You know what I'm talking about... those cartridges that are the lightest possible for a given job.

I suppose they're called "cocktail cartridges" because they're part of an on-going game we all induldge in around the campfire or in the comfort of our homes... drinks in-hand. A sort of "mental-gymnastics" exercise. I'm not sure why some of us play this game. While I don't take the game to its extreme (i.e., 223's on elk), I'll admit I'm as guilty as the next guy. Is this some sort of Ludite or Puritan throwback... a "less is more" sort of thing? A depression-era hold-on? An imposed economy due to financial limitations, or just plain-old ego?

I'm not really sure. Around this part of the world it's not a game as much as it's a reality. For example, many in these parts think of a 338 Win Mag as an "elephant gun" while you'll get approving nods if you use a 270 for everything.

Now I'm not knocking the 270... heck, I think everyone should own one. Coupled with a 338 Win Mag I doubt there's a finer pair for all North American game. But we dither about a cartridge that holds ten or twelve extra grains of powder as if that were some wasteful extravagance. We opine that a lesser cartridge is up to 95% of the tasks of its larger competitor (the 7-08 vs 270 for example... name your pair). What we often loose sight of in this excercise is that 5% (or whatever fraction) still involves the death of a living creature. Cartridge minutia and reloading economy really shouldn't enter into the equasion. How many cents extra are we really blowing out the barrel?

Obviously this premise can be taken to an exterme. I'm not advocating we all use 416 Weatherby's for elk and 340's for deer and pronghorn. New "wonder bullets" have made marginal cartridges much more effective. On the other hand, those same "wonder bullets" have made entirely adequate cartridges more than adequate!

I guess the bottom-line in all this is we should use the biggest cartidge (for the quarry we seek) that we can precisely shoot... to heck with the notion of "overkill." If we can't shoot a cartridge that will dispatch our quarry humanely under less than ideal conditons then perhaps we shouldn't hunt that animal... or hold our fire for a "perfect" opportunity.

What got me thinking about all this is that my twelve year old daughter informed me this past Sunday that she wants to take hunter's ed this year and start hunting. Of course I'm absolutly thrilled, but was caught off-guard as she'd not given me any indiction this was even a remote possibility... girls! Being my daughter she wants to tackle elk straight off! Only problem is, I doubt she can handle more than a 243. We'll go for pronghorn and deer first... the elk (with a 308 or 270) will have to wait!

Brad

[This message has been edited by Brad (edited 03-15-2002).]

DFS (darn well said) Brad: Also I am happy as a puppy with 2 peters that your daughter is gonna become a huntress. I also hope like heck to be there with the 2 of you.

"GET TO THE HILL"

Dog

Brad, I'm really happy for you! In a lot of ways, girls can be a bit difficult to raise, so make the most of this chance to do something together with your 12 year-old daughter. Those hunts that you share with her will carry some big rewards, plus long-term benefits for both of you.......

But to your hunting topic....... I remember in the old days, lots of the prominent gunwriters loved to play a sort of "how low can you go" game out of cartridge selection. They were always sighting the time Ol' So&So whacked the biggest and toughest critters on Earth with .270s, 7mm Mausers, and .257s, and with fabulous killing results. When I was fifteen years-old, I thought that rational was stylish wisdom at its finest, but today, I think that sort of rational is ridiculous.

But I suppose I was a lot smarter thirty years ago than I am today. I believe in using plenty of gun for the game at hand - period - and I really don't give a hoot what sort of small cartridge has been used (you never heard about any failures for some odd reason!) on big moose, big bears, or even elephants by some old timer from fifty years ago.

AD

Hey Mark... tried to call you last night at MRP... missed you by five minutes! Can't wait to take her out this year.

Allen, you're probably correct that this "game" was inveneted by gunwriters... they've certainly found a willing audience! Like you, the older I get the more I like to see the stuff I shoot get truly "smacked"... no sense fooling around!

Year-before-last I watched a perfectly placed 100 grain 6mm go broadside into the lungs of a big cow elk at 200 yards... she led us on a merry chase, and was finally anchored with a 7mm Wby and Nosler Partitions. In the timber that old-gal would have been lost. I'd be willing to bet a 270, 30-06 or even better, a 300 or 338, would have put her down much quicker.

Brad

Forgive me, butttt........what's all this EGO crap just because someone uses a lighter than normally used caliber. Maybe they're recoil shy.......that's EGO? Hey, you want EGO........talk to those guys who think you're not huntin' unless you're carrying some cannon around, now that's EGO! Maybe Bell was recoil shy or didn't like heavy guns or the noise they made. I've heard because it(7x57) being quieter, elephants in those days hung around to be picked off. Do you understand before the popularity of the mags that many years ago big bear hunters thought they were adequatly equiped with 30-40 krags, 303s and thought they were well equiped with the '06 and .348 win.? All those white African pioneers that did the same with lessor than supposedly adequat calibers. I have nothing against using plenty enough gun but some people do just as well with less. That's not EGO, that's not pushing the envelope, that's not showing off! That's not a holdover from depesssion days......what kind of analitical nonsense is that??? You're making this way too complicated to try and explain something that just makes plain sense to light caliber hunters. Showing off is shooting a cannon.......that's hairy chested machismo! Think people, think!

I agree with Allen. I think that if someone wants to shoot big game with light cartridges, they should start with DANGEROUS GAME. If they survive they can come back and tell us about it.

In the case of your daughter, are you sure you don't just want to start with deer and other smaller game first, that can be taken with a 243 and work you way up to elk as she becomes more proficient and can handle a larger firearm? Nothing could be worse for your daughter than if she wounded an animal and it ran off without being recovered. You would not be training her to be a responsible hunter.

[This message has been edited by rockhead (edited 03-16-2002).]

Interesting string!
Take the girl with every chance you get!
As for the big vs. small thing I could care less as long as you're effective with it. I hate finding critters wounded. Deer IMO, can be had very effectivly with smaller caliber rifles. I even have a soft spot for the .257 Roberts, HOWEVER, I also believe the bullet choice is the most critical when the caliber is small. When dealing with a novice "enough gun" is good advice because a larger rifle is more forgiving in that a wounded and lost animal is less likely. I use a .338 Win Mag for Elk and love it. I am not impressed with the .270 on Elk at all, but it is a fine deer rifle. Ego has little to do with my choices as I use several rifles with great differences.
There are the ego trip types but usually they are also the ones bragging about great long shots and not the long stalking that preceeded a 50 yrd shot.

Brad,

The curiosity of these "cocktail cartridges" is very interesting indeed.

There are many complex angles to this notion, and each distorts and twists the real issue. Individual recoil limits are not the full story. Shot to shot economy is merely a smoke screen. Yet, all the while ethics never seem to be abandoned, no, they are always held in the most sincere regard.

So, what are we to make of it all? What is the motivation behind all this?

When I distill these considerations, I find what is at the heart of your question. I find the heart of the hunter. You see, deep down we all know that life is a very fragile thing. So fragile, that our distant ancestors were reasonably successful harvesting animals with mere sticks and stones. And we in turn, wonder if we could do the same. Do we really have what it takes? I'm convinced this base urge to simplify (and even to prove ones skill, dicipline, and prowess themselves) is what leads people to hunt with handgun, muzzleloader, and bow. All of which are equally deadly in their own right. When this personal renniassance takes place-- in thought or action-- we see that killing does not truely motivate the hunter. Rather, it's the experience and the hunt itself.

Anyway, these are just a few of my meanderings on this thread. It's a real thinking-mans topic. Thanks Brad!

Leo, take a deep breath man... it certainly can be ego, though of a different variety. To take animals with cartridges entirely too light for the species... well, it's actually a sort of arrogance. Arrogance that the animal's life is of so little consequence that any old cartridge will do. Certainly there is a lot of "machismo" surrounding larger calibers too... no doubt. Around here though there's just as much bragging about spectacular shots with 220 Swifts on elk. You obviously haven't lived around yahoos who use this sort of armament day in and day out... like my example of 6mm's on elk. You need to "think", and perhaps read a little more carefuly... you've obviously READ enough of Bell's exploits (and his ilk) to "know it all" though.

Rockhead, if you read my post, I never said I was taking my daughter after elk with a large rifle... I said I'd start her on deer and antelope first with a 243. She's not ready for elk hunting in the mountains yet. I can't wait until she is ready though!

BigNate... I totally agree. I've never thought deer take all that much killing. I've taken them with 250 Savages and Roberts' on-up. They're thin-skinned, light bones little critters. I'm always amazed at the amount of hand-wringinging over deer cartridges! I DO think, however, that in the west it doesn't get much better than the 270 for deer.

Elk are a different matter. I think the 338 Win Mag is about the best elk round to come down the pike. I've used it with great success... and no, I don't have a hairy chest! The reason I like it is because it's exactly the kind of round I'm talking about. It's a cartridge for less than ideal situations on big, tenacious critters. I think anyone who's accustomed to shooting a 30-06 can learn to handle a 338 Win Mag if it has a soft recoil pad on a stock that will mitigate recoil.

Waldog, I agree... it is a "thinking man's" subject!

Regards all,

Brad

Maybe a little girl should not go elk hunting until she is big enough? There is plenty of game to hunt smaller than elk! This can be explained with the goal being elk.

Then there is the matter of shooting distance. As Atkinson has pointed out "at some range every .300 magnum becomes a 30/06!" This means that a small person can shoot a .308W up to 200 yards and it will hit just as well as a .300 mangelem at 400 yards.

As to the cocktail cartridge topic. I think it's a poor plan. You don't want to drive over a bridge that is made to the 2 ton weight of you truck do you? Bridges are made to take 6 or more times the load. They may be rated low but they will do a lot more!

You may have a shot with a animal quartering towards you and find to your dismay that it was not quartering towards you but instead looking back over it's shoulder!

Use enough gun.

Brad

I know you intend to start on smaller game. I did not mean to be critical, I just wanted reinforce that she progresses gradually to bigger game as she becomes more proficient and capable of shooting appropriate calibers. This is the same approach I will take with my two daughters

I think that it is excellent that your daughter wants to hunt with you. I an envious, You are fortunate, I am still several years away from hunting with my children.

[This message has been edited by rockhead (edited 03-16-2002).]

Hey, I'm no fan of Bell. I think he was just a very practical man that knew his bullets would penetrate properly and would get the job done if he did his part which I'm told he was quite capable. One thing that bothers me is that people will say that a .243 or .223 are an expert's calibers when used on just deer. That's nonsense, they are very shootable calibers for kids and recoil sensitive women. If a kid doesn't have enough control to wait for a good shot with a .223 then he won't with a .270 and will probably be alittle afraid of the larger gun causing a bad shot. And another thing, It horrifies me that many experienced hunters will reccomend a very light rifle(model seven for example) in the potent .308 for a kid because it's easy to carry. Light guns and potent calibers do not make for enjoyable shooting. That's only practical for frequent range shooters.

Personally if it were me-under the right conditions I would take her on a elk hunt. As long as I had a good buddy along (and yes I am voluntering).
We should talk Brad about taking her to the ranch I guide for elk-they have an early hunt for cows. We could use the atv or the ponies to get one out. It would be a blast!

"GET TO THE HILL AND TAKE YOUR KIDS WITH YOU"

Dog

Rockhead,

What a masterpiece photograph!

I can only imagine the memories that lie behind this day in the woods...

I suspect that 20 years from now, the biggest trophy on your wall will have less value than this one photo.

Congratulations on your darling girls.

I wish I could go back 15 years and take my son hunting more. But I'll try to make up for it this June in Zimbabwe.

Rick.

Thanks Rick

Good luck in Zim, I am sure it will produce wonderful memories for you and your son. My best hunting memories are those involving my father.