Lots of good feedback in the "What's long range" thread. From that info, it seems that the vast majority of our shots at big game are well within 300 yards. So, if our shots are within 300, why shoot a kicking, bellowing magnum? Again, in my experience, rounds in the 270- 30-06 range are completely adequate for elk out to this range, and I believe the majority of hunters shoot better, far better in many cases, with a rifle that does not kick too hard. A more powerful round is no substitute for good bullet placement. I think the real advantage in shooting a magnum is in increasing one's range. Another point, I use 200gr bonded or partition bullets from my .300 because with standard bullets at ranges of under 250 yards or so, the bullets always blow apart. I have seen a lot of animals that looked like they were hit with a grenade after being shot at "normal" ranges with a mag and standard bullets. With these "tough" bullets, I get complete penetration and don't ruin half an elk, but at the ranges I am discussing here my old '06 with standard 180 grain bullets seemed to be just as deadly. So, would we be better off to leave the magnums to those who are shooting long range, or the big bears? For most of us, are we really unnecessarily over-gunned with a magnum?
Posts: 866 | Location: Western CO | Registered: 19 February 2004
While it is true that a magnum can, if you do your part in practice and preparation, increase the range of shots you may take, the real reason that I like them is that you can shoot heavy bullets at the same or similar trajectory over the normal range you shoot. Hope that makes sense to you, but I like heavier bullets if they are available for the caliber used. JMHO. A wider range of shot angles possible become available, also. With that statement, premium type bullets become the norm.
Posts: 1944 | Location: Moses Lake, WA | Registered: 06 November 2001
In Alaska, regardless of "Magnum" or not, I want a rifle that with a heavy bullet is capable of breaking a bear's shoulder bone (or both bones) within 200 yards. I have broken both shoulders on moose out to 200 yards with my .338WM and 230-grain FS bullets. This year i shot a moose at 325 yards through the shoulders (didn't brake leg bones), and even at that distance the 250-grain Nosler passed right through.
Posts: 2448 | Location: Alaska | Registered: 25 May 2002
I agree with Ray, for years I used a 338 WM as my go to gun. I don't go after elk or bear anymore so I recently bought a Remington 7600 synthetic carbine in 30-06 and the longer I have it I find myself going to the Remington more and more. I also believe in using premium bullets for the shorter ranges, in my case either A-frames or FailSafes.
Posts: 8827 | Location: CANADA | Registered: 25 August 2004
One advantage is that Magnums tend to put the animal on the ground faster, all things being equal. I am a lousy tracker, and prefer to keep the animal as close to the point-of-impact as possible.
With my 308, anything with in 325 Meters that I drop the striker on is toast! That isn't bragging,it's confidence in my rifle and my ability with it. If I want to make sure of an Elk,Moose or Bison However,at those ranges I would be looking to my Wby Mk5 in 300Wby. Heavier bullets going the same speed or a bit faster. I owe it to the game I hunt to put it down as quickly and humanely as I can. derf
Posts: 3450 | Location: Aldergrove,BC,Canada | Registered: 22 February 2003
I have seen guys buy the biggest, baddest, super ultra magnum, and flinch badly. For the deer around here (so. central KS) they just are not needed. I've never seen an animal die from muzzle blast, either. Magnums are great when they are needed, and the shooter LEARNS how to shoot it. Just my opinion.
Quote: I have seen guys buy the biggest, baddest, super ultra magnum, and flinch badly. For the deer around here (so. central KS) they just are not needed. I've never seen an animal die from muzzle blast, either.
Magnums are great when they are needed, and the shooter LEARNS how to shoot it. Just my opinion.
That's true. But i have also seen a little lady, maybe 5' tall firing a .375H&H. I asked her about recoil, and the answer was "this rifle is heavy, and it was the first rifle I ever fired, so the recoil does not bother me." I have also seen people sighting small guns at the range, before the hunting season, and hardly hitting the target at 100 yards.
I agree with you that for deer, specially in the lower-48, a big gun is not needed. In "big" bear country, however, it's not a bad idea to use rifles that poke big and deep holes, and break bone.
Perhaps we are concentrating on the word "Magnum" a little too much. For example, a .330 Dakota does not have the word "Magnum" next to its name, but it launches a 250-grain bullet from 2,700 fps to 2,900 fps. Also, you are correct in relation to where or what one hunts. I know a moose hunter who kills his moose each year with a .338 Lapua. He sits on a tree stand, and shoots across a very large clearing, from 300 to 500 yards. The rifle weights over 13 lbs, and he is deadly accurate with it.
I hunt areas that are of approximately 500 yards in diameter, so my shots are seldom taken past 250 yards, or near the center of the fields. Must hunters in Alaska use .300, and .338's, as well as .30-06's. But even in the interior of Alaska, near Fairbanks, some grizzlies killed have measured over 9'. A guy from Anchorage killed a 9'4" grizzly a few years ago during a charge. He dropped with a couple of shots from his .375H&H.
My view on this subject is as follows: At least for bear hunting in Alaska, use the biggest gun you are most proficient with. But for me, I am most comfortable with a .338WM.
Posts: 2448 | Location: Alaska | Registered: 25 May 2002
First, the magnum delivers more energy at all ranges, and just-plain kills stuff better, no matter if it's 100 yds. away or 400 yds. away. As Bob Hagel so astutely pointed out some twenty years ago, "No cartridge kills any better than the cold, hard ballistic tables say it will." That's been my experience as well.
Secondly, while I don't go out of my way to shoot stuff at extended range, the flatter trajectory that the magnum provides is there if and when I needed it. I don't need the power that the V-10 engine of my Ford F-350 provides for routine driving, either -- but at least it's there when I need it.
I have had magnums for a long time becasue I want them. If hunting here in the North East USA then such a rifle is not an advantage most of the time. There are some long pastures however so for specialized situations one might be a benefit.
Since your in Aspen, Co. I wonder why you ask the question? When I was out West a summer ago we were driving on 1-90 and I spotted a hill ahead in the clear air. I checked the odometer and as we got to the approximate spot the distance became two miles. My point is that with no magnification I could see stuff on that hill about the size of a large animal at two miles!
Now some hunt with muzzleloaders by choice. If I hunted out there I would use a magnum unless the specific terrain never allowed long shots. That's my choice.
Don't get me wrong, there are a lot of reasons for magnums. What I was getting at is the "bigger is better" mindset. Some of these folks would be better off to go with a milder caliber, and spend more time actually shooting. Someday, I hope to make a trip to Alaska, and believe me, I'll be carrying a small cannon!
Quote: Some of these folks would be better off to go with a milder caliber, and spend more time actually shooting. Someday, I hope to make a trip to Alaska, and believe me, I'll be carrying a small cannon!
Actual shooting practise is the key reguardless of what cartridge you shoot.As you say,many people don't practise enough.
Posts: 3104 | Location: alberta,canada | Registered: 28 January 2002
Okay, first I'll say I have done a Mule deer with a .300 maggie (at 60 yards), and second I have become an arthritic wuss, unable to shoot, well practice significantly, with my heavy magnums, so they are for sale. Light magnums, like the .257 and .240 Weatherby still have their places, cause they are light recoil and still deliver the maximum power in their calibers. However, the plain jane .30-06 and .270 WCF are still supreme field cartridges, and oh my God, then we can get into the 7x64, .280, 7x57, 7mm-08, .260, 6.5x55, and 6.5x54. All of these cartridges will do the deed, even out to 300 yards. It's all about marksmanship, and no matter how powerful your super boomer magnum is, won't do a lick of good if you cannot hit the target! Use a rifle/cartridge match that you can hit with, success in the field will then come naturally.
LLS
Posts: 996 | Location: Texas | Registered: 14 October 2004
Lots of good commentary here. Savage99, the primary reason I asked the question was simply to start this exchange of ideas regarding magnums. I think too often we automatically assume a magnum is the better tool when maybe it isn't. There are two old cowboys I know that were born and raised here, that have killed many, many elk. One uses an old 30-30, the other an old .308. They both tried '06's back in the '50's, but didn't like the recoil. These old boys hunt horse back covering many miles riding the quakies, or they (used to) prowl through the timber when they had to, to find game. They don't take long shots, and I've never known either of them to miss. They shoot what they shoot best with, and they know their effective range. I always told my hunting clients that if they were not already using a magnum, don't buy one just to come out here to hunt elk. Use the 270 or '06 they were already comfortable with. They shot better and killed more elk that way. Myself, I started shooting a custom .300 Jarrett, launching 200 gr bullets at 2980 fps, 9 years ago because I wanted a 500 yard elk rifle. The farthest elk I've shot with it was just over 300. I could just as well be shooting my old '06. I do like knowing that the rifle has enough punch to drill through to the vitals on a difficult angle shot, though that hasn't been necessary either. It's my opinion that for hunting deer and elk, unless one wants to shoot beyond 300 yards or so, a magnum really isn't necessary. My 15 yr old daughter shoots a 7-08, and before anyone flames me, she has killed 4 elk and two big mulie bucks in the past 4 years. Shot selection, with a rifle she shoots well.
Posts: 866 | Location: Western CO | Registered: 19 February 2004
i use a magnum because i want to put the animal down as fast as possbile and guided hunts are expensive so i want to get every advantage ican no matter how small. if i have to take a longer shot, i have the gun and capability to do it accurately.
if you shoot enough, the recoil should not bother you. so, why not use it then?
i find with proper shot placement and load selection most times the animal drops where it stands with no tracking at all. this statment does include, b.b., moose, etc.
There is another reason to use a magnum or big bore. If you have on your agenda a scheduled hunt for large animals of the tooth, claw or horn variety you might just want to take the proper tool to the field to become familiar with it's quirks, handling, and faults. If your DGR is going to fail to do what it is designed to do, it would be nice to find it out with a nice whitetail doe in the cross hairs rather than when you have 3/4 ton of PO'd brown bear at ten yards and closing fast. This is how I got started using a 375 H&H on deer. The trajectory is the same as my '06 so I don't have to rethink all the time. It does nicely on little does too. I realize you were talking about more on the overbore type rifle. I like my 30'06 fine but my go to gun has become the 375. After using it for several years for routine hunting and shooting a 416 Rigby loaded warm the recoil of a 375 in not much of an issue. Is it more gun than the bare minimum to kill deer/elk? You betcha.
Posts: 1701 | Location: Western NC | Registered: 28 June 2000
I shot magnums for years and still keep a 404 Jeff around for Africa. But I've sold or traded my magnums and my 2 principal hunting rifles are custom CZ550's in 7x57 and 270. I'm collecting the parts to have a 30/40 Krag built on a Ruger #1 action. I can shoot magnums but my shots are seldom over a hundred yards and almost always under 250. It is a personal choice--I just don't want to carry the heavier rifles if I don't have to and I don't want to put up with the added recoil if I don't have to. I sure don't mind anyone carrying a magnum provided they are safe with it. That's part of what hunting is about--enjoying the weapon you're carrying. For potentially dangerous game a bit more cartridge is a good thing. For long range hunting (over 300 yards IMO) flatter trajectory and more retained KE are advantages the magnums have. I guess when I started hunting deer and elk with a recurve I found out how much fun getting closer is--or maybe I morphed from a shooter into a hunter.
Posts: 6711 | Location: Oklahoma, USA | Registered: 14 March 2001
Funny thing about this debate, is that since the introduction of the first belted magnums the performance that was then attainable by a 300 H&H or a 300 WM can now very nearly be duplicated by a 30-06 what with the addition of better powders and projectiles, within 100 fs easily, yet the pro mag arguments remain the same.
Dead is dead.
Actually I like the chamberings I mentioned along with the new breed of beltless mags, its the loudenboomers like the STW's and Ultra mags that I find rediculously redundant. They go far beyond the point of minimal gains, better to use the powder on another round.
Posts: 10166 | Location: Tooele, Ut | Registered: 27 September 2001
Not quite true. The High-Energy and Heavy-Magnum loads are available for the .300 Win. Mag. as well -- not just the .30-06.
In my rifles at least, the HE .30-06 180 gr. loads have produced 2850 fps. and change, and I've had four .300 Winchesters that have spit out the Federal HE 180 gr. TBBC load out at over 3100 fps., and this from both 24" and 26" barrels.
Comparing apples to apples, the .300 Win. Mag. still outclocks the same bullets in the '06 by somewhere between 200 & 300 fps., and you can handload the .300 H&H to outpace the '06 by some 200 fps. Case capacity still counts........
Quote: Comparing apples to apples, the .300 Win. Mag. still outclocks the same bullets in the '06 by somewhere between 200 & 300 fps., and you can handload the .300 H&H to outpace the '06 by some 200 fps. Case capacity still counts........
very true.I have also seen many guns that would not shoot the light magnums or high energy loads very accurately.Some would do no better than 3" or even worse at 100 yards,so for those rifles the high velocity loads are not an option.
Posts: 3104 | Location: alberta,canada | Registered: 28 January 2002
Stubblejumper, I have seen the same thing in 'traditonal' chamberings such as .270 Win, 30-06, and .308 Win not perform well when loaded near max -- often. What is the dynamics of this? In reading my reloading manuals I don't see anything specific about inaccuracy of near max loads, other than, that in the manuals they will list "most accurate load tested" and it most often is not the max load. I have seen referrals to the sweet spot for a rifle in the forums and elsewhere, I assumed that it had to do with the harmonics of the barrel and a particular rifle. I am just curious as to what folks think the reason is that many rounds don't shoot as well near the max. Regards--Don.
Posts: 3563 | Location: GA, USA | Registered: 02 August 2004
You've posed a fine question, but I think you've got a few things added in that hide your point(s).
Quote: (1) why shoot a kicking, bellowing magnum? ...(2) I believe the majority of hunters shoot better, far better in many cases, with a rifle that does not kick too hard. (3) A more powerful round is no substitute for good bullet placement. (4) I think the real advantage in shooting a magnum is in increasing one's range. (5) With these "tough" bullets, I get complete penetration and don't ruin half an elk (6) So, would we be better off to leave the magnums to those who are shooting long range, or the big bears? (7) are we really unnecessarily over-gunned with a magnum?
(1 & 2) First and foremost, because it is fun. For reasons that will forever remain unknown, some folk are bothered by recoil and others aren't. For those that aren't, there is a form of joy to be found in simply making a big bang and they are capable of shooting the Ouch & Ouch Magnums as accurately as those calibers with a little less bounce.
(3) For hunters with any experience, they know that bullet placement with an adequate caliber beats additional punch every time. For hunters without experience, they are too often trying to make up with technology what they lack in time in the field.
(4) If by magnum, you mean faster and flatter, yes. I think part of it hearkens back to experience level and our current lifestyle. Those without a lot of experience simply don't know how to stalk to within halitosis distance. For a lot of us, we are stuck behind a desk 52 weeks out of the year and may not be in shape to climb back down the ridge, circle around and go back up and do it all in time to get there before the animal leaves. So, if they are going to fill a tag, they might think they need to reach out a bit further.
(5) For too many of us with more gray on top than whatever color hair we originally had, we remember when standard bullets weren't able to take the energy of the (then) new magnums, so we switched to premiums, and then never tried anything else because we stuck with something that we knew worked.
(6) You are confusing long range with heavy hitters. So far you've been referring to magnums as the high speed jobbies. The big bullet shooters may be using something with magnum in the name, but the caliber was chosen for big bullets, not because they might go fast. The .375 H&H magnum was the only .375 capable of throwing heavy bullets at more than black powder velocities for a lot of years. Some of the newer hunters who want big bullets are choosing calibers without magnum in the name.
(7) What is over-gunned? If it'll kill at 400 meters and the bullet is a good one, it'll also kill at 40 meters.
Posts: 262 | Location: Alaska | Registered: 09 July 2004
For the power,when needed...Bear. Two weeks ago I was moosehunting with my pals,we ambushed two moose BUT..there was also one bear surrounded,when the bear recognised us and hes position he went panicing.The bear runned tovars on one guy but stopped some 30ft away when my pal shouted loud and aimed the bear which then runned around some time and broke out of rurrounding..situation was fast and at that time we was not allowed to kill the bear,only for selfdefence. I usually use 3006 on moose,also 4570 but that day I missed my 375HH which I then took the next day.I think I will carry it this season.It was not wery pleasant to follow a fucking crazy bear running among us..magnums,this is why I have one.
Elias
Posts: 45 | Location: Finland | Registered: 09 February 2004
Allen Day hit the nail on the head on High Energy rounds and the .06.I have seen alot of Elk go down in my old days as a logger from calibers from 22-250(Head Shots) to the big calibers.The majority of mine were with the .270 but thanks to a good buy and the kids moving up to hunting ages,I got a .300 Win Mag as almost a give away and I will tell you there is a noticeable difference in immediate effect on Elk.Saves us old fella's from packin them out of some awefull hole from hell.Yep-They were dead but didn't know it and went off of adrenalin down-down and down the hill.I have not had that happen with the .300 Mag,in fact none have moved ten feet which in Idaho could be off a 50% grade which as you all know is not a good thing in steep country.
For Elk...Bigger is better and good bullets are a must in my opinion..I did get a Spike this year with the old war horse 45-70 with 300 barnes XFN's and it hit the ground like a head shot.A wound channel like I have never seen with totall penetration.
Good luck huntin guys.........Jayco.
Posts: 565 | Location: Central Idaho | Registered: 27 February 2004
The magnum gives you a greater thump at all ranges compared to standard cartridges. The original purpose of the magnum was to send a greater weight of metal downrange at the same velocity of the standard cartridges. It seems only when the magnums became "Americanized" and Roy Weatherby invented the word "hydrostatic shock" (scientific term meaning "spray and pray") did the magnums become a light for calibre boy howdy look what I can do weapon. With public hunting grounds becoming more and more crowded, there is a need to put your quarry on the ground quickly. However, I think the folks that are buying into the hyper-velocity, light bullet trend are going in the wrong direction. I would go toward a heavier bullet at a lesser velocity. Say a 8mmx57 or a 35 Whelan or even a .35 Remington. The 45/70 would have to be an awsome stopper at woods ranges east of the big river. Also, you can show me all the charts, BC's, diagrams, foot pounds and so forth you would like but I will never believe a 130gr .277 bullet @3200fps will kill as well as a 200gr .308 bullet @2800fps. And, why would anyone want to argue that the light for calibre bullet gives you a flatter trajectory (ha) when you're talking about shooting a whitetail at 76 yards? Finally, why is the first argument from folks that don't like magnums is the magnum owners can't shoot them well. That's pretty presumptive to my way of thinking. If they would take a walk down the line at a 1000 yard match and see what some of those folks are shooting and what they are scoring, they might change their minds.
Posts: 2037 | Location: frametown west virginia usa | Registered: 14 October 2001
Quote: Also, you can show me all the charts, BC's, diagrams, foot pounds and so forth you would like but I will never believe a 130gr .277 bullet @3200fps will kill as well as a 200gr .308 bullet @2800fps. And, why would anyone want to argue that the light for calibre bullet gives you a flatter trajectory (ha) when you're talking about shooting a whitetail at 76 yards?
I don't use charts to determine how well a bullet kills game.I use first hand experience with the bullet on game.My 7mmstw's shooting 140gr bullets have killed medium sized game like deer just as fast as the larger bores or heavier bullets that I have used or witnessed being used.As for elk and moose,My 300ultramag shooting 180gr bullets have provided the quickest kills that I have seen on elk or moose and I have witnessed elk and moose killed with bullets weighing 250 to 300 grains. As far as trajectory is concerned,don't assume that we all hunt under the same conditions and ranges.I do not hunt the thick woods but instead hunt open fields and mountains where ranges can be quite long.My average shot on game has been around 200yards with many over 300 yards and a few over 400 yards.
Posts: 3104 | Location: alberta,canada | Registered: 28 January 2002
Quote: ".. .. .. .. it seems that the vast majority of our shots at big game are well within 300 yards. So, if our shots are within 300, why shoot a kicking, bellowing magnum? .. .. .. .."
Why?
#1 I like them and they "like" me --- we just really get along well.
#2 When I receive my license for a given specie it does not state the distance, the angle, nor the circumstances of the shot opportunity I will get. I'd rather play it safe and just plain "be ready."
That said, those who cannot handle rifles chambered for the "friskier cartridges" would definitely be served better by something more mild.
For our elk camp we instituted a "30-06 power/penetration" rule five years ago (mainly for our guests) and things have been MUCH better since then. Folks that aren't up to that level of play don't go with us. (FWIW, we did have a young lady (13) and a buck twenty get her first elk this year with a 30-06).
It would just be boring as heck if everyone shot the same load from the same caliber all the time. Lots of folks equate "the way I do it where I live & hunt" as being the only correct answer to the question.It is like arguing about "which girl is prettiest"
mike
Posts: 201 | Location: Virginia | Registered: 25 August 2004
I like magnums for throwing heavier and/or bigger projectiles farther and deeper. I don't mind a bit of "push" recoil, I just don't like a lot of "punch" recoil. I just traded for a 375 H&H and shot it today. Recoil is not bad at all and it will be my elk/moose/bear gun. I also have a 7mm Rem Mag that is easy on the shoulder and a 45-70 that can put an ouch at both ends pending on load. None of these are "punchy" (except for the 45-70 with really stout reloads). I believe in loading bullets that are heavy for caliber thereby keeping the velocities to a sane level and increasing momentum. I also have rifles chambered in "standard" cartridges but I have more confidence in putting heavy softpoint bullet through and through game with a magnum. True, bullet placement is the #1 key factor in humanely taking game, but penetration and confidence in your firearm are also important.
Use enough gun, put a bullet where it counts .
Posts: 707 | Location: Nebraska | Registered: 23 December 2001
