Is There Ever a Time to Hunt with Magnum Calibers?

[JPW13]

A couple of thoughts:
Point 1 - 500 pages, if that is the real number, great. Evidence is subjective and consider the source, there have been ballistics charts for nearly every single caliber available, large and small. This is NOT just a small caliber thing

Point 2: The documentation is available in thousands and thousands of pages, articles, anecdotal evidence and more than 300 years of hunting and shooting. It may not all be here but you dont have to look far to find it.

To your larger question than yes, a standard 30 Nosler provides ballistic advantage over a standard 243. Period dot.

There are places that a large caliber is critical - taking it to the highest level, I would not want to hunt a charging grizzly bear or a Cape Buffalo with a 223. Ever...

If both bullets hit the same spot, my question has always been the same - why is it bad to have more of a good thing?

You raise a fair point about large calibers for dangerous game, but it makes me question whether a .223 really wouldn’t work on something like a grizzly (no idea on African dangerous game). There’s documented evidence of small calibers killing grizzlies, and with the right bullet—a fast-expanding, well-constructed design—it could create significant tissue damage, leading to incapacitation.

Add to that the ability to fire multiple well-placed shots quickly due to the low recoil of a .223, and in theory (not saying I’d want to test this in a high-stakes situation), shouldn’t it work as well—or possibly better—than a single slower follow-up from a magnum?

I’m genuinely curious here, because if the .223 delivers sufficient tissue disruption and the shooter can get multiple shots on target, isn’t the idea that it “wouldn’t work” more about perception and tradition than reality? Of course, there’s the margin for error to consider, but I’d like to hear more thoughts on this, especially from those who’ve seen small calibers used in extreme situations.

 

[Wrench]

Lewis and clark covered the whole country with an air rifle.....and wolves and bears were much more plentiful.

I personally like big nasty bullets going fast when I am chasing sharp toothed critters on stalks. If I plan on sniping, I can care less how big it is.

 

[JPW13]

I have a clarifying question because everyone on this thread is conflating two things.

OP are you talking about moving up in caliber size? Or moving to a "magnum" case ie more powder behind the same caliber?
Those are two different things!

For instance if you're shooting a 100 grain bullet in a 6ARC at 2800fps you could choose to move up to a magnum, a 240 WBY might shoot the same bullet at 3200.

Great question! That’s why I said magnum calibre, somewhat tongue in cheek. I’m asking heavy for calibre small cartridge vs the same in a large cartridge. An 88 ELDM vs a 225 ELDM (22CM vs 300PRC) as an example (I shoot both).

To your point; I killed a deer with a 77TMK in a 223 and it worked great, but I want the same performance beyond 500M and that’s what the 22CM does for me (6arc to 240wby).

The ballistics show that I’m not gaining significantly more range or wind bucking within the effective expansion range of either bullet (88 vs 225), so is there any case where the bigger bullet provides a hunting advantage?

 

[Article 4]

You raise a fair point about large calibers for dangerous game, but it makes me question whether a .223 really wouldn’t work on something like a grizzly (no idea on African dangerous game). There’s documented evidence of small calibers killing grizzlies, and with the right bullet—a fast-expanding, well-constructed design—it could create significant tissue damage, leading to incapacitation.

Add to that the ability to fire multiple well-placed shots quickly due to the low recoil of a .223, and in theory (not saying I’d want to test this in a high-stakes situation), shouldn’t it work as well—or possibly better—than a single slower follow-up from a magnum?

I’m genuinely curious here, because if the .223 delivers sufficient tissue disruption and the shooter can get multiple shots on target, isn’t the idea that it “wouldn’t work” more about perception and tradition than reality? Of course, there’s the margin for error to consider, but I’d like to hear more thoughts on this, especially from those who’ve seen small calibers used in extreme situations.

Can you kill a grizz with a 223, probably. Should you, that is up to you. Again, if you were shooting at a Grizz at 100 yards and had one shot, would you want a 100 grain bullet at 2800 fps or a 250 grain bullet at 2800 fps?

Point 2: Lets make sure we are talking apples to apples. Comparing multiple shots in a 223 and then 1 with a heavy magnum is not a comparison. I can get off 2 shots with my 470 NE faster than someone with a bolt 223.
There is a ton of evidence of people shooting bears 9 times with a 9mm and it not dying on the way to mauling and killing them, conversely there is a ton of evidence showing one shot from a 454 casul ending the conflict on the spot. More shots does not always equal better.

The best evidence I can share with you is that many outfitters will NOT allow you to shoot G bears or other Dangerous Game on any continent with small calibers. They have seen it go wrong too many times.

The idea here is not if you can....it is in some instances if you should. That can only be answered by you.

 

[S-3 ranch]

Ok this needs to be settled once and for all, pea poppers vs Fudds
4/20/25 a bare knuckle throw down in a locked stadium, wiener measuring is judged by Form on pea poppers side and Fudds are still open for submission

 

[Quicksilver]

Mentioned just a few times in here, vaguely. But the issue with these magnum arguments is people bring up the old and common magnums. 300prc, 300wm, 300wsm, etc. Truth is in today’s advancements you can have the same thing in a lighter and less recoiling package. A 6.5 magnum with a heavy for caliber bullet is equal to or better in some cases ballistically to the .284 and .300 common magnums.

To really break ahead of the average joes in the magnum world and in my opinion justify going with a larger setup, you need to either be looking at a RUM parent case or a lapua bolt face. Once you get above .4 g7 bc while maintaining around 3000fps, you start appreciating the advantages of your system.

Most guys will do just fine with a short mag or smaller for their entire hunting career is the truth. Most guys (myself included) don’t need that 300 nmi with a 245 berger to cheat the wind and destroy anything in its path…but I want it and I like what it does at long range.

 

[Steel Rain]

I haven’t shot as much game as many of you but I have shot a lot at the range. I’ve shot deer with 5-6 different chamberings. I like to shoot them all. They have all worked. I just picked up a .223 bolt gun to keep my practice cost down and save some barrel life on my other rifles. I say shoot what you want. I don’t need a Tundra to get me to work but I like driving it.
I will pose a question to you. What makes a chambering s magnum other than “magnum” being in the name?

 

[Article 4]

Lewis and clark covered the whole country with an air rifle.....and wolves and bears were much more plentiful.

I personally like big nasty bullets going fast when I am chasing sharp toothed critters on stalks. If I plan on sniping, I can care less how big it is.

True. that thing was cool. It did shoot a .46 caliber bullet and part of the reason they innovated was out of necessity. concern about finding gun powder along the way.

I prefer my 6cm for certain things. Won’t be taking it elk hunting though.

 

[idig4au]

Interesting points on this thread.

I’m a dinosaur so I’ll continue to use my non chassis barrel burning magnums with too much free bore shooting copper mono bullets with less than 0.5 BC from my full length non-suppressed barrels with muzzlebrakes. If it’s not broken, I don’t see a reason to fix it even though according to the internet, my setup is no longer effective at taking big game at any distance.

 

[Article 4]

I haven’t shot as much game as many of you but I have shot a lot at the range. I’ve shot deer with 5-6 different chamberings. I like to shoot them all. They have all worked. I just picked up a .223 bolt gun to keep my practice cost down and save some barrel life on my other rifles. I say shoot what you want. I don’t need a Tundra to get me to work but I like driving it.
I will pose a question to you. What makes a chambering s magnum other than “magnum” being in the name?

It started when innovators decided to use large dangerous game cases, such as 404 Jeffrey, and turn them into smaller copper rocket launching death missiles.

My take on this is the amount and ratio of powder to bullet size in heavy magnums.

 

[JPW13]

Mentioned just a few times in here, vaguely. But the issue with these magnum arguments is people bring up the old and common magnums. 300prc, 300wm, 300wsm, etc. Truth is in today’s advancements you can have the same thing in a lighter and less recoiling package. A 6.5 magnum with a heavy for caliber bullet is equal to or better in some cases ballistically to the .284 and .300 common magnums.

To really break ahead of the average joes in the magnum world and in my opinion justify going with a larger setup, you need to either be looking at a RUM parent case or a lapua bolt face. Once you get above .4 g7 bc while maintaining around 3000fps, you start appreciating the advantages of your system.

Most guys will do just fine with a short mag or smaller for their entire hunting career is the truth. Most guys (myself included) don’t need that 300 nmi with a 245 berger to cheat the wind and destroy anything in its path…but I want it and I like what it does at long range.

Agreed - the 6UM is a great example (so is a 240WBY). But, wouldn't a 22UM be the ultimate?

My question was about the bigger bullets being pushed fast and where they start to be an advantage (or if they ever do). It sounds like maybe it's ELR, possibly outside of hunting ranges and dangerous game when it's trying to kill you?

 

[hereinaz]

Fair point—this definitely feels like ground we’ve covered in other threads! I think I’ve read through almost all of them, and they do tend to break into two camps:

1. Small caliber advocates: Backed by 500 pages of evidence, ballistic charts, and personal success stories with well-constructed bullets heavy for caliber .224 and .243s.

2. Large caliber advocates: Relying on their own experience, often distrustful of smaller calibers efficacy, and rooted in the “if it ain’t broke, don’t fix it” and “more is better” mindset.

I respect both perspectives, but I’m trying to dig a little deeper here. Instead of focusing on preferences, I’m trying to suss out whether there’s a specific hunting scenario where a larger cartridge—particularly a magnum or even something in the ultra-magnum category—provides a clear and significant advantage.

From what I’ve seen (and shot), the newer “ultras” and Noslers don’t seem to provide a huge ballistic advantage over fast, heavy-for-caliber small bullets at ranges under 1000m. If that’s the case, where does a larger cartridge’s advantage become noticeable? And if the answer is beyond 1000m, how far beyond, and does that push into territory where ethical, practical hunting shots become questionable?

It’s a nuanced question that doesn’t seem to fit neatly into either camp, which is why I’m hoping this discussion can break some new ground. Looking forward to everyone’s input!

You have to specify the magnum, not all are created equal. A 300 win mag/7 rem mag in factory is a different animal than a 300 PRC/7PRC. The 30 and 28 Noslers don’t shoot high BC bullets either.

Velocity reigns inside 500ish, but BC starts to matter more beyond that.

Run the ballistics for a 22 creed shooting 88s and a 7mm 180 VLD at 3000 fps and post them up. Add in the 6UM with 115 DTACS if you want.

That’s an easy comparison. Look at wind drift and terminal velocity.

Merely saying, it’s only .2 tenths and we suck more than that… whole generally true, it isn’t enough. We are talking specific use cases and making other assumptions.

Saying it is easier to shoot a 22 creed is obvious, but if I can shoot a 7 mag as precisely with the time and opportunity a 1000 yard shot gives me, the point is moot.

I have had got a response in one of these conversations with Form, and he conceded that the small caliber thing wasn’t as applicable to my specific case. Where I hunt we are not jump shooting Coues deer at 100 yards nor are we plopping down to shoot them through a gap in brush at 300 as we still hunt. His case for the small caliber isn’t as applicable to many Arizona scenarios. It’s not that I want more recoil, I just accept as much as needed to get the better ballistics.

I will carry my 12 lb 26” barrel, suppressed 7 mag on my pack. It’s no big deal when it’s a camp based hunt, or even some backcountry hunts.

The case for magnum is situation/shooter specific, and animal/condition specific.

After running the numbers, look at it in inches and compare to vitals size. Get nitty gritty. Wind drift, drop, aerodynamic jump, etc…

I have shot long range enough, and competed a few times so I know a 7mm or more is much better for stuff past 700. Same think with 1500 and more, the 338s are better, and past that the .4 class bullets are better.

Bullet weight matters, all other things being equal, the more you stretch it out—if you have the skill to shoot it!

 

[JPW13]

Can you kill a grizz with a 223, probably. Should you, that is up to you. Again, if you were shooting at a Grizz at 100 yards and had one shot, would you want a 100 grain bullet at 2800 fps or a 250 grain bullet at 2800 fps?

Point 2: Lets make sure we are talking apples to apples. Comparing multiple shots in a 223 and then 1 with a heavy magnum is not a comparison. I can get off 2 shots with my 470 NE faster than someone with a bolt 223.
There is a ton of evidence of people shooting bears 9 times with a 9mm and it not dying on the way to mauling and killing them, conversely there is a ton of evidence showing one shot from a 454 casul ending the conflict on the spot. More shots does not always equal better.

The best evidence I can share with you is that many outfitters will NOT allow you to shoot G bears or other Dangerous Game on any continent with small calibers. They have seen it go wrong too many times.

The idea here is not if you can....it is in some instances if you should. That can only be answered by you.

I like your thinking on this one and I think it makes sense. We know that a fragmenting 30cal will create a larger permanent wound channel than an 22cal. Ergo a grizzly bear is attacking me from inside 100 and that big 225 is going to do absurd damage with one shot. The 88eldm will be less, but I might get 2 or 3 shots on target. I'd prefer the one and done. That said, I don't think I want to shoot my mule deer at 100 with the same bullet as I risk splitting it in half...

 

[Axlrod]

Of course energy is important and necessary for a bullet to kill. However knowing the amount of energy wont tell you if the work done in the animal is adequate to kill.

Im going to run with your work example here. If you show up to dig a trench for me, I don't want your admin to tell "he has 10,000 joules of energy. That should be plenty to finish that trench today." What if half that energy is used up in a pushup contest with a passerby (ends up in the hillside after passing through). I want to hear your boss say "He digs 5 feet per hour, so your 30 foot trench will easily be dug before the end of the day."

Knowing your bullet's velocity and minimum expansion velocity helps determine if the energy of the bullet will be applied effectively to the task at hand. If you are below the bullet's expansion velocity, energy is not going to be adequately applied to the task you "employed" the bullet to perform, even if the amount of energy the bullet has looks good by itself.

You will also have to take into account how much his admin weighs, and how many FPS he or she can accelerate in high heels.

 

[eric1115]

Interesting points on this thread.

I’m a dinosaur so I’ll continue to use my non chassis barrel burning magnums with too much free bore shooting copper mono bullets with less than 0.5 BC from my full length non-suppressed barrels with muzzlebrakes. If it’s not broken, I don’t see a reason to fix it even though according to the internet, my setup is no longer effective at taking big game at any distance.

Of course it's still effective. It'll still kill game just fine. A 1988 Honda Accord will still get you to work, too.

 

[JPW13]

You have to specify the magnum, not all are created equal. A 300 win mag/7 rem mag in factory is a different animal than a 300 PRC/7PRC. The 30 and 28 Noslers don’t shoot high BC bullets either.

Velocity reigns inside 500ish, but BC starts to matter more beyond that.

Run the ballistics for a 22 creed shooting 88s and a 7mm 180 VLD at 3000 fps and post them up. Add in the 6UM with 115 DTACS if you want.

That’s an easy comparison. Look at wind drift and terminal velocity.

Merely saying, it’s only .2 tenths and we suck more than that… whole generally true, it isn’t enough. We are talking specific use cases and making other assumptions.

Saying it is easier to shoot a 22 creed is obvious, but if I can shoot a 7 mag as precisely with the time and opportunity a 1000 yard shot gives me, the point is moot.

I have had got a response in one of these conversations with Form, and he conceded that the small caliber thing wasn’t as applicable to my specific case. Where I hunt we are not jump shooting Coues deer at 100 yards nor are we plopping down to shoot them through a gap in brush at 300 as we still hunt. His case for the small caliber isn’t as applicable to many Arizona scenarios. It’s not that I want more recoil, I just accept as much as needed to get the better ballistics.

I will carry my 12 lb 26” barrel, suppressed 7 mag on my pack. It’s no big deal when it’s a camp based hunt, or even some backcountry hunts.

The case for magnum is situation/shooter specific, and animal/condition specific.

After running the numbers, look at it in inches and compare to vitals size. Get nitty gritty. Wind drift, drop, aerodynamic jump, etc…

I have shot long range enough, and competed a few times so I know a 7mm or more is much better for stuff past 700. Same think with 1500 and more, the 338s are better, and past that the .4 class bullets are better.

Bullet weight matters, all other things being equal, the more you stretch it out—if you have the skill to shoot it!

In your scenario the 180 at 3000 hits 1800fps at 845M and would need 41.8" with a 10mph FV. The 88 eldm is 1800 at 777M and would need 42.4". But, lets say there was someone else's BOAL that needed leg shooting, so you stretched the 88 beyond it's velocity range to 845M it's now 51.7". Of course if the wind was 2mph slower you'd be back at 40"...

I see your point, but practically it seems like there are a myriad of other factors that would be more significant and that's not considering any of the negative effects of the higher recoiling round.

 

[hereinaz]

Some people on both sides in these threads just “whistle as they walk past the graveyard” cause they have no interest in the gory details. It’s scary to enter the unknown and hard work to dig up the evidence.

So, it’s easy to scroll past answers that are quick drivebys.

 

[Choupique]

When, or is there ever, a time when a magnum caliber cartridge is advantageous for hunting?

Of course. We all do this for fun. If using big kaboomers is fun for you, use it.

Written while whitetail hunting with a 338 win mag. If my 375 was ready to go, I might would have that with me. No particular reason other than I like big rifles, and it works.

If your sole goal in hunting (and therefore source of enjoyment) is maximum optimization of everything, than maybe there's no cause for big guns.

 

[hereinaz]

In your scenario the 180 at 3000 hits 1800fps at 845M and would need 41.8" with a 10mph FV. The 88 eldm is 1800 at 777M and would need 42.4". But, lets say there was someone else's BOAL that needed leg shooting, so you stretched the 88 beyond it's velocity range to 845M it's now 51.7". Of course if the wind was 2mph slower you'd be back at 40"...

I see your point, but practically it seems like there are a myriad of other factors that would be more significant and that's not considering any of the negative effects of the higher recoiling round.

Everything matters. Some matters more. But, to say that something is a smaller factor and therefore can be ignored is a fallacy.

You may make that judgement call, but I judge differently and will take the inches and benefit.

When targets are inches, inches matter.

Edit to add:

At the BOAL at 845, a 2mph error with your 22 is not an insignificant amount. Who can call wind within 2 mph?

Those are the nitty gritty real life scenarios that play out when I am shooting steel at 500+ yards. Given time and opportunity to build a position, I can smack steel all day with my 7 but wind beats me up with my fast 6mm and 223.

I need the ballistic charts to really point those things out.

 

[hereinaz]

In your scenario the 180 at 3000 hits 1800fps at 845M and would need 41.8" with a 10mph FV. The 88 eldm is 1800 at 777M and would need 42.4". But, lets say there was someone else's BOAL that needed leg shooting, so you stretched the 88 beyond it's velocity range to 845M it's now 51.7". Of course if the wind was 2mph slower you'd be back at 40"...

I see your point, but practically it seems like there are a myriad of other factors that would be more significant and that's not considering any of the negative effects of the higher recoiling round.

Can you post pics of the ballistics?