I have quite the paradox right now... When you shoot a woodchuck at 200 yards with a .223, the object is for the bullet to completely explode, hopefully causing the woodchuck to follow suit. The same goes for coyote, fox, bobcat, cougar, etc... Why is it that if a handgun bullet fragments, it is less lethal than one that holds together. it just seems to me, causing an explosion of lead fragments is more traumatic to soft tissue than one hole. I did an experiment with a cheap Remington 115 gr JHP and a Speer GDHP 147 gr. Both were fired into blocks of red potting clay approximately 8x10x14. There were at least five noticable exit wounds from the 115 gr which had completely fragmented, the copper jacket sitting on the bank behind the block. The hollow in the block of clay was large enough to fit both my hands into once I peeled open the initial entry wound. The 147 gr left a hollow I could fit one hand into and left one focal exit wound approximately the size of a golf ball. It just seems to me that a fragmenting bullet is more lethal than just an expanding bullet. Both rounds were fired from a 995 at approximately 20 yards.