HuntingNet.com Forums - A noticed trend

HuntingNet.com Forums (https://www.huntingnet.com/forum/)

- Guns (https://www.huntingnet.com/forum/guns-10/)

- - A noticed trend (https://www.huntingnet.com/forum/guns/362980-noticed-trend.html)

Quote:

Originally Posted by rjhans53 (Post 3935005)

.. Yes there is a trend for bigger is better...

One more vote saying yes there is. After you cut through all the mustard.

That was an interesting read Ridge Runner. Thanks. I had a 30 caliber Winchester Model 94 and the barrel was stamped 30 WCF. It was made before the second World War. And a great shooter also. My brother saw it, hunted with it and begged me to sell it to him. So I did. He still has the rifle. I will have to send him that link as he was asking me about the history of the rifle.

He hunted with Winchester 170 grain Silver tips and drops every deer he shoots at. That is a good cartridge for the Wisconsin woods.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Shoobee (Post 3934779)

The .270 and the .30-06 will drop anything close in, but you need to remember that the .30-06 was designed with WW1 combat (sniping) in mind, and the .30-30 for Indians and cougars in the wild west. They wont drop a big animal at a long distance in its tracks.

Wow, that is pretty remarkable. Good thing my .270 Win didn't know it couldn't kill that big 4X5 mulie that is now hanging on my wall at almost 450 yds with one well place shot as my guide watched over my shoulder.
And this year, I can't wait to try my newly acquired 32 Win Spl on deer. Gee, I hope its enough gun otherwise I may have to go back and finish him off with my 325 WSM!

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ridge Runner (Post 3935016)

wrong on the 30-30 it was not developed for anything military, it was the first smokeless sporting cartridge. first appeared in the win. catalog in 1895 read it here
http://www.leverguns.com/articles/3030history.htm
RR

You are correct. I was thinking of the Henry repeating rifle of 1860, which was a .44 not a .30-30.

I stand corrected, thanks.

Quote:

Originally Posted by bronko22000 (Post 3935069)

The topic is modern trends in elk guns however. So your mulie story is not exactly on point. Although mulies can get really big, yes.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ridge Runner (Post 3935211)

couple more points, for the longest while the larger cases were branded as barrel burners, with the advancements in alloys and modern powders todays magnums will last a lifetime of hard hunting. so I crunched some numbers to see how they all stacked up. these are all 7mm bores sighted in at 300 yards with a 160 accubond, same scope heighth, same conditions all loaded with top level loads from the hodgdon manual for that bullet/case. max range is 500 yards wind drift figured for a 10 mph full value crosswind
7mm/08 drop at 500 - 39.75
drift at 500 -20.88
the 280 rem. drops 20% less than the 7mm/08 and 14% less drift
the 7mm rm drops 24% less than the 280 and 16% less wind drift
the 7mm STW drops 13% less than the 7 RM and 9% less drift
data was aquired using point mass by applied ballistics

as far as costs using the very slow burning milsurp powder the powder to load 1 stw cartridge is 1/3rd the cost of buying IMR4831, so its cheaper for me to shoot my stw than my 7mm/08 or my 7 RM so I'm still saying the magnums are a better choice no matter how ya look at it, if you can shoot them.
RR

RR,

Do you prefer the 7mm's over the various 30 and 338 calibers? I have always used a 270 Win as my "long range" caliber but I know the 7mm bullets offer better ballistics.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ridge Runner (Post 3935222)

I prefer the 284 over the 30's but the 338 is in a class itself.
RR

If a man was going to go the 338 route, what would you recommend?

Quote:

Originally Posted by Shoobee (Post 3935098)

The topic is modern trends in elk guns however. So your mulie story is not exactly on point. Although mulies can get really big, yes.

I do believe the original question was moose? Somehow elk got thrown into the mix. I reference my mulie story to squash the notion that Shoobee put out there that the 270 and 30-06 can't reach out. Apparently this poor guy has also been mislead by the need for magnum cartridges.
The Nosler chart shows the BC of their .284/7mm 150 gr BT to be .493 where as the 180 gr .308 bullet is .507. Even the 150 gr .270 is .496.
And you will probably find that when you compare any manf's 7mm bullet against their 180 gr .30 cal bullet the 30 cal wins hands down.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ridge Runner (Post 3935292)

nope it don't.
160 accubond .531
154 sst .525
154 interbond .525
162 sst .550
162 a-max .625
180 berger .68
200 wildcat .84
RR

OK I guess I should have done a bit more research. I was only lookng at one manufacturer. But on the other hand the .308 - 200 gr Accubond .588. But to be realistic IMO the 200 gr as well as the 180 gr in a 7mm is too much bullet to allow it to be the flat shooting cartridge it is. And the same can be said for the 200 gr .308. I believe the 7mm is better suited for bullets in the the 154 gr weight and the 30s in the 165 - 180 gr range. Anything heavier or lighter would be better served using a smaller or larger caliber.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ridge Runner (Post 3935245)

for what type of hunting? shooting what distances?
RR

Say for elk or moose at 500 yards or so.