hard cast for less meat damage???????????????

[savageml10-2]

well textbook broadside shots are great for an 300xtp (my 170# 8-point)but i want to try a hard hard 20-23 brinnel hardness bullet with a wide metplat anybody try a 330 grain 45cal harvestor hardcast flatnose or a 335 grain 45 cal Precision Rifle LBT hardcast in our savages? Cecil has yet to steer me wrong, i am not advocating bad shots just normal 1/4 and 3/4 to and from shots i made a longways body shot and was upset by my meat loss, plus all of my shots are 150yrds or less on deer any other ideas?

 

[sheephunterab]

The XTP is designed to expand rapidly and do maximum damage. If you are looking for something that might hold together better, the SST is a good choice.

 

[Doohan]

Barnes Spitfire would serve you well .

 

[savageml10-2]

i was under the impression that SST`s are fragile??? :shock:

 

[sheephunterab]

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

i was under the impression that SST`s are fragile???

Not from what I've seen from the 20 or so dead animals I've seen killed with 250s and 200s.

 

[big6x6]

i was under the impression that SST`s are fragile??? :shock:

It 100% depends on impact velocity. I have two recovered 250gr SSTs from this fall shot from Savage #IV with a MV somewhere around 2330fps. One was from the buck I shot in Kentucky at 58yds, ~2100fps impact velocity, the other from the aoudad, TOUGH animal at 70-75yds, ~2000fps impact velocity. Cores separated. I'll have a pic of them when Kristel get through with my camera! All other deer I've shot with the 250gr SST exited. The 9pt I shot the other day was at 148yds with Savage #IV exited and the others have been with Triple Se7en guns where the muzzle velocity was about the same or less than the IMPACT velocity with the Savage so impact velocity was less.

Did those bullets kill their target quickly? YES they did! Are they a fragile bullet? IMO, yes they are. Are they OVERLY fragile? Ask the dead animals! Are they a TOUGH bullet? There certainly are tougher.

 

[Anonymous]

Cecil has yet to steer me wrong, i am not advocating bad shots just normal 1/4 and 3/4 to and from shots

He just did. Intentional use of non-expanding bullets makes no sense on deer.

Consider "meat loss" vs. the loss of an entire animal. :shock: Dramatic destruction of vital organs is what I want-- less meat demage points to a less quickly lethal bullet. There are always head shots.

A Barnes MZ-Expander offers controlled, limited expansion-- and a Barnes Original is a far, far tougher bullet due to jacket thickness than an XTP or pure lead. A dumb old bullet cannot discern between destruction of vitals or meat-- that's where your shot placement comes on. Loss of lungs, top of the heart, etc., is not generally cause for consternation.

Hard cast or hard ball-- not a good hunting bullet unless you are after African game where penetration is the primary criterion.

 

[schoolmaster]

I have shot quite a few deer with the TC maxiball in 54 cal. and it will work but you have to trail them unless you hit BONE (shoulders, neck, spine). The only deer I ever lost was shot with a 54 maxi. and hit too far back. I have shot 5 deer with the White shooting star bullet in 45 cal and all expanded and a short recovery. But I believe that these bullets are soft.

 

[big6x6]

Intententional use of non-expanding bullets makes no sense on deer.

Hard cast or hard ball-- not a good hunting bullet unless you are after African game where penetration is the primary criterion.

I wish you'd tell the critters that have been falling form being shot with bullets made by the fine people atBeartooth Bullets, both here AND abroad for YEARS!

 

[Anonymous]

Buicks have killed deer for years, but that hardly makes them a weapon of choice. I suspect they expand better than hard cast, though. :?

When deer populations become signatories to the Hague and Geneva conventions, hard cast will be deserving of another look. :d'oh!:

 

[Ron S]

ROTFLMAO! :applause: Ron

 

[big6x6]

Buicks have killed deer for years, but that hardly makes them a weapon of choice. I suspect they expand better than hard cast, though. :?

When deer populations become signatories to the Hague and Geneva conventions, hard cast will be deserving of another look. :d'oh!:

I don't think these animals were killed with Buicks... :huh?:

Beartooth Trophies

 

[savageml10-2]

chuck,
i was lookingat those trophy`s wow i was a handgun hunter long ago thats quite a testomonial! :shock:

 

[Anonymous]

I don't think these animals were killed with Buicks... :huh?:

Perhaps not, but the Buick is the weapon of choice in Northern Illinois-- about the only weapon the delightfully generous Mayor Daley apparently allows. It's mostly "ONE BUMP - ONE KILL" in Chicago. :cry:

The only reason I bought this Mitsubishi was its BC of .43. :wink:

Chuck Hawks sums up the "meat damage thingy" well:

"A complaint often heard about fast expanding bullets is that they destroy too much meat. My answer is that the whole point is to destroy a lot of tissue in order to cause a quick, humane death. The shooter, not the bullet, is responsible for what tissue is destroyed. If you put the bullet into the heart/lung area, little if any edible meat is destroyed, since most people don't eat internal organs. If you put the bullet into the animal's hip it is going to destroy a lot of meat, for sure, but the hip is not a vital organ. This is a bullet placement, not a bullet performance, problem.

 

[sheephunterab]

"A complaint often heard about fast expanding bullets is that they destroy too much meat. My answer is that the whole point is to destroy a lot of tissue in order to cause a quick, humane death. The shooter, not the bullet, is responsible for what tissue is destroyed. If you put the bullet into the heart/lung area, little if any edible meat is destroyed, since most people don't eat internal organs. If you put the bullet into the animal's hip it is going to destroy a lot of meat, for sure, but the hip is not a vital organ. This is a bullet placement, not a bullet performance, problem

Amen!