What caused the Rokslide shift to smallest caliber and cartridges?

Formidilosus

Super Moderator
Shoot2HuntU
Joined
Oct 22, 2014
Messages
10,083
That is a false equivalence. It is like saying because rattle snakes are venomous and a concern, king snakes should be a concern too because they are a snake. Even when one considers that tetanus can be gotten from a king snake bite, the two warrant vastly different levels of concern.


Do what? What happens when you ingest tungsten?
 

Elite

WKR
Joined
Sep 4, 2018
Messages
1,079
I am curious if anyone has some links to some research or proof on how these smaller calibers do on a bad shot? Say a moose front shoulder? Curious if this is were the larger calibers shine?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 

Formidilosus

Super Moderator
Shoot2HuntU
Joined
Oct 22, 2014
Messages
10,083
I am curious if anyone has some links to some research or proof on how these smaller calibers do on a bad shot? Say a moose front shoulder? Curious if this is were the larger calibers shine?


Gotta watch those dreaded “shoulders”…


IMG_3037.jpeg

IMG_3038.jpeg

IMG_7368.jpeg
IMG_7367.jpeg

IMG_7369.jpeg


But wait, what happens if you hit the thickest bone in the front half….
IMG_3039.jpeg





If only there was a nearly 300 page thread that had hundreds of pictures of wounds in animals from antelope to moose that have been killed with a .224 caliber cartridge.
 

jimh406

WKR
Joined
Feb 6, 2022
Messages
1,174
Location
Western MT
If you would read the thread in its entirety, all of these questions would be answered.
It's an ever increasing thread that repeats. I don't feel like I had to read every post to get the points. ;). Reading every post would get the specifics ... or maybe I should just see how good google search is.
 

Formidilosus

Super Moderator
Shoot2HuntU
Joined
Oct 22, 2014
Messages
10,083
It's an ever increasing thread that repeats. I don't feel like I had to read every post to get the points. ;). Reading every post would get the specifics ... or maybe I should just see how good google search is.

There is more information about how bullets actually damage and destroy tissue with photographic examples, than any other single resource on the internet.
I have yet to meet or talk to a single person that has read the 223 thread in its entirety, that hasn’t come back and said “my belief about how this works was completely wrong”. Every question and point you and others have brought up in this thread are discussed- with empirical evidence and legit terminal ballistics research papers, at length in that thread.
 

fwafwow

WKR
Joined
Apr 8, 2018
Messages
5,554
If only there was a nearly 300 page thread that had hundreds of pictures of wounds in animals from antelope to moose that have been killed with a .224 caliber cartridge.
And if only there was a search function on this site that could be limited to such a 300 page thread
 
Joined
Mar 16, 2021
Messages
3,570
Location
Western Iowa
You’d gain more support for the ideas if the threads weren‘t such echo chambers with guys repeating half ass arguments against proven game getting combinations.
I don’t think any of the folks detailing the mountains of evidence that support shooting 223, 243, 6mm, .257, or .264 have ever claimed the larger stuff doesn’t work. We are advocating the smaller stuff because the mountains of paper, studies, ballistics charts, detailed necropsies, and amateur photos prove without a doubt that they do.

It’s the hard headed guys like yourself, that have zero substantive arguments against shooting the small stuff, that are coming off as half-assed.

EDIT: If you can provide any reasonable bit of technical evidence that supports not shooting the aforementioned calibers, then maybe more folks would listen and be persuaded. Pick whatever metric you like and we will all listen and try to learn something.
 
Last edited:

Marbles

WKR
Classified Approved
Joined
May 16, 2020
Messages
4,463
Location
AK
Do what? What happens when you ingest tungsten?
You pee and poop most of it out. If it is metal, you poop all of it out. (Edit, regarding tungsten, this does not apply to lead).

Lead is considered unsafe in drinking water at levels of 15 ppb (parts per billion), toxicity in blood starts above 0.35 mg/L (depending on what you want to consider toxic effects and the age of the person being measured,). In adults blood lead levels above 0.7 mg/L can cause acute toxicity and the potential effects include encephalopathy, coma, and death. An adult has about 5L of blood, if we call it 6L for a large adult and go for a the typical range were the worst symptoms start of 0.8 mg/L, that is 0.074 grains of lead in the blood is enough to potential kill a large adult. Consumed lead metal is bioavailable in humans, though surface area will play more into this than the mass ingested.

Soluble tungsten (such as WO4) is likely safe at levels below 2.28 mg/L in drinking water, soluble tungsten can cause nephrotoxicity at exposure levels of 125 mg/kg/d (a 220 lb man would have to consume 4.4 ounces of soluble tungsten per day). However, non-soluble tungsten (tungsten metal) is not bioavailable and not toxic based on current evidence as it is eliminated in the stool. Prolonged exposure to soluble tungsten may increase risk of heart attacks and strokes, but beyond potential nephrotoxicity there are not acute syndromes associated with it. No toxic effects have been observed from tungsten metal and it does not appear to be bioavailable.

The two are not comparable beyond the fact that they are both metals.
 
Last edited:

TaperPin

WKR
Joined
Jul 12, 2023
Messages
3,231
I don’t think any of the folks detailing the mountains of evidence that support shooting 223, 243, 6mm, .257, or .264 have ever claimed the larger stuff doesn’t work. We are advocating the smaller stuff because the mountains of paper, studies, ballistics charts, detailed necropsies, and amateur photos prove without a doubt that they do.

It’s the hard headed guys like yourself, that have zero substantive arguments against shooting the small stuff, that are coming off as half-assed.
You must not be paying attention if you don’t hear the constant steam of guys trying to say a larger caliber isn’t as lethal because nobody can hit anything with it. Lol
Obviously we’ve been killing things just fine.

I enjoy being the devils advocate at times, because it’s easy to pick holes in some of the arguments. I could care less what other people shoot - not once have I ever wondered what other people are shooting when I’m offline.
 

wyosam

WKR
Joined
Aug 5, 2019
Messages
1,282
While they are recognized around the world for record-setting accuracy, MatchKing and Tipped MatchKing bullets are not recommended for most hunting applications. Although MatchKing and Tipped MatchKing bullets are commonly used for varmint hunting, their design will not provide the same reliable explosive expansion at equivalent velocities in varmints compared to their lightly jacketed Hornet, Blitz or Varminter counterparts.

if you read between the lines they say the tmk doesn’t expand on Varmits. That’s a 3” wide animal, probably too thick a jacket. Doesn’t mean they won’t expand on a deer which is a 12-18” across. I don’t think anyone is saying to use a light for caliber varmit bullet.

this is also why it’s going to be a long process to change minds and regulations. Colorado for one, doesn’t allow 223 for elk. If the law is changed it needs to be specific enough to say what to use as not every 223 bullet will do the job.

I’d be pretty shocked to see them change the rule if they feel they have to be that specific, other than maybe “at least x grains”. Are wardens going to carry a bullet puller and scale?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
Joined
Dec 20, 2019
Messages
1,133
There is more information about how bullets actually damage and destroy tissue with photographic examples, than any other single resource on the internet.
I have yet to meet or talk to a single person that has read the 223 thread in its entirety, that hasn’t come back and said “my belief about how this works was completely wrong”. Every question and point you and others have brought up in this thread are discussed- with empirical evidence and legit terminal ballistics research papers, at length in that thread.
To be fair, I have read it and even reread parts of it, but I can't remember all of the details. That's what happens when threads get too big. A person cannot read it and walk away doubting the efficacy of a 223 though.
 
Top