Is There Ever a Time to Hunt with Magnum Calibers?

[z987k]

Conditions and context?

Sometimes it doesn’t matter as a practical matter, especially inside 300.

A 115 VLD out of a .257 Weatherby will buck wind better than a 115 VLD out of a 6 creed because of higher velocity, but there is a point that the BC wins out as the velocity decay is faster with the .257.

I can show the ballistics, but I don’t have a .257 115 in my app any more. Can’t remember the velocity my buddy is running.

Edit to add: For me, it is helpful to remember that “time” is a critical part of the calculations for drop and drift. The less time something is in the air, the less effect wind and gravity has.

Look at the ballistic charts in a post above, the 22 creed is “better” than the 7 SS, until a point that the lower weight of the 22 means it slows faster. The extra mass of the 180 means velocity decays slower. The BCs of the two aren’t that far apart to make a huge difference.

Except that mass isn't part of BC. SD is, which has mass in it, but there's absolutely nothing that says a 160gr 7mm will drift less than a 140gr 7mm everything else equal. A 140gr bullet can have a higher BC than a 160gr bullet. Launched from the same case, the 160 will drift more at every distance.

The part I took issue with

At 800 to 1000 yards, you have to have crazy high velocity or you have to be a high BC bullet and over 150 grains to buck wind.

That bolded part is empirically false.

 

[Scoutfan]

I am glad we are 5 pages in and still having a civil meaningful discussion!
I have,use,and like both small and magnum rounds.I have seen advantages and disadvantages to both,and will continue to use both.

My main hunting rounds in no particular order are 223, 30/06ai, 35whelen and 300rum.
The 06 and whelen aren't truly magnum but for this thread I am putting them in that category. My 06 is running about the same as a 300h&h and my whelen is not far behind a 358 norma, and a 350 Remington mag is pretty much a ballistic twin.
I recently added a fast twist 22-250 to replace my old slow twist one.
I have and use a few others but these are my main ones. I have used or seen pretty much every caliber in-between used quite a bit as well. I don't say this to sound like some kind of expert. I mention it to say that I spent a lot of time experimenting trying to decide what works best for me.

 

[hereinaz]

Except that mass isn't part of BC. SD is, which has mass in it, but there's absolutely nothing that says a 160gr 7mm will drift less than a 140gr 7mm everything else equal. A 140gr bullet can have a higher BC than a 160gr bullet. Launched from the same case, the 160 will drift more at every distance.

The part I took issue with

That bolded part is empirically false.

I was wrong, without giving specifics. What I said wasn’t perfect, and needs context. Good to call me on it. I don’t know that we disagree. Lemme try again.

Reread and edited a bit.

Yes, lighter bullets can have higher bc, like the Hornady ELDvt, but it is basically the same shape as a VLDm but with less lead behind the tip. It has a higher BC than older boat tail tangent ogive bullets that weigh more. Same with newer designs, like the 109 ELDm vs the 108 ELDm, though essentially the same weight, the 109 has better BC because of design.

Run the numbers for factory loadings for 22 creed, 6 creed, 6.5 PRC, 6.8 Western, and 7PRC. Generally my rule will hold.

It takes the weight plus really high BC to buck wind more efficiently between 800 and 1000, OR crazy high velocity and high BC.

The extremes can break the general rules, especially extreme wildcats. My 25 SST hangs with my 7 SS to 1000, and that is 133 grains.

I did say “crazy high velocities” which tommea means anything over 3100 fps, especially when pushing the high BC bullets. If Weatherby ever made a new 6mm or 25 for high BC bulllets, that would change things for factory cartridges. The 6mm 115 VLD at 3300 beats a 7mm 180 VLD at 3050.

Generally, whenever I am talking about bullets in this context, a 140 will never have a higher BC than a 160, because I assume we are talking about heavy for caliber bullets that are designed for max efficiency and are the best choices for long ranges we are talking about. There is no 7mm in 140 or 160 I would shoot for long ranges.

 

[Scoutfan]

Some reasons I picked my 30/06 and 35 whelen-- I see less bloodshot meat and usually get complete pass throughs, while causing plenty of tissue damage and blood loss. I can't say they kill any better than small to mid caliber rounds. This is with 180 and 225 accubonds.I feel much better with either one in my hands while in bear country. I also feel comfortable shooting something at just about any angle, knowing I will get good penetration,can break any joints, and normally not have massive meat loss.
The trade off of course is more recoil.

My 223 is course much more pleasant to shoot and cheaper. I have killed a lot of animals with it.
My 22-250 is simply to give me more range and less wind drift. It will be pushing 77-88 grain bullets and under 300 yards is mostly head shots so no meat loss, but able to reach out well past that whenever I choose to. I wish it was legal in all the states I hunt

My 300rum is for hunting when I want the ability to really reach out. I am very fortunate to be able to practice to a bit over a thousand yards from my back porch. I prefer not to shoot animals at long range,but practice enough to feel comfortable doing so.

 

[roadrunner]

....there's absolutely nothing that says a 160gr 7mm will drift less than a 140gr 7mm everything else equal.

Yeah, it's called inertia. The more mass, the more it takes to get it moving...

 

[mt100gr.]

I am glad we are 5 pages in and still having a civil meaningful discussion!
I have,use,and like both small and magnum rounds.I have seen advantages and disadvantages to both,and will continue to use both.

My main hunting rounds in no particular order are 223, 30/06ai, 35whelen and 300rum.
The 06 and whelen aren't truly magnum but for this thread I am putting them in that category. My 06 is running about the same as a 300h&h and my whelen is not far behind a 358 norma, and a 350 Remington mag is pretty much a ballistic twin.
I recently added a fast twist 22-250 to replace my old slow twist one.
I have and use a few others but these are my main ones. I have used or seen pretty much every caliber in-between used quite a bit as well. I don't say this to sound like some kind of expert. I mention it to say that I spent a lot of time experimenting trying to decide what works best for me.

This comes back to the "what makes a magnum" question.

By this logic, a long barreled hot (RL26!!) 6.5cm that out-paces a shorter 6.5PRC with the same bullet is a "magnum"....but not truly a magnum. Or a juiced up .284 win that can hang with the 7RM?? Same bullet, so what's the difference?

I have, shoot, and hunt mags, mids, and mouse guns, so I am not arguing....but it really is starting to look like VELOCITY is the determining factor is how these cartridges perform terminally. Wierd!!! Unless we qualify it by bolt face size....which would be silly.

 

[danhuntingmi]

I moved on from magnums back when I had an hour drive to the range and wasn't able to shoot the volume I needed during load testing and what not. Now I live 10 minutes from where I shoot but I've found that anything I hunt and anything I'm likely to hunt dies pretty quickly from standard cartridges.

That being said, I'm not sure if precision shooting or new bullets really make the difference. Precision shooting at the range is one thing but often quite another in real life. Regardless, shots near the center of the vitals from practical ranges are going to do the job whether you call it 'precision' or not.

Same goes for bullets. If anything, modern bullets make magnum velocities more practical not less. Regardless, a properly constructed bullet is going to do what it does and these have been around well longer than most (all?) here have been alive.

That doesn't mean magnums might not be desired by someone and won't be a good choice. Some dang good shots shoot magnums and enjoy them. Good for them.

 

[hereinaz]

Yeah, it's called inertia. The more mass, the more it takes to get it moving...

Inertia is at the heart of my comment… bullets of different weight with all other things being equal: namely velocity and BC, have different wind drift.

The drop will be the same, because gravity is equal on all objects. The relevant thing is time over the distance traveled. Weight has essentially nothing to do with it, except as it relates to BC which determines the time it takes for it to travel.

Wind drift happens when it destabilizes a bullet. A heavier bullet is harder for the wind to move.

Look at 1000 yard matches, the 7mm 180 has become the dominant caliber because of performance in wind. The 30 cals can move more efficient, but not at the cost of recoil as it affects performance.

Run the numbers with bullets of the same form factor per Litz books at the same velocity but of different weights. Heavy wins every time.

The extreme proves the rule. No 7mm will hang with a 338 of the same BC and velocity at a mile. It’s why the king of two miles is dominated by .4 cal varieties over the .338.

Ballistically, the nose tries to turn into the wind like a weather vane. But the gyroscopic spin works to keep it flying front forward. More weight means better gyroscopic stability.

It drifts not because the wind blows it sideways as if we blew on a cotton ball. A right twist bullet actually drifts at an angle up and to the left in a left to right wind. It drifts down at an angle to the right in a right to left wind. That’s because of the way gyroscopic stability works.

The gyroscopic movement of the nose is in tiny circles spinning in a larger spiral. It’s the kind of swirly movement a spinning top makes if you bump it or it starts to slow down. It looks kinda like a 4 leaf clover shape repeating itself. It is called precession.

The trajectory of the bullet changes as a result of the gyroscopic instability, which is why there is the long standing debate, which matters more, wind at the muzzle or wind at the target…

Watch one of the kids Nijago top battles, the movement of the tops shows how a bullet moves.

 

[hereinaz]

This comes back to the "what makes a magnum" question.

By this logic, a long barreled hot (RL26!!) 6.5cm that out-paces a shorter 6.5PRC with the same bullet is a "magnum"....but not truly a magnum. Or a juiced up .284 win that can hang with the 7RM?? Same bullet, so what's the difference?

I have, shoot, and hunt mags, mids, and mouse guns, so I am not arguing....but it really is starting to look like VELOCITY is the determining factor is how these cartridges perform terminally. Wierd!!! Unless we qualify it by bolt face size....which would be silly.

It’s best to use the typical factory box ammo numbers as the definition. Wildcats and extremes screw up the discussion…

And, you can’t cut the legs out from under a 6.5 PRC to compare it to a long barreled 6.5 creed loaded hot.

But, your point holds, it’s best to talk from bullet woght, BC, and velocity in the details.

 

[z987k]

Yeah, it's called inertia. The more mass, the more it takes to get it moving...

Not anywhere in the wind drift formula. I call this out each time I see it because it won't die. A lot of people have no clue at all what the factors in wind drift are.

 

[JPW13]

...but it really is starting to look like VELOCITY is the determining factor is how these cartridges perform terminally. Wierd!!! Unless we qualify it by bolt face size....which would be silly.

Totally agree. "Magnum" might have been a bit "click-bait"y. It really is just small heavy for calibres vs big heavy for calibres and velocity is the equalizer until you start getting further out there than people hunt. So the question could easily be when should you prioritize a big heavy for calibre over small heavy for calibre? Really far out there might be one? Would monos be another?

 

[Formidilosus]

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.

Kind of a snip here…

If the bigger bullets and guns are better at hitting past 400 or 500 yards (or past 700 as you stated above), why are they not dominating NRL hunter matches? Why did NRL hunter purposely make rules that banned 6mm’s?

The same thing could, and should be asked of PRS, except that the excuse of PRS shooting too many shots comes up- but NRL hunter doesn’t have that issue. So if “better ballistic performance” mattered so much- 7PRC, 300PRC, and 300NM would be the winningest cartridges… instead they had to effectively ban the smallest cartridge so that it didn’t dominate like it does in PRS. They reason 6mm dominates is because it’s the smallest bullet that will consistent show moment and splash on a plate- if it wasn’t for that, .224’s would dominate.

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

You’ve mentioned bullet weight multiple times, and I’m not sure why? BC is BC- if two bullets have the same BC at the same MV, they drift exactly the same.

 

[Scoutfan]

This comes back to the "what makes a magnum" question.

By this logic, a long barreled hot (RL26!!) 6.5cm that out-paces a shorter 6.5PRC with the same bullet is a "magnum"....but not truly a magnum. Or a juiced up .284 win that can hang with the 7RM?? Same bullet, so what's the difference?

I have, shoot, and hunt mags, mids, and mouse guns, so I am not arguing....but it really is starting to look like VELOCITY is the determining factor is how these cartridges perform terminally. Wierd!!! Unless we qualify it by bolt face size....which would be silly.

I think there is more to it than just velocity. 375 h&h and 458 Winchester magnums seem to be pretty effective yet they aren't all that fast. My 22 magnum is quite puny compared to even a 223 but I have killed quite a few pigs with it.
I wasn't trying to get into a what really makes a magnum discussion, I was simply saying that those two are much closer to magnums than small and mid-bore rounds.
I don't recall the bc numbers at the moment but my 06 is running a 180 accubond at 2950 fps which is about the same as a 300h&h mag.
My 35whelen pushes a 225 accubond at 2825 fps.
My 45/70 is not fast and not a magnum but it still made the most devastating (for lack of a better word) kill on a whitetail that I have ever seen.

 

[z987k]

You’ve mentioned bullet weight multiple times, and I’m not sure why? BC is BC- if two hikers have the same BC at the same MV, they drift exactly the same.

Because there's this really weird old timey saying that "heavy bullets buck the wind better" despite mass of the bullet not found anywhere in the wind drift formula.
It will not die.

 

[Formidilosus]

Here’s my question: When, or is there ever, a time when a magnum caliber cartridge is advantageous for hunting?

Purely objective- when bullet trace and or splash exceeds the capability of a caliber. Velocity helps some, but trace and splash is also caliber dependent. 22cals with heavy, high BC bullets are easy in almost all conditions to around 700-900 yards or so- faster ones a bit better (I.E., 223 with 77’s are pretty easy to around 700 yards; 22 creed with 88’s to 900 plus, etc). 6mm’s easy to 900y, usable past and to 1,100’ish from 6UM level, etc. So on and so forth.

Big 30cals and 338’s are when trace, splash, and impacts get hard to see. Under most conditions that’s around 1,100 yards. If I am going out with the expectation that I will kill animals past 1,000 to 1,100 yards only- with near zero expectation under that; then a max weight big 338cal with a 300gr Berger or 285gr ELD-M is the choice- and that isn’t about wind drift, terminal ballistics, etc; it is solely about the big bullet throwing up enough splash for a spotter to see.

The 115gr DTAC NR and 112gr Matchburner from big 6mm’s like the 6UM has near completely removed the need for big 6.5’s, 7mm’s’, and even 30cals for me- once I go past the capability of the 6UM with 115gr- I am straight to large 338’s.


In summary- large calibers with large capacity are for rifles for dedicated use past 900 yards, and really past 1,100+/- yards.

 

[Wyobohunter]

Magnum cartridges aren’t meant to provide some huge margin of error in terminal ballistics, they are to increase velocity.

Sometimes I shoot a .338 RUM, I can reliably hit well within muley vitals at 800 yards, but I don’t shoot at living animals that far away. My personal limit with this rifle is 550 yards, I carry a drop calculating rangefinder, and have the dope taped to my stock. Still, I won’t shoot to my personally imposed limit if conditions are anything but ideal, I’ll try to get closer instead. I practice at ≈ 1.5x the distance I’ll shoot in the field. I usually carry my lightweight 30-06, and limit myself accordingly. I pass on more shots than I take, because this isn’t about survival for me.

Am I a hunter or a shooter? According to the Marine Corps I am an expert, both times, but I don’t take long shots on animals because I am a hunter. Posting a picture on the internet is less important than keeping my ethics intact.

There are very few people who can ethically take an 800+ yard shot under field conditions after climbing a mountain at 9,000’, even then, I don’t think it’s ethical: at some of the ranges people are talking (bragging) about, the time of flight is over one second…

How many feet can an elk move in a second?

After reading all of the talk of super fast .224 bullets and long range shooting, I wonder how many critters are wounded every year. No one brags about that.

Please remember, you are doing this for fun. To the animals, it’s life. Don’t risk causing unnecessary suffering to prop up your ego. I lost a deer to a poorly placed arrow once, I didn’t feel great about the shot but loosed anyway; it was more than twenty years ago, it still bothers me.

 

[Wyobohunter]

To add to the above. Range is only one variable to consider when hunting the backcountry on foot.

What time of day is it? Will I be dressing an elk by myself, in the dark, in grizzly country? What is the temperature, and how close can I legally and safely get the Jeep? Will meat start to spoil before I can get it home? Where is the animal likely to go down? Will I be risking injury trying to get the animal through that steep talus, or across that creek?

I’ve passed on multiple shots; I’ll continue to do it because I’m owed nothing.

A lot of you are from the Midwest, or the East. Please remember that when you go “out West”, you are owed nothing.

If you drive around in a SxS, cool. Don’t be tempted to drive around the gates, it’s illegal and someone will turn you in; I’ve done it before, I’ll do it every time. There is zero shame in ethically giving it your best effort but going home empty handed. You are owed nothing.

If you put in the miles and vertical, only to be presented with a less than ideal shot… Pass on the shot. There is zero shame in ethically giving it your best effort but going home empty handed. You are owed nothing.

If you are presented with a good shot that’s in a bad spot, pass on the shot. There is zero shame in ethically giving it your best effort but going home empty handed.

You are owed nothing.

If everything works out, you’ve followed the rules, your breath is under control, the shot is reasonable… take it. You’ve earned it.

 

[hereinaz]

I’ll concede, I as wrong about wind. As a practical matter, bigger bullets are used at long range in matches because of performance reasons. I was remembering an article by Litz, and old one, that seemed to show that using form factor, a heavier bullet drifted less.

I went back and read more, the reason for larger calibers at longer ranges has to do with tunability, etc.

Regardless. There is a case for magnum cases— to get either the hyper velocity of the 6 UM or higher velocity of magnums for high BC bullets at max effectiveness long range.

You mention PRS. With shooting games as an example. What bullet dominates in a game is dependent on the parameters of the game. Some of it transfers over.

@Formidilosus you personally find the break point at 1100 where you jump way up to .338. That clearly means there is a rationale and justification, but it is drawn by choice and skill.

When do you choose to take the 6 UM vs. a .223 cal when you are hunting?

I see why 6 um can take the place over larger calibers. But, is it unreasonable for me to choose 7mm mag for benefits between 700 and 1000, if they are the same for your jump to .338 at 1100?

Is the recoil of a suppressed heavy 7mm so much that it makes it worse than the 6 UM?
Is there a factory round that matches the 6 UM in small caliber?

I also use 1800 fps as my minimum terminal velocity, even though 1600 is the minimum number. It’s a judgement call.

Go back to more of my comments, the key factor allowing me to select larger calibers magnums is the shootability with time to build a position and the ranges will be between 700-1000. Given the time and opportunity that distance gives me on my hunts, I will choose a heavier bullet, just like f-class at 1000 is dominated by 6.5 and .284.

Why do .284 bullets dominate in 1000 yard f-class matches but .243 dominate in PRS that is mostly inside 500 yards? It’s the balance of factors, and there is a breaking point between 600 and 1000 based on the requirements. It’s the same for NRL hunter, which is shot mostly inside 600.

Interestingly, why doesn’t.223 dominate benchrest? Also interesting, .243 dominates PRS with practically the same cartridge as benchrest at the same 600 and in. That’s because of the balance of factors.

Why doesn’t .204, or .223 dominate in benchrest at 600? Its paper. There is a reason it dominates, besides the additions reason in PRS because of the splash over .223.

 

[Scoutfan]

Thanks for the thoughtful responses, everyone! I want to clarify my original question and add some context from my experience.

First off, I’m not here to argue against magnums—I own and shoot several, and I enjoy hunting with them. In 2023, I took a mule deer at 600m with my .300 WSM, and before trying out the .224s, I dropped a bear at 700m with my 7 PRC. I also regularly take spring bears with my .45-70, which is a completely different kind of experience but one I genuinely enjoy. I shoot a lot of rounds each year, and I’m comfortable with heavy recoil. I’ll hunt with what makes me happy, but success in the field makes me happiest of all—and that’s where I’m trying to understand if there’s still a practical case for magnums.

A few take-aways from all the replies:

1. "If it were better, it would be obvious":I agree—if something is clearly better, it usually doesn’t take long to notice in the field. But by my own experience the 88s have killed just as dead with as quick a time to incapacitation as the 175s or 212s. Are there cases where a bigger bullet somehow aids in lower expansion velocities for longer range success in a way a small caliber can’t replicate?
2. "Shoot what you can handle":Absolutely valid. A magnum is only advantageous if the shooter can handle it accurately. Heavy recoil and infrequent practice lead to missed shots and wounded animals. That said, I might not shoot as tight a groups with a magnum, but I do tend to still ring still with the same frequency as a smaller calibre and sight picture is maintained because I don't use high magnification.
3. "Magnums are never wrong; they’re just more of a good thing":I hear this argument, but if the difference in wind resistance or terminal performance between a magnum and a fast .224 is minimal, is "more of a good thing" just a theoretical benefit? Or does it manifest in real-world hunting conditions where that slight edge has made the difference?
4. Shoot what you want, there’s no right or wrong":I get the sentiment, but I’m trying to explore whether magnums still hold a practical, hunting-specific advantage. Does anyone feel they’ve seen an outcome where a magnum clearly succeeded where a smaller caliber might have failed?

@Formidilosus has talked about shooting magnums - but I think it was just for fun or work, I don't remember a hunting example where it benefited?"

To sum up, I’m trying to move past “personal preference” and dig into whether there’s a functional reason for magnums in modern hunting. So far, the advantages seem minimal or situational, but I’m open to (and sort of hope to be) convinced otherwise. Looking forward to more insights!

Thanks for the thoughtful responses, everyone! I want to clarify my original question and add some context from my experience.

First off, I’m not here to argue against magnums—I own and shoot several, and I enjoy hunting with them. In 2023, I took a mule deer at 600m with my .300 WSM, and before trying out the .224s, I dropped a bear at 700m with my 7 PRC. I also regularly take spring bears with my .45-70, which is a completely different kind of experience but one I genuinely enjoy. I shoot a lot of rounds each year, and I’m comfortable with heavy recoil. I’ll hunt with what makes me happy, but success in the field makes me happiest of all—and that’s where I’m trying to understand if there’s still a practical case for magnums.

A few take-aways from all the replies:

1. "If it were better, it would be obvious":I agree—if something is clearly better, it usually doesn’t take long to notice in the field. But by my own experience the 88s have killed just as dead with as quick a time to incapacitation as the 175s or 212s. Are there cases where a bigger bullet somehow aids in lower expansion velocities for longer range success in a way a small caliber can’t replicate?
2. "Shoot what you can handle":Absolutely valid. A magnum is only advantageous if the shooter can handle it accurately. Heavy recoil and infrequent practice lead to missed shots and wounded animals. That said, I might not shoot as tight a groups with a magnum, but I do tend to still ring still with the same frequency as a smaller calibre and sight picture is maintained because I don't use high magnification.
3. "Magnums are never wrong; they’re just more of a good thing":I hear this argument, but if the difference in wind resistance or terminal performance between a magnum and a fast .224 is minimal, is "more of a good thing" just a theoretical benefit? Or does it manifest in real-world hunting conditions where that slight edge has made the difference?
4. "Shoot what you want, there’s no right or wrong":I get the sentiment, but I’m trying to explore whether magnums still hold a practical, hunting-specific advantage. Does anyone feel they’ve seen an outcome where a magnum clearly succeeded where a smaller caliber might have failed?

@Formidilosus has talked about shooting magnums - but I think it was just for fun or work, I don't remember a hunting example where it benefited?"

To sum up, I’m trying to move past “personal preference” and dig into whether there’s a functional reason for magnums in modern hunting. So far, the advantages seem minimal or situational, but I’m open to (and sort of hope to be) convinced otherwise. Looking forward to more insights!

#4. Sorry still learning how post just a portion.

I have seen several times,even with well placed shots that without a good exit hole there would not have been enough blood to track and recover the animal. I prefer larger and heavier for pass throughs with less meat damage. Two instances that stick out.
#1 Hunting partner made a good shot on a buck with an early made 27 caliber ballistic tip. Bullet destroyed front right shoulder,did massive heart damage and exited just behind left shoulder. It looked like the bullet had grenaded in chest cavity but had just enough left to make a decent exit hole.
How that buck went over 400 yards though thick woods I will never understand. What I do understand is we would have never recovered him had that bullet not exited. Even though smaller modern bullets are better and more effective than ever, I still haven't seen the consistent pass throughs as I have with larger bullets. If y'all are getting the consistent damage with pass throughs with 22--25 calibers at nearly any angle out to 700 yards please let me know what cartridge and bullet.
Seriously let me know, because that is a big reason why I prefer larger rounds.


#2 Probably the most bizarre kill I have made with a Magnum That I feel certain a smaller round would not have done. I shot a 252lb sow(pig) with my 7mag. Distance was about 100 yards and bullet hit square on the shoulder. If I remember correctly bullet was a 140 grain Hornady interlock,pushed as fast as possible with good accuracy.At the shot she dropped on the spot without a single twitch. Loaded her up to make sausage. While cleaning I was checking the damage/ bullet performance. The bullet totally disenagrated on the shoulder. I could not find one single entry hole or fragment inside the chest cavity. The entire shoulder was destroyed. The only explanation I have come up with is that there was enough energy transmitted that it stopped her heart instantly. There have been some documented cases were people with bullet proof vest on died from being shot even though the vest stopped the bullet. That is why most vest now use a trauma plate.

I agree that in most cases destroyed tissue resulting in blood loss and lack of oxygen kills. What I don't agree with is people totally dismissing the role that energy plays. I also agree that only transfered energy counts. But the bottom line is bigger heavier bullets driven the same speed as smaller lighter bullets have more energy to transfer.

 

[JPW13]

Purely objective- when bullet trace and or splash exceeds the capability of a caliber. Velocity helps some, but trace and splash is also caliber dependent. 22cals with heavy, high BC bullets are easy in almost all conditions to around 700-900 yards or so- faster ones a bit better (I.E., 223 with 77’s are pretty easy to around 700 yards; 22 creed with 88’s to 900 plus, etc). 6mm’s easy to 900y, usable past and to 1,100’ish from 6UM level, etc. So on and so forth.

Big 30cals and 338’s are when trace, splash, and impacts get hard to see. Under most conditions that’s around 1,100 yards. If I am going out with the expectation that I will kill animals past 1,000 to 1,100 yards only- with near zero expectation under that; then a max weight big 338cal with a 300gr Berger or 285gr ELD-M is the choice- and that isn’t about wind drift, terminal ballistics, etc; it is solely about the big bullet throwing up enough splash for a spotter to see.

The 115gr DTAC NR and 112gr Matchburner from big 6mm’s like the 6UM has near completely removed the need for big 6.5’s, 7mm’s’, and even 30cals for me- once I go past the capability of the 6UM with 115gr- I am straight to large 338’s.


In summary- large calibers with large capacity are for rifles for dedicated use past 900 yards, and really past 1,100+/- yards.

I really appreciate the insight here—this perspective helps clarify where the big calibers fit in. It makes a lot of sense that beyond 1,000–1,100 yards, it’s less about wind drift or terminal ballistics and more about splash and trace to ensure impacts are visible and corrections can be made.

I’m curious, though—when you’re running those large 338s with 300-grain Bergers or 285 ELD-Ms, are you typically shooting them out of big, heavy rifles to mitigate recoil? It seems like that would be critical to staying on target and making follow-ups manageable. Or can you manage a lighter setup at those ranges, provided you’ve got a good spotting setup?

It also sounds like this is a very specific use case that requires a particular skill set, nearly perfect conditions, and a large target like elk or bigger to make it practical. It's interesting how specialized the role of these "magnum" cartridges becomes when framed in that context. Thanks again for sharing your approach—it sounds like we were on the right track that heavy weight heavy for calibre bullets are for way out there; further than most people should attempt at game.