What caused the Rokslide shift to smallest caliber and cartridges?

[MT_Wyatt]

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.

 

[CorbLand]

I wouldn’t say I have been converted to small cartridges but the information and data that has been posted is probably the driving factor towards it.

 

[Salmon River Solutions]

@Formidilosus is the expert…

But it’s not bullet size, it’s bullet performance driving everything in my book. I wouldn’t shoot a 338 lapua with a bullet that doesn’t open up for shit. Just like I wouldn’t shoot a 100 grain bullet that doesn’t open up for crap.

 

[robby denning]

great thread. Subscribed.

 

[Antares]

For me, it's because I learned that you can get the same wound channel out of a cartridge that's cheaper and easier to shoot.

 

[fisherman983]

I think the why is because proper bullet placement is key.
Shooting smaller cartridges that recoil substantially less and are much easier to shoot allows lesser abled shooters to put bullets where they need to be.
It also helps that bullets that destroy lungs/heart work no matter how big they are.
If you shoot at distances where said bullets will work as designed there really isn't a bullet too small as long as the wound is large enough.

So hence the fast 6mm and heavy caliber bullets destroying vitals just as well as a big 30 or 338.




Sent from my SM-G996U using Tapatalk

 

[LeftyWilbury]

none of my friends are on rokslide, yet somehow they've all gone from 300 WMs and 30-06s down to .243
and their success rate has gone up.
turns out the justification is indeed an increase in a) hitting where you want/need and b) using a "proper" bullet for your application

mostly a) for my friends

i love my 7 RMs sending out 140 gr pills at 3100 fps but my suppressed 308 does 3000 with 130s, is more enjoyable to shoot, and critters end up just as dead. and i don't own a tikka 243 yet, but i probably will. because why not?

and then a 223 for practice, of course.

 

[SloppyJ]

I think a lot of it has to do with modern bullets and people actually testing terminal performance. Don't worry, the days of old aren't leaving. The vast majority still go get a box of core lokts for their 300wm come deer season.

I think there's some merit to it. Maybe it's an evolution type of deal as you shoot more? I really don't know and I'm building a 300PRC so I'm probably not the guy to ask. With that said, I've had some of the cleanest kills with my .243 growing up so this topic really made me start to think. With a son that just turned 6, I'm starting to have a real desire to build a 6 Creed and go to town.

 

[MuleyFever]

Effective bullet design has allowed the smaller calibers to drift less and kill fast. It has taken a bit for people to see the results but its now gone mainstream. This is my observation.

 

[fwafwow]

Maybe this is the answer of a simpleton, but for me it was a logically presented argument supported by reason and evidence.

 

[Macintosh]

Its an attempt to show with data that some of the conventional wisdom around cartridge choice (and optics) is either wrong or unnecessary or based on spurious correlations, and often ends up being counter-productive in the long run for no better result. The folks presenting conventional wisdom have decades of accumulated articles and “sources” to point to, so the data-driven approach is necessary to illustrate many of the points—its a lot harder to argue with data.
I admit it gets tiresome for me, but at the same time it is just as tiresome to see the same questions answered with the same “traditional wisdom” that is just as, if not more, prevalent and often isnt based in fact. I think it is only so noteworthy because it isnt the conventional wisdom. I hope at some point this stuff is common-enough knowledge that it doesnt require being beaten over the head with it.

 

[Ice-kub]

Maybe this is the answer of a simpleton, but for me it was a logically presented argument supported by reason and evidence.

^This

Choked I built a 7wsm before seeing all of the data on 22/6mm's laid out.

 

[ResearchinStuff]

For me, it was a few things:
First seeing smaller cartridges make equivalent or larger wounds than the magnums and "premium" hunting bullets I was using a few years ago.
Second, reliable rangefinders and accurately dialing scopes wiped out the 2" less drop at whatever range advantage. Finally, understanding the lower threshold impact velocity for adequate bullet upset sealed the change for me, as I never have the time or access to develop the skills necessary to benefit from the added terminal range of the magnums.

 

[Lawnboi]

I drank the koolaid early because a gunsmith decided to keep a rifle for a year, which forced my hand. The 223 was all I had.

Grew up shooting deer with magnums at fairly close range.

Have learned a lot in that time, you can go back years on here.

 

[Brandon.miller.4]

I prefer fast and high BC. With larger calibers, that comes at a substantial cost of recoil. My reasons WHY:

-Moderate to low recoil
-Spotting impacts (follow up shots)
-Hit percentage
-Certain bullets = greater wound channels and make smaller calibers sufficient

The biggest driver of this IMO is the education or understanding of what can be accomplished with the correct bullets delivered at the correct velocity window. Because of others' immense amount of experience and detailed reports I took the leap and decided to see for myself. Not surprisingly 9 big game animals later, from whitetail does, to bears, to elk. I and those around me have seen the "light" you speak of. I don't think it's necessary for most experienced shooters to go as small as the 223 (I'm not saying it ISN'T sufficient, don't crucify me) but many can benefit from dropping their 300s and picking up a 6mm to 6.5mm.

All this coming from a big 300 shooter, they still have a place. Just not in 95% of hunters' hands.

 

[Dirtbag]

A better "information age" and quality components have changed the game.

I think a lot of people used to put way too much stock in what a gun writer used to say. which in many cases was a guess at best. Or in other cases, Many people still regurgitate the same talking points from gun writers of yesteryear (Ruark, Keith) about using enough gun, magnums and so on, failing to realize how times have changed and quality components have come along way.

My transition to trusting smaller cartridges happened years ago. I dont love recoil, and I shoot smaller stuff very well. I can also use the same rifle for nearly all my hunting, deer, antelope, coyotes and so on.

I also was able to see results from real hunters( Pat Sinclair for example, Who helped me out with some of my own reloads I use now) who have truckloads of experience with smaller cartridges on game. Regardless, I like to do my own testing before coming to a conclusion. The results have been fantastic.

 

[ljalberta]

I am a convert. For me it was the sheer body of evidence and data with respect to: (a) seeing actual wound channels that modern bullets cause, and (b) seeing how much my shooting improved moving to lower recoiling calibers.

In terms of (a), the evidence against smaller calibers is always that they simply aren’t enough. But then when you press or ask those advocates for larger rounds what evidence and data they have seen that shows modern small bullets are insufficient, there simply is none - most have never shot an animal (dead or alive) with smaller caliber modern bullets. It is just a claim that has been stated for so long that people accept it as fact. On the other side, when you look at the actual evidence of wounds and the killing capacity of modern small caliber bullets, it is undeniable they have the capacity to kill.

With respect to (b), once I started shooting a small caliber rifle, I noticed a huge increase in shooting ability on first shots, as well as the ability to spot and adjust for follow ups. This increases my ability to hunt more effectively and have success. I’d encourage everyone who is able to dedicate some time to learning to shoot on a .223 or similar and see if your skills don’t vastly improve.

 

[robby denning]

While not really big to really small, I did swap from a 7mm REM mag (168 bullets) to a 270WSM (130 & 140 bullets) back in 2015 because…

—not a brake fan and the 7mm in a sub 8lb rifle was brutal
—seemed like a lot of extra killing power that wasn’t always needed on bucks
—270WSM was flatter at moderate yardages.
—6 buck kills and 2 cow elk later, can’t say I miss the 7mm too much (and unless I’m forgetting, no wounding loss)

Ryan wants me to go 6UM now, so says the guy who had a 14lb rifle launching watermelons when we started this place (luv ya bro’)

 

[Dirtbag]

In terms of (a), the evidence against smaller calibers is always that they simply aren’t enough. But then when you press or ask those advocates for larger rounds what evidence and data they have seen that shows modern small bullets are insufficient, there simply is none - most have never shot an animal (dead or alive) with smaller caliber modern bullets. It is just a claim that has been stated for so long that people accept it as fact.

When I was first exploring using smaller cartridges I was told by someone who truly "has been there, done that"

"anyone who doubts the effectiveness of .22 centerfires on game simply hasnt done it yet"

I often wish there was a way to take some of the naysayers out and have them watch me shoot a deer, with them not knowing I used a 22-250, .223, swift so on, and then have them guess what I used. I think they would be in disbelief.

 

[ShortMountain91]

Lower recoil but still plenty of killing power is an attractive combination. I think a lot of people (myself included) thought you couldn't get the killing power. But this site has an impossible to ignore body of evidence that killing power is there with the smaller cartridges and correct bullet. Plus if you reload the smaller cartridges save a little power