308 blootering deer
- Thread starter pete evans
- Start date
Howaboutthat
Active Member
Muir said:
If you would use a full metal jacket on a deer YOU should'nt be shooting them! a, its allegal and b, it not morral, You can have the best constructed bullet in the world but shoot a deer in the ass/guts or any animal for that reason and it won't die or at least not for a long time, bullet placement is a 1st total must, but obviously bullet construction is closely followed.
MarkH
Well-Known Member
Hi Muir and njc110381
I don't know the exact distribution. Needless to say if you have 80% weight retention in you bullet after expansion the other 20% is somewhere in the low value meat. Ballistic tips will spread the most contamination.
Only eat blood shot meat if you have to.
Mark
I don't know the exact distribution. Needless to say if you have 80% weight retention in you bullet after expansion the other 20% is somewhere in the low value meat. Ballistic tips will spread the most contamination.
Only eat blood shot meat if you have to.
Mark
Howaboutthat said:
Wow. Did you even read the part in parenthesis or was it obscured by the nostrils flared in righteous indignation??
I guess you read it all but didn't comprehend it. I speak American so it's hard for some to understand. Allow me to clarify: The FMJ reference was hypothetical and all my remarks were predicated on being able to place a bullet where you were aiming. I still stand by what I said. IF I was carrying full metal jackets, there would be places I would aim and places I wouldn't. FMJ's immoral? No more than using a heavily constructed bullet on a 50 pound deer and not deliberately placing it into enough meat to allow adequate expansion. Just my coarse, colonial opinion of course...~Muir
MarkH said:
Is there any evidence to suggest ballistic tips spread more contamination? We're not talking lighter fox/varmint rounds which are highly frangible and splatter on impact. I thought weight retention for BT's designed for heavier game was roughly comparable to lead tipped bullets - or am I miles off the mark?
Howaboutthat
Active Member
Muir said:Howaboutthat said:
Wow. Did you even read the part in parenthesis or was it obscured by the nostrils flared in righteous indignation??
I still stand by what I said. IF I was carrying full metal jackets, there would be places I would aim and places I wouldn't. FMJ's immoral? No more than using a heavily constructed bullet on a 50 pound deer and not deliberately placing it into enough meat to allow adequate expansion. Just my coarse, colonial opinion of course...~Muir
I apoligise, I'm obviously too righteous? Can't read or understand conversation, don't deserve an opinion! never shot an animal in the UK or some of the toughest animals in the world?
Perhaps we will leave it there, as obviously I need to read more about shooting as I obviously don't have a clue!
P.S No Nostrils flared I just thought that all people in the UK used standard softpoints as standard (Premium bullets upto them with respect to meat damage and controlled expansion) and adhered to the law!(No FMJ's) and a softpoint bullet in the correct place, hence I still say correct bullet placement is a 1st must will kill anything on our Island. This is a UK stalking website talking mainly about UK species, and I wanted to give the correct advice as their are obviously people new to the sport on here!
I'm sorry you think I am some kind of hot head that knows nothing, however nothing could be further from the case.
Happy Xmas
WoW!, I thought I'd slipped onto an AR page for a Mo' then 
Howaboutthat
Active Member
finnbear270 said:WoW!, I thought I'd slipped onto an AR page for a Mo' then
No wow's Finnbear270, I just thought I was giving some good advice? I won't be giving any advice or help any longer on this website.
pete evans
Well-Known Member
see ya
Howaboutthat said:Muir said:Howaboutthat said:
Wow. Did you even read the part in parenthesis or was it obscured by the nostrils flared in righteous indignation??
I still stand by what I said. IF I was carrying full metal jackets, there would be places I would aim and places I wouldn't. FMJ's immoral? No more than using a heavily constructed bullet on a 50 pound deer and not deliberately placing it into enough meat to allow adequate expansion. Just my coarse, colonial opinion of course...~Muir
I apoligise, I'm obviously too righteous? Can't read or understand conversation, don't deserve an opinion! never shot an animal in the UK or some of the toughest animals in the world?
Perhaps we will leave it there, as obviously I need to read more about shooting as I obviously don't have a clue!
P.S No Nostrils flared I just thought that all people in the UK used standard softpoints as standard (Premium bullets upto them with respect to meat damage and controlled expansion) and adhered to the law!(No FMJ's) and a softpoint bullet in the correct place, hence I still say correct bullet placement is a 1st must will kill anything on our Island. This is a UK stalking website talking mainly about UK species, and I wanted to give the correct advice as their are obviously people new to the sport on here!
I'm sorry you think I am some kind of hot head that knows nothing, however nothing could be further from the case.
Happy Xmas
Howaboutthat: I apologize for what turned out to be a snippy post. Please write it off to weariness after a long day dealing with idiot coworkers. After reading my original post I can see that the idea that I was speaking hypotheticaly didn't exactly come through.
As I said, the FMJ reference was hypothetical. The point I was making is that so may irresponsible shooters give no consideration the bullet construction when deciding shot placement. I think this is why the 6.5x55 has been taking it on the chin lately: to many heavy (or heavily constructed) bullets peircing ribcages and causing run-offs. The bullets were probably better placed into the shoulder to ensure adequate expansion.
That's where I was going. My apologies to you and those who read my ill thought response. to your post.
Merry Christmas.~Muir
Muir , all I saw until the posts started stretching a bit like a hot core job, was a robust discussion, Merry Christmas! 
Thar
Well-Known Member
75 said:
With most bullet manufactures there is only one difference between a ballistic tipped bullet, and a soft point or hollow point bullet. They have stuck a bit of plastic at the front. The manufactures are using the same jacket irrespective of bullet type. Jacket thickness is a controlling factor in bullet expansion; thin copper jacketed bullet will be more frangible, a thicker jacket will lead to less expansion. Could somebody tell me why all other thinks being equal, the ballistic tip bullet will expand more than another type?
The reason in my opinion Ballistic tips have been given a bad press is because early ones V-Max’s etc were not designed for deer but for varmints, some shooters then used them for a purpose for which they were never intended. Of cause if enough people repeat it over and over again others start to believe it as fact.
As for lead poisoning caused from eating big game, are there any independent peer reviewed medical trials to prove that it is a medical problem? I have ate plenty of small game that has been pepped right though with lead (unavoidable when game is shot with a shotgun) with no problems, and I have never heard of anybody having ill effects from lead poisoning by eating game.
Is this a solution to a problem that does not exists spread around by the purveyors of none lead projectiles?
ATB
Tahr
Slight change of direction here, so apologies, but relevent to the thread, I had relatives who worked most of their lives in the lead works at Chester, where the shot tower is still standing, that supplied ammunition for Nelson's navy & the Crimean war etc, most people who suffered lead poisoning from working full time with lead there, were contaminated by breathing in dust, laden with lead, & not by ingesting lead into the digestive tract, many workers seen on their way home were presumed to be drunk, but in fact were suffering in the later stages of lead poisoning, so eating meat or other game items that have been taken by means of lead projectiles in my own opinion are unlikely to be responsible for death or ilness during the normal life span of humans, in direct opposition to this , wildfowl use a grinding process to digest food, so the lead they ingest is reduced to fine particles, (read dust), the workers who made their living at the leadworks were said to work at "The Deader" 
Howaboutthat
Active Member
Muir said:Howaboutthat said:Muir said:Howaboutthat said:
Wow. Did you even read the part in parenthesis or was it obscured by the nostrils flared in righteous indignation??
I still stand by what I said. IF I was carrying full metal jackets, there would be places I would aim and places I wouldn't. FMJ's immoral? No more than using a heavily constructed bullet on a 50 pound deer and not deliberately placing it into enough meat to allow adequate expansion. Just my coarse, colonial opinion of course...~Muir
I apoligise, I'm obviously too righteous? Can't read or understand conversation, don't deserve an opinion! never shot an animal in the UK or some of the toughest animals in the world?
Perhaps we will leave it there, as obviously I need to read more about shooting as I obviously don't have a clue!
P.S No Nostrils flared I just thought that all people in the UK used standard softpoints as standard (Premium bullets upto them with respect to meat damage and controlled expansion) and adhered to the law!(No FMJ's) and a softpoint bullet in the correct place, hence I still say correct bullet placement is a 1st must will kill anything on our Island. This is a UK stalking website talking mainly about UK species, and I wanted to give the correct advice as their are obviously people new to the sport on here!
I'm sorry you think I am some kind of hot head that knows nothing, however nothing could be further from the case.
Happy Xmas
Howaboutthat: I apologize for what turned out to be a snippy post. Please write it off to weariness after a long day dealing with idiot coworkers. After reading my original post I can see that the idea that I was speaking hypotheticaly didn't exactly come through.
As I said, the FMJ reference was hypothetical. The point I was making is that so may irresponsible shooters give no consideration the bullet construction when deciding shot placement. I think this is why the 6.5x55 has been taking it on the chin lately: to many heavy (or heavily constructed) bullets peircing ribcages and causing run-offs. The bullets were probably better placed into the shoulder to ensure adequate expansion.
That's where I was going. My apologies to you and those who read my ill thought response. to your post.
Merry Christmas.~Muir
I apoligise as well Muir I didnt totally disagree with your comments it just got to be a silly snowball situation.
I hope you have a good Xmas
Regards
Isn't that a hard one? Balancing expansion with bullet weight retention?
By odd chance, I had a conversation with my brother today. He is a fanatical deer hunter with some large tracts of land and many land owner permits. His main quarry is large whitetail bucks; the bigger the better. His main gun is a custom 7x57 with using Speer145 grain bullets. Anyhow, we had a talk about a pair of fellows visiting this fall who were using 308 for deer. Is observations were interesting. One fellow was using light, frangible bullets and shooting the rib cage and lungs out of every deer he shot. I remember going by their cabin and seeinng "blootered" (I like that word) rib cages in the butcher scrap pile. They were shot up badly on both sides. The other fellow used a heavier bullet and used the same shot. Little ruined meat and I guess only had to "look" for one deer which traveled about 70 yards. This is miserable tracking country, littered with draws and brushy creek-bottoms. That one serious runner -that my brother helped track- had left a sufficient blood trail so that Charlie found it easily.
I mentioned this post and discussion and he offered no opinion but just said, "well, anything will work. They're only deer, after all. It just depends on how far you want to shoot them and how fast yiou want them to drop."
I guess there is no good answer.~Muir
By odd chance, I had a conversation with my brother today. He is a fanatical deer hunter with some large tracts of land and many land owner permits. His main quarry is large whitetail bucks; the bigger the better. His main gun is a custom 7x57 with using Speer145 grain bullets. Anyhow, we had a talk about a pair of fellows visiting this fall who were using 308 for deer. Is observations were interesting. One fellow was using light, frangible bullets and shooting the rib cage and lungs out of every deer he shot. I remember going by their cabin and seeinng "blootered" (I like that word) rib cages in the butcher scrap pile. They were shot up badly on both sides. The other fellow used a heavier bullet and used the same shot. Little ruined meat and I guess only had to "look" for one deer which traveled about 70 yards. This is miserable tracking country, littered with draws and brushy creek-bottoms. That one serious runner -that my brother helped track- had left a sufficient blood trail so that Charlie found it easily.
I mentioned this post and discussion and he offered no opinion but just said, "well, anything will work. They're only deer, after all. It just depends on how far you want to shoot them and how fast yiou want them to drop."
I guess there is no good answer.~Muir
enfieldspares
Well-Known Member
Could somebody tell me why all other thinks being equal, the ballistic tip bullet will expand more than another type?
a) The plastic tip creates a cavity in the lead core. Therefore making in effect a hollow point bullet the tip of which has been plugged ostensibly make the bullet more ballistically efficient. The "velopex" principle. Same as was done with the aluminium tip on the 303 Mk VII bullet.
The original "velopex" was a design by Leslie Taylor of Westley Richards.
b) The lead is denser than the plastic. On impact either the plastic will come out - creating instantly a hollow point (see a) above) - or will deform and "stop" and the lead bullet continue to be driven forward over it.
Thus the ballistic tip acts as a wedge increasing the expansion of the lead core. A bronze point bullet with an exposed tip (or exposed aluminium tip as on the old 240 Apex) will also do the same. These were the "ballistic tips" of their day before plastic could be moulded so small.
I am just old enough to remember them being condemned by many if they came across a packet of such things...which even in the late 1960s and early 1970s sometimes were "lurking" on some gun shop shelves!
c) By having a lightweight tip (or as on the 303 Mk VII) the bullet on striking flesh sometimes becomes unstable and will tumble. As the bullet is overlong for its weight with more weight in the base.
Especially so at ranges where the "yaw" of the bullet has not yet settled down. The 303 Mk VII was in fact notorious for this. There is debate as to whether the "tumbling" was an intended or unintended effect of the "velopex" principle.
Plastic (or bronze or aluminium) tips also increase terminal (after impact) "yaw" in the target.
Some sources infer that this instability was in fact desired but that to avoid falling foul of the then new Hague Regulations it was "disguised" as being a way to increase the ballistic efficiency of the bullet.
On the "yaw" issue note for example that inn the handbook for the US Army 1917 .30-06, it lists that a .30 caliber (standard no tip filler FMJ) bullet from that gun would only penetrate 6.3 inches of sand at point-blank range, but at 500 yards, it penetrated 13 inches--more than double. This is because of "yaw". The British "Textbook of Small Arms" lists similar for the 303 Mk VII. But I can't find those figures on the 'net.
a) The plastic tip creates a cavity in the lead core. Therefore making in effect a hollow point bullet the tip of which has been plugged ostensibly make the bullet more ballistically efficient. The "velopex" principle. Same as was done with the aluminium tip on the 303 Mk VII bullet.
The original "velopex" was a design by Leslie Taylor of Westley Richards.
b) The lead is denser than the plastic. On impact either the plastic will come out - creating instantly a hollow point (see a) above) - or will deform and "stop" and the lead bullet continue to be driven forward over it.
Thus the ballistic tip acts as a wedge increasing the expansion of the lead core. A bronze point bullet with an exposed tip (or exposed aluminium tip as on the old 240 Apex) will also do the same. These were the "ballistic tips" of their day before plastic could be moulded so small.
I am just old enough to remember them being condemned by many if they came across a packet of such things...which even in the late 1960s and early 1970s sometimes were "lurking" on some gun shop shelves!
c) By having a lightweight tip (or as on the 303 Mk VII) the bullet on striking flesh sometimes becomes unstable and will tumble. As the bullet is overlong for its weight with more weight in the base.
Especially so at ranges where the "yaw" of the bullet has not yet settled down. The 303 Mk VII was in fact notorious for this. There is debate as to whether the "tumbling" was an intended or unintended effect of the "velopex" principle.
Plastic (or bronze or aluminium) tips also increase terminal (after impact) "yaw" in the target.
Some sources infer that this instability was in fact desired but that to avoid falling foul of the then new Hague Regulations it was "disguised" as being a way to increase the ballistic efficiency of the bullet.
On the "yaw" issue note for example that inn the handbook for the US Army 1917 .30-06, it lists that a .30 caliber (standard no tip filler FMJ) bullet from that gun would only penetrate 6.3 inches of sand at point-blank range, but at 500 yards, it penetrated 13 inches--more than double. This is because of "yaw". The British "Textbook of Small Arms" lists similar for the 303 Mk VII. But I can't find those figures on the 'net.
Jagare
Well-Known Member
All these stories of horrendous meat damage from the .308 with ballistic tips. Strange, used ballitsic Tip 165grn Noslers For years and shot one or two roe and fallow with them. The ballistic tips seemed to kill them Ok and i don't recall any Blootering of the deer.
Nosler used to make a BTsoft point the forrunner to the ballistic tip. shot one or two with those as well. a very nice bullet.
Some deer dropped on the spot but the most ran. Where's the problem with a deer running? Use a bit field craft or get a dog . Finding a runner no problem.
Now i only shoot 180 grn Norma Oryx in the .308 or 158grn Oryx in the 7x57R. A bit to much bullet for roe perhaps but as i said if it runs of i go find it.
Nosler used to make a BTsoft point the forrunner to the ballistic tip. shot one or two with those as well. a very nice bullet.
Some deer dropped on the spot but the most ran. Where's the problem with a deer running? Use a bit field craft or get a dog . Finding a runner no problem.
Now i only shoot 180 grn Norma Oryx in the .308 or 158grn Oryx in the 7x57R. A bit to much bullet for roe perhaps but as i said if it runs of i go find it.
Similar threads
