My 11 year old has been saving his money and is wanting to buy a gun. He is tired of always using one of mine. Anyways, he is considering these two calibers and we were looking for some feedback. He is specifically looking at the Weatherby Vanguard s2. He has been mowing yards and doing chores for grandma and I want to make sure that he gets the best gun for him and his money. Any feedback would be appreciated.

7mm/08 no question!

Another vote for the 7mm-08

7mm-08

7mm-08

What are the reasons for everyone choosing the 7mm-08. And what type of scope would you put on it. I told him I would buy the scope if he bought the gun. Do not want to spend more than 300 on the scope.

The 7MM-08 can go with him all the way through adulthood, and has twice the power and distance.
243 are good guns, but don't have the knock down power of the other. Plus 7mm-08 is built on a 308 casing which is better for longer shots too!!!.
My Dad hunted with a 7MM Mag all his life, but in his 70"s now, the 7MM-08 is the perfect gun for him.

a .243 is a .243, cant do much more with it, the 7mm-08 you can go down to a managed recoil 120 grain load with nil recoil and in time load it with 160 or even 180 loads for really big North American game like elk, mule deer, even moose, a .243 cant do that. a kid will outgrow a .243, but can grow into a 7-08. no comparison, the 7-08 is an amazing caliber. read up on it.

as for a scope, Redfield 3x9x40 or 50 for less than $250 fits your need.

Since he is 11 it would depend on he handles recoil and whether or not you think it would lead to bad shooting habits (flinching etc.) in the future. Only you can know that.

My Dad killed mule deer in Colorado with a .243. Since I have shot a .270 and 30.06 I know very little about the 7mm-08. So I googled it and found an interesting article.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/7mm-08_Remington

Scope Zeiss conquest 3x9x40 from www.cameralandny.com perfect scope for kids rifle great eye relief!

forget about articles and other peoples opinions, find out for yourself.

either should be great, a rifle builder grey bull precision takes some nice animals with a little .243! His latest is a young girl folding up a elk using his rifle and hand loaded 105 grain vld at a close 688 yards! His videos are on youtube. He loves the .243 for long range on animals.

this may sound silly but what ammo can you buy at walmart? walmart are everywhere and lets say you forget ammo - I bet they carry 243.

7mm-08 is a round popular on this forum. BUy what the kid is comfortable with.

I hate both rounds personally BTW

And you hate them because.....

I swear you troll to go against the grain in every thread. Can't wait to hear why you hate both

since Bobo is out of commission I will say 25-06.

Yup...

7mm-08.

Biased much?

The 243 and 7mm-08 are both part of the 308 cartridge family, ie same case just the neck changed to hold a different size bullet.
The rest of the 308 family are 260Remington, 338Federal, and 358Winchester. There are also a few more wildcats on the same case 22-243 (I really like this one) and a 25 caliber that the name escapes me right now.

Of the 2 listed in the OP I still say the 7mm-08

The 7mm-08 does not have twice the power or range of the 243. I have both and reload for both along with 22-243, 308 and 338. But then I am a fan of short actions and the 308 case.

I don't troll anything. I just don't like either cartridge. If anyone ever looked at ballistic charts, most rounds are so damn close to eachother,its crazy. So why in the hell would anyone buy the more expensive round? TO gain 45 FPS? Or to gain 25 pounds of energy? Most of tese threads trying to decide between rounds are so damn close it does not matter. At that point, it is all opinion.

It is not like asking if we prefer a .223 or a .458 win mag for elephants.

And before you accuse me of trolling again, read back through my few posts. Not the case popcorn eateing troll man.

I have read and watched your posts and you do go against whatever direction the thread is going troll boy! And you are right not alot of difference in most it is personal preference but he asked for opinions and received them and I don't see where you explained one damn reason you don't like the two, and good ammo is expensive regardless if it is .308 or 7/08 or .270 or .280 so that argument doesn't hold water unless you wanna shoot cheap arse ammo!

dang I forgot the popcorn

That's a lie popcorn boy.

No that is true!

I wonder what the recoil difference is between 120 grain 7mm-08 and 100 grain .243?

About 1lb of felt recoil.

Another vote for 7mm-08. Someone asked about ammo at Wal- Mart. They have a fairly good selection of the common rounds HOWEVER; the tricky part is finding someone to open up the glass case to get it!

7-08 has a huge following on not only this forum, but many others!

The 7mm-08 is certainly a more versatile round for typical big game. In my opinion, it would be a better long-term decision for a young man. As mentioned, it can be loaded to have recoil just slightly above a .243, then loaded heavier to handle much larger game.

With today's bullets, it offers a rifle that shoots flatter than a .308, hits with more energy than a .243, but has less recoil than a .270 or .308. Solid choice.

I agree with the 708 recommendation. A wider range of bullet choices if you reload, meaning a wider range of applications. if you don't reload, starting out on the managed recoil loads, then moving up to full house 140's will allow this rifle to be well utilized for the rest of your son's life, and probably his son's too.

For strictly whitetail and smaller game the 243 is sufficient, but barely in some cases. And you'll never be able to run any heavier than a 100grain bullet. To me, that's simply too limiting for a "one gun" scenario. Sure, there are people that love the 243. And no doubt that it has proven itself over many years of service. But, to me, it falls more in the class of a varmint cartridge with the ability to use it whitetail hunting when conditions are optimum. Pushing it beyond that is asking for disappointment. That's my opinion of the round, some will disagree, no doubt.


And ammo availability would never be a factor in my choosing a caliber. NEVER! I have ammo for each of my rifles packed in at least two different locations when I go on a hunting trip. And usually a few rounds stashed at camp when going to where I normally hunt. Anyone who "forgets" their ammo didn't have their mind in the right place when preparing for the hunt to begin with. Also, what are the odds that the store is going to have the exact same ammo you were using to start with? That's a gamble with any caliber. A change in something as small as lot numbers can make a difference in point of impact. If one was to forget their ammo and go buy some more, they'd really need to re-sight/verify anyway. So that argument holds absolutely no water with me.

I like the .243 for those of smaller stature/newer to shooting. My wife has one and no deer has gone farther than 20 yards. She just took a good 9 that didn't take a step after she hit him. As others have stated, the availability of ammo is also a plus!

However, if you son is never going to buy another rifle, the 7-08 will, as others have said, is able to "move up" in grain size for larger game.

243 WCF
100GR BOAT TAIL SOFT POINT
BC .39
MPBR FOR 6 INCH VITALS
SET SIGHTS + 2.49
SECOND ZERO=240 YDS
MPBR=282




7-08
140 GR BOAT TAIL SOFT POINT
BC .45
MPBR FOR 6 INCH VITALS
SET SITES +2.51 @100YDS
SECOND ZERO=235 YDS
MPBR=277
Path is very close between .243WCF 100 gr, and the 7-08 140 gr, But FPE energy is around 400 to 600 FP higher with the 7-08 140 gr

If you take the rule of thumb of 1,000 FPE for WT, The 243WCF is capable to about 370 yards. More than enough FPE for a clean kill with proper placement on the average Texas WT.

And the 7-08 looks to have the 1,000FPE to about 600yds

That 1000FPE is a bad rule of thumb IMO, BUT man I like your style!

It all depends on the Indian.

Yes and I won't get into that argument. Deer have been killed with cars, rocks, spears (friend of a friend did so just recently actually), all the way to airplanes. Doesn't mean I'd use those methods or "calibers". If it works for you, keep on doing it! To each it's own as long as your getting it done on a consistent basis.

the FPE combined with premium weight retaining bullets ensures pentration should you hit bone. It's like having insurance, you don;t know you need it until you've screwed up.

both r good calibers and i have both. ones a 6mm on a 308 case and ones a 7mm on a 308 case and thats about the difference between the two, 1mm.

the holes they put on deer look about the same.
the S2 comes in stainless in 243 and not in the 7-08, that might make the choice for me, id take the stainless in .243
ive used a 243 for over 20 years and never lost a deer, not even my kids and they made tremendous shots at game over 200 yds.
i like the 7-08 but whats the big deal with it, the 7mm mauser has been around longer and the 7-08 just matches it.

7m-08 for Me ! I love the 243 too !! 243 ammo is alot cheaper to shoot.

Love the 243..but being recoil is very simlar on both calibers never hurts to go with the energy.

And yes I would toss in the 25-06... But hard to compare a LA vs SA.

Either will work fine but when using a .243 one must make sure and not use varmint bullets on deer sized game.

My daughter started shooting the 7-08 at age 8, now I shoot it also because I like it so much. In my opinion the 243 is very capable of doing the job if pinpointed more so than the 7-08. With kids, I like to give them a little more room for error. Your son will have no problems with the 7-08, and you may even start shooting it.

I understand that it's not for everyone and some have personal preference; however hating the 7-08 is beyond my belief.

I've been shooting the Hornady Custom 120gr reduced recoil rounds in a Stevens 200 7mm-08 this year ($23.99/box at Cabellas). I have added weight to the stock since its a very light gun and the recoil is very light. I can't imagine it being much more than a .243. I really like the round. I shoulder shot a buck, 100 yards, field dressed at 125, and he went down like a sack of potatoes. That did it for me, I really like the round and would vote 7mm-08 over .243. Add to it the fact that you can shoot up to 160gr bullets and it is a no brainer for a more versitle hunting rig.

Let the little man who has worked his rear off pick the rifle he wants...
Scope under 300 bucks?? Leupold..
Less?? Weaver or Nikon... Have a Weaver and love it..

Never could dump the 400 bucks on a Zeiss.. Hear it's good glass, but for another 100 bucks I start thinking of some other rifle I want...

a 7-08 in the vanguard isnt going to kick, the vg is a kinda of heavy, its what i shoot. I run 120 gr hot loads through it and it kicks less than a little savage in .243.

For a scope take a look at Mueller scopes, I run 3 of them and they are realy good scopes and I have put them to the test, they will track with the best of them. I use the turrets as intended I go from 100 yds bump too 200 yds bump to 300 yds and bump it back to a 100 and its back dead on, clarity is top notch, I have dropped my gun off the bench, with leopold bases and rings, picked it up and shot it and was still dead on, there in the USA as well, plus you get a illuminated dot.
link below

http://muelleroptics.com/mu41650igr

I don't recall what your son's intended use will be but, as another thought, the 243 would also make for a great predator or hog round. Year round opportunity for practice vs. just thinking of a deer rifle. Again, just a thought.

the .243 is a 6mm-08. the deer aint gonna know if he was hit with a 6mm or 7mm. it all boils down to cost and availability. the real world difference between the two is in the gun shop cash register not the field.

IMO you have never used these cartiridges on game.

I don't know - with less than ideal shot placement (which is pretty common in real world scenarios), I would imagine the animal might notice an additional 500+ ft lbs of energy with the 7mm-08.

bullet kinetic energy doesnt kill, never will. The sole lethality of a bullet is the tissue damage it does as it passes through organs, bigger bullets tend to leave bigger holes and thats the difference it has nothing to do with kinetic energy.
Shoot a deer in the neck with a 300 mag, miss the spine and the jugglar and the deer escapes even though he was just hit with3k ft/lbs of kinetic energy, hit the same deer with a a 22 hornet in the neck dead center with a puny 600 ft/lbs of energy and it severes the spine and you go retrieve your deer.

seen a 300 mag to the gut, even with all that energy deer still was alive 3 hours later and was finished off, but my lil 22 hornet perfect double lung went 20 yds and expired within 30 seconds, kinetic energy doesnt kill.

Dont think you could go wrong either way.

Maybe you could meet up with a couple of members and let the him shoot both calibers. If he is comfortable with both, let him decide.

Like i said, cant go wrong with either. Im partial to the .243, but thats only because i've used one. I'm sure the 7-08 is a great round too.

I have piled up a lot of stuff with both the 243 and 7mm-08, but the 7mm-08 is a little more versitile, so is the 260, just got one in a 700. Bullet placement is the key to either.

Yup 260 is another good one. Half way between them

Speed/rpm and bullet construction kill

Hit that deer with a solid bullet/ or bonded bullet and your right(unless really close) ...passes through with little damage

Same shot using a bullet built to break up/ expand really quickly like a game king or ballistic tip loaded hot it drops.

Shot to many deer the last two years with an 80 gr ttsx at 3850 ft/s and seen to much tissue/organ damage that wasn't even close to the bullet path. Huge believer in hydrostatic shock.

I gotta go with the 7mm-08 in a Remmy 788 action.

I have used both 243 & 7-08 but still like the 08 better. I use it now with 120gr Nosler ballistic tips and it is deadly.

I just got my son a Savage in 7mm-08 this year and both shoot the same handload ammo great.

As far as optics I have Burris 4 x 12 Fullfields on them and they are great scopes.

very impressive!

Under $300:
http://www.cameralandny.com/optics/minox.pl?page=66000
http://www.cabelas.com/product/Bushnell174-Elite174-4200-Riflescopes/748946.uts

Either caliber would do for Texas game. Maybe I'd go with the 7-08 if I was limited to one gun, maybe not. With a 7-08 you will be able to shoot heavier bullets, the .243 will shoot flatter and faster with light bullets. If he likes to shoot a lot of small game and whitetail is pretty much the biggest game he'll hunt, a .243 is a good choice (since the S2 doesn't come with any 6.5mm options).

I went through this same situation about a month ago. I was looking to get my girlfriend a deer rifle and was split between .243 and 7mm-08. I needed a gun with not much recoil and something thats not so loud it would bother her. I ended up getting the 7mm-08. She loves it, it was the first one I had shot, and I think its a great caliber. I grew up with a .243 and if i would have had a 7mm-08, I don't think I would have ever needed another deer rifle. Hope this helps.

i really like the 7mm08, and really don't like the 243,, the 243 is too limited,, if i am gonna shoot something w/ a 243 then i prolly wouldn't mind shooting the same thing w/ a 223,, i hand load and my 223 kills everything that i wanna shoot, but it is all about shot placement.. and being honest enough w/ myself to know if i should take the shot or not...an all around rifle for me is a 2506 or bigger,, after having sold all my other rifles but 3 in the last couple of days my current do it all truck gun is a remington ltr 308..

i now own two 308's one remington ltr (my son's), and a remington 5r (mine), and a ss model 70 in 300 wsm (mine), and hopefully soon another 223 in (tikka t3 heavy barrel)

dont see it like you do, the 243 is not limited, it will do what your 223 will, only better and do what your 223 cant and thats hunt elk and black bear. Is it the best for elk, nope but remember you said shot placement is the key. The .243 makes the cut for elk in states the 223 doesnt.
The 7-08 is limited to deer and elk the .243 will do that and shoot yotes. it will push a 55 gr to 4k fps and a 100 gr to 3k

The 260 covers both the 243 and 7-08, but it is pretty tough to find ammo.

Here is some scientific evidence to educate you on the importance of kinetic energy and hydrostatic shock....

Ammunition selection for hunting:
Hydrostatic shock is commonly considered as a factor in the selection of hunting ammunition. Peter Capstick explains that hydrostatic shock may have value for animals up to the size of white-tailed deer, but the ratio of energy transfer to animal weight is an important consideration for larger animals. If the animal’s weight exceeds the bullet’s energy transfer, penetration in an undeviating line to a vital organ is a much more important consideration than energy transfer and hydrostatic shock.[79] Jim Carmichael, in contrast, describes evidence that hydrostatic shock can affect animals as large as Cape Buffalo in the results of a carefully controlled study carried out by veterinarians in a buffalo culling operation.

Whereas virtually all of our opinions about knockdown power are based on isolated examples, the data gathered during the culling operation was taken from a number of animals. Even more important, the animals were then examined and dissected in a scientific manner by professionals. Predictably, some of the buffalo dropped where they were shot and some didn't, even though all received near-identical hits in the vital heart-lung area. When the brains of all the buffalo were removed, the researchers discovered that those that had been knocked down instantly had suffered massive rupturing of blood vessels in the brain. The brains of animals that hadn't fallen instantly showed no such damage.

— Jim Carmichael[80]

Dr. Randall Gilbert describes hydrostatic shock as an important factor in bullet performance on whitetail deer, “When it [a bullet] enters a whitetail’s body, huge accompanying shock waves send vast amounts of energy through nearby organs, sending them into arrest or shut down.”[81] Dave Ehrig expresses the view that hydrostatic shock depends on impact velocities above 1,100 ft (340 m) per second.[82] Sid Evans explains the performance of the Nosler Partition bullet and Federal Cartridge Company’s decision to load this bullet in terms of the large tissue cavitation and hydrostatic shock produced from the frontal diameter of the expanded bullet.[83] The North American Hunting Club suggests big game cartridges that create enough hydrostatic shock to quickly bring animals down.[84]

popular contemporary misconception results from the belief that the rapid "transfer" of the kinetic energy of the bullet thereby kills instantaneously through "hydrostatic shock". This term gets used rather loosely to describe quite a lot of things, including some actual wound mechanics, but for the sake of the following discussion I confine my reference to purported effects induced far from the wound cavity that are attributable to a "shocking effect" ascribed to certain bullets or loads.

I don't know where this term originated, but it is pseudoscientific slang. In the first place, these are dynamic - not static - events. Moreover, "hydrostatic shock" is an oxymoron. Shock, in the technical sense, indicates a mechanical wave travelling in excess of the inherent sound speed of the material; it can't be static. This may be a flow related wave like a bow shock on the nose of a bullet in air or it may be a supersonic acoustic wave travelling through a solid. In terms of bullets striking tissue, shock is never encountered. The sound speed of water (which is very close to that of soft tissue) is about 4900 fps. Even varmint bullets do not have an impact velocity this high, let alone a penetration velocity exceeding 4900 fps. Unless the bullet can penetrate faster than the inherent sound speed of the medium through which it is passing, you will not observe a shock wave. Instead, the bullet impact produces an acoustic wave which moves ahead of the penetration. The initial acoustic wave causes no damage (it has been observed in testing passing harmlessly in advance of the bullet's path).

Some people use "shock" in the colloquial sense to describe a violent impact, but it is confusing, especially in connection with the term "hydrostatic" and lends undeserved quasi-scientific merit to the slang. It also tends to get confused with the medical expression attending trauma. We are not describing what is meant by shock to the medical profession. The word shock should never appear in a gun journal, in my opinion.

Before I become too dogmatic and overstate the situation, let me concede that there may be some merit to the idea that hydrodynamic (not hydrostatic) impulse created by bullets which have a high kinetic energy (or perhaps simply a high velocity) and generally exhibit violent cavitation (or merely generate local pressures of a certain magnitude in combination with specific shotlines), can cause some secondary effects due to pressure on the nervous system or circulatory system. In addition to the pressure induced cranial hemorrhage described previously, it is possible to kill manually by nerve "strangulation". In this case actual damage to the central nervous system is not caused, but the signals governing the heart or diaphragm are shut off, resulting in instantaneous unconsciousness or even death. This sort of thing makes for lurid mythology in the martial arts and bad movies, but there is some real science behind it. Certain rare sports fatalities have been definitely attributed to a swift blow which interrupts the cardiac rhythm. Acoustic pressure on the spine can also cause temporary paralysis.

These phenomena may account for the rapid effectiveness of some high-velocity hollow-point pistol bullet wounds, especially in cases in which the victim is not mortally wounded and recovers consciousness within a few minutes. Some special handgun loads (e.g., the THV bullet) have been designed allegedly to achieve this result. Unfortunately, this is an unreliable mechanism of incapacitation, generally obtained at the expense of effective penetration. No bullet yet designed will produce this rapid shocking effect on demand because it depends more on the hit location and perhaps even the timing of the hit than it does on the design characteristics or velocity of the bullet. Many of the handgun bullets designed to use this effect can be defeated by common barriers, such as glass, sheetrock, and even clothing. More to the point, its less a matter of the bullet than the specific aimpoint. Doing this deliberately by hand, even with a profound understanding of the mechanism and vital points, is extremely uncertain; using the passage of a pressure wave from a bullet to accomplish this falls into the freak event category. Such is never an acceptable mechanism for the hunter.

I am a firm believer that much more hydrostatic shock and dramatic kills take place with a lung shor if the animal had just exhaled. The lungs themselves are denser and pass that shockwave better if not full of hot air. Kinda like a water jug, If you shoot it when full of water the jug will be much more deformed than if the jug is full of air. Shoot some foam rubber that is saturated and one that is dry you will also see a dramatic difference in the resulting damage

no such thing as shock or shock wave, maybe hyrdraulic pressure but it aint a shockwave.
read above your post

Perhaps wrong word but it is not an instantanious transfer, very short time I agree, but it does not all happen at the exact same time IMO.

and not always inolving fluids as hydraulic pressure seems to relate to. FWIW, there's no way for you to kill a deer, legally, w/o KE playing a huge factor. Even if you run one over with a truck.

Vanguard atleast site your source when cutting and pasting so it doesn't look as your own words... the ability for people to see your reference material makes it more legitimate

KE is the factor least determining the lethality of a projectile, wound channel being the most important factor.

a good read and link to keep, better have time though its long.
http://www.rathcoombe.net/sci-tech/ballistics/myths.html

It's a hydraulic shock. It's the energy transfer from the projectile to the less dense softer tissue (IE. mussle tissue or organ tissue) in the body.

If you shoot it through the lungs, would it then be pneumatic shock?

It's the most important.. if something is possessing no KE, it wont create a wound channel. Penetration requires energy release..bullet runs out of energy it stops. Could be in the ground on the other side of the critter, under the skin on the exit side of the citter, or in the shoulder on the entrance side. This takes into account bullet design as well due to high weight retention still possessing intial energy.

Interesting the Theory's going on there but the author is very choppy and non consitant.

an arrow has about 60lb ke and tipped with a razor broadhead it will kill better than an fmj witt 1500lb ke so tell me how its the most important

I have a .243 and like it. Ammo is easy to find.

Fairly simple if the fmj hits a major attery like an arrow does same effect, except there will be more tissue damage cause by the speed of the impact by the bullet.

2 different methods of killing... or else you could kill a deer with that same arrow at 400yds like you could the FMJ.

i doubt it but lets say your right.
shoot a deer in the leg with a 300 mag delivering 3000 ft lbs ke,
so again hows ke the most important factor determining the lethality of a projectile

come on your reaching, the wound channell is the sole determing factor of the lehality of a projectile
hit a deer in the gut and your KE didnt kill squat

Don't have KE and you can't have a wound channel.

Anyways... I have both and have killed animals with both. Whitetail, axis, and coyotes with both as well as hogs and javelina with 7-08, and seen several nilgai killed with 7-08. My 7-08 does have noticeably more recoil and my 243 but from talking to others I think it has more to do with the fact that it is a Browning. I know for a fact that other rifles by different manufacturers makes a difference in recoil since other members of my family also have both calibers but both in Remington and I have shot them with less felt recoil. All that being said I can honestly say either one is fine for hunting in Texas and with a decent recoil pad for a kid just fine. I would want a larger rifle caliber if I knew I was going to Colorado to elk hunt or some other bigger than deer size animal.

hehehe that is true though

What's to doubt? anything hit in a major artery will die whether it's a knife or bullet. I never said knetic energy is so important but you need a fair amount to help penetration or a bullet built well enough to compensate. The KE will help poorly built projectiles to reaching the vitals and still being able to dispatch the animal.

An arrow typically kills from hemorage due to the cut made by the arrowhead be that watever material. A bullet on the though is more like a blunt force instrument tearing and bludgenoning its way thruough. Both take sufficient KE to cause enough damage to cause the death of the intended animal. Wether that is 40ft/lbs with an arrow or 250ft/lbs with a Hornet

What is also true is that it is hard to kill without a wound...

So which one is MORE important? Wound channel, no doubt. 22lr through the brain has much more potential to kill than a .338LM through a toe.

someone gets it

your correct but I like to say its velocity not KE,
KE is just a mathmatical derivative of velocity. Velocity on the other hand is measurable quantum

Both handguns and rifles have a temporary cavity and a permenent cavity. Handguns generally (unless talking about certain uber magnum) the temporary cavity doesn't damage the tissues that much, and the permenent cavity is the main mechanism of damage.

Rifles, on the other hand, mostly have enough energy to do damage with their temporary cavity. Thats why a good shot will turn the lungs and heart into mush. Its not that the wound channel was 5" wide.

Bullet construction determines how bullets hold together through tissue.

Knetic energy is not a derivitive it's the energy an object carries it works directly with inertia which all very with different velocity's.

can you physically measure kinetic energy of a bullet.
I can weight a bullet and i can measure its velocity
when we do the math isnt that realy potential energy
ahhh my head hurts this is mucho petho

Maybe you should specify that the "location" of the wound channel is the most important factor in the lethality of a projectile.

If you hit a deer in the gut with a .22 versus a .300 Mag I would bet the KE dispersed would be an important factor to the deer and would be much less likely to survive the shot from the .300. The size of the wound channels are related to the cavitation and hydrostatic shock delivered by the bullet, not just the size of the projectile.

No?

ΔK = W = FΔs = maΔs

v2 = v02 + 2aΔs ⇒
aΔs = v2 − v02
2

ΔK = m ⎛
⎝ v2 − v02 ⎞
⎠
2

ΔK = 1 mv2 − 1 mv02
2 2

ΔK = W = ⌠
⌡ F(r) · dr = ⌠
⌡ m a · dr = m ⌠
⌡ dv · dr
dt

ΔK = m ⌠
⌡ dv · dr = m ⌠
⌡ dr · dv = m ⌠
⌡ v · dv
dt dt

ΔK = 1 mv2 − 1 mv02

K = ½mv2

KE is determined by use of a mathmatical formula just like velocity.

They directly relate VG's wording to me points that it's not a real thing which it is, just takes a known formula to calculate.

to measure kinetic energy you have measure it in heat, its energy so using at as a determining factor in a would channels or lethality is bogus science

That would be thermal energy not kenetic energy you measure in heat.

Here's a pretty in depth definition, gotta love Physics/trig.
http://www.kineticenergys.com/

Your boy needs to shoot both, then decide for himself. Personally, I'd go .243 so he has plenty of excuse to replace it in the future.

kinetic energy would have to be transfered to joules if some one want to figure that go ahead I aint very good at math, then how many joules does it take to boil water.
Dude kinetic energy is bogus in terminal balistics

Thanks for getting back to the topic. It is amazing how many times these things hit a tangent

How do you figure? Terminal ballistics is the study of what happens when a projectile comes into contact with another body of mass and how far penetration is. The higher the known Kinetic Energy the more resistance is needed to stop the projectile, again this is where bullet construction comes in to play.

Easy. It's a straight forward from the equation of 1/2 * m * v^2, no conversion needed.

Weight of bullet, f.e. 6.8gr
Velocity, f.e. 1000m/s

1/2 * 0.0068 kg * 1000^2 m^2/s^2 = 3400J

So simple a caveman could do it.

Mathmatical representation of Joules

Kg X mxm
J = ----------
sxs

Joules = Mass in kilograms times meters squared divided by seconds squared.

have to agree with Vanguard makes the brain hurt thinking back to Physics, Statics and Dynamics classes.

Sufice to say without sufficent energy to create a wound cannal a bullet is not very useful hunting tool.

hehehe but is it energy that creates a wound channel or velocity, energy is what I use to make toast

The S2 comes in 257 Weatherby Mag, pretty much set for life.

The 257 Roy might be a lil much for a kid.

limbsaver

Concur, but 80 ttsx aren't bad

I was thinking more the muzzle blast it's a bit more than even the 25-06.

It is transfer of energy that creates the wound.

I agree.. only bad thing about either the 25-06 or 257is it just being a long gun for a kid

KE is the math representation if energy in a moving object. Without velocity the object there is no energy.
The energy on the moving object is given up as the object slows down.

In the case of a bullet energy is released into what the bullet hits reducing the bullet energy and velocity to zero where the bullet or the many pieces thereof have no KE left because there is no velocity to impart energy, just mass (weight). So I guess you could say the wound is caused by the energy transfered to a pliable object (your deer) as the bullet is slowing down on its hopefully well aimed path into or through the animal.


A bullet has no energy to transfer without velocity unless we change to a discussion of potential energy. The energy it has potentially if it fell from the shelf and gained velocity imparted by Gravity.

Thermal energy gets you toast brown, not KE You can throw that slice of bread all day or until it comes apart it will have and loose KE on each throw but will not be brown

Dang that wound up being a long post

If shooting TXS the kid needs to reload, at ammo prices for that stuff you can hurt a young mans spending money pretty quick in ammo cost. Great round though

The 257 Roberts works a lil better in a shorter overall package, but like the post above not overly efficiant unless pops or junior is a reloader.