I think most argueing on the internet is because of the increase of availeable information.

Let me explain just a bit. In years gone by the average guy had little if any way of determining his velocity or energy. He had some reference material and used it. The cartridges were judged by performance in the field.

Now we have access to chronographs, more data, and a much larger variety of bullets than ever offered before.

Ballistic tables are interesting, and I've parused them quite a bit myself. And the sectional desities, BC's, and drop tables are all quite interesting.

The bottom line for me still comes back to what I have experienced in the field. What worked for me. How did it do on game? Because of this I have adopted some opinion on what works that may not follow the ballistic religion crowd, but some things are hard to argue with. I have used the controlled expansion bullets at high velocities and on deer sized game they were quite effective. They didn't seem any more effective than the same caliber and slighty heavier. On elk I don't have as much experience as many here, and I don't get to hunt them as much as I'd like. But what I have noticed is the argueing about how effective a such and such is, generally focuses around smaller caliber rifles. I personally have used a variety but have come to believe the .338 WM using 250gr bullets is about as close to optimum an elk rifle as you'll find. There are bigger, there are faster, ect. but when it comes to comepleteing the task at hand it really does an exceptional job. The larger diameter with expanding bullets is very effective. Where I've witnessed elk hit pretty well with smaller caliber rifles that didn't hardly react, I've yet to see that with the .338WM. When something works that well it's hard to want to try something else.

I will admit there may be others that are as effective and if I were given one I try it. The 340 Wby, .358 STA, 8mm RM , and now the .358 Wells has even caused some thought. I don't think they'd be much more effective but the trajectories are flatter. When shooting game within the effective range for the cartridge most will work. It's knowing where that effective range is. Taking elk at 500 yards really doesn't apply to me much as I have passed up way more shots at distant elk than I've taken shots at them all-together. Nate

quote:

Originally posted by El Deguello:

Yes, but within reason, penetration is more a function of bullet design (including sectional density, of course) than of bore size. For example, I once read a statement by W.D.M. Bell that the Kynoch 173-grain FMJ bullet fired from a 7X57mm Mauser round was the only bullet he'd ever heard whistling away through the air after it had passed through an elephant's head. Now, he did not claim that other, similar bullets of larger caliber did not have equal or better penetration, just that the 7mm was "adequate" for the task.

Of all available calibers in his day, Bell opined that the .308 Winchester, loaded with a good 4-diameter solid (220 grain qualifies) would be the best of all rounds for the kind of elephant shooting he used to do, since it could be used in a short action, which he considered to be an improvement over even a 7X57mm Mauser-size action.

It was more a matter of where he hit them than what he hit them with. And it still is, actually!

This is only valid for brain shooting animals with solids, it does not hold for heart/lung shots.

In small bores, which I catagorize as 30 cal and under, when you shoot large game, you can either have wound dia or penetration, but you can't have both. There simply isn't enough bullet there to give you that. Let's say your shooting a moose with a 7mag, you can either have a tough bullet that will go through both shoulders, but is a sacrifice for lung shots, or a soft bullet that will be good for lung shots, but you should stay away from the shoulder.

With a 338 mag 250 gr on up, you don't have either or, you have both. You can shoot the lungs, you can shoot the shoulders, you can take a quartering away shot and take out the lungs and offside shoulder.

The problem is most NA hunters only take whitetails, and where the smaller bores aren't a compromise, because it is a smaller big game animal. When you move up to the biggest species, the 7mag et all aren't the be all end all of hunting rounds, and have very real limitations.

There is no game animal in North America that I would hesitate to hunt with my 300ultramags shooting the 180gr tsx.With almost 4600ftlbs at the muzzle and a bullet offering great penetration and good expansion,I see no reason to step up to a larger bore for hunting on this continent.

Well, I have never "changed to caliber upward." maybe I was just lucky, but maybe not. While in the military in Alaska, for the first time in my life I decided that since I was going to retire here I wanted to give a try to moose hunting with a couple of friends. These friends were civilians who had been living and hunting here for years.

Back then I decided that I wanted to use the most popular cartridge for big Alaska game, including bears, so it had to be a rifle more powerful than the .30-06. I asked all sorts of questions to my fellow GI's to see what caliber rifles they were using, and it ranged from the .30-06 to the .338WM-which later I found out have been the most popular cartridges in Alaska for years.

I decided back in 1992 or so, a couple of years before retiring from the military, that the rifle had to be the .338WM, and that it had to made of stainless steel/synthetic stock, topped with a Leupold Vary-X III low-powered scope. I settle down for a Ruger M-77 MKII, and a Vary-X III 2.5-8x scope.

That's the rifle/scope combination I have used for over ten years, and have no plans whatsoever to move upward in caliber. In fact, if I had to buy another, it would be a similar rifle/scope combination. I only have one big game rifle, but use bullets from 250 grains to 250, and load a few heavier ones just in case (haven't used them, though).

Anytime that you are wondering if you need a larger bullet or cartridge, you most likely need a larger bullet or cartridge.

Confidence is an important aspect of the shooting sports.

quote:

Anytime that you are wondering if you need a larger bullet or cartridge, you most likely need a larger bullet or cartridge.

More likely it is because someone else is trying to convince you that you need a larger bullet or cartridge.

quote:

Originally posted by kudude:
When the caliber you are using cannot reliably penetrate thru and thru the animal(s) you are hunting at the ranges you are hunting them, you need to change. Kudude

I've used a few calibers in hunting. Are you saying the bullet needs to completely pass through the animal? I've had one pass through in all my years of hunting.

The other bullets have always been found on the far side in most cases just under the bruised hide. Even at fifty feet on a large 5 point bull the same result it was a heart shot which took him right off his feet. But he managed somehow with the arteries detached from his heart to jump to his feet and run head long into a tree 50 feet away? This was with a 7MM Mag. 162 Gr. Hornady.

The next year I was using a .300 Weatherby for Elk. Running shot at 150 yards with the animal quartering away right to left at 45 degrees. Two steps on its nose rolled over and never regained its feet. 200 Gr. Sierra Gameking no exit wound the bullet was under the hide on the right shoulder.

Oh the pass through I mentioned a nice 3 point Mulley. Ran off I had to track it. He ran into a herd of cows. The shot placement was right behind the front leg with a 162 Gr. Hornady. I switched to my normal 139 Gr. load while tracking. He was sick but not down. I slowly approached and he moved out of the back of the herd. One shot with the non exiting 139 Gr. bullet dropped him. I’ve used 139 and 140 Gr. bullets on deer ever since that and have continued to drop them in their tracks.

I forgot to mention another advantage of the 33's on up, consistant blood trails.

I'd agree that 95-97% of the time the 30 cal on down will work flawlessly. That said I like 100% odds, and I can shoot a true medium bore just as well as a small bore. So to me, for bears and moose, the 338 mag, varies 35's and 375 H&H is my choice. I know no matter what I'm presented with in the field, the only thing I have to worry about is my shooting.