Interesting study on shot placement and caliber.

[Juster]

The shoulder shot reducing distance travelled is interesting, I'm wondering how much of that is due to reduced mobility.

 

[1899]

I agree that the smaller high velocity cals give some awsome results on deer size game. I used a 6MM rem and a 270 win for years, I also destoyed more meat than I care to remember!! With the small high velocity cals, the shock to the meat was very bad. I started useing a 300 win mag and the wasted meat went way down. The animals were just as dead, and I got what I was out for, The Meat....The worst shock I have ever seen ,without hitting a major bone, was on a elk that was shot with a 25 06, yes It died fast, but what a waste..

I believe damage to meat has more to do with bullet fragmentation than velocity. GS Custom bullets in South Africa showed this by comparing game shot with a .22x64 (necked down .30-06) and a .243 Winchester. The former used monolithic bullets, the latter cup and core. The .22x64 left less bloodshot meat even though the impact velocity was far greater.

I shot a nice Whitetail (and numerous boar) with a .257 Wby and the old 75gr X bullet - the muzzle velocity was just under 4000 fps. There was minimal bloodshot meat. I also have a friend who used to be a game warden in the former Yugoslavia. I sent him a couple boxes of the old .243" 75gr X and he used it on dozens of Roe deer and boar. He was always very happy with the results.

 

[brybenn]

Pondoro taylor stated that a small fast bullet hitting the target at 2600-2800 fps was like lightning strikes to the animals and I've found that to hold true. I think the issue against the 30 cals is tougher bullets. Many ppl take premium controlled expansion bullets in to the deer woods. On a lung shot a deer doesn't offer enough resistance for bullet expansion and te greater weight of the bullet plows it right thru whereas a smaller faster bullet hit home in the ribs it looses much more velocity much faster creating more shock. Faster larger shockwave destroys more tissue. Besides I'd rather use my 25-06 then my 300win mag for deer. Now for moose I'd go the other way

 

[Huntin' Gun]

I've only shot 2 deer with the 25-06, and that was about 10 years ago. Both were good hits, and neither deer travelled more than 30 yards. I don't recall the bullet used. I've shot more deer with the .280 and the .270, and more recently. I've personally seen more bang/flops on deer with the 280 and the 270 than I have with any other cartridge. But maybe because I've used those chamberings more than any other, that's why I've seen more DRT kills with them than any other. Kind of a self-fulfilling professy.

 

[Huntin' Gun]

Pondoro taylor stated that a small fast bullet hitting the target at 2600-2800 fps was like lightning strikes to the animals and I've found that to hold true. I think the issue against the 30 cals is tougher bullets. Many ppl take premium controlled expansion bullets in to the deer woods. On a lung shot a deer doesn't offer enough resistance for bullet expansion and te greater weight of the bullet plows it right thru whereas a smaller faster bullet hit home in the ribs it looses much more velocity much faster creating more shock. Faster larger shockwave destroys more tissue. Besides I'd rather use my 25-06 then my 300win mag for deer. Now for moose I'd go the other way

A 165gr or 180 gr premium controlled expansion 30 caliber bullet going through a deer's lungs won't kill that deer as well as a 150 gr 30 cal soft point. Or a 140 gr .284 cal softpoint, or any caliber softpoint.

One of the most interesting kills I've seen was last season. I was using a 150gr Fusion bullet out of my 7mm WSM. I shot a large bodied WT buck at about 180 yards [estimated]. I hit it behind the shoulder, as it was broadside to me, and had no idea I was there. It fell like a sack of bricks. Dropped in its tracks litterally.

I walked up to it and it was still alive, but paralyzed from the neck down. It was trying to get away, but couldn't move anything but its head. And the breathing was very laboured. So I used my knife and finished it off quickly.

I thought I must have missed really bad and actually hit it in the neck or the spine or something. There were no huge holes anywhere, but there was a trickle of bright lung blood on the hair behind the offside shoulder.

Upon autopsy the only holes were the entry and exit wounds right behind the shoulders. Unless there was a bullet fragmentation that somehow clipped the spine, the only thing I can think of that caused the paralysis was some massive hydrostatic shock. But, the bullet didn't seem to expand all that much as it only made a quarter-sized [25 cents] hole on exit.

Anyways, I think hydrostatic shock is a phenomenon that shouldn't be overlooked as to the importance of DRT kills, and bullets that are too well constructed aren't the best for deer. They make too small of holes and the deer will run further and more often.

 

[Northman999]

I've got zero experience shooting deer, but I've shot plenty of caribou/moose/bears.

I have to say, my experience generally fits the study, in that double shoulder shots always result in an animal moving no farther than 1-2 staggering steps and going down (with straight out DRT not being real uncommon), and that caliber is much less important than many would like to believe; much less than shot placement for sure. The softer bullets being more effective is not really a surprise, but my experiences with soft vs hard was not as different as the study suggests. My experience is that properly placed shots with an appropriate caliber means a dead animal basically regardless of bullet specifics, overall.