Killing Power

[Smith and Wesson]

I know most rounds don't make things "deader", but some rounds "kill quicker" and don't let animals run as far, or some rounds just kill animals without them moving. I often hear people say that the 300 Win Mag doesn't kill animals any quicker or doesn't keep animals from walking or running any futher than when shot with a 30-06. If so, does that mean a 300 Wby Mag doesn't kill any quicker or make animals expire any quicker than when shot with a 300 Win Mag or 30-06?

 

[Scorch]

I have seen animals shot with a variety of cartridges, from 223 to 458, including many of the Weatherby cartridges. The fastest kills I have ever seen were with smallish caliber/high velocity rifles like a 25-06/243/6mm. Actually the only "dropped like struck by lightning" kill I ever saw was killed by a 7X57. One thing the Weatherby and other magnum cartridges do is shoot flat and ruin a lot of meat.

 

[Sierra280]

I know most rounds don't make things "deader", but some rounds "kill quicker" and don't let animals run as far, or some rounds just kill animals without them moving.

The difference has ABSOLUTELY NOTHING TO DO WITH CALIBER!

Shot placement is everything.

Say it with me now; "shot placement is everything" repeat as necessary until memorized.

 

[nemesiss45]

shot placement is not "everything"... you can shoot an animal in just the right spot, but if you are using a .22 L/R on an elephant, it means nothing.

the deadification factor of a given bullet (if placed in the right spot) is a combination of impact energy, expansion, and penetration. where the bullet excels on that spectrum will cause it to be more deadly for a given animal and type of shot. every shot and every animal is not the same. sometimes you need a bullet to drive through feet of large game meat and bone before hitting the vitals. that same bullet hitting a coyote broadside will just pop a little hole in it and keep going out the other side.... it may kill it... but it's not ad deadly as a varmint bullet with very fast expansion.

 

[hooligan1]

Nemesiss, bullet selection for calibers is part of the hunters duty tomake sure clean quick kills are made. shot placement is everything.
Im not sure you could kill and animal deader than dead but you can kill them quicker with proper bullets and proper shot placement.....

 

[steveNChunter]

you can kill them quicker with proper bullets and proper shot placement

Bingo.

 

[Double Naught Spy]

Shot placement is everything.

Shot placement is 1/3 of everything.

You need, 1) shot placement, 2) trajectory, and 3) penetration to reach the appropriate vital to get the desired terminal ballistics. Shot placement is only an exterior location on the animal/person. It is critical that the placement correspond with the trajectory being fired to have the round penetrate through the vitals. A given location is only as good as what the trajectory and penetration will allow to happen AFTER the bullet enters the body. So a shot location for an animal quartered away from you may be great, but the same location terrible for an animal quartered to you. Neither location or trajectory mean squat if the round doesn't penetrate appropriately. You can reach the heart with a Texas Heart Shot, but if the animal is large, that may be the worst way to try to do so because the bullet may not be able to penetrate far enough to reach the heart.

You can find all sorts of examples of head shots that resulted in glanced shot that failed to penetrate. Placement was great. Trajectory was great for penetration, so long as the bullet didn't deflect, but it did.

This also comes up with bullets deflected in the body off of bones. Your shot may be placed great, with great trajectory to hit the desired vitals and the bullet able to penetrate sufficiently to reach them, only to have the bullet deflect off of a rib or leg bone and have it go else where with a less lethal or less than lethal wound.

Bigger and more powerful calibers tend to do more bodily damage. More bodily damage can turn a less than great shot into a shot that does what is needed. That doesn't mean that it will, however. Also, using a smaller and less powerful caliber often means requiring a bit more precision to get the desired results. With that said, I have dropped large hogs with 5.56 just fine and had hogs shot with .45-70 that ran off. Both calibers will work just fine, but the .45-70 will give you a bit more wiggle room on some shots than the 5.56. A .45-70 may penetrate through what would otherwise deflect a 5.56. Make sense?

When you are looking at similar calibers as in the OP, the differences in performance are going to be more subtle than noted in the 5.56/.45-70 example. At that point, aside from shot placement, trajectory, and penetration, consideration of bullet type and performance will be a relevant factor in the terminal ballistics. A well designed and expanded hunting round will undoubtedly perform better more often than simple ball ammo.

 

[AllenJ]

I often hear people say that the 300 Win Mag doesn't kill animals any quicker or doesn't keep animals from walking or running any futher than when shot with a 30-06.

On average, that statement has not been my experience. I've shot multiple elk with both the 30-06 and 300 Winchester and my opinion of what I've witnessed is that the animals reacted differently and expired quicker when I used the 300 Winchester. The "On average" statement is because one elk I shot with a 30-06 was in the spine, no tracking required, and one fat cow I shot with my 300 Winchester ran over 200 yards after I made a nice double lung shot on her and the bullets performance was perfect. Sometimes the animal itself is the determining factor regarding questions like this and that is something we can't predict.

 

[Brian Pfleuger]

Shot placement is 1/3 of everything.

You need, 1) shot placement, 2) trajectory, and 3) penetration to reach the appropriate vital to get the desired terminal ballistics.

shot placement is not "everything"... you can shoot an animal in just the right spot, but if you are using a .22 L/R on an elephant, it means nothing.

These comments are silly. "Shot placement" isn't just where you poke a hole in the skin. It includes penetration. It's really "bullet path" and includes every part of the animal that's hit.

When you have to bring a 22LR and elephants into the scenario, you know you're making an irrelevant point.

There's a CONTEXT to these questions. What does a bullet bouncing off a skull or a .22LR on an elephant have to do with the difference in "killing power" between common, high-powered rifle rounds on animals that we actually hunt?

Precisely nothing, that's what. No doubt, there will be "but, but, but" arguments. It's silly, and I'm not going to acknowledge it further.


As it relates to the actual point of the question asked in the OP, there is no difference at all. A .300Win Mag that hits the same spot as a .30-06 is going to have precisely the same result in almost all real world scenarios. The difference will be in the blow absorbed by the shooters shoulder and the speed of the bullet when it hits the tree on the other side of the animal.

When you have to get around to imagining scenarios, hoping to highlight some infinitesimal difference, you know that there's no real world difference.

 

[Slamfire]

Most of what I have read is more related to "stopping power", that is the ability of the cartridge, to kill an animal instantly. Anything that bleeds will bleed out given enough time assuming the wound is severe enough that it cannot be repaired by the natural healing processes of the animal. Most of the animals who are hit and run off later die, either through blood loss or infection. So in that way, a 30-30 is just as lethal as a 300 Win Mag. But a lost animal is not desired or a humane outcome.

Most shooters would agree that instead of waiting for the animal to bleed to death it would be better if the animal died immediately on impact. That however, takes hitting something that shuts the animal down. This has been explored ad nauseam in the gun press, but since these organs are small, it takes a combination of shot placement and proper bullet construction to reach.

I do believe that the largest diameter through hole that one can create is the best solution, and for that, I believe the more powerful calibers are better than less powerful, but I don't know the upper limit nor do I know the lower limit if the desired effect is an instant death.

We should always be wary of those who have a profit motive, such as this Weatherby ad. I don't believe the claim that Weatherby cartridges are so powerful that you don't need to place your shot.

 

[Jimro]

The old advice, "carry the biggest gun you can shoot well" is still good advice.

I don't particularly care for recoil, a 30-06 or 8x57 is about my upper limit, although my 9.3x62 is quite maneagable, more of a shove than a kick. Heck, even conversing with other shooters at a match we all agreed that the 1917 Enfield was more pleasant to shoot than the 1903 Springfield, largely in part because it is a heavier rifle that reduces felt recoil better.

But in terms of "lethality" on game, any cartridge capable of doing the job will do the job as long as the bullet is constructed to reach the vital area, and the shooter places it there accurately, and the differences between a 7mm Rem Mag, 30-06, 300 Ultra Mag are more academic than practical.

Many of the hunters I know who chose the 300 Win Mag or 7mm Rem Mag did so because "It is flat shooting!" without noticing that you won't get 4 inches of trajectory difference over a 308 Win until a few football fields down range...

Jimro

 

[Sierra280]

That Weatherby ad is pretty funny; actually the Ruger #1 is for hunters who make their first shot count.

I should have mentioned something about terminal ballistics, but as long as a 'hunting' bullet is being used it should be fine, as 'Target' or 'match' bullets are only made for punching holes in paper.

I've never understood what 'stopping power' means. A friend of mine from Wyoming came to visit last Saturday; he has taken 4 Elk in the last 3 years all with his 308 and 150 grain Barnes bullets (doesn't like using lead in his food). The first elk he shot took a couple steps before dropping, so in his hunts after that he focused on shot placement and stalking close, the next 3 dropped where they stood.

 

[Art Eatman]

I've noticed over a few dozen deer that if you break the neck (preferably the white spot) that they don't go anywhere at all. Don't waste any eatin' meat, either. For no particular reason, to me the .243 is as small as I plan on using for Bambi. Wuz I for eating elk, I'd just stay with the old '06.

I guess I'm in the shot-placement camp.

 

[jmr40]

With the examples you listed it is all about effective range. They all shoot the same bullets, just at different speeds. As range increases bullet speed drops off and trajectory gets more arched. At some point speed is slow enough that the bullet isn't moving fast enough to do enough damage.

At ranges inside of 300-400 yards there isn't an animal on the planet that will know the difference between being hit with a 308, 30-06, or any of the 300 magnums firing the same bullet. As range increases the flatter trajectory of the magnums and faster bullet speeds make a greater difference.

For all practical purposes all of the below are equals at the ranges listed. If you don't plan on shooting anything farther than about 400 yards the 300 mags offer zero advantage over a 308.

308 @ 400 yards
30-06 @ 500 yards
300 WM @ 600 yards
300 WBY mag @650 yards

 

[Hog Buster]

Brain or spine shots with a bullet capable of penetration of those areas, delivered precisely to those areas, will anchor said animal in place. Will said shot kill the animal quicker? I don't know for sure, but they don't walk or run off. Any shots delivered to other parts of the animal, regardless of caliber, can turn into a crap shoot. Some drop nearby while others run off to die, some at a great distance.

Big guns with big bullets make big holes, but does this improve the hunters chances of a kill because of a poor shot, I don't think so. Of course there are those who do.

 

[9x19]

When I was living in Colorado I carried a .30/06 but down here in north Texas the white-tail are pretty small, and I have a few friends who hunt them with a .223 using 62 grain bullets... I use an old bolt action in .30/30.. both work just fine.

 

[jimbob86]

I've seen a lot of deer shot over the years, and it seems to me that the cartridge used has a whole lot less impact on what the animal does after the shot than placement. That said, placement is not a guarantee, either: I've seen heartshot animals do all manner of things, from standing there puzzled till they keel over, to "dropping like they were zapped by Zeus" to running 100+ yards before piling up ..... I've also seen deer that "dropped like they were zapped by Zeus" get up and run again.

You just never can tell ....

 

[JD0x0]

Some cartridges will do more terminal damage and can open your margin of error slightly. It's why we use expanding bullets for hunting. If it was ALL about placement then everyone would be using FMJ bullets, because expansion doesn't matter if you put that bullet in the right spot. Hit the animal in the spine, directly in the heart, or brain, and it doesn't matter if you use a FMJ at 2000fps, or an expanding round at 3500FPS. The problem is that in hunting scenarios, you rarely have the conditions to get those shots perfectly, every time so we use expanding bullets at high velocity to do maximum damage, incase we miss our intended area of impact, by a couple inches.

Expanding ammo causes more damage and creates more significant hydrostatic shock. This 'shock' can damage and destroy organs which are not directly in the path of the bullet. This opens your margin of error as a hunter, because you don't need to hit their heart, lungs, spine, or brain, directly with the bullet. You could miss the heart by 2 inches and still destroy it. Where as a FMJ could potentially pencil a small hole, potentially missing every major organ in the chest cavity.

The point most people try to make is that more gun ISNT the answer for poor shot placement, and it's an unethical way to hunt. That said, it doesn't hurt to be a little 'over gunned' just in case. The animal could move, you could misread the wind, etc.

Saying that 300wby doesn't 'kill quicker' is also silly. Supposed you gut shot a coyote with a .30-30 at 100 yards, with a non-expanding bullet. Did that yote die cleanly and quickly? Likely not. Shoot it in the same spot with .300 RUM or 50BMG with an an expanding bullet and that gut shot could potentially still destroy the heart and lungs through hydrostatic shock. Obviously I don't condone hunting this way, but mistakes do happen, and if you can shoot a .300 RUM as well as you can shoot a .30-30 I see no reason why you shouldn't use the bigger cartridge, other than 'meat destruction' which is further evidence of a cartridge doing 'more damage.' Obviously if you got perfect shots with either, the yote should die quickly and cleanly, but what about when you don't get perfect hits?

Shot placement trumps caliber/cartridge almost every time, but it never hurts to have a little 'extra' gun if you can shoot it equally well, 'Just in case.' There are so many variables out there to get the absolute perfect placement every time.

 

[44 AMP]

(gets out his trusty p-38 and opens this particular can of worms...)

Shot placement is only an exterior location on the animal/person

That is one way to define it.

For me, the phrase "shot placement" is not a location, it is a skillset. It is knowing what the right spot to hit is, what it needs to be hit with, and being able to do it, at the desired range.

That's knowledge of the animal (the right spot) bullet construction and velocity/energy for the chosen spot and range, the skill to accurately gauge the wind drift and drop, and the eye/hand co-ordination to fire at the right moment so all these things come together properly.

Once you pass the minimum energy & penetration needed, (for the specific target & range) all that a faster, more powerful cartridge gets you is something that will allow you more of an error, and still do the job. Providing you are ok with paying the cost in recoil and other things.

IF you can compensate for a 48" drop at long range, you can compensate for a 56" drop too. That is a matter of YOUR skill, and has nothing to do with the cartridge itself.

If it was ALL about placement then everyone would be using FMJ bullets, because expansion doesn't matter if you put that bullet in the right spot.

Expanding bullets can make the "right spot" a bit bigger, but they aren't always the best choice for everything. Note that the folks who hunt big critters at close range, that have a nasty habit of trying to stomp bwana into red mush when irritated, those people tend to favor FMJ bullets. Heavily constructed solids in large calibers are the preferred choice.

The pelt hunter wants something that will not exit (ideally) or something that only leaves two small holes, not one small and one large ragged one in the pelt.

Deer/elk hunters have a much broader range of bullet designs that will work very well, but not every one is the best one for a given shot. It NEVER hurts to use a bullet built "better" than the needed, but the reverse isn't true.

High velocity, and expanding bullets work really well for almost everything. but they aren't the only way to get the job done, or the only way to get it done well. Size does matter. It may not matter as much as some people think, but it does matter.

Another thing is that you can hit two different individual animals in precisely the same place with exactly the same bullet at the same speed, and get vastly different results, sometimes. Essentially, if you don't hit the "off" button, where ever that happens to be, the critter will either do what you expect, or it won't.

 

[nemesiss45]

Nemesiss, bullet selection for calibers is part of the hunters duty tomake sure clean quick kills are made. shot placement is everything.
Im not sure you could kill and animal deader than dead but you can kill them quicker with proper bullets and proper shot placement.....

I totally agree... AFTER bullet selection, shot placement i everything.

These comments are silly. "Shot placement" isn't just where you poke a hole in the skin. It includes penetration. It's really "bullet path" and includes every part of the animal that's hit.

When you have to bring a 22LR and elephants into the scenario, you know you're making an irrelevant point.

There's a CONTEXT to these questions. What does a bullet bouncing off a skull or a .22LR on an elephant have to do with the difference in "killing power" between common, high-powered rifle rounds on animals that we actually hunt?

Precisely nothing, that's what. No doubt, there will be "but, but, but" arguments. It's silly, and I'm not going to acknowledge it further.

I'm not making an irrelevant point, I am making a deliberate exaggeration to illustrate my point that is totally relevant to topic. people can and do make the wrong bullet choice. Even within a selection of cartridges that are appropriate for a given game animal, some will get the job done, others will do more damage than is necessary (or make up a little for poor shot placement.) None of the cartridges may be wrong, but they will have different effects inside the animal.