THE ACCURATERELOADING.COM AMERICAN BIG GAME HUNTING FORUMS

Accuratereloading.com    The Accurate Reloading Forums    THE ACCURATE RELOADING.COM FORUMS  Hop To Forum Categories  Hunting  Hop To Forums  American Big Game Hunting    Re: Long shots, large animals, and cartridge selection

Moderators: Canuck
Go
New
Find
Notify
Tools
Reply
  
Re: Long shots, large animals, and cartridge selection
 Login/Join
 
<9.3x62>
posted
Quote:

Hmmm, a moment of soul searching on that one. Reviewed the posts in this thread I can't see where I conjecturing anything there. Everything I've said I've done, I've done.

Conjecture is a risky thing on a site like this. Someone conjectures up that it's okay to shoot long at big tough animals with marginal rounds, then some "mama's boy" reads it and now he's out there "popping off" at a herd of elk at 350 yards because someone conjectured that it should work. Meanwhile it's one (or more) of North America's most magnificent game animals that gets turned into coyote fodder.




First off, you are conjecturing here. Most "mama's boys", I would counter-conjecture, are most likely to be starry-eyed from the magnum chatter than be moved to try a modest approach that sets riflery above a marginal difference in ft/lbs.

Quote:


One certainly can't stop such behavior however one can certainly try to be responsible what one writes where a 1000 newbies can see it and then go give it a go based on the digital vapor of someones imaginings. Nope, not too fond of internet conjecture held out as fact.




You claim the 300 WM is a superior killer in this instance. Prove it. If you can't, your statements are anecotal (informed with some experience as they may be). If you can't prove it, then you are making a conjecture. Get it? The conjecture game goes both ways, my friend, which is why a controlled experiment is the only resolution.
Quote:



The Ph. D. thing:

Yep, plain jane statistics says that a sample size of thirty is required for a meaningful statistical conclusion for most cases. So one is to put a life time of hunting and 30 head or more elk on the "altar of conjecture" in order to come to a PhD conclusion that "this ain't working too good." Sorry, I got an ethical issue with that approach. Talking to a wide cross section of experienced folks on the internet COULD be a reasonable and quickly doable alternative, but like with statistics it may or may not tell you what you want to hear.




If you think you need a PhD to understand the scientific method and the importance of controlled experiment in making a meaningful conclusion on issues of this shade of distinction, then you have reduced yourself to an "asserter" and not a discoverer. This is a common sense version of high school math, and I dare say we ought both to leave this to people who have the resources to provide these conclusions, and that we may both have the humility to accomodate their results with our own experience to make better our hunting experience and advice. Perhaps your own results are all that you need...

"This ain't working to good" sounds like a conjecture about the outcome. Seems to me that you cannot have ethical issue without knowing the outcome, which it appears, you have presumed. Why do the such a study, EKM has already spoken.

So you are willing to sample from the experiences of cyber identites and scoff at the only real way to answer the questions posed in this thread. Glad you aren't running FDA drug approvals...

Quote:


PhD Humor:
the PhD measures with a micrometer, the foreman marks it with a grease pencil, the workman cuts it with an axe!





Classic banter from those who would presume that their personal knowledge trumps a body of knowledge. BTW, I have been a logger and carpenter off and on for 15 years now.

Quote:


Hunter Conjecture Humor:

The engineer in product development computed and measured the ballistics of the cartridge to 1/1000th of an inch.

The sports writer confirmed it to within 3/4 of an inch off of the bench and then embellished the facts to keep his popularity up.

The hunter, shoots at the bull elk at 350 yards with his tack hammer 308 and a field rest, the bullet doesn't quite fly down the string quite like it was supposed to, after clipping the shoulder bone, the bullet creates a mortal wound but fails to penetrate far enough to be quickly lethal, the coyotes eat well.

Only 29 more elk to go and it will be statistically valid!





Sounds like an ill-advised shot for a 308 or 300 WM, and one that a magnum toter is more likey to take and just as likely to fail. All those ft/lbs do odd things to a guy's ego, especially the newbie. I presume you are implying that the 308 wouldn't do it and the 300 would - more conjecture on your part.

Why is it so hard for you to accept that diminishing returns set in as you go up the ballistic ladder within a sensible class of rounds? It's not like am extolling the virtues of the 22-250 as an elk slayer or even a 270. You are hell-bent on hanging your hat on a few hundred extra ft/lbs, and making fun of the only way to establish if your faith in this difference is a meaningful one.

Now, if you want to talk about the 308 vs. the 338 or 9.3x62, or if you want to talk about the importance of being in shape for hunting/hiking/packing, I suspect we will have a lot more to agree on, both in matters of experience and conjecture.

Anyway, happy new year to you.
 
Reply With Quote
<9.3x62>
posted
Quote:

9.3

I'm not sure what you just said there, but by the sound of it, it must have been brilliant.

Anyhow, 9.3 is a respectible round for sure. You and I look to be both on the analytical side, both a curse and a blessing. If we met over a campfire instead of here we'd probably get along fine. You're right about one thing, we've got much better fish to fry.

Best Regards,
Have A Prosperous New Year

Good Luck and Good Hunting,
EKM




Here, here. Until we meet again...

Best Wishes,
9.3
 
Reply With Quote
one of us
posted Hide Post
9.3



I'm not sure what you just said there, since it makes no sense to me at all.



Anyhow, 9.3 is a respectible round for sure. You and I look to be both on the analytical side, both a curse and a blessing. If we met over a campfire instead of here we'd probably get along fine. You're right about one thing, we've got much better fish to fry.



Best Regards,

Have A Prosperous New Year



Good Luck and Good Hunting,

EKM
 
Posts: 289 | Location: Denver, Colorado | Registered: 16 January 2003Reply With Quote
one of us
posted Hide Post
I almost forgot to address the obvious!



Good news!

We had more than 34 unique respondants meaning our sample size was over 30!



No matter how many times you posted you only got one vote.

The vote categories to the "308 vs 300WM" question are:



#1 - non-commital/conversational----2---6%

#2 - vote for the 308----------------5--15%

#3 - vote for the 300WM-----------24---71%

#4 - neither, you need more gun!----3----8% (arguably a vote for the 300WM)



I know this might be conjecture (isn't everything) but isn't that just the cutest little chart you ever saw? Statistically, the distribution kinda looks like a skewed bell curve with the 300WM anchored securely under the peak of the curve with a very favorable standard deviation. [Or perhaps a mere bar chart would be appropriate, same result.]



For you folks that weren't cursed with a stats class (lucky you) the translation is, "its just a plain old fashion a$$ whooping with the 300WM doing the whooping." It even sounds better than the statistics, ahem "stuff".



Good Luck and Good Hunting,



EKM
 
Posts: 289 | Location: Denver, Colorado | Registered: 16 January 2003Reply With Quote
one of us
posted Hide Post
I did not belittle bookworms or anyone else, I am a bookworm and have even owned and operated my own bookstore; many of the most experienced bushmen I have known in the many years that I spent working and living in the wilderness were also bookworms, some of them were very erudite persons.

Your comments concerning bullet performance are interesting, I have not made any remarks concerning "slap down" or ft. pds. or anything of that nature and since I have only used insurance shots to the head, it is a moot point. My actual field experience, which you seem to doubt with your uncalled for snide remarks about ...claim to have... has tended to demonstrate that the .300 Win. Mag. will produce more rapid kills than will the .308Win, both loaded with 180 Nosler Pts.

This experience involves the shooting of and being present for the shooting of many more than 100 BIG game animals. I have found that the 6 point bulls that are all that is legal in most of B.C. are about the toughest animals to put down and keep down with one shot or two shots than anything else, except maybe Goats. I have used a .308 while Mulie-Elk hunting, but, I felt undergunned and prefer a .338 because I seem to kill with it more quickly than with my lighter rifles.

If, you want to consider Lions, Tigers or Wolf packs in your conjectures, go ahead, I only talk about what I have done and base my opinions on REAL LIFE experiences. BTW, I have been very close to wild Wolves while alone in really isolated bush a number of times, they are not a problem unless you have a female dog around.

Black Bears are not the same thing as Grizzlies, I have driven many of them away from my cabins and tents by throwing rocks. I have chased enough of them, sows with cubs included, up trees by simply yelling and waving my arms that I have no desire to shoot at one, it's not necessary. I have been within 20-30 ft. of bears dozens of times and have seen them shot with about everything, I once shot one in the head with a .25 Stevens rimfire after one of these hotshot experts who read "Outdoor Life" to learn about the bush wounded it with his 7 Mag., so, I know a bit about bears.

I was not trying to co-opt the discussion with my concerns about Grizzlies while Elk hunting; this is a part of contemporary Elk hunting in B.C. and one must take it into consideration. You may live and work in Grizzly country, but, you very obviously do not know anything about them.

The idea that anyone would deliberately carry and use any marginal rifle in hunting 6 point Elk in very tough country when a Grizzly attack is a very strong possibility is just bizarre. A .300 Win. Mag. will drive a 200 gr. Nosler Pt. bullet at an honest 2850 fps. while a .308Win. will drive a 180 gr. bullet at 2650 fps. or a 200 at about 2450. The tissue destruction of the magnum load will be considerably greater than the standard load in the body of an Elk or a Grizzly; I have witnessed this too often to be persuaded otherwise.

In the case of bear attack, the additional magazine capacity is nice to have, but, I prefer to put my faith in the first and second shots with a larger rifle to obtain a faster kill, especially at long range. But,a .308, .270 or .280, all cartridges I own, load for and use will kill an Elk, if, you cannot shoot a magnum rifle, then you may be better off with one of these, but, I am not.

If, you were to come to B.C. and hunt Elk in Grizzly country for a few years, I would bet that you would change your mind. It is quite common to have 300-400 yd. shots at big bulls here and it can take an hour to reach one across a narrow ravine; they frequently are lost to bears because of this as they wander downhill to die in the really thick bush The guides will NOT go into the bush after the Elk when there are bears about, even with their .338s, etc.; maybe you would go in with your .308?????
 
Posts: 619 | Registered: 18 December 2003Reply With Quote
one of us
posted Hide Post
I was, as a lad, a huge O'Connor fan. I even bought a Al Biesen .270 FWT at age 21, a very pretty rifle which cost me a big bank loan!

After working with many outfitters, guides and wranglers who had known and guided JOC and getting some very serious bush experience myself, I came to realize that O'Connor was, as he said, a college professor and he was a "dude" as a bushman-hunter.

Bob Hagel, Elmer Keith and some of their pals worked and lived not too far south of where I grew up. I found that their opinions on rifles, loads and bullets for WHAT I ACTUALLY DO AND HAVE DONE for 40+ yrs. were more true to my experiences and those of my colleagues.

JOC shot Grizzlies with a .270, so what, I know of huge bears killed in B.C. by 6.5 MS and .30-30 rifles; the people who did this had nothing else available. That does not mean that these small calibers are ideal for bears---didn't JOC point this out, more than once?

My real point here is simple, for where I hunt, the bigger rifle is better as we have no choice, B.C. has a serious Grizzly problem on our best hunting grounds and I am not about to get mauled simply because I want to demonstrate that small-bores are equal. If, you feel confident with a .270, fine, come here and I will take you into Grizzly country and you will change your mind, I'll bet my Dakota on it.

BTW, have you ever seen a Grizzly up close, with his ears back and his little eyes glaring at you---it's quite hard on the nerves, I've been there quite a few times.
 
Posts: 619 | Registered: 18 December 2003Reply With Quote
<allen day>
posted
WOW! A man who loves books, loves to read, and who has superb hunting experience.......

I'm impressed!

You, sir, are a man after my own heart!

AD
 
Reply With Quote
one of us
posted Hide Post
Elkcamp--thanks for the stats--now if you wish to persue a stat that I would find a bit interesting try this.

Get ahold of all those that responded find out exactly what there elk hunting/harvesting esperience includes and whether or not they hunted on their own or with an outfitter. Then post those stats--it may be fun and then again it may not be.....Not trying to start anything here just curious is all.

By the way I'd vote for the 300 WM each and every day of the week first off. If I needed to use the 308 instead I would not worry. As long as I intimate with either rifle, I would take the shot with confidence! If I did not-well then I would not take the shot.

Just my thoughts.

Have a superb 2004 and I hope all get to the hill often.

"GET TO THE HILL"

Dogz
 
Posts: 879 | Location: Bozeman,Montana USA | Registered: 31 October 2001Reply With Quote
One of Us
Picture of Wstrnhuntr
posted Hide Post
Thats right Allen, it was Jacks 06 that he killed about six of them with. But what you said about needing more gun to kill an animal with "today" is where we will have to agree to disagree. Ive not noticed any armor clad animals since the introduction of the Magnum and that is the tone of "conjecture" that motivates me to make threads like this one because the PROOF is quite the contrary.



Elkampmaster wants to criticize me for suggesting a 308 for long shots on Elk over the internet. I suggest that those subject to potential corruption from such advice go ahead and research things. And if they do their homework they will find that the majority of game are shot at much closer distances and for good reason.



When Allen "worked up" to a more intense cartridge he did it right, that I think is also a point worth mentioning to those seeking advice, but does that happen? No! The more is better advocates would go ahead and suggest a 375 H&H to a newbie just as fast as you can type HELP!



To set the record straight, Im not suggesting that anyone runs off and trys to kill a grizzly with a 270 because its been done before. But all of the ballyhoo that Jonny NEEDS a Mag to kill an Elk is total BS and irreguardless of how many choose to believe it, once again, the PROOF is quite the contrary.



Ive never shot an Elk at 350 yds and doubt that I ever will, Id rather be closer for lots of reasons and so I do. Perhaps Elkampmaster has, and if he wants to bash me for my conjecture there then feel free as that much is conjecture on my part. But I dont NEED no stinking 70 grains of powder to kill an Elk.



In our Elk camp, the prowess of the hunter isnt determined by the amount of weight he can bench press, the amount of beers he can slam, or the amount of powder he packs in his pistol. We have a couple of Mag shooters there sure enough, but they dont sport them like they are the only ones who will score because no one else brought enough gun, they know better. And I respect their choice of weapon because they respect mine.
 
Posts: 10190 | Location: Tooele, Ut | Registered: 27 September 2001Reply With Quote
<9.3x62>
posted
Quote:

I almost forgot to address the obvious!

Good news!
We had more than 34 unique respondants meaning our sample size was over 30!

No matter how many times you posted you only got one vote.
The vote categories to the "308 vs 300WM" question are:

#1 - non-commital/conversational----2---6%
#2 - vote for the 308----------------5--15%
#3 - vote for the 300WM-----------24---71%
#4 - neither, you need more gun!----3----8% (arguably a vote for the 300WM)

I know this might be conjecture (isn't everything) but isn't that just the cutest little chart you ever saw? Statistically, the distribution kinda looks like a skewed bell curve with the 300WM anchored securely under the peak of the curve with a very favorable standard deviation. [Or perhaps a mere bar chart would be appropriate, same result.]

For you folks that weren't cursed with a stats class (lucky you) the translation is, "its just a plain old fashion a$$ whooping with the 300WM doing the whooping." It even sounds better than the statistics, ahem "stuff".

Good Luck and Good Hunting,

EKM




I would conecture that most everything we speak is conjecture. Facts are stubborn once found, but elusive until then.

Actually, it's not a bell curve because it's not a continuous random variable, but anyway...

Looks like an uphill battle for the 308 team. I sure hope, for the elk's sake, that all those 300 WM users are as responsible as is Allen Day (honest compliment Allen, no snide intent.) I'll always put my faith in the rifleman first and foremost...
 
Reply With Quote
<9.3x62>
posted
Quote:

I did not belittle bookworms or anyone else, I am a bookworm and have even owned and operated my own bookstore; many of the most experienced bushmen I have known in the many years that I spent working and living in the wilderness were also bookworms, some of them were very erudite persons.

Your comments concerning bullet performance are interesting, I have not made any remarks concerning "slap down" or ft. pds. or anything of that nature and since I have only used insurance shots to the head, it is a moot point. My actual field experience, which you seem to doubt with your uncalled for snide remarks about ...claim to have... has tended to demonstrate that the .300 Win. Mag. will produce more rapid kills than will the .308Win, both loaded with 180 Nosler Pts.




Slow down. If I was mocking you, I would have made it more clearly, and likely used an *emphasis*. I was not. My experience, though no doubt less than yours (not being snide), is not consistent with your experience. What can be said?

Quote:


This experience involves the shooting of and being present for the shooting of many more than 100 BIG game animals. I have found that the 6 point bulls that are all that is legal in most of B.C. are about the toughest animals to put down and keep down with one shot or two shots than anything else, except maybe Goats. I have used a .308 while Mulie-Elk hunting, but, I felt undergunned and prefer a .338 because I seem to kill with it more quickly than with my lighter rifles.




Just out of curiosity (not being snide), how many elk have you killed with a 308 or similar powered round? Did it fail you, or did you move on to a 300 WM or 338 straight away?

Also, I would remind you again that the choice is not between a 308 and a 338, we are talking about a 308 and a 300 WM. If I were free to choose outside this pair, I, too, as I have already stated, would select one of my 9.3x62s.

Quote:


If, you want to consider Lions, Tigers or Wolf packs in your conjectures, go ahead, I only talk about what I have done and base my opinions on REAL LIFE experiences. BTW, I have been very close to wild Wolves while alone in really isolated bush a number of times, they are not a problem unless you have a female dog around.

Black Bears are not the same thing as Grizzlies, I have driven many of them away from my cabins and tents by throwing rocks. I have chased enough of them, sows with cubs included, up trees by simply yelling and waving my arms that I have no desire to shoot at one, it's not necessary. I have been within 20-30 ft. of bears dozens of times and have seen them shot with about everything, I once shot one in the head with a .25 Stevens rimfire after one of these hotshot experts who read "Outdoor Life" to learn about the bush wounded it with his 7 Mag., so, I know a bit about bears.




Slow down. I never said you had no knowledge of bears. I thought I was being genuine by clearly stating that my experience was with black bears and not grizzlies, and that I left room in my comments for your perceptions about the differences. Perhaps we have dealt with different black bears, or perhaps I am not as intimidating as yourself when waving my arms and calling them names, as both have failed to persuade a black bear to leave a number of times.

Quote:


I was not trying to co-opt the discussion with my concerns about Grizzlies while Elk hunting; this is a part of contemporary Elk hunting in B.C. and one must take it into consideration. You may live and work in Grizzly country, but, you very obviously do not know anything about them.





Speaking of snide and uncalled for remarks... Show me where I stated that I was a grizzly expert. In fact, I admitted straight up that I had not been charge by or had any other type of nerve-racking encounter with them. For some who once owned a bookstore you evidently do not read very carefully (snide intended, as it appears to have been invited).

Quote:


The idea that anyone would deliberately carry and use any marginal rifle in hunting 6 point Elk in very tough country when a Grizzly attack is a very strong possibility is just bizarre. A .300 Win. Mag. will drive a 200 gr. Nosler Pt. bullet at an honest 2850 fps. while a .308Win. will drive a 180 gr. bullet at 2650 fps. or a 200 at about 2450.




A few years bad I had a rather ghoulish opportunity to do some "cadaver" tests an old holstein bull who had been put down (I knew the farmer). I am shameless when any sort of ballistic tests are on the horizon. As you may or may not know, this breed of bull is famed for its enormous size, much larger than even the largest bull elk. Anyway I wanted to see if a 30-30 would kill it. I shot it in the shoulder with various 30-30 factory loads; every one of them penetrated through the shoulder bones into the chest cavity. That has left a lasting impression on me, and has contributed a great deal to my respect for the old 30-30. Anyway, out of the 20 in barrel, I later chronographed these loads, and then computed that none exceeded the 1650 ft/lb mark. All this with rather delicate flat nose bullets common to this loading. A 308 delivers this or better, with say a 180 gr X-bullet, at 400 yds, and does so with a considerably tougher and more reliable bullet than a factory 30-30 flat nose. Anyway, I will be the first to admit that this is anecdotal, but perhaps it is suggestive, and perhaps even worthy of a conjecture.

Quote:


The tissue destruction of the magnum load will be considerably greater than the standard load in the body of an Elk or a Grizzly; I have witnessed this too often to be persuaded otherwise.




We have been through this already...

Quote:


In the case of bear attack, the additional magazine capacity is nice to have, but, I prefer to put my faith in the first and second shots with a larger rifle to obtain a faster kill, especially at long range. But,a .308, .270 or .280, all cartridges I own, load for and use will kill an Elk, if, you cannot shoot a magnum rifle, then you may be better off with one of these, but, I am not.




You just can't resist implying that someone who would choose a non-magnum round must be someone who cannot handle the recoil. Have you noticed that my handle is a round just this side of a 375 H&H in power? And yes, I shoot them frequently and as well as my measly 250-3000s.

Quote:


If, you were to come to B.C. and hunt Elk in Grizzly country for a few years, I would bet that you would change your mind. It is quite common to have 300-400 yd. shots at big bulls here and it can take an hour to reach one across a narrow ravine; they frequently are lost to bears because of this as they wander downhill to die in the really thick bush The guides will NOT go into the bush after the Elk when there are bears about, even with their .338s, etc.; maybe you would go in with your .308?????




This is getting silly. Now you have me trailing a huge, wounded 6 point elk into a thicket full of bears that no guide would go, even with a 338. And you would feel safe charging in there with your 300 WM? Also, tell me more about how often these 300-400 yd shot results in an elk wandering down to said thicket. If a shot is taken this far and results in this circumstance with some amount of frequency, one should probably stop taking those shots, regardless of the ft/lbs.

Here is a summary conjecture. In this time of modern powders, strong actions, long/light barrels, and premium bullets, it is almost always the shooter who is the ethical constraint, not the ballistics. The vast majority of hunters have no business shooting at game much past 200 yds (my opinion based on observing fellow hunters and shooters in the field and at the range), I don't care what round they are bragging up. Most people need a lot more practice, not more rifle.

Finally, happy new year to you.
 
Reply With Quote
one of us
posted Hide Post
9.3......it seems funny that you would come down on the .308 side of the arguement . From your handle (9.3x62) , your favorite cartridge would deliver ft. lbs. of energy ( and recoil ) in the same class as a .300 mag .







"After working with many outfitters, guides and wranglers who had known and guided JOC and getting some very serious bush experience myself, I came to realize that O'Connor was, as he said, a college professor and he was a "dude" as a bushman-hunter.



Bob Hagel, Elmer Keith and some of their pals worked and lived not too far south of where I grew up. I found that their opinions on rifles, loads and bullets for WHAT I ACTUALLY DO AND HAVE DONE for 40+ yrs. were more true to my experiences and those of my colleagues."





I continue to be amazed at the hero worship O'Connor gets . The man was a good writer , but if you actually READ his stuff , it is pretty obvious most of his hunting was done under completely different conditions than the Hagel/Keith types........
 
Posts: 1660 | Location: Gary , SD | Registered: 05 March 2001Reply With Quote
  Powered by Social Strata  
 

Accuratereloading.com    The Accurate Reloading Forums    THE ACCURATE RELOADING.COM FORUMS  Hop To Forum Categories  Hunting  Hop To Forums  American Big Game Hunting    Re: Long shots, large animals, and cartridge selection

Copyright December 1997-2023 Accuratereloading.com


Visit our on-line store for AR Memorabilia