Calibre / Velocity / Projectile vs Meat Wastage

What's the general consensus (if there is one) on the relationship between calibre, velocity, and projectile weight vs meat wastage?

Obviously with reloading you can change the variables such much calibre almost become irrelevant...so for this assume factory ammo only. Also assume a beginner so no neck shots.

Would it be correct to say, that generally for the same given energy, a higher speed / lower weight projectile will cause more meat loss than a lower speed higher weight projectile?
(Either due to damage or blood shot/ bruising)

Eg - (Using Barnul ballistics data)
7.62x39 125g - 2109ft/s & 1235ft/lbs @ 100
556 55g - 2717ft/s & 902ft/lbs @100
556 62g - 2567ft/s & 907ft/lbs @100
308 168g - 2537ft/s & 2401ft/lbs @100

Remington data
300 AAC 125g - 1977ft/s & 1084 @100
300 AAC 130g - 1824ft/s & 961 @100


What's going to reliably put the animal down, while minimising meat wastage?



(Sorry, this was supposed to be in the Hunting section, not Firearms )

I note that you are assuming 100 yard shooting.
Bullet construction id a big consideration. Light fast bullets are not as reliable as heavily condtructed bullets that can reliably penetrate deeply and smash bone. Say you ate looking at a terminal energy delivery requirement of at least 1000ft lbs;- as well as this the bullet must be strong enough and designed to penetrate deeply through hide, bone and sinew to vitals of heart lungs and nerves. One thing is for sure; at 100 yards you do not need any sort of centrfire magnum ! There is good info on the Terminal Ballistics website. A good all rounder for 100 yards is the 30-30.

forget ALL about meat loss....think animal lost and it becomes irrelevant..... far better to kill it 3 times over than kill it just about enough and have it get away into spot you cant find it.....one of you old meat hunters will correct me on this if wrong but I believe 70% of the good meat is behind the 3rd rib..... so at WORST you will loose 30% shoulder and neck is stew or mince.....the steak is in the back and bum....TAKE OUT THE FRONT WHEELS AND ITS GOING NOWHERE.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Micky Duck

forget ALL about meat loss....think animal lost and it becomes irrelevant..... far better to kill it 3 times over than kill it just about enough and have it get away into spot you cant find it.....one of you old meat hunters will correct me on this if wrong but I believe 70% of the good meat is behind the 3rd rib..... so at WORST you will loose 30% shoulder and neck is stew or mince.....the steak is in the back and bum....TAKE OUT THE FRONT WHEELS AND ITS GOING NOWHERE.

---

Yup the dirty old rem mag has destroyed a few shoulders but nothing has ever walked away.....or at all :D granted I'm almost never shooting at 100 yards

A big bullet, think 45 going slowly will cause minimal meat loss and still be lethal even if only dawdling along subsonically. It's shot placement that does it. Take out the front wheels. Hydrostatic effects from hyper velocity and soft rapidly expanding bullets are what cause it.

I use the most devastating projectile I can find pushed at an effective speed. Penetrate then expand violently but not splatter all over wet hide. I try to damage as much meat as possible, at the front.

All the tasty bits are in the back.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Micky Duck

forget ALL about meat loss....think animal lost and it becomes irrelevant..... far better to kill it 3 times over than kill it just about enough and have it get away into spot you cant find it.....one of you old meat hunters will correct me on this if wrong but I believe 70% of the good meat is behind the 3rd rib..... so at WORST you will loose 30% shoulder and neck is stew or mince.....the steak is in the back and bum....TAKE OUT THE FRONT WHEELS AND ITS GOING NOWHERE.

---

Obviously an animal crawling away to die slowly is an animal lost and totally wasted.
But referring to the question at hand -if all other things are equal, and one option preserves more meat than the others - why wouldn't you want to use that option? Otherwise you might as well use a 338 on rabbits...

Basically - I have no issue with killing animals for meat/ and or pest control. But I feel it is more respectful to the animal/life to use as much as possible. That's just my ethics though. Other may feel differently and thats totally fine.

Most of my deer receive a 308 Hornady 150gr,at 2964ft/sec with 2950ft/lbs at the muzzel ,thru the sholders.Most of the time i loose both sholders or my cats get some off cuts,no fancy head shots.But deer dont walk away.Shots between 30yds and 300yds.

Better to get most of the meat than none of the meat and have an animal run to where you can't find it. Over gunned is better than under gunned. Accept the fact that you are not going to get 100% of the meat unless its a head shot. That's just how it works.

45/70

Eat right up to the hole.
And nothing hit by one of those is going very far....bang-flop....

Another consideration is lead in the area where the animal is hit, it’s been covered in other threads.
I recommend take out the front legs and leave them in the bush. Take home the rear end as has been said.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by berg243

if you want as much recoverable meat as possible use a 44 or 45 cal with a big lump of lead at sub velocity otherwise pick your angle to miss the meaty bits.

---

The angle of the shot can definitely save a lot of meat. The last 2 fallow I took were with the 338 at 130 and 380m . Both taken with the animal positioned around 45 degrees facing away from from me. Bullet goes in back behind one shoulder and out to one side of the chest. All the shoulder meat was left untouched .
Broadside isn't the best option for meat retention and I prefer to wait for the angled shot if possible to save the meat from damage. As long as you can picture in your mind where best to place the shot to clear both shoulders and still do max damage in the engine room and the bullet doesn't deviate then all is well.

The heavier the projectile the less meat damage as a rule - a 130 sp in a 308 will damage more than a 150.
I like a hard projectile that exits. Accubonds open immediately and cut a hole straight through. Damaged shot meat from a carcase averages 5 litres - I always carry out the whole deer. Most animals will run for a few steps but always die quickly with a hole right through.

If that tiny bit of extra meat is really that important then you might aswell be head or neck shooting them to save everything otherwise meat saving is irrelevant IMO. Never ceases to amaze me the amount they blab on about meat saving in the states. I suppose their opportunities are much more limited then ours. What matter is using the appropriate caliber/projectile to achieve the most humane and efficient kill at the target end. My experience has been that it doesn’t overly make much difference. Deer i’ve shot square through the front shoulders with my 243, 708, 308, 270, 284 etc are generally just as stuffed as the ones I shoot with my 7mmRM.

I use a big bullet (for calibre) at a reasonable speed and always aim for the front wheels (thru the shoulders) as its better to recover all the rest and feed the damaged meat to the dogs than try for a "tricky" meat saver shot and end up with no meat or even worse wounded meat running away.
For me that means a 30cal 200gn ELD-X or TLR bullet at about 2850-2900

That's thumpy, 3 and a half thousand ft lbs at one end and still quit a bit at the other 300 win mag I'm guessing.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MrMatu

Obviously an animal crawling away to die slowly is an animal lost and totally wasted.
But referring to the question at hand -if all other things are equal, and one option preserves more meat than the others - why wouldn't you want to use that option? Otherwise you might as well use a 338 on rabbits...

Basically - I have no issue with killing animals for meat/ and or pest control. But I feel it is more respectful to the animal/life to use as much as possible. That's just my ethics though. Other may feel differently and thats totally fine.

---

have you ever done the maths on rabbit with .22lr
projectile weighs ABOUT 5grams...rabbit weighs 500-1000grms so projectile is 0.5-1% of animals weight... big red deer might go 200lb so to be doing same you need projectile 1-2lb even if you use 100lb for deer its still a HUGE hunk of lead.....
I dont believe you need to use AS MUCH AS POSSIBLE....but should always use enough to ensure a clean kill.....and putting projectile in correct place is big part of that....

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Marty Henry

That's thumpy, 3 and a half thousand ft lbs at one end and still quit a bit at the other 300 win mag I'm guessing.

---

It definitely kills better than my 6.5SAUM did with 143 ELD-X's ( I had several bullet failures at close range and wounded animals :( ) and reloading if neccessary is not the lottery it was with the SAUM either.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by vulcannz

I hunted a lot of fallow with a 243, then I got a 300BLK. What I noticed is that the 243 did considerably more meat damage across a larger area. The 300BLK has dropped them on the spot more, and does a tighter more violent area of damage (to the point my butcher/wife was much happier with the amount of meat recovered). I sold the 243.

I suspect it is to do with a bigger calibre and lower velocity imparting more damage.

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by 7.62

@vulcannz a slow 30 cal will definitely damage less meat than a fast 6mm.

---

Found the information I was looking for in the 223 thread in the hunting section.
Thanks to those that replied.
👍

https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/202...e7b672e54b.jpg



This was shot at around 30m with my 22-250 with a 52gr Berger hollow point going 3750fps.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Jlang

https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/202...e7b672e54b.jpg



This was shot at around 30m with my 22-250 with a 52gr Berger hollow point going 3750fps.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

---

Not good, shallow penetration and bullet blow up. Why the shoulder shot with a 250 ? I would shoot the base of the neck, as in the neck crease

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by stagstalker

If that tiny bit of extra meat is really that important then you might aswell be head or neck shooting them to save everything otherwise meat saving is irrelevant IMO. Never ceases to amaze me the amount they blab on about meat saving in the states. I suppose their opportunities are much more limited then ours. What matter is using the appropriate caliber/projectile to achieve the most humane and efficient kill at the target end. My experience has been that it doesn’t overly make much difference. Deer i’ve shot square through the front shoulders with my 243, 708, 308, 270, 284 etc are generally just as stuffed as the ones I shoot with my 7mmRM.

---

It is not just the States that recover all the meat, all across Europe is the same and I believe Africa do too. We are the only ones who think wastage and poor marksmanship is acceptable

From my point of view we try and save as much meat as possible as the amount of deer we see (not) hunting the local doc land you would think it was an endangered species...
More than likely I'm just crap at hunting tho :( :oh noes:

Is there a difference in general hunting terrain in NZ to many other countries? Thick bush with limited viz you are motivated to try and drop the animal on the spot here.

Sent from my LM-G710 using Tapatalk

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Moa Hunter

It is not just the States that recover all the meat, all across Europe is the same and I believe Africa do too. We are the only ones who think wastage and poor marksmanship is acceptable

---

Well that last sentence is a load of rubbish.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by stagstalker

Well that last sentence is a load of rubbish.

---

Alright I'll re-phrase: 'Lack of confidence in ones ability to place the bullet in a small vital area'.
The best rabbit shooters today can shoot 300 a night and they will all be head shot, so why is shooting a deer in the head, neck or behind the front leg hard ? Hundreds of NZ hunters worked full time or part time as professional meat hunters in the 60's 70's 80's. They didn't shoulder shoot with 222's, 22-250's and 243's. The deer were 'clean shot' - head & neck for top money.
I find it hypocrisy to condemn the aerial slaughter to waste of Tahr with one breath and condone the wasteful shoulder shooting of deer with the next.

now we know you talking crap...... Im no top rabbit shooter but along with Kerry we shot 470 head shot from brick of power point back in the day when were using them for commercial dog tucker...TOP shooters doing search n destroy were shooting 12-1600 for a night.

people DONT shoot behind front leg as THEY WANT TO INSTANTLY ANCHOR animal..... if you believe it makes you a better person because you carry out and utilise 100% of meat off carcass well good for you.... but WHEN not IF you cock it up and blow off a jaw leaving animal to die lingering death..dont expect sympathy from me.
and not all shoulder shot animals have large amount of meat wasted....even with the .270 win using cup n core 140grn hornadies ,shoulder shot deer might loose 1-2 maybe even 4kgs of meat....closer to .5kg if close to vechile so can carry it all out....
and who says leaving it in the bush is WASTE???? it goes back into ground and fertilizes growth of plants...round n round circle of life n all that...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Micky Duck

now we know you talking crap...... Im no top rabbit shooter but along with Kerry we shot 470 head shot from brick of power point back in the day when were using them for commercial dog tucker...TOP shooters doing search n destroy were shooting 12-1600 for a night.

people DONT shoot behind front leg as THEY WANT TO INSTANTLY ANCHOR animal..... if you believe it makes you a better person because you carry out and utilise 100% of meat off carcass well good for you.... but WHEN not IF you cock it up and blow off a jaw leaving animal to die lingering death..dont expect sympathy from me.
and not all shoulder shot animals have large amount of meat wasted....even with the .270 win using cup n core 140grn hornadies ,shoulder shot deer might loose 1-2 maybe even 4kgs of meat....closer to .5kg if close to vechile so can carry it all out....
and who says leaving it in the bush is WASTE???? it goes back into ground and fertilizes growth of plants...round n round circle of life n all that...

---

Read the previous posts - guys advocating shoulder shots as a first choice and leaving the 'front wheels behind'. I am responding to that. We are not in Africa needing to 'Anchor' dangerous game. I consider it unethical to leave good meat behind after making the decision to shoot the animal.
I consider it unethical to choose an aimpoint that will result in a lot of wasted meat when other shots are available. What would you think of someone catching a trout and cutting it in half at the vent and throwing the front away because they cant be fafed gutting it.
Re the Rabbit shooters, 300 a night shot, gutted, hung on the fence in batches as you go to cool and then collected and stacked on bread crates in the chiller and repeated again the next night and the next is a Top shooter imo
Measure the shot meat from a shoulder shot deer and report back, I challenge it is more like 10 - 15 kg

First, a disclosure statement. I have no New Zealand hunting experience. That said, I have a shade over three decades of hunting experience in Africa where critters vary widely in size and their "toughness". (If the latter doesn't make sense to you, an example would be kudu and blue wildebeest. Although not very different in size, blue wildebeest do not go down nearly as easily as kudu. Same with warthog compared to the smaller antelope species.)

The important variables on meat damage would be bullet construction and impact velocity, emphasis on impact. Bullet weight does not play a direct part in meat damage but would affect the other variables as well as contribute to penetration, heavier for calibre (high sectional density) providing deeper penetration, all other things being equal.

So, impact velocity. This is probably the single most important factor, high impact velocity results in more meat damage. There's some good science I understand too poorly to articulate myself on temporary wound cavity increasing with speed of bullet through wound channel. The faster the bullet impacts, the higher the speed through the the wound channel, the larger the temporary wound cavity. The temporary wound cavity would be the red gooey mess around the actual hole through the carcass. In extreme cases, high impact velocity result in bullet failure before reaching vitals.

Bullet construction plays a secondary role. A bullet that breaks apart more easily may result in more meat damage as parts of the bullet fracture off, creating secondary wound channels. The higher bullet impact velocity, the more likely a bullet will break apart (so once again, there's the impact velocity as the primary factor).

A example of sorts to illustrate:

1. A 30 calibre bullet fired at a quartering angle, impacting in shoulder of a big blue wildebeest bull. If the bullet is of poor construction, fired from a 300 Win Mag at short range, you may luck out and have bullet failure and end up with a wounded animal. If the range to target is increased, same bullet from that 300 Win Mag will have reduced chance of failure. Same 30 calibre bullet launched from a 308 Win at the original close range will have reduced chance of failure.

If at the close range engagement both the 308 Win and 300 Win Mag does not fail and penetrate to vitals, meat damage in the case of the Win Mag is most certainly going to be more. If the original 30 calibre bullet is substituted by one of eqaul weight but better construction (eg a Nosler Accubond), odds for bullet failure is decreased. While you might have less meat damage than with the conventional bullet construction, the 300 Win Mag will still cause more meat damage compared to the 308 Win.

Of course, there are no free lunches, physics doesn't work that way. The lower velocity of the 308 Win will result in a worse trajectory compared to the 300 Win Mag, that's why we have both available and select them when appropriate. (Or we sacrifice a lot of range time and learn the one we have really well so we can do everything with it.)

More personal example: I often hunted impala, kudu or blue wildebeest with my 404 Jeffery. The 404 is adequate for even elephant or buffalo (but I was much too poor to hunt those beasts). Despite that, it resulted in minimal meat damage, sometimes comparing favourably to my mate's 270, especially if animals were shot at close range. The reason? A 400gr bullet at muzzle velocity of just under 2200fps ensured very low impact velocity. But the bullet was going to penetrate whatever it hit. The downside was of course a trajectory more akin to a rainbow than a straight line. I was never going to shoot beyond 150m with the 404.

Trigger warning: I'm going to commit heresy in the eyes of some members here. Energy delivered doesn't kill an animal. If that were the case bows and arrows (or in the extreme, pointy sticks) would never be able to kill an animal. A useful indicator of ballistic performance or an approximation of rifle bullet ability to penetrate it may be but no more than that. Animals die because they get a hole in an organ causing the organ to fail, not because we inject it with energy above a certain threshold.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Moa Hunter

Not good, shallow penetration and bullet blow up. Why the shoulder shot with a 250 ? I would shoot the base of the neck, as in the neck crease

---

When u need meat and your in the bush not in a open paddock sometimes all u can see is a shoulder, part of a head or arse. Shoot my fair share in the head and neck so don’t go calling me out when u don’t no. And by the way that bullet exited so I’d suggest don’t accusing people of poor marksmanship when u don’t no the reason


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Jlang

When u need meat and your in the bush not in a open paddock sometimes all u can see is a shoulder, part of a head or arse. Shoot my fair share in the head and neck so don’t go calling me out when u don’t no. And by the way that bullet exited so I’d suggest don’t accusing people of poor marksmanship when u don’t no the reason


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

---

I didn't call you out, actually I commend you for posting the photo, (which is not an ideal result) that can then be discussed. I asked the question of why a shoulder shot and you have given a valid answer. The topic is meat wastage so posting a photo invites critical comments.
In another post I said that I consider advocating for shoulder shots is unethical because of the meat wastage. What is your opinion on that ?

its OK guys I believe I may have worked out where the confusion /controversial opinions are coming from...
If I was hunting animal with long skinny neck that is easy to see,that lived out in open grasslands and moved slowly....that DIDNT have shoulder as such to speak of and whos main source of mobility and the locomotive bones to drive these were buried inside giant drumsticks....yeah I think I too would be neck shooting....
@Nwke great post ,great post indeed,your 404 bit reminds me of why fellas are hooked on .45/70,big hole you can pretty much eat right up too.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Micky Duck

If I was hunting animal with long skinny neck that is easy to see,that lived out in open grasslands and moved slowly....that DIDNT have shoulder as such to speak of and whos main source of mobility and the locomotive bones to drive these were buried inside giant drumsticks....yeah I think I too would be neck shooting....

---

You got Moa or Ostrich wandering around down your way Micky ?