Originally Posted by jwp475
Originally Posted by Riflehunter
Originally Posted by jwp475
Originally Posted by Riflehunter
Originally Posted by jwp475
Originally Posted by RinB
jwp

On heavy potentially dangerous animals I believe 9.3 diameter 250 grain monolithic bullets are where fully adequate starts.

There are no 35 250 monolithic bullets by Barnes. There are some outfits that make monos but they are designed to fragment which I wouldn’t want for DG.


The 225 TSX in 35 caliber is very long, no way would I want a 250 grain. The 200 TTSX at 3000 FPS will handle any chore IMHO. The 250 grain Noseler at 2700 hits very hard also. Elmer Keith killed a lot of big bears with the 35 Whelen as did Pondero Taylor who thought it was great on lions
But Elmer Keith clearly stated that he thought the .333-06 and .338-06 to be superior to the .35 Whelen because of the better sectional density of the .33 caliber with same weight bullets.


Sectional Density is a BS number, I can demonstrate lower SD bullets put penetrating higher SD bullets. Frontal area, nose shape both play a bigger part in solid bullet penetration than SD. Bullet material and construction means more with expanding bullets.
The counter to that argument is the ceterus parabus qualification or "all other things being equal" meaning, like nose shape, like construction etc.


A round nose solid of mono metal construction I've seen them out penetrated by lower SD flat point solids with a proper nose shape

When anyone stakes their argument on SD they are very experienced
Assuming you mean "inexperienced" then Elmer Keith, whom you quote, argued sectional density...and yet I can't see anyone at all saying he was not experienced.