Elvis wrote:

the chamious or shammy as we call them have been known to absorb a heck of alot of large hucks of magnum lead if the first shot is not right and the adrealin kicks in look out. the big advantage of a larger/heavier bullet is the bigger out hole to let the red stuff out, makes it easier to track if the shot isnt quite right. the smaller/lighter/softer projectiles wont exit to leave blood trail. those barnes type projectiles look like they will get around this.

A bit like the goats over here, seems 90% of their internals is Adrenal gland, if you dont take off their head or take out the boiler room on the first shot, they take on a bullet proof demeanor and leg it into the distance, usually uphill (steep ones)and quite quickly.

slimjim wrote:

BTW, I cringed when a hunting friend told me that he uses 55gr FMJs in his AR to hunt deer. He uses neck shots and was more successful last season than me. Another does head shots. I just can't get myself to take neck and head shots.

I wouldn't be comfortable with relying on head or neck shots under most conditions either. The head of a game animal is the most mobile part of their anatomy, and their necks aren't far behind in that regard. They are constantly looking around for danger so what was a perfect shot when the trigger broke could easily be a bad one when the bullet reaches the target. I have found too many deer left to die an agonizing death from starvation because their jaws were shot away to ever rely on that type of shot. Besides, in most cases a high-velocity bullet generally leaves the head in a pretty distasteful state. Game animals deserve a bit better from us.

I do see a real niche for this bullet for the owners of fast-twist rifles such as the .223 WSSM. It might be just the ticket for those who want more punch on varmints at extended ranges.

Head and neck shots will limit the shots you take but if the rifle and hunter's skill is up to the job then it is always a kill shot. I can and have done head and neck shots - it's the only shot my brother uses - but I prefer a heavier bullet into the vitals.
John, my brother, uses light bullets (65 gr. 6mm and 130 gr .308) and I prefer the 165 in my .308 (30-06) for all my hunting of game animals though I have loaded from 220gr down to 110gr in the same gun.

I agree with Paul, neck shots demanded the hunters skill and a rifles ability to put a bullet where it belongs. I have shot only 2 deer with neck shots with the /06 using both 150gr and 165gr bullets and deer never moved.

I had a choice of either trying the 2 shots or loosing the bucks, have also shot 1 bull elk with 340wby in the neck which broke the spine and never moved. I'm still a firm believer that if you put a bullet in the boiler room, it's yours but neck shots I do try to avoid unless no other option.

slimjim wrote:

I think bullet construction becomes critical in the smaller calibers used on larger game. The monolithic bullets that have near-100% weight retention for deep penetration provide the discrimator to consider this caliber optoin.

Couldn't agree more

chambered 221 wrote:

A poorly placed shot is a poorly placed shot regardless of bullet size period !!!

Hit right on the head

my buddy shot a red hind through the neck from a steady rest at about 100yrds the deer staggered around so I plastedit again in the neck she staggered abit more and fell over. both shots had just missed the spine the in and exit holes were 1" apart on opposing sides. he was using 150grn from 30/06 I was useing 130 grn from .270 which just goes to show you HAVE to hit them in the right place.

Elvis wrote:

my buddy shot a red hind through the neck from a steady rest at about 100yrds the deer staggered around so I plastedit again in the neck she staggered abit more and fell over. both shots had just missed the spine the in and exit holes were 1" apart on opposing sides. he was using 150grn from 30/06 I was useing 130 grn from .270 which just goes to show you HAVE to hit them in the right place.

Absolutely right. Your experience is why I wouldn't choose head or neck shots as shots of choice. They require too much precision and ideal conditions seldom found in the field. Even worse, the misplaced neck shot seldom leaves a blood trail if not fatal within short order.

I'm not saying I wouldn't use the neck shot if pushed to it. I have used it once to finish a gut-shot doe that a fellow "hunter" wounded and had chased over half the county. He had fired so many fruitless shots that he had actually run out of slugs (this was in a shotgun only area). He asked for my help and the only shot I had before she made it onto property owned by a rabid anti-hunter was her head and neck protruding above the brush. A steady rest gave me the opportunity to carefully place my shot into her neck and put an end to her suffering. I later found out that this "hunter" had never sighted his shotgun for slugs and was shooting four different brands because he "had them just laying around" and arrogantly argued with me that all slugs shoot the same. I didn't make a new friend when I suggested that he either get educated or give up hunting.

SingleShotLover wrote:

I later found out that this "hunter" had never sighted his shotgun for slugs and was shooting four different brands because he "had them just laying around" and arrogantly argued with me that all slugs shoot the same.

It amazes me as to how many of these so called hunters are out there !!!
And your defiantly right about their arrogance !!!

chambered221 wrote:

A poorly placed shot is a poorly placed shot regardless of bullet size period !

After seeing what a .270 Win with a 130gr bullet does to an elk, I am not hesitant to use a 60-70gr monolithic bullet on the small statured Texas deer at 100 yards. As its has been stated before, and chambered did again above, shot placement is the key.

Hear Hear the mighty .270 aye. good on ya mate

While I 99% of the time agree with Slim, Ethics on game kill come to mind. Even thou your deer are smaller, it doesn't mean they have a lower zest for life. I still believe the minimum cal for deer is 243/6mm.

1000 ft lbs is considered a minimum amount of "power" over here and .222 the smallest cartridge....having dropped pigs with the .223 I have no hesitation taking that rifle after deer.

When I asked my guide what his favorite catridge was for elk, he said he had taken more elk with a .22-250. I was rather surprised. When I quired him on the details, he said he used a 50gr Hornady bullet for a neck shot. I'm not promoting this but it does show how shot placement is the most cruicial factor in harvesting larger game.

Ive heard of that theory too... soft projectile gives up all its energy on head or neck shot. always give a secound shot when it drops to make sure .
the 22-250 has alot of fans out there Alex Gale used 1 to meat hunt professionally .

A lot of folks here have a lot more hunting experience than I do but here's my thought... I want a cartridge/bullet that packs enough "oomph" and penetration to make a clean kill in case I have to take a second shot should the first shot be muffed for some reason. That bullet that killed my "hunting trophy" tree could have resulted in a gut shot instead of a clean miss, requiring a follow up. The follow up is unlikely to be at an optimum angle so you need enough gun to make it count. I do think that the monolithic bullets have made a difference here, as far as cartridge size, allowing some smaller cartridges to be as effective as larger ones using "cup and core" bullets.