Help Support Long Range Hunting Forum
I was talking similarities. Reduced to its simplest form, both need destruction of vital tissue to succeed. Equipment not up to the task 100% of the time is poor form. That's the similarity I'm speaking of.
Hunting deer and elk with archery gear, for me, is largely about longer(and usually earlier) seasons with less of a crowd. If rifle season were extended to be be the same as archery season, I'd not hunt archery.
The people I'm reading arn't mag authors. They are experienced hunters. You should not disregard your experience, but you should be willing to admit that other people may, lefitimately, have different experiences. Sometimes those people have far more experience than you. Another example is the ttsx, which more than one person finds to have "penciled through". On balance , I'd use them.
My Father's family owned a slaughterhouse. Dad was an avid .45 Colt shooter, the vet who inspected the slaughterhouse was an archery hunter. They tested the comparative penetration of Dad's .45 Colt SAA 7.5" and the vet's 80 lb bow. They used the carcass of a 2000 lb horse that was there available; it was dead but not bled out, dead by a killing bolt. Dad's hard cast bullets: one stuck in the fence behind the horse, the other he found just under the skin on exit side. The arrow point penetrated fully. I don't know where they shot on the carcass, but both were aware enough to undertand that that would affect the outcome. The bow is pretty powerful.
Your advice is coming from other people and the internet. My advice comes from me. Big difference. If you dont have any experience of your own, your just attempting to repeat what has already been said. Your not adding anything new.
There's a reason a lot of guides require a minimum caliber for brown bear. I'd believe the guide I hunted with twice that requires 30 cal minimum, and usually insists on 338. He's killed around 11 brownies himself and has guided hunters to over 100. So I'll take his word on what should be used over some guy who wants to get attention by using a 223. I'm aware of the rokslide thread, and am a huge fan of the 223 for deer and elk at appropriate ranges, but going on a $35k dangerous game hunt with a 223 just has no logic to it. Even if it will work sometimes, any of us that have hunted brown bears know that common sense dictates it's not a good idea.
Pretty big head, Mr. Marky...
I'm required to have a guide anywhere grizzlies or brown bear. If someone can provide me a link to a serious guide that will let me bring a .223 I'd appreciate it.
Well said, I have a 300 win mag, 338 win mag but for my bucket list hunts had a custom 375 RUGER made. I am just having fun getting the feel for her. In my humble opinion, takes minimum of about 150-200 rounds to get the ins and outs of a rifle before a big hunt, wind no wind, dial in, etc,. Just need to know your gear, being an older guy that wants a clean kill with every shot.
I know that all of those animals that you just wrote about can hurt you, but..... they do not weigh in at 800-1400 pounds, have a nasty disposition with teeth and claws that will tear a person apart "just because", and will fight to the death for their cubs or for their latest kill. I have a post in this thread somewhere in the "500+" replies where a group of hunters, who have been hunting Alaska for decades, switched from .300 WinMags to controlled feed .338 WinMags because one of the group was seriously injured by a wounded bear. I wrote controlled feed because when he tried to rack in another round the extractor (Browning X Bolt?) pulled through the rim of the case causing a catastrophic jamb when the bolt picked up the followup round out of the magazine. I haven't read Creedmoor yet, perhaps a .22 Creedmoor with a 77 grain TMK will get the job done
But... I would not want to be the one doing the evaluation of that combination.
