.223, 6mm, and 6.5 failures on big game

[JohnJohnson]

As for no experience with the .224 on a moose shoulder, I do not honestly think too many that have actual experience

I do have moose experience and have taken enough animals to develop my own opinions.

These statements seem to contradict each other.

I shot a moose at 45 -50 yards and found a my bullet in the opposite shoulder hide. As luck would have it, I had to use a back up rifle with 180 Barnes bullets. That moose took that bullet surprisingly well at such a close range. DRT for sure, but no exit at that range was eye opening with a bullet known for good penetration.

Why did this experience teach you a lesson about good bullet penetration instead of a lesson on using a bullet that performs better when it's in the animal?

 

[deerhunter628]

These statements seem to contradict each other.

Why did this experience teach you a lesson about good bullet penetration instead of a lesson on using a bullet that performs better when it's in the animal?

How do those statements contradict each other. Someone can have experience with shooting moose, but that experience is shooting them with something other than a .224 bullet.

 

[HuntHarder]

These statements seem to contradict each other.

Why did this experience teach you a lesson about good bullet penetration instead of a lesson on using a bullet that performs better when it's in the animal?

Explain how they contradict. I have never shot a moose in the shoulder with a .224 but I have shot a moose...

The lack of a pass thru at that range with that bullet based on previous experience with that bullet. I have seen that particular load blow thru plenty of elk and deer at longer range. Until someone has actually walked up on a Yukon moose, you can not even grasp how big they are. Bigger than I thought they were gonna be for sure. Not sure if the bullet could have performed any better inside the animal as he expired pretty fast and only took a couple steps.

 

[JohnJohnson]

Explain how they contradict. I have never shot a moose in the shoulder with a .224 but I have shot a moose...

I thought you two were talking about you questioning the use of .223 on moose. And only one of you has any experience actually doing that.

The lack of a pass thru at that range with that bullet based on previous experience with that bullet. I have seen that particular load blow thru plenty of elk and deer at longer range. Until someone has actually walked up on a Yukon moose, you can not even grasp how big they are. Bigger than I thought they were gonna be for sure. Not sure if the bullet could have performed any better inside the animal as he expired pretty fast and only took a couple steps.

The way you said the moose "took the bullet surprisingly well" made it sound a certain way. I've used Barnes 180gr TSXs out of a 300WM and didn't find it to be a very impressive round terminally. Kind of like a glorified arrow almost. But to be clear that wasn't on moose and I don't know what cartridge you were using to launch that 180gr.

Edit: Not sure if anyone has posted this video in this thread. 12:30 for the shooting to start. He gives an explanation of what the bullets did when they hit it if you're morbidly interested.

 

[bmart2622]

Explain how they contradict. I have never shot a moose in the shoulder with a .224 but I have shot a moose...

The lack of a pass thru at that range with that bullet based on previous experience with that bullet. I have seen that particular load blow thru plenty of elk and deer at longer range. Until someone has actually walked up on a Yukon moose, you can not even grasp how big they are. Bigger than I thought they were gonna be for sure. Not sure if the bullet could have performed any better inside the animal as he expired pretty fast and only took a couple steps.

This is the perfect thread for that. Not sure if you knew this but any bullet that doesnt pass thru is a bullet failure.

 

[gbflyer]

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Reburn]

Lol, like last month when you were giving me parenting advice and telling me I was doing it wrong? I take it back, I’m quite confident you are that dense.

Link for this?

 

[Ucsdryder]

Link for this?

You need some tips from form?

 

[Reburn]

You need some tips from form?

I am always down for new and improved ways to F up my kids. I want them to use all of their inheritance on therapy.

Link?

 

[MCS]

I shot a elk last season with a 147 eldm out of a 6.5 prc. Two of the rounds were in the shoulder and they only penetrated through one shoulder with only a few fragments of the jacket making it into the off side shoulder.

I shared this information in another thread and was called a liar by all the small caliber guys because I didn't take pictures.

 

[FredH]

Pretty sure this thread, which could have been useful information has gone off the rails. I have had no failures using the 223 because I have always shot it carefully in consideration of the bullet I was using. I have had some not so great 243 kills because I treated it like a 30-06 a couple times. Plus the 85 grain Partition I used for several years tended to make narrow but deep wound channels. When I started shooting for necks, high shoulder things got right back on track. I had great results with the 100 gr. Sierra Game kings and 95 grain Ballistic Tips. So far with 6.5 diameter bullets, mostly 140 grain Nosler Partitions and Hornady innerlocs I have had nothing but fine results. The last few years I have used mostly the 120 grain Ballistic tips, made one too far back hit which resulted in some work for my dog but was recovered. In my case anyway I can trace my toughest recoveries to bulllets that were too tough or were not placed properly. I have only one time ever had a bullet not give enough penetration.

 

[Choupique]

was called a liar by all the small caliber guys because I didn't take pictures.

I feel like I'm going to be taking a lot of inside the rib cage pictures this year.

Evidently I'm going to have to invite some people to come bushwack some palmettoes to understand why an exit hole might be important to some people.

 

[eric1115]

I was on a 13 day hunt when you killed your bull. Maybe I missed it when I went thru all my notifications. You shooting a moose with a small caliber wasn't a huge event for me. As for me giving advice. I think guys can give their opinion on any subject. I have never eaten a pile of human feces, but i am pretty confident it is gonna taste like shit.... As others have pointed out, you seem to get defensive if guys do not agree with small caliber for large game. Just know that it is the internet and people are allowed to have their own experiences and opinions. You might change some but likely not all.

As for no experience with the .224 on a moose shoulder, I do not honestly think too many that have actual experience. I do have moose experience and have taken enough animals to develop my own opinions. I shot a moose at 45 -50 yards and found a my bullet in the opposite shoulder hide. As luck would have it, I had to use a back up rifle with 180 Barnes bullets. That moose took that bullet surprisingly well at such a close range. DRT for sure, but no exit at that range was eye opening with a bullet known for good penetration.

At any rate, telling people not to comment on a thread is weird. Ignore posts that aren't SME's and read only ones that you feel are. No need to argue with you anymore. This matter is squashed in my book. Good luck on your future hunts, post pictures since it sounds like you have quite a bit of tags.

Not to stick my nose into a discussion I wasn't part of, but it's happening on a public forum so here it goes.

A big part of the "defensiveness" or whatever you perceive it as, comes (I think) from the following pattern: 95% of the people who have tried heavy for caliber match bullets have come to the position that they work very well. 95% of those who say they are not good/effective/optimal/whatever have not actually tried them.

That's the interesting thing about this thread for me... It's a place for the 5% to come and describe the why of "I tried it and didn't get the results I wanted."

That post a couple pages back about the broad head "failure" is a great summary of why these are often unproductive. I posted a report in the .223 mega thread a couple of years ago that described a result I was less than thrilled with. It was met with productive discussion, I think in part because it was more like example #1 in that post than it was like example #2.

 

[Formidilosus]

Link for this?

Who can ask for your proof of suppressor ownership?

Can any law enforcement agent ask for proof? Game warden, sheriff, highway patrol, meter maid? @mtwarden

rokslide.com

 

[rbutcher1234]

lol that thread about suppressor proof was enlightening

 

[roadrunner]

I would say the mechanism is velocity and velocity alone. Work is done - true. Energy is transferred - true. But they don’t cause the bullet to expand. I believe the transfer is a byproduct of the bullet fragmenting due to the bullet hitting the animal and the bullet deforming or fragmenting. My thoughts

No, energy isn't a by product. The only thing velocity does is describe lateral distance covered over time. Velocity does not cause the bullet to expand.

 

[roadrunner]

Work is done on the bullet through resistance. If the bullet meets low resistance it won’t allow the bullet to change upset and damage increased levels of tissue.

I’ll attach the equation of resistance for reference. The big take away is that velocity’s input into the equation for resistance is squared, and energy or mass is not even mentioned.

Velocity is squared because it's a first order integral and the area under the momentum curve. You're analyzing the change in momentum relative to the change in velocity over time, aka, deceleration.

You can cause a bullet to upset by hitting the tip with a hammer. The hammer transmits mass at whatever "speed" to the bullet. The bullet doesn't know if it impacted a target or was impacted by a mechanical instrument.

 

[mxgsfmdpx]

lol that thread about suppressor proof was enlightening

Who’s going to demand to “see your papers” in the back country over a suppressor on a hunting rifle? That was an interesting read through before bed haha.

Anyone willing to take time out of their hunt to appease some sort of nazi style overlord, over a silencer on a hunting gun during hunting season, is part of why my two sons may not even be able to hunt anymore come the next few decades. Sad.

Now let’s get back to the 12 pages of blow ups and splashes!

 

[Southernfried]

I don't have a dog in this hunt yet, but, I'm seriously thinking of building a 22 ARC in an AR, since I already have a 6.5 Grendel, it is just a barrel swap. But this video, and its a little contrarian in that he is shooting wood, concrete, and metal. BUT, the interesting part for me, the 75 ELDM in the 22 arc made the same size hole as a 6mm or 6.5 and 6.8. Im sure anyone can interpret what they see in the video in many different ways, I just thought it was interesting. 22 arc, vs 6 arc vs 6.5G and 6.8 He lists the velocity's etc at end that you can extrapolate the data to apply in your own situation.

 

[Macintosh]

Velocity is squared because it's a first order integral and the area under the momentum curve. Your analyzing the change in momentum relative to the change in velocity over time, aka, deceleration.

You can cause a bullet to upset by hitting the tip with a hammer. The hammer transmits mass at whatever "speed" to the bullet. The bullet doesn't know if it impacted a target or was impacted by a mechanical instrument.

What does this have to do with this thread?
And
You are probably technically correct, but in a way that does more to obscure the issue than to illustrate it. We arent taking about shooting rocks or hitting bullets with hammers. We’re talking about specific bullets (ie a constant) being sent into a specific medium (flesh and bone) that has a narrow range of variation (ie another near-constant). The VARIABLE is velocity. The velocity doesn't CAUSE the upset, but it is PREDICTIVE of the upset. That’s why people are concerned with velocity, is because its the only variable that matters in the only situation that matters. It also allows 1:1 comparison without required translation, including between different bullets, ie this bullet upsets above x velocity, this other bullet requires x+++ velocity.