|
The answer, I think, can only be found by collecting enough data points to take out the noise. I would expect that anything less than 100 data points would provide very little insight.
From what studies I have seen, which include a Swedish study on cartridge comparison on moose and a North (?) Carolina study on white tail, there really is very little difference in cartridges and "travel after the shot". I would assume that the same is true with bullets: shot placement is much more important that bullet selection or cartridge choice.
That said, those of us that are "highly focused" (obsessed is such an ugly word), like to take out the uncertainty, and pony up for the high dollar copper bullets.
The big difference, in my opinion, of the copper bullets is that they penetrate deeper. If the shot is not ideal, there will be a longer wound channel, which has a higher probability of hitting vital organs or major blood vessels before exiting. Like Rocky said, some of us highly value that exit wound. I like lots of blood on the ground, so I can find what I shoot. FWIW, Dutch.
|