So you want me to go dig up all the video's I can to show the opposite affect? I have seen 100's of animals hit the dirt from 338 to 204, elk, moose, deer. I have seen heavy calibers do little to nothing to elk as far as visual affect and watched them run over the ridge. I have seen elk crushed to the ground with an arrow. (that was a weird one). I have a ton of real world experience to tell me what I need to know and 1 or 10 video's is not going to make a major impact on changing anything. Am I biased? Only in the sense that I am anti-biased to BS. In the past 2 years 16 elk in our camp have hit the dirt to a 143 in a creedmoor. Not a single loss, not a single track job, and most died in their tracks. No lingering deaths. If that was a 308 with a 165 nosler no one would care. They'd say it was anomaly, a bad hit, or some other rhetoric to dismiss the video. Simply because it was a creedmoor the biased crowd raises their flag and thinks they have evidence to say it is not valid cartridge. It's total BS, nothing more to it. Is the video valid? Yes, sure, it is example of a bad example as I had clearly stated.
Let's put this in perspective. A 143 traveling 2800 mv will impact the elk at 200 yards at 2577 fps. A 7mag with a 168 berger at 2860mv will impact the elk at 250 with 2571 fps. Energy, is 2065 vs 2466. The 7mm energy at 450 is identical to the 143 at 200. I am will to bet no one would bat an eye at a 450 yard shot with a 7mag and 168 berger but yet the data is identical to the 143 at 200. It doesn't take long to debunk a lot of opinions with data if a person wants to spend a little time with a ballistics calculator.
