The Magnum Disease.

You know when I think about it the whole "you're not starting from 0" principle really sheds light on the .270 vs 308 for deer hunting question. Inside 200 yards I feel (and others can testify) that the .308 win is less prone to excessive meat destruction than the .270 with bullets of equal construction because of the milder velocity...but beyond 200 yards I feel (and others can testify) that the .270 is a more emphatic killer of cxp2 (or however the denote it) game, again because the .308 dips below that 2200-2600 fps velocity mark sooner than does the .270. The 2 cartridges really compliment each other I think, both all around guns. The thing is, most of my deer are shot right at 200 yards (give or take 40) so I don't think either is going to show a huge difference. I happen to own a .270 and its suited my needs well though I can testify that at close ish range it is destructive indeed (though under penetration is never going to be an issue on deer with either round if appropriate bullets are used)
 
Roadkill2228 said:
Inside 200 yards I feel (and others can testify) that the .308 win is less prone to excessive meat destruction than the .270 with bullets of equal construction because of the milder velocity...
Click to expand...

The trouble with that theory is that with bullets of equal weight the velocities of the 270 and 308 are virtually identical, but the .308 is usually slightly higher. Hodgdon data, with 130, 150 and 180 gr bullets.... 130gr, .270 runs ~2900-3100, .308 runs ~2800-3,200, 150gr, .270 runs ~2700-2950, .308 runs ~2700-2900, 180gr, .270 runs ~2500-2600, .308 runs 2500-2650.

Using generic data for 150gr Nosler Partition in both cartridges, they drop below 2600 at about 125 yards for the 270 and 115 yards for the .308, they drop below 2,200 at about 325 for the .270 and 275 yards for the .308.

At 500 yards there's only 3" trajectory difference between them, in favor of the .270. At 300 yards it around 1/2" difference, in favor of .270.

In other words, there's virtually no difference between the two.
 
Maybe someone wants more power because they just want it not because they need it. A 6 cylinder Mustang will get you where you want to go quicker than you can go there legally but some people opt for a V8.

Call it a disease if you want but it might just be a personal choice.
 
Yall can bash magnums all you like, but I guarantee you it is much easier to hit and kill the animals in the bean field at 700 plus yards with a 7 Rum than it is with a 7-08. I hunt with different rifles in different situations. The magnums are the kings of the bean fields.
 
I've got a few 7mmRM and have owned various mags over the years. I mainly shoot SA standard cartridges these days, not because I don't like horsepower or am sensitive to recoil, I just like them more. Cheaper, handier, more fun to shoot, inherently more accurate etc

But, this is a free country, at least for now. Shoot what you want, that's why they make them. One plus I see a lot is that most magnum nuts chasing whitetail in my area are even worse shots after they get mule kicked a few times. Gives me more opportunities down the line.
 
There are certainly applications where magnums shine when employed by a shooter who can handle them.

The problem is that some shooters think that they will compensate for poor shooting performance.

Here's a excerpt from an article entitled “Return to Reason” from the May 2008 issue of Shooting Times. The article was written by the late Greg Rodriguez

I take note of caliber, bullet, shot distance, shot placement, and the distance each animal runs after the shot. Over the last three seasons, hunters on one of the ranches I run took 92 deer and 27 hogs. Of those my tracking dog ran down 21 deer and 8 hogs. Two hogs and four deer were never recovered....

Further digging revealed that all but four of the animals that had to be tracked more than 50 yards were shot with magnum rifles. All but one animal that was wounded and lost were shot with a magnum of some sort.

That revelation inspired me to go back a few more years, and the result were pretty much the same: The majority of poor shots were made with magnums.​
 
Which reflects the experience of a good friend of mine who worked as a guide in the Rawah Wilderness in Northern Colorado.

If you have PO Ackley's book "Handbook for shooters" vol 1 ,old school outfitter Les Bowman says the same.

I have access to almost 4 sections of ranch to shoot on.I have one spot there that is lasered a 1090 yds.I have shot a number of targets there.

At that range,with my Win M-70 Classic Laredo 7mm Rem Mag,I can typically shoot a 3 shot group that would be well within the deer "kill zone"...for group size.

That does NOT mean the first round goes into the black.

One foot wind drift turns a lung shot to a gut shot.Winds are tricky.

Generally,shooting at a target gives you the luxury of position,bipod or sock full of rice,etc.

I'm not scared of shooting at a target at 1000 yds offhand.If I miss,I just smile.

I have just seen enough havoc and suffering caused by folks overestimating themselves.

A three legged,even a two legged antelope will run,stumble and fall on the bone stumps for miles.
And,no,it was not me.I'm 63,I lost one at 16..

I have been in on ending the suffering.

With my 30-338,I built a 600 yd rifle.I had a once in a lifetime private land hunt for deer where there were monster bucks...racks that looked like the belonged on a medium small elk.I had my scope on one.Brother lasered 665 yds.I probably could have made that shot.But I had only put that rifle on paper to 500 yds.It was my first season with that rifle.There was only about an hour and a half light left.I let that magnificent deer walk.90%,I'd have dropped him.The 10%,made it not worth it.I have no regret.

I'd like to see all the guys who shoot 700 yds put up a $10,000 bond on the shot.Put some skin in the game.Clean kill?Congratulations!!.
Not so clean? Lose your 10 G.
And NO,I do not buy "Coyotes gotta eat,too"

I can hit a prairie dog most of the time at 250,300 yds.

I know a big game animal is chops at that range if I get steady.

He does not have a chance.Thats the way I like it.

Stunts don't impress me.
 
Last edited:
"In other words, there's virtually no difference between the two."

the only real difference being the 308 does it more efficiently.
 
Just judging by people that show up at public and private ranges, I would have to say that the people on these "Ranch hunts" just recently purchased or borrowed the Magnums. Usually they were told they "Had to use a magnum" out west or to hunt caribou. Probably a lot of truth to that, but point being they were probably using a gun that was new to them. I ran into a bunch of guys from a shotgun area at the range one day. Some of them had never fired a high powered rifle before and apparently there was a lot of new guns in the mix. They were headed out west and the range we were at was only 100 yards.
 
All this "efficiency" stuff gets taken too far. A Prius is more efficient than my F-350. I don't intend to pull goose necks with the prius.
 
My efficiency comment was in regards to the comparison of 270 and 308 Win. Very similar ballistics but the 308 uses less powder to achieve it which also results in less recoil.
 
Rob96 said:
My efficiency comment was in regards to the comparison of 270 and 308 Win. Very similar ballistics but the 308 uses less powder to achieve it which also results in less recoil.
Click to expand...

In terms of recoil, the difference is almost entirely academic.

Using 150gr bullets and Hodgdon's data, the .270 maxes out at 2,940fps and 60.8gr (compressed) of IMR 7977. Most loads are 52-56.8gr and velocities are in the low 2,800 range. The .308 maxes out at 51.5gr CFE223 and 2,974fps. Most loads range from 44-48gr and velocities are generally mid-2800s.

If I input some of the data to handholds.com recoil calculator, using the two highest charge weights for each cartridge and a firearm weight of 7.5lbs, I get a difference of 7.8% recoil impulse, 7% firearm velocity and 16% in recoil energy, all lower for .308. (.308 has 16% less recoil energy)

However, if I happen to be loading my .270 with IMR4831 and my .308 with CFE223, I would have differences of 3%, 2.8% and and free recoil energy of 5.7%, all lower in the .270 (.270 has 5.7% less recoil energy)

Now, 16% is not trivial but we can see that I can completely change the balance by using a different powder.

So, while the .270 generally has higher recoil than a .308, the difference is usually quite small and sometimes it's not even true at all.

reynolds357 said:
All this "efficiency" stuff gets taken too far. A Prius is more efficient than my F-350. I don't intend to pull goose necks with the prius.
Click to expand...

Yes, but we're not comparing a Prius to an F-350. This is more like a an F-350 versus a Silverado 2500. Or some other such truck... I know nothing about trucks. ;)

Gunplummer said:
Just judging by people that show up at public and private ranges, I would have to say that the people on these "Ranch hunts" just recently purchased or borrowed the Magnums. Usually they were told they "Had to use a magnum" out west or to hunt caribou. Probably a lot of truth to that, but point being they were probably using a gun that was new to them. I ran into a bunch of guys from a shotgun area at the range one day. Some of them had never fired a high powered rifle before and apparently there was a lot of new guns in the mix. They were headed out west and the range we were at was only 100 yards.
Click to expand...

What I'd really like to know from the guy who wrote that article (the full article is here by the way) is what percentage of the animals that were found and didn't need tracking were shot with magnums. I'd also like to know how he defines "magnum".

I could say something like "90% of lost animals were shot with a .308" but that really only has meaning if less than 90% of ALL animals were shot with a .308. If 95% were shot with a .308 then 90% lost shot with .308 would actually mean it's performing BETTER than average but just saying "90% were with .308" sure doesn't make it sound like it.
 
I've found a couple of magnum rifles I like. The 7mm mag has the same perceived recoil as a .30-06 but better long range ballistics and higher sectional density. For me personally it sits at a sweet spot recoil-wise in a Winchester M70 type rifle. My self-imposed recoil limit is that a gun can't bruise my shoulder when shot from the bench. If it isn't injuring me, we can get along. The 7mm mag is fine. The .300 WM is not. I hunt with a 7mm mag supergrade.

Magnums also have their place when dealing with dangerous game. Starting of course with the venerable .375 H&H. But given a choice if I've got to stop a cantankerous bear or bovine, I'd like to be toting an 1886/71 in something like .450 Alaskan. Is that a magnum? If their marketing department was any good it would be...

That said, the .308 and 7mm-08 are so capable for such a mild mannered cartridge that it's hard to argue against them.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top