.22 cal 40 gr versus .30 cal 40 gr both 900 fps?

I had a Red Wolf shooting 25gr .22cal pellets and an Impact shooting 25gr .25cal pellets at approx the same velocity (within a few FPS). Judging by the look of the impact on magpies (at the same distance), I would say the .25cal hits harder. My assumption is due to the increase in frontal mass it imparts more energy on contact.

If both hit at the same speed when it hits the target, all things be equal other than diameter the smaller would have better penetration or even pass through. Same amout of energy but only difference is smaller diameter, Right?

Smaller dia will be longer and have better BC. Fly flatter, but as far as sopping power, the 30 cal hands down, dumps more energy into the target.

practically it wont matter .. you hit, say a rabbit at 50y with either the effect will be the same .. you could get two examples on the table and examine the wound differences and try to draw a conclusion, but shot placement is going to be the biggest factor in what shut one down the quickest .... ive shot alot of sht with alot of different guns and ammo .. the only real differences your gonna notice is at the extremes eg, very large projectiles or very fast ones are the only way you can get away with sloppy shot placement and still 'blow something up' lol ... if you explode a rabbit with a 25 hp projectile at 3000fps theres not gonna be any meat left to eat it will be scattered over a 20 square yard area lol .. you can kill it with a but shot though lol ..

Birds and squirrels the .30cal would have the advantage, but on medium size game like coyotes I would pic the 22 40 grain hand down because of the amount of penetration and the BC. 

I've said this once, but I'll say it again: There is more to terminal performance than the weight and velocity of your projectile, and we can add caliber to that statement. Take a look at this video I made which has the Benjamin Bulldog .357 shooting various weights into Ballistics Gel and also using bodyshots shooting pest. I also note the temporary and permanent wound channels. This takes a few other things into consideration, such as how the size of the game and the design of the ammo lend to takedown power.

For instance, shooting a heavier, but slower round into game may not provide maximum expansion, but it may carry enough energy to smash through bones, even if it is ice picking (which means making a smaller wound channel). Ice picking or not, if you hit vital organs, veins or arteries, the game will die - eventually. But there are times when a round that leaves all of it's energy in the game can drop the target right there, where a passthrough that leaves no energy at all will not.

Obviously, there is no perfect example you can ethically do on live game, so you have to take the pest control recordings as an additional data point, and not perfect gospel. But the ballistic gel test do give some insight on how different rounds can effect game, depending on how deep their vitals are.

Never in a million years would I have thought the Polymags would be more effective on groundhogs than 110gr and 142gr slugs, but I have only once put a Polymag into a groundhog and it got away. +150fpe and no passthrough kills them insta-dead. 

Just like this 30 yard shot on a small groundhog with the Bulldog and .357 Polymags did not generate a passthrough. It just killed him dead before his face hit the turf.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aLXTueSqyOI

First, let me say that "stopping power" is a myth. The Alphabet org published an exhaustive investigation to conclude that. We kill things by either hitting the central nervous system or by causing enough blood loss that the brain shuts down. My way of looking at it is we make holes. To some extent we can choose between a narrower but deeper hole or a shallower but wider hole. I think that is kind of what the OP is asking. Does a wider but shallower hole kill quicker or a narrower but deeper hole.

To answer that, we have to consider where the hole is placed. In the central nervous system, it doesn't really matter as long as penetration is sufficient to interrupt the electrical signals that keep the target alive. Should be the case for the two examples up to and including deer and hogs. For both.

For a body shot, for small game it again does not matter. Both will go right through small game and kill it quickly as long as vital organs are hit but the 30 caliber is more likely to cause it to drop quickly - essentially immediately. The bigger hole causes more blood loss. But if you use an expanding projectile in the 22 you still should have adequate penetration and now you have a wider hole too. When you go up in size to something like a deer or hog, you need what you cannot have. You need more penetration but you also need a wider wound channel to cause enough blood loss quickly. If you use an expanding projectile, you will give up a lot of penetration. If you don't use an expanding projectile you are unlikely to cause enough blood loss to kill quickly. If I had to use one, I'd rather have the 30 caliber because the hole size is better without expansion.

To me, ice picking implies an inadequate wound channel. That would seem applicable to a 22 or even a 30 caliber wound channel through a deer. But not a 22 or 30 caliber wound channel through a rabbet or squirrel. How big a hole we need is a function of how big a target we are shooting at. I've done the math and a 22 caliber hole through a squirrel is a hole about the same percentage of area as a 3/4 inch hole in a deer (I did not check my notes, might be a little different but this should be close enough to make the point). I've shot 30 squirrels with air rifles in the year I've been shooting at them. 15 with a 22 and 15 with a 25. All with non-expanding pellets. I haven't lost any with the 25 but did loose 3 with the 22. My 22 is low power, a Prod. I increased it's power and the only one I lost of the last 11 went into a rotted area at the base of a tree that was too deep for me to reach the squirrel. It was brain shot and doing the flopping around they sometimes do. My impression is they drop quicker with the 25. All but 3 of the shots with the 25s have gone through. The squirrel that moved the furthest after impact was one of the ones that did not exit. It was hit in the shoulder and angled back. The pellet came out of the stomach near the back leg and traveled under the skin to the rear leg where I found it. It died quickly but moved about 10 feet before it dropped stone dead. There are many people with more experience than I have but I don't see any indication that a projectile that doesn't exit kills quicker. I don't try to have enough power that they always exit because I don't want the projectile going onto a neighbors yard and hurting something. But I like having enough penetration that they often exit. I think two holes causes quicker blood loss than one. If they don't exit when I hit the shoulders or on angled shots through the body I'm hoping they leave with a low enough velocity that they won't do much damage when they exit on side or brain shots. 

Stopping Power, Energy Dump, Hard Hitting, or whatever other name you want to put to it isn't a myth, its physics. 

If you shoot a projectile hitting a 25 pound coyote with 175 fpe, and that ammo doesn't do a passthrough, that means the animal had to dissipate that energy. It's much more than just the size of the projectile before and after mushroom that causes damage as it penetrates vessels and organs.

Have you ever had commercial ballistics gel in your hands? Do you know how firm it is? If you put a knife straight into the gel then tried to put your finger in the knife's place, you can feel how tight it is, and just how dense the material is. Now imagine what happens to neighboring vessels, nerves and organs that were not directly penetrated by your round, but you were shooting with the Predator Polymags just like in my video? Veins and arteries could be ripped in half, while organs would suffer from blunt force trauma.

Everyone shooting airguns have at one time or another watched a video where game was dropped where they stood without giving it a headshot. That is the result of ammo stopping power. If you haven't experienced this personally, try Polymags or Hades on a raccoon, coyote or groundhog, and you'll see for yourself the effectiveness of modern ammo.

The .30 will have more knockdown, and the .22 more penetration due to sectional density. Depending on what you are hunting, select accordingly.

I like throwing bigger ammo when I can. If they weigh the same and move at the same speed, at point blank range not much different. Ballistic coefficient will matter more at range

Once the projectile arrived to vitals the name of the game is: "More damage".

Biggest surface of contact generates more damage on vitals.

That clear, simple and easy to understand !!

There's no replacement for displacement.

It might be easier to hit said game if a projectile blows in the wind less, the higher BC 40gr projectile helps in this regard and arrives at a higher velocity due to less shed in velocity, thus it can also penetrate deeper.

But which projectile provides superior or adequate precision, it might be that the best projectile for killing stuff doesn't shoot as well as hoped.

You are then in a debate of does greater frontal area trump the above at X distance and when do all these different things make enough sense in regard to a discovering of a discernible difference, as well as using solid points vs hollow points.

Mostly shooting closer in I'd pick the larger diameter that provided the most expansion. For farther out, I'd use the one with better BC and acceptable expansion.

Oranges and apples but the 22 cal 42gr slugs/.142BC I use blow waaaaay less in the wind than 44gr pellets/.046BC do "at distance" even though the slugs are going 80 fps slower, this translates to higher hit ratios using the former. If trying to penetrate as well as shoot farther out it'd be those slugs for my choice. If thwacking a squirrel out of tree at 25Y well it doesn't matter (much??) which of these two projectiles I use. Only thing is one of these projectiles is more versatile than the other in my case as far as use criteria.

If you believe in stopping power or knock down power you need to read the Alphabet org report on handgun effectiveness. It isn't just me that thinks it's a myth. Some bad guys quit fighting from a wound that was not life threatening, others took several lethal hits and kept fighting. They looked at lots of data. Their conclusion is the same as I stated. There are phycological factors that affect how long an animal, or person, fights for it's life but the reason they die is a hit to the central nervous system or blood loss shutting down the brain. 

Damage outside the path of the projectile in the temporary wound channel area happens but only at impact velocities way higher than any air rifle. Our velocities are more like handguns which is why I think handgun data is a good reference. The velocity of the wounded area has to exceed it's elastic limits. It is not a factor for airguns (just like it isn't for handguns).

So for us, bigger holes kill quicker. But only if they reach vital organs or cause so much bleeding the animal dies. On a practical airgun data level, I've killed 31 squirrels in a little over a year of shooting them with airguns. 15 with a low power, 13-18 fpe 22 (Prod) and 16 with 35-45 fpe 25 calibers. I only lost 3 I hit, all with the 22. I also have more squirrels that needed another round with the 22. All the 16 squirrels hit with a 25 were collected. Maximum distance traveled was about 10 feet, largely vertically down. None of the 31 squirrels were hit with a projectile that expanded. 2 of the 3 lost with the Prod were before I raised it's power level. The only one after was brain shot and flipped into a deep rotted area at the base of a tree where I could not reach it. The 22 caliber holes kill effectively. But the 25 caliber holes tend to kill a little quicker, typically. But I have had to shoot at least one more than once and I have had a few move a few feet after impact. Most with the 22 or 25 dropped stone dead about 1-2 seconds after impact. A lot were brain or neck shots but there were body shots with both calibers. I do not have a lot of experience but I have some. The one I remember that took 2 shots with a 25 was with my Avenger tuned to about 40 fpe. Even my lower tuned 25, a P35, shoots through squirrels most of the time. No lack of power. But it doesn't physically move them at the impact. Not even a little 4 ounce female I brain shot. It just collapsed at impact.

I'm not against expanding projectiles as long as the weapon produces enough penetration with the expansion. I'd prefer not to have projectiles leave the animal with enough velocity to carry to where they could hurt something else. I'd also prefer a bigger hole - as long as it is deep enough. But I remain firmly of the opinion that the only thing the expansion accomplishes is a bigger diameter hole in the animal. That is significant but doesn't guarantee it drops on the spot. The squirrel that moved the furthest after a hit from one of my 25s was hit in a front leg and the FTT penetrated diagonally all they way through it's body stopping under the hide against a back leg. So it took the full impact. Didn't matter, it still moved about 10 feet before it dropped stone dead. Many others dropped immediately from a pass through.

Jim,

I share your ballistic views.

And I'm getting an itch to do a real reaearch study on what kills better.... — especially on HOW much better — as in: "Is it worth to go up in caliber?"

Matthias

Matthias,

You didn't ask about it but might be interested in the first few sentences of the last paragraph of the Alphabet org report:


Kinetic energy does not wound. Temporary cavity does not wound. The much discussed "shock"
of bullet impact is a fable and "knock down" power is a myth. The critical element is penetration. The
bullet must pass through the large, blood bearing organs and be of sufficient diameter to promote rapid
bleeding.

The Alphabet org paper is not real encouraging with respect to data collection for body shot stops. They logically point out that it would be important to know exactly where the bullet hit. That would be hard for small game. Even for people the Alphabet org does not believe the data they want is readily available. I try not to look much at the guts as I clean my kills and some people just dispose of them. I'm not sure I'd recognize the organs if I did look. All I do is record head/neck versus body. I find neck impacts to cause a reaction about the same as head shots so I lump them together. I also make note of the approximate projectile path through the animal for squirrels. There may be a better way to record data on small game kills but this is what I do.

I'm looking forward to getting a higher power 22 and probably a 177 pcp to gather some more data with.



Jim

Matthias,

You didn't ask about it but might be interested in the first few sentences of the last paragraph of the Alphabet org report:


Kinetic energy does not wound. Temporary cavity does not wound. The much discussed "shock"
of bullet impact is a fable and "knock down" power is a myth. The critical element is penetration. The
bullet must pass through the large, blood bearing organs and be of sufficient diameter to promote rapid
bleeding.

The Alphabet org paper is not real encouraging with respect to data collection for body shot stops. They logically point out that it would be important to know exactly where the bullet hit. That would be hard for small game. Even for people the Alphabet org does not believe the data they want is readily available. I try not to look much at the guts as I clean my kills and some people just dispose of them. I'm not sure I'd recognize the organs if I did look. All I do is record head/neck versus body. I find neck impacts to cause a reaction about the same as head shots so I lump them together. I also make note of the approximate projectile path through the animal for squirrels. There may be a better way to record data on small game kills but this is what I do.

I'm looking forward to getting a higher power 22 and probably a 177 pcp to gather some more data with.



Jim

Click to expand...

Jim,

I share your ballistic views.

And I'm getting an itch to do a real reaearch study on what kills better.... — especially on HOW much better — as in: "Is it worth to go up in caliber?"

Matthias

Click to expand...

Temporary wound cavity is real. If you knew how much force is required to just get your fingers into a 10% ballistics gel block, you'd understand how much force is required to generate a 3" void, and that can't but help cause damage to vessels, organs and nerves. If you can kill an animal with blunt force trauma, you can do significant damage with a temporary wound cavity.



But as all things, this is like debating religions or who makes the best beer  .

I put the Alphabet org quote in my last post hoping it would cause some to reassess their views. The Alphabet org flatly states temporary cavity does not wound. If you read their paper they explain that while the tissue is expanded in the animal by the temporary cavity it simply goes back where it was after the projectile passes by. With a center fire rifle, the tissue is moved fast enough that the tissue cannot move that fast without being damaged. But with much lower velocity pistol and airgun projectiles, the animal tissue stays within it's elastic limits and it just moves back into it's original spot, undamaged.

I like the pictures of the big cavities in soap blocks, gellatin, and clay. But I don't think they are meaningful with respect to how quickly our targets expire. If that was just my opinion, you would be as likely to be right as me. But it isn't. The research has been done and temporary cavity is just not how we wound animals with low speed projectiles. A wider diameter hole from an expanded projectile does damage and will kill more quickly if the hole is also deep enough. But there isn't a shock effect that wounds the animal outside the path of the projectile.

Good points from both sides. But shot placement is #1 and use enough gun is #2. If you are so concerned about a pass through, you are too close to others or not using a good backstop. As for the OP, neither is better. We are not talking hadrastatic shock like a PB delivers which these 2 rifles are not producing. I concur that there is some merit of dumping all spent power in the animal like a squirrel or bird. But there is just as much merit using a pass through on larger game do to the low power ( no HS). Hell, you can kill anything with a perfect brain shot provided you can reach the brain. Bottom line is pick the gun and ammo for what you are trying to kill. I hunt deer with a 350 gn .45 slug. Why? I don’t know. I would do just as well with a 250 gn slug. It makes the same size hole, goes several fps faster and gives a better long range trajectory. It doesn’t hit any harder on a clean lung pass through. But if I do hit a bone, it will do a better job of carrying through than the lighter bullet. I personally like a bigger caliber. I can always beef up the speed or slow it down, use a different weight or type of bullet.