There are generally two theories hunters use to choose their caliber/bullets.
There is the fast and light theory ex: 7rem mag and 130 grain bullet.
Then there is the slow and heavy theory ex: 30-06 200gr bullet.

My question is do hunters with less experience tend to go with more with the fast and light theory and hunters with more experience tend to go more with the slow and heavy theory.

For myself I started out fast and light but as I get more experience I am definitely shifting to the a little slower and a lot heavier theory. I have been hunting for 15 years.

Anybody have any thoughts on this?

Maybe. I started out with conventional 175's, and am now shooting copper 130's. So there you have it, both ways.

I probably shouldn't mention that my main elk rifle is now a 35Whelen instead of a 7mag...... LOL! FWIW,Dutch.

It's not as much experience as habit.Many older hunters grew up when bullet technology was in it's early days and heavier weights provided better penetration on very large game.Even though bullets are much better now many older hunters use heavier bullets because that is what they are used to using.Younger hunters are more likely to try new things and with the new premium bullets the heavier weights are not required.I have been hunting over 30 years and started out slow and heavy.I now use faster lighter bullets since I have seen that the heavy bullets are not required.

[ 08-01-2003, 22:18: Message edited by: stubblejumper ]

Some of the old timers, like Stubblejumper said, never seen X bullets. They used heavy for caliber soft points so they wouldn't blow up, and no other reason. Heavy bullets would perform better than a faster, lighter bullet. I started out a few years ago shooting 160 gr. 7mm X bullets, and am now shifting to the lighter 140 gr. or even 130 gr. X, even for bear and moose. Now if I used a regular soft point, like a Hornady, I would choose a heavier weight for the game I was hunting, but with a premium, controlled expansion design, less can be more

I think it's a bit of both habit & exp. The more hunting & shooting you do the more you realize there isn't a big trajectory adv. from say a 150gr 7mm BT & a 175grNP @ normal hunting ranges. A good heavy bullet works most of the time, expands & penetrates to the vitals. It's hard to argue w/ what has always worked. I stay w/ heavier for caliber bullets in all my big game rounds except my .338-06. It just works very well w/ the 210grNP.

Maybe experience has an effect on use of heavier bullets, that would probably be hard to prove one way or another. But I do feel experience teaches people with even a little intelligence that it's unwise to push the lightest available bullet at the highest possible speeds. People quickly realize that the super light/fast combo is liable to blow up at close range and bleeds speed/energy much faster than the heavier stuff.

I prefer the heavier bullets for caliber. I've used most of the premium bullets, including the "X" bullets which I do use for cape buffalo in 416 RM and with 400gr bullets. To me there isn't any reason to use less than 180 Nos. part in the "06" and 200 in the 300 mags. I have used 210gr nos parts in my 338s but use mostly 225 X today. In 9.3X62 I like 250gr North Forks and 375 H&H 300gr X's. For deer sized game and smaller go to wallmart and buy what's on sale, just make sure you have your rifle shot in for that load.

I just know that I've gravitated toward bigger bores and heavier bullets for most of my hunting over the years, especially the last ten years.

Thirty years ago at age fifteen, I bought my first big game rifle - a .30-06 - simply because I wasn't really familiar with other big game cartridges and the concept of bullet construction was incomprehensible to me. I shot handloaded (Lee Loader at the kitchen table) 165 or 180 gr. Hornady's for everything and did OK.......

Twenty-five years ago, I became a .270 Win. fanatic because of all the Jack O'Connor and John Jobson stories I grew to love reading. I came to figured that 130s were good enough for everything short of African big stuff, which I never thought I'd get to hunt anyway, so that's what I hunted with for a time. I still love the .270......

Twenty years ago, I bounced back and forth between my rekindled love for the 7mm Remington Magnum and a new-found fascination for the .338 Win. Mag. I shot 175s in the 7mm and 250s in the .338. Both worked........

Ten years ago, I started hunting seriously with the .300 Win. Mag., and it remains my favorite cartridge to this day for all-around use. Premium 180s have been good for over 100 big game animals so far with this cartridge - from Texas whitetails to elk to moose to lion to (in a pinch) cape buffalo. I ONLY shoot premium 180s in the .300, no matter what I'm hunting with it or where.......

Today I still shoot 130s in the .270 Win., 180s in the .300 Winchester, 210s or 250s in the .338 Winchester, 270s or 300s in the .375 H&H, and 400s in the .416 Remington. I don't hunt big game with other cartridges anymore, nor do I wish to experiment with anything else, either. My personal family of hunting cartridges is essentially complete, and I'm just interested in hunting with what I've got.........

AD

I'll venture to say that the statement is probably true. A lot of PHs love the 220 grain in the 300s for example. With the advent of the "Super Premiums" part of the appeal was that one could go to a smaller bullet ( hence less Sectional density) and still maintain penetration with a flatter trajectory. In the "old days" like Todd B said, one had to go to a heavier bullet for weight retention and penetration. I tend to stick with the same bullet weight for a given caliber ( i.e., 180 in the 300s) . I use Swift A Frames almost exclusively, but I also use Hornadys for deer and other light game. jorge

I think all levels of experience are going to the heavier bullets. I disagree with that philosophy because I think you lose a lot of the calibers versatility, but to each his own.

Kensco-Most Of the people I know are actually going to lighter weight bullets.

I've done both, but since I carried a pistol alot decided that the largest,heaviest and fastest thing I can throw out there is the best way to do it.

I would not say I am "experienced" but I like heavy for calibre bullets infact I like big bores and the heavy bullets they deliver full stop. I don't know why I just do. My Gunshop owner on the other hand is a neck down light bullet speed fiend who is not happy unelss velocity's are over 4200 fps...he swears by stuff like this

I still use the same weights in the calibers I hunt with that I did 30yrs ago...mostly the same bullets too! Nosler partitions just seem awfully hard to beat. I also use Fail Safes and other premium bullets but haven't seen any real advantage to going very far up or down in weight.

I have gravitated to heavy for caliber bullets, most who hunt the Cape Buffalo, Elephant, and Lion end up shooting heavy bullets simply because light bullets have little effect on big brutish animals..

I think folks that mostly hunt deer try to apply the same theory to the heavy stuff, it just don't fly...I have had much better luck on even elk and Kudu with heavy bullets and I can take any angle shot...

Some think the monolithics change the whole picture and they do change it but not the "whole" picture....You still need a heavy base to push that bullet in flesh...which coorelates to a 230 gr. .338 Failsafe equals a 250 gr. Nosler in penitration...or a 165 gr. BarnesX equals a 180 gr. Nosler...BUT a 180 gr. monolithic in a 338 does not equal a 250 gr. Nosler..

My favorite all time elk load? A 300 gr. Woodliegh RN, it really takes an elk out and you can see it...It works perfect to 300 yards and I don't shoot elk passed that range. If I ever change my mind and take a longer shot I'll let you know how it did...

Not pushing either side of the equation, as I use both the medium weights and the heavier weights per caliber.

In the experiences I have been reward with, a lighter faster bullet does need to be a premium to work at its best.

However the mid range weights do perform well on deer sized animals, regardless of caliber.

As for the heavier weights, ( minus having a heavy bullet fail to expand because of velocity, person experience and we all flogged that one to death on another post) I have not ever seen a heavy for caliber bullet fail. Even if it was not a premium bullet. I think few can contest having experienced anything different.

There is no wrong answer, when one picks a bullet up to the task at hand, and the shooter puts it in the right place.



[ 08-02-2003, 07:26: Message edited by: seafire ]

I've always gravitated towards heavy for calibre and when the premiums started coming on to the market, it was extra insurance. I still like heavy for calibre bullets between 2500-2800 fps. Never found much reason to vary from that.

I think as hunters get older/more experenced they tend to shot heavier bullets for the most part. When I was young I thought speed was everything. I think some common sense comes with age/experence, might make more sense to shoot an elk with 180gr or 200gr than a 150 gr. out of a 300mag. But with experience I've leaned that some of the premium bullets permit shoting a 140gr with the same results as a 150gr for the most part, as long as you hit um in the right place

Personally I've used the light weights and the fly weights--to me none of this is rocket science.

What with the new preme bullets available, a fella can get plenty of penetration with the lighter bullets.

I've personally found not much for difference in the light vs heavy debate. If you hit them right they will die, if you don't then you will need track shoes with both. If anything on good broadside shots I've noticed that the lighter bullets at speed will tip over critters a bit faster.

THE one thing that I have noticed is that the more experienced rifleman tend to use a couple of rifles, and only one type of slug per rifle. I.E. they dont' play the I'll use 150's for this and 180's for that (although that is what makes some cal's so good, is that they have so many more bullets available than others right--grins..) They also tend to use them very well.

We've always heard beware the one gun man-I also prescribe to beware the man with 12 elk rifles (or whatever)-it could well turn into a rodeo when hunting him.

A quick story ran into a fella a couple of weeks ago-he went on and on to tell me about elk hunting and how he had 14 elk rifles in his stable. I asked him how many hunts he'd been on and how many elk he had taken--it was a zero for both.. Too bad he doesn't seel a few of those rifles and get to the hill to hunt elk.

End of my story-have a great weekend boyz!

"GET TO THE HILL"

Dog

The heavy or light issue is not that big a debate on deer sized game, IMO. On larger game, it very well may be the difference in a successful hunt and a sorry, or dangerous hunt. All my rifles will shoot a particular bullet with pinpoint accuracy, or I will not keep it around. That bullet for that rifle may be smaller in weight, medium or heavier. I will shoot all sized bullets in that particular chambering to determine the most accurate load for the rifle. If I can live with that combo for the game I wish to hunt with the rifle, it is a keeper. ----- Notice I said chambering instead of caliber. A 30-30 chambering is quite different from a 30-378 chambering, while both are the same caliber. ----- I tend to want the rifle to shoot the heavier bullets best on the larger and more dangerous game, and yes I am a senior hunter, who has seen Brown Bear charges up close and personal. The young hunter that has not witnessed that still has that lesson to experience and hopefully survive. I am going to Alaska next month for Caribou in Brown Bear country, I will be loaded for Bear, and not worry about the excess damage done to the Caribou, because I want to return to grandma. ----- Bottom line, some senior hunters have been there and done that, and are still talking. Good shooting.

[ 08-02-2003, 19:07: Message edited by: phurley ]

I like heavy.

I dont give nearly as much creedence to claims of flat trajectories due to superior velocities as I once did. The notion that one needs 3000+ fs for hunting accuracy is armchair ballisticans bullshit. Within reasonable hunting ranges a healthy chunk of lead moving along at (only )2400 to 2600 fs will give much better hunting accuracy than its given credit for. Instead I like lighter bullets that cook along at 3000 + fs for their shock value on the lighter species. But when the tougher hard to bring down species are whats in your sights, more bullet is definatley where its at.

Hello ruki.....

It all depends on the animal I'm hunting at the time.

For me I like my bullets with flat bases and round noses when I hunt heavy animals (300 Win Mag)

For Antelope/Deer I like the 115gr. partition (25-06) When Nosler quite making the 115 partition, I settled with the 117gr Hornady, then Nos brought the 115 back.

For Javalina sized game flat base soft points(223)

For P.Dogs and Crows polycarb.. tiped. (22-250)

I perfer flat base bullets over boat tails.

All The Best
Steel

My philosophy is simple. Why go light for caliber if there's a smaller cartridge with better BC to do it?

A 130gr in a .270? Might as well have a 120 in a .25/06.

A 150 in a .30/06? That's what .270s and .308Win are for.

A 250 in .358 Norma? That's a .338 Win Mag.

A 180gr in a .300 Win? 175 in 7Mag.

Twenty-nine years hunting. Don't know if that makes me an old-timer or not.

I like a larger diameter more than a heavier bullet, if bullet construction is up to the task. I don't like bullets that disappear on entry with no exit, I like a good exit wound. I don't like a small entry with half the animal gone on the exit side. Those considerations are for the type of hunting that I most commonly do, for meat and hide, trophy considerations are not real high. For a bona fide trophy hunt, I might reconsider. For real DG, I would reconsider. When you meat hunt, it doesn't make much sense to turn a quarter into unuseable goo. I can do the tracker thing OK if needs be. For the other types of hunting, on the ground the fastest wins my vote. I know it dates me, but Nosler Parts seem to fit the bill on most counts. There are a lot more options today, if I were burning 4-5 pounds of powder a month like I used to, I'd be trying the options out for sure. To the question, over the years I have gravitated to larger and heavier bullets. I got quicker kills, but none deader than my 7MMRM with Nosler Parts. In all honesty, bullet placement is more important, IMHO. This wouldn't work for Africa, I think.

[ 08-03-2003, 03:36: Message edited by: 8MM OR MORE ]

I SHOOT 50-60 deer a year due to car/deer accidents. Sometimes they are out in a field flopping and crawling away. That is when I use the shorty M16 in .223
Sometimes they are closer and I use my .45 duty gun. I find the .45 shot deer always die cleaner and quicker then the .223 shot deer.

When hunting with a rifle, I LIKE BIG. BIG bullets in BIG calibers.
Other then using the .223 at work, I can't remember using a bullet lighter then 250 grains on anything from deer up to moose and caribou. The SMALLEST calliber I have hunted with in the last 20 years or so is my .340 Weatherby. Otherwise I use the .358 Win, the .375H&H or the 45-70.
BIG penetrating bullets just give you more shot options then smaller lighter bullets. I have confidence in whatever I carry that a "Texas heart shot" if necessary, will be just as certain and fatal as the cleanest textbook shoulder shot. "TOO much gun? Who cares? certainly not the animals because they die quickly and without wearing out a pair of boots tracking them.

I have had to help too many people chase after game hit by the latest "whiz bang 'souper' bullet/gun" that was supposed to strike like lightning and was so fast that even a near miss would suck the air from their lungs causing the game to fall dead.
I had a friend who LOVED his .243 for deer. He was a good shot but MAN, unless he took them in the neck, the chase was on. I finally got him up to a 30-06 and using 220 grainers. He was amazed that the same shots had such a different effect.

heavy-good
light-not so good

I've used heavy bullets for years, as that's what daddy used, and he always brought home meat. I went to Africa hunting two years ago, and shot heavy for caliber bullets with great results.

The only problem I had was, being black, the PH and the camp help had a bit of a time adjusting to me being the hunter!

Walter Williams for president!

I'm for heavy bullets, too.

Rastus, I've got to ask. Are you from a small town just north of Tuscaloosa? I knew a black man years ago in that area with a hell of a firearms collection, who hunted all over the place. When I had met this individual, he had just returned from hunting Siberian brown bear. I believe it was aroung 1978.

Ric Carter, then from Iowa, from Montana the past twnety some odd years.

Ric, yes that is me, and my goodness is it good to hear from you! I remember you well from saving me and my family that day after our accident, and we will be eternally greatful. My wife had brought you up just last week, as she was going through some old photos, and found some of the wreck. The kids of course don't remember you, but we certainly do! It is indeed a small world! Anything we can ever do for you, all you need do is ask.

Randall, email me at waksupi1@yahoo.com

I have often wondered who started the tripe about beware of the one gun man..My experience reveals that if he doesn't like guns enough to own more than one then he can't shoot for beans, has no knowledge of guns and usually shoots a piece of junk thats never been sighted in!!!

I suggest beware of the 20 gun man, its is whole life!!!!

Ray, why stop at 20???

Here's my take on the mythical (sp?) one gun man.

First off, I know of a very very few that only have one rifle.

I do know a lot of people that have a lot of guns--to the man the very best of those shooters consentrate on a couple 2 or 3 guns at most. That doesn't mean they only own 2 or 3. But it does say that the best rifleman that I have known-that can kill on demand, and to long range or quickly at close quarters, and do it in a duplicateable manner only use a couple of favorite rigs.

Just my thoughts...

"GET TO THE HILL"

Dog

[ 08-04-2003, 00:49: Message edited by: Mark R Dobrenski ]

OK:

Not that I have hunted much at all, but here's my two cents.

Except for 22 lr, which I use for practice to keep from developing a horrible flinch, I like big bores, with light for caliber bullets, at low pressures, unless walking around bears, lions, etc. then it's heavy for caliber softpoints.

I've got to write this, and then go shoot off all my 375 H&H ammo, as I finally decided to rebore the 375 to 458 Lott.

Here's my logic. I believe penetration is more a function of bullet weight then anything else.

If that's the case, a 300 grain bullet, Barnes X for example, out of a 458 Lott at 2600 fps, or even 2400 fps, is going to cut a big hole, and still penetrate, maybe not quite as well as the same bullet weight in 375, but still deep enough for most uses.

In other words, I like calibers that allow a broad range of bullets, from light for caliber to heavy for caliber. Good examples are 30-06, the 458's for heavy rifles, 45 colt, 454 Casull, 44 magnum, and 45 Super. I'm sure some of the other calibers have wide variety of bullets avaliable, but these are the calibers I've decided on.

Examples of calibers with relatively limited bullet options are 416 Rigby, etc. Great caliber, but not enough bullets avaliable, and the variety isn't broad enough, since the same diameter bullet isn't used by a lesser, or greater, included caliber(example 7.62 x 39,308 for 30-06, 300 Mag, 30-378,XXX 45-70, 458 win mag, 458 lott, 460 WBY).

TRULY ideal would be a caliber that combined pistol caliber bullets on top of rifles. For instance if the 458 daimeter was used in 45 acp, and 454 casull/45 colt.

The 35's come to mind. 350 remington magnum,356 Winchester, 358 winchester,35 Whelen,, 358 Norma Mag,and the 357 Magnum pistol, and 38 special.
(Now I've convinced myself I could really use my 30-06 rebarreled to 35 Whelan).

I like being able to shoot light for caliber bullets for practice, or fun, like 130 grain bullets in a a 30-06, and still have heavy bullets for certain situations.

I also like the cost savings factor, that means I'll be able to shoot my big bore more then others.

For example, I shot hard cast lead bullets, cost .5 cents each, out of my 45 colt/454 forever.
Put the bullet over a case of H-110, pull the trigger, and it was accurate, kicked a bit, big blast, but it was safe, and, it didn't kick the stuffings out of you like a 345 grain in the same gun.

Same theory in rifles. If I can use a 300 grain bullet in a Lott, at 2400 fps, that should be fine for anything, yet I can load it up, and, if I desire, I can load 500 grain bullets, at 2200-2300, if I feel like I need the stuffings beat out of me.

The only problem I find is the lighter for caliber bullets don't tend to be as accurate as the longer bullets, but, you have trade offs in life.

So I guess my answer to the question is I want as few calibers as possible, that make as big a hole as possible, and are as versatile as possible, and, therefore, as economical to shoot as possible.

One last comment. Would any here feel that a 300 grain Barnes X, in 458 Lott, going 2800 or more, fps, would be inadequate as an elk, or big bear round? My point is that a rifle like the Lott gives you both flat shooting, hard hitting, long range capabilities, with still heavy bullets, and, for short range, really heavy bullets, if need be.

Finally, since I consider a rifle the best defense. I also need a low recoiling, explosive bullet, with good diameter and penetration, for close range work.

Some of the 45/70 bullets, at 40,000 cup should be perfect for such work.

s

I think Mark D. has it right with regards to hunters that own a large number of rifles. I know he is 100% correct as it applies to myself and several friends. We each own a number of rifles but concentrate on the ones needed for the upcoming hunts. If I'm hunting elk this fall, which I am, I will be shooting my 300Wby or 33G&A quite a bit now. If I'm only making a deer hunt or two then the 270 will get a workout instead of the 33G&A. We look at the rifles as tools, choosing the best one or two for the job at hand and then getting in the practice with them to be certain of the outcome, if we are lucky enough to have a shot!

I think Ray is right.

I use as evidence, the above post that has now convinced me that I need a 35 Whelan, and a 50 BMG wouldn't be bad, either.

The problem is to keep the choices down enough so that you concentrate on one particular, or a couple particular, calibers, and get really good with them.

For example, 22 lr, 45 acp, and 45 colt.

Or 22 lr, 30-06, and 458 Lott, or 375 H&H.

I shot 20 rounds of 375 today, at 50 yards, off hand, and, it was in the black, but, I did not accomplish my goal of 40 rounds.

Looks like I need a muzzle brake...

s

After 40 years of hunting, I find I have a "favorite" load for different situations.

For thin skin game with a 300 win mag, I use 165 grain Speer Boat Tail. Sort of middle of the road. For medium African Plains Game I use 180 grain Swift A Frame, again middle of the road.

For larger plains game, I use 350 grain Swift A Frame in a 416 Rem Mag. I also use this load in open plains for Buffalo.

Up front and personal for DG, I use 500 grain Woodleigh in 470.

I guess I have Migrated to heavier side of the spectrum. I started with a Sears 22