![]() |
Decision Tree for Bullets
Decision Tree for Bullets Very low cost---Yes-->Harvester Cast bullets 300g or larger, any cast large Meplat conical (BullStop, etc) | |no | Cost, low cost? ----yes----> 300g XTP, 300g Gold Dot, 250g Gold Dot, | | No, terminal performance is most important to me | Shooting Long distances most of time?—Yes---> 290, 250g Barnes TMZ, 200g SW, | 200g Lehigh, 275g Parker Ballistic Extreme | |no | Take oblique angle shots----Yes-->300, 250, 260g Nosler Partition, 250, 300g Barnes MZ | Sight in 3” high at 100, for MPBR of 170 yards | | take only bow shots at deer i.e. broadside behind front shoulder | | Any bullet that is 3” or smaller group size at 100 yards and doesn’t fragment in it’s performance range What other logic to add to the tree? I believe this is the collective wisdom of the board, or at least what I have learned from being on this forum for last 2 years. Chap |
RE: Decision Tree for Bullets
Chap - Maybe it would be better or easier to pick a bullet if you listed the bullets across the top of a page. Then under each bullet, write down the assets and flaws for each one. Then the one that has the most assets and least flaws for your given criteria would be the one you pick.
Examples of assets: Accuracy, penetration, weight retention, etc. Examples of flaws: Fragmenting, poor expansion, inaccurate, etc. Just a thought. |
RE: Decision Tree for Bullets
Then there are the ones that have to be used with in a certain velocity range, at long range they have slowed down to much or with some people that like light loads they don't open at any range. Except for a few like the hard cast and the full metal jacket which should only be used for extreme penatration, I believe most modern bullets will do a reasonable job if used with in there proper velocity range.
I also believe that people using the wrong velocity have put a bad rap on some good bullets. Lee |
RE: Decision Tree for Bullets
Add some Parkers
|
RE: Decision Tree for Bullets
ORIGINAL: bronko22000 Chap - Maybe it would be better or easier to pick a bullet if you listed the bullets across the top of a page. Then under each bullet, write down the assets and flaws for each one. Then the one that has the most assets and least flaws for your given criteria would be the one you pick. Examples of assets: Accuracy, penetration, weight retention, etc. Examples of flaws: Fragmenting, poor expansion, inaccurate, etc. Just a thought. I agree with lemoyne, I think overall differences between bullets are hyped way too much. |
RE: Decision Tree for Bullets
ORIGINAL: Old/New Add some Parkers |
RE: Decision Tree for Bullets
ORIGINAL: Old/New Add some Parkers |
RE: Decision Tree for Bullets
ORIGINAL: spaniel I agree with lemoyne, I think overall differences between bullets are hyped way too much. Chap |
RE: Decision Tree for Bullets
ORIGINAL: bronko22000 Chap - Maybe it would be better or easier to pick a bullet if you listed the bullets across the top of a page. Then under each bullet, write down the assets and flaws for each one. Then the one that has the most assets and least flaws for your given criteria would be the one you pick. Examples of assets: Accuracy, penetration, weight retention, etc. Examples of flaws: Fragmenting, poor expansion, inaccurate, etc. Just a thought. this coupled with the tree should be a good start for most new folks or folks looking to change bullets. I don't think many are going to changebecause of this decision tree, but some will change over from ShockWaves from Grouce45's pictures and descriptions. Chap |
RE: Decision Tree for Bullets
ORIGINAL: Grouse45 ORIGINAL: Old/New Add some Parkers Yeah...I use the 275gr BE in my Pro Hunter. Love 'em And Chap, Thanks! |
| All times are GMT -8. The time now is 04:07 PM. |
Copyright © 2026 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.