Why magnums for USA, if AK Fish & Game say 30-06 enough?

Status
Not open for further replies.
Glad you brought up that classic, one of my favorites. Here's an interesting comparison with the 338 Win Mag. With 250s, my 338 shades my 9.3 by 150-200 fps. Better BC, too, so the 338 wins out at moderately long hunting ranges. I might get more out of the 9.3 safely, but accuracy falls off over 2,500.

But if I were going "in the alders", I would load 275 Swift A-Frames in my 338. They go 2,491 avg and are very accurate. Or, I might just take the 9.3, loading 286 A-Frames at 2,472. Also very accurate. I should note that my Sauer 9.3 gives up 2" in barrel length to my Savage 338.

So, at least in my rifles, they are awfully close. I'd probably take the 9.3. How about recoil? Yes, I have fired these rifles back to back, and cannot honestly detect any difference. You don't have to call yourself a "magnum" to hit hard (at either end).

PS: Folks worry too much about bears. There are lots of hazards that you face everytime you leave camp. Or, in camp, those ornery pack mules scare me.
 
PS: Folks worry too much about bears. There are lots of t everytime you leave camp. Or, in camp, those ornery pack mules scare me.
Click to expand...

Sure, like slip, trip, and fall injuries that ruin/cut short more hunts much more commonly.
 
How about the plane flight into the hunt? Or the boat trip. No comparison but those who live stateside obsess about grizzly bears (and pontificate endlessly). Live here, nah.

Now me, snakes wig me out. If I had to sleep outdoor in the South West (and I did) I slept on top of a picnic table (why we did not put up the tent I could not tell you)

To hunt Alaska - it would be the .270 Win/150 gr.

To hunt Alaska in the alders - the 9.3x62mm/286 gr.
Click to expand...

Ahh more gems of wisdom . Anything from a 243 on up works in AK.

Stay out of alders and god knows why you would hunt in them. If I had to get a bear out then 50 caliber machine gun is the minimum and 20mm cannot more better.
 
Anyone ever been to Anchorage, AK? Anyone ever noticed the bear in the airport?

That bear managed to chow down on two people about 72 hours before its own demise. One of them shot it with a 38 Special.
Although the hiker fired six shots and managed to hit the grizzly with four (that the Service ultimately retrieved, along with twelve 7mm slugs, inside the bear's body), it only wounded the bear and probably angered it immensely.
Click to expand...

While I always believed the 100 plus year old 30-06 Springfield was suitable for all North American game I may have a few reservations. That given the fact that bullet designs have tremendously improved over the years. I have encountered plenty of brown bear and have no desire to ever encounter a grizzly bear let alone a pissed off grizzly bear.

Ron
 
"...many hunters have been convinced..." Most don't take or have the time to learn how to shoot properly and many think a magnum will fix that. Few of 'em ever shoot enough of their hunting ammo either because magnums are not fun to shoot all day. Little or no practice means a lack of familiarity with the rifle and load.
Magnums, in general, are the result of one of the most successful marketing campaigns in human history. The assorted gun rags sold magnums to the unsuspecting public starting in the late 50's. Prior to then(read one of O'Connor's books published in 1952 recently. Odd reading an articles with no. 308 cartridge family involved.) 30 calibre magnums were the .300 H&H or Weatherby. Both were very, very expensive, but there was nothing else. The .30-06 was the king of all hunting.
"...I can stop that man-eater..." BS. Nothing will stop anything in its tracks. Never mind a PO'd bear. Who really is only interested in you leaving him or her alone. You are not food.
"...very long range competition shooting..." Knew a guy who won DCRA(Our ruling shooting oligarchy like the NRA) 1,000 yard matches, regularly. He used a custom built .300 Win Mag on a Win M70A receiver with a Douglas Premium SS barrel. He used 190 grain Match bullets. Dunno the load. The rifle weighed 17.5 pounds.
 
"...many hunters have been convinced..." Most don't take or have the time to learn how to shoot properly and many think a magnum will fix that. Few of 'em ever shoot enough of their hunting ammo either because magnums are not fun to shoot all day. Little or no practice means a lack of familiarity with the rifle and load.
Click to expand...

But so many hunters like to pride themselves on how many years they can make a box of hunting ammunition last. :eek:
 
BS. Nothing will stop anything in its tracks.
Click to expand...

BS. Countless animals on two legs or four, up to and including elephants have been stopped in their tracks by a bullet in the right place.

GETTING a bullet in the right place may not be simple or easy, but if you get it there, they ALL go down. Don't confuse the inability of the shooter with some inability of the bullet, they are quite separate matters.
 
Post 46 is interesting in that .308 is stopping moose quicker than 30-06. Hmmm. One would expect throwing the same bullet faster would be more effective. Maybe I am missing something?
 
Post 46 is interesting in that .308 is stopping moose quicker than 30-06. Hmmm. One would expect throwing the same bullet faster would be more effective. Maybe I am missing something?
Click to expand...

I think you're either missing a lot or you are reading things into the data that just isn't there.

First thing is that the data is reported to be AVERAGES. That alone shows you cannot and should not make any definitive conclusions about one cartridge over another.

Stopping the animal "quicker"?? based on what, the AVERAGE distance 1700+ moose traveled after being shot "1.5" times over a 7 or ten year period???

THINK ABOUT IT,,,,

If the average distance is 43meters, that means that some of them were DRT and some others could have traveled over 100m...

and despite the average, I feel confident that NONE of them were shot one and a HALF times...

Statistics and especially averages are wonderful things, and sometimes give useful information, BUT they can also lead to mistaken conclusions.

Consider this, by the law of averages, half the people you meet in your life are below average intelligence. And the other half is above...where does that put you?? or me?? Math isn't always the right answer to every question.
 
Interesting, what I got from the data comparing .308 and 30-06 is that the moose traveled less distance after being shot with .308 because on average, they were shot more times.

With that said, I would put exceptionally little stock in the claimed distances that the moose went after being shot the first time. Hunters often don't know the exact spot an animal is shot and even when they do, I have NEVER seen a hunter take a measuring wheel into the bush and track the exact trail the animal took to where it was down. A moose may be down 43 yards from where it was shot, but could have traveled a total of 77 yards get there. Animals often don't run in a straight line after being shot and will often circle back and head in a direction of last known safety. In other words, the distance from where the animal was shot to the point where the animal was recovered is likely less that the actual distance run and potentially considerably less. Hunters rarely have the proper gear to make accurate assessments of distances between shot location and recovered location.
 
Even in Northern California, 30-06 or bigger is a necessay hikung item, and those are for black bear.
Click to expand...
Not to derail the thread, but black bears are a real threat in many areas, not because they are especially powerful or aggressive, but because they are often surprised with cubs or feeding at close quarters by family hikers who panic when the bear charges. But needing a 30-06 to hike the woods in CA? Not for bear defense, mostly for defense from people guarding drug farms or meth labs. Black bears are easy to kill, an acquaintance of mine killed the then CA state record in 1983 with a .38 handgun. Pop! Flop.
 
handlerer2 said:
I'm going to politely disagree with you Danrab.

In Montana this is not considered an urban legend. It's been awhile since I actually read about this. I had heard associates talking about Grizzly bears beating hunters to their kill.

It was 2008, when there were 8 reports of hunters attacked by grizzly. One of these was the Deputy Director of the Department of Parks, Wildlife and Fisheries. All were injured, but there was only one fatality. Only the presence of other hunters nearby prevented this from being worse.

I agree that most animals in the wild, subject to hunting pressure will flee at the sound of gunfire. A very experienced and colorful associate said he believed that Montana grizzly were meaner and more dangerous than Alaskan grizzly because our grizzly didn't have big ol' juicy salmon jumping into their mouths. But rather had to roll a thousand pound boulder to get a handful of bugs and if they were lucky a mouse.

I have to believe that the Grizzly bear considers itself the top of the food chain, and it only takes a step back to a larger bear. If it weren't for modern firearms or an organized hunting parties with lances and such, humans would be helpless before them.

So, in the bears mind if fresh meat falls dead before them it's theirs. I think everyone will agree that grizzlies will attack immediately if their young are threatened, or you interrupt their meal.

Apparently these bear in Montana have been conditioned to respond to the sound of gunfire. I have a feeling that they would hear gunfire, then just stumble on the gut pile and get an easy meal. Bears are said to learn fast. If the bear comes upon the kill first it's his.

I am more of a shooter than a hunter. The hunting that I have done, I did with a 300WBY. I only hunted mule deer and had excellent success. I never had to track an animal or take a second shot. I was alone and unaware then of any bear threat other than random contact. I also carried a stainless Super Blackhawk, 44mag. Mainly for comfort, I guess, because if a 30-06 isn't suitable to stop a charge, a 44mag isn't going to do it either. It is said by some that a 300WBY will stop a charge if you can calmly make a kill shot at a charging bear.

I'm curious if anyone else considers inland bears more dangerous than those lazy fat bears chillin' in a stream waiting for a nice juicy salmon to leap into his mouth.
Click to expand...


I agree from personal experience that Montana grizzlies tend to be more aggressive and dangerous on average than Alaska grizzlies for the reasons stated. I’ve had a black bear walk into my elk kill hoping to scare me off and eat my kill. It happens in high pressure areas more frequently.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
Scorch, I love you man... but statistics show only about 100 black bear deaths since records began being kept in 1900. It seems that solo adolescent males are more apt towards aggressive behavior than mother bears or females.

A quick google search brings up multiple sources to back me up.

The discussion is bear rifles. Since I have a 30-06 I would carry it. If I was buying something new, I think I would start with a bigger hole such as 375 Ruger and a couple of young guys with rifles to hike with around Kodak or polar bears.
 
Black bears are easy to kill, an acquaintance of mine killed the then CA state record in 1983 with a .38 handgun. Pop! Flop.
Click to expand...

Every animal is easy to kill when you are hunting and get to pick and choose to make the right shot. Given that your acquaintance didn't make Ammoland's pistol defense uses against bears, I take it that the person was hunting. https://www.ammoland.com/2020/03/up...r-attack-93-cases-97-effective/#axzz6ojNTMWfv

I will just say that a .38 is overkill compared to use of a .22 that will work just as well, even for grizzlies that are also easy to kill. :rolleyes: Pop! Flop! https://www.ammoland.com/2014/11/wh...a-world-record-grizzly-in-1953/#axzz6ojNTMWfv
 
Double Naught Spy said:
Again, what does it matter what the AK Fish & Game say?
Click to expand...
It does and it doesn't.

Of course everyone is free to do as they see fit, I just view them as more knowledgeable regarding game and firearms than me.

My thinking is along the lines of somebody that for budget reasons or whatever, can only have one rifle. And they want the most versatile rig possible, a jack of all trades, for hunting, target shooting, competition, etc... and they are trying to gather information and advice.

The biggest, largest and most dangerous game is in AK. And AK Fish & Game say that even there, you do not need a magnum rifle.

So does a magnum rifle make sense for somebody in the lower 48? I am not talking about a gun enthusiast, or a well heeled hunter that goes on safaris. For the average Joe who can only afford to own 1 rifle, 1 pistol and 1 shotgun, and wants to be able to hunt deer, elk, a once in a lifetime moose, and participate in some sports or competition shooting.... does the magnum make sense?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top