Non lead bullets and performance at distance

[pods8 (Rugged Stitching)]

Should be at least 2700, in which case I don’t see it losing 700 fps in 400 yards!

At sea level that is exactly what will happen in 400yd with a 168ttsx, higher altitude is more forgiving (more like 600fps in the 5-6k altitude).

 

[SDHNTR]

At sea level that is exactly what will happen in 400yd with a 168ttsx, higher altitude is more forgiving (more like 600fps in the 5-6k altitude).

I haven’t run 30-06 numbers but I have a chopped .308 shooting 165’s starting at 2525 and it’s still 2000 at 400. Still 1800+ at 500+. Assuming 5500’ and 40 degrees. How is a 30-06 with at least another 200 fps losing more?

 

[SDHNTR]

Some of the barnes LRX they say will open down at 1600fps for instance with some of the TTSX at 1800fps. That said as someone that shoots mostly barnes while hunting (some hammers too), I would personally avoid those lower velocities because while you get expansion you do not get full expansion. I STRONGLY prefer to keep the impact velocities 2200+fps and would go well out of my way to avoid impact velocities below 2000fps as a personal preference. With those in mind I play around with the ballistic calculators and I pick a bullet based on initial muzzle velocity and BC to see which are gonna deliver that criteria best.

If you knock 4" off your barrel and are down to say 2750fps muzzle velocity at sea level the 168TTSX would be ~2200fps at 300yd which is reasonable, at 400yd you're ~2030fps so I personally would be much more aware of the shot situation in that case (you're going to have less terminal damage due to a smaller frontal area creating trauma).

He might be at 2750 with a 22 or 24” barrel, not likely after chopping 4” off.

 

[SDHNTR]

Curiosity got the best of me. Ran it through my solver. Assuming initial 2750 MV, and cut 4 inches for 2550. 168TTSX and G1 BC as listed on the box. I get 1961 FPS at 400 and 1827 FPS at 500. I must admit, I’m a little surprised at those numbers. Still, though, I absolutely would not hesitate to fling it at 400.

And OP, everyone is really just guessing without knowing your true muzzle velocity. And we are splitting hairs. I really don’t think 100 ft./s variance, put in the right place, is going to matter much at all.

 

[fuzzymarindave]

Fellow Californian. I shoot a lot and have access to 700 yard range a few min down the road.

Monos suck at distance. No way I’d be shooting that far with a mono. Terminal performance gets marginal below 2200fps impact IMO, and wind drift is terrible increasing your odds of making a bad hit. Terminal performance is overall poor compared to lead even at higher impact velocity.

600 yards absolute MAX in perfect conditions, and you better be practicing it a lot. A minor, imperceptible change in the wind and you’re missing a 12in plate at 500 and gut shooting our tiny little blacktails.

Have killed two bucks at 500ish with monos, one was a rodeo requiring 5 hits (eventually hit some bone) before he died. The other was a perfect shot through his front leg but my experience is that monos and long range do not work well together.

I’d love to find a non toxic combo that lets me shoot beyond 600 yards, but I have yet to do so.

What happens beyond 600 yards? I'm a long range novice but so far have good luck with 199gr mono on paper up to 600 yards based CDS ballistics. Impacts started going low beyond that distance when using the CDS turret. Is that part of what you are finding too? I just figured that other environmental factors were to blame.

I'm wondering if you have seen any science or testing on the long range mono performance? The ballistic programs that I've seen don't ask for the material composition of the bullet. They only ask for the BC of the projectile. Maybe the G1and G7 numbers are more closely related to lead core projectiles? I've not studied the math so I don't know.

 

[SDHNTR]

What happens beyond 600 yards? I'm a long range novice but so far have good luck with 199gr mono on paper up to 600 yards based CDS ballistics. Impacts started going low beyond that distance when using the CDS turret. Is that part of what you are finding too? I just figured that other environmental factors were to blame.

I'm wondering if you have seen any science or testing on the long range mono performance? The ballistic programs that I've seen don't ask for the material composition of the bullet. They only ask for the BC of the projectile. Maybe the G1and G7 numbers are more closely related to lead core projectiles? I've not studied the math so I don't know.

It’s not the CDS (although I’m absolutely not a fan) and the mono problem has nothing to do with the ballistics flying through the air. It has to do with terminal impact ballistics— what happens after hitting the animal. Essentially, when that mono bullet slows down, you don’t get enough expansion to disrupt enough vital tissue to kill cleanly. Monos need speed to open reliably and rapidly, to kill efficiently.

 

[willfrye027]

What happens beyond 600 yards? I'm a long range novice but so far have good luck with 199gr mono on paper up to 600 yards based CDS ballistics. Impacts started going low beyond that distance when using the CDS turret. Is that part of what you are finding too? I just figured that other environmental factors were to blame.

I'm wondering if you have seen any science or testing on the long range mono performance? The ballistic programs that I've seen don't ask for the material composition of the bullet. They only ask for the BC of the projectile. Maybe the G1and G7 numbers are more closely related to lead core projectiles? I've not studied the math so I don't know.

No science. I think it’s just the lower BC makes wind call more critical. Lower velocity at impact possibly leads to greater vertical dispersion. Maybe with a 199gr you have better BC and greater margin for error?

Either way I think actually shooting your load at distance, in different conditions, will show what it’s capable of.

 

[fuzzymarindave]

No science. I think it’s just the lower BC makes wind call more critical. Lower velocity at impact possibly leads to greater vertical dispersion. Maybe with a 199gr you have better BC and greater margin for error?

Either way I think actually shooting your load at distance, in different conditions, will show what it’s capable of.

Thanks. Yes, I just looked up published BCs and while the 199gr Hammer Hunter (30 cal) has pretty much same BC as the 190gr Nosler ABLR it is definitely less than 210gr ABLR. Just from extrapolation, if Nosler made a 199gr ABLR it would have higher BC than the 199gr Hammer Hunter. I was fortunate to recently pick up two boxes of the 210gr ABLR and am looking forward to trying them at long range.

 

[pods8 (Rugged Stitching)]

How is a 30-06 with at least another 200 fps losing more?

I had said ~700fps at sea level, you save ~100fps at a mile high which you had quoted (which I also tossed in as a clarification off the bat). At sea level the calcs say 168gr .47 G1 at 2750 drops to 2033 at 400yd, it just is what it is, not sure how to answer your question.

 

[Macintosh]

Curiosity got the best of me. Ran it through my solver. Assuming initial 2750 MV, and cut 4 inches for 2550. 168TTSX and G1 BC as listed on the box. I get 1961 FPS at 400 and 1827 FPS at 500. I must admit, I’m a little surprised at those numbers. Still, though, I absolutely would not hesitate to fling it at 400.

And OP, everyone is really just guessing without knowing your true muzzle velocity. And we are splitting hairs. I really don’t think 100 ft./s variance, put in the right place, is going to matter much at all.

Agree, surprised me too. I hunt mostly around 1000’-2000’ at home, and its a rare mono (especially factory-loaded) that retains “manufacturer’s minimum expansion velocity plus 10%” too much past 400 yards or even less at this elevation. And, many of the higher-bc bullets are only marginally stable in some of the traditional cartridges, ex plug in barnes 129gr lrx in .270 win 1/10 into a stability calculator for sea level or 1500’. Going up to 5-6k’ elevation makes a big difference.
I know when I ran the numbers for my 3006 the 150gr ttsx carried velocity a bit further than the 168. And then people said the 168 would expand at lower velocity. So end of the day who friggin knows?? I’ve gotten some really wacky and inconsistent information directly from Barnes on expansion velocity’s for various bullets, so I’m not even sure what to trust. Therefore, I just don’t feel like pushing it that much.

I dont have experience to back it up but I bet you are right that the difference in performance between 1900fps and 2000fps or 2100fps and 2200fps (or whatever) probably isnt a showstopper. At the same time, pushing it that way too much invites finding out the hard way where exactly the line is between “grip and grin” and “rodeo”—the manufacturer doesnt tell you that number for no reason. Guess you just have to weigh the consequences in that situation and decide what you are willing to chance.

 

[pods8 (Rugged Stitching)]

Agree, surprised me too. I hunt mostly around 1000’-2000’ at home, and its a rare mono (especially factory-loaded) that retains “manufacturer’s minimum expansion velocity plus 10%” too much past 400 yards or even less at this elevation.

The 7mm 139 or 145 lrx in a decent powered cartridge does pretty well. Barnes only loads that in factory for 7mag (places like unknown munitions load it in other calibers) but if reloading 284, 280, 280ai and any of the magnums should deliver.

 

[Jfjfrye]

No prob. Honestly, I think the minimum velocity concerns with copper are largely overblown. I hunt hogs in CA year round and see them operate routinely. Unless you are really shooting something slow, any reasonable range of say, sub 500 ish, should be easily attainable with 1800-2000 fps+.

It’s something to be mindful of, but I’ve never seen copper really necessitate a change of build or cartridge plans. Unless we’re talking extreme ranges, in which case, just get closer!

Do you have any idea what would cause7mm mag 150gr ttsx and .243 80gr hornady cx to pencil through both shoulders on a deer at 176 and 265 yards? Happened twice this year. Same size entry as exit. And no wound channel to speak of. I’ve alway had decent results with copper. But I’m really really doubting any and all monos at the moment after seeing zero terminal performance at ranges with high velocity where optimal performance should be easily achieved.

 

[SDHNTR]

Do you have any idea what would cause7mm mag 150gr ttsx and .243 80gr hornady cx to pencil through both shoulders on a deer at 176 and 265 yards? Happened twice this year. Same size entry as exit. And no wound channel to speak of. I’ve alway had decent results with copper. But I’m really really doubting any and all monos at the moment after seeing zero terminal performance at ranges with high velocity where optimal performance should be easily achieved.

I haven’t seen that happen on hundreds of animals. I have seen some minimal expansion at longer ranges when no bone is hit, but that’s apparently not what happened to you. Sometimes weird stuff just happens in the field.

 

[Tod osier]

Do you have any idea what would cause7mm mag 150gr ttsx and .243 80gr hornady cx to pencil through both shoulders on a deer at 176 and 265 yards? Happened twice this year. Same size entry as exit. And no wound channel to speak of. I’ve alway had decent results with copper. But I’m really really doubting any and all monos at the moment after seeing zero terminal performance at ranges with high velocity where optimal performance should be easily achieved.

Well, it sounds like both animals died, so I doubt the terminal performance was zero.

 

[Macintosh]

Edit--Have shot plenty of 120gr 7mm ttsx's into game with great results, so no idea on that one. I hear it every once in a while, there was a guy on here who siad he had multiple penciled 6.5cm ttsx factory loads also at pretty short range. It's also hard to say without seeing the entry/exit holes or a detailed, quantified description, what exactly that means. Every bullet has a wacky 1 in a million failure every so often, but its hard to say thats it if it happens to the same guy twice. I've never seen it, hope I never do. To me its far more likely that a fluke or a bad production-lot of bullets caused less than normal performance, than it is that all of my previous experience was not representative of what I should expect in the future. If it happens twice in a season, and with different bullets both well inside terminal range, I'd be looking for an explanation other than the bullet.

 

[pods8 (Rugged Stitching)]

Do you have any idea what would cause7mm mag 150gr ttsx and .243 80gr hornady cx to pencil through both shoulders on a deer at 176 and 265 yards? Happened twice this year. Same size entry as exit. And no wound channel to speak of. I’ve alway had decent results with copper. But I’m really really doubting any and all monos at the moment after seeing zero terminal performance at ranges with high velocity where optimal performance should be easily achieved.

I know you said no wound channel but wanted to clarify that a small exit doesn't inherently mean it penciled, the hide does a pretty good job of keeping the exit wound to the side of the bullet shank & petals (if a version the peels vs sheds) while still creating hydrostatic trauma in between.

I've never used the Hornady monos after the initial reports of the early GMX being kinda hard. The 80ttsx in 243 performs great (shot 3 deer and 1 pronghorn with it this year, 50-300yds). I have no experience with the 150gr ttsx, I use the 139LRX & 145LRX in 7mm with really good results.

Can you describe that 7mag situation more? Was it really high up through the spine and backstrap, a paralizing shot? If so I can se that having what appears to be limited tissue damage. When I butcher the holes through the should muscles from mono shots are ~2" of meat loss, IE minimal bloodshot damage (which is want I want), but they definitely didn't pencil, they cut up vitals in between causing stuff to drop on the spot or with minimal steps and their chest cavity is full of blood is my experience.

I haven't played scientist to drap all the vitals out to see what was and wasn't damage in what capacity. But I don't feel the need to because everything dies quickly when hit by a barnes >2200fps in the vicinity of the heart/arteries in my experience so I don't question it.

 

[rcook10]

I wrote this up in other places but ultimately I am moving away from copper monos after this year. Everything I have shot or helped others shoot died but the speed and violence of death was poor outside of a couple hundred yards with 308s, 270s, and 6.5 Creedmoors. Monos need a lot of velocity to get bang flops in my experience and as a result I am moving back to bonded bullets. I will also say that as a rule I am usually taking double lung shots or head/neck shots for maximum meat savings. In these applications it seems to pay off having more fragmentation. While that copper has been great for breaking shoulders without damaging too much meat, I get similar performance with partitions and accubonds. As others have said some of these newer designs that are supposed to fragment/have non toxic cores that are supposed to act like lead are interesting and I will probably try them at some point.

EDIT: Should have prefaced that all of these experiences have been with barnes ttsx, tsx, and lrx bullets. Also results have been really good inside 2-300 yards. The really slow deaths have been on deer and elk outside of this range with double lung hits some with and others without ribs being struck on entry.

 

[pods8 (Rugged Stitching)]

I wrote this up in other places but ultimately I am moving away from copper monos after this year. Everything I have shot or helped others shoot died but the speed and violence of death was poor outside of a couple hundred yards with 308s, 270s, and 6.5 Creedmoors. Monos need a lot of velocity to get bang flops in my experience and as a result I am moving back to bonded bullets. I will also say that as a rule I am usually taking double lung shots or head/neck shots for maximum meat savings. In these applications it seems to pay off having more fragmentation. While that copper has been great for breaking shoulders without damaging too much meat, I get similar performance with partitions and accubonds. As others have said some of these newer designs that are supposed to fragment/have non toxic cores that are supposed to act like lead are interesting and I will probably try them at some point.

EDIT: Should have prefaced that all of these experiences have been with barnes ttsx, tsx, and lrx bullets. Also results have been really good inside 2-300 yards. The really slow deaths have been on deer and elk outside of this range with double lung hits some with and others without ribs being struck on entry.

I've wrote these types of thoughts up in other places (quite a few times over the years) and not attacking you personally but using your example to nit pick:

I've hunted only monos for the last decade, my experiences have been anything but poor speeds of death. BUT you've already addressed the differences in your post. If you are a die hard rear lung shooter then I agree, don't hunt with monos generally speaking (the fragmenting ones will perform better). Its kinda like someone using a light jacket match bullet at very high velocity at close range, having it explode on the shoulder and then saying they don't work... If you want to shoot a bullet without taking its needs into mind then yes go to traditional bullet, they'll cover the most use cases most likely. If you want low velocity expansion, go with a thin jacket match bullet. IF you want to use monos then don't pretend they are a traditional lead core.

Keeping it very simple my advice: shoot for the heart / arterial bundle zone and keep the velocity for Barnes over 2200fps and I highly doubt you'll say you are seeing poor deaths over and over. If that isn't a place you are wanting to aim and you won't stick with higher impact velocities then yes don't hunt with barnes. This shot placement will tend to sever something that will cause massive blood loss quickly (not suffocation) and an animal will drop quickly form loss of blood pressure assuming it didn't get knocked down from the initial shock already.

I've used other combinations but my 280AI with the 145lrx with a muzzle velocity of 3130fps has hammered the most animals; pronghorn, deer and elk. Easily half the shoots are 300+yds away. BUT I've got reasonable BC paired with a high initial muzzle velocity so I'm still carrying 2200fps out to 600yds (at a mile of altitude) where as some other cartridges/combinations have a low initial muzzle velocity or lack the BC to carry velocity out there a ways so they are going to be limiting.

Good luck out there. Monos have their place, its just frustrating seeing "poor" reports that are very obvious in my mind why and easily avoidable IF someone wants to use monos. Not everyone does and that is perfectly fine too.

 

[rcook10]

I've wrote these types of thoughts up in other places (quite a few times over the years) and not attacking you personally but using your example to nit pick....

I mean you are literally saying that they have shortcomings with different shot placement and at low velocity in your own post which i think is overwhelmingly what I said in mine. That is poor performance for a bullet in the context of the job that I assigned them to do; kill animals with vital zone hits at the ranges they are stated to be functional at. This is especially true when compared to different bullet designs I have used.

Let me put it to you this way: I have blown up plenty of shoulders and lost meat many times with cup and cores (sierras or hornadys) and I have had animals die more slowly than I like with copper monos (barnes as above). I have yet to have either experience with nosler partitions and accubonds, federal terminal ascents, or swift scirrocos at the velocities they advertise to be functional. I will also say that I have had awesome experiences with monos inside reasonable distances (again as stated within 2-300 yards) but I don't shoot screamers and most of my handloads are tuned for consistency and accuracy rather than speed. In addition most of the mentees I take out are recoil averse and so it's a rare thing to get a higher bc bullet up to 3000fps with the rifles I have.

That brings us to shot placement; sure I think heart/bundle shots are great when everything lines up and you can slip one just above the elbow with a perfect broadside. I also have absolutely shoulder shot critters to get to that bundle on entry and exit but I would rather give myself and my students the largest room for error and the most pleasant butchering process and a central lung shot does the job better for us most of the time.

Now to be clear everything I have personally shot or been with a mentee for has died within 400-500 yards of impact and so in the grand scheme of things all of the bullets have been "lethal." However I really dislike suffering in the animals i shoot and my new hunters usually have a lot of anxiety in watching their first big game animal run over a ridge or down into some timber and so I am more prone to pick a bullet that will give me what I want. This year my friends/mentees and I mostly hunted with copper bullets (though previously I have shot 8 big game animals from white tail fawns to large cows with barnes bullets) and of the 6 shot with copper only two tipped over right away and one was shot twice (1 white tail, 1 antelope) and both were shots inside 200 yards. The other 4 (two elk and 2 antelope) shot from 300 to 500 yards with my 270 or a 6.5 cm had really good central lung placement and impact velocities in the 2500-2200 fps range. They ran for several hundred yards and the two elk were shot multiple times. I also observed two pencil throughs with a 6.5 tsx and 6.5 ttsx without ribstrike on entry and marginal lung tissue displacement. That's a swing and a miss in my book for over half the animals harvested. The other 4 deer and 1 elk I shot or helped harvest this year were shot once with bonded 308 and 270 caliber bullets and all died within a 50 yards with similarly placed behind the shoulder lung shots from 220 to 450 yards. I still have a late cow tag and 15 more lrxs loaded up so maybe i'll improve that average but we'll have to see. These experiences are similar to what I have seen in the past and while I'm not form, i usually kill 3-5 big game animals a year and guide/help/mentee another 3-5. At this point i've personally seen more than 80 big game animals shot with centerfire rifles and i feel like thats a pretty good sample size to make decisions with at least in the calibers I am shooting.

Per your velocity suggestions: I think this is another irritation I have with the mono market is that as you yourself have said you typically need impact velocities in excess of several hundred FPS of manufacturers recommended minimum to get good terminal performance. When you compare that to the work being done with heavy for caliber match bullets or well-designed bonded bullets I just don't see why i'd go back to pure copper unless I had to though I am very curious and will likely dabble with some of the newer frangible bullets and non lead cores on the market.

The pic is my personal tags from the last 5 years so you know i'm not entirely full of shit.

 

[pods8 (Rugged Stitching)]

I mean you are literally saying that they have shortcomings with different shot placement and at low velocity in your own post which i think is overwhelmingly what I said in mine. That is poor performance for a bullet in the context of the job that I assigned them to do; kill animals with vital zone hits at the ranges they are stated to be functional at. This is especially true when compared to different bullet designs I have used.

Let me put it to you this way: I have blown up plenty of shoulders and lost meat many times with cup and cores (sierras or hornadys) and I have had animals die more slowly than I like with copper monos (barnes as above). I have yet to have either experience with nosler partitions and accubonds, federal terminal ascents, or swift scirrocos at the velocities they advertise to be functional. I will also say that I have had awesome experiences with monos inside reasonable distances (again as stated within 2-300 yards) but I don't shoot screamers and most of my handloads are tuned for consistency and accuracy rather than speed. In addition most of the mentees I take out are recoil averse and so it's a rare thing to get a higher bc bullet up to 3000fps with the rifles I have.

That brings us to shot placement; sure I think heart/bundle shots are great when everything lines up and you can slip one just above the elbow with a perfect broadside. I also have absolutely shoulder shot critters to get to that bundle on entry and exit but I would rather give myself and my students the largest room for error and the most pleasant butchering process and a central lung shot does the job better for us most of the time.

Now to be clear everything I have personally shot or been with a mentee for has died within 400-500 yards of impact and so in the grand scheme of things all of the bullets have been "lethal." However I really dislike suffering in the animals i shoot and my new hunters usually have a lot of anxiety in watching their first big game animal run over a ridge or down into some timber and so I am more prone to pick a bullet that will give me what I want. This year my friends/mentees and I mostly hunted with copper bullets (though previously I have shot 8 big game animals from white tail fawns to large cows with barnes bullets) and of the 6 shot with copper only two tipped over right away and one was shot twice (1 white tail, 1 antelope) and both were shots inside 200 yards. The other 4 (two elk and 2 antelope) shot from 300 to 500 yards with my 270 or a 6.5 cm had really good central lung placement and impact velocities in the 2500-2200 fps range. They ran for several hundred yards and the two elk were shot multiple times. I also observed two pencil throughs with a 6.5 tsx and 6.5 ttsx without ribstrike on entry and marginal lung tissue displacement. That's a swing and a miss in my book for over half the animals harvested. The other 4 deer and 1 elk I shot or helped harvest this year were shot once with bonded 308 and 270 caliber bullets and all died within a 50 yards with similarly placed behind the shoulder lung shots from 220 to 450 yards. I still have a late cow tag and 15 more lrxs loaded up so maybe i'll improve that average but we'll have to see. These experiences are similar to what I have seen in the past and while I'm not form, i usually kill 3-5 big game animals a year and guide/help/mentee another 3-5. At this point i've personally seen more than 80 big game animals shot with centerfire rifles and i feel like thats a pretty good sample size to make decisions with at least in the calibers I am shooting.

Per your velocity suggestions: I think this is another irritation I have with the mono market is that as you yourself have said you typically need impact velocities in excess of several hundred FPS of manufacturers recommended minimum to get good terminal performance. When you compare that to the work being done with heavy for caliber match bullets or well-designed bonded bullets I just don't see why i'd go back to pure copper unless I had to though I am very curious and will likely dabble with some of the newer frangible bullets and non lead cores on the market.

The pic is my personal tags from the last 5 years so you know i'm not entirely full of shit.

Every bullet has different short comings.

I don't think you're full of shit, I was merely clarifying you're displeased with the performance and I was giving you my personal opinion/experience on how to get good performance from them IF you want to use them. I am not surprised at all that lower velocity and/or rear lung shots didn't deliver what you wanted. I'm not saying lower velocities or different shot placements won't work but I'm telling you/others how they can get quick death shots consistently IF they want to shoot monos (don't if you don't want to). Can they work just fine at lower velocities that 2200fps? Probably, but I don't set up a gun/load with that being a common use case in mind for my ideal shot distances. I don't think I've ever had an animal go 100yds with a barnes (usually less than 50yds) using my own advice. Obviously shooting rear lungs alone results in longer runs per your experience, don't do that if you are using a barnes and don't like that result.

The "reasonable distance" aspect is really "higher velocity" right? Distance is fairly irrelevant without knowing the rest of the picture (muzzle velocity and bullet BC), it could be a distortion for someone else reading it if they didn't realize what is really important, keep the velocity up at impact. I'm just trying to be clear on the parameters to keep in mind is all, for SOME of my guns that reasonable distance in terms of velocity is out quite a bit further than 200-300yds.

I have a 12 & 13yr old hunting now, a 243win pushes the barnes 80gr ttsx over 3200fps, it doesn't take a big magnum or high recoil necessarily. But that 80gr ttsx is lower on BC so it scrubs off quicker if further distance is needed but that is where muzzlebrakes / suppressors can help tame bigger guns for mentees if needing to shoot further (brakes REQUIRE earpro but with my kids I'm making them put on earpro regardless if there is a brake or not so its not really relevant compared to a bare rifle for me. I'll allow no ears for a suppressor but if we have time we're putting on ears still, doesn't hurt to protect them more). Lots of options in the tool chest to effectively use a given bullet IF there is desire to do so, again don't shoot monos if you don't want to, I'm just explaining how to avoid some of the results you didn't care for IF using them.

The summary of my entire point in responding is monos can absolutely deliver quick/effective kills if you deploy them in a certain manner.