Larger diameter bullets allow more room for error?

[Wedgy]

Go read Broz's experience with 7s and 30s on elk.

This was an interesting observation from Broz on the 7mm 195 killing elk from this thread;
https://www.longrangehunting.com/threads/7mm-sherman-short-mag-vs-300-win-mag.170582/page-2
---------------------------------------------------------------------

"But since I spent last fall killing elk like a mad man (70 elk taken total) and the 300 win with a 215 Hybrid @3035 and the 7-300with a 195 @2950 were the two rifles use most for the first of many kills, let me offer some real world long range hunting results. PS, both rifles loaded to max with equal pressure signs.

First, to the OP, you are cheating your 300 win with the 210 VLD. It is no doubt that the 195 is one of, if not the best bullets for external ballistics there is for a 7. So lets offer the same to the 300 win and feed it a 215 Hybrid with a much higher BC than the 210 VLD. It is only fair to compare hybrid ogive to hybrid ogive right? Plus the 215 Hybrid with its shorter bearing surface than the 210 VLD will actually get more velocity than a 210 with less powder. Been there done it over and over.

Now lets go kill elk. I mentioned the 300 win and the 7-300 were the two most used rifles during a good part of last season here. This included a pre-season management hunt, all season long. And a post-season management hunt. Some nights we even had these two rifles side by side with a different hunter on each rifle while we waited in the blind for the elk to enter the hay field. Here are the results. The 215 Hybrid will out kill the 195 in a way so obvious after about a 15 or 20 elk taken with the 7 I put it away. The 300 with a 215 , not once needed a second shot to dispatch the elk. The 7mm, several needed a second shot. Now, add in the real world possibility of a less than perfectly placed shot and the advantage in terminal performance of the 300 with a 215 becomes even more evident.

This I feel is a great comparison. Why?
1: Because all this info is real and happened.
2: Same parent case were used.
3: Same powder were used
4: Same barrel brand and length were used same number of lands and groves
5: Repeated results were studied with several witnesses
6: I personally field dressed about 50 elk and documented the terminal performance, wound channels and shot placements myself
7: Optimum bullet used for each chambering
8: Both with the same muzzle brakes and barrel contour.

Since I just happen to have both of these rifles in my ballistic app, with drops documented to a mile and confirmed. Lets compare the real world external ballistics.

7-300 win with 195 Berger @ 2950
800 yards 10 mph 3:00 wind
dial up 15.9 moa right 2.6 moa
impact velocity 2150 energy 2000

300 win with 215 Hybrid @ 3035
800 yards with 10 mph 3:00 wind
dial up 15.0 moa and right 2.8 moa
impact velocity 2141 energy 2188

7mm takes .2 moa less wind (one click)
300 has 1 moa less drop (4 clicks)
300 arrives with 188 lbs more energy.

I used 800 yards because the OP was about at that distance for his comparison. And 400 to 850 were where we took all of these elk. But if you want to go further the same trend in results will only magnify the advantages of each.

So I offer these documented results for those who are trying to decide between the 7 and the 30. It will always boil down to personal needs. But if elk are ever going to be in your freezer, under equal conditions, the 30 cal will out kill the 7 all day long."

 

[Varminator 911]

Wedgy that's great real world results. But I'd suggest that maybe just maybe it's not caliber but bullets that are being compared. According to many accounts the 215 just seems to be a real killer. The 230 308 Berger not so much. Maybe the 195 is like the 230, it's just not built quite the same as the 215. I think the 215 has a large hollow tip and the 230 not as much. Not sure that's the case but I think so. So bullet construction could be the difference and not caliber, energy, or velocity which really aren't that different. A large hollow tip vs small could easily result in more bullet expansion. If they all penetrate enough more expansion could easily account for the difference in on game performance.

 

[Alibiiv]

And for my two cents worth here, and I know that we are not talking elk/deer stuff, but..... here goes. I use outfitters to hunt bear out of. All of the outfitters will ask what we are hunting with. My response is 35 Whelens, .358 Winchester and 45-70. Response usually is a smile and that they are really good calibers. When asked about that response the outfitter's response, "Because we usually do not have to do too much tracking, and if we do there's really a good blood trail to follow. I have only had to track one bear that I shot with a 30-06 and a 180gr Barnes TSX. The shot was "supposed" to be a racking shot, just behind the ribs on the left and exit just in front of the right shoulder. The bear decided to move as I was squeezing the trigger, flipped him over and he spun like a top, then got up and ran off. It was near dark and we tracked him for over an hour before we found him about 150 yards away in blueberry bushes. The shot entered just in front of the left rear hind quarter, and exited just behind the front right shoulder; so it really didn't hit anything vital at all. The bullet did what it was supposed to do with a large entry and a very large exit hole, but....I didn't do my part. If I'd shot it with the Whelen would it have made any difference, I don't know, there certainly would have been a lot more muzzle energy going into that bear. I use 225gr Barnes TSX in the Whelen and the shot was close, so 180 TSX or a 225 TXS both going about the same muzzle velocity............. I've also shot caribou with a 300 WinMag, 180gr Nosler partition. With the first one that I shot it was a quartering shot from center chest to just behind the right ribs, @ about 80 yards, I had to really look for the exit hole.The second one was a thru and thru, just behind the shoulder, about the same distance 80 yards. With the first caribou I had to really look to find the exit hole. The second caribou had a relatively sizeable entry hole and a decent exit hole on the other side. Both animas were quartered out, so they were never field dressed so cannot comment on what damage was done on the inside. Both animals took only a couple of steps before they went down; DRT. Wedgy your post really seems to make the most sense to me. Thanks

 

[Mach 1]

Wedgy that's great real world results. But I'd suggest that maybe just maybe it's not caliber but bullets that are being compared. According to many accounts the 215 just seems to be a real killer. The 230 308 Berger not so much. Maybe the 195 is like the 230, it's just not built quite the same as the 215. I think the 215 has a large hollow tip and the 230 not as much. Not sure that's the case but I think so. So bullet construction could be the difference and not caliber, energy, or velocity which really aren't that different. A large hollow tip vs small could easily result in more bullet expansion. If they all penetrate enough more expansion could easily account for the difference in on game performance.

I shoot the 215 hybrids in my wsm rifles and can attest to its abilities. It's a good long range bullet for hunting or paper punching. I use the 215 in my 300 wsm 1000yrd bench gun.

 

[WildRose]

So I have heard this said multiple times on multiple threads. Do larger diameter bullets really allow more room for error?

I am genuinely curious what everybody's opinion is. Lets talk elk and deer calibers, no need to bring up the 50 BMG.

For example, do you guys believe bullets in 308 expands the kill zone in a game animal vs a 264 or 284?

I am not sure I buy into it...what are your thoughts?

*I edited this to take out specific cartridges and focus on bullet diameter. Trying to avoid cartridge bias

All else being equal they do when comparing similar bullets.

Now if you compare a heavy for caliber smaller diameter bullet to a light for caliber larger diameter bullet, or compare a high velocity small diameter bullet to a low velocity bigger diameter bullet things get skewed pretty quickly.

All things being equal however the larger diameter bullet has a greater surface area, greater energy, and holds it's velocity better down range.

 

[FIGJAM]

Now if you compare a heavy for caliber smaller diameter bullet to a light for caliber larger diameter bullet, or compare a high velocity small diameter bullet to a low velocity bigger diameter bullet things get skewed pretty quickly.

I think this is where I am looking for clarification. Energy seems to be a good indicator of how different cartridges match up.

 

[Alibiiv]

I think this is where I am looking for clarification. Energy seems to be a good indicator of how different cartridges match up.

I think that I mentioned a few variables, like bullet construction, weight and sectional density? Cannot compare a FMJ and a non-monolithic bullet for example. All the variables have to be the same for a true controlled comparison.

 

[BigGrizz]

Come on man - lets not default to shot placement and bullet selection argument. Thats a given...


Lots of people say that - but why? Why is a 140gr 264 bullet arriving at 1500 ft lbs of energy less ethical than a 200gr .308 bullet arriving with 1500 ft lbs?

Come on man- youve got to include the whole package in to your assesment.

And I'll step out of this thread like this. My everything rifle is a 338LM popping 300gr Accubonds. Anybody's 6.5 popgun aint in the 338's league and never will be. Period. So keep dreaming about small bores performing the same as big bores.

 

[WildRose]

I think this is where I am looking for clarification. Energy seems to be a good indicator of how different cartridges match up.

Energy is of course a big part of the equation but it also depends on how that energy is imparted on the target animal.

Solids tend to pass through with little damage.

Highly frangible bullets may or may not even penetrate into the body cavity and if they do rarely exit.

A bullet with good, consistent, controlled expansion will tend to pass through retaining most of its weight still doing massive internal damage and give you a good exit wound.

Others can be all over the map, some producing exit wounds so large and gory they sicken me.

In each case the energy is the same given the same bullet, same weight, same impact velocity etc but can have completely different effects.

After trying literally just about everything over the last forty years I'm firmy in the camp of consistent, controlled, reliable expansion with lots of internal damage and a good exit wound, approximately the size of a golf ball allowing for complete collapse of the lungs instantly and massive external blood loss as being the most efficient.

 

[FIGJAM]

Come on man- youve got to include the whole package in to your assesment.

And I'll step out of this thread like this. My everything rifle is a 338LM popping 300gr Accubonds. Anybody's 6.5 popgun aint in the 338's league and never will be. Period. So keep dreaming about small bores performing the same as big bores.

 

[Aoudad shooter1975]

Nothing, I mean nothing can beat good shot placement. There are small bore guys and guys that tend to lean to the heavier side. I know there are a ton of guys with a lot more experience than I have shooting game. I have taken a few whitetail deer.. shot some exotics here and there,and shot some big game. I will say the more I hunt, the more gun I usually take. I enjoy some of the banter on here--and love to see the guys say "well my 26 Nosler--will do xxx to an elk".. most either live in elk country or talk a good game on line. I will say I have been on a fair amount of guided hunts, and traveled a bit and hunted some different game in different places. I want to know would the same guy that uses his 6mm on elk..would he let a red deer walk the last day of a hunt he paid 12k for because his 240 weatherby might be marginal on a ranking shot... I will say my 338 bucks the wind better, and hits with more authority than my 7mm in most cases. I always see guy say--well you shoot a 6.5 better than a 338...well that is horse fodder to as one of my favorite guns to shoot is a 338. I try not to be too man-LY and most of my rifles we are muzzle brakes--as I shoot better with them...just some thoughts and some rifle lore I wanted to dispel.

My father did not like to leave the county, he liked to hunt and found a 257 Roberts fit his bill to a tee. He could shoot his rifle and knew it very well. He could hunt everyday, knew the country he was hunting and picked his shots (a lot of what I see on this board)..this is different hunting than a guy going on a once in a life time mule deer or elk hunt. I remember-- I was sitting one evening on a ridge Sheep hunting. Wind was whistling 30 mph and light and time were fading on the hunt--there were no sheep in front of me--but I was glad I had a 7mm mag and not a 243 if the shot arose. That's what I think we are talking about when I see "margin of error".

 

[WildRose]

Come on man- youve got to include the whole package in to your assesment.

And I'll step out of this thread like this. My everything rifle is a 338LM popping 300gr Accubonds. Anybody's 6.5 popgun aint in the 338's league and never will be. Period. So keep dreaming about small bores performing the same as big bores.

They will both kill animals just effectively within the ranges 99% of hunters are capable of shooting.

 

[FIGJAM]

Energy is of course a big part of the equation but it also depends on how that energy is imparted on the target animal.

Solids tend to pass through with little damage.

Highly frangible bullets may or may not even penetrate into the body cavity and if they do rarely exit.

A bullet with good, consistent, controlled expansion will tend to pass through retaining most of its weight still doing massive internal damage and give you a good exit wound.

Others can be all over the map, some producing exit wounds so large and gory they sicken me.

In each case the energy is the same given the same bullet, same weight, same impact velocity etc but can have completely different effects.

After trying literally just about everything over the last forty years I'm firmy in the camp of consistent, controlled, reliable expansion with lots of internal damage and a good exit wound, approximately the size of a golf ball allowing for complete collapse of the lungs instantly and massive external blood loss as being the most efficient.

I agree with everything you said - let me ask a follow-up question:

There is a 140gr 264 bullet that leaves the muzzle at 3300 fps and arrives at 500 yards with 2200 ft lbs of energy.

There is a 200 gr .308 bullet that leaves at 2850 but also arrives at 500 yards with 2200 ft lbs of energy.

Bullets are the same construction - something that will do exactly what you described above, reliable expansion, golf ball sized exit etc. will there be a material difference in performance, or the wound channel?

I am thinking no, but could be wrong.

 

[WildRose]

I agree with everything you said - let me ask a follow-up question:

There is a 140gr 264 bullet that leaves the muzzle at 3300 fps and arrives at 500 yards with 2200 ft lbs of energy.

There is a 200 gr .308 bullet that leaves at 2850 but also arrives at 500 yards with 2200 ft lbs of energy.

Bullets are the same construction - something that will do exactly what you described above, reliable expansion, golf ball sized exit etc. will there be a material difference in performance, or the wound channel?

I am thinking no, but could be wrong.

Probably nothing you could actually measure. There will be slightly more direct tissue disruption by the larger diameter bullet but you'd never be able to measure it.

If anything with a well placed heart/lung shot, you might see a difference of a step or two before the animal craters.