That is where my mind was at when I picked the .358. I was attracted by the caliber’s ability to be effective on everything from small game to big bears at the ranges I usually make kills at. I used to hunt everything with a Winchester 94 in 45 colt, right down to rabbits. Shocked my grandpa when he sent me out to get rabbits for Christmas dinner and I came back with my limit, all shot through the head, no meat wasted. He had been skeptical when I left with that Winchester. Cast bullets and light loads work geat for pot hunting. Lighter bullets for deer and coyotes, heavies for elk, moose and bears.
Looking it over, the .358 seemed hard to beat for a guy who has shot one animal at 400 yards in his life, and most of the rest under 100, maybe a majority of those under 50. I like getting into the thick stuff and taking close shots. Feels better to me to stalk and kill an animal in its “safe space”, often before it has any idea I am there, than it does sitting and waiting for it to walk by. Hunting, as opposed to shooting. The .358 in a short handy rifle should excel at that. That’s the other thing I like about it. Makes hay in a short barrel, which means one doesn’t sacrifice performance for handiness.
Probably going to sell my .308 AR, too, and replace it with a rifle set up for open country. Longer barrel, and a cartridge that cheats wind and shoots flatter to 500 yards or so. I don’t care for belted magnums, so thinking 6.5-06 or 270, maybe. Such a rifle will mostly be used for mule deer and smaller, so no need for a sledgehammer, more interested in flat trajectory and minimizing wind drift.
Last edited by OldGrayWolf; 02/22/19.
