best for Elk at distance 7 mm mag or 300 win mag ?

I'm sure any moose/elk/deer isn't going to feel any difference whether you punch a .06, 7mm or .300 threw there lungs or heart at short range. If you need an excuse to buy another rifle then yes you should get the .300winmag and a 7mm mag.


I own a 300wsm,.300winmag and .308. Still looking for my .06 and 7mm mag LOL
 
1899 said:
What kind of powder/charge/barrel length/cartridge OAL are folks using? I am playing with IMR 7828 and Sierra GK right now and so far am getting 2800-2900fps out of a 25.5" barrel (over an Oehler 35P). I am going to try H1000 and Ramshot Magnum too.
Click to expand...

R25, Magnum, Retumbo, 7828ssc, and H1000 should get you there without too much trouble with your 25.5" barrel, but some barrels show pressure earlier than others, I suppose.
 
bearkilr said:
John Burns owns a company(Greybull Precision) that assembles customized rifles with Berger as a sponsor, I wouldn't exactly call that trusted. Isn't that also the fellow with the infamous video of the greenhorn teen hunter blasting an elk cow at extreme range?
And I thought Barsness was the "optics guru", or is he a "bullet guru" now? Keith and O'Connor were both well known and trusted, but had polarized opinions. Who was right? Your guess is as good as mine. :)

And evidently you don't trust them either, regardless of what the "experts" say, or you wouldn't load up Barnes for what you consider short range (under400). ;)

I put little value on BC, it's the "be all,end all" of bullets lately. Years ago it was sectional density.
Click to expand...

John Burns is no longer affiliated with Greybull, to my understanding, but still recommends and uses the VLD over all else. Sponsored or not, a man would have to believe in his product if he's using it on Grizz. I'm sure he wants to keep his own hide half intact, regardless of who pays for his bullets.

Since when is John Barsness an optics guru? He's a gun writer, and tests and reports on most everything guns and hunting. He also happens to be one of the most unbiased and trusted gun writers out there.

I'm not saying that Berger bullets are best for everyone or every scenario, but they do perform admirably at short range or long. I personally load Barnes bullets for close range shooting because I don't limit my shots to broadside or slightly quartering, and have been known to ask my bullets to penetrate through a few feet of animal at times ;) For long range shooting, I can almost always get a broadside or slight quartering shot, so Bergera or A-Max's do just fine.

Agreed that there's a lot more to a bullet than BC, but if you do any shooting beyond 300 yards when there's any wind, you can't kill what you can't hit ;)
 
Jordan Smith said:
John Burns is no longer affiliated with Greybull, to my understanding, but still recommends and uses the VLD over all else. Sponsored or not, a man would have to believe in his product if he's using it on Grizz. I'm sure he wants to keep his own hide half intact, regardless of who pays for his bullets.

Since when is John Barsness an optics guru? He's a gun writer, and tests and reports on most everything guns and hunting. He also happens to be one of the most unbiased and trusted gun writers out there.
Click to expand...

I suspect he has someone with backup nearby, even if it's not on camera. You'd be surprised the lengths some will go to sell a product. Remember Mark Sullivan and his African videos about provoking charges of wounded game so he could get a good video?

Barsness wrote the book "Optics for the hunter" and is a regular contributor about optics on various forums. I wasn't aware he was a jack-of-all-trades in the hunting community. I take most gun writers ponderings with a large grain of salt, they get paid to write about products. That said, there are a few, like Boddington, who have a lot of real world experience, but I always prefer the ones who write about the hunt rather than gear and gadgets used.
 
bearkilr said:
Pretty impressive numbers, you must be gettin' up there in age. Laugh2
Click to expand...

Have lived off wild game my whole life, I am Metis, and feel free to come visit, there is NO other meat here other than what I harvest. Moose, deer, goose, duck, grouse, bear, fish, etc... Plus I hunt other provinces with friends and family. I trap and fish as well. I find it hilarious that all you "city slickers" that own a "gun" or two find it hard to believe that there are people in the world that live a totally different lifestyle.

I also was involved with culling game animals through a company contracted by the MNR years ago where overpopulation had caused severe diseases in Whitetails.
 
bearkilr said:
I suspect he has someone with backup nearby, even if it's not on camera. You'd be surprised the lengths some will go to sell a product. Remember Mark Sullivan and his African videos about provoking charges of wounded game so he could get a good video?

Barsness wrote the book "Optics for the hunter" and is a regular contributor about optics on various forums. I wasn't aware he was a jack-of-all-trades in the hunting community. I take most gun writers ponderings with a large grain of salt, they get paid to write about products. That said, there are a few, like Boddington, who have a lot of real world experience, but I always prefer the ones who write about the hunt rather than gear and gadgets used.
Click to expand...

I'm not sure, since any opinion about the honesty and motives of those two fellas would be speculation, but I've seen enough reports from enough people now to believe that the VLD works well at close range, and there is a staggering absence of failure reports.
 
bearkilr said:
I suspect he has someone with backup nearby, even if it's not on camera. You'd be surprised the lengths some will go to sell a product. Remember Mark Sullivan and his African videos about provoking charges of wounded game so he could get a good video?

Barsness wrote the book "Optics for the hunter" and is a regular contributor about optics on various forums. I wasn't aware he was a jack-of-all-trades in the hunting community. I take most gun writers ponderings with a large grain of salt, they get paid to write about products. That said, there are a few, like Boddington, who have a lot of real world experience, but I always prefer the ones who write about the hunt rather than gear and gadgets used.
Click to expand...

IIRC, some of Sullivan's charges didn't require much provocation. I can't imagine there is a PH anywhere who works harder to the benefit of his client. The idea that he had a back-up shooter was a common criticism, and one of the few he bothered to respond to. Confronted with a charge, which by his definition did not even start until the 30' barrier was crossed, he would typically make his shot on a charging buffalo or hippo at a range of 8-12 feet. What could the back up shooter do if Sullivan's shot had not been effective, when the animal was already almost on top of him? Save his rifle? In his words, "Well, its a nice rifle." But when considered in context, the criticism doesn't make much sense. Consider all of Sullivan's videos, now how many charges were documented, out of what now must be 23 years of operating as a PH, each one with a camera man in tow, and with his clients killing of well over 500 buffalo and dozens of hippo over that same period of time. Out of that there was what, 20 charges . . . maybe less? Does he have a gimmick, yes. Does it give him experience that few others have, yes. did he exploit that gimmick for personal gain and to make money, yes. But Sullivan was rich long before he went to Africa. He does that stuff because he loves it; the same reason we hunt rather than buy our meat at Safeway.
 
Jordan Smith said:
I'm not sure, since any opinion about the honesty and motives of those two fellas would be speculation, but I've seen enough reports from enough people now to believe that the VLD works well at close range, and there is a staggering absence of failure reports.
Click to expand...

I generally prefer to adhere to personal experience over internet banter. Maybe you think the same, as you're still using Barnes for closer ranges. :D
 
Boomer said:
IIRC, some of Sullivan's charges didn't require much provocation. I can't imagine there is a PH anywhere who works harder to the benefit of his client. The idea that he had a back-up shooter was common and was one a criticism he bothered to respond to. Confronted with a charge, which by his definition did not even start until the 30' barrier was crossed, he would typically make his shot on a charging buffalo or hippo at a range of 8-12 feet. What could the back up shooter do if Sullivan's shot hadn't been effective, when the animal was already almost on top of him . . . save his rifle? In his words, "Well, its a nice rifle." But when considered in context, the criticism doesn't make much sense. Consider all of Sullivan's videos, now how many charges were documented, out of what now must be 23 years of operating as a PH, each one with a camera man in tow, and with his clients killing of well over 500 buffalo and dozens of hippo over that same period of time. Out of that there was what, 20 charges . . . maybe less? Does he have a gimmick, yes. Does it give him experience that few others have, yes. Does it make him money, yes . . . but Sullivan was rich long before he went to Africa. He does that stuff because he loves it; the same reason we hunt rather than buy our meat at Safeway.
Click to expand...

Boomer:
Have you watched any of his videos? I have a few, there is no doubt his objective on some is to get a charge on video and the animal could have been dispatched long before he decided to fire the finisher, the very reason SCI banned him.

But that's another topic.
 
Last edited:
Not only do I have his videos, but umm . . .

That's me getting some fatherly advice
africa1stcd118.jpg


As for the reason Sullivan was banned by SCI, it had nothing to do with the videos. He was banned because he was very critical of certain individuals and he named those individuals in his second book, "Fear No Death". Some of those folks are not without influence. Look at the timing, he was banned when his book was released, no new footage had been released at that time.
 
Boomer, that is a cool photo. You should check out the Accurate Reloading website...there's a great deal of criticism of Mark Sullivan on there, but it's undeniable that none of it seems to come from his clients. I certainly have no personal experience of or with him, but I vividly recall some footage of him talking to the camera after the shot, while a buffalo thrashed and writhed behind him. I found it quite infuriating...it's bad enough to watch TV hunters knock an animal down, then immediately start high-fiving and mugging for the camera without even watching to make sure the critter doesn't get up...but to watch an animal suffering a long, protracted death while the guy with the gun ignores it and yaks to the audience instead of shooting again is something I find very hard to accept.

Sorry for the highjack...now everybody go back to shooting big game with your ballistics calculators...er, I mean...guns....
 
Cleftwynd said:
Every bullet, of every type has had a failure at some point, it's the frequency of failures that matter.
Click to expand...

Also the severity and type of failure. A bullet that doesn't expand is still good for something. A jacket can separate, a bullet can explode inside the chest, or any number of things and still succeed in its mission. Hell, it might even meet someone else's idea of perfect performance.

A bullet that blows up on the hide is worth SFA.
 
Just reading about it pisses me off
Unless its eyes are glazed over and it aint twitching at all it gets a finisher shot asap ..every time


jjohnwm said:
Boomer, that is a cool photo. You should check out the Accurate Reloading website...there's a great deal of criticism of Mark Sullivan on there, but it's undeniable that none of it seems to come from his clients. I certainly have no personal experience of or with him, but I vividly recall some footage of him talking to the camera after the shot, while a buffalo thrashed and writhed behind him. I found it quite infuriating...it's bad enough to watch TV hunters knock an animal down, then immediately start high-fiving and mugging for the camera without even watching to make sure the critter doesn't get up...but to watch an animal suffering a long, protracted death while the guy with the gun ignores it and yaks to the audience instead of shooting again is something I find very hard to accept.

Sorry for the highjack...now everybody go back to shooting big game with your ballistics calculators...er, I mean...guns....
Click to expand...
 
I didn't see the video in question (I've never seen many of Sullivans movies) but if the buffalo that was thrashing in the background had been brain shot, the thrashing is just the death throes of the animal. Anyone who has brain shot animals has seen that there is quite a bit of movement of the animal, even though the brain has been scrambled completely. It can go on for several minutes, actually.

I think Sullivans videos often have animals that have been head shot, so this is a possibility.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom