Masculinity and Caliber Choice

[Rich M]

Story for me. I’m not forcing what’s not there. That’s for me. IMO.

Nothing really - grew up hunting VT, NH, ME - would hunt all day every day of season and be happy to have seen 1 deer per year. Couple guys used to always get bucks and they were heros.

Found out that those who were "always" successful took whatever shots were presented - ass, shoulder, guts... One guy was telling me the story of a particularly large WT and all he could see was horns sticking up over some brush so he put the + where the shoulder should be and shot - got the deer. Go figure. I was raised to wait for a better shot and took many years to finally get a buck.

 

[JohnJohnson]

Rifle hunting - Say critter is 100 yds away, looking at you/me, antsy getting ready to bolt - can see one eye, half a head and a big antler, couple trees, the rear half of guts + butt end. Is it a hunting story about the big one that got away or are you quartering that animal? My guess is that most guys would be telling a story around campfire that night. A few would be packing out meat.

Honestly I'd be telling the story about the one that got away. I don't NEED to kill something, I'm not a subsistence hunter.

 

[ddowning]

That’s no better, instead we just fight about fixed vs mechanical, single vs multi-pin, and heavy vs light arrows. All the same shit

Yep, same shit. Most of us can't get past the basics. If you create a double pneumothorax it really doesn't matter how you did it. Things just tend to die. We should be talking about techniques and training exercises to get better at that. That's where the 98% is. Instead, we're over here in the weeds arguing about the last 2% when most of us suck WAY too much to even notice the 2% improvement from caliber/arrow/broadhead.

 

[ddowning]

What? Have you seen elk vitals?

For a walking shot, they are big. Someone who is actually a skilled shooter should have no problem. Many of us think we are skilled when, in fact, we are not.

Also, the thread devolved into trotting and running targets. As someone who grew up around iowa deer drives, I can tell you that Fred Eichler and Geoff Neomich's ability to hit running coyotes at close range is an anomaly. Geoff also uses an AR so he can "catch up." Of the couple hundred guys I have done deer drives with, there are less than 5 that could consistently hit (at all, not vitals) a running deer inside 100 yards with a slug gun. Most would shoot 25-100 slugs/season to get lucky and connect once or twice. Getting a hit in the vitals on the first shot at difficult running shots is a skill few people develop. It will be argued ad nauseum, but based on my life experience, this is where I stand.

 

[wyosam]

For a walking shot, they are big. Someone who is actually a skilled shooter should have no problem. Many of us think we are skilled when, in fact, we are not.

Also, the thread devolved into trotting and running targets. As someone who grew up around iowa deer drives, I can tell you that Fred Eichler and Geoff Neomich's ability to hit running coyotes at close range is an anomaly. Geoff also uses an AR so he can "catch up." Of the couple hundred guys I have done deer drives with, there are less than 5 that could consistently hit (at all, not vitals) a running deer inside 100 yards with a slug gun. Most would shoot 25-100 slugs/season to get lucky and connect once or twice. Getting a hit in the vitals on the first shot at difficult running shots is a skill few people develop. It will be argued ad nauseum, but based on my life experience, this is where I stand.

I was once ok at it. Where/how I grew up hunting deer that weren’t on their way somewhere else were really rare. Moving shots were the norm. So that’s what we practiced- coyotes and jackrabbits on the run. Mostly with a 30-30 lever gun. Those running deer were generally close though- inside 50 yards. I’ve done ok on moving follow up shots over the years, though I’ve become less and less likely to take them, instead trusting the first shot and giving it a minute to do its thing. Wouldn’t take a first shot and anything moving beyond a slow walk at this point, and then only if the range is on the short end.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Ozarkansas]

On the whole “calibers defining masculinity” topic: I think it’s totally okay to tell someone you shoot the caliber you do because A) you like it, and B) your hunting style isn’t the same as theirs.

I wasn’t totally joking when I said swag is an important factor in a hunting round, I pick my hunting cartridges partly because I think they’re neat or have nostalgia, and that’s not a position you’re going to be able to logic me out of. It doesn’t bother me when I meet someone who doesn’t see the same value in those things.

As far as my hunting style being different: a lot of guys on this forum advocate for small calibers and match bullets, which obviously work very well. SOME (not saying it’s any of you on this thread) seem to tie their identity to it and look down on anyone who uses anything else (or at least they come across that way in my opinion). But those guys are often using them at long range and in situations where a fast follow-up is possible and often required.
Meanwhile I’m taking shots at relatively close range, through small openings, often on walking animals, with nearly zero chance at a follow-up if I miss the vitals. I’m never prone, due to the vegetation I hunt in, but I’ve also never had issues following blood because it shows up so well on a hardwood forest floor.

I clip shoulder blades enough that I prefer bonded bullets or monos- but I do it to save meat, I’ve seen what a frangible bullet from a .243 does to both shoulders of a deer at close range. Basically, I get what the Rokslide Special guys are going for, I think it has merit, but I have no problem saying “that’s not for me”. It doesn’t mean I think they’re wrong or effeminate, and I hope they don’t think that I’m overcompensating by shooting a 6.5.

 

[Formidilosus]

SOME (not saying it’s any of you on this thread) seem to tie their identity to it and look down on anyone who uses anything else (or at least they come across that way in my opinion).

To nit pick a bit- can you quote or show where someone shooting a small caliber has looked down on, or in some way “attacked” someone shooting a larger caliber?
For instance, if everyone is standing around a campfire the 223/243 guys don’t tell the old timers that they are stupid or that what they’re using is wrong. It is always the other way around. From what I’ve seen here, it’s exactly the same. Read this thread, the 223 thread and the 6mm thread- it’s small caliber users having to explain repeatedly why they aren’t unethical or “undergunned”. No one using smaller calibers is telling someone using a 30-06 or 6.5x55 that they are unethical. It’s the other way around.

 

[Ozarkansas]

To nit pick a bit- can you quote or show where someone shooting a small caliber has looked down on, or in some way “attacked” someone shooting a larger caliber?
For instance, if everyone is standing around a campfire the 223/243 guys don’t tell the old timers that they are stupid or that what they’re using is wrong. It is always the other way around. From what I’ve seen here, it’s exactly the same. Read this thread, the 223 thread and the 6mm thread- it’s small caliber users having to explain repeatedly why they aren’t unethical or “undergunned”. No one using smaller calibers is telling someone using a 30-06 or 6.5x55 that they are unethical. It’s the other way around.

I agree there’s a lot more of the magnum users being jerks to small caliber guys than the other way around, but there’s been a few times on the .223 thread and a few others where someone will say something that just comes across as a bit condescending or rude. They’re not saying larger caliber guys are unethical, just kind of implying or outright saying that if they REALLY knew what they were talking about, they’d be using a .22 caliber too. I’m not going to pull any examples to quote, partly because it’s a 350+ page thread to comb through, and partly because it would probably hurt some feelings over something that might not have been intended to come across that way. Often I think it comes from the poster mistaking someone with legitimate questions for another argumentative fudd, or else someone wants to engage in honest debate with a large caliber guy but accidentally comes across as argumentative.

I just brought it up to point out that looking down on someone for their caliber of choice cuts both ways, even if you’re right that it does generally originate from the big caliber guys

 

[yeti12]

To nit pick a bit- can you quote or show where someone shooting a small caliber has looked down on, or in some way “attacked” someone shooting a larger caliber?
For instance, if everyone is standing around a campfire the 223/243 guys don’t tell the old timers that they are stupid or that what they’re using is wrong. It is always the other way around. From what I’ve seen here, it’s exactly the same. Read this thread, the 223 thread and the 6mm thread- it’s small caliber users having to explain repeatedly why they aren’t unethical or “undergunned”. No one using smaller calibers is telling someone using a 30-06 or 6.5x55 that they are unethical. It’s the other way around.

Do you think alot of this is cause people with smaller calibers tend to shoot more? I know alot of prs/nrl type competitors and their "large rifle" is a 6.5 prc, 6.5 creed, 6.5x47 etc. They understand ballistics, recoil, their limits as a shooter etc. None of them want to shoot a large caliber magnum because of the recoil and muzzle blast and difficulty of shooting them. Not saying large caliber magnum shooters don't understand all that but based off my experience a very small minority of magnum shooters have a good grasp on things. That could just be my circle.

But alot of times, you get magnum shooters that fire 3 or 5 rounds off a bench one time in September/October and then next September they do the same thing. So they aren't getting beat up by the rifle.


I've watched friends drop in hunting caliber sizes as the amount of rounds they shoot in a year goes up.

 

[Formidilosus]

Do you think alot of this is cause people with smaller calibers tend to shoot more? I know alot of prs/nrl type competitors and their "large rifle" is a 6.5 prc, 6.5 creed, 6.5x47 etc. They understand ballistics, recoil, their limits as a shooter etc. None of them want to shoot a large caliber magnum because of the recoil and muzzle blast and difficulty of shooting them. Not saying large caliber magnum shooters don't understand all that but based off my experience a very small minority of magnum shooters have a good grasp on things. That could just be my circle.

But alot of times, you get magnum shooters that fire 3 or 5 rounds off a bench one time in September/October and then next September they do the same thing. So they aren't getting beat up by the rifle.


I've watched friends drop in hunting caliber sizes as the amount of rounds they shoot in a year goes up.

Yes. The more rounds people shoot a year, especially rounds not from a bench, the smaller cartridge they go to. The more they shoot a year, the easier animals die, and the smaller cartridges they shoot, so too seems the easier that animals die.

What it boils down to is that the difference in wound size or killing between any good .224-.308 bullet is generally not noticeable- they all kill about the same with any reasonable shot. The differences come with where the bullets are placed, and the less a gun recoil and moves during the shot- the more shots land in vitals. It’s a positive feedback loop.

 

[jimh406]

But alot of times, you get magnum shooters that fire 3 or 5 rounds off a bench one time in September/October and then next September they do the same thing. So they aren't getting beat up by the rifle.

I don't think caliber has a lot to do with it. If the goal is to shoot relatively short ranges and the gun is zeroed, why should the shooter shoot lots of times with any rifle unless they are doing it for fun. I'm assuming that the person has good fundamentals and already knows how to shoot. Otherwise, shooting a lot is just spending money.

I also think some who shoots a lot could simply be using the rifle to hunt that they shoot a lot. Most of the time, it won't matter if someone uses a small or large caliber, in any case.

 

[yeti12]

I don't think caliber has a lot to do with it. If the goal is to shoot relatively short ranges and the gun is zeroed, why should the shooter shoot lots of times with any rifle unless they are doing it for fun. I'm assuming that the person has good fundamentals and already knows how to shoot. Otherwise, shooting a lot is just spending money.

I also think some who shoots a lot could simply be using the rifle to hunt that they shoot a lot. Most of the time, it won't matter if someone uses a small or large caliber, in any case.

I don't think you understand the skill gap between someone "with good fundamentals and already knows how to shoot" compared to someone who shoots a few hundred or thousand rounds a month in good practice, timed practice, precision practice... It's significant.

In every sport that's out there, practice is super common. But for hunting or shooting people think that they just have this skill built in.

Practice is important and no one wants to shoot a 338 all afternoon.

 

[jimh406]

I don't think you understand the skill gap between someone "with good fundamentals and already knows how ro shoot" compared to someone who shoots a few hundred or thousand rounds a month. It's significant.

I'm not sure why you think that I don't understand. My point is that shooting short distances requires less practice than shooting longer distances.

The amount of shooting required to shoot accurately at 100-200 yds is significantly less than shooting long distance. Obviously, someone should practice as much as required to successfully shoot the range they expect to shoot.

 

[ElPollo]

I don't think caliber has a lot to do with it. If the goal is to shoot relatively short ranges and the gun is zeroed, why should the shooter shoot lots of times with any rifle unless they are doing it for fun. I'm assuming that the person has good fundamentals and already knows how to shoot. Otherwise, shooting a lot is just spending money.

I also think some who shoots a lot could simply be using the rifle to hunt that they shoot a lot. Most of the time, it won't matter if someone uses a small or large caliber, in any case.

I’ve never met anyone who shoots 3-5 times a year that can shoot well in the field.

Edit: That also goes for 100 yards and in. Short range shooters are almost never shooting prone or with a solid front and rear rest. Shooting like that takes more practice than most people think.

 

[yeti12]

I'm not sure why you think that I don't understand. My point is that shooting short distances requires less practice than shooting longer distances.

The amount of shooting required to shoot accurately at 100-200 yds is significantly less than shooting long distance. Obviously, someone should practice as much as required to successfully shoot the range they expect to shoot.

Correct. But I've seen no shortage of people show up to a nrl22 shoot that would consider themselves a "pretty good shooter" and get put into a position that could easily happen hunting and miss a 3moa target at 50 yards, 4moa at 100 etc

But they will also say they won't shoot past 300 yards cause they aren't experienced at long range shooting...

But they missed at 50.... with a gun that doesn't recoil


See where I'm going with this?

 

[jimh406]

But they missed at 50.... with a gun that doesn't recoil

I get that but a miss is a miss no matter if it is 50 or 500. Some people get nervous whenever they shoot at game. Practicing on targets isn't going to fix that.

I’ve never met anyone who shoots 3-5 times a year that can shoot well in the field.

Edit: That also goes for 100 yards and in. Short range shooters are almost never shooting prone or with a solid front and rear rest. Shooting like that takes more practice than most people think.

I guess it depends on what you are calling "shoot well". There are plenty of people who don't shoot much any more who can easily shoot a deer or larger size game at close range and do it year after year without shooting more than a few times a year.

There are also plenty of people who shoot a lot that regularly wound and miss big game. It's not how much you shoot it's knowing your limitations that matters.

I'm not advocating not practicing, but the amount required depends on what you are trying to accomplish and what skills you've already developed over the years.

 

[TheGDog]

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

SHORT ANSWER:
Because they had an experience with that caliber, which was more than likely due to their shot placement not being great, and the experience "soured" them to that caliber.

MY EXAMPLE:
Like the very first coyote I ever shot... it was this close-quarters thing that was a jump-shot opportunity at like 25yds about. I was, extremely rapidly due to the situation, aiming for typical behind the shoulder when this yote scrambled up the side of this drainage I was in, and stopped for just a second as he crested the drainage, to look back at me. So I wasn't gonna waste any time!

I squeezed off the shot... literally saw him do a barrel-roll mid-air, and fall to a slump where he was. But he was still like sorta out of it like a drunk flopping back and forth a lil bit for like I dunno 3-5 seconds.... before I dunno maybe shock set in? He then proceeds stand up, turns to look at me, me just staring stunned in disbelief. And he then runs off, up the knoll up there and out of my view.

I figured ok, he'll probably pile up in 40-100yds or something, and up there it shouldn't be hard to find him.

WELL... blood trailed him like crazy, in noisy 20-25mph wind, up out of the drainage, across the rising knoll... then... down into a ravine.. the lil game trail he descended on with lots of splashes of blood on rocks occasionally at the side of this trail... it pointed right at a Juniper growing out of a water rut at the bottom of the Ravine. Took off my pack and crawled up and underneath of it to look around, saw another like silver-dollar sized puddle of blood. Then circled around the Juniper uber slowly, finally found 2 drops. Turned them into a line segment... followed up the other side of the Ravine where that line pointed towards. Yup.. a lil flat spot.. found more bleeding.. then......??? Nothing. The trail ran out. Fanned out, but never found him. Re-traced the blood trail again from beginning to end too. Stayed and watched to see if the Ravens/Crows maybe showed interest in some particular spot. Nothin'.

Now me personally... my first reaction wasn't that a .223 Rem is weak, but for me it was "Holy Crap these Coyotes are TOUGH!" In my mind I was like I couldn't believe what I just witnessed!

Well... Coyotes ARE pretty tough, but a .223 Rem at 25yds is NOT weak, not by any stretch of the imagination.
But you can see what I'm saying about how it would be easy for someone to maybe think that, after experiencing this unsuccessful result? If they personally didn't take the time to really analyze what went wrong.

Later on, after finally taking my first deer, and seeing first-hand how lung-blood looks different than muscle-blood... I feel certain that my other suspicion was probably true... that my shot must have hit him in the protruding phalanges there sticking up from his Vertebrae by the shoulder region instead. The shot a little high. That was how it hit a solid enough structure like that to impart that energy such that it caused him to barrel-roll like I saw. Is what I now figure.

-G

 

[Rich M]

I’ve never met anyone who shoots 3-5 times a year that can shoot well in the field.

Edit: That also goes for 100 yards and in. Short range shooters are almost never shooting prone or with a solid front and rear rest. Shooting like that takes more practice than most people think.

I think a lot of folks forget that many hunters have been shooting many years and that the basics dont leave. I’m not gonna blow a shot inside 100 yards with about 50 years of shooting couple hundred rounds per year in fun. I will go up to 300-500 rounds if i think i need to shoot 400 yards.

Not gonna try for more than that, not interested in shooting over 1,600 feet in hunting - no place around here to practice.

 

[Rich M]

SHORT ANSWER:
Because they had an experience with that caliber, which was more than likely due to their shot placement not being great, and the experience "soured" them to that caliber.

MY EXAMPLE:
Like the very first coyote I ever shot... it was this close-quarters thing that was a jump-shot opportunity at like 25yds about. I was, extremely rapidly due to the situation, aiming for typical behind the shoulder when this yote scrambled up the side of this drainage I was in, and stopped for just a second as he crested the drainage, to look back at me. So I wasn't gonna waste any time!

I squeezed off the shot... literally saw him do a barrel-roll mid-air, and fall to a slump where he was. But he was still like sorta out of it like a drunk flopping back and forth a lil bit for like I dunno 3-5 seconds.... before I dunno maybe shock set in? He then proceeds stand up, turns to look at me, me just staring stunned in disbelief. And he then runs off, up the knoll up there and out of my view.

I figured ok, he'll probably pile up in 40-100yds or something, and up there it shouldn't be hard to find him.

WELL... blood trailed him like crazy, in noisy 20-25mph wind, up out of the drainage, across the rising knoll... then... down into a ravine.. the lil game trail he descended on with lots of splashes of blood on rocks occasionally at the side of this trail... it pointed right at a Juniper growing out of a water rut at the bottom of the Ravine. Took off my pack and crawled up and underneath of it to look around, saw another like silver-dollar sized puddle of blood. Then circled around the Juniper uber slowly, finally found 2 drops. Turned them into a line segment... followed up the other side of the Ravine where that line pointed towards. Yup.. a lil flat spot.. found more bleeding.. then......??? Nothing. The trail ran out. Fanned out, but never found him. Re-traced the blood trail again from beginning to end too. Stayed and watched to see if the Ravens/Crows maybe showed interest in some particular spot. Nothin'.

Now me personally... my first reaction wasn't that a .223 Rem is weak, but for me it was "Holy Crap these Coyotes are TOUGH!" In my mind I was like I couldn't believe what I just witnessed!

Well... Coyotes ARE pretty tough, but a .223 Rem at 25yds is NOT weak, not by any stretch of the imagination.
But you can see what I'm saying about how it would be easy for someone to maybe think that, after experiencing this unsuccessful result? If they personally didn't take the time to really analyze what went wrong.

Later on, after finally taking my first deer, and seeing first-hand how lung-blood looks different than muscle-blood... I feel certain that my other suspicion was probably true... that my shot must have hit him in the protruding phalanges there sticking up from his Vertebrae by the shoulder region instead. The shot a little high. That was how it hit a solid enough structure like that to impart that energy such that it caused him to barrel-roll like I saw. Is what I now figure.

-G

I shot a coyote dead center at 225 yards. Spun couple circles nipping at bullet hole and took off. Followed him 300 yds and gave up when he left property. Need a killing shot to kill them and anything else. I never aimed for lungs, just put it dead center and sent one. My bad. It died but not quickly.

 

[Castle Rock]

Just like some people are naturally gifted athletes or ball sports players, some also don’t need to try as hard to excel at shooting