Alternatives to foot pounds of energy (fpe)
- Thread starter JimD
- Start date
The only need for numbers is if you are shooting at the limitations of your rifle.
You can do all the calculations you want. If you miss the vitals or fail to anchor the animal it dosent really matter what your shooting. Calculate that.
If you want to hunt coyotes you need an appropriate weapon. An airgun isn't it. In some situations it may work but those situations are pretty limited. An air rifle can certainly kill a coyote but that does not mean it will be an effective weapon when hunting.
It's not a matter of "can it be done if things are perfect". It's a matter of "can it be done effectively even when things aren't perfect".
A .22 lr is not enough gun for a coyote. A .22 mag isn't enough gun either. They both have plenty of energy but they just aren't suited to the task.
Can you kill a coyote with an airgun? Sure! Is an air rifle an appropriate weapon to hunt coyote? No. And any coyote hunter will tell you that.
To effectively hunt coyote you need a flat shooting rifle that is accurate out to AT LEAST 200 yards and carries enough energy to pass through. You also need the capability of a quick follow up shot. Your choices for an appropriate hunting caliber start at .223 rem. Anything less than that and you simply do not have an effective weapon for the task.
You can do all the calculations you want. If you miss the vitals or fail to anchor the animal it dosent really matter what your shooting. Calculate that.
If you want to hunt coyotes you need an appropriate weapon. An airgun isn't it. In some situations it may work but those situations are pretty limited. An air rifle can certainly kill a coyote but that does not mean it will be an effective weapon when hunting.
It's not a matter of "can it be done if things are perfect". It's a matter of "can it be done effectively even when things aren't perfect".
A .22 lr is not enough gun for a coyote. A .22 mag isn't enough gun either. They both have plenty of energy but they just aren't suited to the task.
Can you kill a coyote with an airgun? Sure! Is an air rifle an appropriate weapon to hunt coyote? No. And any coyote hunter will tell you that.
To effectively hunt coyote you need a flat shooting rifle that is accurate out to AT LEAST 200 yards and carries enough energy to pass through. You also need the capability of a quick follow up shot. Your choices for an appropriate hunting caliber start at .223 rem. Anything less than that and you simply do not have an effective weapon for the task.
Upvote 0
That's one take, that disagrees with someone else who disagrees with crunching numbers as they have taken medium game (which coyote fall under) with low powered air guns.
No sense running circles, plenty of air rifles are capable of dispatching Coyotes and even much larger, provided you crunch numbers. Some States even ALLOW hunting large game with airguns, provided you...use the right caliber with the right energy, probably because they, crunched numbers.
-Matt
Upvote 0
Interesting read so far .
I am old school . i know my gun and ammo , i know the wind . I know if the wind is from my right @ 10 to 15 i hold one dot or 1.5 dots to the right on my scope = dead squirrel . end of thinking about it .
I am old school . i know my gun and ammo , i know the wind . I know if the wind is from my right @ 10 to 15 i hold one dot or 1.5 dots to the right on my scope = dead squirrel . end of thinking about it .
Upvote 0
1.5 dots at 50 yards or 100 yards or just your backyard at a specific distance? Clearly you don't oppose all number crunching as you dope for wind, so applying number crunching to other factors may not be valuable to you personally, it certainly can be to others.
The thread doesn't suggest the imposition of alternatives to FPE number crunching, it only gives means to approach said number crunching, which I think is cool.
-Matt
Upvote 0
That's one take, that disagrees with someone else who disagrees with crunching numbers as they have taken medium game (which coyote fall under) with low powered air guns.
No sense running circles, plenty of air rifles are capable of dispatching Coyotes and even much larger, provided you crunch numbers. Some States even ALLOW hunting large game with airguns, provided you...use the right caliber with the right energy, probably because they, crunched numbers.
-Matt
And my point is that a calculation based on a minimum energy requirement does not constitute an effective weapon for the job.
There is a lot more to hunting than that. A lot more to killing than that.
Yes, airguns have the energy to kill a deer at short distances. They are legal to use in a bunch of states....
But there is more to the calculation.
A guy that wants to hunt with an air rifle needs to stay within his "calculations". That is what makes an air rifle unsuitable for hunting larger animals in most cases. You can't stay within your calculations. And you can't calculate fast enough.
Pesting a coyote jumping over your back fence or around the chicken coop is a valid use for air rifles and calculations. Hunting coyote is another ball of wax.
Shooting a deer from a stand at limited range an air rifle and calculations are all you need. Hunting deer in the desert mountains those calculations are worthless. And so is an air rifle. Legal or not.
For little animals at close range that present relatively stationary targets an airgun shines. It is an effective hunting weapon. In those situations the calculations mean something. You can stay well within them.
For larger animals that take in lots of territory an airgun is simply not an effective hunting weapon. The calculations prove that.
Many airgunners work in small areas and visualize a "hunting situation" much differently. In those controlled situations an air rifle may be a perfect "hunting rifle". But it is the situation that allows the rifle to be adequate. Not the virtues of the rifle.
Last edited:
Upvote 0
your correct , it does not apply to me , but i still find it a interesting read .1.5 dots at 50 yards or 100 yards or just your backyard at a specific distance? Clearly you don't oppose all number crunching as you dope for wind, so applying number crunching to other factors may not be valuable to you personally, it certainly can be to others.
The thread doesn't suggest the imposition of alternatives to FPE number crunching, it only gives means to approach said number crunching, which I think is cool.
-Matt
Upvote 0
Humorous little "mind movie "resulting from the above few posts .
A hunter is in Big horn sheep country , he spots one and range finds it to be 275 yards . The hunter quickly pulls out his Ipad and taps the yardage into his pad , the pad says to turn his turrets this way and that which the hunter does , the hunter then peers through his scope and finds the ram has moved so he ranges it to find another 20 yards to add to the calculation . and so the story goes .
this post is not meant to belittle any one or thing ,just what went through my head .
Stan in KY .
A hunter is in Big horn sheep country , he spots one and range finds it to be 275 yards . The hunter quickly pulls out his Ipad and taps the yardage into his pad , the pad says to turn his turrets this way and that which the hunter does , the hunter then peers through his scope and finds the ram has moved so he ranges it to find another 20 yards to add to the calculation . and so the story goes .
this post is not meant to belittle any one or thing ,just what went through my head .
Stan in KY .
Last edited:
Upvote 0
This is why knowledge is power, so are dope cards and having things memorized based on prior research, such as we're trying to do here.
Based on your above statements, the use of any ballistic program is not fruitful to you, but yet, many, many hunters do use them or dope cards they have prior to engagement.
-Matt
Upvote 0
Running such calculations, or simulations, gives one the knowledge to understand their airguns limitations, from range, to size of game they can and cannot dispatch.
"Who needs any rifle scope, I'm old school and use iron sights." -The old school hunter
"Who needs rifles, I have bow and arrow." -Some Native Americans.
"Who needs to weigh their ammo loads, I don't need no stinkin' scale!" -Some guy.
And the list goes on.
-Matt
Last edited:
Upvote 0
If your calculations help you to understand how effective an airgun will be at dispatching various critters then your path is a worthy one.
My calculations show that any calculation is unnecessary if you divide by 30-'06. And unneeded with an air rifle if you stick to little stuff within reason.
I do see where analyzing the data is useful. Especially with the limitations of an air rifle. A lot of guys wonder how large an animal can they take down with their air rifle. And I suppose for some the data can be useful, satisfying and meaningful.
So carry on with your equations. When you total it all up divide by the square root of "not much bigger than a fat raccoon" and you have found the realistic hunting limitations of most air rifles.
Last edited:
Upvote 0
As some say, to each their own. I hold nothing against you for your resolve with dispatching prey. I personally praise great mathematicians / ballisticians that, in the last century, and even recent decades have opened up many new doors for hunters due to their ability to formulate and calculate various data that many avid hunters find advantageous, which in part have also helped create legislation that enables pneumatic rifles to take part in hunting larger game than previously allowed.
I don't think OP's stance, and I know mine, isn't one to enforce these calculations, merely suggestive for inquisitive minds.
-Matt
Upvote 0
I don't think the numbers are meant to decide which rifle to use for a hunt. For me it is a tool to understand what is happening with the projectiles and why one is better suited for a certain job than the other. Common sense and experience tells the same story in another way. One does not replace the other. For many years people used arms of any kind to hunt without being able to do calculations. Today we use calculations to understand better what those people knew and to make it more interesting. I for one hunted many years without even having a range finder, but today I use a range finder, ballistic app and whatever modern aids that can help me fine-tuning and doing a better job.
Upvote 0
Your mind movie is a guy with an airgun over 100 yards if he wants a one shot kill, not a hit. I have been in this situation with my best guns. Sometimes it gets to the point when an animal just won’t stop moving that I just say F it and give up. Horrible trajectory even with enough FPE for the numbers guy is the nightmare that is an airgun. With horrible trajectory comes great responsibility.
Upvote 0
Many archery hunters have shifted to calculating momentum instead of kinetic energy (momentum is measured in "slugs" as the unit). Instead of squaring the velocity, momentum is a simpler formula of p=mv and puts less emphasis on the velocity.
Upvote 0
I firmly believe in the "there's more than fpe" involved.
Years ago I was hunting with a black powder 50 cal and blew right through a ram, knocked it right over, and seconds later it got up. The second round put it down. Inspection showed the exit wound was the same size as the entry. Small..............
Back home after the trip I switched slugs. The one I was using was obviously packing plenty of fpe but,,,,,,,,,,,
The slug I switched to performed much better at basically the same fpe. I shot a buck that made it about two steps and never moved again. Small entry wound, the exit was the size of my fist.
Years ago I was hunting with a black powder 50 cal and blew right through a ram, knocked it right over, and seconds later it got up. The second round put it down. Inspection showed the exit wound was the same size as the entry. Small..............
Back home after the trip I switched slugs. The one I was using was obviously packing plenty of fpe but,,,,,,,,,,,
The slug I switched to performed much better at basically the same fpe. I shot a buck that made it about two steps and never moved again. Small entry wound, the exit was the size of my fist.
Upvote 0
I haven't been following this even though I started it. I'm glad some found it an interesting topic. That additional factor, Matt, is something I might add to my spreadsheet. Or perhaps I'll find a reasonable way to post it and you or others can. I do not often look at all those numbers but it doesn't take up much space in the spreadsheet to add another column.
I agree with "Bedrock Bob" on minimum powder burner for coyotes. I also agree that no air rifle can realistically work as well as an accurate 223 (or 22/250) for coyote hunting. But if you can get a short range shot I remain convinced a 357 air rifle is a reasonable choice. I don't have one so I've never tested penetration and I would do that first. I haven't even calculated another measure I like to look at which is the area of the projectile versus the area of the target. I used it to calculate a 177 pellet damages about the same amount of the area of a squirrel as a .75 inch projectile would in a deer. That convinced me that a 177 was a reasonable choice and I've since used one to take >10 squirrels. While I have not done the math I think a .35 diameter hole through a coyote would work OK. I doubt that a 223 expanded would make a bigger hole. Penetration must be adequate too and I would test that before using it on game.
To me, looking at the area of the projectile versus the area of the target animal and the penetration depth of the projectile from the subject airgun are best and are still not terribly time consuming or costly to obtain. I think they are better than any formula. It will weed out what I consider unsuitable projectiles. In my most recent penetration test I included metal mag pellets, for example. They only made it through 3 or 4 wet magazines. My standard for squirrels is 9-10. They expand nicely so there is no problem at all with the hole size but there is a risk that they won't go deep enough for a clean kill.
It does not apply to airguns but fast moving PB projectiles can also damage more tissue than the diameter of the projectile due to rapid expansion of the animal tissue. That sort of expansion is shown in ballistic gel tests and with something like a 223 the area of the cavity in the gel will be damaged animal tissue. But with an airgun (or a handgun) that tissue just goes back to where it was. It is not permanently damaged. So I don't do much with ballistic gel tests for airguns. It's another reasonable way to test penetration but I don't think we should look vary hard at the admittedly cool looking cavity.
I like looking at some numbers because it gives me some idea of the suitability of a gun or round before I buy them and start testing them. It is not sufficient in my mind by itself but it is useful as long as you don't treat it as the final thing to be considered. I like alternatives to fpe because very, very few airguns meet the PB criteria of 1000 fpe for deer. Very fuel black powder guns or handguns do either but both have been used effectively for a century or more. So fpe must not tell the whole story. Other measures may help get a more clear idea for large slow moving projectiles.
I agree with "Bedrock Bob" on minimum powder burner for coyotes. I also agree that no air rifle can realistically work as well as an accurate 223 (or 22/250) for coyote hunting. But if you can get a short range shot I remain convinced a 357 air rifle is a reasonable choice. I don't have one so I've never tested penetration and I would do that first. I haven't even calculated another measure I like to look at which is the area of the projectile versus the area of the target. I used it to calculate a 177 pellet damages about the same amount of the area of a squirrel as a .75 inch projectile would in a deer. That convinced me that a 177 was a reasonable choice and I've since used one to take >10 squirrels. While I have not done the math I think a .35 diameter hole through a coyote would work OK. I doubt that a 223 expanded would make a bigger hole. Penetration must be adequate too and I would test that before using it on game.
To me, looking at the area of the projectile versus the area of the target animal and the penetration depth of the projectile from the subject airgun are best and are still not terribly time consuming or costly to obtain. I think they are better than any formula. It will weed out what I consider unsuitable projectiles. In my most recent penetration test I included metal mag pellets, for example. They only made it through 3 or 4 wet magazines. My standard for squirrels is 9-10. They expand nicely so there is no problem at all with the hole size but there is a risk that they won't go deep enough for a clean kill.
It does not apply to airguns but fast moving PB projectiles can also damage more tissue than the diameter of the projectile due to rapid expansion of the animal tissue. That sort of expansion is shown in ballistic gel tests and with something like a 223 the area of the cavity in the gel will be damaged animal tissue. But with an airgun (or a handgun) that tissue just goes back to where it was. It is not permanently damaged. So I don't do much with ballistic gel tests for airguns. It's another reasonable way to test penetration but I don't think we should look vary hard at the admittedly cool looking cavity.
I like looking at some numbers because it gives me some idea of the suitability of a gun or round before I buy them and start testing them. It is not sufficient in my mind by itself but it is useful as long as you don't treat it as the final thing to be considered. I like alternatives to fpe because very, very few airguns meet the PB criteria of 1000 fpe for deer. Very fuel black powder guns or handguns do either but both have been used effectively for a century or more. So fpe must not tell the whole story. Other measures may help get a more clear idea for large slow moving projectiles.
Upvote 0
OK, I've attached a file if somebody wants to play with my spreadsheet. I keep this file in OpenOffice and converted it to excel to at least potentially make it handier for others. I was going to post the open office version too but that doesn't seem to be permitted. I made a little portion of my spreadsheet to keep the file size small and because I doubt you are interested in all the data I have in mine at this point. This is just one of many tunes I tried on my Prod (and not the one I use).
View attachment Velocity spreadsheet for sharing.xls
View attachment Velocity spreadsheet for sharing.xls
Upvote 0