Form struck someone’s nerve

[JohnJohnson]

He does mention a guy in New Zealand who kills hundreds of animals a year and has a bunch of data against the effectiveness of small calibers. Still, JVB does not provide any specific detail from him other than it's dangerous to use small calibers on big game.

For people wondering who he's talking about, it's Nathan Foster. Foster's wound knowledgebase is scant/non-existent when it comes to .223, 6mm, 6.5mm heavy for caliber match bullets used on the sort of large game JVB is talking about. His A-Max stuff is the closest you'll get to ELD-M results for his "research" and he doesn't shoot anything above about 150 pounds with them it seems.

Foster also still relies on energy and prioritizes different things about bullet performance than some here.

6.5mm - Hornady A-Max

6.5 140 grain A-MAX wounding

www.ballisticstudies.com

 

[mtnbound]

For people wondering who he's talking about, it's Nathan Foster. Foster's wound knowledgebase is scant/non-existent when it comes to .223, 6mm, 6.5mm heavy for caliber match bullets used on the sort of large game JVB is talking about. His A-Max stuff is the closest you'll get to ELD-M results for his "research" and he doesn't shoot anything above about 150 pounds with them it seems.

Foster also still relies on energy and prioritizes different things about bullet performance than some here.

6.5mm - Hornady A-Max

6.5 140 grain A-MAX wounding

www.ballisticstudies.com

Thanks for the info.

 

[mxgsfmdpx]

Hey I run a camo sombrero when I’m archery hunting and glassing! It’s spectacular when it’s 100 degrees out!

Big straw sun hats are even more spectacular when it’s 120 out here in AZ

 

[UngulateGuardian797]

Big straw sun hats are even more spectacular when it’s 120 out here in AZ

I totally get that.

 

[Gstew1930]

The funniest thing about the whole small caliber debate is i believe most of us used to be on the other side of the spectrum. i for sure was a big magnum guy. i just see zero benefit from using them anymore. I've had way less bullshit since i started using my pissant rifles

 

[Ozarkansas]

The funniest thing about the whole small caliber debate is i believe most of us used to be on the other side of the spectrum. i for sure was a big magnum guy. i just see zero benefit from using them anymore. I've had way less bullshit since i started using my pissant rifles

That doesn’t surprise me at all. The guys who chased the trend of super magnums are overgunned and realizing it. They also have the most to gain by buying a totally new gun in a “pipsqueak” caliber.

Meanwhile the guys who hunted with 308s, .270s, and 7mm-08s (I’d argue 6.5s too but it seems like they fall into the “small caliber” grouping sometimes) aren’t so overburdened by recoil that they need a smaller caliber. They’d probably still shoot a 22 ARC more accurately, but not by enough of a margin to really solve anything.

 

[mlevimadden]

The funniest thing about the whole small caliber debate is i believe most of us used to be on the other side of the spectrum. i for sure was a big magnum guy. i just see zero benefit from using them anymore. I've had way less bullshit since i started using my pissant rifles

Agreed, I don’t know why there is so much hate on the people using small calibers at the current point in time when the majority of us have hunted with the big magnums. My main hunting rifles over the last 20 years were used in the following order.

243 win
270 win
300 WM
270 win
6.5 PRC
6 creed

I had to buy that 300 WM when I moved out west for the longer shots on those bulletproof elk. I practiced less, missed more, and was the worst shooter at that point of my hunting career. I have way less rodeos and more confidence in my shooting skills today than I did 5 years ago.

 

[KHntr]

I dunno about this part… The guys that are running 308/270/708 etc are likely still using a conventional controlled expansion hunting bullet simply by virtue of what is available on the LGS shelf. Not that there is anything wrong with that, I just personally believe that in the event of a fringe hit a softer bullet would result in less losses.
For me, it was a really difficult concept to accept that a “match bullet” is a faster more effective killer than a harder “hunting bullet”, after decades of killing stuff with various mono’s quite effectively. It’s a major mental shift that a person has to be willing to accept. No matter WHAT the scenario is, that isn’t an easy leap to make. Less so if you are taking a leap away from something that has worked for you and you get limited opportunities to try it and have to wait for a year if it doesn’t work….

That doesn’t surprise me at all. The guys who chased the trend of super magnums are overgunned and realizing it. They also have the most to gain by buying a totally new gun in a “pipsqueak” caliber.

Meanwhile the guys who hunted with 308s, .270s, and 7mm-08s (I’d argue 6.5s too but it seems like they fall into the “small caliber” grouping sometimes) aren’t so overburdened by recoil that they need a smaller caliber. They’d probably still shoot a 22 ARC more accurately, but not by enough of a margin to really solve anything.

The funniest thing about the whole small caliber debate is i believe most of us used to be on the other side of the spectrum. i for sure was a big magnum guy. i just see zero benefit from using them anymore. I've had way less bullshit since i started using my pissant rifles

I’d agree with that. I used to Ultra a lot of stuff, from coyotes to grizzlies. For me it wasn’t recoil that was the issue (since I shoot an 8 lb unbraked 300 Ultra with 200’s at LEAST as good as an Olympic grade Feinwerkbau air rifle, if not better…..) but components. When it was getting harder to find primers and powder and I had to start thinking about if I could afford to fire a shot at something and still have enough to get through the season I started using smaller cartridges to stretch out my powder reserves.

 

[Ozarkansas]

The guys that are running 308/270/708 etc are likely still using a conventional controlled expansion hunting bullet simply by virtue of what is available on the LGS shelf.

Idk if that’s true, I know guys who handload for those calibers and they’re still picking modern, high BC bullets. But you’re right that a lot of guys- including magnum shooters- are just buying what’s on the shelf at the store.

But my point is moreso that “intermediate calibers” (let’s say 6.5s up to non-magnum 30s) kill fine, even with traditional hunting bullets, and also don’t generate tons of recoil. There’s not as large of an incentive for guys shooting those guns to drop in caliber compared to guys shooting something like a 338 RUM.

 

[pods8 (Rugged Stitching)]

I do not blindly follow anyone; I don’t care what anyone shoots. I keep an open mind and test things for myself, so during a long drive, I listened to JVB’s podcast about small calibers.

Highlights that I got from it:

• He states that small-caliber guys are not being truthful about their results. Calling folks liars with zero proof to validate the claim, classy.
• Due to testosterone increases during the rut, bull elk gain large amounts of muscle, and their skin thickens, which implies that small calibers won't be able to penetrate enough to kill a bull elk effectively. Has ignored the user generated data proving otherwise and provided nothing of greater substance to validate his claim.
• Small-caliber bullets are not effective for strong quartering shots. Not everyone is unethical and takes ass shots, cause that is really what we're talking about right?
• A small-caliber bullet won’t penetrate enough if you have to shoot through the Paunch to get to the vitals. See above about unethical ass shots.
• When faced with a once-in-a-lifetime animal, he encourages taking any shot that’s available, and a large-caliber bullet will make up for a less-than-perfect shot. AND THERE IT IS, yep throw ethics out the window when its a trophy (anyone surprised he's related to the guy that doesn't range a deer someone else has shot and shoots it in the leg to claim it?).
• Elk and Moose shoulder blades are significantly bigger than Deer, but he is referring to the Length of the shoulder blade. He does not reference the thickness of the shoulder blade at all. I don't think anyone would disagree they are a larger area (and minimally thicker) but it doesn't stop correctly chosen bullets).
• States that if small-caliber hunters believed in their choice, they would only shoot the animal once. Ethical folks of any caliber will put additional shots into alive animals to end it quicker and it happens ALOT with larger cartridges and would be laughable to suggest otherwise.
• States small-caliber hunters need to do Journalistically Forensic Peer-reviewed necropsies to validate their data. Why? They aren't forcing anyone to shoot small caliber and only sharing their data, if someone thinks they are lying why not prove it with the above versus being a clown and just calling folks liars?
• Several stories about large caliber bullets failing to penetrate entirely through animals. Does talk about one animal shot with a 223 in the brisket that failed to penetrate the thoracic cavity. Bullets matter not just the cartridge, no one has ever suggested using any old 223 bullet that I'm aware of.
• States small-caliber hunters would choose a different caliber if faced with a once-in-a-lifetime or dangerous game animal. He sure seems to think alot of himself to claim to know what everyone else would do.
• Agrees less recoil is beneficial. Amazing he could acknowledge that at least, there is hope.
• He does mention a guy in New Zealand who kills hundreds of animals a year and has a bunch of data against the effectiveness of small calibers. Still, JVB does not provide any specific detail from him other than it's dangerous to use small calibers on big game. Doesn't sound like the dude has data from what is being suggested, again bullets matter.
• JVB is entitled to his opinion and feelings but provides no data to validate that small calibers are ineffective for big game. The lack of supported data validates to me that this is all about getting views on social media. He's a clown.

 

[pods8 (Rugged Stitching)]

I dunno about this part… The guys that are running 308/270/708 etc are likely still using a conventional controlled expansion hunting bullet simply by virtue of what is available on the LGS shelf. Not that there is anything wrong with that, I just personally believe that in the event of a fringe hit a softer bullet would result in less losses.
For me, it was a really difficult concept to accept that a “match bullet” is a faster more effective killer than a harder “hunting bullet”, after decades of killing stuff with various mono’s quite effectively. It’s a major mental shift that a person has to be willing to accept. No matter WHAT the scenario is, that isn’t an easy leap to make. Less so if you are taking a leap away from something that has worked for you and you get limited opportunities to try it and have to wait for a year if it doesn’t work….

I don't think its hard at all to be objective about it. I hunt monos and still do and can easily see how a bullet that upsets notably after an inch or so and carries that upset forward for plenty of distance in regards to an animal's size will destroy tissue and kill it. Being I think its unethical to take an ass shot on anything but an already wounded animal, regardless of the "trophy", I do not see how anyone with some critical thinking skills would say the wound channel of the specific bullets being discussed wouldn't lethally damage tissue resulting in a generally quick death. It seems the ass shot is what some folks are hanging their oversized hat on while comically pretending to be an ethical hunter.

 

[ElPollo]

So I think calling someone a clown because they believe the dogma that has been spread for decades isn’t all that helpful. The best way to communicate with someone who has different views is to ask them questions about those views that make them evaluate and defend their views. Not everyone will put 2 & 2 together, but it’s much more likely to make a difference than just telling someone they are wrong and calling them names. I know it’s not the preferred option in the social media world today, but everyone who is unhappy with JVB’s stance could go post polite questions on his podcast and see what happens.

 

[pods8 (Rugged Stitching)]

So I think calling someone a clown because they believe the dogma that has been spread for decades isn’t all that helpful. The best way to communicate with someone who has different views is to ask them questions about those views that make them evaluate and defend their views. Not everyone will put 2 & 2 together, but it’s much more likely to make a difference than just telling someone they are wrong and calling them names. I know it’s not the preferred option in the social media world today, but everyone who is unhappy with JVB’s stance could go post polite questions on his podcast and see what happens.

At the onset of things I do not disagree. This person has already shown a closed mind and his entire persona is clownish (fake name for attention, the look and voice cadence he has adopted I find highly suspect was the way he always dressed/talked) so I'm calling him a clown. I haven't even listened to these podcasts because I've heard the guy before an the voice/cadence is utterly annoying but I figured he was a level headed guy. The reports here have shown he is not such a guy, at the moment anyways. And I'm not even a small caliber guy to get butt hurt about anything. I just find the behavior currently being reported as annoying and clownish.

 

[ElPollo]

At the onset of things I do not disagree. This person has already shown a closed mind and his entire persona is clownish (fake name for attention, the look and voice cadence he has adopted I find highly suspect was the way he always dressed/talked) so I'm calling him a clown. I haven't even listened to these podcasts because I've heard the guy before an the voice/cadence is utterly annoying but I figured he was a level headed guy. The reports here have shown he is not such a guy, at the moment anyways. And I'm not even a small caliber guy to get butt hurt about anything. I just find the behavior currently being reported as annoying and clownish.

A former coworker once told me that it wasn’t worth disabusing stupid people of bad ideas and that doing so in public just makes you look like an asshole. I’ve always tried to take that to heart… And I am not in anyway inferring that you are an asshole for your opinions. They are totally valid, but they aren’t going to change JVB and may actually make things worse by getting him more clicks. That’s another big downside of the modern social media world. It’s now a valid career to be a shit-stirrer and a crap talker.

 

[KHntr]

Idk if that’s true, I know guys who handload for those calibers and they’re still picking modern, high BC bullets. But you’re right that a lot of guys- including magnum shooters- are just buying what’s on the shelf at the store.

But my point is moreso that “intermediate calibers” (let’s say 6.5s up to non-magnum 30s) kill fine, even with traditional hunting bullets, and also don’t generate tons of recoil. There’s not as large of an incentive for guys shooting those guns to drop in caliber compared to guys shooting something like a 338 RUM.

I don’t disagree with you. Valid points for sure.

 

[Lawnboi]

The whole argument is not about calibers at all and is really a good example of differing personalities.

Some people think critically of things even if it works.

Some people see something work and think that’s now the only way.

 

[Bluefish]

The smaller caliber match bullet is disruptive technology. Until those bullets existed, small calibers were limited in range and ability to take big game with the bullets that existed. This is a key part of the theory of small calibers for taking big game. You can’t just go grab any 223 or 6 mm bullet and have it work. This also makes it hard to write a regulation as most hunters are not that into the details. They just ask the guy at the gun shop or buy what’s on the shelf. they do not get the nuances that you need To run specific bullets.

As far as big guns getting the job done, yep they do. Can go in to any gun shop, buy a rifle with cheap ammo and it will do the job. Is it the best tool for the job, data suggests it isn’t. The problem I found was there are very few places to get actual tested results. It’s mostly fudd lore. Also most don’t care enough to get read the details. I for one am not going to read the 223 and 6mm threads. But I am also able to understand the concept and look at why it works from a physical perspective. It makes sense and aligns with what I have witnessed.

In the end, you can’t only lead the horse to water.

 

[ElPollo]

The smaller caliber match bullet is disruptive technology. Until those bullets existed, small calibers were limited in range and ability to take big game with the bullets that existed. This is a key part of the theory of small calibers for taking big game. You can’t just go grab any 223 or 6 mm bullet and have it work. This also makes it hard to write a regulation as most hunters are not that into the details. They just ask the guy at the gun shop or buy what’s on the shelf. they do not get the nuances that you need To run specific bullets.

As far as big guns getting the job done, yep they do. Can go in to any gun shop, buy a rifle with cheap ammo and it will do the job. Is it the best tool for the job, data suggests it isn’t. The problem I found was there are very few places to get actual tested results. It’s mostly fudd lore. Also most don’t care enough to get read the details. I for one am not going to read the 223 and 6mm threads. But I am also able to understand the concept and look at why it works from a physical perspective. It makes sense and aligns with what I have witnessed.

In the end, you can’t only lead the horse to water.

Ever hear of the 250 Savage? Developed in 1915. People used to kill truckloads of elk with them using standard cup and core lead bullets. This is not a new argument.

 

[Billogna]

You can’t just go grab any 223 or 6 mm bullet and have it work.

There's a couple of coastal brown bears and a walrus that would disagree with this....

 

[Bluefish]

Ever hear of the 250 Savage? Developed in 1915. People used to kill truckloads of elk with them using standard cup and core lead bullets. This is not a new argument.

Imho a 257 and 6.5 bullet are almost identical. 6.5 have been killing big animals for a long time. I think the hardest idea to accept is a 223 can kill an elk at distance. 3 years ago I would have said, not ethical. Now it’s probably ok. I still won’t be doing it, but I would use a 6mm or 25 cal.