T/C fan!

I don't own a magnum rifle, but certainly don't hold it against someone for hunting with one, as long asthey are proficient with it. My beef is with the sports writers of magazines, tv showsetc...(not all of them)that are pounding it into "new" hunters heads that bigger is better. A lot of new hunters areeasilyswayedand believe this crap. They get the mentality that they NEED a magnum rifle to kill a deer, so they go out and buy the lastest big boomer. And, for the most of them, onevery short session at the range and they develop a flinchresulting in pooraccuracy and, if their ego is too big to downsize, can result inwounded and lost game. For the record,I live in ky and hunt whitetails with a .308.

haugenna

If you want meat go buy a steer. I am out there for a trophy, not meat. Beef tastes better anyway. Not saying I waste the meat. You are probably right by saying you will put more meat on the table but I would argue that we put more heads on the wall. You can go to the grocery store for meat.

'this outta be gas on the fire'

For the record, proud owner of a weatherby accumark 30-378.
Well said NVMIKE

RedAllison

Gorse if getting jumped EVERYTIME I or another poster recommends or even mentions a magnum too someone constitutes being "sensitive" then yeah call me whatever you please. The simple fact is it gets VERY old, rediculous and only shows the naysayers ignorance. I for one do NOT recommend (nor have I ever willingly) recommended larger guns too young shooters.

1000 ft#s, where did that theortical number come from? Does that mean that a deer shoot with only 800#s is gonna limp off and die a week later? Why also, does everyone have to redicule those who take deer at over 300yds? Another theoretical number which I think is bunk. Who set the those numbers and how did they arrive at them? See what I mean? It's arguement over hypothetical and purely random selections and numerical values.

"Inside 300yds, inside 300yds, inside 300yds" Is this the ONLY standard of comparison? And for those who either live in states that prohibit arms that reach out that far, why does that give you "carte blanche" to redicule those of us who have the freedom and ability to hunt areas that command a much larger viewing area and more possible shot opportunities? For the guys who say, "If you can't get any closer than XYZ (again a purely randomly obtained and hypothetical range) you are a sorry hunter or just plain suck!" What kind of attitude is that? I for one enjoy sitting up during firearms seasons and watch many crossings and travel routes from a single vantage point as opposed to sitting in close quarters and watching only 1 or 2 possible travel routes. Alot of guys also complain about needing to move into the woods after opening day anyway which adds more fodder too their collection for their obsession with getting closer and not needing to shoot very far. Well perhaps if you completely stayed out of the woods and simply setup in a location that offers viewing of multiple travel corridors you would then realize that bucks WILL move all season long under daylight conditions and you just might need to whack one at 400+ yds?

It's all relative and what works for brush hunters in PA might not be as effective for large southern food plots and vice-versa. I was just trying to bring out the fact that it is getting old to constantly be rediculed for offering a suggestion too someone who actually asked for recommendations in the first place. I thought that's part of what this place was for in the first place... a place where ideas and information could be exchanged WITHOUT redicule, belittlement and thread highjackin?

I'm a deathly serious bowhunter by nature, my first deer was killed with a bow when I was 13 and I have a couple of P&Y class bucks to be thankful for. I LOVE getting close and get that fix during bowseason (both were killed inside of 10yds). But I am a rifle junky and love tinkerin with guns and that's as much reason I gun hunt as anyother. I don't feel the need to call myself more of a "sportsman" by killing a buck in the woods at 75 yds as compared too the fellow who whacks one from the otherside of the field. But I guess there are som on here who have that urge!


RA

James B

TC. Well said. I think we should all use what we like best and what works for us. The folks who buy the big magnums help out the gun companies and thats a good thing.

gorse

RedAllison,
I cannot argue with your assertion that that being ridiculed is not fair. Certainly you don't deserve that - NO one does. If I added to your frustration, then you have my apologies. I mostly wondered whether the level of "persecution" is actually as great as you seemed to be saying. However, if you feel it to that degree, that is your right. As I said, neither you (nor anyone else) deserves that.

I, for one, have no comment or criticism to offer as regards your hunting techniques. Those are a matter of your choice, not mine. If they are effective, then good for you. I certainly agree, as a former Elk and Mule Deer hunter, that magnum rifles do offer an advantage at longer ranges. That is not open for dispute. That is why I used a 7mm magnum for such hunting. I don't enjoy hard-kicking rifles myself. I also prefer relatively mild loads now, as it is easier on the rifle, the brass...and my shoulder. My hunting ranges now rarely exceed 100 yards....and if the shot is beyond 125 yards, I forego it. For my uses now, a magnum does not make sense. However, that is entirely a matter of personal choice. If magnums are what you prefer...and they work well for you (in your specific circumstances), then more power to you. There is nothing whatsoever wrong with that.

I suppose that much of this kind of debate boils down to personal choices - which many perhaps try a bit too hard to foist on others, as the "only" logical solution. The debate about recommendations to new or perspective hunters has raged on forever....and probably always will. Everyone has his prefered cartridge(s)/ equipment. The problem comes in, I think, when any of us try to assert that our particular choice - is the BEST choice. I think that we all would do well to realize that there are many possible choices in this matter.....and no one is automatically "wrong" because of their personal preference. The concept that a magnum is perhaps not best for beginning shooters has a lot of weight....I happen to agree with that. But, yet again, it's a matter of personal taste. I for one, make a point of recommending magnums only to those whose needs involve longer-ranges - IF asked. That does NOT go to suggest, however, that magnums are a bad choice. They definitely have their uses... as I know from direct experience.

So, to sum up..... perhaps some of us should take more care in not being too assertive as to the ultimate wisdom of our particular preferences in equipment. There are a lot of choices available. If we stick to the facts and avoid hyperbole....and maintain a willingness to admit that our particular solution is NOT the ONLY solution...... then there might be a bit less acrimony. That, I suspect, would be pleasing to all. I intend to do my part.

Highpower

I'm gonna side with Red on this one. I think I'm a fair shooter, better than some, not as good as others. I shoot and hunt because I love the sport. I have more firearms than the average and they run the scale from .22 to 300RUM and 444 in rifles and I love them all. Each has a purpose for me. I don't carry my 30.06 or .308 for groundhogs, why would I when I can carry the .223 or 22-250. I don't carry my .243 for elk either, I have something that should do a 'better' job if I do my part. Point is, I buy and shoot my firearms because I enjoy them. Something new, is like Christmas in July. It's like owning a Corvette. You can't drive 200 mph anywhere around here. Is it necessary? Of course not. Does it make you a better driver? Doubt it. Pain in the butt to bring home groceries. But most all American boys grew up wanting one, and if you own one, I don't hold it against you, it's just fun to have. The cannons are the same way. If you want to shoot a 505 Gibbs for deer, more power to you. I don't think I want to....yet.

statjunk

That was hilarious.

To theguy who said that cow taste better than deer, you are totally nuts. I will leave it there.

Tom

Gundigest

I own a 7x57 Mauser, 30-06 and 300 WSM and I use all of them for deer hunting and I would use any of them for any North American game. I have no problem with someone who wants to use a magnum, however I do think most people are not capable of shooting them accurately. Most magnums have to much recoil for most people. I know someone (about 16 years old) who asked his parents for a 7mm STW for christmas and durring the youth season was to affraid to shoot it so his older brother shot the deer with it. The next year he was using a 300 ultra mag. Young shooters should start out shooting .22 LRs and smaller caliber rifles and work their way up. The Ruger #1 in 7x57 was my first rifle when I was 13 and I was not affraid of it. My WSM kicks quite a bit but I can still shoot 1/2" groups with it. I will shoot any rifle you hand to me, but I can tell you that if I was shooting a 378 weatherby mag much I would develope a flinch. You should not be using a gun you are scared of so I would have to say you are better off recomending a30-06 over a 300 ultra mag if it is capable of doing the job, which it is 95% of the time.

bigcountry

Most if not more than 80% of shots are under 100 yards, why does one need to shoot .5" groups from his 338win mag or 243 to kill????

Why does one have to be able to get subMOA groups at 500 yards to have a blessing from this forum to use a higher powered gun? And most of all, why do you care what others are using? Do it help your skills? Put more meat in your freezer? Or money in your pocket?

Just curious?

Solitary Man

That about sums it up for me too. Thanks bc for saving me some keystrokes.