Ever just stop and laugh?

Ardent

Ardent

CGN Ultra frequent flyer
Rating - 100%
818   0   2
Location
Northern BC, Coastal BC, or Africa. Depends on the
I've toyed with a gazillion cals like all of us, invented several wildcats in the dimmer hours and ordered the reamers therefor to recreate what's already happening- differently. In the end, for those of us who enjoy hunting more than shooting, who else has to sit back and laugh? All the usual suspects caliber wise, in the end, do the same thing inside 200 yards, heck for the most part 400 yards. I've agonized over my dislike for the .277" bore on peculiar concerns such as minimally smaller bullet selection than the 7mms, or minimally poorer BC's than the 6.5's... only to have a .270 in my lap after trades and find that heck, it's as good as any .260, .280, or .300 WSM at dropping a buck.

I've come to see that since the technology is the same- launching a bullet via the pressure of burning powder down a rifled bore- that essentially within the realm of all the usual choices all is identical. The variables left are the shooter, and bullet construction. Whether you're shooting a TSX or a cheapo C&C has shown itself to matter far more than whether the rifle is a .270 or a .35 Whelen or a .303 for me. This said, I do believe sectional density matters, but nearly all calibers in the usual range have high or at least reasonable SD options.

Now, my choices are a lot more tame than they used to be; I want to be able to feed it, therefor components must be readily and affordably available, and well, that's about it. Gone are my exotics as anything feedable means it's established; proof enough it works without splitting the hairs of .270 and .280. Also, so few of us hunt outside 400 yards all the minute trajectory differences between say a .270 and a .308 become meaningless. I'm guilty of splitting a million hairs myself, even started threads on the matter. But in the end, doesn't it all start to look a bit silly? Every cartridge has a case, powder, primer, and a bullet. The usual choices are all of comparable effect and became a 'usual choice' through being a sensible middle ground. I'm starting to think more of our hobby is arguing about differences that essentially don't exist than shooting them! I'm as guilty as the next guy, and vow for my choices will become much simpler and more boring. Hopefully my rhetoric will too as a result!
 
I feel the same way, and started a thread about this last year "Does cartridge selection matter"

Sure it's fun to debate, but they all work, and with new superbullets, the differences are almost non existent.
 
Ardent said:
I've toyed with a gazillion cals like all of us, invented several wildcats in the dimmer hours and ordered the reamers therefor to recreate what's already happening- differently. In the end, for those of us who enjoy hunting more than shooting, who else has to sit back and laugh? All the usual suspects caliber wise, in the end, do the same thing inside 200 yards, heck for the most part 400 yards. I've agonized over my dislike for the .277" bore on peculiar concerns such as minimally smaller bullet selection than the 7mms, or minimally poorer BC's than the 6.5's... only to have a .270 in my lap after trades and find that heck, it's as good as any .260, .280, or .300 WSM at dropping a buck.

I've come to see that since the technology is the same- launching a bullet via the pressure of burning powder down a rifled bore- that essentially within the realm of all the usual choices all is identical. The variables left are the shooter, and bullet construction. Whether you're shooting a TSX or a cheapo C&C has shown itself to matter far more than whether the rifle is a .270 or a .35 Whelen or a .303 for me. This said, I do believe sectional density matters, but nearly all calibers in the usual range have high or at least reasonable SD options.

Now, my choices are a lot more tame than they used to be; I want to be able to feed it, therefor components must be readily and affordably available, and well, that's about it. Gone are my exotics as anything feedable means it's established; proof enough it works without splitting the hairs of .270 and .280. Also, so few of us hunt outside 400 yards all the minute trajectory differences between say a .270 and a .308 become meaningless. I'm guilty of splitting a million hairs myself, even started threads on the matter. But in the end, doesn't it all start to look a bit silly? Every cartridge has a case, powder, primer, and a bullet. The usual choices are all of comparable effect and became a 'usual choice' through being a sensible middle ground. I'm starting to think more of our hobby is arguing about differences that essentially don't exist than shooting them! I'm as guilty as the next guy, and vow for my choices will become much simpler and more boring. Hopefully my rhetoric will too as a result!
Click to expand...

This is probably the first thread I've read that I agree with 100% you nailed it it does not matter which caliber you use.
Hunting is definitely about the hunter and animal he is hunting and nothing to do with the equipment he chooses to use.
 
Your just wise and getting older. What about us younger guys getting into reloading and looking forward to the next great thing?:)
 
Last edited:
But never forget growing old like i do it always give me reason to go out thre an buy a new toy, even if what you say is right, i love to have a reason to buy a new gun, kind you always need a new challenge... a new rifle... a new caliber...The kid still in the old man... Cheers. JP.
 
Yup Ardent, I would agree with that. I have owned well over 100 firearms and have been finding myself getting more back to basics in the past few years. It is funny how things come full circle.

I think when we are experimenting, learning and trying new rifles/cartridges we are making things more difficult than they need to be. Don't get me wrong, it is all enjoyable and part of the game, but for years I tried to find something that I enjoyed using more than say a .270 or 06 for example. In all reality simple cartridges such as those just work and work well and I find myself right back enjoying them more than I ever have in the past.

only to have a .270 in my lap after trades and find that heck, it's as good as any .260, .280, or .300 WSM at dropping a buck.
Click to expand...

Exactly.
 
I don't have much real-world experience, but from extensive reading, some range work and looking at ballistics I'm starting to think that outside of broad classes, it doesn't really matter. A person could outfit a rimfire, a varminter, a big game gun and a hard hitter for variety, along with the obligatory 12 and 20 gauges. Eg. 22 LR, 223 Rem, .270 Win, .375 H&H, an 870 in 12 gauge and a double in 20 gauge. Sub .22 WMR/17 HMR, .22-250/.22 hornet/.204 Ruger/.222, any centerfire 7 mm/.270/.30, or a .375 Ruger/.338 Win etc. to your particular predilections and it won't make much difference.

In rimfires, going to a WMR or HMR probably makes more of a difference than the other classes.

Perhaps a .458 Lott or .505 Gibbs would be another class, but perhaps they would fall into the realm of the .375 H&H magnum. I don't know. Some pro hunters feel the .375 H&H isn't the best choice for dangerous game...

IMO, within each broad class it's more about having rifles with different handling and sighting characteristics than having different firepower.
 
Like the Old man said :
"Somebody designing something to sell to someone who thinks they need it"!:p
The amount of wildcatting I have done over the years and the rifles i have traded for and got just staggers me at times.
heck, I even owned a pre '64 M70 in 270 at one time!!
Got a few 308 match rifles , and my 6.5X55 express gun, a nice little 28gauge SXS, a 12 guage ,a few dedicated .22 match rifles, my muzzle loader in .58, my 38/55 cast bullet highwall, a few 303's, and the other 200 or so are just redundant!!f:P:
However, I ain't gettin' rid of 'em today so don't ask, tomorrow don't look good either!!:D
Cat
 
Bullet selection makes a bigger differance than a few thou in caliber size or a few hundred feet per second in velocity.

I also laugh at the guys that are dead set against a certain caliber. The fact is you can make a 308 shoot flatter than average joes 270 and you can make average joes 270 penetrate as deep as my 338.


Yep,,,, super high BC bullets, super explosive bullets, expanding solids, bonded bullets that expand realy wide, new solids that don't deform, bullets with expansion stops, cup nosed solids that make wider wound channels, pointed bullets for leveractions, super accurate match bullets, super accurate match bullets that can be used for hunting, cast bullets, traditional lead copper bullets, yada yada yada
 
I totally agree with your comment's Ardent................for the most part there isn't much difference when hunting with a 243 winchester to a 300 weatherby when hunting a buck. I'm going on 54 years of age and killed over 100 big game animals and half of them I could of killed with a Winchester model 94 chambered for a 30-30.

The same could be said for the make and model of firearm. I've owned Blasers and Merkels and today Coopers, Weatherby's, Sako and Krico. A person really dosen't "need" these luxury firearms, hell a cheap Savage chambered for a 30-06 will get the job done. I myself have debated about cartridges, guns, bullets (I simply hate Barnes bullets) and such, but I perfer to talk about hunting then to waste my time splitting hairs about "my bullet is better than yours", or "mauser actions are better than push feed actions". I have come full circle and really don't care as much of what gun, cartridge or bullet that I use, as long as I put more time in for hunting. In the past I hunted around home and went on a hunting trip for a week. Now I hunt around home and take three weeks for my trip.
 
I don't reload yet so I don't have anything to contribute. I just wanted to tell the OP that this thread was very well written and I enjoyed reading it. Its like those short articles they put at the end of Guns and Ammo. Thanks for the good read!

Cheers,

Evilgrin
 
Like a lot of shooters I started hunting with my Dad. I learned bush craft, shot placement and game preparation. I used his 303 SMLE and was quite pleased with its capacity to take deer and moose as well as the odd bear. My brother used his 3006 JCHiggens for the same purpose. We used a 22lr for birds and rabbits and a 410 as well. With two boys hunting Dad needed to duplicate a rifle for each son.

As time moved on I bought a couple handguns and got invilved with the local gun club. I was working so had a modest income. I really think that is when the loonyness started. When I got married there was a need to outfit my wife so the collection multiplied as did my interest in oddball cartridges. Gone was my attitude that there existed any such concept as a multipurpose rifle. I had two girls and they needed oufitted too.

I taught them as I had been taught by my Dad, and their favourite rifles became a Stevens sure shot and a Savage 99 (the younger) and a Winchester pump and 303 SMLE (the older) The centre fires were Grandpa's rifles passed down to them. I started to rethink my own selections and realised I only really hunted the same rifles year after year. A 338 winmag, a 303 SMLE and a lever 22 or pump 12 ga.

The last three guns I have purchased have been a 3006, a 303Br and a 375H&H. I did not yet own a 3006, the 303 was a Ruger #1 and my youngest daughter is an avowed single shot hunter, and the 375 is because of an African addiction I picked up in 2009.

I have started going through the gun case with an eye to selling and decided I will move one every couple of months. That should give me eight years to get back to basics. Some have been claimed by my girls which pleases me, others are memory evokers, and some are just too odd to sell.

I am not cured, as I am still looking for a 7x57 full stock. :)

Randy
 
Just wait.... In a few more years you will find that todays factory ammo has gotted so good that the need to reload no longer as pressing as it once was.
 
One thing I have noticed is that I use some specific firearms for specific reasons, but most of the reasons have to do with enjoyment and reliability of the rifle, rather than need for that particular cartridge.
 
Good read ! I guess it all comes down to being a gun nut and having the need to try something different and upgrading so to say. There is the kool factor too lets not forget that
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom