Coyote Hunter, you've given me a lot to consider and respond to. I can't really see where you are coming from in some regards, because it seems to me that you approach bullets with the idea that tougher is better. This perspective is not true, and there is much evidence to the contrary, as far as speed of kill.
Tougher bullets, such as those you name, as a group also have poor BC, which matters if your shots get long (>300yds). An experience I had demonstrates this, as well as my point that MV is irrelevant, and that impact velocity is THE thing: I was out shooting and a guy pulled up and watched me wrapping up. I started BS'ing with him about the upcoming elk hunt. He had a 300 RUM and factory ammo that he was going to use. I talked to him of my 30-06 and 185gr Berger handloads. He mentioned the ability to make a 300yd shot with his RUM, scoffing at my 30-06. I told him that my '06 has a 300yd MPBR, and that it catches up to and begins to pass his chosen ammo before 400 yds. He seemed incredulous. I explained the numbers to him. He still didn't see it. We ended the conversation talking about accuracy. Seems he was able to shoot about 3" groups at 100 with the RUM, and was pretty proud of that. He said the recoil was pretty rough.
There is always the chance of bumping elk up close where I have hunted the last 15 years. Most shots, however have been 400+yds. Should I get a RUM then, and shoot A-Frames, so I can get about the same impact velocity as I get with a 30-06 and Bergers? As an aside, I've not ever caught one. Not in deer, not in elk. Not in steeply quartering impacts. Broken bones, broad wound channels, exits. I've also tried other bullets, and been with guys who use still other bullets. Rodeos have always come with poor hits, regardless of the bullet/ammo.
You seem to claim that only certain bullets should be considered hunting bullets, i.e., the tough ones. And that, I guess, all those other bullet makers are what, lying? Committing some kind of fraud? No, bullets aren't all the same; but that doesn't mean that some don't work because they don't fit your criteria.
I will tell you again: impact speed is THE thing when talking bullet performance. For your hunting, your choices obviously work well. There are other factors than the ones you use to judge bullets. I know this because you don't even consider the ones that weigh most for me, including price.
HuntnShoot -
You misinterpret what I think about bullets. Tougher is not always better. If it was I would be shooting only non-expanding, copper-jacketed steel-core spitzer bullets. Instead I like bullets that expand fairly easily but are 'tough' when it comes to holding together. The North Fork SS, Barnes TTSX, Nosler AccuBond and Swift A-Frame all fit into this category and have performed very well at ranges near and far.
"Poor" B.C.? Neither the AccuBond nor the TTSX I use have what I consider "poor" B.C. values, although you can easily find bullets with higher values, including their "Long Range" brethren. The North Fork I use include a 7mm/140g (a pointier design Mike Brady never made generally available), 'standard' .308"/165g and .308"/180g SS and a .458"/350g FP. The B.C. for all of them, and the .257"/120g A-Frame I use, is more than high enough for my purposes which average under 300 yards but has stretched to 487 yards. Several years ago I took my .300WM/180g Barnes MRX (predecessor to the TTSX) and a .30-06/150g Nosler BT to the range for a final scope check. The last thing I did was try for clay pigeons on the 600 yard berm. "Poor" B.C. values or not, I was able to hit two pigeons with a total of five shots, three with one rifle and two with the other.
The "poor" B.C. of the .284"/140g TTSX (.412) was quite good enough for me to take my antelope last weekend with my .280 Remington at 373 lasered yards, my 4th longest shot ever. Calculated impact velocity was only 2078fps. (The others used a Nosler AccuBond at 487 yards and both a Barnes MRX and North Fork SS at 400 yards.)
Nowhere have I ever claimed that "only certain bullets should be considered hunting bullets". While my choices are limited to just a few, based on a variety of factors, I've often stated other people are free to use whatever they choose. If Berger bullets work for you, by all means use them. Some people like A-MAX as hunting bullets but I've seen first-hand the excessive damage these thin-skinned bullets can do at 30-06 velocities. While I use some cup-and-core bullets they only get used at low velocities. None of the premium bullets I use and have recovered have shown any signs of failure to expand or coming apart, regardless of the range used.
Most bullets will work most of the time, something I stated rather often. It is for those times when things go wrong that I'm willing to invest a bit more in my bullets and when I've needed deep penetration the bullets I use have delivered. If you have never had a Berger stop or come apart your experience is very different from what other people have experienced and Berger advertises , to wit:
All of our Hunting bullets are made in the VLD or Hybrid designs. These designs incorporate a sharp nose and slightly thinner jacket that allows the bullet to penetrate 2” to 3” before it starts to expand. After the bullet starts to expand it will shed 40% to 85% of its weight as shrapnel into the surrounding tissue (internal organ). The combination between the shrapnel and the hydrostatic shock produces a massive wound cavity within the vital area (internal organs) that will be 13” to 15” long.
Is Berger lying? Thanks, but when I've possibly wounded an animal and all I have is a hind quarter shot as it flees, I don't want a bullet that performs as Berger advertises in my chamber.
The Hornady 162g InterLock BTSP I used on my first elk centered a near rib, missed or barely nicked the far ribs and stopped under the hide. The next year I switched to Speer 160g Grand Slam bullets and it was 20 years before I recovered one. That one destroyed both shoulders of a 5x5 bull elk yet still retained about 50% more weight than the Hornady InterLock all those years before. Both shots were broadsides at about the same range, 100-110 yards. Even with a "poor" B.C. of 0.387 the Speer Grand Slam also made my 5th longest shot (350 yards) with ease and the 6x5 bull never took a step.
Velocity is not "THE thing" I consider most important and in fact falls well behind accuracy and bullet performance. The North Fork 350g FP I use in my .45-70 has an estimated B.C. of 0.232 and I launch it at a 2147fps. At 213 yards retained velocity is about 1515fps, but that was enough to drop a 6x6 bull elk in its tracks and I wouldn't hesitate to use them at 300 yards (1313fps, -24"), which would be a much longer shot than my average shot range, even with my bolt rifles. That same .45-70 will drive 350g hardcast (1097fps at the muzzle) through 12 one-gallon water jugs. I wouldn't want to shoot an elk broadside with that load if another elk was standing behind it as I would have some explaining to do to Parks and Wildlife officers.
We obviously disagree on what the important characteristics are for a hunting bullet. Price barely enters into the picture for me as I don't take enough shots while hunting for them to be a major expense, and far from it. Accuracy with reliable and consistent performance over a wide range of impact velocities counts for much more in my book.
