.223 for bear, deer, elk and moose.

[Formidilosus]

Dumb question #1: I have chest shot and killed deer that never moved another muscle where post mortem indicated no apparent CNS damage and a heart still relatively intact. Is it possible that the hydraulic effect shocked the CNS or the heart? Or is this a case where the animal "psychologically" (if that's even possible in an animal) checked out immediately, rather than physiologically.

Not hydraulic, the temporary stretch cavity. And yes, animals just like humans have varying levels of psychological incapacitation

Dumb question #2: After looking over the various rifle gel tests, is there really an appreciable difference between the lethality of the common chamberings from 223-308?

Nope. Given ideal projectiles for any cartridge within that realm, bigger is “more” but not generally more enough to mean anything*. That is- just because you shoot an animal in the lungs and it runs 50 yards does not mean that if you went bigger that it would have ran 25 yards instead. Barring a CNS hit, they have to run out of oxygen or blood, and given correct bullets and impact speed everything in the 223-308 realm is more alike than different.

*heavy frangible 6.5, 7mm and 308 bullets can cause significantly more tissue damage than say a .224 with like bullet, however those bullets way cross over the line that almost anyone would find acceptable for meat damage. With a 223 and the right bullet it’s already at too much tissue damage levels- why would I go bigger unless I wanted to cause even more meat loss? Because going bigger and then hamstringing the cartridge by putting a bullet in it that causes less damage is akin to buying a V8 and then yanking spark plugs because it’s too fast.

I'll leave the questions at that for now. As a general comment, I was surprised to see how glass dramatically affected the bullets and the wound cavity. I would have never thought that.

Yes indeed. Glass is horrific on bullets. It’s also what one can expect as a worse case scenario- say extremely large ungulates (moose/bison) shoulder knuckles or shoulder joint. Plywood is similar to elk/big deer shoulders. Heavy denim equates to vary large and fat hide and skin.

 

[Formidilosus]

Maybe some of the medical folks can chime in, but I’ve dropped many a deer with double lung just above the heart shot which should not incapacitate instantly -

if I understand this; if the heart was on the down stroke when shot and next beat would be filling the heart (ie it’s empty) and the top two veins are damaged, a instant drop in blood pressure in total body “may”occur.

This has never proven out in multiple research and medical studies. I believe it was Fackler that wrote extensively about it. Almost certainly when an animal drops instantly from a shot that does not hit the CNS, either the temporary stretch cavity effected the spinal cord, or bullet or bone fragments did.

 

[CApighunter]

@Formidilosus
For high speed .224s, a 22 creed in my case, what bullets would you recommend for deer/antelope sized game? Any knowledge of how the 95gr SMK perform on flesh?

 

[Shraggs]

Yes it was fackler, I read long ago. And your right form he was clear that what I summarized was more hypothesis. Short of knowing then.

Logically it made sense then, and I’ll try to double lung high/top of heart if at all possible as opposed to Heart focused (taught as a kid) ever since. Certainly my experience has shown that shot very efficient killing especially archery.

honestly as I type, that shot is so much more forgiving in terms of placement especially short range elevated or long range rifle vs center heart that my observations may simply be better accuracy by eliminating fringe hits low.

 

[Formidilosus]

@Formidilosus
For high speed .224s, a 22 creed in my case, what bullets would you recommend for deer/antelope sized game? Any knowledge of how the 95gr SMK perform on flesh?

Unfortuntely terminal performance is extremely variable with the pointed SMK’s of which the 95gr is one. The 77gr TMK actually has been working well from 22CM’s, etc. That or the 88gr ELD-M. If meat damage is a large concern, especially for antelope, the Barns 77gr LRX is worth a look.

 

[Formidilosus]

Yes it was fackler, I read long ago. And your right form he was clear that what I summarized was more hypothesis. Short of knowing then.

Logically it made sense then, and I’ll try to double lung high/top of heart if at all possible as opposed to Heart focused (taught as a kid) ever since. Certainly my experience has shown that shot very efficient killing especially archery.

honestly as I type, that shot is so much more forgiving in terms of placement especially short range elevated or long range rifle vs center heart that my observations may simply be better accuracy by eliminating fringe hits low.

That and/or maybe damaging the aortic arch…?

 

[Shraggs]

That and/or maybe damaging the aortic arch…?

My reasoning anyway. More fragile than heart muscle, and massive natural blood flow to disrupt bookended by lungs.

 

[Castle Rock]

@Formidilosus
For high speed .224s, a 22 creed in my case, what bullets would you recommend for deer/antelope sized game? Any knowledge of how the 95gr SMK perform on flesh?

The 77 TMK is working really well for me at 3200 FPS, as is the 80 ELDM
I used to use a lot of SMKs, and as many others have said I found their performance very erratic

 

[Fartrell Cluggins]

Unfortuntely terminal performance is extremely variable with the pointed SMK’s of which the 95gr is one. The 77gr TMK actually has been working well from 22CM’s, etc. That or the 88gr ELD-M. If meat damage is a large concern, especially for antelope, the Barns 77gr LRX is worth a look.

Can you tell me how that variability plays out in the testing? Are they not opening, not penetrating, minimal stretch and damage, inconsistent?

I am a product of the generation that was taught that you don't use match bullets for game. When I first started reading of people using match bullets for game, my default position was that they were nuts. I am a skeptic by nature. But then as more data points started pouring in (Think the Scenar thread on 24HCF) I changed my mind. Some match bullets work great on game. Things like this from Sierra make me scratch my head still:

"While they are recognized around the world for record-setting accuracy, MatchKing® and Tipped MatchKing® bullets are not recommended for most hunting applications."
Does Sierra know something that you don't or vice versa?

As I read through various forums these days, it seems many people start working up hunting loads with match bullets, then asking others what kind of performance others are having on game with that bullet. That seems pretty backwards to me, but it's very common. Are there really that many people that shoot game at distances where the BC advantages of match bullets come into play? An internet fad for the most part?

Just the stuff that runs through the mind of a skeptic.

 

[Nomosendero]

What runs in my mind are the terminal results shown in this thread.

 

[Reburn]

"While they are recognized around the world for record-setting accuracy, MatchKing® and Tipped MatchKing® bullets are not recommended for most hunting applications."
Does Sierra know something that you don't or vice versa?

To my understanding and Im sure form will correct me if im wrong.

If a bullet is classified from the manufactor as a hunting bullet it wont be considered for law enforcement or military uses.
I dont understand why as hunting people is the same as hunting animals but that is what I have seen said before.

 

[Nomosendero]

To my understanding and Im sure form will correct me if im wrong.

If a bullet is classified from the manufactor as a hunting bullet it wont be considered for law enforcement or military uses.
I dont understand why as hunting people is the same as hunting animals but that is what I have seen said before.

Years ago Hornady stated the AMax was a Match bullet but could be use for medium game. When Law Enforcement started using them they no longer advised them for hunting. We are not supposed to use hollow points in the Military but we call the MK an "open tip" Match. Point is the bullet manufacturers have to do some PC dancing at times.
What I am concerned with is how bullets perform not what they are called.
If we can't go with actual results as shown here quite clearly then I am not sure why we should have discussion forums. I appreciate the info!

 

[CApighunter]

Can you tell me how that variability plays out in the testing? Are they not opening, not penetrating, minimal stretch and damage, inconsistent?

I think what form is getting at is that the 95 in particular has a pretty small opening that doesn’t always yield consistent expansion. I’ve seen a few photos of dramatic expansion from them as well as reports of them penciling through.

 

[BjornF16]

Years ago Hornady stated the AMax was a Match bullet but could be use for medium game. When Law Enforcement started using them they no longer advised them for hunting. We are not supposed to use hollow points in the Military but we call the MK an "open tip" Match. Point is the bullet manufacturers have to do some PC dancing at times.

LOAC stipulates not using bullets designed to fragment in order to maim; nothing other than some JAG who doesn’t know squat about bullets keeps our military from using OTM bullets. LOAC really only applies to a conflict between signatory state actors, but that is another discussion.

But agree, stopping advertising A-Max as hunting bullet probably had more to do with police use and their concern of PC / optics.

 

[Formidilosus]

Can you tell me how that variability plays out in the testing? Are they not opening, not penetrating, minimal stretch and damage, inconsistent?

They are inconsistent. It’s always failing to upset or fragment.
Sometimes they expand almost normally, sometimes they penetrate 4-5” and then tumble and fragment, sometimes they penetrate 10-12” without fragmenting, and sometimes they behave optimally by tumbling within 2-3” and fragmenting violently.

I am a product of the generation that was taught that you don't use match bullets for game. When I first started reading of people using match bullets for game, my default position was that they were nuts. I am a skeptic by nature.

They problem with things like “no match bullets for game” line of thinking, is that it’s based on nothing. It’s a meaningless stance. “Match” is a marketing term and nothing else as there are no standards for that designation.
What a company labels a projectile as, has generally nothing to do with what that bullet will do in tissue. There are match bullets that are poor performers in tissue, there game bullets that are poor performers in tissue, there match bullets that produce lackluster precision, there are game bullets that produce excellent precision, and there are match bullets that produce excellent and ideal tissue disruption.

But then as more data points started pouring in (Think the Scenar thread on 24HCF) I changed my mind. Some match bullets work great on game. Things like this from Sierra make me scratch my head still:

"While they are recognized around the world for record-setting accuracy, MatchKing® and Tipped MatchKing® bullets are not recommended for most hunting applications."
Does Sierra know something that you don't or vice versa?

Others have addressed why a company might choose to not advertise a bullets use in hunting. I can say with near certainty that there is no one that has seen more big game killed with TMK’s than I

As I read through various forums these days, it seems many people start working up hunting loads with match bullets, then asking others what kind of performance others are having on game with that bullet. That seems pretty backwards to me, but it's very common. Are there really that many people that shoot game at distances where the BC advantages of match bullets come into play? An internet fad for the most part?

It’s an internet and advertising game. I wouldn’t call it a fad as we have been pushing and stretching the limits of weapons since their inception. There are a couple of main issues-

1). Long range shooting/taking animals at longer ranges while hunting is here to stay. The greatest problem is that while the advancements in optics, rangefinders, bullets, and ballistic apps to make long range shooting extremely predictable and attainable- the consummate increase in shooting knowledge, skill, and practice has not. In short- hunters don’t shoot. And most seem proud of that fact.

2). Manufacturers, gun writers, and advertising have misinterpreted, were totally ignorant about, or outright lied about bullet performance in tissue and “killing” animals. This has resulted in a complete system built around “killing power” that is totally backwards of reality.

3) Heavy for caliber, rapidly fragmenting match bullets create the biggest wound channels of any type of projectile. This isn’t because they’re “match”, it’s because they’re the only projectiles in common usage that didn’t go down the “max retained weight, picture perfect mushroom” path.


There is no downside to a high BC, rapidly upsetting, precise bullet in tissue provided that minimum required penetration depth is achieved.

Just the stuff that runs through the mind of a skeptic.

You should be. Everyone should be. We as a consumer group should be demanding that manufactures prove that their products work correctly, and we should be challenging what is written by anyone with healthy skepticism until sufficient evidence has been provided.

 

[Castle Rock]

I think what form is getting at is that the 95 in particular has a pretty small opening that doesn’t always yield consistent expansion. I’ve seen a few photos of dramatic expansion from them as well as reports of them penciling through.

What I surmise has happened with the 77 MK I have used is some tumble and cause great damage and others don’t and pencil through

On the other hand Berger and scenar hollow points the front of the jacket collapses on impact initiating much more consistent expansion

 

[BjornF16]

@Formidilosus How would a 195 TMK perform out of 300 WSM?

 

[Formidilosus]

@Formidilosus How would a 195 TMK perform out of 300 WSM?

Devastatingly.

 

[BjornF16]

Better to use 168 TMK or 195 TMK?

 

[Formidilosus]

Better to use 168 TMK or 195 TMK?

195gr for big game. Tissue damage will be extreme.