Matchking as game-taker??

[thermaler]

My hunting requirements have changed as I have aged. I have more than enough nice racks to my name and now meat is my goal. I don't want fragmentation. It messes up the meat. I also don't want to track them any more. I want them anchored on the spot or darned close to it so a good solid bullet is required.What's your preferred bullet?

[JASmith]

OK--I know this gets into "ethical controversy land" but let me say from the get-go that I neither use nor advocate the use of target rounds for taking big game--but am intrigued to ask nonetheless and am interested what the collective group-think is.

I happen to know a professional hand-loader (meaning he does this for a living for match shooters, LE etc.) and he tells me he hunts with matchkings. He's been hunting probably longer than I've been alive--which is saying alot since I'm well north of 50...
How often does your friend take a shot from other than broadside and into the vital zone?

The issue being that it does not take much to get into the ribcage from the side. The stouter bullets help give more margin for deeper penetration for quartering shots and the occasional shoulder impact.


PS Neck and head shots don't take much bullet either, but neither of these are reliable game-taking shots since the critical zone is so small and the animal moves its head more than anything else except for the tail. Alas, too many folks take these shots and brag when they work and say nothing about misses.

[yobuck]

Alas, too many folks take these shots and brag when they work and say nothing about misses.

truer words have never been spoken. but that also relates to all the world record groups shot with hunting rifles.
we tend to hear good news quickly. bad news seldom finds its way out of the woods.

[stomp442]

With my experience with the bergers the meat damage has been less than one that passes completely through as there is generally only damage to one side and the internals only. I also differ from most hunters and aim for the shoulder bone rather than behind the shoulder. The bergers have no trouble penetrating and breaking bone and making complete goo out of everything behind it.

[thermaler]

Most hunters I know--if you get enough beers in 'em--well fess up to at least one that was poorly hit or for other reasons they could never find. Not something they generally want to brag about. I've heard a fair amount of "that bullet (bigger calibers than 223) I swear went right through the vitals and out the other side but I never had a good trail and couldn't find the deer."

[JASmith]

I have pretty much all these bullets at my disposal--I was just wondering how much credence there was to the internal fragmentation/massive destruction theory--sounds pretty solid to me from what I gather here. Funny how I haven't heard many people step up and say anything nice about Barnes copper bullets which are supposedly known for their very significant mushrooming and very high weight retention.
The key to reliably bringing an animal down in short order (<~10sec) is opening the large arteries near the heart or the heart itself. The thing doing the slice does not have to be a massive lance. One can look at hunting arrows used over the last 7,000 years and see that. In fact there was a paper published in a refereed archeology journal with those conclusions.

These primitive archers took the time needed to make good broadside shots. In the case of American Indians, they even waited until the buffalo had started to step forward so the ribs would separate enough to give the arrow a better chance to enter the thorax.

With rifles, one doesn't need much bullet to get through the rib cage and yes, the more fragments one gets inside the thorax, the better the chances of causing the animal to quickly faint by cutting enough blood vessels to cause massive loss of blood pressure, . When they work, these explosively fragmenting projectiles work very well. These bullets, however, don't always get into the vitals when the shots are taken at quartering angles and through large bones.

The lead-free expanding bullets do so well by expanding modestly in the first few inches and then keeping their weight and shape for the rest of the penetration even when going through bone. A key factor, and not one that is well-understood, is that the copper alloys used are far more ductile than lead and the strength can be controlled through modern metallurgy. This is why they tend to routinely make beautiful mushroom shapes.

You can read more about wound channels, bullet weights, construction, and killing power in this note: Ideal Bullet Weight (http://shootersnotes.com/ideal-bullet-weight/). One of the conclusions to be drawn is that the lead-free expanding bullets seem to show about the same killing power as a bullet of classic design weighing half-again or more as much. That is one of the reasons they are becoming more popular.

[GaCop]

nosler ballistic tips have been some of the most accurate bullets i've ever shot. And they are serious deer hammers! amen!

[FW Conch]

Year before last, I got my buck with my 358Win, 225grn Sierra GK, @ 165yds, through & through, 1" exit hole. It knocked him off his feet and he never got up. No bloodshot meat-I ate right up to the hole. That is bullet performance with nothing left to be desired ;-)

[MacDR]

I have followed this thread and hesitated posting as I have heard the same discussion many times in the past. If you always wait for the perfect shot and have the necessary skill and a decent rifle you can kill a deer with any caliber and any bullet. Unfortunately my experience has been that the perfect shot seldom presents itself. Hunting bullets are designed to give you a tool to deal with the not so perfect shot where penetration to the vitals requires weight retention and the mushroom develops to maximize the wound channel. Match bullets are not designed to do this. The people who design them even say this if one cares to read their literature. Taking a point from an earlier poster, no one boasts about their failures but any of us who have hunted any amount have found them in the woods or had to put them out of their misery., legs shot off, jaws blown away, eyes missing, guts hanging loose or haunches rotting while the animal is still living. Just as I wouldn't use a ball peen hammer to drive a nail I don't use match bullets for hunting. As far as accuracy is concerned, as long as a sure killing shot can be made who gives a darn whether you were "Paper" accurate. Taking bad shots at distance beyond your skill level with the wrong tools marks someone as a irresponsible and not fit to be in the company of men and hunters. Sorry for the pulpit but someone had to step up with the shovel.

[BoilerUP]

Taking bad shots at distance beyond your skill level with the wrong tools marks someone as a irresponsible and not fit to be in the company of men and hunters.

Agree completely.

So what's worse, a hunter that shoots his rifle with match bullets hundreds of times and picks his shot on game with those bullets...or the fudd with the '06 and a box of Core-Lokts from Wal-Mart with a "if its brown, its down" attitude that thinks he's good if he puts one shot anywhere on a paper plate at 50yd?

People that want enough gun for a texas heart shot are MUCH more a concern to me than a hunter using a SMK that knows how to put the bullet where it needs to be, and has the discipline to pass on marginal shots (not unlike bowhunters).

[yobuck]

well i have the feeling that the comments by macdr were directed more toward those he feels break his rules.
that being taking shots longer than he feels legitimate. if im wrong im sorry but thats my take.
those type comments usually come frome those totaly ignorant about the subject they condem.

[Apache]

You guys better be careful here........rule violations will get infractions issued.

[thermaler]

It wasn't my intent to start an ethics debate--I was just wondering if there was anything to the theory of using highly fragmentable bullets such as match bullets as an effective game taker. I'm not an experienced hunter myself but am looking to gather as much info as I can before going out. The variety of opinions expressed here actually reflect closely the variety of opinions I get from other hunters I've talked with. It seems to me most people will swear by whatever it is that works for them at the type of terrain/hunt they most often do--which is likely not to be the same for everyone everywhere.

What I find interesting is that it seems that the more high -performing a bullet is--it seems to me the more likely a hunter might take a demanding shot. For example, based on the anecdotal accounts I've gathered a bigger better penetrating bullet might lead to more of an inclination to take quartering head-on or away or down-angle shots where the likelihood of needing to effectively penetrate bone before hitting the vitals goes up. I've often heard about spine, neck and head shots as well--but these sound to me like low-probability shots or the province of expert shooters. My other main conclusion is as long as it yields a quick and "humane" kill it doesn't really matter what you use as long as you have the skills to confidently put the bullet where it needs to go.

The devil in the details seems to be what happens if things don't quite go according to plan. It occurs to me that a highly fragmenting round that imparts a widely -dispersed internal tissue damage pattern MIGHT (that's pure conjecture on my part) "compensate" for an impact that is off for whatever reason.

These have been great comments and have really given me "food for thought." Thank you.

[MacDR]

Unfortunately discussions about hunting ethics seems to have taken a back seat these days. While I believe the vast majority of hunters still adhere to the traditional principles of humane killing and responsible harvest levels we seem unwilling to stand-up for those principles. When I started hunting when I was twelve I was fortunate to do so in the company of men who held these principles in common and by actions and words passed them on to us youngsters. Fifty years later I find myself now to be one of those old men. Many new hunters read these forums. In many ways the forums replace that gathering around the table in the camp. Introducing and re-enforcing the principles of ethical hunting should be at the forefront when discussions start putting game in the same category as paper. "Wow I hit him at 1000 yards but he got away" isn't something to boast about. Perhaps ignorant and old go hand in hand ;-).

[BoilerUP]

There's a picture on SnipersHide of a pronghorn George Gardner of GA Precision got earlier this week at 1268yd with a 6.5 SAUM and a 130gr Berger - one shot, one cleanly harvested animal.

Is that "unethical"?

What if I told you George created that caliber, built that rifle around that bullet, and has fired well north of 2500 rounds of that particular caliber in the last year including placing in multiple PRS competitions and winning the SnipersHide Cup?

Is he any more or less "ethical" than the 50yd pie plate shooter I mentioned above that goes through a 20rd box of ammo in their hunting rifle every half-decade, and shoots deer up the rump because they don't have the discipline to pass on a marginal shot?

[JASmith]

Well said MacDR!!!

This whole discussion may have just been trumped by the passage and signing of AB711 which will ban the use of lead-containing bullets for hunting across the entire state. The courts may determine that all or part of the law does not meet constitutional standards, but it is clear that the prices of hunting ammunition will rise.

Bottom line for the thread title is that, yes the MatchKing has been used as a game taker with some degree of success and NO, it is not recommended by either the manufacturer or folks who know how bullets work on impact and penetration. Purpose-designed hunting bullets should be used on medium game and larger animals.

[yobuck]

well im now in my 79th year of life on this planet. i also started hunting at age 12 in 1947 in north central pa.
our method of hunting was by organised drives. you could sometimes follow the deer down the hillside by the
sound of the shots by the hunters shooting at him as he ran. rifles were often chosen by the amount of lead
they could put out quickly.
if you had 10 men in a group rest assured at least 3 were poor shooters. none would be good shooters.
we were deer hunters not target shooters. ethics have always been an individual thing. they were no better
among hunters in 1950 than they are today.

[MacDR]

I apologize if I suggested somehow that long range hunters were unethical. Those with the required skills and the right equipment are definitely ethical. The neophyte with the semi-auto who peppers the air with shots using surplus military ammo hoping one will connect with a running animal, well you decide.

Yes Yobuck, somethings don't change but I believe society has become much too tolerant of bad behavior or maybe it's just the more aches I develop the more cantankerous I have become. To the original poster, I agree that match kings can kill animals but disagree for practical and ethical reasons that they should be promoted for hunting big game.

[DanSavage]

I've only harvested around 10 whitetail deer so far at 36 years old now I only had one issue that almost led to losing the harvest. The young swamp buck was 45 yards away when I first spotted him standing in a swampy area and he was looking right at me. I was stalk hunting in the woods moving very slowly on and old concealed logging trail. He was front first quartered away a little and I slowly brought up the .243 shooting 80 grain federal factory hunting rounds, and I shot him right in the brisket right into the vital area. Then he and 3 more deer that I didn't even see all took off running to the left. I knew I had to have hit it, and I looked everywhere for signs of blood and couldn't find anything. I found him over 100 yards away, and I looked all around and still couldn't find any blood. The soft point bullet penciled through the vital cavity and gelitized the organs. The exit hole a ways behind the shoulder was small. I just can't believe that deer had enough adrenaline to run that far away.
My favorite shot is behind the shoulder through the upper part of the heart and exit out the shoulder, it's a rather low shot into the vital area but it drops them instantly. But most of the time I'm just shooting for the heart visualizing right where it is within the deer.

[yobuck]

this being a topic about bullets and match type bullets in particular i feel weve sidetracked the issue enough.
i will however start a new topic on the subject of long range hunting if there is enough interest.
i will out line exactly how we go about in in pa and the equiptment used for doing it. i could post pictures also
with some coaching.