Theory ... your thoughts on the topic?
Damage to the meat is a function of bullet velocity, bullet diameter, and bullet contruction and not bullet weight. In fact, ft-lbs of energy is not a good gauge of potential meat damage, because it factors bullet weight to heavily.
A 338 Federal 200gr would do much less damage to the meat than say a 270WbyMag 140gr. My theory, the larger the diameter the bullet, the slower you should push it to preserve weight for the grill. Just saying that ft-lbs of energy isn't a good gauge to use in some cases.

I would say that impact speed of a given projectile, the weight of this projectile, and the construction of the projectile are what determines damage to flesh.

I'm no expert, but I would think speed and what happens when the bullet hits flesh/bone would be the most important factors. A FMJ does little damage to the surrounding area regardless of weight or speed, but it has to at least have enough speed to penetrate one side of the target. If it has enough speed to go through the target thats ok. How the bullet reacts is probably most important. Does it mushroom, fall apart, etc... There is a company making a bullet that I saw on TV that will shoot through a metal plate, 1/4' thick, I think and turn into a powder that completely obliterates a ham. They claim there is nothing coming out the other side of the ham, if I remember correctly. Complete 100 percent meat loss on the ham. So, what the bullet does once it penetrates the target probably has the most to do with the damage.

I won't speculate on how it works, but I have killed deer with calibers ranging from 223 up to 9.3x62. The 9.3x62 does MUCH less meat damage than a 223.

I've heard a lot of talk about the TSX being a good bullet to preserve meat. I'm assuming this is due to the tougher construction than typical lead bullets?

I agree that bullet expansion, weight, diameter, velocity, and energy play a part in preserving meat on game. The main factor is simple bullet placement. If you want to save meat put the bullet behind the shoulder, the worst thing your going to do is lose a few strips of meat between the rib cage. I load rounds for the terrain of the area that im hunting. Just my 2 cents.

Bullet construction is the main factor to consider when evaluating meat damage. I've shot smaller animals with my 338 win mag like rabits and experienced minimal meat damage (believe it or not, it's like someone else said about hitting them in the right spot and not hitting bone). I've hit coyotes in just the right spot with a 30-06 and you couldn't even tell where the hole was.

I think it is bullets coming apart due to high velocity for that particular bullet.
I also think that high velocity with any kind of expansion can make a mess.
A bullet staying in the animal (no exit wound) thereby expending all of it's energy in the animal will make a bigger mess than one that penetrates clear through, taking some of it's energy with it.

i can tell you that a 120 gn hornady in my 7mag will ruin twice as much meat as a 140-165gn . i think with any big caliber you really must stay off the shoulder to save meat. the best shot with anything is right thru the ribs.
with the 7mag if and light bullets if you hit far shoulder on exit you will lose the whole shoulder in most cases.

the 270 weatherby w/ a tough bullet on a deer sized animal wont do much damage because its in and out too fast.
if your worried about meat damage either buy a 45-70 and shoot cast bullets at 1400 FPS or shoot all your animals in the brain.
i dont eat much rib meat so as long as the bullet causes enough structural damage to the internal organs im good.
i have a 376 steyr that pushes a 235 gr speer SP nearly the speed of a 30-06 and it doesnt damage much meat at all, even w/ a broadside shoulder to shoulder shot. its just not inside long enough to expand into a shroom.

From my experience how much meat a TSX destroys depends entirely on how fast you are driving it.

In general, driven at the same speed and of the same weight a TSX will destroy less than any cup and core bullet in a side by side comparison.

BCR

Several factors involved. The more bone you hit, the more damage you get.

the worst bloodshot meat i have ever seen was from a 243 grandslam bullet in the speer nitrex load. the least was a 45-70 405 grain hard cast load at -1500 FPS impact.
looked like a clean hole. like someone ran the buck thru w/ a piece of #4 rebar.

Why would a 270 Roy driving a tough bullet fast do any less/more damage than a .243,.25-06, 7mm Mag, 30-06, 300 WM driving a tough bullet the same velocity?

Your comment about the 376 Steyr I do not understand at all. Please elaborate.

Least amount of damage I've seen is from my 50 bmg. Clean hole in and out.

TSX and its versions are about the best choice for me.

Worst choice over the years have been too light of a bullet for caliber, IE like 120s for 7 mags and 150s for 300s. Worst bullet by far has been BTs but I've not shot many of the newer tougher ones. Soured too much by early versions. I've seen less damage from BTHP bullets than from BTs.

Speed is an issue too, I have shot a few of the 125 BTs in a 7.62x39 and they don't explode like they would out of a faster round....

Of course stay off bone if possible is the best bet.

on deer sized game the 235 gr SP is tough and just punches thru w/o the resistance needed to make it expand.

You wrote, its just not inside long enough to expand into a shroom, I understand your latest comment much more.

Okay, I hate to bring physics into this, but all of the contributing factors add up to one thing - how much kinetic energy that the bullet is carrying ends up dumped in the animal is THE determining factor on meat loss. Before you object, just consider that a light, fast, cup and core that does not exit expends ALL of its energy in the animal. A heavy-for-caliber premium bullet will generally penetrate through and through, expending enough energy to obviously kill the animal, but much of the remaining energy is expended after the exit wound is made. Same concept with big, "slow" bullets, like hard cast from a .454 or .45-70 or .357 Maximum - they penetrate through and through, impact at a much lower velocity, don't generally break apart, and the remaining energy is expended after complete penetration. I have yet to recover a bullet from any deer I've shot with a .454 Casull and 320 gr. bullets or my .357 Max with 215 gr. bullet, even on long (over 150 yds) shots with either weapon, and I can eat right up to the hole. My .308 on the other hand, when loaded with 165 gr. Nosler Ballistic tips frequently doesn't exit the deer, and meat damage is often more than I'd like, but that's the trade off for increased ballistic advantage over the slow, heavy cast bullets. How much energy is transferred to the animal is at the core of the meat damage issue, Barnes TSX bullets generally pass through, doing enough to kill well, but not burning all of their energy in the animal. And Ringworm, I'm waving the BS flag on you .270 Wby comment, I hope you were joking. The speed at which a bullet passes through an animal has NOTHING to do with how little or how much damage occurs, I guarantee my pistol cast loads spend MUCH more time in the animal than the .270 Wby bullet, but I know which animal I'd rather butcher.

by meat i assume you mean the tissue that would normally be prepared and consumed, correct?
I dont figure there is enough rib meat to worry about with any bullet of any caliber at any velocity.
perhaps the answer is easier than all let on. buy a accurate rifle, practice and have the patience to take well placed shots in areas other than the hams and shoulders.
I used to shoot a lot of deer in the neck until someone showed me how to cook a rocking neck roast.

seems to be a big target area behind the shoulder.

Barrel twist might be a factor as well...
I've seen deer killed with a 264WM with a 1-8 twist and the damage was greater than a 1-10 twist 7Mag... Both were 140gr.TSX bullets...

JB had a very good article about "eating right up to hole" and the meat damage or lack there-of based on cartridge, bullet speed, etc. I forget which issue of Rifle it was but it was the usual great common sense, real-life experience stuff from john.

I remember on my first deer- I clocked a buck right through the shoulders(high up) with a Partition.
The slug whizzed right on through, but the off shoulder was shredded.
Lesson learned!

ringworm, your rib shooting comment is spot on. This may be off-topic, but would you share/describe your "rockin' neck roast" I've got a young one that hasn't been butchered yet - is it bone-in or deboned? Bone in sounds tasty though. I'd sure appreciate it!

whole neck split verticle. sear meat in #8 cask iron skillit w/ high temp oil. place in crock pot with 1 pound of PURPLE (not red or new) potatoes. 3 whole carrots, 1 cup beef broth, 2 teaspoons of monteray seasoning, 2 teaspoons tabasco 1 half can flat beer.
cook on low 6 hours.

How do you split it? Right down the vertebrae or what? That sounds like all kinds of delicious...maybe an easy meal next week while finishing semester final projects! Thanks ringworm!

My wife seems to have solved this problem completely. Her two deer have had absolutely no meat damaged and her projectile is a 4,000 automobile. She seems to have a nack for popping them in the nose and breaking their necks. No muss, no fuss. Damage to car # 1 - nothing. Car # 2 was a dealer loaner, so the deductible of $100 covered it all.

This year I took a Buck that was shot earlier in the morning by someone else. Hit in the shoulder, broke the bone and fragmented. Don't know the caliber but guessing small high powered. I finished him off with my 9.3X62 at about 100 yards. Thru the lungs, heart and went through the same shot up shoulder. The 9.3X62 was a clean hole with no damage. This was the sixth deer taken with this rifle never have had any shot up meat. Can't say that for the wifes 243 with 100g, makes a mess unless good shot placement.

You need TSX's in that .243.

Bought her a 7mm08, TSX works well in this one. Still a larger caliber at medium velocity seems to damage meat less than small high velocity calibers from what I have seen in the field.

Thought I'd better put my boots on before I waded into this one...Lol.

The arm chair theorists really hit the key board quickly whe this topic comes up.

Any and all muscle tissue (Meat) is "damaged" when it is, well....Damaged by being displaced, streched, and torn by any object passing through it.
The "degree" of damage is subject to the amount of upset to that tissue.
But the degrees of damage caused by bullets is pretty much the same, when it comes to preservation for consumption, reguardless of velocity and diameter, and yes.., momentum.

I have read of such things as "eating right up to the hole..." Really... right up to the hole...? Sure, and if I was really hungry I might chew on the little bone chips too.

Those of us who shoot deer and other big game with such things as a 50 caliber round ball with an impact velocity of 1000 fps., to the 22-243 Middelstead 60 grain partition at close to 4000fps, to the meager 12 ga. Foster slug at 1400fps, to the 257 Wby 100 gr. at 3600fps. and on, and on, and on... We find that there is ALWAYS a pronounced amount of meat damage, and blood shot(bruised tissue), around the hole. But, no matter what the projectile, or the velocity, there is ALWAYS some meat/tissue damage.

I once thought that "Big, fat, and slow" bullets would "Greatly" reduce the carnage...Well, maybe slightly, but still nobody in my home is eating "right up to any holes..."

I have not found that the differance in bullet velocity, diameter, or momentum has been "much less" damaging, or "much more" damaging from one shot to another...A "little" differance, yes..., but with bullets made for hunting large game, the differanes have not been significant enough to say that this one , or that one "Saves more meat..." they all have proven similarily destructive.

Scott

358: Good post!As a general rule,if you wanna avoid meat damage,I suspect it's best to avoid high velocity and splashy bullets.Still all bullets destroy bone and tissue which is how they kill stuff...hard to avoid.

any your sitting on what, a milk crate?

phazers set on stun are the best way...

now that's funny!

Sitting..?
I'm not sitting, I am "Standing..," standing on experience.

Besides, too much sitting can make for a nasty case of Ringworm...so I've heard.

Don't really do much sitting.... unless it's on stand or at the reloading bench.


Scott

so your an expert in ballistics and trauma and everyone else is an arm chair ballistician at best?
try this on for size...
http://www.rathcoombe.net/sci-tech/ballistics/methods.html



"The killing power of a bullet in flight depends entirely upon the average size of the wound it makes in the animal, and upon nothing else. The size of the wound in turn depends upon the size, weight, construction, and shape of the bullet, and the velocity with which it strikes, and upon no other details. ... We frequently see it stated that the killing power of a cartridge depends upon its energy, and tables of the properties of cartridges often give the energy of each. Now energy depends upon the weight of the bullet times its velocity, and on nothing else, and thus can have only a very distant bearing on our subject." (Townsend Whelen, The Hunting Rifle, Stackpole Sons, 1940, pg. 236)

There is very little meat on the shoulder of an average white tail...don't sweat the small stuff.

I worry more about getting their carcus in the back of the truck with as little tracking as possible.

I always aim for the off side shoulder or through both shoulders on a broadside shot. Deer can and do run a long ways when lung shot. Perhaps 50% or more deer run when shot through the lungs, and deer running dead in thick cover makes for a lot of wasted time...often not recovering the deer if the buck is pumped up from chasing a doe in the rut.

It always has amazed me at how many people think that lung shots(staying away from shoulders) is the best shot to take.

I have lost two really good bucks that were lung shot at distances between 200-325 yards. My theory is to shoot the running gear out from underneath them so that you have something to eat...not how much you have to eat.

keith, I beg to differ, a good portion of my burger and stew meat comes from the shoulder. I'd MUCH rather dump it through the lungs, deer that are lung shot well are toast, through the ribs is my preferred shot. Don't take this the wrong way, it's an honest question, not trying to get the hackles up - How do you KNOW they were lung shot if you didn't recover them? Just curious. And apparently 358wsm is the authority on shooting deer and meat damage - most of the rest of us are making comments from our observations as well Scott. It's rather rude to imply that you're the only fellow killing deer and butchering his own.

Gee, unlike 358WSM, I have noticed a difference in how much meat various calibers, bullets and velocities will shoot up, at least in average. And I didn't do it from a chair. And I have seen close to 1000 animals shot with rifle cartridges from the .220 Swift to the .458 Lott, to maybe 100 more cartridges in between, including shotgun "slugs" from various sabot-launched expanders to Foster slugs.

I have eaten prett much right up to the hole on animals shot with moderate-velocity bullets from cartridges that get from 2100-2500 fps, especially if the bullet only lost 10% or less of its weight--and didn't hit bone. A few years ago I killed a big Canada moose with a 9.3x62 using a 286-grain Nosler Partition, range about 175 yards. I shot the moose at the rear edge of the shoulder, and lost a piece of meat about the size of my thumb. The bullet ended up under the hide on the far side, and the bull ended up stmblking about 15 yards abd going down. Have shot a number of other animals with the same combination (including deer) and never lost more than one handful of meat.

I also am not one who is convinced that shoulder meat is negligible, either in amount or type. On a typical 150-pound deer there are at least 3-4 shoulder steaks that can be cut from each shoulder, along with a good pot roast off the shoulder blade itself. This is before cutting off burger or stew meat. When anybody says they disregard the front end of a deer (or pronghorn) for eating then I know they are either lazy or ignorant.

As for eating up to the hole, I just finished butchering the right shoulder of the Iowa whitetail I killed last Saturday. I shot him with a .357 Maximum Encore pistol with a 215 gr. cast, gas-checked bullet, approx. Lyman #2 alloy I make myself. Velocity 15 ft. off the muzzle is 1850 fps with this load, I shot him quartering away at 166 lasered yards. In the third to the last rib, out the shoulder, he didn't take another step. The shoulder with the exit wound went entirely into the burger pile, bullet went through the shoulder blade. Zero blood shot meat, nice neat hole - I am "eating" right up to and including the hole. Entrance wound was a different story, I didn't want to take the time to clean the pile of hair from that piece of rib meat, but everything up to 1 inch away was just fine.

Good morning all,

Ringworm,Selmer, and Mule Deer...


Fellas, in no way am I trying to be disagreeable, or come off as an "expert" or some kind of arrogant "authority" on trauma caused on live tissue by hunting bullets.

I completely respect your experiences, and do not question that they are and or have been different than what I have seen, but than again, I don't think we are in too much disagreement.

My point was that bullets cause a general amount of damage, as they pass through tissue.
I am intregued by the fact that some of your testimony states that there was no blood shot tissue ... My experience has been that even a 85 grain Thunderhead broadhead causes some bruising around the wound upon entry, though not as much as projectiles moving 3x as fast.

I believe that my previous statement was something along the lines of, "any object that displaces, tears, or upsets the tissue is damaging to that tissue..." Though not word for word, I mean this in terms of realitivity, as in such comparisons as schrapnel from a an IED blast, to that from the surgens schalpel that removes the schrapnel from the wounds. I think this is a good illistration of what I was trying to say. Most everytime tissue is perferated by fragments of a blast it is "damaging." So too is it damaging when a surgen takes out the knife...but to a much differing percentage, but none the less, a wound is made because tissue is upset.

Ringworm, Selmer, and Mule Deer.. I believe that we are on the same page to a great degree. My point was supposed to convey the fact that bullets cause a similar amounts of tissue damage... but that they are all distructive. Perhaps we were not coming at this from the same place, and believing that we were comparing apples to oranges instead of apples to apples.

I appreciate the article on "Shooting Holes Through Wounding Theroies," it's a must read (of which I have before), and also that excerpt from Mr. Whelen..., (I always liked what he had to say).

I did not mean to be rude, or seem arrogant...and I am sorry if that was clouding the simple point that I was trying to make, a realitive point, that when it comes right down to it, we are probably in more agreement than disagreement.

Some of our findings are honestly quite different, and this might be the reason for us to have such strong convictions on this topic.

For example, Ringworm, you state that the 270 Wby. bullet goes in and out too fast to caust much damage. My personal findings are quite different. Besides a quartering toward shot that I took on a Deer with my 300 Savage and a 165 Hornady (which, upon exiting the off side flank opened that deer op from the last rib to the pelvis), that 270 Wby caused the most damage of any I have shot, one such incident found the deer with a wound channel that was "cone" shaped from the point of entry to that of it's exit, where upon the off side scapula was removed from the deer leaving a coffee can diameter hole out that side. Now, if you had looked at this deer and the amount of tissue damage you would have an entirely different view of the bullet damage of the 270 Wby, and would not say that it's an in and out kind of thing.

It could be different experiences such as this that cause up to make such conclusive assessments.

Agreeably, the damage that occured from that one incident with the 270 Wby. was much less than the damage (in general) caused by a 300 grain .452" 45 colt slug out of my Blackhawk. And what I am trying to say is that they "Both" create their share of damage.

Again fellas, I am not trying to be difficult here.

Respectfully,
Scott

selmer, here in the South, we shoot a lot of deer, no check station, no tags, season from Aug 20 to Jan 1, non stop.

When does are being chased buy bucks, things are hot and heavy. We all help each other finding deer that have ran off with good hits in the lungs. As the distances increase, so does the tempory wound cavity that is created by the projectile. Simply punching a hole through the lungs often(not all the time) leads to deer running from 50 to 200 yards...deer run in strange patterns when they are dying, also.

I help my cousin often on doe days at his deer processing plant. So, in a day, I may bone out 25 or more deer(long day). We hear all kinds of stories, half of the lung shot deer may run, usually 30-50 yards, large bucks shot while pumped up may run 200 yards is shot in the back of the lungs.

The area of the country you live in makes a huge difference whether or not a deer runs. Out West, if they run 200 yards you probably will never loose sight of them. In the South, woods are thick as a Jungle and 200 yards seems like 200 miles. I have had to track many lung shot deer down on my hands and knees feeling for their tracks in the leaves, trying to get a direction. Deer often will circle and circle and circle as they are dying, disoriented from loss of blood.

I've lost two really good bucks shot thorugh the lungs at ranges between 200-250 yards, good solid hits as seen through my scope with a rifle that has a muzzle break on it(you can see the bullet impact on the animal).

With all the tracking that I have had to do, lost deer, one thing for sure, I preach to the average hunter to shoot the running gear out from underneath the deer...get some meat vs no meat at all.

A shoulder shot will take out their ability to run, internally the heart or top of the heart is gone and front of the lungs. When they are knocked down, they don't have the blood pressure to get back up, it does not get much better...blood pressure to the brain drops to zero instantly. On a lung shot, they hemorage or bleed out internally and can can cover a lot of ground in 6 seconds till the Oxygen gives out in their brain.

On the other hand, a deer shot low in the heart will probably go at least 100 yards+.

Gunwriters have really done the deer hunting public a huge disservice by promoting "aim behind the shoulder" shots on deer or having a picture of a deer with the cross hairs behind the shoulder, just my opinion.

"Gun writers?" Do you mean that every gun writer in the business suggests only shooting deer behind the shoulder? Or do you mean SOME gun writers?

I once had a table at a local gun show, among other thinsg selling some of my books. A guy stopped by and noticed the books, and within a minute or so was off on a rant about "gun writers" saying the .270 isn't enough for African plains game, citing his experiences in Africa. Which, of course, is something that I have never written....

I guess we're all one guy, writing 25,000 articles a year under different names.

the last time I checked a deer's heart is well below the shoulder--but have always thought the shoulder was that joint connecting the leg to the spine

educate me here guys...

"...guess we're all one guy, writing 25,000 articles a year under different names."

You must be very busy...and very wealthy!

Damage to meat depends upon what you hit. Hit a bone going in, good luck. Hit/damage a subcutaneous blood vessel, big blood patch, etc.

The only thing that routinely drops an animal on the spot is CNS (read nerve) damage- head/neck, spine, high shoulder. No nerve signal, muscles don't move neither does the animal.

Lung/heart shots may as well, but depends on how long it takes for the blood than normally goes to the brain doesn't any more (10- ? hundreds of yards).

For deer I prefer a high lung shot, just behind the shoulder crease. Minimal damage to meat, I don't care for the ribs. Spikes get a head/upper neck shot. For big game (I have found that universally, guides want to limit locomotion) I prefer a high forward shoulder shot...lots of nerves to hit.

Since they've come out I've used TSX exclusively on all my game from deer to nilgai (.270 Win - .340 Wby in the field). I've found TSX are great bullets, especially at 2-300 yards, deadly. That's their perfect niche.

But at 100yds on deer, they're "too efficient" once the petals open they just slice through the animal, giving the impression that it's a pencil shot, but I truly don't believe it is. They just slice through the meat rather than push through. Great meat saver, but variable walk offs......of course it all depends on what you hit goin in/out.

This is pretty much where my thinking is. It's what my experience would indicate and why I hunt with all old traditional rounds like the 7x57, '06, etc. Very effective for the hunting I do and I don't blow the meat all to hell-o. Ballistic tips and magnums are not in my cabinets based on my experiences with them.

Respectfully, hard to believe you weren't trying to be difficult with statements like that. Not exactly a welcome to a friendly discussion among friends -is it? OK -done with it, see you are fairly new and welcome you aboard. Hey for all that don't like rib meat - I threw some of the puny things completely unseasoned on a gas grill figuring I would let the dogs have them. I tried some for the heck of it and was very much surprised at how good the things were. Not enough meat to worry about ruining one or two- just saying don't dismiss them automatically as junk meat. As for shoulder shots, I hated the reaction I got from deer. One in particular sort of upset me - an obvious amount of agony and kicking. Double lungs seem more humane. Had one or two just stand there after being hit rather peacefully slump over dead in a matter of seconds. Am beginning to a bit higher up might be the way to shorten\stop a long run.

When a FMJ hits bone the bones become secondary projectiles causing lots of damage. (A rumor I heard)
whelennut

Keith, I understand your reasoning to a degree, and thanks for a concise explanation without assuming that I was saying that you were gut shooting (or somewhere else) deer. Most of my hunting IS done in fairly open areas, Iowa and South Dakota. I've never hunted the really thick stuff that goes for acres upon acres, but I'd lung shot some deer in pretty thick stuff, cattail and willow sloughs that require perfect tracking. I've never seen a lung shot deer that didn't leave a wide swatch for a blood trail, but obviously our experiences differ.

Oh, and Scott not only put out a public reconciliation, I also got a kind PM from him as well. I was afraid we had another troll on our hand, but it appears not to be the case.

So, you're saying the 120 gr 7mm Ballistic Tip seconds I was eying for my 7mm WSM at 3500 FPS are a bad idea? ;-)

Actually I was thinking of loading them at 3000-3100 FPS, maybe that'll work out better.

I really need to get that .338-06 built..

The problem with taking out the running gear is that if you end up with a three legged deer they can cover a lot more ground than a lung shot or heart shot deer on a death run.
A lung shot deer normally leaves a Helen Keller blood trail.
Unless you are using a small caliber.
Some of our woods goes for miles in each direction.
We also have timber wolves and it is best to find the deer before it gets dark. Otherwise they will chew some of it up.
More than is damaged by a Ballistic Tip!
There also two legged wolves who will try to tag your deer if they get to it first. It is good to damage enough meat so that the deer doesn't travel very far after being shot!

My son shot his deer with a 120 gr Ballistic Tip @ 3300 fps
from his 7mm Magnum. It worked so well I used it to fill my tag the next weekend.

Jack O' Connor was the one who advised hunters to take out both lungs because it is a big target and very easy to find the deer because of the blood trail caused by an exit wound spraying blood. It works for me. YMMV
whelennut

Well said, and point taken,

Scott

There is no joint that connects the front leg to the spine. The shoulder on ungulates is the scapula, a bone that starts narrow at a joint just above the middle leg bone, and becomes quite wide and thin. The shoulder is basically attached to the side of the ribs by muscle tissue over a large area. Most of the shoulder will be above and in front of the heart. I've personally been unimpressed with the reaction of heart shot deer. If you're not shooting one of the shoulders, I prefer trying for just above the heart, where the aorta can be torn or severed. As with the heart shot, lung tissue will be damaged in the process as well, and it's still low enough in the chest cavity so that it will start to leak without filling the entire chest cavity.

we do a disservice to kids by bringing them up shooting fast light highly expansive bullets. when i was brought into deer hunting a quick kill was as important as how much meat was gained. shoulder shots were verboten and light fast calibers were seen as varmint rounds. i was rasided up shooting 180 gr. corelocts and told to make neck shots. when we send these young hunters into the woods with reduced loads and light bullets we are telling them that blowing away the front shoulders is acceptable. whats the difference between a man who kills a deer and leaves it to rot and a man who intentionally shoots a bullet into the shoulders when he could otherwise put it behind them. waste is waste is it not?

My poem. Tell them where you heard it first.

Shoot 'em high, and watch 'em die,
Shoot 'em low, and watch 'em blow.

Life is good.

Can't see where a neck shot differs from a shoulder shot in the meat loss dept, more so when the bullet follows the contour of the spine, unless that never happens?.

Haven't shot an animal yet I haven't had to get rid of the bullet path from the meat.

Lung shots work fine, as do most shots through vital organs. I prefer to use loads that take out the running gear and the front of the vitals, but I'm not beyond a lung shot.

Head shots or lassos from now on I guess.

Why would you want that bullet to shoot deer in the neck?

It wasn't a disservice to young kids to use such, apparently.

Put a light fast bullet into the lungs and you will get a quick kill and no wasted meat unless the leg is in the way when you shoot.

So far my short hunting career has allowed me to bag 9 deer. I know most of yall have killed more in one season but I have enjoyed reading your posts and wanted to comment as well.

I have yet to track a deer. Not one. The longest run one has taken after shot was at the most 10 yards. I find it interesting and sometimes confusing when I read threads about guys tracking them 50,100, even 300 yards plus. I am just not getting the same results but believe me I am not complaining. Maybe its just luck on my part but honestly 8 of the 9 deer have been bang flops. I find them where they stood when I pulled the trigger. I also took a moose in Vermont three years ago with a shotgun slug of all things. He was a bang flop also.

I have practiced alot on bullet placement on usually have hit the same general place on all the deer, high shoulder shot and just behind it. Usually all that is lost is a fist size portion of backstrap and less than half that of shoulder meat. I gladly will give that up as bloodshot in trade for finding the deer and not losing the whole thing. Ballistic tips, Hornady sst's, and core lokts in 308, 7mm-08, and 7mm rem mag are what I have shot them with. I dont think the deer are dying that rapidly from blood loss but instead an interruption to their CNS followed/ coupled with bloodloss while down. For me that has been the most effective bullet placement point if you will and will stick with it until that stops working.....

Thanks

Scott

An old guide in Colorado always claimed he used a 45-70 and "you could eat right up to the hole"

Your right, bullet placement and using a good bullet is key to what happens. The shot you described is highly recommended by the 'Best in the West' tv show (I think that's the one). Unfortunately, everyone doesnt have that same shot, everytime. Others choose not to mess-up shoulders and backstraps. I'm not saying anyone is right or wrong, it's just what a person wants to do.

Same here- think he will fit it just fine.