Energy vs inertia?

[AZMark]

I want to shoot .38 wadcutter target loads at my rimfire bullet trap. I've shot .22 Mag at it with no problem. I think the muzzle energies are roughly the same between the .38 target loads and the .22 Mag, but does that mean they'll hit with the same force? Is the inertia going to be the same?

[imashooter2]

Momentum = mass * velocity

Energy = mass * velocity * velocity

Your wadcutters will have way more momentum.

[AZMark]

So, you wouldn't try it? Why do we use ME if it's not a good measure of how hard the bullet actually hits? If that's a better measure, then for instance, there's much less difference in a .357 magnum and a .44 magnum than the ME figures would suggest.

[johniv]

My boolit trap,(caswell, I think) is rated at velocity max 2000 fps. Is your trap homemade or commercial?
John

[AZMark]

It's commercial.

[35remington]

Most rimfire bullet traps are barely adequate for the long rifle - in other words, rather flimsy, and doubtful to hold up under long term .38 wadcutter use. In addition, the angle of the backstop plate is fairly steep, so they spit lead back out the front and perforate the target with lead slivers.

When I shot at a .22 indoor range at the Lincoln, NE Parks and Rec. on 10th street, which was and is a converted double wide trailer with the usual slanted backstop, the only .38's we could shoot were little 75 grain tuna can wadcutters loaded to about 600-700 fps provided by the range. I know the load because I queried the guy that loaded it, and we could only use those loads on the range. As I recall they used about 2 grains of Bullseye, and it was suggested we tip the barrel up then lower it before firing.

So, in the rangemaster's opinion, and in practice, 38 wadcutters in 148 grain weight were too hard on the .22 backstop.

[imashooter2]

So, you wouldn't try it? Why do we use ME if it's not a good measure of how hard the bullet actually hits? If that's a better measure, then for instance, there's much less difference in a .357 magnum and a .44 magnum than the ME figures would suggest.

There are all sorts of benchmarks and indexes for computing cartridge effectiveness. All of them have weaknesses. I wouldn't use either pure energy OR pure momentum figures to determine "better."

[Hurricane]

Why do we use ME if it's not a good measure of how hard the bullet actually hits?

ME is used because it is easy to measure. The ammo companies use it because it sounds nice and people have been taught that it is a good measure of bullet killing power. In real live bullet weight and construction are more important than ME. If ME was the answer to everything then people would hunt Cape Buffalo with the 22 Swift. They don't because they want to live till tomorrow. As for my choice, a good bullet of appropriate size at from 2600 fps to 2800 fps will handle anything on the planet.

[northmn]

Actually to be egg headed about it, KE is used becasue it applies to the effect of collisions, not just in bullets (which collide with a stationary target) but with planes trains and automobiles. Momentum is based on Newton's law that an object in motion tends to stay in motion (or like me an object at rest tends to stay at rest) Basically the momentum formula can be applied to comparing say a 150 grain 30 cal bullet to a 180. The 180 if driven at the same speed will penetrate deeper and retain velocity bettrer (NS). The problem with using KE is that it is far to simple. Energy reacts on the target and the bullet. A 40 pound silhouette will not travel 10 feet if hit by a bullet at 400 foot pounds of energy. Generally the bullets blow up which takes up a lot of the energy. If the bullets do not blow up they either shoot through the metal of dent the heck out of it. Most people think that by using the latest and greatest super mag on deer that they will see a real amazing effect. Often the bullets spend the extra energy on a tree on the other side of the deer. The new super bullets that started with the Nosler are an answer to the effect of energy on bullets. Essentially they toughen the bullets to make them perform like the standard bullets did out of the old 30-06 for instance. Note that the large game stuff is still mostly heavy bullets at medium velocitites. The old standby the 375 HH with its bullets traveling in the mid 2000's. An old favorite in Africa was the 9.3 X64. 286 grain bullet at about 2300. The heavy bullets are better able to withstand the effects of KE and therefore work better. John Taylor had a "knock down" formula that worked but not because of the math. KE would require a coefficeint of durability or some such thing, for both the critter and the bullet. A 38 special wadcutter would not break up like a 22 mag bullet and would therefore transfer more energy to the target.

Northmn

[StarMetal]

Actually to be egg headed about it, KE is used becasue it applies to the effect of collisions, not just in bullets (which collide with a stationary target) but with planes trains and automobiles. Momentum is based on Newton's law that an object in motion tends to stay in motion (or like me an object at rest tends to stay at rest) Basically the momentum formula can be applied to comparing say a 150 grain 30 cal bullet to a 180. The 180 if driven at the same speed will penetrate deeper and retain velocity bettrer (NS). The problem with using KE is that it is far to simple. Energy reacts on the target and the bullet. A 40 pound silhouette will not travel 10 feet if hit by a bullet at 400 foot pounds of energy. Generally the bullets blow up which takes up a lot of the energy. If the bullets do not blow up they either shoot through the metal of dent the heck out of it. Most people think that by using the latest and greatest super mag on deer that they will see a real amazing effect. Often the bullets spend the extra energy on a tree on the other side of the deer. The new super bullets that started with the Nosler are an answer to the effect of energy on bullets. Essentially they toughen the bullets to make them perform like the standard bullets did out of the old 30-06 for instance. Note that the large game stuff is still mostly heavy bullets at medium velocitites. The old standby the 375 HH with its bullets traveling in the mid 2000's. An old favorite in Africa was the 9.3 X64. 286 grain bullet at about 2300. The heavy bullets are better able to withstand the effects of KE and therefore work better. John Taylor had a "knock down" formula that worked but not because of the math. KE would require a coefficeint of durability or some such thing, for both the critter and the bullet. A 38 special wadcutter would not break up like a 22 mag bullet and would therefore transfer more energy to the target.

Northmn

....but a 22 mag hollow point will blow a big hole in tissue and more then likely be lots more lethal then a 38 wadcutter. The energy transfer looks good on paper but in actual shooting animals or people it's the temporary and permanent cavity, the shock caused by the bullet to the body (not talking shock as being hit, but the state the body goes into when it's hurt) the penetration of organs and bones, and loss of blood that do the most damage.

If I were asked which to be shot with I'd pick the 38 any day over a 22 mag.

Joe

[imashooter2]

But will the .22 mag reach deep enough to hit vital organs, or just blow a big cavity in surface fat and muscle? The .38 wadcutter will make it, even if a rib or 2 gets in the way.

[StarMetal]

Oh it will do the job. That very very soft 38 wadcutter isn't a very good penetrater either. I've had those things bounce back off lots of things, like trees for example.

Joe

[crabo]

How about seeing if you could add a piece of 3/8" plate where the boolit impacts? You also might want another piece where the boolit stops. I don't know what your trap looks like.

How close are you planning on shooting at this?

[GBertolet]

Velocity not energy determines penetration in steel. Look at the army's M1 tank. They shoot a sub caliber saboted round to jack up the velocity, for penetration in steel. That round doesn't even have an explosive on it. They just burn through armor using the impact generated heat. I am assuming you are worried about shooting through your trap. The 38 WC will have less penterating power in the steel bullet trap than the 22mag. There would be more momentum transfered to the trap with the 38. My biggest concern is that the trap might move a little each time it is hit and possibly the joints might loosen up in time. If you decide to try it , please let us know what happened.

[StarMetal]

Velocity not energy determines penetration in steel. Look at the army's M1 tank. They shoot a sub caliber saboted round to jack up the velocity, for penetration in steel. That round doesn't even have an explosive on it. They just burn through armor using the impact generated heat. I am assuming you are worried about shooting through your trap. The 38 WC will have less penterating power in the steel bullet trap than the 22mag. There would be more momentum transfered to the trap with the 38. My biggest concern is that the trap might move a little each time it is hit and possibly the joints might loosen up in time. If you decide to try it , please let us know what happened.

GB hit the nail on the head.

Joe

[imashooter2]

Oh it will do the job. That very very soft 38 wadcutter isn't a very good penetrater either. I've had those things bounce back off lots of things, like trees for example.

Joe

I've never shot a tree that bleeds. We'll have to disagree.:-D

[StarMetal]

I've never shot a tree that bleeds. We'll have to disagree.:-D

If Jeff Cooper were still alive you could ask him that question. Which would he prefer to be shot with. He answered it when he ran the Handgun question column for G&A long long ago....and he said 22 mag or 38 special...on the 38 he didn't state what type bullet style and we presumed it was a 38 roundnose. He selected the 38 special. I agree with him and you disagree with him by the sounds of it. The tree thing was saying they didn't have enough velocity or oomph to penetrate the bark even. I've shot lots of things with both calibers. I personally have no friends that are not impressed with the 22 mag.

Joe

[David Caldwell]

I suspect that "energy" was the term of choice in the earlier days of gun writers because it had long been a common word and most folks had an idea what it meant whether they were discussing sledge hammers, Sonny Liston's upper cut, or a gallon of gasoline. Few readers knew or cared about the relationships between force, momentum, energy, pressure, acceleration, &c; but "big energy" has meant "big happenings" since the ancient Greeks.

I agree with many that most bullet performance comparisons are best done with "momentum" at normal diameters and velocities. (If the bullet shatters or is made of sharpened steel, things change.) I think of energy as the amount of fuel and it's rate of application that is required to achieve the desired momentum. Blah, blah.

Get a 3/8" piece of steel from the recycling place for nearly nothing. Prop it up at about 37 degrees and shoot NON-jacketed bullets. I shoot 200 gr. 30's around 1600 fps, 240 gr. .357 up to 1200, and 400 gr. .458's about 1100 fps.. It's been shot 1000's of times for 10 years; looks good for another 10. It's 25" X 34".

[mike in co]

more than either is the abiity to transfer energy to the thing being shot. one of the reasons the 45acp has been so successful is its a big(large surface area) , heavy, slow bullet. it transfers energy well.
in the last 15 yrs or so bullet design has improved, and the ability to transfer energy has improved with it. xtp's golden saber's, black talons.....
a specific 125 for the 38 special means i don't want to be shot with a 38.

so with a modern bullet design, a well placed shot is more important than the caliber anymore.

in a small gun a 32 auto with silver tips(old school), a p64 in 9mak with xtp's, and a 45acp with 230 xtp's, a 44mag lever gun with 300 gr lfn........all for short range......then we step up to a shotgun and then a rifle.....

mike in co

[StarMetal]

more than either is the abiity to transfer energy to the thing being shot. one of the reasons the 45acp has been so successful is its a big(large surface area) , heavy, slow bullet. it transfers energy well.
in the last 15 yrs or so bullet design has improved, and the ability to transfer energy has improved with it. xtp's golden saber's, black talons.....
a specific 125 for the 38 special means i don't want to be shot with a 38.

so with a modern bullet design, a well placed shot is more important than the caliber anymore.

in a small gun a 32 auto with silver tips(old school), a p64 in 9mak with xtp's, and a 45acp with 230 xtp's, a 44mag lever gun with 300 gr lfn........all for short range......then we step up to a shotgun and then a rifle.....

mike in co


I'm sure when Mr Cooper responded to that question back in the mid 60's that there weren't any 125 gr 38 Special factory loads.

That Win Silvertip 32acp load is a ***...very very very under powered. With the right ammo the 32 is nearly right up there with the 380 auto, probably is a better penetrator.

Joe

[9.3X62AL]

I would choose "NONE OF THE ABOVE" as "caliber to get shot with", thank you very much.

None of the calculated formulae used to assess terminal effects of gunshot wounds are entirely adequate. All rely upon the 'squaring' of one element of the equation--bullet weight, bullet velocity, or bullet frontal area.

Interestingly, the Hatcher Index of Relative Stopping Power uses the square of the bullet's frontal area, which--as we all know--also increases at a squared value relative to linear expansion. So it could be said that the squared element in the Hatcher equation simulates reality more closely than do other quantification formulae.

Maybe. It's still not the total answer, but might run closer than some others. Better bullets have changed the landscape since Thompson/LeGarde and Hatcher, but I'm most comfortable with Hatcher's IRSP when handgun rounds are under discussion. I like Hatcher + XTP or SXT = Best Case Scenario, myself.

Oh, and I would reinforce that boolit trap, too. :)

[44man]

The .38 wad cutter is a dud for anything but paper but it will ruin a .22 target in the long run unless shot VERY slow.
Long ago a friend cut me some diamond plate for IHMSA practice. The ram was 200 meters and a friend shot it thousands of times with a .357 and there was no damage. I started shooting my .44 at it and in no time I had a very large salad bowl. I would flop it on the ground and wale on it with a sledge hammer and I could not flatten it. I turned it and shot the other side only to get another salad bowl in the other direction.
Look at all the armor plate targets shot in IHMSA, they stay flat but welds are always breaking from impact, the feet break off.
The weight of the boolit will do the damage, not the muzzle energy.
Muzzle energy has nothing to do with effect at the target or killing power, it is a false, useless number. Bullet construction and weight along with the velocity to make THAT bullet work is where it is all at.
However, you can shoot a light bullet so slow it does no damage to speak of to steel, but can you hit anything? All bets are off if you make the boolit heavier.
Once I was lapping a .58 Minie' mold to fit a musket. I made it the right size but stuck a ball in the bore. I was in the basement so I pulled the nipple and just dribbled in a little powder, pushed the Minie' to the pinch of powder, capped it and shot it out. I held the muzzle near a 2X4. The boolit barely cleared the muzzle and I could feel it go by my hand on the barrel. It made a small POP but the darn thing stuck full depth in the 2X4. That thing would kill a person!
Never, ever underestimate what weight will do. Drop a tennis ball on your foot from 6" and then do the same with a bowling ball! [smilie=1:
We shot a 420 gr .475 WFN boolit at gallon water jugs yesterday, it blew up a bunch and still made it through 14 jugs. I figure about 7 people would have holes in them! :drinks:

[S.R.Custom]

...None of the calculated formulae used to assess terminal effects of gunshot wounds are entirely adequate...)

Indeed...

As a long time pin shooter, my observations concerning 'KE and 'M' are this: A healthy dose of M is what drives the pins off the table in an authoritative manner. Prodigious amounts of KE, on the other hand, is what leaves a split and splintered mess lying on the table.

As a long time hunter, I've found that when applied to blood and bone targets, KE does a wonderful job of turning inelastic tissue (livers, lungs, and brains) into pudding. Which is fine, if you can hit your target unawares. But a target that's fleeing and ramped up on adrenaline will continue its flight despite having its lungs and liver turned to Jello. (Brain shots notwithstanding.) M, by contrast, is what breaks bones and destroys elastic tissue like hearts and other muscle and connective tissue, making physical escape impossible.

Personally, when I work up a load for a given caliber, I try for a combination that maximizes both; with some calibers it's possible to take a lighter bullet and drive it fast enough to match the M numbers of a heavier, slower slug. The .357 Magnum and the 125 grain bullet comes to mind.

But in getting to the core nugget of truth, it's helpful to put aside all the mathematical voodoo and remember something Isaac Newton once said, and I paraphrase-- that load which causes the shooter the greatest amount of discomfort will likewise cause the recipient an over-abundance of physical distress...

As for shooting steel traps & targets intended for rimfires... I've found that that despite what the math majors say, shooting them with .38s tends to make a mess of them quite quickly.

[northmn]

Both the American military and the British screwed up at the turn of the century by using higher "energy" small bore cartridges. The 303 and 30-40 failed in military applications due to the fact htat military bullets shot through the aggressor without doing much damage. The infamous Dum-Dum Arsenal in India made soft points that cured the problem. The Americans in the Philipine war were said to have filed off the noses to get expansion. Energy is used today in hunting to make a small bore into a bigger bore through expansion. If you look at the LBT theory for a handgun at lower relative energies you see them using tempered bullets of large bore that do not deform, which also conserves the energy for transfer to the target. As to the M-1 Bullet and velocity. You have the metal punch theory. A center punch will dimple the steel to start a drill bit and pin punch will not with the same hit. Its a matter of the concentration of energy. Big heavy bullets can withstand energy better than little bullets, whcih is why very large game is shot with heavy bullets. The old buffalo guns were very effective on buffalo but had the energy of a 243 at best. They worked because a 400-500 grain bullet can withstand energy better than the little 100 grain 243 bullets. Also at the slower velocities they did not expand much. As to Hatcher's formula on the square of the diameter, that only worked in the good old days when HP loads were not functioning at the level they do today. Also velocity does create hydrostatic shock. The Germans used this in the development of the 8mm Mauser. The US followed suit with the good old 06 and the British developed a 174 grain bullet that tumbled. The old 303 worked very well in Africa with the Kynoch 215 grain bullets but developed a bad reputation with the military bullet. KE works, but there are so many variables. Its kind of like one car hitting another car or big oak tree and comparing damage. KE explains it but the variables differ.

Northmn

[StarMetal]

I would choose "NONE OF THE ABOVE" as "caliber to get shot with", thank you very much.

None of the calculated formulae used to assess terminal effects of gunshot wounds are entirely adequate. All rely upon the 'squaring' of one element of the equation--bullet weight, bullet velocity, or bullet frontal area.

Interestingly, the Hatcher Index of Relative Stopping Power uses the square of the bullet's frontal area, which--as we all know--also increases at a squared value relative to linear expansion. So it could be said that the squared element in the Hatcher equation simulates reality more closely than do other quantification formulae.

Maybe. It's still not the total answer, but might run closer than some others. Better bullets have changed the landscape since Thompson/LeGarde and Hatcher, but I'm most comfortable with Hatcher's IRSP when handgun rounds are under discussion. I like Hatcher + XTP or SXT = Best Case Scenario, myself.

Oh, and I would reinforce that boolit trap, too. :)

Al,

I agree with you not wanting to be hit with either. Neither a pellet rifle for me too. Cooper got a question about which caliber he would pick for home protection. The 38 special or the 22 mag. Not wanting to get a flood of angry letters he opted to answer the question such as I have already presented it.

Joe

[StarMetal]

Let's go back to the early 60's. This true story might be one that you all may be hearing from time to time. It's about Joe & Carl. You see Carl was my childhood best friend and is still today. Carl bought a 22 mag Savage bolt rifle while we were in high school. The both of us grew up with that rifle and caliber and know quite well what it can and can not do. Our hunting and shooting abode were the woods that paralleled town. This was in a very hilly area of Pa. This particular set of woods was a very large and long hill. It was terraced by three railroad track. Starting at the bottom along the creek we labeled them as first track, the next up second track, and the third and last third track. They were known to all the town residents by those names. First track was an old mine track long out of business. Second track, and where this story will take place, was the steel mill track. The train cars hauled slag from the steel furnace and dumped them eventually building mountain of sorts. Third track was the freight line of Norfolk & Western Maryland. We're talking back when train cars had Babbitt bearings. There was a box about a foot square between the trucks of wheels filled with a wooly material called waste that was oil soaked to keep constant lube on the wheel bearing. This box had a contoured steel cover on it, oh about 1/8 to 3/16 inch thick. One day while on second track Carl and I found such a cover. We set it up and measured off 100 yards. He had his Savage 22 mag and I had my 22 Remington. He was shooting Winchester 40 gr hollow points and I the Remington 38 grain LR hollow point. Carl shot first and the cover fell. We walked out to reset it again and examined a very nice 22 caliber hole punched throught it. Next I shot it and it fell. Upon examing the cover my bullet merely left a lead splatter and there was no hint of even denting the cover. That was the beginning of an education of the difference between the 22 mag and 22 LR. Why this story? What do you think a 38 wadcutter would have done to that cover? Surely knock it down, but would there be a lead splatter and a dent too?

Joe

[BABore]

My first handgun was an 8" Colt Trooper Mk III at age 17. I shot the snot out of it with Speer HB wadcutters over Bullseye. Any time I wasn't doing farm chores, I was shooting. Went through about 500 rounds per week for as long as I could afford it.

A friend of my Dad had a butchering hog that he sold us for $25. My Dad planned on shooting him there and hauling him home to skin out. He grabbed his favorite 22 LR rifle and I grabbed my wheeler. He told me I could get a crack at it so as to test out my load. The hog was is a fairly tight pen in a barn. I put the muzzle about an inch away from the hog's forehead, nice and square, just above the eyes. Just like my dad always did with the 22.

Pow!:-D Squeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeel!:shock:

The hog never even lost his feet. I looked at the now PO'd hog and could see the HB end of the boolit sticking out of his forehead with a nice black powder burn around it. It was still smoking too.[smilie=1: Oops!

My Dad handed me the 22 rifle and I put one right next to the starter hole I made dropping big piggie on the spot. I later skinned out the head for some forensic work. The 38 WC just dented the skull. Not even a decent mellon crack. The 22 LR was just under the skin, by the throat. So, I'll have to agree with Joe on this one, based on a real test.

In regards to your 22 LR target. Just go shoot it a few times and see. They're all built a little different, so it may work out for you. If it looks to be sturdy enough, just keep an eye on it long term.

[StarMetal]

My first handgun was an 8" Colt Trooper Mk III at age 17. I shot the snot out of it with Speer HB wadcutters over Bullseye. Any time I wasn't doing farm chores, I was shooting. Went through about 500 rounds per week for as long as I could afford it.

A friend of my Dad had a butchering hog that he sold us for $25. My Dad planned on shooting him there and hauling him home to skin out. He grabbed his favorite 22 LR rifle and I grabbed my wheeler. He told me I could get a crack at it so as to test out my load. The hog was is a fairly tight pen in a barn. I put the muzzle about an inch away from the hog's forehead, nice and square, just above the eyes. Just like my dad always did with the 22.

Pow!:-D Squeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeel!:shock:

The hog never even lost his feet. I looked at the now PO'd hog and could see the HB end of the boolit sticking out of his forehead with a nice black powder burn around it. It was still smoking too.[smilie=1: Oops!

My Dad handed me the 22 rifle and I put one right next to the starter hole I made dropping big piggie on the spot. I later skinned out the head for some forensic work. The 38 WC just dented the skull. Not even a decent mellon crack. The 22 LR was just under the skin, by the throat. So, I'll have to agree with Joe on this one, based on a real test.

In regards to your 22 LR target. Just go shoot it a few times and see. They're all built a little different, so it may work out for you. If it looks to be sturdy enough, just keep an eye on it long term.


"Don't go agreeing with me too much, Kid"

Joe Eastwood :Fire:

[MtGun44]

The comment about the M1 sabot round misses the point.

The very high velocity and very high mass of the depleted uranium penetrator both
increase the ENERGY that is dumped on the target. The energy is converted to heat
and pressure and melts, burns and blows it's way thru the target.

Killing things means damaging critical organs. If you cannot penetrate deep enough
to reach critical organs, you will not kill quickly. If you cannot provide enough damage
to the organ if you reach it, you will not kill quickly.

Pistols have very little power/energy/whatever you want to call it. You need to get
deep enough, so maybe you can't afford to widen your wound path by turning the bullet
a wider (expanded) version of itself. Maybe you have enough power/energy/whatever
to get deep enough even with an expanded boolit/bullet. If so, good.

Velocity is squared, so the energy dumped on steel or other very hard targets (where
it is all dumped at the surface) is much higher for high vel projectiles.

750 fps squared is ~560,000. 2100 fps squared is ~4.4 million, about 8 times the value.
The .38 spl is about 4 times as heavy, so the mass portion brings the two energy
values into about 2:1 ratio. The contact area of the .22 is much smaller, so you concentrate
twice the energy on 40% of the area, and you will punch thru the steel better - much higher
local energy per unit area. Also, the .22 mag has a copper jacket, harder than the lead
.38 Spl, so better to push thru steel.

Hitting steel with a projectile has very little relationship to hitting an animal with a
projectile. In one case, much of the kinetic energy is turned to pressure and heat in
a VERY small time and space, in the other the energy is spread out over much more
time and space, and the point is to intersect and damage a critical organ as much as
you can.

"killing power" is very complex, and millions upon millions of words have been written
on it by people that have killed far more animals than I ever will. Still, the irreducable
fact is you have to punch a hole in something critical to kill the animal. Deeper and
wider are almost always better. Other than those points, all is up for discussion and
definitely, the same ammo will NOT always provide the same results because of
differences in bullet placement and the state of mind of the animal.

Bill

[StarMetal]

The comment about the M1 sabot round misses the point.

The very high velocity and very high mass of the depleted uranium penetrator both
increase the ENERGY that is dumped on the target. The energy is converted to heat
and pressure and melts, burns and blows it's way thru the target.

Killing things means damaging critical organs. If you cannot penetrate deep enough
to reach critical organs, you will not kill quickly. If you cannot provide enough damage
to the organ if you reach it, you will not kill quickly.

Pistols have very little power/energy/whatever you want to call it. You need to get
deep enough, so maybe you can't afford to widen your wound path by turning the bullet
a wider (expanded) version of itself. Maybe you have enough power/energy/whatever
to get deep enough even with an expanded boolit/bullet. If so, good.

Velocity is squared, so the energy dumped on steel or other very hard targets (where
it is all dumped at the surface) is much higher for high vel projectiles.

750 fps squared is ~560,000. 2100 fps squared is ~4.4 million, about 8 times the value.
The .38 spl is about 4 times as heavy, so the mass portion brings the two energy
values into about 2:1 ratio. The contact area of the .22 is much smaller, so you concentrate
twice the energy on 40% of the area, and you will punch thru the steel better - much higher
local energy per unit area. Also, the .22 mag has a copper jacket, harder than the lead
.38 Spl, so better to push thru steel.

Hitting steel with a projectile has very little relationship to hitting an animal with a
projectile. In one case, much of the kinetic energy is turned to pressure and heat in
a VERY small time and space, in the other the energy is spread out over much more
time and space, and the point is to intersect and damage a critical organ as much as
you can.

"killing power" is very complex, and millions upon millions of words have been written
on it by people that have killed far more animals than I ever will. Still, the irreducable
fact is you have to punch a hole in something critical to kill the animal. Deeper and
wider are almost always better. Other than those points, all is up for discussion and
definitely, the same ammo will NOT always provide the same results because of
differences in bullet placement and the state of mind of the animal.

Bill


That's all true Bill, especially comparing shooting steel to actual shooting animals. I can say this having shot the 22 mag for many many years.....it kills way out of proportion to it's size and what it is and at very long distances. I can't say the same about the 38 special (talking in it's original power range form, not this new fast hot +P stuff). Sure, it'll poke a hole in an animal and it will die, but the 22 mag puts them down quicker and that's the main thing I'm talking about. I just brought up the steel shooting to show how much power the 22 mag had left even at 100 yards. We're way off topic I believe. I know that the 22 mag will more then likely ruin that 22 bullet trap, sure the 38 will, but not as quick.

Joe

[northmn]

Part of the problem kind of rests in our perceptions and heresay and comments from writers. When one considers the appliction of a load on steel KE is used and can be based on the KE, the diameter of the bullet and the bullet construction or durability. A small bore, using a stiff jacketed bullet, can dent or penetrate steel better than a big bore soft lead bullet. Center punch effect where the impact is centered in a small area. For hunting or defense applications you have a variety of issues including skin thickness, bone densities and the thickness of the animal. One of the issues for personal defense is that of shooting a biped facing you where only one lung is hit as compared to a quadruped with a side shot where bot lungs need to be puntured. The FBI came up with their 147 grain 9mm load based on a study in which pigs were shot. Marshall and Zanow have done studies in which a lighter bullet is more effective for police. A good example of heresay is the mystique of the 45. In its military ball form it really has not been shown to be that effective.
If you ahve ever browsed through "Cartridges of the World" you will see editorializing by Barnes comparing everything to a 30-30 and stating how much superior these cartridges are. I woul have preferred that Barnes had kept those opinions to himself as some of his claims were rather ridiculous. I have used the 30-30 a lot on deer as well as a 270. If used reasonabley the 30-30 brings home venison. You cannot do better than that. A friend o mine that is something of a woodsy type went 26 straight one shot kills with a 30-30. Saying that a 44 mag or a 454 Casull or whatever is better raises the question as how is it better? Dead is dead and extra energy just destroys meat. My sons friend bought a 50BMG single shot rifle and taped a doe being shot with it with a soft-point. Instead of the spectacular kill they thought they would film the deer ran about 70 yards with the far side of its rib cage nearly blown out.
Look at it this way. To ask which is a better killer on deer a 32 long with a 98 grain lead bullet or a 32 auto with a higher velocity and a lighter bullet is ridiculous because both are very underpowered and either energy figure or momentum figure or whatever is meaningless. The same can be said for comparing a SW 50 to a 454 Casul on deer. Both are more than adequate and neither is likely to show any superiority in a properly designed test. So much of what we go by is an unusual personal experience. I shot a jackrabbit with a 222 that ran about 80 yards after being hit in the lungs. It was amazing considering the damage the varmit bullet did. Would going to a 243 really make sense because of that experience?

Northmn

[44man]

Northmn, A lot of what you say is true. The 30-30 is a fantastic deer gun but I have seen the wrong bullets used that did so much damage both shoulders were lost. A hard cast in the caliber will mean lost deer.
The .44 shines with hard cast, large meplat boolits where a fast expanding bullet can fail. Go to the .454 with hard cast and deer can again be lost so the best is going to be a softer boolit or a good jacketed. Same with the 45-70 that is such a great killer with the proper boolit yet fails with hard cast or can destroy a deer with the wrong bullet.
There is no BETTER deer gun but there are BETTER bullets/boolits for each. Bullets must be tailored for the game to be hunted with any caliber.
Then there are calibers that should never be used on big game even though they will kill under certain conditions. The .22 mag will surely kill a deer and blow up the heart but there will be no blood trail. Same with the .222, .223 and a lot of other sub calibers. A deer can go a long way with the heart gone, how do you find it?
A .22 LR will kill about anything with a head shot except those with thick, tough skulls. Large spines will stop them. But they fail 99% of the time with lung shots. I can't count the deer I killed in PA with my bows that had lumps on the inside of the rib cage. I cut them open only to find a .22 bullet encased.
There are calibers that should be only used for paper, like the .38, etc. Oh, sure, they CAN kill a deer but is anyone with any ethics going to use it? I don't even like a .357, save it for bad guys.
But that was not the question here. It was about a .22 target being damaged by a .38. Will it cause enough vibration or impact from the heavier boolit to damage it?
I have a bunch of thick .22 silhouette targets welded to rods I can stick in the ground. I shot my .44 at several with light loads using a 245 gr boolit and 7 gr of Unique. One had all the welds break and the other split the pig right in half. Granted the .38 is a lot less but eventually the heavier boolit will lead to damage. Consider most .22 boolits are only 40 gr, even though fast, results on the target are very weak with all the energy just blowing up the bullet.
A boolits "hang time" on steel is important so even though it will not dent the steel or poke a hole in it, more energy has to be absorbed by the steel and the parts holding the target.