Home› Main Category› Hunting
Armor Plated
As I sit in a hotel room staring out the window the mind begins to meander.
Referring to another thread about the toughness of certain game animals.
I am always amused when a certain cartridge is flatly stated to be the minimum for "X" critter. For example, 338WM or 300WM the minimum for Elk, or some such. We have all seen such writings or heard such statements.
Once upon a time the 300 Savage was considered plenty stout elk medicine. To listen to some now that cartridge should be considered cruel if used for anything larger than your garden variety deer.
I am a proponent of using as much gun as one can shoot proficiently. I also consider energy minimums as reasonable benchmarks, for cartridge selection. I am curious to know who determined these energy levels as minimal, i.e. 1000# for deer or 1500# for elk?
I am not a magnum hater. If one can shoot their mag-na-blaster with significant proficiency for the task at hand, more power to 'em.
To tell a newbie that they gotta have a mag-of -the -day for whatever game animal is doing a disservice to them. Unless they are going to Africa and have legal limits they must meet, chances are they would better served with a standard caliber.
I am certain this subject has been "beat to death" :yesno: previously.
Referring to another thread about the toughness of certain game animals.
I am always amused when a certain cartridge is flatly stated to be the minimum for "X" critter. For example, 338WM or 300WM the minimum for Elk, or some such. We have all seen such writings or heard such statements.
Once upon a time the 300 Savage was considered plenty stout elk medicine. To listen to some now that cartridge should be considered cruel if used for anything larger than your garden variety deer.
I am a proponent of using as much gun as one can shoot proficiently. I also consider energy minimums as reasonable benchmarks, for cartridge selection. I am curious to know who determined these energy levels as minimal, i.e. 1000# for deer or 1500# for elk?
I am not a magnum hater. If one can shoot their mag-na-blaster with significant proficiency for the task at hand, more power to 'em.
To tell a newbie that they gotta have a mag-of -the -day for whatever game animal is doing a disservice to them. Unless they are going to Africa and have legal limits they must meet, chances are they would better served with a standard caliber.
I am certain this subject has been "beat to death" :yesno: previously.
"The .30-06 is never a mistake." Townsend Whelen :iwo:
Replies
-Mikhail Kalashnikov
:that: Not positive, but I would be willing to bet that more game (elk, moose, bear...etc) has been taken with "non-magnums". From .243, .270, .30-06, 6.5x55, 7mm Mauser, 8mm Mauser, .303...etc, than the big boomers.
Trouble is, the word 'Need' has no place in a firearms discussion.
You, sir, are a trouble maker.
Now, when are you going to part with that mint condition pre-64 Model 70 Winchester .270? I need to use it for an upcoming t-rex hunt.
Gun control laws make about as much sense as taking ex-lax to cure a cough.
You mean this one?
Come and visit and we will discuss it over a beer or two. Will even let you hold it.....
Great looking rifle.
JAY
Big ones, tall ones, short ones, small ones. I like them all and will use them as I see fit.
Well, I like them all, except that .270 abomination of a cartridge.
Bullet placement is everything.
Adam J. McCleod
I have had my eye out for a 2ND hand Marlin in this cambering for quite some time. Just haven't found one available when I had the $$ at the same.
One of the lighter bullets, or one of a traditional weight for that matter, at 2200 FPS (mas 'a mino) would be a fine combination for collecting one of our TX denizens of the brush.
With the disclaimer of bullet construction, I'll string along with what you read, range limitations not withstanding.
However, if someone came to me and said, "We will finance you on big game hunts all over North America but you have to use only one rifle and it can't be a magnum chambering". I would choose a .30 '06. 150 grn Partitions for Whitetails, where ever they exist, hogs as well, and probably Muleys. For anything bigger I'd move up to 180 grn ABs. Possibly 200grn ABs for the larger bears and maybe the far north moose. But if they don't make 200s in .308 then I'd have confidence in the 180s.
Edit: I forgot about 200 grn Core Locts in .30 '06. I've use them to good effect in the past.
But as you say, it ain't about need, so i will happily continue using my magnums when I choose too. Blowing Southern Whitetails in half while doing so. I actually had a LGS counter guy say that to me when I went in there shopping for a used .338WM.
I also agree it's a fun topic for campfire discussion.
I remember hearing about folks successfully hunting polar bears with the then new and "BAD-A" 357 magnum.
Imagine the hue and cry now if someone said, "Hey, I'm going to go polar bear hunting. What load should I use in my N frame 357?"
edited to add: I seem to be bucking the trend, as more folks seem to be going to larger and larger cases and bullet diameters, I'm going smaller.
Used to do ALL my hunting with a 30-06. Then stepped down to a 7x57, then 7mmIHMSA (necked down 300 Sav) and then a small increase in bullet diameter & case capacity (50 Beowulf) and now the 6.5 Grendel.
I actually intend to take a deer with a 223 Rem (And probably 64gr Win PP). It's legal here, and I have no doubt it will do a fine job and long as I put it where it's supposed to go (Key no matter WHAT round you're using)
At the same time, some people do really, really well with small bullets, and will likely continue to do so, but those guys usually have the game figured out pretty well and hunt in particular ways. Bigger non-mags will and do work just fine too, but IF, and that is a real big IF, you can shoot a mag well, its some cheap insurance. I know a guy over on AR that bags some big bulls in WY every year with a 25-06, his favorite rifle. He is proficient and confident, but even he recommends something bigger to the hunters he guides. That guy also spends 200 days a year in the field where he hunts and knows it like the back of his hand. A guy coming out from FL for 5 days doesn't have that luxury (unless guided). That 300 yard quartering to shot may be all he gets. I'd rather have a little oopmh behind the bullet.
Boy, you guys are on a roll. I'm sure glad I traded my last .270 for a silly millimeter more. Fortunately, those deer, elk and antelope I shot with that .270 didn't realize that was what I was shooting. Otherwise, they would have laughed at me instead of dying a quick death.
Please, let's keep this little secret among ourselves. If news of this ever spreads to the animal kingdom, all .270 shooters will have to upgrade.
Gun control laws make about as much sense as taking ex-lax to cure a cough.
Seriously, it is just a marketing term that we should lose along with "tactical"
D
Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives.... now who's bringing the hot wings? :jester:
"The Un-Tactical"
When I increase #1 everything else gets better, with the exception of extreme short range uses that I am not planning for. HEAD SHOT:guns:
With my SP's or with a rifle I choose a cartridge based on how far it will take my hunting bullet(s) and still perform the way I want it.
I am talking about calibers I will use for hunting.
Bullets have a impact velocity range to where they typically work the best.
I should have made the point that I typically don't get a gun just to have the biggest or so I can say, "I use a Magnum."
"The Un-Tactical"
I agree the term "magnum" IS a marketing term, as they took it from large wine bottles. But then if we didn't use the term mag, we'd have a hundred different names lol. And sometimes that name DOES get tossed around for no real good reason.....222 Rem Mag, 370 Sako Magnum come to mind.
Not so. The .300 savage wasn't developed until 1920. There were several other .30cals already available that out performed the .30-30win. The .30-40krag, .30-06 and .30 newton to name a few.