Picking the RIGHT hunting caliber/cartridge for the job. By the numbers

[packgoatguy]

What he is writing is not science, it is pseudo science based mostly on dogma and tradition- not data. It just dresses up like science because it sounds math-y.

The real science is new bullet technology. It is not misunderstanding the role of energy and making up some other laughable killing score.

9mm usurping 40 and 45 because of bullet technology has already happened. 223/5.56 being the better choice for large game because of bullet technology like 77g TMK is going to become popular as well. 6.5crd is a step in this direction. It will be slower than it should, because people pit science/technology against dogma and tradition.

Well... lets talk about the 77gr 223 bullets. Lets say a G1 BC of .362, and MV of 2720? At 600 yards, that bullet has slowed down to nearly 1600fps at 4000 ft (depending on air temp and pressure on my calculator) if you are at lower elevations, you might be below 1600fps. Energy on target is down to around 400-470 foot pounds of energy. Now, Im no mathematician... but I can compare other known quantities... that sounds pretty similar to 22mag velocities and energy, or a lightweight 9mm like the 68gr +p xtreem defender from Underwood (1800fps). Again, nothing against the 22mag (well regarded as a varmint killer, but illegal in most states for big game), and nothing against a 9mm pistol (my pistol choice for CC) for stopping human threats at close range... however, I don't hear too many guys claiming that a 22mag or a 9mm is the "ideal" elk killing cartridge for under 100 yards (where the velocity and energy here would be comparable to your 77gr 223 at 600)... However, if you feel that 1600 feet per second and 400 foot pounds of energy on target is adequate for an ethical shot the next time you take a shot at a mature bull elk, moose, or grizzly bear, then more power to you I suppose.

As for the distinction between 9mm and 40/45, I agree, if you choose a modern performing bullet out of a 9mm and put it against cheap ball ammo out of a 45, then the 9mm will out perform it in wound cavity and tissue damage. However, if you are comparing apples to apples, and putting the same exact modern bullets into each (just scaled for caliber and weight), you will get more tissue damage (all else being equal) from the larger heavier bullet. Much of the argument regarding 9mm vs 45acp had more to do with which cartridge is easier to shoot accurately in the heat of the moment, which let you carry more ammo for the same weight, and other functional self-defense related issues, all which give the edge to the 45acp in comparison. However, that is not the type of comparison here being utilized here for big game capable cartridges.

However, your point is well taken that "bullet technology" plays a role here. Were my bullet choices limited to an FMJ that would pencil through my elk at 600 yards, much of my energy and velocity issues are moot... and I would probably feel more inclined towards an even bigger bullet to compensate for the lack of tissue destruction, in an effort to get as quick a kill as possible. Likewise, if the highest BC's offered were in the .3 range (blunter old school style, less aerodynamic) vs the .6 range of many modern 30 cal 200gr bullets, then my chosen 300 win in this scenario would have bled off too much velocity by 600 yards to be a contender. So yes, thankfully, we have a plethora of modern bullet choices that give us reliable expansion and high Ballistic Coefficients that can carry that bullet further faster and impart more tissue damage on target than ever before. (its a different topic and argument entirely if you want to discuss the terminal advantages/disadvantages of a monolithic/bonded style bullet construction with 70-80% retention vs a cup/core style 20-40% retention bullet, or if you prefer exit wounds or the effect of dumping all the energy into the target).

 

[BjornF16]

I used to buy into the energy game...now really the only thing that matters is bullet type and impact velocity.

.223 and 77 TMK good to about 450 yards. The 6.5's (CM/260) good beyond 600 yards.

6.5 Creedmoor/260 for Deer, Elk, and whatever else.....

Seeing that the 223 thread is such a success, I thought maybe I would start one for the Creedmoor/260. Seems like people are asking a lot about using them and various bullets, especially for elk. I've used mine for the last few years almost exclusively. I have some pics of bullet damage, albeit...

www.rokslide.com

 

[packgoatguy]

What did they kill elk, Buffalo, grizzlies and yada yada yada with before all the science and magnum calibers?

Calibers increased in size and scope to compensate for human error. There are members and lurkers here who have had one gun, some probably a single shot, that have hunted with that same gun for their entire life and that gun would be considered anemic by other members and lurkers.

I could give the right person any number of non-magnum calibers and with the right bullet he could kill just about anything on the planet.

Case in point, buddy hunted with an Elk guide a few years ago, guy had been killing Elk with a 243 for decades at all kinds of distances.

Your science is taking into account human error. A well placed shot trumps science every time, practice with your given rifle and load, learn the anatomy of the animals you are after and take out the CNS, heart, lungs or brain and it's game over regardless of what you are using.

If we spent as much time practicing with our equipment as we did researching the means and methods, we'd have a lot less lost game, missed opportunities and a lot more meat in the freezer.

Darryle, you hit the nail on the head here; "Your science is taking into account human error."

If I knew for a FACT that I (and anyone I hand my rifle to) could hit an elk in the head, every time, under any conditions, from 600 yards, then cartridge choice is moot. I would merely want the fastest tiniest bullet I could find. However, that is not the case, and I would doubt it is the case for most honest hunters. In fact, the human error you speak of, might not be my own human error... it might be the human error of a young hunter Im mentoring, which is exactly the situation Im planning for. I would also be compensating for the host of variables that I cannot control in the field. Lets say that, like many hunters, my rifle and bullet choice gives me reliable 1-1.5MOA groups at the range. At 400 yards, that is a 4-6 inch group, at 500 that is 5-7.5 inch group, at 600 that is 6-9 inches. At 600 yards, a mere 5mph wind could blow my bullet 9 inches off course. Lets say there is no wind where Im at, no visible wind at the target, but a cross wind in the middle that Im not aware of... (say a cross canyon scenario) might get anywhere from 2-6 inches of deflection. Or maybe, because my heart rate is pumping after hiking to the top of a ridge, or because the adrenaline is pumping as look at the biggest bull of my life, maybe I pull the shot... just a tad... human error right? Im not perfect. Ive never hunted with anyone who was. So yes, ultimately, (speaking strictly for myself and the half dozen kids I try to mentor every year) I need a margin of error to work within, and a bullet on target that has more mass, energy, velocity, and any other characteristics I can offer that will do as much immediate tissue damage on target as possible, so that even if the shot isnt "perfect" then the target animal will still expire quickly and humanely.

The other side of the coin is, even if the shot placement is PERFECT, there are still variables out of my control, and for which again... I want to over-compensate for.

A couple of examples;

My 17 year old son shot a cow elk a few weeks ago at 450 yards with a 300wm 200gr ELDX. Upon retrieval, the shot placement was perfect, right behind the crease of the front shoulder, about half way between back and chest. Bullet hit a rib on entry and split in two; one part carried on strait and true through both lungs, the other went sideways into the guts. in spite of perfect placement, in spite of even having the 300wm, this particular cow still managed to go over 200 yards, and took 4 minutes or so to expire. Because in this particular instance, the bullet did not make an exit wound, there was zero blood trail. Had I not been able to find her in the spotting scope after the shot, or if she had been on the edge of thick timber instead of in the open, we might not have found her before the coyotes or we froze to death (temps were well below zero that afternoon).

Example 2:
I watched a friend of mine shoot an antelope buck with his bow. Perfect shot. Buck laid down, and appeared to expire. After a couple minutes, we assumed he was done for and we stood up out of our concealed position (our mistake). He was in fact not done for, and picked up his head, and then stood up and started following his does. We ended up tracking him for over an hour and over a mile, before my friend put another arrow in him. When we gutted him, we found where the first arrow had made a broadhead shaped hole through the middle of the buck's heart. No exaggeration here, no hyperbole, this buck went over a mile and over an hour with a hole through its heart.

Example 3:
a couple years ago, my then 11 year old son shot a doe with my 243 win at 155 yards. He was quite inexperienced, although he had taken a small buck his first year hunting the year before, so I had limited his shot options to under 200 yards. We eventually found the right setup, a small group of does just over the crest of a rise, where I was able to get him in a comfortable prone position. The does werent going anywhere, so I let him take his time... which ended up being close to 15 minutes as he fidgeted back and forth trying to get set just right, tried to control his breathing, etc etc. Finally he felt he was ready, and he took the shot. There was no visible evidence that he had hit her, she didnt flinch, but she and the whole herd took off. We watched them go another 200 yards or so before they disappeared into some timber around a neighboring hill. I thought he must have missed, but we went to investigate anyway. Luckily, the deer had all taken a similar path, so their tracks were fairly visible. I finally found one speck of blood about 150 yards beyond where the doe had been... (after an hour of hands and knees searching) I wasnt very optimistic. The tracks split up after that point, and we started following each one as far as we could before we lost them in some rocky areas beyond. Finally, and luckily, we traced out a set of tracks that led us to his doe, she hadnt gone far from our sightline, perhaps a total of 300 yards. However, it had taken us nearly 3 hours to find her by that time. Upon inspection, his shot had been a bit far back in the ribs, still obviously mortal, but not "drop in its tracks" accuracy. No exit wound as well. Having seen very similar shot placement over the years, my intuition suggested that the same shot been taken with a bullet weighing at 150-200 grains instead of 95-100, then it likely would have made a significant exit wound, and the blood trail would have been significant. This particular story had a happy ending of course, but there were several points along the way that it could have gone badly with just a bit more bad luck, or even inexperience. Ive met plenty of hunters on the hill over the years who would have merely assumed it was a clean miss after inspecting the shot site and not finding any evidence of blood, and then stop looking from there. That would have been a waste, but unfortunately is the reality for many hunters.

So, yes, we are having to compensate for human error, and even when we do everything right, sometimes the deck is stacked against us.

 

[packgoatguy]

Not trying to sound arrogant or prickish....but,

Quit reading chit and go kill some stuff. If you're nervous, there's about a zillion proven combo's of case head and bullets that have worked for nearly a half century.

There's really nothing more than taking a bullet's optimal upset range and one that offers as close to as much penetration as needed and driving the damn thing home.

The internet has really made a lot of money for guys that don't deserve it.

Grab a rifle that you can stuff 5 partitions into a cantaloupe and go win your prize. If you hit the cantaloupe at 100 or 600....good, that's your end game.

Prs, benchrest, youtube....it's making people forget how to actually apply the strategies of smashing a bullet into a critter and eating it.....many are thinking about the photo op before they finish the shot.

Well, lest you think that my analysis was created in a vacuum, or that Im not willing to put my money where my mouth is... we have 4 elk in the freezer and 3 deer this 2021 season (9 in my household, so a lot of mouths to feed). All taken by my older boys ages 12-17, all taken at about 300 yards or more (longest was 450). All with either a 6.5cm or 300wm. Most were one shot kills. Several other deer this season for nieces or close friends as well. We have the luxury of practicing in our backyard out to 600 yards. Honestly, I didnt fill a single one of my own tags this year, because I was so busy setting up these kids for their shots. I would much rather them have the experience than myself. I believe we need to be giving this next generation of hunters all the help they can get so that they can be better hunters, sportsmen, and conservationists than we ever were. That takes a lot of planning, forethought, time, and resources.

 

[Oneforeachofyou]

Well... lets talk about the 77gr 223 bullets. Lets say a G1 BC of .362, and MV of 2720? At 600 yards, that bullet has slowed down to nearly 1600fps at 4000 ft (depending on air temp and pressure on my calculator) if you are at lower elevations, you might be below 1600fps. Energy on target is down to around 400-470 foot pounds of energy. Now, Im no mathematician... but I can compare other known quantities... that sounds pretty similar to 22mag velocities and energy, or a lightweight 9mm like the 68gr +p xtreem defender from Underwood (1800fps). Again, nothing against the 22mag (well regarded as a varmint killer, but illegal in most states for big game), and nothing against a 9mm pistol (my pistol choice for CC) for stopping human threats at close range... however, I don't hear too many guys claiming that a 22mag or a 9mm is the "ideal" elk killing cartridge for under 100 yards (where the velocity and energy here would be comparable to your 77gr 223 at 600)... However, if you feel that 1600 feet per second and 400 foot pounds of energy on target is adequate for an ethical shot the next time you take a shot at a mature bull elk, moose, or grizzly bear, then more power to you I suppose.

This paragraph sums up nicely what is wrong with your arguments. By your admission here, the 77g TMK should not work well *at all*on elk, deer, etc. Using your ideas here, it should be just awful. BUT there is a giant thread full of actual data showing it working just great. I can't really understand how you aren't seeing this but ... your hypotheses are not supported by the data.

 

[Steve O]

Any math that suggests a 500 S&W is 50% better than a 300 Win is suspect. Grab the 300, go forth, and slay everything up to and including dragon.

 

[packgoatguy]

This paragraph sums up nicely what is wrong with your arguments. By your admission here, the 77g TMK should not work well *at all*on elk, deer, etc. Using your ideas here, it should be just awful. BUT there is a giant thread full of actual data showing it working just great. I can't really understand how you aren't seeing this but ... your hypotheses are not supported by the data.

You arent reading my whole comment then. I dont blame you, I know have written a lot and I can be a bit wordy. However, I have stated and emphasized several times that I am in no way suggesting that smaller, lighter, slower projectiles than those flung by the 300wm are incapable of killing an animal. In fact, I have clearly stated that I have personally taken big game with a 223. Will a bullet shot from a .223 kill an animal? Yes. Of course. No one is arguing otherwise here. The question is merely about the margin of error involved and the likelyhood that a mortal shot might take longer to take effect. Having personally witnessed the effect of .223 and .243 caliber bullets on game at range vs similar hits with .264, .284, and .30 caliber projectiles, at least in my experience, there is a difference. Animals dead just the same, but fewer of them went as far when hit with the larger/faster projectiles, and other important factors like blood trails were amplified as well. Bottom line, if I am sitting on a ridge watching the buck or bull of my dreams at 475 yards... and I have two rifles nearby... one is a .223 and one is a 300wm... im going to grab the 300wm to make the shot. I know from the math and from personal experience that I have a lot more factors in my favor when that 200gr bullet leaves the barrel than if I had chosen the 77gr option instead.

 

[Darryle]

How big is the heart on an ELK? CNS?

What about a guys that bow hunt, how low is their KPS compared to your 300 Win Mag?

This pass season I hit 3 deer in the head at ranges up to 310yds. Their head is a bit smaller than an ELK, but it wasn't science, it was trust in the equipment and practice.

There are an infinite number of variables in every hunting situation, practice in the field and at the range will stack the deck in your favor.

I don't understand the science you espouse, but I do understand results in the field. In 45+yrs of hunting I have seen both positive and negative results, results because of poor shot placement, bullet failure or a combination of both. I have seen animals run for distances that were unbelievable, I saw a 250lb wild sow run almost 400yds with both lungs deflated and at least 1 unborn piglet hanging out of her side. I shot her with a 450 Marlin at about 60yds, it was unfathomable she'd make it 50yds. I chased her on foot and shot her 2 more times with the same rifle before she went down, last shot thru the rear ham and out below her snout.

I shot another wild pig that was about 350-375lbs with a 6.5 Creedmoor and it was lights out.

There is no concrete science that will guarantee 100% positive results each and every time, regardless of caliber. That's why PHs in Africa carry double guns, there are animals there that hunt back.

Read Death in the Long Grass

 

[PNWGATOR]

Energy and “KPS” are both meaningless in determining effective terminal performance.

 

[BjornF16]

Interesting observation from the 6.5CM/260 thread directly comparing 143 ELD-X and 300 WM launched 200 ELD-X:

6.5 Creedmoor/260 for Deer, Elk, and whatever else.....

I wanted a super lightweight mule deer gun. So 4 years ago i got a tikka superlite in 6.5cm. I load 4350 and a 143gr eldx. I don't have any pictures of the carnage and these are the only 4 animals this gun has shot at. All dropped on impact 330 yards hit behind the shoulder and exited out the...

www.rokslide.com

Probability of first shot hit is higher with the lower recoil rifle.

 

[z987k]

Energy and “KPS” are both meaningless in determining effective terminal performance.

So much so, that I'd probably put lack of recoil (and let's be honest, that's directly correlated with accuracy) a wildly larger share of any pie chart than KPS or energy. The KPS getting 0%. Not sure I've read a more stupid metric.

 

[Howiemoth]

"Discovered" this site today, seems very informative, just search caliber interested in.

Extensive Field-Tested Rifle & Cartridge Research - BallisticStudies.com

Expert rifle & cartridge research, carefully compiled through extensive field-testing & freely offered to the firearms community.

www.ballisticstudies.com

 

[packgoatguy]

Any math that suggests a 500 S&W is 50% better than a 300 Win is suspect. Grab the 300, go forth, and slay everything up to and including dragon.

Doing the math, and comparing both at point blank range (MV to MV) the 300wm with 2850fps and a 200gr bullet scores about 80 on the KPS scale, the 500S&W with a 500gr bullet at 1475fps scores in the mid 120 range (about the same as a 12 guage shotgun 1oz slug). Ive never personally witnessed point blank tissue damage from any of the 3 options, all would be instant death for pretty much any critter I would suppose... however, anecdotally, when I think about what alaskan hunters and guides tend to prefer for immediate (up close and personal) big bear defense, I think you would see more favoring a 12 guage, 45/70, 500S&W magnum (all with big wide heavy bullets) for "stopping power" at close range over a more long range suited rifle caliber like the 30-06, 300 win, 300 rum, etc. That is not to say that some dont pack a 30-06 at the ready when hiking through close in alaskan brush...

However, here we are talking about the killing power of a particular bullet from a particular cartridge at range. Beyond a certain point, even a 500gr bullet will lose enough velocity to not do much other than leave a bruise... and certainly it will reach that threshold LONG before the sleeker bullets of the 300wm. But the KPS score gives us a chance to compare known (from the experience of hunters who have gone before us) killability with otherwise lesser known quantities. If good ole Jack O'Connor and his beloved 270win were taking any and all North American game successfully out to 350 yards, with a 130gr projectile... then we can identify the terminal effectiveness of that particular bullet choice and extrapolate it out to other yardages with otherwise dissimilar characteristics (lighter or heavier bullets, different velocities, etc). It does no disservice to Jack to suggest that a 130-145gr .277 projectile has the same relative killing capacity at 250-300 yards (with 2500-2600fps velocity retained) as would a 200-220gr .30 diameter projectile at 600 yards with 2050fps velocity retained. Otherwise, if you have two bullets, one smaller diameter 130 and one larger diameter 200 grains, and they are both doing 2000fps at the target... it doesnt take a rocket scientist to discern that the heavier/larger projectile has the capacity to do more "damage"... The KPS score merely gives us a way to compare their relative umph on target in spite of dissimilar weight and bullet size. Its a tool.

 

[PNWGATOR]

Your conclusions are incorrect.

 

[BjornF16]

I have an 8 lb sledgehammer tool. Nobody really wants to use it when building decks even though it is very effective in driving nails.

Problem is no one wants to hold the nail as it can be painful when hit by the tool.

Also, since no one really holds it, nails get driven in slanted. Sometimes in expectation of the hit, they release the nail too early and the nail fails to be driven into the wood.

On paper, it is really effective tool. I don’t understand the reluctance to use it

 

[packgoatguy]

So much so, that I'd probably put lack of recoil (and let's be honest, that's directly correlated with accuracy) a wildly larger share of any pie chart than KPS or energy. The KPS getting 0%. Not sure I've read a more stupid metric.

Recoil is certainly a part of the equation, and partly why I personally limit my cartridge choices to the minimum threshold my criteria required (2000fps, 1500ft lbs, and 35kps) Certainly a 300RUM or a 338LM would also meet my threshold, but the additional recoil, cost of ammo, weight of components leaves me with diminishing returns (based on my own hunting style). Were I to have a different max yardage, say 300, or even 800, then my caliber choice (based on my criteria) would also necessarily change. That said, with the right muzzle brake or suppressor, my kids can all easily control and shoot a well balanced 300wm effectively. Some even claim they prefer it to an unbraked 243 or 6.5cm.

As for your suggestion that the KPS is a stupid metric, you are certainly entitled to your opinion, however you should know that you are essentially saying that it is "stupid" to consider the variables that make up the KPS scale... A KPS score is merely derived by multiplying three factors... energy of the bullet on target, the sectional density of the bullet in question, and the frontal area dimensions of the bullet (think diameter). So, which of these three factors would you say is "stupid" to consider?
1) The energy?
(that factors in the weight and velocity of the bullet...)
2) the sectional density?
(Any argument about why a 10mm out of a G20 is an adequate bear stopping firearm inevitably includes a lengthy dissertation on the importance of Sectional Density related to the penetrating capacity of a bullet...)
3) or the frontal area of the bullet...? maybe you think it is stupid to consider the size of the bullet into the equation? Maybe you think Its just silly to think that a .17 diameter projectile has any different properties or effect on target than a .338, .45, or even a .5 inch diameter projectile...

 

[z987k]

Recoil is certainly a part of the equation, and partly why I personally limit my cartridge choices to the minimum threshold my criteria required (2000fps, 1500ft lbs, and 35kps) Certainly a 300RUM or a 338LM would also meet my threshold, but the additional recoil, cost of ammo, weight of components leaves me with diminishing returns (based on my own hunting style). Were I to have a different max yardage, say 300, or even 800, then my caliber choice (based on my criteria) would also necessarily change. That said, with the right muzzle brake or suppressor, my kids can all easily control and shoot a well balanced 300wm effectively. Some even claim they prefer it to an unbraked 243 or 6.5cm.

As for your suggestion that the KPS is a stupid metric, you are certainly entitled to your opinion, however you should know that you are essentially saying that it is "stupid" to consider the variables that make up the KPS scale... A KPS score is merely derived by multiplying three factors... energy of the bullet on target, the sectional density of the bullet in question, and the frontal area dimensions of the bullet (think diameter). So, which of these three factors would you say is "stupid" to consider?
1) The energy?
(that factors in the weight and velocity of the bullet...)
2) the sectional density?
(Any argument about why a 10mm out of a G20 is an adequate bear stopping firearm inevitably includes a lengthy dissertation on the importance of Sectional Density related to the penetrating capacity of a bullet...)
3) or the frontal area of the bullet...? maybe you think it is stupid to consider the size of the bullet into the equation? Maybe you think Its just silly to think that a .17 diameter projectile has any different properties or effect on target than a .338, .45, or even a .5 inch diameter projectile...

Yes, all three of those, multiplied and turned into a number that has no actual meaning are stupid.
You're taking what is essentially a fossil's old wives tale's and assigning a number to them, and then declaring a larger number better.

I'll make my own scale. We'll call it Z's BS, or ZBS.
It takes muzzle velocity * BC / powder charge.
And we'll get some numbers that mean absolutely nothing when talking about killing an animal, but all the modern short fat cartridges shooting long for caliber/high twist rates would come out ahead.

Now let me do what you're doing -

But what part would be wrong? Do you disagree that high BC bullets putting more energy and velocity down range is bad? Do you disagree that a higher muzzle velocity is detrimental to killing animals? Do you think doing that with the smallest powder charge and least recoil would be bad for hunting?

 

[packgoatguy]

Your conclusions are incorrec

How big is the heart on an ELK? CNS?

What about a guys that bow hunt, how low is their KPS compared to your 300 Win Mag?

This pass season I hit 3 deer in the head at ranges up to 310yds. Their head is a bit smaller than an ELK, but it wasn't science, it was trust in the equipment and practice.

There are an infinite number of variables in every hunting situation, practice in the field and at the range will stack the deck in your favor.

I don't understand the science you espouse, but I do understand results in the field. In 45+yrs of hunting I have seen both positive and negative results, results because of poor shot placement, bullet failure or a combination of both. I have seen animals run for distances that were unbelievable, I saw a 250lb wild sow run almost 400yds with both lungs deflated and at least 1 unborn piglet hanging out of her side. I shot her with a 450 Marlin at about 60yds, it was unfathomable she'd make it 50yds. I chased her on foot and shot her 2 more times with the same rifle before she went down, last shot thru the rear ham and out below her snout.

I shot another wild pig that was about 350-375lbs with a 6.5 Creedmoor and it was lights out.

There is no concrete science that will guarantee 100% positive results each and every time, regardless of caliber. That's why PHs in Africa carry double guns, there are animals there that hunt back.

Read Death in the Long Grass

Your experience mirrors my own. Sometimes these critters keep going under circumstances that would have leveled another. I dont have an answer. Nor do I expect 100% positive results every time. In fact that is my entire point here, because I cant control all the variables in the field, I choose a cartridge that (at least for elk sized game) gives me more umph on target than some other cartridge choices, which if all else goes wrong, hopefully that difference will make up for some of what else went wrong, and leave me with critter in my freezer.

 

[bsnedeker]

If you aren't using a 50 BMG are you even hunting????

 

[z987k]

If you aren't using a 50 BMG are you even hunting????

If you're not using a 20mm recoil-less rifle, you've not for the correctly optimized hunting rifle. Using some new thing I made up that is an amalgamation of what General Patton said in a speech once and my affinity for the F-4