Smaller bores....bigger game

[Blkram]

A note for those that may not realize the difference in size of the moose that live where DrMike and I live, and the moose where hodgeman lives...
Our moose may get up to 1000 lbs, but the average bull harvested here is 700-800 lbs (the same weight as our elk), and bulls living about 250 miles north of here can get up to 1500 lbs.
The Bulls in Alaska can get up to 300 lbs heavier than that. And that difference in size makes a difference in the cartridge used to ensure a bullets ability to penetrate to an animal's vitals, that can be double in weight.

Yes, I used the 6.5 Creedmoor on my 2 1/2 year old bull last fall, but I passed on the larger moose (55" bull) at the longer ranges (354 yards). My bull weighed approx. 500 lbs and was at 20 yards. That 143 gr bullet had more than enough energy for that animal at that range. I had been packing the 338-06 all season, but switched that day as I was expecting to find better luck on mule deer or wolves that day instead of moose. And as my wife suggested, maybe a switch would bring a change in luck!

Is it the best moose cartridge...no, I don't think so, but used with discretion and 140 gr bullets and heavier, it will work just fine. The Scandinavians shoot a lot of moose each year (100,000) with the 6.5x55, which is virtually a ballistic twin to the Creedmoor, but they prefer the heavier bullet weights and keep ranges to a sensible distance.

Like lefty, I prefer not to take neck or spine shots, but sometimes there is no alternative choice, or the bullets strikes high. As stated, it has happened to me.

 

[Thebear_78]

I hate to play devils advocate here but I really think this a cyclical relationship. It really wasn't uncommon for people to hunt with what was considered "too small" by today's standards. Pistol cartridge leverguns and the "powerful" at the time 30-30 were in common use on game of all size. Even the bigger rounds of the time 40-65, 45-70, 45-90 were all very mild by today's magmun standards.

I think there was a really big push for more and more powerful rounds. Pretty soon people where hunting smaller big game with the big 30s and 7mms.

Then as the bullets got better guys started realizing that they didn't need those huge magnums to cleanly take game. Our bullet technology has been a real game changer. Mono metal bullets that punch way above their weight class.

Advances in rifle, optics, and ammunition leading to almost unheard of advances in accuracy. A popular trend of longer and longer range shooting. Hunting tactics that became more and more sedentary, plopping down in a hunting blind watching large fields became the most popular hunting methods. In this situation shooting longer and longer ranges were real advantages. Large heavy rifles were less of a hindrance.

The fact that hunting now is really more of s luxury than a need. This allowed more scrutiny in game selection, you could afford to wait for the right trophy and most advantageous shot angle.

All these things contributed to the trends you are referring to.

My personal feeling on the subject is this. With smaller cartridges you must live within their limitations. You have to be extra critical of shot placement. If you want to hunt moose with a 25 or 6.5, use a premium bullet and know it will limit your shots. If you want to hunt with a 338-375 you can be less critical of bullet composition and might offer a few more shot angle opportunities but you still have to live within your ability to handle the extra recoil and shoot the rifle as well as the smaller rifle.

A happy medium is probably best. Somewhere around 7-08 or 308 to 30/06. I have and use everything from 25 WSSM to 458 Lott. Properly loaded any in that spectrum will be an effective big game rifle. The two cartridges I use most are 308 and 300 RUM.




Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[c. schutte]

I'm a deer hunter and have plenty of experience with that. That puts me right with about 11 million other folks. So when I wanted to go on my first elk hunt I did something that used to be the norm, maybe not so much today. That was I went and paid a visit to a guy who has hunted elk for 40+ years and had shot perhaps 25 bulls or so. I asked him who to hunt with, where and what rifle/cartridge/bullet did he recommend.

Once on that hunt I talked to several guides and other hunters who had experience. Not all answers were exactly the same but, you could spot a trend. And that trend was NOT towards little cartridges/little bullets.

There are exceptions to every rule and there are folks that are more than good with the 1/4 bores and prove it every year. Heck, a bull elk is not safe with Scotty toting a sling shot! For me, using the wisdom of those with their teeth a little longer & the hair a little greyer is a great place to start.

Not one of those guides, outfitters or experienced hunters told me "well, I read in a hunting mag that you need....bla......bla.....bla" They had done it enough to know what works over the long haul.

Too many google-foo Jedi-masters now days............................

 

[Guy Miner]

On this thread, we're dealing with two separate but related subjects:

1) Smaller bore cartridges for big game.

2) Long range hunting.

Neither subject is particularly new...

The use of small-bore cartridges, in my mind anyway, seems to have started in the late 19th century and early 20th century when cartridges like the .30-30, 7x57, etc... were introduced and very quickly relegated the older big-bore cartridges (which really hadn't been around all that long) as obsolete.

There are old photos of hunters using the Savage 99 in .22 Hi Power for TIGER! :shock: That's a 70 grain soft point at under 3,000 fps... Oddly, that particular practice didn't catch on... :roll:

But some hunters took the "new" small bore cartridges and shot... everything, including elephant, with them!

I was utterly amazed about 12 years ago when I got real enthused about the .25-06 as a mule deer & coyote cartridge, about how many of my friends told me that they'd happily used it for bear and elk! My goodness!

16 years ago, my .28 cal rifle was the smallest in elk camp. Yet it took a big bull with one shot.

What is a small bore? .30, .28, .27, .26, .25, .24, .22 ? I'm not sure where to draw that line. Personally these days I tend to draw the line at .25 as my "small bore" hunting rifle, which yes, I'd take for any game in the lower 48 states. The .25-06 or the .257 Weatherby, with GOOD bullets... Ya, I'd happily hunt elk, black bear, mule deer, with either of those. Would I take one for grizzly? Hmmm... I dunno, lacking any experience on grizzly. Somehow I'm more comforted with a .30 cal or larger when contemplating a hunt for the big bears.



Long range hunting... Well, some like to think of it as something in the past 10 years or so... But... Facts destroy that thought. The first example I can think of are the buffalo hunters who used .45/70's and other 1100 - 1300 fps cartridges to literally destroy the herds of MILLIONS of buffalo that roamed western North America. Some of those shots were taken at pretty impressive distance, thus the story of Adobe Walls... Billy Dixon supposedly made a shot killing an attacking Chief at 1,000 - 1,500 yards! Estimates of the distance vary. Point is, that he knew how to handle long-range shooting, because of his history as a buffalo hunter. He used a borrowed .50-90 for that shot, hardly small-bore! :mrgreen:

Then we have a group of very serious marksmen in Pennsylvania who took up cross-canyon deer hunting after WWII. They learned that with the old rangefinders (long before lasers) and .30-06's and 7mm & .30 cal magnum rifles, they could reliably bring down game at extended ranges. Their hunting success spread as the internet developed, and I remember reading stories of their successes 20+ years ago. I think those fellows kindled the current interest in long-range hunting.

We have here on this forum, very respected members who have done a fair bit of deer and elk hunting at very challenging ranges... Usually with 7mm, .30 and .338 caliber rifles. Those guys are fellows I respect tremendously for their dedication to being able to make those hits at extended ranges.

Elk... I've only taken two. A big bull at 180 yards or so, with 7mm Rem mag and a cow at 338 yards with a .30-06 rifle. Neither was hard to drop, though I waited patiently for a clear, broadside shot on each. Some folks paint elk as nearly bullet proof... Well, okay, I've only taken two. Maybe there are bullet proof elk out there. I know another respected member of this forum who has no problem using a 6mm Remington to take elk... That's a 90 grain bullet... No problem...

Nor do I put myself in a position to harshly judge a hunter who goes at it differently from me. I'm most comfortable doing spot and stalk hunting, with a .25 - .375 cal rifle, and limiting my shots to 400 yards or closer. But, those who bait bears, use hounds, take snap shots at close range with their lever-action rifles... That's the stuff I love to read about! Because it's different from what I usually do. Though I've had my close range shots, like a bear in the brush at 10 - 15 feet! :mrgreen:

In my opinion, crummy shooting, at distances near or far, is what leads to problems.

Have I made poor shots on game? YES. No doubt. But I strive to make good shots, and burn a lot of powder and spend a lot of time making sure I can make those shots.

There ya go, a fairly lengthy response, from a fellow who has done his fair share of long range shooting atop 50 years of hunting.

Regards, Guy

 

[cloverleaf]

While half the shooting world is extolling the virtues of the "Creed" for virtually everything it WASN'T designed for, I'll just stick with the cartridges that offer more horsepower and get the job done with a margin of error built in.

Yes - if you put any decent bullet into the vitals of a game animal a kill is going to follow. But how often do all the elements of a perfect shot present themselves under real life hunting conditions?

I prefer my game to drop quickly to ensure recovery. Marginal cartridges rarely provide the DRT results that many hunters prefer.

"While half the shooting world is extolling the virtues of the "Creed" for virtually everything it WASN'T designed for"

Interesting...Seems to me Ive read virtually the same thing about my beloved 250-Savage. Rightly so, an 87Gr .25 Cal bullet is nothing to be using on departing deer let alone an elk, but folks did so. Until it got a reputation as a "wounder" of game. Then there was a 300 Savage. OF course there were multiple reasons for this, some not germane to this conversation. Fortunately for me, 300 yards is a long ways away. Hunting is a matter of variables, variables we cant control. The further away the more the variables have an impact. Even if its just my "wobble". IMHO CL

 

[IdahoCTD]

Comparing the retained energy of a 6.5 Creedmoor shooting a high BC 140+gr bullet at 2850fps and a 270win shooting 130's at 3100fps you can see the Creedmoor catches the 270win relatively quick and surpasses it before 300yds. I'm sure there have been a lot of elk killed with a 270win shooting 130's past 300yds, with even lower BC bullets then the 130BT's I used in my comparison. High BC bullets have changed the effective range of many lowly calibers. Weather or not you like to use those bullets for hunting they have changed the long range effectiveness of all calibers. I've shot a lot of elk with calibers up to 416 Rem. and I can tell you the "explosive" type bullets in smaller calibers kill like a bigger conventional bullet. They do a amazing amount of damage to the vitals. Where they don't shine, due to the lack of penetration, is a shot from a poor angle or poor shot placement.

 

[Guy Miner]

While half the shooting world is extolling the virtues of the "Creed" for virtually everything it WASN'T designed for, I'll just stick with the cartridges that offer more horsepower and get the job done with a margin of error built in.

Yes - if you put any decent bullet into the vitals of a game animal a kill is going to follow. But how often do all the elements of a perfect shot present themselves under real life hunting conditions?

I prefer my game to drop quickly to ensure recovery. Marginal cartridges rarely provide the DRT results that many hunters prefer.

Ha, the .30-06 wasn't designed for hunting either... But it's worked out pretty well in that role.

I hear ya Charlie, you're not happy with folks shooting game with cartridges you consider too small. Okay, so, don't hunt with those cartridges. There are a gazillion cartridges out there for us, and I'm pretty much a live and let live kinda guy regarding personal choice.

Regards, Guy

 

[salmonchaser]

Growing up hunting the high desert of Oregon I developed a pretty good sense of what a Mule deer or elk looked like at 400 yards. In the days before lazer range finders, that was a long poke. Still is.
This year I've had my hands on about a dozen elk shot with .25-06, 270, 7mm, 06 & 300 and 338.
Closest was about 100, furthest right at 400.
I tracked six of these critters including one shot straight through the heart with a 7mm Remington.
Five were hit in front of the diaphragm. Slightly quartering caused some issue and the application of my tracking practice.
I've rarely had the opportunity for a perfect broad side shot, the ground is far from being a flat range. I prefer to use enough gun and bullet to transect from the last rib to the far shoulder. That will always work.
Others here this morning have alluded to Aldo Leapold. We have no gallery watching us. We each must evaluate what we are doing when afield. Ethics change, based on societal norms. It may be interesting to read what the hunting/shooting publications are writing 20 years from now.



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[sask boy]

Very interesting as I have never really allowed distance to become a factory on whether I take a shot or not. I have shot both Moose and Elk at around the 500 yard range successfully but have likely taken the majority at the 100 to 200 yard range. I try to learn what the rifle I am carrying is capable of and then I decide if the shot is a ethical or not.
I guess what I am trying to say is hunting is different for every person and as long as the hunter is capable I have no problem either way.
This year I took my cow Moose at 65 yards and my nephew told me that is a hunter's yardage and he stated it was closer to 50 :mrgreen: but those young punks don't know for sure :lol:.
Also I took this Moose in the head and I will never do that again in respect to my native brothers and sisters on this forum.

Blessings,
Dan

 

[SJB358]

What a great topic.. I agree with others, if it is legal, and they are abiding by fair chase, then it's alright in my book. I stepped down this year from the 338 I use alot and used my 7mm MSM for two elk and had two of my quickest elk kills to date. Unlike the TV shows, I have rarely seen cow or bull drop at the shot unless the spine is hit. The 7 MSM did a pure rib shot on a cow and put her flat down, and the spike was shot in the ribs exiting the opposite leg bone.. That elk made it about 35 yards and was stone dead.

I think about taking those longish 400-600 yard shots and to be honest, I don't like the idea of much past 500 to be totally honest. Everyone mentioned how much an animal can move, how different the terrain looks when you try to find them, etc.. In the real world, it takes experience in the field to find them once they move off. Exits aren't guarantees on elk with just about any cartridge I can fire, even with excellent bullets, their bones have chewed up Nosler Partitions and other similar "tough" bullets.

I do like to shoot long, as the confidence makes those less than longer shots feel alot easier. That queasy feeling a hunter gets when he worries if he just tripped the trigger and wounded an animal isn't cool and makes for a sleepless night if you can't track till the morning. I don't wish it on anybody.

69GTO mentioned a 338 makes and leaves a better impact than a small caliber. I agree with that, but I'll add, REAL hunting bullets that expand WIDE and drive deep act like a 338.. Bullet for bullet a 338 will expand wider but I was sorta humbled a bit when I compared a 225 AB from my 338 at 2900 to a 150 grain Bitterroot from my 270 WSM. The 150 BBC expanded wider, retained more weight and hit going about 3150.. You couldn't tell me the 270 was less gun in that case. Bottom line is pick right bullets you know will shoot through those big ball joints like Hodgeman mentioned on moose (elks are TOUGH stuff).. We don't always get a perfect broadside shot.. Even when we think we have that shot, sometimes it just isn't so.

Sorry for the long post, but I am no longer the guy that touts that one cartridge is better than another just cause its bigger, but the bullets its shooting make alot of the performance. I'd almost back away from Ftlb's of energy as well, and rely on impact speed to a certain extent (within reason to BG hunting cartridges) since it takes speed to make GOOD BG bullets expand. Elk don't seem too impressed with energy from what I can tell.

Deer.... Anything can kill most deer... We have shot alot of man sized critters with a 5.56.. Does alright with a decent bullet.

 

[Guy Miner]

Know your rifle & load. Know yourself. Know your game.

Guy

 

[lefty315]

Know your rifle & load. Know yourself. Know your game.

Guy

Seriously Guy, if that's all you have to do we wouldn't have anything to discuss on this forum anymore

 

[Thebear_78]

130 TTSX @ 3000fps from my wife's 270 win. 85-90 yard shot blew thru both ribs and dropped this big old cow like someone jerked the rug out from under it. Hit the ground stone dead and never even twitched.

I don't see how the results would be any different if it had been a 10gr lighter 6.5mm TTSX at a similar speed.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[SJB358]

130 TTSX @ 3000fps from my wife's 270 win. 85-90 yard shot blew thru both ribs and dropped this big old cow like someone jerked the rug out from under it. Hit the ground stone dead and never even twitched.

I don't see how the results would be any different if it had been a 10gr lighter 6.5mm TTSX at a similar speed.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Man, I dig that TB!

I think the spiral is just what you said, if a 270 with a 130 works, why not a 264 with a 120 and then a 257 with a 110, and then the 243 with a 100.. :lol:

I know that is extreme, but it happens in the other direction as well. Bottom line, your wife hammered it with a great bullet with God's chosen caliber and the Riflemans Rifle! Hardly anything could have happened any different! :grin:

 

[c. schutte]

130 TTSX @ 3000fps from my wife's 270 win. 85-90 yard shot blew thru both ribs and dropped this big old cow like someone jerked the rug out from under it. Hit the ground stone dead and never even twitched.

I don't see how the results would be any different if it had been a 10gr lighter 6.5mm TTSX at a similar speed.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Man, I dig that TB!

I think the spiral is just what you said, if a 270 with a 130 works, why not a 264 with a 120 and then a 257 with a 110, and then the 243 with a 100.. :lol:

I know that is extreme, but it happens in the other direction as well. Bottom line, your wife hammered it with a great bullet with God's chosen caliber and the Riflemans Rifle! Hardly anything could have happened any different! :grin:

Yep........................ :lol:

 

[Africa Huntress]

First and Foremost --congratulations to Mrs Thebear-78.

I think God's chosen caliber is different in different parts of the world, as I was told it was the 300 H & H

A serious question however. Why, do you shoot at game at 500 plus yards. Is it because the terrain will not allow you to get closer, you just want to see if you can make the shot, or ?

Second serious question. If your shooting a large bone animal like an Eland and you have access to a medium bore rifle that you shoot well, what would make you want to use a smaller caliber ?

Best Regards

Jamila

 

[super-7]

I can only answer these last questions Jamila from my own experience.
1- sometimes on the farm land I hunt for one reason or another getting closer may not be an option.
I have one piece of land we hunt where we only have permission on one side of a long ridge, the key here is to get in early and wait for deer to cross at feeding time on to property we can hunt. Depending where they come out shots will be 300-450 yrds. Getting closer is problematic.

2- Sometimes I just grab a different rifle out of the safe. I'm a bit superstitious that way, a rifle I shoot well and have many kills with sometimes gets the nod vs a larger caliber rifle that I haven't had the same degree of success with. ( my 300 Bee is cursed)

Again all my hunting is within the game laws in Alberta , and I hunt accordingly.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Thebear_78]

I have only shot two game animals on the far side of 500 yards. I'm not sure that I would again except under perfect conditions.

The first was at 519 yards. It was on an opposing hillside and I was out of cover. I had gotten as close as I could without spooking him and if I had dropped elevation I wouldn't have been able to see him. He was a real brute, I had a rock solid rest, literally a rock, and a vey slight wind at my back. A rifle and load that I had utmost confidence in. I had been shooting out to 500 meters and felt very good about my holdover. First shot punched thru his shoulder and he locked up. Fearing I had missed low I shot again aiming a touch higher and hit it at the top of the shoulder sending him rolling down hill.

Shooting position a large boulder that made a perfect bench

The second was a wounded bull I shot to avoid it getting away at 657 yards. Shot while prone. I would not of taken that shot on an unwounded animal but he had been shot in the guts and once in the rear leg by a hunting partner.

I had shot this bull at just I've 323 yards at the same time. As you can see cover is scarce and they can get quite skittish later in the season. A long shot might be all that you can get.

All three of these shot with my go too 300 RUM 168 TTSX@3340fps.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Africa Huntress]

super-7 thank you sir. Sometimes we forget those type of restrictions if one is not confronted with them. I have not had to live within those type's of restrictions in Africa or Argentina, but I can somewhat relate when hunting in Sweden.

There is an older gentleman we hunt with sometimes who will only hunt if he is wearing his "lucky" socks and hat, so your point about your hunting rifle is understood and again thank you

Thebear-78, understood and thank you. I appreciate your taking the time to explain your reason to me. And BTW--heck of a shot, congratulations

Best Regards

Jamila

 

[Anonymous]

A serious question however. Why, do you shoot at game at 500 plus yards. Is it because the terrain will not allow you to get closer, you just want to see if you can make the shot, or ?

Second serious question. If your shooting a large bone animal like an Eland and you have access to a medium bore rifle that you shoot well, what would make you want to use a smaller caliber ?

I've only taken a single shot at an animal in the 500 yard range- a caribou my partner wounded, missed repeatedly and was outbound. I did manage to knock it over after three rounds from my .270 somewhere about the 550 mark.

I'm firmly in the "use enough gun" category. While I admit newer bullets do punch in excess of their weight class- I still like using bigger if I've got it right up until it gets ludicrous. My partner (different partner) used his .375 on caribou this year. It worked really well. "Too dead" is not nearly the problem "not quite dead enough" presents.