Are bigger cartridges really better?
 

It seems to me year after year guys who hunt big game try to get a bigger cartridge. I'm sorry, but I just think it is overkill. Plus, there have been countless guys who have taken large grizzly bears with smaller calibers, so surely a 300 win mag type caliberwill do the job with no issue.

Many guys will tell you thatshot placement is the most critical thing, but then they tell you to get some monster recoilcaliber. It would stand to reason the larger the caliber the more recoil, which would reduce accuracy most of the times. A well placed round from a 300 win mag is better than a poorly placed shot from a more powerful cartridge IMHO.

It just seems that every year I here that you need a 700 nitro type caliberto take a grizzly. To me the proof is in the pudding, anda lot of guys have nailed even huge bears with "smaller" cartridges. If I am way off my base please don't hesitate to say so, because it has happened before (see my wife).;) As of right now I would have no problem grizzly hunting with a 300 win mag.

RE: Are bigger cartridges really better?
 

I read an interesting article recently on the subject of the magnums for elk, moose, and other big game.

It pointed out a good fact, that sure any cartridge can take just about anything if the bullet is placed in the right spot at the right angle.

So certainly a .25-06 on a elk broadside will get the job done, but the point the writer made was on the less than desireable shot, the 1/4 away, etc.....when that bullet has to go through more hide, bone etc...to get to the vitals is when the .300 win mags, or .338 mags, will do a better job than say a .25-06.And an animal doesn't always cooperate, so knowing this, may mean being unable to take a ethical shot with a .25-06 vs a .300 mag.

Valid point I thought.

RE: Are bigger cartridges really better?
 

Good post. I agree, but a lot of guys think even a 300 win mag is too light of a caliber to hunt grizzly with.

RE: Are bigger cartridges really better?
 

I've looked at quite a few griz/brown bear outfitters websites, and think overwhelmingly they suggested that the brown bear cartridges began at .300 win mag, and the .338 and .375 being much more ideal.

I was looking at my .340 cartridge recently and thinking, this is big? .300 mag casings pack a whollup sure, but to me it doesn't look like a big cartridge, in the sense of big dangerous animal, when that gun goes off I wanna know its being hit with some umphff. I think the .338 and .375 are quite ideal for brown bear.

My .340 also kicks less than my .300 win mag, so my view is that case size is all about the same kick/recoil. They're close/similar in recoil though. Also if you have a guide backing you up that does change things, but this is hunting and with dangerous game I wouldn't want to count on anyone else.

Also I think shooting a brown bear with a 300, certainly will kill a brown bear, I think the main argument with the bigger bores, comes when having to "stop" a charging animal, and when talking about that, bigger seems to be the conscensus as to stopping anything, bigger bore, bigger mass.

RE: Are bigger cartridges really better?
 

When hunting game that has the potential to send you home in a casket, why use a cartridge that is merely adequate? sure the .300 Win Mag CAN kill a big bear, but so can a .22LR, big animals, warrant the use of big cartridges, either accept that fact, or stay at home. For the big bears, nothing smaller than a .338 Mag of some kind, that seems to be the popular opinion of hunters, and guides alike.

RE: Are bigger cartridges really better?
 

I haven't posted here in a while, probably two years but this sparked my interest.

This issue is one that has been a hot topic for as long as I've been a member here and probably will continue to be for as long as we chase critters with firearms.

It's great to see people that can see reality. The one thing I've always felt, in the words ofold Beaver Jack, huntin ain't bench shootin. There are a lot of variables in hunting like wind, uphill and downhill shots, animal movement, mis-judging distance or trajectory and the average guy is just not a military trained sniper so we will make mistakes. The larger cartridges (notice I didn't say caliber, caliber is only half the equation, the powder behind it and bullet selections are the other half) are recommended for the less than perfect shots. It's true that if you gut shoot an elk with a large magnum cartridge it won't make a difference, I'mnot talking about grossly misplaced shots I'm talking about the shots that are just a little off. Do not be fooled by the "shot placement" is everything argument. It's important and we should do all we can to be as good with our rifles, bows, etc as we can be. But mistakes will happen and a larger cartidge will help you punch through the thick part of an elks shoulder or something along those lines.

I think we all agree that a 22 LR isn't enough and a .50 cal Howitzer is a bit much so we will always continue to debate what is and isn't enough.

Here are some pics of a shoulder shot bull that someone didn't find. Didn't find the bullet frags so I can't say for sure but you can make your own judgement. The entire skeleton was present and the bull was hit in the thick part of the shoulder. This is why some recommend larger cartridges.

http://i99.photobucket.com/albums/l310/kmarble9000/ElkShoulder.jpg

http://i99.photobucket.com/albums/l310/kmarble9000/ElkSkeleton.jpg

RE: Are bigger cartridges really better?
 

I've used a BC outfitter who's been guiding in the Flathead Valley (prime interior Grizzly country) for 25+ years. He views the .300WM as the perfect rifle for everything (including grizzlies) in his territory. "If you buy a .300, you'll never need anything else".

If you're intimately familiar with your .300, then go forth & whack 'em!

FC

RE: Are bigger cartridges really better?
 

A .300 cal be do the job withvery little issues.
Yeahgenerally its shot placement,bullet selection and a cal that you can handle.
*BUT PEOPLE HAVE TO KNOW,
The issue will always come down to the individual hunter and his confidence in himself, and the resiliance of the animal,when unexpected things happen.
My cousincrawled to the top of a crested mountainto spot deerdeer huntingand was charged by a sow grizzly who was protecting her cubs.the grizz at the time wasabout 200 yrds away.
He told me that Grizz covering ground so fast he panicked bolted dropped his gun his pack and bolted.
My brother and 3 others had to go up there with him the next day to grab his gear.
He still hunts with a .300 mag, me with a 30-06, some of us with 7mm,and 6.5 but we never ever hunt alone in this area anymore.
Just because of the high density bear pop.
As far as I'm concerned anymore, 2 bullets flying at the same target in the same spot are better than one.
Choose whatever cal you want, alot will work,I have never been charged but I do hunt in areas that have a high density bear pop.
To me its not the huge caliber I carry as much as it is knowing there is backup.

RE: Are bigger cartridges really better?
 

This issue has come up fairly often, ask what most Alaskan guides are shooting and they tell you 30-06 with a solid construction 200 gr bullet. That's not to say they're shooting solids, but you get the drift Aframe, partition, x bullet, etc.

RE: Are bigger cartridges really better?
 

To me it seems like a personal issue. From my point of view though if a person can kill one with a bow and arrow, then pretty much any rifle will do.
I have killed several with a 30-06 shooting 180gr ammo, but if someone wants to shoot a magnum caliber what do I care? Do what you do, and have fun doing it.

RE: Are bigger cartridges really better?
 

When you actually get your money together,
and actually go on your grizzly hunt,
let us know what rifle you actually took.

RE: Are bigger cartridges really better?
 

a .30-06 will take ANYTHING on this earth with no trouble. President Roosevelt, when he was alive, shot bull elephants with a .30-06. last time i checked elephants were slightly larger than any north american game animal.

RE: Are bigger cartridges really better?
 

In my opinion, I would go with the largest cartridge you can shoot and still be comfortable and accurate. If you can handle a .375 then use it. If not then go with a smaller cartridge.

RE: Are bigger cartridges really better?
 

Uuuummmmmmmmm........I see what you're trying to say there but you're not comparing apples to apples. An arrow and a bullet kill in different manners so you can't bring a bow and arrow to a gun fight.

Arrows kill by hemorrhaging and bullets kill by trama. (Although granted they do sometimeskill by hemorrhaging if the trama doesn't work) But just not the same. I certainly would not agree that because an arrow is effective that any old rifle cartridge will do.

RE: Are bigger cartridges really better?
 

I agree when an arrow enters an animals body it usually cuts a wound channel at least 1 inch in diameter. Where as a small caliber bullet may leave a wound channel 1/2 in diameter but relies on the destructive force of the bullets velocity and extreme energy delivery to kill an animal.

So can you kill a large animal with a small caliber weapon? Yes. Can a larger caliber weapon kill more "efficiently"? Yes. If you don't believe me go out and shoot two 90 lbs. does, one with a .223 one with a 50 bmg and compare the two. Both just as dead as the other but the one shot with the 50 was killed more "efficiently" though not for the table.

RE: Are bigger cartridges really better?
 

...for me I'd rather drive a 455 TransAmthan a boltswagon. There aint no substitute for cubic inches, horsepower, or grains of powder.

RE: Are bigger cartridges really better?
 

EKM; If you are directing your response towards me.....then I have taken several with my 30-06.

rather be huntin; Perhaps I overstated my philosophy a little, but I still think it is a valid point. If you can get a rifle to penetrate deep enough to the vitals or through the animal it will get the job done, and for the most part that does not require a magnum. Again though, if you or anyone else wants to shoota magnum what do I care.

ruger m77.270; I'm not sure Ientirely agree with your killing more efficiently philosophy unless you takeit to an extreme.For instance, while I have never shot a deer with a .223, I have taken several with a .243, and a 30-06. The farthest any have gone with either caliber is 20 yards. Most with both calibers have dropped where they are at. Undoubtedly the 30-06 has more power, but I don't think it killed any of those deer any more efficiently than the .243.

silvertip; .......1955 Crown Victoria bored to 510 pushing 780hp without nitrous.

RE: Are bigger cartridges really better?
 

Yeah...I think the difference here would be he isn't talking about shooting a 90lb deer. If it's all the same to you fellars, I wouldn't want my back up pardner to be carring his Matthews with some sick slick tricks either, no matter how ultimately deadly that combo may be.
Dead is dead, ok. And if hunting an animal capable of killing me, I am sure my family would take solace in the fact that the grizz that killed me died soon after due to my having placed my .223 bullet in the proper place.

Just for my own use, I would go big. Unlike most that post on this site, I am not Dirty Harry/John Wayne and my ability to always place the bullet exactly where it needs to be can be compromised by a multitude of factors, not the least of which is finding myself on the receiving end of BEAR CHARGE. The elements, lack of a bench or sand bags, exertion....all play in to the "field conditions" shot.
No, I wish I was immune to all these things like so many here are, but alas, I am just a nerve addled, mere mortal,hunter trying to harvest an animal and doing my best not to be harvested.
Hope my betters out there will allow me my compensation and not think to little of me? I have no desire to hunt grizz, but if I did, my decision would be whether to take my 338RUM or get something bigger!!!!

RE: Are bigger cartridges really better?
 

An Alaskan guide named Shoemaker uses an '06 with 200 or 220 gr. bullets on the big bears. He says it works as well as anything.

RE: Are bigger cartridges really better?
 

Did you just make that up? Mr. Shoemaker uses the screename "458WIN" for a reason.

http://www.riflemagazine.com/magazine/article.cfm?tocid=1043&magid=75

RE: Are bigger cartridges really better?
 

The only argument that I was trying to make in my first post on page one (pictures in the links) is that using a smaller rifle cartridge (I still can't say caliber because powder matters too)with greatshot placement will do the job. You'll be fine. But if you hit the shoulder blade or something heavy like that which is a big possibility under hunting conditions (it's not bench shooting), the bullet will fragment and not penetrate and leave you with a very long tracking job. This bull was shot in the shoulder and not found by the person that shot him. Who knows what cartridge this person was using but is a perfect example why my opinion is what it is. A shoulder shot when using a bigger cartridge should not result in this. Notice how the shoulder blade is constructed with a "ridgeline" of bone that makes certain parts of the bone very thick and heavy.





Arrows kill differently and work differently so I'm still having a hard time drawing a line between the two. Beside like someone else said if a bear is charging you then and all you have is a stick and a string, your middle name just became "lunch".

RE: Are bigger cartridges really better?
 

ColoraoElk, read some aticles written by Mr. Shoemaker and also John Barsness.

RE: Are bigger cartridges really better?
 

Over on AR, Phil has sung the praises of the 458WinMag even telling how he has taken caribou at 350 yards with it.

RE: Are bigger cartridges really better?
 

If you have hunted very long at all, you have made a marginal shot. On a marginal shot the advantage goes to larger calibers and magnums EVERY SINGLE TIME!

RE: Are bigger cartridges really better?
 

Why?

RE: Are bigger cartridges really better?
 

Power to penetrate bone,tuff tissue and muscle. Of course, if all of your shots have always been perfect, and all your future shot placements are going to be perfect, no need. I don't have a problem with people that don't use them, but I do understand those that do! Me being one of them.

RE: Are bigger cartridges really better?
 

Phil is holding the 458 and the Rigby.

The article referenced was written by Phil.

Also, based on review of his article, please provide the link to substantiate your statement:

An Alaskan guide named Shoemaker uses an '06 with 200 or 220 gr. bullets on the big bears. He says it works as well as anything.

I think you made that up.

RE: Are bigger cartridges really better?
 

Not sure I can agree with you, but thats the way it is I guess. I just happen to think that even on marginal shots non magnum calibers can and do perform well. Heck I have made marginal shots on game (pretty sure everyone has), and they worked fine. How much is too much?
Like I said before though, if you want to use one what do I care. Do what you do and have fun doing it.

RE: Are bigger cartridges really better?
 

i'm not an expert on ballistics but i believe a .30-06 will break both front shoulders of any north american game animal when shot square in the shoulder. maybe not at 400 yards but most hunters don't shoot that far anyway. if hunting big bears over bait, your shot is going to be within 40 yards anyway not 400 yards. i'm not trying to argue, just post some of my observations.

i use to be a "bigger is better" kinda hunter, that is why i own a Wby .300 Mag. i bought it several years ago and hunted faithfully with it. i'll never sell any of my guns that's why i still have it. i haven't hunted with it since i realized i don't need it for what i hunt. i bought a .25-06 last year to hunt with and believe that was the best hunting decision i ever made.

RE: Are bigger cartridges really better?
 

This is why when I started building my battery, the only magnum that I have is a 270 WSM. For Deer sized game I can go to the 257 Roberts, 6.5x55, 270 WSM, 30-06 for larger game 30-06 and 35 Whelen. If I ever had the opportunity to go to Africa I can address that need then Most likely with a 375 H&H or Ruger. Sure dead is dead and the animal won't know the difference but you don't want to go undergunned either. There are so many choices out there these days and with new technology and bullet construction making smaller lighter projectiles perform to higher levels. I say to each their own. I'll stick with the 06 based cases and not need to look back.

RE: Are bigger cartridges really better?
 

ColoradoElk,

Your challenge appears to be going unanswered.
That was quite the write up on Phil.

RE: Are bigger cartridges really better?
 

Just like any other tool, Big works better in some cases and small works better in some. Match the tool to the job and you will do fine. As we all know, the 30-06 has killed every species of game on earth and is a good place to start. Keep in mind that legal issues might determine what you use in some places. For all of North America something like the 270/30/06 and a 375 H&H/Ruger would cover the big game end very well. For one gun, maybe the 300 WM.

RE: Are bigger cartridges really better?
 

Hello there everyone (and EKM).

A reply would have been interesting but unneccesary. Although not atop tenof mine, if a fellow wants to shoot an '06, they have made an acceptable choice. Composing fiction and attributing it to one of the "been there, done that" guys that makeshis living (and reputation) guiding/protectingclients is not acceptable.

I did draw an ES tag for the 1st. Ironically, DOW is doing such a excellent job promoting elk habitat, there are TWO leftover cow tagsfor that season. I put two steers in the freezer this year, but beef is no substitute... Meat vs. Antlers, think I'll take the meat. As a sidenote, why were they FEEDING the deer in Gunnison and now lining up to shoot the elk in Estes???

Ironically, I completed another lot of 285 gr Speer GS, 375 Ruger for the 1st season. I fired 23 shots on Saturday and the stock split on me. I am thinking of calling McMillan in the morning and see what they can do. Anyone have ideas? If I can't get the 375 repaired in about 8 weeks, I will have to go back to the 416. That 375 Ruger is a phenominal cartridge and has become my favorite. Anyone that might have a worn out '06 should rebarrel. I was going to go bunny jumping at Pawnee for preparation, but that isn't going to happen.

For all that drew/are huntingthis year, good luck and be safe.

RE: Are bigger cartridges really better?
 

Bummer about the cracked stock. Hope you get a satisfactory response from McMillon.

RE: Are bigger cartridges really better?
 

Hello James:

The cracked stock was not a McMillan product, but was the original stock installed by Ruger. McMillan has a lifetime warranty on their products, except for the Edge Model, which is what I was hoping to get. They will only warranty that stock up to .338 and the model they have won't fit the Ruger action. I think the .375 Ruger is a great cartridge, it is just unfortunate that for theprice it will cost for McMillan toinstall a real stock, Icould buy another Hawkeye...

RE: Are bigger cartridges really better?
 

I always get a kick out of the answers to these kinds of questions...

ItALWAYS comes around to bears, and then you can just hear the quiver in the voicesof the posters answers, then there knee's start shaking so bad my puter screen starts moving around on my desk when i read them...

A 'properly loaded" 30-06 (200 NP's) will break both shoulders of any bear alive, and a high shoulder shot will damage the spinal cord, anchoring the bear...

A 7 Rem. mag. loaded with 175 NP's is even bigger medicine, so don't tell me you need 30 cal. on up for big bears...

This 7 mag. combo will out penetrate a 458 Win mag. loaded with factory soft points.. It will also out penetrate a 375 H&H, 270 grainers...

How do i know these things??? Because i've used and seen them used, yes even on big bears...

I can't see where a "magnum" out shines any decent std. cartridge that's "properly loaded", at any decent range...

Through my many years of wondering all over Alaska hunting big game, i've found it's much MORE important to use the proper bullet construction, than worry about what case is behind it. (i'm talking 06 size on up here)

BTW, anyone who "thinks" a 340 wby. doesn't recoil more than a 300 Win. Mag., needs to try again, with BOTH cartridges chambered in the exact same style/weight rifle... Both with similar SD bullets...

DM

RE: Are bigger cartridges really better?
 

Well said DM

RE: Are bigger cartridges really better?
 

and then....
Magnums, it seems that even the people who want to hate them have a hard time not praising them.

RE: Are bigger cartridges really better?
 

Hey EKM,

If you think i hate magnums, then you aren't paying attention to my post much... Just because something isn't needed, doesn't mean it's hated.

BTW, a properly loaded 340 Wby. is bigger medicine yet, as is a 378Wby... That doesn't mean the 30-06 isn't enough... I don't need to drive to town in a semi to get there... Do you get the anology?

DM

RE: Are bigger cartridges really better?
 

Ever thought about a Laminate. They're heavier but sure can take abuse. Boyd's has laminates that are very reasonable.