M. L. McPherson

Synopsis: In a hunting cartridge, bullet construction and shot placement are far more important than power. The author backs up this opinion with anecdotal experiences spanning a more than three decades and firsthand knowledge of about 200 kills on elk and deer.

Many things enter discussions about the effectiveness of various cartridges and loads for big-game hunting. Those of us who have witnessed, or are lucky enough to have experienced, dozens of kills on big game often form strong opinions. This is easy enough to explain. We have seen what matters and what does not matter!

All too often, when making judgments about the effectiveness of various cartridges, even "experts" forget the importance of the "fundamentals". I have witnessed, or have first-hand knowledge of, more than one hundred kills on deer and almost as many on elk. More than 98% of the time, two "fundamental factors" dominate all others in determining the effectiveness of a load. These factors are neither complicated nor mysterious and have nothing to do with the power of the cartridge!

The most important factor is bullet placement. This is simple enough, a well-placed shot usually results in a clean kill. On all but a few of the rare occasions when a poorly placed shot has resulted in a kill, perhaps surprisingly, I could find no obvious connection to the power of the load.

Second in importance is how the bullet performs after impact. Again, this is simple enough. A well placed bullet that opens properly and holds together, as necessary to provide adequate penetration, usually produces a clean kill.

It should be obvious that shot placement and bullet performance go hand in hand. A poorly placed shot with the best bullet in the world is a poorly placed shot. When a shot goes awry, a clean kill becomes a matter of pure luck. Equally, a properly placed shot with a bullet that either does not expand properly or disintegrates, before penetrating sufficiently, may not get the job done.

Before giving classic examples of kills where bullet selection and shot placement were the dominant factors in effectiveness, let me give details of one kill where the energy delivered by the bullet played an important role in a successful outcome of a long, hard hunt. In this one instance, I can state with confidence that use of a less powerful cartridge could have resulted in a long tracking session; it is even possible we could have lost the trail and the elk.

After several days of fruitless hunting, my friend, an expert shot, saw a very large cow elk moving through a small clearing in the junipers at long-range. He underestimated the range - a common error with elk hunters, and she was an unusually large elk - and, therefore, the necessary lead. Because of his misjudgment and the fact that he fired when the crosshairs had strayed higher than he intended, his shot went through the kidneys.

Fortunately for us, he was hunting with a .338 Win Magnum. His powerful handload launched Hornady's excellent 225-grain Spire Point at about 2900 fps. The bullet opened up properly but, failing to hit bone, still penetrated completely, carrying much unused energy into the dirt on the for side of the target - where it did no good at all. This is not a condemnation of the bullet. Almost any proper hunting bullet would have done the same thing.

Two points are important here. First, when striking such a soft spot at long range, some bullets might not have opened much, if at all. Without significant expansion, massive tissue damage would have been unlikely. Barring significant expansion, the result would almost certainly have been every hunter's nightmare - a mortally wounded animal, untrackable and lost.

Second, because that 225-grain 0.338-inch bullet did expand properly and was traveling at high velocity, it could do enough tissue damage that the elk managed to travel only about 100 yards before bleeding out! I am convinced an identical hit with a lesser caliber, such as the 270 I was using, could have led to the loss of a mortally wounded animal. At the very best, the elk might have traveled a mile or more before succumbing. I do not know if we could have followed the trail that far on that dry rocky ground.

In my experience, about 10% of the time, when a cartridge with "marginal" power was used, a properly hit game animal evidently traveled a few yards farther than it might have if a more powerful gun had been used. Any difference probably amounted to only a few yards, on average, and I think this is insignificant - at least in the areas where I routinely hunt.

I will back up my opinion with this fact: Of all the big bulls I have seen killed the three that traveled the furthest, after being mortally wounded, had the most devastating wounds of any animals I have autopsied! One cannot assume that an elk, which traveled a nearly quarter of a mile after being hit through the heart with a "measly" 257 Roberts would have gone down instantly with the same hit from a 460 Wby Mag - ain't necessarily so, my friend. Truth is, it might have gone the same number of steps.

For example, in 1976 I shot a larger-than-average spike elk that had been running with a herd. My 270 bullet hit a rib going in and practically cleaved the heart into two pieces. Destruction was so complete that we were unable to save any heart meat. The bullet completely ruptured three of the chambers and produced plenty of other damage. I can say without reservation, "That elk had more damage to a vital organ than any other I have ever autopsied."

At the shot, we heard the impact. However, that bull continued running with the herd, as if nothing had happened. Dad had a cow permit and we waited to see if he could get a shot - so we did not make immediate pursuit. After perhaps a full minute, the herd had passed from sight but we waited a few more seconds, to see if any stragglers might show, we then initiated pursuit.

I took my time going the 150 yards or so up the slope to the narrow clearing through which the bull had been passing through when I shot. Certain I had hit him, I slowly sneaked along the trail. At least 200 yards along the side of that ridge, I came over a small rise in the trail. My bull was in the bottom of the subsequent ravine, more than 250 yards from where he had been hit.

It had been more than one minute since I pulled the trigger. As I approached, it rose onto its front legs and was almost completely up when it lost its balance and tumbled. It finally expired, as I prepared for a coup de gras.

You are welcome to try to explain to me how a bigger gun might have done the deed quicker. That does not seem likely to me.

Excepting 1968, my brother has hunted big game in Colorado every year since the mid-sixties. Most of those years he has hunted both deer and elk. His total take exceeds 30 bucks, a handful of does - taken on extra tags - and close to 30 bulls. Almost exclusively, he has used either the 284 Winchester or its ballistic twin, the 280 Remington. For almost every one of these kills, he has used Hornady's 139-grain Spire Point, launched at around 2900 fps.

One spike elk he hit too high in the torso managed to travel about one-half mile before succumbing. In every other case, he placed his shots properly - into the heart lung target. The result, a dead animal, seldom further than 150 yards from the spot where it was shot, and meat in the freezer.

With one possible exception, he has not lost any game animal because of using a too-small cartridge. The possible exception, in 1965 he killed a big bull elk with five or six perfect hits into the lungs using 170-grain 30-30 Silvertip loads at close range.

The stubborn bull did not realize its own demise and trotted a short distance, going over a ridge. Then as it stood, no doubt expiring, on the other side of the ridge, two "hunters" opened fire. In the next few seconds, eleven shots rang out.

Those gents shot off one antler, damaged points on the other and riddled both ends of the carcass with bullet holes. Although he had every right to it, my brother made no effort to claim that shot-up mess.

I contend that he did not "lose" that bull because he had used a too-small gun. The same thing might have happened if he had been using a much more powerful rifle. I know of two very similar cases, where big bulls sustained repeated hits through the lungs from 30-06 class cartridges and went just as far, before expiring.

My father has hunted all his life. Before 1976 he used a 30-30 and later a 244 Remington and took dozens of deer with those moderately powerful rifles. He never had any complaints and we had meat on the table, almost every year.

In 1976, Mother and I bought Dad a 270-chambered Remington Pump for Father's Day. That was the first scoped rifle he owned that was a proper "Elk Gun." He felt his 244 was a bit small for elk. Perhaps it is but I killed my first bull with one shot from that 244 - with a bullet that would penetrate - and recently repeated the feat, just for nostalgia.

Since 1976 until quite recently, Dad hunted practically every year and has been very successful. He has taken 14 bulls and several deer. His 270 hunting load: Sierra's 150-grain boattail handloaded to about 2850 fps. As with my brother's load, when this bullet is properly placed, the results are quick and certain - and my father's shots always seem to be well placed! As you may surmise, our families have eaten much elk and venison over the years!

I did not intend to do so but I have trapped myself here - okay, I will admit it! I have not been as successful a hunter as either my brother or my father. I have hunted dear and elk all but a few seasons since I was of legal hunting age, which came in '67, I believe - I'm trying to forget, you know. I have only taken 28 elk and 22 deer. In not one instance have I wounded and lost a deer or an elk! I have trailed several for a couple hundred yards, but I do not believe a more powerful gun would have made any significant difference in any of those cases.

I have used several loads through the years. I killed my first three deer cleanly, using Dad's 244 and 90-grain factory Bronze Point varmint loads and several other deer using other varmint-style bullets! Luck may have entered the picture. Perhaps I got away with something there and I do not advocate the use of frangible (easily fragmented) bullets on any game animal. Of the two bull elk taken with the 244, the former was dispatched with an ancient solid-base bullet, the latter with a Barnes X. Later, I killed one deer with a neck shot using my brother's 30-30. Then I got my 270.

With that rifle, my first hunting load was Sierra's 130-grain boattail loaded with a stiff charge of N205 at well over 3200-fps. I killed several elk and many deer with that load. I had no complaints about the bullet killing effectiveness I did notice two things.

First, tissue damage was excessive on deer. Any shot into meat wasted too much food.

Second, on all elk taken, that bullet failed to follow a true path after impact. The spike, mentioned earlier, was taken with this load. That remains of the bullet came to rest in the cartilage, along the brisket. I was shooting from slightly below the elk and the bullet had entered well above the heart! It had turned practically 90 degrees, cleaving the heart from top to bottom!

As I say, that load produced clean kills but those two things, unnecessary tissue damage on deer and evident excessive deflection on elk, bothered me. For these reasons, I changed to Sierra's 150-grain boattail. Loaded at just over 2950 fps, from my rifle, this bullet delivers unbeatable accuracy and terminal ballistics.

I reasoned that this identically constructed bullet traveling significantly slower than the 130-grain would open slower and do less damage on deer, this seems to be true. In addition, for whatever reason, after impact, it has always held a "truer" path, compared to the lighter bullet.

For several years recently, I hunted with a 30-06 Remington Pump-Action (I have since hunted with a 280 and a 50-90). I bought the '06 after wearing out the barrel on my 270 with too much varmint and target shooting, if one can have too much shooting! My hunting experiences with the '06 prompted this article.

I worked up a very powerful and accurate '06 load, using Hornady's 168-grain Match Boattail. I wrote Hornady Manufacturing about using this target-bullet for hunting.

Steve Hornady took the time to write me a considerate and explanative letter. He cautioned that, although this bullet would not suffer point deformation during recoil - one reason I had chosen to try the style - he could not recommend any such bullet for big game hunting. His admonition, "The jacket is not constructed for hunting and the hollow-point design on these bullets tends to separate jacket from core . . . bullet failures are likely."

Because of the exceptionally high ballistic coefficient and accuracy of these bullets, I tried them, despite expert advice to the contrary. Using these bullets loaded to maximum safe velocity with N205, I killed a 600 pound five-point bull elk, a 450 pound four-point bull elk and two bigger-than-average mule deer bucks. In all four kills the bullet failed to hold together properly, instead it came apart after entering the vitals, even on the one long-range shot. I call these, "Partial failures of the luckiest kind!" In each instance, proper bullet placement and a bit of luck saved the day; therefore, albeit quite slowly, I finally learned.

I have purchased Hornady interlock boattails in 150, 165, 180 and 190-grain weights. I will test these for accuracy, in this '06. Hence, unless another bullet weight turns out to be a lot more accurate, I will be hunting with Hornady's 165-grain bullet in front of a stiff charge of N205 - it turned out that this rifle really preferred the 190-grain bullet.

Through the years, I have seen several other bullet failures and all too many poorly placed shots. (I am happy to report that the vast majority of the poorly placed shots I have witnessed were fired by people I just happened to have seen out in the hills.) In all of these instances, results are equally conclusive. With either a poorly placed shot or one where the bullet fails badly, 90% of the time you have a problem, whatever gun is used. Poor placement of a bullet that functions badly almost always creates a big problem.

This is not a condemnation of the "bigger gun" theory. As I have stated, a bigger gun can make the difference but I will make the following observations:

1: If, for whatever reason, you do not place your shot correctly there is little chance that use of a bigger gun would have saved the day. There is no way to put a number to this but, when a bad shot is made, my experience suggests that about 10% of the time a substantially more powerful load might have helped.

2: When a bullet fails seriously, success is mostly a matter of luck. Yes, a more powerful failure may be more apt to bring good luck but, based on what I have seen, there just is not that much difference. After all, the biggest practical hunting rifle only delivers about twice the energy of the smallest. Doubling truly bad odds still gives one bad odds.

3: Bullet choice and marksmanship are the critical factors. If the hunter is unwilling to hone his shooting skills until he can consistently hit any game animal he shoots at and hit it where he intends to hit it, his use of a more powerful gun is meaningless. The most common - and oft' observed- result of using a bigger gun is even poorer marksmanship. However, this may provide some benefit as such a "hunter" no longer merely wounds game, he, more often, misses it cleanly!

If a hunter is too dense - as in my recent performance - or is too slovenly to bother to learn which bullets are designed for the game he intends to hunt bad results are inevitable.

I once had a very bad experience with such a "hunter" - the unpleasant details are another story. This person was hunting deer with a 460 Weatherby Magnum and using FMJs, to boot! Every time a deer came within sight of his mountaintop perch, he would open fire, regardless of range. If this "hunter" could have hit anything at such long range (at least one "target" was close to one-half mile) with his illegal loads, there is every chance he would have watched it run off to die, without even knowing he had hit it.

The factories do an outstanding job with bullets these days but you still must match the bullet to the purpose. My advice (which I now, too, follow), "Follow the expert's suggestions." If you handload, stick to bullets specifically designed for the game you will be hunting. If in doubt, spend a minute and make a call or write a letter, bullet makers have a vested interest in your successful hunt and will go out of their way to advise you about what bullet to use.

A hunter who shoots a trophy bull elk in the shoulder with a 110-grain 30-06 load or one who gut shoots any animal with any load will most likely be in for a long day. He will certainly have no one to blame but himself.

Before closing, I must make one further observation. There are areas where cover and other conditions make the existence of an easily followed blood trail critical for tracking any animal. In some such areas, cover is so dense that an animal that travels only a few dozen yards can be quite difficult to locate without such a trail. For those hunting such areas, a very powerful gun using a bullet that will definitely achieve full penetration may very well be a practical necessity.