what's the lightest mono-metal bullet you'd use on moose
- Thread starter MiG25
- Start date
Personally, I am a fan of momentum, the lightest I would go on a large bodied animal is 150 grains... I have a friend who has taken more than 50 moose with his 270 using 130 grain cup and core bullets, so that is clearly not the issue, but he is also a "hunter" and gets close and shoots for a broadside lung shot. I would say that an individual's maturity and shot choices will weigh-in heavily in answering your question. If they are inclined to shoulder shoot on a quartering-on animal, the bullet better have some mass, regardless of it's construction.
rifleman762
CGN Ultra frequent flyer
- Location
- Southern Alberta
Depends on calibre. Sectional density is also important for penetration.
Momentum is a function of speed and mass, simply; Momentum = Mass X Velocity... mass is more significant in momentum than it is in the more commonly referred to "Energy" expressed in ft/lb's where velocity is squared. I believe that as the mass of the target increases, so does the need for momentum... the question really is about "margins," exactly how much momentum is needed, and how close to that minimum requirement are you prepared to go. This question is loaded on an X/Y scale, as there are many factors affecting it, such as shot placement (hide/heart/lung tissue vs. hide/scapula/lung tissue), the depth of the medium (frontal shot vs broadside lungs), the distance to the target (momentum/energy at impact), etc...
I am confident that a monometal of 100 grains travelling with speed will be sufficient on a broadside lung shot... however, I am not personally comfortable with that "margin" and self impose (somewhat arbitrarily) a 50% additional margin and answer with 150 grains at speed for moose with monometals or bonded and preferably 170+ grains for a cup&core...
The above is pure opinion, based on my experience, thoughts and observations... not a line in the sand that I feel any need to defend.
While technically true, it's far less relevant when you're talking mono metal bullets with near 100% weight retention. Im a big fan of sectional density (its the measure I use to compare bullet weights across calibers), but you can't really use it to compare a cup and core with a premium bullet.
OP we need more info. Caliber? Cartridge? Range expected?
- Location
- Saskatchewan
My observation is that Moose are difficult to knock down, but easy to kill. I agree with everything hoytcanon has posted. That said, I have shot two bull moose with 130 grain TTSX from a 30-06. Both were about 150 yards, broadside. One was shot in the neck and required a follow up shot. The second was shot through the ribs. No bullets were recovered.
I also shot two moose, at the same distance with my 358 win. using 225 gr TSX. One bullet was recovered and it had mushroomed perfectly. However, my current, favorite moose /elk caliber is the 9.3x62 mauser. I believe it leaves more room for error and I like the history of the caliber. I've been using Norma oryx (bonded bullet) in it and have had no issues.
I've seen a 100 grain TSX in a .243 go darn near lengthwise through a doe whitetail. When you compare mono metals to cup and core they behave quite bit differently. I'm not a big fan of the explosive type bullets that tend to give spectacular one shot kills. I'll take a Barnes instead. Everything I've read and observed about mono-metals is that they like to be driven with speed, so yes dropping down in weight should result in more energy being expended in the animal.....Sorry for the rambling post .LOL.
I also shot two moose, at the same distance with my 358 win. using 225 gr TSX. One bullet was recovered and it had mushroomed perfectly. However, my current, favorite moose /elk caliber is the 9.3x62 mauser. I believe it leaves more room for error and I like the history of the caliber. I've been using Norma oryx (bonded bullet) in it and have had no issues.
I've seen a 100 grain TSX in a .243 go darn near lengthwise through a doe whitetail. When you compare mono metals to cup and core they behave quite bit differently. I'm not a big fan of the explosive type bullets that tend to give spectacular one shot kills. I'll take a Barnes instead. Everything I've read and observed about mono-metals is that they like to be driven with speed, so yes dropping down in weight should result in more energy being expended in the animal.....Sorry for the rambling post .LOL.
- Location
- Saskatchewan
Generally speaking, Yes. A longer bullet (better ballistic coefficient) will shoot flatter and penetrate better. What it really comes down to, is understanding the limitations of the particular bullet/caliber combination you choose, and accepting those limitations. Weather you are hunting with a bow, blackpowder, or rifle, hunting about is waiting for the proper shot opportunity, so you can accurately place the bullet in the vitals. All else is secondary, but fun to debate.
Irrelevant. That's what it is. Lol
- Location
- Saskatchewan
Yep!
- Location
- Saskatchewan
double post
Ive got a load for my 300wm using 110gr gmx at 3700fps mv. I havent used it on game but id have few reservations taking a broadside shot on a moose. However for moose id prefer to use federals trophy bonded tipped 180gr
Any mono bullet should be capable of penetrating both lungs on a broadside moose. The faster it travels thru the more energy transfer and thus more tissue damage.
Monos being longer generally have more bearing surface so a drop in weight is usually recommended as they preform better with higher speed impacts by design
Any mono bullet should be capable of penetrating both lungs on a broadside moose. The faster it travels thru the more energy transfer and thus more tissue damage.
Monos being longer generally have more bearing surface so a drop in weight is usually recommended as they preform better with higher speed impacts by design
