which is better? Ballistic tip or boat tail soft point for deer?


PDA






springfield1911loaded
October 19, 2008, 05:47 PM
Hello ive got a remington model 700 .308 with a leopould vx 3 50mm scope. I just got it this year and was wondering which is better for hunting white tail deer and ranges from 100 to 600 yrds, balistic tip or boat tail soft point?
im used to hunting with the soft points but i thought i might want to switch.Oh yea i diddnt mention that the only thing I hunt with is hornady.

If you enjoyed reading about "which is better? Ballistic tip or boat tail soft point for deer?" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!
Bartkowski
October 19, 2008, 05:58 PM
I would go with soft points, they are generally cheaper and very effective. I don't know why you are shooting deer at 600 yards, or anything over 250 yards.

rcmodel
October 19, 2008, 06:05 PM
B.C of the 165 grain SST & Interbond is .447.
The B.C. of the 165 BTSP is .435.

With a 200 yard zero, and 2600 FPS MV, drop at 500 yards is:
SST & IB = 54.6".
BTSP = 55.3".

3/4" differance is not enough to make the slightest bit of differance.

So, whichever one your rifle shoots the most accurately would be your best 600 yard bullet.

You would just have to try each one and see.

rcmodel

Shawnee
October 19, 2008, 06:40 PM
Unless there is a dramatic difference in accuracy in favor of the ballistic tips - I would use the BTSP bullets because your gun (.308) is way overpowered for deer so the ballistic tips may be "too much bullet" to perform well on deer at closer ranges.... that's to say they may simply go through the deer without much bullet expansion which in turn could let the deer run a long way after being shot.

The BTSP bullets are very likely perform well on deer at all ranges.

:cool:

DeathByCactus
October 20, 2008, 01:23 AM
I use a Browning 7mm Magnum. I have used Winchester Ballistic Tips for as long as I can remember. Killed my first deer with them and everything else since (except for a few occasions). Never had an issue with runners either, except for one, but that was just a crappy shot; no joke either. Ranges of 50y to 270y (roughly).

My brother uses Remington soft points in a 7mm, he swears by the "lead spread".

I find the bullet doesn't matter much as long as you don't miss.

Al Thompson
October 20, 2008, 02:09 AM
Shawnee, my experience is different - depending on exactly which bullets your talking about. Usually closer equals bullet over expansion, not under - if it won't open up at peak velocity, it sure won't open at slower velocity.

Ridgerunner665
October 20, 2008, 02:32 AM
The 165 Ballistic Tips have a BC of .410 (my calculations...not published BS) and they do tend to blow up at close range if they hit bone...even at low speed (2,600 fps)

Nosler has a new 168 grain Ballistic Tip that's WAAAAY better...its built a bit tougher, with a thicker jacket...and the best part is its BC, which is .490, that's much higher than ANY other 168 grain bullet made (that I know of)...those 3 grains go a looong way.

35 Whelen
October 20, 2008, 05:13 AM
Springfield, over the last 30+ years I've used many, many different calibers on deer, but a few years ago settled on the 308; specifically a Scout Rifle I built from an FR-8 Mauser. I mostly use Remington 150 gr. Core-Lokt bullets because they're cheap, accurate, and kill deer with extremely boring consistency. The neat thing about a 308 is that most of them will shoot just about anything you feed them.

I recently came into an older Ruger 77 with a cheap, 6X Bushnell scope on it. This rifle is a little beat, and untouched as far as bedding & tweaking go. I had a box of Hornady 165 gr. flat base soft points on the shelf so I picked a powder and worked up a load. Here are the results: (Disregard the group tagged in blue. Different rifle)
http://i60.photobucket.com/albums/h6/308Scout/Ruger77308target-mod.jpg

I also worked up a 180 gr. load using ordinary Remington Core-Lokt bullets that was almost as accurate. My point is this: You don't necessarily need some trendy, plastic pointed or stream-lined boat tail bullet. Bullet manufacturers have R&D departments tasked with designing and selling new products most of which the typical deer hunter (like me) doesn't need.

So, if you're using factory ammo, start with the cheap stuff like Remington or Winchesters 150 gr. softpoints. When you find one that shoots well, buy several boxes with the same lot number and you're all set!
And before you go lobbing bullets at deer that are 1/4 mile (440 yards) or more away, I'd politely suggest you do some target shooting at that range to see what you're up against. I think you'll be surprised. And for what it's worth, Hornady bullets are my first choice for deer hunting.
Regards,
35W

Shawnee
October 20, 2008, 07:15 AM
"...if you're using factory ammo, start with the cheap stuff like Remington or Winchesters 150 gr. softpoints. When you find one that shoots well, buy several boxes with the same lot number and you're all set!"

High-5 to that !!!


"Hornady bullets are my first choice for deer hunting."

...and High-5 to that !


:cool:

Dr. Tad Hussein Winslow
October 20, 2008, 10:39 AM
I think it depends on WHICH ballistic tip you're talking about. But generally speaking, a soft point is preferable in my opinion.

Strongbad
October 20, 2008, 05:23 PM
Let the gun tell you which one it likes. I typically go with the BT's over the SP's because they tend to shoot better for me, and on deer I've always gotten superb expansion out of them regardless of distance.

springfield1911loaded
October 21, 2008, 09:53 PM
to 35 whelen ive shot and killed a deer at 560 yards i was sitting in a old metal shop that looks out at a corn field the corn had been cut and the field is 615 yards exactly and the deer usually come out at the very end outof the woods and i was sitting there when i saw him, he came out at what im guessing was 570 yards so i waited for him to hopefully come closer not wanting to risk a shot at that distance with my old remington model 788 .243.
So i waited for maby 20 mins when i finally just said heck with it put my crappy tasco scope on him aimed about 1 to 1.5 feet above him and pulled the trigger i hit him in the tops of both lungs which to me is a crappy shot cause he ran about 150 yards. but at least i killed him :D

JWarren
October 21, 2008, 10:04 PM
I really don't think it matters.

Or should I say that the best is whatever you shoot most accurately.

With enough accuracy and a caliber you are comfortable with, either will do the job.

I have dropped dozens of deer with 30-06 Remington Core-Loct. If I remember correctly, that is a boat tail soft point.

A while back, I switched to using Winchester Ballistic Silvertips. I really don't remember why. I was never unsatisfied with the Core-Loct. Maybe it was that cool Nickle case and black teflon bullet. I made the switch when I switched to using a .308 as my primary hunting rifle (I still love 30-06)

Whatever the reason, I have dropped dozens of deer with Winchester Ballistic Silvertips.

This coming season, I will be using Winchester Ballistic Silvertips again. Why? Because that happens to be what I have.


-- John

SimpleIsGood229
October 21, 2008, 10:15 PM
Shawnee, my experience is different - depending on exactly which bullets your talking about. Usually closer equals bullet over expansion, not under - if it won't open up at peak velocity, it sure won't open at slower velocity.My experience echoes yours, Al.

Bottom line is, it doesn't matter if you use a BTSP or Ballistic Tip. All you have to do is land the lead in the right spot.

BornAgainBullseye
October 21, 2008, 10:53 PM
because your gun (.308) is way overpowered for deer so the ballistic tips may be "too much bullet" to perform well on deer at closer ranges.... You could not be farther from reality..... I guess that the 15 or so deer that I have taken with my .308 using softpoints, ballistic tips and hollow points have not ran past 50 paces before taking a dirt nap. nice entry hole. red jello vitals, and a baseball size exit. Sounds like it worked for me.

JWarren
October 21, 2008, 11:07 PM
+1 BornAgainBullseye


I would use the BTSP bullets because your gun (.308) is way overpowered for deer


I've got about 60 dead deer to .308 using ballistic tips that says otherwise. The ranges were between 25 and 350 yards.

How exactly is .308 "way overpowered" for deer when 30-06 has been one of the top 3 most common DEER rounds for the last 100 years?

I've but several dozen deer on the ground using 30-06 ballistic tips as well. Ranges have been from 25 yards to 300 yards.

Neither 30-06 nor .308 has caused me any major loss of meat due to blooding.

Therefore, I utterly reject the notion that .308 is even remotely overpowered for deer.



-- John

Dr. Tad Hussein Winslow
October 21, 2008, 11:10 PM
Interesting that two very experienced guys in this thread ended up ultimately settling on a rifle in .308 Win after trying several other things. 35 Whelen, I always enjoy your detail; thanks very much. What the heck is that tube on an FR8 - it's a dadgummed turnbolt, not a semi -auto! :confused:

Don357
October 22, 2008, 12:16 AM
What is the opinion about using 168gr BTHP Match Military .308/7.62x51. I have a CETME and a Stevens Model 200. I have 150gr soft points, and ballistic tips too. BTW, in my humble opinion "overpowered" is a 7mm Mag, 300 mag and the like, all of which seems to be the "status" standard around here. However there are some that go to the other extreme with .22-250, .223 etc. Personally I feel that a .243 is bordering on being too small, and anything above .270, or .30-06 is "overkill".

35 Whelen
October 22, 2008, 12:18 AM
to 35 whelen ive shot and killed a deer at 560 yards i was sitting in a old metal shop that looks out at a corn field the corn had been cut and the field is 615 yards exactly and the deer usually come out at the very end outof the woods and i was sitting there when i saw him, he came out at what im guessing was 570 yards so i waited for him to hopefully come closer not wanting to risk a shot at that distance with my old remington model 788 .243.
So i waited for maby 20 mins when i finally just said heck with it put my crappy tasco scope on him aimed about 1 to 1.5 feet above him and pulled the trigger i hit him in the tops of both lungs which to me is a crappy shot cause he ran about 150 yards. but at least i killed him

In 1987 I took my very first elk hunting trip. A few days into the season, I finally see a legal bull and his harem drift into the bottom of the canyon where I'm hunting that evening. I slip back up into the timber and work my way down to the herd. In my excitement (and rank inexperience), I way over estimate the range and shoot over the bulls back with my 7x57. As the herd begins to run, I take another shot at the bull with no visible results. The herd ran up the opposite side of the canyon and for whatever reason stopped just short of the timber. I knew it was a very, very long shot, but I was young and desperately wanted a bull. I hold about 2 feet over the top of the bull and let one more round go. Lo and behold the bull dropped as though the terra firma had been jerked from beneath him. I later found I had hit him in the neck.
Knowing the velocity of my handload, how my rifle was sighted in, and how much I'd held over the bull, I cross referenced the info into my Hornady manual and found that the bull was probably about 500 yds. away...maybe a bit further. That shot was foolish and it was blind luck that I hit him, and I'd never try it again. As they say, "Even a blind hog finds and acorn now and then."

My point is this: just because you made one 560 yard shot, doesn't mean you can do it again (or should even try). And I find it totally amazing that you can estimate range at that distance and only be off 10 yds. From the information you provided on the 243 in your last post (caliber, distance, amount of hold over, etc.) I'd say that for you to hit that buck at that distance with that cartridge and that amount of holdover, your rifle would have had to be sighted 8"-10" high at 100 yards. Was that the case?

I'm not trying to make an example of you or make you look foolish, but seriously, do some shooting at ranges like that. It's very humbling.

Premium ,thanks for the compliment. I love listening to and telling stories, and I enjoy sharing my experiences with pictures. That tube on an FR-8 is a little gimmicky little pull-through cleaning kit. I, of course tossed mine when I built the rifle!
One of my reasons for settling on the .308 is practicality. It's a .30 caliber, so bullets and ammunition are available everywhere. It's a current military cartridge so brass is available everywhere. The round itself is very efficient and naturally accurate.
As far as the Scout Rifle is concerned, in my opinion, it's uber practical! Not perfect for any one hunting task, but will do for anything from small game with my cast bullet loads to the largest game on this continent with good bullets if need be. It's light, handy and even has good solid back up sights should the scope get damaged. I've even carried elk hunting when I needed a light rifle for walking and slipping through the timber.

Regards,
35W

Ridgerunner665
October 22, 2008, 01:40 AM
35 Whelen beat me to it...

I was gonna call BS on that 560 yard 243 shot with only 1 - 1.5 feet holdover too.

I too have come full circle...I've used every common caliber there is at one time or another, everything from 243 to 300 Win Mag at least...only to end up right back where I started...with a 308.

Al Thompson
October 22, 2008, 02:43 AM
Don357, when I worked for the Wildlife Control folks at USDA, we tried the 168 MatchKings. Very mixed results, nobody wanted to use them after that one experiance. We went bak to the Ballistic Tips. BTW, Ballistic Tips 15 years ago were much quicker to expand than the ones (Nosler brand) available today.

Ben Shepherd
October 22, 2008, 04:36 AM
I'm not a fan of ballistic tips for hunting game I want to put on my table. I've found them too explosive for my tastes. Too much ruined meat.

Shawnee
October 22, 2008, 08:47 AM
Hi Al Thompson et al...

If your experience with BT bullets is good - that's great. It isn't everyone's experience but it's your experience and just as valid as anyone else's.

As for the .308 being overpowered for deer... millions of deer have been killed by muzzleloaders, by the 30/30, by the .22/250, by the .243, and by the .250 Savage and the .257 Roberts.... so, yes, the .308 is way overpowered for deer.

Use it and love it all you want but it's still way overpowered for deer.

:cool:

BornAgainBullseye
October 22, 2008, 10:07 AM
A muzzleloader??? check this at 50-70 yards a modern inline shooing 100grains of tripleseven and a 260-300 grain .45 has the same energy as a .308 winchester and a bigger hole. Dont tell me that a .308 is overpowered. Don't be a hater. It works and it works exceptionally well. Thousands of deer are illegally taken with .22lr by poachers.... does that make your .257 or .243 WAY overpowered? You are changing your story. Before you said that it is overpowered, so the bullets dont perform at close range.? what gives.

pbearperry
October 22, 2008, 10:23 AM
The only 600 yd shot you can get in Mass. is on the highway.Also,having to use shotgun would be a major problem.lol

Shawnee
October 22, 2008, 10:27 AM
Bornagain...

What's with your attittude, lad? Don't get you panties in a wad.

If you like the BTs and the .308 - fine - use and recommend 'em. But stick your attitude where the sun don't shine..

:cool:

springfield1911loaded
October 22, 2008, 04:24 PM
since you want me to go into more detail: the place where i killed it is on our hunting club's land and we have every 50 yards marked and he was in between the 11th and 12th pink tape we have set up so thats how i guessed the range and as for the shot i did aim from what i recal 1 and a half feet above his back which is a total of about 2.5 foot drop from time of shot to time of entrance. now i know i was VERY lucky with the shot wether it was wind or a miracle i hit him and as you said neither would i take a shot like that again. if you need more detail just tell me.

JWarren
October 22, 2008, 04:44 PM
As for the .308 being overpowered for deer... millions of deer have been killed by muzzleloaders, by the 30/30, by the .22/250, by the .243, and by the .250 Savage and the .257 Roberts.... so, yes, the .308 is way overpowered for deer.


By that logic, 22lr is not underpowered, and anything over that is overpowered. More deer have been killed with a 22lr than any of us would like. No, this isn't saying that I consider 22lr on deer ethical. But it has happened and will happen again albiet illegally.

I base the consideration of over-powered as a function of lost meat. I've never lost much meat with either .308 or 30-06. And the vast number of my shots have been shoulder/heart-lung shots.

I base the consideration of underpowered as what runs a significant risk of an unethical/prolonged kill with anything less then optimal shot placement.

With .308 and 30-06, I have only had one deer run more than FIVE (5) steps prior to dropping. Of course, that doesn't mean anything. The one that DID run more than 5 steps ran 75 yards. When I found it, the deer was shot through the heart and lung. Sometimes it just works out that way. I've been very lucky/fortunate that I've not had to track the vast majority of my own deer. I have, however, had to track for others in my family.

Can lesser calibers make ethical kills? You bet. But there is an increase in probablity that the shot is less than ideal as you drop in caliber.

Conversely, as caliber increases, there is a point where meat loss is unacceptable. From my experience, I neither .308 nor 30-06 approaches that level. I, however, have not purchased anything like a 300 win. mag. because I have friends that use them. They just destroy too much meat for the deer of the size that live here.

To me, 308 and 30-06 exist within that optimal range where I do not worry about the capabilites of the round to make an ethical and humane kill, but I also do not worry about being wasteful.

I see caliber considerations as a sliding scale of compromises. Depending on the game, you find the level where you have an acceptable amount of each consideration. There are plenty calibers to choose from in the mid-sized game area to choose from that have varying aspects.

For the above reasons, I do not consider .308 or 30-06 to be over-powered.



-- John

Shawnee
October 22, 2008, 05:30 PM
Hi JWarren...

"Can lesser calibers make ethical kills? You bet. But there is an increase in probablity that the shot is less than ideal as you drop in caliber."

To copy your tactic - by that logic a caliber larger than .308 will have less probability than the .308 of a prolonged kill - and so now we're up to hutning deer with nothing less than a 20mm cannon.

I didn't say the .22lr was a "logical" deer caliber - you did, and you know that's wrong.

As I encouraged "BornAgain" - if you like the .308 - have at it. It's still overpowered.:)

:cool:

JWarren
October 22, 2008, 05:44 PM
I didn't say the .22lr was a "logical" deer caliber - you did, and you know that's wrong.


Do please tell me where I said such a thing that 22lr was a logical deer caliber. Don't put words in my mouth, if you don't mind.


And please do tell me where we started talking about "logical" anything.




by that logic a caliber larger than .308 will have less probability than the .308 of a prolonged kill - and so now we're up to hutning deer with nothing less than a 20mm cannon.




I suspect that you missed this part:


JWarren wrote:

I see caliber considerations as a sliding scale of compromises. Depending on the game, you find the level where you have an acceptable amount of each consideration. There are plenty calibers to choose from in the mid-sized game area to choose from that have varying aspects.


But whatever.


-- John

Shawnee
October 22, 2008, 05:58 PM
"By that logic, 22lr is not underpowered, and anything over that is overpowered."


Your words from Your post, JWarren. You put them in your mouth, not me.


I figure it like this... If a caliber has the power (and appropriate bullets) to cleanly kill a deer at any range within the shooter's capability it is an appropriate deer caliber - and, yes, that includes several calibers. If a caliber is of significant excess of power to meet those requirements then it is "overpowered", eg. characterized by power that isn't necessary. And in that situation it is entirely possible the excess of power works to the detriment of the shooter's ability to make cleanly lethal shot placements - and in more than a few cases people will use a caliber of excess power as a crutch or excuse to take shots they should never take.

Does all that mean you are a gutshooter? No.

Does it all mean the .308 is The Devil's Brew? No.

It means the .308 is overpowered for deer.


:cool:

JWarren
October 22, 2008, 08:10 PM
Shawnee,

You are failing to grasp the difference between a statement illustrating the trouble in a thought process and advocation of such process.

I'll illustrate:

If one was to say...

People look at porn on computers. You own a computer. Therefore, you look at porn.

That would be an incorrect correlation and a non-valid thought process.

By my illustrating that non-valid thought process, I would have a problem with someone then saying that "You stated that owning a computer means you look at porn on the computer."

No, that wasn't at all what I said in the above example.


My saying:

JWarren wrote:

"By that logic, 22lr is not underpowered, and anything over that is overpowered."

Is NOT equivalent to my saying anything that resembles


Shawnee wrote:

I didn't say the .22lr was a "logical" deer caliber - you did


No, I did no such thing. I illustrated the error of using number of deer killed with a caliber to guage whether that caliber should be considered underkill, overkill, appropriate, ethical, or unethical.



Your words from Your post, JWarren. You put them in your mouth, not me.


Clearly, I didn't say what you thought I said.





However, this whole discussion veers off the topic. I posted this in order to attempt to explain how attempting to highlight an error in a thought-process IS NOT the equivalent of actually subscribing to the very thought process you are highlighing the error within.


I actually don't think you and I are saying anything all that different. I willingly and happily concede that there are a plethera of calibers below .30 caliber (specifically 308 and/or 30-06) that are perfectly adequate to ethically hunt deer. I actually never made a claim otherwise.

By that every concession, I logically have to concede that anything above some nebulous "perfect" caliber would be theoretically overkill.

For instance...

If we had some quantifiable and undisputable method of reaching an agreement that .243 Winchester was the perfect caliber for deer. It necessarily follows that anything greater in caliber and/or muzzle energy is overkill-- even if the amount of "overkill" is an insignificant amount.

And no... I did NOT just say 243 was anything. I used it as an example.


However, the entire concept of "overkill" MUST to come into question. I suspect that we cannot even get a consensus on what that means. It seems that there isn't such consensus even on this thread-- let alone in the firearms community.

To me, I do not even concern myself with "overkill" concerns until I start losing a significant amount of meat from the effect of making the shot. In my SUBJECTIVE measure, I do not feel that 308 or 30-06 has reached that point.

And the very fact that you and I disagree only illustrates the subjective nature of this topic.


EDIT:

Let's you, me, and whoever else that may have an opinion on "overkill" of 308, 30-06, or any other caliber either drop it, or take it to a new thread. Let's leave this one back for the BTSP or Ballistic Tip discussion.

Best,


-- John

If you enjoyed reading about "which is better? Ballistic tip or boat tail soft point for deer?" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!