This is pretty much one of those “gotcha” questions! Many will “claim” that, if the animal was recovered.....it wasn’t a failure.
My take on this is a bit different. When the shooter/hunter expects a bullet to perform as advertised, at velocities for which it was designed, and it fails to do so ....... I see it as a failure! The majority of hunters do not perform extensive bullet testing in ballistic gel or a homegrown test medium, and rely upon the manufacturer’s bullet description!
Once upon a time, I used a bullet on thin skinned game, deer, antelope, bear (Black), and elk......which was designed for a large, medium bore cartridge that would/could be used on potentially dangerous game in Alaska and/or Africa. Yet, the bullet would completely disintegrate after impact on small, thin skinned game......deer, bear, and elk. Yes, 2 of 3 animals were recovered after a quick decisive kill. However, these were broadside shots, which could have just as easily been accomplished with a .223 Rem. The other animal, which was shot at a steeply angled, “raking” shot requiring deep penetration.......was lost.
Yes, I should take the blame for “not” realizing that these bullets were inferior after the first animal taken, finding that the bullet had disintegrated .......failing to exit a small, thin-skinned animal! But, being young and dumb.....I “wrongly assumed” that a heavy, large caliber bullet, from a prominent, highly regarded bullet manufacture, designed for a cartridge recognized as a cartridge/bullet to be used on potentially large, dangerous game ......would “not” completely disintegrate on any animal!
So you make the decision.......was this bullet failure or not? memtb
Last edited by memtb; 05/22/21.
