Most "efficient" cartridge for each caliber?

[Varminterror]

More subjective elections which are restricting the analysis to a sub-set of analyte options of your choice… you exclude big bore cartridges as if all big bore cartridges are DG cartridges - run 44mag through your analysis… but wait, we can’t, because even though it readily kills deer past 250 yards, your choice to focus on velocity as a defining characteristic for maximum range capacity eliminates big and slow cartridges. How does a .30-30 fair here? Low velocity, low recoil - but outside of the unfair shake it would get with a 2000-2200fps impact velocity, I’d imagine it looks relatively good - 7-30 waters even better… does a 243win “punish” the shooter or 260rem “punish” the shooter with increased recoil (no), even though these will be punished compared to 308win because their “per velocity” will always have a larger denominator…

Even in this last bit of analysis, you make the observation that bumping up and up on cartridge increases effective range disproportionately faster than it increases recoil… which I’ve agreed is a sensible yield analysis - but when you turn back around and divide that ratio by velocity - you depreciate that gain, punishing MORE the higher velocity, higher recoil cartridge - to what defensible objective end? 300 RCM is faster than 300 Savage, but your analysis shows the trade off for YOUR definition of effective range increases proportionately favorably over increase in recoil, but then your analytical choice knocks the faster 300 RCM back down a peg, for being faster… at the very base level, you have a muzzle velocity divided by a muzzle velocity - as the effective range is really a velocity function… high MV increases your term AND decreases it… doesn’t make sense…

Math’s fun, but this is the kind of card stacking stuff folks point at as deception in statistics.

I’ve seen a lot of folks attempt what you’ve attempted here, for a lot of years. As I mentioned in the outset, it always ends in the same way. It’s not your fault, it’s just the way it is for this particular analytical goal - we don’t end up with anything which is truly more meaningful than a wholly subjective and anecdotal conversation with a levelheaded hunter who has tried a lot of cartridges…

 

[wombat13]

More subjective elections which are restricting the analysis to a sub-set of analyte options of your choice… you exclude big bore cartridges as if all big bore cartridges are DG cartridges - run 44mag through your analysis… but wait, we can’t, because even though it readily kills deer past 250 yards, your choice to focus on velocity as a defining characteristic for maximum range capacity eliminates big and slow cartridges. How does a .30-30 fair here? Low velocity, low recoil - but outside of the unfair shake it would get with a 2000-2200fps impact velocity, I’d imagine it looks relatively good - 7-30 waters even better… does a 243win “punish” the shooter or 260rem “punish” the shooter with increased recoil (no), even though these will be punished compared to 308win because their “per velocity” will always have a larger denominator…

Even in this last bit of analysis, you make the observation that bumping up and up on cartridge increases effective range disproportionately faster than it increases recoil… which I’ve agreed is a sensible yield analysis - but when you turn back around and divide that ratio by velocity - you depreciate that gain, punishing MORE the higher velocity, higher recoil cartridge - to what defensible objective end? 300 RCM is faster than 300 Savage, but your analysis shows the trade off for YOUR definition of effective range increases proportionately favorably over increase in recoil, but then your analytical choice knocks the faster 300 RCM back down a peg, for being faster… at the very base level, you have a muzzle velocity divided by a muzzle velocity - as the effective range is really a velocity function… high MV increases your term AND decreases it… doesn’t make sense…

Math’s fun, but this is the kind of card stacking stuff folks point at as deception in statistics.

I’ve seen a lot of folks attempt what you’ve attempted here, for a lot of years. As I mentioned in the outset, it always ends in the same way. It’s not your fault, it’s just the way it is for this particular analytical goal - we don’t end up with anything which is truly more meaningful than a wholly subjective and anecdotal conversation with a levelheaded hunter who has tried a lot of cartridges…

That is not at all what is going on. Also, please show me the Nosler Accubond that is sold for .44 mag. You insist on comparing apples and oranges.

The metric that I'm using is "Maximum effective range divided by recoil." I am not dividing anything by velocity. Nosler publishes 1800 fps as the minimum velocity for the accubond. If I changed my metric to 1800 fps, these curves would look the same with larger numbers for the y-axis.

I chose to look at how that metric varies with velocity and found that it varies with velocity in a meaningful way.

Also, 7-30 waters is on the charts I posted for 7mm. It's at the left end of the curves.

 

[Ignition Override]

Is this entire discussion to improve competitive shooting, or long-distance hunting?

Going to Krav (self-defense) class tonight, don't have time to read seven pages.

 

[Varminterror]

I am not dividing anything by velocity.

The instantaneous slopes of your plot of max range per recoil vs. velocity is dividing performance yield (range per recoil) by velocity.

 

[wombat13]

Is this entire discussion to improve competitive shooting, or long-distance hunting?

Going to Krav (self-defense) class tonight, don't have time to read seven pages.

Hunting. That's why my measure of range is based on a minimum impact velocity to ensure adequate expansion of the bullet.

 

[wombat13]

The instantaneous slopes of your plot of max range per recoil vs. velocity is dividing performance yield (range per recoil) by velocity.

Yes, I know that.

 

[Bcwitt]

Most efficient cartridge ever =22lr