Home Forums Reloading Big Game Rifles Bullet Failure report

The Federal Power-Shok 130g has a rated velocity of 3060fps. (I assume this I swat was used as Federal doesn�t have a �Hi-Shok� line.)

Regardless of the angle and placement relative to a line through the �vitals�, I would consider any bullet that fails to penetrate the shoulder to have failed. This is exactly the reason I do not care for standard cup-and-core bullets at velocities over around 2700fps � there are simply too many reported cases of such bullets acting like a varmint bullet as in this report.

Even for non-handloaders there are ammunition choices that are better � and I would not consider going to another standard cup-and-core bullet such as the Power-Point or Core-Lokt to be one of them.

Federal offers several excellent choices:
130g Partition @ 3060fps
130g TSX @ 3060fps
140g AccuBond @ 2950fps
140g Trophy Bonded @ 2940fps
140g Trophy Bonded @ 3100fps

Any one of these would have been a better choice.

The cost?

Midway sells the Federal 130g Power-Shok for under $12 a box. Guess that�s a case of you get what you pay for, but it probably is good practice ammo. Switching to Partitions or better will add about $1 to the cost of a one-shot hunt. Let�s consider the report above and assume both shots used the same 130g Power-Shok ammo at $12 per box. Two shots means the cost was $1.20. Federal�s 130g partition load runs $31.99 for a one-shot cost of $1.60. The total �savings� in this case was $0.40 best case (one shot with a Partition) or $0.80 (two shots).

Those meager �savings� do not factor in anything for the time, trouble, expense and inconvenience (gas, wear and tear on the vehicle, lost hunting time by the other party members, etc.) of two trips home and back to go get help (�Returned home to get brother and Dad. Found a fairly good pool of blood, but no deer. returned the next a.m�.�)

The �savings� here were purely illusionary.

Have killed...and eaten, lottsa northern whitetails with standard cup and core 130 .270's. Some factory, some handloads.

The reduntancy of the matter is...that it's all about shot placement. Period.

Deer are easy, if you can shoot.........

Unless they are Texas Deer (grin).

If the bullet disintegrates before entering the vitals, as the original post describes, it doesn't matter where you hit the deer.

Jog,

Easy, ok? We are not certain with absolute precision as to what actually did happen. At least I question the facts and accuracy of the observations and retelling.

In general any 130 gr soft point from a 270 Winchester will blast a deer good at 70 yds and that includes all bullets.

For someone to blame the bullet in this particular instance, as related, is not facing up to the responsibility to aim well.

If as stated by the post starter that the bullet hit the deers shoulder at an angle as it was going away then the failure to kill the deer was entirely due to the bullet not being aimed at a vital area.

In this particular instance the shoulder was not a vital area due to the direction the bullet took. There are no arteries there in the shoulder.

This was not bullet failure at all. Any jacketed 130 gr lead filled bullet from a 270 will kill a deer within a reasonable range as long as the shot placement is good. In this case it was not good.

As to not scrimping on the bullet I recall someone showing a little deer that they shot with a .22 cf. If my memory is correct it was a target bullet from Hornady and a much less powerful and a much smaller bullet than the subject one out of a 270 Winchester.

There was no scrimping of the cartridge or bullet selection at all but just a bad hit. If possible its more successful to keep shooting until the animal is dead.

JOG...

I was wanting to know what the un-named soft point bullet is that Federal uses in thier Power-Shocks...

For my own reference, and partly to throw some gas on this fire...(grins)

Here is the quote from the post starter about the bullet.

"Autopsy showed the initial 130 gr Fed Hi-shok had literally disintegrated on the shoulder, AND NOT EVEN GOT THROUGH TO THE VITALS."

Here is the rest of the information on the shot placement.

"Shot was placed as animal was quartering away, but stopped, into on-side shoulder. Deer ran off, boy watched, as the deer looked hit hard. "

We could ask if the bullet fragments were recovered? Yes, thats a good question.

Lets find out more.

I do stand on my generalization that any soft point from a 270 will cream a deer at 70 yards as long as the aim is reasonable.

Autopsy showed the initial 130 gr Fed Hi-shok had literally disintegrated on the shoulder

If as stated by the post starter that the bullet hit the deers shoulder at an angle as it was going away then the failure to kill the deer was entirely due to the bullet not being aimed at a vital area.

In this particular instance the shoulder was not a vital area due to the direction the bullet took. There are no arteries there in the shoulder.

This was not bullet failure at all.

He missed.

Yep...

Mauser,

Ok, you say you take their word. Fine! You weren't there anymore than any of us. You've stated, not in exact words, theyre not gun or bullet loonies. I'll leave my speculation as to how much they know at all out of this because they may know a lot or just a lot of BS. However, the assertion that you're making based on "the facts they reported" is something I don't believe. This bullet didn't strike the deer's shoulder anywhere near square because even if it had "failed" as believed it would still have broken the shoulder. An "autopsy"? Who, with any knowledge of WHAT to look for, or without a preconceived notion performed it? And of course your advice to them about throwing away 130gr 270 loads and going to 150RNs combined with their fresh experience is well on its way to making the 270 marginal at best on local deer according to the "local experts".

You might believe every word these friends say...fine, they aint my friends, and I don't have to buy it. I think you KNOW they believe what they're saying, and I also, based on what you write, you KNOW they might possibly not actually know what evidence to look for in such a case.

No, Mauser, there aint no "facts" here. There's the version you got, then the version you're relating to us. You reported it, and now don't like the comments. None of which seems to be malicious in anyway towards your friends, but merely offer a theory as to what happened. If you don't want comments, don't post...you will get them and seems you don't like the ones that even speculate as to what happened. And I don't care how hard you want to defend your friends...the onside shoulder aint the aimpoint for a quartering away shot! Period! If you don't dispute "the facts" then this was a poor shot!

Mauser,

Ok, you say you take their word. Fine! You weren't there anymore than any of us. You've stated, not in exact words, theyre not gun or bullet loonies. I'll leave my speculation as to how much they know at all out of this because they may know a lot or just a lot of BS. However, the assertion that you're making based on "the facts they reported" is something I don't believe. This bullet didn't strike the deer's shoulder anywhere near square because even if it had "failed" as believed it would still have broken the shoulder. An "autopsy"? Who, with any knowledge of WHAT to look for, or without a preconceived notion performed it? And of course your advice to them about throwing away 130gr 270 loads and going to 150RNs combined with their fresh experience is well on its way to making the 270 marginal at best on local deer according to the "local experts".

You might believe every word these friends say...fine, they aint my friends, and I don't have to buy it. I think you KNOW they believe what they're saying, and I also, based on what you write, you KNOW they might possibly not actually know what evidence to look for in such a case.

No, Mauser, there aint no "facts" here. There's the version you got, then the version you're relating to us. You reported it, and now don't like the comments. None of which seems to be malicious in anyway towards your friends, but merely offer a theory as to what happened. If you don't want comments, don't post...you will get them and seems you don't like the ones that even speculate as to what happened. And I don't care how hard you want to defend your friends...the onside shoulder aint the aimpoint for a quartering away shot! Period! If you don't dispute "the facts" then this was a poor shot!

Is this the standard 'blue box' Federal stuff we're talking about here? If it is, that stuff should be Speer Hot-Cor bullets shouldn't it?

Some quartering shots are steeper than others. Have to see how much was quaretering and how much was broadside to know what shot placement I would have chosen so I'll stay out of that argument.

Think they may be right that the bullet may have skipped. But again have to see it to know.

But I have to swim against the conventional wisdom here. I hunted with premium bullets from the time I started hunting until about 5 years ago. Stopped using them because they just didn't get the job done as quickly and efficiently as the regular stuff.

It got to the point where I dreaded the straightaway chest shot because I had to finish off a couple of runners with pretty decent shot placement. Made the switch to cup/core and haven't looked back.

But that is just me. Every one has to make that decision for themselves.

Everyone keeps saying that deer are easy to kill. That shot placement is everything. Maybe. But I've seen some hard hit deer run quite a ways. And unless you hunt on a farm you don't usually get the chance where I hunt to wait on a broadside deer ala Bill Jordan hunting one of those farm raised deer down in Texas.

So you go with what you like. I like medium to heavy conventional bullets in a standard deer round. And my experience tells me that they do a better and faster job on a good healthy mountain buck than partitions, trophy bondeds, and other premium bullets I've used.

And this has nothing to do with cost. I could afford any bullet I've seen advertised without thinking twice about it. You guys are right in that this should not be even considered. But just because you have considered and chosen a conventional bullet does not mean there is something wrong with your thought process. Some of us have considered and chosen conventional bullets.

That said I am going into the woods with a new bullet this year myself. But it is a standard bullet. Unless someone considers the interlock to be premium.

By the way, hunting season opens for a lot of us on monday and I wish anyone going into the woods for opening day next week a good, safe, and productive hunt.

Will

It seems to me that many of you are missing the most important part of his post. "The bullet literally disintegrated". If the bullet hit bone, any bone, any where, stopped dead and then disintegrated, it is bullet failure plain and simple.