Where are we up to with the lead ban for rifles?

[Old Waltonian]

No - 222 is a lovely cartridge. Only reason I use a 223 is that I couldn’t find a left handed .222.

That's good to know - thanks.

 

[Old Waltonian]

Ah - God’s very own calibre, obviously a man of taste and distinction!
For me 55gns Sierra Gamekings over a decent charge of Viht N120 for Munties and Hornady 50gns Vmax for foxes do nicely - do not try Vmax 52gns in the triple deuce - they won’t stabilise!
Should you need any advice when you go over to the dark side this is the place to get it.

I like to think so!

This place is certainly proving to be a minefield of information - I'm now wishing that I'd come in from the 'outside' a lot sooner than I did.

 

[Foxyboy43]

I like to think so!

This place is certainly proving to be a minefield of information - I'm now wishing that I'd come in from the 'outside' a lot sooner than I did.

Indeed - far better to ”come in” rather than “come out” on this testosterone-fuelled site - right few dodgy types hanging around in darkened corners….
When you start to dip your reloading toe you should have a look at the attached - if that doesn’t put you off…..

Overview of the Reloading Process - From Spent Case to Loaded Round

This is intended as an overview of the reloading process explaining the steps required to turn spent brass cases into new loaded rounds. It is aimed at those people who are unfamiliar with the reloading process but if any old hands want to chip in with alternative suggestions then please do - I...

www.thestalkingdirectory.co.uk

 

[billy_boyle_2010]

The logic that kinetic energy kills is fundamentally flawed. It was the concensus of thinking in the 1800’s when 12 bore rifle was a small cartridge and 8 and 4 bores were all the rage. But with the introduction of small smokeless powder fueled high velocity rifles this soon fell by the wayside.

With the kinetic energy logic we use 1,000 ft lb min on small deer such as muntjac and roe which have a live weight of 25 to perhaps 50kg.

Yet the likes of the 416 Rigby, 458 Lott are only producing 5,000 ft lbs, yet are perfectly capable of killing buffalo (1,000kg plus) and elephants (5000 kg plus).

Plenty of elephants fell to little rifles such as the 6.5 Mannlicher and 7x57, but using non expanding solid military type bullets. Even today the AK47 with 7.62 x39 is used by poachers to kill plenty.

And bow hunters using arrows kill just as well - albeit much closer range yet a bow produces similar energy to an FAC air rifle.

What actually kills an animal is the projectile severing major arteries and nerves within the body. If you sever major arteries it will need in a moment of two. Impact the Central Nervous System it will collapse on the spot. However a CNS shot will stun but might not kill. You need blood loss to kill.

What is required is sufficient energy to send the projectile right through the body severing all those vitals.

An arrow works by having a very sharp blade which cut as it goes in. But you have to be very careful not to hit shoulder but slip the arrow in behind.

With a bullet, how it penetrates is a function of its design.

A traditional cup and core bullet expands quickly on impact loosing lots of material with small lead fragments blasting into the lungs. The remaining slug - weighing about 50% of its original mass, may or may not penetrate right the way through.

Energy is Mass times Velocity Squared, and as the bullet sheds weight it looses energy, and as it penetrates it looses speed rapidly - hence sheds energy and momentum very quickly.

With a traditional bullet on bigger tougher animals you need to be careful on shot placement as a smaller bullet (eg 243) can easily expand completely within the nearside shoulder of a bigger deer and fail to cause catastrophic damage and a kill. I have had this happen to me. With bigger animals you need to go to bigger tougher constructed bullets that are long for calibre, so you have enough retained mass for penetration.

With a monolithic bullet, the bullet does not usually fragment. It expands into a spinning cutter that cuts right through. It doesn’t shed weight so maintains its energy as it cuts through the body.

All bullets also set up a bow wave - think of a boat - that causes a temporary wound cavity. Ballistic gel tests show a traditional cup and core has large initial wound cavity but quickly tapers off. A monolithic might not have as wide an intertial cavity, but it has a bigger cavity all the way through.

As to bullet density. Copper is 80% density of lead. But traditional lead core bullets are not pure lead. They are a lead core with a copper jacket.

If you take bullets such as the bonded cores and partition bullets the copper content is perhaps 40% weight of the bullet.

So if you look at ballistics you will not a huge level of difference between the energies and trajectories of a traditional lead and a copper monolithic bullets.

Because a monolithic bullet doesn’t break up on impact you can use a lighter bullet going faster which negates need for a heavier for calibre bullet.

We need a different way of thinking - you always do when new technologies arrive. And old thinkings don’t necessarily read across.

But I will admit plenty still think the earth is flat, and the moon is made of cheese, and that lead is not harmful to human health.

Very interesting thanks for your contribution

Ref buffalo and elephants- aren't elephants normally head shot ? All bets are off for head shots aren't they ? And buffalo- don't they normally take several chest shots ?

Agreed re arrows they kill in a v different way and just use a v sharp cutting tool. Their momentum and penetration ability is incredibly good. But bow shots take quite a lot longer to kill don't they ? Unless they hit a major artery/top of the heart- their chest shots take much longer to kill. I have seen those favouring quartering shots- partly so they miss the shoulder bone- and partly so the arrow can do more damage inside by taking a diagnol trajectory. Please correct me if I'm wrong. But where its good practice to wait 10 mins after chest shooting a deer- archers wait 45 mins or so.

Just so I fully understand-

You're saying that the initial wound channel of a lead bullet may be larger, but as it sheds weight- the wound channel becomes smaller and smaller right ? Whereas a copper bullet will likely have a smaller wound channel- but its consistent in size throughout the whole journey as it retains most of its weight ?

You're also saying that energy deposited in a chest shot animal doesn't kill it- only the severing of the major blood vessels does ?

If that's true- would you mind clarifying the below-

Is the only benefit of an expanding bullet that it will cut more blood vessels ? Nothing to do with energy deposit ?

Say we have two situations. Identical in all factors (quarry, shot placement etc etc) other than those I list

1) 3000 ft lbs of energy at bullet entry. Bullet expands to 2cm and retains 100% of its weight. Exits animal with 300 ft lbs of energy remaining.

2) 1000 ft lbs of energy at bullet entry. Bullet expands to 2cm (its a softer material) and retains 100% of its weight. Exits the animal with 30 ft lbs of energy remaining.

(I realise that bullet 2 probably wouldn't exit etc etc. But for the sake of the discussion).

Are you saying that- because the wound channel is the same, and the bullets capacity to severe vessels is the same- that the animal would die equally quickly from both shots ?

 

[User00040]

Energy isn't the primary killing mechanism.

If an animal was to get hit by an Arctic lorry going 50mph (well exceeding any man portable rifle in terms of energy), the initial impact may not be sufficient to cause death. However, the subsequent impact onto tarmac will almost certainly kill it.

If you watch enough dashcam of car-deer impacts, the ones which roll over the bonnet and into the windscreen usually survive the impact (as the cars are designed to save pedestrians).

There is a reason why Outback Oz fits Roo bars to their motors!

 

[billy_boyle_2010]

Energy isn't the primary killing mechanism.

If an animal was to get hit by an Arctic lorry going 50mph (well exceeding any man portable rifle in terms of energy), the initial impact may not be sufficient to cause death. However, the subsequent impact onto tarmac will almost certainly kill it.

If you watch enough dashcam of car-deer impacts, the ones which roll over the bonnet and into the windscreen usually survive the impact (as the cars are designed to save pedestrians).

There is a reason why Outback Oz fits Roo bars to their motors!

I'm happy to be corrected but IMO your interpretation is incorrect.

You're dead right that the animals that roll over the top of the vehicle, are more likely to survive.

But IMO this isn't because they haven't hit the tarmac. IMO this is because 100% of the force hasn't been deposited into the animal. The animal has recieved a glancing blow.

Much the same that a square punch to the chest is more painful than one that glances off, or you're moving away from.

When an animal is thrown backwards after being hit- they have recieved more force- when they hit the tarmac they often roll and the impact is much reduced. IMO its the car hitting them and their body absorbing them that kills, not the landing

 

[Foxyboy43]

Indeed - far better to ”come in” rather than “come out” on this testosterone-fuelled site - right few dodgy types hanging around in darkened corners….
When you start to dip your reloading toe you should have a look at the attached - if that doesn’t put you off…..

Overview of the Reloading Process - From Spent Case to Loaded Round

This is intended as an overview of the reloading process explaining the steps required to turn spent brass cases into new loaded rounds. It is aimed at those people who are unfamiliar with the reloading process but if any old hands want to chip in with alternative suggestions then please do - I...

www.thestalkingdirectory.co.uk

Minor authorological error - it’s the 53 gns Vmax that won’t stabilise.

 

[Heym SR20]

Very interesting thanks for your contribution

Ref buffalo and elephants- aren't elephants normally head shot ? All bets are off for head shots aren't they ? And buffalo- don't they normally take several chest shots ?

Agreed re arrows they kill in a v different way and just use a v sharp cutting tool. Their momentum and penetration ability is incredibly good. But bow shots take quite a lot longer to kill don't they ? Unless they hit a major artery/top of the heart- their chest shots take much longer to kill. I have seen those favouring quartering shots- partly so they miss the shoulder bone- and partly so the arrow can do more damage inside by taking a diagnol trajectory. Please correct me if I'm wrong. But where its good practice to wait 10 mins after chest shooting a deer- archers wait 45 mins or so.

Just so I fully understand-

You're saying that the initial wound channel of a lead bullet may be larger, but as it sheds weight- the wound channel becomes smaller and smaller right ? Whereas a copper bullet will likely have a smaller wound channel- but its consistent in size throughout the whole journey as it retains most of its weight ?

You're also saying that energy deposited in a chest shot animal doesn't kill it- only the severing of the major blood vessels does ?

If that's true- would you mind clarifying the below-

Is the only benefit of an expanding bullet that it will cut more blood vessels ? Nothing to do with energy deposit ?

Say we have two situations. Identical in all factors (quarry, shot placement etc etc) other than those I list

1) 3000 ft lbs of energy at bullet entry. Bullet expands to 2cm and retains 100% of its weight. Exits animal with 300 ft lbs of energy remaining.

2) 1000 ft lbs of energy at bullet entry. Bullet expands to 2cm (its a softer material) and retains 100% of its weight. Exits the animal with 30 ft lbs of energy remaining.

(I realise that bullet 2 probably wouldn't exit etc etc. But for the sake of the discussion).

Are you saying that- because the wound channel is the same, and the bullets capacity to severe vessels is the same- that the animal would die equally quickly from both shots ?

It might and it might not in your cases of 1 and 2. In either of your cases the bullet has gone through the rumen (stomach) and transferred a lot of its energy to all the contents sloshing around. Its likely the shock wave will have expanded, but being elastic the rumen probably wouldn’t split. In many cases a bullet will remain in the rumen having expended all its energy.

Is this going to kill an animal. Probably eventually after rumen contents leak in the abdomen etc.

You could also have a case where the bullet hits the ball and socket joint on the shoulder and fragments and stops. Again all the energy is transferred. Given the number of nerves under the shoulder this will stun the animal and it will drop on the spot, only for it to stagger to its feet as you approach it and it will then lead you on a merry dance over the Scottish hillside till you eventually catch up with it and shoot it in the head - happened to me with a 243 using RWS 100gn soft point bullets.

The only point of energy is for it to be enough to push the projectile through the body tissues severing them as it passes through. The shock wave / temporary cavity may cause additional damage, in particular hitting the nervous system with a tremendous blow.

 

[Heym SR20]

Very interesting thanks for your contribution

Ref buffalo and elephants- aren't elephants normally head shot ? All bets are off for head shots aren't they ? And buffalo- don't they normally take several chest shots ?

Agreed re arrows they kill in a v different way and just use a v sharp cutting tool. Their momentum and penetration ability is incredibly good. But bow shots take quite a lot longer to kill don't they ? Unless they hit a major artery/top of the heart- their chest shots take much longer to kill. I have seen those favouring quartering shots- partly so they miss the shoulder bone- and partly so the arrow can do more damage inside by taking a diagnol trajectory. Please correct me if I'm wrong. But where its good practice to wait 10 mins after chest shooting a deer- archers wait 45 mins or so.

Just so I fully understand-

You're saying that the initial wound channel of a lead bullet may be larger, but as it sheds weight- the wound channel becomes smaller and smaller right ? Whereas a copper bullet will likely have a smaller wound channel- but its consistent in size throughout the whole journey as it retains most of its weight ?

You're also saying that energy deposited in a chest shot animal doesn't kill it- only the severing of the major blood vessels does ?

If that's true- would you mind clarifying the below-

Is the only benefit of an expanding bullet that it will cut more blood vessels ? Nothing to do with energy deposit ?

Say we have two situations. Identical in all factors (quarry, shot placement etc etc) other than those I list

1) 3000 ft lbs of energy at bullet entry. Bullet expands to 2cm and retains 100% of its weight. Exits animal with 300 ft lbs of energy remaining.

2) 1000 ft lbs of energy at bullet entry. Bullet expands to 2cm (its a softer material) and retains 100% of its weight. Exits the animal with 30 ft lbs of energy remaining.

(I realise that bullet 2 probably wouldn't exit etc etc. But for the sake of the discussion).

Are you saying that- because the wound channel is the same, and the bullets capacity to severe vessels is the same- that the animal would die equally quickly from both shots ?

Speed of death is caused primarily by the brain being starved of oxygenated blood.

With a normal chest shot the major blood vessels (aorta etc) connecting the heart to the rest of the animal are severed. Oxygenation blood cannot be pumped to the brain so animal will drop once its brain runs out of oxygen.

Instant paralysis- ie where the deer drops on the spot, is not the same as death. What happens is the Central Nervous System stuns and renders the animal unconscious.

But unless major loss of blood also occurs then it may well not die.

Plenty of people have survived being shot through the head. They often suffer long term effects, but they are not dead.

Severe a major artery in the leg, in the chest or the neck then you will dead pretty quickly.

And Ref Buffalo and Elephants. I have no direct experience, but know PHs who cull them professionally and have shot plenty. Brain shots on elephants are tricky. Mostly elephants and buff are shot through the engine room. And mostly the first shot will be fatal.

However, both don’t like being irritated by hunters with guns. Unlike deer, which on being hit will run off and flee only to pile up dead 10 or perhaps 50 or 100 yards away, Elephant and Buffalo will turn and attack.

Now given that you probably only 20 yards when you shoot, and you now have a few tons of grumpy animal that wants to take you with him to the happy hunting grounds, standard practice is to keep shooting till it drops.

And you never know whether your first shot was a killing shot, so best put another one to be on the safe side.

This also makes the safari that much more exciting. But most PHs when they are controlling animals will generally use one shot in the right place.

 

[25 Sharps]

The logic that kinetic energy kills is fundamentally flawed. It was the concensus of thinking in the 1800’s when 12 bore rifle was a small cartridge and 8 and 4 bores were all the rage. But with the introduction of small smokeless powder fueled high velocity rifles this soon fell by the wayside.

With the kinetic energy logic we use 1,000 ft lb min on small deer such as muntjac and roe which have a live weight of 25 to perhaps 50kg.

Yet the likes of the 416 Rigby, 458 Lott are only producing 5,000 ft lbs, yet are perfectly capable of killing buffalo (1,000kg plus) and elephants (5000 kg plus).

Plenty of elephants fell to little rifles such as the 6.5 Mannlicher and 7x57, but using non expanding solid military type bullets. Even today the AK47 with 7.62 x39 is used by poachers to kill plenty.

And bow hunters using arrows kill just as well - albeit much closer range yet a bow produces similar energy to an FAC air rifle.

What actually kills an animal is the projectile severing major arteries and nerves within the body. If you sever major arteries it will need in a moment of two. Impact the Central Nervous System it will collapse on the spot. However a CNS shot will stun but might not kill. You need blood loss to kill.

What is required is sufficient energy to send the projectile right through the body severing all those vitals.

An arrow works by having a very sharp blade which cut as it goes in. But you have to be very careful not to hit shoulder but slip the arrow in behind.

With a bullet, how it penetrates is a function of its design.

A traditional cup and core bullet expands quickly on impact loosing lots of material with small lead fragments blasting into the lungs. The remaining slug - weighing about 50% of its original mass, may or may not penetrate right the way through.

Energy is Mass times Velocity Squared, and as the bullet sheds weight it looses energy, and as it penetrates it looses speed rapidly - hence sheds energy and momentum very quickly.

With a traditional bullet on bigger tougher animals you need to be careful on shot placement as a smaller bullet (eg 243) can easily expand completely within the nearside shoulder of a bigger deer and fail to cause catastrophic damage and a kill. I have had this happen to me. With bigger animals you need to go to bigger tougher constructed bullets that are long for calibre, so you have enough retained mass for penetration.

With a monolithic bullet, the bullet does not usually fragment. It expands into a spinning cutter that cuts right through. It doesn’t shed weight so maintains its energy as it cuts through the body.

All bullets also set up a bow wave - think of a boat - that causes a temporary wound cavity. Ballistic gel tests show a traditional cup and core has large initial wound cavity but quickly tapers off. A monolithic might not have as wide an intertial cavity, but it has a bigger cavity all the way through.

As to bullet density. Copper is 80% density of lead. But traditional lead core bullets are not pure lead. They are a lead core with a copper jacket.

If you take bullets such as the bonded cores and partition bullets the copper content is perhaps 40% weight of the bullet.

So if you look at ballistics you will not a huge level of difference between the energies and trajectories of a traditional lead and a copper monolithic bullets.

Because a monolithic bullet doesn’t break up on impact you can use a lighter bullet going faster which negates need for a heavier for calibre bullet.

We need a different way of thinking - you always do when new technologies arrive. And old thinkings don’t necessarily read across.

But I will admit plenty still think the earth is flat, and the moon is made of cheese, and that lead is not harmful to human health.

You are wrong on the ‘energy’ calculation as the answer is decided by a constant and purely guessing (incorrectly) on a bonded bullet being copper. Some mono metal bullets also fragment on, or close after impact.

By and large your post is just inaccurate, much like copper .22 rounds!!

 

[Old Waltonian]

Indeed - far better to ”come in” rather than “come out” on this testosterone-fuelled site - right few dodgy types hanging around in darkened corners….
When you start to dip your reloading toe you should have a look at the attached - if that doesn’t put you off…..

Overview of the Reloading Process - From Spent Case to Loaded Round

This is intended as an overview of the reloading process explaining the steps required to turn spent brass cases into new loaded rounds. It is aimed at those people who are unfamiliar with the reloading process but if any old hands want to chip in with alternative suggestions then please do - I...

www.thestalkingdirectory.co.uk

I should have seen that one coming! Better to perhaps keep quiet about any excess of testosterone, however, just in case there's someone out there looking for an excuse to ban us.

Thanks for the 'heads up' on the Reloading tutorial...that's going to come in mighty handy.

 

[billy_boyle_2010]

It might and it might not in your cases of 1 and 2. In either of your cases the bullet has gone through the rumen (stomach) and transferred a lot of its energy to all the contents sloshing around. Its likely the shock wave will have expanded, but being elastic the rumen probably wouldn’t split. In many cases a bullet will remain in the rumen having expended all its energy.

Is this going to kill an animal. Probably eventually after rumen contents leak in the abdomen etc.

You could also have a case where the bullet hits the ball and socket joint on the shoulder and fragments and stops. Again all the energy is transferred. Given the number of nerves under the shoulder this will stun the animal and it will drop on the spot, only for it to stagger to its feet as you approach it and it will then lead you on a merry dance over the Scottish hillside till you eventually catch up with it and shoot it in the head - happened to me with a 243 using RWS 100gn soft point bullets.

The only point of energy is for it to be enough to push the projectile through the body tissues severing them as it passes through. The shock wave / temporary cavity may cause additional damage, in particular hitting the nervous system with a tremendous blow.

I'm confused- why has the bullet gone through the rumen ?

My examples of 1 & 2 were of lung shot deer. Side on. Let's assume that it entered and exited as desired. But doesn't clip the heart/aorta.

So can a bullet with more energy kill more quickly ? Does the hydrostatic shock (which presumably is greater internally if the energy deposited internally is greater) increase the chance of nearby vessels from hemorrhaging?

Your sentence about energy just being there to push the bullet forwards is interesting, and certainly correlates with everything you have said

 

[billy_boyle_2010]

Speed of death is caused primarily by the brain being starved of oxygenated blood.

With a normal chest shot the major blood vessels (aorta etc) connecting the heart to the rest of the animal are severed. Oxygenation blood cannot be pumped to the brain so animal will drop once its brain runs out of oxygen.

Instant paralysis- ie where the deer drops on the spot, is not the same as death. What happens is the Central Nervous System stuns and renders the animal unconscious.

But unless major loss of blood also occurs then it may well not die.

Plenty of people have survived being shot through the head. They often suffer long term effects, but they are not dead.

Severe a major artery in the leg, in the chest or the neck then you will dead pretty quickly.

And Ref Buffalo and Elephants. I have no direct experience, but know PHs who cull them professionally and have shot plenty. Brain shots on elephants are tricky. Mostly elephants and buff are shot through the engine room. And mostly the first shot will be fatal.

However, both don’t like being irritated by hunters with guns. Unlike deer, which on being hit will run off and flee only to pile up dead 10 or perhaps 50 or 100 yards away, Elephant and Buffalo will turn and attack.

Now given that you probably only 20 yards when you shoot, and you now have a few tons of grumpy animal that wants to take you with him to the happy hunting grounds, standard practice is to keep shooting till it drops.

And you never know whether your first shot was a killing shot, so best put another one to be on the safe side.

This also makes the safari that much more exciting. But most PHs when they are controlling animals will generally use one shot in the right place.

V interesting and makes sense thank you

 

[Acm]

Plenty lead in supposedly 'lead free' ammo... start at the primer and work your way up... trades description act anyone?

'Non-toxic' won't fit the bill either, since any metal will be toxic to humans in sufficient quantities.

Not with the federal gear slash, industry first lead free primer!

 

[User00040]

Not with the federal gear slash, industry first lead free primer!

I am aware:



Shot about 50 deer with those, gave up when one broke the shoulder of a Roe but failed to enter the chest cavity.

Caught up with the deer thanks to the dog but stopped using after that.

 

[Jh1986]

I am aware:

View attachment 330587

Shot about 50 deer with those, gave up when one broke the shoulder of a Roe but failed to enter the chest cavity.

Caught up with the deer thanks to the dog but stopped using after that.

Given that's basically all my shop stock....doh

 

[User00040]

Given that's basically all my shop stock....doh

It's just too slow, almost certainly not 'deer legal'.

Grouped well but dropped like a stone, a 270 with 22" barrel should not have over 9" of drop at 200m when zeroed at 100m (forgive the metric/imperial transgressions)

 

[Jh1986]

It's just too slow, almost certainly not 'deer legal'.

Grouped well but dropped like a stone, a 270 with 22" barrel should not have over 9" of drop at 200m when zeroed at 100m (forgive the metric/imperial transgressions)

I tested my 200m drop on it last time out zeroing. 9-10cm for me. 308, 20" barrel

I've got 100 rounds of the stuff but stock round here is the issue so I'll have to crack on with reloading I suppose

 

[Acm]

It's just too slow, almost certainly not 'deer legal'.

Grouped well but dropped like a stone, a 270 with 22" barrel should not have over 9" of drop at 200m when zeroed at 100m (forgive the metric/imperial transgressions)

I’ve used 60 rounds of it in .30-06 to tide me over whilst I didn’t have time to reload. It was fine, but burnt a bit dirty. Interesting to hear you’ve had issues, it’s some going to shoot a roe with a .270 and it be anything less than lethal.

 

[Heym SR20]

I'm confused- why has the bullet gone through the rumen ?

My examples of 1 & 2 were of lung shot deer. Side on. Let's assume that it entered and exited as desired. But doesn't clip the heart/aorta.

So can a bullet with more energy kill more quickly ? Does the hydrostatic shock (which presumably is greater internally if the energy deposited internally is greater) increase the chance of nearby vessels from hemorrhaging?

Your sentence about energy just being there to push the bullet forwards is interesting, and certainly correlates with everything you have said

With the lungs you have a large number of very small arteries flowing through the lung tissue. Lungs are a spongy mass full of air. Both often provide little resistance to a bullet, this bullets often don’t expand well, especially if of stout construction.

With a lung shot the animal will die once the blood pressure lowers, and obviously the more damage, the more blood vessels are cut the quicker the bleed out. But in my experience lung shots either result in the animal standing stock still and swaying back and forth, eventually blood comes out of its nose and it falls over, or they run a good long way and then collapse dead - both after lungs have bled out.

Lung shots where the meatsaver shot. A nice soft fast bullet such an SST or a 243, 25-06 or 270 softpoint works pretty well. But you generally get a running animal. Put the same bullet further forward on a bigger animal and you loose a shoulder’s worth of meat.

I don’t like lung shots. There is little chance of taking out the nervous system and getting a collapse on the spot. I much prefer centre of body just under shoulder blade, ideally with animal slightly quartering away. I shot a mid sized stag the other night with this shot placement his head was down. Bullet entered through the back of the nearside shoulder, took out the aorta just above the heart, then smashed through the spinal column at the front of thoracic cavity and I found just under the skin on the far side.

Bullet is a 7mm 140gn RWS HIT copper monolithic. It arrived with 2,700 J of energy (according to box figures). Collapsed on the spot and kicked for a few moments - and of course it was on the edge of a ditch so fell into it - butchering I lost about 2” from the neck body junction.

And no issue with putting out the remains fir the eagles and other critters.