What caused the Rokslide shift to smallest caliber and cartridges?

[Reburn]

Au contraire, my duty rifle is loaded with issued Federal 55 gr. bonded soft points.

Sigh.
Dude.
How are a TMK and a bonded soft point even remotely the same? Other then both being bullets.

 

[Squincher]

Sigh.
Dude.
How are a TMK and a bonded soft point even remotely the same? Other then both being bullets.

You said they can't sell hunting bullets to law enforcement. My duty rifle is loaded with issued "hunting" bullets sold to a law enforcement agency. Sigh, indeed.

 

[hereinaz]

As others have mentioned this is a very old discussion. Absolutely nothing new or revolutionary here. In fact, those who embrace the soft/match bullets are bigger fudds than the tough bullet guys! The first jacketed hunting bullets where all thin jacketed soft points that behaved precisely like the thin jacketed match bullets. They were not as precise or aerodynamic but they performed the same terminally. This is because they were a lead core wrapped in a thin copper or gilding jacket with no means to control expansion or retain weight. Worked perfect for low velocity and dynamite most of the time at high impact velocity lung shots. However sometimes didnt penetrate enough and hunters complained. Bullet makers listened to hunters

Bullets like your grandpa’s Remington corelokt or Win Silvertip came along which thickened / tapered jackets to limit expansion. Cores could still slip, but in general, you had less failures due to insufficient penetration. I will interject here that Jack O’Connor often pointed out that these new fangled “controlled expanding” bullets did not kill deer as fast as the old soft points (sound familiar?) on lung shots but were advisable for shoulder shots, bigger game or “brush hunting”. However, failures were made worse by smaller calibers at higher velocites (6mms, weatherbys, win/rem mags)

Then came partitions, bonding, and eventually monos to increase weight retention. Now lack of penetration were mostly a thing of the past even with light bullets on bigger game. Along with MSR, rise the popularity of using smaller calibers on bigger game….22s on deer, 6/6.5 on elk, etc….

So there is bullet history lesson to get me to my point…. Now we are combining small calibers and bullets with no means to control expansion or retain weight. There are history lessons here. This is not new at all. There is nothing cutting edge in bullet performance with soft bullets. What IS new is we are now focusing on longer ranges where impact velocity is lower and I believe in general guys on places like RS are better educated and equipped. Shot placement and lower impact velocity can forgive some sins in bullet construction. I think that is at least part of reason this trend is gaining here. I will probably get flamed by folks who think I am shading their choice but I am not. I don’t think any bullet construction is perfect for all scenarios and load for my hunting circumstances

So is this trend good for masses. I don’t think so. People wonder why manufacturers don’t recommend their match bullets for hunting. It is because of the history of hunting bullet design not some fuddery or lack of understanding. Despite the long range trend, for every guy that shoots a deer or elk broadside at 300+ yards there is probably 500 that shoot one quartering at under 100 yards even with “long range ammo”. Bullet makers know this and they want to make sure all of their hunting bullets handle both shots well as often as possible. This is why somebody like Hornady will say their match bullets are not for hunting. There is NO design feature in a match bullet to limit expansion or retain weight to increase odds of penetration on non-perfect shots. Like they say it may or may not work. They don’t design match bullets for that and don’t care and certainly don’t want to hear people complain if they fail in that scenario.

Lou

What old school cartridges were the soft points coming from that didn’t penetrate?

I am picturing a 30-30.

Do the bigger soft point bullets expand faster than smaller closed tip or plastic tip bullets?

 

[fwafwow]

What's the debate technique called when you just ask snarky rhetorical questions - many of which have been asked before in threads one does not want to read - as opposed to responding to the fact or logic questions posed?

Wait - did I just do it?

 

[roosiebull]

Why don't they come out and make it public? Surely, they aren't adverse to an exponential increase in sales and profit. Hell, they could probably just make that one bullet and do record levels of business.

They can’t keep up as it is, so why would they use more resources to promote a bullet in a different way (testing and marketing) when they can’t keep up as it is?

Of course that’s speculation, but trying to further endorse a bullet they already can’t keep up with needs no help, they would first have to figure out how to increase production

 

[jjohnsonElknewbie]

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've never seen anybody discount the lethality of larger calibers. I shoot a .308 and .35 Whelen in addition to my .25-06 for crying out loud.

The only question about lethality has to do with shooters that cannot shoot these larger calibers well due to recoil and/or muzzle blast and associated flinching. My .35 has a factory brake that tames recoil significantly, however, the muzzle blast is remarkable enough to create anticipation even with ears on. Experienced folks can adapt and shoot these rounds adequately. However, new shooters and smaller framed folks may have a harder time. Thus the appeal of the smaller stuff for these folks and for anybody else that wants maximum practical accuracy out of their hunting rifle without the recoil.

From my own experience, range sessions with my .35 and .308 are far less enjoyable than my .25-06. 20-40 with the aforementioned and I notice some discomfort vs. 100 or more from the .25.

Keep shooting what you like, but until you can provide a reasonable metric for not shooting the smaller stuff, maybe lay off with the negativity.

EDIT: what factual or scientific holes have you poked in the small caliber argument?

 

[JohnJohnson]

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.

Maybe we can get around the need to argue at all if we just say:

1. I trust you when you say you shoot large cartridges well. The concept of averages exists. Maybe you're an outlier.
2. The vast majority of people do not.
3. Their flinching and unfamiliarity with their rifles due to reduced practice make things worse the further the distance gets.

That way you can keep your manhood in tact and we can move on. You're not picking holes in any actual argument that someone has made in here. You're taking what is said in point #2, distorting it to say we're claiming no one shoots big magnums well, and then picking holes in the fake argument you made up. Congratulations, you won an argument with yourself.

 

[Choupique]

Yea, the point is everyone shoots better with lower recoil and muzzle blast. Idk how anyone could refute that unless they are non-human. I know that I take extra time to get right behind my .338 before taking a shot than I do with smaller rifles. 100% to do with knowing that the cannon will bite me if I don't. I missed a bobcat last season because I couldn't get square behind the rifle and didn't even shoot. Non-issue with basically anything else.

Whether or not recoil "bothers" you is absolutely 100% subjective but whether or not you'll shoot better with less recoil is non-debatable. Even more so at the extreme ends of the spectrum.

 

[Reburn]

You said they can't sell hunting bullets to law enforcement. My duty rifle is loaded with issued "hunting" bullets sold to a law enforcement agency. Sigh, indeed.

Law Enforcement - Federal Premium LE, Speer LE, BLACKHAWK!, Eagle - Rifle Details

See Federal Premium LE Rifle details

le.vistaoutdoor.com

These right?

 

[Althma]

This thread’s getting crazy.

 

[Choupique]

It's fascinating though. We've got a great mix of people who are holding on to what they know and ones who have gone to doing stuff that I'd have thought was absolutely insane 3 years ago and totally flipping everything i thought i knew about rifles on its head. It's cool to read the insite from people who passed through the phases that I'm in right now a decade ago (I'm getting the biggest gun I'll ever need and shooting everything with it). I've been a part of lots of bad experiences over the years with small rifles and regular soft point hunting bullets.

I'm sticking with my boomer until it gives me a reason not to because it works for me so far, but I'm going to try to send my kids down a different path. Since I started reading here I've realized that while I do shoot my big gun well, it does suck to shoot both on the shoulder and the wallet. I'd really like to be able to tolerate and afford shooting my hunting rifle more than I do.

 

[Squincher]

Law Enforcement - Federal Premium LE, Speer LE, BLACKHAWK!, Eagle - Rifle Details

See Federal Premium LE Rifle details

le.vistaoutdoor.com

These right?

I believe so.

 

[robby denning]

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?

 

[TaperPin]

Maybe we can get around the need to argue at all if we just say:

1. I trust you when you say you shoot large cartridges well. The concept of averages exists. Maybe you're an outlier.
2. The vast majority of people do not.
3. Their flinching and unfamiliarity with their rifles due to reduced practice make things worse the further the distance gets.

That way you can keep your manhood in tact and we can move on. You're not picking holes in any actual argument that someone has made in here. You're taking what is said in point #2, distorting it to say we're claiming no one shoots big magnums well, and then picking holes in the fake argument you made up. Congratulations, you won an argument with yourself.

You just made my point, and the post after this was even more so - rather than simply saying we shoot these small cartridges and they work great, there’s always a claim that nobody shoots a larger caliber well. Lol

Averages are a pretty low bar to aspire to, unless you want to be mediocre - do you think guys hang out in hunting forums aspire to be mediocre? The average hunter is pretty crappy at it. The average shooter that picks up a gun can barely hit anything.

The other claim that echoed over and over is guys with larger guns don’t practice a lot - no we don’t with the large gun, but that argument only applies if you own one gun.

I don’t expect you to stop repeating these same worn out claims, but I will point them out from time to time.

 

[JohnJohnson]

Averages are a pretty low bar to aspire to, unless you want to be mediocre - do you think guys hang out in hunting forums aspire to be mediocre? The average hunter is pretty crappy at it. The average shooter that picks up a gun can barely hit anything.

You unknowingly made our point here while thinking I made yours. Unless a thread starts out with "I believe @TaperPin doesn't shoot big magnums well", people are literally always speaking about averages. It's the only way we can discuss anything. Gear, shooting, hunter behaviors, everything.

I don’t expect you to stop repeating these same worn out claims, but I will point them out from time to time.

I thought you were just trolling but I'm starting to think you actually don't get that this 20 page thread isn't centered around you.

 

[Reburn]

I believe so.

Those are specifically marketed to LE.
I dont work for an ammo company and I'm not sure where the line is but I dont see anything saying hunting on that page for the tactical rounds.

However I know federal makes soft point hunting ammo but my google fu says its a brass case with a copper bullet and not the nickel case with copper bullet.

Why that matters and to what degree I couldnt tell you.

 

[jimh406]

Law of averages is an interesting slant. Handling recoil is a component of hunting/shooting, but it's not the only one. If you want to reduce recoil, there are multiple methods including brakes, suppressors, downloading, and going to a round that doesn't kick as much.

Likewise, physical size is a component of handling recoil. After all, that's a reason why people don't usually suggest large calibers for kids. Our body sizes are not the same. It's easy to find examples of people who are dramatically smaller or heavier. It's not that hard to find people who are literally double the weight of others. Maybe they should all shoot the same calibers, but maybe not.

However, there are other components of hunting/shooting as well. Shortening up the range that you are willing to shoot, finding the range properly, aiming properly, setting up your gun correctly (torquing bolts), leveling scopes, finding a round that shoots well in your gun, learning to shoot in field conditions, etc.

I could go on, but let's not get wound up in caliber when it is really only one small part of the hunt. I can't say it's the most important or least important, but it matters.

 

[TaperPin]

Keep shooting what you like, but until you can provide a reasonable metric for not shooting the smaller stuff, maybe lay off with the negativity.

I‘ve never said the small caliber guys should stop doing what’s been working. If it’s working and you guys enjoy it, then I wouldn‘t even try to change your minds - same for someone bow hunting, muzzleloaders, pistol hunters and whatnot.

I’ll try to add more so it doesn’t seem as negative

 

[jjohnsonElknewbie]

I‘ve never said the small caliber guys should stop doing what’s been working. If it’s working and you guys enjoy it, then I wouldn‘t even try to change your minds - same for someone bow hunting, muzzleloaders, pistol hunters and whatnot.

I’ll try to add more so it doesn’t seem as negative

...

 

[ktmkaratechips]

Yea, the point is everyone shoots better with lower recoil and muzzle blast. Idk how anyone could refute that unless they are non-human. I know that I take extra time to get right behind my .338 before taking a shot than I do with smaller rifles. 100% to do with knowing that the cannon will bite me if I don't. I missed a bobcat last season because I couldn't get square behind the rifle and didn't even shoot. Non-issue with basically anything else.

Whether or not recoil "bothers" you is absolutely 100% subjective but whether or not you'll shoot better with less recoil is non-debatable. Even more so at the extreme ends of the spectrum.

Were you lining up a shot on a bobcat with your 338?