Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Elk Hunting Water jug tests

So, no problem, but you'll never use the bullet again.

Makes sense to me.

It's been a known fact for a long while that sst bullets don't hold together very well.

You can't know that unless you've shot 'em through water jugs.

You can't know that unless you've shot 'em through water jugs.

One of the human traits most of us share is the ability to learn indirectly through the shared experiences of others. Some folks found the water jug test results useful and it was for them that it was published - including the poster that specifically asked for the results with the 165g SST.

Yet, you, the guy who actually ran the test, ignored your results and used a bullet known to blow up on a game animal. So yes, some humans learn indirectly and some can't even learn by direct observation.

You must be one old sourpuss of a man - and a poor excuse for one at that it you have nothing better to do than act like a grade school bully.

Your behavior says much about you and I'm just laughing at your childishness. If you have nothing better to do, as seems to be the case, I pity you.

Not at all. I'm just trying to get you to admit that the only way to judge how a bullet will perform on flesh and bone is to shoot flesh and bone.

But I see you're incapable of that. You ran your test, got your results, then ignored those results. Telling.

And if you want to meet and discuss your definition of "poor excuse for a man" just say the word.

You make my point. Again. Men worthy of respect don't behave as you do.

But to your claim I "ignored" the water jug test results, no, I did not. I merely confirmed their similarity to flesh and blood results. Based on the water jug tests I intentionally waited a full broadside opportunity and was careful to place the bullet behind the front leg where minimal meat damage would occur. The results were as expected.

Whatever you say, CH.

And if you think you can judge a person by what goes on here on this internet forum, more power to you. I don't want your respect, just so we're clear on that. And looking at the people who you have a beef with on here like JB and Pat, I think I'm in good company.

So if you expected the bullet to act like that, then you were unethical when you used it on an animal.

The critters deserve our best, not to be science experiments.

What do you think would have happened if the bullet would have landed on a shoulder?

Not unethical, just cautious. I think the doe would have died even if the SST hit a shoulder, I just would have lost more meat. If I seriously thought the doe would run off or suffer needlessly I wouldn't have used the bullet at all. Some would suggest using the SST was MORE ethical because of the quickness of the death, something that is hard to prove either way.