Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Ask The Gunwriters The "Other" Monos

I've seen lung soup many times. Mostly from .243's and .22-250's with what most folks would consider "varmint bullets". You don't pull the lungs out of a deer shot with them, you pour the lungs out.. Even a .223 with a typical 55 gr. sp is pretty darn good at the "lung soup" gig if the range is kept fairly short, as was my old .222 with my woodchuck loads using the old 50 gr. Nosler solid base "expanders".

[quote=dave7mm] Parker Ackley over 50 years ago stated that the 220 Swift,with proper bullets, was the best one shot killer of deer and deer sized game animals ever devised.
Those that disagreed had never tried it.
The proper bullet was a bullet of his design called the Ackley CE bullet.CE for controlled expansion.A copper mono bullet with 10g of lead in the nose.If I remember right it weighed 48g.
They did hundreds of tests.Went on hunts and shot deer, goats, and pigs side by side with 06s and 7mm Mags with the bullets of the day.Ackley built many Swift rifles and placed them in the field with his bullets.
The reports always came back the same.
Hands down, the Swift was the better one shot killer by a wide margin.
Not even close.
You can read about it in Ackleys handbook for shooters and reloaders....It makes for pretty interesting reading.

Although im not usuing a Swift myself i've found that light copper mono bullets driven for all there worth put deer down quicker then conventional rounds.
Im reminded of the time I decided to take my 375 H&H deer hunting.A 250g Sierra spbt on a large doe at 130 yards.knocked the doe to its knees and then a 65 yard death run.Chest shot.
You kind of shake you head and go huh?

These days I follow Ackley.
I r

Hola John!

This shedding-petals monos' is an interesting concept and surprisingly effective given the neat, clean wounds they produce.

The left over shank has about the same frontal area of an unexpanded bullet and they penetrate like there was no tomorrow. So much that it has taken a lot of effort, shooting big animals at odd angles in my cull hunts in RSA and Namibia, only to recover a couple of them.

And I am talking about getting a complete pass-through through the shoulders of an eland cow shot at 85 meters, broadside, with a 105gr LM KJG loaded in my son's 7x65R!!

I know these (current models being the MJG and the Flitzer), like Sologne's GPA or SAX´s KJG are not familiar to the North American hunter but, if memory serves, did I read a report from you using GPAs on a black bear hunt?

If you have had further experience with them I would highly appreciate if you could comment us on them.

Kind regards from Spain,

Alvaro

PS: for me it is funny when I read how much meat damage Bergers inflict, or that someone has yet to recover aTTSX, or.... my experience havin been oooh so different!!!

Or a 90 gr Scenar out of a .240 Wby.

DF

Hola Alvaro!

Wasn't me who used a GPA on a black bear!

Eileen and I have recovered a few monolithics--along with one Fail Safe--that have lost all their petals. Some have been designed that way, like the 40-grain Cutting Edge Raptor that Eileen used at 4300 fps from a .22-250 to crumple a pronghorn maybe 5 years ago. The antelope was quartering toward Eileen at about 150 yards, so she put it just inside the near shoulder, and the doe dropped instantly. Found out why during butchering: The bullet had cracked the bottom of the spine and the far shoulder blade, before ending up under the skin. I can't remember what the remaining shank weighed (Eileen has it in her collection somewhere) but Raptors are designed to lose their petals, and it wasn't much more than 50% of its original weight, maybe 25 grain--yet it penetrated around 18 inches.

The others have all been bullets that tend to retain all their petals, One was an original Barnes X-Bullet, the hollow-point, without shank grooves, a 120-grain from a 6.5x55 that I used on a big axis deer. The range was around 130 yards, and the buck was quartering toward me so I shot it through the shoulder. It ran 35-40 yards, on three legs, before going down. The bullet had hit the big shoulder joint, ending up under the flank skin on the other side, losing all its petals and retaining 77.5% of its weight--but even without the petals the front end was "mushroomed," measuring .41 inches across.

Eileen shot a Namibian gemsbok bull as it almost faced her at 200 yards, using a .30-06. The 165-grain Fail Safe cut a carotid artery and crunched the bottom of the spine, so the bull dropped right there. The bullet ended up under the rump skin with all the petals gone, retaineing 80% of its weight--but again the front end was mushroomed (riveted?) a little, and oddly enough also .41 across, even though the caliber was larger than the 6.5 X used on my axis deer.

Eileen's last elk was taken with a 130-grain TTSX from her custom .308 Winchester at about 250 yards. Again, the BIG cow was quartering on, and staggered 20-25 yards toward us before falling. The bullet broke the shoulder slightly above the big joint, and was found under the rib-skin on the opposite side without any petals--though one was found a couple inches from the bullet. Retained weight was 62%, and the front end was also mushroomed a little, to .40 at the widest point.

We have a pretty good collection of recovered monolithic bullets, mostly Barnes because they've been around longest, but also E-Tips and GMX's. I do suspect that we find more than some other hunters because we personally butcher all the animals that go into our freezers, and make it a point to look for bullets--rather than taking the animals to a meatcutter. In fact a few years ago we recovered two monos in a row, both 100-grain TTSX's from Eileen's NULA .257 Roberts, the first from a quartering-away cow elk, and the second from a directly facing pronghorn doe.

The Berger bullets we've used have punched the typical very small hole at the entrance--sometimes so tiny you have to part the hair to find it--which ruins far less meat any monolithic we've used. Then they violently expand inside the animal, sometimes so much they don't exit, though even when they do the meat damage is minimal because they're going VERY slowly by then. Have talked to a very few people who had Bergers break up at the entrance when they hot big bone, ruining some meat, but so far we haven't encountered that in the dozens used to take big game from pronghorns to a red stag about the body size of a 3-year-old bull elk.

Gracias, John!

And sorry fot the confusion about that article... I would have bet it was yours.


Alvaro

I agree. To analyze the "cup and core" vs. "mono" choice without adding variables such as impact velocity is silly, and counter productive. P.O. Ackley was right, and, by extension, Roy Weatherby. Speed kills.

Every since monos came to the mass market, I've been shooting light for caliber monos. Mostly Barnes, some GS customs. Drive them very, very fast and animals at modest distances die like they were pole-axed.

I have a pretty thorough understanding of statistics, and telling someone that their experience with several score of animals is invalid when the external variables such as sd/bullet weight, distance, animal size and impact speed do not vary...... is not credible.

It is very easy to construct a scenario where the mono will kill faster than an expanding bullet (like a cup and core). Just drive a very light for caliber mono very, very fast, and a very heavy for caliber expanding bullet, and the mono will outshine the expanding bullet.

That, and no lead in my meat. The argument that "lead bullets don't leave tragments in meat", is, in my opinion, untenable. Especially someone feeding a young family. The science is pretty well established (see for example: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2669501/ ).

Dutch, I switched over to mono's because of the lead issue and that is the only reason why.
With that said I have never shot a mono out of anything remotely considered a low velocity cartridge besides 1. That would be the 250tsx out of a 45-70. Most have been out of 25-06AI, 300wsm, 300 win mag, 300 rum, and 270. Even when using these high velocity rounds I havent noticed monos to kill as fast as traditional bullets.

Agreed.
A picture is worth a thousand words.
http://huntingwithnonlead.org/lead_in_meat.html
I didnt eat paint chips as a kid.
Ill pass now to..

dave

I simply wish that Barnes made more of their bullets with a wider expected opening such as they do with the two black tip bullets for the 300 Blackout.

Those two bullets driven at 30-06/308 velocities work great. Hold together, get wider, and kill quicker in comparison to their 130 TTSX.

+1

I figured with the popularity of the Grendel that we'd at least see one in 6.5mm...but no such luck. A 7mm 120 would be sweet as well. I've put the .308/120 Blackout bullet into medium at a shade over 2800 fps (impact speed). The petals looked thinned/stressed but still held together. The expanded diameter at the widest point was eye-popping at just over 0.9". I'll see if I can locate that photo later.

EDITED to add photos:

Dutch,

As mentioned earlier, I have been shooting monos (or the same type of "petal" bullet) since the late 1980's, when the first X-Bullets appeared.
My statistics of how far animals travel after being hit with various types of bullets are from over 1000 examples, and yes, impact velocity has a definite effect. But have seen plenty of animals shot through the lungs in the "pocket" behind the shoulders with various high-velocity monos (and yes, other bullets) that did not die particularly quickly. Others did.

Could give individual examples of each, but that would be pointless. Let's just say that results have varied as much as shooting wild animals usually does.

What I do NOT believe is much of what P.O. Ackley wrote or published. Have been reading his stuff since around 1970, but after reading closely (and considerable experience in the field) realized how flawed many of his experiments were, and how anecdotal his game-shooting examples. In fact cannot remember him ever mentioning shooting an animal himself--or more important, seeing them shot. He was not a hunter, and got his info second-hand.

You should also read Roy Weatherby's journal from his first African safari--where his high-velocity theory did NOT consistently prove itself. It's included in the excellent book WEATHERBY: THE MAN, THE GUN, THE LEGEND by Grits and Tom Gresham.

Yes, high velocity can definitely help, but is not THE ANSWER, just as large-caliber, heavy, moderate velocity bullets are NOT always the answer. There are too many variables in shooting wild animals for any single truth to exist--except shooting big game in right place, with bullets that penetrate sufficiently.

Lead in the meat is another deal. There's also plenty of evidence that hunters have lower blood-lead levels than the general population where they live. Have cited such studies before, but the biggie appears to be that hunters tend to live in more rural areas, where general environmental lead from other sources is low. My wife and I have used about 70% monos over the past 5 years, but even long before (when lead-core bullets were standard) our lead levels were very low. Maybe this was because of careful butchering (we do all our freezer animals ourselves) but due to considerable evidence it's also due to the rural areas where we've lived for over 30 years. Though eve before then we lived in parts of Montana that were very rural compared to the rest of the U.S.

Yes, the science is very settled on kids and lead--which is a very good reason to use lead-free bullets. So are some other reasons--but that does not mean Miles58's claim that they kill quicker, due his limited experience, is valid. While he's shot several dozen whitetails at shorter ranges. that does NOT mean his results are conclusive for general hunting. Hunting is by its very nature more random than that, and far more examples from far more bullets at different ranges (and a far wider variety of animals) provide more information.

Miles also made another statement that shows how little he understands the statistics I've derived from a bunch more animals. He doubt my results because he didn't trust the ability of the shooters involved. That had nothing to do with my results from a bunch of lung-shot animals, because I ONLY included results from solid 2-lung hits, not "marginal" hits. However, my statistical results do indicate that bullets destroying more vital tissue do indeed kill quicker, on average, than bullets that don't--and monos don't,even if they lose all their petals.

Can also cite results from other high-volume shooting of big game, from bullet companies in Europe (where the animal generally belongs to the landowner, and if runs onto another property before it dies is lost revenue) and whitetail culling in the U.S. All I've encountered have concluded that bullets losing more weight killed quicker.

The only Barnes bullet I have ever recovered was a 300gn TSX shot from my 375 H&H into a Bison bull. Under the hide on the offside shoulder after traveling through over 30” of animal. One petal had sheared off, and the bull took about 5 steps before going down. Roughly 80 yard shot with MV around 2650.

Have shot quite a few deer and hogs with TSX’s and TTSX’s in calibers from 223 to 338 and have never recovered a single bullet. I will say that the Hornady 162 AMax does seem to do a lot more internal damage from my 7-08AI than either the 120 or the 140 TSX, and the AMax tends to drop deer a little quicker on broadside shots. I haven’t killed 100’s of deer, probably more like 60-70, and probably 100+ hogs, so my experience is limited.

In this discussion we are talking about double lung shots, and within that limited scenario, I completely agree.

]

I think that it’s very wise to not believe everything PO Ackley wrote. He was human, and made conclusions, some of them incorrect. All humans are prone to that present company included



And here you come so very close. Speed, alone, is not the answer. The only thing that kills animals is holes in animals. Speed with monos increases the initial diameter of the holes. Bigger holes kill better. In that way, fast monos somewhat resemble fragmenting bullets. The difference between the two is the depth of the hole. Because the mono retains mass, it makes a deeper hole. Because the first part of the wound is somewhat similar (with very fast monos) but still the mono wound channel is considerably deeper. Therefore the volume of the hole created by the fast mono is larger. And it’s the size of the hole that makes the point to the critter.

Under very controlled conditions, stand hunting, culls, etc, the variables are limited to the double lung scenario and that’s fine. In that scenario the depth of the wound is not relevant, because the animal isn’t deep enough for that depth of penetration to add to the wound volume.

But to take the numbers from that scenario and suggest fragmenting bullets kill quicker....is not valid when those variables are different, like when you’re shooting at an elk quartering away or a Texas heart shot on a fair sized pig, or when buck fever yanks the shot into the shoulder, or when shooting at a wounded animal waking away down hill, or, or, or........ Fragmenting bullets may indeed kill quicker in some scenarios, but it’s not valid to conclude they “kill quicker” without qualifying the circumstances.

Dutch,

First you say:
"In this discussion we are talking about double lung shots, and within that limited scenario, I completely agree."

Then you say:
"Under very controlled conditions, stand hunting, culls, etc, the variables are limited to the double lung scenario and that’s fine. But to take the numbers from that scenario and suggest fragmenting bullets kill quicker....is not valid when those variables are different, like when you’re shooting at an elk quartering away scenario the depth of the wound is not relevant, because the animal isn’t deep enough for that depth of penetration to add to the wound volume. "

So first "we are talking about double lung shots" and then we're not?

Because of this I am guessing that we agree on the basic points, but you keep jumping around so much in your posts, it's hard to tell. My point about high velocity was that I have never found it to be The Answer. Believe me, I have seen plenty of different bullets used in plenty of different cartridges at various velocities. I mentioned in an earlier post on this thread about how a "fragmenting" mono weighing only 40 grains worked fine on a pronghorn when started at 4300 fps. Have also seen plenty of other bullets (both mono and not) used from various cartridges at VERY high muzzle velocities.

You never told us exactly how you define extra-high muzzle velocities. Is the base level 3300 fps, 10% higher than the 3000 fps most hunters consider the minimum for "high muzzle velocity"? Or would it be 3500+fps? Here's a list of cartridges that I have considerable experience with, using bullets of various weights (not all monos) at muzzle velocities most hunters would consider very high:

.22-250, 40-70 grain bullets at velocities from 3450 to 4300.
.220 Swift, 60-grain bullets at 3650. This was actually the first .22-caliber round Eileen and I used quite a bit on big game, starting in the mid-1980's. The initial bullet was not a mono, but the 60-grain Nosler Solid Base.
.240 Weatherby, 90-100 grain bullets at 3400-3500, both mono and lead-core.
.25-06, 100-grain Barnes TTSX at 3450 fps
.257 Weatherby, 100-grain monos from the original TSX to the TTSX to the E-Tip, all at 3550-3600.
.270 Weatherby, 130-grain bullets at 3400-3500
Various 7mm cartridges, with 120s (both mono and lead-core) started at 3200 up to around 3600.

Often they did result in spectacular kills with double-lung shots. Probably the most spectacular was a good-sized mule deer buck my wife shot at 200 yards with the .257 Weatherby Magnum and a 100-grain TSX at 3550 fps. The buck was standing pretty much broadside in sagebrush, and the next thing we saw after the shot was four hooves waving gently above the sage, because the buck had flipped over on its back. The shot landed in just about the middle of the body, tight behind the shoulder.

But a couple years later I shot a big pronghorn buck at 250 yards with the same rifle and load. (It may have even been the same batch of handloads.) Instead of flipping over, the buck disappeared behind the low ridge it was standing on--and went 250 yards before falling over.
The bullet placement was essentially identical, the two bucks even both standing facing to the right.

The 60-grain Solid Base from the .220 Swift generally exited, but despite obviously fragmenting more than a mono, I cannot remember it dropping an animal right there with a double lung shot. Instead they generally acted very much like they'd been hit with a typical 100-grain cup-and-core from a .243 Winchester, going anywhere from 15 yards up before falling.

Could give plenty of other examples, but simply have not seen consistently quicker kills from warp-speed bullets. Have seen them from fragmenting bullets at more modest velocities. In fact the Berger VLD has produced the highest percentage of pure rib-shot drops of any bullet in my data-base.

This does not mean I consider Bergers the greatest bullet ever, any more than monos. I prefer to simply report on what I see, with a wide variety of bullets on a wide variety of game--partly because I have yet to find The Answer.

Hey Dakotadeer, I think I'm going to try this. What sort of speeds do you drive them to? Looks like you could get up to 3300 or so, but I'm guessing that much isn't needed. I just got off the phone with a rep from Barnes and he said anything over 2700 or so and it would start shedding petals... which I guess isn't a bad thing?

Curious to know what speeds you were driving. Thanks.

I am of the opinion that the star shaped petals and other bullets like the Bear Claw, Woodleigh and Bitterroot, is that the petals or claws do more damage. Again to quote Siegfried he though that bullets like the A-Frame that expand like a wadded pice of bubble gum do less damage.

Who knows the wide round expansion should create more hydro static shock, the petals more primary wounding much like a broad head. Moot point as they both work splendidly.

I am going to try the Black Out Xs in my 300 WM, nothing exceeds like excess and I bet it will drop a deer pretty quickly, maybe not DRT, Red Mist or Blood soup quick but PDQ is good enough for me. Bet I can get them to at least 3,500 fps maybe more.

That bullet looks the way it does because it tumbled towards the end of its travel, which pealed the petals back off the shank IMO.

The petals dont actually cut or touch anything given cavitation.

Tejano,

Sorry, I am not usually a spelling Nazi, but Ross's last name is Seyfried (pronounced SIGH-fred), not Siegfried. But am also willing to believe you were the victim of auto-spell correction.

There is no such thing as hydrostatic shock, as it was first defined many years ago, as resembling brake fluid suddenly and violently going throughout an animal's veins and arteries--and often promoted by people like Roy Weatherby. There is, however, a phenomenon called cavitation that actually exists--which results in more damage to animal tissue, and varies considerably due to expanded shape and impact velocity. I explained the basics in Gun Gack II, in the chapter on solid bullets.

A flat (or even cupped) frontal area results in more tissue damage from cavitation than a rounded front.