I do not reload, so my shooting is confined to factory ammunition. As I understand it, the old thumb rule of having the bullet stay in 'em to produce max damage is not necessarily true. High velocity bullets kill by destroying essential internal machinery. Hearts. Lungs. Electrical wiring (nerves). Circulatory components, and capillary beds located in other internal organs. In order to do that, penetration is necessary. The more penetration, the better.

I was just reading an article on "bear bullets," in which the writer was testing different .30 caliber bullets using an 06. The bullets are Triple shock, GPA, and interbond.

I'm using a 7mm-08 primarily for deer and antelope. What factory ammunation is available that provides that sort of penetration?

IMHO, sufficient penetration is secondary to traumatic shock (e.g., energy release to critical organs and vascular tissue). If the penetration is enough to reach these intended organs, then you're fine. On the flip side, if you use a rapidly expanding bullet like a polymer tip, non-bonded model, most of the energy can be absorbed on the shoulder plate with little resulting damage to the animal's powerplant.

I don't agree with the "more the better" statement. A FMJ bullet going through & through with little damage to the organs is meaningless.

A high quality, CONTROLLED expansion bullet that makes it to where you need it to go without core separation is the ticket; the long list of these was started by names like Nosler Partition, Speer Hot-Cor and Hornady Interlock. We're lucky today with additional names like Barnes, Swift A-Frames and Norma Oryx.

There's two solutions if you're in doubt. Use a Nosler Partition or a bigger gun.

Bye
Jack

JackG I think the only factory ammo available for the 7-08 that would provide the best penetration would be Federal 140 bear claw and Winchester 140 failsafe. I personally use Hornady Light Mag 139gr SST's. They have connected with many deer and will poke holes coming and going on any broadside shot. I suspect the same result for your prairie goats. I have seen the 139 sst's go through several hogs hit broad side.

JackG I think the only factory ammo available for the 7-08 that would provide the best penetration would be Federal 140 bear claw and Winchester 140 failsafe. I personally use Hornady Light Mag 139gr SST's. They have connected with many deer and will poke holes coming and going on any broadside shot. I suspect the same result for your prairie goats. I have seen the 139 sst's go through several hogs hit broad side.
Hog hunter. Since the Hornaday LMs provide that magic 3000 fps velocity, with a 139 grain projectile, they do attract attention. What rifle are you shooting them from and what sort of accuracy are you getting?

It's my opinion that the 140 Failsafe would be king with respect to penetration. However, in the 7mm-08, and with the antelope/deer on the menu, it's more bullet than is needed. Any std Speer/Hornady/Sierra/Rem/Win loading in the 140 grainers would be plenty sufficient to pass through, even with a shoulder shot at the velocities considered.

I just used a Nosler Partition this past weekend to kill a deer and the exit wound was the size of my fist... no other bullet can do that...

JackG I think the only factory ammo available for the 7-08 that would provide the best penetration would be Federal 140 bear claw and Winchester 140 failsafe. I personally use Hornady Light Mag 139gr SST's. They have connected with many deer and will poke holes coming and going on any broadside shot. I suspect the same result for your prairie goats. I have seen the 139 sst's go through several hogs hit broad side.


I've done a bunch of camparisons on factory numbers (but on .270 ammo...33 different rounds!). The Bear Claw and the Light Mags are the hottest, and hardest hitting (ft/lbs energy over distance). The Fail Safe is not holding as much energy over the same distances. Granted, these are .270 numbers, but I'd guess the 7-08 will show similiar results?

And yes, it is just factory ammo and numbers, so the reality may change on the range/in the field.

But, fun to look on paper ahead of time.

cheers

jonas

I'm using a 7mm-08 primarily for deer and antelope. What factory ammunation is available that provides that sort of penetration?


Deer and antelope are rather light-framed critters. I'd venture that satisfactory results may be had with any plain ol' cup-and-core softpoint on the market. Speer, Sierra, Remington, Hornady -- I've had outstanding results with all of them. I won't venture to put down the performance of the myriad "premium"bullets on the market -- they work astoundingly well, and can allow a hunter to use a caliber that with standard bullets might be a bit too light for the job. But, IMO, the need for them is grossly oversold.

Hog hunter. Since the Hornaday LMs provide that magic 3000 fps velocity, with a 139 grain projectile, they do attract attention. What rifle are you shooting them from and what sort of accuracy are you getting?


JackG I shoot them out of a Model 7 SS. They are the most accurate of many factory cartridges I tried. If I do my part they generally shoot .75" @ 100. For comparison core lokt 140's average about 6" @ 100. Go figure.

Deer and antelope are rather light-framed critters. I'd venture that satisfactory results may be had with any plain ol' cup-and-core softpoint on the market. Speer, Sierra, Remington, Hornady -- I've had outstanding results with all of them. I won't venture to put down the performance of the myriad "premium"bullets on the market -- they work astoundingly well, and can allow a hunter to use a caliber that with standard bullets might be a bit too light for the job. But, IMO, the need for them is grossly oversold.


This is the real truth of the issue and 100% correct. The need for premium bullets for deer and antelope is over marketed. They simply do not need a tough bullet nor excessive penetration. Your run of the mill core lokts, power points, etc are fine for this type of game. A 7-08 is more than adequate for either so your issue isn't penetration. If you were after elk, then I'd say yeah, go for a tougher bullet to make sure you get the penetration to the boiler room.

pisgah nailed it. After 45 years of killing deer, elk, bear and a bunch of other assorted animals I can attest he is giving you the gospel.

I do not reload, so my shooting is confined to factory ammunition. As I understand it, the old thumb rule of having the bullet stay in 'em to produce max damage is not necessarily true. High velocity bullets kill by destroying essential internal machinery. Hearts. Lungs. Electrical wiring (nerves). Circulatory components, and capillary beds located in other internal organs. In order to do that, penetration is necessary. The more penetration, the better.

I was just reading an article on "bear bullets," in which the writer was testing different .30 caliber bullets using an 06. The bullets are Triple shock, GPA, and interbond.

I'm using a 7mm-08 primarily for deer and antelope. What factory ammunation is available that provides that sort of penetration?

Try this ammo. from Norma:
Cal.7mm-08 Rem
Bulletweigt:9,1gram/140grain
Bal.koeff:0,485
Speed V0:860m/s
Energi E0:3367

More info: http://www.norma.cc/ or in eng: http://www.norma.cc/sida/eng/index.html


If you should handreload use this bullet:
7mm/.284 artnr:67004 weight:10,1gram Blyspets Oryx

/MrHunter

Last year I took a very big buck with Hornady's std 154 gr spire point bullet with my Browning BLR in 284 Win.

The deer was "stone dead" in mid air. I couldn't ask for better performance. Premium bullets certainly have their place for larger game such as elk, but are not really necessary for deer. Actually, one of the cheapest bullets available, Remington's core-lok, has probably accounted for more game than all premium bullets combined. It is still an excellent choice.

[QUOTE=Jack Monteith]There's two solutions if you're in doubt. Use a Nosler Partition or a bigger gun.

Great quote Jack.

As for deer and antelope, I have had nothing but perfect success with Nosler 165 gr ballistic tips in .30 cal. (06/.308). They flat hammer deer, even big ones on front quartering shots through the shoulder. Pentration has never been lacking with the 165. I am certain the same would be true with the 140gr 7MM ballistic silver tips. It's sectional density is identical to the 165 gr .30 cal. Winchester sells these rounds if you don't reload. I have found accuracy in the BTs to be superb.

I promise you no deer ever born can survive your 7MM-08 with any good 140 or 150 grain BT bullet through the vitals.

If you want to hunt elk, go to a nosler partition or accubond.

[QUOTE=Jack Monteith]There's two solutions if you're in doubt. Use a Nosler Partition or a bigger gun.

Great quote Jack.

As for deer and antelope, I have had nothing but perfect success with Nosler 165 gr ballistic tips in .30 cal. (06/.308). They flat hammer deer, even big ones on front quartering shots through the shoulder. Pentration has never been lacking with the 165. I am certain the same would be true with the 140gr 7MM ballistic silver tips. It's sectional density is identical to the 165 gr .30 cal. Winchester sells these rounds if you don't reload. I have found accuracy in the BTs to be superb.

I promise you no deer ever born can survive your 7MM-08 with any good 140 or 150 grain BT bullet through the vitals.

If you want to hunt elk, go to a nosler partition or accubond.

As people have said, for most deer, the classic Rem Cor-Loks will work just fine. But, I chose the Accubond (.270, 140/gr) because I think it would hold up better against larger deer (maybe moose), at longer ranges. I guess the idea is that I don't have to change ammo for what I'd be hunting. Is it overkill for a small (120-130lb) deer? Maybe a bit. But, also won't be under-powered.

As for the Ballistic Silver Tips, I've read/heard that they tend to disintergrate at short ranges. I used to bench shoot really really nice groups with them. But the kind of shots we have up here (lots of sub 100 yd), the BST didn't seem like a good choice. As there has been a discussion about the "best all around" caliber, maybe there's a discussion to be had about the "best all around" bullet? Lots more variables there, as bullet performance changes per caliber (I'd imagine).


jonas

As for the Ballistic Silver Tips, I've read/heard that they tend to disintergrate at short ranges.



I don't know about the Ballistic Silver Tips, but years ago when the original Ballistic Tips came out I laid in a supply for use in my .30-06. They were accurate but, man, those things blew up like grenades at typical '06 velocities, all the way out to 200 yards. Even on several broadside lung shots on smallish deer those bullets fragmented and failed to exit. Yes, they killed dramatically even so, but I was quite uncomfortable using them as I felt that they'd fail me on any type of an angle shot. I quit using them in the '06 and eventually used them in milder loads (around 2300 fps) in my old Spanish Mauser .308. At that speed their performance was stellar, even at extreme close range. I haven't used Ballistic Tips in years, but I understand they were later toughened up substantially.

I don't know about the Ballistic Silver Tips, but years ago when the original Ballistic Tips came out I laid in a supply for use in my .30-06. They were accurate but, man, those things blew up like grenades at typical '06 velocities, all the way out to 200 yards. Even on several broadside lung shots on smallish deer those bullets fragmented and failed to exit. Yes, they killed dramatically even so, but I was quite uncomfortable using them as I felt that they'd fail me on any type of an angle shot. I quit using them in the '06 and eventually used them in milder loads (around 2300 fps) in my old Spanish Mauser .308. At that speed their performance was stellar, even at extreme close range. I haven't used Ballistic Tips in years, but I understand they were later toughened up substantially.

I had similar concerns until I shot a really big buck that was quartering towards me right through the shoulder bone. You couldn't have asked for better performance. I have shot several deer clean through with ballistic tip that produced similar exit wound that you would get with any soft point .30-06 bullet. I also once shot a nice buck that faced me head on at very close range and the bullet entered at the sternum and penetrated to the hind end (unfortunately). I actually wish that one would have "blown up" in the chest cavity and stopped.

I have read all the "blow up" stories, but in over 20 deer cleanly killed with 165 BTs between my best friend and I, I have to say that is bunk! I have read that the first year or two the bullets were too fragile and that is where the reputation started. I have a feeling that is the lot the previous poster loaded. Maybe he was using 150s too - I've never used those. I must have started in year three, because the terminal performance on my 165s has been super. As good as any core-lock or hornady inter-lock I ever used, with noticably better accuracy.

I have read all the "blow up" stories, but in over 20 deer cleanly killed with 165 BTs between my best friend and I, I have to say that is bunk! I have read that the first year or two the bullets were too fragile and that is where the reputation started. I have a feeling that is the lot the previous poster loaded. .


I'm sure they were the first batch because, as stated, I bought them when they had just come out and were being touted as the Second Coming. These were 165's, and for anything bigger than coyotes I judged them far too frangible. I can assure you, the stories about those early ones are far from "bunk" but, as I also said, they were toughened up substantially after that.

I'm sure they were the first batch because, as stated, I bought them when they had just come out and were being touted as the Second Coming. These were 165's, and for anything bigger than coyotes I judged them far too frangible. I can assure you, the stories about those early ones are far from "bunk" but, as I also said, they were toughened up substantially after that.


A good place to read up on performaces is at Midway.com. When you get the details of any product, there is a customer review section. According to Winchester, the BST came out in 1997-98. The reports from hunters about highly frangible BSTs are from 2003, 2004 and 2005. But the bahavior of the BST might be different in the .270 than in .30-06.
The issue seems to be the close range shots.

A good place to read up on performaces is at Midway.com. When you get the details of any product, there is a customer review section. According to Winchester, the BST came out in 1997-98. The reports from hunters about highly frangible BSTs are from 2003, 2004 and 2005. But the bahavior of the BST might be different in the .270 than in .30-06.
The issue seems to be the close range shots.


Man, it'd be nice if folks would read a post before responding! Ballistic Silver Tips -- I specifically said I do't know beans about them, never tried them. I was referring to the original Nosler Ballistic Tips which came out 20-some years ago. Jeez...

Man, it'd be nice if folks would read a post before responding! Ballistic Silver Tips -- I specifically said I do't know beans about them, never tried them. I was referring to the original Nosler Ballistic Tips which came out 20-some years ago. Jeez...


If you'd read Nosler's site, you'd learn they list them as basically the same thing. I would guess the only difference is the Lubalox coating and the silver vs. green tip. Nolser makes both. If you can tell me that there's an important difference in construction, then maybe you have a point. Otherwise, I've read the posts, and the manufacturer's data. Seems to suggest that there may still be a problem at short ranges. That is, unless you know something about the construction that makes them signifcantly different. But as you noted above...you don't. I'll leave it at that.

Perhaps there's some massive difference, but Nosler certianly isn't suggesting it. And people are reporting short range disintegration. That's as clear as I can make it.

Watch the promo video...
http://206.29.99.9/Announcements/Product/584152_791000_ST.asx

If you'd read Nosler's site, you'd learn they list them as basically the same thing. I would guess the only difference is the Lubalox coating and the silver vs. green tip. Nolser makes both. If you can tell me that there's an important difference in construction, then maybe you have a point. Otherwise, I've read the posts, and the manufacturer's data. Seems to suggest that there may still be a problem at short ranges. That is, unless you know something about the construction that makes them signifcantly different. But as you noted above...you don't


I'm aware that they're basically the same. Are you aware that they're NOT the same as they were when they first saw the light of day lo those many years ago? I am, and that's all I'm saying.

I'm aware that they're basically the same. Are you aware that they're NOT the same as they were when they first saw the light of day lo those many years ago? I am, and that's all I'm saying.


Have they been made better? Perhaps. But the reports are still coming in. I don't think hunters tend to make up what happens to their bullets in the animals they drop.

Evidence seems to indicate that there may still be issues. That's all I'm saying.

Well, that's enough of that. No need to get too fired up before tomorrow's opening hunt.

If they work for people, great. If not, switch! :)

Hope to report a deer on Wed...shot with an Accubond!! :):)

cheers

jonas

I'm sold on the Swift Scirrocos. Especially at 300 RUM velocities. They hold together and retain alot of their wieght. My backstop is good old NW CO clay and gets very hard when it's dry. The 165 grainers I recovered wieghed 115 grains. I know that hard clay doesn't simulate flesh and bone but after that much punishment I thought they held up pretty well. I killed my elk with a 250 yd neck shot that completely shattered his spinal column and still passed thru.

I didn't mean to start a fight. I guess I just bought good lots of 165 gr BTs. I have always been a Nosler guy, but may have to check out the Swifts. Anyway, I am out now and am interested in 150 gr or 165 gr Accu-bonds (30 cal). If anyone can report some result on these, please do it here.

Hunt Safe!

GO CHIEFS

hey bird dog: not wanting to start a fight neither. I tried the nosler 180 grain solid base bullets in the 06 some years back when I was young and foolish :rolleyes: . I think they are like the accubond is now. A very accurate bullet but too derned exspensive to shoot in the volume I like to. Use the hornady 165 interlocks in the 06 now . As soon as I get the sierras all shot up in the 7 mag I'll try some Scirrocos in it too.

I'll tell you right now that ballistic tips do blow up... but they kill just about everything they hit... and they don't run around in the cavity like other bullets that retain a lot of weight can... the bottom line is that a bullet that expands and doesn't pass through transfers all of its energy to the critter... hydrostatic shock is what kills animals, not blood loss...

hey bird dog: not wanting to start a fight neither. I tried the nosler 180 grain solid base bullets in the 06 some years back when I was young and foolish :rolleyes: . I think they are like the accubond is now. A very accurate bullet but too derned exspensive to shoot in the volume I like to. Use the hornady 165 interlocks in the 06 now . As soon as I get the sierras all shot up in the 7 mag I'll try some Scirrocos in it too.

I have killed 3 or 4 deer with 150 gr boat tail interlocks with no complaints. The only problem I had with hornady is the one box I bought had 5 or 6 smaller bullets in them. Looked to be 6.5s or .270s flat base interlocks. This was many years back. I sent them to hornady with a letter and requested a fresh new box. They said I must have mixed them up. Well that wasn't possible because all I loaded at the time was .30-06. Pretty hard to mix in a .270 bullet when I didn't have any! They ended up sending me a plasic baggy with 15 new interlocks. Cheap and classless customer service, so I have steered away from that brand ever since.

hydrostatic shock is what kills animals, not blood loss...


Right! This is why it is absolutely impossible to kill deer with an arrow, a muzzleloader firing roundball, or any weapon firing a heavy hardcast bullet at moderate velocities. :rolleyes:

Last year I took a very big buck with Hornady's std 154 gr spire point bullet with my Browning BLR in 284 Win.

The deer was "stone dead" in mid air. I couldn't ask for better performance. Premium bullets certainly have their place for larger game such as elk, but are not really necessary for deer. Actually, one of the cheapest bullets available, Remington's core-lok, has probably accounted for more game than all premium bullets combined. It is still an excellent choice.

Core-loc that's all we've ever used in .270 & 30-06...always a tiny hole going in and a larger one comming out...I took a doe w/ my '06 that was close. bullet broke the near leg, blew the bottom off the heart & trashed the other leg on the way out...I've never found one inside a deer, even way back when I shot the old 300 Savage.

I have never lost a deer with a Nosler ballistic tip but I did have a 150 grainer from a 7 mag blow up in a deer at about 50 yards. SST's and core-lock have always punched 2 holes for me at same and closer distances as Im sure many of the new super bullets would. On the plus side for nosler BT I hit a big doe high in the shoulder with a 120 grainer from a 260 Remington = dead deer with complete pass through and 2 broken shoulders and the bottom half of the spine severed. Range was about 150 yards.

Right! This is why it is absolutely impossible to kill deer with an arrow, a muzzleloader firing roundball, or any weapon firing a heavy hardcast bullet at moderate velocities. :rolleyes:

I read an experiment not too long ago by an engineer on terminal ballistics. A few others I recall also addressed the issue and they seem to point to tissue damage, not hydrostatic shock as what kills. I'll have to see if I can find the link before I head up north for a week to go hunting.

I'd say from my experience I'd have to agree as if you think about two bullets from the same caliber, same velocity, etc. except one a FMJ, the other a PSP. Which one is more apt to make a quick kill? I've seen deer shot with FMJ, and they don't die quick and the hole was the size of a pencil, through and though. I suppose we can say that by not mushrooming it doesn't put as much energy in the animal (ie hydrostatic shock) as the PSP, but I tend to believe that it also doesn't create the tissue damage and therefore the quicker kill.

If it were just hydrostatic shock than we wouldn't hear such varied reports of deer (or other game) running sometimes over a hundred yards with properly placed bullets from adequate calibers. Last year my youngest brother shot his first buck, a 5-pt at 50 yards with a 308 Win and 150 grn CT Ballistic Tips. It took off and ran 100 yards and acted like it was never hit. The shot was through the chest cavity and he found pieces of lung on the ground. I'd have to say that a majority of that round was expended in the deer yet it behaved as if it were a clean miss. So that leaves me believing that if it were the shock, any game shot with an adequate caliber would die right there like it was hit with a giant hammer instead of many times running with blown up vitals....JMO ;)

Found that link, some's kinda dry but it's a good read:

http://www.rathcoombe.net/sci-tech/ballistics/wounding.html

http://i13.photobucket.com/albums/a281/wfJack/md3.jpg

This mule deer buck was taken with 150 grain Remington core-lockt ammo. A common yet effective 30-30 ammunition that really does work as well as the ads claim! This buck was shot at about 125 yards or so after a half hour stalk. The bullet went all the way through and vanished into the snow.

I'm convinced standard soft tip ammo is just fine for deer. antelope, wild boar, etc. Your 7mm-08 will kill 'em just as dead with the plain ammo.

But Premium bullets are superb for tough-built animals like moose and elk or zebra and eland. The Premium bullets provide a deeper wound channel for most situations.

Good hunting to you.
TR

I have never lost a deer with a Nosler ballistic tip but I did have a 150 grainer from a 7 mag blow up in a deer at about 50 yards.

Honestly, that's a lot to ask of a bullet, and I'm amazed at how well bullets perform as they do at the vastly varying terminal conditions that they face. I sympathize with the bullet designers faced with design conditions that vary with velocities from a 7x57 to a 7mm RUM, and then add on top of that the variables of range, animal size and bullet placement that the designer has no control over. It's like asking a piping system designer to design a system capable of pumping 2000 gpm, or 4000 gpm, and then expect the pumps to still operate at peak efficiency through the whole range of flows.

All we can (and should) do as ethical hunters is to be informed about the limitations of our tools and make selections that will be suitable for any of the conditions we might face, and then, decide to shoot, or not.

I'm glad we have all of the choices that we do, and our shooting/hunting world would be a bit boring if we didn't have those choices. ;)

Well if hydrostatic shock and not blood loss is what kills animals last Sunday I saw 7 reasons why I won't use a 270 to kill elk with. Well 6 actually, the 7th shot in the head killed him. I'm glad I didn't have to gut that bull let alone eat him. And here is where you'll all tell me that if any of those were well placed shots the elk would have gone down and I would have agreed with you. Well 3 of those shots should have killed that elk but due to poor bullet choice, 130 grain nosler ballistic tips or something like them. They have a green plastic tip at any rate. The bullets failed to hardly penetrate the chest cavity. Yes the left lung was perforated but we all know how far an elk sized kritter can go with a hole in his ribs. :eek: Elk are a tough animal. One that has been hit but not critically can run on adrenilin for a 4377 of long ways.

In my most humble opinion I beleave that if this elk would have been shot with a bullet of better constuction, like say a Hornady Interlock, Nosler Partition, Swift A Frame. Remington Corelokt, Swift Scirroco, etc,etc, or even a cast bullet from somebody's old lever gun it would have penetrated BOTH lungs and at the very least should have been under the hide on the far side.

When I choose a bullet for my rifles I look at these 3 things.
1. accuacy potential - bullet shape
2. intended use- varmints, big game etc
3. velocity of the bullet

Now the bullet I choose for my varmint rifles (.222 and .223) is going to be thin skinned yet constucted well enough to hold together going as fast as it can be accurately be driven. The thin skin will help reduce or eliminate the possibility of ricochets. This important when shooting in open fields where the backstop is a 3 inch high mound of dirt.

My big game bullets are chosen with accuracy and velocity in mind. My 35 Whelen gets a 250 grain Hornady Interlock. It's only going 2400 fps at the muzzle but at 250 grains its not going to be stopped by much less than a brick wall. Even on deer sized game you will be able to eat up to the hole. The only draw back is distance. 300 yds is about as far as I will shoot the Whelen. Not because of energy loss but because of bullet drop.

The 7 mag gets a 150 grain Sierra Game King going about 3000 fps. Although it is a very accurate load, I'm not terribly impressed with this bullet going that fast. It doesn't seem to hold up well on the elk I've killed with it. Especialy on broadside shots to the shoulder. It does make a good deer bullet however, because deer aren't near as tuff as an elk. I've haven't tried Swift Scirrocos yet but that is on my agenda for this winter. I'm sure I will be able to work up a load.

The 30-06 gets a 165 grain Hornady Interlock loaded to 2900 fps. This bullet has taken care of Ben's last 2 elk and one deer. The old Enfield realy likes it's 4350 and this bullet . If I can hold still enough it can put 5 shots in under an inch at 100 yds.

The 300 RUM gets a 165 grain Swift Scirroco loaded to 3380 fps. This is not the fastest load for a 165 but it is the most accurate one for this rifle. I can't help it, I'd rather have small groups than speed any day. I'm still working on a 180 grain Swift Scirroco load but I havn't got there yet.

This is information I have collected in my 30 years of reloading and from listening to other folks talk about their experiences with different bullets and cartridges over the years. One of these fellers is 80 years young and swears by the 270 but uses his old 308 in a 99 Savage for most of his deer hunting and a 338 for elk. Go figure.

Now I've never killed a zebra or an eland or a cape buffalo or any of the other animals that live on the "dark continent" and it doesn't look like I will in the near future. But if I do you can bet your bippy that I will have done my homework and come up with a rifle and bullet combination that will do the job.

recoil junky:

My guide lives in Craig - you may even know him. Through the years he has taken at least 30 elk - he says he has lost count. His rifle is a saddle scabbard worn Remington 721 in .270 Winchester, with a Weaver K4 mounted on top. He says he has total confidence in this rifle, "it's always right on".

Believe me, the last thing I would try to do is to tell him that his rifle isn't adequate. Last month I got my bull with a Browning A-Bolt in .270 Winchester, one shot at 100 yards. He managed to go about 15 yards before falling. I was using a 140 grain Barnes X bullet powered with a maximum charge of H4831. This is the second elk I've taken with this rifle and I couldn't ask for better performance.

8iowa: My point was supposed to be about proper bullet selection, not about calibre or bullet weight. The last thing I wanted to do is turn this into a 270 bashing thread. :rolleyes: Some people see the 270 mentioned and get on the deffensive or offensive right away. Me, I could take or leave the 270. I would take a 270 in a pre '64 model 70 with a K4 Weaver on it if some one had one they were going to throw out. :D

This thread is after all about high penetration bullets. I noticed you use a Barnes X bullet, made for penitration. Excellant choice.

I too have lost count of how many elk I have killed or helped other people pack out, but I do remember the ones that made it farther than they should have due to poor shot placement and/or poor bullet selection.

What's your guide's company name? I know a few of them but not all. There's an outfitter under every tree seems like.

Found that link, some's kinda dry but it's a good read:

http://www.rathcoombe.net/sci-tech/ballistics/wounding.html
M1 - interesting that you should bring up that article. That is exactly what I've been reading over the past two days. The author is apparently an engineer and is technically disciplined. I would suggest any interested person read it. Or more correctly, trudge through it.

Things I had taken for granted, such as "hydrostatic shock," he mathematically demonstrates are gun writer myths. In order to produce a "shock" wave, analogous to sonic shock in air, which is what that implies, due to tissue density, according to his calculations, would require a bullet velocity of around 4900 fps. We all know that's not happening. it's term someone thought up. In the physical world he contends it has no real meaning.

Using kinetic energy as the predictor is faulty as well, according to his analysis. It depends on the quality of that energy. Kinetic energy is simply a product of the mass and the velocity squared, with units corrected. Tremendous kinetic energy can be produced with a high mass and a low velocity, and the damage is nill. So, it depends.

Deformation of bullets occurs in the first few inches of the bullet's path, below about 1700 fps, which comes about pretty fast, there is no more deformation. It's just drilling a hole after that. I don't think I had really thought that one through. Bullets striking tissue is a very dynamic system with everything from bullet diameter, even bullet mass, and velocity, changing constantly in fractions of seconds.

The logic of FMJ limitations, as I always accepted, is that the bullet doesn't dump its energy. This is demonstrated by its passing on through and exiting. This line of thought is that passing through is what allows it to continue to retain its energy and therefore minimize the damage. However, take one bullet in .308, a FMJ, that passes on through compared to a .308 that expands to say .60, which empirically happens depending on the bullet, the wound channels are .0745" in diameter, Vs, .28" in diameter. With an equal path length, the expanded bullet would gouge out almost 4 times the volume of tissue as the FMJ. That happens whether or not the bullets stays in the target. In fact, often high performance bullets hit, expand, and plow right on through leaving an exit wound. Some hunting ammuntion is designed to leave a big exit wound to allow following a blood trail if the critter should book. He argues that it's not the passing or staying, but most likely the amount of tissue the bullet destroys that does the job.

At the tail end of the discussion he does set forth some graphs based on empirical data that as near as I can tell, come down to the wound channel size, both length and diameter, as prime operators in bullet damage and killing.

Part of what lead me to this was reading Karamojo Bell's accounts of hunting in Africa. When it all came down to it, his favorite elephant killing caliber was the Rigby .276. I remember years ago reading that and wondering what he was talking about. I suspected a rustic's misunderstanding of what "caliber" meant (his no mine). Recently someone said that he was refering to the 7X57 Mauser. He killed them, in the triple digits, along with most other critters running around the Continent, using a 7X57. The elephants were done in with brain shots. I guess that brings me back to shot placement. Do sufficient damage to the right components and they die every time.

M1 I put that in my favorites column to be read later . Look's to be some interesting reading.

jack: I don't think I'd have the correct sized certain body parts :rolleyes: to shoot a hefalump with anything less than an M1A1 Abrahms tank. At least he couldn't get me in there. :D

I've read something to that effect to. In the book "Hunter" by J.A. Hunter he talks about using a .475 Jeffery to dispatch elephants, later a.505 Gibbs. He also shot a .275 something but I can't remember what.

Nosler Ballisic Tips 21 - Deer 0

Number 21 came Saturday morning at 80 yds. Tough shot through a small hole inthe brush. Average doe. The 165 green tip caught the back edge of the shoulder going in and exited with a skoal can size hole on the opposite side. Lung matter everywhere. After examining the damage, it looks to me like the front half of the bullet does blow up, but the core passes on through. I say this based on finding the green tip back quite a ways from the main wound channel. I have seen this same pattern quite a few times. I almost always get complete penetration, but I do not think it is the entire bullet passing through. If this is by design, I do not know. Still the record and accuracy of these bullets says it all. I would stay away from 150s at -06 velocities. But the 165s have been foolproof for me!

I just trudged thru most of the rathcoombe site. He does use alot of engineer speak but all in all it's pretty understandable unless you been out in the timber to long.

I had a good physics teacher in highschool who was also a hunter and we got into some pretty good discussions about bullets and mass in motion. Made the girl in the class green around the gills but we all learned something from it. (very small school, 103 students)

Anyway, from what I gleaned from reading this, a thru and thru shot is better than a shot that terminates in the thorax. Just like Dad used to tell me. A blood trail that looks like it was painted witha roller IS very easy to follow and over penitration in a big game bullet is not a bad thing.

I'm not going to empty the magazine of Swift Scirrocos and refill it with Sierra game kings to shoot a deer. He might get away :D

It's a great article, but it's long. I printed it and read parts at my leisure. Recoil, I'd have to agree with you on bullet choice, it's like tools, some are designed for different jobs and IMO, the ballistic tip is not an elk bullet. I could name at least ten othet bullet styles from the Barnes to the Swift A Frame that would have given much better results. He was probably getting lack of penetration due to the bullets not holding together long enough. With a larger caliber (like your 35 Whelen) I believe the BT's have a thicker jacket and you can get away with it but in the 270, you're taking a gamble and should use a bonded or heavy constructed bullet.

Considering the original question, the right bullet for deer/antelope for the 7-08 is anything on the shelf at WalMart.

Dunno why you'd want a "bear load for the 7-08" to kill bitty deer. Bell killed elephants with 7x57 (7-08 twin) solids, but that doesn't relate to deer hunting - unless you're taking brain shots.

Considering the original question, the right bullet for deer/antelope for the 7-08 is anything on the shelf at WalMart.

Yup, and the same bullet choice for a 7mm RUM (for example), is NOT the right choice (unless you're shooting varmints).

Considering the original question, the right bullet for deer/antelope for the 7-08 is anything on the shelf at WalMart.

Dunno why you'd want a "bear load for the 7-08" to kill bitty deer. Bell killed elephants with 7x57 (7-08 twin) solids, but that doesn't relate to deer hunting - unless you're taking brain shots.

You're right Charlie. Bell indeed "brained 'em." There is a parallel in principle however with getting anything on the ground by shooting it. The critical damage done by a modern rifle bullet is the destruction of essential internal organs. Bell got the elephant's brain, the main switchboard, with that little 7X57. In killing thin skinned, low mass, non-dangerous game such as a deer, you've still got to take out essential organs and life support systems. The brain on a deer is I think pretty hard to tag because it's so small. Turning say the lungs and heart to the consistency of pudding provides a much larger target, andwill certainly do the job. You're also right about ammunition, and anything off the shelf will do that.

If that 7mm-08 were given the task of killing heavier game such as elk (and I'm not recommending it, I'm just saying "if") then bullet design as well as the mass would become critical I think.