Home Main Category Hunting

Armor Plated

41magnut41magnut Senior MemberPosts: 1,203 Senior Member
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.
"The .30-06 is never a mistake." Townsend Whelen :iwo:

Replies

  • bullsi1911bullsi1911 Moderator Posts: 11,150 Senior Member
    How did you know I'm looking at .45-70 rifles for hunting deer?
    To make something simple is a thousand times more difficult than to make something complex.
    -Mikhail Kalashnikov
  • jaywaptijaywapti Senior Member Posts: 4,958 Senior Member
    Wambli Ska wrote: »
    You can kill just about any animal on earth with just about any chambering out there within reason. AS LONG as you are willing to work with that chamberings limitations AND are an ethical hunter willing to pass up the bad shots. I'm more concerned with platform and bullet construction than chambering.[/QUOTE

    How true !!

    After going thru a severe case of magnumitis in the 60s I can honestly say that i've killed 90% of my game with only 2 rifles 30-06 and .358 Win.

    JAY
    THE DEFINITION OF GUN CONTROL IS HITTING THE TARGET WITH YOUR FIRST SHOT
  • MichakavMichakav Senior Member Posts: 2,728 Senior Member
    Wambli Ska wrote: »
    You can kill just about any animal on earth with just about any chambering out there within reason. AS LONG as you are willing to work with that chamberings limitations AND are an ethical hunter willing to pass up the bad shots. I'm more concerned with platform and bullet construction than chambering.

    :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.
  • orchidmanorchidman Senior Member Posts: 8,110 Senior Member
    I read somewhere that the only calibre anyone needs in the USA/Canada/Alaska is the 270. It is capable of taking critturs from squirrels right up to Moose, Grizzly and Polar bears....or so I have heard.

    Trouble is, the word 'Need' has no place in a firearms discussion.
    Still enjoying the trip of a lifetime and making the best of what I have.....
  • JerryBobCoJerryBobCo Senior Member Posts: 7,939 Senior Member
    orchidman wrote: »
    I read somewhere that the only calibre anyone needs in the USA/Canada/Alaska is the 270. It is capable of taking critturs from squirrels right up to Moose, Grizzly and Polar bears....or so I have heard.

    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.
    Jerry

    Gun control laws make about as much sense as taking ex-lax to cure a cough.
  • orchidmanorchidman Senior Member Posts: 8,110 Senior Member
    JerryBobCo wrote: »
    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.


    You mean this one?

    Felicesmummodel70049.jpg

    Felicesmummodel70047.jpg


    Come and visit and we will discuss it over a beer or two. Will even let you hold it.....
    Still enjoying the trip of a lifetime and making the best of what I have.....
  • jaywaptijaywapti Senior Member Posts: 4,958 Senior Member
    Do I hear a bidding war ????

    Great looking rifle.

    JAY
    THE DEFINITION OF GUN CONTROL IS HITTING THE TARGET WITH YOUR FIRST SHOT
  • MichakavMichakav Senior Member Posts: 2,728 Senior Member
    The old "slew 70".
  • LerchessLerchess Senior Member Posts: 550 Senior Member
    Interesting topic. I think I have been in that crown for a short period of time before I realized that such was not the case. One of my high school teachers took a MI elk with a .300 Savage. One round was all it took.
  • ZeeZee Senior Member Posts: 23,988 Senior Member
    I like guns and the cartridges they're chambered for.

    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.
    "To Hell with efficiency, it's performance we want!" - Elmer Keith
  • CaliFFLCaliFFL Senior Member Posts: 5,486 Senior Member
    I shot my Shiras with one 165g factory Core-Lokt. One round through the ribs, punched both lungs, and he dropped in 20 seconds. I shot my bear with the same rifle and the same box of ammo. Broke his shoulder and tore through his heart. Sat down let out groan and fell over.

    Bullet placement is everything.
    When our governing officials dismiss due process as mere semantics, when they exercise powers they don’t have and ignore duties they actually bear, and when we let them get away with it, we have ceased to be our own rulers.

    Adam J. McCleod


  • 41magnut41magnut Senior Member Posts: 1,203 Senior Member
    bullsi1911 wrote: »
    How did you know I'm looking at .45-70 rifles for hunting deer?

    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.
    "The .30-06 is never a mistake." Townsend Whelen :iwo:
  • RazorbackerRazorbacker Senior Member Posts: 4,646 Senior Member
    orchidman wrote: »
    I read somewhere that the only calibre anyone needs in the USA/Canada/Alaska is the 270. It is capable of taking critturs from squirrels right up to Moose, Grizzly and Polar bears....or so I have heard.

    Trouble is, the word 'Need' has no place in a firearms discussion.

    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.
    Teach your children to love guns, they'll never be able to afford drugs
  • knitepoetknitepoet Senior Member Posts: 21,093 Senior Member
    41, keep in mind that before the 300 Sav, the lowly 30-30 was the baddest boy on the block.

    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)
    Seven Habits of Highly Effective Pirates, Rule #37: There is no “overkill”. There is only “open fire” and “I need to reload”.


  • MileHighShooterMileHighShooter Senior Member Posts: 4,805 Senior Member
    Devil's advocate time.....critters and hunting ain't the same as when the 300 Savage was king of the hill. Colorado for example, didn't have 8 elk seasons from August until Feb. There weren't ATV's running all over heck and back. There weren't even a fraction of the number of hunters today. Sure if you go waaaay far back, the game is less spooky but anything within 4 miles of a road....games different. Are the elk themselves any tougher? No, but they're under constant pressure especially by the time rifle seasons roll around. I use mags for the most part, and to me the advantage is being able to take that less then perfect shot presentation with confidence. I don't HAVE to wait for a good broadside shot across a meadow with perfect conditions.

    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.
    Wambli Ska wrote: »
    Once again, please refrain from cutting short any baseless totally emotional arguments with facts. It leads to boring, completely objective conversations well beyond the comprehension ability of many.
  • JerryBobCoJerryBobCo Senior Member Posts: 7,939 Senior Member
    Wambli Ska wrote: »
    Notice I qualified my statement with the words "just about". The .270 has no place out in the field, except in the hands of the infirm, sickly city children and women of short stature and slight build, for use in the short range taking of game from squirrel to MAYBE coyote (and only because the venerable Elmer Keith thought so)... Armadillo excluded of course. The bullet bounces right off the plates and it could take your eye out.

    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.
    Jerry

    Gun control laws make about as much sense as taking ex-lax to cure a cough.
  • BigDanSBigDanS Senior Member Posts: 6,973 Senior Member
    Personally I dislike the term "magnum" because it denotes nothing really. A .22 rimfire magnum is nowhere near as powerful as a .223. The 30 06 and 30 30 share bullet weights but a 30 06 is 20% faster in a 150 grain load. Does that make the 30 06 a 30 30 magnum?

    Seriously, it is just a marketing term that we should lose along with "tactical"

    D
    "A patriot is mocked, scorned and hated; yet when his cause succeeds, all men will join him, for then it costs nothing to be a patriot." Mark Twain
    Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives.... now who's bringing the hot wings? :jester:
  • Ernie BishopErnie Bishop Senior Member Posts: 7,474 Senior Member
    When I go larger in case capacity it is for the expressed purpose of having higher bullet impact velocities that I did before with said bullet.
    Ernie

    "The Un-Tactical"
  • Ernie BishopErnie Bishop Senior Member Posts: 7,474 Senior Member
    #1 & #3 with #1 getting the strongest lean. In good conditions I can out shoot the capabilities of some of the bullets I use in certain cartridges.
    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."
    Ernie

    "The Un-Tactical"
  • MileHighShooterMileHighShooter Senior Member Posts: 4,805 Senior Member
    Some guys here are freaks of nature when it comes to shooting and could probably kill an elk with a folded up piece of paper, Ernie, you're one lol.

    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.
    Wambli Ska wrote: »
    Once again, please refrain from cutting short any baseless totally emotional arguments with facts. It leads to boring, completely objective conversations well beyond the comprehension ability of many.
  • justin10mmjustin10mm Senior Member Posts: 688 Senior Member
    knitepoet wrote: »
    41, keep in mind that before the 300 Sav, the lowly 30-30 was the baddest boy on the block.

    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.
  • MileHighShooterMileHighShooter Senior Member Posts: 4,805 Senior Member
    And unknown to the public at that time, the 30-40 Krag had slayed the extremely long standing world record elk
    Wambli Ska wrote: »
    Once again, please refrain from cutting short any baseless totally emotional arguments with facts. It leads to boring, completely objective conversations well beyond the comprehension ability of many.
Sign In or Register to comment.
Magazine Cover

GET THE MAGAZINE Subscribe & Save

Temporary Price Reduction

SUBSCRIBE NOW

Give a Gift   |   Subscriber Services

PREVIEW THIS MONTH'S ISSUE

GET THE NEWSLETTER Join the List and Never Miss a Thing.

Get the top Guns & Ammo stories delivered right to your inbox every week.

Advertisement