If sniper's use them to take out humans, why do people think that they will not work for hunting coyotes, deer, etc???
-
Having trouble using the site?
Contact support
why not hunt with 175 smk's
- Thread starter kingfamous
- Start date
Re: why not hunt with 175 smk's
It's well known that a .30 caliber hole is not nearly large enough to kill a deer! The bullet absolutely must expand a full ten times to be lethal enough to not have to hit them in the vitals. Use ballistic tips or partitions so that you can hit them anywhere and drop them dead in their tracks.
(Ducking for cover. . . )
It's well known that a .30 caliber hole is not nearly large enough to kill a deer! The bullet absolutely must expand a full ten times to be lethal enough to not have to hit them in the vitals. Use ballistic tips or partitions so that you can hit them anywhere and drop them dead in their tracks.
(Ducking for cover. . . )
Re: why not hunt with 175 smk's
Some people do.
I use Lapua Scenars for hunting.
Its all about shot placement. I can put a 155 grain scenar thru a stop sign pole at 500 yards. I couldnt even do that with my 320lb draw weight compound bow at point blank range. So i figure my accurate little scenars have enough penetration to break a shoulder or penetrate vitals and rib cage.
I think SMK's have a thinner jacket than the scenars, but you could still use them on coyotes if you wanted to.
Some people do.
I use Lapua Scenars for hunting.
Its all about shot placement. I can put a 155 grain scenar thru a stop sign pole at 500 yards. I couldnt even do that with my 320lb draw weight compound bow at point blank range. So i figure my accurate little scenars have enough penetration to break a shoulder or penetrate vitals and rib cage.
I think SMK's have a thinner jacket than the scenars, but you could still use them on coyotes if you wanted to.
Re: why not hunt with 175 smk's
I made the mistake shooting 175 FGMM while out on a night shoot. Accidently shot a deer 1 inch under the eyes and did not kill it. From now on I will never use a match bullet for hunting game. Go ahead and learn for yourself.
If it wasn't for the Geneva convention I'm sure our snipers would use much more devestating bullets to put down our enemies.
Happy huntings kingfamous.
I made the mistake shooting 175 FGMM while out on a night shoot. Accidently shot a deer 1 inch under the eyes and did not kill it. From now on I will never use a match bullet for hunting game. Go ahead and learn for yourself.
If it wasn't for the Geneva convention I'm sure our snipers would use much more devestating bullets to put down our enemies.
Happy huntings kingfamous.
Re: why not hunt with 175 smk's
Funny I've killed deer and hogs with the Sierra 168. All were DRT. I've always neck shot and never had any problems. I shot a 200lb Louisiana sow hog at about 85 yards hit her just behind the shoulder high and angling back. The bullet fully penetrated and exited through a 2-3" exit wound.....hog DRT(lots of pink mist)
Funny I've killed deer and hogs with the Sierra 168. All were DRT. I've always neck shot and never had any problems. I shot a 200lb Louisiana sow hog at about 85 yards hit her just behind the shoulder high and angling back. The bullet fully penetrated and exited through a 2-3" exit wound.....hog DRT(lots of pink mist)
Re: why not hunt with 175 smk's
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: stungib</div><div class="ubbcode-body">I made the mistake shooting 175 FGMM while out on a night shoot. Accidently shot a deer 1 inch under the eyes and did not kill it. From now on I will never use a match bullet for hunting game. Go ahead and learn for yourself.
If it wasn't for the Geneva convention I'm sure our snipers would use much more devestating bullets to put down our enemies.
Happy huntings kingfamous. </div></div>
That's because your shot placement was off. If your trying to sell that a head shot to a dear with a 308 was not lethal ONLY because it was a match bullet....
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: stungib</div><div class="ubbcode-body">I made the mistake shooting 175 FGMM while out on a night shoot. Accidently shot a deer 1 inch under the eyes and did not kill it. From now on I will never use a match bullet for hunting game. Go ahead and learn for yourself.
If it wasn't for the Geneva convention I'm sure our snipers would use much more devestating bullets to put down our enemies.
Happy huntings kingfamous. </div></div>
That's because your shot placement was off. If your trying to sell that a head shot to a dear with a 308 was not lethal ONLY because it was a match bullet....
Re: why not hunt with 175 smk's
for coyotes with decent shot placement i believe it would be fine. (i do it myself with 142 smk's out of my .260) but the problem on big game is that the thin jacket fragments rapidly, acting somewhat like the v-max's do on prairie dogs, it ruins lots of meet and does not alway have enough penetration. as for shooting humans it is quiet effective, causes massive shock, trauma, and tissue damage.
Disclaimer: this is solely my opinion backed up by scientific experiments that i can not directly quote or provide links to, and / or my personal observations in the field.....
for coyotes with decent shot placement i believe it would be fine. (i do it myself with 142 smk's out of my .260) but the problem on big game is that the thin jacket fragments rapidly, acting somewhat like the v-max's do on prairie dogs, it ruins lots of meet and does not alway have enough penetration. as for shooting humans it is quiet effective, causes massive shock, trauma, and tissue damage.
Disclaimer: this is solely my opinion backed up by scientific experiments that i can not directly quote or provide links to, and / or my personal observations in the field.....
Re: why not hunt with 175 smk's
Many years ago I had 3 deer lost to other hunters because the hollow point bullets blew apart on the ribs and never penetrated the chest. I changed to Nosler Partition bullets and haven't lost a deer since. Very seldom have they gone more than 10 feet after the hit. I have been doing some testing on Barnes "X" bullets. They look very promising.
The bottom line is shoot what works for you. I just prefer to not loose any animal because of the ammo I'm shooting.
Many years ago I had 3 deer lost to other hunters because the hollow point bullets blew apart on the ribs and never penetrated the chest. I changed to Nosler Partition bullets and haven't lost a deer since. Very seldom have they gone more than 10 feet after the hit. I have been doing some testing on Barnes "X" bullets. They look very promising.
The bottom line is shoot what works for you. I just prefer to not loose any animal because of the ammo I'm shooting.
Re: why not hunt with 175 smk's
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Arboreal</div><div class="ubbcode-body">I didn't know a human could pull back that heavy a bow. </div></div>
Hopefully down under, draw weight is commonly mistaken with arrow velocity in fps. Then it would make perfect sense.
Surprised no one else jumped all over that.
If I'm mistaken, I'd like to hire this guy to pull start my snow mobile this winter. It's been a real p.i.t.a. lately.
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Arboreal</div><div class="ubbcode-body">I didn't know a human could pull back that heavy a bow. </div></div>
Hopefully down under, draw weight is commonly mistaken with arrow velocity in fps. Then it would make perfect sense.
Surprised no one else jumped all over that.
If I'm mistaken, I'd like to hire this guy to pull start my snow mobile this winter. It's been a real p.i.t.a. lately.
Re: why not hunt with 175 smk's
LMFAO yup sorry fellas, im still pissed from last nights NYE antics.... ahhhhh a keg of Heinneken to myself
320FPS, not lb's draw weight.
Can someone please explain something to me...
Ok, so Berger bullets have matched Hunting and Match ammo, same BC only difference being the jackets have different thickness. Im told the "Hunting" projectiles have thinner jackets.
I then hear people saying that match projo's are not good due to their "thin" jackets, yet Berger makes their hunting projo's in an even thinner jacket.
To me this information is conflicting.
Im in no way trying to start a pissing match as I do believe the stories I hear of jacket failures on heavy skinned animals... but whats the deal.
Or is it simply that Berger are trying to push a higher level of frangibility (is that even a word?) as the cause for DRT animals?
LMFAO yup sorry fellas, im still pissed from last nights NYE antics.... ahhhhh a keg of Heinneken to myself
320FPS, not lb's draw weight.
Can someone please explain something to me...
Ok, so Berger bullets have matched Hunting and Match ammo, same BC only difference being the jackets have different thickness. Im told the "Hunting" projectiles have thinner jackets.
I then hear people saying that match projo's are not good due to their "thin" jackets, yet Berger makes their hunting projo's in an even thinner jacket.
To me this information is conflicting.
Im in no way trying to start a pissing match as I do believe the stories I hear of jacket failures on heavy skinned animals... but whats the deal.
Or is it simply that Berger are trying to push a higher level of frangibility (is that even a word?) as the cause for DRT animals?
Re: why not hunt with 175 smk's
vman,
Regarding Berger, many get the two jackets and the time line confused...
The original VLD is what would later become known as the hunting bullet line, when it was learned that some match shooters were having problems with bullets not making it to the target. Berger quickly developed a heavy jacket version and when it was released they changed the packaging on the original version, putting them into a hunters orange box and marking them "Hunting".
I suspect that the blow ups we hear of are still old inventory bought/imported before the switch over. To add insult to injury, the original version was in packaging that had the term match grade or some such marked on the box as well. But it was those (the original) that started the hunting revolution so to speak.
stungib,
Looking at my European mounts, 1” below the eye would not be a kill shot regardless of what bullet was used. An inch and a half behind the eye would have taken out the brain cavity, and below that would be the spine.
OP,
People think that they will not work for hunting coyotes, deer, etc because Sierra specifically recommends them for target shooting only.
The following is my opinion only...
If Sierra were to indorse them for hunting use, Sierra would be acknowledging the design does expand and this would likely lead to the military looking to another bullet and Sierra... a loss of revenue.
Now SMK’s do have a jacket that has been said to be 45% thicker than game bullets, so it does stand to reason that they would stay together longer and/or less likely to expand. But you are free to use them as you see fit. I have used them against ground hogs and they preformed just like a FMJ when no bone was hit. Berger Hunting VLD’s expand violently, Lapua Scenars I have not made up my mind about them yet. I used one to down this guy this season but the bullet did exit and was un-recovered so I can not say one way or the other.
Due to the shot no bone was hit and the bullet traveled from just behind the front leg (as I was taught) and exited a six inches beyond the diaphragm. The deer was traveling quartering towards me. From now on I will always aim for my exit as a exploded tummy is not so yummy.
vman,
Regarding Berger, many get the two jackets and the time line confused...
The original VLD is what would later become known as the hunting bullet line, when it was learned that some match shooters were having problems with bullets not making it to the target. Berger quickly developed a heavy jacket version and when it was released they changed the packaging on the original version, putting them into a hunters orange box and marking them "Hunting".
I suspect that the blow ups we hear of are still old inventory bought/imported before the switch over. To add insult to injury, the original version was in packaging that had the term match grade or some such marked on the box as well. But it was those (the original) that started the hunting revolution so to speak.
stungib,
Looking at my European mounts, 1” below the eye would not be a kill shot regardless of what bullet was used. An inch and a half behind the eye would have taken out the brain cavity, and below that would be the spine.
OP,
People think that they will not work for hunting coyotes, deer, etc because Sierra specifically recommends them for target shooting only.
The following is my opinion only...
If Sierra were to indorse them for hunting use, Sierra would be acknowledging the design does expand and this would likely lead to the military looking to another bullet and Sierra... a loss of revenue.
Now SMK’s do have a jacket that has been said to be 45% thicker than game bullets, so it does stand to reason that they would stay together longer and/or less likely to expand. But you are free to use them as you see fit. I have used them against ground hogs and they preformed just like a FMJ when no bone was hit. Berger Hunting VLD’s expand violently, Lapua Scenars I have not made up my mind about them yet. I used one to down this guy this season but the bullet did exit and was un-recovered so I can not say one way or the other.
Due to the shot no bone was hit and the bullet traveled from just behind the front leg (as I was taught) and exited a six inches beyond the diaphragm. The deer was traveling quartering towards me. From now on I will always aim for my exit as a exploded tummy is not so yummy.
Re: why not hunt with 175 smk's
The SMK is not designed to expand, neither is a muzzel loading round ball. From everything I've read both will kill a deer. I might have to look at the Berger .30 caliber line. I don't hunt due to lack of opportunity, not ethics, and would like to have a .308 match round and hunting round with the same ballistic curve.
The SMK is not designed to expand, neither is a muzzel loading round ball. From everything I've read both will kill a deer. I might have to look at the Berger .30 caliber line. I don't hunt due to lack of opportunity, not ethics, and would like to have a .308 match round and hunting round with the same ballistic curve.
Re: why not hunt with 175 smk's
Round ball will kill a deer. Been using it for 10 years and hasnt failed. As for the expanding bullets I would rather not use them. From what ive seen whatever you kill there is little usable meat due to lead or copper fragments all over the place. Hit em in the neck and you wont have a problem whatever you use.
Round ball will kill a deer. Been using it for 10 years and hasnt failed. As for the expanding bullets I would rather not use them. From what ive seen whatever you kill there is little usable meat due to lead or copper fragments all over the place. Hit em in the neck and you wont have a problem whatever you use.
Re: why not hunt with 175 smk's
In my experience 175smk will work on deer, but why take the chance, I use barnes 168ttsx or 130ttsx bullets in my .308 and they shoot sub 1/2moa and work very well on deer and bear. I just dont understand why you wouldnt want to use a dedicated game load that shot well.
In my experience 175smk will work on deer, but why take the chance, I use barnes 168ttsx or 130ttsx bullets in my .308 and they shoot sub 1/2moa and work very well on deer and bear. I just dont understand why you wouldnt want to use a dedicated game load that shot well.
Re: why not hunt with 175 smk's
I shot a large buck with a 223 75gr Hornady BTHP. The bullet came apart upon impact into 3 large pieces and each piece penetrated to the opposite hide. I shot him back behind the vitals and he was dead within 80 yards.
I would not hesitate to use the round again.
I assume a 168 smk would have better results.
I shot a large buck with a 223 75gr Hornady BTHP. The bullet came apart upon impact into 3 large pieces and each piece penetrated to the opposite hide. I shot him back behind the vitals and he was dead within 80 yards.
I would not hesitate to use the round again.
I assume a 168 smk would have better results.
Re: why not hunt with 175 smk's
The Hornady boat tail bullets seem to work pretty good on deer in .223, so does the 70gr barnes. The problem I have seen with the SMK is they dont always seem to give you a good blood trail. 80 to 100yds where I hunt could take a long time to find a animal if no blood trail was present. Any animal I ever shot with a nosler part. or barnes ttsx series bullet has either been DRT, or bleed very hard for a easy trail to follow.
The Hornady boat tail bullets seem to work pretty good on deer in .223, so does the 70gr barnes. The problem I have seen with the SMK is they dont always seem to give you a good blood trail. 80 to 100yds where I hunt could take a long time to find a animal if no blood trail was present. Any animal I ever shot with a nosler part. or barnes ttsx series bullet has either been DRT, or bleed very hard for a easy trail to follow.
Re: why not hunt with 175 smk's
My most recent deer was an 8 point cull buck that was taken with my .243 shooting 90gr Lapua Scenar at 3000 fps. Deer was 144 yards away and quartering toward me. Bullet entered the neck about 9 inches forward of the shoulder and passed through the neck, into the chest cavity and through the opposite side at the third from last rib. must have been ~24" of total penetration with the spine encountered at about 10" in. THe exit wound was ~1.5" in diameter. Deer was paralyzed in three legs and stopped moving (died) in about 10 to 15 seconds.DRT. Plenty of blood there should it have been needed for trailing.
I have also taken four nutria (large varmint, looks like a huge rat) with the same load at 250 yds with no ill effect. Bullet appears to expand and create a 1.5 to 2" exit wound after 6" of penetration.
I plan on using 175 SMK or other similar "match" bullets for long range deer hunting once my 308 build is complete.
tater
My most recent deer was an 8 point cull buck that was taken with my .243 shooting 90gr Lapua Scenar at 3000 fps. Deer was 144 yards away and quartering toward me. Bullet entered the neck about 9 inches forward of the shoulder and passed through the neck, into the chest cavity and through the opposite side at the third from last rib. must have been ~24" of total penetration with the spine encountered at about 10" in. THe exit wound was ~1.5" in diameter. Deer was paralyzed in three legs and stopped moving (died) in about 10 to 15 seconds.DRT. Plenty of blood there should it have been needed for trailing.
I have also taken four nutria (large varmint, looks like a huge rat) with the same load at 250 yds with no ill effect. Bullet appears to expand and create a 1.5 to 2" exit wound after 6" of penetration.
I plan on using 175 SMK or other similar "match" bullets for long range deer hunting once my 308 build is complete.
tater
Re: why not hunt with 175 smk's
Why other than being too lazy to develop a hunting load would you take the risk of losing an animal to a less than perfect shot with a match bullet?
White tails are not big animals, I use 150gr bullets and could easily get by with something lighter. If you insist on a heavy(er) bullet use either version of the SGK 165 (HP or SP). It's a BT bullet that will get you out as far as you can likely see to shoot.
Why other than being too lazy to develop a hunting load would you take the risk of losing an animal to a less than perfect shot with a match bullet?
White tails are not big animals, I use 150gr bullets and could easily get by with something lighter. If you insist on a heavy(er) bullet use either version of the SGK 165 (HP or SP). It's a BT bullet that will get you out as far as you can likely see to shoot.
Re: why not hunt with 175 smk's
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: XTR</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Why other than being too lazy to develop a hunting load would you take the risk of losing an animal to a less than perfect shot with a match bullet?
</div></div>
Why other than being too lazy and not putting in the practice would you attempt to pad a less than perfect shot with a "Hunting" bullet...
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: XTR</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Why other than being too lazy to develop a hunting load would you take the risk of losing an animal to a less than perfect shot with a match bullet?
</div></div>
Why other than being too lazy and not putting in the practice would you attempt to pad a less than perfect shot with a "Hunting" bullet...
Re: why not hunt with 175 smk's
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: elkhuntinguide</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: XTR</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Why other than being too lazy to develop a hunting load would you take the risk of losing an animal to a less than perfect shot with a match bullet?
</div></div>
Why other than being too lazy and not putting in the practice would you attempt to pad a less than perfect shot with a "Hunting" bullet... </div></div>
Touche.
Because we're not talking about paper targets, and flyers happen. When I take a shot I expect it to be a 1 shot kill, and they usually are, but not all have been, so I'll take the advantage of a bullet that it designed to expand over one that isn't.
That and what is the real difference in MOA between a hunting bullet like a SGK and a SMK? Something like 0.5MOA off of a bench/bipod? In real world shooting you're probably looking at a difference that you can't see.
I also don't hunt "big game" animals (i.e., deer) with small caliber rounds. Yea, I know you can kill white tails with a 22LR it doesn't make it the best answer.
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: elkhuntinguide</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: XTR</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Why other than being too lazy to develop a hunting load would you take the risk of losing an animal to a less than perfect shot with a match bullet?
</div></div>
Why other than being too lazy and not putting in the practice would you attempt to pad a less than perfect shot with a "Hunting" bullet... </div></div>
Touche.
Because we're not talking about paper targets, and flyers happen. When I take a shot I expect it to be a 1 shot kill, and they usually are, but not all have been, so I'll take the advantage of a bullet that it designed to expand over one that isn't.
That and what is the real difference in MOA between a hunting bullet like a SGK and a SMK? Something like 0.5MOA off of a bench/bipod? In real world shooting you're probably looking at a difference that you can't see.
I also don't hunt "big game" animals (i.e., deer) with small caliber rounds. Yea, I know you can kill white tails with a 22LR it doesn't make it the best answer.
Re: why not hunt with 175 smk's
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: XTR</div><div class="ubbcode-body">
Touche.
Because we're not talking about paper targets, and flyers happen. </div></div>
I was not referring to paper either... Shot placement will by far trump bullet design and headstamp everytime...
A bad shot is a bad shot no matter the projectile type or caliber...
The SMK will definitely kill when placed correctly as will any other projectile...
Are "flyers" a product of the equipment or a product of the marksman...
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: XTR</div><div class="ubbcode-body">
Touche.
Because we're not talking about paper targets, and flyers happen. </div></div>
I was not referring to paper either... Shot placement will by far trump bullet design and headstamp everytime...
A bad shot is a bad shot no matter the projectile type or caliber...
The SMK will definitely kill when placed correctly as will any other projectile...
Are "flyers" a product of the equipment or a product of the marksman...
Re: why not hunt with 175 smk's
EHG, while a agree, (and i use amax to hunt by the way) you have to admit there can be an advantage to a good terminal performing bullet.
If you have <span style="text-decoration: underline"><span style="font-style: italic"><span style="font-weight: bold">never</span></span></span> missed your point of aim on a game animal you have either :
Not hunted enough to truely be in this conversation
or
are lying.
going by your name im sure you have hunted enough, and i doubt you are trying to say you have never missed poa, so really who is to fault a guy for using a hunting bullet that gives a little padding? but like i said, i shoot match bullets even when nuisance hunting deer at night. I have never had an issue with too little penetration or too little expansion.
also, not all game animals have a chest cavity the size of my freezer :}
EHG, while a agree, (and i use amax to hunt by the way) you have to admit there can be an advantage to a good terminal performing bullet.
If you have <span style="text-decoration: underline"><span style="font-style: italic"><span style="font-weight: bold">never</span></span></span> missed your point of aim on a game animal you have either :
Not hunted enough to truely be in this conversation
or
are lying.
going by your name im sure you have hunted enough, and i doubt you are trying to say you have never missed poa, so really who is to fault a guy for using a hunting bullet that gives a little padding? but like i said, i shoot match bullets even when nuisance hunting deer at night. I have never had an issue with too little penetration or too little expansion.
also, not all game animals have a chest cavity the size of my freezer :}
Re: why not hunt with 175 smk's
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: elkhuntinguide</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: XTR</div><div class="ubbcode-body">
Touche.
Because we're not talking about paper targets, and flyers happen. </div></div>
I was not referring to paper either... Shot placement will by far trump bullet design and headstamp everytime...
A bad shot is a bad shot no matter the projectile type or caliber...
The SMK will definitely kill when placed correctly as will any other projectile...
Are "flyers" a product of the equipment or a product of the marksman... </div></div>
Most are surely the marksman. If your handle is actually your profession then I'm sure you've seen more than your fair share of ill-advised shots taken, and more than a few misses. A lot of guys go in the woods to hunt, few are truly marksmen.
There is no argument against proper shot placement, that's a given. But a lung shot just behind the shoulder that misses major blood vessels will kill cleaner/faster if the bullet expands, the same for one that thrown a little wider and hits the liver.
I'm not a fan of the type of bullet that over expand/fragment when they get to the first rib, but I want to see something better/bigger than a .308 hole from one side to the other.
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: elkhuntinguide</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: XTR</div><div class="ubbcode-body">
Touche.
Because we're not talking about paper targets, and flyers happen. </div></div>
I was not referring to paper either... Shot placement will by far trump bullet design and headstamp everytime...
A bad shot is a bad shot no matter the projectile type or caliber...
The SMK will definitely kill when placed correctly as will any other projectile...
Are "flyers" a product of the equipment or a product of the marksman... </div></div>
Most are surely the marksman. If your handle is actually your profession then I'm sure you've seen more than your fair share of ill-advised shots taken, and more than a few misses. A lot of guys go in the woods to hunt, few are truly marksmen.
There is no argument against proper shot placement, that's a given. But a lung shot just behind the shoulder that misses major blood vessels will kill cleaner/faster if the bullet expands, the same for one that thrown a little wider and hits the liver.
I'm not a fan of the type of bullet that over expand/fragment when they get to the first rib, but I want to see something better/bigger than a .308 hole from one side to the other.
Re: why not hunt with 175 smk's
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: armymedic.2</div><div class="ubbcode-body">EHG, while a agree, (and i use amax to hunt by the way) you have to admit there can be an advantage to a good terminal performing bullet.
If you have <span style="text-decoration: underline"><span style="font-style: italic"><span style="font-weight: bold">never</span></span></span> missed your point of aim on a game animal you have either :
Not hunted enough to truely be in this conversation
or
are lying.
going by your name im sure you have hunted enough, and i doubt you are trying to say you have never missed poa, so really who is to fault a guy for using a hunting bullet that gives a little padding? but like i said, i shoot match bullets even when nuisance hunting deer at night. I have never had an issue with too little penetration or too little expansion.
also, not all game animals have a chest cavity the size of my freezer :} </div></div>
I do see an advantage to a good terminal performing bullet thus the reason I say an SMK will work fine when properly placed... I have <span style="text-decoration: underline"><span style="font-weight: bold">NEVER</span></span> experienced a problem or witnessed the Horror stories I have heard/read with the SMK...
I have killed a few things here and there and may not be qualified to truly be in this conversation but what the hell... I'll give it my best...
I have missed my POA but hoping a bullet would make up for my inconsistencies is comical... attempting to replace practice and trigger time with bullets/equipment will never make a marksman...
No one is at fault for using certain bullets/equipment of their choice but to attempt to pad poor marksmanship with said items is fuckin funny...
The AMax is a great bullet as well... All bullets will kill as long as the shooter takes shots within his/her paygrade...
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: armymedic.2</div><div class="ubbcode-body">EHG, while a agree, (and i use amax to hunt by the way) you have to admit there can be an advantage to a good terminal performing bullet.
If you have <span style="text-decoration: underline"><span style="font-style: italic"><span style="font-weight: bold">never</span></span></span> missed your point of aim on a game animal you have either :
Not hunted enough to truely be in this conversation
or
are lying.
going by your name im sure you have hunted enough, and i doubt you are trying to say you have never missed poa, so really who is to fault a guy for using a hunting bullet that gives a little padding? but like i said, i shoot match bullets even when nuisance hunting deer at night. I have never had an issue with too little penetration or too little expansion.
also, not all game animals have a chest cavity the size of my freezer :} </div></div>
I do see an advantage to a good terminal performing bullet thus the reason I say an SMK will work fine when properly placed... I have <span style="text-decoration: underline"><span style="font-weight: bold">NEVER</span></span> experienced a problem or witnessed the Horror stories I have heard/read with the SMK...
I have killed a few things here and there and may not be qualified to truly be in this conversation but what the hell... I'll give it my best...
I have missed my POA but hoping a bullet would make up for my inconsistencies is comical... attempting to replace practice and trigger time with bullets/equipment will never make a marksman...
No one is at fault for using certain bullets/equipment of their choice but to attempt to pad poor marksmanship with said items is fuckin funny...
The AMax is a great bullet as well... All bullets will kill as long as the shooter takes shots within his/her paygrade...
Re: why not hunt with 175 smk's
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: XTR</div><div class="ubbcode-body">
Most are surely the marksman. If your handle is actually your profession then I'm sure you've seen more than your fair share of ill-advised shots taken, and more than a few misses. A lot of guys go in the woods to hunt, few are truly marksmen.
There is no argument against proper shot placement, that's a given. But a lung shot just behind the shoulder that misses major blood vessels will kill cleaner/faster if the bullet expands, the same for one that thrown a little wider and hits the liver.
I'm not a fan of the type of bullet that over expand/fragment when they get to the first rib, but I want to see something better/bigger than a .308 hole from one side to the other.
</div></div>
I have seen a ton of terrible shots as well as excellent shots...
I have seen a lot of "Hunting" bullets fail as well... Failure to expand in most cases...
As mentioned above I have never had a problem with the SMK... YMMV...
Use what works best for you...
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: XTR</div><div class="ubbcode-body">
Most are surely the marksman. If your handle is actually your profession then I'm sure you've seen more than your fair share of ill-advised shots taken, and more than a few misses. A lot of guys go in the woods to hunt, few are truly marksmen.
There is no argument against proper shot placement, that's a given. But a lung shot just behind the shoulder that misses major blood vessels will kill cleaner/faster if the bullet expands, the same for one that thrown a little wider and hits the liver.
I'm not a fan of the type of bullet that over expand/fragment when they get to the first rib, but I want to see something better/bigger than a .308 hole from one side to the other.
</div></div>
I have seen a ton of terrible shots as well as excellent shots...
I have seen a lot of "Hunting" bullets fail as well... Failure to expand in most cases...
As mentioned above I have never had a problem with the SMK... YMMV...
Use what works best for you...
Re: why not hunt with 175 smk's
I Would venture to guess that some would argue that a 105 AMAX wouldn't expand 1100 yards from the muzzle.... But will sure dump a yote within 10 ft with a kinda poor shot. Pick your shots an you could shoot a FMJ! never seen a headless/brainless deer walk away
I Would venture to guess that some would argue that a 105 AMAX wouldn't expand 1100 yards from the muzzle.... But will sure dump a yote within 10 ft with a kinda poor shot. Pick your shots an you could shoot a FMJ! never seen a headless/brainless deer walk away
Re: why not hunt with 175 smk's
"I have missed my POA but hoping a bullet would make up for my inconsistencies is comical... attempting to replace practice and trigger time with bullets/equipment will never make a marksman..."
supremely true......also not what the op was saying.
and a good bullet will make up an inch or two's error sometimes. no doubt in my mind (or science's. not something to count on in favor of practice however.
"I have missed my POA but hoping a bullet would make up for my inconsistencies is comical... attempting to replace practice and trigger time with bullets/equipment will never make a marksman..."
supremely true......also not what the op was saying.
and a good bullet will make up an inch or two's error sometimes. no doubt in my mind (or science's. not something to count on in favor of practice however.
Re: why not hunt with 175 smk's
I think that anytime a game animal is involved, ANYTHING that reduces potential human error is what we should all be striving for.
I think that anytime a game animal is involved, ANYTHING that reduces potential human error is what we should all be striving for.
Re: why not hunt with 175 smk's
On AR15.com a lot of the guys are using 75 gr SMK's to deer hunt with.
On AR15.com a lot of the guys are using 75 gr SMK's to deer hunt with.
Re: why not hunt with 175 smk's
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Jerkface11</div><div class="ubbcode-body"> On AR15.com a lot of the guys are using 75 gr SMK's to deer hunt with. </div></div>
In my book anyone older than 13 using a .223 to hunt deer is an ass.
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Jerkface11</div><div class="ubbcode-body"> On AR15.com a lot of the guys are using 75 gr SMK's to deer hunt with. </div></div>
In my book anyone older than 13 using a .223 to hunt deer is an ass.
Re: why not hunt with 175 smk's
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: XTR</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Jerkface11</div><div class="ubbcode-body"> On AR15.com a lot of the guys are using 75 gr SMK's to deer hunt with. </div></div>
In my book anyone older than 13 using a .223 to hunt deer is an ass. </div></div>
seriouly? cause we should all hunt with a 300 RUM. give me a break. cause you're saying a .223 soft point won't go through both shoulders while spraying bone fragments through nearly every vital organ on it's way?
that is like saying a "light" load out of a 243 won't get the job done..........
and let's not forget suddenly it's ok to let a kid do something you wouldn't want to do yourself? anyone that thinks like that is an ass.....
and yeah i get your point, i just don't agree with it. just like i don't agree that smk's and amax are not apprpriate for killing, just like to play devil's advocate.
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: XTR</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Jerkface11</div><div class="ubbcode-body"> On AR15.com a lot of the guys are using 75 gr SMK's to deer hunt with. </div></div>
In my book anyone older than 13 using a .223 to hunt deer is an ass. </div></div>
seriouly? cause we should all hunt with a 300 RUM. give me a break. cause you're saying a .223 soft point won't go through both shoulders while spraying bone fragments through nearly every vital organ on it's way?
that is like saying a "light" load out of a 243 won't get the job done..........
and let's not forget suddenly it's ok to let a kid do something you wouldn't want to do yourself? anyone that thinks like that is an ass.....
and yeah i get your point, i just don't agree with it. just like i don't agree that smk's and amax are not apprpriate for killing, just like to play devil's advocate.
Re: why not hunt with 175 smk's
I just dont understand why somebody would not develop a dedicated hunting load. My 130gr ttsx barnes load is pretty much as accurate as my 175gr smk load out to 200yds(never checked past that, thats twice as far as I can see in heavy wooded area we hunt). It is devasting on white tail, maybe the 175smk load would kill good also, but I dont need to find out.
I just dont understand why somebody would not develop a dedicated hunting load. My 130gr ttsx barnes load is pretty much as accurate as my 175gr smk load out to 200yds(never checked past that, thats twice as far as I can see in heavy wooded area we hunt). It is devasting on white tail, maybe the 175smk load would kill good also, but I dont need to find out.
Re: why not hunt with 175 smk's
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: pappy83</div><div class="ubbcode-body">I just dont understand why somebody would not develop a dedicated hunting load.</div></div>
I could see why you might not if you hunted with your "accuracy" rifle and didn't want to bother losing range time to developing and becoming proficient with a bullet/load that you'll only make a couple shots in anger with a year. Especially with the full knowledge that no matter how the bullet performs terminally it's heavy enough to power through and put the smackdown on deer sized critters.
My serious accuracy rifle isn't going much farther than 30' from my truck since it weighs over 20# and has a 30" bbl so for me it's a non issue. But I can see how it might for folks with lighter guns hunting from fixed cover.
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: pappy83</div><div class="ubbcode-body">I just dont understand why somebody would not develop a dedicated hunting load.</div></div>
I could see why you might not if you hunted with your "accuracy" rifle and didn't want to bother losing range time to developing and becoming proficient with a bullet/load that you'll only make a couple shots in anger with a year. Especially with the full knowledge that no matter how the bullet performs terminally it's heavy enough to power through and put the smackdown on deer sized critters.
My serious accuracy rifle isn't going much farther than 30' from my truck since it weighs over 20# and has a 30" bbl so for me it's a non issue. But I can see how it might for folks with lighter guns hunting from fixed cover.
Re: why not hunt with 175 smk's
This argument will never die. Let's just let eachother hunt with whatever we are most comfortable with and quit trying to tell eachother what is ethical.(Within reason) I don't care what you use if you are good with it, good enough to take animals humanely whether its a .223 with smk's or a 500 Jeffrey shooting solids.
I've used 175 smk's exclusively for the past few years to take 4 speedgoats, 2 deer, and two elk (one of which was taken at 560 yds) they have worked just fine.Not that anything else would or wouldn't, that all depends on the particular shot and impact. If everybody would do their best with what they have, then the flavor of bullets becomes secondary.
This argument will never die. Let's just let eachother hunt with whatever we are most comfortable with and quit trying to tell eachother what is ethical.(Within reason) I don't care what you use if you are good with it, good enough to take animals humanely whether its a .223 with smk's or a 500 Jeffrey shooting solids.
I've used 175 smk's exclusively for the past few years to take 4 speedgoats, 2 deer, and two elk (one of which was taken at 560 yds) they have worked just fine.Not that anything else would or wouldn't, that all depends on the particular shot and impact. If everybody would do their best with what they have, then the flavor of bullets becomes secondary.
Re: why not hunt with 175 smk's
I have dropped 6 elk with the 175,s. they all dropped like a brick.Most in the 350 yard range (One at oner 500 yards.)
I have dropped 6 elk with the 175,s. they all dropped like a brick.Most in the 350 yard range (One at oner 500 yards.)
Re: why not hunt with 175 smk's
175 grains of anything going 2600fps will kill a deer if hit in the vitals. I just love these discussions, really gets people fired up!
175 grains of anything going 2600fps will kill a deer if hit in the vitals. I just love these discussions, really gets people fired up!
Re: why not hunt with 175 smk's
The reason snipers use FMJ bullets is because that is what they're issued. They're issued FMJ bullets because the idea isn't to kill your assailant, it is to diffuse the situation.
If someone breaks into your home and attacks you and you shoot them and go to court and claim you shot to kill then you will go to jail regardless. Lawyers will tear you apart if you admit that you had a lethal intent while defending yourself. Now if you say that you intended to disarm them and prevent them from being able to hurt you or your family, even if the shot happened to kill the intruder, you will be much better off.
Now from a hunting point of view, a bullet is a bullet. Muskets used metal ball and this killed deer. It may not have been the most efficient way but it did work. Now we have much better projectiles moving at much higher speeds to create more efficient kills. But more efficient doesn't mean its the only way to get the job done. Yes a 175SMK will kill a dear and many people do use them with much success. But it is a gamble as you may get a clean passthrough and have to track an animal in alot of pain for quite a long time and that sucks bigtime.
Many people don't trust them because they aren't made to expand rapidly or even at all in some cases as a hunting bullet which is ultimatly made to produce a large controlled wound channel. Whenever i take a shot while hunting im under a considerable ammount of excitement no matter what. This leads to failure to remember the basics and usually results in less reliable shots, and if im using bullets that aren't made to expand then i have no correction for shooters error and thats a bad thing. But i guess if you are a seasoned hunter or otherwise just less excited when taking a shot then you probably don't really need that extra safeguard that a hunting specific bullet gives the shooter.
Hope this helps,
Dylan
The reason snipers use FMJ bullets is because that is what they're issued. They're issued FMJ bullets because the idea isn't to kill your assailant, it is to diffuse the situation.
If someone breaks into your home and attacks you and you shoot them and go to court and claim you shot to kill then you will go to jail regardless. Lawyers will tear you apart if you admit that you had a lethal intent while defending yourself. Now if you say that you intended to disarm them and prevent them from being able to hurt you or your family, even if the shot happened to kill the intruder, you will be much better off.
Now from a hunting point of view, a bullet is a bullet. Muskets used metal ball and this killed deer. It may not have been the most efficient way but it did work. Now we have much better projectiles moving at much higher speeds to create more efficient kills. But more efficient doesn't mean its the only way to get the job done. Yes a 175SMK will kill a dear and many people do use them with much success. But it is a gamble as you may get a clean passthrough and have to track an animal in alot of pain for quite a long time and that sucks bigtime.
Many people don't trust them because they aren't made to expand rapidly or even at all in some cases as a hunting bullet which is ultimatly made to produce a large controlled wound channel. Whenever i take a shot while hunting im under a considerable ammount of excitement no matter what. This leads to failure to remember the basics and usually results in less reliable shots, and if im using bullets that aren't made to expand then i have no correction for shooters error and thats a bad thing. But i guess if you are a seasoned hunter or otherwise just less excited when taking a shot then you probably don't really need that extra safeguard that a hunting specific bullet gives the shooter.
Hope this helps,
Dylan
Re: why not hunt with 175 smk's
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: armymedic.2</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: XTR</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Jerkface11</div><div class="ubbcode-body"> On AR15.com a lot of the guys are using 75 gr SMK's to deer hunt with. </div></div>
In my book anyone older than 13 using a .223 to hunt deer is an ass. </div></div>
seriouly? cause we should all hunt with a 300 RUM. give me a break. cause you're saying a .223 soft point won't go through both shoulders while spraying bone fragments through nearly every vital organ on it's way?
that is like saying a "light" load out of a 243 won't get the job done..........
and let's not forget suddenly it's ok to let a kid do something you wouldn't want to do yourself? anyone that thinks like that is an ass.....
and yeah i get your point, i just don't agree with it. just like i don't agree that smk's and amax are not apprpriate for killing, just like to play devil's advocate.
</div></div>
My best friends mother was killed by a 22lr when he was 18mo, and I've seen lots of deer dropped with them too (officially that would have been called poaching) but that doesn't mean that it makes a good military round or that it makes a good big game round. My experiences there are with extremely well placed shots and don't reflect a reasonable sampling of performance in all conditions.
Yes, damned near anything will kill a deer with perfect shot placement, but there are some things that do it better with more consistently, and I doubt very seriously that anyone is going to come in here and tell the story of the one that they screwed up.
If you hunt long enough you're going to see that shot that for whatever reason went wide. Not everyone always shoots sub MOA, hell look at the vid of Lowlight shooting the ammo from the guys who sell here on the site, his first shot is on the edge of the steel.
As for it being OK for a kid and not for an adult, I don't particularly like it, and in a few yrs I'm sure I'll have to figure out what my son will be using to shoot deer. I'll get back to you when I get to that one.
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: armymedic.2</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: XTR</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Jerkface11</div><div class="ubbcode-body"> On AR15.com a lot of the guys are using 75 gr SMK's to deer hunt with. </div></div>
In my book anyone older than 13 using a .223 to hunt deer is an ass. </div></div>
seriouly? cause we should all hunt with a 300 RUM. give me a break. cause you're saying a .223 soft point won't go through both shoulders while spraying bone fragments through nearly every vital organ on it's way?
that is like saying a "light" load out of a 243 won't get the job done..........
and let's not forget suddenly it's ok to let a kid do something you wouldn't want to do yourself? anyone that thinks like that is an ass.....
and yeah i get your point, i just don't agree with it. just like i don't agree that smk's and amax are not apprpriate for killing, just like to play devil's advocate.
</div></div>
My best friends mother was killed by a 22lr when he was 18mo, and I've seen lots of deer dropped with them too (officially that would have been called poaching) but that doesn't mean that it makes a good military round or that it makes a good big game round. My experiences there are with extremely well placed shots and don't reflect a reasonable sampling of performance in all conditions.
Yes, damned near anything will kill a deer with perfect shot placement, but there are some things that do it better with more consistently, and I doubt very seriously that anyone is going to come in here and tell the story of the one that they screwed up.
If you hunt long enough you're going to see that shot that for whatever reason went wide. Not everyone always shoots sub MOA, hell look at the vid of Lowlight shooting the ammo from the guys who sell here on the site, his first shot is on the edge of the steel.
As for it being OK for a kid and not for an adult, I don't particularly like it, and in a few yrs I'm sure I'll have to figure out what my son will be using to shoot deer. I'll get back to you when I get to that one.
Re: why not hunt with 175 smk's
Do You realize a 22LR will kill a deer? But that doesn't make it a reliable deer cartridge. I've killed deer with 175 SMK's out of my 308. Got the deer, which was what I intended when I shot the deer. But they did a poor job. This bunch would raise hell if they could prove the stated BC of a bullet was .020 off, but when a bullet mfg tells you certain bullets aren't hunting bullets you want to disagree? Remember a 22 LR will kill a deer.
Do You realize a 22LR will kill a deer? But that doesn't make it a reliable deer cartridge. I've killed deer with 175 SMK's out of my 308. Got the deer, which was what I intended when I shot the deer. But they did a poor job. This bunch would raise hell if they could prove the stated BC of a bullet was .020 off, but when a bullet mfg tells you certain bullets aren't hunting bullets you want to disagree? Remember a 22 LR will kill a deer.
Re: why not hunt with 175 smk's
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: vman</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Some people do.
I use Lapua Scenars for hunting.
Its all about shot placement. I can put a 155 grain scenar thru a stop sign pole at 500 yards. I couldnt even do that with my 320lb draw weight compound bow at point blank range. So i figure my accurate little scenars have enough penetration to break a shoulder or penetrate vitals and rib cage.
I think SMK's have a thinner jacket than the scenars, but you could still use them on coyotes if you wanted to.</div></div>
320 lb draw weight? Don't you mean 320 fps? nevermind, I see you addressed it
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: vman</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Some people do.
I use Lapua Scenars for hunting.
Its all about shot placement. I can put a 155 grain scenar thru a stop sign pole at 500 yards. I couldnt even do that with my 320lb draw weight compound bow at point blank range. So i figure my accurate little scenars have enough penetration to break a shoulder or penetrate vitals and rib cage.
I think SMK's have a thinner jacket than the scenars, but you could still use them on coyotes if you wanted to.</div></div>
320 lb draw weight? Don't you mean 320 fps? nevermind, I see you addressed it
Re: why not hunt with 175 smk's
yeah, cool guys.
i think it is worth consideration that the smk's are labeled by producer "non hunting" for other reasons.....My amax isn't supposed to be but so far i can not see a difference between them and v-max on maybe 300 woodchucks, 2 deer last summer, and 1 deer this winter. is that a scientific study? no, but two words "violent expansion" would sum it up (and i don't mean a magically disintegrating bullet that somehow made 178 grains going in between 2600-1500 fps suddenly stop in three inches).
yeah, cool guys.
i think it is worth consideration that the smk's are labeled by producer "non hunting" for other reasons.....My amax isn't supposed to be but so far i can not see a difference between them and v-max on maybe 300 woodchucks, 2 deer last summer, and 1 deer this winter. is that a scientific study? no, but two words "violent expansion" would sum it up (and i don't mean a magically disintegrating bullet that somehow made 178 grains going in between 2600-1500 fps suddenly stop in three inches).
Re: why not hunt with 175 smk's
I've killed a couple of pigs with 175gr MKs and some with 155gr VLDs, both from my .308. While the sampling is small, the VLDs anchored the pigs MUCH quicker. The only problem I have with VLDs is not being able to reach the lands at magazine length. I don't have the same problem with the 175 Mks, and they shoot more accurately for me.
John
I've killed a couple of pigs with 175gr MKs and some with 155gr VLDs, both from my .308. While the sampling is small, the VLDs anchored the pigs MUCH quicker. The only problem I have with VLDs is not being able to reach the lands at magazine length. I don't have the same problem with the 175 Mks, and they shoot more accurately for me.
John
Re: why not hunt with 175 smk's
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: alf</div><div class="ubbcode-body">If you only knew how many animals elkhuntingguide kills a year you'd turn tail and skidaddle....... </div></div>
Actually no, I wouldn't. I'm one of those guys who's job often requires me to explain to people why/how they have been doing something wrong for a decade. Try being successful at that with an entrenched government employee with a self esteem problem that compensates by being an prick.
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: alf</div><div class="ubbcode-body">If you only knew how many animals elkhuntingguide kills a year you'd turn tail and skidaddle....... </div></div>
Actually no, I wouldn't. I'm one of those guys who's job often requires me to explain to people why/how they have been doing something wrong for a decade. Try being successful at that with an entrenched government employee with a self esteem problem that compensates by being an prick.
Re: why not hunt with 175 smk's
To me it is about efficiency. Can you tow with a honda? ...sure you can...but a 1 ton diesel. Pickup does a way better job. So I pick my tools accordingly. Albiet this comes from a guy who deer hunts with a 375h&h. Just saying:..use the best tool for the job.
To me it is about efficiency. Can you tow with a honda? ...sure you can...but a 1 ton diesel. Pickup does a way better job. So I pick my tools accordingly. Albiet this comes from a guy who deer hunts with a 375h&h. Just saying:..use the best tool for the job.
