Hi all, I was reading up on OGW "Optimal Game Weight"
tables. does anyone now much about this "theory"
of matching rifle to game? I found it interesting going
thru the tables. I couldn't find out if the tables are
from the end of the muzzle, or 100 yards away.
Please inform

Snowdog...

These type of calculations are pretty simple and usually relate Foot Pounds of Energy delivered to certain types of animals. The target FPE for a given animal would be measured at the animal. For instance, one table that I have says 1000 to 1500 FPE for deer. No matter what the distance, that is the energy that you need to kill a deer. In other words a 30-30 would kill a deer out to 150 yards and a 444 Marlin could kill one out to 250 yards.

I think it involves a lot more than just the simple relationship of energy delivered to a particular animal. I believe what influences the kill more than anything is bullet construction and shot placement. Matching the bullet to the animal along with the knowledge of where to place that bullet is what matters to me.

Michael

Snowdog,

I assume you're referring to the OGW tables found in the 47th Edition of the Lyman Reloading Manual. This formula is one created and promoted by Edward A. Matunas, who for many years was one of the head honchos at Winchester, pushing their Latest and greatest go fast cartridges. This at a time when the whole ft/lbs energy hype was being pushed to its highest.

I think maybe this is Matunas' way of atoning for that blunder, I'm not sure. Looking at his tables, beginning on page 143, you'll notice that there are five columns of data listing optimum weight for the cartridge, based from the muzzle, 100, 200, 300, and 400 yard ranges.

It's an interesting idea, and I think comes much closer to the actual performance of each cartridge's potential than does the ft/lbs malarky. It all makes for fun reading, and speculation and ideas to toss around at hunting camp!

the replies are appreciated, thanks Yea its an
interesting theory. I didn't read up on it from
that book though, but its sounds like I need to
pick it up. I am getting a bit frustrated with all
the theories, big grners, small grners, subsonic,
slow. I don't throw out much in these talks
as I don't feel I am at all qualified to back up any opinion.
I am leaning towards the bigger
slower bullet theory though, I guess that because of
my circumstances though, as Deer and elk shots here
in Western Wa, are pretty short in yardage, <200.
never shot an elk over 100 yds away.

A sincere attempt to help hunters out by selecting appropriate cartridges for game.... but I don't think that there will ever be a 'formula' that can account for all critters under all conditions.

Can't blame Ed for trying.... however, when you have a theory that's just derived from emperical results, it's still only a theory and can be neither proven nor disproven.

Like Marshall said, keeps the deer camp conversation interesting!

The energy formula is criticized for squaring velocity and favouring high velocity. Taylor and Keith didn't square velocity in their formulas and used momentum instead of energy. On the other hand, Matunas cubes velocity in his formula, which emphasizes velocity even more than energy.

This fellow has some very strong opinions on the various formulas. A long but interesting read.
http://www.mindspring.com/~ulfhere/ballistics/wounding.html

Bye
Jack

OK. When you are reading the velocity is the most important formulas, remember one thing, when you get an X-ray you are dombarded with particles traveling at the speed of light. According to the velocity formulas, you should all be as flat as 3 day old road kills. On the other hand, I used to throw green walnuts at my brother and he is alive today, lots of diameter and mass, but slow. Velocity, bullet diameter and mass are important. But give me bullet diameter and mass up close. It you need more convencing, think about shooting a grizzly with a 223, 55 grain bullet. I would like your gun in your will.

Here's the Matunas OGW formula.
Velocity^3 X Bullet Weight^2 X 1.5E-12 = Maximum Game Weight for that load.
So, for a 180 grain bullet at 2700 f.p.s., and with the aid of a scientific calculator.
2700^3 X 180^2 X 1.5e-12 = 957 lb.

Bye
Jack

I haven't looked at that table for a long time but remember by his theory there was no rifle that was appropriate for large animals, i.e. Elephant.

Yes, that's the problem with all formulas; none of them scale outside of a small range of animal weights.