Can we all agree on this... But likely disagree

[Big Grey Wolf]

Like the story of my ex father in law. Natives in Peace Country would ask to borrow his fathers old lever action, he would give them half dozen shells.. Natives would give 5 back and Say "Only want to shoot one moose"

[Stinky Buffalo]

Originally Posted by Bushleague

Yeah, my own impression is that generally, more velocity tends to do more meat damage rather than a bigger caliber, all other things equal.

That's something that I was wondering about as well, based on my observations over the last couple of years.

[GoneOutdoors]

Originally Posted by Bushleague

This. Just sort of seems like the type of mostly pointless pontificating that someone relatively new to guns and hunting would be into... "Just watched my 3rd moose go down, and all those gun writers are full of BS!" Just the vibe that I get from this whole discussion.

We've all been there.

Join the conversation or dont... You can jump into any of the threads and point out how stupid or dumb the points are.

In sticking with comparisons - if you're speaking of my experience and expertise in compared to 58thecat... You're right - i'd be a young pup to him - likely the same age as his kids. But still have 30 years hunting and shooting. But make sure you make anyone new to the sport not welcome here. You're doing a fine job.

Stick with the spirit and idea of the conversation. I'll just assume you shoot a creedmore or prc...


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Smoky buck]

Originally Posted by Bushleague

Yeah, my own impression is that generally, more velocity tends to do more meat damage rather than a bigger caliber, all other things equal.

The other tendancy I've noticed over the years is that rounds using bullets more or less designed specifically for that round (IE 30-30, .243, 303 Brit, the .270 and 6.5's until recently) often tend to do more damage, but also tend to punch above their weight in terms of clean kills. The popular .30 and 7mm cal rounds, on the other hand, have been long been all over the place in terms of velocity, and so is bullet construction for those calibers.

With the .303 Brit, for example, I have never seen "premium" factory loads, despite widespread use on the largest of game species I've never heard any complaints of bullet failure. One way or the other.

Yeah I am just simple and go by if I want to eat a part of an animal I just don’t send a bullet through it

When it comes down to it I don’t get crazy with my caliber choices. As long as it’s comfortable to shoot, accurate and not a 6.5 creedmore odds are I would hunt with it

[fishnguy]

Whether the animal runs or not after being shot probably also depends on the animal’s state of mind when it is shot in the vitals since the nervous system still keeps working for some time after the event. That may be why whitetail and, as some say, elk may run more often: they are generally more “alert” than moose and mule deer. Given a good shock to the central nervous system, they all drop the same. Every animal I shot in the heart through the chest (ie front) never made a step from where they stood, some dropped before I even realized they did, others stood a while and then tipped over, but never moved otherwise. That kind of shot likely comes with quite a bit of shock heading up the neck, so the animal drops where it stands, the same way it does when properly shot in the head or neck. Every animal that ran after being shot broadside that I saw was ready to bounce any moment prior, so they ran until they died; literally, they died while running, unless you define death as stoppage of heart because then they ran while dying and after being dead. Except for the ones that were shot poorly. An animal with one lung collapsed would live significantly longer than animal with both lungs gone. The same is true for an animal with shot liver, etc. As long as there is supply of oxygen (blood) and no damage to the nervous system, the animal would try to survive. Once that stops, the animal dies quickly. I had a whitetail run with no heart and collapsed lungs about 70-80 yards (downhill, then uphill, and downhill again), which was probably the longest I saw an animal run without the blood supply. Another whitetail ran about 40 yards uphill and then straight in the bush in similar circumstances but with one lung crushed (which matters little when there is nothing to pump blood to the brain). One muley doe did close to what the first whitetail did, running a very long distance in the field towards the bush (she would actually jump off a cliff if she didn’t collapse for another second or two). These animals were extremely alert when the shots were taken. One muley buck was also alert, but he made a circle in the spot he was standing, then almost flipped on the spot and fell dead. One bull elk tried to get up but couldn’t for, what seemed like, the longest time before it was shot again in the head. And so on.

Long story short, if the vitals are shot, the calibre doesn’t matter, no animal will survive. If the heart is shot, the animal will not run more than 100 yards. It may run a little longer if both lungs are shot, but the heart keeps pumping; even longer if the liver is shot, etc. But they all will die because damage to those organs is not compatible with life (without urgent medical intervention, as there is with humans). So shot placement is key and this post is a long version of that statement, lol.

The only significant meat damage that I see is when a bone is touched. In those situations there could be a big mess. Otherwise, there is little meat to discard. But I never shot any of those “explosive” bullets. For this reason, I will likely never shoot a whitetail buck in the neck because there is so much good meat on it. A doe, on the other hand, I might (if that is the best I can do and usually isn’t the case) because I can’t say it matters.

[Bushleague]

Originally Posted by Smoky buck

Yeah I am just simple and go by if I want to eat a part of an animal I just don’t send a bullet through it

When it comes down to it I don’t get crazy with my caliber choices. As long as it’s comfortable to shoot, accurate and not a 6.5 creedmore odds are I would hunt with it

Yeah, about the least important feature of a rifle is whatever its chambered in, IMO. Short of ridiculous extremes.

Mostly to simplify keeping a good float of ammo these days, almost all the rifles in my safe are either chambered in .270Win or 30-06. I regard both rounds as interchangable, I basically just use whichever round is easyest to find on any given year.

[fishnguy]

I should have read more replies before posting, haha. I’d post a few words more. For example, bears. I’ve shot a few and saw a few more shot. Most took a very long time to die even though all were dropped in the spot. You give them time, come over and it is still breathing. You give them more and there are still signs of life. Not sure why that is. Maybe shot placement wasn’t on point in most of those cases. Again, common sense suggests an animal cannot live without functioning vital organs, this is just fact of life. But maybe some animals’ hearts keep beating longer when lungs are shot, for example. Even the central nervous system. None of those bears got up and run though.

Originally Posted by GoneOutdoors

I'll just assume you shoot a creedmore or prc...

Ok, this is funny. Because of how far it is from truth, haha. Not that there is anything wrong with either of the mentioned calibres.

[Bushleague]

Originally Posted by Stinky Buffalo

That's something that I was wondering about as well, based on my observations over the last couple of years.

I've shot a few deer with a .50 cal patched round ball, can basically eat right up to the hole. The 180 grain 30-06 loads that I use damage less meat than the 150 grain .270 bullets I favor... but I do find that the .270 loads tend to produce more dramatic results on deer, on moose or elk its about equal.

[Bushleague]

Originally Posted by fishnguy

I should have read more replies before posting, haha. I’d post a few words more. For example, bears. I’ve shot a few and saw a few more shot. Most took a very long time to die even though all were dropped in the spot. You give them time, come over and it is still breathing. You give them more and there are still signs of life. Not sure why that is. Maybe shot placement wasn’t on point in most of those cases. Again, common sense suggests an animal cannot live without functioning vital organs, this is just fact of life. But maybe some animals’ hearts keep beating longer when lungs are shot, for example. Even the central nervous system. None of those bears got up and run though.


Ok, this is funny. Because of how far it is from truth, haha. Not that there is anything wrong with either of the mentioned calibres.

Yeah, but I did deserve it, lol. Sorry, woke up hurting from head to toe after doing a brutal deer drag yesterday and I must have been feeling a bit dickish this morning.

One thing I've found about kills is that almost any animal dies quicker if the hunter stay's out of their line of sight. It seems to me that even in an animal split millimeters from being dead, the sight of a predator can keep the adrenaline flowing enough to keep them clinging to life.

A few years back a friend lung shot a deer that ran a short distance and then dropped, even on close inspection it seemed stone dead, we were talking for a few minuets when it started kicking... He shot it in the neck. He was about to start dressing it about 5 minuets later and it started kicking again. He was about to shoot it again when I suggested we just get out of its line of sight and give it some space... you could visibly see the deer relax, it blew one last breath out the bullet hole (odd because it didnt seem to be breathing when we were standing there), and that was it.

I've seen this same performance played many times, to varying degrees, so my own policy is that so long as I'm absolutely sure the animal has a hole through its lungs, I stay back and just give it some time rather than aproaching it.

[CNP]

For 20 years I hunted solely with a bow. I've taken many moose with a bow and concur with the OP that moose die the easiest when compared to deer or elk. Moose don't travel far when double lung'd with an arrow.

Antelope that I've arrowed ran the furthest, fortunately you can see forever on the prairie

Now that I've forsaken archery for rifle hunting, I've had to retrain myself on where to place my shot. Bow hunters shoot behind the shoulder, optimally through ribs and a double lung pass through. A shoulder shot usually results in less than adequate penetration.

If I want an animal to drop where it was shot I bang on the shoulder. This is useful when there is a deep coulee or other obstacle that you do not want the animal to run to. This of course results in more damaged meat than a through the ribs lung shot.

If there are no obstacles and I can see forever than why not place a bullet behind the shoulder and damage less meat?

A well placed shoulder shot usually results in a bang flop and a well placed behind the shoulder lung shot usually results in tracking the animal.

[Prairiewolf]

Originally Posted by Mountain Guy

Its not the calibre that causes meat damage.
Don't know how many times I've heard guys saying '' that gun is too big for deer..it'll destroy all the meat''..
A 243 with an exploding bullet will do way more damage than a 300 with a mono

160 grain Nosler Partitions in each case. I did not recover either bullet so cannot comment on how much weight they retained. I agree with your comment though - a big contributor, but energy at time of impact has to play a factor as well.

[Dogmatixx]

For hunting the nest test of a bullet/cartridge is a bull elk.

I like 12 gauge slugs on bears…try to avoid them if packing anything smaller

[jqsk]

Originally Posted by fishnguy

Whether the animal runs or not after being shot probably also depends on the animal’s state of mind when it is shot in the vitals since the nervous system still keeps working for some time after the event. That may be why whitetail and, as some say, elk may run more often: they are generally more “alert” than moose and mule deer.

I think this is a huge part of the puzzle that is often omitted from discussions about the stopping power of various cartridges. It's something I'm trying to keep in mind when I'm presented with a shot; noting the animal's apparent mental state can prepare me for how it might react to the impact.

I also believe that the muzzle report can have a significant effect on the animal. Louder rifles may trigger an auditory reflex to spook it.

This podcast from Hornady provides an informative discussion of terminal ballistics and animal death.


Cheers

[fat cat]

being a guide and outfitter in Alberta and B.C. i have seen a lot of animals shot, and have shot a lot myself. i recently was on a moose hunt with my grandson and he shot a bull moose at 80 yards with a 270. the moose did not drop right there, and , it brought up concerns to me. moose are big, and also easy to kill. i wondered why it didn't drop at shot. i know it would have dropped if i would have shot it with my old 7mm. i blamed it on bullet choice, because i know calibre was not at fault. i have watched so many animals shot, with so many calibers, i do believe a moose is not the animal to be used in judging the the end result in calibers.