Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Deer Hunting Fast vs Slow (inside deer) bullet debate??

This debate routinely surfaces about this time of year in deer camps, hunting forums etc...

Guy #1 uses 150gr(fast)cup and core bullets for his '06. Explains that they "open up" and do more damage.

Guy#2 opts for a heavier(and slower) bullet of similar design in the same round because it, "stays in the deer longer and does more damage."

How would you respond to this debate?


And................

Similar to above.. Often heard, "my magnum cartridge bullet is no good at close range. It is going through the deer too fast to completely open up fully and do much damage."

Thoughts please!

guy#1 will always work with good shoot placement,no need for heavy,unless the game requires it.

Guy #1 has it right.

The rest is the ramblings of idiots.

I don't know about the fast vs slow arguement, but I can tell you the barnes X works well at 30 ft from a 264 winnie on whitetail deer. It opened fully and did plenty of damage. Lost it in paunch. Bang, flop

I haven't recoverd a "fast" 150gr out of a deer, wether it be in .308Win or .30-06 medicine. Have shot quite a few with each.

Shot a wt doe with a 180 spire point out of a .308 Win, head on. It did bad bad things, but exit was not one of them. It was one hell of a mess.

Tom

30 ft?/ LOL!!


sound from a distance must have been like "Kabunk!!!"

good thing you had your flat-shootin' 264!!

Funny, but true...+1

More time in deer measured in miliseconds = extra damage? Where the hell do some folks come up with this stuff?

#1 you agree with, #2, you just let think what he wants to...too far gone down the path of stupid ideas to save...luckily, he likely wont do any damage to the deer with that thinking...at least past killing them.

#1, I have only a single data point but I am going with it...shot thru a small deer with a heavy slower bullet one time, it did not work I had to find it and reshoot it (the deer not the bullet). It was shot thru the center of the chest at an angle taking out only one lung and it penciled thru. None shot with 150's from 06 or 308 were alive when I found them.

Im in group one as i believe the faster bullet will indeed open a tad faster (maybe 2 milliseconds,albiet its a moot point)but with the increased speed the wound channel will be more pronounced.

And we all know (or should know) that the amount of hydrostatic shock interuppting the cns and where it occurs does more towards killing the animal quickly and humanely then anything else.

Uh oh! Nooooooooooooow you gone and done it!

The 338 Federal with 210 grain TSX is not what I would call a fast round, yet check out the damage it did to this Zebra's heart





Exit in hide





Shot was about 100 plus or minus yards....

Fast versus slow?

My answer is "whatever." And I'd be wondering if the next topic was going to be about knock-down power.





The old .30-40 Krag was the first [so-called] smokeless round adopted by the U.S. Army. Propelled a 220gr solid-lead bullet at @2200 fps, and could easily shoot through a deer and even some larger animals. Was quite the game killer in its day.

I should also point out I don't care about bang-flop killing my big game. If I can put my bullet through the 'ole boiler room' (aka the lungs), whatever I'm hunting is going to die, and I can follow its trail to where I'll find it. This has worked for me more than 30yrs.

My point - I care more about shooting a cartridge that has ample power/performance to propel a bullet through the lungs/heart of my game animal - more than anything else. I don't need nor care about which cartridges travel at mach-4 or 4500fps.

I won't use them!

I'm not tryingto be argumentative - EITHER.

Through my own experience 2400-2700 feet-per-second is plenty I've discovered - to propel any copper-jacketed lead bullet that will kill any beast I hunt. And I can eat almost up to the hole - if I don't hit a major bone and cause lots of secondary damage.

A .30/06 180grn bullet travels at 2700fps at the muzzle.

Hydrostatic shock caused lots of unnecessary damage (IMO) in many of the animules I killed with rounds that had a muzzle velocity greater than 2800-3000fps. I threw away lots of what should have been edible meat.

But to each his own. Whatever blows up a guy's kelt.

Anyway, flame away!

Stubbleduck, no flames from me, and your analogy of the 06 with 180 gr's at 2700 FPs has plenty of power, i was referring the "really" heavy for caliber bullets as i have a few buddies that prefer them. I also do not go super light as like you said too much hydrostatic shock with the wrong bullet or in the wrong place can be bad as well.

hydrostatic shock... christ.

I ain't touching it. What was it, 15 or 20 pages the last time?

I will however recommend an excellent text, Incompressible Flow by Panton. This is the bible of incompressible fluid dynamics and would make a fine addition to any personal engineering library.

Will

While I agree with #1, I have always liked the middle of the road....you know maybe in a '06 a 150 might be too light whereas a 180 or 220 might be too heavy (of course depends what your hunting....lets say deer today) so I would opt for a 165/8......kinda get the best of both worlds.
Then again I might just do 180's anyway......am I confusing ya?

That is quite impressive.

Just to be clear, it's not my opinion that hyper velocity is a requirement. Only that it would be ridiculous to believe that your load would somehow be even more destructive had it been going 500 fps slower, due to longer "time on target".

I agree with everyone here, #1 has had less whiskey tonight.

I also fully agree with the hydrostatic shock theory. Weather or not that's actually the reason, in my experience light and fast bullets kill quicker and more reliably that heavy slower pills even given similar internal damage. Assuming of course proper bullet construction built to handle higher impact velocities.

As a very small example, this year my hunting buddy and I both shot our antelope bucks the same day. He shot his with a 30-06 and 180gr accubonds at maybe 2650 fps mv, and mine was shot with a 7wsm and 120gr TSX at 3340 fps mv. They were shot at similar ranges, about 220 yds and the entrance/exit wounds were surprisingly similar and in the same location, right through the lungs. His goat ran off like it hadn't even been shot, then of course fell to the ground maybe 75yds later. Mine dropped instantly and was stone dead by the time I recovered from recoil. Again, all the damage internally and externally was very similar. Hydrostatic "shock" is basically the only reason I can come up with as to why this is ALWAYS my experience with the light and fast. Just my $.02

The distance may have been closer than 30ft. I was 50 yds from the edge of a clear cut(2 yrs old). The buck came from the timber behind me, and was shielded by 2 small pine trees. The 1st opening was at about 30 ft. It was now or never because he was starting to figure out he wasn't alone. BTW, in front of me I could have easily had a shot out to 300 yds or so. The 264 works up close too. It wasn't as messy as I thought it was going to be.Good hunting to you in MN this year