i would say for the general public, a bullet that stays together is a better option. i say this because i've seen bullets blow up on contact and not kill. not trying to get the bullet debate going but a bullet that penetrates will kill every time. again, i said for the general public. after seeing what hunters can do or i should say, can't do, i would give them an accubond or sturdier type of bullet, every time. for people that know what they're doing, a thinner skinned bullet will get more dramatic results.
Agreed. Accubonds are a better overall bullet for all applications. But I think people are looking at the wrong end of the problem in "wanting a blood trail for tracking purposes" when if they would have used a more destructive bullet better suited to thin skinned game, there would be no tracking in the first place. It all boils down to where does YOUR bullet reach maximum expansion? On the skin, 4" in, 8" in, 12" in? Then you match YOUR bullet to YOUR game's anatomy. Whitetails in the 100 lb class, coues deer, desert sheep, pronghorn, and some desert mule deer can be cleanly killed like being struck by lightning with even varmint bullets. I saw video of a pronghorn getting shot by a friend of mine using a 22-250 and 60 grain VMAX two years ago and it died faster than the one I shot with my 338 this year!
Location: Somewhere twixed Waterloo & Cedar Rapids, IA
Down-range ballistics of bullets are interesting, to say the least. A frangible
bullet hitting an animal at less than 100yds may cause a very severe, but
superficial wound. The same bullet colliding with an animal at 200 yards
can result in a DRT kill. As a moderator on another forum, I got into severe
arguments with an individual who's life experiences were totally different than
mine because of the above facts. He had used 55gr Hornady SP's @ 3600fps
under 100yds with absolute bullet failure. My Dad, brother, and I had used
the same for 35yrs with total success. The difference?......all of our deer
had been shot over 150-450yds. He didn't need the speed for the range in
which his shots were being taken.......some at 60yds. We were shooting
mulies in open country where shots could be somewhat long, for the caliber.
Remedy?.......use slower loads with frangible bullets if your shots are expected
to be very short ranges.
Yet for looong shots..........those shots in which the animal can move a
few inches to a foot, from the time the primer ignites the powder 'til the
bullet reaches the target and the POI will NOT hit the perfect killing zone,
would not a less frangible bullet be wiser?
Actually, I like both, depending on ranges and that which presents itself.
That which peeves me, are the individuals who use "premium bullets" to
compensate for their lack of expertise and/or practice. :mad:
I had every expectation that the A-Max would prove to be a very effective bullet with standing-broadside chest hits. I was, however, rather surprised at how effective this fragile bullet was when making direct hits on the deers shoulder. There was more than enough penetration to break bones and destroy vitals for instantaneous kills.
Normally, I like complete penetration on game animals. However, I am taking on a new opinion regarding this matter. :>) DRT
my brother and i use 208 amax in our 300wm's.he busted a whitetail buck at 560 yards.didn't take a step.hit was a hair high in the boiler room/broadside.exit wound 50 cent piece size.they work for us.we are not pushing them hard either.just at the powder charge where they group well.our loads are about 4 grains under listed max loads.jason
As much as I like the A-Max for deer, I do not think it is an acceptable Elk bullet. Such a big difference in muscle mass and bone structure. Now some others may have experience or opinions that differ.
Become sheep and the wolves will eat you!