WOW! I just read Rathcoombe's FULL terminal effects bullets report! What an AMAZING piece of work! Easily, far and away, the most complete and best testing of any bullet and wounding effect report I have ever seen, and I have read a bunch of them.
Marine HAwk,
This particualr article or series of tests need to be put into a separate thread in the hunting forums here. IF you do not cite and paste it in those, may I? (with a nod and note of appreciation/acknowledgement to you for originally bringing this to my attention in this forum) sir?
safariman, It's not my stuff. I just linked it. Go ahead. It is very interesting to me because it explains and discounts a lot of theories. I learned a lot from it in an earlier version years ago. Notice the highest penetration from large meplat, moderate velocity bullets; but you can't get that at 300+ yds, so you need things like a .340 Wby with a 225gr TTSX fired at 3,160fps for that. But, for short, medium, range if one can do his part, a fat, large caliber meplat will kill/penetrate the best.
If you hit a water-based object (an animal) ant moderate+ velocity with a flat-faced bullet, as it penetrates, the tissue must spew sideways to exit the path of the flat-nosed bullet, which causes additional lateral damage. That's why big-bore, flat-nosed rounds are so deadly at shorter range.
Note, IMP the data shows why large caliber flat-nosed HC bullet do so superbly ad moderate ranges, but suggests that pointed high-velocity rifle bullets might be better (obviously) when shooting at long range. E.g., military snipers use long barreled rifles (rather than handguns) for long shot kills for a reason.
) that 340 is the rifle I reach for. Unless the 416 is Really needed, or I have not shot anything with it in a long while. Did you know that a 350gr TTSX at 2750fps works really well on Tennessee hogs? Who coulda predicted that!? <G> Shot one on that trip with my 10mm at close range, and IT worked too. I wonder which theory was at play here? 
