Big and Slow vs Small and Fast

Status
Not open for further replies.
It is almost a constant of the Universe that given enough discussion of a rifle/cartridge selection question, the .30-06 is often agreed upon as one of the best answers and often THE BEST ANSWER.

Here is just a quick and dirty posting of a link that partially explains why:

http://www.ballistics101.com/30-06_Springfield.php

The size and velocity range shown on this link incompletely illustrates what is perhaps the greatest range of weight/velocity of any commonly available commercial rifle cartridge:

112gr. @ 3650fps / 220gr @ 2410fps

It is an incomplete list because loadings lighter than 112gr. and heavier than 220gr. are out there.
 
My 12 year old is obsessed with this topic. He is always asking me which is "more powerful", IE: 45-70 vs a .243, or any and all other comparisons imaginable. Usually the answer is fairly apparent, but in the example listed, not so much.

How do we measure "power"? Is is ft. Lbs of energy at the muzzle? That's a "per square inch" measurement. The .243 wins, right? Not so fast; the 405 gr flat nose has nearly twice the frontal area to impart that energy.

But wait, the .243 shooting a properly mushrooming 100 gr. projectile may likewise expand to 1/2", so it is more powerful.

But wait, what about those extra 305 grains? That has to count for something. Surely there is a concrete measurement for "knock-down power"?

But wait, that .243 is hustling way yonder twice as fast, think of all that hydrostatic damage! But what if it fails to penetrate given the quick loss of momentum being so much lighter?

But wait, how can anyone hit anything at more than 10 yards with a basketball sized projectile barley falling from the barrel?

But wait, long-distance shooters are still setting records with the good oi' sharps rifle in .45-70.

I remain confused. Oh yea, Eskimos are still killing polar bears with .243's. What a screwed up world.

So "daddy, which one is the most powerful?" Heck if I know, kid.
 
^^AKElroy Lol. Gotta love kids. I think it depends on how you define power. Is it tissue damage, or penetration? You have a great opportunity to have a very informative discussion with your son. Ask him which he he thinks is the determining factor. Then the answer is cut and dry. But be sure to explain the pros and cons of both and how both are important. And explain that neither one can make up for a poorly placed shot.
 
It's kinda like a screw driver

The bigger the phillips head and the longer the shaft the more torque you can apply to the head.

However it does not fit all the Phillips heads so even with all the power it's not gonna help you. You need the right size to do the job.

A 375HH shooting a 300 grain solid at 2650fps max load will deliver 4679 fpe

A 243 shooting a 100 grain Ballistic tip at 2800fps delivers 1741 FPE

Now shoot a 125 pound antelope, or white tail deer clean through the lungs with each one. What happens?

With the 4679FPE 300 grain solid bullet, the antelope or deer runs 80-100 yards and dies someplace in the bush. Get your tracking shoes on. The bullet zips right through with the animal not really understanding that it has been shot, and with almost no "explosive" terminal damage at that instant. The perforation will cause it to slowly drown in it's own blood over a minute or so.

With the 100 grain 1741 FPE .243 soft ballistic tipped bullet the deer will die in a few steps with everything inside now being a big bubbling mass of purple bloody goo.

Which one has more power?

Gotta use the right screw driver
 
Then the answer is cut and dry.
Click to expand...

Really? 4 pages and I don't see cut and dried. I read a lot, and I get the numbers behind ballistic coefficients, muzzle energy, sectional density, on and on. It all goes out the window when hammering a gong at 80 yards with that big loafing 405gr slug vs. a .243. There is more to assigning power than simple math; there are variables at play that vastly effect the definition of "power" that go beyond the numbers on a page.

To quote the great western philosopher Rango, "It's.......a complicated."
 
MC,
I hope the AR guys don't read that comment lol. This thread will go off topic and be closed in short order. And FYI, I do have a SA M1A. It's topped with a nice VXII and Harris Bipod (Not on top though. Kinda pointless to have a bipod on top of your gun). Plenty of firepower for anything round these parts. But shooting animals at 200, 300, or even 400 yards isn't fun or a challenge. I'm more of an "up close and personal" kinda hunter. In my last 6 years of hunting, I haven't shot an animal past 47 yards. Even with my rifle(s) (2 deer in 6 years not taken by archery).

My point about being a B&S fan is not to downplay high power S&F cartridges. It's merely to state that both have their "fans and fanatics" for good reasons. S&F has the advantage of not having high "hold over" on longer shots. And given a well placed broadside shot at those longer distances with the proper bullet, S&F= Dead critter. B&S doesn't have that advantage. But it has an already large wound channel (due to initial bullet diameter) and "great penetration from most any angle" advantage. And within the B&S's range (again with proper bullets) size, thickness, of animal doesn't really matter. Please don't bring up a texas heart shot on a rhino, or elephant. Those aren't realistic hunting scenarios.

B&S "typically" means you have to get much closer to your game. S&F (DRASTICALLY) tipped the "advantage" scale to the hunter. I prefer a more even playing field.

"Me against Mother Nature" doesn't take place at 300-400 yards.
Click to expand...

Oh, I hear ya, sorta why I like muzzle loading and, if I could see worth a toot in my right eye, archery. Of course, archery offers early season hunting when the deer ain't so wise to hunters in the woods. I've about decided to buy a crossbow and top it with a low power scope. Now, that's legal in Texas and would keep me from wounding a buck because I can't see those damned pins in the shadows of the woods with my worthless right eye. I would shoot the crossbow left handed like I do my rifles and shotguns, not something I can do with a bow. I'd put my good eye behind that scope.

Anyway, I just never got into cartridge black powder. I prefer the front stuffer, one shot counts or go home empty approach. I class a 50 cal front stuffer as "big and slow". :D It'll kill anything a 50-90 sharps will kill just as dead.

Here ya go, big enough? :D ......

14l26ac.jpg



I do have a Hakim I could rig for night hunting, 11 rounds of 8x57 Mauser fast as I can pull the trigger. Never shot anything, but paper with it,
Click to expand...

I need to amend this. This weekend I attended a Taurusarmed.net Texas meet up. One of the things we shot was an old computer. I went to town on it with that Hakim and some old surplus ammo. :D They have something against computers I suppose, blew one up with Tannerite. AND, there was a full auto...select fire....Class 3 M14 there. The tacticool AR kids were droolin'. LOL!

AND, I shot that computer with my Hawken a couple of times just to put 50 caliber holes in it. :D
 
Last edited:
AKElroy,
There is no one that can legitimately argue that a 100 gr. psp .243 at ~4000 fps will penetrate into an animal farther than a 405 gr. hardcast at ~1400 fps will. Penetrate enough? Sure. But farther? No. And a 405 gr hardcast will not create the hydrostatic shock/pressure wave that the 100 gr. 243 will. They are two different "screwdrivers".
 
AKElroy,
There is no one that can legitimately argue that a 100 gr. psp .243 at ~4000 fps will penetrate into an animal farther than a 405 gr. hardcast at ~1400 fps will. Penetrate enough? Sure. But farther? No. And a 405 gr hardcast will not create the hydrostatic shock/pressure wave that the 100 gr. 243 will. They are two different "screwdrivers".
Click to expand...

I'm not making that argument, good buddy. I have a safe full of mostly light and fast rigs, but lately I've come to prefer my .30-30, which is in a new category of being neither heavy and slow or light and fast. It seems to kill a bunch of stuff for me, so I don't dwell on it much.

I just find it interesting that regardless of what the math may say, nothing bangs and rocks that 80 yard gong like that hard cast 405. I don't own one, but I hope to remedy that soon enough. Until then, I'll just keep watching Hickok45 do his thing on YouTube with that guide gun. Ooh, except for those 1,000 grain fosters....
 
AKElroy,
I completely agree. And you have a great round in the 30-30. If I didn't have my 45-70, I would probably own a 30-30. But yes, there is a BIG difference in hitting a gong with a .243 (ting...) and a 405 hardcast (CLANG!!!!!)

Don't just watch Hickok45, bite the bullet and go get a "poor mans" big bore. You won't regret it. But don't get rid of that 30-30. It's perfect for your son.
 
Don't just watch Hickok45, bite the bullet and go get a "poor mans" big bore. You won't regret it. But don't get rid of that 30-30. It's perfect for your son.
Click to expand...

He has his own model 94, and will one day have 3 more .30 WCF's, including my 336. They have been multiplying. I check all the usual on-line haunts for a clean pre-rem guide gun from time to time. Prices are pretty steep for clean examples, so I'm too sure the "poor mans" big bore still applies........
 
Remember, they don't make them anymore and odds are they aren't ever going to get cheaper. Think about how long you've had your other rifles. The great thing about quality firearms is they rarely lose value if maintained properly. Pre '64 Winchesters for example. A pre-Rem Marlin will likely go a similar route. But, I don't own guns for value. I own them to shoot them. That's where the value lies for me. Barring some unforeseen catastrophe, I will have that gun, and my S&F guns till my last day.
 
I completely agree. And you have a great round in the 30-30. If I didn't have my 45-70, I would probably own a 30-30. But yes, there is a BIG difference in hitting a gong with a .243 (ting...) and a 405 hardcast (CLANG!!!!!)
Click to expand...

That's called momentum, what you want playing games that involve knocking over steel. But, deer aren't made of steel plate. Still, a 45/70 makes upwards of nearly 3000 ft lbs with a good load in a strong rifle. Just keep it within your range, which might not include 400 yard shot across canyons in New Mexico, and you'll be fine. BUT, that don't mean my .257 Roberts will bounce off a deer. It's killed dozens over the years for me and quite a few for my Grandpa before that, with a lowly 100 to 117 grain bullet pushing over 3000 fps in either case. It's a 1/2 MOA gun and I can put it where it counts with no shoulder bruising as a bonus.

Again, more'n one way to skin that cat.
 
MC,
Absolutely agree. Deer aren't armor plated animals that need magnum AP rounds any more than a hog do. "Preference" and "Proficiency" are all it takes.
 
If fast and flat is necessary, such as hunting for game or in terrain where the likely shot will be beyond 300 yds., I will use lots of slow burning powder, and a mid weight bullet from a 7 mag or similar capable cartridge. For instance, antelope hunting has put me in shots that range out to 600 yds. +, so shooting my 7 mag I will run with a 120 gr. bullet at 3400 fps..

OTOH, if hunting elk, bear, or similar game, and the projected shots will be under 200 yds., I would probably go with a 7 mag and a 168 gr. pushed with as much velocity as I can, and a super good bullet capable of sticking together at 3000 fps. while penetrating heavy bone. And a better option at least in my opinion, is a 338 WM with a big heavy bullet. That combination right there can actually fill the bill for long shots as well though, considering.

In conclusion, I guess I'm a high velocity freak, per say, cause I just don't care for the really big, really slow cartridges. If I were hunting in Africa I could see the need for big and slow, but here in NA I just don't see the need to reduce my options to one or the other. I'm the guy who will argue that the 7 mag will effectively handle anything on this continent, with the right load. And better yet, a 338 WM or like, will definitely perform well for any conditions in America, long shots as far as one can take, and up close and personal if need be, and I wouldn't ever feel under gunned.

GS
 
d2wing said:
In truth we need a lot less gun than we think. Russian hunters in Siberia, to my surprise carry SKS rifles in 7.62x39 and single shot shotguns. I would have guessed Mosins. They have the same brown bears as Alaska and they are plentiful. The Eskimos seem to favor AR rifles in .223 and shoot Brown and Polar bears with them as well as .243. In Africa the poachers kill a lot of elephants with AK-47s. SO shoot what you want. Just don't tell me your pistol cartridge the best cuse it ain't. That is my story and I am sticking to it.
Click to expand...

There's a .223 soft point that will penetrate enough for brown and polar bears?

Taking elephants with the 7.62x39 seems inhumane but I guess the poachers don't care.
 
ExAgoradzo said:
This is a real question: I'm not trying to start a fight.

Why do the big and slow guys think theirs is better than small and fast?

And, apart from trajectory, why do the S&F guys think theirs is better than the B&S?

If you get more lbs of energy on an animal with the S&F why would you want something big and slow.

Please educate me...:confused:

Greg
Click to expand...
I've shot plenty of game with both ranging from a 55 gr. SP running over 3800 fps MV out of a 220 Swift to a 260 gr. SWC running 930 fps MV out of a .44 Special revolver, and have seen both work very effectively. But I've also seen things first hand go wrong with small and fast which adversely affects penetration. So, the older I get, the less I feel a need for fast and light.

Then there's the trajectory argument, which is pretty much quashed with the ease of use of rangefinders. If you know the range of the target and you know the projectiles trajectory as you should, what difference does the range make?

Oh, and one other thing I've learned, bullet energy doesn't kill, holes in vital organs does.

Think PHYSICS. A .224" bullet, no matter how high the quality will never penetrate like a bigger, heavier bullet of like construction simply because the former is lighter and therefore more quickly and easily slowed down.

35W
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

AJC1
  • Locked
Big and heavy or slow and fast
2 3 4 5 6
Replies
129
Views
4K
Jon35er
Jon35er
H
  • Locked
.40 vs .45 is not really a big & slow debate?
Replies
19
Views
2K
cooks 7
C
T
  • Locked
Fast burning Powders vs. Slow burning?
2
Replies
36
Views
11K
SHR970
S
M
  • Locked
10mm vs 45 ACP which has more stopping power.
3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12
Replies
283
Views
48K
NM Mountainman
N
M
  • Locked
.338 for deer - heavy and slow vs light and fast?
2
Replies
35
Views
3K
35 Whelen
35 Whelen
Back
Top