I admit am biased & partial to my 7mm RM. Emotionaly attached to it. Will my 300 wm kill better & quicker? Yes it will & I like it also. Me or my son has never made a bad shot with our 7mm RM. So I'm about to build a 30 cal that will hang in there with my 7mm in terms of shootability. I must say that a 180gr from a 7mm @ 2950 is no slouch in terminal performance but a 225gr 30 cal @ 2900 should be even more impressive if I can shoot it just as well. I will see!
Larger diameter bullets allow more room for error?
- Thread starter FIGJAM
- Start date
Help Support Long Range Hunting Forum
.300H&H
Active Member
I own the book and can read thanks. His recommendation is the 90% rule if you read it again.
.300H&H
Active Member
Exactly, anyone who thinks 40+ extra grains of fragmentation during a shot a bit far back is meaningless is only fooling themselves.
RockyMtnMT
Official LRH Sponsor
@FIGJAM
Thanks for a great thread.
A lot of this stuff will always continue to be debated because it is nearly impossible to prove in the field on game. You can only learn so much from media testing and what you learn does not always transfer over to game.
I do not put nearly as much value on energy of a particular bullet weight/caliber as I do impact vel. Energy is a bit of an arbitrary figure that does not translate well to on game performance. How the bullets react to the impactis too much of a variable. Energy is a good number for comparing one cartridge to another but not for determining terminal performance. We have done a lot of hunting with smaller caliber and weight bullets than is considered traditionally adequate for the job at hand, with great success.
So it comes down to creating a large enough permanent wound channel to make the targeted animal bleed out rapidly. Bullets tear that hole buy displacing the soft tissue far enough that it tears and can not spring back into shape. I think the shape of the deformed bullet as it passes through soft tissue is more important than the dia. The shape along with how fast it is moving though the soft tissuemeans much more than the energy. If a bullets slows down to quickly inside the animal it does less and less damage as it slows. If the bullet deforms properly and some how could continue through the animal without losing any vel it would create the largest possible wound channel from one side of the animal to the other. This defeats the energy argument, the more energy the bullet "dumps" the slower it gets causing less damage.
I said earlier that the shape of the bullet after impact is more important than the diameter. Yes. But if we are to compare different caliber bullets that take on the same form after impact traveling at the same speed the larger dia makes a larger wound. This is just about impossible to make happen in the field on game, so kinda mute.
I think sectional density is not paid enough attention to when choosing bullets. If we are comparing two bullets of the same construction in different calibers the bullets with higher sectional density will retain a higher % and most likely result in deeper penetration or less vel loss as it passes through resulting in better permanent wounding.
I think the biggest thing that seems to be lost in the choice of what to use for hunting at short or long range is the impact vel. Vel kills. Same bullet hitting faster Does more damage. Assuming the bullet can hold up to the impact. xxx 180g bullet from a 308w at 600y will not be nearly as effective as the same xxx 180g bullet at 600y from a 300 rum.
I do know that much stuff that I thought to be true about bullets changed when we started impact testing. For the last 4 years every animal taken has been a bullet test. Being a manufacturer changes how you look at harvesting animals. You never shoot an animal again without looking at what the bullet did. We learn more from marginal hits than we do from perfect hits. The poor hits happen, just part of the game. The sicker the animal is from the poor hit the more likely we are to recover it. I don't know how to prove that the larger dia bullets do this MUCH better than the smaller dia bullets. I do think that larger caliber bullets do this at a larger rate than just the nominal difference in dia. There is no mistaking the visual impact on large animals like elk comparing different size calibers. We have killed a half dozen or so elk with .264 caliber bullets of differing manufactures and weight. Often you could not tell the elk had been hit. 30 cal bullets at similar distance and impact Vel the elk shows immediate signs of being hit. Call it what you want, I don't think shock is the correct term, but it is what I will call it. Larger dia causes more "shock".
Thanks for a great thread.
A lot of this stuff will always continue to be debated because it is nearly impossible to prove in the field on game. You can only learn so much from media testing and what you learn does not always transfer over to game.
I do not put nearly as much value on energy of a particular bullet weight/caliber as I do impact vel. Energy is a bit of an arbitrary figure that does not translate well to on game performance. How the bullets react to the impactis too much of a variable. Energy is a good number for comparing one cartridge to another but not for determining terminal performance. We have done a lot of hunting with smaller caliber and weight bullets than is considered traditionally adequate for the job at hand, with great success.
So it comes down to creating a large enough permanent wound channel to make the targeted animal bleed out rapidly. Bullets tear that hole buy displacing the soft tissue far enough that it tears and can not spring back into shape. I think the shape of the deformed bullet as it passes through soft tissue is more important than the dia. The shape along with how fast it is moving though the soft tissuemeans much more than the energy. If a bullets slows down to quickly inside the animal it does less and less damage as it slows. If the bullet deforms properly and some how could continue through the animal without losing any vel it would create the largest possible wound channel from one side of the animal to the other. This defeats the energy argument, the more energy the bullet "dumps" the slower it gets causing less damage.
I said earlier that the shape of the bullet after impact is more important than the diameter. Yes. But if we are to compare different caliber bullets that take on the same form after impact traveling at the same speed the larger dia makes a larger wound. This is just about impossible to make happen in the field on game, so kinda mute.
I think sectional density is not paid enough attention to when choosing bullets. If we are comparing two bullets of the same construction in different calibers the bullets with higher sectional density will retain a higher % and most likely result in deeper penetration or less vel loss as it passes through resulting in better permanent wounding.
I think the biggest thing that seems to be lost in the choice of what to use for hunting at short or long range is the impact vel. Vel kills. Same bullet hitting faster Does more damage. Assuming the bullet can hold up to the impact. xxx 180g bullet from a 308w at 600y will not be nearly as effective as the same xxx 180g bullet at 600y from a 300 rum.
I do know that much stuff that I thought to be true about bullets changed when we started impact testing. For the last 4 years every animal taken has been a bullet test. Being a manufacturer changes how you look at harvesting animals. You never shoot an animal again without looking at what the bullet did. We learn more from marginal hits than we do from perfect hits. The poor hits happen, just part of the game. The sicker the animal is from the poor hit the more likely we are to recover it. I don't know how to prove that the larger dia bullets do this MUCH better than the smaller dia bullets. I do think that larger caliber bullets do this at a larger rate than just the nominal difference in dia. There is no mistaking the visual impact on large animals like elk comparing different size calibers. We have killed a half dozen or so elk with .264 caliber bullets of differing manufactures and weight. Often you could not tell the elk had been hit. 30 cal bullets at similar distance and impact Vel the elk shows immediate signs of being hit. Call it what you want, I don't think shock is the correct term, but it is what I will call it. Larger dia causes more "shock".
Seems like many of the people responding to your question are thinking two dimensionally...
Where the energy is expended inside the animal is what is important. Ideally we all want a DRT hit with minimal meat damage which means hitting the vitals and causing massive trauma.
Also the range that big bull elk steps out is a factor here. We aint shooting paper! You don't get the option of picking the range, THE ANIMAL IS IN CONTROL OF THAT! So let's compare a 6.5 140 gr. Berger VLD is shot @3200fps mv. to a .308 Berger 215gr Hybrid @3000. (BTW... sea level #'s)
1) The 6.5 VLD reaches 1500 ft/lbs at 670 yards....
2) The .308 - 215 Hybrid reaches 1500 ft/lbs at 990 Yards!!!
So say an elk pops out of the woods at 900 yards which of the two would most likely get you a DRT elk???!!! Doesn't take a genius to figure that one out! Also keep in mind that a .308 holes leaves a better blood trail than a 6.5mm hole just in case things don't always go as planned. A bigger bullet also is more likely to contact hard tissue like breaking bones and causing rapid expansion...AKA more forgiving
Yeah I'll pick the .308 or larger for elk every time....
At 990 yards the little 6.5 140 gr VLD is only making around 1000 lbs of energy which is IMO is great for mule deer or goat but not for a 1000 lb. Elk... Also, amazingly, both bullets are traveling close to 1800 fps at that range.which is the low limit for the lethal speed zone a Berger is designed for.
Remember, there can be no clear answer to this unless you address the bullet construction that is being used too. A Swift A-frame delivers its energy different when compared to a Berger or Barnes mono or Speer GS. Why?? Because the speed of a 6.5 bullet is faster compared to a .308 and you have to pick the appropriate bullet that works in the speed zone it was designed for. This is true for up close handgun hunting or a 300 blackout or shooting a 30-378 WBY.... Different bullets for different speeds.
I like a Berger or other fragmenting designs for long range hunting because the fragmenting pieces cause a much wider zone of trauma inside the animal compared the classic mushrooming style. Long range wind calls are always tough and the fragmenting bullets help make up for those errors. Under 500 yards it's not so much a problem.
Last edited:
Swamplord....maybe you missed the two hunting shows both looking for inland grizzly.....
the first hunters shot a big grizz at basically point blank range and the bear ran away while being blasted by the guide and the other hunter....now they didnt specifically say what caliber they were using...but a bear called to within maybe 20 yards and a poor hit by the Hunter resulted in several shots by the guide and other hunter to secure the bear while running away....
the second hunter on guided trip big grizz at 200 yards....one shot one drt grizz....wanna take a guess what caliber......26 Nosler...142lrab..factory loads...
So it seems there are flaws in every situation...
I am not advocating everyone grab a 264 caliber and run out for a grizz hunt...but it all comes back once again.....shot placement and animal attitude...and best bullet made for caliber...
Obviously the three guys all had made horrible bullet choices(haha)
But my experience with the 142lrab....it has a very soft front end...at 200 yards that bullet had to have disintegrated to maybe 60 grains of weight......but that bear went straight down..not even a quiver......
the first hunters shot a big grizz at basically point blank range and the bear ran away while being blasted by the guide and the other hunter....now they didnt specifically say what caliber they were using...but a bear called to within maybe 20 yards and a poor hit by the Hunter resulted in several shots by the guide and other hunter to secure the bear while running away....
the second hunter on guided trip big grizz at 200 yards....one shot one drt grizz....wanna take a guess what caliber......26 Nosler...142lrab..factory loads...
So it seems there are flaws in every situation...
I am not advocating everyone grab a 264 caliber and run out for a grizz hunt...but it all comes back once again.....shot placement and animal attitude...and best bullet made for caliber...
Obviously the three guys all had made horrible bullet choices(haha)
But my experience with the 142lrab....it has a very soft front end...at 200 yards that bullet had to have disintegrated to maybe 60 grains of weight......but that bear went straight down..not even a quiver......
Last edited:
Yup I know a group of hunters who had been hunting grizzly bear in Alaska for two generations and swore by the .300WM from the father and then to the son. I asked them once if they thought that the .300WM was adequate for grizzly, because I didn't, and they replied that it was more than enough gun to get the job done. And they had been hunting them for years (two generations), the 300WM worked for them, thus they were the ones to go to for information. A few years ago one of those hunters was seriously mauled and nearly died after being stranded for three days because he couldn't get air lifted out due to weather. He'd shot the grizzly with a .300WM, once when he had spot and stalked the animal and the second time as it charged him up close from the alders; now all of these hunters hunt with .338 Winchesters. The hunter went back the following year and found the skeletal remains of a bear about 100 yards from where his incident had happened. I asked him how he knew it was the same bear, he replied, "Because the teeth marks matched the marks in my head!" True story from the mauled hunter's own words. I am not a professional hunter, nor have I hunted and shot everything on this earth, however from my limited experience of hunting caribou, whitetail deer, and bear the bigger caliber and faster has always worked better for me than small and faster! For me it's like going to the emergency room after being bitten by a poisonous snake. The ER doctor comes out and asks if you want the anti-venom that ought to work it it's injected in the right location, or the anti-venom that will really work? No brainer for me!!
A well placed shot will always do the trick!! A .223 will stop a big bear if you you shoot em in the eye! Putting down a charging ****ed off grizzly, cape buffalo, or wild boar coming at you when it's only mission is to bite claw or stomp the living sh...t out of you before it dies is very different than hunting one and picking the your best shot at a distance.
Varminator 911
Well-Known Member
A 142 lrab that blows up in a gizzes lungs/heart is deadly. Just like a Berger at high velocity. But one kill doesn't prove anything except that it's possible. I'd learn how to shoot a 375 Ruger if I were after big bears. Twice the bullet and stouter construction is a much better formula.
Capt RB
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Dec 1, 2014
- Messages
- 1,994
This guy killed this deer with 0 contact from the bullet. Just the overpressure and vacuum created by the massive slug. I'm a fan of small calibers but I'm also pretty realistic. If I'm the hunter it's one thing if I'm the guide or back up I know I will not have a pristine shot I can turn down. Back at that time in my life the 300wby was my preferred caliber for a bolt gun. The 18" 760 I still do the most of my hunting with was my second, just for the handiness of a 6# open sighted very fast accurate enough rifle with enough to do the job.
Yeah, I'm with you here! If your on a guided coastal brown bear hunt in Alaska just look at what the guide is using as a back-up gun. There is probably a 9 out of 10 chance that his gun will be bigger than yours...LOL
FIGJAM
Well-Known Member
I don't disagree with anything you said - but isn't energy king? The cool thing about the energy formula is that it takes into consideration the mass of the object. It can't just be about impact velocity or we would be shooting 204 rugers and 22-250s. Mass also has to be a consideration. Because of the formula to calculate energy allows velocity more influence than say momentum, I would think energy at impact would support your position. It also supports mine.
You can't have equal impact velocities from a 264 and a .308 (unless the bullets weights are the same) and have the same "shock" or wound channel because the lighter .264 would have less energy. The impact velocity of the 264 would have to be significantly higher at impact in order to equal energy.
This whole post came about because there was another thread where a guy was asking if a 26 nosler with 140's would be better than a 300 win mag with 180's for elk at 500 yards. When I looked at the energy numbers at 500 yards they were crazy similar - so I came to the conclusion that they would work equally well.
Lots of people were saying the 300 win mag was a much better option. Lots of people scoff at high velocity rounds like the 26 Nosler and the 6.5-300 wby. In my mind if the 300 win were really a better option then the difference of .044 diameter bullet between the two would have to cause an exponential increase in the damage caused. I am not sure it does given equal energy at impact.
I think the guy was shooting accubonds. But the same thing could apply to hammers - i haven't done any ballistic gel testing, if you have, have you noticed an exponential increase in the wound channel from a hot 26 nosler or 6.5-300 vs a 300 win mag with similar energy at impact? I genuinely want to know - I don't believe there would be a material difference given the same bullet construction. I am open to being wrong though.
It would be cool to hear from some of the guys hunting with the 26 Nosler and 6.5-300 and see what experiences they have had - they are obviously fewer of them than 300 mag guys.
Varminator 911
Well-Known Member
Imagine if he had hit that deer with the 50 BMG...!!
FIGJAM
Well-Known Member
You have to compare a 6.5 that equals the energy of the 300 at impact - my argument is that energy at impact is more important than bullet diameter alone. I am not contesting that you can generate more energy with a heavy fast .308
