On a different note, "Nothing against you, but I've heard enough about "perfectly hit" deer that weren't recovered……more than likely they were poorly hit but nobody wants to admit that they screwed up." This really chaps my hinderparts. Yes, I can see where this is a common scenario, but why not just come out and call me a liar? It would have been simpler, more straight forward and saved you the wordsmithing. Those two deer I lost to the .243 aren't the only deer I've lost to that round, but that's not to say it isn't capable of killing a deer. That round has blown both front shoulders off of deer before, broken the upper legs and made mincemeat out of the boiler room. I've just lost my patience with it since it has proven less than ideal even under ideal circumstances. I'm positive I'm not the first, nor will I be the last to encounter such results. I was hesitant to join this forum because personal experience has showed me that some expert is always quick to point out how impossible or improbable someone's account is based on their extensive "I read I somewhere on the internet" personal expertise. Please, have a blessed day, and have no fear of me blackening your doorsteps with my presence, nor will I waste anymore "professional's" time by asking questions.
Simple question here……..how do you know they were hit "perfectly" if you didn't recover them??
Simple answer, you can't and don't!
Don't want to "blow both shoulders off of a deer??? Don't shoot them through the shoulders! Can't retrieve one that gets across the property line? Don't shoot one 100 yards from the property line!
It's not the 243 or "ethics" that are "hampering" you……...
