Is There Ever a Time to Hunt with Magnum Calibers?

[Formidilosus]

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?

Yes, absolutely. 16 to 20lbs is normal.

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.

True long range and extreme long range hunting is very specialized. The last dedicated LR/ELR rifle I had put together for hunting has benchrest stock, 1.25” diameter full length barrel that is 34” plus muzzle brake. It produces 3,250fps with 220-225gr bullets on its cruising loads- and 3,400fps MV at max. It barely moves when fired and is extremely easy to shoot well because it weighs approx 20lb unloaded.

It and others like it are very, very specialized guns that don’t really translate to normal field shooting.

 

[thinhorn_AK]

Those bears were no more knocked over than you were when you fired the gun.
You disrupted the CNS.

It bothers me when people think a bullet knocked an animal down, bullets only lose velocity and energy as they gain distance. If it had the energy to knock a bear over at 100yds, it would have the energy to knock the shooter over with the recoil.

I’ve shot bears that looked like they were knocked over, moose too, in reality they just fell down.

 

[rbutcher1234]

When I put my 300NM barrel in my AI, yeah it’s definitely turned into a 22lb monster.

Then again, I’m also that guy who hunts with an AT in 308 most of the time, so I can’t exactly talk about “light weight”.

 

[Article 4]

It bothers me when people think a bullet knocked an animal down, bullets only lose velocity and energy as they gain distance. If it had the energy to knock a bear over at 100yds, it would have the energy to knock the shooter over with the recoil.

I’ve shot bears that looked like they were knocked over, moose too, in reality they just fell down.

I wonder how you arrived at your opinion that if the bear was knocked over, the shooter would automatically get knocked over?

I wondered this myself and found a good calculation that explains:

It states that “back” energy is “forward” energy times ratio of m/M. Back energy is much smaller than “forward” energy due to the bullet and gases weighing less than the rifle and shooter. Couple that with the size and weight of the composition of the rifle, stock, the recoil dissipation of carbon fiber stocks etc...we don't get "hit" as hard as the animal taking the bullet


I didn't do the math, but based on what I can fine, this is how they calculated it.
Energy of forward going mass is:

and back going mass energy is:

From MS Principle we get:

If we substitute V in E with that, we get:

then

and

I saved the article a long time ago - I have always liked it - it says something similar but different. You decide what you wanna take from it

Ballistics of Modern Firearms - USC Viterbi School of Engineering

In the past two decades Americans have experienced a turbulent relationship with guns. We are compelled as a society to love them through popular culture and are taught to hate them through the acts of newsworthy criminals. Through all this, it is easy to view guns as a living force by which we...

illumin.usc.edu

 

[thinhorn_AK]

I wonder how you arrived at your opinion that if the bear was knocked over, the shooter would automatically get knocked over?

I wondered this myself and found a good calculation that explains:

It states that “back” energy is “forward” energy times ratio of m/M. Back energy is much smaller than “forward” energy due to the bullet and gases weighing less than the rifle and shooter. Couple that with the size and weight of the composition of the rifle, stock, the recoil dissipation of carbon fiber stocks etc...we don't get "hit" as hard as the animal taking the bullet


I didn't do the math, but based on what I can fine, this is how they calculated it.
Energy of forward going mass is:

and back going mass energy is:

From MS Principle we get:

If we substitute V in E with that, we get:

then

and

I saved the article a long time ago - I have always liked it - it says something similar but different. You decide what you wanna take from it

Ballistics of Modern Firearms - USC Viterbi School of Engineering

In the past two decades Americans have experienced a turbulent relationship with guns. We are compelled as a society to love them through popular culture and are taught to hate them through the acts of newsworthy criminals. Through all this, it is easy to view guns as a living force by which we...

illumin.usc.edu

Your bears weren’t “knocked over” this isn’t a movie where a guy get shot and flies across the room.

 

[Article 4]

Your bears weren’t “knocked over” this isn’t a movie where a guy get shot and flies across the room.

YOU said they didn't get knocked over not me. They aren't my bears, it wasn't my statement.

If you wanna answer how to arrived at your thoughts on it, I am all ears.

Great quote from on of the the articles LOL

 

[JPW13]

YOU said they didn't get knocked over not me. They aren't my bears, it wasn't my statement.

If you wanna answer how to arrived at your thoughts on it, I am all ears.

Great quote from on of the the articles LOL

I think this is all relating back to my comments around shooting bears with a 45-70

You make a fair point—so let me clarify my observation. When I described the bears as being "knocked over," I was trying to convey their immediate physical reaction to being hit, not suggesting some kind of mythical "knockdown power." That's said it's not like they tripped and fell down; the .458 projectile hit them with something (energy, force, 45-70 magic?), and their reactions were dramatic.

One bear dropped into a seated position and fell backward. The other fell to the side opposite the impact. Neither were a CNS hit, as both bears got back up, attempted to run, and then fell down again shortly after. While "knockdown" might have some loaded connotations, it accurately captures what I observed in layman's terms—seemingly more of an instinctive reaction to the energy transfer and trauma.

I’ll admit it’s not a scientific conclusion, just my firsthand experience. Happy to hear your thoughts on it or how you interpret and describe similar reactions in your hunting experience!

 

[Rich M]

I think this is all relating back to my comments around shooting bears with a 45-70

You make a fair point—so let me clarify my observation. When I described the bears as being "knocked over," I was trying to convey their immediate physical reaction to being hit, not suggesting some kind of mythical "knockdown power." That's said it's not like they tripped and fell down; the .458 projectile hit them with something (energy, force, 45-70 magic?), and their reactions were dramatic.

One bear dropped into a seated position and fell backward. The other fell to the side opposite the impact. Neither were a CNS hit, as both bears got back up, attempted to run, and then fell down again shortly after. While "knockdown" might have some loaded connotations, it accurately captures what I observed in layman's terms—seemingly more of an instinctive reaction to the energy transfer and trauma.

I’ll admit it’s not a scientific conclusion, just my firsthand experience. Happy to hear your thoughts on it or how you interpret and describe similar reactions in your hunting experience!

They might wear you down twisting words so be careful. We all know what you are talking about - some calibers tend to really flatten an animal. But folks also flinch from the calibers that often knock em down dead, so you are better with a small caliber so you don't flinch with is the mantra. You need to spot your shots so you can shoot again.

Guns don't have any "knockdown power" and kinetic energy means absolutely nothing.

 

[Bluefish]

recoil is really momentum. Ie mass X velocity. A 45-70 400g subsonic smacks a target, but only has 1200ftlbs of energy. If you look at the mass of the bullet and velocity then look at the mass and velocity of the bear after the bullet hits it the velocity is very low. No way the bear gets even moved by the bullet.

Now I am sure they notice the pain from getting hit by a big chunk of lead. I also agree that big heavy bullets cause a reaction. This is one reason why I have concluded that energy is a mostly irrelevant metric for bullet effectiveness. Slow heavy rounds have relatively low energy yet work well. I think the v^2 term in energy puts a premium on velocity yet that doesn’t translate into better killing.

 

[JPW13]

They might wear you down twisting words so be careful. We all know what you are talking about - some calibers tend to really flatten an animal. But folks also flinch from the calibers that often knock em down dead, so you are better with a small caliber so you don't flinch with is the mantra. You need to spot your shots so you can shoot again.

Guns don't have any "knockdown power" and kinetic energy means absolutely nothing.

Haha, I've observed a some "twisted words" a few times on here! All good though, I appreciate what's been pretty open discussion so far.

Also, I completely agree on the flinching. Thos particular big boomers are open sights and for in close, usually still hunting timber, and I know for sure I flinch because I observe it every time I pull the trigger and drop the hammer on the cross bolt, scare the bear, and get annoyed at myself for flinching. Fortunately - inside 100ms I can still usually hit what I'm aiming at despite the short comings of my form and it gives me an excuse to go shoot a whack of 223 prior to the next season and cure that flinch in time to make some long range 22CM impacts.

 

[JPW13]

recoil is really momentum. Ie mass X velocity. A 45-70 400g subsonic smacks a target, but only has 1200ftlbs of energy. If you look at the mass of the bullet and velocity then look at the mass and velocity of the bear after the bullet hits it the velocity is very low. No way the bear gets even moved by the bullet.

Now I am sure they notice the pain from getting hit by a big chunk of lead. I also agree that big heavy bullets cause a reaction. This is one reason why I have concluded that energy is a mostly irrelevant metric for bullet effectiveness. Slow heavy rounds have relatively low energy yet work well. I think the v^2 term in energy puts a premium on velocity yet that doesn’t translate into better killing.

Kind of taking this off topic but...

You make some great points about momentum versus energy, and I agree that slow, heavy bullets like those from a .45-70 seem to cause a very noticeable reaction despite their relatively low energy. But I’m still skeptical of the idea that the bear wouldn’t be moved at all. While I understand that the mass and velocity of the bear far outweighs the momentum of the bullet, something is happening beyond just pain.

For example, if I shoot a round of wood with a .22LR traveling at the same speed as a .45-70, the reaction is completely different. The .45-70 creates a much more dramatic impact. Obviously, a bear isn’t a block of wood, but the physical response isn’t purely psychological or from pain—there’s a real, visible effect on the body. The seated position and backward fall of one bear and the hard drop to the side of the other suggest some transfer of force or disruption.

I’m curious what you think is happening in these cases? What is causing the reaction? Would love to hear your thoughts.

 

[Article 4]

I think this is all relating back to my comments around shooting bears with a 45-70

You make a fair point—so let me clarify my observation. When I described the bears as being "knocked over," I was trying to convey their immediate physical reaction to being hit, not suggesting some kind of mythical "knockdown power." That's said it's not like they tripped and fell down; the .458 projectile hit them with something (energy, force, 45-70 magic?), and their reactions were dramatic.

One bear dropped into a seated position and fell backward. The other fell to the side opposite the impact. Neither were a CNS hit, as both bears got back up, attempted to run, and then fell down again shortly after. While "knockdown" might have some loaded connotations, it accurately captures what I observed in layman's terms—seemingly more of an instinctive reaction to the energy transfer and trauma.

I’ll admit it’s not a scientific conclusion, just my firsthand experience. Happy to hear your thoughts on it or how you interpret and describe similar reactions in your hunting experience!

Appreciate the additional detail.

I am about to test the theory again in Montana next week on a Bison. 470 NE and a 500 grain DGX. might smash him down. might go all the way through and he might run a bit. Even that gun doesn’t knock me to the ground when i shoot it, but about 20 rounds of practice is all i can take.

In recent personal experience. I have shot or witnessed antelope, deer and elk dropping from impact and some running off dying later. Some not dying at all

Antelope with my 6.5 GAP-and a 140 berger at 285 yards. Hit square in the chest and flipped on its back. dead.

Deer with my 7/300 and a 175 eldx. Shot in shoulder. dropped dead.

Elk with my 30 nosler and 210 ablr. same. shot in shoulder. dead on spot.

At no time did any of those shots knock me down. I have witnessed hunting friends in camp shoot larger animals with smaller bullets in similar spots and no drop dead action. they all had life enough to run till dead. 1 didn’t die and we spent the next day and a half of our hunt trying to find it.

From my reading, the data suggests that the energy from the impact radiates through the animal invading the spine and brain tissue. Affecting immediate incapacitation and death. Much harder for smaller calibers to transfer that kind of energy

 

[JPW13]

Appreciate the additional detail.

I am about to test the theory again in Montana next week on a Bison. 470 NE and a 500 grain DGX. might smash him down. might go all the way through and he might run a bit. Even that gun doesn’t knock me to the ground when i shoot it, but about 20 rounds of practice is all i can take.

In recent personal experience. I have shot or witnessed antelope, deer and elk dropping from impact and some running off dying later. Some not dying at all

Antelope with my 6.5 GAP-and a 140 berger at 285 yards. Hit square in the chest and flipped on its back. dead.

Deer with my 7/300 and a 175 eldx. Shot in shoulder. dropped dead.

Elk with my 30 nosler and 210 ablr. same. shot in shoulder. dead on spot.

At no time did any of those shots knock me down. I have witnessed hunting friends in camp shoot larger animals with smaller bullets in similar spots and no drop dead action. they all had life enough to run till dead. 1 didn’t die and we spent the next day and a half of our hunt trying to find it.

From my reading, the data suggests that the energy from the impact radiates through the animal invading the spine and brain tissue. Affecting immediate incapacitation and death. Much harder for smaller calibers to transfer that kind of energy

Thank you for sharing the additional data points. Is it possible that it's less about the size, speed, energy of the bullet and more about the state the critter is in and where it's hit?

We know from the threads here that little heavy for caliber bullets kill, medium bullets kill, big bullets kill, arrows kill, basically if you hit something in a spot that is necessary for staying alive - it's going to die.

But we naturally tend to assign the reaction or the way the critter dies to some mythical power of our chosen bullet, calibre, cartridge, lucky spear etc. Might it simply be that depending on where it gets "poked" and the state of mind it's in at the time ANY fatal stimulus would cause the same reaction?

 

[Article 4]

Thank you for sharing the additional data points. Is it possible that it's less about the size, speed, energy of the bullet and more about the state the critter is in and where it's hit?

We know from the threads here that little heavy for caliber bullets kill, medium bullets kill, big bullets kill, arrows kill, basically if you hit something in a spot that is necessary for staying alive - it's going to die.

But we naturally tend to assign the reaction or the way the critter dies to some mythical power of our chosen bullet, calibre, cartridge, lucky spear etc. Might it simply be that depending on where it gets "poked" and the state of mind it's in at the time ANY fatal stimulus would cause the same reaction?

I’m sure it is possible.

I tend to lean toward a bulk of similar findings rather than the “one offs” where this one time this happened stuff. We all have those stories though.

I have read a lot. I mean a lot on energy transfer and incapacitation of that transfer. Some believe it. some don’t. I believe it, obviously

Agree, put a big enough hole in something it usually dies, especially with a perfect shot. we know in the field, perfect shots don’t always happen. if it’s not perfect, prefer more of everything to increase the odds.

So as the OP thinks about magnums or larger bullets going faster over use of smaller calibers, It is definitely a part of African hunting and could happen here, as it has with archery equipment and muzzle loaders.

 

[BRWNBR]

Man. These threads get ridiculous.
I’m guide here in Alaska, mostly deal with brown bears. I’ve got some experience with situations when I need stuff dead five minutes ago and situations where we were under equipped for the task. I’ll hit a few points I’ve come to learn over 25 years of Alaska bear guiding.

-Bears can’t read ballistics charts, nor do they appear to give a crap about any numbers.

-heavy rifles are stupid.(breathe folks) unless the shooter can manage them off hand and shoot quickly and instinctively. Lost bears because guys couldn’t pull up and hit a shot without a rest due to heavy rifle.

-the caliber doesn’t seem to play as big a role as the bullet construction. Berger bullets in a 338 lapua are less effective than a X bullet in a .308. I’ve seen it. More than once.

I do feel magnum calibers have their place. Bigger is better IF coupled with a controlled expansion bullet. They are amazing. Can’t deny exit holes. Guys have asked me for years what’s a good bear rifle. My answer is always this. Complete penetration from any angle in any condition. Magnum calibers. Magnum quality bullets will do this more often than others.

This is not hard fast rules. This is my opinion based off my experiences. Others will or may have difference of both. That is fine. Bottom line as a hunter is we make things dead as quickly as we can. If you’re pursing that. You and I will never have an argument. (Unless you think 800 yards shooting is actually hunting -ducks for cover!!-)

 

[Bluefish]

Kind of taking this off topic but...

You make some great points about momentum versus energy, and I agree that slow, heavy bullets like those from a .45-70 seem to cause a very noticeable reaction despite their relatively low energy. But I’m still skeptical of the idea that the bear wouldn’t be moved at all. While I understand that the mass and velocity of the bear far outweighs the momentum of the bullet

If we just look at bullet diameter, twice the diameter is 4x the area. Look at it this way. On one you are sticking a 1/4” rod into the animal the other is a 1/2”. The 1/2” rod moves a lot more stuff out of the way. Probably why when we were limited to round ball or plain lead that bigger was always better. I like how 45-70 subs work, just wish they didn’t drop so fast.

I found Rokslide due to figuring out why deer I shot with big bullets (35 cal) going 22-2500 fps didn’t just drop. Everyone says that animals are always just dropping when hit. That wasn’t happening for me. I wondered why. I now have had 1 animal just drop out of 9. Was a spine hit from what I could see. The other 5 animals shot with the same load all ran a ways. I now know why.

 

[SteveAndTheCrigBoys]

Man. These threads get ridiculous.
I’m guide here in Alaska, mostly deal with brown bears. I’ve got some experience with situations when I need stuff dead five minutes ago and situations where we were under equipped for the task. I’ll hit a few points I’ve come to learn over 25 years of Alaska bear guiding.

-Bears can’t read ballistics charts, nor do they appear to give a crap about any numbers.

-heavy rifles are stupid.(breathe folks) unless the shooter can manage them off hand and shoot quickly and instinctively. Lost bears because guys couldn’t pull up and hit a shot without a rest due to heavy rifle.

-the caliber doesn’t seem to play as big a role as the bullet construction. Berger bullets in a 338 lapua are less effective than a X bullet in a .308. I’ve seen it. More than once.

I do feel magnum calibers have their place. Bigger is better IF coupled with a controlled expansion bullet. They are amazing. Can’t deny exit holes. Guys have asked me for years what’s a good bear rifle. My answer is always this. Complete penetration from any angle in any condition. Magnum calibers. Magnum quality bullets will do this more often than others.

This is not hard fast rules. This is my opinion based off my experiences. Others will or may have difference of both. That is fine. Bottom line as a hunter is we make things dead as quickly as we can. If you’re pursing that. You and I will never have an argument. (Unless you think 800 yards shooting is actually hunting -ducks for cover!!-)

Do you have experience with smaller cartridges/calibers on brown bears?

The common rebuttal to the “guide experience” bigger caliber / magnum point is often that guides haven’t tried the smaller cartridges and popular match bullets. Would be cool if you do have experience with them to compare.

 

[Scoutfan]

Good to see you post on here Jake. So you don't think 2 or 3 perfectly placed 223/77tmks are better than one well placed 35 whelen? .
Serious question-- Have you seen any accubonds used and what were the results and your thoughts?

 

[BRWNBR]

We have shot multiple browns with .270’s and 308’s. My kids go to is our 308 for the brownies. Several clients have used them as well. And they work just fine in simple circumstances. The problem with bears is sometimes you need follow up shots and typically these are on spinning contorted creatures and you need to run a bullet thru the hip and up and out the front of the chest. This is where things get more beneficial with power.
Broadside, chosen shot moments on brown bears…almost. Almost any center fire rifle will kill then just fine. Small calibers. Medium. Large. Xtra-large all work on a broadside brown bear. Poke the hole, let them run and the air go outa their tires. And tada. Dead bear. But like everything else….thats IF everything goes right. My preference is to be prepared for the “IF they don’t go right” moments. We have the capability to be equipped, so why not be?

 

[Scoutfan]

I would like to know about your experiences with Berger style bullets and what you didn't like about their performance?
I am also curious about your comments about exit holes. Is it simply because it shows good penetration and leaves blood trails if needed?

I will leave the 800 yard shot topic alone, except to say that some people are way more capable of that shot than your average joe six pack that checks his zero with 3 shots and then pot shots at 500 yards.
I greatly prefer close shots but will stretch a bit if needed under ideal conditions.