Do we really need Magnum rounds for North American Hunting? I used a computer ballistics program to compile the following comparisons of magnum vs non-magnum rounds. They are based on loads I found in the 12th edition of the Speer reloading manual (Speer gave test data based on actual rifles instead of pressure barrels). I tried to pick and compare loads a typical hunter in this country might use with the particular cartridge. I used a zero range of 200 yards for the data sets.

Please pay close attention to how close the 250 yard figures are to one another. I would venture the summation that 99% of all game taken in this country is taken at this range or closer. Also note how beyond 300 yards all the rounds go into an epizootic decline in trajectory, wind drift and energy.

Additionally, before anybody gets the notion that Ol� HBB is some sort of magnum hating stick in the mud please note that my favorite cartridge for hunting all critters great and small is the .300 Winchester magnum.

Now what do You all think?

HBB

Set I:
.223 Rem. 52 grain bthp @ 3448 fps (.253 BC) Test Rifle: Ruger 77 MkII w/ 22 in bbl.

220 Swift 52 grain bthp-match @ 3844 fps (.253 BC)(pg. 159) Test Rifle: Ruger 77-V w/26 in. bbl.

Ballistic Comparison:
.223 Data:

Range Velocity Impact Drop ToF Energy Drift
0 3448 -1.5 0 0 1373 0
50 3125 0.42 0.48 0.05 1128 0.82
100 2840 1.43 1.86 0.1 931 1.99
150 2572 1.38 4.31 0.15 764 4.03
200 2322 0 8.09 0.22 623 7.07
250 2086 -3 13.49 0.28 502 11.27
300 1864 -8.02 20.9 0.36 401 16.81
350 1659 -15.55 30.83 0.45 318 23.92
400 1474 -26.25 43.93 0.54 251 32.84
450 1313 -40.98 61.06 0.65 199 43.81
500 1181 -60.78 83.25 0.77 161 56.94

.220 Swift Data:

Range Velocity Impact Drop ToF Energy Drift
0 3844 -1.5 0 0 1706 0
50 3600 -0.03 0.39 0.04 1496 0.66
100 3383 0.78 1.45 0.09 1322 1.34
150 3176 0.82 3.27 0.13 1165 2.48
200 2978 0 5.96 0.18 1024 4.14
250 2789 -1.81 9.63 0.23 898 6.36
300 2608 -4.73 14.42 0.29 785 9.18
350 2435 -8.95 20.5 0.35 685 12.67
400 2269 -14.64 28.05 0.41 594 16.89
450 2110 -22.01 37.29 0.48 514 21.91
500 1957 -31.36 48.5 0.55 442 27.83

SET II:

.243 Win. 100 grain btsp @ 2766 fps (.430 BC) Test Rifle: Ruger 77 Mk II w 22 in barrel

240 Wby Mag. 105 grain Spitzer @ 3206 fps ( .443 BC) (page 179) Test Rifle: Wby Mk V w/ 24in. bbl

.243 Data:

Range Velocity Impact Drop ToF Energy Drift
0 2766 -1.5 0 0 1699 0
50 2655 0.83 0.7 0.06 1565 0.63
100 2551 1.94 2.63 0.12 1445 1.21
150 2450 1.7 5.9 0.18 1333 2.19
200 2352 0 10.63 0.24 1228 3.59
250 2256 -3.27 16.94 0.3 1130 5.44
300 2162 -8.26 24.96 0.37 1038 7.77
350 2071 -15.12 34.85 0.44 952 10.6
400 1981 -23.99 46.76 0.52 871 13.98
450 1894 -35.1 60.9 0.59 797 17.92
500 1810 -48.64 77.47 0.67 727 22.48

.240 Data:

Range Velocity Impact Drop ToF Energy Drift
0 3206 -1.5 0 0 2397 0
50 3086 0.32 0.53 0.05 2220 0.59
100 2976 1.22 1.98 0.1 2065 1.05
150 2868 1.14 4.41 0.15 1918 1.82
200 2763 0 7.9 0.2 1780 2.93
250 2661 -2.28 12.53 0.26 1651 4.38
300 2561 -5.8 18.4 0.32 1529 6.2
350 2463 -10.65 25.6 0.38 1414 8.4
400 2368 -16.94 34.24 0.44 1307 11
450 2275 -24.78 44.43 0.5 1207 14.04
500 2184 -34.3 56.3 0.57 1112 17.53

SET III:

257 Roberts +P 120 grain btsp @2793 fps (.435 BC) Test Rifle: Ruger 77 MK II w/24 in barrel

257 Wby Mag. 120 grain BTSP @ 3199 fps(.435 BC) (page 195) Test Rifle: Wby Mk V w/24 in bbl

.257 Roberts Data:

Range Velocity Impact Drop ToF Energy Drift
0 2793 -1.5 0 0 2079 0
50 2682 0.79 0.69 0.06 1917 0.62
100 2579 1.88 2.58 0.11 1772 1.19
150 2479 1.65 5.79 0.17 1638 2.14
200 2381 0 10.42 0.24 1511 3.51
250 2285 -3.19 16.58 0.3 1391 5.31
300 2192 -8.05 24.42 0.37 1280 7.58
350 2101 -14.73 34.08 0.44 1176 10.33
400 2012 -23.37 45.7 0.51 1079 13.61
450 1925 -34.18 59.49 0.59 987 17.44
500 1841 -47.33 75.62 0.67 903 21.86

.257 Wby. Data:

Range Velocity Impact Drop ToF Energy Drift
0 3199 -1.5 0 0 2727 0
50 3077 0.33 0.53 0.05 2523 0.59
100 2964 1.24 1.99 0.1 2341 1.06
150 2853 1.16 4.43 0.15 2169 1.86
200 2746 0 7.95 0.21 2009 3
250 2641 -2.31 12.63 0.26 1859 4.5
300 2539 -5.88 18.56 0.32 1718 6.38
350 2440 -10.8 25.84 0.38 1586 8.65
400 2343 -17.17 34.58 0.44 1463 11.35
450 2248 -25.15 44.92 0.51 1347 14.49
500 2156 -34.84 56.97 0.58 1239 18.1

Set IV:
6.5x 55 Mauser 140 grain spitzer @ 2671 (.496 BC) Test Rifle: Ruger 77 MkII w/ 22 in barrel

264 Win. Mag. 140 grain spitzer @ 3130 fps (.496 BC) (page 204) Test Rifle: 700Rem w/24 in barrel

6.5x55 Data:

Range Velocity Impact Drop ToF Energy Drift
0 2671 -1.5 0 0 2218 0
50 2577 0.94 0.74 0.06 2065 0.61
100 2489 2.08 2.79 0.12 1926 1.13
150 2403 1.79 6.26 0.18 1795 2.01
200 2318 0 11.23 0.24 1670 3.27
250 2236 -3.41 17.83 0.31 1554 4.92
300 2155 -8.58 26.18 0.38 1444 6.99
350 2076 -15.62 36.4 0.45 1340 9.5
400 1998 -24.67 48.64 0.52 1241 12.48
450 1923 -35.91 63.06 0.6 1150 15.94
500 1849 -49.51 79.84 0.68 1063 19.92

.264 Mag. Data:

Range Velocity Impact Drop ToF Energy Drift
0 3130 -1.5 0 0 3046 0
50 3024 0.37 0.55 0.05 2843 0.57
100 2926 1.29 2.06 0.1 2662 1
150 2831 1.19 4.58 0.15 2492 1.71
200 2737 0 8.2 0.21 2329 2.73
250 2645 -2.36 12.98 0.26 2175 4.06
300 2556 -5.96 19.01 0.32 2031 5.72
350 2468 -10.9 26.37 0.38 1894 7.73
400 2382 -17.26 35.16 0.44 1764 10.1
450 2299 -25.17 45.49 0.51 1643 12.85
500 2217 -34.72 57.47 0.57 1528 16

SET V:

.270 Winchester 130 grain btsp @ 3117 fps (.449 BC) Test Rifle: Ruger 77 Mk II 22 in barrel

270Wby. Mag. 150 grain btsp @ 3249 fps ( .496 BC) ( page 211) Test Rifle: Wby Mk V w/ 26in bbl

.270Win Data:

Range Velocity Impact Drop ToF Energy Drift
0 3117 -1.5 0 0 2805 0
50 3001 0.4 0.56 0.05 2600 0.59
100 2893 1.33 2.09 0.1 2416 1.06
150 2788 1.23 4.65 0.16 2244 1.86
200 2686 0 8.35 0.21 2083 3
250 2586 -2.44 13.25 0.27 1930 4.5
300 2488 -6.19 19.46 0.33 1787 6.37
350 2393 -11.34 27.07 0.39 1653 8.64
400 2300 -18.02 36.21 0.45 1527 11.33
450 2210 -26.35 47 0.52 1410 14.46
500 2121 -36.46 59.57 0.59 1299 18.06

.270Wby Mag Data:

Range Velocity Impact Drop ToF Energy Drift
0 3249 -1.5 0 0 3516 0
50 3140 0.26 0.52 0.05 3284 0.57
100 3040 1.14 1.92 0.1 3078 0.97
150 2941 1.08 4.26 0.15 2881 1.65
200 2845 0 7.62 0.2 2696 2.62
250 2751 -2.16 12.05 0.25 2521 3.89
300 2659 -5.46 17.63 0.31 2355 5.47
350 2569 -10 24.45 0.37 2198 7.37
400 2481 -15.86 32.59 0.43 2050 9.63
450 2395 -23.14 42.15 0.49 1911 12.24
500 2311 -31.94 53.23 0.55 1779 15.23

SET VI:

280 Remington 140 btsp@ 2976 (.502 BC) Test Rifle: Ruger 77 Mk II 24 in bbl.

7MM Wby. Mag. 160 grain btsp @ 3082 fps (.556 BC) (page 235) Test Rifle: Wby. Mk V w/24 in barrel.

.280 Rem. Data:

Range Velocity Impact Drop ToF Energy Drift
0 2976 -1.5 0 0 2753 0
50 2876 0.53 0.61 0.05 2571 0.58
100 2782 1.51 2.27 0.11 2406 1.03
150 2690 1.35 5.06 0.16 2250 1.78
200 2601 0 9.05 0.22 2103 2.85
250 2513 -2.65 14.34 0.28 1963 4.26
300 2428 -6.67 21 0.34 1833 6.02
350 2344 -12.19 29.15 0.4 1708 8.14
400 2262 -19.28 38.88 0.47 1591 10.64
450 2182 -28.08 50.32 0.53 1480 13.56
500 2103 -38.7 63.58 0.6 1375 16.89

7MM Wby. Data:

Range Velocity Impact Drop ToF Energy Drift
0 3082 -1.5 0 0 3375 0
50 2989 0.4 0.57 0.05 3174 0.56
100 2902 1.33 2.11 0.1 2992 0.94
150 2817 1.21 4.69 0.16 2819 1.59
200 2734 0 8.37 0.21 2656 2.5
250 2652 -2.38 13.22 0.27 2499 3.7
300 2572 -6 19.31 0.32 2350 5.19
350 2494 -10.94 26.71 0.38 2210 6.99
400 2417 -17.28 35.52 0.44 2076 9.1
450 2341 -25.12 45.83 0.51 1947 11.55
500 2268 -34.54 57.72 0.57 1828 14.35

Set VII:
30/06 Sprg. 165 btsp @ 2803 (.477 BC ) Test Rifle: 700 Rem 22 in bbl.

300 Win. Mag. 180 grain btsp @3059 fps (.540 BC) (page 313) Test Rifle: Ruger 77 Mk II w/ 24 in bbl.

.30/06 Data:

Range Velocity Impact Drop ToF Energy Drift
0 2803 -1.5 0 0 2879 0
50 2702 0.76 0.68 0.06 2675 0.6
100 2607 1.82 2.55 0.11 2490 1.11
150 2515 1.6 5.71 0.17 2318 1.98
200 2425 0 10.24 0.23 2155 3.2
250 2337 -3.08 16.26 0.3 2001 4.82
300 2251 -7.76 23.88 0.36 1857 6.84
350 2166 -14.17 33.22 0.43 1719 9.3
400 2084 -22.43 44.42 0.5 1591 12.2
450 2003 -32.71 57.63 0.57 1470 15.59
500 1924 -45.14 73 0.65 1356 19.49

.300 Win Mag Data:

Range Velocity Impact Drop ToF Energy Drift
0 3059 -1.5 0 0 3740 0
50 2964 0.42 0.58 0.05 3511 0.57
100 2875 1.37 2.14 0.1 3304 0.97
150 2788 1.24 4.77 0.16 3107 1.64
200 2703 0 8.52 0.21 2920 2.59
250 2619 -2.44 13.46 0.27 2742 3.84
300 2537 -6.15 19.67 0.33 2573 5.4
350 2457 -11.21 27.24 0.39 2413 7.27
400 2379 -17.73 36.26 0.45 2262 9.49
450 2302 -25.77 46.81 0.51 2118 12.05
500 2227 -35.47 59.01 0.58 1982 14.98

SET VIII:

.338/06 225bgrain btsp @ 2678fps (.484 BC) Test Rifle: A-Square w/23 in bbl.

338 Win Mag 225 grain btsp @ 2981 fps (.484 BC) (page 350) Test Rifle: 70 Win. w/24 in bbl

.338/06 Data:

Range Velocity Impact Drop ToF Energy Drift
0 2678 -1.5 0 0 3583 0
50 2581 0.94 0.74 0.06 3328 0.61
100 2491 2.07 2.78 0.12 3100 1.14
150 2403 1.79 6.24 0.18 2885 2.05
200 2316 0 11.2 0.24 2680 3.33
250 2232 -3.41 17.79 0.31 2489 5.03
300 2149 -8.59 26.14 0.38 2307 7.15
350 2068 -15.63 36.36 0.45 2137 9.72
400 1989 -24.73 48.63 0.52 1977 12.78
450 1911 -36.02 63.1 0.6 1825 16.34
500 1836 -49.71 79.96 0.68 1684 20.43

.338 Win Mag Data:

Range Velocity Impact Drop ToF Energy Drift
0 2981 -1.5 0 0 4440 0
50 2877 0.53 0.61 0.05 4135 0.59
100 2780 1.52 2.26 0.11 3861 1.05
150 2685 1.36 5.05 0.16 3602 1.83
200 2592 0 9.05 0.22 3357 2.95
250 2501 -2.66 14.35 0.28 3125 4.41
300 2413 -6.71 21.04 0.34 2909 6.23
350 2326 -12.27 29.23 0.4 2703 8.44
400 2242 -19.44 39.04 0.47 2511 11.06
450 2159 -28.33 50.57 0.54 2329 14.1
500 2077 -39.1 63.98 0.61 2155 17.58

My thought is that there is nothing in the USA that can't be taken with a 308 or 358. Some will claim that you need more velocity at longer ranges to make a clean kill, my thought is that you need to take more time and know where the bullet will go. If the round you are using wont kill cleanly at 300 yards, learn how to get closer. Learn all you can about the round you are using and practice,practice and practice some more till you know where the bullet is going to go at the ranges you are going to shoot at. Placement is more important than velocity.

I can't speek for we but I don't.I hunt SWVA where
a 250 yard shot is waaaaaay long and dangerous game is playing spin the bottle and hopeing the wife dosen't catch you!! BUT if I lived in a different localaty where things besides snakes and
wives bite back I might start shopping!

Do we really need a magnum? Well, yes and no. Sometimes a magnum is used for a different reason. Last month I hunted deer on Kodiak Island. Did I need a magnum to kill deer? No. But I sure felt better with a magnum in my hands knowing that a big bear might be around any corner.

I've hunted on Kodiak in the past with a 308 Win and it was just fine for the deer. With a magnum, I didn't have quite the pucker factor while going through alders by myself. Sometimes a magnum helps with the mental part of hunting...even if it isn't needed for the kill. In fact, most of the time it isn't needed, but it doesn't hurt either.

Yes and No too.You don't need a mag to take any game,I never used one,don't want onebut there is some that like them and want one,there is nothing wrong with using one if thats what you like to do.An animal doesn't know wether you're using a mag or non -mag anyhow.As long as its legal go with what you like and feel comfortable with.

If you think about it rifles are the equivalent to us that clubs are to golfers or skis to skiers...With most sporting equipment there is a range of performance level available from beginner to expert. As with everything in life there is somewhat of a tradeoff at every level. Tiger Woods can use very high performance clubs because his skill level is such that he can get the most out of them. The average golfer will find that he is generally better off with a set of clubs that has a bigger sweet spot and is more forgiving even if it costs a little in theoretical distance if the ball is hit perfectly. A World Cup skier can wring all the performance out of a pair of racing skis that the average skier doesn't even have the strength or skill to bend. That person is better off selecting equipment that matches their true skill level and not their ego. And that is where the problem lies. We all want to think we are Tiger, or Bode Miller, or Pete Samparas, or Dale Jarrett, or Craig Boddington and in our effort to satisfy our ego we many times end up with equipment that we really don't have the skill to utilize. Magnums offer performance increases over standard calibers, no question. As with any increase in performance there are trade offs in noise, recoil, weight, etc. There are many shooters who have the skill to make use of the added performance a magnum offers but there are many more who would be served with something more forgiving and user friendly. That's where the standard argument seen around here regarding the 30-06 vs. .300WM or some such version comes from. If a hunter can shoot a magnum well and has the skill to make use of the added performance then more power to him. If a hunter can't then at best a magnum offers no advantage and at worst can cause poorer shooting because the shooter has difficulty with the recoil and is afraid of his rifle. That was one of the fundimental arguments made years ago by Jack O'Conner in his writings. MOre so than being an advocate of the .270, he was of the opinion that shot placement was the most important factor in successful shooting at game and that most hunters skill level was better served by cartridges in the .270/30-06/7x57/.308 in most cases. I tend to agree with that.

Jeff

Hear in the US and probibly most anywhere , you could get by with only 3 . A .22 a 12 gauge and a 30/06. But wheres the fun in that i would of had to stop buying guns when i was 16. Later Tanoose

In my humble opinion, the only thing more useless than the magnum belt is the see-through scope mount.

Here's my favorite magnum story:
I went to a gun store in the middle of hunting season. I remarked that, with the season on, they probably weren't moving many new guns. The reply?

"We're doing great. By now the amateurs have missed so they buy a 7mm Magnum"

why is the word need always thrown into these want issues?

[ 01-08-2003, 00:22: Message edited by: Curtis_Lemay ]

Skibum,

Well stated, I couldn't agree more. Besides, Curtis Lemay brought up another great point; why always need.

Use what you want! Don't like belt, see-thrus, magnum anythings? Buy something else, that's where the fun is. Me? I have a little of everything. Magnums? Got a couple, getting ready to get one more! Amateur? Probably. I have most of my fun when I'm killing.........time! After all, time is actually the only thing we really need.

Joe

No we don't need magnums.We also don't need smokeless powder or breachloaders.Actually we don't even need guns as many head of game are taken each year with archery gear.Hunting has not been about need for many years.Rather it has been about having the choice to use what we want.I personally use magnums for all my big game hunting.

Wstrnhuntr,

I think, maybe, I was giving some credit to people that go afield in that I certainly hope they would do or have done as you suggest. Twenty years experience can also be one years experience twenty times. Quite a difference between the two.

The bottom line to this post,IMHO, is to shoot what you choose to shoot well, be intimately familiar with your weapon of choice, and take the best shot with proper bullet placement.

Now, with that said, the choice is yours. Choose wisely!

Joe

Nope!

Do I want one? Sometimes, its a 7mm Mag, a 30-338, a 257 Roberts, or 223. It all depends. Do I need electricity? Nope! Do I want it? You bet!

Glenn Bevin

I would agree that "need" probably has little to do with caliber choice for most hunters most of the time. I like 'em all! If it goes bang that is enough for me. My favorites are two Model 70 Super Grades in 30-06 and .338. I really enjoy shooting and hunting with both of them. I also have a new Remington Sendero in 7mm Ultra Mag. Overbore, inefficient, loud, and tremendous fun to shoot. I am doing my absolute best to shoot out the barrel. So many calibers, so little time. If I had to pick one caliber to do it all with it would be my .338 Win Mag.

Probably not. After all, you could effectively hunt the entire world with a .22, 30-06, 9x63, and a .12ga. So, in reality, you only NEED 4 guns. And I now expect all of you to run out and sell all your other guns

Need? Probably not. Want? You bet. Because a .300 H&H is drop-dead sexy.

It is like a friend told me you won't need it everyday but when you need it you badly need it.

the first thing i noticed about your data is the test guns used 24" barrels on the weatherbys, why bother ? try the 26" barrel like most people have and your data changes...
the data lists:
257 Wby Mag. 120 grain BTSP @ 3199 fps(.435 BC) (page 195) Test Rifle: Wby Mk V w/24 in bbl

drop over to the 100 grain partition w/26" barrel.. new ball game...

but to answer your question, yes i need a magnum. its sexy, and since IIIII'm to sexy for my 30.06, too sexy for my '06...

oops, getting carried away

Talk about not shooting before hunting. I was hunting in NM and 3 guys showed up for a Goat hunt. The outfitter ask them if their guns were sighted in and the one guy a DR. with a new Rem. 7MM Mag topped with a Simmons scope said "everythings fine we picked up the guns on the way to the airport and the guy at the shop said the were bore sighted and ready to go". The outfitter suggested they check them, you know the airline etc.. It was so funny (actually pittyful) to watch. They set up a box about 3 foot sq. backed off a 100 yds app. and went at it, after a box of rounds went thru and they hadn't hit the target ny hunting partner and I suggested they maybe wanted to start at 25 yds and get on paper, well the story goes on and on. It opened my eyes as to what is out there, eh.

A magnum by any other name is just as sweet.

I think Stubblejumper covered the bases pretty well. I killed my first deer with a bow and hunted exclusively with it for years. Then I got a 30-30 and thought the rifle made it "to easy". I even said things like, "this is killing, not hunting". I graduated to a .308 and enjoyed it's flatter shooting capabilities, then along came a .300 Win Mag, then a .340, then a .358 STA, you get the picture, now it is a .416 and beyond, and dreaming of Africa. Think how dull it would be if we had stopped with the old Kentucky Long Rifle. The magnums are not necessary, but in the hands of a practiced shooter, who can place the shot where it needs to be, they are a much more efficient killing instrument, considering all distances and conditions. Good shooting.

I've seen the same thing Old Hunter and it is eye opening. Putting a magnum in the hands of a hunter that won't spend the time to become familar with his rifle only compounds the problem because he is likely to be afraid of it. The worst case of shooting I ever saw was by a hunter with a .300 Win Mag while hunting mule deer in Montana. A buddy of mine and I were hunting with Keith Atcheson and this guy showed up in camp. It was obvious he was wound pretty tight and was concerned on impressing everyone else. His first day out he missed a huge buck from 100 yards. He was so depressed in camp that night I was concerned. I told my partner that I would bet he would lose any focus of trying for a good buck and shoot the first thing he saw. Sure enough the next day he killed a very small buck and managed to put a bullet in just about every part of that deer but a vital area. He even managed to blow one eye completely out of it's socket and Keith was still forced to finish the buck off with a pistol. I gained a lot of respect for what outfitters have to go through some times and we had tears in our eyes as Keith told us the story back in camp. It was even funnier seeing the reaction of the hunter when he compared his buck to the beautiful 6x5 that my buddy took the same day with his .270. I'm not by any means suggesting that a .300 WM is not adequate medicine for mule deer. I fully blame the fiasco on the poor shooting of the hunter involved but in his case I believe he was using more rifle than he could manage because of ego and that it contributed to the whole mess.

Jeff

Two words "Bison" and "Bear"!

Yes. we need magnum cartridges.

JMHO,

JohnTheGreek

Skibum, very well said.

The other issue that needs to be brought up is the "We" part. It is not "we" it is "me" or "I" and whether I use one or not makes no difference to anyone else out hunting . It is a matter of personal choice. I have 16 center fire rifles in my safe right, not all mine, 5 are magnums. Some of the nonmagnums will do the equivalent jobs in most situations but I and the owners of those rifles made choices to purchase those for the intended use. They all work. The magnums may be a bit tougher to master given the recoil.

Ask yourself this? With the magnums "we" have do we need any of the non magnums?

I don't know why this question keeps coming up. If your neighbor or hunting buddy wants one, more power to him. If you don't want one and can live without questioning his intensions at every step, more power to you.

I think that you all have valid comments. I am new to this www. So Assuming you can shoot. I know thats a big step, but assuming you can shoot, doesn't the bullet actually do the dirty work. If the bullet will do its job and not blow the shoulder off like some of the immitation bullets will, while you watch the animal run away. If you have a bullet that will penetrate all the way through an elk lengthwise. Like my friend that shot an elk with his 270 Winchester and a 130gr Barnes XLC , a non magnum. Hasen't he just brought his regular 270 Win into the magnum category? Haven't you have stepped into a whole new erra. I believe that we are seeing a whole new generation of bullets that will make your regular gun into a magnum category.

Once a King always a King but once a night is enough!

Shooters, even those who are recoil conscious, can acclimatize with practice to magnums. Some big tough animals need them, ie some bears. IMO a shooter who can use his magnum, combined with targets for which magnum power is wise, make magnums a fair choice.

Another point that nobody else seems to have mentioned is reloading versatility. Either an '06 or .300 can be loaded down to the same velocities. Only a .300 can be loaded up to the higher potentials.

I think the new short magnum cartridges look spiffy!

I don't know about "need" in the strictest sense of the word, but I do that I really like magnum cartridge and use them for most of my hunting anymore.

Shooting magnums well and with confidence is just a matter of sufficient practice and careful equipment selection.

AD

I believe that the cartridge one will use depends on one's hunting style. I am a still hunter. If I may, I would remind that there are both belted and non belted magnums. I own two .375H&H rifles. I purchased the first one because I always wanted one. IMO, the .375H&H has no non-magnum competitor. I bought the second one (stainless/synthetic) for a brown bear hunt that never happened. I have enjoyed the cartridge so much that I target shoot with it and hunt whitetail deer with it. I certainly do not need it for this. But, for big bear it is what I chose and would continue to favor. All my other hunting can be covered by a standard cartridge with very good bore to case capacity effectiveness, such as the .30-06, .45-70, .260 Remington, etc. I do not shoot beyond 300 meters with any rifle on game, and with many rifles I have imposed personal 200 and even 100 yard(my .44 mag Deerfield) limits. If I hunted as one of my friends does, a treestand overlooking a field where ranges are likely to start at 100 yards and proceed to 500, I would use a long range magnum as he does. The rifle is hardly a carrying rifle, weighing about 15 lbs scoped. In choosing a cartridge, I have always picked those with established market histories (well almost, I did own a .17 Remington for a little while)so as to avoid the high costs and possibilities of no availability.

[ 01-11-2003, 19:48: Message edited by: targshooter ]

Hillbillybear comes to the wrong conclusion from his own data! Look at the 243 and 240 energies at 250 yards. The 240 has 46% more energy and it's energy that is needed at long range!

For normal ranges we are all better off with the standard cartridge of course unless dangerous game is the issue.

What really counts is mind control. One can take the abuse of hard kickers if we are determined to do so. This takes practice and a cost in terms of time and abuse to our bodies. Either you can do it or you can't.

Most people cannot shoot magnums well due to the lack of effort required.