Is a .30 caliber airgun REALLY deadlier than a .25?
- Thread starter Baker Airguns
- Start date
Really ?
So we get a .22 shooting @ 30 FPE and vwe compare it to a .50 shooting @ 30 FPE and I can tell you the .22 will win that kind of test by far,......so now the .22 is more lethal then a .50 ..........is that more apples to apples ?
Upvote 0
You are just being silly. Deadly as defined by the military, Alphabet org, etc has penetration as part of the equation. I would assume they have some reason behind it.Really ?
So we get a .22 shooting @ 30 FPE and vwe compare it to a .50 shooting @ 30 FPE and I can tell you the .22 will win that kind of test by far,......so now the .22 is more lethal then a .50 ..........is that more apples to apples ?
Upvote 0
Well yeah so the .22 is way deadlier then a .50
,...still that test as is it's deeply flawed and draws no real conclusions, just one guy with bias that tweeked the test to make it give the results that he wanted to push.....useless.
Upvote 0
So .177 is most deadly.lol, it needs the least FPE to penetrate a balloon filling helium tank. 32 fpe, .177 slug 21g
Last edited:
Upvote 0
But who would tune their 30 caliber gun to shoot 843 fps?? In their bone stock form, FX Impacts shoot around 880 right from the factory.
Upvote 0
If penetration is the key factor then a 33gr .22 Jumbo beast at 880 would be the ticket. BC and SD checked.
Upvote 0
All of the above are correct,
with the parameters used on the video if transferred to other calibers will eventually have the .177 as the deadliest caliber.
That is why that test is irrelevant.
with the parameters used on the video if transferred to other calibers will eventually have the .177 as the deadliest caliber.
That is why that test is irrelevant.
Upvote 0
instead of opinions and backyard experiments let’s get down to the science of penetration.
Best way to determine or compare the penetration capability of projectiles is the cross section density. Basically mass divided by the cross section area. Another way to look at it is wound you rather have a thumb or a thumb tag tip pushed into your palm at equal force.
Best way to determine or compare the penetration capability of projectiles is the cross section density. Basically mass divided by the cross section area. Another way to look at it is wound you rather have a thumb or a thumb tag tip pushed into your palm at equal force.
Last edited:
Upvote 0
Upvote 0
The underlying premise of this experiment centered on a very specific scenario where a person found their .30 cal inadequate to penetrate the skull of a hog.
To appreciate how unique this problem is, please consider the nature of a mature hog's skull...
For example, from https://www.texaskayakfisherman.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=154446
"This is a cross section of a hogs skull sawed in half. You can see the thickness of the skull and the small size of the actual brain. The skull is 1 1/4" thick and slanted."
So yes, if your quarry is a flesh-wrapped M1 Abrams, you would do well to concern yourself with maximizing penetration. But in the vast majority of hunting and pest control scenarios we face, achieving sufficient penetration is not an issue and the larger caliber will produce more damage and kill more effectively.
To appreciate how unique this problem is, please consider the nature of a mature hog's skull...
For example, from https://www.texaskayakfisherman.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=154446
"This is a cross section of a hogs skull sawed in half. You can see the thickness of the skull and the small size of the actual brain. The skull is 1 1/4" thick and slanted."
So yes, if your quarry is a flesh-wrapped M1 Abrams, you would do well to concern yourself with maximizing penetration. But in the vast majority of hunting and pest control scenarios we face, achieving sufficient penetration is not an issue and the larger caliber will produce more damage and kill more effectively.
Upvote 0
Yes and no!. It still depends on what power is behind and abillity to penetrate. Best example on this: How deadly is a headshot with a 5inch snowball thrown by human hand on wild boar?...
Upvote 0
I think the reality is going to be that as long as you have adequate penetration to the vitals fpe is going to be irrelevant. But fpe will come into play when the vitals are missed and blood loss becomes the cause of death.
Upvote 0
This comparison is like comparing the ballistics of a .257 WBY MAG to a .30-06 when you know that a .300 WBY MAG exists. Pointless and misleading.
And, .257 WBY MAG is my favorite round but I'm not going to claim it's deadlier than a .300 WBY MAG.
As far as deadly, vitals, etc. shock effect matters as much or more than penetration.
And, .257 WBY MAG is my favorite round but I'm not going to claim it's deadlier than a .300 WBY MAG.
As far as deadly, vitals, etc. shock effect matters as much or more than penetration.
Upvote 0
Deadliness actually starts with the proper projectile to get you enough penetration no matter the caliber.
Upvote 0
Everyone has an opinion...here is mine: It's a no brainer as to the difference a .177 has between a .30 pellet. Kinetic energy is the factor on damage by any pellet.BUT the term Deadliest....is moot. Dead is dead, so you killed something with a .177 but REALLY killed it with a .30?
Dead is dead and damage is damage, two totally different things. But it's interesting reading. IF a pellet, accurately shot, doesn't have enough kinetic energy to penetrate, you may not have a kill...its not a magic formula.Shooting the .30 will do more damage because of its kinetic energy/size. But IF the .177 pellet did it's job, shooting a .30 wouldn't kill it deader.
SHOT PLACEMENT+PENETRATION= DEAD..
SIZE+KINETIC ENERGY=DAMAGE
Dead is dead and damage is damage, two totally different things. But it's interesting reading. IF a pellet, accurately shot, doesn't have enough kinetic energy to penetrate, you may not have a kill...its not a magic formula.Shooting the .30 will do more damage because of its kinetic energy/size. But IF the .177 pellet did it's job, shooting a .30 wouldn't kill it deader.SHOT PLACEMENT+PENETRATION= DEAD..
SIZE+KINETIC ENERGY=DAMAGE
Upvote 0