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

[Article 4]

I have enjoyed hunting with both. I understand the abilities of both.

I have enjoyed hunting with both too, killed tons of deer and smaller with smaller bullets. I draw a personal line at anything bigger than deer. IMO and IME Bigger is better for big game.

 

[Grizzle]

And were back to the ignorance Olympics. Gonna be a tight race for gold

 

[atmat]

Small bullets belong on small game.

This is such an ignorant opinion presented as fact.

 

[Article 4]

This is such an ignorant opinion presented as fact.

Opinions are never facts. But I guess you felt you need to point that out.

You just gave your opinion, would that make it ignorant without any facts?

 

[Chris_in_Idaho]

IME Bigger is better for big game.

You mean "IMI", in my ignorance. "IME" would mean in my experience, but you proudly have zero experience with small calibers for big game.

 

[77TMK]

Good God. If you don’t want to contribute anything of value to the thread and only post to tell others you don’t care, then stop posting in the thread. It is not hard.

 

[Article 4]

You mean "IMI", in my ignorance. "IME" would mean in my experience, but you proudly have zero experience with small calibers for big game.

Have a good day

 

[Athens]

I think elk hunting cartridges could start at the 6.5 PRC, 6.5 SAUM, maybe 6.5/284, but I would consider their range limited still on a quartering shot. As huntinfool18 said maybe it should start at 270 cal. Longer ranges, say past 400 yards, I would start at a 6.8 Western, maybe 270 WSM if you are using a bonded or monometal. I like the 6.8 better as it brings larger grain bullets to the table (if you compare the two as they were designed, I am sure some people have fast twist 270 WSM's out there). The good ol' 7RM will stop him in his tracks though. Put a 160 Accubond or Partition moving at 3000fps from the muzzle through his shoulder he will crumble, even at extended ranges.

 

[gabenzeke]

I think elk hunting cartridges could start at the 6.5 PRC, 6.5 SAUM, maybe 6.5/284, but I would consider their range limited still on a quartering shot. As huntinfool18 said maybe it should start at 270 cal. Longer ranges, say past 400 yards, I would start at a 6.8 Western, maybe 270 WSM if you are using a bonded or monometal. I like the 6.8 better as it brings larger grain bullets to the table (if you compare the two as they were designed, I am sure some people have fast twist 270 WSM's out there). The good ol' 7RM will stop him in his tracks though. Put a 160 Accubond or Partition moving at 3000fps from the muzzle through his shoulder he will crumble, even at extended ranges.

So you do or do not have examples of the failures this thread is discussing?

Sent from my Pixel 6 Pro using Tapatalk

 

[atmat]

Opinions are never facts. But I guess you felt you need to point that out.

You just gave your opinion, would that make it ignorant without any facts?

You didn’t state it as an opinion. You stated it as fact.

Honest question: why are you here? It seems you just argue bad points for the sake of arguing.

 

[WTFJohn]

I think elk hunting cartridges could start at the 6.5 PRC, 6.5 SAUM, maybe 6.5/284, but I would consider their range limited still on a quartering shot. As huntinfool18 said maybe it should start at 270 cal. Longer ranges, say past 400 yards, I would start at a 6.8 Western, maybe 270 WSM if you are using a bonded or monometal. I like the 6.8 better as it brings larger grain bullets to the table (if you compare the two as they were designed, I am sure some people have fast twist 270 WSM's out there). The good ol' 7RM will stop him in his tracks though. Put a 160 Accubond or Partition moving at 3000fps from the muzzle through his shoulder he will crumble, even at extended ranges.

I just went and did this for you. 14.5" AR, 5.56 mk262 (77 gr SMK), 110 yds. 14 ga mild steel, 1/8" 4340 chromoly spaced 3 fingers apart, single shot that penetrated both. It is not hard to go try things for yourself to see if what you believe is backed up by reality. There is nothing in the front half of a big game animal that is tougher than steel. We should have a few elk down in the next week or so, I will shoot this again with a couple of scapulas behind it. I picked a .224 to give all the advantage possible to your argument, happy to shoot steel with a 6.5 if you feel results will be different. The elk will all be killed with a 6.5.

 

[Article 4]

You didn’t state it as an opinion. You stated it as fact.

Honest question: why are you here? It seems you just argue bad points for the sake of arguing.

Good question - I do have different opinions and many of them are very valid. Many of you disagree, there are many who agree. Thought that was the purpose of discussions.

My issue comes when someone goes out their way to call me ignorant for having an opinion on a public forum. Wouldn't you argue, as you are now, if someone called you ignorant?

I wont get personal anymore - but I will continue to share my opinion, my experiences and what I believe are facts - whether the mainstream thinks they are ok with them or not, isn't the concern.

 

[2001precision]

Yep. The same people come on every thread and defend their little bullets like they’re defending their children. It’s strange. I’m going to build a 25prc to shoot the new a tips, should be a sweet back country setup for my daughter, but I don’t for a second believe it’ll kill like my 300nmi shooting 245 bergers.

100% agree. I think when you go to a bigger caliber, shooting a heavier bullet, with the same velocity, I believe they cause more damage and “kill better”. I can’t back it up by science, other than ft lbs of energy, BC, or velocity…. But in my experience (looking at terminal performance on game), a .338 Lapua Improved launching 300 grainers at 2950, is going to cause a lot more damage than a 6 creed, launching 108 ELD-M’s at 2950. This is assuming similar bullet construction of course.

 

[Article 4]

You didn’t state it as an opinion. You stated it as fact.

Honest question: why are you here? It seems you just argue bad points for the sake of arguing.

Why are you here?

 

[Article 4]

100% agree. I think when you go to a bigger caliber, shooting a heavier bullet, with the same velocity, I believe they cause more damage and “kill better”. I can’t back it up by science, other than ft lbs of energy, BC, or velocity…. But in my experience (looking at terminal performance on game), a .338 Lapua Improved launching 300 grainers at 2950, is going to cause a lot more damage than a 6 creed, launching 108 ELD-M’s at 2950. This is assuming similar bullet construction of course.

No surprise, agree completely. Killing better is a relative term...a dead critter is a dead critter...prefer not to find out if a smaller bullet will kill or fail on larger game. Shoot tons of smaller sized big game (Coues, antelope, deer sized) with 115s though 140s - but those bullets don't fit my personal description of small bullets on larger game. All things the same, bigger is better.

 

[WTFJohn]

100% agree. I think when you go to a bigger caliber, shooting a heavier bullet, with the same velocity, I believe they cause more damage and “kill better”. I can’t back it up by science, other than ft lbs of energy, BC, or velocity…. But in my experience (looking at terminal performance on game), a .338 Lapua Improved launching 300 grainers at 2950, is going to cause a lot more damage than a 6 creed, launching 108 ELD-M’s at 2950. This is assuming similar bullet construction of course.

A 480 gr arrow traveling at 300 fps has under a hundred ft lbs of energy as it leaves the bow, I guess they won't kill elk.

Quit shitting this thread up with large caliber nonsense. Post some bullet failures. The easiest way to shut people up would be to have a picture-filled thread with some info on the animal, shot, etc... showing that smaller caliber bullets fail more often in big game than larger caliber bullets. That's all this thread was about.

 

[KHntr]

Good question - I do have different opinions and many of them are very valid. Many of you disagree, there are many who agree. Thought that was the purpose of discussions.

My issue comes when someone goes out their way to call me ignorant for having an opinion on a public forum. Wouldn't you argue, as you are now, if someone called you ignorant?

I wont get personal anymore - but I will continue to share my opinion, my experiences and what I believe are facts - whether the mainstream thinks they are ok with them or not, isn't the concern.

I think the main difference between your opinion and any of us that are using small cartridges (and I might be wrong here but I don’t think so) is that all of us small cartridge guys started out with bigger cartridges. And then a lot of guys (like myself) went to even BIGGER cartridges before moving down in size based on seeing the similarities and differences shown on animals.

Your opinion, as you have stated, is based on simply using bigger stuff and not wanting to change.
So yes, your opinion has less validity to those of us that have done both.

 

[Ucsdryder]

A 480 gr arrow traveling at 300 fps has under a hundred ft lbs of energy as it leaves the bow, I guess they won't kill elk.

Quit shitting this thread up with large caliber nonsense. Post some bullet failures. The easiest way to shut people up would be to have a picture-filled thread with some info on the animal, shot, etc... showing that smaller caliber bullets fail more often in big game than larger caliber bullets. That's all this thread was about.

Bullets and broadheads kill differently. Should we start comparing bullets and cars?

 

[Article 4]

I think the main difference between your opinion and any of us that are using small cartridges (and I might be wrong here but I don’t think so) is that all of us small cartridge guys started out with bigger cartridges. And then a lot of guys (like myself) went to even BIGGER cartridges before moving down in size based on seeing the similarities and differences shown on animals.

Your opinion, as you have stated, is based on simply using bigger stuff and not wanting to change.
So yes, your opinion has less validity to those of us that have done both.

Maybe you are right, maybe not, but some pretty broad assumptions when you say "all of us"

I like small bullets - for certain big game animals and have made it clear that I shoot a ton of them - deer sized and smaller. I have witnessed small bullet failure on game but have not had one fail myself. My thing is if I can gun up and create more of everything, why not.

Help me understand why preferring bigger is so hard to accept?

Easy to post pics of smaller bullets working on game, they are dead. The better question to me is admitting one failed and the animal got away - pretty tough to show a pic of that and I rarely see folks proudly sharing that point.

 

[2001precision]

A 480 gr arrow traveling at 300 fps has under a hundred ft lbs of energy as it leaves the bow, I guess they won't kill elk.

Quit shitting this thread up with large caliber nonsense. Post some bullet failures. The easiest way to shut people up would be to have a picture-filled thread with some info on the animal, shot, etc... showing that smaller caliber bullets fail more often in big game than larger caliber bullets. That's all this thread was about.

Hey buddy, I read the first 10 pages with about 2 real pics of bullet failures. If that. We’re on page 53 or 54 now. You’d better have posted a bullet failure, with pictures, or you’d better get off the thread yourself. You know what’s funny? I just got off a thread of cartridge selection in Alaska, and every single guide up there won’t let you shoot anything that’s not significant. 338 minimum usually. I didn’t find any 22 cal or 6.5 Creedmoor lovers over there… funny. By the way, I simply dropped my opinion. Take your bow kills to another thread.