Hunting & Fishing Effective Range?

[Hook Creek]

Just wanted to see what anyone has to say about hunting big game (deer and up) when velocity and energy get pretty low. I did a search but theres no actual answers, just opinions. Any experiances etc. you may have please share it. This got me curious because I used JBMBallistics calculator and was looking at my results thinking what the effective range would be for my gun.
here was my results Link
I know alot of people frown uppon using match bullets for hunting, but its what I got
SPS Tactical .308
168gr SMK BTHP
42.0gr IMR4064
COAL 2.803
Federal 210 Primer
Let me know what you have to say.

 

[SavageSlayer]

Re: Effective Range?

"Effective Range" is ultimately determined by the shooters skill and ability. Sure, those bullets will kill deer sized game at 1000 yards if hit in the right place, but can you hit them in the right place?

Effective range is different for everybody. Some hunters will never take a shot past 300 yards while others will take game past 800. If you can dope the wind and consistently shoot MOA in all sorts of conditions and elevations out to 1000 yards then there is no reason you shouldn't be able to kill with those bullets at that range. They carry enough velocity and energy to kill deer sized game.

If you are MOA or better shooter out to 500 yards but have no experience at 600 or you group sizes go beyond MOA at 600 then I would say your effective range is 500 yards.

 

[blksno]

Re: Effective Range?

Your 400 lbs of energy at 1000 is plenty for big game in North America, as long as your shot placement is reliable and repeatable.
With my rifle, load and conditions, i drop below 400lbs of energy at about 675m

i agree with T-Money, but i think the OP was asking more in regard to the energy delivery upon impact.

I can still shoot MOA out to 800m but am running out of energy at or beyond that distance with my bullets.

for example. if you can shoot a 6" group at 1000m...is 400lbs of energy enough to rely on?
how much energy would you consider "effective" regardless of distance.

Perhaps some fellows with wispers are running out of energy at 400, still shooting good groups with reliable dope, but the energy could become a concern.

 

[SavageSlayer]

Re: Effective Range?

I would have to say that ft/lbs of energy is not what kills. Bullet placement and cavitation is what kills. A .30 caliber wound channel through any animals lungs or heart will kill it wheather it has 5000 ft/lbs or 200 ft/lbs behind it. At distance velocity becomes more important than ft/lbs.

Another example is archery. Arrows or bolts aren't carrying 400 ft/lbs of energy, yet they kill.

Shot placement is the most important factor.

 

[Hook Creek]

Re: Effective Range?

Thanks for all the input here. I was sure that it would be making kills with good shot placement, but wanted to here what people have to say about it at long range. I actually took the gun to the range today to find that that chart has been spot on up to the 300 Yard mark. I havent gone any further yet, but was very surprised with the JBMBallistics calc for being so on point.

 

[bmt]

Re: Effective Range?

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: T-Money</div><div class="ubbcode-body">"Effective Range" is ultimately determined by the shooters skill and ability. </div></div>

AMEN.

 

[Alaskaman11]

Re: Effective Range?

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: c_bass16</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Your 400 lbs of energy at 1000 is plenty for big game in North America, as long as your shot placement is reliable and repeatable.
With my rifle, load and conditions, i drop below 400lbs of energy at about 675m

i agree with T-Money, but i think the OP was asking more in regard to the energy delivery upon impact.

I can still shoot MOA out to 800m but am running out of energy at or beyond that distance with my bullets.

for example. if you can shoot a 6" group at 1000m...is 400lbs of energy enough to rely on?
how much energy would you consider "effective" regardless of distance.

Perhaps some fellows with wispers are running out of energy at 400, still shooting good groups with reliable dope, but the energy could become a concern. </div></div>

I think I will disagree here. You said "plenty for big game of North America" with a statement like that you include critters in my back yard. Will a bullet fired from 800 yards with 400 Lbs of energy kill say a 1400 lb Brown Bear or a moose coming in at 1k? I think it will sooner or later. But that is not what hunting is about. It has been said that hunting is not sniping. You might be able to hit, but will it kill right then and there. On a Brown Bear, you make the hit in the lungs, then what, it makes it into the alders, you have a living VW bus that's real pissed and will fuck you up. Same as that moose. This year I watched a moose take 3 pills from my 338 Lapua in the lungs before he gave up the game, oh ya, it was 186 yards. What I'm getting at in this rant is, yes you can make the hit, but please try to get as close as you can, you owe it to the animal to make it a clean quick kill.



Rant over.

 

[waveone]

Re: Effective Range?

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Alaskaman 11</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: c_bass16</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Your 400 lbs of energy at 1000 is plenty for big game in North America, as long as your shot placement is reliable and repeatable.
With my rifle, load and conditions, i drop below 400lbs of energy at about 675m

i agree with T-Money, but i think the OP was asking more in regard to the energy delivery upon impact.

I can still shoot MOA out to 800m but am running out of energy at or beyond that distance with my bullets.

for example. if you can shoot a 6" group at 1000m...is 400lbs of energy enough to rely on?
how much energy would you consider "effective" regardless of distance.

Perhaps some fellows with wispers are running out of energy at 400, still shooting good groups with reliable dope, but the energy could become a concern. </div></div>

I think I will disagree here. You said "plenty for big game of North America" with a statement like that you include critters in my back yard. Will a bullet fired from 800 yards with 400 Lbs of energy kill say a 1400 lb Brown Bear or a moose coming in at 1k? I think it will sooner or later. But that is not what hunting is about. It has been said that hunting is not sniping. You might be able to hit, but will it kill right then and there. On a Brown Bear, you make the hit in the lungs, then what, it makes it into the alders, you have a living VW bus that's real pissed and will fuck you up. Same as that moose. This year I watched a moose take 3 pills from my 338 Lapua in the lungs before he gave up the game, oh ya, it was 186 yards. What I'm getting at in this rant is, yes you can make the hit, but please try to get as close as you can, you owe it to the animal to make it a clean quick kill.



Rant over. </div></div>

Beautifully stated. By all means, feel free to continue if you like. Hunting is most definately not "sniping". Both require a certain responsibility..

In hunting we owe it to the animals to deliver the very best.Which means as clean, and lethal a shot as possible.

Anyone can practice and shoot effecively from beyond 300 yrd range ,if due diligence is executed. Yet again that is not really the point, though longer shots present themsleves and should be taken at times.

The game changes on elk and moose jacked up on adrenaline and testosterone. I suspect it is a real game changer on a grizzly or brown bear. In that case only getting jacked up would be a blessing. It occurs to me someone not putting the bear away post haste could end up asa dinner.

Beside all that nothing beats getting up close and personal to those magnificent animals. The adrenaline rush is indescribable.

 

[Shooter21]

Re: Effective Range?

nothing says "I don't fly for shit" like a 168 SMK. I wouldn't take a shot over 500 with it anyway

 

[XL Mammal]

Re: Effective Range?

Be prepared to track with a SMK. They can leave an exit hole that you can't get your pinky finger in. Found that out with a heart shot on a whitetail at 325 yds. I'd treat hunting with match ammo like bow hunting. Go for the double-lung shot, so you're not relying on expansion and have a chance of finding blood. Good luck.

 

[badred6]

Re: Effective Range?

It is not advised to hunt with match bullets, it can be done but it may not work out to well. Dont shoot further than you have practiced.

 

[spaniel]

Re: Effective Range?

We don't archery hunt with field points; if your velocity drops below the minimum expansion velocity for the bullet you are using then this is essentially what you have once the energy level drops below where significant shock damage will occur. If you pencil a match bullet through the lungs of an elk at 900 yards with a 308, prepare for a long, long tracking job. This does not do the animal justice.

With high power rifles, I would never hunt at a range where my bullet will not reliably expand.

With larger calibers the rules change somewhat. A .45cal or .50cal muzzleloader shooting a hollowpoint bullet will leave a nice hole regardless of expansion.

 

[Jhnmdahl]

Re: Effective Range?

If you're sighted in and most comfortable shooting 168gr SMK, you could switch to something like a Nosler Partition that has very similar ballistics but will expand on a hit. Maybe something like:

http://www.midwayusa.com/viewproduct/?productnumber=570724

John

 

[Bevan]

Re: Effective Range?

I've never used SMK. But for Amax bullets (which I do use) I know they expand down to 1500fps impact velocity so I am happy to shoot at least that far with them - if the shot is one that I am able to make with a high % at that range, wx conditions, rest etc

 

[Top Cat]

Re: Effective Range?

The effective range of a hunting bullet is partly determined by the velocity window over which the bullet will perform as it was designed to do. Most manufacturers publish this data.

Whether designed for target or hunting, over time thousands of man hours and millions of dollars are spent on research to refine bullet designs before they come on the market. Hunting bullets undergo a lot of engineering and testing in the lab and also on actual game.

Though some hunters use the SMK and have satisfactory results, it was not designed as a hunting bullet and is far from the best design in that category.

The SMK will work, as will a cast lead round ball, but the point is that there are many better choices that are both accurate and more effective. There are much more advanced designs, and nearly all of them better on game than the SMK...and for only a couple of $20 bills, all the benefits of those R&D millions, time and effort can be yours...buy a box, live a little.

TC

 

[Bevan]

Re: Effective Range?

Amax bullets work as well as or better than any hunting bullets I've tried in the cartridges I use them in. Wouldn't be my first choice on bears or moose but for deer and other smallish game they're great

 

[Greg Langelius *]

Re: Effective Range?

I'd say effective range depends on at least three factors. Shot placement, terminal energy, and the bullet's ability to transfer that energy.

Some bullets require a lot of energy to expand and could fail to cause adequate cavitation, others might expand and transfer energy very efficiently, and others could expand too quickly, disintegrate, and only create a very shallow region of cavitation.

Using a calc to plot trajectories and determine terminal energy does not do the entire job.

Bullet makers generally asssign game types to load data, etc., for their various bullets. Assumptions get made that apply judgements about the distances the bullets will be used at. This is where the Long Shot Hunter can get into trouble, and the main reason I am not a fan of long shots

Too often the bullet which has the great ballistics and is recommended for a particular type of game will go those extra hundreds of yards and arrive too pooped to pop. The result could be an escaped, wounded animal.

Greg

 

[JSTARSZ]

Re: Effective Range?

I think a Barnes 168 GR TTSX would be a much better choice for a hunting bullet and if you use a 168 SMK it won't be that different in flight but I would re-zero of course. I agree with above from Alaskaman 11, it is imperative that you take the animal as clean as you can to avoid wounding it and making it suffer. And, that is why there are hunting bullets and match bullets that have different applications.

 

[Vandon16]

Re: Effective Range?

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: T-Money</div><div class="ubbcode-body">I would have to say that ft/lbs of energy is not what kills. Bullet placement and cavitation is what kills. A .30 caliber wound channel through any animals lungs or heart will kill it wheather it has 5000 ft/lbs or 200 ft/lbs behind it. At distance velocity becomes more important than ft/lbs.

Another example is archery. Arrows or bolts aren't carrying 400 ft/lbs of energy, yet they kill.

Shot placement is the most important factor. </div></div>

Well said. Would it be cool to say you took a deer @ 500-1000 yds? Probably get you a free beer or two and a pat on the back. BUT, if you misplace your shot, wound and not recover your game how will you sleep at night? Surely you will tell no one of this. If long range game taking (deer) is what you seek than I would consider something with a little more poop behind it just for piece of mind. My 2 cents. CD