Penetration or Expansion?

[thundergrey]

Not intended as a Burger Vs TTSX But that is more or less the question.

Assuming you have enough cartridge, say a 308 at 250 yards on an elk, (magnums kind of make any conversation about this moot) would you rather a bullet that will always exit (like a mono) and cause less internal damage or a bullet that expels all energy into an animal and rarely exit (like a Burger, for example)?

I see the merit to both for sure and we definitely have options in the middle as well but for all intents and purposes which of the two would you gravitate towards and why?

Using the 308 example above, what would be your preferred weight retention on a mixed design? (Like Monos are 100%, Partitions are typically 60%, ABs are around 70%, ballistic tips like 50%...) Assume appropriate bullet weights for the bullet design.

[Dick284]

I like 2 holes, an inny and an outty.
But I do like a bit of collateral damage on the ways thru.
Lighter to average for diameter monos, or a partition/bonded of average weights. Or if bellow 2700 FPS, just gimme a decent cup core slug.

A wee bits of boths.

Take this average mule deer buck shot at 80 yds, with a 300 Wby loaded with 165 TSX’s doing maybe 3060fps at the muzzle.
Here’s the inny(through the ribs.

Here’s the outty, through the meaty part of the front leg(just missed the scapula)


Damn near perfect in my eyes(albeit an exit through the ribs woulda been better)

[sgill808]

Wife wants both

[Salavee]

For impact velocities between 1800 to 2700 I'll take a bullet like a Nosler Partition or Swift A-Frame any day. I don't use Monometals so I can't speak for them. I like to see the bullet stopped,or close to it, before it exits.

[Nyksta]

Accubond has always been the best of both penetration and expansion.

[Dubious]

I prefer a mixed type bullet wound, not more than 30% loss of total weight to put some fragmentation in them and then the rest to pass through. I also prefer to select bullets that don’t allow the core to separate from the jacket. I wonder why everyone is so afraid of the scapula, Once you strip the meat of them with a nice green bone there paper thin even on an elk or moose you can shine a light through them and flex them quite easy, now the leg bone it’s self is very tuff and I’ve hit a few of them as well and the bullets have still had full pass throughs.

[Salavee]

Originally Posted by Nyksta

Accubond has always been the best of both penetration and expansion.

My preferred shot placement is the same as in Dick's picture. It eliminates what could be, in many cases, more difficult recoveries. Too old to handle those.

[Peebles]

Energy transfer is not what kills, damage to vital systems is what does it. Both bullet designs can easily disrupt the heart or lungs, but a bullet that breaks apart on impact can put less volume through the vitals if the shards are stopped by bone or deflect into non lethal areas. For this reason I prefer monometals. Even when lethal the meat trimming process can be more work and messier with highly frangible bullets.

[Pathfinder76]

In pretend fairy land, like here, bullets will expand to the size of golf balls and blow through both shoulders wrecking everything in between. Every time. This does not happen. And you will not be blowing through many elk if any angles or heavy bone are involved. Cows and calves maybe, bulls of any size not so much. You need enough penetration to hit vital organs from your chosen angle and you need enough expansion to cause enough damage to kill as quickly as can be expected. So pick your compromise. And be prepared to scratch your head over what your chosen bullet does in practice.

[thundergrey]

Originally Posted by chuck

...pick your compromise. And be prepared to scratch your head over what your chosen bullet does in practice.

Lol you see through my question to easily

If you don’t make it to vitals you will never kill it but if you don’t do enough damage you will be chasing the elk forever.... either can be a lost elk. Accubonds and Partitions seem to always come up, but then so do TTSX and even Burgers and Ballistic Tips (like the 120 7mms)

[GMX]

First I’m not sure what you mean by a mono causing less internal damage from my experience with the GMX and TSX I get two holes and extensive damage. Lots of blood shot meat more if I catch a bone. I haven’t persyused a Berger bullet so I have no first hand information but was told from a good friend they leave a brutal mess on game. He does a lot of long range shooting and loves them for that application. Lots of guys on here have used noslers partitions with great results interlocks used to be my go to until failsafe’s and mono’s came along.

[Norwest Alta]

Originally Posted by sgill808

Wife wants both

Mine says she's never had so much on her with so little in her. I guess that's her polite way of saying lose some weight and gain a couple of inches.

I do prefer ttsx

[300magman]

Originally Posted by sgill808

Wife wants both

LMFAO!!!


For the OP, depends on what.......larger game like elk and moose, penetration. Deer, antelope, sheep, etc I go for expansion. Accubonds for penetration, partitions or bergers for expansion depending on what. Partitions for deer and sheep, bergers for antelope, ewes, etc

[KegRiver]

I learned to hunt with army surplus or hand-me-down rifles, and hardware store ammo.

That equipment left one no choice but to get close and place your shots very carefully.
As the years slipped by we bought better rifles and found better sources of ammo and learned to reload.
So we gained confidence in our equipment and our abilities and started shooting at game at greater and greater distances.

Through it all we learned that such shots are possible but they carry with them a whole lot of variable the shooter has no control over.
Variables that can lead to wounded animals.

There is wind drift, animal movement, unseen branches variations in ammo and a host of other pitfalls one does not see in short range hunting.

So many of us returned to short range hunting.

I can understand why some folks think that expensive gear and long range shooting is all there is. We go with what we learned.

But there are alternatives that don't require long range sniping ability and the risks that come with it, or the cost of equipment and components that will perform reliably at longer ranges.

I also think all the talk about long range shooting, or finding the perfect bullet or the perfect rifle may lead beginners to some unfortunate conclusions.

It certainly seems to be the case on threads such as this.

Terminal ballistics is interesting and all. But in the real world terminal ballistics takes a back seat to accuracy every time.

Couple accuracy with short range and you have a much more predictable result without the need for expensive equipment or the latest and greatest in technology and equipment.

Money saved can be used to have more days out hunting.

Seems like a win win for me. Unless spending money is where the thrill is for that individual. If that's the case, enjoy!

[Flatlandliver]

Originally Posted by KegRiver

I learned to hunt with army surplus or hand-me-down rifles, and hardware store ammo.

That equipment left one no choice but to get close and place your shots very carefully.
As the years slipped by we bought better rifles and found better sources of ammo and learned to reload.
So we gained confidence in our equipment and our abilities and started shooting at game at greater and greater distances.

Through it all we learned that such shots are possible but they carry with them a whole lot of variable the shooter has no control over.
Variables that can lead to wounded animals.

There is wind drift, animal movement, unseen branches variations in ammo and a host of other pitfalls one does not see in short range hunting.

So many of us returned to short range hunting.

I can understand why some folks think that expensive gear and long range shooting is all there is. We go with what we learned.

But there are alternatives that don't require long range sniping ability and the risks that come with it, or the cost of equipment and components that will perform reliably at longer ranges.

I also think all the talk about long range shooting, or finding the perfect bullet or the perfect rifle may lead beginners to some unfortunate conclusions.

It certainly seems to be the case on threads such as this.

Terminal ballistics is interesting and all. But in the real world terminal ballistics takes a back seat to accuracy every time.

Couple accuracy with short range and you have a much more predictable result without the need for expensive equipment or the latest and greatest in technology and equipment.

Money saved can be used to have more days out hunting.

Seems like a win win for me. Unless spending money is where the thrill is for that individual. If that's the case, enjoy!

Bingo.
The challenge of getting close with the ability to reach out accurately when necessary.
30 cal Barnes TTSX has worked for me at all ranges on all sized game.

[jm12]

Originally Posted by sgill808

Wife wants both

Hahahaha Hope you can give both .

[KegRiver]

Originally Posted by thundergrey

Not intended as a Burger Vs TTSX But that is more or less the question.

Assuming you have enough cartridge, say a 308 at 250 yards on an elk, (magnums kind of make any conversation about this moot) would you rather a bullet that will always exit (like a mono) and cause less internal damage or a bullet that expels all energy into an animal and rarely exit (like a Burger, for example)?

To each his own. If someone prefers a huge wound channal, go for it. If another prefers two holes, let him have it.

As for me, I choose neither. Expansion, penetration, two holes or one, make no never mind if the shooter can't hit the side of a barn from inside the barn.

In some places in the world they hunt Deer with centerfire .22 rifles. In Africa more then a few Elephants have been felled with the (despised by many) .303 Lee Enfield.

For me, accuracy trumps all other considerations. I prefer to get close and aim carefully. That way I don't have to spend a small fortune on rifles, scopes, high end ammo and all that comes with successfully making long range or awkward angle shots.

For some the challenge is in the equipment they carry, for others the challenge is in their stalking ability. neither is better then the other.

And both need to have good accuracy for the style they choose or they will wound game, even with the best ammo money can buy.

So for me accuracy is my number one choice and the two choices you list are not even in the running.

[bdub]

Lots of good bullet designs out there now that give both. Here are a couple Nosler partitions out of two different moose on the left. The most deformed bullet was found in the spine after crushing a fair bit of bone. The far right is an old barnes x I believe. Can’t remember what it came out of as it was someone else’s bullet. I like the fact that the partition expands quickly and then holds together to punch out the other side in most of my experience. I have not recovered many as almost all of them have exited. Having two holes is a good thing in my opinion.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Steelhorse Cowboy]

For that 308 (or any in that class) the fore mentioned AB in 165 grain will do the job on any critter you'd typically hunt for the 250 yard and closer we do.
I use a 139 Interbond for my 7x57 and never had a bullet not do an in and out.
I used to use a plain 139 Hornady spire points and had the same results.
Guess I got lured away by the marketing team LOL.

[416 Ultramag]

I think you just use what works for you. I have seen weird results in most manufactures. I have had 225 gr Barns X not completely penetrate mule deer at 175 yards from a 340wby. 200 grain Sierra from 300win bend like a banana on an elk shoulder. 200 grain accubonds blow up on Moose fired from 300 Ultra... I tend to use what just shoots the best out of my rifle and stick to it, As I have had great results as well from the above manufactures.

[Curly Bill]

Seeing is believing. Last year I had an interesting hit. Long story short was presented with a running texas heart shot and took it. Shooting a 6.5x284 140gr Berger VLD.
Bullet entered the rear quarter about 3" left of the anus and a bit on an angle into the animal. Bullet did what it was designed to do, penetrate 5-6 inches then expand. Substantial damage was done to guts, liver and surprisingly both lungs and even had a small gash in the heart. Was surprised to find decent chunks of jacket further up where the rib cavity starts narrow down to neck on both the left and right side of the buck. Was very pleased with those results however I would not expect the same results after contacting bone or in the same situation.

[KegRiver]

And so we come full circle.

Success stories from all camps, failures or less then optimal results from all camps.

Looks to me like the best advice is;
Practice, practice, practice, use what works for you, and know your limitations and your rifle.cartridges limitations.

Oh yeah, and say hi and shake hands with the guy using what you won't use.

Merry Christmas everyone.

[LKILR]

IMG_0351.jpgIMG_0352.jpg

These are Hornady interbonds retrieved from bull elk. One on the left is .338 225 grain. Shot was quartering towards into closest shoulder and bullet was found against the hide on the other side. It’s the only bullet I’ve ever found from the .338 because all others were pass through. On the right is .270 win. Bullet struck a vertebra right above the shoulder. Both have good weight retention and good expansion.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[double gun]

The partition is the bullet I trust most regardless of which NA big game animal. I also trust the accubond quite a bit and am using it more and more (however it must be said that I’ve not used them on game larger than deer). I’ve used the original Barnes x, the tsx, and the ttsx on game but I never completely trust them, although everything died. They are my third pick but I will use them if the other two options aren’t available .

[KegRiver]

I use normal jacketed bullets. They do all I need them to do.

I don't need a bullet to tear an animal apart or to make two holes.
All I need it to do is for it to take out one major blood vessel or the heart or lungs.

At ranges under 200 yards any jacked hunting bullet appropriate for the cartridge will do what I need to do.

No doubt there are hunters who can hit a dime at 500 paces. I can't and don't feel the need to. So for me, 200 yards or less works and saves me money on gear and ammo.

[JBE]

I reload for my sons 270wsm and use 140 accubonds. Ths year a 6x6 bull elk at about 250 yards with a pass thru. He didn't do 50 yards and down. His big white tail buck went less than 50 yards with a pass thru. This was at 80-100 yards. They work fine for us.
I would like to try the ttsx's but seen one fail to expand last year and has me a bit nervous about using them

[buckbrushoutdoors]

killed a big bull elk at 60 yards this fall with 145eldx from my 270wsm, complete pass through on a almost perfect broadside shot. hit him the heart and he went 30 yards