Why is that lets here it o mighty one How does a bullet work best on an animal???? Sounds like not to many peole are good at science or at biology.Which kills more a bullet or a gernade? ballistic tips do the same thing as a berger but the blow up on impact not inside.From my experience(more damadge than I want).

Dont mind chuck there Justin,he likes to talk alot about everything.Even more so the things that he does'nt know about.you and I both know about the barnes so let them use the bullet.

You are right dead is dead.I just have not seen what make me want to use them.If you like a bullet dont worry about what my opinion is just use it.I have my theory and I use what I do.

I dont know never had a run in with him I know you sure have.:lol: Like I stated you use what ever you want just dont come on here and tell me I know nothing.I know alot more than a lot of others on here.If I dont I ask.

Sorry dude,
I'm going to have to disagree with you on this one.
Saying that the Barnes is unethical to hunt with shows your inexperiance in using this bullet on game. You clearly have never seen the chest cavity of an elk turned to Jello as a result of a Barnes X. How much energy was deposited in that animal?

Most people are completely un aware of how a bullet actually kills. Everyone knows that stuff dies when you shoot it, but do not know the mechinism of death.

In the 2 bullet examples that you give (Barnes and Berger), both bullets are quite capable of providing quick humane kills. Both bullets are fully capable of disrupting the central nervous system if directed to head or spine. The same bullets are entirely capable of depriving the brain of oxygin through blood loss and damage to cardiovascular system when directed into the heart/lung area.

Barnes and Berger bullets are designed to perform differently, but disrupt the same systems in the animal. Remember that impact velocity and energy are only second in importance to penetration in their ability to humanely incapacitate animals.

You are entitled to your opinion, but please don't allow your assumptions influance that opinion. And remember, there are a TONNE (thats metric) of guys on this board who shoot Barnes bullets with great sucess on game. It is inadvisable to call all of these fine outdoorsmen UNETHICAL because they fail to agree with your uneducated opinion.

TK

I have been waiting for this. Like I said you uses what you want. I shot them for a year.Everything that was shot ran and needed a fallow up shot.Yes I shot where you are supose to tight behind the shoulder.My old man loves them as well as all of the rest of you.I am not puting all the people that use them down I dont like how they work.You talk of disrupting the central nervous system. Which does it better a bullet that is in an animal or the one that blew through???? as we are back to tranfer of energy from one to another.

I remember hearing a while ago that the ballistic tips were initially used on varmints and then when used on game killed like nothing else. Then some people started complaining about the bullet failing on poor shots or breaking apart on bone.

To me (my opinion) it seems like the same thing happens with Berger bullets however I think the reason we haven't heard the bad rap about Bergers failing is because they are of a VLD design and the casual hunter/reloader doesn't use them, rather for the most part only the better shooters/long range guys use them and they can put the bullet where it counts...

x1000.....

I hear someone calls the bullet I use 'unethical' and I stand up and take notice. You have drank the kool-aid if you think that the most important part of killing is in energy transfer and in calculations. I shoot a bullet that will out penetrate and put holes in important stuff. I can shoot at various angles and devestate internal organs and get complete penetration with a Barnes TSX. All shots I have taken resulted in major damage to organs with two nice holes on each side of the animal.

To me, I'd rather have penetration than a bullet that expands rapidly. Period. The 35-40 animals I've killed with them all died quickly and had perfect performance from ALL ranges on all sorts of hits.

I'm not out there shooting coyote pelts, so I am happy to have a bullet that will bust through BOTH shoulders and leave an animal leaking out of each hole if its in the bush or it doesnt drop on sight. Most of my shots have been DRT with the TSX, but I'm confident in the strength and ability of the bullet.

Energy doesnt kill animals. Period. I take bullet penetration over rapid expansion any day of the week, but thats just my choice. Using a term like 'unethical' to describe the TSX is pretty laughable though....

Transfer of energy is definitely key to quick kills, I would agree 100%. But to say that 3" of penetration is better than a pass through is F'n crazy. You stated in another thread that you would recommend a cartridge smaller than .308 calibre for elk out to 400 yards, and to add to that, now your saying that only 3" of penetration is desirable? Do the 2 add up? Take me to school, please!... because, I don't understand your teaching!

I have regreted that I said unethical That was wrong. I have a good point on the other stuff. Yes energy transfer kills. Even with your barnes.

They do nt start to exspand till it goes throgh a min of 3-5" go to berger site and watch the demonstation.It is like a gernade going off in there chest cavity not in the sholder.Bergers go right through a sholder going in before expanding.I also have had pass throughs on deer the organs(all of them) were jello. I will take video this year ogf the shot and the aftermath of all organs.Very impressive.



Also I am not a 30 cal guy I just dont like them.That is all.When it come to telling him not to I did not I said I dont like them.I have seen lots of elk and moose killed with a 270 or smaller.it is whhere you put the bullet. Not what bullet or caliber you are shooting.

I can appreciate a man's like or dislike of a particular bullet but to call a proven bullet like the TSX unethical just shows how little you understand bullet performance.

I wasn't aware that energy killed. I always thought it was putting holes through vital organs and causing mass hemmoraging that did it. Shows how little I know I guess.:rolleyes:

Are some people sponsored by any of the major bullet manufacturers on here? Who gives a **** what anyone else uses, in the end you use what makes you feel happy, because no else can make you happy. I will only use Bergers and Lapua and Sierra and Nosler and Sierra and Barnes and try those Chinchagas that's my opinion, and it makes me happy. :) Oh missed Hornady

He already said using the word "unethical was a mistake" do you just type to see what your thoughts look like written, or do you think first? Geeze

LOL...I've been accused of talking without think before :D

I noticed the repent of his sins after I replied to his earlier post. Happy to see that he saw the error of his ways. :innocent:

yes you are right but energy tanfer cause all of that hemmoraging/shutting all orgens do on impact do to energy transfer.Like how you eye gets black after someone punches you:evilgrin:

Justin, I'm not sure you totally appreciate the fuction and performance of a bullet. While a rapidly expanding bullet with minimal penetration may indeed dump a lot of kenetic energy in an animal, the would channel is short and the energy limited to one specific area, as in your example of a punch in the eye. Depending where that energy is dumped, it may indeed disrupt organs but it may also be a temporary disruption. We've all seen animals drop hard from the initial energy dump and then get up and run away apparently unscathed. A deep penetrating bullet that also expands well, dumps energy along the complete length of the wound channel, creating a far more effective use of that kenetic energy, even if all of it is not displaced within the animal. It's this long wound channel and the damage associated with it that makes the TSX and other deep penetrating bullets so effective.

Where you really start to realize the importance of this deep penetration is with larger game like moose or African game. They can soak up a lot of kenetic energy dumped in one location but quickly succuumb to a long wound channel with a wide path of energy dump. Just because a bullet passes through does not mean it doesn't use most of it's energy. Bullets like the TSX experience very rapid expansion at high speed and are designed to use energy and penetrate well over a very wide range of velocity. Most people are shocked to learn that very close range high velocity shots with a TSX typically have far less penetration than mid range shots.

While your punch in the eye may knock someone down....don't coun't on it keeping them down...:innocent:

Bergers too are a very effective bullet but not for the reasons you are expressing here.

Just so I have this clear. You are stating that you have more experience with Barnes bullets than I. Is this correct?

Your statements regarding them indicate you know precious little about them.

Just want to add 2 cents worth. When I go to enjoy my tenderloin, I want to be certain that I, or my loved ones, are not consuming the lead that was deposited there by an exploding varmint grenade. Copper solids are safer in that regard.
P.S. I have found the Accubond to be a consistent shooter in my .300 WSM

Who in their right mind shoots big game with varmint grenades and in the tenderloins to boot?

I've polled the masses too in regards to bullet choice. For the most part, one always comes out of it more confused then not. It seems to me that every bullet has performed very well for some and poorly for others. For the game that I've hunted in southern Alberta, Hornady Interlocks and Speer Grand Slams have performed well. The only bullet failure that I've ever experienced is with Ballistic Tips, and that may have been a fault of mine due to poor choices. I'm going to now test drive the 210gr. TSX's for obvious reasons, but lead contamination has nothing to do with it.

Tongue in cheek about the grenade, but in all seriousness, when a bullet sheds 70%+ of its mass in the chest cavity, some shrapnel may end up in edible flesh.

I used them and have seen other use.I dont like them.DROP IT CHUCK. You have a problem with tyler go deal with him.I dont care if evrybody on this fourm like barnes I DONT..........

Take a deep breath. Or something.

I will end up trying both Bergers, and TTSX's when I start working on building loads for my .300 WSM. But as always I will start with getting my Accubond load established. I guess one big part of this whole topic, that plays a big part in each hunter's individual choice in bullets is what shots will be taken. I will always pass on a quartering shot that doesn't allow me to put it behind the shoulder, and wait for a broadside shot, or the animal walks away. EVERYTIME. This is my reasoning for thinking that Accubonds suit my needs perfectly. Other guys may prefer to drive it through the shoulder into the boiler room. Something like a Barnes or a Fail Safe is a better choice for these shots. Just sayin'.

so is it fair to say that an accubond will not go through a moose shoulder? looking more for an anchor shot as opposed to a lung shot, for the first round, lee.

I wouldn't say it's fair to say that. A lot would depend on cartridge, velocity, and bullet weight.

280 ai, 140 ab, 3200fps - +/-, lee

Quote:

Originally Posted by duceman (Post 557584) 280 ai, 140 ab, 3200fps - +/-, lee

I'd lean more towards a TSX, Fail Safe, A-Frame, TB Bear Claw, or even the new Nosler E-Tip for your application. I used 200 grainers at that speed out of my .300 RUM and would have had no problem pounding one of those thru, but a 140 at the same speed........:scared:

Just about any bullet will do the trick on smaller game. Smaller shoulders etc, do not demand a premium high penetrating bulllet. But bigger stuff can. If a person is prepared to wait for just the perfect shot after waiting 12 years for their moose draw then I guess it doesn't matter what you shoot. For people that realize in the real hunting world the perfect shot always doesn't present itself, they would probably take every advantage they could, which means a bullet that will hold up if it encounters heavy bone. Talk to a few African P.H.s and ask them if they trust their lives to a bullet that could come apart on a whim. Also, this business of knockdown power is highly overrated.
I knocked a moose over once with a bonded bullet. Knocked over. Not killed. He was getting up to take off when I finished him. The bullet was absolutely flattened and lodged between shoulder and rib cage, about as big around as a quarter and about as flat. A TSX would have made it through. I have taken many head of game with TSXs. Many of these dropped to the shot. Hmmmm I guess they do shed enery. As well as leaving a long wound channel.