The bighorn sheep outfitter I worked for years ago used to always say that. "Speed kills", he'd say, and send me off to buy 150gr whatever's(long as it had a plastic tip) for his Blaser .300 Win. We had lots of grizzly in the area and he'd had more than one encounter, but when I asked him if he wouldn't prefer a heavier bullet he said the 150 was all he needed. Mind you he was a pretty cool customer so maybe it was, but he could usually talk the bear into going about its business anyway. But I digress.

Couple days ago,reading another thread somewhere in the bowels of the forum, someone mentioned a site by an Aussie or Kiwi who has done what appears to be a rather extensive amount of killing/dissection to determine what works best or kills fastest. He seems to believe that an impact velocity of 2600fps or faster kills significantly faster than bullets that impact below that velocity thresh hold. Above .35 cal and the speed drops to 2200 for fast kills. I don't have nearly enough experience to verify these findings, but I can say that the deer shot with the .270 and 25-06 tended to drop sooner than the ones shot with the .356. Could be just a coincidence, as the sample size isn't that large.

Since many here have vastly more experience in this area, I thought I'd pose the question to you all. If a bullet is constructed stoutly enough to penetrate to the vitals, doesn't a faster bullet tend to produce faster kills and more DRT's? Is this why small fast calibers seem to kill out of propertion to their size? Of course a slower heavier bullet kills just fine,we've all seen that and its not in question. The question remains though, does a significantly faster bullet generally equal a significantly faster kill?

Not a gunwriter, and I don't have as much experience as some here, but IME a fast bullet generally equals a faster kill. That said, I quit worrying about such things. A good bullet in the right spot= dead stuff.

Way too many variables to even start to debate....my exp has been that 30/06 and 7 mm08 and 257 Roberts kill about the same given the same distance. 243 not so good. Lots of tracking and blood shot meat...but then again I shot a few with 220 swift it was like a lightning bolt....po ackley wrote about this in his books, testing on feral donkeys..he liked the high vol...

I can't answer the question, but FWIW, for cup and core bullets the length of the wound channel is fairly constant over the range of impact speeds from 2100 to about 2750 FPS. Below that, the channel is actually longer because the bullet fails to open. Above that, the channel is shorter because the bullet begins to break up and shed more weight than is optimum. Premium bullets extend those limits. Partitions, for example, open at 1700-1800 FPS and hang together up to warp 9.5.

So for a given bullet, if speed does not lengthen the wound channel, it probably doesn't do all that much to increase killing power. And nobody seems to have a definitive formula for killing power, anyway.

But speed does get you more range, and that's often very important.

Now if you want to compare the 220 Swift to the 9.3x67, that's a more complicated discussion.

DISCLAIMER: As I've said on here many times, I'm not much of a hunter. My interest is in the technical side of the hobby.

Yes - BUT --------

Speed does kill.

It's a whole lot more complicated. We're considering both internal and external ballistics. The one missing element in your query is shot placement. That's paramount.

If you gut shoot an animal speed doesn't mean much. Same with a rump or leg shot.

The explosive effect of fast, lighter bullets certainly does produce a seriously effective "hydraulic shock" that is proven dramatic". This is not only seen in ballistics gel but also in animals. It shocks the system big time. But doesn't necessarily have to be the primary cause of demise.

The way ballistics works it that certain powders produce certain speeds, feet per second, and certain pressures. Faster, lighter bullets travel further with less 'drop" so with long range shooting - past 300 yards, they come into their own. And I speak too about ultra distances, snipers - 1,000 yards, a mile.

As I related recently our ancestors exterminated over 42 million bison is just a few decades shooting primitive rifles using black powder at various ranges including 600 yards.

Too 12 gauge rifled slugs travelling at 1,200 - 1,500 fps are devastating at closer ranges.

As I also related recently, an exhaustive study of various bullet expansions, different types, different constructions, lead, clad, solids, copper, showed essentially expansions that couldn't amount to a hill of beans as far as the photos were concerned. They all looked basically the SAME - to me.

Another aspect is energy dump. Within the animal or pass through, clean exit on the other side. Barnes loading manual shows a study wherein exit wounds are significantly more effective and cause shorter "runs" after being struck. They bleed more and leave blood trails better too for tracking.

Consider also that a caliber, say .25, .27, .30 bullet that expands 50% can be reproduced diameter/dimensionally by simply shooting a larger caliber rifle 50% bigger than the base case.

Way back when I was a young guy I moose hunted with a .25-06. I spined it and dropped it in its tracks. Many years, and rifles, later I moose hunted with a .338 Winchester Magnum. I spined the moose and dropped it in its tracks. Both shots were in the range of about 200 yards. I had zeroed my scope at 200 so it was dead on at that range. The .25-06 was a light bullet around 100 grains or so. The .338 Mag was 2 1/2 to 3 times heavier.

So the answers to you questions are that one size DOES NOT fit all. It depends on the hunter, his personal beliefs, philosophy, range or distances he/she is/are shooting.

Generally, however, up to 300 yards, the heavier bullets, at slower speeds *( necessitated by the consideration of maxing out on the guns safe pressure ratings ) are more effective than lighter, faster bullets because they carry more energy and oomph.

The Weatherby's are an example of really fast as are numerous proprietary and custom brands. They are certainly more effective and better killers. But they burn out barrels faster.

A .30-06 is completely effective for killing an elephant with a head shot and it has been done.

A bow and arrow is/are completely effective in dispatching all sorts of animals with energy and velocity that is but a shadow of a good rifle.

So the bottom line is that you can kill game with just about anything including a .22 short rim fire *( Which I have done on the farm with pigs ).

Do I have your permission to 'steal' this and quote you?

That defines my position and requirement for rifle/cartridges for hunting.

Thnx

Jerry
3100 guy

I read a South African website quite a bit and those guys prefer heavier bullets at slower velocities than we do here. Of course they hunt larger game as a rule.

Sure...speed kills.Like Denton said, it gives us range.I'll add it also expands our bullets on impact.

So long as we still get the two things we need to kill BG animals cleanly and consistantly at any distance...penetration and expansion.

We don't have to do anything more complex than shoot a bunch of woodchucks with a common 22 rimfire;then do it again with a 220 Swift to see the effect of the extra velocity.

It still boils down to bullet construction, though;and impact velocity. Years ago we used to shoot a lot of woodchucks with Sierra 52 and 53 gr match bullets. Jackets were hard but brittle. Not intended for shooting animals.

Out to 300 yards or so results were dramatic...ghastly,jagged wounds and sometimes animals almost blown in two. But beyond that, as velocity drained the magic was gone. They often drilled through. Chucks got back to their holes and made tracks.We stopped using them. Common soft points killed better beyond 300 yards.

John "Pondoro" Taylor wrote years ago of the peculiar "shocking effect" of the 375 H&H,due to its high velocity (for those times).IIRC he noted it occurred at velocities of 2500-2600 fps and up.He was talking Cape Buffalo,and large game....not deer.

Complex subject. Impact velocity, shot placement,bullet construction and expansion characteristics,size of animal, etc all come into play IMHO. Most modern cartridges all seem to do well out to 300 yards or so....it's beyond that it seems that higher impact velocities rule the roost.

Drive 55 to stay alive!

Speed kills up to a point. Please do not confuse me with the folks that really know anything on this subject. However, I have shot a bunch of deer with a variety of rifles and nearly identical situations. What I have seen indicates that there is blessed little difference in what a 25-06, 30-06, and 35 Whelen do at comparable ranges on comparable whitetail deer, trying my best to take out both lungs and the top of the heart.

In some cases the deer run a little bit, but in nearly every case, I can stand where they were when I shot them and see toes in the air. In each case, I am getting an exit wound. All these deer have been taken with 175 yards.

The idea that speed buys distance is a good one. What else I can add is that if the bullet has enough speed to open up and you are getting an exit wound, the difference between 25-06 and 35 Whelen is largely being spent in the dirt on the far side of the animal. If I had to take a pick for which does the best job, I'd not take the 35 Whelen . Overall, the best job seems to be done by the 30-06 using either 150 or 165 grainers.

I think modern bullet construction has made bullet diameter and weight less important and tipped the balance in favor of ligher bullets going faster. When smokeless powder was 1st developed,it was not uncommon for smaller faster bullets to over expand and not reach vitals.

It absolutely does in my opinion. Just talking deer, I've shot them with a 375 H&H down to a 250 Savage and nothing kills them faster than a 257 Weatherby with 100 grain Hornadys at factory specs. I've never had one take a step when shot with one and I try to shoot all my deer on the shoulder.

Randy Brooks told me personally years ago the 416 seemed to kill better with the 350gr TSX than with the 400 when he was testing them and he could only surmise it was the difference in velocity. Lastly, Ross Seyfried in his book tells where the most impressive buffalo killer he's ever used was the 416 Weatherby @2700 fps.

Bob summed it up very well.

Bullet construction plays a big role. The whole speed thing only works if the bullets expand. Shoot a deer with a 30-06 loaded with a 150 grain SST going 2900 FPS and shoot another with a 150 grain M2 ball going 2900 FPS and compare the results. Obviously the SST is going to do a lot more damage and kill faster even though both rounds are going the same speed.

Animal size and construction. With deer, the size of their chest cavity is roughly that of a volley ball. The typical center fire with expanding bullets can destroy the deer's chest cavity with one shot.....kind of like what happens when you shoot a watermelon. Is there a shoulder fired rifle and ammo combo that can accomplish the same thing with a buffalo?

Then there is of course shot placement. If you destroy or disrupt the nervous system or not.

If you're going to do that in Georgia its best you stay in the right hand lane to stay alive!

His sisters got her feet on the dash. He cant see to merge back right for the color of sis panties

Sure.

Plus, let me rephrase and expand some of my first post on the thread.

If your bullet impacts at sufficient speed, it will open fully. As you increase impact speed, the length of the wound channel will not increase. It remains pretty constant until you reach the point that the bullet begins to fail. At that point, penetration begins to decrease.

Sadly, some of the best information we have on the effect of bullets was gathered by physicians treating battle wounds.

One thing that is understood is that the energy dump in tissue results in two different effects. The tissue directly in front of the bullet is crushed and torn. The tissue around this wound channel is elastically stretched. Slow, heavy bullets do more crushing and tearing. Fast, light bullets do more elastic stretching ("bloodshot"). It's the crushing and tearing that creates the wound channel.

Hydrostatic shock is an oxymoron. Hydro means water, and static means standing still. Hydrostatics is the study of water or other liquids that are not in motion.

Now maybe there is some form of hydraulic shock at work when a bullet impacts. Maybe that kills game faster. I don't claim to know. But please don't call it hydrostatic shock.

A stoutly constructed bullet that expands and penetrates well will add a lot more internal trauma when driven faster, no doubt.

Denton, I have to disagree with you a bit.

A faster impact will give you a wider wound channel which can result in more internal damage then a long narrow wound channel. The wider the wound channel, the better the chance for a CNS hit, which is what produced most DRT results.

A 160gr bullet leaving the barrel at 3400 can have amazing on game effects.

Denton:

You posted:

"If your bullet impacts at sufficient speed, it will open fully. As you increase impact speed, the length of the wound channel will not increase. It remains pretty constant until you reach the point that the bullet begins to fail. At that point, penetration begins to decrease".

Sorry but I just don't understand. Something is getting lost in the interpretation.

Can/will you please elaborate ?

No doubt speed kills. Not sure why it is even a debate or a revelation.

But in truth, anything that pokes a whole in the vitals will kill.

That's certainly true but a << properly constructed bullet for the job >> going FASTER has a more immediate effect.

If slow bullets didn't kill - then the 30/30, 30 Rem, 35 Rem. et.al. wouldn't have killed all that they have.

SLOWER bullets---

1. take longer to get to the game, allowing the game to move some, or allowing another animal to interrupt/deflect the bullet.

2. take longer to get there IF they get there. (edit to correct)

3. do NOT travel as FLAT.

4. do NOT hit as hard.

Hi-Vel accomplishes a few things that SLOW bullets can not.

These things ARE why I strive for the best velocity WITH the best accuracy I can GET.

Jerry

Roy Weatherby would have agreed with all that.

And he was RIGHT ! <grin>

jwall,

My post was two sentences long. Somehow, you only managed to read the second half.


I still don't see how this topic is worth this much discussion. I thought everyone knew over 100 years ago that faster bullets produce a more dramatic effect.

On a lighter note on this topic, I'm convinced that when it comes to varmint hunting accuracy may be king but velocity is the court jester.

You are.. W R O N G.., this time. I only quoted the 2nd part.

I guess you could say this discussion is about....

'faster bullets'. There are some virtues ?, attributes ?, whatever that MORE speed achieves or has.


Tom T Hall, "older whiskey, faster women, more money !" You get the idea ? More of a good thing.

Jerry

Bob has a way of doing that...

Speed does extend effective range, no doubt.

Terminal performance is another matter.

Balance is where the rubber meets the road.

Bullet type and weight matched with range and speed produces results.

Nope, one size does not fit all, never has, never will...

DF

Whatever dude. You think that other animals can walk between a bullet and a target when fired from slow cartridges. Obviously there's no point in arguing with you.

Arguing ? who was arguing? I was trying to answer your question.

I'll ask (axe) another.

Have you ever seen a deer sag-twist his head/neck and then lick its side or scratch itself? That can happen at just the wrong time and you have a MIS placed shot.

I have and believe me another deer that you haven't seen, can take a step into a bullet's flight at just the wrong time. My main point is faster bullets USE LESS time from muzzle to game. STUFF happens.

Again, I wasn't arguing and AM still discussing.

Jerry

I'm laughing AT MYSELF before someone else does.

I MIS quoted Mr. Hall.

I believe he sung,

"Faster horses, Older whiskey, More Money"


That was one of those 'fraudulent' slips.

'faster women' has been MY version a long time.

Jerry

About 12 years ago I was hunting Alabama. There were two bucks in the edge of a wood line about 200 yards out. I settled in on the older, much nicer buck and right as pulled the trigger, the younger buck gigged the older buck in the ham with an antler. The older buck jumped up and out of the wood line and just stood there.

I thought I had missed, and hurriedly racked another round and hit him in the shoulder - dropped him where he stood. Later I realized my first round had hit lower and further back than I thought, catching the bottom of the lungs just behind the heart. That was the the difference in POI from a high shoulder shot as the buck moved as the trigger was pulled. Rifle was a 7mm-08, 140 Ballistic Tip at ~2750fps.

David

I would have to agree, there is enough anecdotal evidence about "speed kills" to believe it's of some value.

The hydraulic effect, in simple systems with incompressible fluids, is undeniable - it's what allows a man to lift a truck using a simple jack. And some have suggested a bullet impact can cause a bunch of blood vessels to burst in the critter's brain. But all the critter's body structures are not perfect fluids, so it's hard to generalize.

I knew one guy who swore that the .22-250 was the ultimate deer round. But get enough beers in him, he'd admit to losing a few. And he eventually went back to the .25-06

Me? I've never seen a .270 Winchester give anything but bang flops

Higher impact velocities rule the roost regardless of range.

Your first version was better. Maybe you should have been Tom T's manager...

No telling where he may have gone...

DF

Sure. Let me have another try at it.

Here is actual average test data from 30-06 cup and core bullets impacting at various speeds



Most people are shocked that the curve slopes downward to the right, meaning you get less penetration as impact speed increases. Below about 2100 FPS, you get very deep penetration because the bullet does not open. Above about 2800 FPS, the bullet begins to fail, and penetration decreases. Between those two speeds, the length of the wound channel is about 15 inches, regardless of where in that window you are.

Partitions open at about 17-1800 FPS, and give about 16 inches of penetration regardless of impact speed above that point.

So more speed does not give you more penetration. In fact, if you're shooting something for big game with an MV above 3000 FPS, your bullets will frequently fail on shots within 100 yards or so, unless you use premium bullets.



You may well be correct about getting a wider wound channel. I'm still wrestling with that one.

There's a reason so many of the 'great' rounds were moderate speed, because they didn't have the bullets we have today.

I think there is a lot to that idea.

Canazes--

Thanks for an example from SOMEONE ELSE beside me. A lot of things CAN and have happened.

Thnx
Jerry

I believe Layne Simpson held the 416 Bee in similar regard.

Above 3k it's time to switch to a modern, bonded bullet.

I killed two coyotes once with my .340 Wby and the 225 spire point. Both shot tight behind the shoulder, and both ran probably 100 yards before toppling over. I was stunned being what I had just shot them with. This same bullet/load had absolutely flattened deer, elk and caribou.


Speed and bullet construction doesn't mean $hit if your target isn't big or stout enough to expand the bullets.

If the bullet is too big in relation to the size of the critter you many not get much expansion.

D H -

IMO your bullet was not designed for your game/target

Jerry

Ya, I realize the bullet was simply too stout for coyotes...That happened in my early 20s and I have learned a lot since then.

I was just illustrating that an animal has to be able to provide some sort of resistance for a given bullet to expand, regardless of speed.

I am.....skeptical.

----------------------------------------------------

How many times has that happened to me on animals ?? Plenty.

Behind the shoulder and below the spine is probably through the rib cage and maybe lungs. Maybe heart too.

The hydraulic shock is tremendous. Witness a watermellon blowing up. The animals are apparently running on adrenalin and some latent motor functions but the shock is seemingly insufficient to flatten the animal. 100 yards is about right for the "run". I have had them go 75 to about 150 or so. Some keel over and some just stand there sick, head down, unable to do anything except stand up. Some run out of sight and I have to track them. I blasted one buck at about 35 to 50 yards, that came over a ridge and didn't see me. Shot him clean through. He was bleeding like a stuck pig but ran 300 - 400 yards. It was a heavily hunted area with swarms of other hunters. I tracked him but some other hunter shot him a couple of hundred yards in front of me, grabbed the antlers and ran down the mountain as fast as his legs could carry him.

___________________________________________________________

I won't argue with the post or the study. To be copasetic, however, I will say that I may not disagree with the findings but I will amplify that my "take" on bullet expansion, penetrations has been formulated over many years of field experience.

Again I will beat up on the bullet peddlers who are desperately searching for more and more malarkey, to run their jive on the unsuspecting potential customer. It's just plain and simple 90% hogwash. I don't buy it in a millisecond. Also again for the old Guys, please don't pay any attention to my opinions. These are not for you, these are for the young, inexperienced fellows who need to know the facts accurately and honestly absent all of the smoke and mirrors. At the risk of repeating myself I will say again that we could get rid of 90% of all cartridges, calibers and rifles and still have far more than any one of us could contend with in a lifetime. That means that if Ken Howell is right about 10,000, losing 9,000 still leaves 1,000 for you to tinker with. Not likely.

The above penetration study is missing some important details. While I don't denigrate it, I know from a lifetime of hunting that there are several aspects of penetration, effectiveness that need to be taken into consideration. What the study does illustrate is the desirability of matching bullet types with velocity.

But I'm a good sport. I don't want to rain on anyone's parade. If it is a turn on to debate the details that's just hunkey dorey with me and more power. Everyone's opinion counts. That's how we learn. Free exchange of ideas and opinions.

Bighorn -

That is true but a couple of points -

I have never owned 'any' Weatherby of any cal/cart.
I am not interested in any of the small Bees.

IMO - the 7 Bee is too SIMILAR to the 7 RM.

IF the 300 Win will not kill any game>> the 300 Bee can not. You need even more.

I own an 8 mm RM and don't need it, so I certainly don't need any larger Bee.

As to this thread -

I don't see nor ever have seen any disadvantage to Hi Vel, AS LONG AS your bullet can operate at the speed.

1 last point and don't want to be offensive.

There are folks, shooters, hunters, who don't want/like/or are afraid of REcoil.

"For every action there is an equal and opposite reaction.

There are NO free lunches.

Jerry

Yes it is. I'd even put the bar a little lower, at about 2800 FPS.

We have some really excellent choices these days.

IMHO speed is a factor in a kill, but having shot quite a few with the vaunted 257 wtby and 100 ttsx at fairly max loads, I've yet to see one fall over DRT.

Rare for them to go more than 20-30 steps, but they do. Same with my buddies experiences when we bought twins...

And I've had to trail some over 100 yards a few times. A few times with almost no blood.

But they are dead and you do find them.

I have the same results from my 32-20. And about everything in between.

Ran a 243 for years, had some DRT shots not related to shot placement there at times too, then bought into all of hte wtby hype and bought a 300... only deer to ever DRT was a facing shot, 180 partition stopped in hindquarter... so all energy expended there...

Mind you I dont' shoot bones, only ribs and lungs typically. If I want less tracking or meat waste I shoot heads.

IMHO the only way to be sure of DRT is to break up the CNS in some form or fashion, by luck ( high shoulder shooters IMHO) or on purpose.

I do think that there may be a slight edge to faster rounds on the non DRT hits overall, but there are so many otehr factors involved that I"ve seen over the years it almost all goes out the door.

How loud is the shot. How calm or agitated the deer is. Is it rut. Are you hunting a feeder or natural trail, blind or no blind? Did the deer just exhale or inhale? Did you hit an artery or a vein.

Just like blood trails or lack of have various reasons.

As to longer shots, you have hit em right first, wind drift is the big unknown so I have always strived to CYA as best I can on that, and thats not a light bullet typically.... after that bullet construction and speed finally...

YMMV.

Nor the good steels that would consistently hold up to 65KPSI or so either IMHO...

Rost,

You are correct, there is more to the equation then just speed. When I say "speed kills", I'm thinking of real speed with a real bullet.

One of my favorite combinations is a 160gr Nosler Accubond leaving my 7mm STW around 3400. So I have bullet that will violently open up, yet hold together to make deep holes. In the real world with wind and critter that have a mind of there own, placement is not always perfect, but the increased destruction does increase your acceptable margin of error, and what could of been a chase can be turned into a critter that isn't going any where. I do get more DRT's with this combination, but IMO that largely due to a higher probability that I will damage/shock the CNS with the larger wound cavity.

All the deer I've shot w the 257 and the standard 100r Hornady pill, have not taken step one. If I remember correctly, I shot three with the 117 RN and they did run, but not far, definitively less than fifty yards, which is fifty yards too far..

I suspect that you are exactly right with the frangible bullets.

Something I just won't risk when barnes are available.

Just me of course.

And I hear you on trailing, I've said it before and got ripped for it, but I enjoy following the trail. Its just part of the hunt and the puzzle to me. Likely because I started bowhunting at an early age and you simply have not many options there... either learn to trail or loose out. You don't have the luxury of not trailing.

I have a box of 80 barnes, and one day I'll ramp them up just to see... if you have no issues with a frangible 100, an 80 mono won't... but I still expect that its all going to be shot placement. And I still suspect if I wanted to go backwards to a cup and core bullet, I still would see very few DRTs due to how I choose to place the bullet.

For a Nosler Partition or Barnes TTSX, drive it either fast or faster. You'll never be sorry.

And the good thing about Barnes.. you can drive em slow and they still work just fine...

Shock-1-a sudden upsetting or surprising event or experience.
2-a violent shaking movement caused by an impact, explosion, or tremor.

The disruption of the fluids at rest is the defining point of the hydrostatic shock.

Static means not moving.

Shock means what you defined it to be.

I don't have a concept for a not moving shock.

The term was coined by non-physicist hunters, and is somewhat of a paradox. For years I've been preaching what denton said. Hydraulic shock is probably the best descriptor for what actually happens.

I have never seen a bullet that kills faster than a Barnes TSX when you really get the speed up regardless of its cal and weight.

There seems to be some difference of opinion on that by some folks I trust like our own JB.
That said, my experience mirrors yours...and Ive killed a LOT of stuff with the little .22 TSX and TTSX...
Speed is a BIG plus with Barnes.

All I can add is that there is a reason I use 32 g V-MAX @ 4K+ on prairie dogs, and 40 gr Nosler BT's (in the mid 3K range)on coyotes. The V-Maxes would not consistently penetrate deep enough on coyotes. (I LOVE the explosive effect of the light V-Maxes on PD's, though)

20 grain V-Maxs at 3650 don't do too bad either.....

Each year I see between 330 to 350 whitetails, around 300 pigs, and at least 50-60 exotics,many coyotes and bobcats killed, with everything from .204 to 45-70 and everything in between, some bullets are fast and light some are heavy and slow,some animals are shot with what you would call junk bullets, some are shot with the best bullet money can buy.
I have looked at animals that looked like they have been run over by 2 big trucks when we dressed them out and I have seen animals that you wondered what the hell killed them, I think you guy's are beating a dead horse.Pun Intended! Rio7

I have.

In my experience, this is false

Dead and stopped are different things.
Stopped being preferred when things have forward vision and claws.

Yeah, it is in mine too. Have even used some cup-and-core big game bullets at 3100+ fps with great results on big game at various ranges, in particular the Hornady Interlock and the present generation of Nosler Ballistic Tips. And the all-around quickest-killing bullets I’ve used, at any velocity, have been Berger Hunting VLD’s.

But I agree that monolithics kill quicker when pushed faster. The highest velocity I’ve seen so far was 4300 fps with a 40-grain Cutting Edge Raptor from a .22-250. My wife used that load on a doe pronghorn at about 150 yards, and the kill was instant and spectacular, just like a mule deer buck she shot with a 100-grain TSX, also at around 150 yards, started at 3550 fps from a .257 Weatherby.

But have also seen a number of TSX’s and Tipped TSX’s (as well as other monos) not kill very quickly when started at velocities from 3150 on up. Which is one reason I hadn’t commented on this thread so far: Over the years and several hundred big game animals I find absolute statements about killing power sort of like political promises: Sometimes they work out and sometimes they don’t.

John: oddly enough, the only "absolute" statement I can make regarding bullets is the little 100gr Hornady Interlock out of my 257 Weatherby at published velocities. Not ONE deer has ever taken a step and I'm talking about a sample of 80 plus animals. It is "electric"!

The critters I've shot with TTSX have not died at lightning speed.

I'm more of the opinion that lead kills...when it fragments. Speed helps with that.

My experience is that the Monos kill as quickly as anything Ive ever used. I don't have as many critters in front of the gun as JB has, but a couple hundred plus....about 60 of which were killed with monos....
I love them for the little guns in particular......


That said, as JB and jorge pointed out, an all time fave of mine is a Hornady Interlock 100 grain 6mm....flat base...which I can no longer find, but am carefully guarding a stash of a couple boxes.....

Hmmm...makes me wonder what a 160gr .338 TTSX doing 3500 out of a .340 Bee might accomplish. I don't normally lean that light for caliber but this conversation does make the idea intriguing.

In my experience as a ER nurse, with human gun shot wounds, the faster rounds do way more damage. Seen many a 45 pistol people survive and have minimal hollow organ damage. Seen some shot with 223/556 and 9mm and other fast rounds. Not pretty the amount of secondary damage produced by the hydrostatic shock wave. So in trauma we say velocity is more important than mass, and so do the trauma manuals. I believe this, and the docs I work with have taken care of more than their fair share of gun shot wounds, so I tend to believe what they say about it.

Each year I see a lot bullet wounds in all kinds of critters large and small, I would agree that the lite fast bullets can and do kill like lighting, but I will comment that I also see large slow bullets kill very well also, the difference seems to be the lite bullets do a great deal more meat damage then the slow heavy bullets,as with every thing to do with hunting every caliber, has it's up side and down side, big and slow usually has limited range, lite and fast more range, less knock down power on larger game.
I think most any modern hunting bullet will do the job when properly placed,then again I have never seen any caliber or bullet, kill like lighting with a gut shot. Rio7

I don't understand all the concern that I read about meat damage. If the animal is shot in a meaty part with any expanding bullet, there will be meat damage. If it is shot through the heart/lungs the damage is irrelevant. If the animal is not running away, I will deal with a little blood-shot meat. I have never found it to be a big issue. I will take the velocity "mess" over the slow mover. The exception to that is for very large animals where extreme penetration is a necessity.