The barnes X 140 in .270 have worked great for me on 4 elk two deer and one pronghorn. The bullets I have recovered all looked and weighed the same, like an ad in a magazine. Either you hit a twig or the barnes I am using are different than the ones you are using.

Pecos, I overstated the case if I said that bullets cannot yaw or tumble at less than 2000 fps. What you see is that pointed rifle bullets that fail to expand usually tumble at impact velocities down to around 2000 to 2200 fps. At that point they become stable in penetration and will drive three or four times as deep as when they expanded or tumbled. The reason is that somewhere in that velocity range they achieve stability after hitting tissue, even if they are pointed. In this situation, a soft point that failed to expand would push through, creating a tiny pencil hole, and exit with most of its impact velocity remaining. It might still kill, but it won't be nearly as effective.

Ray is right, of course, that expanded or short bullets will also often be found turned around (partly or fully) at rest. My testing leads me to believe that this occurs just prior to the bullet arriving at its rest state, but I'm sure that varies.

Pecos, I did misunderstand your tumbling statement in that many people tell of how the M-16 with FMJ's cut like a buzz saw because the bullets tumble in flight. This instability was a fact earlier on but a keyhole in a target would clarify in flight instability.
I do think as Ray pointed out, that a proper choice of bullet matched to an effective velocity is key. I too love my .338 WM for Elk, but don't exactly feel undergunned carrying my 7mm Rem Mag with 175's either. Effectiveness is hard to argue about.
I haven't recovered many bullets from game as most have exited, and I didn't save many of the ones recovered. I will now as it is a point of interest. Bullet performance is a hot topic! I think few give impact velocity enough consideration.

I was always taught that for best shocking power/killing power a bullet below .45 needed to expand to at least half again it's diameter to create a proper wound channel and disrupt enough fluids and tissue to create the shock needed for those spectacular drop them in their tracks kills. Bullets .45 and above were said to do the job just fine without much expansion. Now this might sound way simple and in part it is. As has been stated in this and other posts spectacular drop in their tracks kills are not always needed or achived. First and foremost a bullet must reach the vitals and do the needed damage. Be it a heart shot, lung shot or CNS shot. Again other vital organs produce kills also but are not choice shots. Personaly I like the good ole behind the shoulder lung shot. As I have stated in other posts I use the .300 Win. mag. I have never chrony'd my loads but estimate them at about 3000 fps. I use 165 grain nosler ballistic tips and have only had one just punch a hole through something. That was a groundhog shot in the snout at about 30 yards. Really pulled that shot and it just zipped right through. Any heavy bullet would have most likely done the same thing. As for deer all shots were spectaular. Not all drop in their tracks shots but the internal damage was awesome. I might add all shots but one were compleate pass thrus with little meat damage when hit in the ribs. Only one shot did not compleatly pass through. It was about a 350 yard shot at an angle through the neck ranging down into the far side of the shoulder. The bullet jacket was sticking out of the hide right behind the shoulder. The insides of this deer were compleatly destroyed. I mean jello. Velocity and a bullet sturdy enough to handle said speed and the game hunted puts meat on the table. The only other gun that I have ever dropped deer so dramaticly with is the other side of the spectrum. A 45/70 handgun with 350 grain softpoint roundnose Hornadays. Punched a .45 cal. hole right through and dropped the deer in it's tracks. Most meat damage ever was with a 30-06 back when I thought you had to hit them in the shoulder to drop them. Funny I tracked more deer shot in the shoulder than I ever have deer shot through the ribs. Here in PA. deer go pretty good with broken shoulders. Again had we had premium bullets back then those shots might have done more internal damage.

Now I have to rethink my aim point for bear.
This will be my first year to bear hunt and from what I read breaking down a shoulder with a premium bullet is the best way to anchor a bear. For now it looks like 180 grain Nosler partitions in my .300 and 150 Nosler partitions in the .308 but I am looking for sugestions.

------------------
Don Nelson
Sw. PA.

The question begs to be asked: Assuming the cowboy with his .17 mach IV was hunting one of the great bears, was his the only gun? Or was there a guide or PH close (but out of camera range) with a stopper?
Howard Hill killed all sorts of large, mean African game with a bow and arrow. But he freely admitted that he had a PH right at his elbow with a .458win

I don't remember the article mentioning whether he did or didn't have a guide.

Interesting discussion.Harald said that he had a "keyhole" problem while shooting a 200 gn. .308 X bullet.Thats an awfully long bullet for that caliber.I wonder what rate of twist Harald's rifle had and if it (the rifle) had a sufficient amount of twist to properly stabilise that bullet?Harald?I agree with Ray in that I also believe that Barnes may have some quality control problems.But I think this is exacerbated by a certain percentage of hunters using X bullets which are too heavy(actually too long) for their rifle's particular rate of twist.In Harald's case,I would'nt think that an insufficient twist rate all by itself would cause a keyhole entry wound such as the one he describes,rather a combination of insufficient twist(instability) coupled with deflection prior to bullet striking the animal.No flames intended here Harald,I'm just curious and look forward to any feedback/dialog you may be able to provide on this subject.Just my $.02 (for what its worth).

------------------
JJWEN