Forums
New posts
Search forums
What's new
Articles
Latest reviews
Author list
Classifieds
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles and first posts only
Search titles only
By:
New posts
Search forums
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Forums
Hunting
Long Range Hunting & Shooting
Energy or bullet diameter most important?
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Pdvdh" data-source="post: 1235901" data-attributes="member: 4191"><p>My response:</p><p><strong>yobuck</strong> implied the discussion of meat ruined by bullets is off-topic on a long range hunting forum. I questioned why long range hunting would be a cause to exclude the discussion of bullet-ruined meat. It's just as pertinent as when hunting at any other range to me, as well as many other members that post on this Forum.</p><p></p><p>On the back of my response to <strong>yobuck</strong>, you more or less state don't shoot meat if you don't want to experience bullet ruined meat. "<em>If you shoot an animal in the meat, and blame the bullet for meat loss, I'm not sure what to tell you.</em>" So don't shoot meat - problem solved - no need for further discussion - <strong>yobuck</strong> got it right?</p><p></p><p>If I misinterpreted that, then let's move on to my next possible misinterpretation. Who blamed a bullet for meat loss in this Thread, in the context that my bullet hit and ruined meat - therefore I blame the bullet? And was your post directed at anyone in particular? <strong>HammerB1</strong> expressed his disdain for frangible bullets due to the large quantity of bullet damaged meat he's seen them cause, and for their lack of penetration. He blames frangible bullets for their <em><strong>increased</strong></em> rate of meat damage, rather than the simple fact that meat has been damaged, unless I totally misunderstood his Post. His clear preference is the use of a bullet that damages less meat - no matter where that bullet hits the animal. </p><p></p><p>Thus my difficulty interpreting your Post. Was your point as simple as bullets won't damage meat unless they hit meat? That seems way straightforward. Straightforward enough to prompt me to state "get real". Bullets hit meat more often than not, in my experiences, and bullets that hit meat damage meat. If all you were intending was that straightforward statement, then my apology.</p><p></p><p>Virtually every discussion on the subject of bullet-damaged meat I've read on this Forum has been focused on comparisons of the rate/quantity of meat ruined by bullets of differing construction, impacting game at differing velocities. It's a legitimate discussion for hunting game at any distance, in my opinion. And based on the Threads I've read in the past, the subject does enjoy member interest. Your post would be the first that narrows that scope on this subject to, bullets damage meat if you shoot meat. So don't blame a bullet if you shoot it into meat.</p><p></p><p>Best regards. Peace be with us.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Pdvdh, post: 1235901, member: 4191"] My response: [B]yobuck[/B] implied the discussion of meat ruined by bullets is off-topic on a long range hunting forum. I questioned why long range hunting would be a cause to exclude the discussion of bullet-ruined meat. It's just as pertinent as when hunting at any other range to me, as well as many other members that post on this Forum. On the back of my response to [B]yobuck[/B], you more or less state don't shoot meat if you don't want to experience bullet ruined meat. "[I]If you shoot an animal in the meat, and blame the bullet for meat loss, I'm not sure what to tell you.[/I]" So don't shoot meat - problem solved - no need for further discussion - [B]yobuck[/B] got it right? If I misinterpreted that, then let's move on to my next possible misinterpretation. Who blamed a bullet for meat loss in this Thread, in the context that my bullet hit and ruined meat - therefore I blame the bullet? And was your post directed at anyone in particular? [B]HammerB1[/B] expressed his disdain for frangible bullets due to the large quantity of bullet damaged meat he's seen them cause, and for their lack of penetration. He blames frangible bullets for their [I][B]increased[/B][/I] rate of meat damage, rather than the simple fact that meat has been damaged, unless I totally misunderstood his Post. His clear preference is the use of a bullet that damages less meat - no matter where that bullet hits the animal. Thus my difficulty interpreting your Post. Was your point as simple as bullets won't damage meat unless they hit meat? That seems way straightforward. Straightforward enough to prompt me to state "get real". Bullets hit meat more often than not, in my experiences, and bullets that hit meat damage meat. If all you were intending was that straightforward statement, then my apology. Virtually every discussion on the subject of bullet-damaged meat I've read on this Forum has been focused on comparisons of the rate/quantity of meat ruined by bullets of differing construction, impacting game at differing velocities. It's a legitimate discussion for hunting game at any distance, in my opinion. And based on the Threads I've read in the past, the subject does enjoy member interest. Your post would be the first that narrows that scope on this subject to, bullets damage meat if you shoot meat. So don't blame a bullet if you shoot it into meat. Best regards. Peace be with us. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Forums
Hunting
Long Range Hunting & Shooting
Energy or bullet diameter most important?
Top