You cannot go wrong with a 7mm STW.

If you guys think that 3100 w/ 160s can't be achieved easily in many 7RMs at less than maximum pressures, You obviously don't have very much experience w/ loading a 7RM. I've seen it readlily achieved in 24" tubes w/ R22 and surpasses 3100 in 26" tubes.

Good Lord some folks never learn.

quote:

Evidently a 7mm is all the recoil you are able to handle, as your repeated comments on the RUM's recoil show. Therefore that must mean that it has the "same ballistic's" as any other round. And yes you did say they were the same ballisically

Oh you just had to resort to that, it doesn't surprise me.

Well I guess if 6-3", 240lbs and an avid Magnum Turkey load tester (Kick Harder than your little ole' RUM in light weight turkey guns) doesn't account for my tolerance for recoil I don't know what will.

Just keep thinking that your RUM is the biggest badest round ever envented. Those fractions of an inch and small amounts of energy are really going to put down dozens more elk than enyone elses little ole' Magnums.

I've had enough bickering w/ you about it on here. If you want to put your money where your mouth is come on over here to the local range and we'll shoot for groups.... My little ole' 8lb 7RM against your RUM. Be sure you don't have a muzzle break, your gun weighs around 8 lbs w/ scope, and leave your recoil pad at home since you apparently don't need it. After about 5 groups we'll see how the ole' shoulder looks.

Have a Good One

Reloader

And don't forget that the groups need be shot at 500 as this is kind of what this thread is about...

Mark D

quote:

Originally posted by Reloader:
If you guys think that 3100 w/ 160s can't be achieved easily in many 7RMs at less than maximum pressures, You obviously don't have very much experience w/ loading a 7RM. I've seen it readlily achieved in 24" tubes w/ R22 and surpasses 3100 in 26" tubes.

Once again it seems you are incapable of reading. No one said it couldn't be done, I said it wasn't "average".

quote:

Just keep thinking that your RUM is the biggest badest round ever envented.

Once again point out where I said that. Are you capable of having a debate? I know my RUM isn't the biggest baddest round ever. But it is a HELL OF A LOT MORE than a 7mm can or ever will be. This is not a guess, it's just fact.

quote:

Those fractions of an inch and small amounts of energy are really going to put down dozens more elk than enyone elses little ole' Magnums.

Now I'm really beginning to doubt that are you able to comprehend anything you read. What does the first line of my last post say? Are you able to read? And by the way if you run a 180gr. .30 @ 3400 and a 160gr. 7mm at 3100 you will see it's more than a "fraction" of an inch and "small" amount of energy.

quote:

I've had enough bickering w/ you about it on here. If you want to put your money where your mouth is come on over here to the local range and we'll shoot for groups.... My little ole' 8lb 7RM against your RUM.

Now your starting to sound like a child. What does "shooting for groups" have to do with the ballistic advantage of a .300 over a 7mm? If you shoot a tighter group than me does that mean that a 7mm is ballistically superior? Wasn't that the discussion here?

quote:

Be sure you don't have a muzzle break

No gun I own will ever have a muzzle break.

quote:

your gun weighs around 8 lbs w/ scope

How would you suggest that I lighten my rifle, and why would I do that anyway? The .300 rum I have is not the hardest kicking rifle I own, never said it was.

quote:

and leave your recoil pad at home since you apparently don't need it.

Why would I do that and when did I ever say I didn't need it? Do you put words in everyone's mouth or just the one's you don't agree with?

quote:

After about 5 groups we'll see how the ole' shoulder looks.

It will probably be a little red but no worse for wear. By the way what was the wager again?

Seems you're pretty bad at a debate yourself my friend.

quote:

Once again it seems you are incapable of reading. No one said it couldn't be done, I said it wasn't "average".

Hum.....

quote:

Reloader, if you can load a 7 REM mag to 3100 with 160's good for you. Don't know many people who can. Flatten any primers???

Never said it eh? Might want to get your story straight.

quote:

What does "shooting for groups" have to do with the ballistic advantage of a .300 over a 7mm?

Ok, now you've summed it up for me and I'm glad you did. You are the exact same as the guys that come to our range w/ their Ultra Mags and tell everyone about how fast they are and how they will flat out beat any cartridge in existence but, when they line up at the bench it knocks the snot out of them, gives them a absolutely terrible anticipation flinch, and their groups are the size of a garbage can. Oh yeah, that RUM is definitely going to bag them much more game than a 7RM or similar Magnum

If you honestly think that better groups "DO NOT" out weigh Ballistics, you have a really big learning curve ahead of you.

I'll be the first to tell you that a man w/ a 308 win that can out shoot me at 500 yards w/ my Magnums has a far better chance at being a succesful hunter. My ballistic advantage doesn't mean squat if the bullet doesn't go where it needs to.

Neverflinch,

If you honestly think that a man would have better luck harvesting elk or any other game for that matter at 500 yards w/ a 300 RUM vs a regular 7RM or similar cart., I feel sorry for the poor soul that takes your advice and buys one over the others. He will be badly misinformed w/ his choice and most likely well disappointed. There's a pile of guys that are advised by so called "experts" to buy the new big bad RUM and yet once they recieve it and find out how bad the recoil is in their new sporter field carring rifle that they never fire it but, a handful of times and think they are just on top of the game when that elk or deer presents himself at 500 yards. OTOH, when they get a rifle that is more user friendly, they are usually much more apt to sharpen their skills at the range.

quote:

run a 180gr. .30 @ 3400

Just looked over at Hodgdons sight and averaged their data, Man, you really got a load there. "Flatten any primers" as you say
Did you get this in a 24" tube? After all, that's what we are comparing on the 7.

quote:

By the way what was the wager again?

$100 $200 you name it, like I said bring a rifle that weighs around 8lbs scoped w/ no muzzle break because after all, if you are going to tote it up and down mountains, it doesn't need to be too heavy.

Look, You obviously can't comprehend that a 7RM w/ 160 ABs is in all Real World scenarios is close enough to the 300 Ultra w/ 180 ABs out to 500 yards that there is no significant advantage.


Refer to the ballistic chart I posted in a previous post, it reflects what I've been telling you the whole time but, you refuse to agree.

Once again you tell everyone that I said that the two are identical or that the 7RM beats the 300RUM . You apparently can't comprehend anything you read. I said there is no ballistic advantage when you compare the two out to 500 yards w/ the very popular 160 grain AB and the very popular 180 grain AB, two bullet weights that are most likely the two most common weights for the two cartriges at hand when the Elk is the game animal involved.

Once again I invite you, If you insist on a constant debate, put your money where your mouth is. It is much easier to settle a debate in person than over this silly internet posting squabble. We'll take two similarly equiped rifles to the range and see how much " more " effective your RUM is Don't worry, I'll be a good sport and buy you some beer w/ some of the money afterwards Heck, That's all I'd want to keep any way, you'd spend enough in your travels.

Oh yeah, Guys when you decide to throw away your 7RMs and other rifles because they will not work anymore. Drop me a message, I'm sure I can find someone that will put them to use

NF,

Come on and throw another silly debate post on here. I'll let this be my last so you can feel good about yourself and your mighty RUM.

Ya'll Have a Good One

Reloader

quote:

Originally posted by Mark Dobrenski:
And don't forget that the groups need be shot at 500 as this is kind of what this thread is about...

Mark D

My 375 RUM shoots darn accurate @ 500yd with 260gr Accubonds. Wait, if he got that, not only would it be a tad unpleasant to shoot from the bench, he would have to start posting in the big bore forum! Which is worse... <sigh>

First, "don't know many people who can" and "It can't be done" are not the same thing.

I also never said that "ballistic advantage" was more important than being able to shoot.

I have never gone to the range and said my gun "is fast and will beat any other cartridge in existance" I said ballistically that a .300 Rum is superior to a 7mm. Never said that was more important than being able to shoot it well, never said it would kill an elk better at 500 yards. These are once again words you have put into my mouth. Just as almost every other sentence in all of your posts do.

As far a garbage can size groups..I shoot sub MOA with it every time I shoot it if it is calm. Best group around 1/2" at 200 yards. Usually more like an 1 1/2" at 200. Many rifles shoot better, many don't. As far as the flinch, I have put over 500 rounds through it and still don't have one. The .300 rum doesn't bother me at all. It's a Sako 75 with optilock rings and bases and a Monarch 3.5 x 10 x 50.Probably weighs in at close to 10 pounds, maybe even more with the bipod.

Also never said better groups do not outweigh ballistics, up to a point. A 30-30 that shoot's .125" groups should not be used for shooting elk @ 500 yards.

quote:

Just looked over at Hodgdons sight and averaged their data, Man, you really got a load there. "Flatten any primers" as you say
Did you get this in a 24" tube? After all, that's what we are comparing on the 7.

Find me a manufacturer that chambers a .300 RUM in a 24" tube. NO one does, they are all 26". As far as that load, I pointed you to the reloading pages ON THIS SITE which makes my load look anemic. Also run a search on this forum and find out what kind of velocities people are getting with 180's in a Rum. It's much more common that 3100 with a 7.

quote:

$100 $200 you name it, like I said bring a rifle that weighs around 8lbs scoped w/ no muzzle break because after all, if you are going to tote it up and down mountains, it doesn't need to be too heavy.

I already told you my rifle weighs more than that. Would you like me to go buy a new one? I don't understand this part of the question. Does a rifle need to weigh less to shoot better? I am confused.

quote:

Refer to the ballistic chart I posted in a previous post, it reflects what I've been telling you the whole time but, you refuse to agree.

This if funny on so many levels I don't even know where to start, so I will leave it alone.

quote:

We'll take two similarly equiped rifles to the range and see how much " more " effective your RUM is Don't worry, I'll be a good sport and buy you some beer w/ some of the money afterwards.

Now I am 100% sure that you do not know how to read. As I have stated over, and over, and over, and over, and over, and over again, never said it was more effective on Elk a 500 yards. Let me repeat that, never said it was more effective on Elk at 500 yards. LEt me repaet it one more time. I never said a .300 RUM was more effective on Elk at 500 Yards. I also never said that ballistics were more important than being able to shoot well. I stated, as I will continue to state, that a .300 Rum is ballistically superior to a 7mm Rem. Mag. It is, and that is a fact. Does that mean it will kill more animals? No. Does that mean it is a better Elk gun? No. It means what it says if you are able to read it. It will shoot flatter with even a 40 grain heavier bullet, and with a "significant" difference in energy. I will satnd by that statement and will offer you a wager in return.

I will bring my rifle, I will shoot my loads with 200gr. accubonds, over your chrono. You can inspect my rounds to see if they are showing any signs of pressure. If you can get your 160's to shoot as fast as my 200's you win the bet. Your's has to have a 24" tube as you said that is what we are comparing. I have also stated that no "factory" rifle is chambered with a 24" tube, and I'd be willing to bet all of Hodgdon's data is out of a 24" tube. That makes a big difference when using powders like Retumbo. Now let me repeat this once again for you, that does not mean I can kill more elk with it, that does not mean it is a better round for elk that does not mean that I can shoot it better than your 7mm. It means what I have said all along. That it is BALLISTICALLY superior, which it is.

So Reloader and Allan:

Just how many elk have you guys shot? Just curious...

quote:

Originally posted by AnotherAZWriter:
So Reloader and Allan:

Just how many elk have you guys shot? Just curious...

None, but I've shot a highly excited bull cow that was easily twice the size of any elk in your most fevered imagination of the regal and lofty creature you call "Elk".
and probably as big any moose.
75yard shot with a 30-06 and a nosler partition and it went down like... well... 3/4 ton of... Beef, which is exactly what it was after all...

an elk is just another herbivore and bullet performance through flesh is pretty much the same for any animal that doesn't have a "dangerous game" mud-packed hide.

If a 165gr 30cal bullet will fully penetrate, break the humerous AND EXIT on a bull cow it'll do the same thing on an elk, moose or buffalo.
And that indicates to me that if a 165 will do a through and through then a 180gr (or heavier) bullet simply isn't needed.

Being honest... before that event with the bull happened if I had been asked what bullet to use I'd have said "180gr" with no hesitation
but after seeing how the 165 did...
Many people have killed Elk with 270's loaded with 130, 140 & 150gr bullets, 6.5-06 with 140's
Various 7mm's from 7x57 through 7mmultra with 140gr bullets, so why do so many people think a 180gr 30cal bullet is necissary?

I agree that yo should use the biggest gun you can control well, but there is a diminishing returns point....

As many who have killed multiple elk have commented they aren't particularly difficult to kill, the hard part is usually FINDING one to shoot at, within reasonable range or at "unreasonable range" and have it politely stand still so you can shoot it at that "unreasonable" range.

But isn't that the way of all game hunting?

AllanD

Allen, a lot of guys that have never hunted elk can't appreciate how tough they can be. A cow, even a big cow, that stands around all day eating & crapping is not the same as a 800# bull elk that has to live in the wild, being chased by 2 & 4 legged predators. Killing one cow, even a big cow, is not really a measure of any cartridge/bullet's performance. I'll agree, you don't need a .338loudasccrappinboomer to hunt elk, but bigger does help if you can handle it.
Reloader, you are correct, it's not difficult to reach 3100fps w/ 1 60gr bullet from a 26"bbl. That is an elk killer for sure. My first elk fell to a 160grNP. Complete penetration through the spine & out the front of the chest (he was running uphill away from me).

Allan:

I could sort of tell - esp when you mentioned 140 grain 7mm bullets for elk.

I have shot moose too, and while they are much larger than elk, they die quick.

No disrespect, but I find it humorous that when an argument boils down to a huge ballistic argument, those who argue vehemently often have little or no experience with said animal.

There is no substitute for experience.

Thanks for answering.

quote:

I could sort of tell - esp when you mentioned 140 grain 7mm bullets for elk.

Well on the other hand,I have killed 15 elk and 4 moose of which 5 elk and 2 moose were killed cleanly with 140gr bullets out of my 7mmstws.My hunting partners have added another half dozen elk and several moose with 140gr bullets.Bullet construction is far more important than bullet weight.

quote:

Originally posted by stubblejumper:

quote:

I could sort of tell - esp when you mentioned 140 grain 7mm bullets for elk.

Well on the other hand,I have killed 15 elk and 4 moose of which 5 elk and 2 moose were killed cleanly with 140gr bullets out of my 7mmstws.My hunting partners have added another half dozen elk and several moose with 140gr bullets.Bullet construction is far more important than bullet weight.

Well, you can't argue with that Stubble. I sort of figured someone would post something like your post.

But why do you pick a 140 grain bullet? Heavier bullets drift less in the wind, and that is far more important than trajectory.

quote:

Originally posted by AnotherAZWriter:
Allan:

Not sure how many elk you have shot...I have killed 5 bulls. I wouldn't dream of using a 140 grain bullet in a 7mm.

All of my elk have been taken with a .338 Win Mag. They are big, tough critters. Elk are tough like Cape buffalo - they just don't want to die. They are thick too, so why use something that forces you to take only a broadside shot?

I would not dispute this assertion. However, so far every bull elk I have shot with the Nosler 175-grain Partition bullet from my 7mm Rem. Mag. has died from one bullet!

Hey guys there is one truck load of responses here, interesting questions from Frank.

There appears to of been something like 33 different people who made comment on this thread about rounds for the taking of elk to 500.

My curious side of me asks, if all these people posted I would like to hear about their experiences with this.

So, instead of hijacking this thread I am gonna start a new one, I would appreciate hearing from all the resondants to Franks thread.

So, take a minute and those of you who commented on this take a look at my questions to you and then weigh in and respond if you don't mind.

I'll take a quick check in from time to time and check you off as we go. I'd really love to hear from all. As it should be good and informative.

Many thanks

Mark D

300 winnie
Sierra Bravo 45
Fred338
Reloader
xman
allan degroot
neverflinch
hoeram
digital dan
bearcat
thumper 470
olarmy
jbd
woods
djpaintles
pop
stubble
bigborehuntz
magnum61
mmagg
wstrnhunter
hvysidr
doublegun
jro45
7magman
anotherazwriter
eldeguello
the_captain
warbird
gixxer
mightypeace
paul h

these were all the resonders so it you've a minute when I get the other thread started please weigh in.

Many thanks

Mark D

Hey guys, come on over to the 500 yard thread I started. There were a lot of responders here and only a couple of people have chimed in over there.

Mark D

quote:

But why do you pick a 140 grain bullet? Heavier bullets drift less in the wind, and that is far more important than trajectory.

I use only 140gr bullets in my stw's because they are much more accurate in my rifles,and because heavier bullets are simply not required.If you use a bullet like the 140gr tsx out of one of the 7mms it will work well on game from deer to moose,yet still maintains a high ballistic co-efficient.

Stubble-you're absolutely correct, The last bull I shot with a 140 TX was out of my 7 Mashburn Super and it was a 520 yds.

One shot thru the fronts and it bounced!

Mark D

I really like the new 150 TXBT now also, it shoots extremely well in my rifle!

quote:

Originally posted by AnotherAZWriter:
Allan:

I could sort of tell - esp when you mentioned 140 grain 7mm bullets for elk.

I have shot moose too, and while they are much larger than elk, they die quick.

No disrespect, but I find it humorous that when an argument boils down to a huge ballistic argument, those who argue vehemently often have little or no experience with said animal.

There is no substitute for experience.

Thanks for answering.

Thank you for being less condescending than I expected....

But I will continue to point out that using 160's in a 7mmWhatever for "greater penetration" when "premium" (Nosler Partitions, Barnes TSX, Swift A-frames etc) 140's usually exit at the same ranges is just plain silly.

that a bullet with more energy will kill better when BOTH weights being considered exit the targeted animal again, it's quibbling a moot point. It only takes so much energy to penetrate an animal and any energy the bullet carries downrange after fully penetrating is irrelevant.

As for the arguement that 160's shoot flatter
than 140's? at what obscenly rediculous range?
because inside of 600yds the difference is about the length of a playing card. and lateral error due t wind drift is atleast a factor of five greater.

If you feel better going with 160's that's your choice, I'm not trying to change your mind.
What I AM trying to do is get you to slow down your attempts to convince everyone that you are right, as the differences are less relevant than claimed....

Your later comment that "heavier bullets drift less in the wind" is pure bullshit.
a bullets winddrift is purely a function of the ratio of crosswind to the velocity
IOW, two bullets traveling at the same speed in the same crosswind are going to drift the same ammount. any bullet traveling faster is going to drift less.

Yes longer heavier bullets slow down less because of their generally higher BC, but if the lighter bullet is fired faster, say 250-300fps faster at the muzzle the 160gr will only drift less than the 140 at ranges where the 140 has slowed to a velocity less than the 160.

unless there is some Magical effect that you have managed to keep secret from the worlds Ballisticians all these years?

Since you like the 7mmSTW I'll use examples from that.

The 140gr Partition @3400fps from a 26" bbl Vs
a 160gr bullet @3200fps
at what range with the 160 drift less?

The 140 has a BC of .434
The 160 has a BC of .475

funny thing is according to Nosler's ballistic tables the 140gr bullet is still moving faster than the 160 even at 600yards.... granted by only about 60fps, but...

So tell me, at what range will the 160 gr partition drift less than a 140gr partition
in a crosswind???

Granted if the wind is somewhat into your face the distance traveled is the distance through the air, so shooting into the wind any bullet has to go further effectively than if fired in "still" air.

So shooting into a 20mph wind can effectively increase the range and cause the bullet to strike low...
There is also an odd effect where bullets in a crosswind can shoot high or low... but that's a small effect even at long-ish ranges.


If you like you can compare two boats moving at the same speed through the water and then taking a current into account

or an aircraft moving through "winds aloft"
the wind speed being unknown the only thing that matters for determining drift is the speed of the moving craft, of both craft are moving at the same speed they will drift the same ammount. a faster craft will drift less a slower craft will drift more.

You can try to argue around that all you like but you'll be wasting your time trying to argue a falsehood as truth...

I say again, if shooting 160;s makes you feel better go with it.
Self-confidence with your hunting tools is as important as any other factor

It's your supporting arguement I have issues with

AllanD

Hey Allen-when you get a minute please take and go over to the thread I started here on LR elk part 2. I've a few questions and am just curious to here about all the responders here elk experience.

Many thanks

Mark D

quote:

Originally posted by Allan DeGroot:

The 140gr Partition @3400fps from a 26" bbl Vs
a 160gr bullet @3200fps
at what range with the 160 drift less?

The 140 has a BC of .434
The 160 has a BC of .475

funny thing is according to Nosler's ballistic tables the 140gr bullet is still moving faster than the 160 even at 600yards.... granted by only about 60fps, but...

So tell me, at what range will the 160 gr partition drift less than a 140gr partition
in a crosswind???


AllanD

Immediately, according to Point Blank Ballistics Calculator. Even though the bullet is going slower which means that your assertion (that velocity is the only influencing factor in wind drift) is in question.

Reloader

Not to make light of the 7mm Rem I own one and a 7mm Weatherby but the difference between them and a .300 Wby and or Ultra is big.

.300 Wby 3300 fps at the muzzle with a 180 Partition has 2149 fpe at 500 yards sited dead on at 200 it is 31 low at 500 yards.

7mm Rem or WBY 3100 at the muzzle with a 160 Partition has 1656 fpe at 500 yards sited dead on at 200 it is 35.8 low at 500 yards.


That is almost 500 lbs of energy that is a BIG can of beans.

quote:

Originally posted by woods:

quote:

Originally posted by Allan DeGroot:

The 140gr Partition @3400fps from a 26" bbl Vs
a 160gr bullet @3200fps
at what range with the 160 drift less?

The 140 has a BC of .434
The 160 has a BC of .475

funny thing is according to Nosler's ballistic tables the 140gr bullet is still moving faster than the 160 even at 600yards.... granted by only about 60fps, but...

So tell me, at what range will the 160 gr partition drift less than a 140gr partition
in a crosswind???


AllanD

Immediately, according to Point Blank Ballistics Calculator. Even though the bullet is going slower which means that your assertion (that velocity is the only influencing factor in wind drift) is in question.

Fundementally flawed comuter code based on ancient faulty reasoning?

Or are you actually paying attention to the ~3/16MOA variance due to the difference in ratio between mass and broadside cross section area?Some ballistics tables will show a 1/4" difference in POI or so @ 200yd in a 20mph crosswind from this factor

Or *HORRORS*, a 3/4" difference in POI at 400yards...


If this is what you are quibbling/argueing over I can only suggest that you grow up and stop being more of a tech-geek than I think you are about to accuse me of being but I'll conceed the point while saying that unless you are trying to shoot Mice at 400yds the effect isn't relevant.

and FWIW I don't know of anyone on the planet that doesn't jiggle much more than that, I know I do, my heartbeat makes the crosshairs move more than that at 200yds....

BTW, when I said "Velocity" I was not entirely accurate, it's actually more a function of "time of flight", which is closely tied to velocity, but it's not ....entirely... the same thing.... there is that "geeky" enough?


AllanD

I consider it a sign of maturity to speak the truth and when you are wrong to admit it. I thought I was relatively benign in pointing out the error you were making, but if you insist on saying things like "grow up" then that can change. I wish they had an emoticon flipping the bird, it would be appropriate here.

The wind deflection difference between a 140 gr 7 mag and a 160 gr 7 mag bullet at the velocities you mentioned are indeed small. However, the 300 RUM with an appropriate bullet drifts approx. 6" less at 500 yards in a 20 mph wind.

Again, I am not bad mouthing the 7 mag, just stating factual information, which you should be careful to do.

And if being able to run a ballistics program and correctly read the data makes me a geek, then I'm guilty.

quote:

The wind deflection difference between a 140 gr 7 mag and a 160 gr 7 mag bullet at the velocities you mentioned are indeed small. However, the 300 RUM with an appropriate bullet drifts approx. 6" less at 500 yards in a 20 mph wind.

However when you drive the 140gr tsx out of the 7mmstw at over 3500fps it certainly does close the gap.

quote:

Originally posted by stubblejumper:
However when you drive the 140gr tsx out of the 7mmstw at over 3500fps it certainly does close the gap.

Uhhhh... I was talking about a 7mm STW in my example.

a 140gr Sierra BT will drift 17.9" @400yd in a 20mph crosswind when fired at 3400fps from a 7mmSTW.
a 160gr Sierra fired at 3200 from the same 7mmRUM will drift 16.9" about an inch less.

A 300RUM will fire a 180gr BT bullet at 3200fps or so and that will drift 17.3"
a 300RUM will fire a 200gr BT at 3100 and that'll drift about 16.5".

It's not about weight as much as it is retained velocity.

So best to worst we're talking about a maximum spread of around 1.4" at 400yards

This is a total difference of slightly less than 3/8MOA...

If this doesn't sound like an "Angels dancing on the head of a pin" arguement to someone besides me I'll be greatly suprised.

Now is that crosswind really 20mph? or
is it 19mph? or 17.6mph? or 22.4mph?
Is the wind speed EVEN all the way to the target? or is blowing left-to-right at one point in the flight path right-to-left at another? mabey the bullet will kill a raindrop
somewhere in the flight path...

The arguement has THEORETICAL validity, but in terms of "real world" conditions completely beyond control from behind the trigger that bullet winding up hitting a particular rib on an Elk at 400yards plus can only be the result of Luck, Divine intervention or Telekinesis, because if it's really that windy anything else is more improbable.

In a world of "dinner plate" accuracy shooters it takes real balls to give a blanket recommendation that people get a 300RUM, "because it's better"

I wouldn't recommend a Hemi-Cuda as
a first car for my Nephew....
and frankly a 300RUM is the Hemi'Cuda of the rifle world.

BTW, I think I just remembered why I don't hunt on public land....

And why I'm thinking about hunting from a slit trench rather than from a tree stand....

AllanD

quote:

Originally posted by Allan DeGroot:

a bullets winddrift is purely a function of the ratio of crosswind to the velocity

AllanD

Hey AD, that is still an incorrect statement

I heard from a couple (4) of you fellas but there is still about 29 of you that are being bashful.

Please go over to my thread on shooting elk at 500 and humor me and answer the lil questioner I posted about your elk experiences.

Many thanks, I see your not bashful here Allan Degroot so please chime in over there as well. I'd love to hear about your elk hunts and what you prefer to use.

Many thanks

Mark D

quote:

Originally posted by woods:

quote:

Originally posted by Allan DeGroot:

a bullets winddrift is purely a function of the ratio of crosswind to the velocity

AllanD

Hey AD, that is still an incorrect statement

One which I have already corrected/clarified.

And the difference between what I have stated
and what reality is is far smaller than what you claim is the difference between 160gr 7mm bullets and the 30cal of your choice.

I tend to believe that in the real world you'd be hard pressed to prove the difference as I believe that it's far less than then variables of real world conditions.

And that only presuming that the shooter randomly chosen to prove it is one of the few that can shoot a 300RUM well, and FWIW anyone who can shoot an RUM well probably can shoot a 7mmRM better because it is simply less abusive
firearm to shoot.

Or it's like telling the doctor you feel better on the new expiremental drug (when infact you are one of the 50% being dosed with placebo)

I'm just saying that the bullet being an inch or so either way ain't gonna make much difference to the elk, but if it makes you feel better....

And frankly I still don't believe that if you have two bullets with the same BC and moving at the same velocity are going to drift differently
to any material degree, wind changes between two rapidly fired shots from a bolt rifle are likely to make more of a difference

I've ignored until now the far more important effect that "drop" is almost entirely a function of time of flight and so it is fairly obvious that even if your heavier, larger caliber bullet posses some magical ability to drift less the fact that it drops more makes up for it any difference...

You shoot, you hit or you don't hit
If using a quality bullet and put it into the animals boiler room it dies.
I don't think that it matters much if it's a 140gr 7mm slug or a 180gr 30caliber slug

Hey, I just got mildly bawled-out in another topic because I said a 25-06 loaded with 100gr partitions is great provided you don't aim it anything heavier than a whitetail.

I got told that they will kill Elk...Not sure I'd try that... but to each his own...

I refuse to say how many deer I've seen killed with 22lr on the grounds that any comments I make may tend to incriminate me.

I will say that my grandfather averaged 45deer EVERY YEAR most of which were shot with a 6" High-Standard Sport King pistol in 22lr.

My grandfather grew two things on his 680acres
Apples and SweetCorn.

Can you say: "Target Rich Environment"?
Sure you can!

He is safely dead and thus beyond any possible prosecution for what was under the law at the time "poaching" (There was at the time no provision for killing animals that caused crop dammage)

AllanD

I shoot all of my game in the head to minimize meat damage, so whatever I can hit at 500 yards with whatever gun bullet combo I am using will most likely die, whether it be a .284 or a super charged .308. How many animals have you shot in the head at 500 yards? BTW, 7mm 140s @ 3350 fps are perfect for 500 yard head shots. My coast guard buddy shot a Brown Bear in the head @ almost 300 yards with a 7 weatherby and 150 gr., much undergunned "according to the experts" I am sure, and killed him dead.

I am sure the B&C book would be far more cluttered with trophies had we had RUMs fifty years ago.

quote:

Originally posted by Whiteeyetattoo:
I shoot all of my game in the head to minimize meat damage, so whatever I can hit at 500 yards with whatever gun bullet combo I am using will most likely die, whether it be a .284 or a super charged .308. How many animals have you shot in the head at 500 yards? BTW, 7mm 140s @ 3350 fps are perfect for 500 yard head shots. My coast guard buddy shot a Brown Bear in the head @ almost 300 yards with a 7 weatherby and 150 gr., much undergunned "according to the experts" I am sure, and killed him dead.

I am sure the B&C book would be far more cluttered with trophies had we had RUMs fifty years ago.

Anyone professing to shoot ANY BG animal in the head at over 150 yards would be kicked out of my hunting camp. Any animal hit will most likely die if not from a lucky brain shot then from starving to death after a shot off jaw. Head shots at 500 yards are even more low percentage than heart lung shots at 500 yards IMHO.

Yep those 500 yard head shots. Thats real skill. Especially since most of the guys you talk to who pull off a head shot at 500 yards,will say "I was aiming for the shoulder". You get the same response when they shoot something in the ass.

If you'd have had RUMs fifty years ago,you'd have had just as many animals running around ass shot or gut shot. The record book would still look the same. Every year you have several thousand animals shot that will make the book,until a tape is put on them. Then ground shrinkage sets in like a bastard.

Whiteeyetatoo:
Frankly, I try to refrain from just flaming on someone, BUT you are either a lier or a jackass or perhaps both. 500 yd head shots . What you are suggesting is GROSSLY irresponcible. Maybe you are the retard that wounded the two elk I tracked and never found last year and 2 years ago.

About twenty five years ago I had some old drunk looser tell me he shot antelope in the head, running no less, every time. I'm sure he is a ghost by now, but unfortunately it seems he had time to breed...

quote:

A fella b4 this wrote to use the heavy weights in the big 7's , the 175 Noz I believe is what he said. His reason was retention, I would bet each and every day that a 140 TX or the 150 TX is gonna be every bit as effective as the 175 Noz and the total weight retention is gonna be higher.

My thinking on this is not to ask each person what happened as only those who had good luck will respond most of the time. At least thats my opinion.

Instead I would re-read Hagel on this again but I don't have the time just now. From memory I think Hagel liked the 175 Partition from the 7mm Mashburn Super for it's penetration and not its retention. In any case thats my take and it's to refer to the wisdom of those who have been there and done it. If my memory is correct Hagel felt that the Mashburn was where he was comfortable and would have used a 340 Weatherby given the choice.

This would be a tough choice for me personally as I don't like the high recoil velocity of those big case magnums. I see it as a matter of proportion however and bigger is better if the game and range is "bigger".

Regular old 7mm Mag gets a vote, or a handloaded .280

THE attraction to the 7mm Mag is that there is no material difference in recoil than from shooting an essentially identical rifle in 30-06.

Yeah the 7mm has a bit more kick, but not enough so you'd really complain about it.
I can't say the same for a 3000RUM, 300WBY, 30-378 or a 30Hart.

AllanD

quote:

Frankly, I try to refrain from just flaming on someone, BUT you are either a lier or a jackass or perhaps both. 500 yd head shots . What you are suggesting is GROSSLY irresponcible. Maybe you are the retard that wounded the two elk I tracked and never found last year and 2 years ago.

About twenty five years ago I had some old drunk looser tell me he shot antelope in the head, running no less, every time. I'm sure he is a ghost by now, but unfortunately it seems he had time to breed...

It is Loser, not Looser, Lier is spelled "liar". You must have been too worked up to type correctly. I am too old to be that drunk ghost's offspring. I am sure the alcohol most likely impaired his bodily functions and reproduction was not a possibility. I may be retarded though, I have never been tested, have you? You have me worried that I may be abhorrently retarted.

Head shots are low percentage, and I really don't try them. The brown bear is true, although I would not have done it and would have probably felt better with a bullet with a bigger frontal area and smacked him in the "heartiocardio" region. I thought I would stir it up since there appeared to be a "I've killed more than you" pissing contest going on this post. The I am better than you, killed more than you, know more than you, really wears me out. You shouldn't be so easily upset at a potential drunk ghost's offspring.

I don't own any RUMs either, but am sure they are quite adequate along with a slew of other rifles for making high percentage heartiocardio shots on game. I do think that 500 may be pushing it for anyone with any rifle on elk, whether it be a wild elk or a "ranch elk pay by the BC score" tame elk. There is a good chance of woundedlostforgood here too. The idea of hunting is to get as close as possible and make a good clean shot that puts the animal down for good. This is especially true for the sons of drunk Ghosts.

The record books would indeed be the same, that is the point.

quote:

Originally posted by Mark Dobrenski:
I heard from a couple (4) of you fellas but there is still about 29 of you that are being bashful.

Please go over to my thread on shooting elk at 500 and humor me and answer the lil questioner I posted about your elk experiences.

Many thanks, I see your not bashful here Allan Degroot so please chime in over there as well. I'd love to hear about your elk hunts and what you prefer to use.

Many thanks

Mark D

Allan this is one of threads I asked you a question about your elk experiences.

Mark D

quote:

Originally posted by Mark Dobrenski:
Hey Allen-when you get a minute please take and go over to the thread I started here on LR elk part 2. I've a few questions and am just curious to here about all the responders here elk experience.

Many thanks

Mark D

Allen this is the other question I asked you about your time hunting elk.

Mark D

WHiteeyetatoo:

I think that about sums you up.