What caused the Rokslide shift to smallest caliber and cartridges?

[Choupique]

I am puzzled why the angst. Why ignore something that works so very well based on opinion you feel is less lethal.

Its just a tough pill to swallow for most of us. You're talking about upending a couple generations of embedded common knowledge.

Hell I've read all of it, I'm an engineer, can't deny the data, still having to convince myself to try it. A lot of us might only get to shoot one deer a year. It's tough to go out and experiment with that one deer a year when that experiment is a direct contradiction to what you've known your whole life.

 

[allstajacket]

Its just a tough pill to swallow for most of us. You're talking about upending a couple generations of embedded common knowledge.

Hell I've read all of it, I'm an engineer, can't deny the data, still having to convince myself to try it. A lot of us might only get to shoot one deer a year. It's tough to go out and experiment with that one deer a year when that experiment is a direct contradiction to what you've known your whole life.

Add in the question “why?”

Unless I’m struggling to get the job done with what I’ve got, why would I change?

People put it out there that the small calibers can work, and can work well. But this weird idea that it’s “better” so everyone should do it and you’re wrong if you don’t is strange. I feel like the tmk ammo can actually cause too much damage. I haven’t tested the theory on my own, but I’m open to doing this test if I get the opportunity. Sometimes, though, only I get an opportunity to shoot one deer a year. Plus I’m in woods for the most part so deflection of smaller lighter bullets is another concern.

What I’m seeing is almost like someone going in a forum and telling me my vehicle choice is dumb because I can commute to work faster or more efficiently with a different vehicle.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[RockAndSage]

A lot of us might only get to shoot one deer a year. It's tough to go out and experiment with that one deer a year when that experiment is a direct contradiction to what you've known your whole life.

Same situation, and definitely understand. Especially in putting weeks into scouting pre-season.

You know what helps with this though?

Putting 1000 .223 rounds downrange in dedicated, focused, slow-fire practice from a variety of field positions over the course of a month or two...

...and after that, then trying to make the same shots with your heavier recoiling gun.

That's an experiment you can control, with no cost other than ammo, time, and the satisfaction of becoming a better shot. And you can do it as many times as you'd like.

 

[allstajacket]

Same situation, and definitely understand. Especially in putting weeks into scouting pre-season.

You know what helps with this though?

Putting 1000 .223 rounds downrange in dedicated, focused, slow-fire practice from a variety of field positions over the course of a month or two...

...and after that, then trying to make the same shots with your heavier recoiling gun.

That's an experiment you can control, with no cost other than ammo, time, and the satisfaction of becoming a better shot. And you can do it as many times as you'd like.

Shit, I have two kids under 7 years old and a pretty busy work/family schedule. I wish I had the luxury of sending 1000 rounds down range in a month or two. My .308 fits me so damn well i have a hard time shooting it poorly. Plus the recoil is essentially non-existent, especially with the can. If anything I truly enjoy the feel of shoot it.

Edit: and to be fair, .308 isn’t even my preferred cartridge. It’s just what was available in the rifle I wanted, when I was able to get it.. and it’s worked fantastic.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Southern Lights]

Shraggs is talking fist-sized entrance holes here - photos in threads of 7mms and .30cals with tipped match bullets and what they do hide-on, hide-off, body cavity...they leave no margin for error if you want to keep your meat. Shoot a little far forward and hit a shoulder, both shoulders on a deer are bloodshot and just blasted with frag.

I was on this website for a good year before I asked about what tipped match bullets do when they're bigger than .223, and had people point me to those photos, or share them in response. So, it's not always a part of the convo, especially not in side threads. Not the evidence. But that damage was so severe that I decided I wouldn't use tipped match bullets in anything bigger than 6mm for taking game - and would "limit" myself to bonded or mono in larger.

I remember shooting a coyote and deer with 178 AMAXs in 308. i couldn't believe the damage. It was so bad I never used them again and still have over 900 of them on my reloading shelf. Fragmenting bullets work well, but yes they can often be way overkill and ruin a ton of meat. Even smaller caliber fragmenting ruin a lot of meat and spray pulverized lead inside the body cavity. That's the main reason I moved away from them for meat hunting. They kill well, but I didn't like the aftermath.

 

[Southern Lights]

It's funny reading these threads and then old writings of Jack O'Connor where he is going on about how well .25 and .24 caliber work on deer with the right bullet. He even mentioned that new fangled 22-250 being used by deer hunters with success.

 

[RockAndSage]

I wish I had the luxury of sending 1000 rounds down range in a month or two. My .308 fits me so damn well i have a hard time shooting it poorly. Plus the recoil is essentially non-existent, especially with the can. If anything I truly enjoy the feel of shoot it.

Here's the deal man - nobody's telling you not to shoot your .308. Especially if it's working as well for you as you're saying. That's awesome, it's a great all-around cartridge, the can makes it a dream to shoot, and it's a formula that's getting the job done you need done. And you have complete confidence in it. Hell yes, completely sincere here.

Here's a couple of additional things to consider:

- You're talking to some people here, for whom 1000 rounds in a month is a good starting point. Not bragging or d*ck measuring. Just giving a baseline of why we're saying what we're saying. I still have my 30-06, with a can, enjoy shooting it, but...I'm sure as hell not shooting 1000 rounds a month out of it. My .223s? Big yes. I can do it cost-effectively, and I can do it 100-200 rounds a session without developing a flinch, and before I get mentally or physically fatigued in ways that just can't be done with a heavier recoiling gun with more muzzle blast.

- Given that we're talking high-volume experience, it may be possible with what you've said, that you may not know either your real-world limitations with your current setup, or are limited more than you realize. If you haven't, you know, burned out a barrel yet with slow, focused range time across a wide variety of field-realistic positions. That makes you normal, and it's not a knock. Just be aware that most of us were in that exact same position, before going low-recoiling, high-volume practice. We're telling you these things because a lot of us see where we were in what you're saying.

- We're not saying ".223s only!". We're saying low-recoiling, cost-effective, high-volume shooting in field-realistic positions, with bullets that are the most effective with the least unnecessary damage to the meat.

- The low-recoiling helps immensely in a dozen ways, including giving you the ability to get into awkward field-realistic and field-expedient positions, and practice in them in ways that a heavy-recoiling gun just makes exceedingly difficult. If for no other reason, than avoiding scoping your forehead. But also, requiring far more concentration on executing your fundamentals to avoid recoil anticipation. Get into some squatting-kneeling weird posture ducking under a branch for a clear shot, 10 times, on a target 200yds out...even with that can, your .308 will give you different performance than the exact same situation and a suppressed .223. I promise.

- This guy we're referring to, Form...I once asked him directly, what the largest cartridge is that he personally would say fits this optimal envelope, for him, before recoil issues start making the concentration demands and positional options more limiting. This is a guy who shoots upwards of 6000 magnum cartridge rounds per year. His answer was ".22 Creedmoor - maybe 6mm Creedmoor." I think this says volumes, and needs to be taken into account, for anyone who wants to optimize their actual real-world hunting capability.

 

[Choupique]

You know what helps with this though?

Putting 1000 .223 rounds downrange in dedicated, focused, slow-fire practice from a variety of field positions over the course of a month or two...

Thats another part of the average guys problem. Going shoot rifles is an ordeal for me, much less to go shoot 1000 rounds over several sessions. Im young with young kids and a busy job and its just difficult to do. These days I might get a total of 10 hours of range time in an entire year, and I've got to squeeze everything into that. Fudd lore is partially still alive just because most of us dont get to shoot enough targets or game in our entire lives to ever have any real data.

Like I said earlier, I completely get it. My motivation for trying it is that if I do like the terminal performance, my wife and kids can hunt with a suppressed collapsible AR instead of a man sized .30-06 like I did when I was a kid.

Its just tough to overcome the mental barricades based on internet people's experience when it directly contradicts your own experience and all the advice you ever got in your life. Most of us will be the first grown man in our social circles to shoot a deer with a .223 on purpose.

I am extremely grateful to see the data driven approach and the knowledge sharing. For some of us theres 50 lifetimes worth of big game kills in that .223 thread.

 

[allstajacket]

Here's the deal man - nobody's telling you not to shoot your .308. Especially if it's working as well for you as you're saying. That's awesome, it's a great all-around cartridge, the can makes it a dream to shoot, and it's a formula that's getting the job done you need done. And you have complete confidence in it. Hell yes, completely sincere here.

Here's a couple of additional things to consider:

- You're talking to some people here, for whom 1000 rounds in a month is a good starting point. Not bragging or d*ck measuring. Just giving a baseline of why we're saying what we're saying. I still have my 30-06, with a can, enjoy shooting it, but...I'm sure as hell not shooting 1000 rounds a month out of it. My .223s? Big yes. I can do it cost-effectively, and I can do it 100-200 rounds a session without developing a flinch, and before I get mentally or physically fatigued in ways that just can't be done with a heavier recoiling gun with more muzzle blast.

- Given that we're talking high-volume experience, it may be possible with what you've said, that you may not know either your real-world limitations with your current setup, or are limited more than you realize. If you haven't, you know, burned out a barrel yet with slow, focused range time across a wide variety of field-realistic positions. That makes you normal, and it's not a knock. Just be aware that most of us were in that exact same position, before going low-recoiling, high-volume practice. We're telling you these things because a lot of us see where we were in what you're saying.

- We're not saying ".223s only!". We're saying low-recoiling, cost-effective, high-volume shooting in field-realistic positions, with bullets that are the most effective with the least unnecessary damage to the meat.

- The low-recoiling helps immensely in a dozen ways, including giving you the ability to get into awkward field-realistic and field-expedient positions, and practice in them in ways that a heavy-recoiling gun just makes exceedingly difficult. If for no other reason, than avoiding scoping your forehead. But also, requiring far more concentration on executing your fundamentals to avoid recoil anticipation. Get into some squatting-kneeling weird posture ducking under a branch for a clear shot, 10 times, on a target 200yds out...even with that can, your .308 will give you different performance than the exact same situation and a suppressed .223. I promise.

- This guy we're referring to, Form...I once asked him directly, what the largest cartridge is that he personally would say fits this optimal envelope, for him, before recoil issues start making the concentration demands and positional options more limiting. This is a guy who shoots upwards of 6000 magnum cartridge rounds per year. His answer was ".22 Creedmoor - maybe 6mm Creedmoor." I think this says volumes, and needs to be taken into account, for anyone who wants to optimize their actual real-world hunting capability.

Yeah I don’t have a problem with people using whatever they like or whatever works for them. It’s the comments talking down on people for doing just that that irks me. (Not you.)


Talking about vasectomies and fertility comparisons because someone uses a cartridge that you don’t like to use lol. Imagine being bothered that much by someone else’s caliber choice. Must be miserable.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[RockAndSage]

Fudd lore is partially still alive just because most of us dont get to shoot enough targets or game in our entire lives to ever have any real data.

^^^ Absolute truth here.

Most of us will be the first grown man in our social circles to shoot a deer with a .223 on purpose.

The funny thing about this, as Southern Lights mentioned above, is that before the Weatherby magnum craze of the 1950s and the WWII vets with 30-06s, what guys were doing in the 20s, 30s, and 40s was almost exactly this. Their era's .223s, in .220 Swift and .22-250.

 

[Shraggs]

Its just a tough pill to swallow for most of us. You're talking about upending a couple generations of embedded common knowledge.

Hell I've read all of it, I'm an engineer, can't deny the data, still having to convince myself to try it. A lot of us might only get to shoot one deer a year. It's tough to go out and experiment with that one deer a year when that experiment is a direct contradiction to what you've known your whole life.

Great point. I scuffed and said to myself what a joke 223 on a moose. As the thread got larger I began to read, I’m old enough in the fudd or myth based hunters, ha. I’m not though. Always a critical thinker. As that thread matured and folks here started setting up rifles and tmks and killing the echos of success were hard to deny. I spoke with Lawnbio as he trialed it early on with great success. He also said not sure he has a reason to hunt deer anymore with a 300wm and the damage of 223/77 exceeded expectations, and almost too much. And how fun it was to shoot. That’s what tipped the scales for me, no pun intended!

Again, 3006, 300 wm I’d not want these bullets and keep my noslers. Short actions kinda if toss up point. But 22–6mm you’re creating lethality equal to traditional boom sticks in light recoil. So, realize imo this isn’t up ending what wasn’t known as pointed out already… and I hope, you’ve mentioned you’re obviously thinking, realize the bullet type is the most important aspect of small calibers, not the bore or powder charge. Right a 55 tsx 223 isn’t going to be legitimately in the conversation taking an elk at 400 yds while 223/77 already has — seriously if folks really think ft lbs threshold for caliber game selection than the 3030 should not have killed millions of deer and many elk over half a century at normal ranges.

When I also considered my prior sources of knowledge… one, my dad bought him and kids 7mm rm as young teenagers for the knock down power so deer didn’t run to neighbors farm! With an average shot distance of 100 yds. Guess what he was flat out wrong. “Good” shots all over a lot of years but overall the 3030, 32 ws and 308 with rem corelokts resulted in significantly less yards traveled vs all of us using the big 7. An acknowledgment we all made years later and shot placement wasn’t as good.

I’d say do your homework, small and fast isn’t new and has always been a debate. But bullet technology has most definitely changed and most in my personal circle it is the after thought.

If you’re close borrow one of my small bore death rays.

 

[allstajacket]

Great point. I scuffed and said to myself what a joke 223 on a moose. As the thread got larger I began to read, I’m old enough in the fudd or myth based hunters, ha. I’m not though. Always a critical thinker. As that thread matured and folks here started setting up rifles and tmks and killing the echos of success were hard to deny. I spoke with Lawnbio as he trialed it early on with great success. He also said not sure he has a reason to hunt deer anymore with a 300wm and the damage of 223/77 exceeded expectations, and almost too much. And how fun it was to shoot. That’s what tipped the scales for me, no pun intended!

Again, 3006, 300 wm I’d not want these bullets and keep my noslers. Short actions kinda if toss up point. But 22–6mm you’re creating lethality equal to traditional boom sticks in light recoil. So, realize imo this isn’t up ending what wasn’t known as pointed out already… and I hope, you’ve mentioned you’re obviously thinking, realize the bullet type is the most important aspect of small calibers, not the bore or powder charge. Right a 55 tsx 223 isn’t going to be legitimately in the conversation taking an elk at 400 yds while 223/77 already has — seriously if folks really think ft lbs threshold for caliber game selection than the 3030 should not have killed millions of deer and many elk over half a century at normal ranges.

When I also considered my prior sources of knowledge… one, my dad bought him and kids 7mm rm as young teenagers for the knock down power so deer didn’t run to neighbors farm! With an average shot distance of 100 yds. Guess what he was flat out wrong. “Good” shots all over a lot of years but overall the 3030, 32 ws and 308 with rem corelokts resulted in significantly less yards traveled vs all of us using the big 7. An acknowledgment we all made years later and shot placement wasn’t as good.

I’d say do your homework, small and fast isn’t new and has always been a debate. But bullet technology has most definitely changed and most in my personal circle it is the after thought.

If you’re close borrow one of my small bore death rays.

I’ve asked some friends if anyone has a spare flat top AR upper or .223 rifle I can try out this year if I get a shot on a 2nd deer. In my head im not liking the wound channel/meat damage, and bullet fragments everywhere.. but I’m open to trying it to compare in my own environment. I still won’t switch away from the 308 full time, but I’d do it just out of curiosity.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Choupique]

hope, you’ve mentioned you’re obviously thinking, realize the bullet type is the most important aspect of small calibers, not the bore or powder charg

Yes, I completely understand that.

you’re close borrow one of my small bore death rays

Greatly appreciated but I already have one ready to go for this season, and have resolved that I will not take the big gun hunting until I shoot a deer with a .223 match bullet.

I think I'll still deer hunt with my .338 some just because I like it, but man figuring out a .223 can work just as well would be awesome.

Now, convincing myself to leave the .338 at home and tote the .223 across country on an elk hunt will be a different matter all together. Baby steps for us easterners.

 

[Shraggs]

Not sure where I’m MI you are, I’m out of but probably have some contacts, let me know.

First time in decades I’m minus a 308. I’ll change that soon it’s great all round cartridge with barrel life an an amazing story to me.

Edit for allsta

 

[Q_Sertorius]

Yeah I don’t have a problem with people using whatever they like or whatever works for them. It’s the comments talking down on people for doing just that that irks me. (Not you.)


Talking about vasectomies and fertility comparisons because someone uses a cartridge that you don’t like to use lol. Imagine being bothered that much by someone else’s caliber choice. Must be miserable.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Lighten up, Francis.

Do you suddenly feel impotent because I cracked a joke about emasculating a big powerful cartridge?

I honestly don’t care what anyone uses for hunting.

I’m not aiming at you. You seem like a decently conscientious person. I am aiming at the “more margin for error” types. The kinds of guys who say stuff like, “with this cartridge if I hit it anywhere it’s going down right there” or the “if you are gonna use a puny little .223, you must be really limited in the shots you can take. I can shoot ‘em anywhere.”

 

[allstajacket]

Not sure where I’m MI you are, I’m out of but probably have some contacts, let me know.

First time in decades I’m minus a 308. I’ll change that soon it’s great all round cartridge with barrel life an an amazing story to me.

Edit for allsta

I’m in the metro Detroit area (Oakland county)


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Shraggs]

Nice! There is always building the 6

223 training and deer and big game legal states

6mm for longer range training in wind and big game in western states

338 for fun, ha and keep stoked with something that will always exit when that makes sense.

Check out all the range drill threads, and compare legitimate 10 round groups vs your 338

Edit Choup

 

[Southern Lights]

From Jack O'Connors Complete Book of Rifles and Shotguns published in 1961:

"WAY BACK IN 1914 CAPTAIN EDWARD C. CROSSMAN, THE GIFTED GUN writer and ballistician who wound up his career as a staff member of Outdoor Life magazine, defined the ideal all-around rifle for Americans. At the time, the .250/3000 Savage cartridge was brand new. He considered it close to ideal. The perfect cartridge for the average American rifleman, he wrote, would be one that would drive a 100-grain .25 caliber bullet at 3,000 feet per second. He added that it should use a case with a head size like that of the .30/06 and the 7 and 8 mm. Mauser cartridges, so that Springfield and Model 98 Mauser actions could be used. That, of course, was long before the day of the Models 54 and 70 Winchester and the Models 30, 720, 721 and 722 Remington.

The reasons behind Crossman’s choice are pretty obvious. Experience had proved that a 100-grain bullet which leaves the muzzle at a velocity of 3,000 feet per second has all the killing power needed for animals of the antelope-deer-mountain sheep class. The trajectory is flat enough so that hits to 300 yards or somewhat over are not difficult. Crossman also recognized the equally important fact that such a cartridge gives a good deal lighter recoil than one like the .30/06.

Some people are born with a lot of built-in recoil tolerance. If a rifle jolts them sharply back, snaps their neck vertebrae and loosens the fillings in their teeth, they don’t seem to mind. Most of us, however, can develop such a tolerance to the degree that the kick of a .30/06 doesn’t bother us-or bother us consciously anyway. It’s even possible to get used to the very potent recoil of something like the .375 Magnum. But most hunters simply do not have the time, the inclination or the opportunity to shoot enough to develop their tolerance to that extent. Probably four out of five .30/06 owners are flustered by recoil to the extent that they flinch, although they wouldn’t be caught dead admitting it. These are the lads who would do better shooting and cleaner killing with a rifle of less recoil—Cap Crossman’s .25 caliber, for example.

This hypothetical cartridge, with its 100-grain bullet at 3,000 feet per second, would also be an exceedingly fine varmint cartridge, ideal for coyotes and wolves, and excellent, with a lighter bullet (the 87-grain, let us say) at higher velocity, on the smaller varmints. This lighter, faster bullet would also be safer to use in settled areas because it would have less tendency to ricochet.

Four American factory cartridges follow Crossman’s specifications fairly closely, and all of them are exceedingly useful all-around cartridges—the old .250/3000, the middle-aged .257 Roberts, the youthful .243 Winchester and .244 Remington. All of them, even the .24s, aren’t too far from .25 caliber. Any of them can be loaded to give a 100-grain bullet in the neighborhood of 3,000 at the muzzle. All produce light recoil and give fine accuracy in good rifles when fed good bullets. One of the most pleasant things about them is that special light, short-barreled rifles that shoot accurately and kick lightly can be built for them. Anyone wanting a very light yet reasonably potent rifle for horseback or mountain use wouldn’t be making a bad choice in either the .24 or the .25."

...

As a note, O'Connor repeatedly comments that bullet construction is paramount for what kind of game you are after and discusses impact of recoil on shooters repeatedly. None of this debate is remotely new.

 

[Shraggs]

I’m in the metro Detroit area (Oakland county)


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

West side holland area

 

[allstajacket]

West side holland area

West side is beautiful! I grew up south of ludington. I typically hunt in the grayling area.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk