Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Ask The Gunwriters Why Do You All Make Bullet Performance So CONFUSING? LOL!

Yeah...........there is probably 37 other threads on the same subject. Not much "new" out there we can hash over but every one I've read on the subject of "what a bullet is SUPPOSED to do".......no one agrees on squat. Ya'll ever realize how danged confusing this makes it for anyone picking a bullet?

100 percent of us will agree on one thing >>>>> Bullet PLACEMENT is king. Yup. I agree too.

The rest of it? I think we "over think" it for everything but stuff that may jump up and bite us or perhaps trample us into broken pieces while running away.

Some bullets have a great following and they rant on how they retain "9999.99 percent bullet weight recovery" (an exaggeration.)

Those using another bullet type (or maybe 2) rant how their bullet "goes in 2-3 inches and comes apart doing maximum damage".

Another bullet type has as many followers who quote that their bullets "loses xy percent of it's weight but the rest stays together and passes through". Allegedly a combination of bullet 1 and bullet 2.

Then we have the crew that insists the bullets with .02 higher BC shoot so flat that they can put the bullet "exactly where they want it" (right) when they "gain" that .7 inches of trajectory.

I actually saw a post recently where the long time member of that WELL known site said "he didn't care what the bullet DID as long as he could put it right where he wanted"(he thinks) and another 1/4 MOA of accuracy was ALL that counted.

For the time being lets totally IGNORE the medium speed heavy bullet vs the super rocket light bullet never ending debate.

Ya'll give me a humongous headache. Every one of these bullets is the best thing since sliced bread!! Just ask those who use them!

For DEER sized, aka medium class animals, SINCE we all agree on bullet placement being the MANDATORY criteria to be met for DRT kills..........are we just beating a dead horse er uh deer?

I CONTINUALLY read rants over "bullet failure" with photos shown of bullet pieces/parts taken from some deceased critter (that more often than not "didn't go far"). Uh hello? I've never seen a photo of a bullet that FAILED because live deer won't hold still long enough to let one dig it out!!

Me thinks I'm going to pick up some ye ol' Speer Hot Cor or Hornady Interlocks and go shoot deer!!!

This is not TRUELY a "RANT" but perhaps a chance for each to offer their own "viewpoint".....KEEPING IN MIND this is all in good fun and not a battleground.........please!!


What say ye Gunwriters and fellow Campfire brethren?
DOES IT REALLY MATTER in what way the bullet does it's job?

God Bless

Steve I don't blame you for being confused. I am,too and have been for years.

To simplify,I think in terms of "penetration"(a bullets first job);and "expansion",second. To effect clean kills under a wide range of striking velocities, you need to have both. If it does one well but not the other,I'd rather leave it home, but will always tilt in favor of penetration, even after expansion.

And it has to be capable of breaking the heaviest bones in an animal (coming or going) to get into vitals, regardless of angle.(No I am not talking ass shots to reach vitals. I won't take that shot on an unwounded animal).

Proper placement is a given...but that's a long ways from being "all that's required".

Which one's do this? Let everyone figure it out for themselves. I have my own notions as I am sure others do.

All true......But.

"it has to be capable of breaking the heaviest bones in an animal (coming or going) to get into vitals, regardless of angle."

The only "heaviest bones" that cover the vitals are the leg bone and scapula (unless shooting steeply downward.

I really have no information of a bullet TYPE that will not go through these but there has seemed to be bullet WEIGHTS (aka very light for caliber) being pushed by the newest and greatest flame thrower cartridge that may not. HERE Again..IMHO that is a bullet WEIGHT issue, not construction nor function.

If there exists a bullet type that will NOT go through the (fragile I might add)scapula of a deer.....there wont be a lot of people toting it's a wonder bullet....... right?

The bullet MUST perform. I am in agreement yet all will do what you are saying......IMHO or no one would use them.

God Bless and thanks for replying.

I think part of the problem is that we ask an awful lot of a lowly bullet. The other part of the problem is that the deer have to cooperate too, which they don't want to do.

Where I hunt in Mississippi a deer is never more than a few steps away from a thicket so DRT shots help. Tracking deer into a brier thicket isn't fun and can be a challenge. In my experience DRT is harder to achieve than one might think. The only combo I've ever had consistent DRT shots on deer without a central nervous system hit with is a 7mm rem mag shooting 140 gr nosler ballistic tips. I only recall one deer out of hundreds I shot with that combo that ran anywhere, and that one ran because the bullet blew up on a rib opening about a 10" hole on the side of her rib cage. She went about 100 yds spewing blood everywhere and fell over when she bled out, it wasn't pretty.

I eventually got away from the 7mm mag/140 ballistic tip combo because the bullet wasn't stout enough to push through from all angles, I wanted something that would penetrate better that could be relied upon not to blow up on bone. There are plenty of bullets that do that but my percentage of DRT shots went way down when I switched to them. It's a trade off I've decided to make to get more consistent bullet performance. I don't try and make CNS shots, I shoot for the shoulders. CNS shots are too iffey for me and the potential to horrendously wound one is too high for me. Shot placement is certainly king but if you shoot enough deer your shot placement will be lacking on some of them, a shoulder shot gives me the widest margin of error while still giving a killing shot.

A couple of weeks ago I shot a medium sized doe that was looking at me head on from 210 yds. I was shooting a TTSX and it probably penetrated a good 2' stem to stern before stopping but she still ran about 25-30 yds. That's not far but unfortunately she went straight into the thickest cutover you've ever seen and didn't drop any blood for about the first 10 yds, enough to where I couldn't find the blood trail that evening. I found her the next morning (fine after a very cold night) but she could have easily been lost even after such a short run for lack of a DRT. Anywhere else other than where I'm at you could have likely watched her fall after a 5 sec. run, but down here it doesn't work that way.

Bottom line is you just can't win, nothing with so many variables involved will ever turn out perfect every time so you pick the bullet that gives the performance you're looking for and take your chances.

Interesting.
I've had only a couple incidents where I HAD TO have a DRT shot result. I fully agree on how to make that happen the most. My only option (only for me) at that point is a shot that takes at least one shoulder AND the spine, AKA a high shoulder hit......for which Id use a heavy bullet...and probably bigger bore than most, but I'm weird LOL

God Bless

Steve my answer is "no" not all bullets will do that...and it very much IS an issue of construction...bullet weight alone won't always do it.

Ever see a bullet flattened against a vertebrae,or a shoulder knuckle at the end of a wound channel? Or fail to penetrate any further into the chest after shattering on a shoulder knuckle?

It isn't just bullet weight although that helps.

No matter what we shoot we can't always be assured of DRT's unless you take out the spine,or brain or some portion of that central nervous system. With pure vital organ hits,no bone...they can make tracks. There are no guarantees but IME if you can combine immobilizing hits with extensive damage to vital organs,things simply don't go very far....usually.

Nope. After just under 4000 deer I have personally deboned in a 16 year span....I can't say as I have.

Strange things happen it seems. I can only go by what Ive seen in decades of hunting and a decade and a half of doing near structural damage autopsies on deer have shown me.

I just cant see ANY bullet doing so......and having people continue to use them is all I'm saying and if not being used, therefore are not within the bullets I am comparing in the original thread.

Perhaps, with the help of your post, I should add this.

All the above hunters, using the bullets types mentioned, are not experiencing lack of penetration due to bone. EACH claims it is a "do all end all" bullet type..without flaw.

And THIS is what is so confusing to me.

No offense meant and thank you for your addition.

God Bless

I've seen both. Maybe because you are just looking at deer,which aren't all that tough to begin with and lots of bullets will work on them?

Personally I never choose bullets with just deer in mind.Because I hunt other stuff from time to time,and don't pick bullets based on deer hunting only.

If you have never seen three legged elk run off from inadequate penetration, I don't know what to say,so no offense taken.

I am in agreement. Elk is an entirely different subject.

We wouldn't agree there either. *wink*

(Big bore fan!!)

God Bless and thanks again!

I have to agree with Steve692. A lot of guys get completely wrapped around the axle when it comes to their expectations of a bullet.

I shared with a resident X bullet elitist a couple of years ago that I was looking for a Winchester 1910 in 401 WSL. He immediately launched into a disparaging diatribe about the low BC and SD of the bullets for that round and how ill suited they were for any long range endeavors. Really? Did he think I was going to try a 600 yard shot with it? It's a 50-100 yard round for Pete's sake. How much sectional density do you need to whack a deer at 50 yards?

9999.99 Percent?

Thanks!!
On that note I'll tell you one thing in addition that gets my brain going "tilt tilt!" since you mentioned it.

Sectional density.

Sectional density is MEASURED by diameter and weight.......NEITHER of which STAY THE SAME going through a critter..NOR will the exact same bullet from the same box ALWAYS repeat said expansion and weight loss due to WHAT ALL it comes in contact with.

SD is something to LOOK AT......but it is not, and cannot be by description of how it is calculated "a constant" that a lot feel it IS.

my 2 cents on that and as always, no offense to the SD buffs.

Yep, the bullet has to weigh "enough" to penetrate. That said the "SD RATING" is a shot in the dark at what it will actually provide in penetration.

As an EXTREME example.

A FMJ bullet has the same "SD RATING" as a thin jacketed soft point of the same size and weight.

Penetration compared between the two is in different atmospheres.

God Bless

hence the "exaggerated" behind such.
It was meant to be humorous.

Cool, I was Hoping.


99.9999 Percent maybe.

Yep. Not totally loony ....just a rifle loony is all.

GOOD LUCK Bob !

This train never runs out of fuel!!

I can stop a Deer (Even J D) but a TRAIN?? No Way!

For some reason I can't figure out that already has been mentioned, some can't understand bullet 'failure' with a pic of a dead deer. I've tried to XPLAIN that morenonce. No Luck.

I've quit trying.

Retained weight and penetration are for low-lifes. Everybody who's anybody knows the more a bullet costs, the better it works.

LOL @ MD's post!!

Partition is never the wrong answer.

Next question......

Justifying more expensive alternatives, and not only bullets, is practically a sport here at the 'fire.