With regards to all the .44 Mag "bashing"; I posted this in another thread on this forum;

"

Posted 28 November 2010 16:23 Hide Post
I connected this weekend. Doe at 50 yards with my .38-40 shooting a 200 grain LFN at 1,300 fps. Facing toward me on an angle, bullet entered the left shoulder high (was in a tree stand) and exited the right hindquarter low. She ran about 50 yards to the edge of the field and flopped over. Revolver, check; ammo, check; knife, check; camera, uh-oh."

Just for those who don't know; this is a .401" diameter bullet; kinda makes up for the .44/.429 thing Whitworth. jwp475 seems to like his .41 Mags just fine. These smaller calibers are fine, but they will never have the same impact on large game as the .476 and .51 caliber rounds. This is a fact, for sure and for certain; not a slight on the .44 Mag and smaller calibers.

So I just don't see why certain individual's feathers are so ruffled.

As far as the so-called .44 bashing is concerned, I know in my case I am simply pushing back. Nothing against the .44 -- it's not the end-all, be-all, but I still have a couple anad always will.

That said, love my .50 cals!!

Not sure that I want in this, but Im gonna anyway. LOL
I can see you alls point for going bigger, such as the 475 and 500s. I dont feel the need. My 44s are plenty. Theyve killed everything Ive ever shot with either. (Ones a Winchester, others a Black Hawk) Thier is a very wide range of loads, from light to heavy, and compnents are much easier to find and lower in price in most cases, which appeals a great deal to me. You all can have your hand cannons if thats what you prefer, Im content with my little 429.

I have stayed out of this, I like my .44 because it has never failed me. I do like the bigger guns too.
But to claim the .22 and .38 has killed a lot of deer sounds so silly let alone all deer dropped in place with a .38! Of course everything has killed deer but just how many have been lost with the silly guns? Never in any single post has anyone said deer were lost---a lot of them in fact.
The simple fact is that a .38 can flatten on a spine or skull while the .22 can penetrate them. But a .22 or .38 through the lungs might make the deer sore for a while.
Bring both here and hunt and for every deer lost you will get beat with a large stick.
Any takers?

quote:

Originally posted by Farrier Matt:
Not sure that I want in this, but Im gonna anyway. LOL
I can see you alls point for going bigger, such as the 475 and 500s. I dont feel the need. My 44s are plenty. Theyve killed everything Ive ever shot with either. (Ones a Winchester, others a Black Hawk) Thier is a very wide range of loads, from light to heavy, and compnents are much easier to find and lower in price in most cases, which appeals a great deal to me. You all can have your hand cannons if thats what you prefer, Im content with my little 429.

No doubt, Matt. There is a lot of good to say about the .44 mag, but to outright reject the bigger bores as somehow only being a fad is not being reasonable in the least.

quote:

Originally posted by bfrshooter:
I have stayed out of this, I like my .44 because it has never failed me. I do like the bigger guns too.
But to claim the .22 and .38 has killed a lot of deer sounds so silly let alone all deer dropped in place with a .38! Of course everything has killed deer but just how many have been lost with the silly guns? Never in any single post has anyone said deer were lost---a lot of them in fact.
The simple fact is that a .38 can flatten on a spine or skull while the .22 can penetrate them. But a .22 or .38 through the lungs might make the deer sore for a while.
Bring both here and hunt and for every deer lost you will get beat with a large stick.
Any takers?

Get that large stick ready, Jim!

whitworth, the .454 has done fine in many cases and when bullets that can handle the stress of the velocity are used it does great. it does great on game and it's just a matter of load choosing.

no i don't want to trade in my .454 for a .44 though i have several and i use them hunting, it's cuz of trajectory and i work hard to be able to use the 454 at the ranges i use it at. that said i would never tell anyone that i would ever feel undergunned with the .44. i just use the right load for the job

as far as pushback, no one blasts the 50 cals etc. you just look at it as people not jumping on the bandwagon some of you are riding on, i applaud you and your choices, but b/c i say i don't see a need for certain calibers for my hunting doesn't mean i'm demeaning yours. when has someone really criticized a 500 linebaugh?

no one has.

and......all that 50 ak/500 linebaugh paper comparo shows is that the 50 ak bullets weren't up to the stress the larger caliber provided. use punch bullets and post results, also the 50 AK is gonna have a larger wound channel. just remember not everyone uses hardcasts all the time. you pin me with the tag of jacketed velocity bullet freak and i'm neither. haven't shot a jacketed bullet at game out of my guns in years. i use hardcast alot, it's just not the best or right tool for every job.

jwp, it took awhile this time, but like clockwork you got to hunting credential questioning again....classy. now post those same pics again, please.

is there really any question why supporters of the .44 mag feel a bit put upon.

quote:

Get that large stick ready, Jim! Big Grin

I sure do. We both know larger works better but the .44 is no slouch. To claim mouse guns kill deer with every shot when a house cat can run away after being shot makes my head spin.
I think I will splinter my stick before it is over. No one with any sense will challenge my offer.
Next someone will claim the .38 S&W is fantastic! Maybe a .25 auto!

quote:

Originally posted by tradmark:
and......all that 50 ak/500 linebaugh paper comparo shows is that the 50 ak bullets weren't up to the stress the larger caliber provided. use punch bullets and post results, also the 50 AK is gonna have a larger wound channel. just remember not everyone uses hardcasts all the time. you pin me with the tag of jacketed velocity bullet freak and i'm neither. haven't shot a jacketed bullet at game out of my guns in years. i use hardcast alot, it's just not the best or right tool for every job.

Go back and read what I said about the limitations of lead bullets. The bottom line is that guys who hunt with higher velocity cartridges like the .454 and the .460 Smith usually use jacketed expanding bullets. Most of the bigger manufacturers of ammo for these calibers push light-weight expanding bullet loads. These choices limit penetrative ability considerably. How many guys do you know actually hunt with Punch bullets in their .454s? I have stated a multitude of times that the only bullets that will get you more penetration when pushed faster are the Punch, CorBon Penetrator, etc.

And yes, if you read the OP's numerous anti-big-bore posts, you will understand the push-back. There is plenty of mud-slinging on his part.

[QUOTE]Originally posted by tradmark:
jwp, it took awhile this time, but like clockwork you got to hunting credential questioning again....classy. now post those same pics again, please.

QUOTE]


It obviously wouldn't matter if I post 1000 different pictures you would not get the point. If you were capable of getting the point you already would have gotten the point.

I take it that you are not willing to list your experience, but are willing to expound on your half-baked theories and/or beliefs, none of which provide any basis of fact.

Another determining factor for me is the amount of meat damaged. I dont care for hollow points or any type of bullet that expands very much because of the loss of meat. I would much prefer to shoot a deer under the ear with a Hornet than through the shoulder with a 44mag. I am curious as to how the larger magnum rounds perform as to blood shot meat compared to the 44.

whitworth, i know several that use punch bullets and corbon penetrators. in fact most of the handgun hunters i hunt with, when on an expensive hunt for game larger than elk usually do, in fact, so do those that use the 460.

that said, i'll post several of the linebaugh results that leave several paths to interpretation.



jwp........i just don't agree with you always, and never will, it's certainly not a matter of intelligence. i think it's more of a matter of an old crusty man behind a keyboard getting pissed and taking disagreement as a personal affront, which it is not.
i have provided plenty of experience here and on other websites where i haven't been in some time, but you pulled the same nonsense there as you have on several forums. in fact, a couple of guys i go handgun hunting buffalo with every year for the last 10 years or so basically said to hell with dealing with you in the past and would just not rather argue and deal with your insults. you just cannot handle that your way is not the only way. you certainly are not the only one here that has shot big animals.

in fact, several of us had a bet how quickly you'd take my post and pics from the site i posted them on the oryx and spew your vitriol here. one hunter said you had more class than that, i disagreed and said it would be within days. i was right.

quote:

Another determining factor for me is the amount of meat damaged. I dont care for hollow points or any type of bullet that expands very much because of the loss of meat. I would much prefer to shoot a deer under the ear with a Hornet than through the shoulder with a 44mag. I am curious as to how the larger magnum rounds perform as to blood shot meat compared to the 44.

About the same. I have had very little meat damage with all of them, butchering to the holes. It is only boolit composition that changes that. A deer shot with the .500 JRH will not have blown up meat but will have great internal damage. There REALLY is a difference in stopping power yet you do not have to destroy the animal.
Your boolit, bullet choice and velocity will govern that, not the caliber. There is just nothing wrong with shooting deer with the large guns.
Even a .44 with the wrong bullet can make a mess of a deer---or lose it.

quote:

Originally posted by tradmark:
whitworth, i know several that use punch bullets and corbon penetrators. in fact most of the handgun hunters i hunt with, when on an expensive hunt for game larger than elk usually do, in fact, so do those that use the 460.

that said, i'll post several of the linebaugh results that leave several paths to interpretation.



jwp........i just don't agree with you always, and never will, it's certainly not a matter of intelligence. i think it's more of a matter of an old crusty man behind a keyboard getting pissed and taking disagreement as a personal affront, which it is not.
i have provided plenty of experience here and on other websites where i haven't been in some time, but you pulled the same nonsense there as you have on several forums. in fact, a couple of guys i go handgun hunting buffalo with every year for the last 10 years or so basically said to hell with dealing with you in the past and would just not rather argue and deal with your insults. you just cannot handle that your way is not the only way. you certainly are not the only one here that has shot big animals.

in fact, several of us had a bet how quickly you'd take my post and pics from the site i posted them on the oryx and spew your vitriol here. one hunter said you had more class than that, i disagreed and said it would be within days. i was right.

Agreeing with me has nothing to do with anything, but you should agree with a preponderance of the evidence. To share your hunt results posted on another board with Eland Slayer is a sharing of information and facts and is also pertainent to his thread.
Your claim of better performance with expanding bullets is not upheld by your own results
Learning and sharing information should be the main objective on these forums, not personality clashes.

quote:

jwp........i just don't agree with you always, and never will, it's certainly not a matter of intelligence. i think it's more of a matter of an old crusty man behind a keyboard getting pissed and taking disagreement as a personal affront, which it is not.
i have provided plenty of experience here and on other websites where i haven't been in some time, but you pulled the same nonsense there as you have on several forums. in fact, a couple of guys i go handgun hunting buffalo with every year for the last 10 years or so basically said to hell with dealing with you in the past and would just not rather argue and deal with your insults. you just cannot handle that your way is not the only way. you certainly are not the only one here that has shot big animals.

in fact, several of us had a bet how quickly you'd take my post and pics from the site i posted them on the oryx and spew your vitriol here. one hunter said you had more class than that, i disagreed and said it would be within days. i was right.

Old and crusty might be right. JWP has shot large animals but I might have shot more deer then he has. I feel he does not relate to the differences.
I am old and crusty too!
Yet each shot, each kill or loss is a teaching thing that can't be ignored. Our job is to stop loss of animals.

Deer are smaller than elk, buffalo, etc. but I believe that they all die the same, by putting a bullet through the vitals - even though deer are pretty thin-skinned.

quote:

Posted 15 January 2011 18:52 Hide Post
Deer are smaller than elk, buffalo, etc. but I believe that they all die the same, by putting a bullet through the vitals - even though deer are pretty thin-skinned.

My friend, you know for a fact that that things can fail.

quote:

Originally posted by bfrshooter:

quote:

Posted 15 January 2011 18:52 Hide Post
Deer are smaller than elk, buffalo, etc. but I believe that they all die the same, by putting a bullet through the vitals - even though deer are pretty thin-skinned.

My friend, you know for a fact that that things can fail.

?????????????

jwp, actually it did show superior results, but you took from my words what you wanted to and you have initiated more personality clashes here than anyone. of course, you're well known for that so trying to take a highroad now is just not gonna work. a legend in your own mind.

quote:

Originally posted by tradmark:
jwp, actually it did show superior results, but you took from my words what you wanted to and you have initiated more personality clashes here than anyone. of course, you're well known for that so trying to take a highroad now is just not gonna work. a legend in your own mind.

Eland Slayer posted that the lungs were destroyed, both you and he shot your animal's 4 times, these are facts and with those facts the results do not bear out your assertion that expanding bullet are superior in the game fields.

my point was that they put a bigger hole through the vitals, and they do.
1) what part of his oryx was hit and then ran off 300 yards and mine was hit and collapsed on the spot to bleed out until i pushed it. the second shot was limited to the shooting lane and didn't hit the vitals so it really didn't contribute. the next two were taken in rapid succession until it quit moving. it took ONE shot. his whole episode lasted well over half an hour, mine a few minutes at best. these are things you weren't able to sort out of my post of the hunt. then again i wouldn't expect you to be able to. it was long and had lots of words and you twist things to your agenda which is just silly. my guide was the owner of the other site. why don't you just ask him if the oryx would've expired on the spot had i not pushed it. you won't b/c it wouldn't support your "view".

You guys can't possibly be still snowed in up there, surely!
Peter.

Tradmark, I know that the two of you have clashed in the past, but I see jwp actually engaging you in a debate and you have not missed the opportuniy to take a shot at him personally in every subsequent post: "legend in your own mind," "then again i wouldn't expect you to be able to. it was long and had lots of words," "an old crusty man behind the keyboard." And that was just from your last three posts.

Now, you guys don't have to like or even respect each other, but the personal insults simply aren't necessary.

Play nice, kids.

tradmark,

The question begs to be asked; why did you push an animal that was down and bleeding, causing it to get up and you shooting it three more times? Seems stupid to me, but then I wasn't there; you may have just gotten too excited.

Tradmark, Eland Slayer used a 44 mag, you used a 454. Those are facts that get let out of your rebuttals


Another point that is missed is a large enough wound channel is exactly that large enough and any larger matters none as these pictures clearly demonstrate.



The wound in Cottonstalks Deer:


Originally posted by cottonstalk:

I am going to show you...the entrance




And now the exit:





If a larger hole had been made through the heart there would have been no difference in the length of time needed to bring rapid incapacitation to the animal, because the wound is more than large enough. An expanding bullet may or may not leave a larger diameter wound, there are many variables that came into play here.

quote:

tradmark,

The question begs to be asked; why did you push an animal that was down and bleeding, causing it to get up and you shooting it three more times? Seems stupid to me, but then I wasn't there; you may have just gotten too excited.

You'd be surprised how hard simple is on some people

well, it wasn't b/c it was still moving. i thought it was dead.

and yes.....i was excited.

This thread has me thinking of Gary Reeder.

What about taking a .500JRH, or .475 Linebaugh case, and necking it down to .429"?

Like most of his stuff, I wonder about it....

quote:

Originally posted by GS:
This thread has me thinking of Gary Reeder.

What about taking a .500JRH, or .475 Linebaugh case, and necking it down to .429"?

Like most of his stuff, I wonder about it....

The question would be "why?" The big advantage you have with these two cartridges are diameter.

Reeder doesn't like heavy bullets, or recoil. So, by necking down the big cases, he gets the case capacity, and, the ability to use heavy for caliber bullets.

In other words, for example, you can get .454 ballistics, without the pretty absurd pressures, using the bigger case. Less violent recoil.

Don't see why you couldn't load 320-340 .429" bullets, like punches, or, heavy hollow points if you want expansion. The added case capacity would allow you to use heavier bullets, better penetration, and stay with reasonable pressure?

Just because we see things the same, doesn't mean their isn't someone out there that P.T. Barnum would love to buy this stuff...

In otherwords, you are trying to bark up the .416 Rigby with a handgun cartridge...

And when all is said and done, you still only have a .429 diameter bullet.

Guys on his forum swear by such stuff.

It makes little sense to me, either.

Just get the bigger caliber, and load it properly.

quote:

Originally posted by GS:
Reeder doesn't like heavy bullets, or recoil. So, by necking down the big cases, he gets the case capacity, and, the ability to use heavy for caliber bullets.

In other words, for example, you can get .454 ballistics, without the pretty absurd pressures, using the bigger case. Less violent recoil.

Don't see why you couldn't load 320-340 .429" bullets, like punches, or, heavy hollow points if you want expansion. The added case capacity would allow you to use heavier bullets, better penetration, and stay with reasonable pressure?

Just because we see things the same, doesn't mean their isn't someone out there that P.T. Barnum would love to buy this stuff...

In otherwords, you are trying to bark up the .416 Rigby with a handgun cartridge...

I have never seen the 44 mag out penetrate the 475 or for that matter the better 45 load not even when the 44 was shot from a rifle with quite a bit higher velocity. Bottle neck cartridges have their fari share of problems when fired from a revolver.

Necking down the the 475 defeats the purpose of the 475 and that is heavy bullets with a wide meplat

Reeder would argue the .454 ballistics are enough, and the bullet weight, but the pressure to get there, and the recoil, are too much. I tend to agree.

Better to use a bigger case to push the .454 bullets to the same velocity, with less pressure.

My view is the .454 is a solution to a problem 30 years ago, which we have solved with the bigger calibers, far better then the .454.

well, depends on what you're loading and how and what you're trying to do with it. the point is that all these calibers work. as far as a .44 mag not outpenetrating the biggies even at high velocities from a rifle is a bullet limitation, which it overcomes with penetrators and punch bullets. it'll never out penetrate a 475 or 454 out of a pistol which i wasn't aware of as being a debate, the question was if it was enough and i still maintain if you hit the vitals with a good load you'll never notice the difference, that we can disagree on. the 454 is a caliber i just see as versatile and don't understand the heavy recoil problem and the loads i use it really isn't very heavy imho. when i had a 475 if loaded to max had very punishing recoil, similiar to 454 max loads, i also think that alot of the perception of recoil is due to the 454 being used alot with jacketed bullets which give a higher subjective recoil level imho.

i've typically found corbon penetrator bullets, 405 at 1600fps to recoil harder out of my guide gun that hardcast loads at over 1900 fps. purely subjective of course, but my favorite load for all around shooting is a 340 grain beartooth load running at 1500 fps. not bad, and very accurate, does not recoil hard. my son got tested by our guide on his last hunt and was able to put all the rounds in a playing card sized group off hand at 30 yards which is what the shot from the stand would've been. i shot a small fallow doe at 85 yards paced off in low light with it. works great and very mild. penetrates for days as well. if ya want bigger, great, i love all these calibers even if i don't see them as better but the reeder calibers make no sense to me, sorry. the 510 gnr answers a question that was never asked.

510 GNR?
That was one of the few that sort of made sense.
Since I was having loads made up for the .500 Linebaugh, truth is, for 350 grain bullets, the case is too big. Try finding a load, with a current powder, that fills the case enough to be reliable. Also Reeder thinks 1350 with a 350 grain bullet is plenty for anything, in .500 Linebaugh. He claims guys have culled elephants with it.

The .510 GNR makes for more reliable ignition with slow burning powders, since the case is smaller. It's fug ugly, since the bullet seats out, in a really weird way, but, it gives you a smaller case, achieves the ballistic goal, and is more effective for a light bullet, in that caliber, then the bigger case.

I tried using the 350 grain bullets in the .500 Linebaugh case, loaded by his boy, Andy Rowe. The result, using AA 9, IIRC was pretty severe velocity variation, meaning accuracy suffered. Had one round go 1040, another over 1400 fps.

Rowe also used a cheaper primer then the CCI 350's that John Taffin states is neccessary
for consistent ignition in that case.

So, I have a few hundred rounds of .500 Linebaugh to shoot off and reload first.

Good news is the price was VERY good.

gs

How does it make sense with the bullet seated out to give it the case capacity of the Linebaugh? Especially when loaded to the same OAL? Why not just use a .500 Linebaugh? You can load that one with a 350 grainer if that floats your boat.

quote:

the reeder calibers make no sense to me, sorry. the 510 gnr answers a question that was never asked.

Could not agree more........