More On Big Game Calibers
#22
Giant Nontypical
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: fort mcmurray alberta canada
Posts: 5,667
RE: More On Big Game Calibers
I don't know about others but I have never used a JUST big enough gun. I always use plenty of gun for what I need.
#24
RE: More On Big Game Calibers
The 6.5x55 with the 140 grain Hornady at 2700 fps works very very well. I have never tried a 243 myself for game bigger than deer nor would I. However its sure been done plenty of times. I would use a 25-06 within its range limit and know several hunters that do. That is, if thats all I had.
#25
RE: More On Big Game Calibers
The first two elk I killed were both with a .243. It isn't ideal and I wouldn't recommend it that is for sure. But it can do the deed if you do your part. I was young and it was the gun Ihad available at the time.
#26
Typical Buck
Thread Starter
Join Date: Dec 2003
Posts: 590
RE: More On Big Game Calibers
Dig down through the layers, and what I'm really, really getting at here is human reasoning processes. Do people ever change their minds?
My post a few weeks back was basically aimed at that point. It seemed (and seems) logical that one's "bottom line" caliber would have to drop at least one notch if the premium bullets were worth buying. Clearly the premium bullets are selling, and its likely that they're selling about equally to "big caliber" guys as anyone else. So why buy them if they don't change the equation just a little. I just wanted to see one person say, "wow you're right, maybe a guy would do fine to shoot elk with a 270 now, even though I had always said 280 was the minimum", or words to that effect. So far, I haven't heard that. People are still stuck on their ancient assumptions.
Swinging back in to the "velocity is the same, weight is the same" position is simply refusing to deal with the point. Clearly, bullet design should compensate in some way for raw statistics on energy, which is at best an approximation of "killing power".
My post a few weeks back was basically aimed at that point. It seemed (and seems) logical that one's "bottom line" caliber would have to drop at least one notch if the premium bullets were worth buying. Clearly the premium bullets are selling, and its likely that they're selling about equally to "big caliber" guys as anyone else. So why buy them if they don't change the equation just a little. I just wanted to see one person say, "wow you're right, maybe a guy would do fine to shoot elk with a 270 now, even though I had always said 280 was the minimum", or words to that effect. So far, I haven't heard that. People are still stuck on their ancient assumptions.
Swinging back in to the "velocity is the same, weight is the same" position is simply refusing to deal with the point. Clearly, bullet design should compensate in some way for raw statistics on energy, which is at best an approximation of "killing power".
#27
Fork Horn
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Hamiltucky, OH
Posts: 485
RE: More On Big Game Calibers
ORIGINAL: Dirt2
Dig down through the layers, and what I'm really, really getting at here is human reasoning processes. Do people ever change their minds?
Dig down through the layers, and what I'm really, really getting at here is human reasoning processes. Do people ever change their minds?
ORIGINAL: Stubblejumper
And a 264 win mag is just about a 270wsm.
And a 257wby is just about a 264win mag.
And a 6mm-284 is just about a 257wby mag.
At some point you have to set a limit.I choose to set mine at the 7mm remmag.
And a 264 win mag is just about a 270wsm.
And a 257wby is just about a 264win mag.
And a 6mm-284 is just about a 257wby mag.
At some point you have to set a limit.I choose to set mine at the 7mm remmag.
Personally, I've found that I could spend my entire life debating calibers, &/or bullet construction... OR, I could make a well-reasoned choice, and get out to the range to become proficient with my particular setup, realizing there will still be legions of caliber & bullet partisans who will deride my decision.
I just bought a new rifle, to scratch an itch. And what I found was that new rifle really made me appreciate my old rifle much more.That old riflefits splendidly,it shoots really well, and I'm so comfortable with that setup that I can almost always put the bullets where they're supposed to go.
I'd argue that bullets are the same way. The new bullets are definitely cool, and they wouldn't be selling that well if they didn't live up to their promise in most cases. But given howlong it can taketo find a rifle/cartridge/bullet/ammo setup that works for you,I don't feel that itmakes sense to switch horses when you've got a proven winner.
Ifrequently try new bullets, but I don't see myselfdownshifting cartridges to see if I can get the maximum efficiency out of the bullet. Rather, I look at upgrading bullets to get the maximum efficiency out of my favorite cartridge (and rifle).
And that's just one more reason why people talk about me, and probably always will!
FC
#28
RE: More On Big Game Calibers
I think the premium bullets do make a difference in killing power or whatever one chooses to call it. I don't see them as a tool to make a marginal rifle a sufficient rifle. When it comes to rifles like the 270, it was a very adequate caliber which is made even better with the use of premium bullets. Bullet construction and sectional density are far more important to my choice of guns than caliber size. I would pick the 270 with a 160 grain bullet over a 300 Mag with a 100-110 grain bullet.