fireman 9731
March 12, 2010, 10:26 PM
It only takes 2 PSI for a number 8 nail to penetrate a human skull, so a 2x4 must be stronger than a man.

Interesting number crunching but its kinda comparing apples to oranges.

March 13, 2010, 12:13 PM
It only takes 2 PSI for a number 8 nail to penetrate a human skull

I just love these tidbits, like the "it only takes 8 pounds of force to rip off an ear" and such.

Hold a nail to your head and apply 2 pounds of pressure. I gaurantee it's not going in. It'll barely leave a red mark on the skin.

March 13, 2010, 12:55 PM
well, to be fair about the nail thing, 2lbs of force applied to the head of a nail is multiplied several times that value at the point of the nail.

Remember the Dr. Shoals shoe insert commercial about the woman in high-heels and how the amount of pressure at the tip of her heals, under her normal weight, was actually equivalent to the weight of several elephants? Same principle.

Just clearing that up.

March 13, 2010, 01:00 PM
What about knockdown isn't anyone going to say there is no such thing.

"knockdown" is a marketing term plain and simple. You have clearly ingested your share.

March 13, 2010, 02:22 PM
I bet a bullet the size of a bucket of paint fired with 100 ft lbs would knock him down though.

March 13, 2010, 02:37 PM
also a big key factor, ft. pounds over distance, and velocity.
a .22lr will penatrate a elk shoulder blade at 20 yards, so you could argue a 22lr can take down a elk, shot placement and distance is key.

March 14, 2010, 12:04 AM
i could argue that if i threw a rock at a brick wall it would have the same effect as pulling the wings off a fly.
dot dot dot

March 14, 2010, 12:21 AM
i could argue that if i threw a rock at a brick wall it would have the same effect as pulling the wings off a fly.

What caliber for fly?


March 14, 2010, 12:35 AM
A better measurement would be how big a hole it makes. MacPherson estimates that you have to destroy 22 grams of lung tissue per 100 pounds of body weight, to kill an animal rapidly with a double-lung shot that doesn't hit the heart or aorta. For a 16,000 pound elephant, that's 352,000 grams, while a .460 Wby, even if the bullet tumbles (which even the roundnose bullets tend to, due to their length; recovered monolithic solids are usually bent slightly from tumbling), will crush maybe 500-700 grams tops.

Of course, a double lung shot on an elephant will result in it running several hundred yards, if not a good fraction of a mile, trumpeting and spraying blood from his trunk the whole way.

To kill an elephant cleanly with a .460, you'd want a heart, aorta, or brain shot.

On the other hand, a 200 pound human needs 44 grams of lung tissue, while a .22 roundnose crushes only about 10. Maybe 15 if it tumbles. A little better proportionally, but still pretty far short of the goal.

And similarly, while a double lung shot on a human with a .22 is probably going to be lethal eventually, they'd have quite a bit of time to get even. You'd once again want a heart, aorta, or brain shot.

March 15, 2010, 12:00 AM
What caliber for fly?

lmao at that one.
(.22WMR, by the way)

i still say the answer to the larger question is a headshot.
if you're undergunned for your prey, you'd better be able to put two into the noggin.
and you should seriously reconsider your caliber of choice.

if you're trying for a double-lung shot on an ELEPHANT, you must want to be trampled repeatedly by a soon-to-be-dead elephant.

March 15, 2010, 05:52 PM
Many years ago two Ph hunters were in a bar in Kenya discussing just such a question. Now, I think alcohol was involved, but who can say. (Short version) They proceeded to shoot an elephant in the soft area near the stomach and in direct line with the heart. The elephant showed no reaction. Took a while, but it died from the lowly .22.

Now, you may cast aspersions upon this story, but I've heard it from another PH who was there (I've been on 4 safaris), and he wouldn't ever inflate a story ...

March 15, 2010, 07:57 PM
Actually, I suspect your theory is correct.

We used to use .22's to slaughter beef steers. One whack to the gourd and it's down like a sack of potatoes. If it can drop a 1,200# beef steer DRT, it can sure drop a human.

Same thing with the elephant round. One good shot to the brain and it's lights out. Natives whack them with AK's with 7.62x39's.

It's all about placement.

March 23, 2010, 03:28 PM
well 7.62x39 i havnt heard of being popular but i have heard of 7.62x54 i know that some of the full metal jackets act as armor piercing, i know my steel jacket 7.62x54 will penetrate over 3 feet of wood, and still have nough momentum to go whistling out the other side pretty darn fast im gona try to test and see how far they will penetrate today :)

March 23, 2010, 03:51 PM
What caliber for fly?

The answer around here is always the same: 1) bring enough gun, and 2) shot placement is key. Flies have rather quick reflexes and take to the air rapidly, so obviously shot placement is an issue. If you could take a headshot then a 1mm JHP should be more than enough, but to have a decent chance of hitting the fly at combat ranges I'd suggest a flat-nose 100mm bullet; the penetration may be poor but the knockdown power will be devastating! ;)

March 23, 2010, 06:11 PM
Elephants don't shoot back. Bad eyesight.

March 24, 2010, 05:48 AM
The concept of the nail through the skull and such is valid. Stress is equal to force applied/area of application. So if we're using a nail, whose tip is REALLY small, cross-sectional area-wise, and we divide that 2 lbs by that really small number, we get a BIG number.

Now on the ear, I'm not quite sure how to explain that one. I heard it was 15 pounds and not 8. But then again I submitted a guy once who tried to collar me by pulling his ear. I gave it a good strong tug, pulled him along for a little walk, and told him that next time I wouldn't be so nice. He still had his ear but by the way he was squealing I was sure I'd torn it some. It was just fine. Either way I'm pretty sure I could yank off one if the need ever arose.

If you enjoyed reading about "22 vs 460 Wtby" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!