Does Anyone REALLY Hunt With 300 Win Mag?


PDA






ReadyontheRight
October 31, 2006, 11:10 PM
With the increased recoil and cartridge expense, how many of you actually use 300 Win Mag and other beefed up cartridges for hunting?

If you enjoyed reading about "Does Anyone REALLY Hunt With 300 Win Mag?" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!
'Card
November 1, 2006, 12:17 AM
Sure. I've got a .300WinMag BAR I use for deer on a regular basis.

It's not my primary rifle. My primary is a Remington 7400 .30-06, but I normally use that in fairly thick cover and rough terrain so I generally zero it at 100 yards. But if my plan for the day will involve sitting on a ridge and glassing a valley and the opposite ridge, where shots of 200-300 yards are possible, then I'm a lot more comfortable with the .300WinMag. It's only a marginal improvement over the .30-06 at those ranges, but it does shoot slightly flatter and hit a little harder at long distances.

dakotasin
November 1, 2006, 01:48 AM
i hunt almost exclusively w/ magnums.

the 'expense' of hunting these is moot, especially for a handloader.
increased recoil... please. any shooter can learn to effectively deal w/ recoil and build quite the tolerance to it.

from all the talk that surrounds hunting w/ recoil, you'd think zeus himself would be the only one that could handle a 50 bmg - yet, i know fellers who go on prairie dog shoots w/ 50's (and if i could afford a 50, i would too).

so... pass me a magnum, please, deer season is open in the morning, and let's go whacknstack.

Glockfan.45
November 1, 2006, 02:11 AM
yet, i know fellers who go on prairie dog shoots w/ 50's

Thats gotta make a mess :evil: .

BigO01
November 1, 2006, 04:37 AM
Not I but I did run into a guy deer hunting about 20 years ago who was using a .338 Win Mag , this was in Missouri and he was hunting Whitetails .

Told me that "ONE DAY" he was going to make it out west to hunt Elk and wanted to get use to using it . Funny thing was he was about 5'6 and weighed maybe 140 lbs , I think it more of the "Short mans syndrome" than getting ready to hunt for Elk , but that's just my opinion .

Grumulkin
November 1, 2006, 06:40 AM
I would ask, what is a magnum?

There is the 224 Weatherby Magnum and the 22-250 Remington and 220 Swift. The one is apparently called a magnum because of the belt; it certainly isn't because of better ballistics.

Then there is the 458 Winchester Magnum and the 458 Lott. Are they both magnums? They both have belts.

The term magnum is only a name. I think it's a fine idea to hunt deer, varmints or whatever with the gun you intend to hunt a bigger beast with. If the marketing department had known what they were doing, we would not have a 30/06; it would be the 300 Springfield Magnum (it was an improvement over the 30-40 Krag) and would magically become able to take any animal in North America.

Art Eatman
November 1, 2006, 09:29 AM
Grumulkin, I think the intent of this thread concerns cartridges that are more powerful than a .30-'06. That is, what a lot of folks consider "overkill".

Dead's dead, and a Big Maggie isn't gonna ruin any more edible meat than a pipsqueak.

If a guy hits where he's aiming, and the critter falls dead, I don't see why I'm supposed to worry about what he's using. That said, there are a lot of shooters who aren't shooter enough to hunt deer with a .22 centerfire, or they can't handle above-average recoil. But that's a whole 'nother bunch of issues...

I just figure that if folks are happy with what they're using, and they're successful, they're righteous.

Face to face around a campfire or at the gunshop, hey, that's a different deal...

:), Art

Desk Jockey
November 1, 2006, 10:20 AM
Sure. 300 WSM for elk. That much power isn't required for elk, but it doesn't hurt to have it. As demonstrated by my hunting partner last week, a .30-06 will kill them just as dead with a single well-placed shot.

Had a doe tag this year, too. But I brought along a .30-30 for that task.

critter
November 1, 2006, 01:03 PM
My primary is a Win M70 push feed in .300 WM. I like the configuration of the gun really well, it is VERY accurate and seems to just be able to put the bullet where I want it to go. AND it does the job when it gets there.

carnaby
November 1, 2006, 03:53 PM
With the limbsaver recoil pad, I barely notice the recoil of my .300 win mag. Took a nice 4x4 muley with it this year. Handloading ammo is fun, and saves a lot of money.

R.W.Dale
November 1, 2006, 05:21 PM
Oh great! another one of these threads:scrutiny:

Ok I'll bite, I like my 300 wby, I choose it for hunting over a dozen other guns I own. I pull the trigger it kills things and I rejoyce. No diffrent than if it were a 270 or a 308 nothing magical about the belt no special vodo over the case capicity., I just happen to like the rifle better. With handloading I can turn my 300 wby into a 30-30 If i choose or I can push the throttle forward to full tilt 300 WBY mag levels and everything in between, Making it much more versitile than standard 30 caliber chamberings

Using a "magnum" cartrige is no diffrent than watching a 52" TV set. You may not need it but it doesn't make you a bad person for using one.

Kingcreek
November 1, 2006, 05:21 PM
I've got a .300WM and I hunt with it when its right for the job. per round expense and recoil are nothing to me.
I also have other centerfire hunting rifles including .243, .270, .308

Geno
November 1, 2006, 05:49 PM
When I hunted with rifle (before the accident) , I used a .300 Wea. Mag. the most. It was tremendously effective. I never had to shoot twice, even on my longest-ever shot, 525 yard shots on a Michigan bean field white tail. For me, it was the flat trajectory. That does not mean that my .270 Win. was not effective. I simply had to keep my shots closer, say 400 yards for reliable, one-shot kills.

Doc2005

Grumulkin
November 2, 2006, 07:08 AM
The 300 Weatherby Magnum DOES tempt me.

X-Rap
November 2, 2006, 11:18 AM
The question is like do people really drive one ton trucks, as tho it's something you never see or don't you think it's a little to showie.Well this season I can Identify easily 10 people that are shooting 300 win. mag or bigger and I'd say most are doing it because of improved ballistics, ammo commonality in camp and just plain thats what dad shoots, all good enough reason for me.BTW no ammo common with me in camp 338-378 weatherby.

12-34hom
November 2, 2006, 11:40 AM
It's one of the great calibers to reload.

Great target cartridge.

12-34hom.

MCgunner
November 2, 2006, 01:31 PM
Now, bare in mind at the time of the story I'm about to type, I had a .257 Roberts and a 7 mag and I'd just gotten the 7. My buddy had just gotten a BAR in 300 win mag and his other rifle is a Browning BLR in .308. It was our first trip to the Guadelupe mountains in New Mexico. We thought we needed the magnums for the long ranges out there, I guess. And, I did take one about 350 yards across a canyon that year with the 7.

We walked into the only little store in miles and miles around in a little hole in the wall called "Queens". There were a bunch of hunters in there for lunch, they were serving great burgers. Everyone was chatting and the owner had some ammo on sale and asked what we were using. I told him, Larry told him, the room erupted in laughter. "Whadda want them cannons for, the elk here are illegal ya know.?" Turns out one of the guys was using a .257 Roberts, a couple had .308s, and there was a .30-30 toter. ROFL! I think Larry was offended, but I mean, really, what do ya need a belted magnum for on deer???? It did the job, though. I've shot one muley with it and four white tails and it is over-kill. Since I got my .308, that's all I hunt with anymore.

When I bought the seven, I was thinking .280 Remmington. I really like the .280. I like 7mm bullet selection. But, I reasoned, if I'm going to get a long action rifle in .280 anyway, why not go with the magnum? I can always load it down. If I go elk hunting some day, I might want more power with heavier bullet loads in the 7. I handload, so ammo cost is not a consideration, but the 7 is widely available and the .280 is a bit more rare. So, I stepped up to the 7 and I don't really regret it. I like having it, knowing if I wanna tackle elk someday, I have the gun for the job, not that the .280 or my .308 couldn't kill an elk, but I may only ever get one elk hunt in my life if I ever get that. So, I hang on to the big gun. Besides, everyone needs one magnum rifle in their collection, just ain't complete without it. I can see the same logic in .30-06 vs .300 if you're more a .30 cal guy.

springmom
November 2, 2006, 03:25 PM
Not me. I'm a weenie on rifle and shotgun recoil. My .243 does just fine with Texas critters. If I ever get a bigger rifle it'll be a 30-30 or a .30-06 and if so it's going to have to have the great grandmother of all recoil pads for these old arthritic shoulders to tolerate :o

But it'd be fun, if I could....:p

Springmom

Desk Jockey
November 2, 2006, 11:01 PM
Springmom-

Try one of the recoil pads that you wear on your shoulder. I use one for sighting in my 300 wsm, and it's really amazing. Without it, I'm sure I'd be flinching after 5 or 6 shots. With it, I've shot two boxes at a session without a problem. They're around $25 or so, I think.

langenc
November 2, 2006, 11:23 PM
Suggest you read Elmer Keiths book "Hell I was there". 300 WM or 300 H&H are about minimum for him.

If you have not read it give yourself a treat this winter and do so.

vmfrantz
November 4, 2006, 07:21 PM
I would like a mag. one day. But I own a 06 and feel the 300 is ballistically to close. And I just wouldnt have a need for anything bigger, atleast not for hunting, but to talk the wife into letting me get another rifle:D

SoCalShooter
November 4, 2006, 08:05 PM
Winchester mag? HA:) I hunt with a .300 weatherby magnum:neener:

MDHunter
November 4, 2006, 09:55 PM
I jumped from the .30-06 (close to the .300 Mag ballistically with premium loads) up to the .338 Win Mag - but that's 'cause I hunt in Alaska, and would like to shoot a griz or brownie, and I like the heavier bullets available for the 338. If I weren't hunting Alaskan bear, I would have stuck with my Win Model .70 in .30-06.

For anyone who is concerned about recoil - try a PAST recoil pad, you wear them on your shoulder and they really help. I can shoot 30-35 rounds at the range out of my .338 wearing one, I wouldn't last more than 8-10 shots without it!

Michael

kevin davis
November 5, 2006, 05:11 PM
I hunt mostly with the .300 wm. I use a 7mm-08 for deer and under, a .30-06 for deer and bigger. I used the .300 in Namibia for plains game. in canada for moose and caribou, and down here in Texas when I feel like it. A better recoil pad and there is no more problem. If you want recoil, I have a Steyr
.376 scout rifle with a 22 inch barrel that almost loosened my teeth after just 5 shots. Since porting it, it is a real fun gun to shoot and I will take it out for deer next time I go , just to see how it does with a 225 grain bullet. Over gunned? No. Hunting and having fun? YES:eek:

IllHunter
November 6, 2006, 01:38 PM
My Wby 300 mag sits on the mantel awaiting the "A" trip... Alaska,Africa, Anywhere but here. The .270 hasn't failed when tasked, the 870 works (guess thats why they sold so many!) The .44 mag has done the deed and I see no need to use a cannon when accuracy works wonders.

GSPKurt
November 7, 2006, 08:11 PM
I have a .300 WM Weatherby Vanguard Stainless. I use it to deer hunt, hogs, too :what: . It's a little stout, but some shots go 150 yards, and I don't want to push the .30-30.

MCgunner
November 7, 2006, 08:32 PM
You can shoot 300 yards with the .30-30 with Leverlution. I've never shot it, but shoot similar Nosler 150 BT handloads in .30-30. Even from a 12" contender, it's a 200 yard gun ballistically.

SHOOT1SAM
November 10, 2006, 06:05 AM
No, I do not hunt with a .300 Win. Mag.

I hunt with a .358 Norma Magnum because it is the most accurate rifle I shoot.

Sam

mustang_gt_350
November 10, 2006, 06:17 AM
I carry my 6mm (95gr CT nosler) for the pa deer season, but my grandfather used to carry his 300 H&H every season. I am currently in the planning stage for a 338 win mag.

gdvan01
November 10, 2006, 06:26 AM
I'd love to have a .300 or .338, just in case you need that extra 'touch'. Due to financial considerations at the moment, the .308 will suffice.

Iggy
November 10, 2006, 07:49 AM
I was 14 years old and paid $81.00 for it new and got a box of shells thrown in by the dealer.

Shot my first antelope a week later, elk a couple of weeks later. It kicked like hell back then, but I grew up with that rifle.

It has made meat many many times since then. Never felt the need for anything else. Well, I have successfully hunted with a muzzle loader and Sharp's 45-70, but my meat gun is a the 300 H&H.

I'm still shootin' it.

Charles S
November 10, 2006, 02:04 PM
I have and do hunt with the 300 Magnums; I have more than one and hunt with all of them. I am really impressed with the 300 Winchester Magnum’s versatility. I have a Thompson Center Encore with a 27 ˝ inch Shilen barrel in 300 Win Mag that is very accurate and the performance is very impressive.

The 300 magnums really are not that punishing of the bench to me. I really don’t find that there is a noticeable difference in a 300 Mag with a good platform and a good recoil pad and a 30-06.

Honestly, my most unpleasant gun off the bench is a very light 270 Winchester. I find the recoil from that rifle much more unpleasant than the recoil from my Winchester model 70 300 Mag.

Are the 300 Magnums necessary for most game? No, not for me. Honestly the 30-06 is substantial overkill on most of the game I shoot.

TimboKhan
November 10, 2006, 02:21 PM
My roommate successfully killed a deer with his .300 just last weekend. For game that small, he typically uses his .308, he was having scope issues and so used the .300. My primary hunting rifle is a 7mmRemMag, and my secondary is a .270.

H&Hhunter
November 10, 2006, 05:01 PM
My magnum is a .391 Rumpripper Magnum. I have a 40 power scope on it with a laser range finder and a bullet tracking GPS.

My bullets are packed in salt.

They need to be so that my game doesn't rot because I shoot game so far away that it'd be ruined by the time I can walk the 5 ridge lines over to it. The salt preserves the critter.

The GPS bullet tracker is an important component to my shooting as well because often the game I drop is so far away that it'll be covered in snow and or the mountain will have changed elevation before I can walk over to it.

My rifle kicks so hard that it is often used as a booster to launch the space shuttle. All you have to do is strap it to the side of the shuttle with the muzzle pointed down and have one of the astronaughts pull the trigger with the remote string astro launcher system. (RSALS) One round out of my Magnum will send a shuttle into low earth orbit. You don't even have to light the rocket up.

I'd show you a picture of my .391 RR excpet it's so big it won't fit in a camera.

abearir
November 11, 2006, 12:10 AM
Heck yeah, where I hunt you never know what your going to run into. Or at what distance it will be. I've jumped whitetails at 10 yards bedded, and elk across canyons at 500 yards on the same stalk. My .338 will sure do both equally well. However in the end, shot placement is everything. Too many people try to make power a replacement for marksmanship and fieldcraft. When I teach hunters ed, I warn the students about magnumitis......bigger is not always better. Heck, my backup gun is a Winchester 94, in 30-30. I'd be willing to bet large sums of cash, that this caliber and smaller in these old lever actions has taken more game than all the magnums combined by several fold.

TimboKhan
November 11, 2006, 12:06 PM
Too many people try to make power a replacement for marksmanship and fieldcraft

This is an absolutely true statement. My roommate with the .300 got his deer because he can shoot that .300, and I use my 7mmRemMag for the same reason. Of course, this isn't new advice. For as long as I can remember, people have been preaching "Placement over Power". For the life of me, I can't understand why people keep shooting shoulder-mounted artillery pieces when they can't hit the broad side of a barn with them. If you can shoot them, fine. If not, power down!

MinScout
November 14, 2006, 04:48 PM
Too many people try to make power a replacement for marksmanship and fieldcraft

Truer words were never spoken. One of my co workers shot and wounded a magnificent Minnesota buck, because I think he could'nt handle the power of his "three hundred mag". He and his buddy finally recovered the animal many hours and several shots later. Shameful.

phonesysphonesys
November 14, 2006, 07:38 PM
I have a 300 WinMag. It is extremly accurate. I use it when I am hunting lower elevations or or areas where I will have long shots. When I am hunting higher up in the timber (9000ft and better I use my 325 Win. Short Mag. It is a lighter gun. When those 220 grain bullets hit I don't have to walk far. Plus the blood trail is easy to follow.

Recoil is a personal thing. Some it bothers. Some it does't. When you are shooting at an animal you never feel it.

Semper Fi

R.W.Dale
November 14, 2006, 08:01 PM
One of my co workers shot and wounded a magnificent Minnesota buck, because I think he could'nt handle the power of his "three hundred mag".

Horse pucky! "Handling the power of the 300 mag" Only comes into play after the bullet leaves the barrel. Your co-worker is a sorry shot, and still would have wounded the animal in question had he been using a 308.

Too many people try to make power a replacement for marksmanship and fieldcraft


AND too many people blame plain old poor marksmanship on using too much gun instead of placing the blame on lack of practice and shot dicipline

Northslope Nimrod
November 15, 2006, 12:55 PM
Decided to stay with the '06. The '06 (with new powders) can really stack up well, with out the punishment.

BUT, MANY of my buddies carry the 300 Mag. One carries an Ultra Mag. Here in Utah, there is terrain where they are very useful. (long shots)

.38 Special
November 15, 2006, 01:06 PM
Horse pucky! "Handling the power of the 300 mag" Only comes into play after the bullet leaves the barrel. Your co-worker is a sorry shot, and still would have wounded the animal in question had he been using a 308.
Double horse pucky! I would hazard a guess that the majority of "casual" hunters -- meaning non rifle loonies -- I see at the range with their .300 mags are afraid of them. You could probably make a decent living betting bystanders that "that guy down the line" is going to close his eyes the next time he pulls on that trigger.

I've got nothing against the people who swear by their magnums. And I have almost nothing against the folks who claim recoil doesn't bother them at all and that "real" men just need to shut up and learn to deal with it. The only thing that bothers me with all of this is the "real men" flinching away with their big guns and putting bullets into the guts of big game animals the country over.

Bottom line: there is precious little "need" for deer guns larger than .270 or thereabouts. For those that want more, have at it, but make sure your ego isn't writing checks that your ability can't cash.

Byron Quick
November 15, 2006, 01:34 PM
Most of the deer I've killed has been with a .300 WinMag. Longest shot I've tried was approximately 250 yards. There's a few 300 yard shots where I hunt and that is about the longest I'd attempt even if a longer shot presented itself.

I'm pretty good with fieldcraft and marksmanship. Don't believe a larger caliber could make up the difference even if I weren't.

With me, it's personal preference...I like the larger calibers.

As far as the economics go...I don't have a family to support so I can indulge my preferences to the limits of my resources.

Hunting with a 7mm Magnum now. Why? Well, I've never killed a deer with this rifle and I don't want to show favoritism. Parker-Hale built on a Mauser action with a Burris 3X9 scope. Got it for $450. Too good a deal to pass up.

If I was all super het up over making a dollar go as far as possible in each and every move I made...I wouldn't be hunting at all. I'd get all my meat from the butcher.

Far as that goes, I wouldn't own but maybe four firearms if my goal was maximum economy.

Biker
November 15, 2006, 02:01 PM
In my neck of the woods, a Rem 700 in '06 does anything I need it to do. I getting a bit recoil sensitive in my addage.

Biker:)

R.W.Dale
November 15, 2006, 05:31 PM
Double horse pucky! I would hazard a guess that the majority of "casual" hunters -- meaning non rifle loonies -- I see at the range with their .300 mags are afraid of them.

TRIPLE HORSE PUCKY!

MY last 270 kicked harder than my current 300 wby. The diffrence in stock style and fit can make WAAAAAY more diffrence in felt reciol than the diffrence between a 30-06 or a 300 Win mag. Crap! by your flawed reasoning anybody who own a 12 ga 3 or 3.5 inch shotgun is automatically going to be a sorry shot.


NOW wouldn't be silly if the people who swear by the short action 308 based cartriges started railing againt those macho types who are trying to make up for sumpin by using those overkill 06 based family of cartriges. YES IT WOULD in fact it'ed be just as silly as some of the replies to this topic. THOSE OF US WHO ACTUALLY KNOW WHAT WE'RE TALKIN ABOUT. Know that that extra 200 fps that 300win mag has over 30-06 is hardly going to make any diffrence whatsoever with an individuals already ingraned bad habits.

You could probably make a decent living betting bystanders that "that guy down the line" is going to close his eyes the next time he pulls on that trigger.

It'ed also be pretty lucritive to bet people like you that the yahoo down the line will still close his eyes when he shoots his .243

Bottom line: there is precious little "need" for deer guns larger than .270 or thereabouts. For those that want more, have at it, but make sure your ego isn't writing checks that your ability can't cash.

PLEASE you're killin me. Over a chronograph the diffrence between a 270 and a 7mm mag is about the same as the diffrence between a 308 vs 30-06. And yet this is supposed to be some kind of insurmountable obsticle for the amature shooter.

MrDig
November 15, 2006, 05:57 PM
Currently I hunt with .243, 30-30, .308, and a 30-06. I feel the need to improve my shooting technique more before I make the jump in expense to a 300 or 338.
That being said I also recognize that the B.C. for the magnum rounds is a little better than an 06. My question is how many 300+ yd shots will I see to make the Magnum worth it. Hunting Dakota prairie lands maybe. But I dont like to take shots I'm not confident about so I need to practice practice practice.

Charles S
November 15, 2006, 06:13 PM
Genteman,

This discussion is about hunting with the 300 Magnum.

Not about shooters generally. I wish I had a dollar for every time I hear someone tell me their hunting rifle shoots one inch groups, and maybe their rifle does shoot one inch groups by their definition. For me to say a rifle shoots one inch groups mean that that rifle will under decent range conditions shoot multiple 3 shot one inch groups (this is for a big game rifle; I tend to group varmint and target rifles with 5 and 10 shot groups). This does not mean that once, when the stars were properly aligned, the wind was right, the sun was perfect; I shot a one inch group. This does not mean that when I walk down range I call out a couple of flyers and say that the last round was a great shot and that is my group.

Do people tell me their standard, off the shelf, hunting rifle with factory ammo, a cheap scope, a 9# trigger shoots one inch groups? All the time.

Do I see hunter’s finch with magnums off the bench? You bet. I also see more shooters that cannot handle the 30-06 than all the magnum shooters combined.

Stock fit is much more important to recoil than most of us care to admit. I think both of my 300s are easier to shoot than my 270 that weights 7# loaded.

Do we need magnums, I know I don’t. Do I like them yes. Do I shoot lighter recoiling calibers better, yes. I have to concentrate really hard to keep from developing a flinch with my 300 Win mag after only about 30 rounds off the bench. Are there things to help me with load development, sure the Lead Sled, good recoil pads, good hearing protection. Do I notice the recoil when I kill game. No.

As I get older I find myself spending more time with my 7X57, my 6.5X55, my 7-08. Have I gotten rid of my 300s? No way they are great fun and have all the power I could ever need.

MDig,

The ballistic coefficient for the 300 and 30-06 bullets are exactly the same. They are the same diameter and the same bullets, the 300s just start of faster. How much, depends on the load, barrel length and the magnum. With my hand loads my 300 Winchester with 27 ˝ inch Shilen barrel will start a 200 gr Sierra Gameking faster than my Remington 700 30-06 will start a 150 gr Sierra Gameking.

.38 Special
November 15, 2006, 06:49 PM
I gather from your all-caps and exclamation points that you disagree with my opinion. :neener:

Shaughn Leayme
November 15, 2006, 08:26 PM
I have a heavy barrel Match rifle (26 inch MTU profile) in 300 winchester magnum that I built for shooting 1000 yds, I have set up on a field for deer season, no deer showed up in the few days I had, that's hunting.

I have been hunting this year with a .375 H&H with hand loaded 235 gr Speer bullets and they are moving along at 2800 fps avg.

Recoil for my 11 pound rifle (300 WM) complete is 26 lbs with 180 gr MK at 3000 fps

Recoil for my .375 which weighs just about 11 pounds complete is 31 lbs with 235 SP at 2800 fps

Recoil of my 308 bolt which weighs about 10 lbs complete is 14 lbs with 180 MK at 2600 fps

A standard 30/06 runs some where around 17 pounds of recoil with 180 grain loads

So with the proper stock and shooting form, the vast majority of shooters, with even a modicum of practice would most likely not notice the difference in recoil between a 30/06 and a 300 WM, but if they practice without hearing protection, the odds a good that they will develope magnum flinch.

For hunting, whatever is legal and floats your boat, in my opinion.

Art Eatman
November 16, 2006, 10:50 AM
H&H, I'm glad you remembered the salt...

:), Art

.45Guy
November 16, 2006, 11:01 AM
Bottom line: there is precious little "need" for deer guns larger than .270 or thereabouts. For those that want more, have at it, but make sure your ego isn't writing checks that your ability can't cash.

WOW! :what: Now I'll be sure to take my overkill 300 Govt. Magnum '06 out Saturday morning!

.38 Special
November 16, 2006, 11:21 AM
Didn't say it was overkill. Said it was unneccessary. And I'm a pretty big fan of the '06 myself. Frankly, I'm a big fan of the .300 H&H as well. I just don't kid myself that I have to have one for deer or elk. The simple fact is there's very little game in America that needs more than a 7X57, .25-06, 6.5, etc.

So a question: if there's no ego involved in the magnums, why is it that the mere suggestion that they aren't neccessary enough to set off a certain kind of magnum owner? It's not as though I'm saying magnums are bad, or shouldn't be used, or are "overkill" or anything. My harshest criticism is that the increased noise and recoil requires an effort to master and that too many "recreational" hunters don't bother. So why does that get the "magnum men" all uptight?

.45Guy
November 16, 2006, 11:36 AM
Said it was unneccessary

So by that same logic I should hunt with the bare minimum required by state law. If I could find a cheap .22 hornet I would consider it.;) Though I do have to admit I nailed a nice doe last season with my AR, so centerfire .22's will certainly get the job done. I think the real meat and potatoes of the issue is availability. I doubt the "casual hunter" everyone keeps alluding to spent hours going over ballistics charts to discover the end all, beat all super mag. It was just a matter of walking into a shop or show and seeing a rifle in their price range. That simple. The fact that it was chambered in .729 Redneck had little to do with the decision.

R.W.Dale
November 16, 2006, 05:51 PM
So a question: if there's no ego involved in the magnums, why is it that the mere suggestion that they aren't neccessary enough to set off a certain kind of magnum owner?

Mainly because the magnum bashers are being asinine. Heck some people (myself included) buy a rifle with caliber being one of the last concederations

Why is it all non magnum shooters think that this is the only reason people choose something belted? Could it possibly be that some people want to shoot a magnum just because:what:

Are people who drive trucks with a larger engine than they NEED just feeding thier ego?

How about watching a larget than 13" television

A 2" pecker works just fine to, but that doesn't mean everybody should be happy with one:evil:

So why does that get the "magnum men" all uptight?

Because it's a retarded arguement that is completly based assumptions on other peoples skill level that you know NOTHING about.

Here's a question for you, Can YOU shoot a good group with a rifle with a 7lb trigger?



Why is it that magnum bashers look at a rifle case with a belt and see some kind of hammer of the gods that is not ment to be weilded by mere mortals?
Where as most people just see just another rifle cartrige.

Legionnaire
November 16, 2006, 11:29 PM
Fun thread; thanks. For the record, I have a .300 win mag, and I like it a lot. But it's set up as a long range target rig, and I've never hunted with it. For hunting, I favor a .308 for medium game (deer), and a .223 for coyotes and smaller varmints.

velojym
November 17, 2006, 12:25 AM
Ah, I used to have a Vanguard in .300 Win Mag, but I sold it when I moved to a woody region. My .30-30 will do anything I need there, but still, I miss the 'Bee.
One of many cases of seller's remorse, I'm afraid.

.38 Special
November 17, 2006, 12:29 AM
So by that same logic I should hunt with the bare minimum required by state law.
Well, no, you should hunt with what you want to hunt with. Despite some of the frothing going on around here, I'm still not suggesting otherwise.:)

I doubt the "casual hunter" everyone keeps alluding to spent hours going over ballistics charts to discover the end all, beat all super mag. It was just a matter of walking into a shop or show and seeing a rifle in their price range. That simple. The fact that it was chambered in .729 Redneck had little to do with the decision.
Actually, I think what often happens is the "casual hunter" talks to his buddies, or the guy behind the counter at the sporting goods store, or reads some article in the latest issue of "Whack 'em and stack 'em" and learns that the .300 Whizbang eliminates holdover out to 9,000 yards and guarantees a dead buck even if you hit him in the toenail. Then he goes to the range, discovers that extra 20 foot-pounds of recoil has wrecked his barely passable shooting, but figures it doesn't really matter. I mean, a gun that good takes most of the skill out of the equation, right?

.38 Special
November 17, 2006, 12:35 AM
Mainly because the magnum bashers are being asinine.
That what passes for "high road" in the Ozarks? :neener:

Why is it all non magnum shooters think that this is the only reason people choose something belted?
Ever heard of a strawman argument?

Could it possibly be that some people want to shoot a magnum just because
I haven't seen a single person on this thread arguing against that, myself included.

Are people who drive trucks with a larger engine than they NEED just feeding thier ego?
Often, IMO.

How about watching a larget than 13" television
As an argument for the neccessity of Magnums, "Well, what about your big screen TV?!?" is one of the silliest I've encountered.

A 2" pecker works just fine to, but that doesn't mean everybody should be happy with one
But not the silliest.


Quote:
So why does that get the "magnum men" all uptight?

Because it's a retarded arguement that is completly based assumptions on other peoples skill level that you know NOTHING about.
I sense that you are nearing the point where you ask if my mother wears combat boots. So I'll tell you what, sport: you win. Magnums are neccessary for all hunting and anyone who doesn't use one has lace in his panties.

Have a nice day. :)

dakotasin
November 17, 2006, 02:09 AM
my 300 win mag after the hunt last saturday (and it dusted off a pretty fair buck, if i say so myself):

http://www.baitshopboyz.com/forum/uploads/dakotasin/2006-11-16_002332_06PrairieRifle.jpg

H&Hhunter
November 19, 2006, 08:57 PM
H&H, I'm glad you remembered the salt...

, Art

;)

Greg

tdog69
November 21, 2006, 02:05 PM
Newbie here, casual hunter

Interesting thread, I had to respond to it, but I do not own a 300 mag my last purchase I even traded my 06 in for a 7mm size bullet. I spent a lot of time researching for the perfect caliber and opted for the Rem 700 XCR 26” barrel in a 7mm Ultra Mag with a 3*9*42 Zies scope. The caliber will take down anything in North America and really reach out and touch a critter if need be. This is now my main riffle and even though it kicks like a mule I would not trade the gun for anything. People I hunt with say it is compensation for a short coming, but me on one block and them on there other block flinching at every shot with there non mags and me driving tacks. 100 yards I can put a grouping in a quarter size on every 3 shot grouping. Over kill for deer, “yes”, but that is why you shoot them in the neck and it even removes the head..LOL

For the price of riffles now a days why would you not go with a magnum caliber and have one gun that can do pretty much what ever type of hunting you want to do and just size down on the grain of bullet or up.

When I do go to deer camp or out, depending on where I decide to hunt if it is in brush, the 30-30 Westfield lever action over welms the killing power of the 7mm ultra mag

carnaby
November 21, 2006, 02:24 PM
that is why you shoot them in the neck and it even removes the head..LOL

I dunno, I shot that big mulie in the neck at 30 yards with my .300 win mag. Head stayed attached. Next time I'll get 'em :)

.38 Special
November 21, 2006, 10:18 PM
100 yards I can put a grouping in a quarter size on every 3 shot grouping.
Not to single anyone out, but this may be a good illustration of the kind of attitude that concerns me. There is a certain kind of hunter that believes the combination of Whizbang cartridge and the ability to put down tight 3 shot groups from the bench at 100 yards is all he needs before whanging away at deer five or six hundred yards away. This does not mean that all owners of such rifles are given to such things -- nor that the author of the above quote is either -- but I have had more than enough experience with such folks to hold me for one lifetime.

As for the question of "why would you not go with a magnum caliber and have one gun that can do pretty much what ever type of hunting you want to do and just size down on the grain of bullet or up"? Easy: I like rifles of very low recoil; things like the 7X57. I personally like to get as close to the animal as possible, which removes the primary advantages of larger rounds. Were I to decide that deer at 500 yards was my game, I would certainly go buy a Whizbang -- and then practice religiously under real life circumstances until I KNEW I could hit at that range.

.38 Special
November 21, 2006, 10:23 PM
I personally like to get as close to the animal as possible...
Upon re-reading, I think this may be an important insight into the "magnum vs. non-magnum" issue: Some of us tend to refer somewhat sneeringly to the folks who enjoy long range hunting, and I'm one of them. This isn't really fair as dead game is dead game and I should keep my personal biases to myself, but I personally can't help but be far more impressed by the man who took his animal at 50 yards than at 500. There are too many slobs shooting at ranges beyond their ability and then bragging when they luck out and hit something, IMO.

Which isn't, of course, the fault of the caliber. Guilt by association...

carnaby
November 21, 2006, 10:52 PM
I'll go with that. I'm a new hunter, never shot my rifle past 100yds, and then only bench rested at the range. I figure I'm good to at least 200 yards if I can find a steady rest while hunting, otherwise it's 100yards or so until I get more practice. Eventually I'd like to be able to take a 300 yard shot if a great oportunity presented itself.

I did get a chance to shoot at a target about 200yds away finally with a half-ass rest, nailed it. But we'll see, without practice, I have no idea what my rifle and I are capable of :D

BullGuide1903
November 22, 2006, 03:01 AM
i do not always carry a magnum, but sometimes, i really do like to tote the. i like the 264 win mag,, the 8mm rem mag. would really like to get a 350 rem mag...when i guide, which is in bear country, i hang a stoked up 4570 lever gun from my saddle

X-Rap
November 22, 2006, 11:13 AM
Like I said on an earlier post, people think that just because the cartrige has a belt it hits like Thors hammer, well the game has a say in the matter to. I've seen maybe a hundred big game animals go down or run away wounded and heard anecdotel evidence on many more. The one truth always rings true. Shot placement =good skils at arms. An animal shot through the lungs will be down in 100 yds,an amimal shot through the shoulders is down now although meat will be lost, an animal hit in the nervous system ie. spine is down now but risky due to small target area and meat damage along back bone. A hit in the body out side the chest cavity=guts will kill an animal but they can travel 100s of yards unless liver or artery hit. Extremity like legs and you probobly lost it unless you can follow and get another shot in it. All that said it amazes me how some people will go in the field with ballisticly inferior firearms when they own or could bought a better one. A case in point would be a guy who has both deer and elk tag and is hunting canyons that will require at least a 300yd shot to get to the other side. He makes the shot with the 243 100gr bullet that gets the antelope and the deer and usually with dramatic results. the bull is standing behind some light brush that the shooter can't see clearly and on the edge of black timber that leads around a point to a side canyon. The bull doesn't go down like the deer do and just runs off into the timber and out of sight. What do you think happens? What do you think would happen given same shot with 30 cal magnum with 180 or better bullet designed for heavy game?

.38 Special
November 22, 2006, 11:24 AM
All that said it amazes me how some people will go in the field with ballisticly inferior firearms when they own or could bought a better one.
Well hell, I'll bet your pet gun is "ballistically inferior" to a .50 BMG! :neener:

Every rifle I own is "ballistically inferior" if compared to a 7 STW or something. I like old cartridges and old guns and seeing how close I can sneak to the animal. If I can get to within 25 yards of a boar and then plug him with a 6.5x52R from a hundred year old bolt gun, then I'm a happy camper.

And on the way back to the truck, I'll try not to sneer at the guy who's bragging about his 500 yard lazered and mil-dotted pig "hunt".:neener:

.38 Special
November 22, 2006, 11:29 AM
Oh, and as for the elk/243? Of course that's a foolish combo. OTOH, it doesn't make a Magnum "neccessary", although there's nothing wrong with using one. A .270/.280/.30-06 would have been just fine, especially with a modern "super bullet".

And I tend to wonder about the "at least a ___ yard shot is neccessary in this kind of country" statements. Again, not trying to single you or anyone else out, but my automatic read on this kind of statement is "Hmm. Maybe some more stalking practice would help..."

Geno
November 22, 2006, 11:45 AM
I just bought a new rifle, Mark V in .300 Win Mag. It's accurate, shhots flat and is just plain fun. The recoil is deceptiovely soft. But, I also keep the .308 loaded for close-in shots, such as the woods. Again, distance and intended game.

Doc2005

X-Rap
November 22, 2006, 11:31 PM
My intent of the balisticly inferior comment was to use enough gun. Simply said if you stalk to 50yds enough gun is a 30-30 44mag or many others that certainly are not appropriate for cross canyon shooting. Using 300 yds was an arbitrary number, in areas of the west that I hunt one can be in timber were 75yds is a long shot and open country were a 500yd shot across a canyon is not unheard of all on the same mountain so you'd better have a gun that will do the job and be up to it yourself. I don't know were your from 38 but a stalk on a standing and probobly alarmed bull is not good odds when you have to cross a deep valley and deal with brush over your head when your on his side. If you find one sleeping the best you can hope for is closing the gap to the point of losing site then check range wind and such and wait for him to expose vitals. Regarding the other calibers and super bullets, most people reading shooting forums are well aquainted with the ___________can be loaded to ___________ magnum performance, true but then can't said magnum be loaded higher yet. I personaly hunt at times with 45-70, 25-06 280, 30-06 and even 243 but the point remains use enough gun for the most extreme requirments of your hunt and you will honor your sport and quarry.

PS I have heard more than one so called hunter say his elk rifle of choice was 243 with shot behind the ear and will bet some will soon show themselves here.

.38 Special
November 23, 2006, 01:50 PM
Fair enough, x-rap. My point, though, is that no matter what gun you have you will be presented with unmakeable shots. I often see game animals at 1,000+ yards. This does not mean that I need more rifle, it means that I need to get closer. If I cannot get close enough, it means that I do not deserve the animal.

I personally have not ever met anyone that can consistently -- like at least 95% of the time -- hit a target the size of a big game animal's vital area, from field positions, in the real world, at 500+ yards. Those people may well exist. I just don't know any of 'em. I do, however, know a bunch of people that think they can, and that really bothers me. These people invariably place a great deal of trust in their Whizbangs, making statements very much like "She'll group into the size of a quarter all day long."

That probably explains a lot of the "anti-magnum" attitude. It's not that I'm against magnums per se. I just don't tend to appreciate a certain kind of person that gravitates to them.

Bottom line: my personal limit on "paper plate" vital targets, from field positions, with the first cold clean shot, in the wind, with the sun in my eyes, whatever, is about 250 yards. I'll extend that a touch if everything is just right, but I know from great personal experience that there is simply too much luck involved in hitting a 500 yard target for me to give it a try on a game animal. And for 300 yard shots, a magnum is just extra noise.

YMMV.:)

FenderTK421
July 8, 2010, 02:08 AM
I love my .300WM. It's the perfect compromise. The most common rifle calibers I see up here are .338's. I don't feel my .300 is underpowered in any way... of course I haven't gotten to go on a brown bear hunt - yet, we'll see then. The .300 is perfect for our moose. Didn't realize I'd necro'd an ancient thread - Sorry

ArmedBear
July 8, 2010, 08:48 AM
I don't currently own any "magnum" rifles.

I do see the purpose of at least some "magnums", but I probably won't be looking to get a .300 WinMag any time soon, precisely because it is a compromise cartridge. For me, the .30-06 is a better compromise, because I can get (and own) a lighter, quicker-pointing rifle with the standard long Model 70 action. Obviously, I am not alone in liking the perennially-popular round that falls in the middle of the .30 caliber spectrum, and pretty much in the middle of the hunting cartridge spectrum across the board.

If I do get a magnum, it probably won't be a .30 caliber, since I would be looking at a more specialized rifle -- either something for long range, or something for hard hits. .240 or .257 Weatherby appeal to me, for pronghorns at long range, because they shoot about as flat as anything ever made for hunting medium-sized game. .338 might make a good elk stopper, with potential for moose.

There is elk hunting right above my house, but the best opportunities in the immediate area are with a muzzleloader, so the .338 isn't a priority. And I screwed up on the tag drawing last year, so I still haven't hunted pronghorns. I figure I ought to shoot at least one with a rifle I have, before dropping the cash on one of the smaller-bore Weatherbys, working up loads for it, etc.

Todd1700
July 8, 2010, 11:00 AM
I can't see much need for the 30 caliber and larger magnums here in Alabama. Our deer aren't that big, (a 200lb buck is a monster here). And the average shot distance here is less than 100 yards. IMHO a large magnum offers no real world advantage over a standard caliber like a 270, 308, or 30-06 at ranges under 300 yards. And the average hunter here that I have encountered can't shoot well enough to utilize any advantage they offer past 300 yards. In fact most, in the terrain we hunt here, will never take a shot over 300 yards at deer in their life.

So why do so many here buy them. I quote this previous statement for absolute by God truth!!!!!
Actually, I think what often happens is the "casual hunter" talks to his buddies, or the guy behind the counter at the sporting goods store, or reads some article in the latest issue of "Whack 'em and stack 'em" and learns that the .300 Whizbang eliminates holdover out to 9,000 yards and guarantees a dead buck even if you hit him in the toenail.

Now I don't really care what you shoot. It's your money for the higher priced ammo, your shoulder, and your potentially detached retina. If you can shoot them well and like them then God bless. But I have long fought the push to sell these things to locals as a needed or superior deer killer.

And here are some reasons why.

Bullet problems: As stated before the average shot distance on deer here in Alabama is pretty close. Close shots mean higher impact velocities. From these whizbang super mags close range extreme impact velocities often cause over expansion and bullet failure. I know a guy that was absolute amazed that he wasn't getting pass throughs on deer with his 300wsm rifle. Standard bullets were just fragmenting all to hell at the short ranges he was shooting deer and just mangling lots of edible meat. So he started using a much tougher premium bullet. End result? He's now paying 50 dollars a box for a tougher premium bullet that, out of his 300 wsm, is putting the same size hole through deer that a plain old Remington Core-Lokt would at 308 velocities.

Recoil: If you can shoot a magnum rifle without it's recoil affecting your accuracy that's great. So can I. I just don't care to. But many people cannot and are far better of with a milder recoiling gun. I worked with a guy that was using a 300 win mag when I first met him. He was disappointed that many of the deer he shot were still running a good bit before dying and was considering stepping up to a 338 magnum. I spent one day shooting with him at the large gravel pit on my families land and could clearly see the problem was his poor shooting due in large part to his fear of the recoil of that 300 mag. He would literally jerk his whole head back as he fired the shot. Seems that on one previous hunt the scope had half mooned him over his right eye and now he had a wicked flinch. After much convincing (magnumitis is a powerful disease) I talking him into getting a 7mm-08 instead of a 338 mag. Over time he came to shoot that soft recoiling rifle pretty darn good at the old gravel pit. The first year he hunted with it he killed 3 deer (two of them hunting with me) all hit right behind the shoulder and not a one ran more than 40 yards. Ahhh, but he changed jobs, i saw him much less and he fell back in with a "Magnum" crowd. The 7mm-08 went back in the gun case and back out came the buddy impressing 300 win mag. End result? He missed one deer last year and wounded another which he never found. Guess he will be getting that 338 win mag before next year for some "Extra Knockdown". LOL!~

Grey Morel
July 8, 2010, 11:22 AM
I don't see anything wrong with using a 'magnum' if that floats your boat.

But there is an undeniable point of diminishing returns. Why would you use a 338 Win mag on small southern whitetails when a .257 Robets would be more than enough for the task? You don't even get the benefit of the magnums extended killing range in that sort of environment.

From a practical point of view, a magnum is normally uncalled for UNLESS you are: hunting large bodied or dangerous game, hunting medium game at extended ranges, or you may encounter dangerous predators while hunting lesser game (such as deer hunting in bear territory).

In reality most of us will never make it to Africa or Alaska, most of us dont have the skill to take deer ethically at 600+ yards, and large bears only inhabit a small section of the contiguous states. :(

Its nice to dream though.

The only "magnums" I will ever own are the .44 magnum, and the 257 Weatherby. Both have more than one niche' use and are solid all around permormenrs.

wombat13
July 8, 2010, 11:38 AM
I don't see anything wrong with using a 'magnum' if that floats your boat.

But there is an undeniable point of diminishing returns. Why would you use a 338 Win mag on small southern whitetails when a .257 Robets would be more than enough for the task?

I'll tell you why. I've got a family to raise which means I don't have the money to buy several rifles and even if I had the money, I don't have the time to practice with several rifles. It's one rifle for everything for me.

I've used my FIL's Ruger M77 MkII in .338WM and liked it. So I chose to buy a Ruger as well and I'd have the .338WM if they made it left-handed. Since they don't, I have a M77 Hawkeye (stainless/laminate) in .300WM. I know that I'll be able to hunt anything I ever have the opportunity to hunt with that rifle.

For now, it's one rifle/one load. Maybe someday when I have time on my hands I'll develop other loads, but for now, I know exactly where my bullet is going to hit.

jimmyraythomason
July 8, 2010, 11:44 AM
I've owned several 7mm,Rem mags,a .300 win,mag and a .300 WTBY mag. Never hunt or hunted with any of them. No need. I have too many rifle in "whitetail" calibers. I keep the magnums on the off chance that I will get to hunt larger game or shoot at much longer distances. For whitetail (Alabama's largest game animal) a magnum is unnecessary.

ArmedBear
July 8, 2010, 01:19 PM
From a practical point of view, a magnum is normally uncalled for UNLESS you are: hunting large bodied or dangerous game, hunting medium game at extended ranges, or you may encounter dangerous predators while hunting lesser game (such as deer hunting in bear territory).

You don't have to go all the way to Africa or Alaska for those things, though it helps. I can't sit here in Idaho and say that there's no use for a magnum. It would not be true.

Maverick223
July 9, 2010, 07:38 PM
Unquestionably there are many magnum rifles being used for tasks that they aren't particularly well suited for, but I don't see anything particularly wrong with that as long as the shooter is capable of doing his job. Personally I don't find a need for a magnum for most hunting (though I have used a few), the .30-06 is more than sufficient for anything that I am likely to encounter in these parts, and there are a multitude of better choices than that (such as the .260Rem. or 7mm-08Rem.). I do believe that a .300WM is a great choice for long range large game hunting, but that isn't really my thing, so my only .300WM is a LRPR, used only for target use.

FWIW, I do have a .375H&H for large DG hunting, as well as a .45-120AE (American Express, comparable to a .450NE) in the works, but those are for special circumstances, not your typical deer hunt.

:)

DeepSouth
July 9, 2010, 07:58 PM
My favorite Whitetail rig is my Remington 700 in 7mm Mag, with a Swarovski 3x12x56 on it. I can see a loooong way sometimes when hunting on pipe and power lines.

With that said I have killed more deer with my 243 than anything else, my 303 brit. would be second.

jbkebert
July 10, 2010, 09:25 AM
The only thing I seem to gather from these threads is that if someone chooses a caliber other than the 30/06 they are fools. That seems to be the measure against all other firearms. I have never owned a 30/06 and have no real desire to own one. It has been mentioned numerous times that a .300 winchester is a compromise cartridge having no real advantage over the /06. In that thinking my first deer rifle and my go to caliber was a .270 winchester. Now what does a /06 do that my .270 will not. Would i not be compromising to ownone?

I hunt a variety of game with a variety of rifles. Pasture poodles with a .22-250, Whitetail with a .243 or .270, Elk with a .300 win or 7stw. There is no such thing as overkill, dead is dead. I shoot a magnum because I have confidence in the gun not because it makes me manly to hunt with one. i have taken more game animals with a bow and arrow than i have ever taken with a centerfire rifle. A arrow sure doesn't hit as hard engery wise compared to a 9mm. Shot placement and the right combination or arrow weight and head or a bullets weight and design are the most important things.

Art Eatman
July 10, 2010, 12:16 PM
jbkebert, for some reason folks get all emotional about brands and cartridges. I never have understood why.

I've always figured that if something works for me, it's as good as whatever works for somebody else--and that's a two-way street.

I figure that a clean ethical kill is about as good as it gets, and anything which will do that is plenty good. My ego's less important than a full tummy.

Getting all emotional about a pretty gal makes sense. Guns? Uh-uh. :D

jimmyraythomason
July 10, 2010, 12:29 PM
dead is dead This works both ways. Hunt with what you have/want. Use whatever reasoning you want to justify your choice to yourself,whether that choice be magnum or non-magnum. "Because it kills better" is just silly. Remember "dead is dead".

Legionnaire
July 10, 2010, 07:41 PM
Except when it comes to zombie threads ... :neener:

scythefwd
July 12, 2010, 03:45 AM
I don't hunt with a magnum cartridge, but one of my hunting buddies uses a .300 wby. He just downgraded to a .30-06 to save on ammo.

ArmedBear
July 12, 2010, 08:32 AM
It has been mentioned numerous times that a .300 winchester is a compromise cartridge having no real advantage over the /06.

That's certainly not what I wrote. What I wrote was that both are compromise cartridges, and for me, the .30-06 is a better compromise since it comes in a lighter, quicker package for hunting on foot. That doesn't make the .300 WM bad, in my estimation. It means that the overall compromise I wanted, didn't favor it.

If I want a gun for elk, specifically, I would be looking at a .338 or a 7mm, depending on the exact conditions. But the best elk hunting in my immediate neighborhood is with a muzzleloader tag, so it's a moot point for the moment.

jbkebert
July 12, 2010, 08:03 PM
That's certainly not what I wrote. What I wrote was that both are compromise cartridges, and for me, the .30-06 is a better compromise

Certainly not a stab at any one person. I think I have seen a hundred threads over this topic. Sometimes people have heard to many rumors that a dreaded magnum rifle will cause a concussion, loosen teeth, and kill dolphins from the shear blast of the muzzle. A magnum rifle caliber is just another rifle cartridge. Yes they can be overkill for somethings but they certainly have earned a place in the shooting world. Folks are funny when it comes to caliber choice its there choice or nothing. It seems that people think a .223 or 30/06 can kill anything on earth from and distance in any condition; and anything larger is just foolish. Then the same folks will say a .380 or .32acp could not possible be a venerable defensive weapon. So if I have this correctly a .223 can take a 8,000# bull elephant from 12 miles from the hip. But a .380 acp could not possibly stop a 150# tweaker from 10 feet center mass.:rolleyes: Not poking fun at any one person it just seems to be a gun shop/interwebz concensus.

ArmedBear
July 12, 2010, 08:21 PM
A magnum rifle caliber is just another rifle cartridge.

Exactly. It's just bullet diameter and weight, going at some velocity out of the muzzle.

"Magnum" doesn't really mean anything. .375 H&H Belted Rimless Nitro Express is just as powerful as .375 H&H Magnum.:)

people think a .223 or 30/06 can kill anything on earth from and distance in any condition

They most certainly will. Untreated infections are a bitch.:D

Another point: Kill =/= Drop

If you really want to shoot elk at 500 yards, in mountains like ours here in Idaho, do you want it to run another mile as the sun goes down? .30-06 might kill it, but there's a reason that Idaho elk-hunting pioneers developed what became the .338 WinMag, and then the .338-378 Weatherby. They wanted DRT, not an exhausting search through the mountains in the dark.

William Lee
July 12, 2010, 09:20 PM
There's nothing wrong with anything, really. We're all allowed our own foibles. Myself, I've practiced with a Marlin 336 carbine in 30-30 and can hit the paper on a sight in target at 150 yards consistently with iron sights. It's all about finding the strategy that works for you.

Maverick223
July 12, 2010, 09:30 PM
"Magnum" doesn't really mean anything. .375 H&H Belted Rimless Nitro Express is just as powerful as .375 H&H MagnumDarn skippy, in fact I say we revert back to the original name...Nitro Express has a nice ring to it, I always wanted a bona fide NE cartridge.

:)

Todd1700
July 13, 2010, 08:52 AM
So if I have this correctly a .223 can take a 8,000# bull elephant from 12 miles from the hip. But a .380 acp could not possibly stop a 150# tweaker from 10 feet center mass. Not poking fun at any one person it just seems to be a gun shop/interwebz concensus

You have never heard me say that. LOL!

The big mags have their place. Hurling bigger bullets fast enough to kill "bigger" game animals like brown bear, elk, moose, and what not, just to name one. All I have ever scoffed at is the push to sell them to local deer hunters here in Alabama. Shooting 160 lb deer at 70 yards with a 300 win mag is (IMHO) like driving roofing tacks with a 12 lb sledge hammer. It'll work, but D@#n, there's sure a better sized tool for the job.

jbkebert
July 14, 2010, 12:14 AM
Everyone knows that a 12# sledge is best suited for 19ga wire brads.:neener:


The rest of your post I could not agree with you more.

blacktailhunter
July 16, 2010, 05:01 AM
I shot my bear with my 338 mag. one mountan to another .I like my mag but not for everyone.

blacktailhunter
July 20, 2010, 12:50 AM
I bought a 300sm ,Iwill bear hunting with this fall . I love my 308 but want somthing with a biger bang and more punch but less than my 338mag.

blacktailhunter
July 20, 2010, 01:06 AM
38 special i hunt bear with a 338 mag. Ihunt deer with my 308 .But when it comes to bear i want somthing that will knok it on its rump if needbe. your wright however bullet placement is everthing .If you cant shoot a 308 or smaler why would you shoot a mag.

~z
July 20, 2010, 09:22 AM
Blacktail,
38Special has not been on this thread since Nov 2006.
~z

shaggy430
July 20, 2010, 10:47 AM
It seems there has been a trend of thread necromancy lately.

Cosmoline
July 20, 2010, 12:52 PM
Bit by a zombie

Vlad357
July 20, 2010, 06:35 PM
Most of my deer hunting is done with my pet .243 if I can pry it away from my kids, otherwise I have several 06s that work fine. However, a few years ago I used my friends CZ .458 just for fun. It killed a big doe very dead, just like an 06, but I don’t ever plan to shoot it again!

WV_Vizsla
July 20, 2010, 07:16 PM
300 Wby 150-165g Hornady has killed ~30 deer for me. I think it has ~1000 handloads out the tube. 30-06 worked before that. Like daughter's 243 enough that I have one now. I use the 300Wby opening days and long range opportunities. 243 is a joy to carry and shoot 50 times on the bench. Perspective "mag" user should all bench test the tool first :-))

Maverick223
July 22, 2010, 12:10 PM
Here (http://forums.gunsamerica.com/yaf_postst128_Busting-the-Magnum-Myth--Choosing-YOUR-Ideal-Hunting-Cartridge.aspx) is an article that I feel sums up most individual's needs for a magnum quite well.

:)

jimmyraythomason
July 22, 2010, 02:19 PM
Thanks Mav! I really enjoyed that article!

stownsend
July 22, 2010, 03:17 PM
I hunt with a 300WM because it was my dad's gun that I inherited and I am very comfortable with it. I believe in using what you have.

627PCFan
July 22, 2010, 04:27 PM
I shoot a 7, but I rarely load up to full power, as I rarely hunt with it. Matter of fact I might have shot less than 10 full power loads through it ever. Its like a 3.5" mag 12 gauge. Not always necessary but there if you wanted it.

airman
July 22, 2010, 05:21 PM
I hunt with what I grab out of the safe at the time. I love my 243 and .06, but the wife stole them...... I guess she likes them better than me....SO I figure there is no way she'll shoot my 300Wm..I was right,now i'm safe for the time being.

Maverick223
July 22, 2010, 07:41 PM
Thanks Mav! I really enjoyed that article!You're very welcome Jimmy Ray; I am glad you enjoyed it. Unlike most articles, I thought the writer of this one was spot on.

:)

jimmyraythomason
July 22, 2010, 07:48 PM
I thought the writer of this one was spot on.
So did I. I just knew he was going to invoke the name of Jack O'Connor before I finished the first paragraph!

Maverick223
July 22, 2010, 08:03 PM
I just knew he was going to invoke the name of Jack O'Connor before I finished the first paragraph!Well you were right about that. To be perfectly honest I didn't know where it was heading, but I like where it went. Despite my love for magnums the author and myself (and apparently yourself as well) share many of the same views and have a fondness for many of the same cartridges.

:)

skiking
July 23, 2010, 06:53 PM
I love my .300 Win Mag, I use it far more than my .243, .270, and 30-30 combined.

Todd1700
July 23, 2010, 10:55 PM
Great article Mav. Thanks I enjoyed that and agree totally with it.

jbkebert
July 23, 2010, 11:16 PM
Great read Mav thanks.

Maverick223
July 24, 2010, 12:19 PM
Glad you guys enjoyed it, never thought it would be this popular.

:)

Buzzard
July 24, 2010, 02:21 PM
Mav, try getting a hold of an article in Rifle Magazine's March 09 issue called "Big Results from Small Cartridges." Like the one you posted it is very much worth reading. Same goes for a piece by Wayne van Zwoll titled "How to be a Crack Shot on Big Game." It used to be up on Remington's site, but has since been taken down. Both preach gospel-truth on hunting with sensible calibers and within your personal range limits.

As for myself, I find little use in any roaring centerfire magnum except as a source of humor. For the people who believe the only way to kill a 90lbs doe is to use a .338 RUM, are truly worthy of a good laugh (or desperately in need of stronger meds).

Maverick223
July 24, 2010, 03:33 PM
Mav, try getting a hold of an article in Rifle Magazine's March 09 issue called "Big Results from Small Cartridges."I won't have an opportunity to read it for a while, as I have to pick up someone from the airport here shortly, but it is here (http://www.scribd.com/doc/28225480/Rifle-Magazine-March-2009) for all to see. The aforementioned article begins at page 44.

I don't know that I agree with your sentiment towards magnums, as long as the user can employ them properly, I don't see an issue, but unquestionably the average deer stalker doesn't have need of one. I have several magnum rifles, and rather like them, though I don't typically hunt with them, as I haven't a need for one (in that capacity) at this time.

:)

WYcoyote
July 26, 2010, 08:23 PM
My elk rifle is a .300 Win Mag.
The way I see it is using the proper tool for the job.
The country is big and so are the bulls, an "adequate" caliber doesn't cut it for me.

H&Hhunter
July 28, 2010, 06:54 PM
The .300 WM is a great hunting round it's basically A .30-06 with 50 to 75 yards of point blank range added to it. It fits in a standard length action and it gets everything it needs out of a 24" barrel. It does EXACTLEY what the .300WSM was supposed to to do and in my opinion is one of the most useful, and sensible .300 mags around. My sheep gun is a light weight .300WM with a .24" barrel.

Recoil from a .300 WM is somewhere between a maidens caress and a fuzzy puppies coat. If you're having issues with recoil shooting a .300WM you need to do three things, first make sure you put a nice soft decelerator pad on your rifle, second make sure your stock isn't too short and that your scope isn't mounted too high. Both of which are rampantly common.

If you are still having issues after those steps have been taken you should immediately strap on your man suit, get rid of that poor little princess rose petal of shoulder that's covered with sensitive pearly white sleeping beauty skin and stop watching Oprah during your afternoon sewing breaks.

That's right...MAN up!!;):evil:

jimmyraythomason
July 28, 2010, 07:55 PM
That's right...MAN up!! Okay,the next time I go after 160 lb deer at 100 yards, I'll take my 300 Weatherby Magnum and 20 rounds of ammo @$80 per box. If the wire that holds my chest wall together breaks I'll just tell my cardiologist that I was only "manning up". I'm sure he'll understand.

H&Hhunter
July 29, 2010, 01:34 PM
Okay,the next time I go after 160 lb deer at 100 yards, I'll take my 300 Weatherby Magnum and 20 rounds of ammo @$80 per box. If the wire that holds my chest wall together breaks I'll just tell my cardiologist that I was only "manning up". I'm sure he'll understand.

Yo Jim, try decaffeinated...

;) Means it's a joke..

I'm not sure the .300 Wby is enough gun for a 100 lb deer maybe you should caliber up?

jimmyraythomason
July 29, 2010, 01:44 PM
Now,what kind of wimp drinks decaf? I would use my .300 mag. IF I hunted anything that required that much energy/velocity. Or if I hunted anything that had teeth and claws and a very bad attitude. Until that day(I would love it to come soon) I will use my wimpy .223,.257,7x57,7.62x39,.280 and 30.06 caliber hunting rifles. I'm sure I left something out. In fact the .280 and 30.06s are a bit too much but who knows,I might need to make a 300 yard shot!

Fremmer
July 29, 2010, 02:25 PM
I'm not so sure about the article. He makes a couple of good points, but it is awfully generalized. Some guys need a magnum caliber that can cover some ground with good power, or just like shooting a heavier bullet for really good penetration. And I don't understand his disdain for the .308 Winchester, which somehow doesn't put the 30 caliber's best foot forward (?), whatever that means. I guess you can load more powder in the .30-06 case, but that just means more recoil and blast, and isn't that what he's criticizing about the magnum rounds? If the .308 recoils slightly less then the .30-06 (which the author asserts can be quite intimidating to some shooters), what's wrong with a bit less recoil, especially with the accuracy you can wring out of a .308?

Use whatever gun you want to use, just make sure you can shoot it well in the field.

Maverick223
July 29, 2010, 02:35 PM
I don't understand his disdain for the .308 Winchester, which somehow doesn't put the 30 caliber's best foot forward (?), whatever that means.I find that there is a certain case size and caliber relationship that performs best. Too large of a case with too small a projectile and you sacrifice efficiency, bbl life, and terminal performance (smaller caliber often begets less trauma and tissue displacement). In the inverse condition you sacrifice good trajectory, sectional density, ballistic coefficient, and sometimes terminal performance (failure to properly expand). The .30Win. case size is not optimized for such large caliber projectiles. It seems to handle 6mm, 6.5mm, and 7mm bullets much better; the .260Rem. being the "butter-zone" IMO. It simply nees more case capacity to perform well with that large of a bullet. FWIW, I don't consider the .30-06 ideal either, the .280Rem. is closer to the ideal caliber for such a case, and the .300WM (amongst other magnums) is about right for .30cal. IMO.

...especially with the accuracy you can wring out of a .308? Please educate me on how the .308Win. is more accurate than any other cartridge, including but not limited to the .30-06. :scrutiny:

Fremmer
July 29, 2010, 03:44 PM
Try shooting a 168 grain round (165 grain round for hunting) through a .308 bolt rifle and you'll see what I mean. Ammo makers have .308 ammo down! :cool:

When it comes to hunting, the .308 Winchester works just like the .30-06 and the .270 work. They're all effective. There is no "sacrifice" from the .308Winchester. I just don't agree with the part of the article concerning the implied underperforming .308 Win (vis-a-vis the .30-06, which is a completely different caliber, the cases are absolutely different, and some powder might work better in one caliber compared to the other caliber). It is an unnecessary (and incorrect) deviation from the main thrust of the article, which is that the reduced recoil of standard non-magnum rifles will provide better accuracy and good performance compared to the high recoil from a magnum round.

Edited to add: but it doesn't really matter, if someone shoots their .375 H&H well, so be it; it'll certainly do the job for deer or elk. To each his own.

Maverick223
July 29, 2010, 04:54 PM
Try shooting a 168 grain round (165 grain round for hunting) through a .308 bolt rifle and you'll see what I mean. Ammo makers have .308 ammo down!The only thing that I will agree with is that there is more match grade ammunition available for the .308Win. that most other cartridges. That doesn't mean that it is in any way better than anything else. There still isn't an "inherently accurate" cartridge. I run my own ammunition factory and can put out any cartridge to match grade specifications and match or best all factory fodder available. :cool:

Furthermore, I am not saying that the .308Win. is a poor cartridge, only that I see the writer's point and agree.

:)

Fremmer
July 30, 2010, 12:43 AM
LOL, yeah, but can you see that the writer's point about the .308 somehow not measuring up to the .30-06 doesn't jibe with the article's main assertion that standard calibers which don't recoil & retort as much as magnum calibers are preferable? The .308 recoils even less than a .30-06, so by his own reasoning, it should be a fine hunting caliber. After all, it is powerful enough to get the job done (like the .257 Roberts or the 7mm-08) and it won't make you flinch.....

Dang. Now I want a magnum hunting rifle!

BushyGuy
July 30, 2010, 12:58 AM
Magnum rifles are overkill, if your a good shot a 30-30 win is good enough gun! Thats what i use i am confident it will make a quick clean kill up to 150 yards.

Maverick223
July 30, 2010, 11:25 AM
The .308 recoils even less than a .30-06, so by his own reasoning, it should be a fine hunting caliber.Not necessarily, his argument is that the .308Win. doesn't have enough velocity to carry the large .30cal. payload effectively. I agree with his assessment. You sacrifice both sectional density and ballistic coefficient by going with lighter projectiles, or a great deal of velocity by going with heavier ones. OTOH, he likes the 7mm-08 (which has less recoil) as well as the .30-06, both being closer to the optimal caliber/case capacity relationship, and thereby providing better ballistics.

:)

Fremmer
July 30, 2010, 11:36 AM
I'm not sure that's his rationale at all, because he states how many people are kicked too hard by the .30-06. I think he made a silly statement about the .308, which detracted from the rest of the article.

I will say it once again, depsite all of the ballistic coefficient and sectional density arguments: the .308 will kill deer and elk just as well as the .270 Winchester, the .30-06, the .25-06, the 7mm-08, the .243, the .257 Roberts, and all of the rest of the standard (non-magnum) rounds. None of the ballistic coefficient/sectional density arguments mean a hoot when you shoot at a deer 150 yards away. None of those figures matter, because as a practical matter of reality (actual hunting, not charts and figures), the .308 will kill it just as dead as the .30-06. Or the .257. Or the 7mm-08. Etc.......

jimmyraythomason
July 30, 2010, 11:44 AM
I agree with Maverick from a technical standpoint and Fremmer from a practical standpoint. Does that mean they BOTH could be right?

Maverick223
July 30, 2010, 12:21 PM
None of the ballistic coefficient/sectional density arguments mean a hoot when you shoot at a deer 150 yards away.True, but so will a .30-30Win. In fact the .30-30 needs the larger caliber because of its low energy, it simply has to "bulldoze" its way through to get the job done, a smaller caliber would be a detriment in this case. I am not knocking the .30-30 either...it has earned its spot. Likewise, I am not saying that the .308Win. is incapable, only that it isn't the most practical, nor my personal favorite.

:)

ArmedBear
July 30, 2010, 10:18 PM
I missed what should have been my answer: No, but I've shot a jackrabbit with a .45-70 Sharps rifle. DRT. Well, actually not "Right There", but rather a good distance back from where it had been when I hit it, but "Dead", anyway.:D

H&Hhunter
July 31, 2010, 06:46 PM
If a guy can handle a .30-06 he can handle a .300 WM (WM stands for Win Mag BTW not Weatherby Mag. (Wby Mag)) the recoil between the two is not significantly different. The majority of the difference in recoil between a .300 WM and .30-06 is imagined and or recoil pad/stock fit.

The .300 is not the answer to many problems but it does have a place in the great big wide world of hunting. If you are shooting Whitetails from a stand at under 300 yards well a .300 WM probably isn't the perfect rifle for your application.

If you are a world wide sheep or goat collector who hunts the high mountains of world for the rarest and most sought after trophies the .300 WM or some such starts to make some serious sense especially when that hunt might be a combo hunt for mountain grizz either on purpose or by necessity.

The .300 WM also makes a fine elk poker and there is nothing wrong with one on a Mule Deer hunt right here in the Western USA.

With all of that being said I seldom find the need for one but I do have to say that with regards to the mule deer I've killed with my .300WM it definitely puts them down with authority. I still prefer a .30-06 for various reasons to a .300WM for most applications. If I feel I need more kill (read penetration) than a .30-06 or a .270 can deliver like when I am hunting elk in thick cover I go to a bigger heavier caliber like a .338 or a .375 as they give incredible off angle penetration so I can safely make kill shots on bigger critters. That is another place that the .300 WM can be handy, using 200 or 220 GR bullets to give more reliable deeper penetration.

I enjoy using different stuff from time to time while hunting but there really isn't any definitive right or wrong answer on these what caliber threads. Anything can fail and anything can work you just have to develop a good level of confidence in your chosen tool and then go out and put some meat in the freezer.

One of these days I am going to draw that coveted Bighorn sheep tag here in Colorado and when I do I'll finally have use for that poor little old .300WM mountain gun I have sitting in the safe.Until then she waits for a real purpose, sitting, waiting, always the bridesmaid never the bride...:)

Captcurt
August 9, 2010, 04:12 PM
I have a cheap, Savage Ultralite in 300 WSM that outshoots everything but my tactical gun. I own several centerfire rifles rangeing from 243 thru 45-70 but I find myself picking up the Savage without even thinking about it.

sam700
August 13, 2010, 10:02 AM
My only hunting rifle is a 300 win. I've got lots of rifles, but only one is a hunting rifle. The others are bull barrel target guns or AR's.

I used to hunt with my target rifle. It worked fine when I was hunting farm land in wisconsin, but way too heavy when I decided I wanted to start backpack hunting in the mountains out west and in Alaska. I decided that I was better off getting one gun in a caliber suitable for huning all game I wanted to hunt. I could have bought a 270 for most hunting and a 338 for the ocasional moose or alaskan bear hunt, but I would not be proficient with it.

Because my 300 is my go to gun for all game I am very comfortable with it and can handle it like it is an extension of my body. If I had a 270 for 90% of my hunting, I would never be as proficient with a mag in the rare instances when it came out of the safe.

elorenzo
August 23, 2010, 11:20 AM
I have been hunting for over 30 yrs and i can honestly say that a magnum in the hands of a well seasoned hunter is a good tool but in the hands of a testosterone charged idiot it can be an unethical firearm i own three magnums a 7 mm mag,300 win mag,and the mighty 338 win mag all three guns have served a purpose elk, moose ,and black bear. on my deer hunts i will use one of my other guns my favorite being th great 30-06. i really believe that at least 50% of the guys that own magnums have no business shooting them you have to shoot your gun to get a feel for it and it"s ability at taking game ethically pulling a 378 weaterby out of the box and saying that you are going hunting next week is pure insanity

PS. for all you guys that think a magnum makes you a better shot please learn to shoot first :cuss:

H&Hhunter
August 23, 2010, 11:58 AM
PS. for all you guys that think a magnum makes you a better shot please learn to shoot first

AMEN BROTHER!! I call it 7MM syndrome. There is nothing wrong with a 7MM but there is a lot wrong with a guy who trades in pappy's 06 for one and thinks he just became an automatic 600 yard elk assassin.

elorenzo
August 23, 2010, 01:01 PM
you and i are on the same page H&H to many guys think of the big magnums like an extension of thier manhood :)

FROGO207
August 26, 2010, 08:42 PM
Wow a long read!! I have a Savage 300WSM cause I got it for a steal. The original owner got sticker shock when he went to buy replacement ammo after burning up 4 boxes he got with the rifle.:D I got it for $150 and bought dies the next day. Never looked back, it is now a go to rifle for me. I love it and BTW what are you all arguing about anyway. Just use what works and let someone else learn by observing your success. :neener: Happy shootin.:cool:

QikEnuF
August 31, 2010, 02:17 AM
Going to be doing deer hunting with an AR50 next year when I get out of the sandbox. Looking forward to it. Also, my dad hunts with a 300WM Remington 700, and it works fine.

COLTHR
September 5, 2010, 09:45 PM
Gotta love the "which is best/right" debate...always gets things stirred up.

The real answer is, "it depends".

Depends on what, where, and how you are hunting. And finally, on what makes you happy.

I used a .300WM in Africa on plains game -- size of game ranged from Jackal to Kudu. Worked great, no issues. Most shots under 250 yards, but was glad to have it for the longest shot at 440 yards. Have used other magnums on other hunts, never felt like I had too much gun. Recoil is an issue for some and not for others. Mainly it's a training issue, but if recoil bothers you enough that you won't practice enough with it, it should be addressed. You can put a slip-on recoil pad on for prone and bench (which is the only time I think rifle recoil really bothers most people) and then take it off for seated/kneeling/standing so you get the same ergonomics as when you hunt.

If I had to have one deer/elk gun for everything then it would likely be the .30-06 just cause it does everything in NA, depending on distance and load, and if your ammo gets separated from your gun you can usually find some where you end up. Happily, I don't have to make that choice. For hogs to deer I've been using a 20" barrel Savage .308 just because it's what I like to practice with.

Accurate gun, good load, good bullets, good glass, and mainly, be able to shoot well (holdovers/come ups/reading wind) and any gun will do out to the max optimal range of that setup, for that animal. But I would rather be overgunned than undergunned.

As for the ethics of long-range hunting. Well that's a personal call, but seems to me that a lot of the logic against it does not stand up. I think we can make a universal statement that willingly causing an animal to suffer unnecessarily is a bad thing. But if only shooting when you absolutely "know" the kill will be clean is the rule, then bowhunting would be out, and honestly, rifles would be out over 200 yards for the average hunter. As far as getting closer with a rifle being more sporting, I think that's a personal call as well. A few years back I was on a moose hunt and we hadn't seen one after five days of hard slogging. I was ribbing our Indian guide about it and he said he had shot one right there (as he pointed out the truck onto the road). "From where?" I asked. "From this truck" he responded. I made the half-joking comment that that did not seem very sporting. He gave me a look I'm sure he had practiced on other city boys, and asked me if "I bought my groceries from the store closest to, or farthest from, my house?" For him hunting was a way of putting meat on the table, and unlike me he did not have the luxury of ritualizing the process.

Don't get me wrong, my favorite part of hunting is stalking, reading sign, not knowing if I'll come home with meat or empty handed. And my least favorite part is actually killing the animal. But that's just me. I don't like shooting prairie dogs cause I can't eat them (YMMV) but I don't begrudge the guys who like to shoot em by the barrel load. Just not my thing.

I'm going to try my .338LM out next year, probably on elk, and depending on how the loads work up I'll probably restrict myself to shots over 600 and under 800 yards. Bullet expansion is what will decide the max range. I probably won't have to do the same level of stalk I would to get within 300 yards, but I'll have to do a whole lot more research (on ballistics and load/bullet performance, as well as shooting (I'll put at least 500 rounds of reloaded .338 downrange through this gun before I go after the elk) and I'll keep shooting my .308 at distance on practice ranges and at matches to develop my skills.

So that's the long-range scenario I'm comfortable with. To me it looks like a lot more preparation than the average deer hunt, and I'm pretty sure there's less of chance of a sloppy kill or a lost animal.

I guess if I had to sum up my thoughts on anything from bowhunting to ultra-long distance, it would be: know your limits.

Psyco Tyco
September 6, 2010, 10:03 PM
the only rifle ive taken game with nowadays is a magnum, own plenty for shooting but just cant seem to get away from that awesome power....though i take elk and bear....so your mileage may vary

magnums are just fun to me, i like having insurance that my bullet reaches the target traveling 1000 feet a second so i know the hollopoint opens, and it doesnt take away from all my other guns usefulness

if i ever get the chance to hunt deer and antelope again i know ill pull out a smaller gun like a 243 or .30-06 but it all comes down to what you want to tote on the mountain and when your shoulder can handle for training, even a crap shot with a magnum doesnt equal a kill just an inhumane shot to an animal....if you cant practice with a magnum then you cant hunt with it

Simpotico
October 7, 2010, 12:45 AM
Versatility is why I own a magnum. My hunting/utility rifle is a Remington 700 ADL in .300 WM; not that I can even remember the last time I fired a factory load through it. I consider myself a rifleman and hand load each round typically to .270 or .308 standards and pack it with a full 220gr load in bear country (coastal AK and north of the Arctic Circle). Although, I feel completely confident with a 150gr .308 load for personal protection; bears ain't bullet proof. Besides, situational awareness and good bear sense is better for personal protection than any shoulder cannon.

Kachok
October 7, 2010, 01:21 AM
I have always owned a magnum "just in case". Mind you I have never seen a deer or hog at 500 yards much less had a clean shot on one. I have owned 3 7mm rem mags including my first rifle, all they have ever done that my 6.5x55 or my 308 won't do is blow up a bunch of meat LOL. That said my friend has a recently retired 220 acre cattle farm where I might get a 500 yard clean shot, so I will continue to own a magnum "just in case". As far as kiling power goes kenetic energy is only the third most important factor. Shot placement and penetration are much more important then massive "hydrostatic shock" A half inch wide permanate wound cavity through the heart or lungs will kill plenty quick. Liquifying the entire chest cavity is just for show. I will amend this to say that if you can shoot your 300 win/7mm rem mag as well as you can your 243, and you are hunting trophy elk or larger, by all means use it if it gives you more confidence just don't down talk folks that have confidence in their 30-30, chances are they have been doing this way longer then you.

usmccpl
October 8, 2010, 12:06 AM
I dont use it a lot but I have a Ruger #1 in 300 Win Mag that see time in the deer field. Mostly it is when I hunt in a spot where I might have a longer shot than 200 yards.

Spittin Lead
October 8, 2010, 10:04 PM
i mainly use my 270 but i do carry my 300 win mag from time to time. as far as recoil (not that it's bad) it doesn't affect me when i'm hunting nearly as much as target shooting. When i'm hunting i'm focused on the game not the recoil so i don't even notice it.

also i do kinda like it for one reason. i had a shot where there were two yearling white tails standing side by side and broad side to me. i was able to get a complete pass through on both animals. so that negates the argument of higher expense of ammo!!! :evil:

Big Bill
October 8, 2010, 10:14 PM
A 300 WSM. What Expense? One shot one kill!!!

Coal Dragger
October 9, 2010, 01:07 AM
I see no need for a "magnum" rifle for any game in the lower 48 states. If it can't be done with a .270, .280 (or my new pet .280AI), or .30-06 then chances are pretty good you are not hunting any game found within the continental United States.

I used to shoot a lot, and still shoot quite a bit, and I shoot better more consistently with non-magnum rifles. Most people do. That isn't to say that I can't shoot a magnum rifle accurately, just that I see no point in mucking around with one at this time. The difference in real trajectory is not all that great, and with the advent of range finders, and BDC type recticles, is barely worth any advantage.

Besides it is no damn fun going out with a .300 Winchester in a sporting weight rifle and putting in real practice from field positions (especially prone, and sitting). Of course most "hunters" consider themselves to be great shots because they can shoot tiny groups off of a bench rest. Then again they are the same idiots that can't manage to hit a milk jug at 100yds offhand, much less at 200yds.

jimmyraythomason
October 9, 2010, 07:32 AM
One shot one kill!!! The same is true for a .223 if you put it in the right place. A .300 wsm won't do it if you can't put IT in the right place.

timney t
October 10, 2010, 11:35 AM
300 Mag is a great round but i use the old tried and true 30-06'. i figure if i need more knock down power i might as well hunt with a 375 H&H.

i have a range that has targets out to 300 yards and the 06' is solid at that range. i WILL ALWAYS try to bring the game in closer but i am confident at 300 yards with the 06'. shooting 180 grain Hornady SST bullets.

You can't go wrong with either round in north america to be honest.

jeepmor
October 13, 2010, 11:14 PM
.300 Winchester in a sporting weight rifle and putting in real practice from field positions

True dat, prone is painful on my 300, even with a limbsaver pad.

brettrow
October 26, 2010, 11:07 AM
Overkill. Ive talked to a lot of guides and they all say the same thing. They would rather have a hunter shoot a rifle they can handle and be accurate than vice versa. They see too many injured animals gut shot on large bore guns because the hunter thinks he can handle it. .270 and 30.06 are a great combo for medium and large game. Both will take both.

UltraMag1981
October 26, 2010, 03:55 PM
I have a Rem 700 sps in .300 rum and have yet to shoot anything with it! I don't want to destroy alot of meat on a deer, so it hasn't made it to the deer camp yet. The only thing I have hunted with the 300 is coyotes but never had a clear shot at one yet (they must smell all that powder from a mile away). For deer I take my 30-06 Benelli R1 which is crazy accurate with 178 berger VLS's It's plenty of gun for deer, bear and even moose, but when the day comes that I head up north for a moose hunt I will be taking the 300 because of the added penetration and energy at greater distances.

jgiehl
October 30, 2010, 09:24 AM
I have a Ruger Hawkeye in .338 win. mag. I went from my .30-06 to that one with never having shot one. What a world of difference! But I bought mine for the purpose that when my kids start hunting I want something bigger for defense also.
That's also why my wife bought her .300 win. mag.
But we both still love spending a day on the range with the .30-06

Kachok
November 8, 2010, 10:58 AM
I have owned three 7mm mags, never a 300 mag. my last magnum ended up busting my nose wide open (not enough eye releif). I sold my magnums and got a T3. The day I have to track ANYTHING shot with my 6.5x55 I might consider them again, until then I cannot justify paying $40 a box for good ammo or bruising my shoulder after only 20 rounds.

slow55
December 28, 2010, 11:53 AM
I traded a 1987 Coleman Pop-up camper needing a lot of TLC for a Winchester Model 70 .300 WSM with case and about 30 rounds of ammo.
It has an older Simmons Aetec 6-20X50 scope on it that has pretty darn good optics for a Simmons. I plan to sell it early 2011 because with all of my other guns, I really can't justify the initial reloading supply setup. I may keep the scope for my 22-250.

The .300 wsm definately has utility in some areas of the US for larger game. Where I hunt in central Texas, I just don't need it. Other than Coyotes at 300+ yards, there's not much to shoot at that I can't kill with a 243 or smaller center fire. My .204 reloads have always nailed the mangy K9s quick and clean.

IMO, my 30-06 Argentine Mauser is the largest I need for a Texas Hill Country White tails or a highly anticipated stray Axis Deer. The last Hog I killed was with my Ruger Bearcat at 20 yards.

farscott
December 28, 2010, 07:19 PM
One of my wife's uncles is a dedicated deer hunter, and his deer rifle of choice is a Ruger 77 Mark II chambered in .300 Winchester Magnum. He says he likes it because the deer are DRT, but I still use my .45 ACP, .243 Winchester, and (next year) .454 Casull in an Encore rifle.

Durty
January 3, 2011, 12:35 AM
I love my 300 win mag. It weighs 14 pounds with the scope so the felt recoil is moderate. Very comparable to my sporter weight 30-06. I have walked a mile with it on several occasions and its not a big deal. I sure wouldn't tote it far in any sort of difficult terrain tho... its a great beanfield rifle which is why I built it. I wanted a gun that is heavy and stable to make 300 yard shots relatively simple. I could have built a smaller caliber rifle but I knew since it was going to weigh so much, recoil wouldnt be an issue anyway. So, why not load my 165 gr Sierras to go 3300 fps?? :-)))

tallcharlie
January 5, 2011, 05:03 PM
I use a Remington 673 in .350 Rem Mag (loaded down a bit) for hunting white tail deer in Tennessee brush. Full factory loads are good for bear in East Tennessee, but you can really use them for anything if you don't reload.

If you enjoyed reading about "Does Anyone REALLY Hunt With 300 Win Mag?" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!