¯ Larry was discussing "Armed And Dangerous" with Roy J.. ®
WT> In other words, multiply the velocity by itself (V ) in FPS (for
WT> example 750 times 750) and then divide by the constant 450,240
WT> and then multiply by the projectile weight (PW) in grains (470
WT> grains to the ounce). The result will give you the impact force
WT> (E) in foot-pounds.
LG¯ Oooh, Wayne, can anyone play?
Sure!  Jump in!!!
LG¯ I prefer Edward Matunas' Optimum Game Weight calculation to the
LG¯ old FPE calculation, which basically gives you a number without
LG¯ any baseline for reference. In most laymen's terms, fpe has very
LG¯ little meaning.  Optimum Game Weight, OTOH, tells one *exactly*
LG¯ what one wants to know about the end results of a projectile.
I'm familiar with the above, and it's useful too as long as you are 
using playing with modern cartridges.  It seems to fall apart when 
you plug in heavy, slow-moving projetiles such as  those developed
for the Sharps, Ballard, and single-shot Winchesters of the last
quarter of the nineteenth century.  It's been fairly well proven 
that rounds like the .44-90-500 Sharps, or the .45-110 Winchester 
for example can take any game in North America (up to, and including
the big bears) cleanly.
LG¯ It is as follows:
LG¯  3     2              -12
LG¯ V  x Bw  x 1.5012 x 10
LG¯ --------------------------  = OGW
LG¯            10
LG¯ Where
LG¯ V = Velocity
LG¯ Bw = Projectile Weight
LG¯ IOW, the Optimum Game Weight for a 7 MM Rem. Mag with a 160
LG¯ grain bullet moving at 2900 fps would be 937 lbs. Elk medicine. 
LG¯ The .30-30 Winchester OTOH, with a 150 gr. bullet at 2300 fps,
LG¯ gives an OGW of 410 lbs. - good deer rifle, but *not* elk
LG¯ medicine. This is the kind of info I can *use*.
Yep!  I'd agree completely with the above, given both cartridges had
bullets properly designed for the job, and they were placed properly
in the target at an appropriate range.  Of course a lot of Elk have
been taken with the .30-30 too.  I'll admit that It's not my first
choice, and I would feel under-gunned unless I could make my shot at
fifty-yards, or less, and even then I'd much rather have something
along the lines of a .280 Rem, or .30-`06...
LG¯ So, if the velocity of the ball bearing was 400 fps (I think
LG¯ doable) and it weighed one and one quarter ounces, we would get
LG¯ the following Optimum Game Weight
                                        -11
LG¯ (64,000,000) x (299,072) x  (1.5012   )
LG¯ --------------------------------------- = 28.73 Lbs Optimum G W
LG¯                 10
LG¯ 'Course this one ain't perfect, either, because it assumes the
LG¯ project a non-frangible, expanding type. And it focuses on one
LG¯ shot quick stop capabilities. For instance, a .22 with a forty
LG¯ grain bullet at 1250 fp yeilds an OGW of only 4.7 lbs.,
Yep...  That formula falls apart when extremes on -=either=- side
are encountered...
Using foot-pounds the above comes out to a fairly respectable
209ft-lbs, which puts that ball bearing in the class same class as
the .455 Webley pistol cartridge, energy-wise, which may, or may not
give an accurate representation of its actual power since the weight
of the bearing is heavier, and the velocity is slower.
-=IF=- that ball bearing will penetrate deeply at a velocity of
400fps, it probably would be at LEAST as lethal as the .455, as a
round ball transfers more energy in a shorter period of time than a
conical ("bullet-shaped") projectile.  And, as you know, energy
transferral IS what terminal ballistics is all about...
LG¯ and we all know that the .22 will do better than that in the
LG¯ real world.
True.  Perhaps by a factor of TEN.  IF the right bullet is used, AND
that bullet is placed properly...
LG¯ However, it *does* tell us that the .22 is *best* suited to very
LG¯ small game, much better so, in my way of thinking than does the
LG¯ figure "138 fpe".
I suppose it depends on how you figure.  Neither formula is perfect,
but both offer a uniform way of comparing one cartridge to another
as long as you recognize the limitations of each.
You always have to take other things into consideration, such as
bullet design, construction, bullet placement, and type of game
being hunted...
LG¯     B U T......
LG¯          ...just for fun...
________________________________O/___________SNIP!_________
                                O\
LG¯ Thanks to Edward A. Matunas for the first half of this post...
LG¯ And to Calypso Louie for the second.
Funny!!!  Thanks for the laugh!!!!!!
                              \x/7
.45 ACP:  ONE-HUNDRED years of successful practical testing!
... Give the gift of high velocity lead.
---
 * ¯ NRA Life Member, 1972 ® *
---------------