What caused the Rokslide shift to smallest caliber and cartridges?

[gabenzeke]

A man's got to know his limitations

When you step down to the smaller bullet, you may change your mind. Then again, you may shoot as well as my son. I hope it's the second.

Here's the thing though...if I go back to a larger caliber because of limitations, I will be able to explain what the larger caliber gives me without just calling it insurance or room for error. I'll be able to say well, the wound channel is wider or deeper or something and could provide photos to back it up. There are several threads on this topic with people saying these same sorts of things and I haven't seen a single shred of evidence to back the concept of insurance up. But the folks shooting smaller calibers provide photo after photo. Saying it more times doesn't make it true. The only people putting money where their mouth is are the guys going with smaller calibers.

Sent from my Pixel 6 Pro using Tapatalk

 

[KenLee]

Here's the thing though...if I go back to a larger caliber because of limitations, I will be able to explain what the larger caliber gives me without just calling it insurance or room for error. I'll be able to say well, the wound channel is wider or deeper or something and could provide photos to back it up. There are several threads on this topic with people saying these same sorts of things and I haven't seen a single shred of evidence to back the concept of insurance up. But the folks shooting smaller calibers provide photo after photo. Saying it more times doesn't make it true. The only people putting money where their mouth is are the guys going with smaller calibers.

Sent from my Pixel 6 Pro using Tapatalk

Apparently I've never been proud enough of a bad shot to bother taking pictures of it. Maybe I'll think of you when I make a few this season. 300wsm and 223

 

[gabenzeke]

I'm not trying to be insulting, just saying if we're trying to make the best decisions based on data, it would seem to me smaller calibers are the smarter choice when you're talking deer, elk, bears, or even moose. Lower recoil, higher hit rates, more than adequate damage, etc. All supported by data and photos. And then some guys are arguing for bigger cartridges....because people say so. No photos to back it up. Data shows lower hit rates. And we all know there is more recoil and/or muzzle blast. Just seems weird that so many say the small calibers are wrong, but all the evidence in these threads, without exception, disagrees.

Sent from my Pixel 6 Pro using Tapatalk

 

[KenLee]

I'm not trying to be insulting, just saying if we're trying to make the best decisions based on data, it would seem to me smaller calibers are the smarter choice when you're talking deer, elk, bears, or even moose. Lower recoil, higher

I'm not trying to be insulting, just saying if we're trying to make the best decisions based on data, it would seem to me smaller calibers are the smarter choice when you're talking deer, elk, bears, or even moose. Lower recoil, higher hit rates, more than adequate damage, etc. All supported by data and photos. And then some guys are arguing for bigger cartridges....because people say so. No photos to back it up. Data shows lower hit rates. And we all know there is more recoil and/or muzzle blast. Just seems weird that so many say the small calibers are wrong, but all the evidence in these threads, without exception, disagrees.

Sent from my Pixel 6 Pro using Tapatalk

I've never said smaller doesn't work great if you're a good shot. Heck most of the 6.5 Creedmoor shooters use basically the same weight bullet I do in the 300wsm. I personally shoot 120 gr NBT in my nice Creedmoor and 7mm-08. Have a few youth Creeds shooting 143 gr eldx.
Unfortunately everyone makes an awful shot sooner or later. Have you ever wondered how many animals weren't recovered or found days later vs the optimal performance pictures you see?
You don't have to convince me, just convince yourself with the performance of your own rifle and be happy with it.

 

[gabenzeke]

I keep trying to make this simple and it isn't working. I'm going to try one last time. You said you shoot the 300 wsm for insurance. You're pointing out just now that I might make a bad shot someday with a smaller caliber. I'm asking you what evidence you have, photographic or otherwise, that the 300 wsm does anything at all to help you in the case of a bad shot. Anything. Any shred of objective evidence that the 300 wsm gains you something over the 223 for example.

Sent from my Pixel 6 Pro using Tapatalk

 

[KenLee]

I keep trying to make this simple and it isn't working. I'm going to try one last time. You said you shoot the 300 wsm for insurance. You're pointing out just now that I might make a bad shot someday with a smaller caliber. I'm asking you what evidence you have, photographic or otherwise, that the 300 wsm does anything at all to help you in the case of a bad shot. Anything. Any shred of objective evidence that the 300 wsm gains you something over the 223 for example.

Sent from my Pixel 6 Pro using Tapatalk

As I've said numerous times, only my experience, which I trust more than handpicked photos on the internet. You are free to believe whatever you wish.
If I "shank" a shot or 2 with the 223 this season and it results in a quick kill, I'll come back here and report.

Edit: by "shank" I meant bad shot in general, not a BOAL leg shot.

 

[Thegman]

As I've said numerous times, only my experience, which I trust more than handpicked photos on the internet. You are free to believe whatever you wish.
If I "shank" a shot or 2 with the 223 this season and it results in a quick kill, I'll come back here and report.

Edit: by "shank" I meant bad shot in general, not a BOAL leg shot.

Not to butt in, but I think gabenzeke is simply asking you to elaborate on "only my experience". Maybe provide some descriptions of the experiences to which you refer.

I'm not saying this while doubting your experience, just curious about the specifics that led you to your current conclusion. (And I'm imagine the 150NBT out of that rifle is closer to ELDM type performance than, say, any sort of mono-metal or bonded bullet, etc. so also imagine it does create some large wounds.)

 

[fwafwow]

This and many other threads have outlived their usefulness, but I still come back each day. Maybe even multiple times a day. (The first step is admitting you have a problem.)

I did manage to learn something - all of the various fallacies that are out there - a few of which seem to be used a lot in these discussions. Ad hominem attack, genetic fallacy, bandwagon argument, appeal to tradition, appeal to authority, non sequitur, stacking the deck, and (my favorite) the "No true Scotsmen" argument.

 

[PistolPete]

This and many other threads have outlived their usefulness, but I still come back each day. Maybe even multiple times a day. (The first step is admitting you have a problem.)

I did manage to learn something - all of the various fallacies that are out there - a few of which seem to be used a lot in these discussions. Ad hominem attack, genetic fallacy, bandwagon argument, appeal to tradition, appeal to authority, non sequitur, stacking the deck, and (my favorite) the "No true Scotsmen" argument.

I keep asking myself why I keep up with these threads. Then I think of a funny joke at the expense of one of the Boomers, then I talk myself out of making it.

And still, I keep coming back.

 

[KenLee]

Not to butt in, but I think gabenzeke is simply asking you to elaborate on "only my experience". Maybe provide some descriptions of the experiences to which you refer.

I'm not saying this while doubting your experience, just curious about the specifics that led you to your current conclusion. (And I'm imagine the 150NBT out of that rifle is closer to ELDM type performance than, say, any sort of mono-metal or bonded bullet, etc. so also imagine it does create some large wounds.)

From a post above: "difference in tissue damage and difference in how far animals run with similar shots".
The difference is even often with similar weight bullets. Yes NBT ran fast is very destructive. Ran slower, still destructive, but much less.

Funny to be called out as a Fudd while running splatter bullets in about a dozen different headstamps. I was splattering deer before most on here were born.

 

[gabenzeke]

Rokslide needs to set up a bounty for evidence that the big guns do something magic with bad shots. Give a custom rifle away and name it Geico or something if someone can prove it.

Sent from my Pixel 6 Pro using Tapatalk

 

[KenLee]

Rokslide needs to set up a bounty for evidence that the big guns do something magic with bad shots. Give a custom rifle away and name it Geico or something if someone can prove it.

Sent from my Pixel 6 Pro using Tapatalk

Make sure it has a tang safety, name it Farm Bureau and I'll load you up with gutshot pics.

 

[Thegman]

From a post above: "difference in tissue damage and difference in how far animals run with similar shots".
The difference is even often with similar weight bullets. Yes NBT ran fast is very destructive. Ran slower, still destructive, but much less.

Funny to be called out as a Fudd while running splatter bullets in about a dozen different headstamps. I was splattering deer before most on here were born.

No offense meant, but "difference in tissue damage and difference in how far animals run with similar shots" is so vague and qualitative it does little to nothing in helping anyone understand what, exactly, you've seen that led you to your conclusion.

What exactly (or even approximately) was the difference in tissue damage? How much further did x run compared to y? Where were the similar shots placed?

Not to sound like I'm needling you, but if you're making a very general claim, I think it's reasonable for people ask for specifics.

 

[Thegman]

Make sure it has a tang safety, name it Farm Bureau and I'll load you up with gutshot pics.

Now we're getting somewhere...

 

[TaperPin]

I was at the public range, thinking about all the average and below average shooters that struggle with a 30-06 or even a 270, let alone a 7 or 300 mag. These lower 1/2 or even 3/4 of shooters should definitely use a smaller cartridge and normal weight rifle. The problem with the smaller calibers is these guys are dipschits and can’t hardly figure out the scope, or how to use bags, let alone figure out appropriate bullets for that cartridge.

Saying everyone should use a snail like the 223 sounds good, but the average guy will never read Rokslide and will be clueless about off the shelf ammo at Scheels.

My 243 and a Nosler partition has shoot exactly one elk double lung off a haystack and it killed the schitt out of it - after 300 yards of running. Joe blow needs a better off the shelf bullet than that - most hunters can’t track 75 yards, let alone 300.

All the talk of average hunters is fun for you guys to repeat, I don’t want to stop a favorite past time, but Mr Average doesn’t have a clue about bullets so for these guys it’s an unworkable half solution.

 

[mxgsfmdpx]

Here's one... Hard quartering towards shot. My wife shot him in front of the "shoulder" obliterating the heart and lung, penciling through the liver, and exiting out the far side front edge of the stomach (exit side shown). 85 yards. 95 Grain SST that "grenades" and "rarely exists" at high velocity impacts according to the internet. 20" Tikka .243 factory barrel.

I shared this photo with 10-12 guys that hunt and did a guess the cartridge game. Every guess was .30-06 and/or .300 win mag with "soft tips".

 

[Thegman]

I was at the public range, thinking about all the average and below average shooters that struggle with a 30-06 or even a 270, let alone a 7 or 300 mag. These lower 1/2 or even 3/4 of shooters should definitely use a smaller cartridge and normal weight rifle. The problem with the smaller calibers is these guys are dipschits and can’t hardly figure out the scope, or how to use bags, let alone figure out appropriate bullets for that cartridge.

Saying everyone should use a snail like the 223 sounds good, but the average guy will never read Rokslide and will be clueless about off the shelf ammo at Scheels.

My 243 and a Nosler partition has shoot exactly one elk double lug off a haystack and it killed the schitt out of it - after 300 yards of running. Joe blow needs a better off the shelf bullet than that - most hunters can’t track 75 yards, let alone 300.

All the talk of average hunters is fun for you guys to repeat, I don’t want to stop a favorite past time, but Mr Average doesn’t have a clue about bullets so for these guys it’s an unworkable half solution.

There's certainly some truth to that, but...this thread asks "What caused the Rokslide shift to smallest caliber and cartridges?" That's not really asking "Mr. Average"...maybe "Mr. Somewhat Above Average", but not "Mr. Average"...

 

[Thegman]

Here's one... Hard quartering towards shot. My wife shot him in front of the "shoulder" obliterating the heart and lung, penciling through the liver, and exiting out the far side front edge of the stomach (exit side shown). 85 yards. 95 Grain SST that "grenades" and "rarely exists" at high velocity impacts according to the internet. 20" Tikka .243 factory barrel.

I shared this photo with 10-12 guys that hunt and did a guess the cartridge game. Every guess was .30-06 and/or .300 win mag with "soft tips".

View attachment 743733

You're not helping...

 

[mxgsfmdpx]

I was at the public range, thinking about all the average and below average shooters that struggle with a 30-06 or even a 270, let alone a 7 or 300 mag. These lower 1/2 or even 3/4 of shooters should definitely use a smaller cartridge and normal weight rifle. The problem with the smaller calibers is these guys are dipschits and can’t hardly figure out the scope, or how to use bags, let alone figure out appropriate bullets for that cartridge.

Saying everyone should use a snail like the 223 sounds good, but the average guy will never read Rokslide and will be clueless about off the shelf ammo at Scheels.

My 243 and a Nosler partition has shoot exactly one elk double lug off a haystack and it killed the schitt out of it - after 300 yards of running. Joe blow needs a better off the shelf bullet than that - most hunters can’t track 75 yards, let alone 300.

All the talk of average hunters is fun for you guys to repeat, I don’t want to stop a favorite past time, but Mr Average doesn’t have a clue about bullets so for these guys it’s an unworkable half solution.

Get off the concrete table and bench and go shoot for real ;-)

 

[KenLee]

Here's one... Hard quartering towards shot. My wife shot him in front of the "shoulder" obliterating the heart and lung, penciling through the liver, and exiting out the far side front edge of the stomach (exit side shown). 85 yards. 95 Grain SST that "grenades" and "rarely exists" at high velocity impacts according to the internet. 20" Tikka .243 factory barrel.

I shared this photo with 10-12 guys that hunt and did a guess the cartridge game. Every guess was .30-06 and/or .300 win mag with "soft tips".

View attachment 743733

Pointing out that your wife shoots better than me wins you no points. All of my multiple exs did also