what do you think is the most versatile cartridge ever made?
- Thread starter Mr. Friendly
- Start date
pete dobinson
CGN frequent flyer
- Location
- Courtenay BC.
No point in trying to explain, they'll never get it. lol
Ardent
CGN Ultra frequent flyer
Nothing to add aside from that’s quote worthy.
I don't doubt that .... but your center fire rifle cartridges can't do to small and medium game what my 12ga can do at the same time .... ;-)
pete dobinson
CGN frequent flyer
- Location
- Courtenay BC.
Did this thread have bears on the menu?
Coastal Alaskan Brown Bear?
That would be a hunt of a lifetime.....
Over the counter cheap rifle with no reloading I would have to pick 338 Win Mag.
Custom build with reloading. 338 Norma Mag.
Pretty sure IF you showed up for a Bear hunt in Alaska with a sub .300 caliber rifle like 308, 250 savage you would be asked to get a different rifle.
That being said the most versatile rifle is one that can be shot accurately.
That would be a hunt of a lifetime.....
Over the counter cheap rifle with no reloading I would have to pick 338 Win Mag.
Custom build with reloading. 338 Norma Mag.
Pretty sure IF you showed up for a Bear hunt in Alaska with a sub .300 caliber rifle like 308, 250 savage you would be asked to get a different rifle.
That being said the most versatile rifle is one that can be shot accurately.
Last edited:
- Location
- The Conservative part of Ontario
True, however, at the other end of the spectrum are those obsessed with sniping instead of hunting.
No disrespect of those who like to shoot long range is intended, I will also do so when I hunt with the appropriate cartridge/rifle.
However, I have a love of hunting the old ways.
Long range hunting has it's challenges, but hunting with old cartridges does too.
With older cartridges, in order to respect the game you are hunting and get a clean kill, you need to be closer. You need the self control to pass on those shots, regardless of the trophy, that can't humanely put your game down.
With long range hunting, similarly, you need to pass on those shots you can't reasonably make (regardless of the BS you may have spread in the internet).
both types require different skill sets.
There is little doubt, that long range cartridges will enable you to shoot more game.
However
For me anyway, getting close raises the bar as far as the excitement level.
It's a reason many enjoy bow hunting as well.
Last edited:
- Location
- Eastern Ontario
30-06
Ardent
CGN Ultra frequent flyer
We used to do the coastal hunt for a living before the BC grizzly closure, and I was totally happy with a client opting for .270 / 7 Mag / .30-06 / .300 / .338 / .375 Mag. .270 is the light end but no denying it will work. 7x57 175gr is the lightest round I’ve taken a grizzly with (brown bear to Americans when coastal, same species) and while perfectly lethal it was the least dramatic kill on a heart / lung shot, and it had a long death walk. Not a big deal on a moose, quite a big deal on a grizzly bear you have to follow a hundred or a hundred and fifty yards into the nasty thick stuff they choose to die in. Those touting Corbett and Bell need to remember Bell made head shots exclusively with FMJs on Elephant, and that Tigers are smaller than Grizzlies and Elk and more lightly built.
If I had to choose the ideal coastal grizz / Brown round .300 for the hunter, .375 for the guide. I’ve seen no discernible difference in effectiveness for a hunting shot between the .300 and .375 on Grizzly / brown, but do believe in the .375’s greater ability on bone in a frontal / charge shot or to break a shoulder of a bear running somewhere you don’t want it to go. If I had to choose the lightest round I’d tackle the NA 29 animals with, yea it’d be the .270, and I’d do it happily. However the .270 is illegal in BC for wild bison, so that’s out.
Then since we’re talking the North America 29 big game animals, we have to recognise the elephant in the room; mountain game. For all the noble talk of keeping it sporting and fair to the animal with a 12 gauge, .45-70, .348 Winchester or the like the reality of it to those who know the hunt is you’ll need to be able to make a 400 yard shot one day. Mountain goats in particular will drive this point home, all the comments from East and central Canada seem to be understandably out of touch with the realities of hunting above the tree line on open ice and rock. There’s utterly nothing more sporting than a stalk up terrain that will kill you with a misstep, that takes two full days of all our exertion to get to 375 yards (which looks like 100 yards on a deer in the bush, over open rock) on the billy or ram of the hunter’s dreams.
All this adds up to 7 Mag for me, for the OP’s question.
You need a 175 grain bullet with greater than 2000 ft-lbs of energy at 100 meters for these guys that can weigh what three eastern moose do; check for the 7 Mag.
You need to be able to make a 450 yard shot cleanly on picture 3 & 4 over the terrain birds eyes in pics 5 & 6; check for 7 Mag at 140 grain. The challenge of this hunt isn’t the stalk, it’s surviving and getting to the shot.
You need to be able to anchor this guy at 25 - 250 yards; check for 7 Mag.
AND all this needs to be done with the OP’s stipulation of the minimum possible recoil for the maximum capability; check for 7 Mag, which is extremely similar to a .30-06’s recoil. A .300 will do slightly better at most of this but will recoil more, even without the OP’s criteria I personally like the big 7. If people are basing their opinion on their experience hunting moose, black bear, and deer in regular bush they should give thought to what the breath of this continent holds beyond deer and moose hunting.
I've killed enough big game with shotguns to know that this is a very true statement. Unless legally mandated or there is some concern about over penetration, I would always choose a rifle. Sure you can use different loads in a shotgun, but you can do the same in a rifle and use subsonic loads for small game and full power loads for the big stuff.
Nice pics Ardent!
I have been very fortunate in my mountain hunting, as the longest shot I have had to take to date has been 300 Yards. Most have been in the 100 to 200 yard range. But I haven't had to hunt in the same large open cirques to harvest my sheep and goats, so it is not an apples to apples comparison to those experiences of others. I was also not on expensive guided hunts where there was the added pressure of harvesting a trophy for my hard earned dollars. This puts added pressure on both the hunter and the guides! The recommendation of the 7 Rem Mag is a good one. I have used it, along with the 7MM STW, 6.5x55, and 270 Win. And most people can handle the recoil of the 7 Rem Mag.
The grizzly is definitely another matter! Have used the 338 Win Mag, 358 Win and a friend used his 356 Win successfully on these. These were interior bears and not its larger coastal cousins. And my Dad and grandfather hunted and guided for these with nothing more than the ol' 30-30 and 170 gr ammo, for over 40 years each. And that was because these were the rifles they had. But all of these were taken at less than 100 yards, and quite often closer. They would not let their hunters shoot past 100 yards on these bears. Dad hated guiding for grizzlies. Not afraid of them, but considers them very smart and always said you had to respect them and never underestimate them! And never to trust a "dead" bear. He had a few play dead on him and his hunters. He said to never throw a rock or a stick, as they would ignore it, but throw your jacket or hat as you approached the downed bear, from above and behind, as they would respond to it!
I prefer the larger, heavier bullets myself!
I have been very fortunate in my mountain hunting, as the longest shot I have had to take to date has been 300 Yards. Most have been in the 100 to 200 yard range. But I haven't had to hunt in the same large open cirques to harvest my sheep and goats, so it is not an apples to apples comparison to those experiences of others. I was also not on expensive guided hunts where there was the added pressure of harvesting a trophy for my hard earned dollars. This puts added pressure on both the hunter and the guides! The recommendation of the 7 Rem Mag is a good one. I have used it, along with the 7MM STW, 6.5x55, and 270 Win. And most people can handle the recoil of the 7 Rem Mag.
The grizzly is definitely another matter! Have used the 338 Win Mag, 358 Win and a friend used his 356 Win successfully on these. These were interior bears and not its larger coastal cousins. And my Dad and grandfather hunted and guided for these with nothing more than the ol' 30-30 and 170 gr ammo, for over 40 years each. And that was because these were the rifles they had. But all of these were taken at less than 100 yards, and quite often closer. They would not let their hunters shoot past 100 yards on these bears. Dad hated guiding for grizzlies. Not afraid of them, but considers them very smart and always said you had to respect them and never underestimate them! And never to trust a "dead" bear. He had a few play dead on him and his hunters. He said to never throw a rock or a stick, as they would ignore it, but throw your jacket or hat as you approached the downed bear, from above and behind, as they would respond to it!
I prefer the larger, heavier bullets myself!
I agree with the entire post across the board. If restricted by the one rifle parameter, my choice would be the .300 WM, but restricted further by a recoil limitation, the 7 RM would be the rifle of choice. Fortunately this is all just discussion and not reality, and I do not currently own either a 7 RM or a .300 WM. My battery is more specialized to the tasks that I actually pursue.
As for the .358 Win... probably my favourite cartridge for the bulk of my chosen pursuits, it would not be a choice as a versatile rifle for all NA game... had I been carrying one on the goat hunt last fall, I would have gone home empty handed... getting inside of 400 yards in that particular terrain was next to impossible... and potentially life threatening.
- Location
- Haliburton County, Central Ontario
I'm just here for the pictures. Thanks, Ardent. 
