Fragmenting bullets versus controlled expanding bullets

[Southern Lights]

I have been reading more from Phil Shoemaker, famous Brown Bear guide in Alaska for more than 40 years. He is what people would here would dismissively call a "Fudd." But, ignoring experience like his would be a tremendous mistake.

Here are some gems from him:

"I make my living cleaning up messes caused by self proclaimed excellent shots and experienced hunter on Brown Bear hunts. In over twenty five years the over whelming majority were caused by the hunter using a rifle he could not handle.

When a hunter shows up with a well worn 7mm or 30-06 and a sensible scope I know he is going home with a trophy.

I don't have a minimum caliber I require a hunter bring but anything less than a .270 is a stunt and anything over a .375 usually ego."


"I have seen light for calibers kill big bears very quickly but also seen miserable results with them as well so I prefer large caliber bullets heavy enough to give full penetration first and velocity second"


"But quality bullets are your best insurance. I am not on anyone's payroll but , like anyone else, I do have favorites as I see an awfully lot of bears killed. Nosler Partitions, Barnes X (and their variations), Swift A-frames, Trophy Bonded, Grand Slams, North Forks, Kodiaks and Fail Safes are all on my A list."

 

[FredH]

I have been reading more from Phil Shoemaker, famous Brown Bear guide in Alaska for more than 40 years. He is what people would here would dismissively call a "Fudd." But, ignoring experience like his would be a tremendous mistake.

Here are some gems from him:

"I make my living cleaning up messes caused by self proclaimed excellent shots and experienced hunter on Brown Bear hunts. In over twenty five years the over whelming majority were caused by the hunter using a rifle he could not handle.

When a hunter shows up with a well worn 7mm or 30-06 and a sensible scope I know he is going home with a trophy.

I don't have a minimum caliber I require a hunter bring but anything less than a .270 is a stunt and anything over a .375 usually ego."


"I have seen light for calibers kill big bears very quickly but also seen miserable results with them as well so I prefer large caliber bullets heavy enough to give full penetration first and velocity second"


"But quality bullets are your best insurance. I am not on anyone's payroll but , like anyone else, I do have favorites as I see an awfully lot of bears killed. Nosler Partitions, Barnes X (and their variations), Swift A-frames, Trophy Bonded, Grand Slams, North Forks, Kodiaks and Fail Safes are all on my A list."

It appears fragmenting bullets are not on his list of favorites.

 

[FredH]

Thanks.

 

[Southern Lights]

It appears fragmenting bullets are not on his list of favorites.

Here are some other things he's said. These Fudds are all alike with this horrible advice.

"Excess power in either a scope or cartridge is poor compensation for experience and knowledge of how and when to shoot."

"I have always found it interesting that most of the problems I see as a guide with clients missing is due to their having their scopes turned up to the highest power; while most experienced users I have known that use variables end up setting them somewhere between 3 and 5 power. Go figure."

"If you can't do it with a 30-06 and a 4x Leupold then you probably can't do it with anything."

"Like any other hunting, it's the bullet that does all the killing - and where the shooter places it that determines how quickly the animal dies.

It is amazing how very little all the other stuff - like bullet diameter and velocity - changes any of the first two.
And how much you paid for you scope, or who built your rifle, or how well you once shot off the bench, doesn't matter a bit."

 

[JJMarsh]

So it seems "fragmenting" is a good thing and little is said about controlled expansion in hunting bullets here. I can see a fragmenting bullet having an edge when the bullet is of small diameter and 2x expansion would only mean .44 and you only have less than 80 grains of bullet to start with. The term controlled expanding and "hard bullets" is misleading as most bullets are designed to expand quickly but hold onto a percentage of weight. That is the controlled part. Leaving Mono bullets out of this argument it appears bullets that fragment to a great degree are going to throw lead particles around freely. Unless you like that wild lead metal taste occasionally not a good thing. In fact many lead cored bullets fragment to some degree, the Partition is a serious offender and yes is a good killer because of it. For years the standard thought on bullet construction was 2x expansion and 60-70% weight retention. Meaning 30-40% of the bullet turned into fragments. Today using smaller calibers that percentage has grown to 50% or more. Many of todays match style hunting bullets fragment a lot and destroy a lot of tissue, killing well. Many boat tailed hunting bullets are constructed to expand at lower velocities because the idea was to use them at longer ranges. I am a big fan of fragmenting bullets for use on things I am not planning on eating like coyotes but prefer to limit the spread of lead in the deer meat. I truly dislike mono's because of crappy performance from early Barnes designs, possibly the newer designs would be ok. This all being opined upon in a rambling manner I never had any real problems getting quick kills using standard cup and core controlled expanding bullets in diameters from 6.5 up. Had a few sketchy results with 6MM's when using them like I would a 30-06. I always considered using the .224 rounds on deer as reliable under easy shot conditions at medium ranges. Not as 400 yard wonders.

You raise valid points about the fragmentation versus controlled expansion debate. While fragmenting bullets can deliver devastating terminal performance on varmints and predators, they do risk contaminating meat when used on game animals. The key is matching bullet design to both the caliber and intended use.

For deer-sized game, I've found bonded core bullets in .264 to .308 diameters offer the best balance - they expand reliably while retaining enough weight for deep penetration. The 6mm and smaller calibers do require more careful bullet selection, especially at extended ranges where velocity drops.

Modern monolithics have improved significantly, though I share your preference for traditional cup-and-core designs in most hunting scenarios. As you noted, shot placement and realistic range expectations matter more than extreme fragmentation.

 

[ElPollo]

While fragmenting bullets can deliver devastating terminal performance on varmints and predators, they do risk contaminating meat when used on game animals.

What do you mean by this, and what evidence are you basing this conclusion on?

 

[JGRaider]

A "fudd" is often used by those who know the subject is right, but have no other argument. Anyone who argues with Phil Shoemaker and/or dismisses his proven experience is a freaking fool, period.

 

[mt terry d]

What do you mean by this, and what evidence are you basing this conclusion on?

This^^^^^

 

[LongWayAround]

What do you mean by this, and what evidence are you basing this conclusion on?

He doesn't. Pretty sure "he" is not real.

 

[LongWayAround]

A "fudd" is often used by those who know the subject is right, but have no other argument. Anyone who argues with Phil Shoemaker and/or dismisses his proven experience is a freaking fool, period.

I may have missed it, but has someone suggested anything against Phil Shoemaker? Didn't he kill a big bear with a 9mm?

 

[WoolyBugger]

What do you mean by this, and what evidence are you basing this conclusion on?

Look at his posts.. AI responses.

 

[FredH]

What do you mean by this, and what evidence are you basing this conclusion on?

I personally base it on finding pieces of lead in processed deer meat. Why would you think a lead core bullet that breaks up would not leave some lead in the animal?

 

[FredH]

This^^^^^

I believe he based his opinion on the obvious.

 

[rookieforever33]

The beginning of this thread stated something that should be obvious, manufactures selling bullets either mono, bonded, or frangible advertise "optimistic" lower threshold velocities. They get away with this because a well placed shot most likely resulted in a kill anyway. No matter which you choose add a few hundred fps to achieve results like the you are probably expecting.
Some posts tell me people are way more interested in gel than I will ever be.
Later references to O Conner and Shoemaker tell me it might be a good idea to use a different bullet for a deer vs a brown bear.
Use what makes sense for your purpose, make sure you are accurate that far, kill stuff.

 

[S-3 ranch]

There is no argument over bonded & mono vs light cup and core
When you are multi species hunting In Alaska, or Africa mono or bonded is mandatory
Yeah yeah some one will chime in and say I killed my ? With a eldm in Africa
99% chance is they where hunting in RSA on a game ranch
Go to wild Africa and your PH will be very disappointed with you bringing match bullets
Same with any outfit doing nilgai hunts or non resident moose hunting

 

[slatebuilder]

It appears fragmenting bullets are not on his list of favorites.

The front half of that partition fragments very violently.

 

[eric1115]

I missed this post but I do have one example of a bullet that cratered at high velocity. I was Antelope hunting in south central Wyoming. The shooter was my girlfriend who I met working at the Mast lounge in Green River. We were working our way through some broken country near the Black Butte coal mine when we walk right up on a doe at some 30 yards. The doe is unaware and my girlfriend whips the rifle up and shoots the doe right on the shoulder bone just below the joint. A crater 6" across erupts and the antelope takes off. After following it for 3 miles we barely beat the coyotes to it. The bullet did break the shoulder bone but broke up badly and only fragments made it through the rib cage. Had to be shot again. The rifle was a pre 64 Model 70 in 270 and the bullet was a 130 grain Sierra Prohunter pushed to around 3100 fps. This was in 1981 and I can attest to Sierra bullets being pretty soft back then, much softer than at least the Gamekings are now.

This is a perfect example of something I've talked about a couple of times in these conversations... The pre-rangefinder days were a big driver of the "big, tough bullet is better" mindset. It had validity when a flat shooting rifle was the best way to extend effective range by reducing range estimation and bullet drop/hold over errors.

Heavy for caliber bullets are hard to drive fast, so light for caliber bullets were the order of the day (a 130 .277 has an SD around .24, pretty low). Light for caliber bullets moving fast do need to be tougher in order to avoid what you experienced. At extended range, those low BC bullets are moving really slowly, and a tough bullet moving slow won't upset much so bigger starting diameter helps some at those extended ranges.

Now that we can accurately measure range and accurately compensate for it with good scopes, we don't need warp 8 muzzle velocity to hit things at range. Since we don't need that MV, we can use heavy for caliber bullets. Since we are using heavy for caliber bullets starting a little slower, we can use softer bullets that upset well at lower impact velocity. Since we are using softer bullets that upset well, they don't need to be large diameter anymore to compensate for poor expansion at long range. Since they are higher SD and have better BC they maintain their velocity at extended range better than the lighter for caliber bullets and extend that effective terminal performance window even further with reliable, highly effective terminal performance.

 

[slatebuilder]

People make way more out of picking a bullet to kill stuff than they need too. There are so many good options.

Last year during rifle deer season my family and a friends family combined to kill like 8-9 deer in the same weekend. With 2 exceptions all of the deer were shot with Walmart/box store soft points and corelokts out of stuff ranging from 223 w/55 grain soft points to 3006 with a 180 corelokt. The 2 exceptions were a 143 ELDX out of a 260 Remington and an 120 hammer out of a 280 Remington .

Takeaway: It was dam hard to tell which animals were shot with what rifles/bullets that weekend. The 223 wound channels were just as violent as the 3006 wound channels.

 

[eric1115]

There is no argument over bonded & mono vs light cup and core
When you are multi species hunting In Alaska, or Africa mono or bonded is mandatory
Yeah yeah some one will chime in and say I killed my ? With a eldm in Africa
99% chance is they where hunting in RSA on a game ranch
Go to wild Africa and your PH will be very disappointed with you bringing match bullets
Same with any outfit doing nilgai hunts or non resident moose hunting

What do you think is the reason for that? Do you think it's because soft, heavy for caliber bullets driven at moderate speeds have different terminal performance in a cape buffalo than they do in elk, moose, etc as demonstrated time and time again and documented in detail? Or do you think that those PH's and Alaska guides are (understandably) hesitant to engage in something that is, to them, an experiment where their life and the life of their client rides on the outcome?

They have a recipe that is pretty well proven. Even if there is a recipe out there that is better, they have to weigh the risk/reward where the positive outcome is an improvement on what is in their mind an already effective system, and the negative outcome is potentially death of themselves and/or client.

That preference on their part is not in any way proof positive that tough bonded bullets kill more effectively than soft heavy for caliber bullets.

 

[eric1115]

I personally base it on finding pieces of lead in processed deer meat. Why would you think a lead core bullet that breaks up would not leave some lead in the animal?

We had a long conversation on this topic some months back. As far as we were able to find, there's really not any evidence that stands up to any scrutiny that even if some small lead fragments do make their way into meat being consumed (and with careful processing the vast majority of that can be avoided), it results in elevated BLL's. It seems that the actual evidence indicates that those chunks/fragments are not really able to be absorbed by our digestive system. Lead dust inhalation, lead vapor inhalation, and some lead compounds (like found in spent primers) can absolutely cause elevated blood lead levels but solid chunks of lead are not highly bioavailable.

Full thread here:

E

Thread 'Lead ingestion health risks'

Jan 6, 2025

There are countless lead vs mono preference threads. That is not what I'm looking for here.

I've spent some time looking at lead studies. It's really easy to find the radiograph pictures of lead fragments in a chest cavity, and the studies where deer were dropped off at processors with the instructions to grind it up and then radiograph that.

What's harder (at least for me) is answering the "so what?" question. All the CDC type lead info pages lean really heavy on the danger of inhaling or ingesting lead dust and lead compounds and lead vapor, but I haven't found a lot of solid info on...

• eric1115
• Replies: 287
• Forum: Firearms

•