Anchoring shots/aiming for heavy bone with monolithic bullets

[Wrench]

If you want to anchor an elk, shot #1 goes double lungs.... shot #2 goes CNS. I've seen elk run off with a leg missing.

A mono works based on hydraulic reaction. Keep it smashing wet stuff before the tip plugs with bone.

The only thing ANY bullet does better than a partition is beat the drag.

It doesn't take big, fast or mono to bust shoulders. That's a 6.5/140 bullet at MUCH farther than you're talking about, impact velo around 1800iirc. The onside scapula is the pencil hole, the offside is busted up. This is a bull elk.

 

[nphunter]

Intentionally shooting at bone is dumb no matter what your are shooting. A good shot will anchor an animal soon enough. I’ve killed 20+ elk and have seen well over 100 killed and it’s sucks when butchering when you hit bone. The only lost elk I’ve ever seen from a rifle are crappy shots, low leg hits, jaw hits or similar and we try to kill those if we see them while out hunting.

I would say 9 out of 10 elk we shoot drop in their tracks or very close. Rifles ranging from .243-338’s doesn’t really matter. My current rifle is a 280AI shooting a 168gr VLD, every elk or deer it’s hit has dropped almost instantly, the two exceptions were on a cow my wife shot at 330yards and hit high, she stumbled 30 yards and laid down and was shot again to speed things up. The second was my sons buck he shot at 50 yards last fall that full out sprinted on impact and made it about 100 yards. The 280 is used by my wife and youngest son mostly and has killed 5 elk and 6 deer I believe all with the 168 VLD.

 

[Rich M]

As for rifle, high shoulder shot is king.

Glad you got a better gun. Go shoot you an elk.

 

[Rich M]

Monos were developed to save the condors and bald eagles.... Not for their superior ability to kill big game. I encourage everyone to look past marketing before deciding.

Monos do kill effectively but they have stark disadvantages if looked at objectively. They also have a few advantages but, imo, those don't outweigh the disadvantages.

Do your homework and make a decision... Just do your best to not focus on biased marketing articles.

Best post i seen in a while. Thanks.

 

[txhunter581]

I always shoot for heart/ lungs but I hold tighter to the shoulder than I used to. Missing the sweet spot and hitting a little far back on a few animals made me start doing that. And the heart/ lungs are farther forward than most people think.

 

[wapitibob]

To clarify, I mostly meant aiming for heavy bone when the angle presented put bone in the way of the vitals. Like a quartering-to shot, which I wouldn't attempt with a softer bullet or smaller cartridge. I'm not talking about going out of my way to hit bone if it isn't the best way to get to the lungs.

I am curious about people's experience on elk with the classic "high shoulder" shot though.

View attachment 398859

Anybody ever intentionally shot an elk here?

In this scenario, I wouldn't go out of my way to hit bone. I'd go for the V. But I have heard a ton of whitetail guys recommend this shot on deer.

That picture should be labeled "Off Switch".

 

[35WhelenAI]

I disagree about the genesis of monos being because of condors. I've been shooting Barnes for 30 years long before any lead bans took place. It's a fact lead is poisonous, anybody argues differently lives in another world. And it's a fact that lead is going away at some point. It's not a marketing hype, it's reality.

Shoot a mono that has a polymer tip and it doesn't "plug with bone", lol, which I question unless someone's recovered one that didn't expand and it had bone inside of it. The same failure must happen with the hollow point long range hunting bullets. Apparently monos only rely on hydraulic action to expand and other bullets expand by a different mechanism from what is being said.

 

[Wrench]

You are correct. A mono has a much more difficult time upsetting than a soft lead core in a thin copper jacket.

The secret to bullet performance is not driving the bullet outside of it's upset range.

Mono's just don't do as well at lower speeds. They work fantastic when driven fast. Partitions work from light speed to loafing.

 

[35WhelenAI]

Agreed, monos need more velocity than bullets with a core. Partition is a great design, it still hasn't gone out of style or outgrown its usefulness. It does combine expansion with penetration. I choose monos because the front core of the Partiton has ruined a lot of meat on impact whereas monos keep that to a minimum. And no animal, pronghorn to elk, properly hit with a mono has escaped freezer duty in my use of them. The Partiton was a great sloution to a problem of bullets expanding rapidly and not stopping expansion which does limit presentation shot angles. In my estimation, however, heavy for caliber bullets can afford to expand rapidly, destroy meat on impact, and still have enough left to get the job done. Monos take animals very well, without any of the downsides as long as folks realize they perform better at higher velocity. Simple solution, drive a lighter bullet faster and get the job done with minimal relative meat loss, or go with a heavy for caliber frangible bullet that manages to make it to home plate simply because there was more of it to begin with.

 

[Hoodie]

Interesting to see so many opinions on both ends of the bullet hardness spectrum. I imagine a lot of that has to do with average shot distance.

I took a look at the Berger stability calculator. A lot of the monolithic options in 7mm were right on the cusp of marginal instability. Probably not a big deal all things considered, but I'd rather be sure. I ended up going with the Federal Trophy Bonded Tip. Seems like it's mostly copper with a bonded lead core and weight retention really close to the mono options. Maybe a good compromise. Should penetrate well and also not dump a ton of fragments in the meat,

 

[Indian Summer]

Shake my head. What’s next a missile that only has to land within 20 yards of an elk to be considered good shot placement? Threads like this make me feel old. Two words: Double lunger!

 

[cgasner1]

Shake my head. What’s next a missile that only has to land within 20 yards of an elk to be considered good shot placement? Threads like this make me feel old. Two words: Double lunger!

People put elk on a pedastool. They are a living breathing animal not a armored car. Hit a bull in the lungs with the proper bullet at a appropriate range and it’s a done deal. I’d shoot a bull inside 100 yards with my 204 if that’s what I had in my hands.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Sled]

If you want anchored elk, go to an elk farm and have the "guide" tie it up for you. Otherwise, use your 7mm mag with a good bullet and go hunting. You'll limit the bad outcomes with good shooting and your previously mentioned self limitations.

 

[35WhelenAI]

I agree the Double Lunger going broadside is a great shot, I don't think anyone will disagree. Coming in behind the ribs on an angle going through the rumen of a large ungulate, use a mono or good controlled expansion design and there is an ethical shot to be had. I do not have to question that it will do the job, as the monos have done it, that is experience. I won't drive a rapidly expanding bullet on a hard quartering shot that would otherwise be lethal with a mono, I would be limited to waiting for a better presentation angle. When a person hunts the better part of a lifetime, it is clear animals don't stop and pose broadside. I am not saying anyone shooting any bullet deliberately takes an unethical shot, I simply want the most options when an ethical shot presents itself. An ethical shot can be dictated by bullet choice in my opinion and experience. If there is a shot to be taken that one bullet will cover more bases than another, I'm all in.

 

[Roughwater]

I've vacillated between bow and rifle hunting elk. First two seasons were archery and I passed on shots I didn't feel 100% on. Third year I killed a cow with a rifle. Last year I lost the first bull I hit with an arrow on a shot I felt extremely confident on. Bad experience. Sold my bow and committed to the rifle, which was sort of a backup deal for me with elk up until that point.

The cow I killed year before last was with a 6.5 CM and the 143 ELD-X. I have a firm 300 yard limit. With that cartridge/bullet combo I limited myself to broadside or quartering away shots where I didn't need to punch through any heavy muscle or bone. Pretty much the same shot selection criteria I'd use with a bow. For penetration's sake as well as to limit meat damage.

I picked up a more appropriate dedicated elk rifle for this year (7mm Rem Mag). With the extra velocity I feel comfortable using monos, which wouldn't be my first choice out of the Creedmoor even though I'm sure they'd do fine within my effective range.

Questions:

Anybody intentionally aim for the shoulder when shooting copper bullets?

How has penetration been on steeper quartering shots?

Any issues with limited expansion despite staying above recommended impact velocity? (I'd be at 2400 or so at my max range)

I don't personally have experience with doing it but I have a friend in Wyoming who uses a 28 Nosler and highly recommends shooting Elk in the Shoulder with a 143 gn Hammer copper bullet and has taken several Elk using the combination. He says when you take out the shoulder they don't get back up. DRT.

 

[35WhelenAI]

Hammer copper or any copper/bonded will do on any shot at whatever distance reliable expansion can be achieved. I don't want to cast doubt on the frangible, long range, heavy for caliber bullets however they've come about as long range sniping has become popular versus what a lot of folks considered traditional hunting ranges. They took the more explosive expansion, added more weight and created a market and less meat in the freezer if it's not a barrel busting long-range shot, IMO. It's my opinion long range frangible bullets and mono bullets/controlled expansion bullets cover entirely different spectrums on the hunting continuum. No one denies a mono is not the best bullet for really longer ranges, because of expansion thresholds. Somehow the more frangible bullet crowd get undies in a bundle when those bullets are talked about and the limitations exposed with respect to potential penetration from harder angles and meat loss at closer ranges. None of us can have it both ways, respectfully, IMO.

 

[Sled]

Hammer copper or any copper/bonded will do on any shot at whatever distance reliable expansion can be achieved. I don't want to cast doubt on the frangible, long range, heavy for caliber bullets however they've come about as long range sniping has become popular versus what a lot of folks considered traditional hunting ranges. They took the more explosive expansion, added more weight and created a market and less meat in the freezer if it's not a barrel busting long-range shot, IMO. It's my opinion long range frangible bullets and mono bullets/controlled expansion bullets cover entirely different spectrums on the hunting continuum. No one denies a mono is not the best bullet for really longer ranges, because of expansion thresholds. Somehow the more frangible bullet crowd get undies in a bundle when those bullets are talked about and the limitations exposed with respect to potential penetration from harder angles and meat loss at closer ranges. None of us can have it both ways, respectfully, IMO.

Not sure how it worked out but I have a Barnes lrx and berger hunter that that I purchase as ammo already made and both hit the same poi out to 400. They'd probably hit the same further but I haven't had the need to test it. The lrx will be used for closer shots and the berger for further shots. Both are in the magazine so a quick bolt cycle gets me another option. Both have killed elk for me but I'm favoring the copper bullets lately. Thats why Im switching a few rifles over to the hammers. Best of both worlds in my opinion.

 

[35WhelenAI]

My reason 30 years ago when I started using Barnes copper was they were the best of all worlds. Uncle Albatross who lost an animal and blames a mono but didn't have a different bullet in the gun to take the same shot, doesn't mean much to me. No way to say a different bullet would've done differently. No one can deny any bullet ever made has left a hunter at some point with a question mark as to why they didn't get their animal. And saying they didn't expand enough or leave the damage a person expected, can only mean they got their animal. My question is at what point in the animals death did the bullet fail? I know from the two Barnes I have recovered, they penetrated diagonally on a hard rear quartering shot and a hard frontal quartering shot on elk and traversed 4 feet of animal if you lay a tape to it. Those both made the freezer. Every other one with more traditional angles, made the freezer as well.

The same thing applies to more frangible bullets, at what point in the animals death did the bullet fail. From a practical standpoint we all want the animal on the ground, and that's what the overwhelming majority of hunters get no matter what bullet they choose. I know I'm not left wondering to myself as I pack out the meat why I had to leave undue meat behind that was destroyed from impact. And as I hike out, I know the next year I will be able to again take any ethical angle shot again because the bullet is up to the task at the ranges I hunt.

 

[Elkangle]

Not sure how it worked out but I have a Barnes lrx and berger hunter that that I purchase as ammo already made and both hit the same poi out to 400. They'd probably hit the same further but I haven't had the need to test it. The lrx will be used for closer shots and the berger for further shots. Both are in the magazine so a quick bolt cycle gets me another option. Both have killed elk for me but I'm favoring the copper bullets lately. Thats why Im switching a few rifles over to the hammers. Best of both worlds in my opinion.

Most bullets of same weight and speed will be fairly similar in trajectory out to 400... Definitely practice with the burgers if you will be carrying two different styll bullets

 

[Elkangle]

I believe there was a podcast that robby Denning pointed out awhile back about copper bullets...kinda interesting..can't remember the name of the podcast

Guy works on a ranch that kills 100 elk a year ? His experiences mirror mine