Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Hunting Rifles Recoil......bullet placement......effectively killing game

And let's not forget... shot placement trumps everything else.
There was a story I think in one of J A Hunter's books where somebody killed an elephant with a 22LR. Slipped it in between the ribs and hit the heart.

You think it's bad at 60, wait until you are on the far side of 70.

Belated Happy Birthday though.

Training shooters to actually hit from varied field positions on realistic sized targets (8-10in plates) under time constraints as opposed to plinking from a bench, I see a very clear difference between 10ft-lbs, 20ft-lbs, and 30ft-lbs of recoil in hit rates with the vast majority of shooters. These aren't pansy dudes either.


400-500 yards the 223Rem/22-250 (-10ft-lbs recoil) with 75+grain bullets have the highest hit rates and lowest called bad shots. They are simply easier to shoot and consequently easy to kill with.


Rifles with around 20ft-lbs of recoil take a bit of work to truly shoot well, but the right cartridge and bullet combinations can help in bad conditions with wind drift.

Once you get in the 30ft-lbs and over, it becomes increasingly hard to shoot them well under the above conditions. Obviously one can learn to deal with the recoil and do good work, but often the juice isn't worth the squeeze.


The sweet spot with regards to shoot ability, bullets, exterior ballistics, retained velocity, wind drift and terminal ballistics is around the 15ft-lbs recoil range. It is the exact reason that the 243, 6mm Creed, 6.5 Creed, 260, etc are booming. The 6.5 Creedmoor probably being the best blend of the lot.

One day at the range I fired thirty shots with my .375-.416 Rem. I was testing max loads with Barnes TSX 270s. The velocity was right at 3,050 feet per second, I think. My son-in-law also fired thirty shots that day with his 7 Rem Mag. He was firing 140 at 3,284 average. At the end of the session he had a huge bruise with a large blood blister in the middle. I didn’t even have a red spot. At the end of the day he said, “How ‘bout you make me one of your brakes?”

A 300 Win mag is the biggest I have anymore. It's not bad,but it's heavy. I'm a 7 Rem guy, lot of power for the recoil. I have 7mm08,308,6.5 Creeds. They kill just as well, and I think I'm liking them more and more as I get older. Does that mean I'm getting old?

I think, perennially, in America the 270 has been the go-to round for those wishing to escape excess recoil while still ensuring a surplus of killing power for what this continent has to offer.

I still think it's about as good a choice as there is. Others like the 7-08 nip at its heels, but it's probably still king of the hill for that role.

Due to shoulder injury I've had to part company with my 300 WM. I replaced it with a 264 WM. Recoil is acceptable but still noticeable.
I've put the light-weight mountain rifle in 30-06 in the back of the safe. I've replaced it with a 308 that's much more comfortable to shoot.
Most of my hunting now is done with either a 243, 25-06 or 6.5x55. I've taken the 243 out to 800 and the 25-06 out to 600 for practice purposes. The 6.5x55 will be the next one I play with out to ranges beyond 300.
These have become my 'favorites' simply due to what Formidilosus was talking about in his post - reduced recoil makes shooting larger numbers of rounds much more pleasurable. And, due to increase practice, accuracy is steadily improving.

One of the best post ever:
By formilodus(sp?) sorry about spelling!

Training shooters to actually hit from varied field positions on realistic sized targets (8-10in plates) under time constraints as opposed to plinking from a bench, I see a very clear difference between 10ft-lbs, 20ft-lbs, and 30ft-lbs of recoil in hit rates with the vast majority of shooters. These aren't pansy dudes either.


400-500 yards the 223Rem/22-250 (-10ft-lbs recoil) with 75+grain bullets have the highest hit rates and lowest called bad shots. They are simply easier to shoot and consequently easy to kill with.


Rifles with around 20ft-lbs of recoil take a bit of work to truly shoot well, but the right cartridge and bullet combinations can help in bad conditions with wind drift.

Once you get in the 30ft-lbs and over, it becomes increasingly hard to shoot them well under the above conditions. Obviously one can learn to deal with the recoil and do good work, but often the juice isn't worth the squeeze.


The sweet spot with regards to shoot ability, bullets, exterior ballistics, retained velocity, wind drift and terminal ballistics is around the 15ft-lbs recoil range. It is the exact reason that the 243, 6mm Creed, 6.5 Creed, 260, etc are booming. The 6.5 Creedmoor probably being the best blend of the lot.

As a gunsmith and a hunter/guide with over 1/2 a century of experience I have to say I agree that recoil is not to be seen as a virtue. It may not bother, but at best it's a neutral, and in many cases it's a problem to overcome.

I am blessed with being someone that isn't bothered much by recoil. I have a 375H&H that I had to rebarrel because I shot the throat out of the 1st barrel and I have made a LOT of 416s 404s 458ss and 460s in my life and zeroed all of them. I just shot my 375 2 weeks ago and I can still keep them under 1".

But despite the fact that I have some large rifles, love them, and I have killed quite a few game animals in my years of hunting, I cannot say that most of the medium sized magnums actually kill game up to elk size any faster than my old 270.

I finds this thread refreshing. I can see I am not alone in this observation. It's nice to read the posts from those that have experience instead of those that just write what they think is true.

I have caught flack in the past for saying so, but I am just reporting what I have witnessed.
Most of that flack has come from others that either (A) have little experience in hunting large game or (B) have experience, but have never used anything but a large rifle, and so they make themselves believe they have to be using something "better", but have nothing to compare it to.

I do see a difference in how fast my 375H&H puts an elk down compared to a 270 or 30-06, but even that is not really all THAT different.

When I compare the average effect of the ones I have killed and seen killed with 300 magnums, and 338s I have to be honest and say I have seen NO difference at all in how fast they fall from those I have killed with my 270s I have always used either Nosler partition in 150 and 160 and the old Remington 150 grain semi-round nose Core-Lokt bullets in the 270s on elk. Like any rifle, if you use bullets that don't hold up, I am sure the 270 would not have been as impressive.

I love my old classic rifles and I love to hunt with different rifles as often as I can. I have used 44 mag, 454 Casull, 308s, 30-06s, 300 H&H, 7X57, 8MM Mauser, 338 Mag, 338-06, 9.3X74R, 62 cal flintlock, and 375H&H on elk, and I have seen elk killed with 25-06s 257 Roberts, 6.5 Swedes, one 260 Rem, lots of 270s, lots of 7MM Mags, 280s, one 30-40 Krag, lots of 308s, lots of 30-06s, one 303 British, 325 Win Short Mag, one 8MM Rem Mag, one 348 Winchester, one 358 Norma, 416 Taylor, one 416 Rigby, 45-70s and one 405 Winchester.

So when I say I have seen elk killed with various guns I am not talking just a handful. I don't know how many I have seen shot in my life, but it has to be 75-100. I'd add another 50 or so to those that I didn't see shot, but I helped with the gutting, packing and butchering.

Anyone that thinks a 270 is "too small" has not used one, or seen one used (with correct bullets)

I decided long ago that a 270 that goes around 6.5# all up is about right.

I like the 270 over all the 308 length cartridges because it feeds and extracts really well.

Also, ammo is available worldwide.

Bottom line, easy to make it go BANG!

I never did have a great deal of tolerance for recoil, especially from a bench. My favorite deer cartridges over the years have ranged from 10 to 12 lb recoil. 6.5 grendel bolt action is my current favorite.

I have caught myself flinching as a result of recoil from light weight 270's & 30-06's .

I was a skinny 14 year old kid, who wouldn't have weighed a 100 pounds soaking wet, when I shot my first "deer rifle". It was my dad's Remington 760 pump in 30-06, with a steel buttplate, shooting 180 grain bullets. After about 3 shots, my boney shoulder was bruised and hurting something awful, and my ears rang for a week. In some ways, I never got over the punishment from that rifle, as I was always recoil conscious after that. I'm now well past 60, nearing 70, and with shoulders that hurt, I simply will not shoot anything that is going to hurt me. I never was like some hunters and shooters who think a rifle must kick a lot in order to kill a lot. Throughout the years, my favorite deer rifle was a 270, and if I'd been lucky enough to get a chance to hunt something bigger, I'd used it for that as well. Most of my shooting these days are with 223 and 243 rifles, as I figure that's about all I need. A bullet of proper construction, put in the proper place, is what kills game, not a gun that sounds like a cannon when it goes off. Always has, and always will, and if you can't put that bullet in the right spot, then you have no business hunting in the first place.

But strangely,some people don't put much credence in 1500 odd bulls Bell dropped with his .256 , .275, .303cal
or the buffalo and lions for that matter.
But they will claim that because he later purchased two .416 rifles, that he no longer found small cals effective.
Yet the fact he purchased six .275 bore rifles over time(one 10yrs after .416 purchase) would indicate otherwise.

Buying two .416s also makes a mockery of the myth that he was recoil shy.

We need to remember that Bell effectively relied on small cals to make a very successful commercial living
and used them to get himself (and others) out of any potential life threatening schit,
He didn't have the luxury of just scrambling behind his PHs .458lott -- Bell was a young 16 yr old lad in East Africa
armed with a single shot .303cal killing lions for British Uganda Rail.

If the internet has been around there would have been people telling him about his 'wrong' rifle and calibre selection.

Bell was also an excellent shot.....something that the vast majority of today's shooters are not. He had enough experience in using those smaller calibers, and could put that bullet in a spot that resulted in a kill. I got into an argument in another thread about the use of the 22 centerfires on big game, especially deer. Now, I've killed a few deer with the 223, with no problem. But, in order to do so, one must use the right bullet and put it in the right place.....just as one would do with any other rifle caliber. Too many times I've seen deer hunters set a 5 gallon bucket out in a field, shoot at it at 50 yards, hit it a time or two, then think they're ready to kill a deer at 300 yards. It just don't work that way. Bell proved what you can do with just about any rifle, as long as you know what you're doing.

For those people that cannot consistently put any size bullet in the required spot to result in a kill,
which calibre can save them? But If excessive recoil is whats effecting a novices marksmanship,
a smaller more manageable calibre may well assist in yielding better results.

WDM Bell despite his experience, never recommended any one particular gun or calibre that anyone else should use,

"THE question of which rifles to use for big-game hunting is for
each individual to settle for himself. If the novice starts off with, say,
three rifles : one heavy, say a double -577 ; one medium, say a -318
or a -350 ; and one light, say a 256 or a -240 or a -276, then he cannot
fail to develop a preference for one or other of them.

For the style of killing which appeals to me most the light calibres
are undoubtedly superior to the heavy. In this style you keep per-
fectly cool and are never in a hurry. You never fire unless you can
clearly see your way to place the bullet in a vital spot. That done
the calibre of the bullet makes no difference. But to some men of
different temperament this style is not suited. They cannot or will
not control the desire to shoot almost on sight if close to the game.
For these the largest bores are none too big. If I belonged to this
school I would have had built a much more powerful weapon than
the -600 bores.

Speaking personally, my greatest successes have been obtained
with the 7 mm. Rigby-Mauser"- Bell

Jerry Fisher said good hunting technique largely involves retraint--having the self discipline to know when not to shoot.
echoing Bells words of wisdom...can anyone honestly say it isn't true?