Long Range Hunting Online Magazine


Go Back   Long Range Hunting Online Magazine > Rifles, Reloading, Optics, Equipment > Rifles, Bullets, Barrels & Ballistics

Rifles, Bullets, Barrels & Ballistics Applied Ballistics


View Poll Results: Terminal Ballistics- Which do you prefer
Bullet passes through and leaves a gaping hole on the other side 21 46.67%
Bullet expends all of it's energy inside the animal and cause severe internal damage 15 33.33%
Bullet kills, cleans, and processes the animal exactly like you like it with no damage to the meat 9 20.00%
Voters: 45. You may not vote on this poll

Reply

Terminal ballistics- Which would you prefer

 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
  #15  
Old 12-26-2012, 01:20 PM
Platinum Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Townsend, Montana.
Posts: 7,934
Re: Terminal ballistics- Which would you prefer

Quote:
Originally Posted by bigngreen View Post
I'm looking for a bullet that penetrates then opens aggressively at close range then the farther you step out it blows slower and at 600+ you get consistent exits that are created by multiple bullet and bone frags, not just a bullet hole!
Exactly.

Jeff
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #16  
Old 12-26-2012, 03:29 PM
Platinum Member
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: South of Canada and North of Wyoming
Posts: 5,953
Re: Terminal ballistics- Which would you prefer

Quote:
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mike6158 View Post
Montana Rifleman - I didn't think it would be confusing but to make it clear, though not stated precisely that way, all of the questions were related to the kill. The last one was nonsensical.

I don't think many people here were taking 800 to 1,000 yard shots on Elk 35 years ago. Especially with homemade lead bullets. But I could be wrong. Last year, at the same ranch, another kid insisted on using his .243 to kill some kind of exotic deer, the genetics of which escapes me. He made a good shot on the animal. It took a while to find due to the conditions (heavy, thorny brush) but we found it. It was a lot bigger than a native white-tail. One hole. There was obviously enough internal damage to kill the deer but if "I" had to make the same choice, the .243 would stay in the case.

toddc- The intent of the question wasn't which bullet do you use. That question would get a WHOLE lot more attention than this little thread. The question was (or was intended to be) what do you want the bullet to do- kill with hole all the way through so you can track the blood trail or kill with one hole.
Mike, did you intend this to be an objective survey/discussion or a subjective bash the "other guy" thread?

I have read dozens and participated in a few of these bullet/terminal performance threads and the vast majority of them turn into ******* contests.

I like to go by the "Big Boy" philosophy, meaning that we are all big boys and accountable for our own decisions, as I mentioned in another thread when a couple of members accused me of having too hot a load without having any firsthand experience with my rifle and load.

There are a lot of highly experienced shooters/hunters in these forums, all of whom I have a great deal of respect for, who have quite different views on bullets.

Your reply that the 3rd option was nonsensical is a bit over the top IME. The processing part is nonsensical, but there are hunters who prefer bullets that get the job done with minimal damage and that is not nonsensical. If you browse through the GS site you'll see that Gerard Schultz, who manufactures monometal bullets, prefers small caliber, lightweight bullets pushed to very high velocities to take medium to large game up to and including Kudu. He has anecdotal stories and and pictures of terminal performance to back up his view. If someone wants to call him or others irresponsible, exagerator or lair, I suppose they have to privilege to do so, but I find it regrettable.

So, assuming this is an objective thread, I'll chime in with my limited experience.

As I said I prefer a bullet that gets the job done. I lean to the monometals because they stay intact and usually produce a significant permanent wound channel and then exit. That said, I'll use other bullets to get the job done if they happen to be more accurate, better BC or whatever.

I do prefer bullets that exit but the vast majority of them have not left gaping exits. A couple of my anecdotal stories...

Shot a very nice B&C Big Horn in the breaks that I guess was about 300 lbs. I drilled him @ about 200 yds with a 7 RM and 160 NP's. 1st shot, he shuddered and stumbled forward a couple of steps, then just stood there. Jacked in another and fired again. Nothing, didn't flinch. Repaet, and again nothing. Started to wonder if I had missed the 2nd and 3rd. Jacked in a 4th and put it through the top of his spine. He fell over. Took him home and skinned him out and found 3 entries that you could have covered with a half dollar. The exits, all close together, were about nickle to quarter size. Not gaping. The 2nd and third had basically slightly enlarged the original wound channel.. Moral, the first NP deposited a lot of energy and effectively killed the sheep where he stood but also exited taking some energy.

Same 7mm and same 160 NP's. Called in a very nice and very large bodied 6x6 down in ID, to about 15 yrds and put one through the ribs. His entire huge body shook violently and he lept up and did a 180, took a single bound down hill and piled up. Again no gaping exist. In both cases minimal meat damage but the bulls lungs were mush.

We all have our experiences and preferences. There is no "perfect" bullet. Love hearing about others experiences but not really interested in the speculative "What ifs" and bashing.

Cheers,

Mark

Last edited by MontanaRifleman; 12-26-2012 at 04:17 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #17  
Old 12-26-2012, 07:21 PM
Gold Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: Boise IDAHO
Posts: 838
Re: Terminal ballistics- Which would you prefer

I want a bullet that makes 90 degree turn and veers off to the bigger buck I did not see circles around it to hit it from a safe direction right in the lungs so it jumps out were I can see it collapse and then shoots a flair up so I know it was my hit........ Bullets are often over thought.................. I want it to kill and kill quick................ Does not matter how it does it as long as I understand the best way to use it. Hard bullets need hard targets like heavy bone, soft hits threw the lungs.....do not. If you want to split the difference use a Heavy weight lightly constructed bullet. It really all comes down to placement. At long range I have never sean a shot that HAD to go threw the shoulder. Unless the guy behind the gun was inpatient he could wait for a better angle. At close range it is different, speed is more necessary and placement options are more limited And that is why I prefer med-long range hunting.
Reply With Quote
  #18  
Old 12-26-2012, 07:43 PM
Silver Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Texas
Posts: 295
Re: Terminal ballistics- Which would you prefer

Quote:
Originally Posted by bigngreen View Post
I'm looking for a bullet that penetrates then opens aggressively at close range then the farther you step out it blows slower and at 600+ you get consistent exits that are created by multiple bullet and bone frags, not just a bullet hole!
If I could go back and add this as a choice I would. Well said.
__________________
Glock Certified Armorer
GSSF Member
Reply With Quote
  #19  
Old 12-27-2012, 12:37 AM
Platinum Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Location: The cold part of Montana
Posts: 1,390
Re: Terminal ballistics- Which would you prefer

Quote:
Originally Posted by D.ID View Post
I want a bullet that makes 90 degree turn and veers off to the bigger buck I did not see circles around it to hit it from a safe direction right in the lungs so it jumps out were I can see it collapse and then shoots a flair up so I know it was my hit........ Bullets are often over thought.................. I want it to kill and kill quick................ Does not matter how it does it as long as I understand the best way to use it. Hard bullets need hard targets like heavy bone, soft hits threw the lungs.....do not. If you want to split the difference use a Heavy weight lightly constructed bullet. It really all comes down to placement. At long range I have never sean a shot that HAD to go threw the shoulder. Unless the guy behind the gun was inpatient he could wait for a better angle. At close range it is different, speed is more necessary and placement options are more limited And that is why I prefer med-long range hunting.
I want one of those too! Maybe Byan could engineer use one
__________________
Keep in mind the animals we shoot for food and display are not bullet proof. Contrary to popular belief, they bleed and die just like they did a hundred years ago. Being competent with a given rifle is far more important than impressive ballistics and poor shootability. High velocity misses never put a steak in the freezer.

Joe
Reply With Quote
  #20  
Old 12-27-2012, 12:40 AM
Silver Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Good Ol' Oklahoma
Posts: 219
Re: Terminal ballistics- Which would you prefer

My preference is for a bullet that exits after doing significant amounts of internal damage.

However, the last deer I shot was at 100-110 yds, head on shot with a 7mm 140 gr Nosler Accubond that entered the chest taking the right side lung, damaging the spine enough at the neck-shoulder junction to drop the 8pt in his tracks. Damage to the right lung was a nickel to quarter size hole and the liver was turned to liquid jelly. Bullet did not exit.

Prior to that, I shot a small 8pt buck at 41 paces with a 30 cal Berger 168 VLD. That bullet entered behind the left side shoulder (hard quartering shot) taking out the left lung, and catching the rear tip of the right lung along with trashing the liver. I found pieces of that bullet all the way back at the rectum on that buck. Internal damage was significant, with massive amounts of blood, and 4 broken ribs at the spine area. This deer dropped at the shot.

On both of those deer, the bullet did exactly what I wanted: killed quickly, anchoring the animals on the spot at the shot.

Even though I prefer exits, what I REALLY want is the bullet to kill quickly with no tracking. )

Regards
Rog
Reply With Quote
  #21  
Old 12-27-2012, 11:31 AM
Gold Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Location: Terre Haute In.
Posts: 696
Re: Terminal ballistics- Which would you prefer

First choice is a bullet heavy for caliber that will give me a DRT 99.99% of the time, as long as I do my part.

Second choice if I can't get a DRT I want said animal to run to truck jump in back and drt. (maybe I should make this my first choice)

Bergers baby
__________________
Rick

Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools
Display Modes



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 08:43 AM.


Powered by vBulletin ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Content Management Powered by vBadvanced CMPS
All content ©2010-2014 Long Range Hunting, LLC