Deep (caliber choice) thoughts from a shallow mind

[TaperPin]

I am not sure what you are arguing for?

Are you arguing that it is better to see and have less information through the scope during and after a shot, or more information through the scope during and after a shot?

I’m saying the argument to use tiny calibers to be able to see the shot only goes so far.

 

[Formidilosus]

I’m saying the argument to use tiny calibers to be able to see the shot only goes so far.

You didn’t answer the question I asked- is it better to see more information or less information during and after the shot?

And now, being that you brought it up- what is a “tiny” caliber and how far does it go? And what is your belief/response based on?

 

[Lawnboi]

Maybe I am doing this all bass ackwards, but what I do is look at wind drift for 3-4mph. I figure I can get within 4mph in any wind I would consider shooting in, 3mph most of the time. I used to spray commercial ag fields and got verry comfortable gauging wind below 8-10mph. Not the same as adding in canyons, thermals, etc I know, but a lot of practice over 20,000 acres per year.

I look at those wind drift numbers, and figure that's my "uncertainty" in my cone of fire location on the animal. I start getting above 6-7" and that gets uncomfortable (for me) fast.

Don't have a mil scope (YET!) but the wind bracketing/gun number is one of the strongest reasons for my next scope being in mils.

I guess a better way of saying is I'm not worried about the math equation, I'm worried about using the wrong value for the primary variable.

I won’t say a better wind number bullet or gun isn’t better all around, but other factors are more important, especially dependent on range when gun numbers are within a few mph.

There are more important factors imo till the point that a mile per hour of wind equals a tenth of a mil. Such as recoil and ability to spot your shot (not just a dust cloud)

For me another 30 cal magnum would only make sense in a 14-16lb package, designed for only prone shooting at ranges I can actually see a difference in the increase in BC. But I’m not there yet.

 

[TaperPin]

You didn’t answer the question I asked- is it better to see more information or less information during and after the shot?

And now, being that you brought it up- what is a “tiny” caliber and how far does it go? And what is your belief/response based on?

You do what works for you. I’ve already said what I think about all of it.

 

[Formidilosus]

You do what works for you. I’ve already said what I think about all of it.

You actually haven’t provided any info at all.

You can’t answer the questions I asked because if you answer truthfully, then your argument fails immediately. Stating that seeing less information is better, is absurd at every level- so that won’t work either. You can’t state what “tiny” calibers are, nor “how far do they go” based on your experience with them, because you lack experience with the calibers and projectiles being used and spoken about here.

 

[TaperPin]

If that’s what you want to believe, then by all means go for it. I’ve said it before, your 223 combo has produced some impressive results, but I do prefer more gun. I’ve selected hardware carefully, and have shot regularly, and hunt conservatively so if one in thirty first shots is a miss I’m ok with that - I may very well die of old age before getting the next 30. A simple 9-1/4” paper dinner plate or 10” gong is how my max range is determined from different positions - if I can’t hit it first shot that’s too far for me.

As I said before, a complete miss means something is drastically wrong - the last time it happened I threw in the towel and returned to the jeep for a backup rifle, but it was more likely to be a bad rangefinder reading so another shot wouldn’t have been any better. The time before that I knew it was bad shot from a rushed trigger pull, in a marginal position and the second shot put him down. The time before that was a pistol shot prior to the days of inexpensive rangefinders and I was so low there was no reason to go full Elmer Keith and keep shooting at rifle range. The time before that was a new to me saddle ring 30-30 sighted in on the way to hunt does and to be honest the group of does felt so sorry for me that one walked within 50 yards, put its tongue out, flipped me off, called me names and trotted off to tell her friends. I was too young to figure out why it shot so bad, but it had a bulged barrel, or something really wrong - dinner plates were quite safe at 100 yards.

Boys keep a guy young - I’m working to try and compete with a nephew that likes to ring plates way out there and I’ll be right with you guys dialing that scope like an old telephone and looking for missed shots with a scope the size of a wiener dog.

 

[Quicksilver]

If that’s what you want to believe, then by all means go for it. I’ve said it before, your 223 combo has produced some impressive results, but I do prefer more gun. I’ve selected hardware carefully, and have shot regularly, and hunt conservatively so if one in thirty first shots is a miss I’m ok with that - I may very well die of old age before getting the next 30. A simple 9-1/4” paper dinner plate or 10” gong is how my max range is determined from different positions - if I can’t hit it first shot that’s too far for me.

As I said before, a complete miss means something is drastically wrong - the last time it happened I threw in the towel and returned to the jeep for a backup rifle, but it was more likely to be a bad rangefinder reading so another shot wouldn’t have been any better. The time before that I knew it was bad shot from a rushed trigger pull, in a marginal position and the second shot put him down. The time before that was a pistol shot prior to the days of inexpensive rangefinders and I was so low there was no reason to go full Elmer Keith and keep shooting at rifle range. The time before that was a new to me saddle ring 30-30 sighted in on the way to hunt does and to be honest the group of does felt so sorry for me that one walked within 50 yards, put its tongue out, flipped me off, called me names and trotted off to tell her friends. I was too young to figure out why it shot so bad, but it had a bulged barrel, or something really wrong - dinner plates were quite safe at 100 yards.

Boys keep a guy young - I’m working to try and compete with a nephew that likes to ring plates way out there and I’ll be right with you guys dialing that scope like an old telephone and looking for missed shots with a scope the size of a wiener dog.

I think I know what you’re saying, and I think you may have it wrong. What these guys are gaining with scopes the size of wiener dogs is top tier glass…that’s about it. A more robust scope system as well that doesn’t lose zero and tracks properly, but mainly glass. Because of this alpha glass you can see a lot more detail (like impacts…or missed ones). Now the high magnification numbers are excellent for dialing in a load and target shooting, practicing punching steel and all that good stuff. In the field it does no benefit during the shot. 12x-15x is where I find my scope most the time for shots in the 600-700yd range and that’s only if I’m prone. Closer in and awkward positions 8x-10x and I’ve shot 2 animals now at 4.5x. All those ranges I watched my impacts happen. Even as close as 60yds freehand with a 7 saum.

The argument being made is a lighter recoiling caliber makes it easier to spot your shots, and if you so desired to use more magnification it would allow you to do so while still seeing your impact. Truth is most people can’t manage recoil on any magnum properly, so smaller calibers get real a popular once they figure out it’s a better setup for them.

 

[Billy Goat]

The point of spotting impacts isn't about misses in the sense of dirt clouds, it's knowing if it hit where you were holding, or somewhere else. Like liver instead of tucked behind the shoulder. Or the leg.




It's surprising how often people don't know where the animal was hit, I'm guilty of it a lot, but do my best to try to know what happened. I can promise, with more recoil, more muzzle blast, it's harder to know.

I keep practicing to be a better shooter, which is better form, better wind calls, knowing more of what happened and why after the trigger broke.

 

[hereinaz]

Being able to see misses and hits are for all field shooting. It’s vastly more important for living things than for targets.

Seeing the shot and managing recoil are the two highest priorities for me. I like the 6mm for both of those. I have 6 creed and 6 XC, shooting the 105-115 class is great. I also built a 6 bra to shoot the 95 VLD in a smaller, lighter rifle.

Like OP, I wanted just a little more than the 6 mm. I want to have more confidence from the cartridge over wind. I came from a 7 mag shooting the 180 VLD at 3050+ fps and wanted similar ballistics but less recoil.

On those two principles I was satisfied with the 257 cal 133 grain Berger at 3000+ fps in a 25 SST. It’s just barely bigger than the 6mm. And, going to a 6.5 wasn’t enough to justify two rifles, IMO. I kept the 7mm and will take it out depending on the situation.

But, my precision with the 25 and spotting shots gives me more overall confidence over the 7mm, cause it is so much more forgiving if my position isn’t perfect. Thinking in mils, I can shoot smaller groups at distance consistently with the 25, which makes up for the little difference in wind drift with my 7mm.

The 133 is a great bullet with high BC and velocity with low recoil and small powder load. Those 18 extra grains over the 115 grain 6mm bring a lot of advantages with only a little difference in shootsbility next to a 6mm. But, going up to the same class in 6.5 like the 150ish bullets brings more recoil than benefit in ballistics.

Besides BC and velocity, bullet weight helps with drift. In a suppressed light rifle I think there is a sweet spot for the 25 short mag for guys who think like me and want to minimize the negative effect of wind error.

 

[Terry300]

I'd say stick with your. 300 and 215's..