Energy to kill a coyote

Originally Posted By: greydogShot a deer with a AIR GUN?????????????? Is that even legal in any state in the Union??? If bullet placement is not important then just use a 155MM Howitzer. You only need to be close then.

Actually, it IS legal to use some of the larger bore PCP airguns on deer (.45, .50). Google search the matter and you'll find any number of articles on the use of big-bore airguns on big game up to and even exceeding the size of deer. Heck, search this forum and you'll find hunters who hunt successfully with these types of airguns. Still, I take your point. The type of airgun my friend used is NOT allowed in any state to my knowledge. With that said, it has to be emphasized that he was NOT hunting deer. He was dispatching/mercy killing a deer that had ALREADY been hit by a car and beyond the repair of a vet. He did this with the only gun in his vehicle. Be that as it may, I brought it up to make a point. Yes, placement is important...the most important part of bringing an animal down cleanly. Re-read my post, that was emphasized over and over. Still, when talking about the killing/stopping power OF THE CARTRIDGE ITSELF, you're not talking about brain shots anymore than you are non-vital shots. ---- Mike
 
Last edited:
Energy doesn't kill. Wound channels, shock and blood loss do (i.e. damage). A combination of energy, bullet design and location of hit is used to create what kills. Choose poorly in any of these factors and you limit your ability. Is there a set number for acceptable energy? More than likely yes but all I know is what works all the time (think rocket launcher), what works most of the time (think centerfire with proper bullets) and what doesn't work most of the time (think rimfire).

CB
 

Mike,

I agree with what you have said.

Leon,

I've read the same stuff as you have posted as well. I've also read all the other as I sure you have. These guys have some great information based on science, lab test, examining actual bodies, as well as eye witness testimony. Their conclusions can't be dismissed.

With this said I have also seen what Mike is referring to as "energy transfer". I'm quite sure you have too and agree this is an important thing to have when you’re after quick humane kills.

To me this "energy transfer" is a obtained when you use a properly designed bullet, move it along at the proper velocity where it will perform as designed (within a certain velocity window), and then put this bullet in the proper place.

I've seen a fair amount of game shot, I would say many thousands. From squirrels all the way up to bear. I've seen lots of stuff shot with arrows of all kinds. I've seen animals also shot with just about every caliber under the sun. Some have been shot with what I would call inadequate calibers and some shot with cartridges that were designed for MUCH larger game. I've seen deer, and coyotes with their hearts shot out run well over 100 yards, and I've seen both shot through the lungs drop dead and never kick. After witnessing all these animals shot I've come to some pretty firm conclusions as to what works. As a result I also know what I won't use or recommend. These studies and experiences of writers is useful and while I agree with some of what they say, I also apply what I know.

So here is what I know and recommend to the OP as far as coyotes are concerned. Get you a good 22 centerfire from 223 up and shoot good 55 to 65 grain bullets that are designed for shooting game and this will work well. These cartridges create enough energy and have the right kind of projectile at the right velocity to reliably kill every coyote at reasonable ranges as long as you put it in his chest. Don't be drug into trying to shoot coyotes or any animal with the smallest caliber, or lightest bullet posibble. Remember you need penetration, and energy transfer for good clean kills. This is not an arrow that kills by rapid blood loss. This is and instrument that kills with energy transfer to the vital organs or disruption of the central nerve system.

The force that is often referred to in ballistics charts as "energy" is just a simple calculation using weight and velocity. While this is a somewhat useful way of comparing one cartridge to another is shouldn't be used and a measure of killing power or effectiveness ruler. As I have mentioned above there are other factors such as proper bullet weights, bullets construction, and their velocity which are very important and should also be considered.

For you guys that don't believe in Hydrostatic shock. You should watch what a 50 grain v-max leaving at about 3600 fps will do to a prairie dog. He is not nearly as resilient as the rubber ball used in Leon's analogy. I've witnessed hydrostatic shocks effect on large whitetails shot. In slow motion you can see the ripples over their entire body. When this happens you can also see the damage while cleaning them or by doing a post mortem. When you are using a good bullet and it fully penetrates or is found whole or close to it under the far skin this tells me that it only punched a narrow hole through the lungs. But yet the peripheral damage would suggest and at least to me prove that the shock wave caused by the energy transfer was the only thing that could have caused this. Arrow don't make jelly out of internal organs, good bullets at good velocities placed there do, thus the term hydrostatic shock.

Man I rambled on this post but it's late and I was interrupted a couple of times. I'm by no means and expert but I do have plenty of real word experience shooting animals and seeing animals shot. I haven't meant to step on anyone’s toes just sharing my thoughts.

Good Hunting, and God Bless,

Byron
 
Last edited:
Thanks Byron for an absolutely excellent post! Extremely informative and easily understood, the only part I take issue with is your not being an expert. If you aren't one, I'm sure I don't know who is! Experience is an invaluable thing to have and so is the ability to CLEARLY convey one's thoughts. This post does both! Hopefully, we'll see more of your writing in the future! --- God Bless, Mike
 
Last edited:
A .223 40gr Vmax at 500 yards has nearly identical ballistics as a 40gr .22magnum at 90 yards. Neither scenario is "ideal" but both will get the job done with good shot placement. I just bring that up because you'll often hear that a 223 doesn't have enough power at 500 yards, but it's about identical to a 22 mag at 90 yards and that's a well known effective shot.

Shot placement is the key. A lot of people THINK they know where the vitals are but they are mistaken. Many others THINK their super-duper caliber/gun will make up for their lack of marksmanship ability. If you put the bullet where it's supposed to go with any reasonable caliber/bullet, that dog is going down quick. No runnoffs, no spinning, no "splash" wounds on the shoulder blade, no guts trailing behind him or limbs flopping around like jello. It's not rocket science...
 
Originally Posted By: DiRTY DOGA .223 40gr Vmax at 500 yards has nearly identical ballistics as a 40gr .22magnum at 90 yards. Neither scenario is "ideal" but both will get the job done with good shot placement. I just bring that up because you'll often hear that a 223 doesn't have enough power at 500 yards, but it's about identical to a 22 mag at 90 yards and that's a well known effective shot.

Shot placement is the key. A lot of people THINK they know where the vitals are but they are mistaken. Many others THINK their super-duper caliber/gun will make up for their lack of marksmanship ability. If you put the bullet where it's supposed to go with any reasonable caliber/bullet, that dog is going down quick. No runnoffs, no spinning, no "splash" wounds on the shoulder blade, no guts trailing behind him or limbs flopping around like jello. It's not rocket science...

Dirty Dog, I'm glad you included the fact that neither scenario is ideal because that one statement alone is at the crux of the issue as far as I'm concerned. I haven't checked the 500 yard energy figures of the 40 grain .22 V-Max but what you say doesn't surprise me. Check out the book, 'Trigger Men' (Amazon.com, Borders, Barnes & Noble, etc.) and you'll see in it where our guys have found a bullet for their M4's (fairly short barreled 5.56 Nator...basically short barreled .223's) that works extremely well on insurgents out to a full 700 meters! I think it was a 68 grain bullet but don't hold me to that. They found that some bullets had stopping power problems while others had stability shortcomings. Anyway, leave it to our guys in uniform to find a better mouse trap!
I think of the .223, like the .17 Remington, to be basically a 300 yard cartridge FOR MOST HUNTERS. I fully realize that it can cleanly kill MUCH, MUCH farther than 300 yards but when you look at the trajectory and wind-drift figures, 300 yards is a good place to consider MAX. range. Different people might feel different about that and that's okay. The way I see it, out to 300 yards BOTH trajectory and wind-drift are manageable and (relatively) easy to manage. Beyond 300 yards and things start getting dicey fast, real fast. Most hunters are going to problem PLACING the bullet properly much beyond that point (300 yards) assuming they even know where to place it to begin with. So yeah, the .223 can take coyotes to 500 and further yards, not to mention insurgents out to 700 meters...but I believe 300 is much more viable for the vast majority of us (including myself). Be that as it may, I appreciate your reply Dirty Dog! Btw, are you the guy who posted those excellent diagrams of coyote anatomy??? If so, let me take the time to thank you! Those were EXTREMELY enlightening and helpful! --- Mike
 
Beyond 300 yards with ANY caliber things start to get dicey. The effects of wind and gravity are not unique to the 223 or the 17 Rem. If you can't make the correct adjustments on a 223, you're not going to be able to do it on a 308 either, (the ballistics aren't that disimilar) and nobody's going to argue the 308 isn't enough gun at 500 yards!

The limiting factor (within reason) is not caliber, nor energy, nor wind drift. The limiting factor is the marksmanship ability of the shooter. That's where many get caught up in the bigger n badder caliber debates. A poor shot with a 50BMG will still kill a coyote. So folks buy big guns hoping to make up for inaccuracy. Most people do not care much about accuracy (ever been to a public range the week before deer season?) or they just lack the knowledge and ability to make accurate shots. Then gut shoot a coyote and tell tales about how tuff coyotes are. Um, that's not where the heart is.
 
DiRTY DOG think you are right on that the limiting factor is marksmanship for many coyote hunters. Your motto( Aim small miss small ) is to the same point. What do you do to accomplish this in the field while coyote hunting, what I call real world. I think this would be good for all of us to know, that would like to improve our shot placement.
 
Practice. Most people don't, plain and simple. Decide ahead of time EXACTLY where you're going to place your shot, don't wait until the coyote shows up to make that decision. Make the shot happen, or make plan B happen. Visualize the shot. I'm used to shootin matches, so mentally every single round I fire is the most important one. Stuff like that. Know your equipment.
 
Originally Posted By: DiRTY DOGBeyond 300 yards with ANY caliber things start to get dicey. The effects of wind and gravity are not unique to the 223 or the 17 Rem. If you can't make the correct adjustments on a 223, you're not going to be able to do it on a 308 either, (the ballistics aren't that disimilar) and nobody's going to argue the 308 isn't enough gun at 500 yards!

The limiting factor (within reason) is not caliber, nor energy, nor wind drift. The limiting factor is the marksmanship ability of the shooter. That's where many get caught up in the bigger n badder caliber debates. A poor shot with a 50BMG will still kill a coyote. So folks buy big guns hoping to make up for inaccuracy. Most people do not care much about accuracy (ever been to a public range the week before deer season?) or they just lack the knowledge and ability to make accurate shots. Then gut shoot a coyote and tell tales about how tuff coyotes are. Um, that's not where the heart is.

Dirty Dog, if you're advocating strict maximum range limits (say 300 yards), I'm right there with you in agreement. I do believe that some cartridges make hitting a bit easier at the further ranges, everything else being equal. I realize that a .223, even a .17 with the right heavy bullets, can do much better than 300 yards when shot by those who really KNOW how to shoot long-range. Most of us think we do but really don't. And yes, practice is definitely the number 1 key factor that makes and breaks all of us. Can't argue with that at all. The way I see it, the .223 and .17 make hitting relatively easy out to about 300 yards and just like you said, things get dicey PAST 300 yards with just about anything. To me, that puts the .223 and .17 in the 300 yard category for MOST OF US who are reading this (including myself). Past 300 yards, there are cartridges with much flatter trajectories and better wind-drift. For those who can make shots on a regular basis at 400-500 yards with those guns, well, they KNOW who they are! Even those guys would be better off IMO with a cartridge shot flatter and produced less wind-drift. Good post Dirty Dog! --- Mike
 
Originally Posted By: DiRTY DOGPractice. Most people don't, plain and simple. Decide ahead of time EXACTLY where you're going to place your shot, don't wait until the coyote shows up to make that decision. Make the shot happen, or make plan B happen. Visualize the shot. I'm used to shootin matches, so mentally every single round I fire is the most important one. Stuff like that. Know your equipment.

This is sage advice! --- Mike
 
Originally Posted By: NM LeonYou need enough energy to cause proper penetration of the bullet type used and enough energy to cause the bullet to perform as designed (fragment, expand/mushroom, etc.).

That has absolutely nothing to do with "hydrostatic shock, a pressure wave caused by the transfer of energy". The only place that has any validity is (possibly) with a shot to the liver (basically a loose/fragile bag of blood).

You are right though, I didn't cite any research. I apologize. Try the link below. That one should be all you need to start you on the road to enlightenment. If you are still curious when finished, do a search for some of the references at the end of it.

By the way, M.L. Fackler, M.D. is actually Colonel M.L. Fackler, M.D., the Director of the Letterman Army Institute of Research, Division of Military Trauma Research, Presidio of San Francisco.

He headed complete ballistics and forensic labs, had the doctors, physicists, and ballistics engineers to staff them, and the budget to fund the research. His teams spent many years studying not only human corpses (autopsies) and animal carcasses (necropsies) but ballistic gelatin and what nobody else had ever done, high speed x-rays of living animal flesh as bullets were damaging it. While their focus was military, they studied a wide variety of different types of projectiles from spherical to fragmenting to FMJ to VLD, etc.

In the paper below (only one of many) he also addresses some of the consequences of the common misconceptions about wound (terminal) ballistics, which has not only included poor weapons design parameters, but also (obviously) the State of Illinois' hunting regs.

http://rkba.org/research/fackler/wrong.html

Attempts to explain wound ballistics (the study of effects on the body produced by penetrating projectiles) have succeeded in mystifying it. Fallacious research by those with little grasp of the fundamentals has been perpetuated by editors, reviewers, and other investigators with no better grasp of the subject. This report explains the projectile-tissue interaction and presents data showing the location of tissue disrupted by various projectiles. These tissue disruption data are presented in the form of wound profiles. The major misconceptions perpetuated in the field are listed, analyzed, and their errors exposed using wound profiles and other known data. The more serious consequences of these misconceptions are discussed. Failure in adhering to the basic precepts of scientific method is the common denominator in all of the listed misconceptions....

MAJOR MISCONCEPTIONS
1. Idolatry of Velocity:...
2. Exaggeration of Temporary Cavity Size, Pressure, and Effect:....
3. Assumption of Bullet "Tumbling" in Flight:....
4. Presumption of "Kinetic Energy Deposit" to Be a Mechanism of Wounding:....
Many body tissues (muscle, skin, bowel wall, lung) are soft and flexible--the physical characteristics of a good shock absorber. Drop a raw egg onto a cement floor from a height of 2 m; then drop a rubber ball of the same mass from the same height. The kinetic energy exchange in both dropped objects was the same at the moment of impact. Compare the difference in effect; the egg breaks while the ball rebounds undamaged. Most living animal soft tissue has a consistency much closer to that of the rubber ball than to that of the brittle egg shell. This simple experiment demonstrates the fallacy in the common assumption that all kinetic energy "deposited" in the body does damage....

Thank you for that it was very interesting.

 
Back
Top