The most efficient hunting cartridges

Boomer said:
One must be careful with such criticisms, since you recently championed a case of all things magnum, proclaiming that you would never hunt with a standard cartridge. This seems to put that acceleration on thin ice.
Click to expand...

LOL!!! Never hunt with a standard cartridge-----now you're putting words in my mouth. I favor the magnums over the standard cartridges, and I pick which cartridge to match the animal/terrain I'm hunting. Big animal - big caliber, small animal - smaller caliber. Cartridge ballistic jargon is a waste of time. I retain the KISS theory resulting with many rewards of fallen game, sans hair-splitting ballistic's. Find your POI at various distances, and then go hunting! KISS;)
 
Gatehouse said:
Lots of people shooting 140-147 gr bullets at 2850-2925 FPS and staying within pressure limits. Most are using RL26 and 24-26” barrels.
Click to expand...

Alliant is bringing out new powders so fast I'm having trouble keeping up, I still consider Hybrid 100, Varget, and R-25 new, and I still use Unique, not Trail Boss for cast rifle loads and moderate handgun loads and manage to get by. So the velocity from the 6.5 is similar to my 210 gr loads in the .300, which at 400 yards has an energy of 2306 FPs where a 147 at the same speed produces 1845; still acceptable for a deer rifle, but I believe I'll stick with the .300.
 
Boomer said:
Alliant is bringing out new powders so fast I'm having trouble keeping up, I still consider Hybrid 100, Varget, and R-25 new, and I still use Unique, not Trail Boss for cast rifle loads and moderate handgun loads and manage to get by. So the velocity from the 6.5 is similar to my 210 gr loads in the .300, which at 400 yards has an energy of 2306 FPs where a 147 at the same speed produces 1845; still acceptable for a deer rifle, but I believe I'll stick with the .300.
Click to expand...

but we're talking 1000 yard V bull snipe
 
Reinforces my feeling that for hunting, I'm doing just fine with my .243, .308 and .30-06, as old and out of vogue as they are in some shooting circles. .300 WM for the longer range work. As I have many more guns than I hunt with or need, may have to try out a Creedmoor since out of all the fad calibers it looks like it's got enough push to actually stick around.
 
NorthernCX said:
Reinforces my feeling that for hunting, I'm doing just fine with my .243, .308 and .30-06, as old and out of vogue as they are in some shooting circles. .300 WM for the longer range work. As I have many more guns than I hunt with or need, may have to try out a Creedmoor since out of all the fad calibers it looks like it's got enough push to actually stick around.
Click to expand...

Don't get me wrong. I'm not knocking some of the 'newer' stuff coming out, in fact I applaud it. We're where we're at today because of those efforts, not in spite of them.
 
track said:
LOL!!! I get a kick out of these regular number cruncher's. Always splitting hairs on velocity, bullet drop, windage, etc. I wonder how many of them are true hunters (DIY), utilizing their hair splitting calculations when it comes down to real life experiences?
Click to expand...
Exactly.... everything changes in the real world. Last calculations I had to do in the field was guesstimating the drop of my '-06 at 400 yards and the only ballistics info I had for that range on me was my buddy's box of .270 WSM... target was a moose, so a bit more drop to compensate. One shot and he buckled, not caring if that bullet was going an extra 100fps or not...
 
track said:
LOL!!! I get a kick out of these regular number cruncher's. Always splitting hairs on velocity, bullet drop, windage, etc. I wonder how many of them are true hunters (DIY), utilizing their hair splitting calculations when it comes down to real life experiences?
Click to expand...

I do. You don't?

As if being a number cruncher and a "true hunter" are mutually opposed :rolleyes:

Some might argue that being a "true hunter" includes being intimately familiar with your tools, their limits, your limits, and exactly how they'll perform together.

You gotta be one of those guys that zeroes three inches high at 100 with three rounds, gets an inch group and says "I'm good to go, this thing'll shoot MOA at 400 yards!"

Some with real life experience understand that's nonsense, and you need to actually shoot it on paper first to see.
 
Last edited:
NorthernCX said:
Exactly.... everything changes in the real world. Last calculations I had to do in the field was guesstimating the drop of my '-06 at 400 yards and the only ballistics info I had for that range on me was my buddy's box of .270 WSM... target was a moose, so a bit more drop to compensate. One shot and he buckled, not caring if that bullet was going an extra 100fps or not...
Click to expand...

Sounds responsible and ethical.

"Screw those stupid ballistic calculations or actually verifying my dope, I'll just take this here other box of ammo for a different caliber and wing it..."
 
It doesn't need to be a new chambering to be an efficient hunting cartridge

6.5x55 (1894)
7mm-08 (1981)
308 Win (1952)
243 Win (1955)
30-06 (1906)
 
flashman2 said:
I do. You don't?

As if being a number cruncher and a "true hunter" are mutually opposed :rolleyes:

Some might argue that being a "true hunter" includes being intimately familiar with your tools, their limits, your limits, and exactly how they'll perform together.

You gotta be one of those guys that zeroes three inches high at 100 with three rounds, gets an inch group and says "I'm good to go, this thing'll shoot MOA at 400 yards!"

Some with real life experience understand that's nonsense, and you need to actually shoot it on paper first to see.
Click to expand...

LOL!!! Guess again..............proof is in the pudd'in.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom