I think part of that effect (far away= big guns) is that guys who live in 'em are playing a different game than out of state hunters.
Put another way.... take that front-range, 270-totin' guy and have him obsess over a hunt in [somewhere far away, expensive, and cool] for [some big animal he's never killed] and I bet our front-range guy gets a little geeky about choosing a rifle, too.
If/when I get to hunt elk in Montana, it won't be with a rifle I think isn't "best" for the job. Not "adequate", not "plenty good".
Best.
Elk aren't "big"'not really anyway;a bull will weigh (what?) 650-750 pounds(never weighed one).....oh they can be "long",but even through the chest I doubt it takes more than 18"-20" inches of penetration from broadside to get most all the vital plumbing.....even through shoulders a 150-160 gr 270/7mm bullet will handle that with ease if construction is good..
But sometimes they can take a solid hit and not react to it....this throws people off base....makes them think elk are tough...they are soft-skinned game,nothing more.
But as animals get larger, I have found you have to be even more precise in placement,because you simply won't overwhelm large animals with power from indifferently (sloppily)placed bullets from powerful cartridges.
And that is the rub......if you can shoot a powerful cartridge,fine.....use it....IME there are those who "can",and those who "think" they can.....like Cobrads SIL....they are legion.......and I have never seen a 300/338 mag shooter who was worth shidt behind the rifle unless he was a handloader and burned 1000-3000,4000 rounds of CF ammo a year...the rest are clueless as to pulling full advantage from a magnum capacity rifle.
