Kinetic energy vs. momentum

[Oldnamvet]

Just to start an argument I guess. A buddy and I disagree. He thinks kinetic energy is what you have to look at when matching a load with game. I think momentum is more valid (not perfect, just better). Of course he thinks high velocity is everything, no matter what the game. I personally like big, heavy bullets at more 'sedate' velocities. To push things to the extreme, he likes .22-250 for deer and I would prefer .45/70.
Kinetic energy = 1/2 mass x velocity squared
Momentum = mass x velocity

 

[JMag]

Kudos on coming up with an original thread...

 

[Zak Smith]

Neither alone will give you a iron-clad metric.

Picking a bullet designed for the game you'll be shooting at the terminal velocity you'll have is a better way to pick.

 

[45crittergitter]

Amen, Zak. Deer don't know 'bout energy OR momentum, and neither is directly indicative of effectiveness. Pick something "big enough" and "powerful enough" AND with a decent bullet for the particular task at hand. To more directly address your question, pick a momentum minimum and an energy minimum, and use a cartridge that meets both. Personally, I want something that will shoot an expanded, intact bullet all the way through, the long way.

 

[22-rimfire]

I guess you read the article in the current Shooting Times on handgun hunting. I got my copy saturday in the mail. I liked the article and the momentum argument makes a lot of sense relative to the observed effect on game.

 

[smokemaker]

What I do know about KE is it always makes muzzleloaders look wimpy on paper, when clearly they are not. Not saying a .50 cal ML is equal to a 300 WM, but still, I can keep up with a 45-70 with 300 grain bullets. Honestly, I prefer good shot placement with good bullets. I grew up with the Elmer Keith philosophy: big, heavy bullets punching big holes in and out. KE doesn't give much nod to that school of thought, but it works fine despite what the ballisticians say.

 

[Oldnamvet]

I remember a quote from Elmer once about 40 years ago. He wrote something to the effect that ballistics are numbers only. What you need is a big hole so you let a lot of air in and a lot of blood out. Not the exact wording but the general idea. All the deer I have shot with my .54 round ball went down just as hard as the ones I shot with my .30-06. Wonder if frontal surface area of the bullet combined with velocity and weight would give a reasonable correlation? That would combine momentum with the size of the hole.

 

[BigG]

I subscribe to the Keith philosophy. Many guys like the paper figures and chortle about what a 22/250 does to a groundhog. Probably never realized hitting a groundhog with a 22/250 or 25/06 is akin to hitting a man-sized target with a 105 mm.