Energy or bullet diameter most important?

[Pdvdh]

Let's say you are hunting for elk sized and smaller game and are targeting 750 yards or less.

So many calibers out there, I just want to start with the right base and get proficient from there.

Do I enter this minefield? Elk-sized and smaller game includes a lot of different sized game animals. And 750 yards back to the muzzle also covers a lot of ground.

I believe you're primarily focused on the selection of an optimal caliber rifle for your needs. Since you included elk on out to 750 yards in your criteria, you should pay heed to Broz's experiences, and lean toward at least a 30 caliber. If it's just an occasional elk hunt and more deer-size game hunting, buy a 30 caliber magnum rifle and install a muzzle brake or suppressor on it.

Then when you hunt elk, research bullets further and select a good one. There are countless threads covering bullets and bullet preferences on this Forum. A single brand and style of bullet that covers all shot scenarios best is like searching for the pot of gold at the end of the rainbow. Some bullets are better for certain challenges, tasks, and situations, than others.

The reason this discussion so quickly turns to the best bullets for the job by very experienced hunters, is because bullet construction and performance plays such an overwhelming role in how quickly, consistently, and reliably, a game animal is killed. And even these bullet criteria can change, when attempting to address all of the various calibers and weights of bullets, the different sized game animals, across the spectrum of shot distances.

I still prefer the selection and use of two bullets. One bullet is for game animals that don't come equipped with teeth, fangs, and claws and the high propensity to maim or kill me - and is selected with the focus on long distance shots. This bullet has to shoot very accurately out of my rifle to make good hits at long distances.

The second bullet is for dangerous game and non-dangerous game at closer ranges. Say from the muzzle out to ~350yds. The primary focus on this bullet is reliability of terminal performance inside the animal. This is the bullet I'm betting my life on in short range encounters with bears or any other game animal that might try to kill me. This bullet is also a great performer on non-dangerous game out to ~350yds, killing quickly and normally with less bullet-caused meat damage than my long range bullet would at the closer ranges. Accuracy is a minor consideration when selecting this second bullet, because almost any decent bullet out of any decent rifle is accurate enough to kill deer-sized game at these closer ranges.

 

[IdahoCTD]

Here is my take, and while I haven't been around hundreds of kills like Broz, I have killed close to 40 elk myself and probably witnessed another 25. All shot with calibers from 25-06 to 416 Rem. in centerfires and many with muzzleloaders.

The very first elk I shot was with a 308 Baer with 165 partitions at 3350fps. I shot that elk 4 times before it dropped. The next year I was hunting with a 358STA, which was much better. So I built a 375-358STA a few years later and that was even better. I eventually built a 416 Remington. The 375 and 416 would just crush elk with complete pass through shots even in soft tissue like the lungs. I shot one bull in the lungs at 350yds with my 416 using 350 Speers Mag Tips at 2650fps MV. That was one of the fastest deaths I've seen on a animal that big, lights out.

After all that I got into muzzleloader hunting for quite a few years until the early 2000's. I built some smaller calibers and tried some of the same Berger's we used to blow rock chucks up with. I had used Bergers on animals smaller than elk for years, way back when there was only the yellow boxes and they didn't say target or hunting on them. After a buddy shot a antelope with a 30-338wm using 190 VLD's at over 600yds and it literally blew the heart out of the antelope, I was pretty turned off for a long time. The bullet made a huge hole on impact and the heart fell out of the chest cavity. The results from trying them on elk was pretty impressive, while not quite as good as the big guns like the 375's and 416's they were pretty close. I'm sure a 338 with 300's would be right there with the big guns, I've just never killed any elk with my 338's. I have killed a fair amount of elk now with 6.5's, 7mm's and 30's using Amax's and Bergers. Displacement is still king but the shock to the animals is way greater with fragile bullets.

 

[mechengr]

Do I enter this minefield? Elk-sized and smaller game includes a lot of different sized game animals. And 750 yards back to the muzzle also covers a lot of ground.

I believe you're primarily focused on the selection of an optimal caliber rifle for your needs. Since you included elk on out to 750 yards in your criteria, you should pay heed to Broz's experiences, and lean toward at least a 30 caliber. If it's just an occasional elk hunt and more deer-size game hunting, buy a 30 caliber magnum rifle and install a muzzle brake or suppressor on it.

Then when you hunt elk, research bullets further and select a good one. There are countless threads covering bullets and bullet preferences on this Forum. A single brand and style of bullet that covers all shot scenarios best is like searching for the pot of gold at the end of the rainbow. Some bullets are better for certain challenges, tasks, and situations, than others.

The reason this discussion so quickly turns to the best bullets for the job by very experienced hunters, is because bullet construction and performance plays such an overwhelming role in how quickly, consistently, and reliably, a game animal is killed. And even these bullet criteria can change, when attempting to address all of the various calibers and weights of bullets, the different sized game animals, across the spectrum of shot distances.

I still prefer the selection and use of two bullets. One bullet is for game animals that don't come equipped with teeth, fangs, and claws and the high propensity to maim or kill me - and is selected with the focus on long distance shots. This bullet has to shoot very accurately out of my rifle to make good hits at long distances.

The second bullet is for dangerous game and non-dangerous game at closer ranges. Say from the muzzle out to ~350yds. The primary focus on this bullet is reliability of terminal performance inside the animal. This is the bullet I'm betting my life on in short range encounters with bears or any other game animal that might try to kill me. This bullet is also a great performer on non-dangerous game out to ~350yds, killing quickly and normally with less bullet-caused meat damage than my long range bullet would at the closer ranges. Accuracy is a minor consideration when selecting this second bullet, because almost any decent bullet out of any decent rifle is accurate enough to kill deer-sized game at these closer ranges.

Best response I've seen yet. Especially the bolded bits! Thanks for chiming in.

After browsing the terminal ballistics research linked a few pages back, I noticed the same recurring theme: bullet construction is absolutely key. Tied in closely with bullet mass, impact velocity, and shot placement (can be dictated by bullet construction), these characteristics are indeed sufficient to "quantify" the energy (kinetic energy), as well as it's "quality" or "character" as described in the quote below, from section III. A. iii. of that ballistic research:

'The character of the work done by a certain quantity of kinetic energy will be dependent upon the mass, construction and velocity of the projectile.'

 

[North Idaho Hunter]

My question for rocky mountain would be, in layman's terms, how can you defend that terminally a copper bullet performs better on game then a frangible bullet?

I in no way shape or form am posting this video as an attack or in a mean way, I would just like to hear your opinion. This video made me steer clear of a solid bullet. Ive had great success over the many years on elk, with cup n core bullets, and recently berger.

Yes I know these are only goats, but they are thinned skin animals compared to deer and antelope, so I would say this is a fairly good comparison.

what say you?

(video starts at 1:00 minute in for guys wanting to skip through, watch the entire video for full disclosure)

[ame]https://youtu.be/NNYq-QeHEuw[/ame]

 

[220s]

It is pretty simple, it isn't energy that kills it poking holes through vital organs that results in death. The bigger the hole the quicker the kill.
How to make sure the hole goes all the way through the vital organs and how it can be made bigger is what we are really discussing.

Most bullet makers are well aware their bullets have limitations that is why quite a few list velocity windows that bullets are designed to perform within.
There isn't a bullet made that will perform from muzzle to 1000y, it is a matter of selecting one that is designed to perform at the impact velocity your going to have at the range your shooting.

 

[MagnumManiac]

These discussions ALWAYS have me chuckling.
Energy is a poor example of killing power, in my humble opinion.
I can propel a baseball at the same energy level as a 25 cal 115/120gr bullet, it is a poor killer, even poorer at wounding at whatever it hits.
A bullet without velocity is no better at killing as is a baseball.
Bullets kill by destroying tissue, blood vessels and organs. The energy transfer, as many call it, does very little, as it is transferred so quickly as to have very little time to do anything. Even shooting a water filled balloon, the reaction is so quick that the balloon and water barely move from where they were placed. Sure, the water reacts violently, it has to, it can't be compressed.
Also, the larger a bullet is, the LESS penetration it will have the FASTER it impacts at.
I find SD a far better calculator of what penetration a bullet MAY give, which goes hand in hand with it's construction.
I would have no qualms shooting an Elk within 600yrds with a 25 cal 115gr Partition from a 25-06, a 250 Savage would have me backing off to within 300yrds tops.
Obviously, the higher BC bullets are a better option, but, sometimes the higher BC bullets aren't up to the tasks we put them too.
Anyway, that's my take on these debates. Have NEVER seen energy paly a part in killing power, EVER.

Cheers.
gun)

 

[HammerB1]

I have kept my mouth shut on this whole thread. I understand both sides (frangible/not frangible) bullets. I have seen a lot of animals killed with a lot of bullets. I have also butchered a lot of the animals, meaning actually gutting, skinning, and actually butchering (cutting and rapping) the final product. NEVER liked to cut and wrap an animal killed with a frangible bullet. Spent more time cleaning blood shot from the meat than making good clean cuts.
I will NEVER shoot a frangible bullet again with my experience on both terminal performance and the loss of eatable meat. I have seen more than one whitetail deer shot in the shoulder with a quality bonded core bullet and it never reached the vitals. One in particular, my uncle shot it at 20 yards, 30-06-180 grain, took off like it had never been hit. I found and killed this buck 2 days later, after gutting and skinning him, the bullet never made it past the big shoulder bone. Fragmenting bullet never penetrated deep enough to get to vitals... Have also seen whitetail killed with fragmenting bullets and found fragments in hind quarter when shot in the shoulder.
Where I come from, Meat is the reason I hunted. Fed our family of 8 kids. After finding solid bullets, meat loss was way less....this is the big reason I will never shoot a fragmenting bullet again....
It is a very long read, but the Shooting Holes in the Wounded Theory tells how terminal performance actually works. I read it years ago, took me days but was worth the read. Explains when the bullet enters the animal, what actually happens.and a lot more.
Everyone needs to read it. I have heard to many stories of how they will use nothing but Bergers, all I can say is, they will eventually Fail... just using them as an example!!! but seems to be the big hype these days. The best performing bonded core bullets I have seen are the Swift Scirrocco's. They will actually retain 70-80% of there weight..
As far as bullet diameter making any difference, there is no replacement for displacement.
Brian

 

[FEENIX]

These discussions ALWAYS have me chuckling.
Energy is a poor example of killing power, in my humble opinion.
I can propel a baseball at the same energy level as a 25 cal 115/120gr bullet, it is a poor killer, even poorer at wounding at whatever it hits.
A bullet without velocity is no better at killing as is a baseball.
Bullets kill by destroying tissue, blood vessels and organs. The energy transfer, as many call it, does very little, as it is transferred so quickly as to have very little time to do anything. Even shooting a water filled balloon, the reaction is so quick that the balloon and water barely move from where they were placed. Sure, the water reacts violently, it has to, it can't be compressed.
Also, the larger a bullet is, the LESS penetration it will have the FASTER it impacts at.
I find SD a far better calculator of what penetration a bullet MAY give, which goes hand in hand with it's construction.
I would have no qualms shooting an Elk within 600yrds with a 25 cal 115gr Partition from a 25-06, a 250 Savage would have me backing off to within 300yrds tops.
Obviously, the higher BC bullets are a better option, but, sometimes the higher BC bullets aren't up to the tasks we put them too.
Anyway, that's my take on these debates. Have NEVER seen energy paly a part in killing power, EVER.

Cheers.
gun)

That's why I commented ...

With all due respect to everybody, IMHO, Hornady did an excellent job addressing this issue >>> HITS calculator - Hornady Manufacturing, Inc (also posted in #27)

 

[Broz]

A few interesting thing in this thread.

*Some only choose to believe science from reading.

*Some only choose to believe what actual field experience's has put in front of their eyes.

I am of the later. I have said before "No one bullet is perfect for all situations and impact velocities." Our personal needs and methods dictate what "Works Best". "Choose the bullet that suits your personal needs best. Know how it works, and use that knowledge to increase your percentage of success."
It is our responsibility as hunters. It is what I choose to do.

Jeff

 

[yobuck]

I suppose if I had 8 kids to feed and ruining meat was a major issue, id be hunting
from a blind and taking head shots.
But this is a long range hunting forum, and id just assume that's what most here would be interested in discussing.

 

[FEENIX]

A few interesting thing in this thread.

*Some only choose to believe science from reading.

*Some only choose to believe what actual field experience's has put in front of their eyes.

I am of the later. I have said before "No one bullet is perfect for all situations and impact velocities." Our personal needs and methods dictate what "Works Best". "Choose the bullet that suits your personal needs best. Know how it works, and use that knowledge to increase your percentage of success."
It is our responsibility as hunters. It is what I choose to do.

Jeff

Amen to that Jeff!

Oftentimes, human factors will complicate things unnecessarily, whether we accept it or not.

 

[RockyMtnMT]

My question for rocky mountain would be, in layman's terms, how can you defend that terminally a copper bullet performs better on game then a frangible bullet?

I in no way shape or form am posting this video as an attack or in a mean way, I would just like to hear your opinion. This video made me steer clear of a solid bullet. Ive had great success over the many years on elk, with cup n core bullets, and recently berger.

Yes I know these are only goats, but they are thinned skin animals compared to deer and antelope, so I would say this is a fairly good comparison.

what say you?

(video starts at 1:00 minute in for guys wanting to skip through, watch the entire video for full disclosure)

https://youtu.be/NNYq-QeHEuw

As hard as that is to watch, I did. Couple times. Couldn't understand him very well. I have shot lots of animals with lots of different kinds of bullets and I haven't had anything die that hard.

I finally figured out what he was shooting...Barnes 168g ttsx if I heard correctly. I ran some numbers on it with as much info as I could gather, and made some assumptions. Don't know his twist, which could play a roll in the bullet performance.

I would estimate his muzzle vel to be between 2600 and 2700fps. At 450y that would give an impact vel between 1800 and 1900fps. For our Hammer Bullets this would be considered a good vel for bullet performance and terminal performance.

The bullet that he held up when examining the ram did not show much deformation. I have a 166g .308 that looks pretty similar to that from low vel testing. It had an impact speed of 1200fps

I can not speak for any other mono's other than the ones that I personally used over the years worked for the most part quite well. I never had any impacts on game that slow nor did I ever use a Barnes. I don't know how old the Barnes in that video are, but I have heard that they are softer than they used to be. I can not validate that though.

As far as our bullets go, we took what we liked about others and improved on that through design and material. It has been an extensive quest to get our bullets to the point that they are now. Finding the proper alloy of copper has been much more difficult that we ever anticipated. We are there now. We have bullet performance at high velocity (no ceiling) and less than 1800fps (we recommend 1800fps as a min for hunting big game) on all of the Hammer Hunters. They are designed to retain 70%-80% (unless they are a short nosed bullet that will retain higher %) on impact.

In the end I can only speak to our Hammer Bullets. You will not see our bullets perform as in this video.

Steve

 

[RockyMtnMT]

I suppose if I had 8 kids to feed and ruining meat was a major issue, id be hunting
from a blind and taking head shots.
But this is a long range hunting forum, and id just assume that's what most here would be interested in discussing.

Are you saying that long range hunters do not care about meat damage? That long range hunters only care about the kill? Head shots are low percentage shots at best. Seen too many animals running with shot off faces only to face a long terrible death.

I can only assume that is not what you meant.

Steve

 

[RMulhern]

I'm fully convinced that when I 'poke' a big muley or whitetail behind the shoulder with my .308 Winchester from 800 yards that I've got meat on the table!

Ask me how I know!