I have just read an article about bullets on another web site. The article discussed the author's personal experience with bullets, and the surprising conclusion was that the author preferred rapidly expanding bullets to the deep penetrating bullets for game up to elk. His experience had been that the deep penetrating bullets did not expand at all, even when hitting ribs, and were less authoritative than rapidly expanding bullets.

This gives me pause. For my October elk hunt (first time elk hunt for me) I was planning to try to find a commercial load that shot well in my.30-06 that also used deep penetrating bullets -- Nosler Accubond or Remington Core Lokt Ultra, for example -- but now I'm wondering if that is needed. I used a Remington Core Lokt (older technology, presumably softer bullet) 180 grain .30-06 on a modest sized whitetail doe last fall, at about 25 yards, and the bullet punched a good hole through the deer, even though it hit a rib on at least one side, maybe both sides. If the bullet was too soft, I would think that at such short range it would be highly subject to disintegration and likely to not punch through the other side.

Can those of you with rifle elk kills provide advice based on your experience? I don't want regurgitated information from either hunting magazines or premium bullet advertisements. I've read those, and they left me assuming the only prudent action was to take the deep penetrating, preimum bullets on an elk hunt. When providing your advice, assume a shot that misses the front shoulders and goes to the heart lung area. Also, my specific interest now is directed to 180 grain bullets in a .30-06 chambering.

I know the deep penetrating bullets are thought to be superior when hitting heavy bone, but is this the optimal bullet selection when the higher probability is you will take a heart/lung shot that does not hit heavy bone, such as the shoulder?