The Accurate Reloading Forums THE ACCURATE RELOADING.COM FORUMS Hunting American Big Game Hunting Exit holes...Go | New | Find | Notify | Tools | Reply | |
| Exit holes... | Login/Join |
one of us |
I opened this thread to avoid hijacking Allen Day's very good post about TSX bullets. Is increadible how different "schools" are among hunters... In that thread many hunters don't give up much atention to the size of exit holes, it's ok, I have killed a very big red deer in the spot using a 165gr X bullets which made a VERY small exit hole.... BUT..I ALWAYS prefer big exit holes, for me it's important, maybe just because is very common here to take shots at running game which the higher charge of adrenalyn makes them (sometimes) go for long distances after being shot. For me a big hole means more blood for track the animal and I believe that if you miss by little the vitals an animal with a bigger exit hole will die faster. L | ||
|
| one of us |
I don't worry about exit holes because it is extremely rare that I need to track an animal that has been shot.I use high velocity cartridges and bullets that provide good expansion and even with lung shots,tracking has not been required. | |||
|
One of Us |
Ceteris paribus...exit holes are better...warm blood out and cold air in. Two holes are better than one. If I break both shoulders adding an exit whole is still better...if I destroy the heart adding an exit whole is still better...if I punch both lungs adding exit hole is still better...if I sever the CNS while not necessary adding an exit whole is still better. Nothing to argue about...hit any piece of anatomy you want or cause any amount of equal destruction to the skeletal structure, the vital organs, or the CNS; having an exit hole is better than not having an exit hole. Mike Never under estimate the internet community's ability to reply to your post with their personal rant about their tangentially related, single occurrence issue.  What I have learned on AR, since 2001: 1. The proper answer to: Where is the best place in town to get a steak dinner? is…You should go to Mel's Diner and get the fried chicken. 2. Big game animals can tell the difference between .015 of an inch in diameter, 15 grains of bullet weight, and 150 fps. 3. There is a difference in the performance of two identical projectiles launched at the same velocity if they came from different cartridges. 4. While a double rifle is the perfect DGR, every 375HH bolt gun needs to be modified to carry at least 5 down. 5. While a floor plate and detachable box magazine both use a mechanical latch, only the floor plate latch is reliable. Disregard the fact that every modern military rifle uses a detachable box magazine. 6. The Remington 700 is unreliable regardless of the fact it is the basis of the USMC M40 sniper rifle for 40+ years with no changes to the receiver or extractor and is the choice of more military and law enforcement sniper units than any other rifle. 7. PF actions are not suitable for a DGR and it is irrelevant that the M1, M14, M16, & AK47 which were designed for hunting men that can shoot back are all PF actions. 8. 95 deg F in Africa is different than 95 deg F in TX or CA and that is why you must worry about ammunition temperature in Africa (even though most safaris take place in winter) but not in TX or in CA. 9. The size of a ding in a gun's finish doesn't matter, what matters is whether it’s a safe ding or not. 10. 1 in a row is a trend, 2 in a row is statistically significant, and 3 in a row is an irrefutable fact. 11. Never buy a WSM or RCM cartridge for a safari rifle or your go to rifle in the USA because if they lose your ammo you can't find replacement ammo but don't worry 280 Rem, 338-06, 35 Whelen, and all Weatherby cartridges abound in Africa and back country stores. 12. A well hit animal can run 75 yds. in the open and suddenly drop with no initial blood trail, but the one I shot from 200 yds. away that ran 10 yds. and disappeared into a thicket and was not found was lost because the bullet penciled thru. I am 100% certain of this even though I have no physical evidence. 13. A 300 Win Mag is a 500 yard elk cartridge but a 308 Win is not a 300 yard elk cartridge even though the same bullet is travelling at the same velocity at those respective distances. | |||
|
| one of us |
I think exit holes are overated. I have so seldom even had to trail an animal that went out of sight after being hit with any of my rifles I would far rather my bullet use it's energy to disrupt vitals rather than pushing thru hide. Leftists are intellectually vacant, but there is no greater pleasure than tormenting the irrational. | |||
|
| One of Us |
TRUE TRUE TRUE! A pessimist views an exit hole as simply doubling the chance of a good blood trail. The reality is that it does more than this by increasing the total volume of blood spilled on that trail as described by Mike above. Sure, it may not matter if you are fortunate and hit the CNS....BUT...from an ethical standpoint and when staring down a trophy fee of four figures or more, it is very comforting to see a lot of blood on the ground. JMHO, JohnTheGreek | |||
|
| One of Us |
I think they're somewhat overrated, but if I'm going for a vitals shot, I'd prefer an exit hole. Punch a hole clean through their lungs and they'll never be able to inflate them enough to run off. Same with the heart, if they're spewing from both sides, chances of very immediate death is very high, they'll bleed out a second or two after punching a hole through their heart. Now, on a spine shot or a shoulder shot, where the animals ability to remain upright is severely compromised, exit woulds aren't really neccessary. IMO, I'd rather smash a shoulder and cut through the lungs than hit them in the lungs/heart. You'd be amazed how far a damn black bear can run off with no heart or lungs! ________  "...And on the 8th day, God created beer so those crazy Canadians wouldn't take over the world..." | |||
|
| one of us |
I would rather see the animal on the ground  | |||
|
| One of Us |
Agreed...if you hit where you are aiming (assuming you are shooting for the CNS) and your super whiz bang magnum does what you think it will. Nobody and no bullet does so every time and IMHO a simple shot into the vitals provides more margin for error. Best, JohnTheGreek | |||
|
| one of us |
I've always preferred an exit hole personally. I also agree that the ideal shot is one that breaks both shoulders and purees the lungs/heart along the way. That shot will drop an animal right where it stands - as if turning off a light-switch. .22 LR Ruger M77/22 30-06 Ruger M77/MkII .375 H&H Ruger RSM | |||
|
| one of us |
I can only relate my own experiences,that being that of the last 40 or 50 head of big game that I have killed,I have not had to track any.Not one animal covered 50 yards after being shot and most fell on the spot or within a few steps. | |||
|
| one of us |
In Africa, I have always shot animals which were standing still or slowly walking away. Of course is always better to take a shot through both shoulders but this is not always possible. Here, most of the time we moved pigs and deers with dogs and to put down an axis deer or a hog it's not so easy, you only see a black or reddish thing at full speed in very thick bush. Believe me, HERE, a good exit hole makes a good difference. I believe it is not so common to shoot at running animals up there..  ??L | |||
|
one of us |
The only time I desire an exit hole is when I'm bowhunting. Other than that, if I get an exit, great, if I don't, great (bullets). On one hand, if the bullet exits I may get a good blood trail, but my goal is to dump the game in its tracks. If the bullet doesn't exit, then I know all available energy was utilized. Either way, I'm going to find it if it ran anywhere. Which, to date, very few have. This is just another campfire discussion that will always be bipolar. Honestly, I've had a couple of deer that made it around 50 yards or so after being shot with a 7 mag and Btips at less than 100 yards. I do remember one scrub buck in particular. I found ZERO blood on the ground and he had a gaping exit would. Explain that. I also think that too many hunters forget that even if you don't get an exit wound, the animal still chokes on it's own blood as it fills the airways and as it runs it is spewing blood from it's muzzle. Like AD, I aim to put it down where it stands. Only a couple of times I took quartering away shots and they still dumped the deer with the TSX bullet. To each his own. Exits are not necessary. Ted Kennedy's car has killed more people than my guns | |||
|
| One of Us |
Lorenzo, I used the 160gr TSX 7mmRemMag at Christie's place on plains game, and I will never use it again except for Eland sized game. It blew through everything with small exit-wounds. I will use partitions or accubonds/scirocco in the future. | |||
|
| one of us |
Where I hunt, an Exit is something we all desire. It isn't there to be able to say your rifle has a lot of energy or that you are using a deep penetrating bullet, but to provide a better opportunity to recover the Game quickly, in case it doesn't drop at the shot. Making a through-and-through shoulder-to-shoulder shot normally does drop them very close to where they were standing. But, occasionally they do make it off aways. Then depending on the terrain, it may or may not be easy to track. In those situations, I certainly appreciate a nice size Exit with lots of blood flowing. For those of you who have the Game Spotters find your animals for you and you hunt on terrain similar to a mowed pasture, I can see where you would not be all that concerned about it. --- Actually, as Mike said there really isnothing at all to argue about. If you prefer no Exit, best of luck to you. If you prefer Exits, you will need "less" luck to recover the Game. | |||
|
| One of Us |
The rare times that I have had to do any tracking for any distance at all, the first thing I look for is the telltale signs of an exit wound. It is a comfort factor in making sure I can recover the game. Over the years I have tracked two bull elk and one muley in the snow and was glad to see that they were leaking from both sides. One of the bulls and the muley had expired when I caught up with them and the other bull required a finisher. Even then, the post mortem on that bull was the loss of both lungs. He had traveled maybe 300 yards with his lights out. It's amazing how much a critter can absorb once the adrenillin starts flowing. I think premium expanding bullets are the ticket and there are a plethora of them these days. Just take you pick. Hit in the front half of the bigh hairy part and he's going down. | |||
|
| one of us |
If you don't have to track, exit holes are not needed. I've always tried not to shoot animals in the shoulder because it usually makes a mess and wastes meat. So, I usually end up tracking and it is always tough if you don't have a good blood trail. An exit wound sure helps if you have to track an animal. I've never had much of a problem shooting through a deer but I have had a few hogs without exit wounds and it makes tracking very difficult. I don't know if two holes makes them die quicker than one but it sure helps to find them in the thick stuff. | |||
|
one of us |
I like to have exit holes also but I don't care how big it is. Some bullets just leave smaller exits. A .338 210 nosler I put through a moose went between two ribs (broke both)going in put a 3" hole through the first lung and a 2" hole through the second lung and exited between two ribs again breaking both ribs. The entrance and exit holes were both small but that doesn't tell the whole story does it. -------------------- THANOS WAS RIGHT! | |||
|
| One of Us |
It seems much more logical to have 3000 pounds of muzzle energy dissipate inside the animal than 1000 pounds inside and a 2000 pounds in the stump 25 yards behind. | |||
|
| Administrator |
Gentlemen, From my own experience, the advantage of an exit hole is over hyped quite a lot. After examining several hunderd animals I have seen shot, ranging from klipspringers to cape buffalo. There is no hartd anf fast rule one can apply that an exit wound will provide a blood trail. Sometime an animal will start bleeing right where he stood at the shot. And sometimes one will not find a single drop of blood on teh trail of animal that has run over a 100 yards before giving up the ghost, despite an exit wound. I think my friend Allen summed it up perfectly. Make sure of your shot, and you won't have to worry about a blood trail. A hard hit animal is not going to go very far. And an animal with a matginal hit is likely to stop bleeding long before you find him. Animals sometimes behave in such an amazing manner, anything one has learnt in his past gets thrown out of the window. And we all end up scratching our heads | |||
|
| one of us |
I like a rifle and cartridge combination that leaves an exit hole on typical broadside shots. That way I feel confident I have the penetration for an odd angle shot I might have to take. | |||
|
| one of us |
I always want two holes. if the bullet doesn't deliver them I usually look for one that will. I have had to follow wounded animals, both my own and others and two holes seem to make a difference. | |||
|
one of us |
I am concerned over exit hole size but for a whole other reason. If I hope to keep the cape, I want a small exit hole. While hunting for Dall Sheep in AK, a hunter shot a nice ram with a 300 Weatherby and BT's. Shot was behind the shoulder but on the off side it exited in the neck. Blew the cape to shreads and he ended up leaving it behind. If I am trophy hunting I prefer a smaller exit hole like those that the X bullets create. ****************************************************************** R. Lee Ermey: "The deadliest weapon in the world is a Marine and his rifle." ****************************************************************** We're going to be "gifted" with a health care plan we are forced to purchase and fined if we don't, Which purportedly covers at least ten million more people, without adding a single new doctor, but provides for 16,000 new IRS agents, written by a committee whose chairman says he doesn't understand it, passed by a Congress that didn't read it but exempted themselves from it, and signed by a President, with funding administered by a treasury chief who didn't pay his taxes, for which we'll be taxed for four years before any benefits take effect, by a government which has already bankrupted Social Security and Medicare, all to be overseen by a surgeon general who is obese, and financed by a country that's broke!!!!! 'What the hell could possibly go wrong?' | |||
|
| one of us |
I always want a very tough bullet that will provide an exit hole, no matter where on the animal it hits. I don't care if the cape is ruined, even on a trophy, I simply want the animal on the ground as soon as possible. I can find another cape if required. Many years and many shots have told me that the bad hits will come somewhere down the line, in spite of all the practice you can do. When hunting dangerous game, particularly in Big Brown Bear country or Africa I really want an exit hole, the bigger the better. My African experience is very limited after many Alaskan and Western US hunts, but a Buffalo hunt and North Fork softs and solids taught me something on penetration because of their efficiency and I will not forget it. Bottom line, give me a large exit hole and the animal on the ground, preferrably at the same time. Call it overkill if you want but I will take that instead of the alternative.  Good shooting.phurley | |||
|
| One of Us |
I prefer exit holes. Hardly ever need them, but I like them. I prefer to stay away from shooting animals intentionally in the shoulders or the spine. I do not like the meat damage that is associated with those type of shots. I also prefer not to shoot any CNS structures. Even with the spectacular results. Another reason is CWD, I like to keep the CNS intact. After butchering my own animals for many years, I like the plain old broadside, double lung behind the shoulder/legs. Does the job with the least amount of damage. Now, if I were to ever go after critters I did not plan on eating, ie big bears or any of the African animals, I can see the benefit of the shoulder/spine instant drop shot. The elk I shot last week had small exit holes that were not needed, but the damage done in between was impressive to say the least. | |||
|
| One of Us |
That's why there are so many different bullet types out there, we all have our own opinion on what's best. Use what you like, and remember there is no magic bullet. | |||
|
one of us |
I prefer complete penetration, hence I want exit holes. I do not subscribe to the "energy dump" inside the animal theory. Short of brain/spine shots which instantly take out the CNS, cavitation through the vitals and instantaneous loss of blood pressure to the brain causes death. I want cavitation through and through. BH1 There are no flies on 6.5s! | |||
|
| one of us |
The energy dump is not a theory. It's a fact. Ted Kennedy's car has killed more people than my guns | |||
|
| Administrator |
Field experience proves otherwise! Damage to vital organs kills, regardless of bow much energy is required to get this done. | |||
|
| one of us |
Wrong. Field experience doesn't prove anything with respect to a bullet releasing energy or not. The fact is, if the bullet doesn't exit, any and all energy is transferred to the surrounding tissue. Period. I never said anything about what amount of energy is needed to kill.
On your second comment, Correct. But I never said how much energy it takes to kill. Reread my post. The FACTUAL comment I made was with respect to energy only. And it is a FACT, as I said (not a theory), that if the bullet doesn't blow through, there has been 100% transfer of available energy. Ted Kennedy's car has killed more people than my guns | |||
|
one of us |
I alwars read the first few posts on a thread like this and laugh at the replies. Sorry if this got covered, but I didn't feel like reading all the same old pissing matches... Too many people seem to equate exit holes to faster kills. This is not an absolute statement. They seem to think that the animal bleeds out faster with 2 holes. Not true. Most blood loss does not end up outside the animal anyways. Remember the big blood clot that used to be the heart/lung area of that deer you through punched...??? They can and do bleed to death without a drop of blood spilled outside their carcass! The only thing an exit hole does is show you that your bullet indeed made it to (and through) the animal's vitals, assuming the vitals are between the entrance and exit hole of course. You can get that same confirmation by opening up a dead animal! Duh! Oh, it shows that you have enough gun. Who-hoo! And yeah, I am a 300 mag shooter at deer...but that's because I'm a 1 gun for multiple game kind of hunter... Bottom line, if it kills for you, cleanly and quickly, 'nuff said. The rest is just pissing matches. Have fun! Believe nothing, no matter where you read it, or who said it, unless it agrees with your own reason and your own common sense. | |||
|
| one of us |
Horsehockey, when a bullet does not exit its because it ran out of gas, usually turned over and was stopped by the skin, it ran out of energy before it got there... With an exit hole the bullet did the same amount of damage and then more by tearing a big hole to let air in and blood out... Energy in killing power is a coined worthless term by some gun writter...In simple terms what kills is terminal destruction of tissue, causing blood loss that voids oxygen to the brain or pushes a rush of blood to the brain and sorta induces a stroke of sorts.. Ray Atkinson Atkinson Hunting Adventures 10 Ward Lane, Filer, Idaho, 83328 208-731-4120 rayatkinsonhunting@gmail.com | |||
|
| one of us |
...and when it does exit it failed to do as much damage internally that it is capable of. This pissing match can go on forever...who cares. Quick and cleanly dead is good, no matter where the bullet ends up. Now if you want to make the argument that one should use enough gun that you insure pass throughs on decent angle shots, we might find some common ground. Rating performance on pass through alone is foolhardy. Get some FMJ's and blast away then. All that is required is to reach the vitals with enough oomph to do enough damage to kill. Period. How much does the exit hole add to that? Believe nothing, no matter where you read it, or who said it, unless it agrees with your own reason and your own common sense. | |||
|
| one of us |
I have had few bullets fail to exit on deer, even from 22 centerfires and if they expand quickly in and around the heart lung area the animals demise is near. On elk though I have found many bullets under the hide after doing much internal damage. There is another way of looking at blood loss, bleeding internally causes problems too restricting the ability of vital organs to operate. Hard hit animals often blow this blood out their muzzles. I don't complain about exit holes but don't feel they are always needed. Leftists are intellectually vacant, but there is no greater pleasure than tormenting the irrational. | |||
|
| one of us |
leaded or unleaded? 
You mean it TRANSFERRED it's energy, right? Ted Kennedy's car has killed more people than my guns | |||
|
| Administrator |
Doc, Years ago, I remember an article that said one needs 1,000 foot pounds of energy to kill a deer - how they arrived at that is beyond me. As in the same magazine, they had articles of deer being shot with handguns, that did not generate that much energy. But, please humor me by exlplaining to me how a 120 pound impala, hit at 50 yards with a 300 grain bullet that started off at almost 2800 fps. The impala is hit in the chest, the bullet penetrating the whole length of his body, and the bullet comes to rest just under the skin in one of hind legs. At teh shot, the impala flinches, then walks a few yards and stand for almost a minute before sitting down, then lays on his side and dies. Shouldn't that impala have gotten lifted several feet off the ground, and flown backwards several yards? Just as in the Hollywood movies? | |||
|
| one of us |
No. I think you and I are on different pages. I have never commented on HOW MUCH ENERGY IS NEEDED....for anything. Did I write that? No. The post I responded to stated something like, "I do not subscribe to the "energy dump" inside the animal theory." I merely responded with, IT's NOT A THEORY. Meaning, if a bullet does not exit, then any and all energy available IS CERTAINLY TRANSFERRED. This is a physics thing and it's a fact. And I certainly cannot see how it is a bad thing when I'm trying to kill something. The game animals reaction to that energy is and always will be different in every case on every continent no matter the angle, distance or shotplacement. Some things seem un-natural, or keep us puzzled. And some things are unexplainable. I'm not sure where you are getting the information regarding "how much energy" is needed. I never commented on that. And I never stated that energy is what does the killing, we all know it is the resultant trauma that is done From the energy.
Same here. And I don't think they meant "needed," I think they meant "recommended." At least, that is what they should have stated. Also, I've heard the 2000 for elk. All bologna.
So, they are hypocrits. Consider the source. I've seen several deer dumped with a 44 Rem mag.
Solid bullet? Mushroomed?
No. Why? Because of how much energy was there? Once again, I never commented on what an animals reaction to energy should be. What do you think would have happened if all else was identical but a more favorable broadside shot was taken behind the shoulder or at the high point of the shoulder?
There's your answer.  May I ask you a question: At 191 measured yards, 2 hunters, prone, side by side, shoot 2 antelope, also side by side and both slightly quartering away, and both of equal mass give or take 5 pounds, at the same time. One rifle is a 243 with a 95 Btip, and the other is a 270 with a 150 grain Btip. Both animals are hit at the same approximate time. The 95 grain bullet has MV of 3097 and the 150 has MV of 2810. Both animals are hit at almost the identical aimpoint, about 2" below the tan line and ~4" behind the shoulder. The 95 grain bullet did not exit, the 150 did. What were the animals reactions, immediately following impact? (and fwiw, I have it on video). Ted Kennedy's car has killed more people than my guns | |||
|
| one of us |
Hey Doc, Your Sample of "one each" might be a bit small to carry into an argu... discussion. A person that has hundreds or thousands of kills can describe what will "typically" happen quite easily, but they also realize it doesn't mean it will always happen 100% of the time. --- Agree. I understand the point you are making that the presence of an Exit does not cause a HUGE increase in the actual Bleeding of the tissue. However, having an additional hole to allow the "opportunity" to create a Blood Trail is a serious benefit where I hunt. Absolutely true, that does "occasionally" happen especially when an Exit is way too high on the Game(upper 2/3) or too far back and becomes "plugged" with innards. Fortunately though, it is the exception with a shot placed "low"(in the lower 1/3) through both shoulders. I still see folks mentioning "meat loss" with shoulder-to-shoulder shots. And I can also agree that is true. However it is not as much meat lost as when you are not able to locate the Game until the meat is spoiled and you find it by smell. Good old "Exits". .... Don't kill Game without them! | |||
|
one of us |
Well here goes...It doesn't matter to me if it exits or not with the proper shot.Advantage-Sometimes but not all the time.No two people react the same to a punch in the jaw as no two Elk react the same to the same shot. Premium bullets gives you the advantage to drive through different angles to get to the vitals that soft bullets(bargain bullets) just don't do most of the time. I am not a shoulder shooter unless there is no alternative.I might want to break down a Bear or a Buffalo for my own health, but not an Elk unless that is the only shot.I have seen them drop to the shot(Behind the shoulder) and seen them buck like a rodeo bronk or have no reaction at all but they are hit and will die and like what was posted above,there is no guarentee you will get a bloodier trail with an exit..To many variables that do happen. Through my work I have seen alot of Elk/Deer and Bear killed and I have not seen any time after time(written in stone) advantage to an exit. Not necessary in my opinion. Jayco | |||
|
| one of us |
HotCore, the point is, it really doesn't matter what the outcome was. Ultimately, we drove up to 2 dead antelope and tagged them. FWIW, the goat hit by the 243 dropped quick. The one hit with the 270 walked around in a circle for about 8 seconds then did the typical antelope death role. I'm not trying to impose any sample size and say it is an absolute, just demonstrating that every kill, no matter where, when, or with what, is different...no matter the energy. Ted Kennedy's car has killed more people than my guns | |||
|
| Powered by Social Strata | Page 1 2 |
 | Please Wait. Your request is being processed... |
|
Visit our on-line store for AR Memorabilia
| View $GS_USERNAME's Public Profile |
| Add $GS_USERNAME to my Buddies |
| Add $GS_USERNAME to my Ignore List |
| Invite $GS_USERNAME to a Private Topic |
| View Recent Posts by $GS_USERNAME |
| Notify me of New Posts by $GS_USERNAME |