Energy or bullet diameter most important?

[Frank in the Laurels]

...I would think that damage would be minimal with these big ole' war horses because of the jacket wall thicknesses even with the so-called soft points...not enough resistance or velocity to open then up all that violently in my opinion. They'd pass right through like a full metal jacket. Maybe someone has experience using them to tell us....

 

[memtb]

Terri Anne, "Need" had absolutely nothing to do with these or many other cartridges to hunt elk with!

It's not the size of the projectile…..but it's design/composition and velocity. If moderately heavy, solidly constructed bullets are used…..lost meat will be minimal, unless the shot is placed into the parts of the elk you should not target anyway! The same can be and has been said about many high velocity cartridges, from a 130 grain, frangible bullet from a 270 Win. (at close range) to many of the high velocity 30's and .338's!

I dare say that there will be far more bloodshot meat created by a high velocity 30 cal (let's use a 300 RUM as an example) placed in the same place as that of the aforementioned 45 cal or 50 cal rifles!

There has been a lot of game taken by 45 through 60 caliber black powder firearms, some making fairly respectable velocities…..with acceptable meat loss.

There used to be an old expression "you can eat right up to the hole"…..you can't say that about numerous high velocity, small to medium bore cartridges! memtb

 

[Maol]

Actually there was a school of thought that big, heavy, slow and accurate was the best. Buffalo rifles as an example, and the 30-30 wasn't a high speed flashy cartridge btw.