[quoteIn a perfect circumstance, yes. But that statement alone is like a foundation built on sand. Here's a similar argument: Are we to believe that a 1 ounce shotgun slug will not put any deer down if shot within, say 125 yards? You'd think with that much lead, a big IOWA buck would go down 100% of the time. I lived and hunted there for 5 seasons. 4/5 years I killed a buck (wih my bow) that had a shotgun slug embedded in the shoulder, neck, rump. A friend of mine shot a nice buck with his 44 Rem mag pistol at 11 steps. He found 2 shotgun lead slugs in it. It had 2 abcessess from old infections.
In one sense, I am comparing shotgun slugs to MK bullets, short range to long range, but the concept is the same. Do they kill based on weight? ( which you brought up).
MK for long range, yes. However, there are always the closer shots than expected. I still live in the midwest and only a shotgun is permitted for deer unless you use a ML. I wouldn't dream of hunting a deer with a shotgun.
I have personally had 100% success with Mk on deer, even as close as 35 yards. But the argument that I read isn't really whether or not the MK will kill, but instead, how fast will it anchor the animal and what is the track record for any given distance.
Starting to sound like AR? Why? Advice was requested regarding bullets and elk and members are responding....nothing wrong with posting opinions based on experience. Obviously this holds true for us shooters that do indeed use MK for game.
Of the three bullets, TSX, AB, and MK, which do you believe has the highest probability of "failure" at any given distance? Failure, meaning, not anchoring the game within a few yards from where hit, since we've already established that all 3 will kill.
[/ QUOTE ]
Nothing puts deer down 100% of the time. Are you saying that a 1 ounce slug doesnt kill whitetails? Are you saying that a 440gr lead bullet traveling 1600fps will be stopped by a deer? You are aware that quite a few bear guides use that exact combination for dangerous bears, right? There's not a whole lot of small armes that can match the terminal ballistics of shotgun slugs.
No, I never said bullets kill by weight. They kill by tissue destruction and/or hemoraging. A 220gr matchking impacting at 3,000fps creates quite a bit of tissue damage.
dakor, never asked which will drop an elk faster. But if you want to go that way, not that you can predict what an animal will do when shot, (unless you interupt the CNS), as thats based on alot of varibles, the 220gr MK will probably drop an elk faster then the other two, due to more tissue destruction. Though I wouldnt hold my breath for any of them to. As far as track records go I tried to point it out that your bad expierences with MK's, was limited to two deer, shot at close range, with one caliber and light bullet. Mine is based on multible calibers, multible weights, distances from 3-1400yds, and several, several animals. Not that your expierences are any less valuable then mine, there not, it just seems that you might be lacking enough samples to get an accurate statistical average.
On the AR comment, just noticed quite a few posts lately giving bad info, especially in regards to match bullets, based mostly out of ignorance. It was not directed at you, or anyone in particular.
Of the three bullets, the TSX, AB, or SMK, that we are discussing. The TSX. All of them will preform at closer ranger, well enough, however the farther you go out, the Barnes gets worse and worse. At 700yds I doubt very likely that it will expand much, if at all.
Failure doesnt have anything to do with not anchoring game withen a few feet of where hit. How did you come up with that? If thats the case, I guess that 750gr Amax failed on a 150lb "mammal" cause "it" moved after being hit in the chest. Once again, unless you interupt the neural pathways, or CNS, no bullet ever made, will guarantee a drop.
In one sense, I am comparing shotgun slugs to MK bullets, short range to long range, but the concept is the same. Do they kill based on weight? ( which you brought up).
MK for long range, yes. However, there are always the closer shots than expected. I still live in the midwest and only a shotgun is permitted for deer unless you use a ML. I wouldn't dream of hunting a deer with a shotgun.
I have personally had 100% success with Mk on deer, even as close as 35 yards. But the argument that I read isn't really whether or not the MK will kill, but instead, how fast will it anchor the animal and what is the track record for any given distance.
Starting to sound like AR? Why? Advice was requested regarding bullets and elk and members are responding....nothing wrong with posting opinions based on experience. Obviously this holds true for us shooters that do indeed use MK for game.
Of the three bullets, TSX, AB, and MK, which do you believe has the highest probability of "failure" at any given distance? Failure, meaning, not anchoring the game within a few yards from where hit, since we've already established that all 3 will kill.
[/ QUOTE ]
Nothing puts deer down 100% of the time. Are you saying that a 1 ounce slug doesnt kill whitetails? Are you saying that a 440gr lead bullet traveling 1600fps will be stopped by a deer? You are aware that quite a few bear guides use that exact combination for dangerous bears, right? There's not a whole lot of small armes that can match the terminal ballistics of shotgun slugs.
No, I never said bullets kill by weight. They kill by tissue destruction and/or hemoraging. A 220gr matchking impacting at 3,000fps creates quite a bit of tissue damage.
dakor, never asked which will drop an elk faster. But if you want to go that way, not that you can predict what an animal will do when shot, (unless you interupt the CNS), as thats based on alot of varibles, the 220gr MK will probably drop an elk faster then the other two, due to more tissue destruction. Though I wouldnt hold my breath for any of them to. As far as track records go I tried to point it out that your bad expierences with MK's, was limited to two deer, shot at close range, with one caliber and light bullet. Mine is based on multible calibers, multible weights, distances from 3-1400yds, and several, several animals. Not that your expierences are any less valuable then mine, there not, it just seems that you might be lacking enough samples to get an accurate statistical average.
On the AR comment, just noticed quite a few posts lately giving bad info, especially in regards to match bullets, based mostly out of ignorance. It was not directed at you, or anyone in particular.
Of the three bullets, the TSX, AB, or SMK, that we are discussing. The TSX. All of them will preform at closer ranger, well enough, however the farther you go out, the Barnes gets worse and worse. At 700yds I doubt very likely that it will expand much, if at all.
Failure doesnt have anything to do with not anchoring game withen a few feet of where hit. How did you come up with that? If thats the case, I guess that 750gr Amax failed on a 150lb "mammal" cause "it" moved after being hit in the chest. Once again, unless you interupt the neural pathways, or CNS, no bullet ever made, will guarantee a drop.
