I stole this from the thread about Noslers.

HunterMontana made this statement:

quote:

The problem here, as always, is how do you define "bullet failure"?

Does poor shot placement, poor choice of shot angle, poor choice of bullet for the job at hand, poor choice of bullet for the caliber and or expected impact velocity, justify the pronouncement of "bullet failure" because in someones opinion the bullet "woulda-shoulda-coulda" if it was just a (fill in the name of YOUR favorite bullet).

It is a statement that in my opinion addresses the "situation" better than anything else. With todays technology in bullet manufacturing, is the problem bullets actually failing or is the problem, hunters, not making the right or best choices as HunterMontana listed and placing the blame on the bullets?

I know that hunting the stuff that can and will fight back is different in some aspects, but even then, how much of ther "problem" rests on the shoulders of the hunter making poor/bad choices?

Well said. I made a similar comment on a thread the other day on AR.

A fair proportion of the blame can be put on
the hunter for using the wrong bullet.

It's not the hunter using the wrong bullet but the hunter taking a bad shot.

A shot with a particular bullet should not be used in a way SO that it will 'fail'.

Of course some bullets are so small, slow or poor that they should not be used.

quote:

Originally posted by Savage_99:
It's not the hunter using the wrong bullet but the hunter taking a bad shot.

A shot with a particular bullet should not be used in a way SO that it will 'fail'.

Of course some bullets are so small, slow or poor that they should not be used.

Good grief. Have you ever seen a carcass bigger than a 120 pound whitetail?

He may not have, but I have, and I have seen people push the envelope just a tad too far.