Maturing as a Hunter

[Tom1911]

When I got into this sport, I read all the magazines and brochures I cound find. Like all kids, I was impressed by numbers, the bigger the numer the bigger the impression. Many of the "old timers" I hunted with weren't very bright. I deduced that because they just didn't seem to get the importance of the modern magnums. Now there were couple of the younger guys who hunted with 7MM Rem Mags, but they also hunted elk so when buying new rifles they opted for the then new Big Remington Round. But most of the "old timers" just didn't get it: BIGGER IS BETTER!!! One of the "old timers" I hunted with talked about the .300, and he meant Savage! Can you imagine a hunter actually hunting with such an anemic cartridge? Talk about lack of ethics! Others were a bit more humane using 7MM Mausers and .06's.

When I got to hunting the Rocky Mountain states I couldn't wait to see the suitable guns those native hunters used. I knew I'd be seeing lots of magnum rounds; I mean, afterall, those deer & elk in the Rocky Mountain states are BIG. I thought it anomaly when the hunters talked of killing elk and moose with .308 Winchesters and the like. A Wyoming moose felled with a .270 Win you say??? Blasphmy!!! Only a magnum can fell moose!!!

Ahh, these guys must not have access to the same information to which I have been exposed. Surely I was going to start seeing hunters with mighty magnums. Alas for poor Tommy (that'd be me), I just didn't see many bug magnums in the field. What I did see were results of work of inferior cartridges. And those dead big game critters were just as dead as if they had been felled with a mighty magnum. And thus began my transformation begotten of reality.

Now hunting is supposed to be fun, so I will never deride anyone for using whatever cartridge floats his boat. (In hunting as opposed toother aspects of life, women really are not impressed by size. :wink: ) But I have acquired a practical bent. Since most big game is felled within 350 yards or so, why would I want to lug around a rifle that weighs more than necessary to do 99% of the work? Now I can buy a heavy .300 Win Mag that will easily fell elk out to 350 to 400 yards, but I can get the same results with a .30-'06. But wait, it gets better. I can also get the same results using an even lighter and smaller .308 Win!!!

The moral here is when I read accounts of youthful exeuberance discussing mega-magnums being all that and necessary for hunting, I anticipate the event of maturation! However, if would be an illogical assumption that because I will smile and offer encouragement to a kid hunting with a magnum that I condone unethical hunting practices. When ranges get beyond 400 yards or so, I really gotta start questioning motive of shooters (to me, they ain't hunters). I think a critical component of hunting is unity of skills, stalking being one. Therefore, I, for one, would appreciate reading more about hunting skills when felling big game animals, something from which I can learn, as opposed to shooting skills at game requiring a different zone tag!

 

[remingtonman_25_06]

Well for most that dont know, all a magnum really does, is increase ones effective range. For example, 98% of people dont need anything bigger then a 270 or 30-06 because they cant shoot farther then about 350-400 yards at most. Any deer or elk will go down with those 2 calibers at that distance. Its when people can shoot farther then that magnums have there place. Thats all I'm saying on this subject.

 

[Reloder28]

Tom,

That was a pretty good treatise. The last line was great, really made me laugh. I shoot a 7mm Weatherby in an Encore that weighs 8lbs scoped and loaded. It is 38" long. I would rather be shooting a .280 Remington. After many rounds fired and loaded thru my Encore barrels I prefer belted or rimmed cases. I am not a bolt gun man. The Wby can be loaded up or down and anywhere in between. I run my 140 gr loads at 3000 fps, well within the capabilities of the 280.

I attempt no shot over 400 yds. My longest shot to date was 390 yds on a Rotisserie Pig.

My point: I would LOVE to hunt exsclusively with a .308 Winchester but I am not comfortable with its 180 gr velocities. I would prefer 180's over 165's. So I settled on the 7mm Weatherby with the 140/160 Accubonds. I don't care about the magnum part.

 

[Tom1911]

Reloader28,

The 7MM WBY Mag is a most excellent cartridge. It is the near identical twin of the 7MM Rem Mag. Both are excllent for all North American big game.

I get 2700 FPS with 180 grain Cire-Lokts out of my 22" barreled Featherweight. Prior to purchasing my .308 Win, I researched the heck out of an ideal mountain cartridge. I was exposed to the fact that the .308 Win will actually out-peform the venerable '06. I was skeptical until I saw the results myself! I get all that and exceptional accuracy in a short action package. Ain't this a great country??? :grin:

Oh, I get better than 2900 FPS with 165 grain Light Magnums. And in a light rifle, both of these loads will let your shoulder known they ain't sissy rounds.

As for me, I like huntin' animals far more than shootin' 'em! Like you, I will do everything possible to keep my range to under 400 yards.

 

[Richracer1]

I am a new hunter as well, only I'm almost 37. Now I didn't get into the "Bigger is Better" mentality, but more so of researching what gun will be adequate and what positively get the job done for a particular animal. With that in mind, my first rifle purchased was a 270 WSM. Once I got more involved, and wanting to hunt elk, moose and bear, I decided to purchase a 338 WM as my second rifle, since I wanted a little more than the 270 WSM could produce, which I consider just adequate for those three species.

 

[Tom1911]

Richracer1,

Quite ironically, I am a huge fan of the .338 Win Mag. I do own one, but I have never hunted with it. Really it is much more than necessary for North American big game unless one lives in Alaska. But it is a cool cartridge. Some have opined that it is the best of all for a rifleman wanting one cartridge for all North American hunting. For elk, though, you're already set!

Buy one, you'll never regret it.

The .270 WSM is much like the .270 Weatherby, which is about perfect for all North American big game save costal griz. In all honesty, I am not sure you'll need another rifle.

 

[Richracer1]

Richracer1,

Quite ironically, I am a huge fan of the .338 Win Mag. I do own one, but I have never hunted with it. Really it is much more than necessary for North American big game unless one lives in Alaska. But it is a cool cartridge. Some have opined that it is the best of all for a rifleman wanting one cartridge for all North American hunting. For elk, though, you're already set!

Buy one, you'll never regret it.

The .270 WSM is much like the .270 Weatherby, which is about perfect for all North American big game save costal griz. In all honesty, I am not sure you'll need another rifle.

I have both rifles and utilize both here in CA. I take both to Idaho for hunting trips. To far to drive to hav my gun/scope break. I do agree with you on the capabilities of my 270 WSM, but I just feel better having the 338WM when I go to get bear (little more grunt w/the bigger bullet).

 

[Bigcat_hunter]

I dont know, I wouldn't be packing a 270 in Grizzly country! I would feel better with a Big Mag! Sometimes bigger is better!

 

[Accubond Believer]

It is accuracy that kills - velocity is the by-product that we all like to talk about. A accurate shot which instantly kills an animal is what we all are looking for whether it be at 40 yards or 400.

Most magnums eat a lot more powder for a little more speed. Using the afore mentioned .308 .30-06. and the .300 mags. and a 180 gr bullet. The more powder behind the bullet the more speed you get - also the more recoil the shooter gets to tolerate. With those cartridges until one is shooting beyond the 350 yard mark, who cares what the cartridge is. With more speed the drop of the bullet is less. If you can handle the recoil it does lessen some of the guess work in where to hold.

After the 450 yard mark it is essential to know you range to target no matter what cartirdge you are shooting. Take a ballistics table and see the difference in drop between 400, 500, and 600 yards respectively.

In reality we all have calibers we hate and those we love. Just my two cents.

Steve D. the HP

 

[FOTIS]

Hwy...You're right.

Marketing is the key here.!

 

[CamoWildcat]

Everyone keeps talking about velocity and bullet drop - and both are important. But I think we are forgetting about another important consideration. Energy. What good does it do to hit an animal in the chest if the bullet won't penetrate or expand. I personally don't think a shot should be taken on an elk if the energy will be below 2000 ft lbs. And for Grizzly and Brown Bears (the coastal BROWN bear being the largest), I would want even more.
Its interesting to see which cartridges get eliminated and which others get limited to 150 yards, etc when applying a minimum energy.
Just my 2 cents worth. Thanks for reading.

 

[Greg Nolan]

I guess I must of read all the same articles you did and all the latest trendy articles about using adequate calibers for real hunters. I've seen hunters who brought big magnums that couldn't hit a barn from the inside or track a bulldozer through fresh snow. It takes all kinds. It is humane to use enough gun. On an elk at 300 yds a 270 with a 130gr bullet is enough gun to hit an elk, a 308 is enough to kill an elk, if you make a good shot and don't mind tracking it a half mile or so. The reality of elk and big mule deer hunting is that everybody can't do that or won't do that. They'll take the shot and think they missed if there is no easy blood trail. A larger or more powerfull caliber will provide a quicker kill and a better blood trail. I'm probably a lot older than you and can remember elk hunters with 30-30s in camp snickering at the young guys with their .270s and 308s. There's no glory in taking anymore chance at letting an animal run off and die of a wound than is absolutely necessary. If using the least adequate caliber was the best to prove our hunting abilities or whatever we'd be using 22s. The animals we're hunting deserve enough gun for a quick clean death and in the case of an elk a .338 or 300 mag can be barely enough even at 200 yds if the animal doesn't give you a good angle and most don't. How can we consider a caliber thats adequate for a 110 lb. deer to adequate for a 850 lb. elk?

 

[remingtonman_25_06]

I read the minimum energy requirements from several top gun writers. Most of the following come to this conclusion. 1000ft lbs for deer. 1500ft lbs for elk. Those are consevative numbers. I use to go by those numbers as well, but dont anymore. You can kill deer with just about anything, put the little .224" 55g bullet in the deers chest and it will go down out to 350-400 yards out of a 22-250 or swift. I have seen it done many of times to know that it works. Energy is way below 1000 lbs on that one. Elk I would say you should have at least 1000 lbs hitting them. Theres people that do there own experiments and come up with there own numbers, but as long as you put the bullet in the right place with enough energy to get through bone and get to the vitals, thats all that really matters. Dead is dead, no matter what. All a magnum does is give you a couple hundred more yards of effective range, that is if you can outshoot the standard 270 or 30-06 max effective range.

 

[Tom1911]

remingtonman_25_06,

Reference the process of death, you are right on the money. What an animal is hit with or its velocity is mostly immaterial provided either the CNS is seriously interrupted or blood to the brain is terminated. Hence, a .300 Win Mag and .308 Win will kill identically provided one of the above occurs.

BTW, it took me some time to realize that biology trumps all preference in calibers.

My best,

Tom

 

[remingtonman_25_06]

Tom agreed that a 308 will kill as good as a 300 WM, out to a certain distance anyways. All a magnum will do is give you the minimum energy/velocity at a couple hundred yards farther then say a 308. A 308 will kill elk out to 600, and deer out to around 800, a 300 WM will kill elk out to around 900 and deer out to about 1100-1200. This is not from personal experience, just based on ballistic numbers is all. But there are some who like to stretch the outer limits of cartridges. I myself have found that out with a 25-06. With a 115g btip at 3200, they have 1000lbs at 600 yards. So all in all, a 25-06 is a 600 yard deer killer. Most say no, but the numbers and I say yes. Its funny to listen to the experts who say a 25-06 is a 300 yard deer rifle, that just cracks me up. I'd like to show them all the deer I"ve literally dropped with 1 shot at 400-600 yards. When I look for a new cartridge, I play with ballistics quite a bit to see what its max effective range is going to be for my game I'm pursuing. I like to be on the outer end spectrum of things, but at least if you know your cartridges limitations, in my opinioin, your 90% ahead of every other joe blow out there who does not do any testing or looks at ballistics to see what they really deliver.

 

[Eagleye]

It never fails to amuse me when some gunwriter or other person with a self-made claim to fame lists some specific energy "needed" to kill a muley, or an elk, or a moose. Now I'm not about to suggest someone should be shooting these animals with 22's or 22 centerfires, and I don't believe that the 6mm's as a group are adequate moose/elk rifles. However, I have lived in prime moose/elk/muley/whitetail/black Bear/Grizzly country all my life [60+ years] I started hunting when I was 12 or so. The amount of game I have harvested/seen harvested is substantial. I have an acquaintance who hunted moose for several years with a 38-55 carbine and factory ammo. He didn't take any shot over about 125 yards, but the moose were not aware that it required 2000 ft-lbs of energy to kill them, they just obligingly died anyway. Maybe they were just humoring him??? :lol: :wink: Another close friend fed his rather large family on deer, elk and moose over a 20 year period using only his old Winchester 30-30. If he had bneen carving a notch in the stock for every game animal taken with that rifle, there would have only been a pistol grip left. Again, the animals shot apparently had not read the information as to how they should not drop dead unless a bullet carrying "X" amount of energy hit them. Certainly, if one feels more confident in carrying a powerful magnum, and can SHOOT IT WELL, then there is no harm in doing so. But my personal experience leads me to believe that much of what is written regarding adequate killing power is nothing more than barnyard effluent. Put a decent bullet from any chambering that will penetrate properly into the vitals, and it's all over but the work of dressing and hauling the animal out of the woods. Stopping rifles for big bears need to be more persuasive, of course, but an unalerted Grizzly poked through both shoulders with a 30-06/200 Partition is in no better shape than one poked the same with a 375 H&H Magnum. Regards, Eagleye.

 

[CamoWildcat]

Put a decent bullet from any chambering that will penetrate properly into the vitals, and it's all over but the work of dressing and hauling the animal out of the woods. Regards, Eagleye.

We can argue about numbers until it snows in Phoenix, but there comes a point in distance when a bullet spends so much energy that it literally bounces off an animal's hide. That is the point I was trying to make. We need to be confident that we can hit the vital area at that particular distance AND that the bullet has enough remaining energy to do the job.
I've been hunting for 47 years (started when I was 12) and the longest shot I have taken in those 47 years was on an antelope at 383 yards. One shot, flop. 150 grain BT out of a 300 WSM. (Yeah, I know - overkill for speed goats.) I've owned a 30-06 for 44 years and the longest shot I've taken with that caliber was just over 200 yards (had to pace it - range finders hadn't been invented yet). :wink: I'm not saying the '06 won't kill beyond that range - I'm just saying "Know your limitations as well as the gun's limitations".

 

[jbdre]

I like them all, tending to use a 30-06 and .338 Win mag more than others but it really depends on what I am hunting and where I am hunting it. The magnum vs non magnum debate seems rather silly to me. One is NOT a better hunter just because he uses a non magnum catridge or a better hunter just because he does. I have no problem handling recoil so I do tend toward the bigger is better school of thinking. In many situations a magnum will buy the shooter an edge but a poor shot with a magnum is still a poor shot and if a hunter is not completely at ease with the bigger catridge he is definitely better off not trying to use it. Another favorite catridge of mine is the .375 H&H. I have used it on big and small and it just plain kills. Another favorite is the 7mm Ultra Mag. If you need to kill something way out there I can't think of a better catridge. Good hunting!

 

[Paparock]

While living and hunting in Wyoming I used a .30-06 and a .375 H&H. The .375 H&H with the load I used basically duplicated the trajectory of the .30-06 load I was used to. I carried the .375 H&H when in an area where there was quite a bit of grizzly problems from young males being pushed out of Yellowstone. Now after I left Wyoming a local doctor wanted my .375 H&H more than I wanted to keep it so I sold it. Then came along the .376 Steyr which brings me to my point. For 98% of the people even in Alaska are the majority of the magnums they carry really needed or could rounds like the .338-06, .35 Whelen, 9.3X62mm, or the .376 Steyr not perform the vast majority of the hunting with less recoil, blast, and be just as deadly. To me would not the average client that goes on a guided bear hunt be better of with such a rifle so chambered. In Wyoming I saw so many people show up with magnum rifles for what ever reason they could not shoot whether from flinching, lack of familiarity with the rifle due to being afraid to shoot it, or what ever. A .338-06, which is an awesomely powerful rifle but is easier to shoot than a .338 Winchester Magnum is not made or sold but by one company. All the hype is about the ultra-high-velocity latest cartridge, which equals harder to shoot accurately without ever increasing amounts of time at the range learning to control the recoil. Why make it harder than it needs to be? At what distance do you shoot dangerous game like bear? It seems every generation of shooters and hunters has to re-invent the wheel before finding out those old guys who settled Africa with none magnum rifles had already figured this shooting and stopping dangerous game without needing magnum high velocity rifles out before even I was born. What percent of game is taken at a range greater than 200 yards? Medium bore rifle bullets of good sectional density at moderate velocity of about 2500 FPS will kill most anything that walks this planet at the ranges they are taken with the exception of very few skilled marksmen. So why do so many buy and carry rifles capable of killing game at two to three times or more distance than they the shooter are capable of shooting said rifle? Why, oh why, can’t we get the gun writers to educate the shooting pubic to the superiority of rifles chambered in cartridges like the new .338 Federal, .358 Winchester, .338-06, etc. as a much more practical choice for their hunting needs and thereby getting the rifle makers to chamber more makes of rifles in these calibers as opposed to such rounds as the .338 Ultra-Mag, or even the popular .300 Weatherby?

 

[jbdre]

I also hunt Wyoming a great deal and it is the one place I have found it very useful to be able too reach way out there. That is where I have found the 7mm Ultra Mag to come in very handy. Recoil with that catridge is not heavy. That does not mean I think everyone is ready to shoot long just by buying such a rifle. Practice, practice, practice. Still, if I had to rely on one catridge to do it all it would be the 30-06 with no close runnerup. If a man can't learn to handle a 30-06 well he probably ought to take up golf. I sure would miss that .375 and .338 though.