Don't know if this is the right section but anyway........ I figured 200 yards for a 6.5x55 using 140 Partitions ? What do you think about shoulder shots ? Keeping in mind the 6.5's out penetrate any other 140 offering in 270, 284 etc. Thanks in advance.

Historically the 6.5's reputation was made with 160 grain bullets. It is that long skinny bullet which penetrates like crazy that makes the 6.5 a true big game rifle. With elk you are squarely in that territory.
The 6.5 magnums do not do well with 160s for a couple of reasons: speed, and stability. 160s have a long bearing surface and driving them at 3000fps isn't easy to do with reasonable pressures. Not all rifles will stabilize that weight bullet either, not without using a round nose anyway. That is exactly why the 7m/m Remington magnum was mor successful than the 264 Winchester magnum.

Didn't answer the question the first time, sorry. Your guess of 200ish yards is about right in my opinion. I still like the long, slow, heavy bullet idea tho...

Gidday Bighornbreath,

I reckon you are on the right track with 140gr projectiles on elk/wapiti sized animals. Go with a hotcore and keep the velocity under 2800fps (not a problem with the 6.5x55/260 cartridges).

You will be able to reliably take shots to 300 metres with such a load and have no worries about penetration or expansion. It will reliably break heavy bone and still get to the boiler room.

Don't try THS though. Go a couple if inches higher and go through the spine or into the back of the neck.

Do your part and the 6.5 will surely do its job.

Happy Hunting

Hamish

quote:

Originally posted by BighornBreath:
Don't know if this is the right section but anyway........ I figured 200 yards for a 6.5x55 using 140 Partitions ? What do you think about shoulder shots ? Keeping in mind the 6.5's out penetrate any other 140 offering in 270, 284 etc. Thanks in advance.

At 200 yards, you bet the 6.5X55mm will take elk if you use a Nosler Partition 140-grain bullet! I believe the 140 NPJ will penetrate every bit as well as a 160-grain round-nose standard construction bullet at 200 yards! Maybe even better.

With a 140 grain partition, I'd feel that 300 yds is realistic.....

A lot of bullets are slower velocities will penetrate a lot more than people give the credit for because they never test them and then read all the myths created by gunwriters of YOU needing "bigger and better" this year than what was "bigger and better" last season......

If you have a regular 140 grain bullet, and its impact velocity is about 1600 to 1700 fps or better, and shot placement is where it should be, then it will easily penetrate broadside on an Elk....So judge your max range based off of what you pick your muzzle velocity to be, as long as it is travelling at that velocity....

And for the Texas heartshot crowd... I have been presented this shot by deer multiple times....
Instead of aiming at the rump, aim OVER the rump and for the neck.... I have taken 5 deer this way, all but one were neck shots and dropped instantly...The other one hit the back bone just behind the lungs and went into the lungs and destroyed both of them... instant kill also!

Yeah and I missed a few, but did not wound them..
I'd rather have a missed shot than a wounding shot, that is not instantly lethal....Shooting them in the ASS is just undignified to me...Even for a game animal...

Another thing that gets me also....

Just because YOU see an Elk ( or deer for that matter) does not correlate to you have had a SHOT presented to you! I hate to see how many times I have seen people banging away at a batch of Elk at 700 yds with their latest magnum... ( the guys with their new magnum seem to be the worst of these as the place that sold them the rifle told them that they could kill ANY elk at ANY distance with this rifle.!)

I see lots of game that I don't think a shot was presented to me! It was too far for the load I was carrying, period! Or the animal was quicker on leaving that I was on getting the rifle up and a sight picture!

So the question of range, is how far Can YOU shoot and effectively place your shot? Then at what distance is that and how much velocity does your bullet have, and how much weight does it have in ratio to the size of the animal?

I myself, like high sectional density... the bigger the game, the higher sectional density I like...This alone negates using say a 243 on elk at 300 yds... Sectional density is only commonly available up to .250 or so ( Speer 105 grain SP)..

All of these thoughts really hold true on any caliber... I'd rather have a 6.5 x 55 with a 140 grain bullet at 300 yds, than a 150 grain bullet out of a 300 Mag at 300 yds....Sure the 150 grain out of the 300 Mag will have a flatter trajectory making hitting the animal easier... but as soon as bullet contacts hide!.... I'd trust a 140 grain 6.5 mm bullet for penetration way over a 150 grain 30 caliber bullet, regardless of velocity, or even a 165 and 180 grain bullet...

Sure the 180 will darn sure get the job done, but most guys will tell you then that the 180 grain bullet will out penetrate because it had more frontal area ( 30 cal vs 26 cal) and more weight ( by 40 grains) and more velocity on impact....

statistically that may be so.....But Statistically vs real world, the same person evidently hasn't spent a lot of time with high sectional density bullets at mid to low velocity and see what they can do penetration wise.....

Just some food for thought from old Seafire!

cheers and good shooting
seafire

I honestly don't know about elk, but I got my moose in Northern Ontario with a 6.5x55 using the 160gr SPSP (round nose to me) bullet at 110 yards. This was with a Remington Classic rifle. I would have had to hold over a bit for a 200yd. shot because this type of bullet will drop more than a spitzer. The penetration is terrific. Best wishes.

Cal - Montreal

Gidday Seafire,

Yet again it seems we are on the same track. I think velocity has its place but sometimes its virtues are over rated.

Most people don't really have the skill necessary to make use of the advantages higher velocity offers, myself especially. I tend to get closer to the target and keep within my limitations. 300 metres is as far as I feel confident taking big game.

I have just started varmint hunting and can say that head shooting rabbits at 300 metres plus does help the confidence and is a hell of a lot of fun. Be that as it may I still feel that big game deserves the respect of being hunted and shots that are taken are immediately lethal therefore 300 metres is my self imposed range limit.

As Clint Easwood says a man should always know his limits (Magnum Force).

You are dead right about the THS. Much better over the back.

Happy Hunting

Hamish

Gotta tell ya about my one and only THS...deer lolly-gags out of some dense Norway Pine saplings and immediately turns away from me. The deer's not spooked, but is definitely moving out.

So, just like Seafire and Hamish suggest, I shot for the base of the neck. Deer goes down, (only about 50 yards away), thrashes for 15 or 20 seconds, and is dead by the time I walk over.

As I walk up, I'm surprised to see no visible wound. I look and look. Finally, as I go to dress it out, I find the entry hole--literally 1/2" right of the anus!

That bullet was a 270 win 140 gr. Remington Core-lokt--their new, bonded Core-lokt. Never found the bullet, but it had, apparently, ridden just under the spine all the way up into the lungs. The chest cavity was a washing machine, and the bowels were, can you believe it, untouched!

It did a little damage to one of the backstraps.

Oh, by the way, it did all that after crushing the pelvis!

Go figure!

friar

quote:

Originally posted by seafire/B17G:
Just because YOU see an Elk ( or deer for that matter) does not correlate to you have had a SHOT presented to you! I hate to see how many times I have seen people banging away at a batch of Elk at 700 yds with their latest magnum... ( the guys with their new magnum seem to be the worst of these as the place that sold them the rifle told them that they could kill ANY elk at ANY distance with this rifle.!)

cheers and good shooting
seafire

Seafire, here's Joe Dufus, with his newest .308 Super Magnum with a 180 grain bullet, B.C. .550, at a MV of 3400 FPS, zeroed at 300 yards, banging away at an elk at 700 yards....

He's 61 inches LOW at 700 yards, and if he has a crosswind of 10 MPH, he's also got wind drift of 26" at that range.

If he's zeroed at a shorter distance, his drop is A WHOLE LOT WORSE!! He's not even going to WOUND anything!!

quote:

Originally posted by Hamish:
Gidday Seafire,

Yet again it seems we are on the same track. I think velocity has its place but sometimes its virtues are over rated.

Most people don't really have the skill necessary to make use of the advantages higher velocity offers, myself especially. I tend to get closer to the target and keep within my limitations. 300 metres is as far as I feel confident taking big game.

I have just started varmint hunting and can say that head shooting rabbits at 300 metres plus does help the confidence and is a hell of a lot of fun. Be that as it may I still feel that big game deserves the respect of being hunted and shots that are taken are immediately lethal therefore 300 metres is my self imposed range limit.

As Clint Easwood says a man should always know his limits (Magnum Force).

You are dead right about the THS. Much better over the back.

Happy Hunting

Hamish

Hamish,
I see that age has rewarded both of us with the same practicality....

I think you will enjoy varmint shooting.... It will also help your long range skills quite a bit....

I shoot a lot of sage rats and prairie dogs during spring & summer time.... a sage rat is about the size of a 12 oz soda can and a prairie dog ranges in size from a 1 litre to 2 litre soda bottle.....

After shooting those at 200 and 300 yds, when you see a deer at 300 yds, it will look like the size of a dump truck in your rifle scope.....
After shooting prairie dogs and sage rats at 300 yds with the scope on 6 to 8 power ( all that I can see out of! with my bad eye sight) you will find that the scope on 4 power will be just fine for distances out past 300 yds for deer etc....

El DeGuello:

Yeah there are a lot of Homer Simpson's out hunting all the time....Sad thing of it is, that I could probably make the shot that they are attempting.... but I spend a lot of time shooting small targets at long distances during varmint seasons.....BUT just because I could probably do it... doesn't make me feel I should be doing it....When the bullet strikes the target, I want it to do the job intended.... Not just wound an animal, that I will have to try and find the beginning of the blood trail once I negotiated the 700 yds to where the animal was.....

And If I miss, I want to know that my bullet is not flying past a distant hunters head, or taking out the radiator on someone's pickup parked at a trail head.....

I see no difference in taking a shot at 700 yds at any big game animal....that the guys who will shoot at a noise in the brush.... and then when you asked them what they were shooting at, they answer " I don't know, something moved!"

I had that happen once...by a perfect stranger....Just shot into the brush because "something moved".... I stomped right up to him and grabbed his rifle... the look on my face must have been pissed because I scared the hell out of him evidently....

I grabbed his rifle and emptied the magazine and put the shells in my pocket....then I took the bolt out of his rifle... I saw a pickup out in a field a half mile away or so. and asked if that was his truck....

he mumbled yes, and I just walked straight to his truck and laid the bolt of his rifle on the hood of his truck.... He never left the spot I encountered him at.....

I hicked back to my truck and just left the spot!!! ( I did go into the swamp that he shot into, just see if some poor hunter was laying in there gut shot! thank God the nimrod didn't hit anyone!)

This guy was more a candidate to be an Anti Gun Liberal in my book than a hunter!
Too many like him to give the rest of us a bad name!

cheers
seafire

OH hell, I had this same conversation today with someone looking at the gunshop at a new 338 Ultra Mag vs a 300 Ultra Mag....


hey If it is a mag, safe range is 1000 yds, heck make that 2000 yds!

I just wanted to know what Unit he will be harassing elk in this season, so I can pick another one!

Notice I did not say Hunting this season, He will probably just be out harassing the Elk....Personally I love it when one of these nimrod's shoot something like a mule, with their new 3000 Weatherby Ultra Magnum.... IN Oregon we get a little extra mileage humor if the same guys have California plates on the Eddie Bauer Edition Ford Expedition......with the 6 inch lift kit and the 38 inch Swamper Mudders on $1500.00 rims!

Yup get any magnum and you can tell any Elk within a ten mile radius....

6.5 mm cartridges, especially NON Magnum ones are strictly for us weenies!

'Laughing all the way'

cheers
seafire

I agree with you guys. And for the record I believe that the 140 grain Partition would work out to 300 yards on elk if the shooter did his part. I have great respect for the 6.5/140 grain combination. Especially the Nosler Partition! The most spectacular kill I have ever seen was made with a 6.5x55 Steyr Forester with Federal Classic 140 grain loads (at a whopping 2500 fps!). I had purchased the rifle just before the Utah deer hunt and hadn't purchased dies yet, but I still wanted to use it. I shot a deer that was broadside at a little over 100 yards and it fell so hard I thought it was going to bounce back up. The bullet (non-premium)broke both shoulders completely, wrecked the lungs and came to rest under the hide on the off side. I really do think there is something to the turn of the century combination of high sectional density and moderate velocity. Many of my buddies think that I am a wierdo because I would rather carry a 7x57 or 6.5x55 than a 7mm or .300 Magnum while hunting deer. I guess its just another case of "if you have to ask the question, then you won't understand the answer." Some of them are beginning to convert (but usually after a nasty case of 'magnum eyebrow') Good luck hunting!

I keep coming back to this thread to read the .300 and .338 Wizbang users explaining how misguided this topic is. Where are these people? Don't they care?

I have this image of them huddling under a dark porch somewhere, cradling the Wizbang, muttering something about "my precious..."

Jaywalker

One thing that continually gets overlooked is sectional density and the recommendation for a well constructed bullet is .260. In .338 magnum, you'll need a minimum bullet weight around 210 grains. In 6.5 mm, 140 grains will get it done with a SD of .289 (Speer). Actually, the Hornady 129 gr. Accubond has a sectional density over .260 also, but some might consider it light, it is well constructed and bonded.

I'm pretty comfortable with the .260 rule of thumb, because ultimately, it is the man behind the trigger that gets it done. Of course, a bullet of good construction helps as does energy. 200-300 yards is possible, but it will depend on how much velocity you have to develop the energy for 300 yards. BTW, the former wildcat 6.5 X .284 is now the 6.5 X .284 Norma. I would say with a 140 gr. bullet it has 300 yard potential. I might stick with 200 if I were shooting the .260 Remington and split the difference with data for modern rifles for the 6.5 X 55 SM. If I held maximum range to 200, I think I could be content with the 140 gr. SPEER Grand Slam. That is what it was intended for. BTW, more than a few Elk have been taken with .257's that don't have nearly the sectional density of 140 gr. .264 bullets.

I would treat it the same as a .270/150gr. Keep your shots under 250yds & OFF THE SHOULDER. It's a heart lung thing. I want bigger bullets if I am putting them on big bones.

Gotta tell this story since there seems to be so many like minded people on this thread. I'm working in the shop last fall when a guy comes in with pics of an elk he had taken on a recent trip. I start asking about details and it turns out that it was taken at, if I remember correctly, 485 yards as measured by a lazer rangefinder. This intrigued me so I asked a few more questions. Turns out that the load was a new .300 wizzem shooting 180 gr. partitions at about 2950 fps. I asked about the hold and he say's "just held a little high on its shoulded and popped it on the first shot." Oh my. After a bit I couldn't stand it anymore..that'll teach me to start asking questions. Anyhow, you should have seen the look on his face when someone else in the room proclaimed it "the most damned unlucky elk in the world." This guy had no idea that with a 200 yard zero he should have had about 4 feet of drop at that range. Must have been the recoil that made him flinch and pull that shot 4 feet higher than he intended?????? Anyhow, I thought someone here might enjoy another stupid story about the clueless brigade.

Allright fine, its hot out, I'm here in front of the computer anyway, I'll take the bait....

The WIZBANG BRIGADE is here!

Now, what was the question? Oh, yes, the safe range of a 6.5x55 on....ELK???

Um, how about 400 yards?--->That should give you a good headstart for when the bull you irritated with that 140 grain bullet gets pissed off and decides to gorge you.....Isn't that a groundhog or woodchuck round or something? Doesn't DigitalDan have one of those as a long range crat blaster?

Personally, if I were limted to a 6.5 for elk I would save myself the money in powder and projectiles and pick up a spear and go after it...probably more humane than shooting it with that flyswatter.......

IV

Hey IV, a 6.5x55 wouldn't be my first choice to hunt elk w/ but there are a lot of guys using the .270/150gr & doing fine. Not me, I like my .338-06, 7mmDakota or .338x74K but if all I had was a 6.5, I'ld load up a good 140gr NP, NF or Swift & get closer!

quote:

Originally posted by fredj338:
Hey IV, a 6.5x55 wouldn't be my first choice to hunt elk w/ but there are a lot of guys using the .270/150gr & doing fine. Not me, I like my .338-06, 7mmDakota or .338x74K but if all I had was a 6.5, I'ld load up a good 140gr NP, NF or Swift & get closer!

Looks like you got a bit Ivy. roger

Closer?...Like what...15 yards and aim for the head?

Funny story (and TRUE)-->not really related though....

My Great Uncle Oliver is 95 years old, he hunted elk in the Yakima area of Washington state for nearly 60 years. The bigget elk he ever killed was done so with his .22mag, it was a 7X6 and came running through camp, he had his .22 mag sitting next to him although he does not recall why he had it out. He threw the clip in and closed the bolt just as the bull realized he was headed straight into camp and turned, Oliver put one nearly through its ear into the head and it folded immediately. He paced it off at 17 paces.

So I guess you could use a 6.5x55 if it was "all you had" ---I concede---but I am with you on the .338---seems much more plausible in the field....do you "need" .338 Ultramag to kill an elk? HELL NO! But there are probably alot of things we don't "need"...thats why I love this country...work hard, play by the rules and every once in awhile you can have the things you want........

IV

I'm sure you guys have killed a lot more elk than I have, but one of the quickest kills I have had was not with my 7 Rem Mag or my 280 or my 7x57, or my 6.5x55.... all of which provided really dead elk with one shot, but it was my puny little 55 lb bow with a 2 blade cut on contact 125 gr broadhead at about 240 fps thru the ribs at a little less than twice the distance Great Uncle Oliver shot his 7x6. About 25 yards from arrow contact to gut pile, again proving it ain't what ya shoot em with, it's where ya shoot em!!!

Yes Lawrider, but if we all took shots @ 25yds we could use a .22mag to the head. That's the only problem comparing bow kills to rifle kills. At 25yds it matter very little what caliber you shoot them with, as long as the bullet can get to vitals (although I still like bigger hoels). Stretch the range beyond 200yds & you have to start thinking more about your shots & what you shoot.
IV, 15yds, really?

Yes, as he tells it the camp was on a major trail area and more elk were killed from within 200 yards of this camp that he was part of for more than 30 years than at any other potion of the hunting area they were in. It had not been logged at the time this occured in the early 70's for about 25-30 years and the doug firs were fairly thick, if you did not see smoke from the campfire or hear voices you could almost walk within 20 yards of it and not know they were there. On more than 1 occasion bullets had zinged through camp......the rack from that bull still hangs in his shop in Republic, Wa today....

IV

YOU Magnum boys can rap those of us that carry a smaller caliber, non magnum cartridge all you want....

Magnums still don't guarantee a KILL on anything .... It still boils down to shot placement, and MOST magnum shooters are nowhere near as good as a shot as they think they are....Those that are, tend to be the exception rather than the norm....

If the USA did like they do in Finland where to get your hunting license you have to hit a running moose target at a certain distance I'd wager that about 85% of those carrying magnums in this country would either be out carrying a smaller cartridge or not hunting at all.....Because they darn sure would be missing the target with their Magnum.... Or else they would be learning to shoot it a hell of a lot better than most of them do now... Either way, that is not a bad outcome.....

My and my " pussy" 6.5 x 55 or 7 x 57 will just keep hunting and living with the fact when we kill our game, there is a thousand guys who say we should not have been able to do that....

I'd also wager to say the 'average' elk hunter with a smaller caliber is a lot better hunter and shooter than the 'average' elk hunter toting his Macho Magnum....regardless of the game.... He is not counting on his equipment to make up for what he lacks in.....

Just the ways I see it all....And that's my story and I'm stickin' to it!


cheers
seafire

As the representative of the WIZBANG BRIGADE I must be completely confused:

1)A smaller cartridge makes you a better shot? (Sounds like the only ethical thing to do is all switch to the tried and true 17 HMR, sneak in close and shoot for the eye LADDY!)

2)If you shoot a magnum you are probably (at least 85% of the time) a bad shot? (I don't get that one....Somehow the target moves at just the instant you pull the trigger because.....it knows you are shooting a magnum???)

3)Running moose targets are easier to hit with a small cartridge? (Yeah, well there a whole lot easier to hit with laser guided smart bombs!...Huzzah!)

4)Magnum shooters need to learn to shoot better? (Where do I sign up?)

5) If you shoot a magnum you lack in some other area of equipment and you expect your magnum to make up for it? (Hey now, I am no John Holmes but if you think that .338" in diameter is an improvement........Well...let me tell y..)


Don't be scared, the shoulder only hurts for a couple of days..........

IV

That's the spirit, IV! While I'm a paid-up member of the 6.5 Swedish Brigade, this topic was looking too much like a love-fest of agreement, and I've never learned a thing when everyone agrees!

I damn sure don't think I'm a better shot than some of the folks at my range who use magnums, but I do know I shoot more shots than they do. (I suspect it has less to do with recoil than than that they burn more powder and the barrel gets hotter quicker.) If shooting more shots leads to "more practice," then I have an advantage. (They may have a head start, that cancels my advantage, but who knows?)

I suspect if I hit an elk in the boiler room, it doesn't much matter whether it's with a 6.5 or a .338. If I don't hit an elk in the boiler room, it doesn't matter either, since I'll have a long, messy job in front in front of me. (I guess I don't buy the "more power means a kill with a marginal hit" theory.) Given those religious beliefs, it seems pointless to put up with the additional weight, recoil and blast.

Jaywalker

quote:

Originally posted by IdahoVandal:
As the representative of the WIZBANG BRIGADE I must be completely confused:

1)A smaller cartridge makes you a better shot? (Sounds like the only ethical thing to do is all switch to the tried and true 17 HMR, sneak in close and shoot for the eye LADDY!)

2)If you shoot a magnum you are probably (at least 85% of the time) a bad shot? (I don't get that one....Somehow the target moves at just the instant you pull the trigger because.....it knows you are shooting a magnum???)

3)Running moose targets are easier to hit with a small cartridge? (Yeah, well there a whole lot easier to hit with laser guided smart bombs!...Huzzah!)

4)Magnum shooters need to learn to shoot better? (Where do I sign up?)

5) If you shoot a magnum you lack in some other area of equipment and you expect your magnum to make up for it? (Hey now, I am no John Holmes but if you think that .338" in diameter is an improvement........Well...let me tell y..)


Don't be scared, the shoulder only hurts for a couple of days..........

IV

Well Vandal...
I told you 'what I was for' first off....

Secondly, YOU know you are putting words into my mouth in your critique of what I am saying....

YOU may personally be part of the crowd that can hunt and shoot his magnum effectively....

However many of us can shoot a smaller non caliber magnum and surprisingly end up doing pretty darn well with it, regardless of game size.... We BELIEVE IN SHOT PLACEMENT not foot pounds as the effective means of terminal performance....

Yes I know a lot of shooters who are over there heads with anything bigger than a 17 Mach 2, or 22 LR.... They just don't know it....or are too proud to admit it...

I don't care what anyone shoots, as long as it gets the intended job done... Unfortunately too many JOE NIMRODs are toting magnums and are either missing or if they hit the animal, are only wounding it.....If a guy can't hit squat with a 243, then he shouldn't be out hunting period anyway.....

If it works for you, more power too ya.... but why tell those of us shooting smaller non magnum calibers, that we are not capable of accomplishing the same thing????

I am not telling you not to carry your magnums... Don't tell me I need a bigger caliber and case capacity.....

I am a lot more comfortable walking into an elk camp and have the other guys there carrying 30/06s and 270s etc, than another camp where they all have 300 Weatherbys etc....I trust the first group moreso than the second....Just experiences boren out over the years....

still just the way I see it....

cheers
seafire

Jaywalker,

Last para is right on.....my point exactly!! Why beat the shit out of your shoulder and loosen your fillings when a properly placed shot out of an ADEQUATE gun is all that is necessary!! Ya don't need no stinkin loudenboomers if you can shoot!!

And no, a 17 HMR is not adequate regardless of what great uncle what's his name did.

Exactly my point!

The problem with NIMRODS is not WHAT they are shooting (Magnum, non-magnum, super dooper pooper scooper laser beam....) It is their skills at shooting. Just as you said. (I think--please corrct me if I am mistating your point) If these idiots think that because have a MAGNUM that they think they can kill something with a greater margin of accuracy, don't blame it on the MAGNUM, blame it on the idiot behind the trigger.

Honestly, we all know my point was to merely stir the pot a little, but I think it is foolish to merely state that if you shoot a magnum then most of the time you are only doing do because you think it will kill "better" or because you are making up for other areas. I believe that most of the folks you are describing simply need to learn how to shoot! If they do not have the patience or the desire to learn how to handle recoil without flinching (because we all know that is generally the problem) then they have no business shooting one!

I do not judge someone based on WHAT they shoot (again my previuos posts were hopefully seen for what they were---a feeble and pathetic attempt at humor on my behalf) I personally respect the guy or gal who uses their equipment properly and places the first shot where they INTENDED for it to go. For many, it matters not what they shoot--->beyond 100 yards it is only a hail mary. For others they are quite capable of making 500-600 yards shots (I personally do not shoot at game animals beyond 450 yards as a rule, I CANNOT DO IT FROM A FIELD POSITION)

To me labeling 85% of magnum shooters as NIMRODS is like labeling every guy with a 4x4 as a jackass who will probably only end up stuck somewhere, or someone who carries a GPS as a moron who is going to get lost when his batteries go dead.

My point is (I'm rambling---> I know) that it is not the GUN, it is the SHOOTER who has failed to properly learn how to use his equipment.

IV

IV,

I enjoyed the humour in your posts - subtly poking at both your own choices and ours. The moral disapproval was nicely done.

My kids tell me I always sound sarcastic when I try sincerity. I say, "Sincerity is the most important thing - once you learn to fake that, everything else falls into place."

Jaywalker

I am glad somebody finds humor in the prose that emits from my two index fingers and a thumb (once in awhile)

But to me the whole labeling of "magnum" owners is the same type of logic anti-gunners use to try and restrict firearm ownership---i.e. "If they have guns, they will use them for illegal means" sounds the same to me as "If they shoot a magnum they will use it improperly...."

Come to think of it, I decided to pull the old 760 I used as a kid chambered in .300 savage for this years deer season---go figure...

IV

IV;

"its not the gun, its the shooter"

My point exactly and YOU and I are both on the same wave length....

It is not the magnum I knock... Unfortunately it the choice all toooooo often of those that do not know how to shoot worth a darn, but are too dumb to know it... My local rifle range is full of those guys at the being of every season.....They watch me shoot and then offer to pay me to zero their Magnum... So I do, and then they shoot it and miss the target, but are still READY to go out and go Elk hunting! ( I also never charge a fellow shooter, to help him out in any way possible)

Too many guys purchasing Magnums, just think it is some sort of PIll that turns them into a shooter who can now kill ANYTHING at ANY Distance..... The same guys who pull the trigger at anything that moves half the time.....YOu have hunted enough to get my point I am sure....Idaho has them just like Oregon or any other state.....

Magnums can't pick their owners, just like most of us can't pick our relatives.....They get stuck with the luck of the draw... It is not the calibers fault that they appeal to the UNKNOWING... I speak of personal experience in my younger days...Some of my biggest bullet failures were out of 300 Magnums....Bullet too hard for the game ( deer in the Midwest) and the bullet passed thru the animal before opening up completely.. wounded deer, headed straight for the swamp and couldn't be found.....

I do enjoy downloading my 3 different magnums tho....all three are accurate and it is against my religion to get rid of an accurate rifle, regardless of caliber....

So we are on the same wave length....

cheers and good shooting
seafire

Not to sound too serious about the subject, but the maximum effective range on elk for your "little" 6.5 and whatever new ".300 or .338 wizbang superthumper butcher and tenderize it on one shot magnum" are exactly the same. It is exactly equal to the distance that you can confidently place a well constructed bullet into the vitals of an elk.

Ok...now that we are all holding hands again, can we get a beer and deceide where to look for Bin Laden....it might be easier!! At least we can all agree that he needs to be dusted by something big enough to kill an Elk or do you think a slow bleed out would be more appropriate??

In his case definitely a slow bleed out, publicly displayed and maybe even defiled by some "infadel" women.

What are the guys with "magnumitis" doing in the "Smal Bore" section ? I asked a few months back when researching what caliber would be best for the woman and I got a few PM's from a few in this thread that said I should start her with no less than a 308 or 30-06. A few even said a 300 magnum !!! I'm not about to let my girl who is 140 lbs shoot any of the above. I'll take a mild 6.5 over a 308 ANYDAY !!! I have seen many elk taken with a 243, none wounded. I have seen 4 elk wounded with a 30-06, 300's and 338's. All up to the shooter, her and I feel more comfortable with a mild gun. I liked hers so much that I have a 6.5 coming to me next week and dumped my 300. Good debate, thanks for the replies.

I bonked a big lead cow a few years back and while I was working on her I heard a half dozon or shots in the not so far distance. A while later I slid her down to a road in the snow. A fellow came walking by, so we walked out together (I didn't know the guy). Turns out it was him with his new gun, boots and camo that was hammering away at what turned out to be 3 different cows. He didn't recover any of them. The 338 he was shooting was not the problem. The next year I listen to some dork tell me that the 25-06 was the best elk "rifle" ever built. That campsite went through a few rounds of ammo during that week, again not the cartridges fault. Now I've stuck enough elk with arrows to feel fine with any legal round used correctly, which in Oregon means 243 on up. Most of the elk I've killed with a rifle have been with a 30-06, but I do carry a 300 win most often when elk hunting now-a-days. But if I met up in 'ol Seafires camp I wouldn't feel under gunned at all with my 260 and a 125 partition or a 129 hornady.

IdahoVandal:

quote:

"If they shoot a magnum they will use it improperly...."

Well, of course that's true. I'm surprised you're surprised... You're not doing it the way I do it, so, ipso facto, it's "improper."

Jaywalker