I would hunt with a 44-40 and not think the cartridge un-equal to the task. Trophy/sport hunting and subsistence hunting require different perspectives and that is as it should be and the twain shall not, ought not to, meet.
How much fps, weight or diameter does it take to make a difference?
- Thread starter bcsteve
- Start date
I like to hear stories like that. I grew up in a rural area. We all weren't quite as poor, but we sure could use any venison, Elk or fish we could get. Most hunting was done with either a 30-30 or a 303, but my brother-in-law bagged a Moose with a 32-20 (of course, he knew where to put the bullet).
While the old 44 is a fine round I would expect to shoot a big Alaska/Yukon moose several times before it went down.
That is nothing remotely like the standard performance of the 375H&H or (even less so) the 458Winchester.
The only reason you would ever need to shoot a moose 3 times with a 375 is if something went horribly wrong. In the case of the old X bullets some of the .375's (supposedly) refused to expand (as Boomer suggested). That said I've killed plenty of game with just that bullet and I never had to shoot anything more than once.
Having to shoot a moose 3 times with a 458Win?
The same 458 that smashes Cape Buffalo?
Not exactly standard 458 behavior!
Just for a funny comparison (and to put things into some perspective) I know for a fact if you shoot a beaver sitting on a frozen lake with a 500 grain Hornady (at about 150 yards) it will blow up like when a prairie rat meeting a 220Swift (don't ask).
troutseeker
CGN Ultra frequent flyer
- Location
- Prince George, BC
- Location
- Somewhere on the Hudson Bay Coast
Subsistence hunting and sport hunting are two very different things. When subsistence hunting, the ethics of fair chase are pretty much abandoned as the meat and hides from a successful hunt means the difference between life and death for you and your family. If you see 10 animals, you kill as many as you can, all 10 if possible. Game management is not the aim of the exercise, and you can only hope that by the next time you need meat it will be available. People who live such a rugged hand to mouth existence don't have the resources for fancy gear, but they can collect moose, caribou, wolves, and the occasional bear with what they have. Most of us would find this type of hunting unfulfilling in more ways than one.
Cameron SS
CGN Ultra frequent flyer
- Location
- Ground Zero
I've only been hunting for a few years, so I don't have any great anecdotes. However, I'd like to bring this discussion back on point for just a minute...
I am sure that ballisticians have been trying to develop a formula to tell you the exact importance of each of those variables, but too my knowledge it hasn't been invented.
The variables you mentioned are each important in their own right, and I will add a few more that have been alluded to by others.
1. Shot placement
2. Bullet Construction
3. Ballistic coefficient
4. WHAT YOU NEED THE BULLET TO DO. (need is not the same as want)
As many have already said, whats more important? it depends. Think of a bullet flying through the air with a purpose as a SYSTEM of variables. If you want to know what will make the biggest difference, you need to consider what is the WEAKEST link in the chain.
All other factors the same, here is an example of bullet wt vs speed
A 55 gr .223 bullet traveling at 3000 FPS will have 250 ft/lbs of energy at 500 yards. At 3200 FPS the energy is 300, a 17% gain.
A 65 Gr Bullet traveling at 3000 FPS, has almost 400 ft/lb of energy at 500 yards, a 60% gain over the 55 gr bullet. At 3200 fps, the 65 gr is hitting with 465 ft lbs, or again, about 17% more.
Here you can see the weak link in this equation is bullet weight. Keep in mind, that a heavier bullet, will automatically have a higher ballistic coefficient, which means greater retained speed and energy at long range.
A 180 Gr HPBT match in .308 has a BC of .495. With 3000 fps at the muzzle it will be traveling 2125 fps @ 500 yards. At 1000 Yards it is 1430 FPS
A 210 Gr HPBT match has a BC of .630. At 2800 Fps MV it is actually doing 2127 FPS @ 500 yards. @1000 yards it is 1563 fps, over 100 FPS faster, in spite of starting off 200 slower.
We all know that more speed is better, as a rule. More weight is better, Higher ballistic coefficient is better, bigger diameter is better. Stronger bullet with better expansion is better.
A ballistic calculator is good for these kinds of comparisons, but they can make your head dizzy with numbers that will soon loose their meaning.
That's the science part of it.
At the end of the day, there are only two things that make a universal difference. You can pretty much guarantee that you be satisfied with the results IF 1) YOU CAN HIT THE DAMN THING where it counts, and 2) you can accept the consequences of what happens next.
If you are shooting for overkill, than no one has ever gone on the record saying "you know in retrospect, I think that was TOO much overkill..."
Like many have already said, Dead is Dead. The effect required to achieve this is much lower than most people realize.
If you don't mind waiting for an animal to bleed out, or you pride yourself on that perfect brain shot, then a few FPS or extra grains, or slightly flatter trajectory don't matter one bit.
If you desire spectacular effects, than every little bit helps.
I find a lot of hunters prefer the massive cannons for hunting deer at 100 yards cause they like a Margin of Error. Bad conditions, buck fever, long shots, big animals, you never know what you are going to find out there.
How much margin of error do you need to comfortably guarantee the effects you desire? The trade off for too big a margin of error is not much left of the animal afterwards.
I use a .300 WSM with a 180 Gr TSX BT bullet @ 3000 FPS. I fire about 2000 rounds a year at ranges out to 1000 yards. I am confident that this is enough to take any game animal on the continent, without wasting an unacceptable amount of meat. My rifle groups at 1/2 MOA out to 500 yards, so at 300 or less I am pretty much aiming for the head anyways.
Once you reach a level of skill and comfort with your equipment and have a clearly defined idea of what you are hunting and why, you will not really notice ANY difference in bullet weight, speed, caliber etc.
Just my $0.02
Last edited:
Dan Lilja shot his sheep in the head a 760 yards and shoots rockchucks at 1000 yards...
When I got him on the phone (during my first LR rifle build) I asked him about his shooting and he spoke as if it was routine!....Hearing that made me want to take up doing work around the house!
Nah! I'll go shooting instead!
Ardent
CGN Ultra frequent flyer
It depends more on the size and toughness of the game than the size, speed and toughness of the bullet. A thread by tod bartell recently detailed taking a small deer cleanly with a .221 Fireball and a conventional vitals shot, intentionally. A job most of us would opt for say a .25-06 or .270 for, and I would argue we opt wisely.
I've shot small animals with .375 H&H, dogs, deer, scores of impala and none reacted any differently than if shot with a .25-06, or even .30-30, to cover both small frontal area and slower speed. However, I've also shot amped Cape Buffalo with .375 H&H, and there, reactions start to change. Even if it penetrated to the vitals and entered the heart, the .221 Fireball isn't going to put down a Cape Buff quickly, where a .375 will. On a coyote, no difference in kill between a .221 Fireball or a .375 H&H, I've used both.
But as the game grows and gets tougher, so too the rounds should. Sure it is possible to kill with too small of gun, but I mean not limiting yourself to say the WDM Bell brain shot when hunting elephant. The smallest gun I consider appropriate for game is the smallest caliber I feel I can rely on to take that game down with a shoulder shot. I want a cartridge capable of busting the large bone mass of what I'm hunting, then I feel I am hunting with an optimal tool, with sufficient safety margin. A .221 won't do this on deer, a .270 will.
So to summarize, bullets and their size, speed, et al aren't making the difference with quality projectiles, the game are and the what makes a difference question applies to them, not the cartridge.
I've shot small animals with .375 H&H, dogs, deer, scores of impala and none reacted any differently than if shot with a .25-06, or even .30-30, to cover both small frontal area and slower speed. However, I've also shot amped Cape Buffalo with .375 H&H, and there, reactions start to change. Even if it penetrated to the vitals and entered the heart, the .221 Fireball isn't going to put down a Cape Buff quickly, where a .375 will. On a coyote, no difference in kill between a .221 Fireball or a .375 H&H, I've used both.
But as the game grows and gets tougher, so too the rounds should. Sure it is possible to kill with too small of gun, but I mean not limiting yourself to say the WDM Bell brain shot when hunting elephant. The smallest gun I consider appropriate for game is the smallest caliber I feel I can rely on to take that game down with a shoulder shot. I want a cartridge capable of busting the large bone mass of what I'm hunting, then I feel I am hunting with an optimal tool, with sufficient safety margin. A .221 won't do this on deer, a .270 will.
So to summarize, bullets and their size, speed, et al aren't making the difference with quality projectiles, the game are and the what makes a difference question applies to them, not the cartridge.
Bummer..If you can head shoot a ram at 760 you can put one in the boiler room and not have to deal with a messed up, jiggly skull with heavy ram horns attached, that also cannot be scored (if scoring interests you)
- Location
- Somewhere on the Hudson Bay Coast
While I enjoy long range shooting, sometimes well beyond 1000 yards, I don't apply it to live targets. This is a personal choice and is not meant to be a criticism of those who feel otherwise. Likewise, I find hitting live targets challenging enough without opting for the most difficult way to do it, yet I do use head shots when shooting seals, as this is the only shot that anchors them and prevents them from slipping down their holes and being lost.
If velocity alone was the cure to all our woes, we would simply abandon all cartridges with the exception of those that have a muzzle velocity in excess of 5000 fps. Yet it doesn't take long to discover that such cartridges require very specific bullets to prevent shallow wounds due to the high impact velocities. If accuracy alone was the most important characteristic of a game bullet, we would choose only match bullets to slay our game. As it turns out, these bullets have a pretty narrow velocity envelope where anything like reasonable terminal performance on game can be realized. If frontal area was the final word in killing power, we would all hunt with .700 Nitros and be done with it. Over the years I have been sucked into each of these ideas, only to discover that each leaves something to be desired unless it is balanced with other characteristics.
Unless the bullet is designed to withstand the stresses of high velocity impacts, high velocity is of little use to us, except to increase range. Accuracy is of little use to us if the bullet cannot hold together well enough to produce straight line penetration, deeply enough to interfere with the flow of blood to the animal's brain. Large caliber bullets certainly have an allure, but we soon discover that it is possible to have too much of a good thing. Many shooters comment that they find the 20 ft/lbs of recoil from a .30/06 objectionable, so its unlikely they would shoot well when subjected to 200 ft/lbs of recoil from a .700, besides 2100 fps, despite a bullet that weighs one seventh of a pound, doesn't produce a trajectory that encourages us to engage 300 yard targets.
The best performance on big game remains that from an expanding game bullet which strikes it's target at a moderate velocity, that can be delivered accurately enough to hit the target, without the hunter having to contend with unduly harsh recoil or blast. The majority of standard cartridges with bore sizes between 6.5 and .30 caliber fall nicely within this parameter without the necessity of choosing severely over-bored cartridges. These cartridges are so similar in performance that the idea of one having a great advantage over another is only in the imagination, as what can be proven on paper cannot always be realized in the field. If your cartridge falls within the group which is defined by the 6.5X55 at the lower end and the .30/06 at the higher end, you can hunt all North American game without any concern of being adequately armed, provided they choose an appropriate bullet. Before the pitchforks come out, I acknowledge the success that many have had with the .25/06 and the .300 Winchester, but I don't think the .25/06 cuts it on the largest game animals, and the .300 Winchester is a bit much to recommend to the occasional shooter.
If velocity alone was the cure to all our woes, we would simply abandon all cartridges with the exception of those that have a muzzle velocity in excess of 5000 fps. Yet it doesn't take long to discover that such cartridges require very specific bullets to prevent shallow wounds due to the high impact velocities. If accuracy alone was the most important characteristic of a game bullet, we would choose only match bullets to slay our game. As it turns out, these bullets have a pretty narrow velocity envelope where anything like reasonable terminal performance on game can be realized. If frontal area was the final word in killing power, we would all hunt with .700 Nitros and be done with it. Over the years I have been sucked into each of these ideas, only to discover that each leaves something to be desired unless it is balanced with other characteristics.
Unless the bullet is designed to withstand the stresses of high velocity impacts, high velocity is of little use to us, except to increase range. Accuracy is of little use to us if the bullet cannot hold together well enough to produce straight line penetration, deeply enough to interfere with the flow of blood to the animal's brain. Large caliber bullets certainly have an allure, but we soon discover that it is possible to have too much of a good thing. Many shooters comment that they find the 20 ft/lbs of recoil from a .30/06 objectionable, so its unlikely they would shoot well when subjected to 200 ft/lbs of recoil from a .700, besides 2100 fps, despite a bullet that weighs one seventh of a pound, doesn't produce a trajectory that encourages us to engage 300 yard targets.
The best performance on big game remains that from an expanding game bullet which strikes it's target at a moderate velocity, that can be delivered accurately enough to hit the target, without the hunter having to contend with unduly harsh recoil or blast. The majority of standard cartridges with bore sizes between 6.5 and .30 caliber fall nicely within this parameter without the necessity of choosing severely over-bored cartridges. These cartridges are so similar in performance that the idea of one having a great advantage over another is only in the imagination, as what can be proven on paper cannot always be realized in the field. If your cartridge falls within the group which is defined by the 6.5X55 at the lower end and the .30/06 at the higher end, you can hunt all North American game without any concern of being adequately armed, provided they choose an appropriate bullet. Before the pitchforks come out, I acknowledge the success that many have had with the .25/06 and the .300 Winchester, but I don't think the .25/06 cuts it on the largest game animals, and the .300 Winchester is a bit much to recommend to the occasional shooter.
- Location
- Prince Albert, Sk
It's starts to make a difference when recoil makes you flinch and miss, otherwise shoot whatever you like.
- Location
- Somewhere on the Hudson Bay Coast
It would be easy to suggest that with the bullet available to us today, the .243 represents the point at where general purpose big game cartridges start, but I consider it to be on the small side. My mantra is that a general purpose big game cartridge should have a reasonable expectation of killing a big game animal with a single shot from any angle within the range limitations of the rifle and shooter. While I consider the .243 suitable for game up to 100 pounds, I am uncomfortable recommending the .25/06 for very big game as many people prefer to shoot 100 gr bullets in it. IMHO, a fully expanded 100 gr bullet doesn't have the momentum to produce as much penetration as I would like to see on a big game animal, particularly with quartering shots at longish range.
At first I determined that the .300 Winchester should be considered the upper limit with respect to this conversation, but I didn't want to appear to be suggesting that I thought the occasional shooter could sally forth and easily shoot a .300 up to its potential. As Dogleg says, it is the limitation of the shooter and not the cartridge. Now I doubt that a .300 kills any better than an '06, but it kills equally well farther away. If you need more, you need bigger, still a .300 magnum represents a fine choice for medium sized big game anywhere in the world, provided the hunter can make use of its advantage.
