I think that performing a necropsy enables the discerning hunter to better develop effective loads for his/her chosen firearm. Sharing the results (photos) in my opinion is useful. If we really are concerned with humanely killing game, don't you want to know how your bullet is performing internally? I certainly do. I too am not a small-bore fan for hunting or for personal preotection -- hence the .44 mag that I strap on. It all comes down to the load you use in your various handguns. As Hitman pointed out, some loads perform better on some game than others. I personally wouldn't load light bullets in any of mine as I am always planning for the worst case scenario where penetration is at a premium, not necessarily tayloring a particular load to game, but tayloring a load for the gun that maximizes its effectiveness on the heaviest or toughest of game. I'm not a big fan of hollow-points, but I would use them on thin-skinned game like deer in a heartbeat -- man is also thin skinned -- as is evident by some of the responses I am reading here........

Whitworth, I am not thinned skinned as you insinuated some of us are.

But don't try to tell me, a 380 ACP, 9 mm, 40 S&W or 45 ACP are going to perform like a 41 Mag or larger round. Just how can bullets and rounds such as the one mentioned above, compare to normal handgun hunting rounds, 41 mag and above?

We as hunter's using handgun for the most part know what bullets work best. At least I thought most knew. I don't need a bunch of pictures of blown up game to know what bullets do, I have first hand experience in the field to show me that.

Will hollow point bullets work in the field, yes they will, but the correctly constructed hollow point, not your run of the mill personal defense hollow point which is designed to expand rapidly.

I just assumed being in a handgun hunting area, I would not have to sift through a bunch of post on non- hunting related threads. If I want to know about personal protection gun, I will go to the pistol forum.

But like you said, everyone sees it differently, I just don't agree with it. Any thing we do as hunters reflects on all of us, posting pictures of blow up animals is not what the non-hunting community, which out number us by the way, want to see.

Too bad that some can not draw the parrelels. A 45 ACP is not a 41 mag, but as the Deer that I have killed with it can attest it is very effective and their lungs were completely distroyed with one shot. What more can one ask? Apperently results do not satisfy those that have an agenda..

quote:

Originally posted by Redhawk1:
But like you said, everyone sees it differently, I just don't agree with it. Any thing we do as hunters reflects on all of us, posting pictures of blow up animals is not what the non-hunting community, which out number us by the way, want to see.

This is a hunting comunity, remember?

No one is forcing you to read threads that you don't want to read. This is still the land of the free and home of the brave and there is no mandate for anyone to read anything that does not interest them.

I don't recall anyone advocating the use of a 9mm or .380 on game, so I don't know where you are going with this. A .41 mag improperly loaded isn't necessarily going to perform better than a .45 ACP so it is all relative. This all depends on the way a cartridge is loaded. I think with light bullets like 325s, the .480 isn't particularly effective (rather limited effectiveness). Same thing with your .510. Why is it that you are using such a light bullet relative to the large bore? This has puzzled me from the start, especially when we are drawing comparisons and declaring which round is better for hunting and which one should be relegated to only personal protection status. Even a black bear is capble of rearranging ones' physical being and they are responsible for more attacks that any other breed of bear. Personally I would want a "hammer" which the .510 certainly can be when loaded properly. This is more what determines a round's usefullness in the hunting fields assuming you have enough bore-size. This is why I don't agree with blanket statements about the .45 ACP not being a hunting round -- IT ALL DEPENDS ON HOW IT IS LOADED. Again, I don't like small-bores -- never had and never will. When I served, I was upset when the military went with the 9mm over the .45.......

Who is showing pictures of blown-up animals? A hole in a rib cage, broken shoulder, etc. are not gruesome in my opinion, and I find it very interesting when I compare my big-bore rifle damage to damage caused by supposedly inferior (at least balistically) handgun rounds. So, you see, there is a usefullness to it and I for one like to see the photos. Do you really know what your bullet is doing internally if you don't check? Wouldn't it be good to know if your bullet is coming apart, or deforming, or veering off course? Don't you want to know these things?? This is all useful information. This reminds me of the professional racecar driver that doesn't want to know how the car actually works.......

You are spot on Mr. Whitworth. Most do not realize the versitility of the 45 ACP the venerable warhorse can be loaded with a 265 grain flat point hard cast to 900+ FPS (Mikeg on shooters forum uses this load) and it is extremely effective. As MSHitman stated "don't impose your limitations on others"

quote:

Originally posted by jwp475:
You are spot on Mr. Whitworth. Most do not realize the versitility of the 45 ACP the venerable warhorse can be loaded with a 265 grain flat point hard cast to 900+ FPS (Mikeg on shooters forum uses this load) and it is extremely effective. As MSHitman stated "don't impose your limitations on others"

I'll bet this 265 grain load would be hell on two-legged varmints.

Whitworth, you're all feisty today. Who pissed in your Post Toasties? Necropsy is hardly what showing the interior of a dead animal is about and to show a shattered ribcage, is simply silly. The weakest part of the structure anatomically, anything, including a target arrow through there will eventually kill anything. Busting both shoulders on a Cape Buffalo would be rather impressive, but I don't know that there's many long guns that can pull that trick off, much less a pistol.

I also don't think (as Hitman implied in his Decorum post about families and children visiting the site) that all the blood and gore serves any purpose other than letting the anti's have more food for thought. The paper I write for and most of the magazines I contribute to insist that the downed animal be displayed "tastefully and respectfully".

As far as the "HUNTING", unless you have a macabre sense of direction, the "two legged varmnts" are not what I envision this forum being about. I'd go to Soldier of Fortune for that. Anyway, my Mafia friend tells me their handgun of choice is the .22 because of the damage it does once it penetrates the skin.

I know a properly loaded .475 will take out 3½ feet of rhino spine. Busting both shoulders on a Cape Buff would be impressive no doubt.

I preview the posts before letting the children look, but most have already been in on skinning deer. They know where their food comes from.

Feisty? No, just feel strongly about some of this stuff and therefore, I am defending my positions -- without resorting to insults I might add........

When we hunt, we skin out our own animals -- at least that is what I was taught from the beginning. Therefore, a little gore shouldn't be a problem for anyone who hunts or who intends to hunt and if it is too much for them, maybe they should take up something less visceral, like crochet, or lawn bowling. JMHO.

As far as the antis are concerned, it doesn't make a damn bit of difference what we put up as they have made up their minds and taken their positions irrespective of the facts. They can find something wrong in all that we do if we post up photos or not.

Oh, and I don't eat cereal -- so no one has pissed in my Post Toasties. That's no way to start any day.......

Wow this went from a discussion of handguns and bullets on light skin American game to large African game. It seems some have a diffcult time staying on track

quote:

Originally posted by george roof:
The paper I write for and most of the magazines I contribute to insist that the downed animal be displayed "tastefully and respectfully".
.

A google seach brought forth no articles by george roof. The search did reveal a tool for Taxidermy that was designed by george roof, but no articles

Whitworth, not one person resorted to insults here. So where did that come from?

Yes we as hunter skin out deer and get into blood and guts. But that is our choice.

But when you have people the could careless either way about hunting, seeing a bunch of pictures of how we big bad hunter blew apart a deer or animal, will surly drive them to the Anti-side, it is sad you don't see that.

It is not the anti- hunting crowd that I am worried about, I am concerned about it is the majority of people that don't care either way, which they are the majority. And yes the anti hunting crowd does not care what so ever, but no use driving the people on the fence to the anti side.

It is not different than seeing bubba driving down the road, with a deer on the roof of a car. It is not the image I want to portray us hunters too the public eye.

The reason I mentioned the 380 and 9 mm and the other rounds was, those were the defense rounds that were brought up in the hunting handgun forum.

But like I said earlier, we will probably disagree on this, but I will keep voicing my opinion on it, as long as I keep seeing it. Very distastefully and really unneeded to prove a point.

People on this site are a part of the pro hunting comunity..

quote:

Originally posted by Redhawk1:
Whitworth, not one person resorted to insults here. So where did that come from?

Yes we as hunter skin out deer and get into blood and guts. But that is our choice.

But when you have people the could careless either way about hunting, seeing a bunch of pictures of how we big bad hunter blew apart a deer or animal, will surly drive them to the Anti-side, it is sad you don't see that.

It is not the anti- hunting crowd that I am worried about, I am concerned about it is the majority of people that don't care either way, which they are the majority. And yes the anti hunting crowd does not care what so ever, but no use driving the people on the fence to the anti side.

It is not different than seeing bubba driving down the road, with a deer on the roof of a car. It is not the image I want to portray us hunters too the public eye.

The reason I mentioned the 380 and 9 mm and the other rounds was, those were the defense rounds that were brought up in the hunting handgun forum.

But like I said earlier, we will probably disagree on this, but I will keep voicing my opinion on it, as long as I keep seeing it. Very distastefully and really unneeded to prove a point.

Damn, you sure are defensive. I wasn't suggesting that you have resorted to insults, I was pointing out that I don't need to sling insults in order to argue a point.

If they are not into hunting, what in God's name are they doing on a hunting site, and particularly on the forum as specialized as handgun hunting? I could fathom antis coming around. Who posted a photo of a deer blown apart or any other animal for that matter? Why is there a tendency to over-dramatize the photos that a few of us have posted? Personally, I want to see what my bullets are doing as I have stated before on numerous occasions.

Whitworth, it is just your perception that I am defensive. That was why I ask where your insult comment came from. You are the one that sounds defensive now.

But I guess it is OK for you all to post your opinions, and I am suppose to respect them, but you all are not respecting my opinion. I guess it is a one way street here.

I think 95% of the other areas here, do not post graphic pictures of there game. The ones I have seen were in good taste.

Respecting your opinion and agreeing with you are not one in the same. I have the right to disagree with your positions and as long as I am not hurling personal insults, I am respecting you opinion. But, it is a two-way street.

I have no problem agreeing to disagree with anyone here.

I wonder why they outlawed Dueling??????

OLBIKER, that was a good one.

Whitworth, if you're referring to my remarks, that wasn't an intended as an insult in any way. Just an attempt at levity that your sunshine didn't make it in on today. But to answer your question as to why anyone not interested in hunting would be here, where do you think Ingrid Newkirk gets all those movies of "game preserve" hunting? At EVERY Wildlife Advisory Council we hold in Delaware, we have a representative of the Friends of Animals there. In Maryland, that silly assed Governor has an animal rights activists sitting ON the board. According to the IRS, PETA has more fiscal assets in it's organization that all our conservation organizations combined. One thing those people AREN'T is stupid. They use us in any way they can to sway young (and old) innocent minds using information WE SUPPLY THEM. Did you see the stink they made last week when the found that had a gun carrying grandmother inside their hierarchy??? They THINK we're dumb rednecked clods who aren't smart enough to do something like they'd do to us, to them. For the most part, we keep proving them to be right.

I think most rational people still view PETA as a radical fringe group. I'm not going to live my life in a state of paranoia because of them. They may not be stupid, George, but they are irrational and that is very clear to many people. And, most importantly, this is a hunting website -- a hunting website of which we are members. PETA isn't going to dictate the direction of anything here........

quote:

Originally posted by Whitworth:
I think most rational people still view PETA as a radical fringe group. I'm not going to live my life in a state of paranoia because of them. They may not be stupid, George, but they are irrational and that is very clear to many people. And, most importantly, this is a hunting website -- a hunting website of which we are members. PETA isn't going to dictate the direction of anything here........

Wrong, wrong, wrong. You would be surprised how many non-hunting, anti-hunting members come to hunting sites. Just looking for ammunition to use agents us.

Like George said, how do you think they come up with what they have already.

Nobody said you have to live in a state of paranoia. We just don't need the general public seeing a bunch of pictures of blown up animals.

Yes this is a hunting site, but should consider ourselves as ambassadors of the sport and show tasteful pictures.

If you don't think anti-hunting groups and people that are on the fence about hunting , don't come to all hunting web-sites, you are mistaken. People do web searches all the time. No just us hunter, but non-hunters as well.

Look at the pictures that this web site uses when you go to different areas, they are in good taste. I am talking about the pictures use on the top of each page. All done in good taste and no blown up animals.

quote:

Originally posted by Whitworth:

I think with light bullets like 325s, the .480 isn't particularly effective (rather limited effectiveness). Same thing with your .510. Why is it that you are using such a light bullet relative to the large bore? This has puzzled me from the start, especially when we are drawing comparisons and declaring which round is better for hunting and which one should be relegated to only personal protection status. Even a black bear is capble of rearranging ones' physical being and they are responsible for more attacks that any other breed of bear. Personally I would want a "hammer" which the .510 certainly can be when loaded properly. This is more what determines a round's usefullness in the hunting fields assuming you have enough bore-size........

I think you may need to brush up on your ballistics, the 350 gr. bullet at 1200 fps is plenty for any North American game. I don't need a 450 gr. bullet in my 510 GNR to get the job done.

How can you tell me a 350 gr. bullet at 1200 fps "isn't particularly effective (rather limited effectiveness)",
when a 240 or 300 gr. bullet in a 44 Mag is considered effective. I don't get your thinking here?

Please explain to me why or how you come up with this?

And what does all this have to do with what we are talking about anyways????????????

For a thread on decorum this is just killing me I might drop over from laughing to hard.

As Rodny King once said Can't we all just get along.

I'll be the first one to admitt that I like a good discusion along with some arguments. Heck I learn more from people discusing what rt or wrong then every body argeeing.

So let the fur fly. We all know that a 22 short place in the proper spot well kill some very big critters done it my self 1200 to 1500 pound steers come to mind. Plus we all know the biggest bullet place in the wrong spot and the critter can run along ways.

The perfect defensive hand gun should be as accurate as a 22 short target gun with as much recoil have at least a 20 round mag and hit as hard as a 50 bmg then only weigh about 6 oz.

S0o what the andswer each to his own I have carried very thing from the smallest 22/25 autos to 44mags they all have there place.

Where's that horse when you need him? Still, the following post appeared on the Taxidermy Net yesterday. ( http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9WypbzC6mi8&feature=related ) I sent it to several people because I thought it was just flat hilarius that a bunny got busted in a drive by, but I got several replys about "that's terrible". Undstand that I obviously didn't send them to anyone I'd consider animal rights activists, but they still reacted negatively.

And YES, I understand this is a hunting site, and NO I don't think we need to be "paranoid" about what the animal rights people think, but I DO, however, think we should act responsible and remember that this is a mass media public forum whereby anyone can lurk and extract information that could, can, and will be distorted when digested by the general public. We no longer strap deer and bear over the fenders of our cars. Not because they stopped putting fenders ON cars, but because of the possible negative impact to the non-hunting public who has no opinion - pro or con- about hunting.

quote:

Originally posted by Redhawk1:

quote:

Originally posted by Whitworth:
I think most rational people still view PETA as a radical fringe group. I'm not going to live my life in a state of paranoia because of them. They may not be stupid, George, but they are irrational and that is very clear to many people. And, most importantly, this is a hunting website -- a hunting website of which we are members. PETA isn't going to dictate the direction of anything here........

Wrong, wrong, wrong. You would be surprised how many non-hunting, anti-hunting members come to hunting sites. Just looking for ammunition to use agents us.

Like George said, how do you think they come up with what they have already.

Nobody said you have to live in a state of paranoia. We just don't need the general public seeing a bunch of pictures of blown up animals.

Yes this is a hunting site, but should consider ourselves as ambassadors of the sport and show tasteful pictures.

If you don't think anti-hunting groups and people that are on the fence about hunting , don't come to all hunting web-sites, you are mistaken. People do web searches all the time. No just us hunter, but non-hunters as well.

Look at the pictures that this web site uses when you go to different areas, they are in good taste. I am talking about the pictures use on the top of each page. All done in good taste and no blown up animals.

"Wrong, wrong, wrong"?? Again -- your opinion presented as dogma. This is exactly what we are talking about. I said that I know the antis come around to these site, but who in the hell are we catering to?? PETA?? Non-hunters?? Or ourselves, HUNTERS? Think about it and not on a surface level. Trophy photos are one thing, but these would be "technical" photos if this was an automotive site, and not pretty photos of the exterior.

quote:

Originally posted by Redhawk1:

quote:

Originally posted by Whitworth:

I think with light bullets like 325s, the .480 isn't particularly effective (rather limited effectiveness). Same thing with your .510. Why is it that you are using such a light bullet relative to the large bore? This has puzzled me from the start, especially when we are drawing comparisons and declaring which round is better for hunting and which one should be relegated to only personal protection status. Even a black bear is capble of rearranging ones' physical being and they are responsible for more attacks that any other breed of bear. Personally I would want a "hammer" which the .510 certainly can be when loaded properly. This is more what determines a round's usefullness in the hunting fields assuming you have enough bore-size........

I think you may need to brush up on your ballistics, the 350 gr. bullet at 1200 fps is plenty for any North American game. I don't need a 450 gr. bullet in my 510 GNR to get the job done.

How can you tell me a 350 gr. bullet at 1200 fps "isn't particularly effective (rather limited effectiveness)",
when a 240 or 300 gr. bullet in a 44 Mag is considered effective. I don't get your thinking here?

Please explain to me why or how you come up with this?

And what does all this have to do with what we are talking about anyways????????????

You quoted me and still didn't comprehend what I said. I said (go back again and read it) that the 325 grain .480 loads weren't particularly effective and I know as I have actually used them on game, when there was nothing else available for the .480 Ruger. This a light bullet for the .475 caliber. A 350 grainer is even lighter for caliber when it is a .510 bore. Maybe you need to brush up on your ballistics. If you do something you have NO tollerance if someone calls you to question. Is it plenty for North American game because you have decided so or because Gary Reeder said so? A 300 grain .44 mag is a 300 grain bullet at a .429 bore. This is a very heavy bullet for the diameter. How can you draw this comparison when the .44 in this case has WAY better sectional density than a 350 at .510 bore? Do you not see that this is a really bad comparison?

Let's look at sectional densities.
240 grain .429 bore = .186
300 grain .429 bore = .232
300 grain .452 bore = .210
350 grain .452 bore = .245
325 grain .476 bore = .205
420 grain .476 bore = .265
350 grain .510 bore = .192
450 grain .510 bore = .247
525 grain .510 bore = .288

The numbers speak for themselves.

What does this have to do with the argument at hand? Everything. You stated that defense calibers aren't effective for hunting and I pointed out that it all comes down to how a cartridge is loaded -- PERIOD. Therefore, this is very pertinent. You espouse a caliber's effectiveness, and then you hobble your own .510 with really light bullets for caliber. Do you recall that you have ad nauseum spoken of the virtues of heavy for caliber bullets such as 700 grainers for your .500 Smith? Well now you have jumped up in bore size, and cut the bullet weight in half. Does this make sense? Have you perfomed any penetration tests on this load? This load is a contradiction to your own philosophy.

quote:

Originally posted by Redhawk1:

quote:

Originally posted by Whitworth:

I think with light bullets like 325s, the .480 isn't particularly effective (rather limited effectiveness). Same thing with your .510. Why is it that you are using such a light bullet relative to the large bore? This has puzzled me from the start, especially when we are drawing comparisons and declaring which round is better for hunting and which one should be relegated to only personal protection status. Even a black bear is capble of rearranging ones' physical being and they are responsible for more attacks that any other breed of bear. Personally I would want a "hammer" which the .510 certainly can be when loaded properly. This is more what determines a round's usefullness in the hunting fields assuming you have enough bore-size........

I think you may need to brush up on your ballistics, the 350 gr. bullet at 1200 fps is plenty for any North American game. I don't need a 450 gr. bullet in my 510 GNR to get the job done.

How can you tell me a 350 gr. bullet at 1200 fps "isn't particularly effective (rather limited effectiveness)",
when a 240 or 300 gr. bullet in a 44 Mag is considered effective. I don't get your thinking here?

Please explain to me why or how you come up with this?

And what does all this have to do with what we are talking about anyways????????????

WOW, to think the man that advocated a 700 grain bullet in the 500 S&W (.500 Bore) is now advocating only a 350 grain bullet in a .510 bore. Contridiction???? I'll say.

The 325 grain hollow point out of a 480 Ruger penetrated the same amount as did the 230 Gold Dot out of the 45 ACP. Is that stellar performance? The 350 gr .510 diameter bullet is not a good penetrator, did you do any penetration test? Since you have now switched sides and are advocating bullets with limited penetration ability, then by that logic the 45 ACP wihich will penetrate the same should now be considered adequate for Black Bear. Make the parrelels to defensive cartridges and hunting cartridges even closer.

quote:

Originally posted by jwp475:

quote:

Originally posted by Redhawk1:

quote:

Originally posted by Whitworth:

I think with light bullets like 325s, the .480 isn't particularly effective (rather limited effectiveness). Same thing with your .510. Why is it that you are using such a light bullet relative to the large bore? This has puzzled me from the start, especially when we are drawing comparisons and declaring which round is better for hunting and which one should be relegated to only personal protection status. Even a black bear is capble of rearranging ones' physical being and they are responsible for more attacks that any other breed of bear. Personally I would want a "hammer" which the .510 certainly can be when loaded properly. This is more what determines a round's usefullness in the hunting fields assuming you have enough bore-size........

I think you may need to brush up on your ballistics, the 350 gr. bullet at 1200 fps is plenty for any North American game. I don't need a 450 gr. bullet in my 510 GNR to get the job done.

How can you tell me a 350 gr. bullet at 1200 fps "isn't particularly effective (rather limited effectiveness)",
when a 240 or 300 gr. bullet in a 44 Mag is considered effective. I don't get your thinking here?

Please explain to me why or how you come up with this?

And what does all this have to do with what we are talking about anyways????????????

WOW, to think the man that advocated a 700 grain bullet in the 500 S&W (.500 Bore) is now advocating only a 350 grain bullet in a .510 bore. Contridiction???? I'll say.

The 325 grain hollow point out of a 480 Ruger penetrated the same amount as did the 230 Gold Dot out of the 45 ACP. Is that stellar performance? The 350 gr .510 diameter bullet is not a good penetrator, did you do any penetration test? Since you have now switched sides and are advocating bullets with limited penetration ability, then by that logic the 45 ACP wihich will penetrate the same should now be considered adequate for Black Bear. Make the parrelels to defensive cartridges and hunting cartridges even closer.

For the benefit of those who may have jwp on ignore.......

Not to be very picky, but how we present ourselves can be very important and it's always a good idea to use the correct word for the situation. No need to further the image of undereducated Neanderthals the antis like to portray us as.

agents = a person acting or doing business for another

against = in opposition to

quote:

Originally posted by MS Hitman:
Not to be very picky, but how we present ourselves can be very important and it's always a good idea to use the correct word for the situation. No need to further the image of undereducated Neanderthals the antis like to portray us as.

agents = a person acting or doing business for another

against = in opposition to

I agree not a good idea to be casting stones when living in a glass house

quote:

Originally posted by jwp475:

quote:

Originally posted by MS Hitman:
Not to be very picky, but how we present ourselves can be very important and it's always a good idea to use the correct word for the situation. No need to further the image of undereducated Neanderthals the antis like to portray us as.

agents = a person acting or doing business for another

against = in opposition to

I agree not a good idea to be casting stones when living in a glass house

Amen to that.

[Quote]Originally posted by Redhawk1:
We just don't need the general public seeing a bunch of pictures of blown up animals. [Quote]



When blowing up animals the proper choice of explosive is just as important as the proper bullet when just shooting an animal VS blowing one up. What is your choice of explosive, C-4 or TNT or Dynamite?

quote:

Originally posted by jwp475:
[QUOTE]Originally posted by Redhawk1:
We just don't need the general public seeing a bunch of pictures of blown up animals.

[QUOTE]


When blowing up animals the proper choice of explosive is just as important as the proper bullet when just shooting an animal VS blowing one up. What is your choice of explosive, C-4 or TNT or Dynamite?

LOL!! I just spit coffee on my keyboard! Thank you for adding some levity to this thread!

quote:

Originally posted by MS Hitman:
Not to be very picky, but how we present ourselves can be very important and it's always a good idea to use the correct word for the situation. No need to further the image of undereducated Neanderthals the antis like to portray us as.

agents = a person acting or doing business for another

against = in opposition to

Thank you MR spell check.. I misspelled a word. I am so sorry.

Whitworth,
It appears I have chosen the wrong bullets to use in my handguns. I will call the bullet casters and tell them to quit selling people them bullets, and come to the AR site and get the proper bullet weight for each handgun out there. I will direct them to this thread. I am sure they will learn tons from people that will tell them so.

Man I hope if I do have a chance of shooting a bear with my extra light 350 gr. bullet in my 510 GNR, that it will work. I am concerned now. Maybe I should just take my S&W 500 mag, with them heavy 370 gr. bullets I use to kill a black bear with 2 years ago. Wait, I think they may be to light for that, I will load up some 700 gr. bullets just to make sure...

Wow.. I almost messed up big time, glad I check this out today, I have a few day to get ready...lol

redhawk1,

mispelled the word, absolutely not, sir! You were spot on the spelling; Olympic gold quality in my opinion.

I hope you bag a big bear. Good luck!

Can't you do better than that? Why the sarcasm? You just don't get it, do you. Who advocates using light for caliber bullets? Who, Redhawk1? Who? No one is saying that your shorty 350 grainer won't kill a black bear (they are not a thick skinned animal), I am just saying that it is way less than optimal -- which contradicts your claim that .45 ACPs aren't hunting handguns. My point was that how a cartridge is loaded is more important than how it is classified: as personal defense or hunting. Something you are failing to grasp. You don't see too many people looking to load their Casulls (as an example) with 200 grain bullets, do you? Nope, people go in the other direction to increase their penetration potential....... Damn, I thought you knew and subscribed to that.

quote:

Originally posted by MS Hitman:
redhawk1,

mispelled the word, absolutely not, sir! You were spot on the spelling; Olympic gold quality in my opinion.

I hope you bag a big bear. Good luck!

MS Hitman, I really have fun going back and forth with some of the guys here. And thanks for the bag a big bear, wish.

I hope I have luck to, but I may be pushing it with my 350 gr. 510 Bullet..lol

You still don't get the point of this discussion.

quote:

Originally posted by Whitworth:
Can't you do better than that? Why the sarcasm? You just don't get it, do you. Who advocates using light for caliber bullets? Who, Redhawk1? Who? No one is saying that your shorty 350 grainer won't kill a black bear (they are not a thick skinned animal), I am just saying that it is way less than optimal -- which contradicts your claim that .45 ACPs aren't hunting handguns. My point was that how a cartridge is loaded is more important than how it is classified: as personal defense or hunting. Something you are failing to grasp. You don't see too many people looking t load their Casulls or other caliber handguns with 200 grain bullets, do you? Nope, people go in the other direction to increase their penetration potential....... Damn, I thought you knew and subscribed to that.

Whitworth, you know I like big bullets and big holes. I don't like ultra light bullets, but I don't consider 350 gr. a ultra light bullet even in a .510 cal round.

The S&W 500 Mag has some loads that use 275 gr. bullets, I do consider them light for the caliber, but once you get over 325 gr, it is in my opinion a heavier bullet. To me the 370 and 440 gr. bullets in a 500 Mag are the optimal weight.

The 510 is so close to the 500 cal, I make no differentiation between the two as for bullet weight.

Just like my 460 Mag, I don't use them 200 gr. bullets, I use 300 and 370 gr. bullets in it. No need to go larger in my opinion.

As for me being sarcastic, that is just one of my flaws.

quote:

Originally posted by Whitworth:
You still don't get the point of this discussion.

I guess if I don't agree with you, I will not get the point of this discussion. Or maybe I just don't understand where your coming from or going with it all.

It would also be nice to have this discussion with you, without having you post JWP post up. I don't see the validity of his post on this what so ever.