Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Ask The Gunwriters Generally accepted truths about hunting, ballistics, gear etc. 1980 vs 2021

Heavy bullets seem to be challenged by those much lighter in effectiveness, dialing turrets, onX, GPS, rangefinders and sleek BC has influenced our thoughts and impressions.

What are the significant game changers (not the Sierra kind of Game Changer) that have encouraged a paradigm shift in your mind and challenged or changed what you’ve been thinking for years?

For me it was as simple as a CDS dial on a fellow hunters 270 Win shooting 150gr NP while shooting rocks across a very remote Newfoundland lake after a Moose hunt that showed me that my 300 Wby was both capable of so much more and over-powered for most game at the same time.

Anyhow, just love to hear about how those that have been chasing game (or punching paper) around the country (and beyond) for years have evolved with the new opportunities or gear that we are blessed (or cursed) with & what the gunwriters might have experienced that we should all look more closely at and seek to understand more thoroughly about our beloved pursuits.

Apologies for being long winded. I blame cabin fever.

Tim

I took a Savage 18" carbine in 375 Winchester out and shot it over 500 yards at a rock. Had a blast smacking that rock. "Close range brush gun"

A well written post is always welcome. Kudos!

Following Along.


Jerry

I like to think I learn something every time. Can't really think of an "aha" moment but it has all been a long slow progression.
Forums like this have contributed immensely to the general knowledge base although none of it is gospel so sometimes you have to wade through the BS.

The definition of "the usual signs of excessive pressure" sure seem to have changed....

Science = generally accepted truths.

Not in this context !



Jerry

The need to scrub the snot out of barrels after every range session. JB helped shed some light on that one.

I certainly have learned a lot, but most of it incrementally. From a basic accuracy standpoint things have progressed. My first center fire a Ruger tanger in 3006, I fnally got a couple of loads that were consistently sub MOA after a lot of work and was super pleased. The folks I hunted with thought that that rifle was a real hummer. Now I expect pretty much any rifle to do that and more with a lot less work. I think its from a number of factors, but I feel bullets are better and I know a lot about reloading that I didn't back in the day.

From my perspective the realization that it didn't take a 30 cal and 3000ft/lbs of energy to kill a deer. Growing up a lot of the folks in my dads generation all hunted with 30.06s mostly Rem pumps and autoloaders, with a few marlin 35 rems. There was often talk of how wimpy a 30-30 was. As a comment the group mostly hunted the Adirondacks so a buck every year was a sign of a good hunter and even someone who tagged out every other year was considered a no slouch, so despite hunting a lot, they shot few deer by modern standards.( we also hunted NY's southern Tier where we shot a lot more deer, but that was shotgun only growing up). So as young guy, being recoil tolerant and indoctrinated by the older generation I grew up thinking that a 30.06 was pretty much the starting point for deer hunting.

The understanding that a 243 or a 250 killed deer pretty much just a like a 30.06 or 300mag was a big one for me. It made shooting a much more enjoyable sport.

Tim I learned that my 300 ultra and 7mm ultra and other magnums were just ego trips the weatherby (257 and 270) are not necessary. A tuned and tested 35 Whelen 270 or 308 can do every thing I need. As an old man we referred to as GRUMPY told me years ago. DEAD IS DEAD lol. Age and maturity is a good thing

And a 35 remington a 444 or 45-70 and a 30-30 in a lever gun is still an excellent deer rifle

For me it was the widely available ballistic calculators, cheap LRF, cheap chronographs, somewhat accurate ballistic coefficient numbers, and bullets designed with relatively high BC that changed everything.

When I was young, 400 yards seemed like a ridiculously long distance to shoot at anything I wanted to hit consistently. The new tech paradigm allowed bullet drop and wind deflection to make sense to me. Before that, it was a cloudy, mystical thing. Now, quarter-mile shots at animals are a gimme, as long as the wind isn't a mystery. It still blows my mind when I think about it, how easy it is to ding 6" steel at the longest ranges I shoot now, because I didn't even know how far across-the-canyon was when I was younger. Cool stuff.

Back in the day of poorer bullet selection, I used heavier for the caliber bullets than I feel is needed now -- in most cartridges.

Like many men, I was not immune to the obvious advantages of affordable rangefinders, superbly accurate bullets, the revolution in fine optics at affordable prices...but they are primarily for amusement purposes...who doesn't enjoy an accurate rifle? But because of the terrain I live and hunt in, the little 6.5 Mannlicher Schoenauer carbine (2 moa) with an ancient 3X Lyman post reticle is the huckleberry. The 156 grain roundnose at 2300fps is a humane and effective bullet even when the old fart wobbles a little.

Agreed. Add to that list the availability and affordability of scopes that mechanically work correctly.

As a teenager and young adult I used to go out into the field several times a week after school and practice shooting milk jugs and balloons out to 650 yards (measured in increments) using a duplex reticle and Kentucky windage. I felt that 450-500 yards on game was a very long shot, even using flat shooters like the .243 or 7RM, considering we still had to estimate range visually and hold for the shot using the duplex aim points and/or Kentucky windage.

The availability of affordable ballistic calculators (Exbal on a Palm Pilot), decent and affordable scopes (first using BDC reticles like the BP or RZ-600, and then decent dialing scopes like the Burris FFII Tactical 3-9x40), chronographs (Shooting Chrony), LRFs (Bushnell Yardage Pro and later the Leica LRF 1200), on top of bullets with a decent BC (SMK), changed the game significantly. Before long, coyotes, gophers, and badgers were in serious danger out to 1000, and game was headed for the freezer if it was within about 600, as long as the wind wasn’t too crazy. Equipment and wind reading has only gotten exponentially better since then.

I’ll also second this. One of my big “ah-hah” moments was when I realized that I didn’t need to put up with the recoil, blast, or powder consumption of a 7 Mag or .300 Mag to cleanly kill BG. I think bullets like the Barnes X and NPT were a big part of that.

Learning that bullet run out and seating depth can make such a big difference in accuracy. I wonder how much powder and how many bullets and primers I wasted searching for the "right" load, when a simple concentricity check and seating depth adjustment could have quickly completed the search.

I recently switched to a 7.62x39. I’ll second the above.

I've been stuck in the 80's for the last 40 years because my woods hunting hasn't changed. I knew what I wanted back in those days, but if anything I'm a little pissed having spent thousands building light weight six pound rifles when now I could buy light weight factory rifles for a fraction of what I've spent. Actually while I still subscribe to the gun magazines, when I go gun shopping I'm looking for the good old stuff in the collector areas.