What caused the Rokslide shift to smallest caliber and cartridges?

[Don Fischer]

The only thing that matters are bullets, bullets, and bullets, in roughly that order.

I don't buy that for one sec. What it is, is shot placement and the ability to make that shot. Without a doubt distruction has a lot to do with it but, there can be to much and to little for the shot taken. Give me a 22 short and I can feed my family deer all year. Give me a 338 mag and probably can't do the same with rabbits. Difference iss the ability of the shooter to place the shot. This of course would change depending on the shooter's. I had a 338 mag and had to shoot a lot, a whole lot, just to be fairly good. As a result I didn't hunt with it much! Had a 7x57 at the same time and hunted with it a lot! Every bullet has the ability to kill pretty much anything if it is properly placed. And properly placed depends on weather or not the user can actually shoot the rifle! I think more than we know bullet's get a bad rap for bad shooting.

 

[KHntr]

88 ELD m, dreaded shoulder knuckle crush ala 223AI…

 

[eric1115]

View attachment 792775
88 ELD m, NOT broadside, intentional shoulder crush ala 223AI

You clearly forgot to notify those moose that you were shooting such a marginal cartridge. They were under the misapprehension that they were shot by a pretty effective bullet!

 

[KHntr]

I don't buy that for one sec. What it is, is shot placement and the ability to make that shot. Without a doubt distruction has a lot to do with it but, there can be to much and to little for the shot taken. Give me a 22 short and I can feed my family deer all year. Give me a 338 mag and probably can't do the same with rabbits. Difference iss the ability of the shooter to place the shot. This of course would change depending on the shooter's. I had a 338 mag and had to shoot a lot, a whole lot, just to be fairly good. As a result I didn't hunt with it much! Had a 7x57 at the same time and hunted with it a lot! Every bullet has the ability to kill pretty much anything if it is properly placed. And properly placed depends on weather or not the user can actually shoot the rifle! I think more than we know bullet's get a bad rap for bad shooting.

How much damage a bullet does in the animal matters FAR more than the bullets diameter or weight, and that is dictated by construction/impact velocity/twist rate.

A 0.224” 77TMK or 88 ELD m through the guts will be lethal much faster than a 0.338 TTSX with the same placement.

 

[The Fish Box]

@KHntr can you elaborate on distances or impact velocities and do you have any pictures of the destruction?

 

[KHntr]

@KHntr heck yeah! Would you happen to have approximate impact velocities and more detailed photos of damage?

Impact velocities ranged from 2440 to 2307 on 2 moose and the elk, and 2007 on the smaller bull moose.

3/4 had either both shoulder knuckles broken at the scapula base, or a single (quartering in versus broadside) and the 1 bull had 15” of spine smashed when he was facing me. That one got the least penetration, but he was 352 yards out so…

Thinking really hard about building a 7 twist 22 creed so I can extend my 1800 fps impact velocity minimum by a couple hundred yards.

I have a few internal pics, see if I can dig them up.

Bigger bull moose lungs.

 

[wyosam]

The only thing that matters are bullets, bullets, and bullets, in roughly that order.

That is exactly right, A bullet (or pretty much anything else) through the vital organs is what matters. And while everyone wrings their hands over the minutiae, some guy is probably out there gutting an animal right now that he killed with a patched round ball. My favorite part of the 223 thread (which I have not read all of, it’s been a while)was when everyone was excitedly waiting for someone to whack a polar bear with a 223/tmk. Then finally some guy did it, but forgot the TMK and went with a 55gr FMJ. Coincidentally, that is probably the most common polar bear bullet by a lot, since Alaska Natives kill most of the bears, and they tend to shoot cheap ball ammo for a variety of reasons. Put something through the vitals and things will probably go your way.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[KHntr]

@KHntr can you elaborate on distances or impact velocities and do you have any pictures of the destruction?

Mooses were:
151 yards both shoulder knuckles broken, bullet under the hide. Immediately down.
172 yards, onside shoulder knuckle smashed, bullet exit at last rib. (I think. It was dark and I was solo) 2 nd round a few seconds later as he was falling, straight through both lungs and exited.
352 yards, 15” of spine smashed. (We had two bulls down so I didn’t spend much time looking for the bullet remnants)
Elk was 109 yards, onside shoulder smashed to bits, exit at last rib. 2nd round 3 seconds later was in behind onside shoulder, out through offside shoulder with a 2” hole bored through it.

Pic is elk lungs with a softball bored through them.

 

[KHntr]

Moose ribs after onside shoulder lifted off.

 

[Titan_Bow]

For me, it was getting my son into hunting, building his first couple of big game rifles, and seeing how effective they were with less recoil. I started with building him a 6.8SPC AR-15 and seeing how effective that little round was on deer. Then it was a 6.5 Creedmoor for his first elk rifle. Seeing how well that rifle has put down several elk with ease, and even a moose this year, solidified that for me.

 

[Don Fischer]

Yea. The right bullet and the right shot placement of that bullet kills!

 

[nagibson1]

Right! It would be different if there was a specific thread on 22 cal kills with 9k responses, including thousands of necropsy photos from deer, elk, moose, and bear, + others.

Oh wait..

To be clear, I did not, and wouldn't say that I think .22 caliber bullets or loads are not highly capable. Many hunters I know drop caliber over time as they hone in on better loads and grow in shooting ability over time, while getting over young, macho caliber mentalities. I think that's great.

What I AM saying is that I have seen smaller calibers NOT do the job- especially if you want a pass through. Our moose hunting friend was right to assume I'm thinking shoulder involved shots. I have had 100gr .243 premium bullets not exit 160lb deer. 2 weeks ago I saw an ELD from a 6.5 creed not go through a bull spine- though it DID drop the bull and paralyze it. One of the hunters on that trip had to shoot his bull 4 times with his .243 this season for it to expire. I have many such stories since the .243 was a caliber of choice in FL when I lived there.

It is arguable that in most of these stories these may have been sub-optimal shots, or not the best bullet of choice. But I know my shots were on and I used modern premium bullets. Thus I PREFER shooting cartridges in the sweetspot of .25 to .30 that do not diminish my accuracy with recoil. Part of this is my feelings. I just don't trust my .243 knowing that I may not have an optimal shot angle offered to me in the Wisconsin deer woods. Those feelings are rooted in my experiences with failures.

To appeal to a compilation of successes attributable to .223 success can tells us success can be achieved, but it doesn't tell us if it is advisable given the alternative options. The male mind tends to push the limits on competitive vectors. For some it's increasing cartridge capacity. For some it's getting all new Kuiu camo and layers. For some guys it's how little we can buy and be successful. And I think that for some of us it's how little gun we can kill stuff with. That's cool. But i do think these can all be "fads"- a way we can push the envelope as far as it can go. I'd rather do it in the .223 direction than in the .338 magnum direction.
Thus to answer the original questions, "why is rokslide seeming to move for smaller calibers?" I offer two:
1. there are good advantages to it. It's a counter to 50 years of caliber inflation that probably HAS been a fad, consumeristic and mostly unproductive.
2. It is in the heart of man to take something as far as it can go. We are competitive and explorers. It's why we go to the woods in the first place. I can't wait for the .221 .

 

[Don Fischer]

Just wonder was it the smaller caliber and placement that failed of simply a small caliber. I firmly believe small caliber's will do the job every time if the shooter does his job every time. But I don't buy into the small caliber hunting as I believe there are better calibers available with even better bullet choices giving a better selection of placement. If I were without food for my family it would not bother me one bit to take the 22 RF out if that was all I had!

 

[35WhelenAI]

There's "desperation" when there isn't a choice, and there is not desperation and having many choices under the sun.

I think we agree in a desperation or no choice situation we're going to make the best of what we have, and I would make sure that a 22LR was used appropriately to take care of business. No way in hell would I choose one unless a last resort, as most would agree.

Folks shoot smaller calibers because, on the whole, they are most comfortable from a recoil perspective, practicing perspective. I would suspect most folks getting into hunting choosing a gun or two aren't choosing a larger case/caliber. Relating to learning to shoot with a heavier recoiling rifle is foreign. It's understandable they have a harder time understanding how some folks do shoot them pretty well.

I go the other way and would rather have a larger caliber and more bullet weight that can handle different shot presentation angles in the field and spend my time practicing with a lighter recoiling rifle. Most shots I've seen here are broadside with the smaller calibers. With a larger caliber and controlled expansion bullet, hard angle shots can be taken with confidence and kill spectacularly.

 

[Formidilosus]

I go the other way and would rather have a larger caliber and more bullet weight that can handle different shot presentation angles in the field and spend my time practicing with a lighter recoiling rifle. Most shots I've seen here are broadside with the smaller calibers. With a larger caliber and controlled expansion bullet, hard angle shots can be taken with confidence and kill spectacularly.

Are you ever going to stop repeating this nonsense?

 

[nagibson1]

Are you ever going to stop repeating this nonsense?

I think the crux of it is that some of us have witnessed a significant rate of failure ourselves with lower calibers on even deer sized game. We have used quality bullets and made good shots and not gotten the performance we were looking for. Thus, others can accumulate lots of positive examples of success, but we don't know what kind of sample that is out of across the hunting population. I've seen TONS of great bow kill pictures, but still 1/5 of deer just do go unrecovered. I presume that a number of the guys killing stuff with the .223's are SIGNIFICANTLY BETTER SHOTS AND HUNTERS THAN ME. I consider my view a prudential and humble one- not a judgmental and arrogant one.

Not only am I not the American Sniper, I am also not Aragorn son of Arathorn. I want an exit wound, and I want a real blood trail. In my own experience, mostly with 100 gr hornady interlocks, if I shoot a deer in the shoulder, I'm not normally going to get an exit wound, even if the shot is inside 40yds. Since I cut my teeth hunting in FL swamps, deer running off without serious blood trails was unworkable. Also, I cannot think of a deer I have not recovered with a .243 that I shot vitally. When I was shooting .30 Sierra HP game kings, I did lose a couple does I definitely shot vitally. Obviously bullet performance is critical. But those were lost because there was no blood trail.

So I am not saying that a lot of you guys aren't dialed in with small calibers and doing great. My buddy in FL who shot 85gr partitions in .243 was never looking for his deer. I'm saying that there are real experience sets that have seen no-confidence performance from low calibers on deer sized game enough that we don't trust them to be up to whatever situation we are in- for range, game size, or game position. Then when some of us spend $2,000 to go out west at best once a year, we don't want to have any doubt about our cartridge at the moment of truth.

For example, my opportunities at elk this trip were:
1. huge bull at 50yrds. Don't want to talk about it.
2. raghorn at 220 through trees (first hour, we passed)
3. 340 bull @ 387 across canyon.

We had to take the third opportunity. At that range with 15-17MPH winds @ 8000ft in 31 degrees- I couldn't be 100% where I could hit that bull within a couple inches shooting at a 45degree downward angle. If I had been carrying a .223AI, I'm not sure I'd have trusted MYSELF to make that shot, even if it is in the gun's technical capacity. Thus, I think using the larger calibers that have very manageable recoil makes sense for people like me.

Is that still nonsense?

 

[Don Fischer]

There's "desperation" when there isn't a choice, and there is not desperation and having many choices under the sun.

I think we agree in a desperation or no choice situation we're going to make the best of what we have, and I would make sure that a 22LR was used appropriately to take care of business. No way in hell would I choose one unless a last resort, as most would agree.

Folks shoot smaller calibers because, on the whole, they are most comfortable from a recoil perspective, practicing perspective. I would suspect most folks getting into hunting choosing a gun or two aren't choosing a larger case/caliber. Relating to learning to shoot with a heavier recoiling rifle is foreign. It's understandable they have a harder time understanding how some folks do shoot them pretty well.

I go the other way and would rather have a larger caliber and more bullet weight that can handle different shot presentation angles in the field and spend my time practicing with a lighter recoiling rifle. Most shots I've seen here are broadside with the smaller calibers. With a larger caliber and controlled expansion bullet, hard angle shots can be taken with confidence and kill spectacularly.

Of course it would be a last resort! But it would work. Your point that heavier bullets give better shot angles is well taken. Think I mentioned that! Also mentioned larger caliber give better bullet options. And well aware that smaller calibers with lighter bullet's are easier to shoot well with less recoil.

 

[AZ_Hunter]

To be clear, I did not, and wouldn't say that I think .22 caliber bullets or loads are not highly capable. Many hunters I know drop caliber over time as they hone in on better loads and grow in shooting ability over time, while getting over young, macho caliber mentalities. I think that's great.

What I AM saying is that I have seen smaller calibers NOT do the job- especially if you want a pass through. Our moose hunting friend was right to assume I'm thinking shoulder involved shots. I have had 100gr .243 premium bullets not exit 160lb deer. 2 weeks ago I saw an ELD from a 6.5 creed not go through a bull spine- though it DID drop the bull and paralyze it. One of the hunters on that trip had to shoot his bull 4 times with his .243 this season for it to expire. I have many such stories since the .243 was a caliber of choice in FL when I lived there.

It is arguable that in most of these stories these may have been sub-optimal shots, or not the best bullet of choice. But I know my shots were on and I used modern premium bullets. Thus I PREFER shooting cartridges in the sweetspot of .25 to .30 that do not diminish my accuracy with recoil. Part of this is my feelings. I just don't trust my .243 knowing that I may not have an optimal shot angle offered to me in the Wisconsin deer woods. Those feelings are rooted in my experiences with failures.

To appeal to a compilation of successes attributable to .223 success can tells us success can be achieved, but it doesn't tell us if it is advisable given the alternative options. The male mind tends to push the limits on competitive vectors. For some it's increasing cartridge capacity. For some it's getting all new Kuiu camo and layers. For some guys it's how little we can buy and be successful. And I think that for some of us it's how little gun we can kill stuff with. That's cool. But i do think these can all be "fads"- a way we can push the envelope as far as it can go. I'd rather do it in the .223 direction than in the .338 magnum direction.
Thus to answer the original questions, "why is rokslide seeming to move for smaller calibers?" I offer two:
1. there are good advantages to it. It's a counter to 50 years of caliber inflation that probably HAS been a fad, consumeristic and mostly unproductive.
2. It is in the heart of man to take something as far as it can go. We are competitive and explorers. It's why we go to the woods in the first place. I can't wait for the .221 .

What were the “premium” bullets used in those cases?

 

[nagibson1]

What were the “premium” bullets used in those cases?

Hornady interlocks and ELD's in most cases I'm personally connected with. I've also seen 85gr partitions not exit on deer, even in pretty hot loads.

 

[nagibson1]

View attachment 792781
88 ELD m ala 223AI at 352 yards, square on.

Yeah KHntr, with an 88gr bullet and AI capacity increase, it seems like that would perform as well as a .243 in 2002 at least. Were these three all 1 shot kills? And did the shots produce a bleeding exit wound? I would love to feel confident shooting a lower caliber with all it's benefits and efficiencies. I have just been feeling like "lowest" for me would be 6.5ish- .260/7-08 or the like.
But as I'm trying to lengthen my effective range, I want something that can grow with me. I'm out to 430 in ideal circumstances, but I'd like to get to 550 eventually. That's why I've stuck with the 30-06 or considered 280ai or 6.5prc as the "lowest" I could go.
For years I've sought to be a .243 for deer and 30-06 for elk guy, and my kids learn on reduced loads in .243 and .270 after they learn the basics in 22lr and an AR platform .223. I'd really like to get down to one gun. even one load.