Listen to guides when loading for big game

[WVELK]

I went on three big game rifle hunts this fall, spending nearly two months with some really great guides. These are guys that spend 5 months a year in the NWT and some that spent 4 months a year in British Columbia. They see more big game animals (moose, goats, caribou, elk and sheep) shot with a rifle in a year than some will see in a lifetime. When you compound that over 5 or 10 years, it makes sense to listen close to what they say. I don’t know if it is really beneficial to identify bullets they say consistently perform worse than others or those that consistently impress. I will merely say I learned A LOT from them and their real world experience. I learned a lot from photos they have taken over the years depicting the trauma post shot.

If you are thinking of working up a new load with a new bullet and have a guide friend or two, it might be worth the effort to pick their brain a bit. Yes, there a lot of bullets that will kill. However, I am more convinced now than ever that some just work better than others.

 

[mxgsfmdpx]

Yeah, no thanks.

Guides are really great in their niche areas at finding animals. They are bad ass outdoorsmans that we can all learn things from.

I would wager that less than 2% of all guides actually know anything about how bullets kill animals and which are most effective. Probably even less than that actually.

They almost always lean towards the same echo chambers and herd mentality that has plagued hunting for decades.

 

[WVELK]

Yeah, no thanks.

Guides are really great in their niche areas at finding animals. They are bad ass outdoorsmans that we can all learn things from.

I would wager that less than 2% of all guides actually know anything about how bullets kill animals and which are most effective. Probably even less than that actually.

They almost always lean towards the same echo chambers and herd mentality that has plagued hunting for decades.

Well we will respectfully disagree on all of your points. If a guide watches 20 animals being shot a year, is watching the animal with spotting scope or binos at the time of impact, knows the caliber and bullet being used, sees where the animal is hit and how quickly it dies or does not die and the field dresses the animal, how is he not going to learn something? One of the guides I was just with had a spreadsheet on over 200 animals his clients have killed in the last 20 years.

There is no way less than 2 percent of guides know nothing about how bullets kill.

 

[rookieforever33]

So do they all like the same style combo of cartridge and bullet?

 

[North of 60]

So do they all like the same style combo of cartridge and bullet?

I'm curious too as to more specifically what you learned from these guys Re: cartridges and bullets.

 

[WVELK]

So do they all like the same style combo of cartridge and bullet?

I am sure not, but in fairness I have not talked to all of them. My point is use them as a resource - like any other resource. I just don’t think it wise to assume they know nothing about bullets or how they work. I have never met a guide who did not start out as a hunter, and did not hunt while I knew him.

 

[WVELK]

I'm curious too as to more specifically what you learned from these guys Re: cartridges and bullets.

Well, I will throw this out there. I would have likely never considered using a Terminal Ascent bullet. But, three different guides in moose camp raved about how well they worked. Another point they often discussed was bullet performance on marginal shots.

 

[BlackTail]

I don’t know if it is really beneficial to identify bullets they say consistently perform worse than others or those that consistently impress.

Come on man, don’t be like that! You already shook up the champagne. Pop that cork, and let’s see what happens!!

 

[Slickhill]

I worked for a guide outfit for a while. 300 magnum minimum for black bears. Boss about shit a cat when my wife killed one with a 270, pissed I let her use such a popgun.

Worked trade and outdoor shows selling hunts/guns for years. More guide espoused lore that I haven’t found to be accurate concerning guns/bullets/cartridges. The damn Texan guides are as bad as any and they were usually selling pig/deer hunts. Hip waders were often required equipment if you wanted to wade through the bullshit to get to the bar and grab a beer. When the drinks started flowing so did the stories of Kevlar elk and Nilgia, AR500 plated bears, and heaven only knows what all else.

I kill a bunch of animals annually. I enjoy experimenting and have done so with at least 2 dozen rifle cartridges and nearly 50 different bullets. I also keep notes and have for years.
Bottom line. Bullets through the front half kill stuff. Softer bullets often show quicker results. Harder bullets are usually easier on the eating parts. But put any of them into the pump house and you’ll be in good shape.

 

[35WhelenAI]

I went on three big game rifle hunts this fall, spending nearly two months with some really great guides. These are guys that spend 5 months a year in the NWT and some that spent 4 months a year in British Columbia. They see more big game animals (moose, goats, caribou, elk and sheep) shot with a rifle in a year than some will see in a lifetime. When you compound that over 5 or 10 years, it makes sense to listen close to what they say. I don’t know if it is really beneficial to identify bullets they say consistently perform worse than others or those that consistently impress. I will merely say I learned A LOT from them and their real world experience. I learned a lot from photos they have taken over the years depicting the trauma post shot.

If you are thinking of working up a new load with a new bullet and have a guide friend or two, it might be worth the effort to pick their brain a bit. Yes, there a lot of bullets that will kill. However, I am more convinced now than ever that some just work better than others.

I agree, a great resource for good information.

It's interesting a poster after this is confident enough to bet money "less than 2% of all guides...". Unless this poster has been on enough hunts to say "less than 2%" of the guides personally questioned knew nothing about bullets and how they kill.

If the poster has had 50 guided hunts, "less than 2%" is less than one full human guide. 100 guided hunts or talking to 100 guides would still not be two full human beings. How does that work exactly?

Must be nearing a couple hundred guided hunts to have a basis for the statement.

You can't make this up.

 

[Stache Attack]

Yeah, no thanks.

Guides are really great in their niche areas at finding animals. They are bad ass outdoorsmans that we can all learn things

As a guide I have many comments on broadheads, try to stay out of it here as some are sponsors…

I disagree with my outfitter on caliber and bullet options. However I will take one guy who knows his gun and how to shoot over one who just buys what they read. I take notes in my journal about most days and every kill. No I am not a 5 month Alaska or nwt guide though.

8 out of the 10 guys who I regularly guide with do not understand or care they are the tough cowboys, I understand what you say, I respectfully disagree with you on stating as a whole though or 98%

 

[SDHNTR]

I know a great many excellent guides. As a group they are awesome woodsmen and know how to find game and handle themselves well in the outdoors. But I have not known many at all who had much technical knowledge when it comes to ballistics. They get by on grit, not technical details.