What caused the Rokslide shift to smallest caliber and cartridges?

[Choupique]

think most who choose to shoot the RokSlide Special for elk/moose/bear ( such as myself) will not have that same mindset and will opt for more optimum conditions.

Yea you guys get very drastically more experience shooting big game at distance than us eastern folk do. I'm jealous. I also could decide right now that I wanted to go blue water fishing out of Venice tomorrow and hook up the boat and go do it. If only we could all have it all. Compromise sucks.

I think we'd all shoot bigger guns if it didn't affect our ability to shoot well or practice. It'd extend the effective range if nothing else. What I never really thought about prior to buying my one rifle is the whole bit about shooting bigger groups, practicing more with what you use, etc. Even if recoil were a total non-factor, the cost of shooting a big gun still is and it still sucks. If you aren't a reloader your looking at as much as $6 to pull the trigger on a 338 win mag. It isn't a whole lot better even if you do reload.

The whole premise of using a .223 for elk is so grunge when looking at the prevailing opinion of magazine writers, TV show hosts, eastern hunters like me, and in general people who just don't shoot a whole lot. I love it. The reality is, most of us just really don't know shit when it comes to killing game out west.

 

[Ranger 692]

And here I thought I was taking big steps turning my Tikka 300 wissum into a 6.5 PRC! Or using my 7mm-08 for elk last year...my head is still exploding. I too thought the original 223 thread was just a giant troll as well!

 

[zusmc]

There's a TON of posts on cartridge selection and bullet threads that go "have you read" the following:
1) the .223 thread
2) the 6mm thread
3) the 6.5mm thread

I've read those, and see a lot of animals and wound channels. I likely missed the nexus or catalyst for what has created this, but Rokslide is very much a place where you're going to get a posting response such as:
"you don't need a 7 PRC, get 7mm-08"
"Magnums are uneccesary to effectively kill game < 700 yards"
etc etc.
@Ryan Avery you shifted from margin of error, big 30s, and came around to super fast 6mm like 6 UM in like 2 years. What was the main thing that changed your mind?

I've read one comment along the lines of "being tired of the constant recommendations for smallest cartridge possible" or similar. I imagine that sentiment is not singular.

My Question: is the justifcation or cause of this people successfully killing animals with smaller catridges and caliber bullets using match-type bullets creating large wound channels? I've heard hit rates/statistics cited, but unsure where to read about this. For those "converts" who have seen the smaller cartridge light - can you please expain to me what/why? If repeated elsewhere in hundreds of pages of the evidence based (ie kills) threads, I still thought it might be useful to tuck the "why" topic into a dedicated thread.

Again I'm not saying it is wrong - I'm just noticing a very prevelant trend and trying to fully understand it. And I own a 6.5CM which was purchased due to cheaper ammo, less recoil, availability, etc so I have some understanding and experience with the benefits cited. I also own a suppresssed 7 PRC, which I read is basically too much recoil/gun for western hunting? I think Form said somewhere a full 6.5 PRC around 16 ft-lb of recoil was the practical limit for most adults, and they always do better < 10 ft-lbs?

I've heard the Shoot2Hunt podcasts and read the threads, and haven't walked away with a clear "why."

Brief me. Please.

With a well placed shot, smaller calibers will do the job. They also offer lighter weight setups for packing on long journeys. The caliber chosen depends on what game you are targeting. I also like ammo that is in abundance and not hard to find. This allows me to try many different brands/combos to find the right one for my specific rifle. I don't reload so this is imperative to superb accuracy. If you are worried about recoil, suppressors do an amazing job reducing felt recoil as well so you can use a larger caliber but still have light recoil.

 

[zusmc]

I actually think this isn’t really a new thing. When the .250 Savage came out it was used for everything up to moose and raved about.

The hunting space has become an industry since then…manufacturers make new stuff every year and incentivize writers and influencers to talk about how great it is so people buy it. Some of it is better, most isn’t. I attribute much of the bigger is better conventional wisdom to that.

Those that started playing with smaller calibers again with better bullets realized they kill stuff. And it’s just more fun to hunt with the ol .223. I killed my first deer with a .223 20yrs ago on a depredation hunt. Been doing it ever since bc it works.

I've killed many deer with my .223 but inside of 300 yards, I prefer my .308 all day long and the insides are much more obliterated which means less suffering of the animal.

 

[fwafwow]

I've killed many deer with my .223 but inside of 300 yards, I prefer my .308 all day long and the insides are much more obliterated which means less suffering of the animal.

Have you read those threads and seen the pictures?

 

[wyosam]

I am not the most knowledgeable but I think that there is alot of validity too it.
I fell trap to the opposite previously. When I first moved to Alaska I was told buy a lot of people that I had to get a Magnum Cartridge if I was going to live in Alaska. At the time where I lived I was only looking at shooting Sitka Black Tail. As I've gained knowledge and experience - you definitely do not need a Magnum Cartridge. The most common calibers in remote Alaska are .243, .270 and .30-06. They kill more moose and caribou and bear than people realize.
I had an option of a rifles a couple years ago and went with a 280AI to get the over 3000 fps with near magnum performance in a fun cartridge that didn't smack as hard as a Magnum.
I think it is more important to have a gun you can shoot regularly to get better and more proficient so you can know your rifle and its performance better than it is to have a big bore. Now saying that I still want to get a Magnum for certain situations. I want a big bore for Coastal Brown Bear and for Bison (If I'm ever drawn).

280ai is my Alaska choice as well, though looking through these threads I have no doubt I could shoot something considerably smaller. I have rejected magnums since owning a 300wm for a couple seasons about 30 years ago. Sucked to shoot, and nothing at the other end looked any different than it did from my 06. The 280 is the largest cartridge in my inventory, though I am building a 338-284 because I like to tinker, and you still have to have a 338 something or another in the safe for Alaska street cred

I just had an idea for those who are worried what their friends will think- somebody make a long action ACIS mag that will feed 223, then do a deep recessed (in a 338 hole) crown. No one will ever know!

 

[Marbles]

I realize this is a side conversation happening, but are you saying the lead used it bullets is bioavalible? The last bit of research I did on this was a bit sparse in actual data. It seemed that there were only a few groups of hunters that had elivated lead levels in their blood from eating lead shot rabbit slow cooked with wine/vinegar.

The details of lead and hunting have been hashed out in other threads, this thread is already a storm of diarrhea.

My point was that worrying about tungsten and copper are not the same. I was NOT arguing that people should not use lead (I hunt with lead currently). I would not grind the bloodshot wound channel into my sausage. I would consider grinding the wound channel from a DRT round into sausage.

To answer the question. Lead metal is bioavailable from the GI tract, that availability is about 10-15% in adults (and around 40% in children). Lead in bullets is not special, but it does come in chunks which makes a lot less of it bioavailable.

 

[hereinaz]

The 6um is curious in this conversation. Given the rest of the conversation, why wouldn’t the answer be 6dasher and burn half the powder instead of adding recoil and expense for 300fps?

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

6 BR -> 6 Dasher/BRA -> 6 GT -> 6 Creed/XC -> 6 SST -> 6 UM

I agree. You probably realize that it depends on the distance/terminal velocity which you choose. Starting with MV you want, you pick the barrel length and then pick the cartridge that can keep the terminal velocity high enough at the distance you plan to shoot. Can look at wind drift and drop as a factor as well.

I did the math and for 600 and in picked a 22" 6 BRA that I am building out a load with a 95 grain VLD-H. The UM is for max performance at long range, which far exceeds the vast majority of shooters.

For the masses, a 6 creedmoor is going to do everything needed and is barely more than the 6 dasher.

 

[Shō[t]gun]

Speaking of coastal Brown ..
what will using a Fusion 200 grain 338 Fed give me over a 108 ELD-M ?

I’m fully on board with using smaller caliber and have been primarily using a 6.5 CM for a decade now. I just need to wrap my head around wether there is still a place, or not, for a much heavier bullet at close range, (Sub 200 yds) albeit starting off at 500 fps less. Primary objective not to hunt B Bears, but for defense.

View attachment 635065

This is where a lot of hang ups and arguments start. Bear defense is considerably different than bear hunting. I’ve never been on a griz hunt, but I can see that a bullet ideal for penetrating a chest cavity and causing tissue damage isn’t necessarily what you want when there’s a wounded bear in the willows. Fudd lore seems to follow logic on this subject. Hard bullets, straight line penetration, and many rounds on tap is what I’d want when a bear’s durable and stabby side is coming my way. Open to opinions and arguments tho.

 

[hereinaz]

This is where a lot of hang ups and arguments start. Bear defense is considerably different than bear hunting. I’ve never been on a griz hunt, but I can see that a bullet ideal for penetrating a chest cavity and causing tissue damage isn’t necessarily what you want when there’s a wounded bear in the willows. Fudd lore seems to follow logic on this subject. Hard bullets, straight line penetration, and many rounds on tap is what I’d want when a bear’s durable and stabby side is coming my way. Open to opinions and arguments tho.

Agreed. Context is 100%. There could be reasons to make a choice other than .223, but it isn’t whether a well placed .223 will kill it.

A solo brown bear hunt is significantly different than one with a guide or buddy backing you up with a .338 federal or they can hand you his rifle to go into the willows. Maybe you carry a .223 and pistola.

A hunted bear is different than a charging bear.

 

[Tmac]

just everyone be nice, hate to see a good thread get locked.

I told my Dad--74 years old-- about this thread last night and I then actually had to calm him down! (he likes the big guns--.338, 300 mag, 7 mag)

He did ask something that I might have missed discussed: What about the big bears? are these being included in the deer/elk/moose argument?

Then on big bears, hunting them vs defending against them. Grizz vs Brown. I was comfortable caribou hunting in the hills on the AK peninsula during the salmon runs with a 280, big bears were all on the creeks.

I will say after I got my caribou when I was hiking back from a fishing trip along an AK peninsula river, and saw large bear tracks in and over my foot prints, it gave me a pause. I’m like you are suppose to be on the creeks, not this big river… When I could take off my baseball cap, lay it in the track, and see print/claws still on all sides, I got a little shiver. All I had was my fishing pole and small knife, oops. Never saw it, thankfully.

They can be huge, no 223 or 6mm’s for me there. I believe bear guide Phil Shoemaker said 270 Win and up is fine for hunters he guided for brown bear, anything smaller was a stunt. I believe him.

 

[wyosam]

This is where a lot of hang ups and arguments start. Bear defense is considerably different than bear hunting. I’ve never been on a griz hunt, but I can see that a bullet ideal for penetrating a chest cavity and causing tissue damage isn’t necessarily what you want when there’s a wounded bear in the willows. Fudd lore seems to follow logic on this subject. Hard bullets, straight line penetration, and many rounds on tap is what I’d want when a bear’s durable and stabby side is coming my way. Open to opinions and arguments tho.

If stopping a bear for defense is the goal, getting “something” to either brain or spine is what will do it quickly. I’m a mono guy for hunting (yes, I fully appreciate the damage the bullets these threads are about cause- just my choice). If these small bullets get to brain or spine, I have no doubt bear will stop. No idea how true it actually is, but a lot of the “big gun, hard bullets” argument on bears, in terms of getting to the brain, seem to center on getting through the frontal skull, and the angle bullet is likely to hit that thick sloping bone is the question. I don’t have much interest in hunting brown bears, but will likely shoot a blackie or two over bait next spring. Maybe I’ll bring my 223 and look for just that shot. Will depend on how far my bait is from the boat though, because my only 223 is heavier than I have much interest in carrying very far, and will want something else for walking since it’s weight and long barrel don’t really work for defense.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Formidilosus]

This is where a lot of hang ups and arguments start. Bear defense is considerably different than bear hunting. I’ve never been on a griz hunt, but I can see that a bullet ideal for penetrating a chest cavity and causing tissue damage isn’t necessarily what you want when there’s a wounded bear in the willows. Fudd lore seems to follow logic on this subject. Hard bullets, straight line penetration, and many rounds on tap is what I’d want when a bear’s durable and stabby side is coming my way. Open to opinions and arguments tho.

The African big five went nearly extinct in places, and wasn’t done with 470 NE’s. It was done with AK’s and FAL’s.

The bear thing is the last dark hole for people to cuddle their big guns with hard bullets whispering “my precious”.

It’s ridiculous. If you sent people to exterminate, that is cull- an entire region of every brown bear alive it wouldn’t be done with 375’s. It would be AR15’s with red dots or LPVO’s.

Bears are large, but they are soft. Their bones are thin- only muscle and fat covering them. The ONLY way to stop a bear on demand is a CNS hit. Which is interesting, because all the “I had to shoot a wounded bear 7 times and didn’t stop” stories illustrate that the only reason they didn’t get mauled was because the bear didn’t want to- it didn’t “stop” from a 458 win to the body. Partly, that’s probably due to the also ridiculous habit of taking really big cartridges and then making sure you load them with bullets that create the tiniest wounds known to man. A 400gr V-Max might do something…..

Everyone is worried about a bear charge in the classical “coming right at me” scenario. Ok, shoot it in the face which is the center of everything coming at you anyways. You have to hit the CNS to stop them to begin with.

I’ll take- a short and maneuverable platform that is literally designed and engineered to be shot as fast and accurately as humanly possible, with 30 rounds of some of the most destructive projectiles on the market, where I watch in real time as the projectiles strike the target at .14 seconds between shots, that is literally removing chunks of flesh as the bullet penetrates 16+ inches; over one that is long, heavy, slow, with massive recoil, creating wounds that you can barely fit a pinky through, that maybe I get one or two shots off on.

 

[wyosam]

6 BR -> 6 Dasher/BRA -> 6 GT -> 6 Creed/XC -> 6 SST -> 6 UM

I agree. You probably realize that it depends on the distance/terminal velocity which you choose. Starting with MV you want, you pick the barrel length and then pick the cartridge that can keep the terminal velocity high enough at the distance you plan to shoot. Can look at wind drift and drop as a factor as well.

I did the math and for 600 and in picked a 22" 6 BRA that I am building out a load with a 95 grain VLD-H. The UM is for max performance at long range, which far exceeds the vast majority of shooters.

For the masses, a 6 creedmoor is going to do everything needed and is barely more than the 6 dasher.

That’s generally my system- pick the bullet you want to shoot (monos for me, but no different logic), identify the speed it needs to impact at to perform as you want (well over published minimum for me), pick the max distance you want that speed to be available, calculate the MV it takes to make that happen, choose a cartridge that gets there without trashing brass. If that fits in a comfortable recoil range. You’re good to go, if it doesn’t, either the max range or the bullet need to change.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[9.3koolaid]

I’ll take- a short and maneuverable platform that is literally designed and engineered to be shot as fast and accurately as humanly possible, with 30 rounds of some of the most destructive projectiles on the market, where I watch in real time as the projectiles strike the target at .14 seconds between shots, that is literally removing chunks of flesh as the bullet penetrates 16+ inches; over one that is long, heavy, slow, with massive recoil, creating wounds that you can barely fit a pinky through, that maybe I get one or two shots off on.

Louder for the people in the back

 

[B_Reynolds_AK]

I’ll take- a short and maneuverable platform that is literally designed and engineered to be shot as fast and accurately as humanly possible, with 30 rounds of some of the most destructive projectiles on the market, where I watch in real time as the projectiles strike the target at .14 seconds between shots, that is literally removing chunks of flesh as the bullet penetrates 16+ inches; over one that is long, heavy, slow, with massive recoil, creating wounds that you can barely fit a pinky through, that maybe I get one or two shots off on.

Sure, that makes sense if you are going to carry some sort of semi-auto weapon with that speed & capacity.
But, in context of a short/light bolt action gun for either caliber, are you going to stick with a .224 or 6mm match projectile or would a 200 grain .338 bullet be significantly more capable in reaching CNS/Vitals from a head on perspective?

 

[CC55]

I know 10% ballistics gel isn't a 1:1 game, but seeing the objective data between these made me feel better before I dove in. Mostly clueless at reading gel, but I get the basics (neck, penetration, TC, TC length). At high velocity, which should be the worst for match bullets, there isn't a crazy difference in regard to penetration. From a TC size perspective 223 gets you about 4ish", 6.5 gets you about 5.5-6", 30cal gets you about 8". Big difference in total volume, only increases margin for error about an inch in any direction. Slow velocity down at distance and you'll probably get better penetration from how I understand it.


77TMK at 2750


6.5CM w/ 147 ELDM at 2700fps


6.5CM w/ 147 ELDM through 2 sheets of 20 gauge steel and gel block 18" away...in case the elk is hiding behind a car door


300PRC w/ 225 ELDM at 2850



For the big vs small debate: 100% not my intention to be preachy or to stir the pot, but for those who shoot big guns well, just a heads up on a quick way to quiet everyone down about your shooting competency. Do the "hunting rifle drill" and post your honest, timed results. 100 yard range is easy to find and will only burn 20 rounds, which is no biggie for good field practice.

Equipment versus practice posts and Rifle practice/shooting

This isn’t in response to anyone I particular, but there is an up tick in the amount of “I want a XXXX distance hunting rifle” traffic the last few months. I am getting a lot of questions relating to this, which I do not mind helping, but thought a public post might help answer some questions...

rokslide.com

 

[Formidilosus]

Sure, that makes sense if you are going to carry some sort of semi-auto weapon with that speed & capacity.

Well since the whole “but what about bears” is a spurious argument to begin with, why wouldn’t one learn to shoot an AR well and then use it?

But, in context of a short/light bolt action gun for either caliber, are you going to stick with a .224 or 6mm match projectile or would a 200 grain .338 bullet be significantly more capable in reaching CNS/Vitals from a head on perspective?

Nothing changes. It’s less than 2 inches required to reach the CNS in the head- I would have zero issues with a .22 mag. Furthermore, even you hit muzzle/mouth- ok. Things don’t like being shot in the face. My, maybe relatively limited experience, says that things modify their behavior when shot in the mouth.


I look at things from an objective standpoint. I will use “common knowledge” as a marker, but that’s about it. Nearly every time the common knowledge or “the guide says so” thing about guns/ammo/ballistics is tested rigorously, it has shown to be false- at best with very small sample sizes, no comparative efforts, and generally completely made up.

I’m trying to think of a single thing about guns, shooting, terminal ballistics that the conventional wisdom was correct about?

Bullets- no.
Terminal ballistics- no.
Cartridges sizes- no.
Scopes holding zero- no.
Rifle reliability- no.
Rifle design- no.
Shooting skill- no.
Holding versus dialing- no.
45 versus 9mm- no.
Magnum pistol rounds- no.


I’m sure there are some things that have proven correct, but sitting here drinking coffee I can’t come up with a single one that is correct today.

 

[Wyo_hntr]

Let your dad know that I’ll try to squeeze in the hard angled away shots that deeper penetrating bullets are better at. . Elmer Keith would have been laughed at if he shot at the base of the tail with a 223 as an elk was about to run over the ridge, but he put the kabosh on many elk at odd angles with his 338 and 300.

If butt shooting elk is the goal, count me out.

And it's yet just another strawman argument

 

[B_Reynolds_AK]

@Formidilosus I agree with the premise of most of what you stated there, including that a smaller caliber could make it to the CNS, except for this quote:

"Well since the whole “but what about bears” is a spurious argument to begin with, why wouldn’t one learn to shoot an AR well and then use it?"

If you, or anyone else here, has hunted blacktail or elk on Kodiak or Afognak Is., then you will know that this is in no way a spurious or trivial matter. And I'm not talking about the one off trip with a group of 6 guys to the Island, but year in and year out hunts in these areas, often solo.
I struggle to think of anyone I know that has done this for years or decades and has NOT had to DLP (Defense of Life and Property) an aggressive Brown Bear.