Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Ask The Gunwriters Interesting comment from Charlie Sisk

There's the distance issue again,Jeff.What have we got at 400 yards where velocity has dropped off dramatically?You're a long range shooter; I'm sure you've seen where damage is not as dramatic due to lower striking velocity.....

In 2005 near Medicine Bow Wyoming I killed one Antelope at 280 yards and one at 777 yards both one shot kill that dropped in their tracks. I used a 300 Win Mag shooting 180 grain TSX bullets. Both wound channels looked identical as far as I could tell and both bullets exited.

OK;so what you're saying is, velocity does not matter? I don't think you believe that,since you' were shooting a 300 magnum

I am saying that enough is just that, enough...

Point is, in both your antelope kills,you were shooting a pretty tough bullet known for limited expansion and frontal area.Apparently,the 300 WM provided enough velocity to ( we think) expand them at both those distances.I don't disagree that enough is "enough";after all, it's antelope.

I also can't agree with anyone who argues that a 308 is the equal of a 300 WM as a long range cartridge.....

If velocity did not matter in terms of bullet expansion, we would not have things today like a TSX.

A cup and core bullet with too much velocity doesn't penetrate well up close with a lot of velocity. A 300's extra velocity adds a few more yards effective range and that is all IMHO and experience. A friend of mine broke the windage adjustable mounts on his 300 RUM and had to switch to a 30-06 during a hunt. He was very surprised to find that the 30-06 dropped game on the spot just as did his 300 RUM
Enough is enough is my point.

My goat hunt last week went something like this:

5 hunters show up in camp. Three had 300 ultras, one had a 300WM, and I had a little ol' 7-08. In the end we all had dead goats, but a couple of those 300 ultra shooters shot a lot more times to equal the results of my little ol' 7-08.

I think I'll keep shooting this little ol' non magnum until I see need for something bigger.

Of course, I do have my 358STA for brown bear, but I'll stick to the 7-08 for everything else in the US.

PS: Kinda afraid to admit how far out I've used a 30-30 on whitetails before I knew better.

run what you brung, take what you won.

The beautiful aspect of the larger cartridges is the fact that you have more flexibility. If you shoot a 165gr bullet well at 2700 to 2800 then load down to those levels, if you shoot the same bullet well at 3000 to 3100 then use that level. Both of my big game hunting rifles are short mags, and I like the flexibility factor but I wouldn't put down anyone in camp that was using a 308/7mm-08.

I shoot both of my short mags very well near the top end of their capability so that's where I load them to. That being said I don't like the 300 win mag at top speed, for me its uncomfortable, not as accurate, and it gives me a bit of the flinches. The flinches were very apparent when I would forget to take it off of safe and squoze the trigger then jumped right out of my shoes.

Yes,
I got the date wrong as there were several journals written and some were included in the Weatherby book that came out in the 90's.

It is the descriptions of the kills that were documented that made good reading as everything that was being attempted to proove a superiority to the .300 tended to assist the smaller cartridges. Obviously the bullets of the day were the influencing factor but in the old black and white days, "blue sky" sold guns and cartridges.

JW

The major point is that Roy Weatherby started promoting high velocity as The Answer to killing power when he had only shot a handful of deer. He went to Africa to "prove" his point, and got extremely mixed results. In fact, about all he really proved was that power doesn't make up for poor shot placement.

The Weatherby African journals do make fascinating reading to all who ponder such questions.

I argue that 'power' can adjust for slightly off shot placement.

The larger in diameter and deeper wound that a more powerful round can make will hit places that a weaker round would miss.

There is an underlying comment or trend being stated by the most experienced writers and hunters among us that is being overlooked, intentially, or otherwise:

At a point in your life when you can reflect on the number of cartridges and loads you have used, you can provide yourself an honest appraisal of the varied performances within the sanctury of of your own mind, where the common factor appears to be that the smaller cartridges you have used tended "overall" to be the equal in killing effect when the bullets were placed as they should.

This makes the whole cup and core Vs homogenous/convoluted design, or magnum Vs standard velocity arguments, come to a conclusion.

If you haven't got there yet, go hunting a few more times. You are entitled to delay the acceptance of fact as long as you wish.

JW

Savage 99,

Maybe, but how "off" does it make up for? Finn Aagaard suggested maybe a couple of inches, MAYBE, and I tend to agree.

As for the deeper wound, I have yet to see a .308 hit any game animal up to elk-size and the bullet not go deeply enough. Sometimes that was with a super-penetrating "modern" bullet but sometimes it wasn't.

On her first safari she used a .30-06 with 165 Fail Safes at 2850 fps or so, a velocity that could easily be reached with a .308. With that load she put not one but two bullets crosswide through a BIG kudu's chest. The first busted the near shoulder and went out at the rear of the oppoasite-side ribs. The second (not necessary but the kudu's head was still up) went in at the rear of the ribs and exited the opposite shoulder. How would a .300 have done any better?

In fact there was a thread on the African section a couple of years ago where a guy was worried about taking is .308 on a plains game hunt because he might onlyh wound an animal with good shot placement, due to the wimpy .308 not driving the bullet deeply enough. This is about as loony as we get, and any body who thinks the .308 won't penetrate enough simply doesn't have enough field experience.

My wife has used the .308 on a pile of African plains game up to a big Burchells zebra, as heavy as most elk and chunkier than all but the biggest bulls, and with a long reputation for toughness. A 150 E-Tip in the chest put it down pronto. And that is the way things work.

Mr. AussieGunWriter;
I believe you hit the proverbial nail on the head.

The first inkling I had of that was when I�d moved from an �06 to shooting a .338 and my late father was shooting a 6.5x55 I�d made up for him from a surplus �96.

Much to my chagrin, on deer sized animals, the 6.5 worked about as well as my old �06 loads had, and as it turned out for me anyway about as good as the .338 seemed to as well.

Thanks for permission to delay coming to terms with all this though. I am not finished in my search for the �ultimate� rifle/bullet combination. I guess I hope to never find it so I can keep on looking and hopefully learning.

Regards,
Dwayne

I have some field experience with a variety of cartridges. Although 375HH type power is good, the smaller calibers are equally good under the right circumstance. This fall i shot a medium size black bear to make some sausage. he was 125yds away and calm, I put a 168gr tsx from my 30-06 between his shoulder blades, looked like a pop can went through it, he never moved off the spot he was shot. My Sako Finnlight is an accurate easy to shoot rifle. The only rounds fired from a rest are for load development all the rest are off hand. i believe shot placement with adequate power and a good bullet has more influence on the results than anything else.

I have both used and seen the big 30's and the 308 used on game. My thoughts are best expressed by these quotes..."Sir, I knew Jack Kennedy and you're no Jack Kennedy." Also, "you can fool some of the people all...."

I don't believe any of those. I use what works for me.

A lot of folks tout the "out west" point like it's some kind of holy grail or something. Well I grew up out west. Born in AZ, lived there 20 years. 8 years total in NM, 5 in MT. Moved here in '04. I can safely say that with the exception of out-of-state hunters, I saw more 30-06, .270, and .308's in use in those three states than I did .300 magnums. Now add the .280, 6.5x55, 25-06, and 7x57 to the mix. Sure, a few guys loved their 7mm Rems and one or two I knew toted a .300 Winnie on occasion, but they didn't kill game any better or faster at any range. But then none of those guys would ever have even thought about considering shooting an animal in the arse from 400 or 500 or even 50 yards away hoping to reach his vitals either.

It seems to me that certain people operate under the mistaken belief that anyone really gives a schitt what they shoot and feel obliged to defend their choice. I don't care one bit. I have less experience than Charlie Sisk or Mule Deer or, most likely, you. I just use what works for me. But my limited experience leads me to agree with Charlie.

Like I said, to each his own.

Come on, talk about a red herring. There's a HUGE relative difference between a 22LR and a 22-250, not nearly the case with a 308 Win and a 300 Mag. To make your comparison of a 22LR and a 22-250 reasonable we'd be comparing a 300 Whisper loaded to about 600 fps with a 150 solid and a normally loaded 300 mag with a good 180 grain bullet; nobody here is making that argument.

I can't speak to what you've heard or seen, but I've shot big animals (moose, caribou, bears) with a 300 Win, 30-06 and 308 Win. Bullet placement was similar with all of them. My sample hasn't yet shown the difference in velocity to make a discernable difference in performance, neither has anything else I've seen. One can talk about a hypothetical difference, but that difference isn't easy to demonstrate in the field.

My thoughts exactly..

A more accurate comparison would be say, between the .223 and the .22-250...