Is There Ever a Time to Hunt with Magnum Calibers?

[Formidilosus]

Yup story will involve 5 shots, post mortem autopsy photos, and hope great their tikka with a rokstok is.

I much prefer the I hit him with a 225 and ripped the rug out from under him experiences..


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

You mean except for the ones that don’t do that? Of the last 5 elk I’ve shot, or seen shot with 300PRC or larger- 4 were shot multiple times.


This one had multiple shots with 225’s and the last was a head shot to end it. I believe there was 6 Rokslide members that was on this hunt.






Wasn’t there another “big guns are better” poster recently that had to shoot a bull “perfectly” 4 times with a large 30cal to stop it?

 

[rbutcher1234]

for me, a big magnum (300NM) is chosen because it’s fun and badass, not because I think it’s the best for the job. I just like it. I’d pick my 223 or 6mm for something where I needed to optimize.

 

[FredH]

If you aren’t talking specific bullets instead of chamberings, then you are comparing pineapples to rutabagas instead of apples to apples.

Thats where the main difference falls between small cartridge guys and “ma three hunnert” guys.
Small cartridge guys are talking about specific bullets at specific minimum impact velocity windows, and big cartridge guys are talking about their rifle.
And a main point of the benefit of a big cartridge is that a person can ask a buddy what he should be using for elk in his new 300 wm and get an answer of “a 180 gr” and it will work as long as he can shoot it and have a bullet land in the front half. And that will be the extent of his knowledge about bullets and terminal effects.

A small cartridge guy who has gone down the rabbit hole will likely know that he can kill elk just as effectively with a 77 TMK or 88 ELD m out to whatever range he can maintain 1800 fps impact velocity to, and that he won’t have the same effectiveness using a 62 gr TTSX or 50 gr GMX or any other number of bullets that have shown erratic performance, etc etc etc.

Hate to break it to you but having a specific velocity as your baseline ignores the fact that elk are not all shot feeding out of haystacks. Or even standing still. Specific bullets that work in a more well rounded set of opportunities are not rare. From .264 on, cup&core bullets weighing 130 grs. and up built for controlled expansion carrying an SD of .240 or more and bc of .4 or better are going to outperform any .224 bullet, both going 1800 fps when it comes to wound depth and width. I personally like a minimum impact velocity of 2000fps because I like to work on the plus side of minimum expansion speed. As for the specific bullets comment. Ok the 160 grain 7MM Partition/Ballistic Tip started at2700-3000 fps. Or a tip of the hat to the match style hunting bullet fans a 162gr. ELDM/X started at 2700-3000 fps. And yes Apples to oranges. I also don't see why there seems to be a "as well as he can shoot it" attitude concerning anyone that wants a bigger hole working for them. That phrase is equally important with the smaller bores. Sure you can make the case that lighter kicking rounds are easier to shoot well. I say someone experienced shooting his 7MM/300 magnum will be able to place his shot either better or just as well as someone whose experience only allows him to use the lightest recoiling rifle possible.

 

[KHntr]

I’m sorry, but what?

What has knowing where your bullet crosses your minimum velocity threshold for bullet upset got to do with where an elk may or may not feed? Does it make a bigger difference in bullet penetration if a bull is walking quartering in or away??

I have to admit, when I see someone start throwing SD out as a measure of bullet effectiveness to make their point online I picture them as typing furiously with spittle hitting their screen.

I really don’t see what point you are trying to make with that, but it comes across as being full of emotion. Take a breath homie, nobody is telling you that you have to use a 223 on elk.

 

[FredH]

I’m sorry, but what?

What has knowing where your bullet crosses your minimum velocity threshold for bullet upset got to do with where an elk may or may not feed? Does it make a bigger difference in bullet penetration if a bull is walking quartering in or away??

I have to admit, when I see someone start throwing SD out as a measure of bullet effectiveness to make their point online I picture them as typing furiously with spittle hitting their screen.

I really don’t see what point you are trying to make with that, but it comes across as being full of emotion. Take a breath homie, nobody is telling you that you have to use a 223 on elk.

My post is very clearly written. You brought up 1800 fps. Yes quartering away or in require more penetration than broadside. You are the one pushing the 223 for all hunting. You brought up "all the people" who have been successful in doing so. If BC is so important to you then why is SD not?

 

[KHntr]

My post is very clearly written. You brought up 1800 fps. Yes quartering away or in require more penetration than broadside. You are the one pushing the 223 for all hunting. You brought up "all the people" who have been successful in doing so. If BC is so important to you then why is SD not?

Yes, I brought up a minimum impact velocity to achieve the bullet performance that I am comfortable with when it comes to killing. I fully believe that someone who has a solid understanding of how their chosen bullet behaves in flesh at various impact velocities is a more effective hunter.

I’m not pushing a 223 for anything, to anyone. I’m merely relating my specific experiences with various cartridges and specific bullets across an array of animals, and what I have found to be an effective and efficient combination when it comes to killing. Shoot whatever you like, I care not. I WILL however point out that some bullets kill faster and more decisively than others, regardless of diameter.

BC isn’t important to me. At all. It’s merely a unit of measure that tells me where my minimum velocity threshold will occur, and how much my bullet of choice can be moved by wind. I need to know what it is so that I can figure out where my performance window ends, but thats about the extent of it.
The construction of the bullet IS important to me - I like how the long nose of the ELD m has a lot of material to crumple and create debris inside the animal, while the long shank keeps penetrating even as it is expanding and fragmenting. That it has a high bc and retains velocity quite well is all a secondary benefit to how it performs on game. Just means I can push the distance out in windier conditions than I could with a short stubby bullet.

SD as a unit of measure is basically meaningless for my purposes as it doesn’t take bullet construction into account. I already KNOW that a Barnes .308” 168 TSX will penetrate deeper more reliably than a 168 Sierra Match King, yet they have the exact same SD.
I recognize that SD is a calculable number, but it doesn’t really mean anything to me. It’s merely an anecdotal piece of information.
No different than figuring out how much energy my daily driver BMW is carrying when I’m doing 150 kph on the highway- it’s a number, and it can be calculated, but it doesn’t really mean anything in the way it is being used.

 

[HuntHarder]

 

[FredH]

Yes, I brought up a minimum impact velocity to achieve the bullet performance that I am comfortable with when it comes to killing. I fully believe that someone who has a solid understanding of how their chosen bullet behaves in flesh at various impact velocities is a more effective hunter.

I’m not pushing a 223 for anything, to anyone. I’m merely relating my specific experiences with various cartridges and specific bullets across an array of animals, and what I have found to be an effective and efficient combination when it comes to killing. Shoot whatever you like, I care not. I WILL however point out that some bullets kill faster and more decisively than others, regardless of diameter.

BC isn’t important to me. At all. It’s merely a unit of measure that tells me where my minimum velocity threshold will occur, and how much my bullet of choice can be moved by wind. I need to know what it is so that I can figure out where my performance window ends, but thats about the extent of it.
The construction of the bullet IS important to me - I like how the long nose of the ELD m has a lot of material to crumple and create debris inside the animal, while the long shank keeps penetrating even as it is expanding and fragmenting. That it has a high bc and retains velocity quite well is all a secondary benefit to how it performs on game. Just means I can push the distance out in windier conditions than I could with a short stubby bullet.

SD as a unit of measure is basically meaningless for my purposes as it doesn’t take bullet construction into account. I already KNOW that a Barnes .308” 168 TSX will penetrate deeper more reliably than a 168 Sierra Match King, yet they have the exact same SD.
I recognize that SD is a calculable number, but it doesn’t really mean anything to me. It’s merely an anecdotal piece of information.
No different than figuring out how much energy my daily driver BMW is carrying when I’m doing 150 kph on the highway- it’s a number, and it can be calculated, but it doesn’t really mean anything in the way it is being used.

So BC isn't important? Suppose it was weak like in the .124 area? That would sure shorten the distance where your minimum velocity happens wouldn't it. It would also way shorten the long nose of the bullet you want crushed to provide fragments. Seems to be of some importance. Sectional density is also important, without it you have nothing. It is a measure of how the mass of the bullet relates to bore diameter. It is not a predictor of penetration. Mass is not a length. Different materials will have different lengths obviously. Bullets of several types of construction fragment and retain a shank. Tell me what is important to you other than a 77-88 grain bullet that fragments and is going 1800 fps at impact? As for your interesting comment on SD suppose it were 0? What would you have?

 

[Wapiti1]

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?

Must be boring as hell for you to poke your head out of the den my friend.

Jeremy