Thought I would post this separately from the standard vs. magnum post that has been going on long enough anyway.

Was just down at the first annual Charlie Sisk Rifle Shoot in Texas, and was in charge of an experiment comparing the .308 Win. to the .300 Win. Magnum at 400 yards. Charlie provided two rifles identical in every way--Model 70 action, barrel, McMillan stock, scope (a 4-12x Kahles)--except chambering. One was a .308 and the other a .300. Ammo was Hornady factory with 165 Interlocks.

The experiment was simple: I zeroed each rifle 2" high at 100 yards, then shot them at 400 measured yards to how much each bullet was affected by drop, wind, etc. The wind was gusting up to 15 mph and I did not attempt to compensate at 400 yards, firing a 3-shot group with each rifle over a forend rest (not a full benchrest setup with rear bag) simulating field conditions. I called one shot in each group out about 2", otherwise all looked good.

We could not tell which shots had been called out. Groups were almost identical at 8-9 inches, strung mostly horizontally due to the wind. The .308's bullets dropped about 7" more, and drifted maybe 2 more inches in the wind. But every shot from both rifles would have landed in the lung area of a big mule deer at 400 yards, if the shooter had held the correct amount high--no matter which rifle was fired.

The entire group from both rifles measured a little over one foot, with most in under 8" inches. In fact, if we hadn't known which rifle fired which bullet, it looked very much like one group.

Admittedly, "tuned" handloads, a better rest, and a very calm day would have resulted in smaller groups. But smaller groups would have resulted in even less difference in trajectory from the highest and lowest shots. Which group came from which rifle would have been more obvious--but any of the shots would still have killed a mule deer with the same hold.

MD

Not surprising. I have always contended that a few 100fps doesn't make a big difference in TOF.

Good post. I did the same thing last spring only I did it with one rifle, my 300 Weatherby. I did my shooting @ 300 yards (actually the target sat on a hump right at a lazered 315 yards from my bench).

I did the testing only with 180gr Nosler Ballistic tips. I began with full power 3200fps loads and finished with 2700fps loads, or roughly that of a 30-06. The difference was small enough to make me puke and sell off my 300 Weatherby. The difference amounted to about the depth of the eyeball on an elk. I don't claim to be a real marksman so I try to keep shots under 300 yards, or I go home empty handed, so I see no real reason to shoot a magnum rifle. To this I will add that in my experiences, the slower bullets seemd to kill better and bullet selection was of less importance when fired under 2900fps.

It is little wonder that my current favorite rifle is a 300 SAvage. Here is the real magnum cruncher, it runs a 180gr at 2400fps and seems to hang in there pretty damn good at 300 yards too and the 150grs running 2650 shoot right there with the 30-06 @ 300 yards which puts it about 2" below my 300 Weatherby at the same range and it is wonderful to shoot.

Maybe there is much to ballistics that we don't understand yet.

Again good post.

CM

I guess you just rediscovered what the military has known for quite a while. <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/wink.gif" alt="" /> I have done a lot of sidexside shooting of the .308 and 300Win. It really doesn't get interesting until beyond 800 yards. For most hunters that really shouldn't matter. Honestly I can't see any reason to have a 300Win Mag over a .308 or 30.06 for hunting. I guess that's why I sold my 300 Win Mag a year before last and I'm not looking to buy another.

INTERESTING THANKS

Makes one wonder whether maybe the only "edge" that the magnum lovers have is really just the edge on their egos.

JimF

I second the comment about the military.

I had the honor to talk rifles and shooting with a USMC scout-sniper team at Camp Pendleton in 1999. (The only thing I have in common with a USMC sniper is that we both shoot the same cartridge in the same action.) They told me they like to engage between 500 and 800 meters because they are vulnerable to lesser rifles under 500 meters and the 7.62 (.308) "runs out of steam" over 800 meters.

is the bottom line that the accuracy is comparable, but drop for the 308 is about 7" lower at 400 yards than the 300 Win Mag?

Let's not forget less kick = more practice.

Just got back from THunder Ranch. Clint Smith shoots a 16.25" Ruger 77 in 308 for everything (except that black powder stuff).

Don't know about that. Everytime I buy the Magnum sized Trojans at the drugstore, I always see the eyes of the checkout girl lightup.

If you mean rifle cartridges, I agree.

Also, thanks for the post JB.

I get that all the time too.....................yeah right!!!.......... <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/tongue.gif" alt="" />

JimF

IF /when the shooting does get out to +/-1000 yards, then the bigger cartridges are able to shine....................I didn't say hunting, I said shooting. I have dropped a few one gallon jugs in their tracks at various ranges from 400 yds to 1000+ yds, long range practice won't hurt your short game............and it's fun !

Absolutely. You can even extend that logic to the fact that many folks who are a bit shy of their rifles, may not practice at all. A hit in bambi's boiler room from a nice mild 270 is far better than a miss, or (far worse) a hit around the edges from a boomer.

Expanding upon the subject a bit, the increasingly common availability and use of rangefinders makes the trajectory advantage pretty meaningless as well. Think about the deer or elk or giant prehistoric woozel sneaking through a clearing thats "out there" range wise. The responsible shooter takes the time to range the target before banging away. Then he applies the necessary correction, takes a good rest and kills the target. It matters not that he has to hold over maybe an additional few inches with the .308. He has to take the correction into account anyway, so the amount of the correction does not matter.

The remaining argument in favor of magnums might be that they improve bullet performance at longer ranges. That may or may not be true, but certainly the quality of bullets that we all currently enjoy is the best ever. We have bullets that will offer proper expansion, adequate penetration, and dependable accuracy far beyond the ranges that we should really ever shoot.

Naturally for those VERY few that have the technology, equipment and the skill to make those 500yd and longer (maybe far longer) shots, the velocity of the magnums is there for them. That is a very small crowd and most of us are just not there.

For the rest of us that shoot our game inside of 400 yds......who needs it.

JimF

I think the only thing the 300 mags have over a 308 or 30-06 (or 300 Savage for that matter) is their ability to handle heavier bullets, hence increase long range performance. I wonder if perhaps it is not the velocity that increases long range performance but bullet weight. A 300 Winchester will run a 220gr match style bullet the same speed that a 308 runs a 150 or 165gr. The 220gr definatly has the edge at long range.

For hunting, this is not much of an issue, but for long range shooting, it is.

I notice this alot when shooting handguns at long range, the heavier the bullet, the better it handles long range. Velocity is of little importance.

CM

Besides the trajectory,the other interesting thing ,which I got from the big 308 180gr test,penatration and weight retention remained almost constant over the bullets design range.It was the same if the bullet hit at 2700 or 1900.

Even the drop figuires differences aren't that great,say between a 308 and a 264.I think I just wrote some heresy. <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/grin.gif" alt="" />

MD,
Great post...

fwiw,
For shooting steel this side of 800 Meters I greatly prefer a .308 Winchester. I've had splendid luck with the .308 Win/175 SMK combination. Though I have seen those who shoot for a living do impressive work with the .300 WM/190 SMK combination.

The .308 Win in the front gets quite a bit more use than the .300 Win Mag in the back...

Regards, Matt.

Steelhead,
You're definitely on a roll this evening!

I considered asking if there was any reason (aside from watching the response of the clerk) for the purchase............ <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/grin.gif" alt="" />

I have always felt the only advantage the magnums have over the .308 was the ability to throw a heavier bullet for better penetration or the ability to push the same bullet a bit faster to held with expansion at longer ranges.

With the advent of premium bullet technology and laser range finders the gap between standards and magnums has gotten considerably thinner.

For me if I need more than a 150gr TSX Im going to reach for the .35 Whelen not more speed.

By golly, I'm convinced! No more .30 mags, .30-06s or .308s around here! I'm gonna get me a good .30-30 and say GOODBYE to foolish cartridges.

I think the USMC sniper rifle is a .308 it was the 30/06 when I was a grunt. Good to 600 yds and beyond as I recall.
I wonder what they use today. I do not recognize some of the ordnance I see on the news.
I had a surprise recently when I shot some old style Nosler 117 gr semi spitz and some 115 Nosler BT's at 300 yds from a 25/06. Not much diff either.
-Doc-

Good Post, John...
I have both, but the .308 certainly gets used more... I have killed deer and Antelope cleanly out past 600 yds with the .308 Win and none of them have complained that it wasn't powerful enough...CJ

Makes the 6.8 SPC sound a bit more practical out of the AR platform!

This test reminds of one I believe Mike Venturino did once on roundnose versus spitzers at longer ranges. Wasn't enough practical difference to get worked up over!

Thanks for sharing,


Mike

Exactly. A couple hundred FPS really doesn't gain you much, especially if you have a rangefinder.

But a heavier bullet of the same type launched at the same velocity will resist wind drift much better, retain it's velocity much better and when you actually hit something you'll have a heavier bullet traveling faster offering better terminal performance.

That's where the advantage is--not the increased velocity with the same light bullet. Sure, people could shoot heavier bullets from their 308's (depending upon twist, etc) but the fact is most simply don't. Eventually trajectory becomes less practical (at ranges one shouldn't even need a rangefinder), some bullets may not open up well, etc.

A quote from Hodgdons #27:


The .300 Win mag throws 200 grain factory "High Energy's" out the barrel at 2930 fps while the .308's best load from Hodgdons is 2514 fps..Thats over 400 fps with a 200 Grain Bullet!Why not just get a 30-30? <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/grin.gif" alt="" />
The 30-30 throws a 170 grain Hornady out at 2330 fps while the 308 throws a 175 grain Sierra at 2706 fps(Both Hodgdon Data) a difference of 400 fps.Same as the .300 and the 308 with 200 grain bullets.Hummm. <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/help.gif" alt="" />

Jayco <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/grin.gif" alt="" />

I hear ya man. That's all I buy too, the magnum sized condoms. 'Course I have have to tie them on with binder twine, so they don't slip off.............but man, I WEAR A MAGNUM!!

The .300 Win Mag with a 200 grain Nosler has more energy at 200 yards than the 308 Winchester at the muzzle with a 200 grain bullet at Hodgdons max velocity, and at 400 yards the .300 Win Mag and the 200 grain Nosler still has 2145 ft lbs of energy.

Now thats if anyone believes in the numbers game.

Jayco <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/grin.gif" alt="" />

Thanks for the report MD. I know a guy that hunts here in eastern NC with a 300 Win. mag. He bought it to deer hunt here with. The first deer he killed with it I helped (ie. showed him how to) skin and quarter it. There was obvious magnum destruction although I'll admit not as much as I would have expected. He claimed that the deer was right at 120 yards via rangefinder and wondered about the impact with a 100 yard zero. I politely explained that 20 yards would make no difference at all and that he would've probably been better off with a 308 on these small deer. He said he thought of that but was afraid that it would drop too much if he got a 200+ yard shot. I pointed that in the woods here, 120 yards is a long shot and most would probably be around half that. Plus, while I don't have a 308 I wouldn't feel handicapped with one as far as I could hit a deer with accuracy. He's taken several deer with a 300mag but he gets a good deal of meat damage and has mentioned it several times. I told him that you don't get nothing for nothing, everything has it's trade offs. Last I heard, he was thinking of a 308 or a 270 to replace his 300 Win. mag.

Case #2. A fellow that shoots at the same range as I do had used a Remington 700ADL in 308 for almost 20 years. He had take SEVERAL deer with it but one season decided on a 300 RUM. At the range he had a heckuva time keeping any kind of group. He wasn't pleased and openly admitted that the recoil was getting the best of him. I asked him why he went with such a bigger round when his 308 wasn't lacking? He replied that he wanted something different. I asked him how many deer has he lost to a 308 and he replied none. You saw the proverbial lightbulb go off. Well, he sold the 300 RUM and bought a new 308 and scope, far as I could tell he is as happy as a lark last time I saw him.

Pay attention to the qualifiers fellows! I don't hunt elk or big mule deer. I hunt little southern California mule deer. I will take the 7" advantage of the magnum. Been there, done that, it matters on a smaller target. Granted if I had a range finder it wouldn't matter, but I don't.

I'll just make one more note. I have used various .30 caliber cartridges over the years, from the .30-30 and .300 Savage up to the .300 RUM. In general even the .308 and certainly the .30-06 have done fine on big game out to 450 yards, which is as far as I have personally ever shot at anything larger than a coyote.

There may be some advantage in the bigger .30's in penetration with heavier bullets. But every animal I've ever shot with cartridges such as the .308 or .30-06 has gotten a hole right through all the vital parts. The bullet was either found under the hide on the far side, or went all the way through. On the longer shots with these "smaller" cartridges the bullet has always been a 165 or 180. Since all the animals were hit right, none went over 30-40 yards after the hit. Some went straight down.

Therefore, it has been hard for me to grasp how using a .300 magnum on the same shots would have resulted in deader animals.

Not that I am giving up my .300 magnums. I own three at the moment, an H&H, Winchester and WSM--and I plan to hunt elk in Colorado this fall with a .300 Weatherby, a cartridge I already have some acquaintance with.

I just fail to see the vast gap in performance that some claim between the "ordinary" .30's and the the bigger ones. In reality it appears to be a "cline," a graded shift rather than a firm division in performance. But then again I quit believing in foot-pounds as a real indicator of "killing power" many years ago, after having shot quite a few animals and mostly discovering that if their pumphouse got punctured, it didn't matter much whether the puncturing was done with a .270 or a .338.

I also quit believing that we somehow "need" a minimum of 200 grains of bullet to kill anything bigger than a caribou. This is because too many animals died from the correct application of lighter bullets. The big factors appeared to be correct bullet placement and penetration, not exactly how much the bullet weighed, or its diameter, or exactly what percentage of weight it retained.

But, as always, that's just one person's opinion around the Campfire.

MD

"Don't know about that. Everytime I buy the Magnum sized Trojans at the drugstore, I always see the eyes of the checkout girl lightup."


The above post reminds me of a time during my college years when I was sexually harassed by a checkout girl who appeared to be maybe, 15 years old. I had finally convinced... ah, I mean, my girlfriend and I had decided the time was right... she was waiting in the car while I went inside to make" the purchase". I am working on my very best, this is no different than buying a toothbrush cool look as I placed the package on the counter.

I swear this girl must've been the owners kid because she did not look old enough to legally be working there. She picked the package up and begins to look it over closely. Apparently she had been reading the fine print. She looks up with a sly smile and begins to question me about my decision in selecting this particular brand and then goes out to point out the characteristics of some of the competing product's different features.

Outwardly, I managed to maintain my composure. However I was glad when I didn't hear my voice crack as I told her that this was what I wanted and that I had no questions for her.

Funny how a thread on Magnum cartridges, "brings up" associations to this topic <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/grin.gif" alt="" />
John

MD thanks for the follow up post. I sincerely appreciate the rational and logical comments on this matter.

Just curious, why the use of a .300 Weatherby this fall? I suspect either as research for a future article or because you enjoy trying different guns/cartriges?

Regards, Kevin

Having fired many rounds out of the 308 out to 1000 yards, I feel the round is a fine round. Have a number of M1As in the safe and a couple hunting rifles in 308 also. Not a thing wrong with them.

Yet when it comes to crunch time, I'll grab one of the mags almost everytime. The factor for me is the wind drift advantage and the ability to run the heavier bullet. I agree on bullet placement being key, but I use the skills I have, and if that calls for a longer shot as the only option thats fine. And with enough experience on Nilgai hunts in my younger years, I find that it can take a heavy bullet to penetrate anything that large from stem to stern and sometimes thats also the only shot available.

Now hunting at home where I can happily walk back to the house and try again the next day, and not have 10s of thousands of dollars invested, I normally hunt with a 308 or 243 or a pistol or bow. No perfect shot available, no big deal, just pass and go home.

As MD stated so well, its only an opinion.

Jeff

Don't want to muddy up this thread so come on up to Hunter's Campfire for another tale along this line.

Well , I got a different viewpoint than many of the previous posters . To me , the seven inches difference in drop is substantial , and enough to result in a miss or worse , a wound .

If the trajectory and energy delivery edge is not important , you might as well chuck your .308 and the old .270 also , and tote a nice handy 30/30 carbine........

It would be interesting to do a penetration/wound channel comparison at that distance as well. I guess you could download each cartridge and shoot @ 200 to make it easier to hit center of ballistic media.

Here on the vast, high plains of Pennsylvania, magnums are quite popular. The reasons offered tend to follow one of the following (although I've heard all three from the same hunter):

1. I hunt public land with alot of other hunters. I have to be able to put a deer down immediately or another hunter will get a shot at it.

2. I want to know I have the deer even if I make a bad hit. (Yes, I still hear this logic alot!)

3. I don't care if I need one or not, I just want to see your eyes light up.

I agree there are certainly applications where a magnum round is quite appropriate. Empirical arguments aside, however, the image problems of magnum cartridges stem from the seemingly inappropriate reasoning of many hunters carrying them in the field.

There is no shame in buying extra small condoms if you can touch the center of your forehead with your tongue.

This experiment sums up, to my thinking, why the 30-06 is the "gold standard" of general purpose Big Game rifles!

I have done a fair bit of hunting with the 300 Magnums and like them. In fact I am having a 28" Gaillard barrelled Sendero made up in 300 RUM as my ultimate long range gun.

However the last few years I have been using a Steyer Scout in 308Win and really like it a great deal. The last two years I have taken 10 caribou at from 180-295 yards with about 14 shots. I am using the 150 Nosler Partition at 2750ft/sec and it hits hard and is easily a 300 yard load. Meat damage is reasonable and the caribou drop or stagger and drop when hit anywhere near well.

As already stated I see the 300 magnums advantage as 1) better bullet expansion at long range and better trajectory
2) Better heavy bullet handling. I am considering the 200 grain Speer load as a moose load in my Steyer but 2400ft/sec is a bit uninspiring. however it is about what the 350 Rem Mag does with 250's. 80% of the poop of the great 350 is no small feat.

For 90-95% of shots at even a long range species like caribou the 308 will suffice and be cheaper, handier and more fun to shoot than the big boomers. It really is a wonderful cartridge in it's own right.

Mule Deer-

Over on Custom Rifles I've been going through the gyrations on what to chamber a lefty, SA Rem in for a sheep/mountain deer rifle. I have not considered anything based on the .308 family let alone the .308.

Instead I've been plodding in the .284 case direction whether 6.5 or other. Rick Bin early on said "308". I've always known what you've so clearly demonstrated and after all, there is a small mountain of factory loads to choose from.

Am I wrong?

George

Despite my championing of the 6.5x284, and the 284, if I were to have a "one-gun" ultralight..........t'would be a .308.

I even have one about 90% finished from parts I had layin' around idle. (it won't be my only gun, and I may not even keep it, but........then again....... <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/tongue.gif" alt="" />)

JimF

FWIW:

A Mountain Rifle chambered in 308 Win is just fine. Load up a 130 gr TSX of a 125 grain Ballistic Tip and go forth.

BMT

I tend to disagree on this topic.

7" is a significant difference, especially in a hunting situation where you are not shooting off a bench, but rather your knee.

And energy does matter on a long range hit. If you are shooting at an elk at 400 yards on the edge of a canyon, I would rather hit him hard with a magnum, than poke him with a 308.

If energy doesn't matter, than you could argue that one might as well shoot 125's out of their 308 vs. 165's. They shoot flatter and are still poking a .308" hole.

When I used to hunt elk with a rifle I used a 30'06 with 180's. I am actually going elk rifle this year for the first time in a decade and I am taking a 338 win mag. I am going to be hunting in an area where long range shots are a reality.

Dat's da bottom line!

No, this is the bottom line.

"and I plan to hunt elk in Colorado this fall with a .300 Weatherby, a cartridge I already have some acquaintance with".
MD


Having used the standards for over 20 years on elk then going
mag, I aint ever going back.

7" at 400 yards is a lot in my book.

Yes sir and I agree totally.I like Honda CR's and Kawasaki's in Dirt Bikes but I ride my Yamaha 250 YZ when I go out. <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/grin.gif" alt="" /> <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/grin.gif" alt="" /> <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/grin.gif" alt="" />

Jayco

Well, you know what they say: Those that can hunt, get close enough. Those that can't, use magnums. <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/smile.gif" alt="" />


I got lots more JP4 to throw on the fire if we needs it. <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/smile.gif" alt="" />














(tic)

Hi Jim-Born and raised in Idaho.My first hunt was at two years old in the Selway-Bitteroots of Idaho.Course I didn't hunt much on that trip.Never missed a season in Idaho.It used to be you had time and lots of game and it was either sex Elk for years or you could shoot anything but a Moose on the same hunt.It is still that way in some places here,but the shot oppurtunities are dwindling for broadside shots with the influx of hunters in Idaho.

Bottum line is,Use enough gun if you want to eat and that is why I hunt,for food.It is cheaper even for a local to buy a 1/2 of beef than the time off work/expenses etc.

One of our very best friends grew up on the Salmon River miles above Macky Bar and at that time,a 32 special fed there family.Many mountains and creeks named after them,like John Day Creek and Aikens mountain.Times have changed and the smart change with them if ofcourse it is for food not sport and time away from the job.

Reguardless of a persons hunting skills, theres not the opp for a broadside/within range shot every year and thats where the .300 Mags shine over the .308 Winchester with bigger bullets at usefull velocities for the one that someone "Didn't: have to walk away from because of the caliber and bullet he chose.....

To each there own and ofcourse just my opinion sitting around the campfire.

Jayco

No problem.

Before anybody gets upset, that last post was just good natured ribbing.

Everybody is free to use whatever they want and shouldn't have to justify their choice to anybody.

I don't really want to get in on this, but do you really take a 400 yard shot kneeling? Maybe I'm a slacker, but I couldn't do it.

I don't shoot past 300 yards. I figure I can should be able to get closer in my hunting situations. YMMV
My line of thinking is: if I think I need more gun, I go to more diameter and weight, and I keep my velocities between 2600-2900fps. Velocity just doesn't make a bigger gun, in my mind. But, like I said, I have no need to shoot past 300 (more like 150).

"do you really take a 400 yard shot kneeling?"

Yeah, all the time. If a hunter can't shoot past 300 yards where I hunt elk he had better just stay home.

Jim, mighty hunter! lets see that ole' thutty thutty in action. <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/smile.gif" alt="" />

Teeder-In my own case,unless there is a stump or a tree limb or something solid neer by which there ususally is,I won't take the shot..Been there done that and there no fun to pack out of "A hole from hell" you can't even get the horses to from a shot off abit.The country I hunt is pretty steep and theres not much room for error in shot placement.

Jayco

There's just enough truth is the theme of this thread to be misleading. I agree with SU35 that 7" less drop at 400 yds. is "a lot". That much can mean the difference between a hit and miss at long range, not to mention the benefits of greater delivered energy at all ranges -- not just out past 400 yds. -- which is a fact that often gets left out of these dicussions.

A little-know fact is that all branches of the U.S. Armed Forces use the 300 Win. Mag. for long-range target work, etc. Now if the 308 was capable of being all things for all purposes, then they wouldn't use it. Neither would high-power 300 magnum shooters who compete at the 1,000-yd. Wimbleton, or so many Weatherby Award-winning trophy hunters.

If 7" less drop and 2" less drift in favor of the 300 Win. Mag. is meaningless, and if greater delivered energy at all ranges is of no practical benefit, than ballistics means nothing. Let's all go back to 30-30s (or .30 M1 carbines) and forget about even the 308 Win. And by all means, lets write outselves a mental note that we NEVER take a shot at any big game animals at long-range under any circumstances, and that we ALWAYS stalk closer -- even if that's not possible.........

AD

Thutty-thutty! Geez, you're still on that overly powerful rifle kick, aren't you?

Just give me a good .25-20. See that elk on yonder mountain? No, no! Not THIS one, that one two ridgelines over! <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/wink.gif" alt="" />

Very well said as usual.

Jayco

If energy(what a couple of foot lbs) is so important, then how does a compound bow, with only 50 ft/lbs kill so quickly and cleanly?Energy doesnt kill anything, its destroying the heart and or lungs that kills an animal. The magnum proponents do not support any kind of arguable thesis. If you cant get closer than 400yds to ANY animal maybe you should stay home. <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/tongue.gif" alt="" /> To compare hunting big game to military shoots is ridiculous, men are a lot easier to kill, and if you wound them, all the better, as it takes a couple of other bad guys to help them. If someone can rest on their knee and hit a target consistently, then why cant the same person compensate for a measly 7 inches at 400yds, none of these reasons make any sense. <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/shocked.gif" alt="" /> If you like your magnum then just say i like my magnum, it looks cool, or i like the huge blast or something like that but dont try to B.S a B.S.er . The 30-06 can handle any shot at any game in N.A. yes even the big bears and it will do it out to 400yds, just ask Mule Deer.If you like to be different well thats just fine but dont fool yourselves the old stand bys do great and even drop em quicker for some reason, so much for that mis-nomer, hydro-static shock, just ask people who have killed a lot of game with a lot of different cartridges and they will tell ya for some weird reason the oldies drop em quicker. As for the 30-30 thing, it has been killing deer for 100years and it will probably be doing it for 100 more, so dont act like its some kind of girlie or kid round and it would probably do for 98% of the hunters out there. <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/wink.gif" alt="" />

264Bore wrote:
A couple of ft lbs?Over 1100 ft lbs at the muzzle with the 300 Win Mag still having at 200 yards more energy than the 308 at the muzzle..Not a couple..A bunch!!!

The bow thing..I hunt and have hunted Elk and deer with a bow and I have never seen one drop to the shot like a rifle caliber.They usually with a leathal hit, run off and bleed out rather than just drop like a rifle mostly does.If your in steep country...Thats not good at all!!!

My opinion..Jayco

I fully agree, 264bore -- the .30-30 is a classic round for either girls or boys. I simply get red in the face if it is shown the slightest disrespect... <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/mad.gif" alt="" />

Like other items, it's a great "high-percentage" performer as long as one doesn't exceed the parameters that make it so...

First of all, most broadheads are an inch or more across. Second, they are designed to cut with as little resistance as possible, not expand. Third, we are not shooting elk with bows at 400 yards.

I have killed several elk with my bow, and they kill differently. They kill by cutting, not bruising and shock like a bullet. Bow kills are gruesome, blood everywhere, and a huge hole.

I don't know anything about paper energy, but what I do know is that a 300 Weatherby shooting a 200 gr. partition at 3,000 fps hits, no slams an elk much harder than a 308 shooting a 165 gr. bullet. There is no comparison, that comes from personal experience of hunting elk since 70'.

The the dude said " elk are not bullet proof". Well no duh, but
they can run with lead in them for a long ways on the second day of the season. Hunting in an area where there are lots of hunters and the elk get pushed hard, it's tough. I'll hedge the edge with a mag, more is better.

The only draw back on mag use is the meat damage, which is just proof of what is really going on inside the animal.

The meat cutter I use has dozens of broadheads stuck in the
central wood post of his shop. ALL recovered from rifle killed elk.

I call the Washington State Game bio's ever year to get feedback about hunting elk in a particular location. Every Bio'
I talk to ask me " what rifle are you using?" Every one of them tells me to be prepared to shoot past 400 yards and better use a magnum. Now I don't solicate their opinion, they just freely offer it as what they see as best medicine to the general public. I just agree with these guys that are in the field every day and see hundreds or the results of hundreds of elk killed.

Much of what has been described here comes under different headings. MD's initial post covered trajectory and only that (he made no mention of remaining energy or power by whatever calculation. I liked his post very much. I also liked his second post very much).

What is important in the long run is the personal optimizing of the variables so as to make a combination of them something as handy and ultimately useful for the purpose as a pocketknife or a plier always on your belt or in your pocket. Those "multi-good for darned near anything" utensils you'd be a fool to be without tend to be mighty attractive, but the proof is always in the performance.

A very interesting post. However, one thing that has not been discussed is that the .300 WM can be sighted in at 300 yards and still have a max height above the line of sight of 4" using a 168g Barnes TSX. Using the same bullet, the .308 would have to be sighted in at just under 250 yards to keep the max height around 4". With that in mind - the .300 WM will then hit 9.2" low at 400 yards compared to 19.1" low at 400 for the .308 Winchester. For me, that is a big difference but others may disagree.

A fine observation, Buzz. I wonder if anyone will take issue with it. <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/wink.gif" alt="" />

When you shoot at said critter that is 400 yds distant, you have to make a correction in order to hit it where you want to. If the hunter is properly skilled to be shooting at that range in the first place, the amount of the correction does not matter. It takes no more time or skill to correct for 19" of drop than it does for 9".

If the shooter does not have both the skill and technology to accurately determine the range, then he should not shoot beyond PBR. If he does have those skills or tools then as long as he knows his stuff, he can hit equally well with either example.

JimF

That's a very good point. But shouldn't we assume that different power levels at PBR might still be considered?

41:

Sure, there is of course no question that of the two examples, the 300 WM carries more of that "energy" stuff. But I wonder how much that matters?

One of our posters swears that a 300 WBY is dramatically more effective than a 308 and therefore he does not want to go back to std cartridges. I guess it depends upon ones definition of effective, but I have been down the magnum road too and generally I have not seen much difference. That (I think) was MD's point as well.

My definition of effective is as follows................Boom+Splat!! = dead critter.

I have reached the desired result with 300 Wby, 7 RM, &338 WM. I have also had the same results (dead critter) with 270W, 30-06, 7-08, 7x57, 25-06, 240 Roy, 6mm Rem, the Bob, and 284. I guess the animals killed with magnums may have been (more dead?) but it would be tough to verify.


JimF

JimF - I agree you DO have to make a correction and the question is at what point does it start to matter? 10" of difference in trajectory in the field is huge and is 2X the difference in the scenario I discribed. The smaller the adjustment that has to be made gives me more confidence in the field and IMO that confidence is worth consuming more powder and taking more recoil.

My use of hunting rifles at longer range (over 400 yards) is somewhat limited compared to some, but I have used both the .270 and the .300 WM to do the job far more often than once or twice with either cartridge. The game I hunted was either Whitetail or Mule Deer. The .270 did as well as the .300 in the way of killing the animal, but the edge clearly goes to the .300 with regard to damage -- it's a better long range bet more often than not, in my experience, even if the choice of bullets for either is comparable.

So maybe I'm saying when a .270 doesn't seem to be clearly enough, I'll maybe wonder if the .300 is justified -- the long and the short answers are: more than occasionally yes and on a few occasions no.

One simply can't replace power with wishes where power is needed -- that's a fact even with the fine and worthy .308 compared to a good .30 mag.

Buzz:

I practice shooting at a homemade gong at between 300-400 yds. I shoot prone over my backpack. My 338-08 (200's) and my 6.5x284 (129's) are dramatically different in drop at those ranges but there is no difference (to me) in the ease of hitting the gong.

However, there (IS) a decided difference in which one I'd rather shoot from that prone position.

JimF

So....are you saying that the deer you killed with the 270 were not as dead as the ones kilt with the 300???

Sorry, just couldn't resist............ <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/grin.gif" alt="" /> <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/grin.gif" alt="" /> <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/grin.gif" alt="" />

JimF

[quote
If a hunter can't shoot past 300 yards where I hunt elk he had better just stay home.

Jim, mighty hunter! lets see that ole' thutty thutty in action. <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/smile.gif" alt="" /> [/quote]


Many shooters I know can flat shoot at most any range you throw their way...400, 500, 800, 1000 yards. You name it. I think I can hang right in there with the above average shooters too. However, most hunters I hunt with firmly beleive in getting close, as close as possible. I lived in Nebraska and hunted coyotes, mule deer and whitetails on the prarie. I was always able to get close. Thinking back I killed only one buck past 200 yards. I took a number of deer in the prarie with a bow and I was introduced to muzzleloading my some friends who hunt with nothing else, yes, on the prarie. There is always a way to get close. I seldom seen it where one could not.

But that is just me. You shoot far shots if you want to. I am there to hunt. It is more important to me.

BTW, I killed a big cow elk @ 300 yards a couple years ago here in the Idaho Desert with my Win. m88 308 Winchester with a 150gr Hornady FB. The bullet penetrated the lung area completely and was not recovered. The cow (which was huge) went 30 yards max and fell over dead, which is probably what she would have done with the same shot from my 300 Weatherby.

PS, I have some loads for my m94 30-30 that will flat amaze you. You name the range as long as it is not past 1000 yards. I can hang them right in there. @ 300 yards, the thing acts more like a 308 or 30-06 than a 30-30.

CM

They were most certainly as dead. <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/grin.gif" alt="" />

The problem is the author's point seemed to be that the 308 is relatively equal to the 300 mag, and a lot of us think 7" is huge difference.

So not only is there a large difference in bullet drop in my opinion, the 300 has more energy too. So all around it is a better bet atleast in 30 caliber rounds. And a 300 win does not kick that bad especially compared to the Ultras etc.

Why is it that I sense ol' MD is sitting at his computer rollin' with laughter????

Oh well, I guess everything that can be said, has been, except to note that the info cited is a darn fine set of reasons why the .270 is STILL one of the finest "deer rifles" around. The recoil of the .308 with the trajectory of the .300. Not a bad combination, eh? Jack O'Connor may not have been what I thought he was, as a man, when I was younger, but he WAS right on the combination of traits that the .270 offers (or .280 or .284, etc.) makes it a VERY apt choice for a great percentage of us.

As a BPCR shooter, I can tell you that the biggest factor in placing a bullet where you want it to go is knowing the trajectory and the range. Given that, and knowing what your gun will do in the wind, there just isn't any significant difference in being able to hit a game animal at fairly long range. I'd also agree with MD's statement that the point of making that shot is to put a hole in the vitals, too. A bigger hole really isn't all that much "better" than a decent sized one, either, IF it's properly in the vitals.

Therefore, if you CAN hit (and you can) with either the .308 or the .300, AND either WILL kill a deer (and either will), then the point I think he intended to make is that maybe we make MORE of the differences than we really should, considering the realities of the pursuit.

Want to have some fun? If watermelons grow in your locale, find yourself a good field that's been picked over its final time. Set up with something in the .308 class and something in the magnum class of trajectory. If you don't own a magnum, a .270 or the equivalent will do. Now, pick out some long range melons, and don't use your laser rangefinder. Try shooting from sitting positions, like sitting with a sling, if any of you still do that sort of antiquated type of thing. See how much difference there really is afield without a rangefinder.

The mag. (or .270) WILL be a bit easier to hit with when you don't know the distance. It needs to be a big field, though, so you can keep changing directions so as to not use previous melons as your mental "rangefinder."

Now, go get the rangefinder, and have at it again. I assume (yeah, I know that's a dangerous thing to do, but ....) you DO know your trajectory, right? Now take your shots AFTER using the rangefinder. I don't think you'll find much difference in your hit rate out to 400 yds. or so.

When you KNOW the range, it's a simple matter compensate. Simple. Effective.

Yes, the .300's WILL usually (but not always - depends on the bullets you use) cause more damage, but unless you're talking about bigger herbivores, that doesn't make much difference unless you hit the "fringe areas" MD talked about a few issues back.

A lot more people ... and I mean a LOT ... use more gun than they can handle than there are those who don't use "enough." Using milder guns OFTEN (no, not always, just "often") allows a LOT of folks to HIT while using a magnum makes them flinch and miss, or worse, wound poorly.

These are matters that have been known among the pros since forever, and they aren't apt to change much, I think, either.

The magnums are fine for those who can handle them, and actually, I think most who can't handle a magnum (no, not all, but "most") probably don't shoot enough or know their rifles well enough to shoot past 200, much less 3 or 400. That's what I've observed.

A lot of underpaid, hard-working folks just don't have the time, money or inclination to put in the time it almost always takes to get really good with a rifle at distance, and giving them a magnum isn't going to cure much, and may well in fact make their shooting worse!

Magnums are for those who can handle and shoot them well, or even casually, without thinking a thing about the fact it's a magnum. As I've gotten older, and my neck and back injuries tend to get my attention more frequently, I find I like recoil less and less. My Whelen Ackley is about as much as I really want to sit down at the bench with and shoot a couple of boxes with. I can handle more, but not in volume, or at least I just don't DO it in volume. Getting older IS supposed to make one wiser, isn't it?

As to deer rifles - I'll let you guys with more experience discuss the elk question - even when my son's buddies got '06's and 7mm and .300 mags., they's STILL point at his little 6mm. Rem. and say, "Yeah, but if you want to see the killingest rifle here, pick up David's 6mm. over there!"

It really IS where you hit them, provided only (as MD said) penetration is sufficient. BTW, that deadly 6mm. never shot a deer with anything other than the 85 gr. Speer BTSP, and it worked at everything from 12 yds. to 350 and a bit, and that was two at 350, too.

As to MD's assertion of the penetration factor, I'll cite a buddy's experience. He shot a decent sized buck (@ 170-180 lbs.) at a mite over 300 once with his little 16" barreled .30/30 and a 150 gr. WW Silvertip. He shot that rifle nearly daily, and it had a peep sight on it. He's always been one to shoot for fun at what many others would call "rediculously long range." There was no wind, and the light was good, and all his instincts just told him to shoot, so that's what he did, and the shot was a good one. A heart shot, in fact, though he was aiming for the lungs. It was a broadside shot. The deer ran off about 30 yds. and piled up. On dressing it out, he found the bullet against the hide on the far side, and it hadn't expanded a great deal due to velocity loss. Those RN bullets DO shed velocity rapidly at distance. Yet, with minimal expansion, that bullet had dispatched his deer very neatly.

The point of that story is that, just as MD said, it IS penetration that matters most, IF you make a good, solid hit. A 190 or 200 gr. BTHP match bullet from a .300mag would probably have to be on the far side of 1,000 yds. to drop to the velocity of my buddy's 150 gr. .30/30 bullet, but with a heart shot, or a good, solid lung shot, the deer is yours if you can track a short distance.

Trajectory DOES make hitting at UNKNOWN ranges easier, and sometimes afield, you may not have TIME to lazer a shot, so all that ought to be factored in, of course. However, I can't help but wonder if just HAVING a magnum doesn't make at least some of us hunt differently, at least some of the time. Perhaps it's just human, and not always unreasonable, to change one's choice of tactics according to the rifle we carry? With all things human, sometimes this serves us well, and sometimes it just fools us into doing things that may NOT be to our advantage.

Most of the guys I know who kill the most deer use very standard calibers. A lot of them .30/30's. They hunt according to their and the rifle's capabilities, of course, but they ALSO hunt where the game will be. They know the land, the game, their rifle, and they're extraordinarily successful.

Maybe all this is a lot like that old carpenter's adage: "It ain't the tools, it's the workman?" But that doesn't sell guns and keep us happy, does it? <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/wink.gif" alt="" />

Oh well, I for one am GLAD they've got magnums, short magnums, super short magnums, and whatever else they come up with next. It gives me stuff to read about and querry folks about, and new reasons to do autopsies, and all that keeps me out'a trouble, so I guess I really ought to thank all the hard working folks that provide us with the best guns, powders, bullets and gear mankind has ever known. I don't think my wife is going to bail me out'a jail many more times anyway, so ..... "THANKS!" to any of you who work in the fields of making this stuff, writing about it, and otherwise keeping me busy and out'a trouble. You just don't know how valuable a service you provide! <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/grin.gif" alt="" />

I'm no Camp Perry shooter, so it does take more of both. Judging 9", as in "aim at the hairline and it'll hit mid- to lower third- chest", is much easier than a 19" "wave it around in the air above and pray". I'm all for a long point-blank range (although not at the expense of toting and resisting a SooperBoomer).

My everyday deer gun is a Mod 7 7-08 with a 20" barrel but once again I'll be taking my 22" M7 300 SAUM out to the sage flats this year. Last year I jumped the biggest buck I'd seen all week. He and his buddies ran over the narrow mesa and then along the base of the rimrock (the young bull elk with them ran another direction). I got to the edge and saw them stop at the corner of the rimrock for a last look back, and was able to quickly aim at hairline, rather than spend time calculating and estimating, and drop him. The trajectory and the 350-yd energy gave me full confidence, confidence I'd not have in the very worthy 7-08.

You say you did not take time to estimate the range or calculate the drop. You just held on the backline and shot.

I don't think so............I think your mental computer took over.

Didn't you mentally compute in the proverbial blink and say "OK, about 350 thats 10" of drop, I'll hold on the backline annnnnnd...........bang!

You could just as easily, in the same blink said "OK, about 350 that's 20" of drop, I'll hold half a body over the backline annnnnnnd........bang!

Either way, it takes the same time and the same skill and would produce the same result. It would have taken far longer to assume the proper shooting position (as I'm sure you did) for that distance than it would to do this instant calculation.

There is another unlikely possibility of course, and that is a blind azz guess. No calcs, no thought, just guesswork. If that was the case, then you got lucky and the magnum might have helped and it also might not have. Of course, that is not real responsible shooting and I'm certain that it is not the case here.

JimF

Sorry for being unclear. "Calculating and estimating" referred to airspace between crosshair and animal, not distance of shot. I had wasted a precious second zapping the distance (I know my [dis]ability in that arena too well).
I spent some time with 10x16" plates from 300-550 yds this Spring and have found that the greater the hold-over needed, the harder it is to estimate that amount correctly and consistently (even with a personal ballistic table at hand and the distance known).
You bet my abacus beads were clacking furiously.
I strongly disagree that figuring and holding "half a body" over is as quick and easy as with lesser amounts. (Granted, I could be unnaturally handicapped in that ability, but I don't think so.)

(BTW, prone over the daypack. And I've got a few friends who can testify that I can 'assume the position' pretty quickly.)

Somebody way back in this thread asked why I was going to use a .300 Weatherby on my Colorado elk hunt.

The answer to the question: Because Weatherby invited me on the hunt, and the rifle model we decided to use (the new Vanguard Sub-MOA) does not come in .270 Weatherby, which would have been my first choice. So I decided on the .300 instead.

It appears that this thread has once again come down to a shouting match between the non-magnums and the magnums. My original point was to show that there isn't as much difference between the trajectory of the two as many of us would like the believe. Before my "experiment" (I already know about what the results would be, having done essentially the same shooting before with various cartridges) several of the boys guessed that the .300 would shoot at least a foot higher.

Whether 7" is or is not a lot is beside the point. The point is that it wasn't nearly as much as most people think.

I use both magnums and non-magnums a lot. As mentioned earlier, I own three .300 magnum rifles myself, and have used them all. Apparently I am not particularly recoil sensitive, as even a .458 Lott doesn't both me much. (A .505 Gibbs starts to, especially in a 9-pound rifle.)

It makes sense to use as much rifle as you can truly handle. A lot of people can't shoot a .300 magnum of any sort. However, to claim that a .308 or .30-06 is inadequate or simply not in the same league as, say, a .300 WSM or .300 Winchester Magnum (which in factory loads are esentially the same thing) at normal hunting ranges indicates to me that the writer lacks experience. If you hunt enough with any of them, and can shoot reasonably well, then you would know differently.

Oh, and my last elk was killed with the .300 Winchester Magnum, using 200-grain Nosler Partitions handloaded to about 2950 from the 25-inch barrel of my custom Sisk rifle. The bull was an average sort of 6x6, taken at the vast range of 75 yards. He was quartering slightly toward me, and the bullet broke the near shoulder and went on through the top of the heart and both lungs--and out the other side. He still ran about 35 yards before stopping, still standing, though weaving. So I shot him again.

Would a .338 have done it quicker? Would a .308 have "failed"? My experience makes me doubt it. I have used the same bullet from the .30-06 for the majority of my elk, and results have been similar. Still haven't recovered one of those 200-grain Partitions, either.

Oh, and one more, for the guy who likes a .300 magnum because nilgai are so tough, and supposedly often "have" to be shot in the butt: I have shot end-to-end through a bull nilgai, though from the other end--with a .270 WSM and a 140-grain Fail Safe.

MD

MD,

I don't see any shouting match, just good, fun debate.

You started it! <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/grin.gif" alt="" />

I'll bet MD IS laughing over this discussion, or at least waiting to make some solid counterpoints.

All of what I'm about to say only represents my personal opinion, so take it for what it's worth, but when you compare cartridges of the same bore diameter, it's easy enough to come up with evidence that'll prove almost any point that you'd care to make. Lawyers do it all the time in court, and gunwriters have done very well following this practice for decades. This is what fuels the market and fuels the entire industry. It's good business and a lot of fun any way you care to look at it.

I started out with the 30-06 in 1972 at age fifteen. I still have my original rifle, a Model 700 ADL which I purchased with money I earned myself on the farm I grew up on, in my collection to this day. I've always had uncommonly good luck with the 30-06 in terms of accuracy, shootability, and good, solid performance on game from blacktails to elk. It's a great cartridge, no question about it, and still probably the most practical general-use hunting cartridge in the world for most hunters.

For some reason, every 308 Win. I've ever owned has been a dog -- don't ask me why..........

When I really started hunting in earnest with the 300 Win. Mag. in 1994, I sort of did so by accident. The previous year, I'd ordered a rifle from a custom gunbuilder I met at SCI, and when he asked me what cartridge, I said 300 Win. Mag., sort of as an afterthought.

But it sure turned out to be a great choice, and as time went on, it was pretty clear that the 300 Win. ironed stuff out more convincingly than the '06. It shot demonstrably flatter, brought animals down faster, and has been the most effective general purpose cartridge I've ever used. From Alaska to Tanzania, and from B.C. to Mexico, on all sizes of game from sheep to Coues deer to elk and moose, plus all manner of African game from lion to eland, it's done the job better than 'well', and quite honestly, I find simplifications comparing it to cartridges like the 308 to be just that -- simplifications that don't come close at all to telling the complete story.

It's true that at known ranges and with ample time, a good rifleman can largely compensate for differences in bullet drop. But I've found that ranges are often long and uncertain, sometimes the exact wind speed is uncertain, and sometimes it's a matter of shoot RIGHT NOW, within the next few seconds, from a hastily-assumed rest, or else forgo the opportunity. You don't always have time to get the rangfinder out and use it, and sometimes conditions are such that rangefinders just don't work.

So........that mere 7" difference in drop in favor of the 300 Win. has come in quite handy more than once, particularly on Coues deer and stuff like Vaal rehbok at long range, and the extra energy it's delivered hasn't exactly been wasted either, particularly on the some of the tougher animals like elk, moose, eland, gemsbok, and zebra that I've taken at long range.

The extra energy hasn't hurt anything up close either, not so as I have been able to determine..........

AD

When I re-read my post earlier it did seem to bash the 300 mags a bit. I want to come back and say that wasn't my intention. My intentions were to point out the fact that the benefits of trajectory and energy of the .300 mags aren't typically utitlized where I hunt. I hunt with one gent in WV that uses a 300 Win. mag every year with great success. Although I have jokingly pointed out that it's a bit much for 75-100 yard deer kills which is probably average for where we hunt. I don't have anything against magnum( used a .44 MAGNUM revolver last year to take a deer) but then again, I don't get long shots. A 200 yard shot where I typically hunt is pretty far, so you can see where I'm coming from. In addition, if I were to use a magnum and have to take a beating, I figure that I might as well move up in bore size to, like the .338 Win. mag or the like. I don't shoot far with standard cartridges because I A)don't have access to a range much over 200 yards, B) don't have to worrry about taking shots much longer than I practice, and C) don't really care to. However, I do realize that other people's hunting evironment could be very different and the benefits of a flatter shooting rifle would help them.

Some miscellaneous comments for MD:
As Saint Elmer Keith once pointed out, when the Navy wanted to shoot something at long range, they went to a heavier gun--16-inchers instead of 12-inchers. Same velocity, but the heavier shells carried further.

Last year in Alaska, I shot a caribou with a 140-grain Fail Safe from a .270 WSM at 200 yards. The next day a friend had the same shot at the same range at the same-sized animal with a .338 WM and 210-grain Nosler Partitiions. The F-S badly outpenetrated the Nosler.

Finally, an old Russian proverb: "He who would speak the truth should have one foot in the stirrups."

MD:

Thanx for reminding us again that practice, not purchasing power, makes perfect.

BMT

This is an interesting thread. MD, thanks for the post. I got it!!
I'm in the stage of life where I don't enjoy shooting big stuff anymore. I'm perfectly willing to learn the trajectory of my favorite 7x57, and shoot accordingly. I have the trajectory firmly in mind.
I do know one thing, that is the 308 is VERY accurate as a cartridge. And, after shooting 300 Winchester Magnums from the bench, years ago, I know I can shoot the 308 far better today, more accurately, than any of the 30 caliber magnums. This is not to diminish people who can shoot magnums well. It's about me, and what I can shoot best at my age. I can flinch in a heartbeat with one of those big boomers, where I rarely flinch with my 7x57. In fact I can't remember flinching with mine. Yes, I have a mental block against the big guns. If I didn't have a thing about 7x57's, I hunt with a 308. They are very accurate. And, bullet selection is as good as it gets.
So much from the geriatric society.. <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/grin.gif" alt="" />
Don

MD, it's your post so you have the right to assign the point you want to make, but it might have helped if you'd stated it from the get-go.
Pointing out that "most people" don't have accurate ideas about various trajectories is fine, but also true about their ideas about such things as the number of calories in a Big Mac. And a close figure for either can be easily looked up, in any manual for the one or on the wall of a McDonalds for the other.
What did you hope to accomplish by pointing out our ignorance?

(I don't really mean to sound snooty)

Why do we shoot any magnum rifle, .300, .338, .375 or whatever? Because we enjoy it. Modern hunting is not about subsistance, we don't go out and kill meat to avoid hunger. It's a hobby for entertainment purposes. Any cartridge from the .243 Win. to a .700 Nitro Express will kill most all North American game animals deader than the proverbial hammer at ranges up to 300 yards. Very few prey would actually REQUIRE brute force big bores. But if one has a fancy to shoot such a weapon, and can bear the recoil and blast, I see nothing wrong with letting it fly. Otherwise, no high velocity heavy hitters are really needed. As others said, the old .30-30 is plenty adequate for deer sized game up to 200 yards or so. There is no real NEED to shoot greater, so why even use a .308 or .30-06? Surely, that 400 fps greater speed must mean something, as these two cartridges are held in much higher regard, and used at MUCH longer ranges. Why shouldn't the .300 Winchester magnum, for example, be considered a step up from the .308/.30-06 class rounds? It's approximately 400 fps faster than those rounds, and if 400 fps faster makes this class of cartridge so much better than the .30-30/.32 Special/.35 Remington category, then it's only logical to believe that the .300 mag class cartridges are that much "more" in every aspect than the .308/.30-06 class. They do kill better, at longer ranges than lesser rounds. Do you need them? I don't know, and don't care. Shoot what you enjoy the most, because if you're not enjoying yourself, there's no point in the hunt. Meat can be gotten at the air conditioned supermarket without climbing tree stands and hills, trudging over mountains, wading rivers, braving cold winter air and winds, etc. Gun and cartridge makers would be out of business left and right if we just bought what we needed instead of what we like and enjoy. Nobody really needs a Lazzeroni, Jarret, Rem. Ultramag, Weatherby, or any of a passle of "magnums", but if the recoil and blast aren't a bother, knock yourself out. If not enjoyable, get the lighter cartridges, and go out and enjoy your hobby.

The bow is as irrelevant to this discussion as a spear is. Energy/velocity is a relevant factor when comparing bullets of equal caliber, weight, and expansion characteristics. If you don't believe this try "throwing" a bullet into animal vs. shooting one.



Possibly not that you are willing to comprehend. More velocity with the same bullet equals less drop, less drift, and better expansion at 400 yards. Its pretty hard to argue against mathematics. If you are satisfied with standard performance that is fine, but some us like more at times.




Why not the 30-30 then, and keep it within a 150 yards?
A person could just as well say that if you cannot use a modern centerfire bolt action rifle to its fullest potential why not use a muzzleloader or bow? A person can often more easily miss a 100 yard freehand shot as fully rested 400 yard shot. Further it is never wise to judge another by your own abilities/inabilities. The consumate hunter can both stalk or shoot at extended ranges. I have used a 300 win. for both, and am not handicapped on either end with the appropriate projectiles. Some want the edge and others are happy with mediocrity.



The outset of this thread is about 400 yard ballistics between a 308 and a 300 win. Those ballistics remain the same whether the target is man or beast, so the references apply. Your point does illustrate the fact that while a 308 may be sufficient to "wound" a man at 400 yards, it may not be the best choice to "kill" some species of big game at those ranges -- hence the preference for a 300 win. mag.



The 7" difference can be significant if the exact range is unknown, and the accompanying energy differences can make a difference in bullet performance. Now that is elementary ballistical application which makes sense to most riflemen.



The same could be said for any cartridge housed in any "cool looking" rifle which goes "bang." This is simply the facts being related to the "magnum challenged hunters."



The lethality of the 30-06 is not in question at all, only the differences between standard and magnum cartridges, whether those differences are real are perceived. Mathematics tables indicate they are real, as well as many well-traveled hunters who prefer the magums over the standards. There is no person who is the singular authority on this subject.



No one is disputing the lethality of the "oldies" for at one time they were the new "whiz bangs" that the codgers then looked upon with distrust; but time has proven that technology can make real advances, or we would still be using the 45-70. Ol' Elmer didn't have much for the -06.



...so then why not limit yourself to it???? If you can't stalk within 150 yards you might as well stay home. <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/wink.gif" alt="" />

As a Doc I have seen my share of GSW's and Mule Deer has it right. A hole in the pump house shuts down the system. Thats really all there is too it. High velocity does more tissue damage but dead is dead. The Inuit's use 22's to kill Cow Boo's. Magnum manhood is something else.
-Doc-

Yup, a 22 rimfire is all thats needed ... everything else is overkill ... or centerfire ego ... <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/grin.gif" alt="" />

Here's my take and of course, it's worth exactly what you paid <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/wink.gif" alt="" />:

If an animal is within 300 yards, I don't want to have to think about hold over or almost ANYTHING, 'cus there is a reasonable chance in open country that "stuff" is happening when you're in that proximity. So, I sight in such that PBR allows for a bit of the jitter but allows me to KNOW that I can stick the crosshairs where I want them to go and pull the trigger. If I hit a muley a few inches high or low or left or right, it isn't going to matter much.

If the critter is much over 300, then I also KNOW that I need some time to set up the shot. Turrets are a wonderful invention and if you practice enough, you can be comfortable out to ??? yards. For me, that number depends a bit. I know it sounds bad, but if I'm out to simply put a cow elk in the freezer I don't mind setting up and knocking her down from 500 yards. For whatever reason, I'd rather "hunt" a bull or buck and 500 yards isn't my limit there. Go figure, we're complex animals! <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/smile.gif" alt="" />

In the latter case, a rangefinder is indispensible and with a good accurate rifle, you can lob one in there. Since I know a 308 in the right spot with the right bullet is no issue at 500 yards, then this isn't an issue for me. If my range were 700 or 900 or ??? then at some point, energy down the trail is going to catch up to me.

Back to the former situation, if my PBR out to 300 isn't what I want it to be, then I may have to "think" about a 250 yard shot and I don't want to have to do that. Now, "what you want it to be" comes into play. What is reasonable? 9" certainly isn't in my book, even if it is in someone elses. 5-6" gives me more confidence, right or wrong. Now, we all know bullet and placement is most important, but so is confidence. I LIKE knowing I don't have to hold over or under out to a certain range and IF I can handle a super-duper-bitchin' magnum and it gives me this confidence? Why not? Actually, we all know it doesn't take the super-duper-bitchin' magnum (SDBM) to do what I need, just a plain ordinary short mag works fine for me (grin).

Of course, I have that SDBM in the case just in case the situation calls for it, but after learning to shoot that &*(#, a 300 shamu seems like a pussy cat, so once again, why the heck not?

Another thought (disclaimer, this comes from a guy with a mathematics degree): at some point, on some shot, there is a margin of error with one that is compensated for with the other. Maybe that's 7" at 400 yards or X foot pounds at 500 yards or ???

At some point, it will mean the difference between a harvest and a lost animal. If everyone did nothing but shoot their elk in the heart, it would be a non-issue, but "somewhere" it DOES make the difference.

I don't believe in overdoing it, but I also believe in stacking those extra 1% odds in my favor. <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/grin.gif" alt="" />

Hey, I had a super-duper bitchin(as in all the time) ex wife once, I didn't know they made them in guns too. <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/grin.gif" alt="" /> Steve

Lordy......
I HAD one of them also..... <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/blush.gif" alt="" />
What a super dooper BITCHIN woman!!!!
<img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/grin.gif" alt="" />
Everybody should have an EX wife!
Virgil B.

Just wanted to add, I've got a 338, and a 35 Whelen for when the 308 isn't Enough.....

What I find interesting is your mention of group size. Do folks really think that moa group they get off the bench will stay that size at 400 yds, and how many can say with a straight face they can hold 7 inches of drop difference at that distance from feild positions in relatively foreign territory. It's one thing to be able to pull of that kind of shot from your home or club range , but then if you gut shoot or blow the hind leg of a metal gong it's really no big deal, but when it happens on live game it can turn into a train wreck in a hurry.

SU35; Would you mind shooting a 10 shot group for us at 400 measured yards from the kneeling position using your elk rifle and hunting loads ?

I'd love to see what you come up with...............probably better use pretty big paper, 'cause we want to see 10 holes, and if you're honest you'll only fire 10 rounds...............

I don't think you can put 10 out of 10 into a 12" circle at 400 yds from kneeling......................with or without wind.

I'm assuming he could have improved the groups had he tried to compensate for the wind, had a steadier rest, etc. But you're right, those certainly aren't acceptable. The horizontal stringing really should drive home the point that wind is your biggest enemy at that distance. Heavier, higher BC bullets would have helped both rounds significantly.

As far as folks being incorrect to think they can shoot MOA groups at 400 yds, they're only incorrect if they don't go out and do it. On a board with so many "one-holer" and "cloverleafing" custom rifles, I certainly hope there are more than a few here that don't think that's any great feat if the conditions are halfway decent. The very best (MOA-wise) groups from my 300 have all come from 300-600 yds. Of course I don't evaluate accuracy (or do much shooting at all with it) at 100 yds anymore. 5 MOA will kill any big game animal at 100 yds rather easily. I test accuracy out where it's needed.

And compensating for the drop of even the 308 at 400 is no trick for anybody practiced with his chosen method (click, lines/dots in the scope) at that range and shooting from a position he ought to be shooting from at that range.

It's not that the 300 Win is so much better than the 308, it's really that the shooters of the 300 Win are so much better people than the shooters of the 308............. <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/grin.gif" alt="" />

Using my 338 with full house loads, I don't think I could put 10 shots into a 12" circle at 400 yards either, I have to wonder if David Tubb could pull that one off.

In real life I wouldnt need to as an elks vital kill zone is more like 18" if not just a tad more than that and neck shots count
as well. I don't normally practice shoot for group in a hunting situation, makes no sense. But, just for you and your gravel belly mentality, I'll give it a go with an archery elk target set up at 400 yards. I'll shoot for the kill zone and see what transpires.

I'll report back one week from tomorrow, with pics.





And btw, you don't have to question my honesty... <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/wink.gif" alt="" />
I'll try and get a member from here to be present just so you dont have any doubts.

I have done a lot of testing of various loads at longer ranges, finding (like most who do much of that) that there is often little correlation between 100-yard group size and groups at 300-500 yards.

Have also found that heavier, higher BC bullets don't make as much difference in the wind as many would like to believe. Just about any spitzer hunting bullet can easily be blown a foot off course at 400 yards by what most shooters would term a moderate breeze. In a REAL wind, two feet or more is more like it.

The experiment was made with 165's as a compromise between 150's and 180's, which are probably the bullet weights most people would choose for longer-range shooting in the .308 and .300 respectively. The reality is that there also isn't a hell of a lot of difference in trajectory between most spitzers at normal hunting ranges, which for the purposes of this discussion we'll put at anything out to 400 yards. Shoot any spitzer from 150 to 200 grains out of either a .308 WCF or .300 Winchester Magnum at maximum velocity, sight them in 2" high at 100, and the difference in trajectory at 400 between the 150 and 200 will be even less than it was between the two cartridges, on the order of 4-5 inches.

Muzzle velocity is the major component in trajectory at normal hunting ranges. If we'd shot 150's out of the .308 and 180's out of the .300, the difference in trajectory would have been more like 4-5 inches, not 7.

Muley Stalker's point about rangefinders and turrets is an excellent one. At any range beyond our PBR we need to KNOW the range--and it is far easier to hit something way out there if we can place the reticle ON it, rather than some distance ABOVE it.

We can obtain the range from a laser or by using our scope's reticle as a rangefinder, and aim either with the help of turrets or a multi-point reticle. Either is far more effective than guessing the range and holding somewhere above the intended target.

In another part of the Sisk Rifle Invitational, we shot a 10-round course, starting with offhand game silhouettes at 30-90 yards, ending with a gong about the size of a small deer's chest at 400 from prone. We could use any rifle in the extensive lineup available, and I chose the .308. If I recall correctly, I was one of only two shooters out of about 15 who hit the 400-yard gong. This was partly because the .308 was equipped with one of Kahles's new scopes with the adjustable turret that can be set for various ranges. All I had to do was twirl the knob to 400 and hold right on. Most of the other shooters chose to hold high, and at least half shot magnums of various sorts.

Elmer Keith liked to say a hit is history and a miss is mystery. I would amend that to say that a hit is a LOT easier if we can simply aim at where we intend to hit. Sometimes magnums help us do that, at least to a slightly longer range. But at some point every cartridge's bullet needs a little help in hitting a distant target.

MD

Macrabbit--

Sorry I missed your post earlier. I did the demonstration (which turned out exactly as the Hornady ballistics tables predicted) because most people don't bother with looking stuff up and figuring it out. If they do bother to look it up, many still don't believe it. They need a real-life demonstration of exactly what happens.

This was a major point of the Sisk event. We got to see, in action, just what the difference was between a .308's and a .300 magnum's trajectory. We got to shoot a practical hunting-target course, from practical field positions, at the vital areas of paper animals, rather than punch holes in tiny circles while shooting off the bench.

To everybody else, and once again, I am not bashing the .300 magnums. As stated above, I own several and use them regularly--as well as other magnums in calibers up to .416. I am merely pointing out that there isn't as much difference in practical trajetory as most people would like to believe.

I would also argue that there isn't nearly as much difference in "killing power" between a well-placed shot from a .308 (or 7x57, or any similar cartridge) and any of the .300 magnums as many magnum fans would like to believe. I have shot quite a few animals with various rounds, and seen almost as many more shot by other people. If you hit the right place, most big game animals go less than 50 yards before piling up, whether they were hit by a .308 or a .338. Very few drop instantly from a typical chest shot unless the spine was also hit. Likewise, I have found the notion that magnums somehow make up for marginal hits a myth.

To me, the various magnums either make long-range hitting a little easier (as in the 7mm's and .300's) or, in their more moderate-velocity manifestations such as the .338 Winchester and .375 H&H, penetrate better through heavy bone and bigger bodies.

But a sufficient hole through the heart and lungs is a sufficent hole, whether made with a 7x57 or .375. I have shot enough game from pronghorn and springbok to Alaskan moose and eland with a .338 or .375 to know the big guns do not kill the smaller stuff any better than a 7x57, and at most make a slight difference on the bigger stuff, assuming a solid heart-lung shot.

The bigger rounds do make it possible to make that solid hit from more angles, but today's wonder-bullets have diminished even that advantage. Many of today's 140-grain bullets will penetrate a 700-pound animal's shoulder and go on through the chest, or penetrate the same chest from any sane angle. I know this because I have seen it, and not just once but quite a few times.

Humans somehow like to make vast distinctions between things that are actually different only in degrees, such as Magnums and Non-Magnums, German Optics and Everything Else, Barnes X's and Not-Quite-So-Premium Bullets. The truth is that all of these things are relatively minor variations on the same theme.

MD

"The truth is that all of these things are relatively minor variations on the same theme."

In case anyone is wondering, Mule Deer is NOT applying for the position of Marketing Director at any of the ammunition component or rifle manufacturing factories. <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/wink.gif" alt="" />



This thread made me look up the trajectory of a 7mm 175 grain Partition at 2500 fps when sighted in at 200 yards (still playing around with my new #1A in 7X57).

Ya know, there really isn't that much difference between that 175 grainer at 2500 fps muzzle velocity and a 180 grain .30 caliber at 2800. Maybe 2 inches at 300 yards, about 5 inches at 400.

Not that I'm going to start long range prairie dog hunting with a 175 gr. 7mm at 2500, but since the longest shot I've ever taken on game was about 300 long steps, within that distance it really doesn't matter all that much what you use.

Now if I was going to make a practice of shooting at 400 yards or beyond, yeah, I'd get me a nice 7mm Rem. Magnum which is pretty easy to shoot and is flat flat flat.

But all in all, the only thing that really matters is that you hit'em where it hurts'em.

Kripes now you guys have really gone and done it dragging ballistics tables and such into the discussion. <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/grin.gif" alt="" /> Not to mention practical experience, sheesh.

SU35 and others

FWIW Having had the pleasure to have fired on the same ranges as David has a number of times(and managing to beat him once on top of that) I can attest that yes David could pull this off. Probably rather easily.

As to the fact of firing 10 rounds at 400 kneeling, I'd suspect that most of us with any sense would not be firing from the kneeling position at that range. Sitting would be much more stable. Personally I don't see a problem with a 12inch group at 400 but I suck at kneeling and though I'm sure I could manage it, it may well take me 15 minutes to break 10 solid shots.

A shot a 400 from prone off a backpack etc.... is a chip shot.

And for those that don't think you can hold still, I held on a white patch of hair on a 'bou at just over 800 one time and favored elevation the second shot. Upon examination the spot I was using as reference was appx 5 inch spot. Of course I can back this up having tested my hold prone with a sling and iron sights as basically being a .5 moa hold area as shown by an electronic training device(Rikka). Add a scope and backpack to rest over and I'm sure its even smaller.

Jeff

This .308 versus the .300 Magnum at 400 yards thread is a good thing.

I was getting tired of the old .270 vs. .30-06 wars, now we have something new to quibble about. <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/wink.gif" alt="" />

Hey, can we start the .257 Bob v. the .25-06 v. the .257 Roy next?

Thats true. At least the food fight has moved into the Jonathan versus Red Delicous apples category.

I probably missed my chance at replying to the correct guy, but the discussion was about holding MOA being hard to do. That makes sense to me. I can shoot better groups with my hunting rifle with it's 3.5x10 or 2.5x8 scope at 100 or 200 than I can at 400 because it's easier to discern that my point of aim is the same for each shot. When looking at a 100 yard target at 6 power you would need the equivalent of 24x at 400 yards to see your bullseye the same. At 400 yards with a 6x scope who knows of you are holding at exactly the same point +/- 1 inch or L/R, while at 100 yards it's much easier.
Wouldn't this explain the gun that won't hold MOA as the distance gets longer and longer. We have a 500 metre gong that is 24" across and the only gun I can hit it with is a fluke, it has a 4a reticle and it just happens the bottm post is the correct hold. To consistently make shots beyond 350 yards I must adjust the turrets on my scope as I can't adjust my hold consisitently enough.

All that being said great thread, interesting to see these. I find these threads get way more action as hunting season approaches.

Holding MOA is the result of practice in consistent sight picture.

I recently shot a 5/8 inch 5 shot group off bags with a friend's M1A which I was sighting in (aperture GI sights). How good is the rifle? Probably not 1 MOA, but proper sight picture and repeatable technique can get all the rifle has in it, and maybe more.

Shooting 300-400 yards in the field without a bench when you are probaly huffin and puffin with all your geer on and the sun and wind doesn't favor you,is iffy.Everything has to be right for that long of a shot in the field.Most of the time it isn't but there are those times and thats where the heavier bullet and dose of energy shine,from just being off a tad..All the difference in an instant or prolonged kill and the bigger and faster bullets prevail in that situation..Period!!!

Shooting paper is one thing but shooting a big ole bull at 400 yards without the broadside,you need all the advantage you can get.

Just my 2 cents around the fire.

Jayco

"Shooting 300-400 yards in the field without a bench when you are probaly huffin and puffin with all your geer on and the sun and wind doesn't favor you,is iffy.Everything has to be right for that long of a shot in the field.Most of the time it isn't but there are those times and thats where the heavier bullet and dose of energy shine,from just being off a tad..All the difference in an instant or prolonged kill and the bigger and faster bullets prevail in that situation..Period!!!

Shooting paper is one thing but shooting a big ole bull at 400 yards without the broadside,you need all the advantage you can get."


That man has been elk hunting in Rockies! Spot on Jayco.

Dang it anyway ... I was getting all worked up to aggravate you even further, MD, but then I read your last post and decided to make Klub instead. Being a Norske, what's your recipe?

I used to be a probation officer, and had fairly frequent opportunities to sit around the witness rooms with game wardens and others. Ask them, and they'll tell you the same thing MD did about what it takes to kill an animal. One of the fairly surprising things they'll tell you is the lethality of the lowly .22 LR on deer. Placed right, they kill a LOT more quickly than most would believe. No, I don't hunt with a .22 LR, and actually prefer something in the 6mm to .30 caliber non magnums, with the .270 probably being my favorite with 22" or longer barrels, and the .308 in shorter barrels. Even so, there's just no denying just how LITTLE it takes to kill an animal with a well placed shot, and believe me, some of the night hunters CAN place their shots pretty darn well, too! I've talked with some of them, and know their reputations with a gun.

As the doc posted, and MD said, damage the vitals good and proper and you've got meat, and what it takes to do that isn't as much as we like to think. After all, it spoils those plans for that new rifle, and far be it from me to stop ANYONE from getting and enjoying a new rifle in ANY caliber!

Many of us are too darn busy, and it's tough enough to make time to hunt, much less anything else, but if we took the time to do all our own field dressing, autopsying and butchering, I think many of us would wind up realizing a lot of things, one of which is it really IS where you hit them MUCH more than what you hit them with, and that the primary requisite in ANY caliber is using a bullet that's appropriate to the game so that you get adequate penetration for the game sought and the angle the shot is taken from. MD said that first, I think, and I'll second that motion any day.

The effect of velocity of about 3,000 fps or more CAN have an amazingly effective impact on how the game acts, too, but let's not get into that now. This thread's too much fun as it is now. <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/wink.gif" alt="" />

I am only 1/4 Norske (the name part) so don't have too many real Norwegian recipes. Am real good at slapping a chunk of red meat on the barbecue. (They do that in Norway too, though they tend to salt the hell out of it first.)

I hunted and fished over there 9 years ago, spending about 10 days in various parts of the country, and learned that real Norwegian cuisine has some interesting variations. Most I liked, but some might take a little getting used to--fried whale steak and onions, for instance. Did enjoy the potato salad made with whipped cream instead of mayo though.

MD

I haven't been to the 'Std vs Mgm' thread to which MD referred, so maybe this is redundant. But how about doing without marketers' terms and just looking at the cartridge continuum.
You're right, MD, that some folks need to learn or be reminded of facts or to have their misconceptions and assumptions corrected.
Just for fun I ran a comparison of 30 calibers. My Nosler manual was almost perfect for the job, as most of their figures were done with 24-inch barrels. I had to do without the .300 Wby, Dakota, and WSM because they were done with 26" barrels.
I used the 165-gr Partition and went with the approximate maximum velocity listed.

The table below shows:
Muzzle velocity;
Muzzle energy;
Recoil with an 8# rifle;
Maximum Point Blank Range based on +/- 3.5";
Drop at 400 yards for-
. No elevation (absolute drop),
. Sighted in 2" high at 100 yds,
. Sighted in for that 3.5" MPBR;
Distance at which energy drops below 1500 f-p;
Distance at which velocity drops below 1500 fps.
(I meant to put in action length but forgot).

So, don't argue one over another; just balance the plusses and minuses for what you want it to do, and go buy your dream rifle. What importance you put on each factor is your choice (and fodder for the Campfire).



Forgive me if you find an error; this was laborious the way I had to do it.
Don't quibble about what velocities you can load to, etc. As a guide, this should work.

A quarter Norske is more than ample, MD -- don't worry a bit. What's this about you having a gourmet cook wife? It's okay with me if she isn't even one little bit Norske, but in my experience it's best to know before I send out the recipe. Klub is fair game for anyone, but you really should start from some kind of base, not that a bunch of spuds, flour and butter won't cover some of the concerns.

There's no subsitute for more practice/better shooting. IMO, no matter what cartridge you use, you're only justified in using it if you shoot enough to become proficient at the ranges you hunt and are willing to except what the bullet is capable of doing at whatever those ranges are.


As far as bow kills go - I guess beauty is in the eye of the beholder!!! <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/cool.gif" alt="" />

Much the same arguement could be made for a less accurate rifle against a more accurate rifle. When ranges are close enough and conditions are good enough, you can kill anything you want with either one rather easily. When ranges are long enough and conditions poor enough, you're SOL with either one. So the more accurate rifle has no advantage?

Well, there's a whole bunch of grey area in between. In this context that grey area stretches from the point groups start to slightly string horizontally due to wind to the point you can't consistantly hit the target. That's a BIG grey area. And that's where you'll enjoy the advantage.

That's where I do most of my practicing--because it's fun. It's challenging. It makes me better--and I do need to get better! I likely always will.

At any given range out there, there's a point where the wind strings my groups. At any given wind, there's a range at which my groups string noticably. This comes from my errors in wind doping one way, then the other. I misjudge, my shot flies wide by a certain amount.

Within the context of this thread, one could come up with numerous bullet/cartridge combinations in which one drifts in the wind more than double the other.

That means at whatever range I'm at, whatever wind there is, whatever error I make, my bullet will fly wide by twice as far. So a 2" error one way and a 2" error the other way opens my group by 4". Turn that into 8" and a mediocre group on the target quickly becomes shots missing the target.

Of course that's an example of extremes but one can see how even a fraction of that difference can add up. When one spends enough time practicing in this grey area (which for me extends from about 200 yds to 600 or so depending upon conditions) and actually trying to shoot the best groups possible, just like the accurate/inaccurate rifle comparison--sooner or later one notices a trend. One is simply easier to shoot good groups with than the other. The same error with one results in a larger miss than the same error with another. Yes, when comparing loads that are pretty close the difference can get lost in the noise of really poor conditions especially if one doesn't do it often.

But the simple fact is using a load that drifts significantly more in the wind only means for the same wind doping ability, for the same wind, you need to get closer to shoot groups the same size. Or for the same range, there needs to be less wind.

If you're a mere mortal, you can't compensate for the wind perfectly every time like you can range. You will err. Magnifying that error, a little or a lot, doesn't help you hit where you're aiming.

It must be a writer thing..Rick Jaimeson did the same thing.All in a 24 inch barrel("That isn't the norm") the same 180 grain bullet and powder if could be.He loaded them as much as he could,the same.
Rick Jaimeson wrote:



Adding barrel length in the 308 and subtracting from a couple others makes them as close as they can be for the cartridge but there still is a difference.Whether one see's it's effect on game is in the eye of the beholder. <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/grin.gif" alt="" />Some say there is none and others say there is?

Jayco <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/confused.gif" alt="" />

THUNDERSTICK Wrote:
The 7" difference can be significant if the exact range is unknown, and the accompanying energy differences can make a difference in bullet performance. Now that is elementary ballistical application which makes sense to most riflemen.

If the exact range is unknown, you don't really have any business taking potshots at game animals at long range. And they would be potshots. If you guessed an animal was 400 yards and he was actually 460 yards then where would your favorite load strike the animal (if at all) in a 15-20 MPH crosswind? If you give me an informed answer I'll bet you have to look it up.

For the vast majority, shooting at game animals beyond 300 yards is serious business. Hunting at ranges beyond 400 yards is a specialized game tha requires specialized equipment and a skilled and practiced triggerman.

This has been an interesting thread to follow. There is a lot of passion shining through in these posts, and I wonder why threads like this are so quick to stir the soul.

I think Blackwater's marathon post was spot-on.