Additionally, providing you hit the target, the bullet must retain the ability to do sufficient work to secure the game, especially at distance. At 1000 yards the STW gives full penetration on an antelope, I'm not sure the same could be said for the .243 Win..
I believe some time back, there was video of a young gal shooting an elk at about 1000 yards with a.243 and it was a 1 shot kill. Fluke? Maybe. Would I recommend it? No. However,I guess it does happen
If this isn’t marginal, I don’t know what is. And way past 1000 yards, what a stunt!
Originally Posted by RJY66
I was thinking the other day how much I used to hate Bill Clinton. He was freaking George Washington compared to what they are now.
I guess it's good so many guys won't take what they consider to be marginal shots. The argument usually goes like this:
"Imagine it's near last legal daylight on the last day of your once-in-a-lifetime elk hunt, and you get a marginal shot at the bull of a lifetime. You're gonna wish you had (insert bigger caliber here) so that you could take the shot."
That's obviously not a direct quote, but you see it on hunting forums. I've seen it in books and in hunting magazines as well, even from some well known gun writers. Seems like a bad message to be sending, but that's just my opinion.
I suppose range is the obvious exception - a 7mm rem mag will have a longer effective range than a 7mm-08, and some shots that are marginal in terms of range with the 7mm-08 will be okay with the magnum if the shooter is good to go at that range. But I'm thinking more in terms of things like angle - quartering away, through the paunch, that sort of thing.
