Masculinity and Caliber Choice

[Boarmaster]

When I got started on Southern Whitetails heard the same magnum thing. So of course being young and impressionable I ran out and bought a 270 weatherby and a 300 weatherby. Cause you know two magnums must be better than one. I felt my 30-06 which I had been killing hogs in Florida for 15 years wouldn't do at the new Alabama lease.
I get to camp and find out to my surprise all the guys that had been hunting there for 35 years were using 260s and 270s. Evidently they hadn't been informed about magnums. I hunted half that year with those magnums and finished out the year with my 30-06.
I ended up with a 7mm08 as my primary deer killing rifle. That all was 25 years ago.

 

[Jethro]

One of handicaps of being a newish hunter (or new at anything) is the inability to decipher what your told is true or not. Lots of wrong information out there being passed off as gospel.

 

[MaraviaDave]

From my perspective, hunters generally suck at shooting from field positions and spend too much time talking about cartridge selection, as opposed to bullet construction, based on the game being hunted.

 

[Thegman]

One of handicaps of being a newish hunter (or new at anything) is the inability to decipher what your told is true or not. Lots of wrong information out there being passed off as gospel.

As to the OP's original question, the above is often correct, I think. Not necessarily a "masculinity" issue, but just that a lot of people don't really know what they don't know.

Many years ago, when I started hunting moose, I asked for advice from the guy who killed more moose than anyone I knew at the time. He steered me to a 300WM as that was what "was needed" to reliably kill moose ( they're pretty damn big after all).

In a few years, as I learned more, I switched to a much lighter and easier to carry and shoot 308Win and it worked as well as the 300WM for killing stuff, -for me-. Never looked back and have used even smaller cartridges since then without issue.

I recently had a conversation with him after he'd learned what I'd been doing for years now. He commented that he really didn't like hauling his heavy 300WM around at times, but didn't realize he could use something smaller and lighter. He's not "tough guy" about it, just never bothered really questioning what he "knew to be true". I find that to be the rule more often than the exception.

 

[RockAndSage]

As a newish hunter, I’ve been talking to many folks regarding calibers, rifles, etc. It seems there is a pretty substantial amount of hunters who make fun of people who use “wimpy” calibers and try to justify using a 338 Win Mag on southern white tails.

Shouldn’t a person use the strongest caliber they can shoot the best? A .243 in the right spot is miles better than a 300WM in the dirt ya know?

I’ve even been told the .270, .308, and even the .30-06 isn’t good enough and a magnum is needed . Doesn’t make sense.

Thoughts on why some people seem to think their masculinity coincides with their caliber choice?

It's totally a thing, but I think it works in the opposite direction too, regarding the animal. To some degree, I think some people would be fine shooting a doe or young forkie with a .223 or .243, but those same people wouldn't want to shoot a trophy buck with a "weak" or "girly" cartridge. Almost like it would be wrong somehow to take a big monarch of a buck with a small cartridge.

 

[06 SB]

I have been hunting southern whitetails for decades. It really depends on the area hunting. If I am in the mountains or thick swampy areas, a magnum is never needed. A 7mm08, 308, 338Fed or 358W work as well as many others like the 30-30. If hunting farm land, a 28 Nosler or 300PRC is needed for the reach with high BC bullets. My answer…It depends.

 

[HingleMcCringleberry]

Ego

 

[Pharmseller]

Remember the whole “Real men don’t eat quiche?”

Real men eat whatever the fųck they want.





My specialty.




P

 

[Acharenio]

i have a 6.5 creedmoor for Coues and 300 winmag when i hun t elk and bear, shoot both very well but here in arizona and mostly the west they give long shots, especially on coues, for me both calibers work fine but for eastern or souhthern whitetails don't thing you need a magnum, 308 or 270 or 30.06will do just fine.

 

[MCS]

I used smaller calibers for years and I've gone back to 7mm for deer and big 30's for elk. If your not shooting past 300 yards a smaller caliber will work fine. I've used 243 and 6.5 on deer and antelope with good success. But almost everything I've shot with smaller caliber rifles ran. When I switched to a 7mm shooting a 180 berger for deer it was a night and day difference. Most of the deer don't take a step. As for using a 6.5 on a elk I will never do that again. A 6.5 will not destroy both shoulders and drop a elk in place like a big 30 cal will.

 

[AkMtnRunner]

All the power to those who choose a small caliber for deer and other medium size game. They really are perfectly adequate with a good bullet and importantly, are easier to become accurate with. With that said, there's nothing wrong with choosing a more powerful rifle cartridge and becoming proficient with it. No doubt that everyone is more adequate with a softer kicking rifle, but that doesn't mean that that greater level of accuracy is necessary. A 6.5 CM shooting 1 MOA at a moose from 200 yards isn't any more useful than a 300 win mag shooting 2 MOA when the vitals are ~20" wide. Now, if we're shooting at over 400-500 yards, sure that accuracy difference is a different story, but traditionally, 200 yards and closer is much more common and has shaped the landscape of cartridge opinions. To each, their own.

 

[Yukon Cornelius]

Do smart car drivers poo poo the Prius?View attachment 700237

The smart car is stupid.

 

[taskswap]

All of the elk I've taken (so far) have been with a 7mm-08 Rem, which until a few years ago was recommended for "women and children" shooters because of its lower felt recoil. Anybody that thinks that makes me not masculine can come say that at my dinner table eating elk under the mounts I have on the wall there, and see if they can get through it with a straight face. But they only get to eat if they carry an 80lb quarter in the door on their back.

 

[Thegman]

All the power to those who choose a small caliber for deer and other medium size game. They really are perfectly adequate with a good bullet and importantly, are easier to become accurate with. With that said, there's nothing wrong with choosing a more powerful rifle cartridge and becoming proficient with it. No doubt that everyone is more adequate with a softer kicking rifle, but that doesn't mean that that greater level of accuracy is necessary. A 6.5 CM shooting 1 MOA at a moose from 200 yards isn't any more useful than a 300 win mag shooting 2 MOA when the vitals are ~20" wide. Now, if we're shooting at over 400-500 yards, sure that accuracy difference is a different story, but traditionally, 200 yards and closer is much more common and has shaped the landscape of cartridge opinions. To each, their own.

Yes, I wanted to add that as well. 308/30-06 and less, have never failed me for years on -many- moose, bears, deer, etc., but.as long as you can shoot the rife well, a more powerful cartridge isn't the "wrong answer" either. I've known lots of experienced hunters that exclusively use 300 mags, 375H&H, etc on the same animals. Maybe not "necessary", but they like them, they can shoot them, and they're successful with them. Most of those with a lot of experience though, don't bat an eye at someone choosing a smaller cartridge.

More choices work than don't. To the OP, take the advice from guys that tell you "you need this" or "you need that" with a grain of salt.

 

[HingleMcCringleberry]

I used smaller calibers for years and I've gone back to 7mm for deer and big 30's for elk. If your not shooting past 300 yards a smaller caliber will work fine. I've used 243 and 6.5 on deer and antelope with good success. But almost everything I've shot with smaller caliber rifles ran. When I switched to a 7mm shooting a 180 berger for deer it was a night and day difference. Most of the deer don't take a step. As for using a 6.5 on a elk I will never do that again. A 6.5 will not destroy both shoulders and drop a elk in place like a big 30 cal will.

What type of bullets were you using in the 6.5/243? You mention bergers in 7mm.

 

[JohnJohnson]

Take solace in the fact that the vast majority of hunters don't shoot enough to know anything about cartridges, rifles, scopes, etc. And keep in mind if you ask any magnum shooter if they flinch, they'll all say no. Then look at them at the range and you'll see most of them do, especially after a few shots. They just don't shoot enough to notice how it negatively affects their form. That's how it is out east anyway.

 

[Pharmseller]

All of the elk I've taken (so far) have been with a 7mm-08 Rem, which until a few years ago was recommended for "women and children" shooters because of its lower felt recoil. Anybody that thinks that makes me not masculine can come say that at my dinner table eating elk under the mounts I have on the wall there, and see if they can get through it with a straight face. But they only get to eat if they carry an 80lb quarter in the door on their back.

You’re a girl.

What time is dinner?




P

 

[MCS]

What type of bullets were you using in the 6.5/243? You mention bergers in 7mm.

The 243 I used 100grain remington coe lokt. In a 6.5 creedmoor I ran 140 vld's 127 barnes 143 eldx. In 6.5prc I ran a 147eldm. The 140 vld penciled through a antelope at 580 yards. The 127 barnes blew through the animal and they ran a long way. The 143 broke both front shoulders and performed good. The 147 in the prc performed great on deer but did not work good on elk. It lacked penetration when shooting the front shoulder. The 100 grain in the 243 worked in a elk 2 rounds right in the lungs she never took a step.

 

[HingleMcCringleberry]

The 243 I used 100grain remington coe lokt. In a 6.5 creedmoor I ran 140 vld's 127 barnes 143 eldx. In 6.5prc I ran a 147eldm. The 140 vld penciled through a antelope at 580 yards. The 127 barnes blew through the animal and they ran a long way. The 143 broke both front shoulders and performed good. The 147 in the prc performed great on deer but did not work good on elk. It lacked penetration when shooting the front shoulder. The 100 grain in the 243 worked in a elk 2 rounds right in the lungs she never took a step.

Your Barnes experience is typical. Same for the berger (they penetrate 3-4" before yawing/fragmenting)

With the 147gr eldm, how far was the shot and what exactly occurred? Just out of curiosity.

 

[MCS]

Your Barnes experience is typical. Same for the berger (they penetrate 3-4" before yawing/fragmenting)

With the 147gr eldm, how far was the shot and what exactly occurred? Just out of curiosity.

I shot a cow last year with the 147. 2 shots frontal in the shoulder 2 shots broadside in the mid to high shoulder and 1 in the liver. All shots were 200 to 300 yards. A big 30 cal would have stopped her. The 147 has worked great for me on deer but not on elk. It failed to break big bones and continue through the elk.