Are we too critical of modern bullets?

[Canadian Bushman]

This is something ive pondered after reading the (insert brand name) fail threads, and after my buddy returned from an axis hunt with two dead axis, five beautifully petaled bullets, and a bunch of questions. None which i was able to answer.
Now im not trying to start a war simply sharing thoughts and seeking opinions.

We really do live in a golden age of bullets. There are so many awesome bullets out there, that you could close your eyes pick one and make good things happen with it. I would really have to go out of my way to find a bad bullet. Especially when compared to the musket balls my grandfather use to shoot.

On the other hand, us nit picking every last little detail, weighing bullets checking bearing surface lengths, comparing ogives, meplats, weight retention and B.C.'s are probably what drove the industry to become what it is.

So i ask you for your humble opinion, are we too critical of modern bullets?

 

[Broz]

Yes we are. We should strive for better placement and knowing how our chosen bullet works best for our needs. And not so much blaming the bullet first. After all in most cases we loaded the ammo, chose the point of aim and puller the trigger. Each bullet has a place where it will excel, if we don't know that and use bad judgment we should carry a little responsibility on our own shoulders. It seems we expect an awful lot these days.

I agree we are lucky to have the many choices we do. Every single bullet will kill what we are after if we do a decent job on our end.

Jeff

 

[MudRunner2005]

Yes we are. We should strive for better placement and knowing how our chosen bullet works best for our needs. And not so much blaming the bullet first. After all in most cases we loaded the ammo, chose the point of aim and puller the trigger. Each bullet has a place where it will excel, if we don't know that and use bad judgment we should carry a little responsibility on our own shoulders. It seems we expect an awful lot these days.

I agree we are lucky to have the many choices we do. Every single bullet will kill what we are after if we do a decent job on our end.

Jeff

I agree! Most people need to learn shot-placement than they do anything. Why on earth would you shoulder-shoot a whitetail deer? They're gonna run regardless. Might as well save the meat and make a lung-shot. Bullets will perform fine in that regard.

 

[pyroducksx3]

I agree! Most people need to learn shot-placement than they do anything. Why on earth would you shoulder-shoot a whitetail deer? They're gonna run regardless. Might as well save the meat and make a lung-shot. Bullets will perform fine in that regard.

Not sure what you mean by this? I shoulder shot my whitetail this year and guess what it did what I wanted died within 10 yards (probably less) of where I shot him.

To the OP I don't think we are too critical of modern bullets, being critical is what demanded these high quality bullets to be made. I do feel we expected too much from the modern bullets. It seems some people want deep penetrating bullets that have super high bc but with a bonded core that opens with cutting petals but blows up inside to a bunch of pieces and dumps all its energy but exits otherswise its a crappy bullet oh yeah and it opens up at low velocity but can survive rocket launches. In reality each bullets has a specific design which comes with limitations and we need to understand what these are and how they effect the bullet we chose.

 

[MudRunner2005]

Not sure what you mean by this? I shoulder shot my whitetail this year and guess what it did what I wanted died within 10 yards (probably less) of where I shot him.

To the OP I don't think we are too critical of modern bullets, being critical is what demanded these high quality bullets to be made. I do feel we expected too much from the modern bullets. It seems some people want deep penetrating bullets that have super high bc but with a bonded core that opens with cutting petals but blows up inside to a bunch of pieces and dumps all its energy but exits otherswise its a crappy bullet oh yeah and it opens up at low velocity but can survive rocket launches. In reality each bullets has a specific design which comes with limitations and we need to understand what these are and how they effect the bullet we chose.

Good for you...But I've been shootin whitetails my entire life. I've had a handful drop in their tracks, and a few only run a couple yards. The rest ran like lightning. They don't always drop in their tracks, or within a few yards. You got one of the rare lucky instances where it did.

 

[RMulhern]

For quite a few years I made custom .30 caliber bullets for Service Rifle competition and the Bench Rest game which was basically 1000 yard competition. On occasion I would take and make up 100 bullets and I would vary the base to ogive length by several 1000ths of an inch and the weight by as much as 5 grains. I would shoot these through a proven accurate .308 Winchester with bull barrel with a 20X Unertl scope in groups of ten shots from 300 yards on a good and quiet day...meaning not much wind. Invariably the ten shot groups would be a 'tight knot' measuring 2.0" or slightly over....all would be less than X ring size on the NRA HP target which was 3.0".
It was my conclusion that in the final analysis concerning accuracy....MORE IMPORTANTLY was the quality of the case being used and what had been done to IT.....rather than the quality of the bullets utilized!!

 

[Canadian Bushman]

Thats very interesting. Did you ever shoot the mismatched bullets at 1k?

 

[WildRose]

This is something ive pondered after reading the (insert brand name) fail threads, and after my buddy returned from an axis hunt with two dead axis, five beautifully petaled bullets, and a bunch of questions. None which i was able to answer.
Now im not trying to start a war simply sharing thoughts and seeking opinions.

We really do live in a golden age of bullets. There are so many awesome bullets out there, that you could close your eyes pick one and make good things happen with it. I would really have to go out of my way to find a bad bullet. Especially when compared to the musket balls my grandfather use to shoot.

On the other hand, us nit picking every last little detail, weighing bullets checking bearing surface lengths, comparing ogives, meplats, weight retention and B.C.'s are probably what drove the industry to become what it is.

So i ask you for your humble opinion, are we too critical of modern bullets?

Yes we are.

Some people want to blame anyone and anything other than themselves for their own failures. Total miss, blame scope, rifle, bullet, powder, ammo manufacturer.

Wounded animal runs off. Blame Rifle, Bullet, Scope, Powder, manufacturer... .

But beyond that we are for the most part very accomplished shooters with the ability and technology to make shots on a regular basis that the average hunter thinks are impossible or only possible with divine intervention.

We are people who's ability to deliver precision shots on targets indeed does exceed the capabilities of a lot of our equipment and components

The above makes us persnickity, nit picky people always demanding better from ourselves and our equipment and components.

No one ever achieved amazing success at much of anything being satisfied with the average, or even just a little better than average.

 

[HARPERC]

I agree! Most people need to learn shot-placement than they do anything. Why on earth would you shoulder-shoot a whitetail deer? They're gonna run regardless. Might as well save the meat and make a lung-shot. Bullets will perform fine in that regard.

A lot of whitetail are either partially covered by brush, or moving out, and shot placement isn't as much of a choice as is ideal.

By asking for more we've got more, and I believe that's going to continue. If not in construction perhaps more selection. Trial and error will play a part, but progress will be made by dissatisfied folks.

Yes there are some great bullets out there, yes I need to be a better shot, yes shot placement is critical, does the bullet choice need to be driven by the parameters it will be used in? yes. Will I look at new developments? absolutely.

 

[Pdvdh]

I'd rather read a member's posted experience with a bullet used on game any day, than an advertisement from a bullet manufacturer.

As best as I could tell, Elmer Keith never fired a Ruger factory rifle in the 1970s that shot groups exceeding 1" at 100 yards, based on the gun review articles he authored. During that same time period, I never fired a Ruger factory rifle that grouped better than 1" groups at 100 yards. It wasn't until internet-based forums allowed for the free, largely impartial, communication and exchange of product use experiences that unbiased information became readily available. Be it bullets, rifles, barrels, scopes, rangefinders, or any of the other equipment hunters purchase and use in their hobby.

Are we too critical? Not critical enough? I'm not really concerned. I value the access to product use information that's representative, rather than biased due to commercial interests or self-serving interests. As in I'll scratch your back if you scratch mine.

Any time people are allowed to express their product use experiences and their opinions about those experiences, there's potential for criticism. I prefer the criticism, rather than the sugar-coated fairy tail versions.

 

[dpicciuto2001]

I don't think we are too critical. I personally expect to get what I pay for. Shot placement, load development, and practice are all essential. However some bullets just don't perform as advertised on game. You'll never know how a bullet performs on an animal until you or a reliable source does so. Also, ballistic programs are going to get you close but probably not perfect. Taking the time to figure out performance by actual shooting is the only way to be certain. Same thing goes for archery broad heads.

 

[varmintH8R]

I'd rather read a member's posted experience with a bullet used on game any day, than an advertisement from a bullet manufacturer.

As best as I could tell, Elmer Keith never fired a Ruger factory rifle in the 1970s that shot groups exceeding 1" at 100 yards, based on the gun review articles he authored. During that same time period, I never fired a Ruger factory rifle that grouped better than 1" groups at 100 yards. It wasn't until internet-based forums allowed for the free, largely impartial, communication and exchange of product use experiences that unbiased information became readily available. Be it bullets, rifles, barrels, scopes, rangefinders, or any of the other equipment hunters purchase and use in their hobby.

Are we too critical? Not critical enough? I'm not really concerned. I value the access to product use information that's representative, rather than biased due to commercial interests or self-serving interests. As in I'll scratch your back if you scratch mine.

Any time people are allowed to express their product use experiences and their opinions about those experiences, there's potential for criticism. I prefer the criticism, rather than the sugar-coated fairy tail versions.

I tend to agree with this. By reviewing critical reports (when measured against the backstory) we all learn something.

Most of us with field experience can pretty quickly weed out the "blamers" when we also hear the details of the story. In some cases, we get the opposite - people praising bullet performance with placement that is maybe not ideal. We learn something there too.

I find the bullet debates thought provoking and highly educational.

 

[MudRunner2005]

A lot of whitetail are either partially covered by brush, or moving out, and shot placement isn't as much of a choice as is ideal.

By asking for more we've got more, and I believe that's going to continue. If not in construction perhaps more selection. Trial and error will play a part, but progress will be made by dissatisfied folks.

Yes there are some great bullets out there, yes I need to be a better shot, yes shot placement is critical, does the bullet choice need to be driven by the parameters it will be used in? yes. Will I look at new developments? absolutely.

I don't shoot into brush, and I have plenty of time to wait for an ideal shot and get my shot lined up exactly where I want it. Take my time. Breath. Exhale. Rease the beast...

 

[MudRunner2005]

Yes we are.

Some people want to blame anyone and anything other than themselves for their own failures. Total miss, blame scope, rifle, bullet, powder, ammo manufacturer.

Wounded animal runs off. Blame Rifle, Bullet, Scope, Powder, manufacturer... .

But beyond that we are for the most part very accomplished shooters with the ability and technology to make shots on a regular basis that the average hunter thinks are impossible or only possible with divine intervention.

We are people who's ability to deliver precision shots on targets indeed does exceed the capabilities of a lot of our equipment and components

The above makes us persnickity, nit picky people always demanding better from ourselves and our equipment and components.

No one ever achieved amazing success at much of anything being satisfied with the average, or even just a little better than average.

Very well said Rose. Granted, sometimes blets will fail, but not evertime an animal doesn't drop in its tracks means it's the bullet's fault. And alot of people love blaming the bullet, gun, scope, weather, sunlight, etc...