TARGET BULLETS ARE NOT HUNTING BULLETS!

memtb said:

Those that feel otherwise have little respect for the animal…..and I for them!

Click to expand...

That's a bit preachy/dramatic. And unfortunately, for your argument, the real world data doesn't support that claim.

Gday

heat_and_fam said:

I notice you refused to addesss my claim…any bullet will kill if you put it in the vitals…yes, even a .223

You seem to wanna make a claim yet won't stand behind that claim, literally. Tells me all I need to know.

And nobody is saying shoot .223 50gr pills at else, stop being childish.

Where I come from it means good day, so long, good talk.

And I've seen the OP around on many a forum, I can assure you, he doesn't need your help in bullet selection. He's done well for himself in the field and has plenty of pics to prove it.

Carry on.

Click to expand...

Give me time man I will show you that a pill do not all kill yet can strike vitals
& this will show scar tissue in lungs & recovered pill so I guess that is the vitals also go search bow hunting not a bow hunter myself but mates are & evidence their also plus other shooting incidents on people as well as critters


Now back to our wager & why I'm so confident I done extensive testing for a organisation in USA as they needed to have a pill that wouldn't exit a as a exiting pill was not a option for them
These tests took many months to complete all documentation was thoroughly examined by them & eventually the pill was found

Yes I know my mate & I know it extremely well so let me know when you have sufficient funds & will legally put this in lawyers hands to make sure the money is held in trust for your offer to take place

No I'm not being childish
I will once again state factual evidence to hopefully get people to rethink their options as if they are on the edge like the 162eldm it will eventually fail & that is not good for the critter or the individual & take that a step further yes every pill will fail but we can lesson the risk by not choosing the 223 &50 gr option & go with a more reliable combo & as stated the 180 eldm may be that better option vrs the 162eldm or something else I've got no idea as I've not used that 180 pill

So I ask you to examine the factual evidence put forward do your research not blinkers on & then you'll be in a better position to offer more propelling advice



The op can answer for himself im sure he's capable
Cheers

@fordy Having been able to talk to Fordy, studied the area he lived in, visited right next to him, studied the area I was in, and read up on what he told me. If Fordy said he tested and has experience with a bullet I absolutely would listen and implement his advise or suggestions. I was never lucky enough to actually have a conversation with someone like Fordy and if I was to ignore what I heard from him I would be STUPID!!!

Two holes are preferable but not at the expense of maximum tissue damage. Some of the solid coppers in high sd calibers like 7mm can punch through and the tissue damage is localized and minimal. I've seen it firsthand. So give me a bullet that does maximum tissue damage and still stays together enough to exit given proper shot placement. For me the Nosler ballistic tip has done very well on deer size critters. If you choose a bullet just to get an exit on any shot angle you're going to be giving up something and that is less tissue damage. I can control the shot angle with proper shot placement by waiting for the right shot most of the time. If I have to put one in at the last rib and it lodges in the far shoulder the critters not going far.

memtb said:

My only comment on this topic is……we owe it to the animal to use the bullet that offers the highest potential for a clean kill at whatever the range at the animal is shot!

Simple using the bullet that may be the most accurate or has the highest BC on an animal…."be damned" the terminal performance on said animal "doesn't cut the mustard" with me. Those that feel otherwise have little respect for the animal…..and I for them!

The bullets that I described in the aforementioned text are great for and very likely designed for use on inanimate objects…..and should be limited for such! JMHO like it or not! memtb

Click to expand...

You're absolutely right! We do owe it to the animals. That's why I use a target bullet.

1. I'm more likely to hit where I'm aiming.

2. Elements have less effect on them, ensuring my POA and POI are the same.

3. They open more reliably than copper and they open more reliably at slower speeds than copper.

4. They do more damage than copper.

5. They leave better blood trails than copper (never understood why someone would want a bullet that sheds petals leaving a caliber size entrance and exit).

6. They're 1/3 of the cost of copper which leads many to practice more, leading to better shots.

heat_and_fam said:

That's a bit preachy/dramatic. And unfortunately, for your argument, the real world data doesn't support that claim.

Click to expand...

Is it conceivable that some, including some our esteemed colleagues on this forum, only tell of their hugely successful exploits….rarely, of their ultimate fails?

Or, could it be that, due to some of the long ranges being shot with the animals not showing signs of a hit…..they couldn't be bothered to verify the hit or miss by going to where the animal was standing at the shot! Assuming a complete miss…..of which they will not share in print!

Call it preachy/dramatic if you like! By the way, "real world data" is only as good as the accuracy of the input! memtb

Ucsdryder said:

You're absolutely right! We do owe it to the animals. That's why I use a target bullet.

1. I'm more likely to hit where I'm aiming.

2. Elements have less effect on them, ensuring my POA and POI are the same.

3. They open more reliably than copper and they open more reliably at slower speeds than copper.

4. They do more damage than copper.

5. They leave better blood trails than copper (never understood why someone would want a bullet that sheds petals leaving a caliber size entrance and exit).

6. They're 1/3 of the cost of copper which leads many to practice more, leading to better shots.

Click to expand...

IF, using a more reliable bullet designed for hunting ( ie tissue destruction) will limit the range at which you choose to shoot…..reduce the yardage at which you shoot animals! Save the "bragging, self serving, ego stroking" long range shots for targets/steel/rocks! memtb

memtb said:

IF, using a more reliable bullet designed for hunting ( ie tissue destruction) will limit the range at which you choose to shoot…..reduce the yardage at which you shoot animals! Save the "bragging, self serving, ego stroking" long range shots for targets/steel/rocks! memtb

Click to expand...

Maybe you're on the wrong forum? Read the name of this forum…

memtb said:

IF, using a more reliable bullet designed for hunting ( ie tissue destruction) will limit the range at which you choose to shoot…..reduce the yardage at which you shoot animals! Save the "bragging, self serving, ego stroking" long range shots for targets/steel/rocks! memtb

Click to expand...

But, but, there just has to be some magical combination of caliber and bullet that does everything perfectly….

The beauty of this Country is that you can do whatever you please, and whatever works for you. I've used mono metals and "target bullets" extensively in my west TX lease. I leaned something real quick, I hate tracking deer in cedar and mesquite. The only 2 does I've lost were shot at 200 yards with TTSX, never again. Berger has been dropping them ever since from 100-400 no issues.

Ucsdryder said:

Maybe you're on the wrong forum? Read the name of this forum…

Click to expand...

I'm quite aware of the forums name……Perhaps it could be more accurately named "Long Range Game Shooting"!

I applaud and have high respect for those that spend the time and money to be the best that they can be at longer ranges.

However that respect greatly diminishes with the use of bullets "not designed" for hunting, used expecting hunting bullet performance. Obviously, any animal can be killed with bullets (or anything else) clearly designed for another purpose. People die everyday, by blunt force trauma……by rocks, automobiles, falls, ect.

I simply believe that if/when hunting, a bullet more appropriately designed for that job should be used…..within it's design limits. memtb

L2land said:

But, but, there just has to be some magical combination of caliber and bullet that does everything perfectly….

Click to expand...

One can only dream……dreams sometimes become reality! memtb

haisardao said:

The beauty of this Country is that you can do whatever you please, and whatever works for you. I've used mono metals and "target bullets" extensively in my west TX lease. I leaned something real quick, I hate tracking deer in cedar and mesquite. The only 2 does I've lost were shot at 200 yards with TTSX, never again. Berger has been dropping them ever since from 100-400 no issues.

Click to expand...

Perhaps a TTSX mono is not the best choice for a 100-120 pound (on the hoof) Whitetail Doe.

It is the hunter's responsibility to determine what is best for the application. For that application, most any bullet that is almost guaranteed (nothing is absolute) to give adequate expansion on said animal should suffice.

I trust that the bullet manufacturer has sufficient knowledge about the bullet that they offer to correctly name the bullet for it's designed purpose! memtb

memtb said:

Perhaps a TTSX mono is not the best choice for a 100-120 pound (on the hoof) Whitetail Doe.

It is the hunter's responsibility to determine what is best for the application. For that application, most any bullet that is almost guaranteed (nothing is absolute) to give adequate expansion on said animal should suffice.

I trust that the bullet manufacturer has sufficient knowledge about the bullet that they offer to correctly name the bullet for it's designed purpose! memtb

Click to expand...

Shooting a deer? Lordy any bullet from any center fire kills them easily if shot in the vitals.