The most efficient hunting cartridges
- Thread starter todbartell
- Start date
There is no doubt that we are seeing a trend in high capacity cartridges for long range killing. It is also no coincidence that ear plugs as necklaces and muzzle brakes are also seeing a rise in use. In the field.
Game is not that hard to kill. But there are a lot of anatomy blind shooters.
Game is not that hard to kill. But there are a lot of anatomy blind shooters.
I’d sooner go big to be sure of a good kill than go down to a 22 magnum and hope for the best. Animals don’t need to kick themselves to death for 10 minutes on the ground haha. Use a proper caliber for hunting and use your target rifles for paper, steel targets and varmints.
Can you provide an example of this?
Point is, PRS isn't live targets. Which leads to the next point which is that a bullet shot from a hunting rifle is expected to do something when it gets there.
And I’ve yet to see any high powered rifle shooting an appropriate bullet not get the job done concisely when an animal isn’t hit on the fringes. When they are, all bets are off with anything.
Nah, it comes down to people that can’t shoot game worth a hoot.
never missed a shot?
I have, that’s how I know that shot placement makes a big difference in almost every single case.
pete dobinson
CGN frequent flyer
- Location
- Courtenay BC.
You can argue cartridges all you want, efficiency comes down to the hunter behind the trigger.
There is no "one" efficient cartridge for down range energy per felt recoil;even if things were all equal. Realistically, in today's world, firearms are not the same as yesteryear regarding felt recoil, hence, muzzle breaks, et al. Equally, there is no "one" all around cartridge for North American big game hunting.
Select a cartridge that best matches the animal, then sink a bullet to where it counts. Cartridge debates will always be continuous in the hunting world.
Select a cartridge that best matches the animal, then sink a bullet to where it counts. Cartridge debates will always be continuous in the hunting world.
Have said this many times before, that in my experience both guiding hunters and hunting for myself here in the Yukon, it is my distinct impression that I have seen more one-shot kills with the 270 Winchester than anything else.
From grizzlies to gophers, it just plain works. So does the 30-06, all of the magnums, and the medium bores at 2000 fps and faster. We can help ourselves to whatever flavour we care to use on any one day. I know a few guys who still carry Model 94s and fill their freezer almost every fall.
I believe the reason the 270 did so well, and still does, is because it is not only very accurate and adequate for all big game, but is easier to shoot well than heavier recoiling rifles. Sighted in three inches high at 100, it also shoots flat enough for dead-on holds to 300 yards, and consequently most do well with it in the field.
Our weather is shaping up for a very early Spring, and a few bears are out already. I have killed lots of bears with the 270, but it will stay in the safe and the 9.3X62 will be in the canoe.
Whatever you choose to use, best of luck to all of you this year.
Ted
From grizzlies to gophers, it just plain works. So does the 30-06, all of the magnums, and the medium bores at 2000 fps and faster. We can help ourselves to whatever flavour we care to use on any one day. I know a few guys who still carry Model 94s and fill their freezer almost every fall.
I believe the reason the 270 did so well, and still does, is because it is not only very accurate and adequate for all big game, but is easier to shoot well than heavier recoiling rifles. Sighted in three inches high at 100, it also shoots flat enough for dead-on holds to 300 yards, and consequently most do well with it in the field.
Our weather is shaping up for a very early Spring, and a few bears are out already. I have killed lots of bears with the 270, but it will stay in the safe and the 9.3X62 will be in the canoe.
Whatever you choose to use, best of luck to all of you this year.
Ted
Last edited:
Have said this many times before, that in my experience both guiding hunters and hunting for myself here in the Yukon, it is my distinct impression that I have seen more one-shot kills with the 270 Winchester than anything else.
From grizzlies to gophers, it just plain works. So does the 30-06, all of the magnums, and the medium bores at 2000 fps and faster. We can help ourselves to whatever flavour we care to use on any one day. I know a few guys who still carry Model 94s and fill their freezer almost every fall.
I believe the reason the 270 did so well, and still does, is because it is not only very accurate and adequate for all big game, but is easier to shoot well than heavier recoiling rifles. Sighted in three inches high at 100, it also shoots flat enough for dead-on holds to 300 yards, and consequently most do well with it in the field.
Our weather is shaping up for a very early Spring, and a few bears are out already. I have killed lots of bears with the 270, but it will stay in the safe and the 9.3X62 will be in the canoe.
Whatever you choose to use, best of luck to all of you this year.
Ted
Hey!!!! Did you witness all the animals (deer, grizzly, moose, elk, etc.) killed in the late 1890's and the first half of the 1900's with the Winchester 1894, 30-30?????.....probably not. Hmmmmmm today, this cartridge is hammering big game! There is no Holy Grail cartridge.
- Location
- Somewhere on the Hudson Bay Coast
So if the cold bore shot is made with equal precision and accuracy in either case the bullet that has the shortest flight time, and the greatest terminal performance, is the correct choice. I don't have to shoot 20, 50, or 100 V bulls, I just need to make one good shot. Those single 300 gr .375 AGSs worked spectacularly on that 100 pound impala and warthog, and taught me that there was no plausible reason to choose a poodle shooter for game. That said, I do have respect for the the 6.5X55 and its similar brethren as general purpose game cartridges, but the same bullet from a 6.5X300 Weatherby gets there quicker and disrupts more tissue upon arrival, so logically is the better choice.
