I made a posting earlier this fall on this sites Reloading Forum regarding my continued happiness over the last two decades with the performance of Noslers Partion bullets out of my 7mm Remington Magnum. I took a nifty 6x6 Bull Elk with the 160 gr. Nosler Partition from my 7mm Remington Magnum at moderate long range on the second day of Montanas Elk season. The Partition performed flawlessly.

I have been happy with the accuracy and lethality of this bullet for so many years now on all manner of Big Game I have taken with it.

Now having completed my second full season of using the great Nosler 130 gr. Ballistic Tips in my Remington 700 Sendero (26" heavy barrel) in caliber 270 Winchester - I feel the need to comment on it. During the last two years I have harvested 6 head of Deer and Antelope with this Rifle and bullet combination.

I could not be more pleased!

I have taken these 6 game animals with just 6 shots (one shot apiece)!

Two days ago I harvested a nifty 4x4 (plus eyeguards) Mule Deer at just under 300 yards with this set up.

The Mulie was looking right at me and the shot was aimed right at the low heart/lung area and at the shot the Mulie hit the ground and never kicked a leg. It was an instant kill!

The bullet was not found nor did it exit the body cavity.

The accuracy and lethality of these bullets has been simply amazingly impressive to me. Most of the other game I have taken with this Rifle and bullet were broadside lung shots and were quick kills but not instant like this latest harvest!

Many years ago when the Ballistic Tips were first available for the 270 they were a bit to explosive on Big Game. And some less than good results were observed by me and others.

This unfavorable attribute has long since been corrected in this caliber and I began using them again in this new Rifle two years ago.

In my eastern Montana high plains and south western Montana forest Hunts (as well as at the range!) the Nosler Ballistic Tips have performed superbly!

Thanks Nosler for the great bullets and the efforts to make them so accurate, lethal and consistent!

Long live Nosler.

Hold into the wind

VarmintGuy

My experiences with the ballistic tip echo yours. Never had a problem with them, regardless of game, caliber, or shot distance.

Yep. Count me as another satisfied BT customer. 140 grain BST, .280 Rem, Win factory load; 180 BT, 65 grains H4350, 300WSM...never had to use a second shot, never lost an animal, in the last 7 years.

VG,

Have you tried the 140s or the 150s in that 270. They have a better SD and man, they are accurate.

Good Luck!

Reloader

Before BT's I hunted with Nosler Solid Base bullets for 20 years and they were uniformly superb on game for me as well. I can't count the number of deer I killed with my .270 Win and 130 gr. Nosler SB bullets.

Never had a problem with the BT's in my 257rbts , my 270win or 30-06.

Nimrod: I still have a supply of .270/130's and 6mm/100's in the old Solid Base that I use in my .270 and .243 Sakos for deer. These bullets are as good as it gets (got, in this case). But I do understand that Nosler is making a limited run of the SB and they are being loaded by some factories.



This is nothing against the Ballistic Tip, but just to say that I liked the Solid Base just fine before they "improved" them.



I do load the 150 BT for my son's .30-06, and he wouldn't have anything else; but of course the Solid Base predates him, so he wouldn't know any better.

I use Matchkings for target shooting and long range shooting.

I use V-Max's for varmints.

I use XTP's in my pistols for all but plinking.

But where the rubber meets the road, is when I grab a rifle and a box of home cooked ammo and head for the woods for medium to large game for the table. Then I ALWAYS use Nosler Partitions except lately I'm using more and more Ballistic Tips. Long live Nosler!!!

$bob$

Reloader: No, I have not tried the 140 gr. Ballistic Tips as yet. My friend Ben uses the 140 gr. bullets in his 270 Winchester. I just got a message from him saying he got his Mule Deer with this Rifle but I did not speak with him as yet about the particulars.
Thanks for the heads up on their accuracy. I bet they (the 140's and 150's) would be great Caribou medicine if I ever get enough moola ahead to be able to afford that Hunt!
Hold into the wind
VarmintGuy

Hey VG, it may not be the first powder of choice you'd think of but I had very tight groups in one of my 270's using 140 Ballistic Tips AND Accubonds with H1000. One grain under max in a 25.5" barrel. I loaded them up at the last minute before a Kansas hunt 2 years ago. I couldn't believe the accuracy/consistency. OH, and yes, the 140 BT puts big Kansas deer right down too.

Obviously, the other powders of choice are H4831 and IMR4831 to start.

Not to steal the LR thread but just came in from a quick afternoon hunt for an EATER whitetail. Ended up shooting a heavy horned 4x4 at 180 yds with the .257 AI and the 115 BT's. I was above him maybe 20 feet on an outcropping and he was sniffing a few does on an island on the Missouri. Problem was I just never had a clear shot at him with all the brush. Finally at dusk he moved to a spot where I had a clear shot and at 180 yds I stuck one through both lungs. He ran maybe 40-50 yds and gave up the ghost.
I like the BT's for their accuracy but they are pretty explosive. I've wanted to get some use out of this rifle and really like the mild recoil and great accuracy. Been a long time since I've had a .257" anything and the Roberts AI is really growing on me.

FN in MT

WOW!!! Unethical to shoot in the shoulder?!?!? I personally do not like shoulders shots, BUT, that is ONLY because it messes up good meat. That being said, when I want to put an animal down right now, with absolutely no worries of it running off, I shoot for the shoulder. In my experience, when a bullet hits the shoulder, not only will it immediately incapacitate the animal, but the bullet, assuming it's a good, tough, big game bullet, will go on to hit the lungs, heart and/or the spine.
Case in point, last Saturday (yesterday) morning I shot a large-ish N. Texas buck with my little 308 Scout and a 172 gr. home-cast hollowpoint at 1900 fps at about 50 yds. I shot him intentionally and directly in the shoulder, broadside. He dropped like he'd been hit with a laser beam. A post mortem, revealed a broken left shoulder and a severely damaged spine. The heart also had a couple of lacerations on it.
My family and I eat venison almost exclusively, but given the choice of wounding a deer and saving meat and making a decisive shot, I'll take the latter.
35W

I don't think it's unethical to shoot game in the shoulder but, it definitely ruins alot of meat. If you are into the "tough bullet" train of thought, I wouldn't be surprised if thats the way you anchor game. I've seen alot of game animals lost on the rib/lung shots due to penciling or very little expansion of the "tough" bullets.

Although, I've shot through both shoulders w/ NBTs at magnum velocities and the bullets exited, I still try to go for the behind the shoulder(back of the heart/lung) shots. I have found that a good expander through the heart/lung area will drop em' just about as fast as a shoulder hit.

If you like more meat from your trophy, go for the "Behind the Shoulder" hit. W/ the proper equip. neither is more lethal than the other but, If you use the unneeded "tough" bullets available today, you better be a bone crunching shooter.

Good Luck!

Reloader

"Un-needed tough bullets"? I'll have to remember that this summer when I go up against Cape Buffalo.jorge

Jorge: You are simply talking out of your inexperienced ass now!

You are lying!

Call that bullshit if you want but knowledgeable Hunters know that medium size Big Game animals shot through the shoulders do not die any as quickly as animals shot through the heart/lungs!

And no you can not do all three - the shoulder, the heart and the lungs at the same time! To state otherwise simply eradicates any vestige of trust in you that some people may have.

I know I certainly no longer have any!

It makes me wonder what kind of person would state publicly, a deliberate distortion (lie?), to try and prove a ridiculous to begin with premise.

I feel sorry for you Jorge and the animals you Hunt.

And I will not hesitate to restate to you and your diminutive band of bordering on unethical Hunters - intentionally shooting a head of medium size Big Game through the shoulders is bordering on unethical! It is wrongheaded and wasteful and condemns said game to a slower death than necessary. It is intentionally wasting game meat and fouls to a certain extent the game meat that is not ruined immediately!

Shame on any of you wrongheaded nimrods who intentionally use this inefficient and wasteful aimpoint!

The proof is, exactly there, in countless kills I have made and observed, that heart/lung shot medium size Big Game dies quicker than shoulder shot animals and is much less wasteful and is resultingly more humane and ethical!

To state otherwise is proof of a couple of things for sure: inexperience and an inability to observe and assess what one sees happening in the field, a disregard for Hunting ethics AND a disregard for the medium size Big Game Hunted!

Jorge if you are comfortable with envying peni (like you mentioned!) and disrespecting the Game you Hunt then I suggest you take up another sport, maybe ice skating on Friday nights with the BOYS and long showers afterwards, would be better suited to your mindset?

If you are to lazy or inept to track medium size Big Game through ten yards of briars then I have even less respect for you now than before. You my fine feathered penis envying friend have no business what so ever in the game fields!

Please remove yourself from said game fields ASAP! Before Hunters get another black eye (I refer to the shooting of 8 Hunters recently by a really heavily unbalanced nimrod!).

Your unproven statement regarding my correct refutation of your erroneous statement regarding shoulder shot medium size Big Game Animals dying quicker is so ridiculous and unfounded (and again let me state had no proof provided what so ever by the way!) that I hesitate to even blow it out of the water - BUT I have decided to do so!

I have observed many hundreds of head of medium size Big Game being harvested! Without memorable exception the heart/lung shot game succumbed quicker than the poor flopping on the ground shoulder shot animals! And remember Jorge even if you don't care what the games flesh tastes like MOST ethical Hunters do! That meat from the heart/lung shot medium size Big Game Animals tastes better as it has less blood and less adrenaline in it to foul the flavor! Your obvious inexperience in Hunting and being afield while others Hunt may require me to explain to you why you do not want adrenaline to be pumped through the flesh of shoulder shot medium size Big Game Animals? Let me know if you need to be brought up to speed in this regard also Jorge!

And Jorge, even if you as a bordering on unethical Hunter could care less that you are wasting meat with your misguided aim point as well as fouling the meat that is not wasted's flavor - most ethical Hunters do care!

You should be ashamed of yourself!

But I perhaps perceive an overwhelming "I am right and no one can correct me" attitude in you. Again another detrimental aspect of your personality, mindset and decision making process! To bad!

So, your flagrantly erroneous and wrong headed policy of shoulder shooting fine game animals I think is bordering on unethical Hunting practice and your unbacked and unfounded declarations to the contrary are simply without foundation, weight and merit!

You are an admitted lazy Hunter, prone to poor decisions making and one who interjects his arguments with strong reference to penis envy - but also one who can not even make credible reference to "proof" even when your bluster alludes to it!

Again I will state emphatically that your bluster is specious and carries no creedence what so ever with me. I have enough credible experience to know better than fall for your drivel (stupid non-sensical utterances)!

I only wish you had the intelligence and common sense to realize your shortcomings and correct them!

You are diminishing yourself without reason Jorge! It is just as easy to aim for the large heart/lung area of medium size Big Game and reap all the added benefits I have illustrated as it is to aim for the wrong (and bordering on unethical Hunting practice!) spot on medium size Big Game! Or are you INTELLIGENT enough to visualize that fact?

I would like an answer to that please!

And yes I do follow ethical and lawful pursuit of Varmints! All of the Varmints I pursue are done so legally and in conjunction with the state laws in the sattes I Hunt them.

Part of the definition of Varmints is there are so many of them they are making nuisances of themselves. And it is legal and ethical to diminish their numbers by my ethical Hunting of them!

Whats the matter Jorge? Running out of room there to hide behind your multi-faceted errors and bordering on unethical practices? Trying, vainly, to cast a wide net of aspersions on someone that is trying to correct your bad behavior?

Typical cowardly stance by someone that has no credible argument - if I might point out?

Maybe you can take this suggestion from me in the vein it is meant - the next time you get the urge to shoot a fine head of medium size Big game in the shoulders - don't do it! Instead have a fantasy about pounding your pud or better yet maybe - pounding your pals pud! Just go on a penis envy parade of daydreams and drift off into your own pathetic mindset! Thus saving undue pain and slower death to our herds of medium size Big Game.

Yeah Jorge, and this - don't dish it out if you can't take it!

I am glad you gracefully accepted my correction of your OUTLANDISH reference (exageration? lie?) of how far heart/lung shot medium size Big Game travels when Hunted!

Maybe there is hope for you yet? Naw - probably not!

Hold into the wind

VarmintGuy

i think that we can boil it down to this:

if you are trophy hunting or hunting large and/or dangerous game, where meat is a second consideration to getting an animal down NOW and FAST, then a shoulder shot makes sense. as i understand it, however, mot animals can run pretty well on three legs, so you want to make sure that you take out both shoulders. it wouldn't hurt to hit the heart and/or lungs on your way through to the other shoulder as well. this shot offers the best chance of anchoring the animal, making a second shot, IF NECESSARY, an easy thing to do. naturally, the bullet used under these circumstances will and should be a tough bullet designed with penetration in mind. since this hunter is not looking for meat as a primary goal, then the equipment and methods that he uses are reflected in that, and they serve best for his purpose.

if you are hunting under circumstances where meat is the first consideration, then the heart/lung shot is really the best choice. no animal shot through the lungs with a rapidly-expanding bullett is going to go far at all, and under nearly all circumstances, any tracking encessary will be easy to do. my understanding of heart shots is that a hit in the heart may cause an animal to bolt and run quite a ways, but a shredded lung will, in 98% of the cases, make it impossible for the animal to go very far at all. it simply can't breathe, etc. the added advantage for the meat hunter is the very quick and effective bleeding-out of the animal and lack of bone/shoulder trauma, which all results in more, better-tasting meat. since this hunter is looking for meat as a primary goal, then the equipment and methods that he uses are reflected in that, and they serve best for his purpose.

as to ethics, i believe that if they are looked at from the two views above, then it becoes a question of WHY you are hunting. trophy hunting is a bit if a different thing than meat hunting, and to further complicate things, some people hunt for both reasons. what all hunters have in common, however, is a desire to get a quick kill with as little suffering as possible on the part of the animal. in the case of the first hunter, using the bullet that he is using, a shoulder shot makes more sense. in the case of the second hunter, using the bullet that he is using, the heart/lung (emphasis on lung) shot makes more sense.

for myself, i am primarily a meat-hunter, but i always keep my eyes open for a nice buck, and if i were to see one, i imagine that i would do what i normally do and aim for the heart/lungs. this is less a consideration in ethics and more a consideration in where i live, where tracking an animal (if necessary) can usually be done with little difficulty. with all of these factors in mind, i will go for the heart/lung every time, and i personally would not feel comfortable taking out a shoulder. to me, it would be wasted meat and a needless shot, and it is against my own personal code of ethics, along with a host of other issues such as long-range, running game, head shots, etc.

having said that, i can find no fault with the trophy hunter, who is using a tough bullet and looking for a wall-hanger, utilizing a shoulder shot. once again, a quick and humane death is the first goal, and in each circumstance under either set of considerations, the goal is best obtained in its own way.

Jorge,

I have never said that "tough" bullets didn't have their place in the hunting world, they definitely do. They were intended for "tough" game and some designed for extremely tough, dangerous game.

When we are talking deer sized game they are simply not needed.

Good Luck!

Reloader

What are they putting in that Montana Coffee?

There isn't any need to be so harsh.

Good Luck and God Bless!

Reloader

Good post tas.

Good points.

I agree on the meat/trophy hunter concept and I believe I fit into that category. I'll let the little ones go to get the mature trophy but, I make sure that I get every ounce of meat I can w/ the exception of ribs. When dressing deer sized animals, I've never found much good use for them so, I just carve off the top layer of meat and cast the rest to the yotes.

Good Luck!

Reloader

RL: I figured that's what you meant. You are absolutely correct in that a super premium is not nessesarily the best option for deer.

VG, better to remain quiet so people don't know you're an moron, than speak up and remove all doubt. I tried to keep this civil and stick to the facts, but spineless sniveling little pukes like YOU that throw out insults via behind the safety of the internet fit the bill perfectly you worthless coward. Calling me a liar? My, aren't we brave. Well I guess all the others that have posted here with vast experience are all liars also. A lot of them hunt world-wide, outside the the maximum range of whatever POS vehicle you drive, or do you use a horse, for surely motorized transport is also unethical. I respect my elders, my parents, my seniors, wife friends, etc., and don't lose any sleep if I don't give an animal the same respect because I don't.

Do *YOU* respect the Varmints your monicker suggests you kill (sorry, harvest) or are you into eating rats too? You never did answer that. And for the record, I KILL game and don't "harvest" anything. I should have known better when you used that term for hunting.

So you go right ahead and pretend you're Mr. Mountain-fucking man, alone in the wilderness having to feed his family "harvesting" game and fending off indians. On that note, I think I'll make a reservation tonight at Ruth Chris' for some of those fifty dollar beef-steaks. jorge

PS: Did I actually "harvest" terrorists over there?

VarmintGuy, The more you write the more ridiculous you are becomming. Your long tirades are becomming less and less entertaining when you start unjustly insulting good people. I don't always agree with Jorge on all points but I'd be glad to hunt with him any day and thank him for serving our country. Instead of spending so much time typing maybe you should spend some time thinking about how people with other points of view can still be OK..........DJ

if those steaks aren't montana beef, you're paying too much!

seriously, as a fellow montanan who does in fact hunt to feed his family, i can see where VG is coming from. i also see where you are coming from, especially re: hunting/killing vs. harvesting. i will assert once again that it all comes down to the intention of the hunter, and once that intention is established, the ethics spring from the differing circumstances of that intention.

as far as varmints go, i know of no one who eats them; that would fall under pest control, which is usually committed with the goal of saving crops or other valuable agricultural produce. the other side of the coin is that when you kill one of these pests, a simple hit anywhere is most likely going to kill it, unless you blow off a paw or soemthing, where it would simply heal. with game animals, the conditions as well as the goals are much different.

these are just my thoughts on the subject, i didn't mean to jump in on the exchange you and VG are having. i was simply trying to see if there were some middle ground.

FWIW, i appreciate and thank you for your service.

Tas: Noted and thanks. I think both you and DJ understood perfectly where I'm coming from. I just happened to prefer shoulder shots becasue from *MY* experience and others with much more than I, also prefer them. Moreover, in Africa that is all the PHs want you to take. jorge

Varmintguy, you run your mouth way too much for a man of experience and conviction. You're so full of dog crap you stink, and I can smell you clear from here.......

AD

Hey DJ, Nice post. I agree with nearly all of it. Well, I guess it would be nice to have a Swabjockey along to keep the floors mopped.

Quote:

---

... no head of medium size Big Game should ever be shot on purpose - in the shoulder! ...

---

I've got to admit, that is as illogical as it gets.

Normally you can explain away some differences in hunting styles and methods between folks due to where a hunter has gained his experience as being a different environment or the type of land he has hunted. However, the above statement is certainly indicative of a complete lack of actual field experience on Big Game.

I see the above foolishness in the same league as AD saying a person is simply wasting their time practicing shooting on paper. Or LAWCOP saying it is unethical to take shots at "all" running Game.

Surely no one in their right mind will buy in to any of that stuff.

I guess we're all shooting deer, elk, and hogs that are constructed totally differently...

My experience has been that lung/heart/liver shot deer don't move more than 5-10 feet from where I shoot them. I guess I never thought I needed a shoulder shot to "anchor" game.

Admittedly my experience doesn't include African game but don't think that's what we're talking about here.

I know that I relish the meat from the front shoulder of a deer and would be loath to "ruin" it by shooting there but maybe I'll try it some time... Or NOT...

For those of you that shoot deer in the lungs and have them run away... I really don't understand it. It's NEVER happened to me with about 60 Whitetail, 3 elk and 2 mulies.

Maybe you aren't using the right gun/cartridge/bullet combination?

I've used 308's and 30-06's mostly with 150gr Nosler Partitions (eat right up to the hole) for so many years that I thought I'd just try out the Ballistic Tips just to be "sporting"...

But... I sure don't mind if you continue to ruin the meat because you feel you need to and hope you enjoy the bloodied meat and I ain't gonna call you unethical for doin' it... Just wasteful of good meat but I guess that's your right.

$bob$

LD: A good post indeed. We've had different experiences and different teachers. And just for a point of fact, a lot of african game (with the exception of the cats) do have their vitals a bit more forward. Regardless, if you go back and read my post you'll see that my experiences differ from yours. good hunting. jorge

WELL...dog gone it...I guess I'll share more of my experiences.

First let me say this: It is my opinion that there is a very large difference between the words 'unethical' and 'distasteful'.

IMO, it is not polite to say someone is 'unethical' if they choose to drop their quarry with a shoulder shot. It is obviously taken as an insult and can obviously lead to heated discussions.

IMO, one can opine that it may be 'distasteful' however, and is not the same shotplacement that someone else prefers and for good reasons based on personal opinions. Regardless, I am confident that everyone knows the difference.

NOW, this is me and what I do. I hunt, I hunt to kill, I take ANY kill zone shot I have presented to me because I have confidence in my choice of equipment. If the bullet hits the shoulder, so be it. If I am hunting on the border of a property line and want to take the most optimum shot that I BELIEVE will anchor the animal where it is hit, I MOST CERTAINLY WILL SHOOT FOR THE SHOULDER. I do not want my game running across property lines and it is my opinion that those chances are INCREASED without a shoulder shot. My experience is undeniable as is everyone elses. I've killed many many whitetails and those hit in the shoulder pretty much fall where they are.

BUT, MOST of the 'soft' hits, (as I call them), which is behind the shoulder, the animal either drops or doesn't travel too far. I did say MOST. The rest, did indeed run a distance I thought was a bit far. The longest being about 75 yards after a B-tip pulvarized the lungs and damaged the top of the heart, and exited nicely. Shot distance was about 55 yards. But this buck still ran off. Dead on its feet.

And Jorge: I have also nailed a deer behind the shoulder, but with a 7 Rem Mag, 140 B-tip, and lung tissue was seeping out the exit hole as well. BUT, this doe had so much trauma, she was hurling up blood anyway, so trailing was a piece of cake. About a 30 yard shot.

To VarmintGuy: We can speculate or even present argument that if a deer is hit perfect behind the shoulder and it runs, say 65 yards, then perhaps the adrenaline is increased substantially, thus altering the taste of the meat also, compared to a 'bang-flop' shot...either shoulder or behind the shoulder, where there is NO adrenaline surge.

I've had shoulder meat from deer. And yes, I like it, but I do not hunt for meat. I hunt because I enjoy it and like being outdoors and pursuing game. I like the kill, it is satisfying, especially with all the work I put into my hunting.

I will take whatever GOOD shot is presented and if I lose some meat, I lose some meat.

All of the following were hit in the onside shoulder and fell on the spot:




[image]http://www.imagestation.com/picture/sraid133/p7f371ee2af002bf278f03dc96b6370b7/f7859527.jpg.thumb[/image]


I am in no way attempting to change any minds here. Stick to what you think is right and keep at it. I know I will. And remember class, big diff between distasteful and unethical. < !--color-->

Case in point proven. Exactly the opposite of my experiences. Guess the air up there in Canada is thinner so they die quicker. Well, one of us is at variance with the facts. . jorge

No doubt the bullet is a factor, however, not the velocity. I use a 300 Weatherby for the most part, but I do concur that the "Roy Weatherby Postulate" of frangible bullets at high velocity can for the most part be devastating. He proved it many times in Africa, shooting animals with "bullet-proof"reputations like Zebra and wildebeest with the 257 Weatherby and 87 gr bullets. By his own admission, it also caused some horrific failures. But all of that is beside the point. The basis for discussion remains the same, in that just about any animal can be CONSISTENTLY anchored more readily with a shot to the shoulder than one through the lungs, with the detrimental effect of more meat loss. Bottom line, all things being equal (i.e., same caliber rifles) give me a Nosler Partition through the shoulders than a Ballistic Tip through the lungs. jorge

VarmintGuy,
I'll bet you are a real riot at a party.
Mike