I grew up hunting in western Arkansas and eastern Oklahoma. The places I deer hunted ranged from dense mountain foliage to wide open sand bottoms on the Arkansas River. In those places, I wanted the deer I shot with a centerfire gun to have two holes for better blood trailing. My grandpa was a “shoot them through the ribs” hunter, and that’s what I learned to do. It’s been a successful model in my hunting over the last 30+ years.

However, since moving to south Texas in 2020, I’m rethinking my approach. The denser brush and plethora of pokey things make blood trailing much less desirable. I know a lot of folks like the high shoulder shot for anchoring animals, but what about bullet design/construction? Did a Nilgai hunt last November, and I chose a monometal bullet (Barnes) for my .338 Win Mag. I had a complete pass through shot, but the bull still ran 80-90 yards. Zero blood to trail. Fortunately, he piled up in an open area. After that, I got to thinking about how much energy was wasted outside the animal. Brother was shooting a bonded, lead core bullet out of his .375 H&H. Bullet was recovered under hide on off side, and bull didn’t go more than 10-15 feet. Would I have had better results with a bonded, lead core bullet that dumped 100% of the available energy inside the animal? Should I have tried to hit a major bone on my Nilgai? Shot happened in the space of a couple of seconds, so not a lot of time to figure out where the major bones were (first Nilgai hunt).

I also fully expect to see lead bullets go away in my lifetime, and wonder where that leaves us as far as bullet designs. Can monometal bullets be designed to match lead performance?

These are the sort of things that run through my mind late at night when I’m trying to sleep. What says the THF brain trust?

I have always said the ideal bullet for deer, hogs, etc, is a bullet that expands to twice its diameter, retains nearly 100% of its weight, dumps 99.999% of its energy on target, and then falls straight to the ground after exiting. A mono metal bullet will NEVER be able to achieve that. I have seen bonded bullets come damn close though.

I’ve shot my share of stuff, from little critters to elephant.

I believe I’m gonna pour myself a drink, put my feet up and get myself an education…

Im with 218 Bee. Its been a little slow on our forum lately so this one may grow some legs.

I’ve used them all and mono suk at distance. They need lots of rpm’s/speed

Out side of that it’s all about shot placement, regardless of the bullet type.

With that said Hunter Hammers are showing a decent compromise but I haven’t used them so I can’t really say outside of pics and online testimony

Wait till Bill Wilson sees this post!

Yep, I’m with freerange and 218 Bee. Waitin to learn somethin…

Maybe it’s time for a Stihl vs Echo argument. But maybe I’ll just have another look at Hump Day. It is inspiring…

I really like this "wish list", but im not sure what will do that. I only hunt big mature whitetail bucks and I only use 3006 165 Nosler Partitions and I shoot just below the hallowed "high shoulder" shot just to give a little more room for error.
Of course if we steer this into a shot placement thread then we will really be off and running.

I hear Nilgai are notorious for not leaving blood trails, their hide is like a truck tire.

I am a fan of Nosler Accubonds in magnums and hornady interlocks in standard calibers.

If it had to be one or the other, I prefer a bullet to expand fully inside an animal rather than leave a pin hole and exit.

I’ve lost count years ago of the number of big game animals I’ve killed but it’s in the triple digits, and I’ve never had one that was shot good with a regular soft point go far, even without an exit. I have however, had them that were shot good with a too-tough bonded bullet and mono-metal go way too far for my liking.

On the flip side, Since I do most of my hunting with a bow now, I definitely want the arrow to make a full pass thru

Lead bullets going away is possible and your question/s raise another question. Monos may be the alternative now but could we see alloy bullets replace lead? There are other soft metals that can be stuffed in a copper jacket and are safer, no?

I've been wondering why this hasn't been done already. Are the other metals are too expensive or dangerous in their compound? Seems like somebody is missing a marketing ploy, if not being first to market with a great product.

Fool Proof Bullet and much less expensive that those fancy ones you guys want to use.

Can monumental bullets be designed to match lead performance? Yes and no. Because lead is not the same density, you won't get the same performance from a copper bullet of the same physical size as a lead bullet. The copper bullet will be lighter and won't carry the same momentum. However, you can get copper bullets, alloyed properly, that are excellent expanders. I have not seen anything in copper that I would consider comparable to softpoint lead bullets. While I know they make frangibles for hard targets (steel plates, for example), I have not seen copper frangible ammo like some of the varmint rounds that are 'explosive' (graphic, but technically incorrect description) and fragment into a million pieces that will come apart like than in soft tissue.

Getting back to your Nilgai example, copper bullets are often known for deep penetration. You were shooting a Barnes bullet. Barnes often seem to be much more velocity sensitive in terms of their velocity performance envelope for opening and the more the velocity drops, the great more the ammo doesn't open as compared to lead. So you may have gotten less expansion with the copper bullet than you would have likely gotten with a lead bullet. However, that is only part of the issue.

You can get pass through and no blood trail with any ammo. I do it with lead-based hunting ammo on hogs and coyotes with some regularity. The bullet does not inherently cause bleeding. People seem to confuse this when they get an animal that doesn't leave a blood trail and they blame the bullet and the bullet is only part of the issue. What is critical is what the bullet hits inside, and this speaks to the animal running as well. So whether or not an animal is leaking sufficiently to cause a decent blood trail will depend on what it strikes inside the animal and how well the blood can get out. We obviously tend to think that a large exit hole is better, and it is, but I have seen large exits that oozed more than gushed. I have seem small exits that gushed. Larger is better, but isn't everything. Hitting a vein may produce a lot of bleeding and cause the animal to bleed out, but internally. Hitting an artery seems to produce better results. Hitting an animal vertically lower on the body tends to produce a better blood trail than hitting an animal higher up as the low hit will more readily drain blood trying to pool internally.

That your Nilgai ran as far as it did sounds like you made a decent vascular or lung shot and it ran until it bleed out internally or suffocated from blood filling the lungs. It didn't drop in place because you did not do direct and significant upper central nervous system damage where the bullet strikes the brain, brain stem, or upper spinal cord that would effectively shut off the animal. The bullet didn't manage to achieve indirectly significant damage the brain or brain stem with hydrostatic shock and your bullet apparently didn't cause sufficient hydraulic shock passing near the spine. So, your animal ran. Indirect CNS kills are never a given with any typical hunting caliber that I have seen, although they tend to be more pronounced with larger calibers and higher velocities.

Your example is but a singular example and singular data points are not sufficient for drawing conclusions.

You note that your brother had one that only ran 10-15 and the bonded lead bullet stayed inside. Another singular example. Did you two shoot the animals in the EXACT SAME LOCATION ON THE EXACT SAME TRAJECTORY where the bullets passed through the exact same structures of the animals? Nope. You probably didn't. We know the bullets weren't even of the same caliber or weight. You can't expect the same results and behavior after the shot if you aren't shooting the exact same structures with comparable ammo, right?

Your comparison is interesting from a hunting perspective because people on both sides want to argue points about things like "one hole to let air in and one hole to let air out" and "bullets needs to dump all its energy inside the animal." These are WAY oversimplified characterizations of bullet terminal performance expectations. Things really are NOT that simple.



If we are going for pie in the sky performance, it would be good to have bullets that do that and also that don't destroy much of the meat.

I can tell you that I have recovered two bullets sticking out of the skin on the opposite side of a hog and one that was found under the hog, but none of them came close to retaining anywhere near 100% of their weight, LOL.

I always wanted smart bullets that knew how to calculate performance and then perform based on the target that was impacted, the velocity they left the barrel, and the distance they traveled before impacting. A mono bullet most certain can achieve that because it isn't just a function of bullet but also of the other factors I mentioned (assuming I got them all).




The problem with most other allows isn't that they are soft, but that they are too light. As such, you don't get the same impact on the animal as lead based bullets to which we have become accustomed. So instead of shooting a 165 gr. .308 bullet, maybe you are shooting a 120 gr. .308 bullet. You are then moving from slow and heavy (relatively speaking) to light and fast if you want comparable energy. It won't be the same. There will be benefits and downsides. I don't know why hunters can't learn to adapt accordingly, but they will balk because it involves change.

Of course, the issue will be finding an alloy that is appropriate for the task that isn't super poisonous, rare earth expensive, but readily available, etc. and THEN getting hunters to accept it.

Game animals don't read gun rags or the internet. "Energy" is just a term used by people who want to quantify the unquantifiable.

What kills animals is destruction of vital organs (preferably, brain, heart, lungs) and massive blood loss causing hypoxia.

Your Barnes would have been fine if it was an "X"-type expanding bullet and placed through shoulder(s). The rumen doesn't guarantee expansion of the "tougher" bullets. I shot my nilgai with a (.375H&H) 300gr. Swift A-Frame through both shoulders. It took perhaps two steps and expired. It wasn't on its feet long enough to leave a blood trail.

As DNS stated, bullets do not cause blood trails, nor do they alone cause death. It is what the bullet hits inside that cuases injury and potential death in an animal.

Take for instance the vaunted 5.56 the US and its nato allies use. The purpose behind this ammo choice (in FMJ of course because HP or fragmenting bullets in war are illegal according to the geneva conv., but I digress, sort of) is not to kill. The purpose is to injure, as an injured person on a battlefield takes 2-3 other soldiers to tend to and takes them out of the fight. The higher MV coupled with the smaller bullet size made for pass through type wounds that did some damage but not catastrophic internal damage (all the time, don't get me wrong, a 5.56 can still kill with one shot). The "axis" allies mostly use the 7.62x39 and that as we all know is a much heavier bullet designed to cause more internal damage and just carnage upon its wounded. They chose that round because they hate us and want us all dead (pure joke there guys).

So what causes death is internal damage. We all know about the liquefaction a bullet path makes, and how this effect is related to energy in the tissues (directly related to bullet speed and size). We all know about physical damage a bullet makes and how bullet design and tip make a huge impact on this aspect. The reason we shoot for certain areas on an animal is for these effect of the bullet to cause catastrophic damage to vital pieces of living tissue, big arteries, lungs, heart, nerve complexes. Hitting these can and will cause death. Hitting gut will almost always result in death. Hitting purely muscle can cause death but if no major arteries are hit in pure muscle then those shots rarely cause death. We all know this stuff and the reason why some people prefer a double lung type shot vs a heart shot vs a neck shot vs a high shoulder shot. Some people prefer to hit lots of bone on the entry to create massive side effects from the bone fragments where some people prefer cleaner shots, and these experiences are largely based on the type of bullet and history of kills by the individual. We all know we shouldn't take the shoulder blade shot with a BT style bullet, but what else is there to bullet performance and tracking, blod trailing, etc?

Shot location is huge, as is the impact of internal vitals injured or destroyed vital to the blood trail and tracking job. We know a fatty animal is typically going to have a much lower external blood loss due to the fat plugging the wound. But even then, how much blood is let out of the animal is going to be a direct result of the size of the wound channel, the structures hit inside, and how fast the animal can move afterward. Take for instance several situations:

1. A double lung pass through- no significant arteries hit but both lungs are quickly deflated due to the hit. Is this lethal? Yes, eventually. But the animal will move quickly at first due to higher oxygen in the muscles and only when that supply is used up will it start to slow down and then ultimately it will die. With these shots, we typically see a scant blood trail and the animal expires within 100 yards, and where they lay there is a decent pool of blood. (truth is most archery shots that double lung will hit major arteries and thus have a bigger blood show, but we are talking gun shots here) A small caliber with a smaller entry and exit will produce less blood where a larger caliber with bigger holes will produce more. It isn't rocket science on these shots.

2. A chest shot that hits heart and lung - good to great blood trail due to the nature of the lower shot and ability for blood to drain quickly, animal will run off quickly, so trail may be initially harder to follow, but animal expires within 100 yards and big blood mess at point of expiration.

3. A shoulder blade shot in a lighter caliber - assuming good penetration, probably get one lung, might get some artery involvement with the bone frags, but the deer won't be able to move as quickly so a trail can be easier sometimes due to blood loss from muscle hit and will eventually expire.

4. Shoulder blade hit with heavy caliber - again, assuming good penetration, will likely get both lungs, decimate the internals from bone frags going everywhere, possibly get opposite shoulder if squared on the shot. This is the anchoring devastating shot, animal isn't going far at all, and massive blood trail usually. Needs the proper bullet and caliper but almost everyone shoots over powered for WT deer, but heavier game animals will need proper power to pull this shot off.

5. gut shot with no major arteries hit - animal will typically trot off, stopping frequently due to the pain of moving, but being that they can still breath and circulate blood well, they will move off slowly to die. They will leave little blood and be tough to track. This is again where more hunters shooting an overpowered weapon for WT deer helps as the possibility of hitting ANY artery in the gut with a sizeable liquefaction trail is higher the more energy is put into the animal, so blood trail can be subject to size of bullet here considerably, as can bullet design. A gut shot is almost always lethal to a deer, due to infection, etc, but tough to find and track due to what is typically scant blood trail (depending on ammo fired).


There is great science behind all this, and some folks have gone to lengths to make videos of how different shots affect animals. The biggest take away from this should be that bullet energy does matter, bullet design does matter, and shot placement does matter. They all play off each other, and each of us have our own ideas about where a shot should go, or what type of bullet should be fired, but it all is relative to what you are trying to do with each component. The worst case any of us can take is "well my gun shoots 'minute of deer' so as long as I can put it within a dinner plate area in the vitals it doesn't matter what I shoot, its going to die"....while that may certainly be true, it doesn't mean you will find that dead deer and we owe it to the animals to be better than that.

I want 2 holes. That lets more blood out and lets more air in which causes the lungs to under inflate. But this only works when the holes are in the right place. I'm of the opinion that many hunters try to blame the bullet when it is their fault for putting the bullet in the wrong place.

Well I personally like big exit wounds no matter what but especially when hunting in thorn country. For the big hogs north of Guthrie TX I really liked big soft points. Favorites were 250 grain Speer spitzer and the Hornady RN from my Whelen. Range was not an issue but anything that went more than 50 feet could be a real problem. Love them rattlesnakes. Trajectory from the 2450 fps velocity was plenty adequate, both bullets expanded readily out to at least 250 yards. I would use that load on big exotics and doubt I would be disappointed. And this load worked nicely on Whitetails! Surely you can get some heavy cup and core soft points for your 338.

You should come to the next hunters challenge and give us all a tutorial.

I’m waiting for the definition of “bullet failure”

The plethora of pokey things in South Texas always draws blood from me. I don’t have to spend any time looking for that.

Monometal bullets pencil thru if you don’t hit bone.

I thought they expand without bone but must enter at the velocity they were designed to expand, at least within that window. I just watched a video from Lone Star Boars of a Barnes into gel. He recovered the bullet and it was expanded perfectly.

Barnes are monometal since they are all copper. Every Barnes I have hit game with has expanded whether they hit bone or not. Just sayin....

You seem to be implying that the don't expand, remain stable, and just zip through with minimal damage, as an all inclusive materials categorization, but this would just plain be wrong without a lot of caveats.

Some certainly may, like brass Controlled Chaos bullets that will just barely open, but all copper bullets most certainly do expand if hit within their performance range. Some are great expanders. Some are limited expanders while being deep penetrators like some of Barnes bullets. Some will expand and the petals break off along the way, leaving the base for deeper penetration, but it is usually tumbling.