Is There Ever a Time to Hunt with Magnum Calibers?

[JPW13]

Maybe we should figure out how small of a hole we can put in a heart or lungs that doesn’t kill the animal then build from there?

HAHA - I see what you did there.

The thing with these heavy for caliber .224s is that they aren't marginal - the damage in the examples provided is more than adequate to catastrophic.

I suppose the other consideration of my original question is type of game. Despite .224s killing brown bears a bigger bullet might be better? Again it's a scale and both can be on the good side, with your suggestions being the superior option, so then we get into by how much? And that might just be preference/comfort?

 

[BRWNBR]

I’ve always said if I have a gun and a brown bear shows up…I now have a bear gun.

I wouldn’t hesitate punching a brownie with a 223. Used them for plenty of caribou and they work fine.
But some bones those little
Bullets aren’t gunna make it thru to continue the damage. But yes preference. Why use a little gun and run more risk just “cause it can”. But I feel better with more gas than I need for a trip too. Or more firewood than I anticipate needing for the winter.

 

[JPW13]

I’ve always said if I have a gun and a brown bear shows up…I now have a bear gun.

I wouldn’t hesitate punching a brownie with a 223. Used them for plenty of caribou and they work fine.
But some bones those little
Bullets aren’t gunna make it thru to continue the damage. But yes preference. Why use a little gun and run more risk just “cause it can”. But I feel better with more gas than I need for a trip too. Or more firewood than I anticipate needing for the winter.

That makes a lot of sense. If I'm hunting deer in an area without grizzly's the "little gun" seems the obvious choice. If I'm going to be in an area with a high density of big people maulers I'm probably going to take pause to think about a bigger stick.

Why I asked the question in the first place is that I love my 300wsm shooting 212s, but when I run the numbers I fall below 1800fps sooner than my 22CM shooting 80 or 88s. So is there ever a time to reach for my mag vs my creed? 12 pages later it sounds like "no" ("maybe" if I'm solo hunting in brown bear country).

Ultimately, I have to go bigger than a 30cal to see a long range benefit and that's a specialized use case with specialized equipment and a skill set I don't have...

 

[coyotekilla]

When is a magnum right? If I'm on a once in a lifetime trophy hunt I want all the odds I can stack in my favor. If I'm hunting something capable of eating me... having it dead sooner is better than later. If hunting say mtn goat where if it runs off it may not be accessible. Does a 338 kill a deer any more dead than a 223, no, but it should anchor an elk better that a 243

 

[rbutcher1234]

See that’s the thing…. It doesn’t.

 

[JPW13]

See that’s the thing…. It doesn’t.

Is that in reply to a 338 anchoring an elk better than a 243?

THAT is exactly what got me rethinking my big guns. The evidence on this forum seemed to show that .224 and .243 bullets anchor things very well. I tested that for myself last year and admittedly my sample size was only 5, but the number of animals "anchored" by a .224 was 4/5 and the 1/5 didn't go far. Maybe that's lucky, but that's better percentages than I've had with bigger guns and is consistent with all the photos and stories posted here...makes a fella think...

 

[rbutcher1234]

Yes correct. A 556 with a tmk or a 6mm with good bullets (or in my case the biggest I use for not elr is a 168 308) anchors things far better than a bigger magnum. Mainly because the bullets all perform far past the threshold needed to anchor things, are easier to shoot well, and lend well to being effective as a shooter.

The best bear defense gun is a ar15 with a mag full of tmk or gold dots. There is no individual on the planet that will stop a charging bear with higher percentages using any gun in existence other than an ar15 with good bullets. Anyone arguing otherwise either hasn’t killed enough animals or is woefully ignorant how to run a gun with accuracy and speed. 0.20-0.25 splits to the face vs a magnum or shotgun? No contest.

 

[Scoutfan]

That makes a lot of sense. If I'm hunting deer in an area without grizzly's the "little gun" seems the obvious choice. If I'm going to be in an area with a high density of big people maulers I'm probably going to take pause to think about a bigger stick.

Why I asked the question in the first place is that I love my 300wsm shooting 212s, but when I run the numbers I fall below 1800fps sooner than my 22CM shooting 80 or 88s. So is there ever a time to reach for my mag vs my creed? 12 pages later it sounds like "no" ("maybe" if I'm solo hunting in brown bear country).

Ultimately, I have to go bigger than a 30cal to see a long range benefit and that's a specialized use case with specialized equipment and a skill set I don't have...

Unless I am still hunting I prefer something like your 22cm over a 30 caliber for Deer hunting. That does not mean it's more versatile for most situations. I think if you run the numbers my 300rum has a bit more usable range than a 22cm. I could be mistaken though. To me my rum is less versatile than my 06ai. The only advantage it has is longer reach-- and Less recoil, but at the cost of a longer, heavier rifle with an obnoxious muzzle break.
Recoil is real and I would be lying if I said I didn't didn't shoot my 223 more often.
Bottom line is use what You feel most comfortable with. Rangefinders and modern bullets have certainly lessened the need for magnums in normal hunting situations, but there are still times when bigger is better as long as you can put bigger where it needs to go.

I believe it was the late Bob Hagel who first said:
Use enough gun for when things go wrong,not just for when they go right.

If you put enough bullets into animals you will eventually see some really weird things happen.

 

[Scoutfan]

Yes correct. A 556 with a tmk or a 6mm with good bullets (or in my case the biggest I use for not elr is a 168 308) anchors things far better than a bigger magnum. Mainly because the bullets all perform far past the threshold needed to anchor things, are easier to shoot well, and lend well to being effective as a shooter.

The best bear defense gun is a ar15 with a mag full of tmk or gold dots. There is no individual on the planet that will stop a charging bear with higher percentages using any gun in existence other than an ar15 with good bullets. Anyone arguing otherwise either hasn’t killed enough animals or is woefully ignorant how to run a gun with accuracy and speed. 0.20-0.25 splits to the face vs a magnum or shotgun? No contest.

Wow! What a statement! How many times have you done that or ever even heard about that happening?
Please make a Bear Man two movie for all the Alaskan and African guides to watch
Guess I will just live in woefull ignorance!

 

[BRWNBR]

Wait a sec….i might be confused cause i am just a normal dude slinging normal lead….

But are people actually thinking the caliber and gun have something to do with “anchoring” an animal?? That a 243 will work better than a 257 or 338 or….??? Is that what I’m reading here?

Man American internet has ruined us all! Lol
Guns are made To kill. Numbers don’t anchor anything. Results and effect do. Bad hit is a bad hit with anything. Biology says what causes an animal to be “anchored”. And I’m pretty sure it has something to do with the body no longer functioning in a way that allows movement. This can be accomplished with an arrow. Baseball bat. Taser. .22 rim fire. 577 t-Rex.

If we overthink this out of boredom or justification to buy a new gun then ya I get it. Carry on.
But if we are actually seeking to find or pass on applicable information then I think we are way off.
Shoot your gun accurately with a projectile that will reach its target and you can anchor anything. Everytime. Just hit the “anchor me” button located inside the animal. Tada. Anchored.
800fps button press. Anchored.
4500fps button press. Anchored.
Pointy arrow button press. Anchored.
800 gr FMJ slug button press. Anchored.

What’s the confusion?

 

[WeiserBucks]

There is no individual on the planet that will stop a charging bear with higher percentages using any gun in existence other than an ar15 with good bullets.

Definitely not hunting oriented but belt fed full auto shit would disagree.

 

[tenth1]

Maybe we should figure out how small of a hole we can put in a heart or lungs that doesn’t kill the animal then build from there?

I moved to Alaska 20 years ago from Montana. I hike A LOT. Always carried a .44 629 classic.

One of my first exploratory hikes scouting, I ran into a real old timer lugging around a scarred shotgun (sawed off model 1200). Real nice guy and got talking guns, he asked to fondle my fancy stainless rig. I did, being from Montana and trusting.

The first thing that he said was to file off the front site. I stared vacantly for a little while. He got tired of me looking like a dolt and told me that it wouldn't hurt as much when the bear shoved it my @#&. Hence bigger tools of the trade.

 

[rickyw]

I moved to Alaska 20 years ago from Montana. I hike A LOT. Always carried a .44 629 classic.

One of my first exploratory hikes scouting, I ran into a real old timer lugging around a scarred shotgun (sawed off model 1200). Real nice guy and got talking guns, he asked to fondle my fancy stainless rig. I did, being from Montana and trusting.

The first thing that he said was to file off the front site. I stared vacantly for a little while. He got tired of me looking like a dolt and told me that it wouldn't hurt as much when the bear shoved it my @#&. Hence bigger tools of the trade.

That’s an old joke up here

 

[iamthenick]

I've asked this is previous threads: how does one quantify this "margin of error"? Asked another way: how badly can you miss and still get sufficient results? Is it relative to the bullet diameter (caliber)? Or the bullet weight? Or the charge weight of the cartridge? Or do guys just know that this big gun will bail them out if they f#*k up? I see this justification for magnums tossed around a lot but no one has been able to say how this margin of error is put into practice with confidence.

Please be the first to answer this question.

If you shoot a .50 bmg within 12 inches of someone even if you miss it will still kill them and their mother at the same time

 

[Scoutfan]

The only thing I have ever seen anchor every animal on the spot each and every time is brain shot or severed spinal cord above all 4 legs, regardless of caliber or weight. I have made more of these shots with a 223 than all my other guns combined. That doesn't mean it is my most effective tool for all my needs. It's my torque wrench not my cresent wrench.
I really enjoyed all the useful and well thought out input on this thread. I like seeing other people's views and experiences. I like hearing about bullet performance people are experiencing.

BrownBear hope to run into you one day up there. Can't wait to see if your still carrying around an old obsolete relic or packing a new ar 15 to protect you and your clients with. The suspense is driving me nuts.

I think this thread has reached the end for me.

 

[coyotekilla]

Is that in reply to a 338 anchoring an elk better than a 243?

THAT is exactly what got me rethinking my big guns. The evidence on this forum seemed to show that .224 and .243 bullets anchor things very well. I tested that for myself last year and admittedly my sample size was only 5, but the number of animals "anchored" by a .224 was 4/5 and the 1/5 didn't go far. Maybe that's lucky, but that's better percentages than I've had with bigger guns and is consistent with all the photos and stories posted here...makes a fella think...

First off, use what's right for you. Personally, I've used 223, 243, 6.5 grendel, 6.5 creed, 300aac, 30-30, 300 wby, 300 wsm, 12 ga, xbow, and a f350 all on whitetails with success. My favorite? Kill tally goes to the 243. The 6.5's are a close second. The thread isn't whitetail specific though. If im going to Alaska, hunting moose, and there is a chance yogi might come nosing around the kill, id rather have a 300 mag in my hands than my .223. To me, 1 must account for the what if's along with intentions. If im culling whitetail, sure use what's effective & efficient. For what it's worth, I have had to scare a bear off with a .223, it was only temporary & I ended up leaving the area early rather than a 3rd encounter, but that's another story for another time.

 

[rickyw]

It wouldn’t be hard to find a lawyer who would have a heyday if a bear guide who was using an AR 15 based on Rokslide “research” had their client get mauled by a bear because it didn’t die fast enough. It would be interesting to see how that case would end. Maybe, once all the data by real experts was reviewed in detail, the small calibers would be vindicated. Maybe not. If I were a guide, I’d carry big, just for that reason.

I can’t help but think of good ol Phil Shoemaker, who went from his 30-06 to a 458 win mag. I bet he has some good reasons for that.

 

[tenth1]

That’s an old joke up here

I'm sure that it is, and that is a true story. The point is that the bigger the better, tried and trued. Killing is a priority and nothing said is better than your life at stake.

 

[wyosam]

HAHA - I see what you did there.

The thing with these heavy for caliber .224s is that they aren't marginal - the damage in the examples provided is more than adequate to catastrophic.

I suppose the other consideration of my original question is type of game. Despite .224s killing brown bears a bigger bullet might be better? Again it's a scale and both can be on the good side, with your suggestions being the superior option, so then we get into by how much? And that might just be preference/comfort?

Something to consider that I haven’t seen mentioned about small cartridges for big bears- if you get mauled by a bear, regardless of whether cartridge choice contributed in any way, everyone other than the Rokslide enlightened is going to say you died because you’re an effing idiot. There’s no getting around that. On the other hand, you’d likely die a hero here, maybe even get a memorial on the 223 for everything thread. It’s definitely a deeply personal decision how these factors might influence cartridge choice, but they shouldn’t be ignored.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[z987k]

Yes correct. A 556 with a tmk or a 6mm with good bullets (or in my case the biggest I use for not elr is a 168 308) anchors things far better than a bigger magnum. Mainly because the bullets all perform far past the threshold needed to anchor things, are easier to shoot well, and lend well to being effective as a shooter.

The best bear defense gun is a ar15 with a mag full of tmk or gold dots. There is no individual on the planet that will stop a charging bear with higher percentages using any gun in existence other than an ar15 with good bullets. Anyone arguing otherwise either hasn’t killed enough animals or is woefully ignorant how to run a gun with accuracy and speed. 0.20-0.25 splits to the face vs a magnum or shotgun? No contest.

I tend to agree. The ar15 would be my top choice with 30rdns. It's the only thing that I might be able to get 10-15 off, and it'll do a lot better than the 9mm where I might get that many off as well. It's not what I'd chose to hunt them with, but for defense it's my top pick.
Except that it's way too much to carry in a position that I'd expect to even get 1 round off. I mean, I guess if we're defending our cabin from attacking bears, sure. But lets get something belt fed at that point.