45 Super v 10mm PCC for hunting... deer?. ELK!!?

[44 AMP]

Hi Sanch,

You're posting about rifles in the Semi Auto HANDGUN forum...

Mannlicher,

I just can't see lightweight, high speed JHP bullets getting the job done, as a hunting round on large animals.

I'd say that depends on the bullet and the animal, and the shooter's skill.
(meaning shot placement)

Light weight high speed jhp pistol bullets (particularly in .35 cal) are generally built to be optimized for use against humans. Whitetail deer are often not quite as big as some of the folks hunting them. Mule Deer run larger, but then, so do some humans today...

180gr JHP in .44 Mag is the "lightweight high speed" bullet in that caliber. Pretty sure it will do the job on deer. Or elk, with correct shot placement.

Elk (and moose) are much larger, and so, self defense pistol ammo is a rather poor choice, but with precise shot placement, can do the job humanely. That part is up to the shooter. Not shooting through the heavy bones (shoulder, etc) is a good idea with any JHP pistol bullet, though more important with smaller lighter ones.

Generally speaking, today American bullet makers concentrate on JHP bullets for personal defense and JSP for hunting use. There is, of course, a degree of overlap...

Adequate penetration with proper shot placement always works. Less than that...not so much...

 

[Koda94]

I was very pleasantly surprised to find out that the carbine shooting factory 45 Super ammo does reach the required 1,000 ft-lbs for elk!!

at the muzzle....

There's a lot wrong with the idea of doing this, so many more things involved here than just minimum energy but I digress... how close do you think you can get to an elk and whats the energy of the 45 Super at that distance?

 

[JohnKSa]

They both kill in an equal manner: terminating topside oxygenated blood flow. It matters not what destroys a big game animal's topside oxygenated blood flow. Arrow, spear, or bullet will all kill the largest Rocky Mountain bull elk if its topside oxygenated blood flow is terminated.

How or what destroys an elk's oxygenated topside blood flow is immaterial. That it's destroyed is.

True, but that's not the issue. You brought up the idea of comparing bullet energy to arrow energy. It makes no sense to do that because bullets and arrows, while both lethal, achieve their effectiveness through different methods. Arrows are primarily cutting instruments driven by momentum while bullets are primarily focused blunt trauma driven by energy. They both provide good results, but trying to compare them based on energy or momentum doesn't provide any sort of useful insight.

It's like trying to use horsepower to compare the effectiveness of a chainsaw to a bulldozer for taking trees down. Both will get the job done, but they operate in very different ways even though it's possible to measure the horsepower of both tools.

 

[Sanch]

Hi JohnKSa,

No. I was explaining the process of death, and how all big game animals die. A .45 ACP bullet that terminates topside oxygenated blood flow will kill elk. Elk are not immune to laws of biology.

Death defined as absence of brain activity.

Harvesting trees is not analogous to killing big game.

 

[JohnKSa]

A .45 ACP bullet that terminates topside oxygenated blood flow will kill elk. Elk are not immune to laws of biology.

Death defined as absence of brain activity.

Yes. Yes. And Yes. Not relevant to what I was talking about. I was talking specifically about your initial attempt to compare arrow energy to bullet energy and then your comment that bullets and arrows kill in equal manner.

Harvesting trees is not analogous to killing big game.

Correct. I didn't say it was, however, I said comparing the killing power of bullets to arrows using energy or momentum was analogous to comparing the tree-felling characteristics of chainsaws and bulldozers to each other based on horsepower.

In other words, in the same way that bullets and arrows are both used to kill game, but don't kill in the same manner and therefore can't be easily compared using simple parameters, chainsaws and bulldozers are both used to take down trees but don't do it in the same manner and therefore can't easily be compared using simple parameters.

No. I was explaining the process of death, and how all big game animals die.

I read that. I was talking about this:

How much energy does an arrow have at release?

To which someone responded:

Your argument for an arrows energy is irrelevant. Arrows use cutting and the mechanical advantage of the incline blade to pierce and cut with not insignificant pass to push the blade through. Whereas bullets use a direct transfer of energy to deform the bullet to a larger diameter and then penetrate causing focused blunt force trauma.

To which you responded:

I've heard that argument a million times from hunters who've forgotten basic laws of biology or choose believe that they're applied selectively. They both kill in an equal manner:

They kill in different manners. That's why it's not useful to compare bullets to arrows using energy or momentum.

 

[Nanuk]

44 magnum

 

[Sanch]

Hi JohnKsa

Knowing futility is wisdom.

 

[Sanch]

Good Morning Nanuk,

The .44 Rem Mag is an authentic North American big game hunting cartridge. It's many leagues beyond the .45 ACP, which is an offensive combat cartridge. I'd hunt anything in North America, including the largest and meanest bears, with a .44 Rem Mag fired from a handy rifle provided that targets are within range of the cartridge. 300 grain bullets fired from a 16" barreled rifle .44 Rem Mag rifle is a whole lot of devastation.

The rub is the .44 Rem Mag generates unwieldy and often painful recoil when fired from handguns.

 

[mikejonestkd]

Knowing futility is wisdom.

JohnKSA was effectively dismissing your comparison between bullets and arrows when hunting. They are not comparable, as the mechanism for providing an animal's death are too different.

 

[44 AMP]

It's many leagues beyond the .45 ACP, which is an offensive combat cartridge.

I don't find anything offensive about the .45acp cartridge...

 

[Sanch]

Happy New Year 44AMP,

I don't find anything offensive about the .45acp cartridge

I don't either. However, our combat enemies and assorted Prohibition Era gangsters complained that the 1911-A1 .45 ACP was an unfair advantage ;-)

I believe the US Army sent cases of Kleenex to whiny enemy combatants. US cops dispatched coroners to complainants who whined about cops using military surplus 1911-A1 .45 ACP handguns to end their carnage.

 

[JohnKSa]

Knowing futility is wisdom.

Perhaps. But since this forum is about sharing information and more than just the discussion participants will read it, I feel like it's reasonable to share information even when it seems futile.

 

[44 AMP]

Never ever before heard about our combat enemies complaining the .45 was an unfair advantage... sometimes I do wonder where these kinds of ideas come from...but then, I really don't care ...

During WWI Germany "complained" about our use of the 12 gauge shotgun. Get this, the people who introduced POISON GAS and FLAMETHROWERS to combat complained about our using shotguns....

Never saw or heard any historical evidence they complained about the .45ACP round....

 

[Sanch]

Hi 44AMP,

I was joking.

Apparently incinerating enemy soldiers with artillery strikes and napalm is permissible, but hollow point ammo isn't. I know there's gotta be logic somewhere in that reasoning.

 

[Pistoler0]

Hi 44AMP,

I was joking.

Apparently incinerating enemy soldiers with artillery strikes and napalm is permissible, but hollow point ammo isn't. I know there's gotta be logic somewhere in that reasoning.

Ah, yes, hypocrisy.

Execution by lethal injection or in gas chamber is humane, guillotine is not.

Hunting is cruel, eating the meat from an industrially killed animal is ok.

Taking my property by eminent domain or through asset forfeiture or through a crafty legal strategy is ok, but if I take someone else's by brute force it is not.

Who makes the rules uh?

Hey do the dirty deed in my behalf, as long as I don't get to see it.

 

[Pistoler0]

per google, it is generally between 1500 to 2000 depending on which source and or state manual you reference. Deer and black bear are generally in the 1000ft lb range.

Yeah, I agree, Chuck Hawks says 1,200:
https://www.chuckhawks.com/elk_cartridges.htm

45 Super is a bit short of that out the muzzle from a carbine.
But maybe ok for deer, bear and hogs then!
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=srkiiclqhZE

But what I was saying from the graphs in the OP, is that out of a carbine, 45 Super performs better than 10mm!!

And in that sense, 45 Super is better suited for hunting.

 

[44 AMP]

First point:
Everybody has their own opinion about how much is needed for elk.

Elmer Keith often wrote that a rifle of at least .33 caliber was needed (particularly in the hands of people he guided), not due to energy, but because a .33 or larger left a bigger hole and a better blood trail.

Lots and lots of elk have been taken with rounds that somebody considered "too light". Apparently no one told the elk the bullet that killed them wasn't enough...

Second point:

If there is a game law requirement for energy needed, then that is the rule. If there isn't then there isn't any rule. Doesn't matter what google or some internet web guy says is "minimum" that's just their opinion.

A couple decades ago, my state had such a rule for handguns, 500ft/lbs for deer/bear, 1,000 for elk. They also had a barrel length rule, and specifically excluded certain rounds such as 9mm and .45acp.

The intent was to ensure hunters were using enough gun. After some years and finding out that hunters were not using underpowered arms, they dropped those requirements. Today there is no energy requirement in my state.

Remember, game laws are not about what is needed in order to work, they are about what best suits game management ideals, which vary widely across the country.

third point:
The BULLET
while a given round may make one's desired energy level (in this case, from a carbine) take a good look at what that velocity does to the bullet.

Bullets designed and built to expand at a certain velocity range can be seriously overdriven by carbine speeds. One of the more famous examples of this is the .357 Magnum 125gr JHP, fired from a carbine. Take a bullet designed to open up in the 1400fps range and push it to 2200fps and it simply acts differently. In effect, it becomes a varmint bullet, expanding violently or even "blowing up", usually with a resulting lack of penetration.

the same thing happens with a .30-30 bullet fired from a .300 Magnum or a .45-70 bullet fired with "Ruger only" level loads. The bullets are simply being driven faster than designed for, and their performance on game suffers as a result.

Which leads me to the .45 Super from a carbine, for elk (or any other big game). What is the pistol bullet going to do when you push it 500+ fps faster??

Using a hard cast bullet or "solid", the increase in speed and energy doesn't negatively affect bullet performance (not hunting elephant here) but an expanding bullet's penetration can be ruined by driving it too fast, SO, CAREFUL bullet selection is the key here. You may have all the energy needed, but if the bullet "blows up" and creates a large shallow wound, instead of penetrating to the vital organs, you've failed in your responsibility as a sportsman.

Most factory ammo for pistol rounds will be loaded with "pistol" bullets. You'll get high speed and high energy numbers shooting them from a carbine, but it is that bullet performance in game that matters.

SO, talk to the ammo /bullet makers and see what they say about their bullet and the speed you get from carbine barrels. Your choices might be more limited than you think. Use the right bullet, go for it. Use the wrong one, and you're not being a responsible hunter.

 

[wild cat mccane]

AMP nailed it.

Going fast on a bullet not made for it? Not good.

If you push a bullet too fast, the bullet will open up too fast. That will either slow down penetration (drag increased from the increased thrust) or the bullet fail and shred itself (pedals break, jacket separates, less weighted piece becomes the main bullet) which isn't the point in a handgun load.

There are some gel test out there showing these hot rod lots under penetrate because they dump their added thrust on a too early opened point.

XTP or a solid copper like Barnes XPB or Lehigh Penetrator? Isn't going to deform against pretty much anything. Don't even need to get hard cast "outdoor" labeled loads.

 

[Nanuk]

Sanch, I disagree with your thought about recoil. With a proficient shooter recoil of this level is extremely controllable. One of my carry guns is a S&W model 69. Loaded with 200 grain Gold Dots over a charge of Win 296 it is just what the Doctor ordered.

You are not alone, many people today do not like magnum revolvers for defense. I have seen enough people shot with them to have tremendous respect for it. I even had an ScTi 44. Magnum, it was not at all unpleasant to shoot. It would just pull bullets no matter how they were crimped. A 12oz 357 magnum is very painful.

 

[Nanuk]

Wild cat, fragmentation with handgun bullets was a thing before bonded bullets. My experience on the street indicated to me that this was a good thing. It creates a devastating would, which cause more pain, more wounding and a higher likelyhood of quicker incapacitation.

As long as it does not fragment to the point of exploding........

I saw an xray from one shooting with a 110 grain Remington SJHP fired from a 2 1/2" revolver. The bullets literally exploded on impact. The BG was DRT. It was impressive, but I would never trust it for anything but that exact shot.


But alas, for hunting fragmentation is bad.