Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Ask The Gunwriters How much is “Enough”?

If you are hunting in your backyard, you can pass shots because you have time and tomorrow. If you traveled 24 hours whether by truck or airplane or any combination of transport, you want to be able to make whatever shot is presented. Bring "enough" or risk going home empty handed.
That being said, you want total confidence in what you shoot. Lots of stories of nimrods showing up with a new magnum or something they are afraid of.

I believe it was an article written by Bob Jourdan years ago, that suggested to choose a well constructed bullet, suitable for the non-dangerous big game (deer and such) intended, of at least .25 sectional density, and pushed as fast as the cartridge will allow, with the recoil you can tolerate. The 270 with a 130 grain bullet has an sd of .242 and hits all the other parameters. But i went with a .280 because the 140 grainer has an sd of .248 a little closer to .25, with a little bit more diameter and weight. I can't fathom how a partition in either would fail if i did my part.

the 28 Nosler seems too much of a good thing. A hunting buddy has a 7mm Weatherby and swears by it. It is his lightning stick.

Seems to me we will have better success with training with what we now have and know.

This^^^^^ memtb

This^^^^^ memtb

Memtb...isn`t the quote you use by Bob Hagel exactly the answer the OP was looking for?

Thanks CGPaul, That was my interpretation! My novel was merely stating that I chose one rifle to “do it all”, and so far it’s worked for me. Is it necessary for any NA game short of Coastal Browns, as stated ....an emphatic “NO”! Within reason, there’s no such thing as too much gun.....for big game. However, it may be,too much gun....for the shooter! This is a decision that the hunter must make. memtb

memtb,

Which is why some gun writer published a book a while back with a chapter titled, "Just Enough Gun."

long time ago, with little money, i wanted to buy a new left handed rifle. i was hanging around wolf publishing, and asked Dave and some of the writers what i should get. The consensus was a remington 700bdl in left hand bolt, in 30.06. They told me it wasn't the best for many situations, but would work okay in almost all situations. I bought that rifle, used it a few times, then being a loonie bought a lot of other rifles including a number of magnums. I could never get their advice tho out of my mind.
so a few years ago i loaded some barnes 180's for the 30.06, and went and shot an elk. I was quite impressive what that barnes bullet did.
it only took me about 40 years to find out they were right all along.
That might not be true all around the world, but for what i was to go after, it was good advice.
the issue that does come into play tho, is if you don't get a perfect shot. I have seen people using 25.06 on an elk. Yeah it will kill them, but what if elk is moving, quartering, and you don't get that perfect shot. A little more horsepower is comfortable.

A ton of overkill beats an ounce of underkill.

Been there on both sides, and prefer some margin.

Do you think loonies ponder this question so we can convince ourselves we need to purchase another one?

To me there is a difference between "enough' and "overkill'. Maybe a better way to ask the question is to name the game and the terrain conditions, then apply a rifle and caliber to the task.

More likely to explain the newest purchases to she-who-must-be-obeyed-or-else-no-supper.

Correct for whilst a 7x64 is adequate for rabbits a 458 is bordering on overkill...costs more.

I like simple rules.
I look for a SD of .275 or better.
I pay attention to bullet construction. I like exit wounds. I hope to be able to take shots at poor angles, through some bone if necessary.
If I can get more than 3000 fps, I consider a heavier bullet as opposed to more velocity.
If I'm worried about adequacy of a high SD bullet at 3000 to do the above, I look for more bore diameter.

There are sometimes reasons to deviate from the above, but it is a good place to start. I have a friend who hunts deer in Louisiana swamp country, where tracking is not easy. He really wants "dead right there." He prefers quick opening 150 grain bullets from a .300 WSM, and sticks to broadside shots (or at least says he does.)

Mule Deer, I have no qualms with that! I merely went with the concept, of using one rifle for “any” game that I may “ever” encounter! I certainly do not look down upon those that have a firearm specialized for a specific job, I simply chose a different direction. We have the capability to be “more game specific” in firearm selection....but chose not too. I’ll “not” be convinced that we’re wrong.....just different! memtb

Great statement.... should be someone’s signature line! memtb

My experience is that an ounce of over-gunned is far worse. Have seen it many times, probably because my job has allowed me to observe many other hunters in action.

In "Just Enough Gun" I describe one of those other hunters, a guy from Lichtenstein who was one of the other hunters in camp on a multi-species horsepack hunt in northern British Columbia. He'd hunted with the outfitter before for Stone sheep using a rifle in 7x64 Brenneke, essentially a .280 Remington, taking his ram with one shot. But this time he was after caribou, elk and moose. He somehow believed a bigger gun was necessary for the elk and moose, so left the 7x64 at home and brought a brand-new .300 Winchester Magnum. His first 3-shot group at 100 yards from the camp benchrest measured around 18 inches, and while things improved slightly after that, he took over 20 shots to kill his caribou, elk and moose.

Quite a few hunters start to flinch at .300 magnum lever recoil. This is not just my experience but that of several outfitters and guides I've encountered. One is John Stuver of Broadus, Montana, who says about 20% of his mule deer hunters who show up with a .300 magnum can't consistently kill a buck at 200 yards. Often the .300 is new, like the Lichtenstein hunter's, because they somehow think the .243., 270 or .308 they usually hunt whitetails with back home isn't enough for mule deer in open country. Another long-time African PH I knew, Finn Aaagard, was a little more generous, saying 2/3 of clients who brought a .300 magnum didn't shoot their rifle well.

On that BC hunt I brought a .300 Winchester Magnum and a 9.3x62 Mauser. Killed my moose with one shot from the 9.3, and a 6x6 elk with one shot from the .300. (Never saw a caribou I wanted.) But since then all my elk have been shot with smaller cartridges, and they killed just as well, and another western Canadian moose taken with the 7x57 went about five more yards than the 9.3x62 bull.

Hunters should use whatever rifle they feel confident with, but my experience is that "confidence" in a larger, harder-kicking cartridge is often misplaced--especially when a hunter headed on his first Big Trip away from home takes the advice of his buddies, who often have never hunted elk or African plains game, but have heard about how tough they are.

I have yet to see a vast difference in how most big game cartridges kill such game, as long as the shot's put in the right place, both in North America and Africa, and with today's bullets angling shots aren't a problem either, or breaking shoulders. In fact, the longer I observe other hunters, the more I'm convinced most don't differentiate between shoulder and behind-the-shoulder shots when describing the effects of various cartridges, and tend to choose examples of shoulder shots when describing the terrific killing power of their favorite round.

I also know RinB very well, and wonder about the intent of his question, partly because I know he's killed considerable BIG game with the .270 Winchester.

Great post. That has been my experience, and what I have observed, exactly.

I am beginning to understand the nuances of this question as you professional people are trying to communicate.

Personally I would not consider hunting with a rifle I couldn't shoot well or was timid about.

But my observation of people hunting with bows, it is easy for me to see those that are " over bowed" and can't handle the weapon reliably. And there are a lot of them!

So I guess there would be a percentage of the population that hunt " overgunned."

Thanks, Jordan.

Might also mention that the common notion of a larger cartridge killing better with off-center hits is also iffy. Finn Aagaard guessed it might help if the shot is only off a couple inches, but not otherwise.

A good example might be blue wildebeest in Africa, often considered the toughest of all the plains game. Have seen quite a few shot over the years with cartridges from the .270 Winchester and 7mm-08 Remington to .375 H&H and .375 Ruger. The only two I've seen lost were both shot with that pair of .375's, because both shots were well off center. The first was a frontal shot with the .375 H&H, which didn't go where aimed at around 150 yards because (it turned out) the scope had gone bonkers. From the blood trail, it looked like the bullet landed in one shoulder, instead of the center of the chest. The other was gut-shot with the .375 Ruger, standing broadside at around 250 yards. The bullets used were both well-proven premium soft-points of over 250 grains.

With the .270 and 7mm-08 the bullets weighed 150 and 140 grains, and again were proven lead-core softpoints. Both bulls were shot at the rear edge of the shoulder, more or less broadside, and went about 50 yards before keeling over.