Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Elk Hunting In defense of big rifles

I was shooting my .338 from prone a bunch on Friday, as well as a 300 WM (but it's a much heavier rifle, a Sendero). The .338 did bite me once when I must have forgotten who I was dealing with, and not tucked it into my shoulder properly. Still, no big deal- no bruise.

Modern recoil pads really make a world of difference. I think, just a hypothesis, that in the same way that (say) the TSX has "upsized" smaller calibers, something like a Limbsaver has downsized the magnums into something completely manageable. There's still a big quantity of recoil energy to deal with, but it's not "sharp"; the quality of the recoil impulse is very humane.

Or something like that <g>. Hell, I just like shooting 'em, too.

I have two rifles designated as being for the "big" stuff, a 325 WSM and a 35 Whelen. I dont see a need for anything that is bigger, weighs more, or kicks harder. Both are fun to shoot and kill stuff efficiently. But then "big stuff" in my world is elk, moose, and the occasional bear.

After seeing what my .325 did to two elk last year, i'm sure not feeling the need for anything BIGGER.

Gotta get a Whelen someday... way cool...

Jeff,
I am not sure if I would consider the 325WSM a 'big' rifle.
I guess it is kind of borderline, perhaps??

Either way, I like mine!

Bob makes some good points here.

I've seen an elk or three... ;)taken and from my prospective the bigger rounds give one a bit more insurance just like a bigger car will do so if you're in an auto accident.

The bigger rounds take a bit more commitment IMO and that is something that most should take note of. I do know that a lot of men/women can shoot the bigger rounds very well (by bigger I am talking 338 on up). I also feel quite strongly that if one lacks the commitment it takes to learn to work with and to handle one of the bigger guns then they should stick to their more standard type of rounds.

Both type of rounds will get the job done very well, but once again I feel that if the chips are down then the bigger round may well help you out of a bad situation.

For what it's worth I feel the same way about the use of preme bullets on elk vs the standard type of bullets. I don't feel that the preme's are needed for elk, but I do feel that they may well give you a benefit that you might need. And might is the key word here.

The magnums normally have a bit more weight to them and my opinion is that a 338 on up that weighs in at 8.25 lbs all up (sling and rounds) aint a bad thing and if it weighs up to 9 all ready to rock it aint a gonna kill 99% of the people going (to carry it I mean).

My experience has been that a goodly share of the people who are not fans of the bigger mags have either chosen to not shoot them enough to get used to them, and or just can't handle the bump from them.

I kind of like my set of a lightweight G33/40 in 270 with dotz to 500 yds (6x36 Leo) and then my mag 700 with a 4-14 on it with Premier dotz to 700.

And I am a firm believer in the idea of if you're gonna be shooting at game at past 451 then you had best be running the rounds thru the gun at those ranges on a consistent basis through out the year. I don't buy into the idea where someone shoots their rig to 500 once or twice a year just so they know where it hits just in case...

Mostly though, I believe in the idea of getting out on the hill and hunting for elk irregardless if one chooses a Roberts or a 340.

Dober

I kind of look at this thread like this: "In defense of big [enough] rifles"

Since it follows several sort-of "how small can we go?" threads, I'm reading this in light of using something that is plenty adequate, not so much how big dare we shoot something with. At some point one gains little in most applications for what it costs in terms of blast and recoil. And, while a 30-06 is not generally considered a big rifle overall, I would consider it "big" [enough], and not in a barely sort of way like some things might be when applied to elk sized game. And while bigger rifles can be somewhat more effective, sometimes, on bigger animals, it is more often the effectiveness - or lack of it- on the part of the user which can sometimes cause a perfectly adequate rifle from being enough.

When I think of elk calibers they start with .270 and end with .338. (35's included) I know smaller calibers will kill them, and certainly bigger ones will too!
But the ones that fall between .270 and .338 kill the majority of wapiti in the west.
To use a caliber lower than .270 may decrease ones chances of taking a ethical shot. I said MAY

To use a caliber bigger than .338 makes little sense to me personally. If you cant kill an elk with a .338 something is WRONG! A bigger caliber will generally mean a heavier rifle with more recoil. Why bother?
My 2006 elk season seemed like a great time to use my CZ 550 .375 H&H. I carried that 10 lb+ beast for one day. My .300 RUM felt as light as a flyrod after that!

KC

guyandarifle;

As I type this, on my desk I'm looking at a copy of "The GUN DIGEST, 5th Edition - 1951". In it are articles by Jack O'Connor - "Choosing The Big Game Rifle"; Roy Weatherby - "Killing Power"; and Elmer Keith - "Pumpkin Rolling".

Your wanted discussion, or debate, has been going on for at least six decades, and no doubt longer. It will not be resolved to anyone's satisfaction in 2009! Having said that, I'll jump in with bits 'n pieces of my experience.

I've read through those three articles several times since purchasing that copy of Gun Digest, on sale for $1.99. It was unsold on the shelf of a bookstore, and they had marked it down twice: Original value = $6.95; first reduction = "Now Only $2.99". I forget the year it was bought in.

But what I've never forgot was the strong impression Elmer Keith's piece made on me. I sometimes get the impression from current gun writers that Keith gave rants against anything less than a true Big Bore! That piece was never a "rant" of any sort, but a straight-forward, factual piece in favor of the 45-70, in BOTH single-shots and levers. He was the FIRST that ever stated in print that the 45-70 could shoot a 400-grain at 2000 fps from a lever-action at 40,000 psi! I took my cue from that and have never looked back!

Don't take me wrong... I've owned my fair share of center-fire .22's, .25's, 6.5's, 7mm's, .30-cal's, .338's, .375's, etc., etc.

I became an aficionado of the magnums in 7 mm's, .300's, .338's and .375's. And yes... .35 Whelens and .350 Rem Mags. All of them are great, especially from .30 on up! I loved my .340 WBY.

But, having whittled the pile... the 45-70 is my top pick for doing it all. Have you witnessed what a 465-grain HC will do to a big black bear at 1900 fps? But then, I have also a Ruger No.1 "Improved" (long-throated)in 45-70 that weighs 7.6 lbs with a Burris fixed 4X. It'll fire a 350 TSX at 458 WM speeds and a 500-grain Hornady that matches a 458WM as well. Now, about recoil... It's my favorite rifle that I've owned longer than any other, which generates 80 ft-lbs of recoil with it's max load! And I'm in my 74th year... Then I have a love affair with my CZ 550, 458WM that equals a Lott because of it's 3.8" magazine and long throat! It'll go bear huntin' along with my Ruger or Marlin.

I only mention this because of the apparent worry of getting busted by recoil. If you know how to shoot, and practice, these rifles mentioned are all capable of MOA. Consistently!

Yes, and I do own some that are milder in "kick". Of course, any of these can be made into mere "pussycats" if you want to lob bullets! A favorite "flat-shooter" is my 300WM and a fun gun to tote is my Ruger 96/44.

A few years ago, a friend was taking his father on a bear hunt. I asked: "What is your dad shooting?" He replied: "His 378 Weatherby... he uses it for all his hunting." His dad was only 83 years young! There may still be hope for some of you guys!

Bob

www.bigbores.ca

I'll preface this that I did not real all posts.

My personal issue stems around shots available and the resultant harvest or lack thereof.

When on a "trophy" to me animal hunt, especially when its not out the back door, I'll take what I consider can take the target animal cleanly from ANY angle and TOTALLY penetrate with the correct bullet, at least penetrate enough to get to vitals from any direction. And at a decent distance, IE capable of the above to about 400 yards or more. Trophy meaning something I want to harvest for whatever reason or "need" to harvest.

On a non trophy hunt, IE when I have no issues of walking away from a shot I'll often take something much less... example was use of a 32-20 I was told shouldn't take deer, to take 2 this year. But I'll just as often take something else, IE 100 pound doe hunt, where I needed to take 3 does for meat, I took a 338 win mag because I wanted to. And for head shots... I mean thats workable with a 223 or less easily....

Hope that makes sense.

Would I hunt buff with a 243? I'm game for anything but it would have to be not out of my pocket and plenty time to pick and choose the single shot that will work. I know for a fact that a 90 grain FMJ from a 243 penetrates more steel than I ever thought it would.... A skull would be nothing.

Good point.

I think you nailed it with "borderline".

Some great posts from Dober, Rost, and others!

"I'll take what I consider can take the target animal cleanly from ANY angle and TOTALLY penetrate with the correct bullet, at least penetrate enough to get to vitals from any direction. "

Jeff,I have a real problem with that. I have always believed that part of the equation of hunting,whether it is meat or trophy hunting is to dispacth the animal as humanely as possible. I'm no tree/bunny huger and don't carry on in a holier than thou attitude ,but a lot of those type of shots inferred from such a statement inflict one heck of a lot of pain on the animal and usually results in slower deaths. Texas heart shots will usually put an animal on the ground about as quick as any other shot,but I have seen my share of those aniamls so hit trying to crawl away on two front legs, usually screaming/howling or what ever you want to call it in pain and fear.

Sure,the bullet can get into the vitals and eventually kil the animal,but the chance for a quick dispatch is much more likely to be compromised from bullet defelection or just plain miscalulation fromt he hunter as to where the initail bullet impact should be.

To me,that one attitude alone by hunters,destroys a lot of the myths about "In defense of Bigger rifles". Howver ,it is not only those users ,but the whole group of hunters who profess to use what ever is avaiable ,super bullets, shoulder cannons or? to take game with.

Saddlesore

You have the right to your opinion. And I'm not saying I'd shoot any angle at any distance but thats how I prepare. IF I choose to take the shot, then I need the tool for the job. Or I have to pass. Thats my option and over the years I've probably passed many more shots than I've taken. But I do go prepared.

From shooting some similar sized animals here, Nilgai, that are extremely tough, maybe as tough if not tougher than elk, there often are no perfect shots offered and they are very quick shots. I"ve found that many angles kill quickly.

You do have to know whats going on and be capable and dedicated and I like to think of every hunter as being that. But alas they probably are not goign to be that way.

But personally I"ve no issues of taking a southbound shot on a northbound animal. It works. Its as quick as any other shot. You simply need the gun and know how/where to use it.

As to deflections, heck I've seen that on ribcage shots that enter, hit a small deer, say 75 pounds, and deflect on a rib and end up going out back through the liver... you cannot control everything. And if we start saying we can't shoot until we know the outcome.. well that'll stop it all.

As to animals crawling away, I've never seen that, but we ended up using enough gun on Nilgai after a bad incident with a 300 mag provoked by a guide and 180 NPs... IE I won't shoot a mild round unless I'm in the mood to pass up iffy shots. But using the correct gun and bullet, its never been an issue and its the same as shooting the game in the chest facing you, same results that I"ve seen and so on. Now with the wrong round and projectile I could quickly see that shot being break the hips and stop like the NP did in 16 puny inches the one time....

Boy Scouts, be prepared. IF you can handle it.

Jeff

I had my .35 Whelen built as an elk rifle in the early 90's and ran it with nothing but 250 Hornadys, I leaned heavily towards the .338 but did not want to deal with the belt as a new reloader.

I love the rifle and would still reach for it first "just because" but would not feel handicapped by my .270 or .308 with either a TSX or something similiar. Now if only someone would make a tipped monometal at about 200grs.....

I think bigger diameter kills better, higher velocity kills farther. Bullet placement trumps both.

A person needs to shoot the biggest cartridge they can comfortably shoot.

Better bullet designs have made smaller cartridges more capable.

I personally found my recoil limit with a 416 Rigby and 350-400gr bullets. It went a way to a new home.

Yes. Agreed. I'll take some too.

And some 8mm 180's.

saddlesore-- Vince right?

I knew there was another point that I couldn't bring up due to being busy at the time I replied...
That other point is though I may or may not initiate a angular shot, I WANT the ability to do so especially in a wounded scenario. Worst thing I could think of would be to wound one somehow, IE broadside shot and muff it and break a front leg or two low... then I don't want a 223.... I want a cannon to stuff the next shot/s as needed.

Its' not always about best case its should be about worst case.

I"ve regretted to this day of watching my nephew shoot a deer and then leave to go to catechism, and take the rifle with him, me waiting a bit to trail and find it, only to see it get up from brush and walk off, I could have tried had I had his 223, BUT I"ve had been more comfortable with the angular shot with one of my 300s and a TSX...

Jeff

If you don't mind the weight and recoil of a bigger rifle there isn't much of a downside. I've hunted with the .375 exclusively for a couple of years now and I find that the familiarity of one rifle and scope for all my hunting is comforting. It sure is more than I need on antlerless whitetail and birds but I don't see a problem...

Jeff.That is one scenario I readily agree with. I want to be prepared if things go wrong, but I don't want to knowingly be the cause of it.Which was really the point of my post

Beat the new guy like a rented mule, but.....

I took my first bull with a .308 and a 165Gr Nolser BT. That just happens to be my biggest elk so far.

I have taken a just legal bull (4xrag-horn) and a mature cow with a .257 Roberts.

Funny how things happen, hunting deer while also having an elk tag!

Just sharing this for the comments on shot placement.

rost495 -

That's pretty much where I am, too - work for the best and plan for the worst. Using enough gun on the second shot generally means enough gun was used on the first as well.