Tussey Hunter

Which do you think is a better killer: a high velocity, light bullet, or a low velocity, heavy bullet? I know that shot placement is most important, but let me specify the question some more. Which of the above two described bullets, if they have the same energy, will be more forgiving of shot placement and kill an animal more quickly with a less than ideal (but not terrible) shot? I personnally tend towards liking the fast, light bullets, as long as the bullets are not so light that they can't penetrate.

txhunter58

Either extreme can be bad. It really depends on the game you are pursuing and what distances you will be shooting. I guess I usually go for a "medium" bullet going at a fast clip. Here are some examples:

Deer: 130-140 grain shot from a 270 or larger going pretty fast. I use a 270 with a 130 grain remington corelokt or a 140 grain hornady light magnum

Elk: 160-180 grain shot from a 7mm or 30-06 or larger. You can also make these bullets go pretty fast. I use a 7mm mag with a 175 grain nosler partition.

There are a lot of firm believers in the "big, slow bullet" theory and I can't argue with there results. For shots less than 150 yards, they will probably do the killing job more effectively than a light fast bullets if the shot placement is not ideal. However, at 300 yards they drop so much you better have a rangefinder and a trajectory chart taped to your stock.

Bullet construction is as important as weight or speed. You need a premium bullet such as a nosler partition, barnes X, winchester fail safe, etc for elk sized game.

Venor ergo sum (I hunt, therefore I am)

Bloodnativ

Txhunter is right. If your shots are going to be 150 yards or less then the "heavy, slow" bullet will probably be a better choice. If you're reaching out 200 yards or better a lighter, faster bullet would be the choice.

Now before anybody starts jumping up and down I know that light fast bullets are more than capable of taking game very effectively at short ranges and heavy, slow moving bullets will kill game at longer ranges. At shorter ranges, light, fast bullets are traveling faster than their optimum impact velocity. Therefor, a good deal of their energy is somewhat wasted. It doesn't get dissipated inside the animal. The bullet will pass through(sometimes causing great damage) and expend it's energy on the helpless ground on the other side. The goal is to get as much of the energy expended INSIDE the animal as possible. A lot of these light, fast bullets don't slow down to their optimum impact velocity until they get out to 200 yards or better.

At longer ranges (200 yards or more) most heavy, slow moving bullets don't retain enough energy to do the job. Also, like txhunter, said you better know the trajectory of your bullet if your going to attempt a long shot with one of these.

Either one will work, but within certain parameters. If your shots will be at varying distances(short range AND long range) then go with a light or medium weight bullet. If the majority of your shots are going to be at short range(150 yards or less) then don't waste the money and energy of the lighter, faster bullets(they tend to be more expensive). A heavier, slower bullet will probably serve you better.

rickt300

I use my 45-70 with a 405 grain remington soft point at 1500 fps for brush hunting feral hogs. The reason is not that it will penetrate brush but that this load will give me total penetration from any angle. For deer hunting I use with my 7mm mauser and 30-06 I push medium weight bullets to 2600 fps, this gives me a useful trajectory to 250 yards and somewhat lessened meat damage and good penetration. My 300 Win mag gets 200 grain bullets pushed near 2900 fps for any open country elk hunting I do. My long range mulie needs are met easily with loads featuring 150-165 grain bullets with velocities of 2850-3000 fps.

noway

Use heavy and fast. That is why so many people are using magnums these days.
Light and fast works with controlled expansion bullets like the Barnes X.

PAhunter86

Out of the two choices you specified, heavy + slow or light + fast, I would choose light and fast.

ELKampMaster

Tussey,
You said you' ve been on the forum before, so I assume you already know that posing a general - highly arguable - unprovable question will generate lots of fussing.

I would say it would help for you to qualify " what" we' re hunting as it may influence our reply: prairie dogs versus moose..... may make a difference.

Varmits: fast and light, faster the better -- explode them.

Most deer: Midrange anything is fine, they kill fairly easy.

Assuming the game is over 300 pounds, then.... Big AND Fast!
Of course that means magnums, and....
Of course that brings out the " why/recoil/flinch/recoil shy/never owned anything like that/don' t like that/saw somebody get busted up at the range once" response....

Good thing I take my vitamins,
Oh well, enjoy the show!

Never Go Undergunned,
EKM

stubblejumper

My fastest kills have been light fast bullets.I have killed over a dozen deer each with the 257wby using 100gr bullets and 7mmstw using 140gr bullets.My fastest moose and elk kills were with the 300ultramag and 180gr bullets.With these combinations most animals drop on the spot and not one has covered 50yards after being hit.

handloader1

For big game I like heavy fast well constructed bullets. I am a firm beliver in Sectional Density. Good luck.

Tussey Hunter

Yes, I realize that this will cause some debate. I don' t mean it to cause arguments, though. I am just curious to see the experiences of others related to the velocity vs. weight argument. Instead of learning from one person' s experience (ourselves), we might be able to get some imput and experiences from others as well, for a fairer comparison of the issue.