Berger supporters, Vocal Minority with Something to Gain, or Legit?

[Ingwe]

So whats your answer, I'm completely open to a new bullet, I shoot new bullets all the time looking for another step up in performance.
You tell me how to be more lethal on elk than what I've show you in this thread, and I'll give it a go, we're going to roll 4 elk in a couple weeks so if I have the bullet I'll load it and shoot it just how you say!!

BNG, I respect the hell out of you from following you here on the forums so I will never tell you what to do. I never shot an elk but I have killed plenty of elk sized animals in Africa so I base my opinion on that.
It SEEMS to me that with a Berger you need to be extra careful to avoid heavy bone and it is crucial to put that bullet into the ribs...let's face it that any cup and core bullet will be effective with that shot. The point of my post opinion is that Berger is NOT the optimal bullet for big animals but you guys use them anyway.
For big animals, I will use a mono bullet or an Accubond and not be afraid to put a bullet into an animal from ANY angle. From a rear quartering angle I put a Barnes X into a Zebras which broke its hip and penetrated 4 feet of Zebra before it exited....try that with a Berger.
Again guys use whatever you like but in a 7mm type round, I wouldn't use a Berger on anything bigger than a deer.

Again my 2 Cents fellas!

 

[Riflehunter1776]

Phase one of Berger defense- accuse all naysayers of being incompetent, unqualified marksmen!

that happens with every product
Some d-bag who is probably affiliated with the company will jump all over you and try to say that any problem is because you are clearly incompetent, not because the product has testable, repeatable issues. Then after insulting you, they will try to claim that for every deer you shot, they shot two. For every 10 pt, they got an 11 pt. Some people are just idiots.

 

[bigngreen]

I'm wondering if our disconnect is partially the why we pull the trigger, I don't shoot an elk to just shoot an elk, there is always the purpose of eating as much of it as possible, I'm simply not going to blow a hole through 22 elk roast just because I HAVE to shoot, not shooting is ALWAYS and option for me!!! I will shoot an elk though the front shoulders, not my preference but I will, it's only a few inches from the vitals and meat loss is of a level that can be acceptable to me but I would prefer a quartering away shot tucked in behind the shoulder. I hunt as much for the shot as I do the animal, if I don't have the shot I simply don't take it and hunt harder to put myself into a position I don't have to compromise the goal which is as much meat as possible and as clean of a kill as possible.
I have been willing to loose some meat in the pursuit to know what a bullet will do though the shoulders since that is a common shot to the vitals and I want to have confidence in that shot if it's the situation. I'm FAR more confident based on actually shooting elk, of getting a 215 or 230 Berger through an elks shoulder into the vitals vs a 168 Barnes TTSX or TSX, again because I spent 8 plus years a Barnes fan boy!!
On a shot through the slats only, again because of actually shooting elk with 215 and 230 Bergers and 168 Barnes I will take the Berger every single time because of the percentage that take too much time because of small wound channels.
If you want to compare a 215 Berger to a 180 or 200 gr Accubond we can do that also, again because we actually shoot stuff, I have yet to have a 215 not clear the front shoulder, I have had to dispatch days later elk that an Accubond simply did not get through, all of them recovered so we actually know what happened.

Your telling me that the Berger is not optimal and Barnes is, I shot a lot of elk with a Barnes they are the reason I started looking for a better bullet because they SUCKED, they were anything but optimal for killing elk. We used to carry 22 pistols because we knew we would have to dispatch elk when we got to them, I've dispatched a lot of elk with a knife because of small wound channels and we got to them fast, I have not had to dispatch a single elk when I've shot a Berger, to me that's optimal performance!!!

 

[Ingwe]

I'm wondering if our disconnect is partially the why we pull the trigger, I don't shoot an elk to just shoot an elk, there is always the purpose of eating as much of it as possible, I'm simply not going to blow a hole through 22 elk roast just because I HAVE to shoot, not shooting is ALWAYS and option for me!!! I will shoot an elk though the front shoulders, not my preference but I will, it's only a few inches from the vitals and meat loss is of a level that can be acceptable to me but I would prefer a quartering away shot tucked in behind the shoulder. I hunt as much for the shot as I do the animal, if I don't have the shot I simply don't take it and hunt harder to put myself into a position I don't have to compromise the goal which is as much meat as possible and as clean of a kill as possible.
I have been willing to loose some meat in the pursuit to know what a bullet will do though the shoulders since that is a common shot to the vitals and I want to have confidence in that shot if it's the situation. I'm FAR more confident based on actually shooting elk, of getting a 215 or 230 Berger through an elks shoulder into the vitals vs a 168 Barnes TTSX or TSX, again because I spent 8 plus years a Barnes fan boy!!
On a shot through the slats only, again because of actually shooting elk with 215 and 230 Bergers and 168 Barnes I will take the Berger every single time because of the percentage that take too much time because of small wound channels.
If you want to compare a 215 Berger to a 180 or 200 gr Accubond we can do that also, again because we actually shoot stuff, I have yet to have a 215 not clear the front shoulder, I have had to dispatch days later elk that an Accubond simply did not get through, all of them recovered so we actually know what happened.

Your telling me that the Berger is not optimal and Barnes is, I shot a lot of elk with a Barnes they are the reason I started looking for a better bullet because they SUCKED, they were anything but optimal for killing elk. We used to carry 22 pistols because we knew we would have to dispatch elk when we got to them, I've dispatched a lot of elk with a knife because of small wound channels and we got to them fast, I have not had to dispatch a single elk when I've shot a Berger, to me that's optimal performance!!!

After reading this post I understand your way of thinking much clearer and your train of thought makes total sense. When shooting an animal, the last thing that I am worried about is losing meat. I don't live in hunting country, and besides deer hunting, any trip that I make is a guided hunt. So knowing that I might not get another shot until my next trip, I want to be prepared to take whatever shot presents itself. In Africa, a lost animal is a lost trophy fee so on a second shot I want to be able to hit it any way I can.
I don't use the X Bullets anymore for the same reason you don't, because I have had them blow through deer with no expansion but they are PERFECT on a 2000lb Eland.
I am using Accubonds now as an all around bullet....a comprimise between an X and a non-bonded cup and core bullet.

That's just me brother and it's all good

 

[mtmuley]

More fun stuff to read. mtmuley

 

[Johnslam]

I'm wondering if our disconnect is partially the why we pull the trigger, I don't shoot an elk to just shoot an elk, there is always the purpose of eating as much of it as possible, I'm simply not going to blow a hole through 22 elk roast just because I HAVE to shoot, not shooting is ALWAYS and option for me!!! I will shoot an elk though the front shoulders, not my preference but I will, it's only a few inches from the vitals and meat loss is of a level that can be acceptable to me but I would prefer a quartering away shot tucked in behind the shoulder. I hunt as much for the shot as I do the animal, if I don't have the shot I simply don't take it and hunt harder to put myself into a position I don't have to compromise the goal which is as much meat as possible and as clean of a kill as possible.
I have been willing to loose some meat in the pursuit to know what a bullet will do though the shoulders since that is a common shot to the vitals and I want to have confidence in that shot if it's the situation. I'm FAR more confident based on actually shooting elk, of getting a 215 or 230 Berger through an elks shoulder into the vitals vs a 168 Barnes TTSX or TSX, again because I spent 8 plus years a Barnes fan boy!!
On a shot through the slats only, again because of actually shooting elk with 215 and 230 Bergers and 168 Barnes I will take the Berger every single time because of the percentage that take too much time because of small wound channels.
If you want to compare a 215 Berger to a 180 or 200 gr Accubond we can do that also, again because we actually shoot stuff, I have yet to have a 215 not clear the front shoulder, I have had to dispatch days later elk that an Accubond simply did not get through, all of them recovered so we actually know what happened.

Your telling me that the Berger is not optimal and Barnes is, I shot a lot of elk with a Barnes they are the reason I started looking for a better bullet because they SUCKED, they were anything but optimal for killing elk. We used to carry 22 pistols because we knew we would have to dispatch elk when we got to them, I've dispatched a lot of elk with a knife because of small wound channels and we got to them fast, I have not had to dispatch a single elk when I've shot a Berger, to me that's optimal performance!!!

Thanks for taking the time to write that. I don't always agree with everything you post, but, after reading it I now have a much better understanding about your experiences. Also, kudos to your discipline on not taking shots. Where I hunt there are too many ppl that care about shooting anything that comes out.

what was your typical shot distance when you were using the Barnes?

 

[bigngreen]

After reading this post I understand your way of thinking much clearer and your train of thought makes total sense. When shooting an animal, the last thing that I am worried about is losing meat. I don't live in hunting country, and besides deer hunting, any trip that I make is a guided hunt. So knowing that I might not get another shot until my next trip, I want to be prepared to take whatever shot presents itself. In Africa, a lost animal is a lost trophy fee so on a second shot I want to be able to hit it any way I can.
I don't use the X Bullets anymore for the same reason you don't, because I have had them blow through deer with no expansion but they are PERFECT on a 2000lb Eland.
I am using Accubonds now as an all around bullet....a comprimise between an X and a non-bonded cup and core bullet.

That's just me brother and it's all good

It's all good, as long as guys can not turn into name calling two year olds before they figure out where they can communicate and see why others differ in opinion then we've raised the level of the content and discourse on the forum IMO!
I understand your angle more as well, having a life long goal and digested every possible source of information on hunting African game I can definitely appreciate your view point!!

 

[bigngreen]

Thanks for taking the time to write that. I don't always agree with everything you post, but, after reading it I now have a much better understanding about your experiences. Also, kudos to your discipline on not taking shots. Where I hunt there are too many ppl that care about shooting anything that comes out.

what was your typical shot distance when you were using the Barnes?

I don't think I've shot any game over 450 yards with a Barnes, typical would be 200-300 yards at the time I shot them.

 

[DawntoDusk]

Berger boys and Creedmore guys are definitely loyal you have got to admit that

What is your bullet/ rifle preference?

 

[DawntoDusk]

It was an article by John Barsness that first got me interested in Bergers, extolling the virtues of them as meat saving bullets

https://gunsmagazine.com/featured/game-saving-bullet-points/

Here is another where he mentions out of 200 animals, none took more than 15 steps

http://www.bergerbullets.com/articles/john-barsness-berger-bullets.pdf

Came here and learned about plugged tips and gyroscopic stability (SG)

Seems like a troll of a topic to me, I get what you are saying about the vocal minority @Troutslayer2 - but if you have a better recipe for lung jello I'm all ears!

In my experience, Bergers make the best lung jello. Even with 115gr on cow elk.

 

[sturner]

What is your bullet/ rifle preference?

The ones that shoot less than a .5 is what I'm loyal to
Sorry if that sound flippant

 

[sturner]

A-max 75 gr 22-250
Accubonds 140-7mag
Accubonds 180-300w
SGK 165-308
A-Max 168 -308
SMK 69-223
I'm kinda fond of those

 

[L.Sherm]

I tried the Barnes x bullets on a deer 30 years ago what a disaster, had to shoot the thing 5 times to put it down.
Penciled right through it.

 

[WYO300RUM]

I don't think I've shot any game over 450 yards with a Barnes, typical would be 200-300 yards at the time I shot them.

I started using Hammers but furthist I've shot a Barnes was180 TTSX at 3360 fps out of my 300 RUM at a bull elk 543 yds. Held air on top of shoulder. Figured drop 30 in.. Hit his front elbow bone. Shattered it and went into chest. He was dead right there. He ran about 10 yrds. and faced broadside again on other side. Held same. Shattered elbow bone on that side and into chest. One shot clipped top of heart. Neither exited. Never happen again but I could of put a rod though both sides of his chest. Maybe an inch difference in the 2 shots. I've killed a lot of elk ,deer ,lope and one bighorn with Triple Shoks. Always performed well. They are bone Buster's. I always aim for shoulder/lungs on elk. They go down where standing. I've used Berger's on a lot of lope and deer. They kill well also but I usually get a lot of meat damage. I used 185 VLD for a long time. Very accurate and deadly .