[ENGLANDER]

Hello from Scotland~

I have just read an interesting article by Ralph T.Walker entitled "one mans opinion"

One mans search for the ultimate White tail bullet for the .30-06, Mr Walker says that the often recommended 150/165gn sp bullets are lacking. His point being that they exit from the perfect heart shot and while they posses plenty of energy, most sails out into the woods !
While such a shot is "fatal" often the result is a run before the deer drops which can be a real pain when shots frequently present themselves in fading light.

Mr Walkers search was for a bullet that dumped all or most its energy into the deer thus resulting in a drop to the shot. His search lead him to try the Speer 130 gn HP, he found it would completely break up within the body cavity with out exiting.The result was devastating ..............

But of course thats only one mans opinion whats yours.....................

Mr Walker raises some interesting points in his artilce and offers a rather unconventional solution.

Englander

 

[Bill Lester]

If one is willing to limit themselves to perfect, unobstructed heart/lung shots from the front and sides then this theory has merit. It's very much the idea promoted by Roy Weatherby. But in my opinion it fails to consider two important points:

1) Less than perfect broadside or straight-on shots. On anything larger than pronghorn antelope I doubt the Speer 130-grain HP at .30-06 velocities could provide sufficient penetration if the shot angle isn't "just so." That can lead to big problems and fast. In my own experience you can count on perfect shot angles maybe 30% of the time. For me, Mr. Walker's theory doesn't leave enough margin for error.

2) Blood trails. I often hunt very dense woods that would make an old courier du bois feel right at home. As Mr. Walker says, many times thoroughly lethal hits are followed by a frantic run into the forest. Now where he sees a perforating hit as a liability, I see it as a great help at dusk. A solid blood trail created by a sizeable exit wound can mean the difference between venison in the freezer and a lost buck. Again, if everything goes right for Mr. Walker you don't have to worry about blood trails. But quite often everything doesn't work the way we want it to and at those times an exit wound is both humane and useful from a recovery standpoint.

I'll stick to the 150-grain in non-magnum .30 calibers for deer. I've seen a fair number of whitetails harvested with the combination and most dropped within yards of being hit.

 

[Chief RID]

Of coarse this is discussed on every long trail job at dusk and everytime a deer falls in it's tracks at the shot right as the light fades. I'll just give you last nights discussion.

Before the hunt I was admiring the butt shell holder full of 7mm08 rounds on my friends M77. He had the winchester nichel plated brass with the Win. plastic tip 140 gr bullet. This is a new gun for my friend who has always shot his trusty Rem slide gun in .308 and used 150 gr. core locs exclusively for 30 years. I asked him why change his bullet preference just because he had a new gun and he said he did not want to mix up his loads so he has his brass for the .308 and the shinny cartridge with the striking back and gray tip bullet for the 7mm08. Good reasoning but what about the difference in bullet performance. He said I shot for the base of the neck when in close and for both shoulder or the off shoulder on longer shots according to the angle. The balistic tip should do just fine for his shots. Who can argue with 30 years of deer hunting experience from Wis. to Ariz to Florida and all points inbetween. ( military you know).

Well as luck would have it he got a chance last night to try it out and the little button buck fell in its track. He had a broad side at 80 yds and hit low in the shoulder, shattering it and the bullet exploaded and the jacket exited upper back on same side. The core was found just under the skin on the off shoulder. The little buck kicked once as it lay on the ground at the spot where it was shot.

I think my phylosophy is if you want to conserve meat, take shots that conserve meat and pass up those that don't. If you want to take those shots that drop them on the spot you need to hit those areas with a lot of enegy and expend as much as possible there. If you want a blood trail and conserve meat shoot a large caliber and a hard non expanding bullet. You know, the "eat right up to the hole" concept.

After I have killed hundreds of bucks or been there to see the results first hand I will have to decide for myself but it is a good idea to consider these things and know what you want to do and have the equipment to do it before we go afield.

 

[loader]

This is the age old penetration - expansion paradox: on paper, good expansion reduces penetration.Many of our best modern bullet technologies are intended to expand well and to penetrate enough to cover bad shooting angles at the same time.

However, all bullets release energy as both momentum and as heat when making a wound channel. The smaller the diameter of the bullet, the more energy is released as heat. Even without much expansion, this heat can be devastating on tissue because water is converted to steam with explosive effects.

So, if one can get a small diameter bullet with a good sectional density go fast and expand moderately, you will get surprisingly large wound channels AND good penetration.

For deer sized game, this works out to a 243 Win or 6mm Rem with sturdy 100 gr bullets. These have the same sectional density as 120 gr 6.5mm, 130 gr .277, 140 gr 7mm and 165 gr .308 bullets. However, as these diameters get bigger, the bullets become more dependent on expansion for creating a wound channel and the expansion/penetration trade off gets harder to make. This is why the trade off is hard to make for the '06 on deer sized game.

 

[William Iorg]

How to say this in a thousand words or less...
I have tried both methods on our little whitetails. The Speer 130 jfn in the .307 kills instantly and penetrates further than I thought possible. Of course we are talking about a 2300 fps muzzle velocity in the .307. I prefer the 170 grain bullets designed for the .30-30 as they both penetrate and expand quickly. Niether Speer or Sierra 170's have ever failed me from any direction. I agree that hunting conditions and whether or not the meat is the most important thing is a deciding factor. My biggest hunting problems have been with bullets that are too tough for the game I am hunting and fail to expand. The 220 Speer in the .356 is a case in point. Works great on bigger game. But even from "bad" angles at close range it is only just beggining to expand as it exits. I have been better served by the 200 grain round noses or cast bullets in the .356. We have a lot of brush and if the animal does not drop at the shot a good blood trail sure is nice. My wife follows the blood trail while I watch ahead. She has better eyes! Anyone else have trouble finding those little specks of blood?

 

[loader]

I agree completely with the "too tough" bullet problem. North American deer do not require tough bullets or a lot of energy to harvest humanely and consistently. This is why the 30-30 does so well as a woods rifle for deer.

At longer ranges we need to flatten the trajectory, but that's about all. Any rapidly expanding bullet with a sectional density of around .245 hitting the target at 2000 fps or more will do the job on deer.

There is really no difference between a 165 gr .308 and a 100 gr .243 for this longer range hunting as long as they are doing 2000 fps or more and expand well at that velocity.

 

[Gunnut45/454]

I shot a doe at about 80 yds with a Speer 165 BT and it completely blow -up in the chest cavity- looked like a shotgun blast on th opposite shoulder . Killed the deer instantly so you don't need the use a hollow piont to get hollow piont results.

 

[IDShooter]

Gentlemen,
The myth here is that a rapidly expanding bullet always drops game quicker. My personal experience tells me this simply isn't true. The only animal I have shot that dropped right away and was NOT hit in some part of the central nervous system was a pronghorn shot in the lungs from about 200yds with the pokey ol' 308 with a 150gr Hornady, which completely penetrated and did only moderate damage compared to the rapid expanders. In contrast I have hit mule deer and pronghorn in the lungs with rapidly expanding bullets and had the animals run a ways, with little or no blood trail I might add. Also, my wife had a .243 95gr ballistic tip hit a pronghorn's shoulder and fail to enter the chest cavity.
Give me reasonable expansion with as much penetration as possible. All that energy stuff is myth. The animal dies from damage, not energy. And a blood trail from an exit wound is a good thing! ID

 

[Gunnut45/454]

IDShooter
I agree, I like to have two holes! It definately makes tracking easier!! But if the bullet doesn't leave on the other sid i do like them to stay relitively intact- lost alot of meat becuase of that bullet breaking up lke it did.

 

[Bill Lester]

ID is most emphatically right. My own experiences jibe with his observations. Theories of "energy dump" and such belong in the realm of bad science fiction. The only thing we as hunters can rely on in a physical sense is perforation of the animal. Paraphrasing Uncle Elmer, "Two holes to let air in and blood out." Combined with a reasonable amount of bullet expansion and you have a winning combination regardless of starting caliber. Stick to time-tested bullet weights in a given cartridge appropriate for your game and you'll have venison in the freezer.

 

[MikeG]

If kinetic energy killed animals, arrows would be just about totally harmless.....

On the other hand, sure is spectactular to blow up prairie dogs with a .22-250 - but you don't eat them, either.

 

[whitehunter35]

Gentlemen,

I wouldn't be too nervous with a speer HP, if I was sure conditions where perfect. My trouble is that the critter normally refuses to act the way I want him too. This being the case, if a hunter can imagine the worst case, and arm himself accordingly, then he is well advised indeed. Load selection is a compromise, and the smart fellow is the one that pick the best for far ranginig possibilities.

Wasted energy outside the body, I have heard before in the case of through and throughs and yes, penetration into a tree stump doesn't do anybody any good. However, It would sure be nice to have a capable bullet, should the trophy of a lifetime present itself. Better to have and not need, than need and not have, don't you think?

I do prefer a through and through, as tracking is much eaiser, and cleaner too, if I do my part. Many one shot kills here, but only three that dropped in their tracks. One was a 150 Grain Fed Factory 308, that blew up the spine. Next was a 444 marlin 240 factory, and the last was a 200 grain hornady spit 350 Rem Mag over a max charge of 4320. The last bullet i recovered, wrecked the back shoulder and lodged in the hide. Wieghed 160 grains, and mushroomed to 78 caliber. Close enough to perfect for me.

Good hunting fellows, magic time is near.

S.R.

 

[loader]

All of the above is true, and good advice, but the criteria are a bit different between to penetration and the explosive expansion advocates.

If we want the highest probability of droppping an animal in its tracks, explosive expansion wins. If we want the highest probability of harvesting a particular animal, penetration with traditional expansion wins.

The problem with big expansion and energy is that it is more likly that a bad hit will end in lost game - the ultimate disaster.Energy dump does work, but it must be somewhere in the thoracic cavity or nervous system.

A thoracic shot that penetrates both sides must hit very close to the heart to drop an animal in its tracks, but it will generally wind up close by if the right caliber is used. If not, it is much more trackable.

In my opinion, gut shots will slightly favor the explosive expansion, but if it doesn't work you are in big trouble.

Bad angles involving more than a few inches of muscle on entry STRONGLY favor the penetration approach.

 

[Old Jim]

I hunted whitetails for many years with a 30-06. I lost about 40% of every animal I shot because they would not cooperate and give me the "perfect shot". Bone fragments, blood shot meat and so forth made me attempt the 243 with the 100 gr bullets. Disaster. Two deer shot, both lung shots, and both unrecovered until much too late. The 100 gr 243 went sailing through with very limited expansion.Tissue damage was minimal and the exit and entrance hole were nearly the same size, 243.
I quit rifle hunting and went to archery and was totaly amazed by the rapid death and short trails created by an arrow. I had 4 different deer over the years take a lung hit and simple walk away for about 5 steps before collapse. The moral of that story is that you do not need the massive explosive effect of the high speed jacketed bullet.
My hunting this year will be with a 44 mag(for the first time) and I will be shooting heavy, large meplat, hardcast bullets in the hope that they will duplicate the arrow kills rather than the rifle kills.
My 2¢.

 

[Old Jim]

Here's an article that gives more information than you will ever need. I had to print it out to study over the course of several days.

http://www.mindspring.com/~ulfhere/ballistics/wounding.html

 

[kciH]

I know this is a little off topic, but not really because my question pertains to expansion and penetration and potentially extreme velocity as well. What have your experiences been with the x-bullet, not the difficulty in making it shoot prior to knowing the in' n out's of them, but performance on game. I've got a lot of ideas floating around in my head about this and am wondering what your experiences or thought are on the matter. Mr Weatherby's thoughts on the the matter at hand, as previously brought up, are what I'm concerned with. Most people, myself included, who have tried the X understand that you need to use a lighter bullet per caliber than you normally would. Is this really the best of both worlds if your gun will shoot them? Super flat trajectory, good down range energy as a result of the higher starting velcoity, and good penetration as a result of the high retained weight? If the temperature disapation within the animal is a factor, it would also play well for the x in addition to the jagged edge expansion characteristics. What are your thoughts?

 

[William Iorg]

I have seen a number of animals taken with the X bullet. All with the 6.5 X 55, .260 Rem, and the .308 Win. All the animals were recovered, all had an exit wound. All were hit at 75 yards or greater distance, furthest about 185 yards.
Good wound channels with interesting exit wounds, sort of a slice in the muscle and skin. At these short distances and on the light whitetails I saw no advantage over standard jacketed bullets. On heavier game or at greater distance I have no doubt that there is an advantage with the X bullet. I am interested in the Winchester combined technology bullet. I have no problem with the accuracy of the X bullet for hunting.

 

[Old Jim]

Go to the website on the previous page. It discusses x-bullets(favorably), rotational energy(doesn't exist) and explosive steam expansion(also doesn't exist). Far greater detail than could be related here.

 

[Bill Lester]

Agreed with Jim. With temps hot enough for a bullet to super heat blood and tissue to the point of explosive steam, in an instant, the core and most likely the jacket would be liquified before leaving the rifle. In addition, if the phenomena existed, the wound in the animal would just as instantly be cauterized. Anyone who has field dressed game knows that just isn't the case.

 

[loader]

Probably the best way to view these issues is to make a picture of it. On a graph, make your vertical axis velocity running from a low of zero to a high of, say, 3000 fps. Make your horizontal axis inches of tissue froma low of zero to, say, 60 inches.

If a bullet enters the tissue at 2500 fps and zero inches and stops at zero fps and 40 inches, you have a line sloping down from left to right. To start with make it straight.

It is losing 62.5 fps per inch. By thie time it has slowed to 1000 fps, it will have traveled 24 inches, and lost 84% of its kenetic energy. This energy is distributed over the 24 inch wound channel in decreasing amounts as a function of the square of velocity.

Now, modify the line so that it dumps 200 fps per inch from inch 4 to inch 14 and 25 fps per inch from 14 to 24 inches. By inch 14, the bullet has now lost 99% of its energy, and 80% from inch 4 to inch 14.

It is the RATE of bullet deceleration that does the damage, and it matters little whether it is a solid meplat or mushroom that is encountering resistance.

Predicitng this line, and its shape, is the challenge and the mystery.Its not about total kenetic energy, momentum, heat sectional density or expansion.

If you drive a Volvo into a concrete abutment at 60 MPH, and the front end crumples 4 feet, driving the engine under you, a seat belt and air bag will let you walk away. If the front end does not crumple at all, you are dead, period.