dips "think" flesh reacts differently to rifle
1 - 8 of 8 Posts
rifles don't get used that much at point blank ranges,
ESPECIALLY not on animals. Out where the deer, etc, are getting HIT with .30 AK, 30-30, 30 carbine, the velocity is 200-400 fps less than what it is at the muzzle. That brings such cartridges down to 1600-2000 fps. That is a VERY attainable velocity range for modern pistols and cartridges, if the barrel is fully supported, and the bullet is both lw and hollowbased.
ESPECIALLY not on animals. Out where the deer, etc, are getting HIT with .30 AK, 30-30, 30 carbine, the velocity is 200-400 fps less than what it is at the muzzle. That brings such cartridges down to 1600-2000 fps. That is a VERY attainable velocity range for modern pistols and cartridges, if the barrel is fully supported, and the bullet is both lw and hollowbased.
Joined
·
5,631 Posts
Deer Hunting
The 7.63X39 and .30-.30 are proven deer cartridges, but the .30 carbine? No way, keyboard commando. 110 Grains with about 1650 FPS MUZZLE Velocity? At 100 yards your in the .38 Special category, which is NOT a deer cartridge. Get some newer magazines to browse through. Also, Audie Murphy (who you are NOT) used an M-1 Garand, a Thompson sub-machine gun and occasionly a German MP-40. Your reading comprehension is poor.
The 7.63X39 and .30-.30 are proven deer cartridges, but the .30 carbine? No way, keyboard commando. 110 Grains with about 1650 FPS MUZZLE Velocity? At 100 yards your in the .38 Special category, which is NOT a deer cartridge. Get some newer magazines to browse through. Also, Audie Murphy (who you are NOT) used an M-1 Garand, a Thompson sub-machine gun and occasionly a German MP-40. Your reading comprehension is poor.
Joined
·
7,395 Posts
I confess to not having chrono'ed any myself, but published numbers for most all factory .30C loads list a 110 at 1950 fps or so, not 1650.
Assuming that to be true, that's something like 975 ft/lbs of energy; a lot more than a lot of guns (.357 magnum, .32-20, .25-20, even a fair amount of of .44 magnum loads) that have taken a lot of deer.
In my brush country, where shots are never over 100 yards and almost never over 75, I'd trust the .30 carbine with HP or SP ammo on our small white tail. Northern mulies or open ranges would be a whole different story.
Assuming that to be true, that's something like 975 ft/lbs of energy; a lot more than a lot of guns (.357 magnum, .32-20, .25-20, even a fair amount of of .44 magnum loads) that have taken a lot of deer.
In my brush country, where shots are never over 100 yards and almost never over 75, I'd trust the .30 carbine with HP or SP ammo on our small white tail. Northern mulies or open ranges would be a whole different story.
Joined
·
1,815 Posts
MELVIN'S misinformation ...
I see, you are getting a good feel for MELVIN"S rhetoric.
Bill
TG:Terry G said:
I see, you are getting a good feel for MELVIN"S rhetoric.
Bill
Joined
·
1,815 Posts
I don't know about that 30 Carbine conclusion John, You are always pretty astute, and spot on in your conclusions.John in AR said:
My Oehler 35P chronograph says the 30 Carbine is usually around where Terry G. says it is. Could it be, that the 1950 fps published figure was taken with a longer barrel? Or maybe from a pressure barrel?
Bill
Joined
·
7,395 Posts
No idea; just what I've read in Shooter's Bible, "Guns & Ammo Annual", etc.
110 grains at 1650 is a major difference, compared to 1950. That's not much above a .357 handgun. (Bummer.)
Sounds like I need a chrono, doens'nt it...
110 grains at 1650 is a major difference, compared to 1950. That's not much above a .357 handgun. (Bummer.)
Sounds like I need a chrono, doens'nt it...
Joined
·
1,815 Posts
Looks like a good excuse to buy one, doesn't it? I really like my Oehler 35P.John in AR said:
Bill
1 - 8 of 8 Posts
Join the discussion
