Jump to content


Photo
- - - - -

Retained Energy


  • Please log in to reply
81 replies to this topic

#76 davyt63

davyt63

    Extreme Hunter

  • Donator
  • 8,572 posts
  • Location:in my Man Cave!! Wiltshire.

Posted 18 March 2011 - 02:10 pm

No dick measuring going on Davy, I just find the maths and ballistics stuff interesting, and value the input of other members with practical knowledge and experience. http://www.thehuntinglife.com/forums/pub...

Markha, you forgot the Bric, Tunisian filled pancake, good for eating!



:laugh: :laugh: :tongue2:

#77 markha

markha

    Extreme Hunter

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,042 posts
  • Location:North Wales

Posted 18 March 2011 - 04:07 pm

I reckon your driving Davey, hence the smilies only replies mate, get off your phone and concentrate man :)

#78 stevenrussell

stevenrussell

    Rookie Hunter

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 22 posts

Posted 20 March 2011 - 08:31 pm

.

Edited by stevenrussell, 20 March 2011 - 08:32 pm.


#79 stevenrussell

stevenrussell

    Rookie Hunter

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 22 posts

Posted 20 March 2011 - 08:33 pm

If you are interested in the .177 vs .22 debate there was an article written in the Air Gunner magazine a while back (could be 2 or more years) comparing the 2 calibers in terms of ballistics and penetration, incase you cant find it on the net , it was proved that the difference in energy retention between the 2 was so small even in terms of sub FAC air rifles it was not worth the fuss, If I remember correctly it was about 0.9ftlbs out to 30 yards (might not be correct, but I do remember it was not a lot), the penetration test concluded the .177 penetrated considerably more due to the smaller surface area of the pellets head, but however the wound channel of the .22 caliber was a lot wider causing a lot more internal damage to the animal. So cutting it short the effectiveness of the 2 calibers comes down to the shooter and personal preference, at the ranges shot with an air rifle (typically no more than 35 yards) both calibers will penetrate the skull of any quarry that should be hunted with an air rifle, the choice the hunter has to make is does he want the accuracy in terms of trajectory of the .177 or the extra internal damage of the .22. I would argue that once the pellet has penetrated the skull the .22 caliber is more effective but I shoot the .177 because for me I like the ease of shot placement, im not saying any caliber is better but down to personal preference.
Also if anyone finds the link to the article written could you please PM it to me or post it on this page would be a good read.
Thanks in advance
Steven.

#80 markha

markha

    Extreme Hunter

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,042 posts
  • Location:North Wales

Posted 21 March 2011 - 09:14 am

Hello and welcome to THL Steven.

There was a test between 22 177 and 20 in March issue of airgunner magazine, but I do remember seeing something recently with test done on ballistic gel.

At the end of the day personally Im not bothered about retained energy, its not the calibre or the speed that matters is correct shot placement at realistic distances for a humane kill, end of thread!

For thise who love the calibre debate and retained energy etc, this is from airgun shooter mag:

All fugures are for 35yds

.177 8.4grn aa fields 7.4ftlbs retained energy 66.1%

.20 11.4grn super field 8.5ftlbs 77.3%

.22 14.3grn accupell 8.6ftlbs 75.4%



However all of the above is highly subjective and depends on pellet choice and wind speed at the time of each test.


We can all spend hours putting different pellet weights in to a ballistics program to come up with a weight with the highest retained energy.

At the end of the day, who cares? Certainly not me or a lot of other people and certainly not my grandad, his dad and maybe even his grandad before him , all of who had air guns.
The pot always had some game in it and that was as far as it went.

#81 davyt63

davyt63

    Extreme Hunter

  • Donator
  • 8,572 posts
  • Location:in my Man Cave!! Wiltshire.

Posted 21 March 2011 - 08:47 pm

Hello and welcome to THL Steven.

There was a test between 22 177 and 20 in March issue of airgunner magazine, but I do remember seeing something recently with test done on ballistic gel.

At the end of the day personally Im not bothered about retained energy, its not the calibre or the speed that matters is correct shot placement at realistic distances for a humane kill, end of thread!

For thise who love the calibre debate and retained energy etc, this is from airgun shooter mag:

All fugures are for 35yds

.177 8.4grn aa fields 7.4ftlbs retained energy 66.1%

.20 11.4grn super field 8.5ftlbs 77.3%

.22 14.3grn accupell 8.6ftlbs 75.4%



However all of the above is highly subjective and depends on pellet choice and wind speed at the time of each test.


We can all spend hours putting different pellet weights in to a ballistics program to come up with a weight with the highest retained energy.

At the end of the day, who cares? Certainly not me or a lot of other people and certainly not my grandad, his dad and maybe even his grandad before him , all of who had air guns.
The pot always had some game in it and that was as far as it went.



dont forget the bunny,its not going to give a damn either :thumbs:

regards

davy

#82 fry

fry

    Extreme Hunter

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,119 posts
  • Location:somerset

Posted 21 March 2011 - 10:08 pm

just ploughed through all this bloody borin really! an wheres phantom gone?


0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users