.223, 6mm, and 6.5 failures on big game

[FredH]

Nice! Do you have a thread going where you will track this? Would love to follow along.

The barrel, gas block , bolt, gas tube are in the mail. Waiting impatiently.

 

[Jake Larsen]

Well I don't shoot past the point where the wind will move my bullet more than 1 inch per MPH or beyond the point my bullet is going less than 2000 fps. What you are saying is you are willing to take shots beyond your personal capabilities. If you don't know within 6 inches of where your bullet will land you should not take the shot. And yes I have shot many rounds at targets past 600 yards. I treat game animals with more respect than paper or steel. You should also.

You’re going to tell me you’ve never missed? Or didn’t hit exactly where you wanted to? Because if so, then you broke your own code of ethics: shooting “beyond your capabilities”

My personal ethics are as follows: I will only shoot if/when I do so believing the shot is lethal and the animal will die. There is no fixed numbers I put on that, except adequate impact velocity for my bullet to upset. All depends on conditions, wind, how stable I can get, how the animal is behaving, ect. But I’m not perfect. Therefore, I want to spot my impact.

You know what has allowed me to be significantly more confident/lethal in field conditions in real life conditions on big game? Shooting low recoiling cartridges. More practice, less flinching, more understanding of how the wind affects bullet trajectory, ect.

If you’re seriously arguing that spotting impacts doesn’t matter, we’re just going to have to agree to disagree


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[FredH]

Ok, Im not saying there is anything wrong with a 308. My main elk rifle over the last couple years has been a 300 ultra at least until my 257 gets rebareled. I love that rifle and have taken alot of elk with it but I dont for 1 second feel that the recoil from it is an absolute disadvantage over the 25cal. You asked a question and I gave you a factual response, you want to argue against facts with subjective emotions and preferences. In the future, dont ask a question if you arent prepared to get a truthful answer back

A 300 Ultramag does put out significant recoil. In your case the question becomes why if you have used that rifle would you consider the recoil of a 308 any issue at all. I asked a question and you have failed to come up with a quantifiable reason the recoil from a 308 is a serious negative. I made no comment regarding subjective emotion or preferences. You answered with subjective emotion and preference.

 

[FredH]

You’re going to tell me you’ve never missed? Or didn’t hit exactly where you wanted to? Because if so, then you broke your own code of ethics: shooting “beyond your capabilities”

My personal ethics are as follows: I will only shoot if/when I do so believing the shot is lethal and the animal will die. There is no fixed numbers I put on that. All depends on conditions, wind, how stable I can get, how the animal is behaving, ect. But I’m not perfect. Therefore, I want to spot my impact.

You know what has allowed me to be significantly more confident/lethal in field conditions in real life conditions on big game? Shooting low recoiling cartridges. More practice, less flinching, more understanding of how the wind affects bullet trajectory, ect.

If you’re seriously arguing that spotting impacts doesn’t matter, we’re just going to have to agree to disagree


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

What you are saying is spotting impacts is important enough in your shooting that recovery of the game animal shot at could depend on it. Spotting impacts even with a light recoiling rifle is not 100 percent possible with every shot. If spotting impacts was so important to me in that respect I would reassess my shooting abilities.

 

[bmart2622]

A 300 Ultramag does put out significant recoil. In your case the question becomes why if you have used that rifle would you consider the recoil of a 308 any issue at all. I asked a question and you have failed to come up with a quantifiable reason the recoil from a 308 is a serious negative. I made no comment regarding subjective emotion or preferences. You answered with subjective emotion and preference.

I'll try and make this more clear so you understand!!! Ive never said that 308 recoil is an issue, what I have said is that a 308 has more recoil than a 223, which is a fact and its also a fact that you can shoot lower recoiling rifles more accurately. Ive answered multiple times but you dont seem to understand or agree with the answer...big difference from me not answering to your lack of understanding

 

[Firestone]

If you’re seriously arguing that spotting impacts doesn’t matter, we’re just going to have to agree to disagree


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

if spotting shots is big for you, you may want to just stay with 6mm. I know for me it's harder spotting impacts with 22cals compared to 6mms.

 

[Jake Larsen]

if spotting shots is big for you, you may want to just stay with 6mm. I know for me it's harder spotting impacts with 22cals compared to 6mms.

What cartridges in what base rifle weights/configurations are you comparing?

Asking because the ft lbs of recoil difference between say the 22Creed vs 6Creed would almost certainly mean a 22 would be easier to spot impacts, all things being equal.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Firestone]

True. But the smaller bullets typically leave smaller splashes on whatever they hit. So if you are already seeing every impact with a 6 creed, the 22 creed may make it tougher. I think that's why majority of the prs guys shoot 6mm or larger.

 

[eoperator]

When I pull the trigger, whether I see the bullet impact or not is immaterial because I know where it went.

If you are good enough to know where your bullet hits without seeing it you should not be "slumming it " with schlub's like me.

 

[deer_hunter132]

This is the issue i ran into and i didnt expect that. Its not giving me the warm and fuzzies.
No entrance or exit blood.

 

[HandgunHTR]

So there are no bullet failures? It is either poor manufacturing, bad shot, or the wrong bullet was used? Is this just your opinion or is there data to support this?

I know this wasn't directed at me, but I am going to try to sum it up a bit. I believe he was saying that "bullet failure", while an objective term, is based solely on each individuals criteria, therefore when combined into a population of more than one, there are too many variables to consider. In the case of this particular thread, if we combined all of the criteria that constitutes bullet failure that has been listed (no exit, over expansion, under expansion, no fragmenting, too much fragmenting, exiting the animal, etc) we end up in a situation where every bullet made fails regularly. Which then leads to the removal of variables to "get better results" and we end up in the "there is no bullet failure" area.

 

[JGRaider]

IMO, a bullet "failure" occurs when a particular bullet doesn't perform they way it was designed to perform whether it kills something or not.

 

[HandgunHTR]

Yes the animal gets a vote. If you are shooting at an animal far enough away that time of flight is long enough for the animal to move enough to take the impact out of the vital zone you are shooting at than you are shooting too far. One should only take shots at game animals where the variables under your control are the ones that count.

What shots exactly? Hard quartering shots at close range. The kind you often get when hunting in thick brush.

It's not just time of flight.

I will use the example you posted because I hunt in thick bush often as well. In my scenario, you are still hunting through an area that was clear cut about 10 years ago. It has patches of very thick cover with well worn trails and open areas. Great place for deer. It has recently rained or snowed, so you can move very quietly. You are hunting into the wind. As you work your way down a trail, you come around a small bend, and 50 yards away there is a buck standing there, hard quartering to. You see each other at the same time. You freeze. He continues to stare at you. After about 30 seconds a doe walks by on a path about 40 yards away. The buck turns his attention to her, giving you the opportunity to slowly take a knee and bring your gun up. He starts following the doe, and stops in a little window at about 45 yards. Do you take the shot? If you do, you know with absolute certainty that he isn't going to take a step as you break the shot?

I used that scenario because it is one that I was in myself a few years back in GA. I was using a 7-08. Do you want to know where I hit the deer?

As to the shots that you wouldn't take with a .22 caliber cartridge. There are many examples of animals being killed effectively with those types of shots. In my experience, heavy slow bullets in small chamberings are about the best for those types of shots.

 

[deerhunter628]

IMO, a bullet "failure" occurs when a particular bullet doesn't perform they way it was designed to perform whether it kills something or not.

So like somebody posted earlier most of the bullets that are being discussed can not fail? Most of the bullets being discussed are match bullets which the manufacturers say are not designed to be hunted with.

 

[deerhunter628]

I know this wasn't directed at me, but I am going to try to sum it up a bit. I believe he was saying that "bullet failure", while an objective term, is based solely on each individuals criteria, therefore when combined into a population of more than one, there are too many variables to consider. In the case of this particular thread, if we combined all of the criteria that constitutes bullet failure that has been listed (no exit, over expansion, under expansion, no fragmenting, too much fragmenting, exiting the animal, etc) we end up in a situation where every bullet made fails regularly. Which then leads to the removal of variables to "get better results" and we end up in the "there is no bullet failure" area.

So you are saying that since there are too many variables to define bullet failure we should just eliminate all the variables and say bullets do not fail?