Prefer bullet to fully penetrate or not?

N

Northslope Nimrod

New member
Here goes again. The great debate of penetration. I have had two guys arguing lately that they prefer to fully penetrate elk rather than have full energy transfer and leave the bullet inside (Ie: in the hide on the opposite side).

They argue that speed kills (versus say a bigger caliber). They also argue that two holes to bleed out of makes for an easier tracking job if the elk doesn't go right down....and elk often don't go right down in my experience.

I have usually subscribed to the full energy transfer theory, but I am now leaning toward punching a hole straight through. Trees are thick where I hunt and I often have to track these critters (I usually use a 30-06 165 or 180 gr bonded bullet)

These guys also argue for using Ballistic Tips. They claim the Ballistic Tip bullet does "explode" (their word) inside partially, but the base of the bullet travels clear through. One of them swears by his 7mm STW (ie: small but fast bullet)

So, which method do you prefer for large animals (elk, moose, etc)? I think deer are different since shock usually is more effective against smaller critters. Also, argue for or against using Ballistic Tip bullets.

Thanks in advance. Just trying to decide, once again, where I stand on this issue.
 
The only advantage of full penetration is another hole for a blood trail. Sometimes that is a SIGNIFICANT advantage.

In a perfect world, the bullet should penetrate completely.... with just enough energy left to fall out the other side. Since this is NOT a perfect world, it only makes sense to have a bullet that will penetrate completely in most circumstances. The result is a bullet that "over" penetrates on some shots while still penetrating completely on MOST shots.

So, yes, I want complete penetration but only barely. I've been on a quest for just such a thing for deer hunting with a 12ga. Traditional slugs blow right through a deer from almost any angle and distance, what good is 3000 ft/lbs of energy if 2500 of it is in a tree on the other side? I'm still looking. I'm almost convinced that it's not possible to stop 300-400gr bullets generating 3000 ft/lbs of energy within the "thickness" of a whitetail.


Properly designed ballistic tip bullets are a great advancement. They have better expansion and impact than a hollow point and better ballistics of a solid.
 
Last edited:
I don't think it matters, and unless you're firing a pretty heavy round, you can't really control whether or not the bullet will exit. Broadside shot through the rib cage? Quartering towards or away? Or coming straight at you at 20 yards like the really dumb bull my friend shot with his '06 a few years back? The best bullets sold today will expand reliably and hold together for both wound channel and penetration. I wouldn't want any "explosive" behavior. What if you hit the shoulder or leg bone on that front quartering shot? What bullet is your friend firing in his hot 7? Most folks go with 160 or 175 in 7 mm, not very different than your choice in 7.62 diameter. How far have you had to track your elk? They are tough, but they won't go very far with their lungs shot out.
 
about ballistic tips

I have never, and will never likely, get the chance to shoot an elk.

I have shot, and seen plenty shot by others, whitetails w/ Nosler ballistic tips.
They were all the rage here for a while. They are also the most accurate bullet in 130 gr in my .270. I consider the "deer weights" 130-.270, 150-165-.30, as soft, fast expanding bullets. A buddy drives 140's(?) in 7mm mag so fast he does not get exit wounds on 150 lb deer.

Considering an elk is so much bigger, I would not think it was a suitable bullet for same.
 
I don't deer hunt, but know plenty of people who do and this came up once at a family reunion IIRC. The general consensus was that it was better for anything .243 or larger to penetrate all the way through. The reasoning being that a well placed shot of a decent SP bullet in a .243+ cartridge is going to take a deer down regardless of weather or not the bullet exits or stays in the animal.

The difference is when the shot is less than ideal, two holes increases the chance of a good blood trail and increases the chance of quick bleed out. It doesn't always happen. Sometimes the entry and/or exit wound doesn't bleed that much, but having two holes vs one increases the chance that at least one does.

Shooting the deer was said to be the easy part, the hard part often was finding the deer if it didn't go down right away. Thus a good blood trail was essential.
 
It is not a perfect world but if it was all of the bullets energy would be expended in the animal with the least damage to the meat. I'll usually take 4-5 rifles on a hunting trip with a few different loads for each. That way I'm covered from 0-500 yds. with some overlap.
 
To exit or not exit is not anything I've ever worried about. I guess I'm spoiled. Most of my 40+ bucks have been DRT. The longest "trailing" I've ever done is about 50 yards.

Neckshots are generally in and out, of course. Most '06 hits go all the way through. A 90-degree .243 hit makes a double-handfull of mush in the heart/lungs, so an exit wound doesn't matter at all.
 
two holes increases the chance of a good blood trail and increases the chance of quick bleed out.
Click to expand...

While I agree w/ the first part of this statement, not so on the second part. I don't think it quantifies anything in terms of whether or not the animal is bleeding quickly. He/it can bleed out within the body cavity just as easily as on the outside.
If you are designing your bullets/ wound channel for punch through, then I think you are missing the boat on the extensive effect on the wound channel doing damage. I am NOT talking about the failed/ untrue goat tests or shock waves versus wound channel. If the bullet expands and then stops, one would tend to agree that it has expended all of its' energy within the body. It would then make you think that it has also expanded as far as possible creating as much wound channel as possible. If it punctures the far side, it has remaining energy that could have been transferred to the target.

Personally, I think a decent compromise is in order. While I am experimenting w/ solid copper bullets for other reasons, my fave happens to be Hornadays' BTSP.
1st...very accurate.
2nd...A lot of my shooting is around 250 yds. 1/2in in,,,2in out (if at all). While there can be wasted energy, it has created a massive wound channel.
3rd....Close range, it doesn't open up as well, herein the compromise. At 50yds, I am picking which hair to shoot. I don't think it's going anywhere, and if so, not too far.

The only universal thing that would tend to be the norm...do not pick a bullet which opens up too fast. I have had terrible results w/ bullets like silvertips blowing up on the surface. Again, this may be due to my caliber as compared to others. 30/06. If I regularly shot close range, I would probably find a faster expanding bullet,,,like a round nose.
elkman06
 
Better to penetrate right thru. Benefits -

1. Pain receptors (nerves) are localized in the epidermis (skin) so with an exit wound more pain is inflicted which results in quicker incapacitation.

2. An exiting bullet creates a suction effect which draws more blood from the wound which promotes hemorrhaging (better blood trail).
 
I like to see how my bullets look after I shoot the animal. But as long as they are dead, I don't really care.

I did get to recover my first handloaded 7mm Nos Accubond. Shoulder shot quartering sharp to me, ended up just under the skin back in the belly region. Perfect mushroom, but weight retention wasn't the best. It started as 140gr and ender up as 98gr. So 70% retention. Deer went 15 yds with great blood.

I love neck shots. Bang...flop.
 
Plenty of folks have far mor hunt experience than I do,but I won't let that stop me.
I just have not had a problem with well hit game animals going very far,regardless.I'll pass on an iffy shot,and I choose appropriate cartridge/bullet combos.As a teen the first antelope I shot with a 7 mag,160 gr Sierra boattail driven by only 70 gr of surplus h-4831.It was on the move a bit,so I hit shoulder,getting horrendous terminal effect from that bullet.

The. far shoulder was pretty much detached.That leg went skyward.There was a football size exit wound.The chocolate pudding and rasberry jello effect went celar back to the sirloins.DRT,BTW.Not much to eat.

Or,I can smack one with my .257.It might be under the hide on the far side,and about a football size wound channel,DRTor maybe 5 or 10 seconds.

If I hit a deer/antelope size animal with my 30-338,a 200 gr Accubond launched at 2900,we will be pretty sure of about a 1 1/4 in exit wound,full penetration,Actually,not a horrendous wound channel,little meat destruction,so far,2 critters,DRT.This would be stone cold dependable on most critters,with a good hit.

I've been around the 308 a fair amount.The 165 gr works out well in an AR-10,and we've helped some folks with load development.

Heart-lung classic shots,165 gr Accubond for elk,the 308 @ 300 yds gave a 14 yr old one shot,one clean kill,under hide far side penetration.

I've seen a friend's wife get one heart shot,one quick kill,cow elk,.243.

I killed a cow ,neck shot .44 mag Super Blackhawk,DRT.240 grain JHP broke up and stopped in the spine.Too much luck factor,DRT or not.I would not trust this bullet again on big game.


A long time ago,Robert Ruark wrote a book"Use Enough Gun"

He included a .220Swift on an African Safari.At first,it showed some impressive kills,but then it failed.

The use of 140 gr ballistic tips in a 7STW on elk is a perfect example ,IMO,of a combination that in the long term will show a failure.It might be impressive(to those easily impressed) but a modest 165 gr .308 round will be more dependable.

From Nosler's number 4 manual,page 52,on choosing Ballistic tips versus partitions,I quote"Load a 140 gr Ballistic Tip in a 7MM STW and push it to the max,and the core will very possibly separate from the jacket" End quote.

Nosler has chosen this as the perfect example of what NOT to do.It will work fine till some elk has a horriblly destroyed shoulder,because the wind made a difference,and it will go many miles on 3 legs to be lost.Its not that a 140 BT is a bad bullet.I might choose it for a 7-08 or a 7x57 at modest velocity for a recoil sensitive shooter.It will be very reliable,as it will expand at modest velocity.

For some interesting perspective,read the experience of folks like Les Bowman,long time outfitter.He has a chapter in PO Ackleys "Handbook for shooters"

Some perspective can be gained from reading about professional hunters in Africa.Many of them do not want in excess of 2400 FPS ,and they want great ,bone breaking penetration.That is when the stakes are different.

Thats is when it is not about some bubba looking at the mess his hypervel made,going "Gol,Dawg,ewweewweew,looky that,sonofa"

If that is why you hunt.

No,these guys know they need what they can count on to perform,or maybe,after Mbogo the buffalo gets done,it is their own body folks will be going "Gol dawg" over.It is not about extremes.

IMO,a good hunter,good shot,using a .303 Brit,or a .300 Savage,or an 8x57 mauser will ,in the long haul,get a better clean kill percentage than a 7STW with ballistic tips will.

There is a darn good reason why our common hunting cartridges like the 30-06 are the classics,the standards for decades all over the world.They work.

But,thats just my opinion.
 
While I agree w/ the first part of this statement, not so on the second part. I don't think it quantifies anything in terms of whether or not the animal is bleeding quickly. He/it can bleed out within the body cavity just as easily as on the outside.
Click to expand...
Good point. I was repeating what others have said and that second part kind of bothered me a little.
 
This exact discussion took place about six weeks ago, in this very forum.

The consensus: no one can agree.

My opinion: Lot's of tissue damage, liquefied vital organs, blood loss, and broken bones always work well. If the heart, lungs, and a shoulder are toast - it doesn't matter if the bullet exited.
 
If you a bullet penetrates the brain or spine it doesn't matter if it exits the animal or not. Pretty much the same thing is true if it goes through the heart.

What puzzles me about this argument is that most people use cartridges that are too powerful not to pass through the average deer.
 
What puzzles me about this argument is that most people use cartridges that are too powerful not to pass through the average deer.
Click to expand...

It's actually bullet performance that determines whether it exits on deer sized game or not. Most soft-point, expanding (Not fragmenting) ammo will penetrate a broadside deer from most legal firearms.

A hollow point designed to fragment most times won't, and therein lies the focus of the argument.

Few would doubt the ability of a 7mm rem mag loaded with 145 grain soft points to shoot completely through a deer, yet the same cartridge, when loaded with a 115 grain hollow point, usually won't.

And in the end, either way will work as long as the hunter/shooter knows what the capabilities are of the bullet (s)he uses. Both types of bullets have their benefits and drawbacks, and a person should take them into consideration when choosing a bullet to hunt with.

Daryl
 
Lot's of tissue damage, liquefied vital organs, blood loss, and broken bones always work well. If the heart, lungs, and a shoulder are toast - it doesn't matter if the bullet exited.
Click to expand...



I second the motion! Add an exit wound and what else can you ask for?
 
Original Poster

OK, we want inside destruction and liquification. Which bullet does this well without risking over-expansion? Another buddy today, recommended Hornady A-Max. He likes them because they "explode" so to speak, in the animal and DO NOT exit. I would like destruction inside but would like to see some of the bullet (the base) pass clean through. Is there a bullet that does this well? The one buddy claims the new Ballistic Tips do this (ie: top part "kabooms" inside the elk but the base passes through)

Another factor. I hunt in dense timber and often there is a pine tree just barely in front of my target. My bullet may hit a small twig. I use a scope so I can avoid twigs but it can happen. Are ballistic tips more prone to disintegration upon contact with a small twig than say a bonded bullet? OR are they both totally vulnerable (due to disintegration or deflection) to the small twig and a 45/70 would be needed to overcome?

**The reason I am asking these questions is that I have been considering a .35 Whelen, but now I am wondering if I even gain anything by going to bigger bores. Will shooting my '06 with a 165 gr at 2900 fps with a Ballistic Tip or A-Max do the job as good, or better with less recoil, cost, etc...
 
OK, we want inside destruction and liquification. Which bullet does this well without risking over-expansion? Another buddy today, recommended Hornady A-Max. He likes them because they "explode" so to speak, in the animal and DO NOT exit. I would like destruction inside but would like to see some of the bullet (the base) pass clean through. Is there a bullet that does this well?
Click to expand...

It's not necessarily about the bullet, but in many cases - Velocity with somewhat controlled expansion.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top