Quote:

---

I believe that a formula incorporating mass, terminal velocity and sectional density might yield a fair result.

---

Yep. I would like to see a primarily momentum based formula, somehow also incorporating SD as well as cross-sectional area, at least up to a point. It seems that after bullets get to a certain sheer weight, the latter factors may become less important; i.e. a 500 plus grain bullet of almost any reasonable caliber driven at 2000 or more fps is going to do some damage through living tissue, even on thick-skinned game. Bullet construction is obviously also important but probably impossible to incorporate into the measure. I guess you would have to assume you are comparing, say quality solids or hard-cast leads across cartridges. Expanding bullets add more variables.

I agree that Taylor's formula overemphasizes bullet diameter just as conventional ballistics measures overemphasize energy, but he definitely made a necessary point. If I were facing down a grizzly or buff with a bad attitude, I would rather be shooting a factory loaded pumpkin roller .45-70 405 gr with ME of 1600 ft-lb than a high velocity .220 SWIFT 55 gr with 1800 ft-lb! I also think that stopping power involves a lot more than just penetration. Penetration and a sufficient wound channel kill, but a "stopper" caliber also imparts a great deal of shock to the animal, transferring terminal energy while penetrating. This is why although a hot-loaded .45-70 may penetrate and eventually kill almost as well as a .470 NE, the latter is much better at halting a charging animal in its tracks.

Post Extras