Hi Guys,
You guys have a vast amount of knowledge about the 99 and I know this has been asked before, but I wonder what is the best caliber for deer hunting? Recoil, Accuracy etc. Also what year did they stop making the rotating magazine. Thanks for your help as I am a novice willing to learn
It's kind of a personal opinion but I've always liked the 300 Sav myself.
I got this quote from a gentleman in his 90's: " boy, the 300(Savage) can kill more in North America than you can ". <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/wink.gif" alt="" />
Best in your quest .. BP...
If I could have only one DEER rifle, it would be a .300.
Another "vote" for the .300 Savage... very close to the same ballistics as the .308 Winchester.
Savage produced their last rotary magazine rifles (the 99E) in 1984. In 1985, only the Model 99C with a box magazine was offered in .243 and .308 Winchester. <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/frown.gif" alt="" />
Strength & Honor...
Ron T.
Ballistics good, less recoil and more accurate than .308 in my experience.
But, I jsut brought another .308 home to try it "one more time"
You didn't specify what you were hunting ......taking a guess and saying - Whitetail .......personally , I like the 300 Savage , but I will go out on a limb and also recommend the .243 or the 250 - 3000 Savage if you are recoil sensitive.....I have had wonderful outcomes with the 300 and the 243 with my 99's ( use Nosler Partitions in 243 ) ....just look in my freezer!! <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/grin.gif" alt="" />
300 Savage is super. There is minimal recoil on this rifle. Excellent accuracy out of mine.
In South Carolina, I'd look at a .250-3000 (if you could find one), .243, 7-08, or .308, or certainly a .284 (ha, ha, ha...)
That said, my personal favorite is, and will always be, the .300 Savage. It'll take just about anything, just about anywhere, and (again IMHO) is THE classic Savage cartridge.
I don't own a 99 but I would get the 300 Savage. I had a Remington 760 in this caliber. It was unbelievably accurate with very light recoil. I should have kept it, but oh well. The 300 Savage is one of the few catridges that I have never heard anyone badmouth.
Was just out shooting my EG in 300 Savage, and I'd vote for it for deer. Recoil is a LOT less than my E in 308, and is extremely accurate.
For antelope.. maybe the 243 or 250-3000 would be better.
For elk, maybe the 284 or the 308 would be more ideal.
But the 300 Savage is capable of doing all three just fine. Good all around caliber, and if you reload there's a lot of variety in there for you.
I've owned a lot of guns and calibers, but I still
got the first .300 Savage I ever bought!
Can't kill a deer any deader!
Jerry
Since your here I'd say your looken to hunt with the 99...therefore any caliber that came in the R or RS or EG or premil F. That said the only exception might be an EG in 22highpower...but if you found one I don.t think you'd want to drag it thru the woods.
What is the best? I`ll go against the grain and say my Savage (1960) 110 in .243.
My 99`s are great and i`m a proud owner but that model 110 is as good
as they come........IMO.
Actually, the .300 Savage can do it all, even though it's been around for over 85 years (introduced in 1920). It has taken and continues to take everything from antelope to elk or moose as long as the hunter places his/her shot well, uses a well-constructed bullet and works their way within a "reasonable" range.
So can the later Model 99's in .308 Winchester, but at the "expense" of a noticeably heavier recoil. The truth is... the .300 Savage cartridge can do anything the newer .308 Winchester cartridge can do... but with less recoil, especially if you are a handloader.
One of my old reloading manuals shows a fairly fast (also "MAXIMUM") load for the 130 grain bullet (so the loads should be fine for a 5 grain lighter bullet weighing 125 grains) consisting of 46.0 grains of IMR4320 (also listed as the "accuracy load") that yields a muzzle velocity of 2860 fps. This should make an excellent antelope load.
Naturally, the slightly lighter 125 grain Nosler Ballistic Tip Bullet should normally have a slightly greater muzzle velocity than the velocity listed for the 130 grain bullet.
The book also shows two other MAXIMUM loads that put out a 130 gain bullet at 2800+ fps... 41.0 grains of IMR3031 yielding 2810 fps & 44.0 grains of IMR4895 yielding 2800 fps. Any of the three would be a good, flat-shooting antelope load.
Of course, when "working up" to these maximum loads, one should exercise all the handloading cautions including reducing the "maximum load" by 10% to produce the "starting load".
I'd choose the powder that proves to be the most accurate in the rifle you're going to use. All of the above muzzle velocities were attained in a 22-inch barrel. If you're using a Model 99 with a 24" barrel, your muzzle velocities would probably be 35-50 fps faster than the same load in a 22" barrel.
The 150 grain bullet is about "perfect" for deer out to 250 yards. My own deer load consists of a 150 grain Nosler Ballistic Tip Bullet in front of 41.5 grains of IMR4895. This load yields a chronographed muzzle velocity of 2680 fps and averages � inch, 3-shot groups at 100 yards.
For elk, moose or black bear, I'd choose the 165 grain Nosler Partition Bullet in front of an appropriate load of powder that will yield 2550 fps to 2600 fps.
The 165 grain Nosler Partititon Bullet is a good compromise between the 150 grain Partition and the 180 grain Partition for the larger game, but doesn't intrude down into the cartridge's relatively small powder chamber nearly as much as the longer 180 grain Partition Bullet. With a sectional density of .248 and a ballistic coefficient of .410... the 165 grain Nosler Partition offers excellent mid-range velocity retention and enough weight for deep penetration.
The advantage of using the premium Nosler Partition Bullet is that it always gives "consistent" performance on game... regardless of the muzzle velocity and regardless of the range (within reason, of course). The average Nosler Partition I've recovered from game showed excellent bullet performance with almost perfect front bullet half "mushrooming" and a weight retention of a little over 71%... proving the "belt" works as "advertised".
Upon hitting a game animal, the front half of the Partition Bullet opens up reasonably fast, even at longer ranges and lower velocities, creating a large wound channel & heavy blood loss while the rear half (the part of the bullet behind the "partition" or "belt") maintains its integrity and drives deep into the game's vital organs destroying organs that are necessary to the game's life.
Any game animal, hit reasonably well with a Nosler Partition Bullet, is NOT going to live very long or run very far.
Of course, proper bullet placement should always be the PRIMARY consideration for all ethical hunters. If you are not sure you can place your bullet in the game's "kill zone", then stalk closer, wait for the animal to turn to a more advantageous position or pass on the shot.
The Nosler Partition Bullet was THE original "premium" bullet... and is still one of the very best... even though it has been over a half century since it's conception. <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/smile.gif" alt="" />
Strength & Honor...
Ron T.
Well said Mr. Ron, well said.
BP...
For awhile there , I thought Ron wore a lab coat from 9 to 5 ......... <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/grin.gif" alt="" />
I do enjoy Ron's take on the peformance of the 300. Always learn something.
I have nothing negative to say about either the 300 or 250 savage, but my favorite is the .358 winchester.
The 300 certainly get the nod when it come to availability of nice 99's at a still reasonable price.
Weagle
Ron is the epitomy of beware the man with one gun......
no matter how many he has he knows his 300 Sav well.
Thanks for sharing Ron
Awww... geesssshhh, guys... (toe doing a "windshield wiper thing" in the dirt) <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/blush.gif" alt="" /> <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/blush.gif" alt="" /> <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/blush.gif" alt="" />
Ron,
You do like the Nosler partitions, have you ever tried Swift A-Frames? They are positively letal.
LRF.....
Nope, never tried 'em, but I've always adhered to a simple "rule", namely, "
If'n it ain't broke, don't fix it."
Since Nosler bullets have worked
perfectly for me for over 45 years, how could that "record" be improved upon? <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/smile.gif" alt="" />
Ron T.
Ron,
Please do as you wish it was only a suggestion.
+1 for Ron_T... only about 12 years on Nosler Partitions for me, but won't switch since I've had nothing except perfect performance.
LRF...
Sorry if I sounded abrupt. I just re-read my original answer to you... and I didn't mean any disrespect towards you or the Swift A-Frames.
I appreciate you taking your time and making the effort to inform me about a very fine bullet you've used satisfactorily.
In fact, as I recall, the Swift A-Frame Bullet has a design very similar to the Nosler Partition... I.E., the A-Frame uses a "frame" or "belt" through its middle to insure the rear half of the bullet will remain relatively in tact while the front of the bullet peels back and enlarges the entry/exit hole.
I've always been extremely pleased with the Nosler Bulllet's performance and while I appreciate your advice, I see no "gain" in using any bullet other than Nosler Bullets at this time.
If, for any reason, I eventually find I'm not happy with the Nosler Bullets, I'll certain heed your advice and try the A-Frame Bullets.
Strength & Honor...
Ron Tateman
I really don't know much when it comes to ballistics, but see where a few passed on that the .300 kicked a lot easier than the .308, but the ballistics were almost the same.
Wouldn't the bigger kick mean higher velocity or energy?
Just playing around on the Remington site, would this be considered a significant difference?
Cartridge Information
Index Number Cartridge Type Weight (grs.) Bullet Style Primer No. Ballistic Coefficient
R30SV3 Remington� Express� 180 Soft Point Core-Lokt� 9 1/2 0.248
R308W2 Remington� Express� 180 Soft Point Core-Lokt� 9 1/2 0.248
Velocity (ft/sec)
Cartridge Type Bullet Muzzle 100 200 300 400
Express�180 SP CL 2350 2025 1728 1467 1252 .300
Remington� Express 2620 2274 1955 1666 1414 .308 1212
Energy (ft-lbs)
Cartridge Type Bullet Muzzle 100 200 300 400 500
180 SP CL.300 2207 1639 1193 860 626 482
Remington� Ex .308 2743 2066 1527 1109 799 587
Short-Range Trajectory
Cartridge Type Bullet 50 100 150 200 250 300
Remington� Express� 180 SP CL 0.2 zero -2.3 -7.1 -14.7 -25.9
Remington� Express� 180 SP CL 0.0 zero -1.7 -5.3 -10.7 -19.7
Long-Range Trajectory
Cartridge Type Bullet 100 150 200 250 300 400 500
Remington� Express� 180 SP CL 1.5 zero -4.0 -10.9 -21.3 -54.8 -110.3
Remington� Express� 180 SP CL 2.6 2.3 zero -4.1 -11.8 -36.3 -78.2
That about sums it up. Always figured the 300s energy and drop made it OK for 300yrds and the 308 OK for 400yrds.
More kick MAY mean more velocity and energy, but ALWAYS means more powder charge when you are talking about the same weight bullets. The velocity and weight of the powder charge is a very large portion of the formula to measure KICK or gun velocity .That is the beauty of the 300 Savage, it is very efficient with it's powder. It takes less powder to achieve the same velocity as it other 30 cal. rivals---308 , and 30'06.There are other factors involved, but powder charge is the diff. we are talking about with the 300 and the 308. Mark.
It takes less powder to achieve the same velocity as it other 30 cal. rivals---308
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Does the .300 really achieve the same performance of a .308?
Isn't 500 lbs of energy at the muzzle and 330lb at 300 yds a significant difference?
Pretty close,and I said same velocity, not same performance. The 300 will get 2700FPS with 42-44 grains of various powder, you need 46-50 or more to get 2700 in a 308.Open up some reloading manuals and compare.
The .303 Savage has been known to get the job done. Of course, you'll want to make sure the deer are either very old or very young. The strong ones in their prime may be able to suck it up!
I've read a good many of
MMarketello's excellent posts over the years... and he is a very knowledgeable hunter/shooter who does his "homework" which makes him quite capable of using very convincing & accurate statistics as illustrated by the use of the statistics in his post (above) which he naturally chose to give his point of view the greatest support.
Most all of us would do the same... but before you "buy" all of those "numbers" without question, let's put them in "perspective" and give the very efficient .300 Savage cartridge it's "due".
One often
unmentioned "difference" between the .300 Savage and it's off-spring, the .308 Winchester, is the "difference" in the two cartridges shoulder angles.
The .308 Winchester has a 20 degree shoulder angle while the .300 Savage has a 30 degree shoulder angle. Another way to say it would be to say the shoulder angle of the .300 Savage cartridge is 50% greater (20 degrees compared to the "difference" between the 2 cartridges or 10 degrees yielding 10/20 or 50%) than the .308 Winchester... a significant "difference" which is the reason the .300 Savage is a more "efficient" cartridge.
Another HUGE "difference" between the 2 cartridges which most shooters/hunters don't realize is that the SAAMI's recommended average chamber pressure for the .308 Winchester is much higher (about 53,000 C.U.P.) versus only 46,000 C.U.P. for the .300 Savage cartridge.
Naturally, the .308's considerably higher chamber pressure is a major contributor to the .308's superior exterior ballistic performance.
In addition, when the .308 was being developed from the .300 Savage cartridge, a longer neck was added to the new cartridge which, naturally, automatically gave the new cartridge (the .308) a greater powder capacity than the "parent" .300 Savage cartridge... a decided advantage for the .308 and it's exterior ballistic performance.
I believe it should also be noted that the examples given of the "difference" in the 2 cartridge's down-range performance used
180 grain bullets to illustrate MMarketello's point thus putting the .300 Savage at a
definite DISADVANTAGE due to the longer bulllet's intrusion into the already limited .300 Savage's powder chamber thus giving the .308 (with its greater powder capacity) an advantage and making the "difference" appear even greater than it would otherwise be.
The vast majority of .300 Savage users hunt DEER and use 150 grain bullets which do NOT intrude into the cartridges powder chamber nearly as much as the 180 grain bullet (which most of us shooting the .300 Savage rarely or never use) thus severely limiting the amount of powder that can be put into the .300 Savage cartridge. Naturally, this limits the cartridge's performance to a greater extent than it would limit a cartridge with a greater powder capacity.
One final point I'd like to make. Even detractors admit that out to 250 yards, there's actually little "difference" between the two cartridges using 150 grain bullets... and I suggest to you that VERY FEW once-a-year hunters (the acknowledged vast majority of hunters) are capable of delivering accurate, ethical "killing shots" much beyond 250 yards... the longest range most of us should even attempt a shot on game.
All of this said, I admit that MMarketello is correct... the .308 Winchester does yield superior exterior ballistics compared to the .300 Savage, but not VERY "superior"... certainly not enough "difference" that the average deer hunter (OR "deer") would be able to tell the "difference" within the ranges that the vast majority of us shoot at game.
And isn't that what this discussion is all about?!?
I believe MMarketello has to admit that the .308 certainly does
NOT have the "classic"
charisma of the .300 Savage cartridge, especially if used in the CLASSIC Model 99! <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/smile.gif" alt="" />
Strength & Honor...
Ron T.
Ron,
You are correct in that if the Noslers work you may not need to consider any other bullet. And you are right that the designs are similar however for in the A-Frames the front porition of the lead is bonded to the jackets so that as it mushrooms it remains attached to the jacket.
About the .308, you said the .308 was an off-spring of the .300 Savage. I would view it a little different in that the .300 Savage is an off-spring of the 30 caliber govt. (30-06), considerably shorten to fit in the short 99 action. As for the .308 it is the civilian equivalent of the 7.62 NATO. All based back to the 30-06 cartridge base diameter.
Ron is correct on the 308, it was developed from the 300 Savage, as the shoulder on the 300 savage was to short to function reliably on the test rifles for the military, so the 308 was designed, more gradual shoulder meant reliable feeding. That is listed in the history of the 308 somewhere, and if you want to get real technical, the 30-06 came from the 30-03 which was designed off of a german cartridge. Hell there are a wide range of cartridges that are just modified 30-06, take the 250-3000 for example. But I am just spouting what I have read. Les
I stand corrected as a modified Savage 300 apparantly did play a role in the development of the 7.62.
Not a big deal, at least yours was small, when I am wrong I am way wrong, but am not afraid to admit it either. And, I am thinking I am wrong on the 30-03 development, can't find the article, til I do, don't take it as fact. I want to say 7x57, but that cart had a rim on it. Les
Les, while there is a 7x57R, the 7x57 has the same case head as the '06.
I believe MMarketello has to admit that the .308 certainly does NOT have the "classic" charisma of the .300 Savage cartridge, especially if used in the CLASSIC Model 99!
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
For sure, and would also feel the 30-30 has some of the same alure more so than the .308.
I would also like to make clear, I am real new to the sport, and my post was more so a lesson looking to be learned, not choosing a side on the issue.
I haven't got into reloading yet so have used a lot of the manufacturers web-sites to do a little learning, I have no re-loading manuals.
Even the 150 grain comparisons have the .308 at almost 200lbs advantage at 300yds. How much that really matters, I can't say being a greenhorn. Just when you think you are getting a handle on it, you learn something else. <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/smile.gif" alt="" />
For sure it must not matter too much since the .300 has been a popular round for so many years, as has the 30-30, but have to admit, this is the first time I have ever heard the .300 being compared as an equal to the .308. That being said, I wouldn't hesitate on a .300 find
Federal.
POWER-SHOK
Federal Load No. Factory Primer No. Caliber Bullet Weight
Grains / Grams Bullet style Use T.B*
300A 210 300 Savage 150 / 9.72 Soft Point 2 24
Velocity in Feet Per Second
Muzzle 100 200 300 400 500
2630 2353 2094 1850 1629 1430
Energy in Foot Pounds
Muzzle 100 200 300 400 500
2304 1844 1460 1140 884 681
Federal Load No. Factory Primer No. Caliber Bullet Weight
Grains / Grams Bullet style Use T.B*
308A 210 308 Win. (7.62x51mm) 150 / 9.72 Soft
Velocity in Feet Per Second
Muzzle 100 200 300 400 500
2820 2532 2261 2007 1771 1557
Energy in Foot Pounds
Muzzle 100 200 300 400 500
2648 2134 1702 1341 1044 807
No, Les, you're correct about the .30/06 being a modification of the .30/03...
And, of course, the 7mm Mauser (aka "7 x 57") is the "Granddaddy" of 'em all. The .30-03/.30-06 is merely an overgrown 7mm Mauser.
MMarketello.......
We all had to start somewhere... and it's good to have you aboard.
Generally speaking, a difference of approximately 200 ft/lbs. of bullet energy would have little effect on a big game animal weighing 150 lbs or more, especially since my hand-loaded 150 grain Nosler Ballistic Tip Bullets leave my .300 Savage's barrel at a chronographed 2680 (not 2630) fps...only 140 fps less than the factory loaded .308 Winchester.
However, without question... the .308 Winchester shoots any weight bullet somewhat faster than does a .300 Savage just as a .30/06 Springfield shoots the same weight bullet somewhat faster than a .308 Winchester can shoot it.
The point is... "Does this difference in muzzle velocity make any practical difference in big game hunting?"... and, to me, the answer is "Not really all that much."
Just as the .308 can do anything a .30/06 can do, thus so can a .300 Savage do anything a .308 Winchester can do.
Strength & Honor...
Ron T.
Okay... my take.
150gr 308 vs 150gr 300: 308 has about 15% more power than the 300 Savage at all ranges.
Or:
95gr 243 vs 150gr 300 Savage: 300 Savage has about 30% more energy than the 243 Winchester at 300 yards
Or:
150gr 300 Savage vs 170gr 30-30; Yeah, right<img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/grin.gif" alt="" />. Okay, the 300 Savage at 300 yards has the energy of a 30-30 at 100 yards.
It's obvious to me that any normal North American animal isn't going to care about 15% less energy at reasonable shooting ranges. I know I can drop any deer with a 243 at 300 yards or less, and I know I can drop any deer with a 30-30 at 100 yards. Thus, I have absolute confidence and no issues with a 300 Savage at 300 yards. Past that my main issue is with my aim..
I have always shot the 180 grain in my 99 .300. I never knew that there was less powder with the 180 versus the 150. When the gun was given to me years ago my Dad always said"shoot the 180s"
Question: What hits harder, A .300 in 180 grain, traveling slower, or the 150 traveling faster?
While the 180 grain bullet will "work" on deer, it may not open up very well on such a light animal since it is basically designed for larger, heavier game that REQUIRE deeper bullet penetration in order to make a clean kill.
The point is... use the bullet designed for the use on the game you're hunting. A 180 grain bullet (which has a heavier bullet jacket than the 150 grain bullet) that totally penetrates a deer's body and goes out the other side only to expend it's reminding bullet energy in a tree beyond the deer has put it's "bullet energy" IN the tree as well as IN the deer whereas there's at least a 'fair" possibility that a 150 grain bullet, which expands FASTER and won't penetrate as deep as the 180 grain bullet, is MORE likely to stay IN the deer and expend ALL of it's bullet energy IN the deer.
Bullets for deer are usually 150 grain range in .30 caliber cartridges. Elk and moose use to require 180 grain bullets, but now... with the improved bullet construction, bullets in the 165 grain range can be used with confidence on the heavier game.
This fact is particularly important to those of us who use cartridges of limited powder capacity such as the .300 Savage.
As bullet construction has tremendously improved... the somewhat lighter bullets work just fine for some game that use to require the heavier bullets. <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/smile.gif" alt="" />
Strength & Honor...
Ron T.
Thanks Ron, Good food for thought. The 150 grain is becoming more common than the 180. My Dad was a big believer in a "heavy" grain in thick cover like we hunted in the north woods of New England. Although I must say I shot a bear in Vermont with 1 shot with a 180 grain Winchester and he went down like he was hit with a sledge hammer.
Yes,
Harry...
Bears can be "dangerous" and require deeper penetration which a heavier bullet gives us. Therefore, a 180 grain bullet is fully justified for bear. <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/smile.gif" alt="" />
Ron
HarryM, my Dad and your Dad saw it the same way. I grew up in northern Minnesota where we had bigger deer and heavy timber. When you bought ammunition you just bought the heaviest that was on the shelf and they didn't stock much of the lightweight stuff then either. To say that a 180 won't open up on a northern whitetail is just BS - and it didn't take me 6 paragraphs to say that.
Thanks Lightfoot, My Dad was old school that's for sure. He carried an old Marlin in the .35 Remington with, I believe, a 200/220? grain cartridge.
I asked about the 150s as lately the gun stores that I buy from only stock the 150s. The last 2 years I have had to order the 180s.
Thanks Ron, Well that was my one and only bear. Don't think I'd take another. The meat was a bit strong for me. I'm sticking to venison!
I've been reading this thread and have found it most interesting. Thoughts on the spoken word Savage "means", to me, .303, .300, 250-3000, and lastly, the 22HP. IMO, in that order. I have noticed that to the hunter, the .300 gets the nod. But how many times have we all read fron the "collectors",,,"I'd go for that gun if it were anything BUT .300??? I find that very curious. I think sometimes we lose sight of the fact that Savage was a working man's gun.
As for bullet choice and weight thereof, I was also raised in the old school of northern New England where bigger was better. My Dad more often than not hunted with his "06 and a 220 gr Remington Corelokt in the chamber. Brother wasnt happy with that. He got the Marlin in 35 Rem. and a 200 grain pill. He was often heard to laude the HUGE diameter of the .35 cal. They had it right though. They KNEW the bullet would pass through and leave a rather large exit hole, and that usually lead to a good blood trail. Neither of them reloaded and, aamof, thought reloaded ammo was 2nd rate ammo and belonged on the range, NOT in the woods. At the range, a misfire meant nothing. In the woods, it could mean the difference between meat and no meat and my father was a depression hunter/poacher that went into the woods to put food on the table, no matter how it was done. As a boy, I can't honestly remember him playing by the rules.
As for bullet selection in the 30 cal. guns. I was a huge proponant of the Nosler partition. My wife and I both killed moose with the Nosler partition 180 grainer. Hers was a complete broadside pass through so there was no bullet recovery. Mine, OTOH, was a recovery. I shot mine 4 times. Of the 4 rounds I was able to locate 1. It started out @ 180 grains and as recovered, weighed in at 65 grains. It shed the entire front section, as advertised. But, nonetheless, I wasn't happy. I switched to the Barnes X bullet in 180 grains for moose. In 1997 my son shot his first moose. When we recovered his bullet, it weighed 178 grains and was picture perfect. It performed exactly as advertised.
I am not contradicting anybody. All information is given and well taken. I also am fond of the .300 and I shoot the 165 grain Speer round nose and would use that bullet on deer, moose, OR bear, and thing nothing of it. My go to's are a 99F in .300, or if shooting is going to be wooded and close, my .358F tags along.
I really like my .257 Roberts and the Ackley Imp. version is also a fine deer round. Too bad no 99 in that cal.
LF and Harry,
You can add my Dad to that list. He hunted the Michigan UP, Northern Wisconsin or the Minnesota Iron Range depending on where we were living at the time and he always used 180s in his .300 Savage. Mostly Silvertips. He never had any complaints about heavy bullets not expanding. What he shot at he hit and what he hit died. Its not unusual for a northern buck to weigh well over 300 pounds. Nothing wrong with using heavy bullets on them if that's what you have confidence in.
Yep,my Dad too...IIRC he said he switched to 150's cuz the 180's did so much meat damage.