What caused the Rokslide shift to smallest caliber and cartridges?

[Harvey_NW]

I'm not sure how any human can argue any point you made in this post.

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..

 

[wyosam]

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..

It’s a cartridge debate, which means it is an argument over how to skin a cat, and the number of ways to skin that cat is roughly equal to the number of cartridges there are x the number of bullet types that can be stuffed into those cartridges. Generally speaking, all work.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[KHntr]

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

 

[KHntr]

88 ELD m, intentional shoulder crush ala 223AI.

 

[KHntr]

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

 

[KHntr]

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

 

[mxgsfmdpx]

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

 

[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!