Great discussion.

[Turpentine21]

My longest elk kill track job, was a perfect 10 ring pass through with a razor sharp Xodus. BUT, he was spooked. Had winded me and was bolting, when a cow call made him hesitate. He expired in 15 to 20 seconds. That's a long run through thick timber.

Every other one with my bow was calm and dead in 3-4 seconds with no tracking needed.

Only one with a rifle. Broke both shoulders. No tracking. If I rifle hunt elk again, that will be my goal.

Way back in they day we used string trackers on arrows when we hunted the swamp and real thick places. The deer would run three to four times as far when that setup was used. We figured that out pretty quick and threw those things in the trash. I guess they could feel that string and felt like they couldn't get away from it. The adrenaline from that just kept them going. That was my theory anyway.

 

[Phil Rizzo]

When you are about half colorblind the shoulder becomes a great aiming point.
Exit or no exit, he's not going to be far with only rear wheel drive.
I normally shoot half way up, and get lungs along with the rest.
Another reason Accubonds serve me well. They are sorta like mono's are described, to Me.
More velocity = more impressive results

 

[Korhil78]

I used to lug around a 14 lb 338 Lapua shooting a 300 Gr Berger. I shot a bull at 760 yards with it one time. Had to put three shots in it before it finally fell. First shot was behind the shoulder, second shot was in the butt as he turned (that one really anchored him), and the third shot was right in the shoulder as he presented another broadside shot. The first bullet was a complete pass through that didn't open up much which could have been the culprit of preventing a quicker kill.

I got tired of lugging that gun around and went to 7mm rifles that weight around 9 lbs. 9-10 lb rifles seems to be the sweet spot for me in maintaining good accuracy at distance.

Since, I have killed one elk, an antelope, and an oryx with the 7mm (not a lot of tags for me lol)

My son has shot 5 elk and has an antelope tag this year. All shot with a 7mm rifle.

I had been with hunters also using a 7mm for multiple elk and one oryx. The shooter on the oryx was a terrible shot and he had to shoot 6 times to kill it. I don't think a larger caliber rifle would have helped him but actually made it worse for him.

I wouldn't use a 6mm creedmoor on elk but if someone else does, whatever haha. I think a lot of it comes down to the person who said.."don't suck". Knowing your rifles and your capabilities will go a long ways.

 

[Turpentine21]

When you are about half colorblind the shoulder becomes a great aiming point.
Exit or no exit, he's not going to be far with only rear wheel drive.
I normally shoot half way up, and get lungs along with the rest.
Another reason Accubonds serve me well. They are sorta like mono's are described, to Me.
More velocity = more impressive results

Or half blind in general. Especially in dim light.
It's interesting that when I shoot animals at longer distances the ELDM really comes into its own and penetrates very well. I shot a deer at 425 yards last week with my 65-06 with 147 ELDM. The deer lurched forward just as the trigger broke. The bullet went broadside through the hams. Centered and shattered bone in both hams and made about a 3" exit. Evidently got the femoral because she was done in no time at all. I also like the way the Accubonds from my 308 kill as well. They are an excellent bullet.

 

[Lou270]

I can see your viewpoint as well Lou!

I don't just blindly believe people either. Actually quite the opposite. I distrust people a lot lol.

But I was intrigued enough to do some testing. And so far, all of my heavy for caliber ELDM and Berger kills have performed exactly how he's described, and VERY similar to seen in ballistics gel. I also have the photos and videos for most of them to prove it.

I just don't think what he's saying is very controversial. A small, heavy for caliber, frangible bullet, with a 2000fps impact velocity, creates a wound channel large enough to kill anything in North America. That is absolutely true, and have been proven.

Now it's totally a personal choice, on how small is too small for someone to feel comfortable, and how small is too small to have no error of forgiveness in shot placement in comparison to your hunting style and ranges.

I like the ability to shoot relatively long ranges if that's the only opportunity, so I'm sticking with the big 7mm's for my back country hunts. Great BC for bucking wind, decently large wound channel for some shot placement forgiveness with a bad wind call, and still pretty marginal recoil.


But I also took my 6mm for a ranch style hunt where I knew getting to 5-600 yards wouldn't be a problem. The 6mm killed no differently than the 7mm. Dead in 5 yards.

I don't disagree with much. What I will say is nothing is new. High SD, long heavy for caliber thin jacketed bullets are what killed the big bores at the beginning of the 20th century. They perform very well at low impact velocities (these cartridges had mv 2-2400ish fps - think 6.5x54/156, 7x57/175, 30-30/160, 30/40 220, etc) Problems can and do arise when impact at high velocity as there is no means to control expansion. This was found with early fast rounds like the 30-06 and later 270 and 300 hh among others came along and bullet construction started changing and controlled expansion bullets introduced. This is also why bullet manufacturers will not recommend these bullets for hunting despite this false claim it is marketing or some conspiracy or somebody knows something they don't. There is plenty of information on history of bullets and ammo out there if you look for it. So just like a min impact velocity for expansion, it is important to pay attention to max impact velocity for bullet design

Lou

 

[Darryle]

The proponents of the 77gr TMK/223 all want to point to how effective the combination works. But, what I alway hear and see are lots of damaged bloodshot meat, that tells me that the animal bled out and you lost some meat. A big fat heavy bullet that hits like Mike Tyson and turns out the lights, puts one fat little finger sized hole in the onside and a slightly bigger hole on the offside does very little visible damage.

I too have forgotten that, the biggest deer of my entire life was killed with a 450 Marlin single shot and a Hornady 350gr flat point Interbond, passed over the heart and lungs, passed under the trachea and you could plug both holes with a finger. The guys at the processor even mentioned how little damage there was to the meat even after passing thru the upper part of the shoulder on both sides.

Necropsy wasn't even on my radar 25yrs ago, not like it is today with readily available digital imaging, we decided how effective a bullet or cartridge was by how fast an animal went down and how little damaged meat there was. Terms like terminal damage and temporary and permanent cavity were not used often back then, or at least I don't recall hearing them.

I also understand how vastly different people hunt in various regions of the country/world. I hunted for years with an old Winchester 70 30'06 and a Sears/Ted Williams 54 30'06 and 180gr SPs. I to have migrated to smaller, sleeker and supposedly highly efficient bullets, whether they are effective or not depends on me and how I use them.

I completely agree that a person should use a cartridge that they shoot effectively regardless of my opinion of it.

 

[Turpentine21]

When I started hunting with a rifle the only person I knew that used a rifle for deer was my uncle. We all hunted with dogs back then and sitting in a tree was called Buzzard hunting. I still love a good dog drive and the social anspects of it. All my uncle used was a 270 with 100 grain softpoints. So, that's what I did. Man they made a big hole. But the deer all ran 25-100 yards when shot behind the shoulder. There was no exit and generally little blood. I figured there had to be a better way. Enter the 130 Corlokt and the shoulder shot. That cut adventures in night time blood trailing way down. You shot the deer and went and got the pickup instead of the flashlight. I still like that combo from 0-300 yards. But the bullets of today have come a long way and the longer sleeker bullets do offer some advantages. Particularly if you shoot longer shots. The penetration is good as well. But I don't see me trophy hunting with a 22 caliber. I'll leave that to other folks.

 

[dogz]

I bet I can find close to 100 videos.

Of course no one shares poor shots and poor performances. But nobody does that with larger cartridges either lol. And there's probably more of those, because more people shoot bigger cartridges and bullets for elk.

These videos just show what is actually capable with a proper bullet and proper shot placement, caliber aside.

Good points, I've been around a fair bit of video work since the late 80's. I always say beware the video that just shows the shot and doesn't follow the critter till it's down and out for sure! Lots of interesting things that happen that don't end up on video's and tv shows

 

[fta0303]

A smashed finger doesn't bleed near as much as a cleanly sliced finger, a fact I learned the hard way.

Index cut by a Muzzy, middle finger smashed almost off between a piece of railroad iron and a Woods offset plow frame. Still cannot feel the tip of the middle finger. Required surgery and a couple of pins to fix correctly, the index finger took twice as many stitches to close and stop the bleeding, index healed faster.

Stupid games win stupid prizes

View attachment 581218

My Father was a steamfitter, building ships during WWII and building some of the Hanford reactor and processing plants after. Over his life, he smashed the tip of every finger and both thumbs. Most, lifting a length of big pipe with another guy who didn't believe in communicating on the lift, who dropped it prematurely, left Dad to absorb the crush and vibration. I've seen him drain blood out of his glove a couple of times.

 

[fta0303]

I think people can make their own decisions with the info provided. If you suck at shooting and are going to hunt anyways, it's more important to shoot something you can
actually manage. Because the right bullet is going to kill if you put it in the right spot. And it's easier to put in the right spot if you aren't scared of the recoil and have the ability to practice more.

If you shoot 1000 rounds of Lapua every year and have no issues maintaining great accuracy and shot placement in field conditions and awkward positions, the bigger the better.

There's a spectrum of shooters, and a spectrum of calibers. The most important part is putting a proper bullet in a proper spot. A huge bullet in a poor spot is far worse than a small, but still effective bullet in a perfect spot.

If a guy really sucks at shooting and goes hunting anyway, I want to see him carrying a 600 Nitro Express smoothbore. That way, he'll never hit what he's shooting at, miss it a country mile, and the random flight path from the smooth bore will ensure side-of-a-barn accuracy. This guy will seldom hit the animal, which will have time then to trot off. A big rifle = big flinch in a bad shooter.

 

[Grey Goast]

As I read through these pages of different view's I see that each one of you from your view point are right. I know each one of my rifle's and what they will do with the right shot placement and range. if my rifle let say good out to 600 yards does not mean I will take a shot at 600 yards. If at all I would prefer to take it at 300 yards but even then if the target does not present a good side view for me at 300 or 600 yards I let them walk on. that's just me. It did not matter if the rifle was a 6mm arc or a 6.5 Creedmoor or a 7prc or a 300 win Mag because I know each one of my rifles and there loads. but I also know ethic's play a role in my life I don't hunt to have a trophy for my wall just the meat. I don't believe in wasting good meat or food.

 

[Pdvdh]

There's no argument that an 8" wound channel has the POTENTIAL to kill faster than a 4" wound channel. But there are endless comparisons that prove that different as well. For example, bulls getting shot with arrows and dying in seconds, and bulls getting shot 3 times with big magnums before they finally topple over.

As has been pointed out, comparison of cutting arrow kills is meaningless and irrelevant, in any discussion of bullet caused death.

A razor can kill with very little kenetic energy propelling it. You fall on an arrow shaft and drive sharp steel blades into your lungs, you die. Not so with a bullet.

 

[Huntnful]

As has been pointed out, comparison of cutting arrow kills is meaningless and irrelevant, in any discussion of bullet caused death.

A razor can kill with very little kenetic energy propelling it. You fall on an arrow shaft and drive sharp steel blades into your lungs, you die. Not so with a bullet.

IMO it's not meaningless or irrelevant what so ever. An arrow simply causes FAR LESS damage than a bullet, and kills extremely effectively. You don't fall on bullets. They hit you at 3000fps. That's a ridiculous statement to even make a comparison like that between falling on an arrow and falling on a bullet???

No matter how it causes it. It is so unrealistic to say that the slice of the blades creates some magical wound that for some reason a bullet can't compare to in any way and that you can't compare their effectiveness in any aspects.

All I'm saying is an arrow kills extremely effectively. 1" fixed blades kill thousands of animals. That wound is 1" x 1/8" slice. Literally zero damage outside that area.

A proper, small caliber bullet is 4" around of shredded tissue. So roughly 32X more damage in the same area. Thinking that that arrow is more lethal because it made a cut, vs. a literal 4" tunnel of decimated tissue is just so absurd to me. I just can't fathom the thinking honestly.

Exit from an arrow

Exit from a bullet

In what world is the first picture more lethal because it has clean cuts?

No one in their right mind would rather get shot in the chest with a 6mm frangible bullet, than stabbed 1 time with a 1" knife.

 

[Pdvdh]

Maybe you're not thinking...

Mount a bullet on the front of your arrow. Then tell us how arrow kills relate in any way, to rifle-launched bullet kills.