Best Mono Bullet for Hunting/Effective Kills

[35WhelenAI]

For sure, it's a sunk cost for equipment larger companies already have, and it's less money for new smaller companies to do CNC. Kudos to smaller companies for developing new products and seeing where things are headed.

 

[DagOtto]

Good point. Shouldn't take Hornady, Sierra, Nosler among others long to fire up the CNC machines and run the smaller ones out given it's easier. Especially if they use the same marketing and money they spend on everything that isn't copper for hunting.

In any case, cooper has so many innovators right now. If a copper bullet can't be found to give the type of wound channel, penetration, etc that a hunter wants, they aren't looking or won't look.

I totally agree. But the hard part is figuring out what type of wound channel and penetration at what velocities each of these bullet options actually offers. I so wish there was an independent testing lab that would test bullets and publish the results for average wound cavity size and length and average penetration depth at various velocities. That would make our lives a lot easier.

It would not be hard to do this, the study protocol is already pretty clear in my head and I'm as far from a ballistician as one could get.

FBI Gel
Shoot given bullet 10 times into Gel with impact velocity of 1600, 2000, 2400, 2800, 3000
Document any failures or anomalies (tumbling, failure to expand etc.)
Document average wound channel size. (ideally use 3d imaging to measure volume as well as length and height)
Document average depth to initiation of impact
Document average depth of penetration

Publish data and images along with summary of bullet performance metrics and images.

Done.

 

[35WhelenAI]

I've contributed a number of pics from elk to mule deer to whitetails here in the last few days, pictures and performance don't need independent data from another source. It's just going to bring up the "... but that is gel and not flesh and bones"... Other guys have posted very evidentiary pics as well. Just like guys shooting frangible bullets, they get the job done but many of us don't want to sacrifice shot angles or meat. Some know lead to be poisonous and old school given the great mono options. That's really what it comes down to.

"Wishes" are well and good, but to my mind the amount of consternation temporary and permanent cavity gets around here doesn't matter two licks when monos have killed for 30 years for me inside of 500 yards.

In my opinion that's the not level of detail needed in order to hunt successfully or make anyone's life easier.

Advice for folks when information paralysis sets in... Spend extra time on the hunting and field skills. Pick any of the bullets that has a picture of a dead animal of the species you are hunting associated with it on this forum and go spend even more time in the field. It's splitting hairs when one is standing over a dead animal.

 

[SDHNTR]

I've contributed a number of pics from elk to mule deer to whitetails here in the last few days, pictures and performance don't need independent data from another source. It's just going to bring up the "... but that is gel and not flesh and bones"... Other guys have posted very evidentiary pics as well. Just like guys shooting frangible bullets, they get the job done but many of us don't want to sacrifice shot angles or meat. Some know lead to be poisonous and old school given the great mono options. That's really what it comes down to.

"Wishes" are well and good, but to my mind the amount of consternation temporary and permanent cavity gets around here doesn't matter two licks when monos have killed for 30 years for me inside of 500 yards.

In my opinion that's the not level of detail needed in order to hunt successfully or make anyone's life easier.

Advice for folks when information paralysis sets in... Spend extra time on the hunting and field skills. Pick any of the bullets that has a picture of a dead animal of the species you are hunting associated with it on this forum and go spend even more time in the field. It's splitting hairs when one is standing over a dead animal.

1000%

This is an incredibly silly and unnecessary debate. This site has turned hunting into stats class. I don’t need any amount of “data” to tell me that monos work just fine and I certainly don't require all this mental masturbation.

 

[Hoghead]

If they didn't work, there would be no dead animals in California. I don't mind the non lead as much as I don't like having a choice.

Sent from my SM-G781V using Tapatalk

 

[amassi]

1000%

This is an incredibly silly and unnecessary debate. This site has turned hunting into stats class. I don’t need any amount of “data” to tell me that monos work just fine and I certainly don't require all this mental masturbation.

Yet here you are mentally whacking away with this same post for the hundredth time. Just bust already and go back to yelling at the kids on your lawn.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[35WhelenAI]

What he's doing is agreeing that proposing an independent laboratory study on temporary and permanent wound cavity in gel is a not a good use of time and only serves to bring more armchairs out of the woodwork.

What's your beef with SDHNTR? Did it come from this thread? You were defensive in the "hammer bullet performance" thread for comments I made. The interpreted context of my post, that wasn't toward anything you said, was so far off as to be more than out in left field. Never saw you respond to my question to you, post #212 if you need.

 

[35WhelenAI]

Hoghead, I can appreciate you are using copper in CA because you are required to, despite the lack of choice. Have read more than once guys saying screw it and still using lead. That's always a good look for hunters.... Good on you.

Lol, I haven't had to use copper as a requirement yet in Colorado, but since 1994 I've been doing so. Too many advantages when hunting animals, not an advantage when shooting at animals past the range where velocity drops off too much for reliable expansion. Which is the limitation for any bullet regardless of construction. Depends whether you want to hunt and get within a quarter mile or so or shoot from a half mile or more.

 

[DagOtto]

What he's doing is agreeing that proposing an independent laboratory study on temporary and permanent wound cavity in gel is a not a good use of time and only serves to bring more armchairs out of the woodwork.

What's your beef with SDHNTR? Did it come from this thread? You were defensive in the "hammer bullet performance" thread for comments I made. The interpreted context of my post, that wasn't toward anything you said, was so far off as to be more than out in left field. Never saw you respond to my question to you, post #212 if you need.

35,

I appreciate your sharing your photos and experiences with this thread. I also appreciate that you have settled on a bullet and type of bullet that you are happy with and have no interest in changing from.

Some of us enjoy trying to optimize our systems including hunting bullets and enjoy the mental gymnastics of doing so.

Like you, I am not interested at all in shooting any big game animal past 400-500 yards at the most. So my old 7mm-08 Winchester Model 70 that grouped 3 shot groups in 2 1/2" was probably good enough. I killed a lot of elk, deer and antelope with it. But I had some rodeos, and I wanted to be better. So I've invested time and money in improving my rifle to a point where now if there is a rodeo I KNOW its on me.

That is just one example of why I enjoy this kind of mental BSing and always trying for the optimal, most humane hunting possible. Sure, I could have kept that old Winchester for the rest of my life and been happy. But I've really enjoyed building much more accurate rifles and it makes my hunting more enjoyable and more affecitve.

Same goes for nearly every aspect of hunting for me. My shooting skills have advanced a ton through research, questioning and training. Gear, Maps, Optics ... on down the line.

In your most recent posts you and SDHNTR make it clear that you don't like this thread of questioning and searching for more data and finer levels of performance. It's clear you think it's a waste of time and you two have settled on what you will be shooting with for the rest of your hunts. I think that is great for you and I appreciate that there are people on Rokslide who are countering the match-bullet-for-game crowd.

But some of us will keep searching for data, input, new ideas and a better bulet. If you and SDHNTR don't like this kind of wonky thinking please feel free to ignore this thread. Otherwise, please keep sharing your great photos and stories.

Thanks.

 

[DagOtto]

1000%

This is an incredibly silly and unnecessary debate. This site has turned hunting into stats class. I don’t need any amount of “data” to tell me that monos work just fine and I certainly don't require all this mental masturbation.

Hey SDHNTR,

I don't think this thread has been a debate at all. Except maybe for your recent post and the previous one from 35Whelen.

I think most of this thread has been a series of sharing information and data and asking questions.

Unless I missed something, you two really are the only ones that seem to be saying, "There is an answer, and I have it, and you shouldn't be questioning things."

Just food for thought. +

 

[SDHNTR]

Hey SDHNTR,

I don't think this thread has been a debate at all. Except maybe for your recent post and the previous one from 35Whelen.

I think most of this thread has been a series of sharing information and data and asking questions.

Unless I missed something, you two really are the only ones that seem to be saying, "There is an answer, and I have it, and you shouldn't be questioning things."

Just food for thought. +

You’re right, it’s not a debate. It’s just comical to me that we keep searching for “data” and coming up with new made up terms like “stretch cavities” temporary or permanent, which is laughable to me. Wtf does that even mean? Bullets make holes in stuff and that makes stuff dead.

I don’t claim to have all the answers. I just do what works for me and I’ve never lost a wink of sleep over bullet choice. My “answer” is that once you understand the inherent limitations, it doesn’t matter, and to give it one more second’s thought is a waste of time! Bullet choice is an entirely practical matter and I don’t question it much. Which one shoots best? Ok then, use that one. Done. Now let’s spend time on things that really do matter like drawing tags, scouting, learning food preferences, rut and migration routes, tracking, wind patterns, etc. Mastering that stuff is what fills tags.

Water is wet. The sky is blue. Bullets kill stuff. Some things don’t need “data” and imaginary new terms. Go Hunt!

 

[Shraggs]

How do you then “understand the inherent limitations” if you discard information. What makes some information something you listen or read as valid?

 

[JFK]

Conversation and debate are healthy but it seems like this is topic has been beaten to death lately. The information is out there. Lead bullets work, copper bullets work…use what makes you feel good. Much like anything now days you get people who aren’t satisfied that they’ve found something that works for them. They want others who don’t agree to concede that they are wrong. I’ve hunted elk, deer and antelope with guys using eldx, partitions, lrx, ballistic tips, accubond. Wounds looked different when skinning them out but bullet placement (i.e. how good of a shot was made) had far, far more to do with how quickly the animal dropped.

As it relates to this thread, I’ve had good success with mono bullets. No weirdness, no “penciling through.” You hit the animal where you are supposed to and they die in short order. It probably doesn’t make for good internet material, no grenaded front quarters, no basketball sized exits. Typically two pretty small sized entrance and exit holes with vitals sloshed in between. Works for me. Doesn’t have to work for you.

Nonetheless, here’s some “data” for the Rokslide “pictures or I don’t believe you” crowd.

Ca Blacktail buck exit. 234 yards. Barnes 129gr lrx 270 win. Muzzle 3050fps. He dropped, sputtered a little bit, stood up to die and fell down a small slope about 15 yards.

Antelope buck. 200 and something yards. Barnes 110gr TTSX. Muzzle 3350fps. Buck looked like he got struck by lightning. Stiffened up while still on his feet then fell forward dead.

Furthest kill with a mono is 480 yards on bull elk. Barnes 129gr lrx. 270win. Impact velocity around 2150fps. Bull died where I shot him. No pics of him skinned out.

Lots more animals, just don’t take pictures of them skinned out.

 

[z987k]

Conversation and debate are healthy but it seems like this is topic has been beaten to death lately. The information is out there. Lead bullets work, copper bullets work…use what makes you feel good. Much like anything now days you get people who aren’t satisfied that they’ve found something that works for them. They want others who don’t agree to concede that they are wrong. I’ve hunted elk, deer and antelope with guys using eldx, partitions, lrx, ballistic tips, accubond. Wounds looked different when skinning them out but bullet placement (i.e. how good of a shot was made) had far, far more to do with how quickly the animal dropped.

As it relates to this thread, I’ve had good success with mono bullets. No weirdness, no “penciling through.” You hit the animal where you are supposed to and they die in short order. It probably doesn’t make for good internet material, no grenaded front quarters, no basketball sized exits. Typically two pretty small sized entrance and exit holes with vitals sloshed in between. Works for me. Doesn’t have to work for you.

Nonetheless, here’s some “data” for the Rokslide “pictures or I don’t believe you” crowd.

Ca Blacktail buck exit. 234 yards. Barnes 129gr lrx 270 win. Muzzle 3050fps. He dropped, sputtered a little bit, stood up to die and fell down a small slope about 15 yards.

Antelope buck. 200 and something yards. Barnes 110gr TTSX. Muzzle 3350fps. Buck looked like he got struck by lightning. Stiffened up while still on his feet then fell forward dead.

Furthest kill with a mono is 480 yards on bull elk. Barnes 129gr lrx. 270win. Impact velocity around 2150fps. Bull died where I shot him. No pics of him skinned out.

Lots more animals, just don’t take pictures of them skinned out.

FMJ's work perfectly well if your shot placement is perfect.
As someone that shoots lead free exclusively on game, my only gripe about mono's is I find them less forgiving of poor shot placement then some of the more destructive lead projectiles.

 

[DiabeticKripple]

FMJ's work perfectly well if your shot placement is perfect.
As someone that shoots lead free exclusively on game, my only gripe about mono's is I find them less forgiving of poor shot placement then some of the more destructive lead projectiles.

this is true, like my liver/gut shot elk i lost. If i had shot an ELD-M my guess is I wouldve recovered the animal.

hit the front half and they die, hit the back half and anything can happen.

 

[35WhelenAI]

DagOtto, I hear what you're saying. I am not coming at you at all, however, I can see where you say that.

I've seen many threads where pictures and experience end up not counting for much. My goal is to stick up for the monos, and was trying (poorly) to head off at the pass the desire for a plethora of data (that would be created by an independent study of temp wound cavity and perm wound cavity with monos) that has typically been discounted as "not from live game" by both sides of this debate. I don't see it swaying someone one way or the other when the proof is in the pudding with field results.

I am fully supportive of it from the standpoint of doing it because it hasn't been done. At the same time wary of it from a time and effort perspective when there is so much "can't deny performance" being shared here with pics.

My experience shouldn't be your deterrent to seeking. I had to figure stuff out too, experience in the field did it for me, studies had little to do with it. For that I should have came at it differently and not like the dude (albeit unintentionally) hollering at kids to get off his lawn.