minimum VS maximum cartridge idealogy

Status
Not open for further replies.
Lefteye just did. You have to hit the deer where it counts. There were no "Slug guns" when the shotgun only areas started in SE PA. The difference now is that the hunters are a little more educated about what it takes to use slugs. Take two identical 12 gage shotguns and put sights or a scope on one. What a difference. Actually fire a couple slugs before the season opens. What a difference. Mike, you are going to love this: I shoot deer with my .22 HiPower 99 Savage. I sometimes use a .223. I have used a 7.62x39 many times. I used to use a 6.5x50 a lot. My current slug gun is a 1930's H&R smooth tube with a scope on top. It will keep up with any sabot out to 50 yards and is still grouping good at 75 yards. After 75 yards, the groups start to open up, BUT I KNOW THAT. I have been called irresponsible for using lighter cartridges. Irresponsible is using the biggest, fastest, hardest hitting cartridge you can find and hoping it will cover for bad judgement or a bad shot.
 
Last edited:
I have never met this person who thinks a hard hitting cartridge is going to make up for a bad shot or poor judgment. But, there are millions of them apparently according to the internet.

As well as millions who suddenly become good shots and have good judgment if they use a 223 , according to the internet.
 
Kind of like that internet quote by Abe Lincoln where he said you can't always trust the information on the internet. (Knowing full well that it was more than 100 years after his death that the internet began)
 
There is an internet statement, Zerojunk. There are people ON THIS FORUM that say a heavier cartridge is better just in case something goes wrong with your shot. The other classic statement is "What if you see the buck of a lifetime?" Being the internet expert, why don't you tell this forum why all the wounded deer were running around years ago. I can remember seeing 50 to 100 deer pass me the first day. By the third day, there were a lot of shot up deer running around. Very few people were using light caliber rifles in the 50's through the 80's. Just one time I would like an internet expert to stand up an tell me how all those deer were hit and lost using heavy caliber rifles.
 
Sort of reminds me of the fisherman who said he caught a 25 pound bass. The other fisherman said that he hung his line on something and swam down to see what it was. It was civil war ship and the lantern was still burning.

He said if you will take a few pounds off that bass I'll put the light out in that lantern.
 
I believe "Proper Bullet put into Proper Place" has been my family's motto every since we started hunting.
I like taking deer with custom rifles Ive had built mostly, not because of the cartridge but its because I wanted to have a memory of doing such.
I currently have a build that when finished should be the one rifle that I can easily take multiple species of deer with, hopefully its as accurate as my 03a3, .270 win rifle.
BTW the new build is a 6.5 Creedmoor, and they currently make enough different hunting bullet types that Im positive I can find one that works on all species of deer.
 
I have never met this person who thinks a hard hitting cartridge is going to make up for a bad shot or poor judgment. But, there are millions of them apparently according to the internet.
Click to expand...

Millions have been made selling that concept. Maybe you missed the ad:




See, you can compensate for poor marksmanship skills by buying a bigger canon! And since it was in a Gun Magazine, it has to be true!
 
For $230 I hate I missed it.

I have hunted all over this country and Canada with a bunch of different people and I guess I just missed the ones who thought you could shoot anything anywhere with some magnum and be successful.

I'm not saying they don't exist, but it is completely overblown. Probably by the same people who were advocating magnums when the wind was blowing in that direction.
 
For $230 I hate I missed it.
Click to expand...

At the time that rifle was selling for $230, the price of gold was $35.00 an ounce. Now gold is going for $1,200 an ounce, if you could have bought $230 in gold bars in the 50's, the return on the investment would have been much higher than buying a $230 rifle.

Really, my posting of a Weatherby ad was more of a rant against the dishonest advertising practices that we all have to live with. And I am of the opinion that as consumers, we are deluged with dishonest advertising about guns, stopping power, cartridge choices. Gunwriters are shills for the industry and as such, they push products with dishonest and misleading claims. I consider it fundamental that you cannot compensate poor marksmanship skills with gimmicks, be they reloading gimmicks, or over powered cartridges. But, touting marksmanship skills does not sell hardware.

If shooters got out to the range more often and tried to hit that 600, 1000 yard target, first time, every time, they would come to the conclusion that it is a lot harder to do, and consistency is hard. But instead, they read in the literature that all they need to do is buy more junk.

I am primarily a paper puncher, but my friends who hunt tell me their stories, where they aim, and the results. I have a bud who is making "bang flop" shots out to 300 yards with 223 Remington's on the small deer in this area. I have another who hunts with a 308 Win. He claimed he is no longer trying for heart lung shots, not because these shots are not lethal, but because the deer will run off and die in the brush. He says he is having much better luck aiming between the shoulder point and the neck, placing his bullet in solid muscle mass. He says the lung shots, the bullets were not expanding, but that same bullet placed in an area with bone and muscle, it really knocks them down.

So for him, it comes down to shot placement and bullet construction.
 
I have never met this person who thinks a hard hitting cartridge is going to make up for a bad shot or poor judgment.
Click to expand...

I rather have a hunter make a bad shot with a heavy calibre vs a small one. as I am the one tasked with tracking the wounded game;)

I say shoot the biggest you are comfortable with

for me that is 9,3x62 i can train with that no problem

I have trust in 6,5x55 and 308win for moose, pig and bear to but I am rather safe than sorry

ironically neither 6,5 nor 308 has failed me but I had a bad shot on a moose with the 9,3:o

I don't like hunters who value the meat too much, don't get me wrong I am also a meathunter 100% but I like my ammo to put a hurting on the game so it goes down quick, not varmint type bullets but close rather than the least amount of meat "wasted"

I don't liek the fablesse of using as small of a calibre as possible either
yes both red and fallow deer that I hunt on occasion will go down with a 223 just like the roedeers do but there is a definite line there between small game like roedeer and big game like red/fallow deer
 
I rather have a hunter make a bad shot with a heavy calibre vs a small one.
Click to expand...

Yep. It does make a difference at the margins.

Some of these guys seem to think that if you shoot a deer in the same spot with a 223 or 300 Magnum the results will be the same every time . It won't. And, they seem to think that there are hunters out there that believe if they put a bullet in a big game animal anywhere with a hot rod magnum they are dead. I have not met these people. With the same shot placement the heavier faster bullet will win on the margins. That is a fact.

Where it gets complicated is that many people cannot shoot the magnums as well. That is a fact.

My problem with some of the thinking is that many people can't shoot anything well. Some think a 223 or whatever is a miracle cure. It isn't.
 
Where did the magnums come in? We were talking about heavy bullets. You stand a better chance of losing a gut shot deer using a 30-30 or 30-40 than with a .223 or a .250 Savage.This is not internet garbage or outdoor magazine nonsense. I have hunted public land for years and I have seen it. I have seen deer running with all their guts dragging along side of them. I have seen two with the nose shot off. You would think it would stun them or slow them down. You really need to get onto heavily hunted public land to understand what goes on out there. Does not really matter if you shoot the leg off with a .223 or a 30-06, you are going to lose that deer with out a fast second shot. I and people I hunt with have shot a lot of 3 legged deer over the years. My Buddy is a butcher and he gets healed over "Stumpies" all the time. What it comes down to is: If you take dicey shots or are less than a good shot, a bigger bullet will not help you.
 
Caliber has nothing to do with 3 legged deer. Poor hunting practices, taking bad shots and poor shooting skills result in wounded animals. After reading thins thread there is certainly a fair amount of disagreement. I personally wouldnt go below 30 30 or 7.62 by 39 here in eastern NC. Out west or in more open northern big woods I may go down to a .223 or .357 magnum carbine. My problem with the .223 is that the bullet will deflect more easily off of a rib, shoulder, or vertebrae. The projectile can stay in the animal not leaving a blood trail. Good luck finding them that way in the pocosin. Better have a tracking dog that doesn't rely on blood. I prefer my .270, dead accurate and extends my comfortable range to about 350 yards. That's another problem with the .223, range.
 
Does not really matter if you shoot the leg off with a .223 or a 30-06, you are going to lose that deer with out a fast second shot.
Click to expand...

That is what is referred to as a straw man. I doubt there is a person on the planet who thinks they can shoot a deer in the leg with anything and be successful.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top