What bullet for 338 rum for deer hunting under 300 yards?

[Deleted member 115360]

Hang out with my Wang out my friend????

Firstly, what experience do you have with large calibres?
Sounds to me like very little.

The bigger the bullet and the LESSER the velocity almost always produces LESS blood shot meat. I will take a large calibre bullet at reasonable speed over a small calibre bullet doing very fast velocity to preserve meat any day of the week.
You are speaking BS.

I think you play with your WANG too much.

Hate to burst your bubble, but there is NO SUCH THING AS HYDROSTATIC SHOCK!
There is such a thing as CAVITATION, this is what bullets do in tissue.

Cheers.

Ok, you'll have to excuse my delayed response, I was driving..

Hydrostatic shock is a thing, and nobody has claimed that it doesn't exist. There are people who believe that the displacemt of fluids by a bullet may not kill by causing nerve damage with the displaced fluids, (this is only a theory).

Wanna see Hydrostatic shock? Throw a rock into a pond, the ripples are what you are looking for.

Wanna see cavitation? Throw the rock really hard into the pond and you'll see air around the rock as it dissappears from view, but..... you'll also see the waves, which represent hydraulic displacement, aka hydraulic shock.

 

[Deleted member 115360]

There's nothing linguistically incorrect about this particular wording. I don't get the overall attitude here. What's your problem exactly?

You're reading the edited version.

 

[Deleted member 115360]

I wanna hear more about the facts and formulas from people that have never once fired a 338 cal bullet at any deer but yet have endless knowledge on the subject.. by all means please continue OB 1

I've also never shot a deer with an 8lb howitzer, but I'll bet I can make an intelligent calculation as to how it would end up. I don't shoot deer with a .338 because it's a ridiculous thing to do, (other than the headshot above). If you are shooting them in the face, then I'm sure it works fine..

 

[Calvin45]

I've also never shot a deer with an 8lb howitzer, but I'll bet I can make an intelligent calculation as to how it would end up. I don't shoot deer with a .338 because it's a ridiculous thing to do, (other than the headshot above). If you are shooting them in the face, then I'm sure it works fine..

The thing is no one on here has shot a deer with a howitzer but a ton have with 338s and you're effectively telling them they don't know what they've seen and you know better. You seem kind of loud in the context of this conversation and again, I don't get it.

 

[Deleted member 115360]

The thing is no one on here has shot a deer with a howitzer but a ton have with 338s and you're effectively telling them they don't know what they've seen and you know better. You seem kind of loud in the context of this conversation and again, I don't get it.

I was just here to get a laugh until 2 of these gentlemen made the claim that "a larger bullet causes less meat damage".

Now, we've already established that all other factors are equal, so..... that's a ridiculous claim that is easily disproven by any scientific method you'd like to use to quantify it.

I am loud. I am not always polite. I'm not sorry that I am not who you think I should be. Have a good evening..

 

[Calvin45]

I was just here to get a laugh until 2 of these gentlemen made the claim that "a larger bullet causes less meat damage".

Now, we've already established that all other factors are equal, so..... that's a ridiculous claim that is easily disproven by any scientific method you'd like to use to quantify it.

I am loud. I am not always polite. I'm not sorry that I am not who you think I should be. Have a good evening..

You too. Sorry if I'm coming off as a jerk as well, not saying anything about who I think people should be. No ill will here.

 

[Aussie Hunter Steve]

Sadly, it seems this thread has generated more heat than light....
The main factors that influence meat damage is bullet placement and bullet construction. This applies to all calibres, 338 included. If the OP takes this into consideration the 338 RUM will do a great job on deer without undue damage, same thing applies to any suitable cartridge.

 

[MagnumManiac]

Hecouldgoalltheway. (Such an apt name you chose)
You are loud and completely WRONG.
There is absolutely zero proof, medically, or scientifically that hydrostatic shock is a thing. Period.
Also, a larger bullet going slower disrupts LESS tissue. I don't care if you believe this or not. A larger hole makes no difference
Please enlighten us all with your scientific proof that a larger bullet does MORE meat damage. I can obliterate a rabbit with a 22-250 50gr bullet @ 3900fps, a 375 Bee hitting a rabbit with a 300g Woodleigh PP puts a 375 cal hole in and out, rabbit stays pretty much whole. And yes, I have done this many times. I have even shot a fox with a 416 Rigby.
Telling me LESSER is not the English language just shows how ignorant you really are.
Ignore list you go!!
Good day, and may I never see another post from you...so wrong it's not even slightly amusing.

Bye bye.

 

[Deleted member 115360]

Oh no, I got blocked by the guy who needed to ask the group what 300gr bullet would kill a deer for him..... bummer..


When a bullet does what it should, it expends 100% of its energy into the animal, and we find the bullet just under the skin on the far side. This is why downrange energy calculations are the best way to predict meat damage. I don't care if people shoot them with a punt gun, but you shouldn't act indignant when someone points out how ridiculous it is. I actually thought this thread was a joke for the first few pages.

 

[rammac]

The bigger the bullet and the LESSER the velocity almost always produces LESS blood shot meat...

There's nothing linguistically incorrect about this particular wording. I don't get the overall attitude here. What's your problem exactly?

Ignorance is bliss.

Between the inability to construct a cogent sentence and the outdated technical information about "hydrostatic" shock, this forum is totally useless for real information but it's very entertaining.

 

[Calvin45]

Ignorance is bliss.

Between the inability to construct a cogent sentence and the outdated technical information about "hydrostatic" shock, this forum is totally useless for real information but it's very entertaining.

Totally useless for real information? I guess I can only hope to already know everything one day. I've learned a ton from the good and "blissfully ignorant" folks on here.

take care

 

[Elk Hunter 338]

Oh no, I got blocked by the guy who needed to ask the group what 300gr bullet would kill a deer for him..... bummer..


When a bullet does what it should, it expends 100% of its energy into the animal, and we find the bullet just under the skin on the far side. This is why downrange energy calculations are the best way to predict meat damage. I don't care if people shoot them with a punt gun, but you shouldn't act indignant when someone points out how ridiculous it is. I actually thought this thread was a joke for the first few pages.

and now your saying that the bullet has too stay in the animal too actually work!!!! DUDE please keep going THIS IS AWESOME!!!

Please TELL US MORE O B ONE!!

 

[Deleted member 115360]

and now your saying that the bullet has too stay in the animal too actually work!!!! DUDE please keep going THIS IS AWESOME!!!

Please TELL US MORE O B ONE!!

Uh, yeah buddy, when a bullet performs perfectly, it dumps 100% of the energy into the animal. It passes all the way to the far side, stopping under the cape.

Now, a guy who shoots 100lb animals with a 338 rum probably doesn't know this, but that's what a hunting bullet is designed to do under ideal conditions.

 

[Elk Hunter 338]

Uh, yeah buddy, when a bullet performs perfectly, it dumps 100% of the energy into the animal. It passes all the way to the far side, stopping under the cape.

Now, a guy who shoots 100lb animals with a 338 rum probably doesn't know this, but that's what a hunting bullet is designed to do under ideal conditions.

100 LBS???? what are you hunting? rats?? gimme a break ...... round these parts our coyotes and fawns are bigger than that!!! no wonder you have absolutely no knowledge on the subject!!