Free: Contests & Raffles.
haha! I was just about to point out that Bullblaster is in fact an engineer. he also drives a prius so
Quote from: JDHasty on March 11, 2016, 08:34:56 PMQuote from: BULLBLASTER on March 11, 2016, 07:54:15 PMQuote from: JDHasty on March 11, 2016, 07:48:15 PMQuote from: BULLBLASTER on March 11, 2016, 02:42:40 PMOutstanding use of Google hasty! I'm sure they don't work as hunting bullets the same as Berger target bullets don't work as hunting bullets.. Btw the op was asking about real life experience shooting animals with smk bullets, not what you can drum up on google...Didn't use a search engine, I went directly to Sierra's site. Sierra sends out an eNewsletter and some time back they covered this topic in depth.Sierra has ballistic engineers on their staff and they analyze the results of extensive testing using the scientific method. Google it if you are not familiar with the scientific method. From my limited knowledge on the subject Berger does say that their research has shown that their target bullets (or at least some of their target bullets) do perform very satisfactorily on game animals. I would assume that Berger's engineers are probably capable of analyzing terminal ballistics and are just as capable as Sierra's engineering staff. What your snark has indited has nothing to to do with impeaching my credibility or my response. What it illustrates is your contempt for the valuable work and expert advice that Sierra staff has done and provided to their customers and potential customers. Ask yourself this: What does Sierra have to gain from advising potential customers to look elsewhere for a big game bullet? OK now if you have not come up with Sierra valuing Sierra's integrity and Sierra's reputation then you are obviously lacking an appreciation of the value of the scientific method and/or are incapable of recognizing Sierra's staff and ownership as professionals who value their reputation and professional integrity above the profit motive.Anyone can go forum shopping and find someone who will validate what they want to hear. Sometimes it is easy to find a source that will rely on "anecdotal evidence" of a limited number of test cases in which the witness has achieved results that are not consistent with conclusions drawn after extensive and exhaustive testing. In the case of any bullet's performance on medium or big game, statistics almost demands that this will be the case. I bet you can also forum shop and find that Nosler Partitions are not a reliable big game bullet. The problem here is that most all hunters do not have enough data to draw a valid conclusion because their sample size is far to low, so low IN FACT that any conclusion drawn shrinks to insignificance when compared to extensive and exhaustive study and scientific analysis of a statistically valid sample size.Can you accept that Sierra did not take making this recommendation in a vacuum? Again what is in it for them to not have studied and analyzed the results of their testing before telling potential customers: look elsewhere? Nothing that I can get my mind around except their integrity and their reputation. I will go out on a limb here and say that in Sierra's testing there were probably a lot of cases wherein the SMK bullet performed well enough for them to accept it as suitable for medium and even maybe on large game animals. What I do not have to go out on a limb to say is that the failure rate was high enough that it was above the threshold Sierra accepts as acceptable on medium or big game that Sierra's staff and ownership decided that to not make a declarative statement advising against such usage was warranted. Snipe at me, belittle my post that links to Sierra's website, if that is what floats your boat. But you have to know that in doing so you have exposed yourself as someone who is not to betaken seriously when it comes to having the ability to examine what is available and give that information the consideration it deserves. No skin off my butt. Good work! Next time just answer the question hat the op asks and leave it at that. No need to write a novel The OP ask a question re: the SMK performance on big game. Sierra has done so much testing and analysis that to leave this consideration out of the discussion would not serve to provide a statistically valid response the OP. Whatever anecdotal evidence is presented shrinks to statistical insignificance when considered in light of the extensive and exhaustive scientific study and analysis that Sierra has done.There are people who go way beyond what ANY loading manual flat out states is a max load. They have never blown up a gun so they say that the loading manual publisher "does not know what they are talking about." But what they have no appreciation for is that so long as you are heading the advice published in a reputable loading manual the statistical chances of blowing up a gun are within acceptable limits. Go beyond that and it implies one of two things: 1) your tolerance for having the statistical chance your face will be blown off is not as conservative as the loading manual accepts as acceptable. Or 2) that you do not recognize that pressure can be influenced by cumulative causal factors. Either way, the data and analysis gained from dabbling you have done shrinks to insignificance when considered juxtaposed to the extensive and exhaustive data collection and analysis that trained professionals have done before they published a definitive statement of their conclusions in the form of loading data. So it is with accepting conclusions drawn from anecdotal evidence gained from people who have used SMK bullets on big game. It depends on what your tolerance of experiencing terminal ballistic failure is. I prefer to err on the side of caution and do give COMMENSURATE consideration to what Sierra's staff and ownership have to offer free of charge. But then again, being an engineer by training and experience, I like to consider all of the data and give it a value commensurate with it's gravitas. Trust me I'm an engineer. Not understanding what published load data and pressure has to do with the lethality of a smk. Can you please clarify?
Quote from: BULLBLASTER on March 11, 2016, 07:54:15 PMQuote from: JDHasty on March 11, 2016, 07:48:15 PMQuote from: BULLBLASTER on March 11, 2016, 02:42:40 PMOutstanding use of Google hasty! I'm sure they don't work as hunting bullets the same as Berger target bullets don't work as hunting bullets.. Btw the op was asking about real life experience shooting animals with smk bullets, not what you can drum up on google...Didn't use a search engine, I went directly to Sierra's site. Sierra sends out an eNewsletter and some time back they covered this topic in depth.Sierra has ballistic engineers on their staff and they analyze the results of extensive testing using the scientific method. Google it if you are not familiar with the scientific method. From my limited knowledge on the subject Berger does say that their research has shown that their target bullets (or at least some of their target bullets) do perform very satisfactorily on game animals. I would assume that Berger's engineers are probably capable of analyzing terminal ballistics and are just as capable as Sierra's engineering staff. What your snark has indited has nothing to to do with impeaching my credibility or my response. What it illustrates is your contempt for the valuable work and expert advice that Sierra staff has done and provided to their customers and potential customers. Ask yourself this: What does Sierra have to gain from advising potential customers to look elsewhere for a big game bullet? OK now if you have not come up with Sierra valuing Sierra's integrity and Sierra's reputation then you are obviously lacking an appreciation of the value of the scientific method and/or are incapable of recognizing Sierra's staff and ownership as professionals who value their reputation and professional integrity above the profit motive.Anyone can go forum shopping and find someone who will validate what they want to hear. Sometimes it is easy to find a source that will rely on "anecdotal evidence" of a limited number of test cases in which the witness has achieved results that are not consistent with conclusions drawn after extensive and exhaustive testing. In the case of any bullet's performance on medium or big game, statistics almost demands that this will be the case. I bet you can also forum shop and find that Nosler Partitions are not a reliable big game bullet. The problem here is that most all hunters do not have enough data to draw a valid conclusion because their sample size is far to low, so low IN FACT that any conclusion drawn shrinks to insignificance when compared to extensive and exhaustive study and scientific analysis of a statistically valid sample size.Can you accept that Sierra did not take making this recommendation in a vacuum? Again what is in it for them to not have studied and analyzed the results of their testing before telling potential customers: look elsewhere? Nothing that I can get my mind around except their integrity and their reputation. I will go out on a limb here and say that in Sierra's testing there were probably a lot of cases wherein the SMK bullet performed well enough for them to accept it as suitable for medium and even maybe on large game animals. What I do not have to go out on a limb to say is that the failure rate was high enough that it was above the threshold Sierra accepts as acceptable on medium or big game that Sierra's staff and ownership decided that to not make a declarative statement advising against such usage was warranted. Snipe at me, belittle my post that links to Sierra's website, if that is what floats your boat. But you have to know that in doing so you have exposed yourself as someone who is not to betaken seriously when it comes to having the ability to examine what is available and give that information the consideration it deserves. No skin off my butt. Good work! Next time just answer the question hat the op asks and leave it at that. No need to write a novel The OP ask a question re: the SMK performance on big game. Sierra has done so much testing and analysis that to leave this consideration out of the discussion would not serve to provide a statistically valid response the OP. Whatever anecdotal evidence is presented shrinks to statistical insignificance when considered in light of the extensive and exhaustive scientific study and analysis that Sierra has done.There are people who go way beyond what ANY loading manual flat out states is a max load. They have never blown up a gun so they say that the loading manual publisher "does not know what they are talking about." But what they have no appreciation for is that so long as you are heading the advice published in a reputable loading manual the statistical chances of blowing up a gun are within acceptable limits. Go beyond that and it implies one of two things: 1) your tolerance for having the statistical chance your face will be blown off is not as conservative as the loading manual accepts as acceptable. Or 2) that you do not recognize that pressure can be influenced by cumulative causal factors. Either way, the data and analysis gained from dabbling you have done shrinks to insignificance when considered juxtaposed to the extensive and exhaustive data collection and analysis that trained professionals have done before they published a definitive statement of their conclusions in the form of loading data. So it is with accepting conclusions drawn from anecdotal evidence gained from people who have used SMK bullets on big game. It depends on what your tolerance of experiencing terminal ballistic failure is. I prefer to err on the side of caution and do give COMMENSURATE consideration to what Sierra's staff and ownership have to offer free of charge. But then again, being an engineer by training and experience, I like to consider all of the data and give it a value commensurate with it's gravitas.
Quote from: JDHasty on March 11, 2016, 07:48:15 PMQuote from: BULLBLASTER on March 11, 2016, 02:42:40 PMOutstanding use of Google hasty! I'm sure they don't work as hunting bullets the same as Berger target bullets don't work as hunting bullets.. Btw the op was asking about real life experience shooting animals with smk bullets, not what you can drum up on google...Didn't use a search engine, I went directly to Sierra's site. Sierra sends out an eNewsletter and some time back they covered this topic in depth.Sierra has ballistic engineers on their staff and they analyze the results of extensive testing using the scientific method. Google it if you are not familiar with the scientific method. From my limited knowledge on the subject Berger does say that their research has shown that their target bullets (or at least some of their target bullets) do perform very satisfactorily on game animals. I would assume that Berger's engineers are probably capable of analyzing terminal ballistics and are just as capable as Sierra's engineering staff. What your snark has indited has nothing to to do with impeaching my credibility or my response. What it illustrates is your contempt for the valuable work and expert advice that Sierra staff has done and provided to their customers and potential customers. Ask yourself this: What does Sierra have to gain from advising potential customers to look elsewhere for a big game bullet? OK now if you have not come up with Sierra valuing Sierra's integrity and Sierra's reputation then you are obviously lacking an appreciation of the value of the scientific method and/or are incapable of recognizing Sierra's staff and ownership as professionals who value their reputation and professional integrity above the profit motive.Anyone can go forum shopping and find someone who will validate what they want to hear. Sometimes it is easy to find a source that will rely on "anecdotal evidence" of a limited number of test cases in which the witness has achieved results that are not consistent with conclusions drawn after extensive and exhaustive testing. In the case of any bullet's performance on medium or big game, statistics almost demands that this will be the case. I bet you can also forum shop and find that Nosler Partitions are not a reliable big game bullet. The problem here is that most all hunters do not have enough data to draw a valid conclusion because their sample size is far to low, so low IN FACT that any conclusion drawn shrinks to insignificance when compared to extensive and exhaustive study and scientific analysis of a statistically valid sample size.Can you accept that Sierra did not take making this recommendation in a vacuum? Again what is in it for them to not have studied and analyzed the results of their testing before telling potential customers: look elsewhere? Nothing that I can get my mind around except their integrity and their reputation. I will go out on a limb here and say that in Sierra's testing there were probably a lot of cases wherein the SMK bullet performed well enough for them to accept it as suitable for medium and even maybe on large game animals. What I do not have to go out on a limb to say is that the failure rate was high enough that it was above the threshold Sierra accepts as acceptable on medium or big game that Sierra's staff and ownership decided that to not make a declarative statement advising against such usage was warranted. Snipe at me, belittle my post that links to Sierra's website, if that is what floats your boat. But you have to know that in doing so you have exposed yourself as someone who is not to betaken seriously when it comes to having the ability to examine what is available and give that information the consideration it deserves. No skin off my butt. Good work! Next time just answer the question hat the op asks and leave it at that. No need to write a novel
Quote from: BULLBLASTER on March 11, 2016, 02:42:40 PMOutstanding use of Google hasty! I'm sure they don't work as hunting bullets the same as Berger target bullets don't work as hunting bullets.. Btw the op was asking about real life experience shooting animals with smk bullets, not what you can drum up on google...Didn't use a search engine, I went directly to Sierra's site. Sierra sends out an eNewsletter and some time back they covered this topic in depth.Sierra has ballistic engineers on their staff and they analyze the results of extensive testing using the scientific method. Google it if you are not familiar with the scientific method. From my limited knowledge on the subject Berger does say that their research has shown that their target bullets (or at least some of their target bullets) do perform very satisfactorily on game animals. I would assume that Berger's engineers are probably capable of analyzing terminal ballistics and are just as capable as Sierra's engineering staff. What your snark has indited has nothing to to do with impeaching my credibility or my response. What it illustrates is your contempt for the valuable work and expert advice that Sierra staff has done and provided to their customers and potential customers. Ask yourself this: What does Sierra have to gain from advising potential customers to look elsewhere for a big game bullet? OK now if you have not come up with Sierra valuing Sierra's integrity and Sierra's reputation then you are obviously lacking an appreciation of the value of the scientific method and/or are incapable of recognizing Sierra's staff and ownership as professionals who value their reputation and professional integrity above the profit motive.Anyone can go forum shopping and find someone who will validate what they want to hear. Sometimes it is easy to find a source that will rely on "anecdotal evidence" of a limited number of test cases in which the witness has achieved results that are not consistent with conclusions drawn after extensive and exhaustive testing. In the case of any bullet's performance on medium or big game, statistics almost demands that this will be the case. I bet you can also forum shop and find that Nosler Partitions are not a reliable big game bullet. The problem here is that most all hunters do not have enough data to draw a valid conclusion because their sample size is far to low, so low IN FACT that any conclusion drawn shrinks to insignificance when compared to extensive and exhaustive study and scientific analysis of a statistically valid sample size.Can you accept that Sierra did not take making this recommendation in a vacuum? Again what is in it for them to not have studied and analyzed the results of their testing before telling potential customers: look elsewhere? Nothing that I can get my mind around except their integrity and their reputation. I will go out on a limb here and say that in Sierra's testing there were probably a lot of cases wherein the SMK bullet performed well enough for them to accept it as suitable for medium and even maybe on large game animals. What I do not have to go out on a limb to say is that the failure rate was high enough that it was above the threshold Sierra accepts as acceptable on medium or big game that Sierra's staff and ownership decided that to not make a declarative statement advising against such usage was warranted. Snipe at me, belittle my post that links to Sierra's website, if that is what floats your boat. But you have to know that in doing so you have exposed yourself as someone who is not to betaken seriously when it comes to having the ability to examine what is available and give that information the consideration it deserves. No skin off my butt.
Outstanding use of Google hasty! I'm sure they don't work as hunting bullets the same as Berger target bullets don't work as hunting bullets.. Btw the op was asking about real life experience shooting animals with smk bullets, not what you can drum up on google...
Quote from: BLRman on March 11, 2016, 08:41:56 PMhaha! I was just about to point out that Bullblaster is in fact an engineer. he also drives a prius so Oh man drives a Prius he must be legit then!! I know a couple people that use smk in their long range rifles and they have had great success with them with no lost game..
Quote from: BULLBLASTER on March 11, 2016, 02:42:40 PMOutstanding use of Google hasty! I'm sure they don't work as hunting bullets the same as Berger target bullets don't work as hunting bullets.. Btw the op was asking about real life experience shooting animals with smk bullets, not what you can drum up on google...And your real life experience with them is...?
I'd treat them like a berger .... if you can hit the pocket you will have catastrophic damage internally . Hit the shoulder and you may cringe on the out come. On a side note I've seen a Barnes x bullet punch strait through a deer out of a 30 /378 at 3200 fps or so with zero damage. Except a hole in the heart .
Quote from: Bob33 on March 11, 2016, 08:15:52 PMQuote from: BULLBLASTER on March 11, 2016, 02:42:40 PMOutstanding use of Google hasty! I'm sure they don't work as hunting bullets the same as Berger target bullets don't work as hunting bullets.. Btw the op was asking about real life experience shooting animals with smk bullets, not what you can drum up on google...And your real life experience with them is...?Insignificant when juxtaposed with multiple rounds that have been scientifically studied.
Quote from: BULLBLASTER on March 11, 2016, 08:46:23 PMSo load data and if you are at or above max load will determine how well a smk will work to kill animals? That is a piece of knowledge that I will cherish for ever. Thanks for enlightening me hasty.And you call yourself an engineer?
So load data and if you are at or above max load will determine how well a smk will work to kill animals? That is a piece of knowledge that I will cherish for ever. Thanks for enlightening me hasty.
Wow, this thread has been totally derailed, personally I find the Gamekings performance and accuracy more than acceptable for hunting use so I have stuck to them. But now I'm curious about 1 thing: JDHasty, What kind of car do you drive?
I don't even know what these dang words mean that are being used.. I agree with coach and treat them like a Berger. This is not from my use but from what I have heard with my friends that use them..
