Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Ask The Gunwriters Reasons to shoot a magnum?

I've always thought that the magnums, whether 300, 338, or to a lesser extent the 375 allow you to shoot tough game animals such as elk at more severe angles than smaller cartridges (with the proper bullet of course), AND they shoot flat enough to 400 yards where turrets and ballistic reticles are not needed.

I never put much weight into the belief that the magnums kill any better on broadside shots, they just allow you to shoot at angles that smaller cartridges should not be used. Shot placement is still critical.

Am I wrong in thinking this?

I agree to a certain extent, except that high sd bullets in the 6.5 and 7mm line can be just as effective as the magnums you mentioned above when it comes to penetration. Magnums shine where the customer seeks high velocity and heavy bullets. For me personally, magnums true value comes into play when shooting long range with heavy bullets.

There are always variables of course, but I certainly can't fault your thinking here.

To either extend the range of equal bullet performance comparing in - caliber standard and magnum cartridges or the ability to launch heavier at comparable velocities.

.............Nope! Not wrong at all.

As long as someone who desires to own a magnum, can handle them such as added recoil, and can properly place the shots.

There are always a few magnum bashers out there, who insist that magnums aren`t needed in most hunting situations and they`re probably correct.

What pisses me off, is them telling me THAT I DON`T NEED ONE and that in their opinion, my own judgement is clouded when compared to their own thinking.

Small amounts of socialism within the shooting world,,,,,,so to speak??.....

bigsqueeze is right IMHO.

The reason for magnums is to shoot lighter bullets at higher velocity than smaller cartridges;and heavier one's at the same, or higher velocities, too.

They also increase the expansion envelope with some certain bullets.

Whether you think you need it or not is a personal choice.

There is a slight fly in the ointment here. Yup, if a fella can shoot a magnum as well as he can a standard round, the magnum can be more effective.

With as many hundreds of thousands of rounds as I've fired, I've never been able to shoot a magnum, say 7mm and up, nearly as well. Technically, they are capable, but I'm talking about MY HUMAN FAILING HERE.

And, quite honestly, when I guided, we asked the hunters what they were shooting. If the guy replied, "Hell, just my old .270 (or .308 or .30-'06)," Terry or I grabbed him.

If the paid hunter replied, "Schit, I got a brand-new .340 Weatherby," we left that sucker to the wrangler. There was a one-hundred percent chance that the "hunter" was trying to buy success and another 100% chance that he couldn't handle the .340. And there was about a 100% chance that the hunter was gonna NEED the wrangler and some mules to get his elk, if he managed to hit one, out of some horrible canyon bottom.

Have I killed elk with the .340? Yup, quite a few. And the .375 and one with the .378. And the elk fell off the hill, but the bullets were not placed as well as I'd have liked.

I killed most of my last 20 or so elk, maybe more, with the .308 and .30-06, using 150-grain Hornady bullets. Just plain cup-and-core and they worked perfectly.

My last two bulls I killed cleanly with my 7SGLC (7X308 Ackley) and 120 Ballistics @ 3,255 fps. The range was 400-ish and they died most sincerely dead.

Another comment, just as long as I'm making unpopular comments. Yeah I know you gotta get the elk down, but if it is humanly possible, it's not a great idea to take one of Elmer's "raking shots." The elk's stomach is the equivalent of a 30-gallon trash bag full of wet green schit. A lot of bullets won't make it through and it will always make a hell of a mess, regardless.

Better to wait, if you can, for the critter to position itself better. Then, either take the "tight behind the shoulder" or the back of the neck or the back of the head or whatever.

Raking shots basically suck.

Trust me, I have seen just about every frackin' rodeo possible ... and in the toughest country; Hell's Canyon of the Snake River. It's the deepest canyog in the Northern Hemisphere and I've chased those smelly elk up and down lots of impassible country, mostly because of poor shooting on the part of one of our clients.

It's a horrible thing to say, but often I was begged to "collaborate," when the "hunter" simply couldn't get the elk down, with a frackin' .300 Weatherby or whatever, and somehow my little .308 put them on their back and rolling down the canyondside.

The hunter is patient; he gets as close as he can, he waits for the shot and then he KILLS DEAD with the one shot. The hunter is by far the most important element in hunting; sub-MOA rifles, magnum cartridges and such don't mean spit.

It is the hunter getting to his 100% kill-percentage distance and then placing the one shot perfectly. Do that and there's meat on the ground.

Case in point is my little Angel-Wife Karen. She's shot a .250 Ackley, pushing a 100 Hornady or Ballistic at 3,000 fps. She shoots once; elk, deer or antelope ... whenever I hear her shot, her ONE SHOT, I start heading in her direction because something just died and she's gonna need some help.

Steve

Cause I shot at an animal last year and it got away, so this year I bought this here MAGNUM.

Phil,

Ain't that the truth??

I shot ducks with a buddy for years. He wouldn't practice at the skeet or trap range, but saved all that for the blind.

My friend, Hank, couldn't hit schit with his 12-gauge, so he upped it to a 12-gauge 3". And when that didn't work for decoyed ducks at thirty yards, he bought an Ithaca 10.

Hank is dead now, but we often laughed that he instinctively went the wrong way.

When he bought a nice little 20-gauge and joining me shooting skeet, he started hitting and killing ducks. He ended his shooting career being a fine, fine shottygun shooter.

Nice guy and I miss him. Miss him a lot.

All the best to you,

Steve

Great post, Steve!

I like magnums as much as the next guy, but I like standard cartridges, too! Why do I like magnums? Because they give me a little more velocity and perhaps a little greater range of bullet expansion than do comparable standard cartridges. This may increase my margin of error with regards to wind drift and trajectory. I like and shoot guns frequently, so I become proficient and feel confident by practicing at the range and while shooting at small varmints, which is 99% of the shooting I do, and then that confidence and ability translates to effectiveness on game animals, which accounts for the other 1% of my shooting.

At the end of the day, it's mostly just because I like magnums and I like non-magnums, and I like owning both for different reasons! In case it's not yet clear, my reasons for owning magnums include the words, "I like", "confident", "feel", etc, and are more based on emotion than any rational argument in favor or against!

Wish I knew who to credit for this; "a magnum of what?" (might have been Boddington).

Hey, if extended range, ultra-high velocity, or moving really big bullets are what you like, load 'n' go. Can't imagine what a .416 Rigby magnum, or .45-70 magnum would be like to fire from the bench. Also can't imagine any animal living to tell 'bout being shot with such a design.

Why shoot a magnum?

If you're a great shooter and hunter, it gives added range.

If you're a normal hunter, it's to make up for feelings of inadequacy.


I hate public sight in days with the guys with their brand new 300 mags and Simmons scopes they just bought. Even the blood running off of their foreheads isn't usually amusing (depending on how much of a jerk they are, it can be).

You'd get a bang out of me then. Shot trap in a league, shot trap, and skeet to hone my wingshooting skills, and still can't hit a dern thing with a scattergun - especially if it's going to my right.

Might as well pull the shells out of the gun, and put 'em in my pocket, 'cause it'd get the same result without all the noise, expense, and frustration.

You guys that can handle scatterguns really annoy me. >grin<

shoot a magnum too burn more powder, ruin your hearing faster, hurt your shoulder better, and increase your range by 50 yards..

'Bout a month ago I drew blood from the bridge of my nose helping a friend sight in a Howa 300 Win Mag he'd won at a raffle.
He couldn't hit the backer at a 100 yards. I took my turns, and found the rifle to be less than 1/2 MOA, and easily clanged a six-inchish gong at six hundred yards repeatedly.

'Twas the first round that got me - grrrrrrr.

That's not only a statement, that's a lesson every hunter should take on board.

I think the original reason to own a magnum was to be able to use heavier or "next step up" bullet weights at the same velocities as the standard round in the same caliber. An example would be using 200 grain bullets in a .300 magnum at the same velocity the .30/06 would generate 180's.

With some of the newer more aerodynamic bullets, there may be more of a case for that today as the standard cup and core bullets of the original magnum era would not guarantee a wise choice was being made.

The other thing is that some cartridges were marketed under the "Magnum" banner though were magnums through intended use as for the .458 and not, because of canister sized powder capacities in relation to their particular bore size.

The bullets we have today are not only the best of our generation, they are the best in ballistic history and more often than not, increase the performance of some cartridges that may have been considered magninal for some uses in decades and even lustrums past in the case of younger shooters.

A brainwashed consumer base is also a contributor to the magnum argument. If you take a look at the .270 in Colorado gun shops, you will find it is usually cheaper (sometimes by a lot) than a .30/06 based on the perception of what is suitable for elk.

There is a lot to it and what is stocked in the gun shops often reflects the market expectations rather than the needs of the consumer, because the customer is always right, especially if he wants to buy a new rifle.

John

Just a thunk; which magnum do you suppose has sold the most?

I'd nod toward the 7mm Remington "magnum".

The name MAGNUM IMHO was stamped for marketing hype.

It catered to the egos of many.

I understand the long distance guys want more PBR, energy, and better wind resistance, BUT EVERY bullet is going to drop, drift, and lose steam over the time of flight.

No cartridge will replace practice learning YOUR rifle/load and scope setting.

And no amount of extra power will justify poor shot placement.

Very good info above.

EVERY hunter owes it to the game they hunt, the sport, and other sportsman, to invest in the time to do what Karen Timm above does with her 'non magnum' dainty 250 She learned how to shoot, and knows when to squeeze, and where her bullet is going - thru vitals.

Thanks to all for the comments so far.

I should probably explain a little about myself. I've not been hunting for very long, this will only be my 5th season. I love rifles and am gradually becoming a better hunter. I killed a nice 3x3 blacktail with my compound a couple years ago. Huge body on that buck and he was a good eating.

Last year I shot a nice 20" 4x4 mule deer with a 300 Win using a 200gr Accubond at 2650 fps with Retumbo. This was near the Snake, in a canyon with 45 degree slopes and loose soil. Intimidating country is a vast understatement, at least to me. Before I got there I worried about other hunters. Not a problem since 99.9% of the other hunters were in or near the timber. I think I was one of the few stupid enough to hunt those canyons!

There's something about those canyons that appeal to me. I think its the sight of a mule deer bouncing away with ears pinned back that make me stop in awe. This is country, like the coastal timber, where human legs fail. You are helpless compared to a deer or an elk. I guess the same could be said about mule deer above timberline and the challenges presented there. My goal as a hunter is to make clean kills in the dark coastal timber, desert canyons, and high mountains. I want to experience them all since they are all so different. But there's something special about those canyons that draw so few and keep everyone else away. I'll be returning to the those canyons this year and can't wait to get there.

That said the areas that I hunt, whether its the canyons near the Snake or the coast mountains near home, that present some challenges in my mind. If you encounter an animal, its either very close or very far. If the range is close, its most likely a bedded animal and you may need to wait a long time for it to move. Severe shot angles seem like a real possibility, and repositioning yourself could be near impossible unless you can levitate or move in the timber silently.

In the canyons, the shots can be long. I guess I could shoot something like a 7mm or 30-06, but I feel more confident with a 200gr high BC bullet from my 300 mag. Unless the animal is directly above or below, most likely it will be across a draw and a flat shooting cartridge seems like an advantage.

Anyway, I have been shooting Tikkas in 300 magnum chamberings for the past 5 years. First a WSM, then two Win Mags. I can shoot these rifle MOA to 400+ yards. For practice I shoot milk jugs at 400+ yards in the field with field rests, not off of a bench at the range. Once I get a load dialed-in, I just shoot in the field. Its not quite like shooting under actual hunting pressure, but its the best that I can simulate. I have hit milk jugs with make-shift rests at 400+ yards 3x times in a row. I think I'm a decent shot at this range and better than most guys I see at the rifle range. Actually a lot better than most, but I know there are better riflemen than me.

So, that's me and what I do. My latest rifle is a Tikka Super Light shooting a 200gr Accubond at 2900 fps using Ramshot Magnum. Its under 1" at 100 yards, and easliy minute-of-milk-jug at 400 yards using a bipod. Recoil is brisk being 7lbs total. I don't want one rifle for deer, and another for elk. Or multiple loads for one rifle. I just want one rifle and one load for everything. I think this will work well. Many think its overkill and others think a 338 is better.

If I was only wanting to shoot animals broadside, I think I'd choose a 270 shooting a 130gr premium. But, I think I'm capable at 400 yards and have the right gear and mentality.

I'm open to other views, so if anyone thinks I'm doing it wrong, please feel free to comment.