Form struck someone’s nerve

[mtnbound]

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.
• 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.
• Small-caliber bullets are not effective for strong quartering shots.
• A small-caliber bullet won’t penetrate enough if you have to shoot through the Paunch to get to the vitals.
• 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.
• 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.
• States that if small-caliber hunters believed in their choice, they would only shoot the animal once.
• States small-caliber hunters need to do Journalistically Forensic Peer-reviewed necropsies to validate their data.
• 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.
• States small-caliber hunters would choose a different caliber if faced with a once-in-a-lifetime or dangerous game animal.
• Agrees less recoil is beneficial.
• 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.
• 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.

 

[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.