Can bullet choice help to prevent meat loss?

[762 ULTRAMAGA]

Bullet selection absolutely can have a huge effect on meat loss, use something like a Barnes or accubond at long range and you risk losing the whole critter.
This is why I switched back to ELDX and Bergers

 

[hereinaz]

What keywords/marketing is used on bullets that describes its characteristics on impact? Is it all construction based? I chose the TA after watching a few ballistics gel tests and it holding together extremely well at muzzle velocity impact speeds. I knew that my shots would be close, velocities high, and what more could I ask for than a bullet that holds together? But you describe it as a high BC exploding bullet. Why is that? Not doubting you, I'm sure you know more than me. I just want more information to make educated bullet selection choices.

Both ELD-X and SSTs (the two most common "exploding" bullet complaints I see) are cup and core. The TA is bonded. Isn't bonded typically the harder construction type resulting in less explosive results?

It is construction. Many long range bullets are thin jacketed bullets with an open meplat or tip which initiate "detonation" of the bullet. SST are thin jacketed bullets as well. With these, the bullet comes apart dumping all energy and creating an enormous wound cavity after 2-5 inches of penetration depending on factors. If you use them at high velocity at short ranges, the bullets can "explode" before penetration. I've seen a couple pictures of a giant crater on sheep with a 28 Nosler shot at close range where terminal velocity was well above 3000 fps on impact. I shot a reindeer cow at 100 yards and saw lung and blood blow out the offside.

A vitals shot behind the shoulder will often "jelly" the lungs and depending on terminal velocity might have enough intertia so the wound cavity extends to the opposite side and leaves a gaping hole. Vital shots like that, not into a muscle group, the animals seem to stand there thunderstruck and you can pump a couple more into them, but they are dead on their feet. Shots into a muscle group, the animals tend to run like a cat bit them. That's one reason why I don't think I would switch to mono and shoulder shots. Not one animal I have hit out to 1000 yards has gone more than 30 yards.

I understand that the "hunting" jackets have a different construction often times so that the bullet mushrooms and holds together. Like the partition/interlock/gameking use mechanical "locks" in the jacket construction to keep the lead from separating from the copper.

 

[BigNate]

I think velocity is the big multiplier.
Slower bullets that are soft expand but don't have the huge bloodshot area around them.
Mono bullets need greater velocity to expand, and do leave some or a lot of bloodshot damage depending on distance/velocity.
I used a 16.5" .308 with factory Rem 180gr RN to take a doe two years ago. I hit shoulder going in and exited just slightly forward of straight through. There was nearly no bloodshot meat in the front, but her guts were in a pile about 8' from where she was standing. She went nearly 30 yds. Craziest thing I've seen. I've had very similar limited bloodshot results from similar bullets of this weight. I think it's because of the lower velocity.

 

[WCB]

High weight retention bullets and stay off of heavy bone/shoulder.

You said your shots are close so why don't you just start shooting them in the neck.
No meat loss
no tracking needed
can shoot them at almost any angle without meat damage

There is meat in the neck....lots of it. Not sure where the no meat wasted on neck shots come from.

 

[Hschweers]

There is meat in the neck....lots of it. Not sure where the no meat wasted on neck shots come from.

I thought the same. Love the neck meat as much as the shoulder meat!

 

[ozyclint]

which bullet for less meat loss? just shoot them where there's no meat.

Last deer I shot was a head shot with .270win at 70 yards. Zero meat loss.

You hear everyone raving about how their gun shoots 1/2MOA at 100. That's good enough for head shots.

"Nothing is so simple that it can't be over complicated by man." - some smart guy.

 

[Hschweers]

I think velocity is the big multiplier.
Slower bullets that are soft expand but don't have the huge bloodshot area around them.
Mono bullets need greater velocity to expand, and do leave some or a lot of bloodshot damage depending on distance/velocity.
I used a 16.5" .308 with factory Rem 180gr RN to take a doe two years ago. I hit shoulder going in and exited just slightly forward of straight through. There was nearly no bloodshot meat in the front, but her guts were in a pile about 8' from where she was standing. She went nearly 30 yds. Craziest thing I've seen. I've had very similar limited bloodshot results from similar bullets of this weight. I think it's because of the lower velocity.

So by that logic any of the rem CL, federal power shok, Winchester PP, or hornady interlock in 180gr would be your choice for close shots on deer? I believe those are all cup and core (or at least mechanical “bonding”) over a harder, true bonded soft point i.e. federal fusion or hornady interbond?

 

[Hschweers]

close shots?

Last deer I shot was a head shot with .270win at 70 yards. Zero meat loss.

You hear everyone raving about how their gun shoots 1/2MOA at 100. That's good enough for head shots.

"Nothing is so simple that it can't be over complicated by man." - some smart guy.

I can’t explain it, but head shots seem… I don’t know. I’d rather not lol
(Although I fully recognize this as a solution to my problem)

 

[BigNate]

More or less, yes. The short barrel yields lower velocity, combined with heavier bullets. The soft bullets expand, where at the lower velocity a stiff jacket or mono probably wouldn't unless you are quite close.

 

[ozyclint]

I'd wager that 1000's of deer are shot annually for the human consumption market by professional shooters here in Australia. Head shots are mandatory for that market since the carcass remains wholly intact.
I'd further wager that 90% of those kills are with a .223

 

[Hschweers]

I'd wager that 1000's of deer are shot annually for the human consumption market by professional shooters here in Australia. Head shots are mandatory for that market since the carcass remains wholly intact.
I'd further wager that 90% of those kills are with a .223

I fully believe it! I personally have a hard time with the idea, but I’m not saying there’s anything wrong with it or that people don’t do it

 

[brushape]

The bullet itself makes a difference no doubt but the placement makes a bigger difference for sure. I’ve had some nasty kill shots but by far the worst damage was a couple deer my ex shot with my 6.5 saum in the shoulder with 120 grain Barnes at close range


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk