Hunting Grizzly with the 45-70

Camp Cook said:
I used to load my 300RUM with 180gr Scirroco's @ 3880fps I can see why/how Dogleg flattened a grizzly quickly with a 180gr Accubond.

I now load my 300RUM with 200gr Accubonds and 200gr A-Frames @ 3200fps.

My son put a 200gr A-Frame length-ways thru a 8' grizzly.

The 300RUM is an awesome cartridge...
Click to expand...

A 180gr 30 cal @ 3880f/sec!! :eek: That's moving! In post # 284 I mentioned I took my only Grizzly with a 308NM. That was with factory 180gr ammo listed at 3100f/sec ;) in my pre reloading era. That Bear was on an alpine slope quartering away to the left about 175-200yds away. Using my pack for a rest, I put the first one just behind its left shoulder and didn't waste any time cycling in a fresh round. As I recall, it spun twice and headed down hill in HIGH gear. With the second shot, I hit from head on, close to the left shoulder and that anchored him. The two shots made mush of that shoulder area but did stop him. I don't think it was heading at me on purpose, but rather just heading away and downhill in high gear but when the second shot stopped him, he was only 50yds away. :eek: They can obviously, 'cover ground'.
 
Camp Cook said:
I used to load my 300RUM with 180gr Scirroco's @ 3880fps I can see why/how Dogleg flattened a grizzly quickly with a 180gr Accubond.

I now load my 300RUM with 200gr Accubonds and 200gr A-Frames @ 3200fps.

My son put a 200gr A-Frame length-ways thru a 8' grizzly.

The 300RUM is an awesome cartridge...
Click to expand...

Good strategy.... pull the trigger and leave your fingers behind for the grizz to snack on while the rest of you makes its getaway.....
 
It never ceases to amaze me at what lengths "knowledgeable" fellows will go to, in order to tell a guy he made a mistake.
Why are you even entertaining that the info posted is correct?
The guy probably made a typo, so maybe just let him know?
Or, simply ask him if he thinks his info is correct?
Less drama, I know, but a far better way to show actual experience.

R.
 
Rman said:
It never ceases to amaze me at what lengths "knowledgeable" fellows will go to, in order to tell a guy he made a mistake.
Why are you even entertaining that the info posted is correct?
The guy probably made a typo, so maybe just let him know?
Or, simply ask him if he thinks his info is correct?
Less drama, I know, but a far better way to show actual experience.

R.
Click to expand...


Yes, its obviously a typo. But typos aren't very dramatic.
 
giphy.gif
 
Ardent said:
Slow day in cowtown? ;)

Johnn the questioning is over Camp Cook's .300 Ultra velocity, standard it runs 3,200-3,300fps with 180s, instead of high 3,800's.
Click to expand...

:redface: Opps. Guess I should've seen that, rather than just comment "that's moving!" Not paying close enough attention. Thanks guy for the clarification.
 
Stop spewing oh clueless ones I didn't post my data and no longer use it...

I did not go off cluelessly on my own I worked with Hodgdon when I developed these loads in the infancy of the 300RUM cartridge just like I did with Ty Herring of Barnes when he was developing loads for the 375RUM only reason he tested RL17 in that cartridge was to test pressures so I could load them in my 21" barreled 375RUM.
 
Ardent said:
Slow day in cowtown? ;)

Johnn the questioning is over Camp Cook's .300 Ultra velocity, standard it runs 3,200-3,300fps with 180s, instead of high 3,800's.
Click to expand...

Not slow at all, considering the other posts. Why take an obvious mistake as fact, and to what end?
Forum drama?

Regardless Camp has cleared it up for us.
No fingers were lost, or otherwise eaten by a bear. :rolleyes:

R.
 
Last edited:
Rman said:
Not slow at all, considering the other posts. Why take an obvious mistake as fact, and to what end?
Forum drama?

Regardless Camp has cleared it up for us.
No fingers were lost, or otherwise eaten by a bear. :rolleyes:

R.
Click to expand...

Obvious if you've owned and handloaded for a .300 Ultra, very, very few here have and they're not clueless for being unfamiliar with it. :) Most don't have the time to google specs on every cartridge discussed, either, especially the more niche ones. ;)


Camp Cook said:
Stop spewing oh clueless ones I didn't post my data and no longer use it...

I did not go off cluelessly on my own I worked with Hodgdon when I developed these loads in the infancy of the 300RUM cartridge just like I did with Ty Herring of Barnes when he was developing loads for the 375RUM only reason he tested RL17 in that cartridge was to test pressures so I could load them in my 21" barreled 375RUM.
Click to expand...

Thanks Cam good to hear I'm one of the clueless ones now. ;)
 
Ardent said:
Obvious if you've owned and handloaded for a .300 Ultra, very, very few here have and they're not clueless for being unfamiliar with it. :) Most don't have the time to google specs on every cartridge discussed, either, especially the more niche ones. ;)




Thanks Cam good to hear I'm one of the clueless ones now. ;)
Click to expand...


Slow day on the Wet Coast?
Your defense of the clueless is admirable...If not misguided, which is very odd for a guide who obviously spots clues for living?
Specific experience with the cartridge in question, or not, the very simple and quite honest mistake was blatant. Given the level of "experience" touted, it should have just been treated as such from the get go.
There was no need to call into the question the level of the load, or to make a statement about losing fingers, which would suggest that the Googler was in fact run to verify that the mistaken velocity was excessive?
Just another case of trying to be more right, at someone else's expense.

Not really sure why your goat happens to here, but you can certainly have it back.



R.
 
Last edited:
Everyone is having fun with my mistake it was blatant can't believe that I didn't catch it myself I even reread the post and didn't see it...

Its all good humour at least I took that way hope others have enough backbone to take it too...

Ardent you know you are living my dream so obviously no I am not...

For clarification its the 180gr data I don't use anymore I'm still using the 200gr data if I remember correctly I am still 1/2gr of powder below max that was recommended to me.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom