Quote:
|
Quote:
|
Quote:
|
Quote:
I just noticed you seemed lost...... again..... so I figured I'd help you out. |
Quote:
|
Quote:
Not too sure I'd put a 308 above a 270, my 280 isn't much different than a 270 and I don't think I'd put a 308 above it? And are you sure Jack said a 3006 is better than a 270? Never saw that coming, lol. |
Quote:
I know if he logged the bulk of his elk kills and reduced them down to s.d. Impact velocity and bullet construction he’d have a window of what he likes. He could do it for class 2 game, dangerous game etc. The cartridge doesn’t kill, the bullets do, at whatever impact velocities. Keeps him writing though to discuss cartridges, look at us fools bickering about them all lol. He must laugh, I think it’s both smart and hilarious. |
Quote:
... other than you started out with the CM as good to go at 500 or so for Elk. Good to see you've settled down a bit. |
Quote:
|
All these arguements about 30 cal vs 6.5 sure makes you wonder about 7mm. Its perfectly in between. That 7mm 160 gr accubond or accubond long range. I still wonder if Ill get a 7mm something some day. I really love my short action shorter barrels with mildish recoil reaching out to 400 meters. Dont know if Id ever need more than that... but then again, my friend has a 7RM and his higher velocity obliterates deer up close.
|
|
Quote:
I don't think it would ever be someone's csliber of choice for anything he's talking about but there was a pretty interesting sentence in the article. "I saw a buffalo taken very cleanly with a single 156-grain solid from a 6.5x53R" Pretty close to a Creedmoor ain't it?:sHa_shakeshout: |
Quote:
Lol but what does boddington know? Last time I talked to him he was at 96 or 97 Cape buffalo. He’s only wrote a couple handful of books. He write is in quite a few magazines. Won the Weatherby award. I tried my hardest to trade him for his 6.5x300 wby Accumark. I think it was number 3 or 5 made. I forget. Any ways he just chuckled and said I need to buy a couple more pitchers of beer first. Great guy. Was lucky enough to pick his brain for 2 weeks. Learned a lot. For non dangerous game he told me to pick the bullet based on the animal being hunted and the muzzle velocity. Higher velocity, stronger bullet. Bigger game stronger bullet. Obviously it has to be accurate. So I’ll save the smart remarks. Never once once did he mention sd of a bullet. Probably because he knew that I knew that every 180gr 308 cal bullet has the same sd. Which makes it irrelevant. It’s funny. A guy like that with such a wealth of knowledge and experience. He never ever acted or implied that he knew it all. Which is more than I can say about a couple guys on here. |
It’s funny how this all started because someone thought they should change the rules to accommodate their child.
|
That’s funny the peanut gallery is pretty quiet
|
Quote:
I don't think you would be relying a .223 on your next Elk hunt either, regardless of what bullet they build for it, or how well you shoot it.... even if it was legal. |
Quote:
|
Quote:
|
I'm of the train of thought that I don't worry about most of the guys on here who might use a .223 to hunt big game. Most people on here know and have at least a "basic understanding" of why it's important to place a good shot and what energy/bullet you need to get the job done at the ranges you intend to shoot your specific target.
The problem is this "basic undertstanding" may not be shared by the average joe hunter who wants to use an inaccurate weapon, maybe a poor bullet choice, at a range too far, on an animal too large to kill ethically. For that reason alone - I am not a big fan of it. I'm not adamantly opposed, but I am certainly not lining up to vote for dropping our regs. to accommodate a smaller caliber. and putting it into the hands of the majority of hunters out there. |
Craig is awesome, shared bear camp with when I was young and just getting started. Have a signed copy of a book of his released shortly after, campfires and game trails(vice versa?). He left a personal note in it. So yes I agree, he’s great guy and I’m a fan. We know he emphasizes more than enough. His experience and knowledge would be hard to top. Does he take it down to the numbers though? No, it’s not his main interest. Some need, and or like, it broken down to common denominators. It helps seeing things on a same plain. And he’s at least got 100 cape buffs now, just saw 100 on the boob tube a couple weeks ago.
If we had chronicles of his kills, distances, cartridges, bullets etc. It likely wouldn’t take long to reduce things to the common denominators and see his preferences. Adequate s.d. For game intended, not more than enough, but a couple hundred FPS more than adequate for FPS, he figured out what works for him, not recoil sensitive, and no interest in efficiency or doing the most with powder burned. We can also aggragate a crap load of other long time hunters that found that they were deadly af with adequate s.d. and adequate velocity. End of day both are right. When Craig goes elk hunting with Steve Hornady you see that exact scenario. Craig takes a 6.5 magnum and Steve takes a 6.5 Creedmoor. Both killers of rarified experience. One makes bullets though.😉 I think one has more interest in the common denominators than the others, and more understanding. The other knows he’s good with the more than enough formula he’s always used. And to be clear again...both are right. |
Quote:
|
Quote:
There are more places with just as many hunters and animals that do allow. 22 CFs for game than not. They don't seem to have all these grevious problems brought up by those who have no experience using them. I have experience. I have many friends with more experience using them and I've never heard or seen a problem. To have an opinion with no experience is just dandy for you. I'd rather stand of facts and that's exactly where I am. |
Quote:
In my opinion, your point just trades one variable (flinching) and trades it against another (small round). Don't know the answer - just my train of thought. |
Quote:
|
Quote:
Shot 3 with a 223 All went down. None were drt. After 30 mins none had expired when I walked up to them A wolf is typically smaller than a deer Therefore I don’t believe a 223 is good for game the size of a wolf or larger. Not rocket science |
Quote:
terminal velocity. That knowledge is as old as dirt. You did not discover sectional density and I really don't think it's worth much study time. Where lies the fascination ? |
Quote:
I’ve seen more bc animals go down then you’ve had hot lunches One day you’ll be tall enough to go on the adult rides Until then keep pumping your own tires |
http://www.westernwhitetail.com/22-centerfires-deer/
Ron Spomer is accomplished. Great read. http://www.rifleshootermag.com/ammo/...re_22_biggame/ And Boddington condones it too...... https://www.americanhunter.org/artic...ight-for-deer/ More credibility for the cause....feel free to ignore science.... I'm personally tired of ignorance on people's parts. If you think its reasonable for the 25-20, 32-20, 38-55, 44-40, 357s etc... to be legal but somehow your snowflake feelings swelter at the thought of the more than capable .223's and 22-250s being allowed them I don't know what to say. Maybe using practical thought processes and reasonable jusdgement is just not your thing. |
Quote:
They aren’t the ones trying to change the rules It’s great she can shoot well I’m sure as she gets older she will be a-ok shooting other calibers as well besides the 223 |
Quote:
Your right, its not rocket science, and your very limited experience is a grain of sand in a desert. |
All times are GMT -6. The time now is 10:19 AM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.5
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.