Best .308 and .270 Bullet for Close Range on Deer?

[Brian Pfleuger]

Standard cup and core bullets like the Sierra Gamking, Hornady Interlock and Winchester softpoints will run about $30/100 .... the bonded and solid bullets cost twice as much or more, yet don't kill twice as dead .......

Yes, but they do perform markedly better under some circumstances and "twice as much" isn't really relevant when that cost amounts to $8-$10 a year. Most of us spend that much in gas just getting to and from our hunting area... once.

[jimbob86]

I agree with the other poster that at distances under 100yds, your biggest consideration should be meat destruction. Any bullet will easily dispatch a deer, and be accurrate enough to hit him in the eye at that range witha stright line trajectory.

The lighter and faster the bullet, the more likely it will fragment, overexpand, and destroy meat.

The solution to not damaging the meat is really not so much a hardware problem as a software problem........ If you want to avoid damage to meat, it is really this simple:

Don't shoot them in the meat.

A high velocity expanding bullet through the lungs will be invariably fatal, and will not damage much more "meat" than the intercostal muscles (that'd be the meat between the individual ribs) where the bullet hits ..... if you can place a bullet well enough to " to hit him in the eye at that range" then putting one into the lower rib cage without hitting the near leg should be a chip shot.

Granted, if you feel you must use a hyper velocity bullet (3100+f/sec) there is going to be some explosive damage from bullet fragments and hydrostatic shock..... the guys that use 100-110 gr bullets in .270 WIN loaded to "Ludicrous Speed" ...... <shakes head>

[Brian Pfleuger]

Have to agree with that... I don't understand how this or that cartridge supposedly destroys more or less meat. Who shoots their animals in meaty places and why? Stop doing that. You'll stop destroying meat.

[jimbob86]

Yes, but they do perform markedly better under some circumstances and "twice as much" isn't really relevant when that cost amounts to $8-$10 a year. Most of us spend that much in gas just getting to and from our hunting area... once.

Ah ..... $8-$10 you say? Every little bit counts ......

You are not familiar with the same economics that I am- I have 3 kiddoes and one more new hunter (Eldest's boyfriend) .....and I want them all to shoot at least 100 rounds of their hunting ammo for practice .......

[Brian Pfleuger]

I see no reason to shoot hunting ammo for practice. There's no difference between shooting the cheapest, accurate bullet you can get and the most expensive premium bullet in practice.

I usually sight my guns in and practice with Nosler or Hornady "cheap" bullets. They're both accurate and cheap. The gun behaves the same. No need to shoot 75 cent bullets when 25 cent bullets do the same thing in practice.

Last session before hunting season, 10 or 12 shots with the Barnes and I'm good. Those 10 or 12 bullets plus whatever I shoot at animals during the season, 5 or 6 rounds if I'm lucky, is the only additional cost.

Besides, if "every little bit counts", 95 out of 100 hunters would be better off selling all their hunting rifles and all of their gear, not buying a license and buying all their meat at a store. For 95 out of 100 of us, that would be far cheaper.

[iraiam]

I personally like Nosler Partition bullets, I use them in 270, 30 cal, 338 cal. I have, shot several animals at 100 yards or less, I have never seen the Partition fragment badly even when I know it hit a rib bone.

I have also retrieved a few from harvested animals, every one of them weighed more than 85% of it's original weight.