# ballistic tips for deer



## KEN WES. (Dec 13, 2005)

has anyone used ballistic tips for deer. I loaded up some 130 gr ones for my sons 270 win. but after seeing what they did to the deer that my nephews ones did to both deer he shot this year I wonder. 
the spike he shot was going away and was hit downward in the backbone and had 2 big exit holes through both front shoulders causing alot of meat damage. I thought it was because of the initall heavy bone hit. but his broadside rib area hit on his 8-pt had a 4-5" entrance hole and no exit but lots of fragements all over.


----------



## bigsablemike (Apr 26, 2005)

i shot one with a Winchester supreme ballistic silver tip.7mm 150 grn.
hit it base of neck/shoulder facing me at 25 yds.there was a pencil hole going in,its heart was reduced to a sliver,lungs were goo,it broke two ribs on the offside and lodged under the hide.i forgot to recover the bullet before i took it to the butcher,but it felt pretty much intact.it flopped over backwards and twitched his leg a couple times,that was it.at such close range going about 3200fps i think that bullet performed great.dont know what bullets your shooting.

i just reread your post.
it had 4/5 inch entrance wound?i cannot envision that being able to happen.


----------



## KLR (Sep 2, 2006)

BT's are designed to rapidly expand, and yes they tend to do alot of damage. I've used 140 & 150 in 7mm and 150 in 30/06- pretty much same story with all deer from 80 to 400 yds. I never measured the entrance hole, but I remember shooting a doe quartering towards at about 85 yds. Lined her up just forward of the shoulder, at the base of her neck. Piled up DRT and she literaly had a fist sized hole at the POI and no exit :SHOCKED:


----------



## Rustyaxecamp (Mar 1, 2005)

Great bullets for deer IMHO. I have killed deer with BTs in 7x57, 30-06, 308 and 300 WBY. There are typically 2 different schools for bullet performance. The cup/core and BT group and then there is the Partition and Barnes folks.

In my mind (and there as many holes in this theory as there is in my mind...), a bullet should dump all it's "energy" into the deer, meaning, I want to find the bullet (or pieces thereof) just under the skin on the far side of the critter I shoot. Why waste "energy" blowing through the deer and into the cedar tree behind it?

My 3 deer rifles for this year are loaded with Nosler Solid Base (a ballistic tip with a lead tip,not plastic), Speer Flat points, and Hornady Interlocks.


----------



## Rustyaxecamp (Mar 1, 2005)

Also, with regards to meat damage, just don't shoot them where the meat is...


----------



## rzdrmh (Dec 30, 2003)

i believe ballistic tips are a very poor choice for deer.


----------



## Munsterlndr (Oct 16, 2004)

Generally ballistic tips work as intended but they have some limitations. If you are using a high velocity caliber (over 3000 fps) and you shoot at something at close range (under 50 yards) BT's have the potential to spectacularly fragment if you hit bone, without getting much penetration. The deer will usually die but you may have a long tracking job with no exit hole to leave a good blood trail. Personally, I like them for out west, where shots tend to be longer range and where they improve the ballistics for long range shooting and enough velocity has been bled off so that they perform as intended. If they work correctly they will anchor a deer in it's tracks and cause massive internal damage.

For most Michigan hunting I prefer plain old hornady spire points in most whitetail calibers. Nothing fancy but they get the job done and they are a lot less expensive given the recent increases in the cost of bullets.


----------



## UPhiker (Jul 13, 2008)

rzdrmh said:


> i believe ballistic tips are a very poor choice for deer.


 Why? They are made for deersized hunting.


----------



## GrtWhtHntr (Dec 2, 2003)

I have shot deer with 150 grain BT's out of my .308 from 30 yards out to 200 yards. Every deer has died quickly and all shots were pass throughs. I've never seen an entrance wound that was larger than caliber. My exits are about the size of a quarter.


----------



## Violator22 (Nov 10, 2004)

Yes, they are made for Deer, and yes, they do a lot of meat damage as they are designed for maximum mushroom, which rips hell out of meat, I use Barnes TSX's on every thing from Elk on down. I shoot 150 grainers from my 30-06 and and 150 gr FN out of my 303 Sav. My 25-06 uses 100 gr bullets, they leave a small hole going in, a small hole going out, and turn everything in the chest cavity to jello. I love 'em. But hey, everyone has a bullet choice, if you are really going for the least amount of meat damage, just get a 45-70 and shoot 400 grainers at about 1400 fps, will knock the stuffin' out of what ever you shoot and cause minimal damage other than the hole through the critter. Les


----------



## Quack Addict (Aug 10, 2006)

rzdrmh said:


> i believe ballistic tips are a very poor choice for deer.


I'll second that statement.

I have shot four deer with 150gr Ballistic Tips from a 30-06 and got a range of results. One deer (70 yard shot) ended with a gaping hole all the way through it's chest cavity that you could put your arm through without getting blood on your sleeve, deer fell in its tracks. The second deer (50 yard shot), also shot in the chest, had a smallish (compared to the other) entrance wound, no exit but the contents of the chest cavity were jello, deer ran 20-30 yards. The third deer (30 yard shot) had a small entrance wound (neck shot), no exit wound, deer fell in its tracks. Fourth deer was a shot to the chest (~40 yards), I tracked it for at least a 1/2 mile through thickets before I lost his trail (tracks got covered by falling snow, blood trail petered out) - never found the deer - I have no idea what happened. That was several years ago and it still tears me up thinking about it. I have not used BT's for deer hunting since, and will not in the future.

I have heard a lot of guys rave about the Nosler Accubonds. Not sure if there are any factory loads available with these bullets but they are similar in shape to BT's, but a far better constructed bullet in comparison.


----------



## codybear (Jun 27, 2002)

Like any bullet, your going to get different results everytime depending on the shot.. I used to use a .243 with balistic tips in 100gr and killed every deer I shot with it and none of them ever ran far.. Most were front shoulder shots and it exited out the other side too. I have since handed that gun down to my son and now use a .308... I have also shot a deer using 30-30 with soft tipped 150gr load and the bullet deflected off the shoulder and came out its @ss and the deer ran over 100yds with very little blood in the snow. You cant base a bullets capabilites on only one or 2 results.. 

CB


----------



## Violator22 (Nov 10, 2004)

Here is what a Barnes TSX does to the deer. Les
Barnes 100 gr TSX Exit









Barnes 100 gr TSX Entrance









Barnes 150 gr FN TSX Exit









Barnes 150 gr FN TSX Entrance


----------



## GrtWhtHntr (Dec 2, 2003)

A lot of people seem to have a wide variety of results with ballistic tips. The BT's I'm using are Noslers in Federal premium ammo. Are there other brands of BT's? If so, is that the reason for the difference in results?


----------



## Rustyaxecamp (Mar 1, 2005)

Nosler makes Ballistic Tips

Hornady makes Super Shock Tips

Those are the 2 thin wall plastic tipped ones I am aware of.

I wouldn't hesitate to use either on whitetails at normal velocities / weights.


----------



## Rootsy (Nov 1, 2006)

In my 280 Remington... No more... not after poor results on 2 deer... in my 35 Whelen AI... Yes... But no longer made... They turned the 225 gr .358 BT into the Accubond.

Shot a big doe, 125 yards, from the top of a ridge, slightly angling away. 150 gr BT from the 280 Remington. Hit a rib going in, turned abruptly left and followed the rib cage to the shoulder. Split the rib cage all the way up, sliced a lung open and ruined the left shoulder. Never found anything but pieces of the bullet... She ran 40 yds or so before expiring... Did the job but it was messy.

The 225 BT from the 35 was a tough bullet... perfect for deer...


----------



## rjg30 (Apr 17, 2007)

Velocity is a big factor. On the Nosler site...they list the max velicity for optimum bullet performance. Ballistic Tips or Accubonds will not perform well on deer if they are in a load that exceeds the max velocity specs. For example...A 300 UM load at 3400 fps.


----------



## KEN WES. (Dec 13, 2005)

I was just wondering if this was a normal type result from this bullet. I know he's shot other deer with these before but did remember see such damage. I do agree that using up all the bullets energy in the animal is probably better but I personally like a bullet that mushrooms and passes through.[ I think its a faster blood trail ]
the ones he was using were winchesters I think. the ones I loaded should be around 2800fps.
I shoot 165 gr hornady interlocks, 100 bullets vs 50 b-tips same price.
but then his deer went 20-30 yds vs 75 for mine this year but mine was 150+ yd shot. but no 2 deer act the same when hit.


----------



## krt (Nov 5, 2001)

Violator22 said:


> they leave a small hole going in, a small hole going out, and turn everything in the chest cavity to jello. Les


This was my experience with the 140 gr handloads out to over 300 yds. I was never happy with the blood trail, but the deer usually went less that 100 yds. The problem was figuring out exactly where they were standing when I shot.
I switch to accubonds and have been very happy ever since.


----------



## gashogford (Jul 5, 2008)

I use 180 grain ballistic tips i my 300 wsm. The deer appear to be struck by LIGHTENING


----------



## rzdrmh (Dec 30, 2003)

there is a difference between controlled expansion and bullet frangibility.

one cannot assume how a bullet will perform based upon looks.

the "ballistic tip" was originally developed by nosler.

nosler makes a ballistic tip hunting bullet, and a ballistic tip varmint bullet. the former uses the plastic tip for controlled expansion, while the latter uses the plastic tip for violent, explosive expansion.

the two will perform drastically different on deer.

"ballistic tip" descriptions are often times used to describe the varmint style bullet that violently and uncontrollably expands in an animal. i would not use these bullets on deer, for various reasons.

hornady, barnes, nosler, etc - just about everyone makes a plastic tip bullet - many of which are superior performers on medium and large game. the barnes tsx is hardly a bullet that i would worry about having uncontrolled expansion, and would gladly hunt most anything with it.


----------



## rzdrmh (Dec 30, 2003)

KEN WES. said:


> I do agree that using up all the bullets energy in the animal is probably better but I personally like a bullet that mushrooms and passes through.[ I think its a faster blood trail ]
> the ones he was using were winchesters I think.


"dumping the energy" into the deer is a fallacy. expansion that sacrifices an exit wound is undesirable - mainly because it's unpredictable. a bullet that passes through an animal will always provide near immediate terminal results, given the hunter does his part to ensure its flight through the vitals.



KEN WES. said:


> I shoot 165 gr hornady interlocks, 100 bullets vs 50 b-tips same price.
> but then his deer went 20-30 yds vs 75 for mine this year but mine was 150+ yd shot. but no 2 deer act the same when hit.


your 165 grain hornady interlocks are a wonderfully constructed bullet. i would use them without hesitation on deer and elk.


----------



## old professor (Oct 26, 2008)

I have given up on Ballistic Tips for the same reason you sited. Too destructice and prone to blowing up and not providing an exit hole. There two schools of thought on whether of not a bullet should produce an exit wound. I fall in to the group that wants an exit hole - more likely to produce a good blood trail. BTs certainly will kill well but with out snow for tracking, recovery can be a problem. I just butchered a deer that had been shot in the rib cage with BTs in .243 Win. Big hole going in, not a single mark of any kind on the opposite chest wall!


----------



## TrekJeff (Sep 7, 2007)

Too many people trying to become snipers rather than hunters. A buddy of mine shoots a 7Mag ballistic Hornady round. He loves it for the range as he sit's in the center of a corn field and normally takes 200-300 yard shots. He's very good at what he does and the deer he kills have great wound channels...BUT when we went hunting on a trac of property south of Cadillac, in regular Michigan woods (50-100 yard shoot), the deer he hit looked as if a arrow had entered and blew up internally in it's shoulder. He had so much velocity that the round just desinagrated, literally shredding the opposite shoulder with no exit wound. 
Take a round that will give great expansion and maintain it's weight, you get both a great wound channel with an exit and knock down power. Untill I get the opportunity to reload and experiment, the SJSP like the corlok will be loaded.


----------



## Ranger Ray (Mar 2, 2003)

Munsterlndr said:


> Generally ballistic tips work as intended but they have some limitations. If you are using a high velocity caliber (over 3000 fps) and you shoot at something at close range (under 50 yards) BT's have the potential to spectacularly fragment if you hit bone, without getting much penetration.


Witnessed this myself. Saw a deer that was shot with a 7mm at 25 yards with BT's and the penetration barely made the first lung. The bullet also separated. First deer I had ever seen run that far after being hit with 7mm magnum and had to actually have another shot put in to him to finish him off.


----------



## Bwana (Sep 28, 2004)

Munsterlndr said:


> Generally ballistic tips work as intended but they have some limitations. If you are using a high velocity caliber (over 3000 fps) and you shoot at something at close range (under 50 yards) BT's have the potential to spectacularly fragment if you hit bone, without getting much penetration. The deer will usually die but you may have a long tracking job with no exit hole to leave a good blood trail. Personally, I like them for out west, where shots tend to be longer range and where they improve the ballistics for long range shooting and enough velocity has been bled off so that they perform as intended. If they work correctly they will anchor a deer in it's tracks and cause massive internal damage.


I have to agree with Munster. 

I have stopped useing Ballistic Tips (BT) for Michigan Deer Hunting. They were producing spectatular "knock downs" but were not producing exit wounds and I was unable to recover a bullet that was still intact. I took several deer with BTs and only had one actually exit the Deer. The last deer I shot with a BT had a gaping (but shallow) entrance wound with no exit and the bullet fragmented badly. The approx. range on the shot was 30 yards and I was useing a .270 Win (I know, a tall order for any ammo to survive). I upgraded to Accubonds and have been satisfied with their performance. 

I would not hesitate to use BTs when I will be shooting over enough distance, but because of the relative close shots I take here that are dictated by the terrain in which I hunt, I simply need a tougher bullet.


----------



## bersh (Dec 9, 2003)

GrtWhtHntr said:


> A lot of people seem to have a wide variety of results with ballistic tips. The BT's I'm using are Noslers in Federal premium ammo. Are there other brands of BT's? If so, is that the reason for the difference in results?


I've been using Hornady SSTs in my 270 and muzzleloader for a while now. The SST is designed for deer sized game, unlike some other BT type bullets that are designed for smaller game or just for a high ballistic coefficient. I've shot quite a few deer with the SST and they don't blow apart like others I've read about.

Editing to add that every deer shot with the .270 with SSTs has been a pass through, but a couple of them have been neck shots. There have been others ranging from 35-110 yards though in the boiler room and they all passed through with minimal "extra damage" from the SST tip.


----------



## bersh (Dec 9, 2003)

Ranger Ray said:


> Witnessed this myself. Saw a deer that was shot with a 7mm at 25 yards with BT's and the penetration barely made the first lung. The bullet also separated. First deer I had ever seen run that far after being hit with 7mm magnum and had to actually have another shot put in to him to finish him off.


I'm not sure you can blame this performance on the BT alone. Many years ago, I once shot a buck at about 12 feet (yes, feet). He came in at an angle and direction that didn't offer a shot, and had he kept going I wouldn't have had a shot, so it was then or never. He was quartering to me hard, and at that close range I wasn't sure what to do, as I have no idea of what kind of effect I'd have from scope offset. To be safe, I aimed at the crease of his near shoulder, thinking it would blow out near the back of the ribs on the other side. I touched it off, and he took off like a rocket. After over 200 yards of tracking, and a follow up shot, he was finally down for good. When I gutted him, I found quite a mess inside, and something had gone through his heart (I think it was bone). When I butchered him, things became a bit more evident. The bullet I was using at the time was Remington Premium boattail, which I believe was basically a Nosler boattail with a lead tip. The bullet totally failed and just exploded at impact with pretty much no penetration. Given the range, I don't think it would have mattered what bullet I was using.

I think that any bullet needs a certain amount of space before it can be expected to perform correctly. With that 7mm, I'd be willing to bet that it reacted similar to my shot and that it really wouldn't have mattered. I do know that a couple years ago I took a nice buck at 35 yards with my .270 using Hornady SSTs, and the bullet performed as well as I could have expected. It was a heart shot, and it clipped his elbow bone (whatever it's called) on the near shoulder, and went through the far shoulder, through a 6" diameter tree behind him, and buried into another 12" tree behind that. Shot placement obviously has something to do with it.


----------



## TrekJeff (Sep 7, 2007)

bersh said:


> I'm not sure you can blame this performance on the BT alone. Many years ago, I once shot a buck at about 12 feet (yes, feet). He came in at an angle and direction that didn't offer a shot, and had he kept going I wouldn't have had a shot, so it was then or never. He was quartering to me hard, and at that close range I wasn't sure what to do, as I have no idea of what kind of effect I'd have from scope offset. To be safe, I aimed at the crease of his near shoulder, thinking it would blow out near the back of the ribs on the other side. I touched it off, and he took off like a rocket. After over 200 yards of tracking, and a follow up shot, he was finally down for good. When I gutted him, I found quite a mess inside, and something had gone through his heart (I think it was bone). When I butchered him, things became a bit more evident. The bullet I was using at the time was Remington Premium boattail, which I believe was basically a Nosler boattail with a lead tip. The bullet totally failed and just exploded at impact with pretty much no penetration. Given the range, I don't think it would have mattered what bullet I was using.
> 
> I think that any bullet needs a certain amount of space before it can be expected to perform correctly. With that 7mm, I'd be willing to bet that it reacted similar to my shot and that it really wouldn't have mattered. I do know that a couple years ago I took a nice buck at 35 yards with my .270 using Hornady SSTs, and the bullet performed as well as I could have expected. It was a heart shot, and it clipped his elbow bone (whatever it's called) on the near shoulder, and went through the far shoulder, through a 6" diameter tree behind him, and buried into another 12" tree behind that. Shot placement obviously has something to do with it.



Very true, you may as well have shot at a engine block at that range. A jacketed soft point would have done wonders and retained it's weight. We've got to get back to the basics, expansion, not explosion.


----------



## bersh (Dec 9, 2003)

TrekJeff said:


> Very true, you may as well have shot at a engine block at that range. A jacketed soft point would have done wonders and retained it's weight. We've got to get back to the basics, expansion, not explosion.


In that case, the bullet was a jacketed soft point. The only thing I can think that may have performed a little better would be some sort of partition. In fact, after that season, I changed to a partition for a while, but they didn't shoot nearly as well (though the deer didn't seem to notice). I eventually dumped the partitions for the SST. Next year I'm going to try some of the interbonds, just to see how they shoot. If they shoot, I'll probably start using them.


----------



## Quack Addict (Aug 10, 2006)

bersh said:


> I think that any bullet needs a certain amount of space before it can be expected to perform correctly.


The "space" (distance) variable you refer to only comes into play because of the effect distance has on a rifle bullet after it leaves the muzzle: the bullet sluffs off velocity as it moves down range, so it progressively travels slower as distance increases.

There is a problem with this - different cartridges shooting the SAME bullet (even different rifles firing the same cartridge) throw lead over a spectrum of velocities at a given distance. Here's two scenarios to consider:

1. Say you may get excellent results with BT's out of a 7mm-08 at 25 yards, BUT the same bullet from a 7mm RUM (or other higher velocity 7mm) may take 150 yards or more to get the same effect. 

2. A Remington 700 in 7mm-08 with a 24" barrel is going to shoot faster (a little) than a Model 7 in 7mm-08 with a 2" shorter barrel. 

The bullet doesn't know or care how long or how far since it exited the muzzle; it only knows how fast it's going at the time of impact. The solution to the problem - - use a well-constructed bullet that covers the FULL range of velocities your rifle can dish out all the way from the muzzle to as far out as you think you might take a shot on game. I know a lot of guys swear by Ballistic tips and their on-game performance... good for them - they obviously have not had one fail on them yet, or they choose to look beyond the incident/s when the bullet did fail them. IMHO, there's TOO MANY better deer bullets out there for me to resort to using BT's. 

A bullet that dumps 100% of its energy into an animal does little good if it fragments just under the skin. 

I've had deer run 100 yards - through thick swamp (one even crossed a stream) - with a .50 cal slug hole THROUGH their heart & lungs. I'm sure he'll go farther if all you do is break some ribs and knock the wind out of him for a few seconds.




TrekJeff said:


> We've got to get back to the basics, expansion, not explosion.


BINGO!


----------



## bersh (Dec 9, 2003)

Quack Addict said:


> The "space" (distance) variable you refer to only comes into play because of the effect distance has on a rifle bullet after it leaves the muzzle: the bullet sluffs off velocity as it moves down range, so it progressively travels slower as distance increases.
> 
> There is a problem with this - different cartridges shooting the SAME bullet (even different rifles firing the same cartridge) throw lead over a spectrum of velocities at a given distance. Here's two scenarios to consider:
> 
> ...


I agree - I was trying to say the same thing, just too lazy to type it out. The only thing I'd add is that there is also a distance, with a given load, where it probably doesn't matter what kind of bullet you're using. In my experience with that deer above, I'm guessing that another bullet may have performed better, but until I get another shot at 4 paces, with the deer quartering hard towards me, I will never know


----------



## Quack Addict (Aug 10, 2006)

bersh - not picking on you - just good conversation. 



bersh said:


> The only thing I'd add is that there is also a distance, with a given load, where it probably doesn't matter what kind of bullet you're using.


I'll agree with that to some extent - with enough distance to decelerate I can see where a Ballistic Tip would be traveling at a velocity low enough to not detonate on impact. That distance is probably a ways out there for a given load however as BT's are one of the more aerodynamic bullets on the market.

Someone else can research this as BT's are useless to me now aside from punching holes in paper and blowing out brass, but I think Nosler actually advertises (or advertised at one time) that these bullets are not intended for use over 3000 fps because they come apart so easily. A lot of factory loads for a lot of calibers approach (if not exceed) this threshold; it's very easy to exceed 3000 fps in a lot of rifles if you handload. 

Here's another interesting factoid: BT's are some of the thinnest skinned bullets out there - and probably THE thinnest skinned of what most consider a 'hunting grade' bullet. A lot of folks think a thin jacket means the bullet just mushrooms easier than a bullet with a thicker jacket... well, when you consider a bullet coming out of a rifle at 3000 fps with a 1-10" twist is rotating at *216,000 RPM*... how far away from perfect do you have to be (hit a rib, off-angle impact, etc) before things go horribly wrong? I just spent an extra $180 getting the crank, rods, pistons & flywheel for my boat engine balanced and that's unlikely to ever see 4000 RPM. Thicker jackets help keep high-velocity bullets together. In some of the mega-velocity varmit calibers, it isn't uncommon for guys to have V-Max's (similar to a BT) come apart due to centrifugal force after the bullet exits the muzzle - that's a clue that you're operating dangerously close to the edge for hunting use. How many shots a year do you get on a game animal? Make the right bullet choice, even if it costs twice as much.



bersh said:


> In my experience with that deer above, I'm guessing that another bullet may have performed better, but until I get another shot at 4 paces, with the deer quartering hard towards me, I will never know


Lol... I shot a buck at an honest 4 yards in 2006 with my Remington 870 12ga, fully rifled barrel, 3" Winchester Supreme Hi-Impact sabot slug (the 1oz hour-glass lead pill). Perfect broadside shot - no problem on penetration - slug went straight through - tissue damage was surprisingly little. He went about 30 yards and piled up. No follow up shot needed; a blind man could have followed the blood trail had I not seen where he landed.

I think the half of the sabot that skipped across his back did more damage to the hide than the actual slug itself 

Bottom line: at close range (i.e. 4 yd) you could be using the rifle equivalent of a wad cutter and have similar (if not better) results than a BT. If you have the opportunity of a close range shot, do you need (or want) a super aerodynamic bullet that frags on impact at that distance? The only reason for a super aerodynamic projectile is minimizing drop at long range; the frangibility of the BT at close range is just an unwanted 'bonus'. IMHO, a lot of guys out there using the Ballistic Tip for deer because they are accurate in their rifle NEED to take a look at the Nosler Accubond. Nearly identical bullet shape... MUCH better construction... the tip color may not be as pretty as a BT, but if "a pretty tip" on your bullet is one of your projectile selection criteria, well... enjoy your BT's. :lol:


----------



## KEN WES. (Dec 13, 2005)

Same rifle, winchester power-point 200 yrds nice entrance hole nicer exit hole, dead deer. I think I'll just burn up the bt's and use the factory bullets and the hornady interlocks. thanks for all the answers and comments.


----------



## bersh (Dec 9, 2003)

Quack Addict said:


> bersh - not picking on you - just good conversation.


No problem. I think I would have had as good of luck throwing a rock at the buck at that distance. The thing that surprised me most is that was the first time a plan actually came together like it was supposed to (sort of). I found fresh buck sign (found his track on top of tracks I made earlier in the day, followed them past a couple fresh scrapes and two fresh rubs, to the groove I eventually sat off of). He came in chasing a doe, and I didn't have much time to react. In retrospect, I should have sat further off the trail, but I was just sitting on the ground against a tree, and really didn't have another good spot to sit without cutting a few shooting lanes - not something I want to do on Nov 16 at 3 in the afternoon. Anyway, the doe didn't stay on the trail, and peeled off and she got within about 5 feet of me before she took off up a ridge. I heard him grunting about 70 yards away and he just motored in with his head to the ground following every step she took. If he would have just gone up the ridge after her I would have had a shot, but instead he came right at me. It was either shoot him then, or have him face right at me and come even closer. I knew that once he made the turn to go up the ridge at that point I wouldn't have a shot. To this day I still can't believe they didn't see me as I just sat there in my pumpkin suit stunned at what was happening. As Hannibal used to say, "I love it when a plan comes together!"

Anyway, back to the topic. I agree with what you're saying, but I do think you are unfairly lumping all BT into the same category. Both the Hornady SST and the Interbond are BT specifically designed for big game hunting. I've never had an issue with the SST, as it's always performed perfectly. This includes a couple shots through both shoulders. My buddy has been using them in is 06 for a while now, and I was skeptical for a couple years as I was of the same mindset as you - BT are junk for deer as they just blow up. After seeing how they performed out of the 06 on deer, along with how they performed on the bench, I was impressed enough to give them a try. The very first group out of my old a-bolt was about .75". My average groups with my new a-bolt are an honest <1", with my tightest being just a touch over .5". They shoot flatter, and for me they haven't blown up or caused any excessive tissue damage. The Interbond are supposed to be even tougher than the SST, and next year I'll try a box as I'm getting low on the SST anyway. If they shoot, I'll use them. If not, they go in the ammo box and get used for fouling rounds.


----------



## Violator22 (Nov 10, 2004)

I can tell ya a lot of Elk Hunters out here swear by the 180 grain 30 Cal SST's, have a buddy up in Wyoming that uses Berger VLD's on Elk, me, I just use my TSX's. I use the 30 Cal 150 Gr FN for my 303 Sav, and my 30-40 Krag, 100 gr TSX for my 25-06, and 169 gr TSX's for my 30-06. No problems, but almost all of my shots are at 100 yards or less. I believe in hunting to get as close as possible, I never could understand some of the folks out here that like to take that 3-500 yard shot and then go track the SOB if they get a bad hit.


----------



## Quack Wacker (Dec 20, 2006)

I love them


----------



## Violator22 (Nov 10, 2004)

The TSX's or the Long Shots.  If it is the long shot, your a better man than I gunga din!


----------



## Tink (Feb 26, 2007)

I have had great luck with BT's out of my 270. The handloads run at 2774fps. I have used the same bullets on shots from 12yds to 254yds. The only large entrance holes that I encountered were when the bullet touched some brush. Those did not have pass throughs and the bullet fragmented. 

The meat being wasted is not an issue because rib meat is not the majority and if you are trying to save meat you are not taking quartering or neck shots. 

I say shoot what shoots well out of your gun and if you plan on doing most of your hunting at less than 10 yds you have a less stinky gun oil than I have!!


----------



## grouly925 (Dec 6, 2006)

I may just be more simple minded than you all, but I have shot my fair share of deer. I have always shot 150gr. remington core-lokts out of my 30.06 and on over 15 deer ranges 30 to 200 yards I have never lost a deer, or even had a bullet that did not pass through for that matter. I think we might just be putting a little too much thought into this ammunition. People used to kill deer with slingshots and rocks, and they still kill them every year with hand made bows and wooden arrows.


----------



## TrekJeff (Sep 7, 2007)

grouly925 said:


> People used to kill deer with slingshots and rocks, and they still kill them every year with hand made bows and wooden arrows.



Yeah, they are called crossbows today:evil: Can't wait for full inclusion:lol:

OOPS, wrong thread..lol


----------



## D.C.U.P. (May 24, 2002)

I have used the BT in various calibers and weights on deer and have always had great results. A for meat damage, I'll give a little to the scavengers as long as it means I get the majority. In other words, a devastating wound channel is OK when the deer goes nowhere - at least in my book.

I have never had a BT fail to penetrate but don't doubt that others have. Early BT's were not jacketed as thickly as they are now according to what I've read, thus the premature expansion. On broadside shots, I wouldn't worry, but maybe a straight-on chest shot could give poor results. 

The most dramatic bullet damage I ever saw was on a doe I shot at about 50 yards with a 165 gr. BT shot from a 30-378 Wby. at over 3400 fps muzzle velocity. It mostly blew out the spine and damaged some vitals too. Later, my dad was skinning her and pulled her right in two when he got to the spot where the bullet hit.

Nowadays, I've gone to the best of all worlds for much of my hunting: the Barnes XLC. I use a 300 Win. Mag. and load my own 130 grain bullets leaving the muzzle at over 3500 fps. I've used this load to kill 2 moose, 3 black bear and a whole bunch of deer.


----------

