I just smile when I hear about that wimpy, underpowered 303. The person waxing eloquent is unaware of their ignorance. It is not a 300 mag, and that is just fine witth me.

When the ad boys started their magnum campaign, the "Use enough gun!" mantra was pushed far beyond sensibility and rational expectations. They did a "bang up job", to be sure.

Magnums have a place when hunting longer ranges or against dangerous game. In Wisconsin, Ontario or New Brunswick, you rarely need something that powerful though. They recoil too much and are more expensive to feed.

Magnums mean more powder, different, more costly bullets and cases. It's harder to introduce new hunters to the sport when their shoulder may end up in the next county. Even loaded down, magnums still use expensive cases and more powder.

I suspect that's the reason why magnums are more frequently seen on the used rack. Once the shine has worn off, hunters realize that they made a mistake buying it and flog the thing for something else. The only winner is the gun shop.

I think that the majority of serious hunters use enough gun for the area where they live and the game. There's no reason for them to discuss the latest cartridge: they don't need it.

They don't need to discuss sectional density, bore diameter or energy transfer. Most are too busy taking game with old or anemic cartridges to bother with Internets debate or ad hype. Good for them.

Don't get me wrong; I think magnums have a place, but more magazine space should be used to educate hunters on what to buy. Hunters too, have a responsibility to learn what they need versus the latest craze.

This last statement usually falls on deaf ears. Chasing shiny things seems to be de rigueur these daze.

Yep, my favourite 30 caliber magnum is the 30-06. PLENTY for everything I shoot. If I was "stuck" with a three aught three I'd survive, but there are a few more bullets to choose from in .308 over .312.

Definitely. If this was 30 years ago, we'd have 150s, 174s, 180s, 200s and 215s for the 303 British. No more. I usually take a 30-06 to camp and carry a 303 or 308 as a backup rifle.

.308 bullets are a more sensible choice nowadays. For deer, depending on the WMU, I carry a 44 Mag or a 308 bolt. The 308 is going away however, in favour of another lever.

The impression I get is that the most popular deer cartridges in the east Kootenays, are:
1. The 270
2. 30/06
3. 308
4. 243
5. everything else.
50 years ago, the 303 would have been at the top of the list.
I have killed more deer with my no.4 MK1 than with evry other rifle I've owned, combined. These deer were taken with the 303 or, in the last 20 years, with the 30/40 Krag (I re-barreled it). By the way,it has also shown itself effective on elk, moose and black bears.
When I was 14 years old, my dad bought this rifle for me. I kind of wanted a 94 Winchester but he felt the added power of the 303 would make it more suitable. I'm glad he did. GD

Steve,

Non-magnums may be fine for deer hunting but for moose they are not necessarily the best choice for a seasoned shooter. Almost everyone of my acquaintances who hunt the big lake country of north-western Ontario now use magnums and few of us are youngsters.

Don't know why but at one time it seemed to be common for moose not to show themeselves until they were within 50 or 60 yards. Now they are frequently seen at much longer distances. I don't think my calling has deteriorated so it must be something to do with the fact the lakes we hunt now are much bigger that where we hunted years ago.

When I hunt deer a shotgun is often used (because of regulations, not choice) or a relatively small caliber rifle.

Jim

If you're taking longer shots, then this is one of those times where magnums make sense. I don't know anyone in your hunting party, but I assume that they can comfortably take a shot at an extended range.

When we go moose hunting, we seem to hunt more clearcuts than years ago, but for those instances I stick with my 30-06. It's one of the reasons I take two rifles. The other is in case one becomes unusable.

This year, I took the 45-70. My longest shot in two of the spots we had scouted would have been 48 yd., according to my rangefinder. The longest shot in one other was 130 yd, across a clearcut. I could have used the 45-70, but took the 30-06. That didn't take moving around into consideration.

This goes back to what I said about hunters knowing where they'll be hunting. You know what rifle will do the job and choose accordingly.

Steve,

Got a kick out of your extended ranges and using the 30-06. I had changed from a 30-06 to a 300 Magnum about 10-12 years ago, and it certainly was effective. I have since graduated back to the 30-06, and with the use of Barnes TSX, dropping a bullet weight and some of he new to me powders, I find the 30-06 only loses about 30 yards or so to the magnum. I have killed more game with a 30-06 and a 22LR than I have with any other, but I've carried one more too.

For me, and for moose or deer, the 168 TSX at 2900 has become my one bullet does everything load. I also have started with the 45-70, and also a 405 Winchester for shots under 200 yards.

For what we hunt, a 30-06 is all a fellow needs. That's not what companies that sell new stuff want to hear though. Modern bullets and powders have breathed new life into older cartridges like the 30-06 and that is a thumbs up to modern technology.

That said, new magnum rifle sales will continue. A year or two later, they will be back in the same store on the used rack. Hopefully, they will be traded for a rifle that is matched to what most people are hunting.

Hey my Grandfather started me out hunting with 303 and it does kill now my son got it and his son will be next . Its been pass down 5 times now grandson will be 6 times great gun. Just like the rest .I would go with 300 savage 250 savage also seem a bunch when I was in camps tn Quebec