 |
|
| Author |
 Topic  |
|
sa
Forum Admin
65 Posts |
 Posted - Dec 10 2002 : 05:05:06
|
Some hunters will claim that a vital hit from a faster (> 3000 fps) bullet will cause a more instantaneous death then from a “slow and heavy” bullet.
The survey www.reloadersnest.com/article_survey_dec0902.asp shows that faster and heavier bullets are better, but when is it “too much” to bring down a moose? “Sparrow with cannon?”
What do you think? |
|
|
Robert
Advanced Member
USA
1608 Posts |
Posted - Dec 21 2002 : 20:14:53
|
First, I would like to introduce myself. My name is Robert, I live in Oregon USA. I am very glad to find this nice new website. Thank You.
As I said....I live in Oregon, we dont get Moose this far south, but I have shot quite a few Elk. I checked out the poll and the calibers. I certainly do agree with the therories about fast moving large calibers. I used a 30-06 for a few years with Elk and it seemed to get the job done effectively, three years ago I received a 300 Ultra-Mag for Christmas, certainly a beautiful weapon. I have used it for Elk and Black Bear since, with some curious results. Three of the four Elk that I shot at near 100 paces, (I dont know how to convert 'yards to metters') just stood there like nothing at all had happened. All 3 were mortally wounded with a good lung shot. But the bullet was going so fast that it zipped right through, and even though it was a mortal wound, there was very little shock, or 'knockdown'. Luckily most of these ran into the open area before falling. The fourth Elk, was a running shot this year, and he ran straight downhill toward me after the shot, and broke both fron legs when he fell because he was running so fast. The shot was perfect, there wasnt any lung tissue left to be found, just a puddle of black goo, yet I had extensive bloodshot and tissue damage to the front quarters due to the lack of knock-down power and permitting this animal to run.
It is MY THEORY...that at close range, the 30-06 is better. If you merely increase the speed of a .308 caliber bullet, that will make it more effective for longer distances. I would have been better suited with a 338 Ultra-Mag or even a 375. I can see very well why the .358 Norma was such a great performer. I think 35 caliber bullets are one of the most effective for large game, not only that, but....they are just SO PRETTY.
I shoot a Thompson Contender pistol, and have done a lot of research comparing the 375/444 JDJ, and the 358/444 JDJ.
The best info that I have found compares the two bullets performance ,velocity, expansion and trajectory. Even though the 375 JDJ is legal in S. Africa for Elephant and Cape Buffalo, the statistics show that it is inferior to the 358 JDJ. The trajectory is bad for longer range, and it is very hard to push a rifle bullet fast enough for proper expansion, a flat-nosed Hornady pistol bullet can be used to increase expansion...but that will sacrifice penetration.
Anyway....to make a long story short...I beleive this transfers to the performance of rifle data...this is why the 358 Norma is outperforming the 375 H&H. Within 100 yards...I have no doubt whatsoever that the 375 will knock ANY ANIMAL on the face of the earth on it's butt...but in varied conditions and distance...a 35 caliber will have a wider window of oppurtunity and a better placed shot. It is flatter shooting and will still have ample knock-down at greater distances.
Make it count. |
 |
|
|
Ronyo
Starting Member
USA
2 Posts |
Posted - Dec 21 2002 : 22:11:30
|
On the contrary, the experiance of many hunters in many parts of the USA and Canada is that cartridges like the .303 British ad the 30-06 preform so well that it is as though 2500-2900 fps is the optimum game killing velocity. This also applies to the smaller 30-30, 6.5 swede and 7mm Mauser as well as 300 Savage and .308.
The fast magnuims work good at longer ranges IF they connect, but notably, at those ranges, the velocities are within this same 2500 FPS optimum velocity range.
My personal opinion is that long range shooting is a great pastime put long range hunting is not really hunting. Even if you don't wound the game, are you going to be able to hike way accross that canyon and pack that elk back to camp before nightfall? If you leave him there, and come back the next day, will you ever find him?
But that's just my opinion, which is that long range shots are great to brag about, but many people are not realistic about thiis kind of hunting. on the other hand, ther's nothing wrong with the magnum cartridges as long as you use a controlled-expansion bullet of adequate weight. many of the magnum cartridge affecionados like the lighter bullet wieghts for their more impressive velocity figures, which again is not being realistic about what is optimum for real-world hunting and the humane killing of game, IN MY OPINION!
ronyo9@yahoo.com |
|
|
|
Robert
Advanced Member
USA
1608 Posts |
Posted - Dec 22 2002 : 00:55:38
|
Hey Ron...good to see you here. I agree....that is why the 6.5 Swede is so renowned, although it is small caliber for Moose, but the velocity is right. That's exactly what I meant about shooting the big fast magnums, they are better suited for longer range, 200+...they will certainly work up close....but if the point of impact is in the +- 2500 fps range, you have more shock and knockdown power. I always use the analogy of shooting an aluminum beveridge can. With a 22 rimfire at 25 yds, you have to walk up to see if you have hit it. The bullet passes through without moving it most of the time, but use a pellet rifle and the can goes end over end. That is knock-down. However...I wouldnt try to make a 400 yd. shot with my pellet rifle.......
Make it count. |
|
|
|
Sean
New Member
USA
14 Posts |
Posted - Dec 23 2002 : 04:11:39
|
I would have to agree that the 2200-2900 fps range probably makes a quicker kill than faster bullets. The best analogy I have heard/read comes from the E. A. Brown (custom T/C barrels) in describing their Benchrest Magnum Line of cartridges. They liken the high velocity numbers to shooting a pop can with a .22 lr and a BB gun. The 22 will zip through doing damage of course but the slower BB gun has more time to transmit its energy so it dents the side of the pop can. Not their exact words but you can find their sight and read for yourself if you like.
I also think bullet shape has a lot to do with it. You cannot tell me that a 180 gr Spire Point (spitzer type bullet) is going to transmit the same feel to the target (shock or slap if you prefer) 400 grain flat nose from a 45-70 or a 220 gr Flat Point from a .358 Win. Sean |
|
|
|
JoKen
Starting Member
USA
3 Posts |
Posted - Apr 04 2003 : 04:34:42
|
Me thinks there is way too much hype with our current magnum craze. Bullet Selection, of the various premiums, can and will change perceived death from hydroshock, bullet weight, velocity etc. I personally think that what the magnums gain you are very similiar to a faster shooting bow set-up, and that is flatter trajectory. Most of the standard calibers will shoot flat enough out to 300 yards or so with a reasonable 2 inches high at 100 yard zero. The magnums can gain you about another 100 yards, but how realistic is this for the average hunter, 400 yard shots. If you are a long range shooter/hunter and are confident and competent at the longer ranges, then the magnum is the way to go. If not, any standard and familiar non-magnum caliber will suffice. My dad has killed most of his whitetails with a 25.06 and the hydroshock and knockdown have always been incredible. If you want to get down to brass taxes, shot placement is the most important.
krm |
|
|
|
Robert
Advanced Member
USA
1608 Posts |
Posted - Apr 04 2003 : 07:08:55
|
I agree with Joken. I have posted it many times in many places. I love my Ultra-Mag. But I seriously think that within 200 yds, the 30-06 velocities have better knock-down power. I am re-thinking the Ultra-Mag, I am pretty sure that I can get balistics similar to a 180 gr 30-06, with a slower 220 gr roundnose in the Ultraa-Mag. That should do a better job than a bullet going 3400 fps. If the bullet just blows through...there is NO RETAINED ENERGY.
Make it count. |
|
|
|
JoKen
Starting Member
USA
3 Posts |
Posted - Apr 05 2003 : 14:15:19
|
Probably the only sure fire way to put a deer down quickly is adjustment in shot placement, regardless of cartridge, bullet, velocity, etc. The old neck shot will do it, but smaller target and not much room for error. The shoulder shot will do it, particularly if both shoulders are taken out, but significant meat damage. I read somewhere that a properly hit whitetail, only has about 30 seconds left, which is usually less than 100 yard recovery. I can't see a whole lot wrong with that really... Good luck!
krm |
|
|
|
win30338
New Member
30 Posts |
Posted - Apr 23 2003 : 05:08:27
|
Also another point is the proper bullet in the caliber for the game.I have used 160 grain partitions in a 7 mag,but it is in MY(and mine only)opinion a bit much for deer.It wasn't intended for deer.
But then again,one of my many late heroes was Bob Hagel,who advocated "efficient cartridges",He showed you could with proper handloads run a 7x57 to within a few hundred fps of a 7 mag.The game wont know the difference.
Another point with the exception of the 300 and 375 Hollands there were no "magnums" for some time and those hunters hunted everything we hunt quite effectively.
Just my two cents worth,and has been said previous,much over 200 yds evn to me isn't hunting.It's sniping.
What happened to getting down out of the tree stand or shooting house
and "hunting"
JRSD1 |
|
|
|
Paul B
Advanced Member
1681 Posts |
Posted - Apr 29 2003 : 23:55:02
|
Some very good points have been made here. I've been hunting for many years, mainly deer, and occasionally elk. (drawing tags ain't easy. ) My first deer rifle was an old 94 Winchester in 30-30, but after reading lot's of Jack O'Connor, I went to a hot loaded 150 gr. bullet in the 30-06. I used that load for many years, but was never quite happy with the results. Then I hunted with a friend who would use nother but 180 gr. bullets in his 06 on deer. They dropped a lot quicker and less meat was ruined. The more I hunted, and the more I read by O'Connor, Keith, Hagel and some others, the more I went along with old Elmer Keith. The rifles I seem to gravitating to more and more are my .358 Winchester and .35 Whelen. In 54 years of solid deer hunting, sometimes in as many as six different states when money was good, I've taken about 150 deer, although I've never really kept a count. Most were just eating animals taken for the pot so no real tropies. The point I'm trying to make is this, of all those deer taken, only two required a shot farther out that 200 yards. In fact, with the exception of about five more, all could have been taken with the lowly 30-30, not that I consider it lowly. Either the .358 with a 200 gr. bullet or the Whelen with a 250 gr, bullet will take any deed I feel comfortable shooting at. As for elk? I'll take my Whelen.
Paul B. |
|
|
|
win30338
New Member
30 Posts |
Posted - Apr 30 2003 : 04:35:05
|
Keith was one of my heroes(they have all died,so I'm getting old),good philosophy of his was if big is good,then bigger is better.O'Connor(another dead hero) in some ways was just the opposite,but they were all pretty much on the mark with what they said.
Takes us back to where we started,but by and large many of those men back then,whether they wrote for us kids or not,were better marksmen,woodsmen and hunters than many of us could ever hope to be.
So with that said,they didn't need what we think we need.
If we had their skills??
Look what Jack O'Connor did with the 270(aside from making Winchester's coffers even larger).He hunted stuff with the 270 that we wouldn't think of hunting.We'd need the latest gee whiz flash bang magnum that somebody came out with cause it's 100 fps faster than the next fastest.
JRSD1 |
|
|
|
Paul B
Advanced Member
1681 Posts |
Posted - May 01 2003 : 08:28:50
|
Interesting point about Keith and O'Connor. Keith hunted basically on his own most of his lihe and guided for others in mostly thick black timber where a large bore rifle was necessary for those difficult shots that were the rule and not the exception.
O'Connor, onthe other hand, hunted mostly open, or at least semi-open country and during the latter part of his life hunted mostly with guides. Here, his flat shooting .270 would be one of the better rounds for hunting.
FWIW, I'be been living in O'Connor's early home territory for about the last 20 or so years. I can see why he chose the rifles he did. Do a hunt in the Coronada National Forest and you'll get the idea.
I've come to the conclusion that both men were right, considering their very different style of hunting.
Paul B. |
|
|
|
win30338
New Member
30 Posts |
Posted - May 02 2003 : 02:09:54
|
Points well taken Paul..The gentleman and the rough outdoorsman.Two complete opposites,and have heard in private they got along quite well.Keith supposedly despised O'Connor's refined gentlemanly ways,and O'Connor despised Keith's wild and rough ways.
Was once said at a writers dinner that someone pointed out Keith and said to O'Connor "That man over there called you an S.O.B."
O'Connor's reply "Well if HE said it,I probably am"!
The world is a much better place because of them..
JRSD1 |
|
|
|
bob
Starting Member
Canada
2 Posts |
Posted - May 17 2003 : 03:01:16
|
I must admit and give in to the magnum loads. They seem to do a better job of stopping the big ones. I am a user of the old .308 win mauser. I use 180 g psp in the bush and 165 scirroco bt out in the open.
My first moose was at 100 yards with 180 g sp, hit twice in the lungs and one shot just touched the heart. The beast didn't even flinch. I thought I missed...then it turned away from me and went 30 yards, fell, and that was that... The bullets went 3/4 of the way through the moose, expanded quite will and did the job...The only thing that was on my mind since then was what would be the result at longer ranges....????? I think that with the knowledge of my rifle and the experience I have with it,,,30 years,,,, I would want a magnum load for anything over 250 yards.
See ya. |
|
|
|
bob
Starting Member
Canada
2 Posts |
Posted - May 17 2003 : 03:06:49
|
I must admit and give in to the magnum loads. They seem to do a better job of stopping the big ones. I am a user of the old .308 win mauser. I use 180 g psp in the bush and 165 scirroco bt out in the open.
My first moose was at 100 yards with 180 g sp, hit twice in the lungs and one shot just touched the heart. The beast didn't even flinch. I thought I missed...then it turned away from me and went 30 yards, fell, and that was that... The bullets went 3/4 of the way through the moose, expanded quite will and did the job...The only thing that was on my mind since then was what would be the result at longer ranges....????? I think that with the knowledge of my rifle and the experience I have with it,,,30 years,,,, I would want a magnum load for anything over 250 yards.
See ya. |
|
|
|
Paul B
Advanced Member
1681 Posts |
Posted - May 17 2003 : 17:08:33
|
Win30338. A bit off thread, but when did Bob Hagel pass? I've seen this mentioned on another thread, but usually, when a gun writer passes on, it's mentioned in all the magazines. I've never seen anything on him. Considering all the writing he did in Rifle and handloader, you'd have thought they would have said something.
Suposedly, Clay Harvey supposedly also passed away, yet I've seen nothing on this as well.
Guess some gunwriter don't count among the current crop of would be gun writers.
Paul B. |
|
|
|
Topic |
|
|
|
| Reloader's Nest Forum |
© 2000-08 ReloadersNest |
|
|
| This page was generated in 0.14 seconds. |
 |
|
Faster kill from a magnum cartridge?
