Interbond
Since nobody else has mentioned it, I will. If you want to hunt with a 165, what about the Hornady Interbond? My tests, and experience with it have been very positive! When it first came out, I did expansion tests with the 165, shooting into water filled gallon milk jugs at 100 yds. I used my 300 WSM, velocity was at 3050 fps. Here’s a few pics of the results;
Weight retention was between 80 and 85%, expansion was all over .800. Penetration was always into the third jug. Since water leaves no wound channel, I had to take notice of the damage to the jugs. The first one usually came apart in multiple pieces. The second one was split in half, the third simply had a hole with the expanded slug inside it. Here’s the set-up;
And the aftermath;
The box is full of rags to catch any bullet that made it through all 4 jugs or skipped out the side.
In use, I shot a small yearling buck last year, the bullet hit high and went between the last 2 ribs. I clipped the back lobe of the left lung, the front of the liver and the underside of the back. Range was around 140 yards. Not much of a test, as the deer was small and with a broken back he dropped at the shot., What WAS apparent is that the interbond opens quickly and does a lot of damage, WITHOUT a lot of bloodshot meat!.
In another rifle, my nephews .280, using the 139 IB, he shot 5 deer with that combo, all dropped at the shot, not one had any bloodshot damage. I didn’t get to see any of the post mortems, but did see them hanging for butchering. One adult doe had been hit from at least 200 yds, behind the last rib, quartering across the chest cavity forward to exit the right front of the chest, enter and smash the right front leg and exit! He said he scooped the lungs out by the handful.
What was said about the Barnes triple shocks, holds true for the IB. You can drop down to 165, benefit from the superior ballistics and still shoot through an elk. I hear how tough elk are. Having never hunted one, I only have skepticism about that claim!