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

[KHNC]

Have you ever shot a deer, or know of someone else shooting a deer with a larger caliber that also didn’t leave blood?

.50 cal Muzzleloader with powerbelt 220gr bullets leave no blood or a shitty blood trail.

 

[Live_weighT34]

.50 cal Muzzleloader with powerbelt 220gr bullets leave no blood or a shitty blood trail.

Muzzleloaders SUCK but I still love a muzzy hunt every year.

 

[AleksanderSuave]

This is an interesting thread..all 15 pages of it so far.

I'll contribute something as a complete newbie to hunting, but somewhat more comfortable in rifle shooting, and working in data analysis..

I find it odd that the phenomenon when discussing these 3 calibers seems to always come to the circular argument of being "outgunned" for the task at hand.

Im personally interested in going on an elk hunt. It wont happen this year, but its my goal within the next 5 years or less, if tags and all work out.

I have spent more time behind my now second 6.5 creedmoor rifle than anything else I own at this point (20+ arms and the list will keep going up), because I enjoy shooting it, the performance is predictable at distance, its repeatedly accurate, and because the recoil is mild and pleasant. It only got better once I introduced a suppressor to this setup. Recoil now is on par with significantly lighter rounds like 5.56, and it feels hearing-safe as well.

When looking up "elk hunting calibers", I keep seeing back and fourth about 6.5 not being "enough gun" for elk hunting, and suggesting to step up to 6.5 PRC or even 7 prc.

The argument supporting the PRC shift is always "6.5 wont do well past 500 yrds on elk".

Interestingly enough, the other day I decided to google the average distance on elk shots, and wasted a ton of time going down the rabbit hole of MANY forums, including this one and LRH, where guys all discussed the amount of elk they've taken, the average shot distance, and whether it was successful (recovered and packed out and dead after tracking).

The average shot distance, based on EVERY post Ive found on this, was well below 500 yards to begin with (in the US at least). In many cases, it was closer to 150-200 yards, with some occasional outliers coming close to 500 yard shots, but those were in the overwhelming minority. The few guys who did happen to have that in their experience, still averaged 350 yards or less between their combined hunts and in most instances, that was a 1 shot experience that skewed the overall average higher of less than 10 hunts.

What I see quite often which is odd to me, is this moving the goal post criterion for caliber discussions, and then points neglecting the obvious benefit (off the shelf ammo selection, popularity of the round, expanding offerings every year in rifles as well), just to try to justify telling someone else to get something like a 7mm rem mag, neglecting the obvious that the recoil alone (amongst other things) is going to be reasonably more. I also know, and see first hand regularly, at my gun club, guys who get recoil-shy trying their 300 WSM, and look like they're being forced to even shoot it, during sight in season at my club.

We all know someone like this. They are the one who will more than likely wound an animal, by placing a poor shot, due to lack of practice, and more than likely not recover it, regardless of having "enough gun" or not.

Also what gets ignored frequently is that these "enough gun" calibers are routinely within the 1000 round expectancy of barrel life. For those who only take it out once a year to sight in and end up expending less than 1 box of ammo in a whole season, that may be perfectly fine.

However, I like to shoot my deer hunting rifle regularly to maintain proficiency with it, and I'd like to do the same with this future elk rifle, once I build it, so that means at least 2-3 boxes, every other weekend, at minimum of a year, until I feel confident with using it. I may even be up to 100 rounds per session, to start, to really get comfortable with positional shooting, testing ammo, etc.

I'll throw one more newbie thing into the fold. Ammo manufacturers, like anyone else, occasionally put out a product that slips past QC and obviously shouldnt have. Hornady is not immune to that. Theres a multi-caliber recall right now on Hornady Black. Its not the most expensive ammo in their bunch, but its also not the cheapest by any means, for their catalogue.

The post that keeps being referenced to the ELDX that failed...its very possibly that was a bad round. It happens. It also doesnt speak to ELDX as a whole being inadequate, or even the caliber, for the task at hand.

Feel free to disregard all of this with the obvious of me being a new inexperienced hunter. Just wanted to share some observations.

 

[Shraggs]

Late finding this thread on match style failures on game.

I’ll add - older style very frangible type bullets too since I go back in years now. My personal definition is poor performance to incapacitation - time and/or distance. For deer and arrows or bullets 50 yards or less is great and acceptable is 75 yards. Right or wrong my view. Not recovered is certainly worse.

1. Deer 80 yards ish, 32 ws, 170 g Winchester silver tips. Broadside walking. Animal hunched up and moved slowly off in same direction. Very little blood, but enough to recover. Gutting revealed paunch and some liver. Conclusion, bad shot. I was 12, open sights standing…

2. Deer 253 steps activity raking and licking branch and scrape, 7 mag w federal 150 g ballistic tips. At the shot from a deer blind with front rest he was broadside, and took off at the shot. After waiting a bit went to look and found a bit of blood and tracked for 50 yards and it stopped. Got help, and 4 hours later following a pin drop every 10 yards found him. Gutting him revealed a quartering away at rear left rib and only one small piece of copper in front right shoulder and some liver damage. Conclusion, he moved at time of shot enough to rotate and I didn’t see it.

3. Deer at 298 yards walking on edge of uncut hayfield. 223 with 77 tmk. On ground using a very old large round haybail. Very stable no wobble and simply waited until she stopped and fired. She dropped but got up and staggered into woods about 20 yards. Waited a bit and walked over with knife and her head was up! Backed out and grabbed gun and she was up and staggered into thick crap. Waited a few hours before getting her. There was blood where she initially laid but none as I quickly scanned. I did see where she went. Gutting revealed the shot was high, forward and quarter too. Conclusion, it was a bad shot - because as she was walking from initial range point it was at an angle getting closer and the tall grass hid that and I never re ranged and hence dialed down, second the hay did not allow me, my desires, to see feet on the ground for confirmation of broadside or not, and clearly not. Damage was still very goo but high. She 60 yards in all.

No autopsy’s - first two the iPhone was not invented yet and didn’t have a range finder until they were available…

Op, I realize all animals were recovered and in my eyes there was failure. It’s easy to blame a bullet but it was me. Maybe not shooting accuracy per se but timing judgement and certainly orientation perspective. In these situations I’m first thinking what did I do wrong, not my bullet sucks.

I have several other redos in over 4 decades of killing deer and a couple I never recovered and none where with high fragmenting bullets, just the opposite. In those cases I most definitely can point to me making enough small mistakes with similar scenarios but it’s the less damage that extended the range to presumable death on neighbors private property.

It wasn’t until lawnbio mentioned it in another thread. I now shoot smaller calibers I wasn’t always seeing my impact on steel…. Figured out I had a habit of closing my eyes at the shot. Not sure why, maybe the magnums I used to shoot. But I’m still consciously aware when I practice now.

I’ve killed successfully with the 77 tmk and am a real believer. This year I’ve added a 6 creed! To me this is about trade offs. The confidence, low recoil, improved bc and extended range without recoil, ability to spot shots and devastating damage are all pluses (if I were still shooting a 30 cal I’m not sure the Devastation would be a good thing as it scales up) . Depending on terrain no exit is a con. I hate tracking in tall thin grass and deadfall, etc. So limited or no blood could be a real problem if —- there wasn’t a real good shot. The rest, My good shots to date have been dead in less than 20 yards.

If it’s a good shot there should not be any trepidation on the lethality, none.

 

[Southern Lights]

The argument supporting the PRC shift is always "6.5 wont do well past 500 yrds on elk".

Interestingly enough, the other day I decided to google the average distance on elk shots, and wasted a ton of time going down the rabbit hole of MANY forums, including this one and LRH, where guys all discussed the amount of elk they've taken, the average shot distance, and whether it was successful (recovered and packed out and dead after tracking).

The average shot distance, based on EVERY post Ive found on this, was well below 500 yards to begin with (in the US at least). In many cases, it was closer to 150-200 yards, with some occasional outliers coming close to 500 yard shots, but those were in the overwhelming minority. The few guys who did happen to have that in their experience, still averaged 350 yards or less between their combined hunts and in most instances, that was a 1 shot experience that skewed the overall average higher of less than 10 hunts.

There have been huge marketing pushes the past 10+ years by certain bullet companies and scope makers to encourage long-range hunting. Like you note, 99% of my shots on game animals have been under 400, with most well under 300 yards.

In fact, I asked this question of hunting mates here how many times they shot at animals past 500 and the answer is remarkably few. Less than you can count on one hand. These people I asked are excellent competitive shooters and guides. And of those long shots, I heard stories of regret as chances of missing or wounding are very high.

Going further, the horror stories I hear from guides have been people coming here with too much gun, too much scope, too much ballistic gear, and screwing up easy shots well under 200 yards. They either are fumbling around with their ballistics and the animal walks off into the bush, or the worst I heard was ranging an animal at a paltry 150 meters and then needing to shoot it five times with their magnum due to poor shot placement.

I have shot, and seen shot, plenty of deer with 223, 6mm and 6.5mm. We can argue specifics of bullet make, but the calibers work if the shots are placed well.

The takeaway here is that practicing at shorter ranges (300y and in) in weird field positions with calibers that have reasonable recoil for accurate shooting is a really good and practical approach. Also practice doing it quickly and quietly. Big powerful rifles/calibers are rarely needed and often are a disadvantage in practical field use.

 

[pacoalcracker]

Hey, if you don't want the recoil of a larger rifle and want to use a 223 or 6cm or 6.5cm, great. Use it. However, don't shove that sunshine up my ass that it's a better tool than my 06 or most anything else because you can't handle recoil very well or don't choose to. Most men can and do handle a 270 or 06 just fine, and many handle much larger just fine, however I do understand in recent years more and more men are softer than I remember. Sure, even my 22 K-Hornet revolver will kill stuff very dead. That's fine. So is my 06. I don't make excuses for bad shots or bad cartridges or bad bullets regardless what my choice of weapon is. It's about knowing what YOU are capable of...not so much what is in your hands.

 

[Hnthrdr]

So do we have any real hard evidence? We have eld-X shoulder guy’s friend and then some weird metric of full pass through vs no pass through then lots of talk of marginal shots or no animal or what not…. Seems like we don’t have a growing body of evidence for these failures…

 

[The Guide]

Hey, if you don't want the recoil of a larger rifle and want to use a 223 or 6cm or 6.5cm, great. Use it. However, don't shove that sunshine up my ass that it's a better tool than my 06 or most anything else because you can't handle recoil very well or don't choose to. Most men can and do handle a 270 or 06 just fine, and many handle much larger just fine, however I do understand in recent years more and more men are softer than I remember. Sure, even my 22 K-Hornet revolver will kill stuff very dead. That's fine. So is my 06. I don't make excuses for bad shots or bad cartridges or bad bullets regardless what my choice of weapon is. It's about knowing what YOU are capable of...not so much what is in your hands.

Bet you'll use your $2700 fake Remington 700 too. Tell us more, oh great one. We love to hear how your CA FFT TI rifles and big boy cartridges shoot and kill so much better than us lowly smaller caliber Tikka shooters can do. Please preach to us and show us your ways!

I'll go kill a bull elk in 2 weeks with my 6 ARC with the 103 ELDX just to spite your opinions.

Jay

 

[Hnthrdr]

Bet you'll use your $2700 fake Remington 700 too. Tell us more, oh great one. We love to hear how your CA FFT TI rifles and big boy cartridges shoot and kill so much better than us lowly smaller caliber Tikka shooters can do. Please preach to us and show us your ways!

I'll go kill a bull elk in 2 weeks with my 6 ARC with the 103 ELDX just to spite your opinions.

Jay

My CA will take it easy in the safe this year over my lowly little tikka, they do share the same head stamp though… good luck on the elk hunt! Let us know how the 6arc handles!

 

[DagOtto]

Wow, I should have made some popcorn cause this is one entertaining thread.. Way past my bedtime now as I just read the whole thing.

In regards to the debate about the "failure to penetrate" poster with the actual photos...... Here is a BS theory that I haven't seen mentioned. As I read through this thread I kept remembering Form's comments in multiple podcasts that "all bullets fail." And I'm basing my BS theories on the assumption that at some point, every bullet is going to fail to do what was advertised to do, and maybe this was the one in a milion situation. This is also based on a desire to believe the poster and give folks a bit of respect. (knowing damn well that sometimes on the internet that isn't deserved.)

Wouldn't this type of bullet failure be possible if that one specific bullet had a manufacturing error?

1- What if only a partial load of powder was inserted in the cartridge, so the muzzle velocity was much slower than it should have been? Wouldn't this explain a wound like that?
2- OR, what if the lead core was not formed to spec, leaving voids or gaps in between jacket and core, or leaving only a partial core?
3-OR, what if the bullet yawed due to manufacturing error causing it to be out of balance, hitting the hide sideways.

Could any of these explain that type of wound if you take the OPs data as accurate?

------------------------------------------------

Second comment---(it's kinda fun jumping into the bar fight after everyone's out cold on the floor....)

It appears to me that there is a valid argument for some hunters to strongly desire an exit wound for better tracking in heavy cover. While I see a ton of arguing about this, it seems quite reasonable for some to feel like a blood trail is a big advantage in successfully recovering the highest percentage of game possible in heavy cover. (I'm thinking of Moose in Alaska, and Whitetail hunting in upstair NY.)

Taking that as a settled: then an important question arises that I don't see addressed:

Is it true that match/frangible bullets exit animals much less frequently than bonded or monos of the same caliber at the same impact velocity? Can anybody point to any research or large-count analysis that gives us a better feel for the difference?

Secondarily, is it true that match/frangible bullets of the same brand and model will exit more reliably as 1) velocity is increased and/or 2)caliber is increased. Again, can anybody point to any research or large-count analysis that gives us a better feel for if either of these are true and if so, to what degree changes in velocity or caliber makes a difference?

In other words--- do any of you out there have good, fact-based guidance for a hunter who needs/wants a reliable exit wound and bleeding but is also curious to try-out smaller than usual calibers and/or match/frangible bullet?

Thanks

 

[The Guide]

My CA will take it easy in the safe this year over my lowly little tikka, they do share the same head stamp though… good luck on the elk hunt! Let us know how the 6arc handles!

My lowly 6ARC rings steel at 505 and 755 on command with the 103 ELDX. At the elevation I hunt at, I'm still at 1800 to 680 yards but will likely keep shots sub 500 there are only a couple places where I can't get closer than that. Sometimes it is 50 yards in the trees walking a bench and sometimes it is across canyon from treed ridge to open ridge 500 yards away. Always a good time walking the mountains in SW Montana. I'll probably bring my 6.5 PRC Tikka too in case I go further south to some more open areas to hunt with my adult son. Down there, most opportunities are 400 to 800 yards and this lot of 6 ARC ammo is super slow so the velocity isn't there. The 156 Berger loads I have are still at 2000 fps at 1K yards at elevation so no problem with the 6.5 PRC for those open lands.

Jay

 

[HandgunHTR]

Hey, if you don't want the recoil of a larger rifle and want to use a 223 or 6cm or 6.5cm, great. Use it. However, don't shove that sunshine up my ass that it's a better tool than my 06 or most anything else because you can't handle recoil very well or don't choose to. Most men can and do handle a 270 or 06 just fine, and many handle much larger just fine, however I do understand in recent years more and more men are softer than I remember. Sure, even my 22 K-Hornet revolver will kill stuff very dead. That's fine. So is my 06. I don't make excuses for bad shots or bad cartridges or bad bullets regardless what my choice of weapon is. It's about knowing what YOU are capable of...not so much what is in your hands.

Wow! You are such a badass. I want to be like you when I grow up.

 

[Harvey_NW]

So do we have any real hard evidence? We have eld-X shoulder guy’s friend and then some weird metric of full pass through vs no pass through then lots of talk of marginal shots or no animal or what not…. Seems like we don’t have a growing body of evidence for these failures…

I literally relayed a first hand situation with pictures that showed a deer shoulder with a wound where 99% of hunters aim, a peeled back jacket and deformed lead core, internal pictures of a cavity with a ton of bloodshot and no penetrations. I got told my friend is lying, people that aren't Delta Force or SEAL team don't actually remember what they did, those aren't pictures of the same deer and he's after personal gain, he didn't see another deer in front of the one he shot perfectly where he was aiming, etc.

You can't make that shit up. It appears no amount of evidence or attestation will appease the cult, if you're not there, it doesn't matter.

 

[ElPollo]

Hey, if you don't want the recoil of a larger rifle and want to use a 223 or 6cm or 6.5cm, great. Use it. However, don't shove that sunshine up my ass that it's a better tool than my 06 or most anything else because you can't handle recoil very well or don't choose to. Most men can and do handle a 270 or 06 just fine, and many handle much larger just fine, however I do understand in recent years more and more men are softer than I remember. Sure, even my 22 K-Hornet revolver will kill stuff very dead. That's fine. So is my 06. I don't make excuses for bad shots or bad cartridges or bad bullets regardless what my choice of weapon is. It's about knowing what YOU are capable of...not so much what is in your hands.

Too much coffee? Relax, no one cares what caliber you use.

 

[kevingm1987]

This is an interesting thread..all 15 pages of it so far.

I'll contribute something as a complete newbie to hunting, but somewhat more comfortable in rifle shooting, and working in data analysis..

I find it odd that the phenomenon when discussing these 3 calibers seems to always come to the circular argument of being "outgunned" for the task at hand.

Im personally interested in going on an elk hunt. It wont happen this year, but its my goal within the next 5 years or less, if tags and all work out.

I have spent more time behind my now second 6.5 creedmoor rifle than anything else I own at this point (20+ arms and the list will keep going up), because I enjoy shooting it, the performance is predictable at distance, its repeatedly accurate, and because the recoil is mild and pleasant. It only got better once I introduced a suppressor to this setup. Recoil now is on par with significantly lighter rounds like 5.56, and it feels hearing-safe as well.

When looking up "elk hunting calibers", I keep seeing back and fourth about 6.5 not being "enough gun" for elk hunting, and suggesting to step up to 6.5 PRC or even 7 prc.

The argument supporting the PRC shift is always "6.5 wont do well past 500 yrds on elk".

Interestingly enough, the other day I decided to google the average distance on elk shots, and wasted a ton of time going down the rabbit hole of MANY forums, including this one and LRH, where guys all discussed the amount of elk they've taken, the average shot distance, and whether it was successful (recovered and packed out and dead after tracking).

The average shot distance, based on EVERY post Ive found on this, was well below 500 yards to begin with (in the US at least). In many cases, it was closer to 150-200 yards, with some occasional outliers coming close to 500 yard shots, but those were in the overwhelming minority. The few guys who did happen to have that in their experience, still averaged 350 yards or less between their combined hunts and in most instances, that was a 1 shot experience that skewed the overall average higher of less than 10 hunts.

What I see quite often which is odd to me, is this moving the goal post criterion for caliber discussions, and then points neglecting the obvious benefit (off the shelf ammo selection, popularity of the round, expanding offerings every year in rifles as well), just to try to justify telling someone else to get something like a 7mm rem mag, neglecting the obvious that the recoil alone (amongst other things) is going to be reasonably more. I also know, and see first hand regularly, at my gun club, guys who get recoil-shy trying their 300 WSM, and look like they're being forced to even shoot it, during sight in season at my club.

We all know someone like this. They are the one who will more than likely wound an animal, by placing a poor shot, due to lack of practice, and more than likely not recover it, regardless of having "enough gun" or not.

Also what gets ignored frequently is that these "enough gun" calibers are routinely within the 1000 round expectancy of barrel life. For those who only take it out once a year to sight in and end up expending less than 1 box of ammo in a whole season, that may be perfectly fine.

However, I like to shoot my deer hunting rifle regularly to maintain proficiency with it, and I'd like to do the same with this future elk rifle, once I build it, so that means at least 2-3 boxes, every other weekend, at minimum of a year, until I feel confident with using it. I may even be up to 100 rounds per session, to start, to really get comfortable with positional shooting, testing ammo, etc.

I'll throw one more newbie thing into the fold. Ammo manufacturers, like anyone else, occasionally put out a product that slips past QC and obviously shouldnt have. Hornady is not immune to that. Theres a multi-caliber recall right now on Hornady Black. Its not the most expensive ammo in their bunch, but its also not the cheapest by any means, for their catalogue.

The post that keeps being referenced to the ELDX that failed...its very possibly that was a bad round. It happens. It also doesnt speak to ELDX as a whole being inadequate, or even the caliber, for the task at hand.

Feel free to disregard all of this with the obvious of me being a new inexperienced hunter. Just wanted to share some observations.

Remember a 24" 6.5cm and a 20" 6.5prc are the same gun...

.

 

[Harvey_NW]

Remember a 24" 6.5cm and a 20" 6.5prc are the same gun...

.View attachment 786150

Not if hand loading lol. My 21" PRC sends the 143 at 2930.

 

[Macintosh]

Wow, I should have made some popcorn cause this is one entertaining thread.. Way past my bedtime now as I just read the whole thing.

In regards to the debate about the "failure to penetrate" poster with the actual photos...... Here is a BS theory that I haven't seen mentioned. As I read through this thread I kept remembering Form's comments in multiple podcasts that "all bullets fail." And I'm basing my BS theories on the assumption that at some point, every bullet is going to fail to do what was advertised to do, and maybe this was the one in a milion situation. This is also based on a desire to believe the poster and give folks a bit of respect. (knowing damn well that sometimes on the internet that isn't deserved.)

Wouldn't this type of bullet failure be possible if that one specific bullet had a manufacturing error?

1- What if only a partial load of powder was inserted in the cartridge, so the muzzle velocity was much slower than it should have been? Wouldn't this explain a wound like that?
2- OR, what if the lead core was not formed to spec, leaving voids or gaps in between jacket and core, or leaving only a partial core?
3-OR, what if the bullet yawed due to manufacturing error causing it to be out of balance, hitting the hide sideways.

Could any of these explain that type of wound if you take the OPs data as accurate?

------------------------------------------------

Second comment---(it's kinda fun jumping into the bar fight after everyone's out cold on the floor....)

It appears to me that there is a valid argument for some hunters to strongly desire an exit wound for better tracking in heavy cover. While I see a ton of arguing about this, it seems quite reasonable for some to feel like a blood trail is a big advantage in successfully recovering the highest percentage of game possible in heavy cover. (I'm thinking of Moose in Alaska, and Whitetail hunting in upstair NY.)

Taking that as a settled: then an important question arises that I don't see addressed:

Is it true that match/frangible bullets exit animals much less frequently than bonded or monos of the same caliber at the same impact velocity? Can anybody point to any research or large-count analysis that gives us a better feel for the difference?

Secondarily, is it true that match/frangible bullets of the same brand and model will exit more reliably as 1) velocity is increased and/or 2)caliber is increased. Again, can anybody point to any research or large-count analysis that gives us a better feel for if either of these are true and if so, to what degree changes in velocity or caliber makes a difference?

In other words--- do any of you out there have good, fact-based guidance for a hunter who needs/wants a reliable exit wound and bleeding but is also curious to try-out smaller than usual calibers and/or match/frangible bullet?

Thanks

Re pass thru’s.
A barnes with a huge frontal area often stops under the hide on the far side. Not so often ime on deer, but have seen this on a couple elk out of a small total # of elk kills.

Theres lots of info on what it takes to get more penetration out of a frangible bullet—it takes a heavier bullet relative to the caliber. So a 77gr .224 or a 108gr 6mm will probably penetrate deeper than a 130 gr .308. I cant help with quantifying that, but that’s ^^ been discussed ad nauseum here.

 

[Hnthrdr]

I literally relayed a first hand situation with pictures that showed a deer shoulder with a wound where 99% of hunters aim, a peeled back jacket and deformed lead core, internal pictures of a cavity with a ton of bloodshot and no penetrations. I got told my friend is lying, people that aren't Delta Force or SEAL team don't actually remember what they did, those aren't pictures of the same deer and he's after personal gain, he didn't see another deer in front of the one he shot perfectly where he was aiming, etc.

You can't make that shit up. It appears no amount of evidence or attestation will appease the cult, if you're not there, it doesn't matter.

Dude i mentioned that as the 1 fail that we have! But we have 13 pages of not a whole lot else, a few stories and lots of bickering about metrics! Chill Winston

 

[Harvey_NW]

Dude i mentioned that as the 1 fail that we have! But we have 13 pages of not a whole lot else, a few stories and lots of bickering about metrics! Chill Winston

Not directed at you, just generally speaking. It got comical.

 

[The Guide]

Remember a 24" 6.5cm and a 20" 6.5prc are the same gun...

.View attachment 786150

My 24" 6.5CM with the 147 ELDM is 2599 fps and my 22" 6.5 PRC with the 147 ELDM is 2830 fps. Even if I lost 100 fps going from 22" to 20", I'd still be 130 fps faster than the 24" 6.5CM. This is with factory Hornady ammo. With handloads, you can push the 6.5 PRC far harder than the 6.5CM.

Jay