300 win mag effective range on moose


PDA






tako976
March 26, 2011, 10:47 PM
Hey all I'm gonna be putting in for my moose permit this year and the area ill be hunting ill be able to make shots out to 950 yards I'm just curious if the 300 winmag has the ability to put down a good sized moose at that range. If not how far is the maximum range that I can guarantee a quick clean kill thanks for any input

If you enjoyed reading about "300 win mag effective range on moose" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!
hermannr
March 26, 2011, 11:51 PM
A 300 win mag has about the same energy left at 600m as a 30-30 has at the muzzle....would you shoot a moose with a 30-30?

Personally I would sight in at 200m and not excede 300m

kludge
March 26, 2011, 11:51 PM
Easy answer... Sight in for 200 yards and limit shots to 250 yards.

Hard answer... Sight in for 200 yards and then practice shooting a lot of ammunitions from realistic hunting positions. When you can no longer keep a 6" group, stop. If that is less than 250 yards, then that is your max range.

Yes, I know the vitals of a moose are more than 6" in diameter, but other factors are in play too on an actual hunt.

mnrivrat
March 27, 2011, 02:02 AM
A 300 win mag has about the same energy left at 600m as a 30-30 has at the muzzle....would you shoot a moose with a 30-30?

And my anser is - yes ! The 30-30 has about the same energy at the muzzle as a 30-06 has at 100 yards. Would you pass on a 100 yard shot with the 30-06 ?

H&Hhunter
March 27, 2011, 03:08 AM
With the right bullet in 180 or better yet a 200 gr loading it will kill a moose as far away as you can hit it in the vitals. Moose are just big deer and they die when you put holes in their hearts or lungs.

Now you might want to consider where you shoot it. Moose love to run out into deep water before they die. That is a real consideration on where you shoot your moose. Swimming for a dead moose SUX!@

nathan
March 27, 2011, 04:35 AM
I watched Jim Shockey outdoor show wherein he guided a hunter who shot a huge moose . THe moose run and layed on knee deeped water. They have to use an Argo all wheerler vehicle to get it into high ground . Without it would have been impossible. THey have to fielddressed the moose in water.

buck460XVR
March 27, 2011, 11:48 AM
Hey all I'm gonna be putting in for my moose permit this year and the area ill be hunting ill be able to make shots out to 950 yards I'm just curious if the 300 winmag has the ability to put down a good sized moose at that range.

You may be able to TAKE shots out to 950 yards, but can YOU consistently make them? If you have to ask about the terminal ballistics of your rifle at that range, I'm guessin' you don't have much experience shootin' that far.

Frozen North
March 27, 2011, 11:56 AM
If the Moose runs, you have 950 yards of catch up to do. It is best to stalk your game, get close, and dispatch it with a sure shot.

Many sportsman consider very long range shots unethical.

exbiologist
March 27, 2011, 11:57 AM
Some people's children...

H&Hhunter
March 27, 2011, 02:08 PM
Anything past 300 yards on game is getting to be a serious poke in the dark IMHO. I prefer 200 and under.

rcmodel
March 27, 2011, 02:59 PM
ill be able to make shots out to 950 yardsWanna bet?

Seeing game at 950 yards is one thing.
Hitting anything at 950 yards is another, let alone the kill zone on a moose.

The 300 Winmag is very capable of hitting a moose that far.
Out of a very good rifle.
With the range measured exactly from a topo map or with a range finder.
And with your exact bullet trajectory known with the load you will be using.

But are you that good a shot with experience doping wind & mirage & 27 feet of bullet drop at 950 yards to even attempt it?

Most of us who have hunted a lifetime are not.

rc

d2wing
March 27, 2011, 08:15 PM
I agree with RC.

WTBguns10kOK
March 27, 2011, 08:22 PM
Moose are one of the easiest big game animals to get close to. Why is this even a question. Drop the 9 from 950 and you have the range your shot should be from.

H&Hhunter
March 27, 2011, 09:08 PM
Moose are one of the easiest big game animals to get close to. Why is this even a question. Drop the 9 from 950 and you have the range your shot should be from.

Good point.

jim in Anchorage
March 27, 2011, 10:02 PM
Hey all I'm gonna be putting in for my moose permit this year and the area ill be hunting ill be able to make shots out to 950 yards I'm just curious if the 300 winmag has the ability to put down a good sized moose at that range. If not how far is the maximum range that I can guarantee a quick clean kill thanks for any input
What kind of hunt is this that you know it's 950? Not 1200, not 800?

Arkansas Paul
March 27, 2011, 10:53 PM
I'm with rcmodel. The number of people who can put a bullet into an animal's vitals at 900+ yds are very few. In real life at least. I'm well aware that just about everyone on the internet can. Even if you can do it on paper, there are factors to consider when shooting at game. There's a big difference in doing it from a bench and in the field.

H&Hhunter
March 28, 2011, 01:25 AM
Jeff Cooper said it best. If you can't get to within 300 yards of a game animal the problem does not is not with the firearm.

The unwashed masses tend to have some confusion with the differences between hunting and target shooting.

tako976
March 28, 2011, 02:02 AM
I know its 950 yard cause I walk that area all the time I'm with you guys id mutch rather take a 50 yard shot but I'm going to be in a blind and shooting off a rest I've shot my win mag out to 950 yard and am able to put all my rounds into a 12 inch target I'm just curious if a the trophy of a lifetime walks out at that range if I should even consider making a shot more realisticly the shot will be less the 400 yards thanks for the input

tako976
March 28, 2011, 02:14 AM
To answer the other question the area I'm hunting is a massive clear cut that separates a bog from a small pond that moose are always crosing I was thinking if I sat at the far end of the clear cut I could cover the entire area most likely ill sit about 2 thirds up the cut so ill limit my shot to about 300 yards

ghostwriter
March 28, 2011, 03:07 AM
I'll step up and take some heat... I shoot a .300 Win Mag and I agree with most of the remarks here about getting close. It's probably better to do that but... I don't know you. I don't know how you shoot, but the 12" at 950 is a beginning in my mind. At a longer distance, you should have more time to evaluate the shot. I suspect if things are right and the moose isn't in a herd that was spooked and are in a jog mode to get away from whatever was the cause, and they are just grazing and walking then stopping you should be able to range it, take your time dialing in the scope and placing the shot EXACTLY where it should go. If you have the optics to do the job, a great rest, and the conditions are good... I'd go for a decent shot placement out to about 500-600 yards with a 200 gr SMK or GK bullet. I'd prefer the 208 A-Max at about 3000'/sec but that's just me.
The ballastics on a 200 gr SMK @ 2900'/sec are included for a 40 degree F day at both 1000' and 5000' elevations.
As you will see if you look, the drop at 600 yds is about 70" (5.8') at it still has about 2000'/sec velocity and 1750 lbs of energy... which I would think is sufficient to drop your bull moose if you're as good a shot on a live target as the steel disk at 950 yds. As has already been stated, closer is better but you don't always have that luxury so if you're confident and can range the target, know the angle if any, can throw together some quick ballastic calcs in your head, I'd be fine with a 600 yard shot but out to the 950 yard mark the energy drops off so much that you'd need a really good upper neck/head placement to be marginally effective. (If you could move up to the .338 Lapua... now that would be a different story... and chapter to this novel.)

PS: You need to develop your own handloads and chronograph them to get a good ballastic chart to cut and paste on your stock for your rifle. Go with a good heavy bullet with great B.C. numbers, the gameking sierras' are fine or the Hornady A-Max versions or the TFX (I think it's called) are all knock down bullets... keep the velocity up and the weight up for accuracy, not just speed. Work it out to the 700 yard range and make that your limit. Hit the 12" disk 12 for 12 at 700 and you're ready. Have a fun trip and be sure to post pics...

shaggy430
March 28, 2011, 10:29 AM
I'd go for a decent shot placement out to about 500-600 yards with a 200 gr SMK or GK bullet. I'd prefer the 208 A-Max at about 3000'/sec but that's just me.

Neither the SMK or the A-Max are hunting bullets and should not be used on game, especially an animal as big as a moose.

rcmodel
March 28, 2011, 01:23 PM
but I'm going to be in a blind and shooting off a rest Move the blind closer to the bog!!

rc

DM~
March 28, 2011, 01:28 PM
I've shot 25 or more of those swamp donkeys, and i've never needed to take even a 400 yard shot. I refuse to put my ego or bragging rights over the huge chance of wounding a big game animal by shooting at it at long range.

Get closer or let it go by, it's called "hunting" not shooting.

DM

H&Hhunter
March 28, 2011, 06:53 PM
I have a custom .330 Dakota that makes your .300 Wm look like a pop gun especially past 400 yards. I launch 225 Gr Hornandy IB's at just over 3000 FPS. I ding 1000 yard steel with it all the time. I've been hunting big game extensively for going on 30 years now.

I wouldn't dream of popping at a moose at 950 yards. I don't know how to put it to you any other way besides that doing so is just plain old stupid and unnecessary.

ghostwriter
March 29, 2011, 01:04 AM
@shaggy430: The A-Max is a hollowpoint with a plastic filler, the MatchKing, a hollowpoint without the filler. You should see what they do to a 230# Mule Deer, I guess I shouldn't hunt with those then. Glad you told me before I did something dumb...

jim in Anchorage
March 29, 2011, 01:27 AM
You might want to try calling. I have shot moose 50 feet from the door of my tent calling them in.

H&Hhunter
March 29, 2011, 02:35 AM
jim,

I don't think this came here for advice it looks like he came here for permission.

jim in Anchorage
March 29, 2011, 02:49 AM
Well he ain't gonna get it from me. I see a 3 legged moose trying to get though winter.

BTW my .358 Norma will do anything your .330 Dakota will do:p

shaggy430
March 29, 2011, 10:28 AM
@shaggy430: The A-Max is a hollowpoint with a plastic filler, the MatchKing, a hollowpoint without the filler. You should see what they do to a 230# Mule Deer, I guess I shouldn't hunt with those then. Glad you told me before I did something dumb...

A mule deer is not a moose.

From Hornady's website (referring to A-max)

•These bullets are not recommended for hunting medium and large game.

Here's the link: http://www.hornady.com/bullets

a-sheepdog
March 29, 2011, 10:53 AM
I would limit my shots to around 350-400 yards because that is all that I am comfortable shooting. Any further than that and i don't feel confident that I can make a clean shot. That is my effective range, yours may be further or less, only you can judge that. I feel confident that a 300 win mag is still effective at those ranges without much of a problem with some good bonded bullets.

H&Hhunter
March 29, 2011, 12:49 PM
BTW my .358 Norma will do anything your .330 Dakota will do

jim,

Yep the old Norma is a SWEET round I am going to have to have one someday!! But the .330 Dak does one thing your .358 can't. It has to use .330 brass from Dakota at like $40.00 per 20 rounds of BRASS!! And there is nothing that you can easily neck up or down to make it cheaper.

So there, my .330 Dak is WAY more expensive to play with than your .358 Norma!!

What do you and your stinking Norma have to say about that!?!:D;)

jim in Anchorage
March 29, 2011, 01:18 PM
H&H-Pffff. You need to do better than that. .358 $42 per 20 empty brass-when you can get it. But yeah I can make it out of most anything with a belt on it.

Built it on a 1936 Win 70. How are those Dakota wanabe M70 actions working for ya?

H&Hhunter
March 29, 2011, 06:19 PM
Mine is M-97 so it's really a wana be!

jim in Anchorage
March 29, 2011, 11:21 PM
M-97? I give up you got me. The "economical" version of the Dakota that sells for $3500 used?

I ♥ my .358 even more:p

H&Hhunter
March 30, 2011, 02:14 AM
M-97? I give up you got me. The "economical" version of the Dakota that sells for $3500 used?

Those are them, only they didn't used to sell for anywhere near that. I've got two of them and paid $1100 for one and under a grand for the other. I have no idea why they have sky rocketed in price in the last couple of years. They are a really well done rifle but I don't get the money they are commanding other than people are bug nut crazy because they say Dakota on them. There was a period about 6 years ago when they couldn't give the M-97's away. All of a sudden they've gone crazy. I'll tell you exactly what they are though, they are simply a re branded Beretta Mateo Mauser action.

The M-76 Dakota is based on the M-70. The M-97 is a round body action like a M-700 only with CRF a M-70 style trigger and a M-70 style safety. AKA Beretta Mateo.

jim in Anchorage
March 30, 2011, 03:13 AM
I've got two of them and paid $1100 for one and under a grand for the other.

That seems like a lot of value at that price. At $3500, no.

I was unaware Dakota ever made a lower cost bolt then the 76. The lineage is confusing, apparently the early Berettas where marked Dakota. Well like you say its in the name.

H&Hhunter
March 30, 2011, 12:12 PM
Jim,

Yeah the M-97 is the M-76 is basically what the Vanguard is to the Mark V Weatherby.

They made several versions of the M-97, The light Weight Hunter and The Long Range Hunter and one stainless version that was called something like the All weather hunter. I've got a light weight in a .300 WM that is a really sweet little .300 with a 24" tube it's smooth as glass and weighs in at just under 7lbs. A really nice little sheep gun.

The other one that I have is a .330 Dak built on the long range hunter. Both of them shoot lights out and are smooth as silk. I got the .330 cheap because it had some weekend gunsmithing done to it, to "make it better" any way after I reblued, rebedded recrowned and rethreaded all the action screws it was back into top shape.

I really don't have much interest in the .330 but this thing was such a steal that I couldn't pass it up. I just love it when some goof ball takes a hack saw and a Dremel tool to an expensive rifle. I've picked up a couple of top dollar rifles that have been severely devalued by backyard gunsmithing. They are usually pretty easy to fix.

jim in Anchorage
March 31, 2011, 01:44 AM
H&H-

it had some weekend gunsmithing done to it, to "make it better" any way after I reblued, rebedded recrowned and rethreaded all the action screws it was back into top shape.



Wow thats some weekend gunsmithing alright. As the cops say in the paper after a car wreak "alcohol may have been a contributing factor"
Similar story with the pre war M-70 I built the .358 on. Someone had "refinished" the stock, sanding all the checkering off in the process, and the barrel[30-06] was from a 1960 M70, Hence Zip collector value and I got it cheap.

Interesting enough, that 1960 barrel is 9 years newer then any pre-64 I own and the chamber is cut nowhere near as well as my early 50's-pre war guns. I think Winchester was going downhill well before the magic 1964 date. And to top it off it's a super grade barrel

Yeah your under 7 lb .300 WM with a full length 24" tube would be a keeper. I know I could use it.
Jim

langenc
April 4, 2011, 08:37 PM
""Moose are one of the easiest big game animals to get close to. Why is this even a question. Drop the 9 from 950 and you have the range your shot should be from."" quoted from first page


This is the first time I have seen the figure that high-950 yrads. Usually it is more in the 350-400 yard quote.

I suspect most of those 350 yard shots are probably more like 135 in actual practice.

How many places can one even see a moose at 950 yards?

grubbylabs
April 4, 2011, 10:50 PM
For those of you hunting with that 300, are you having any luck with a 165 grain bullet? Or do I really need to be looking at the 180?

Oh and by the way here in Idaho you can easily find areas that could offer well over a mile for the shooter willing to take that kind of gamble on an animal.

Even though I really want to take a moose with my 54 cal I think they are the perfect archery animal, you only have to stay down wind of them to get incredibly close.

jbkebert
April 4, 2011, 10:56 PM
I have had fairly good luck with 165 grain SST loaded on the slower end of the .300 win mag spectrum. Mid range velocites and quicker the 180 grain accubond has been a great preformer in my rifles. Both of my .300's have 28" barrels and a 1:10 twist. The Hornady Interbond has also preformed very very well at the mid velocity range to high velocity loads.

grubbylabs
April 4, 2011, 11:04 PM
I have a win Model 70 and I am not sure what the barrel length is or what the twist rate is. I don't see my self shooting beyond 300 yards.

jbkebert
April 4, 2011, 11:09 PM
I target shoot beyond 300 but have never found a need to shoot game beyond 200 yards. In my two rifles the 180's just seem to fly better at higher speeds than the 165's. It has nothing to do with trying to push for longer shots.

grubbylabs
April 4, 2011, 11:21 PM
Well I have a lot of load development to do this summer. I decided to switch over to Hornady bullets and Varget for my 308, so will save a few of those 165's for the 300 and see what they can do. Do you mind sharing what loads you use. I usually work up to a suggested load in 1/2 grain increments till I get within a 1/2 and then I go to .2 grain increments.

jbkebert
April 4, 2011, 11:38 PM
Hornady match brass
WLRM primer
165 grain Hornady SST
68.5 grains RL-22
seated to cannelure nothing fancy

Through my Sendero they run average of 2874, and through the Encore they are just a touch slower 2865 average. typical 5 shot group of 1 3/16" with best group fired being .965" worst group at a touch over 2" with a hot dirty barrel. More than accurate enough for hunting.

grubbylabs
April 5, 2011, 12:05 AM
Yup thanks for your input. I think I am going to try the IMR 7828 first but If I don't get what I want or like I am going to go for the Rel 22. The Rel 22 and the 7828 are probably the two most recommended powders.

jbkebert
April 5, 2011, 12:07 AM
RL-22 also works great in my .270 win

ghostwriter
April 6, 2011, 03:50 AM
I'm amazed over the past decades how hunters shot anything bigger than a coyote without these new technology bullets. Amazing... Incredible... one bullet for paper, one for tall game, one for short game, one for hairy animals, one for short haired buggers... what's a reloader to do?

x_wrench
April 9, 2011, 12:25 PM
why is ANYONE talking about a 950 yard shot at a moose? have you seen where a moose LIVES?! most of the time, unless you are on one shore of a lake, and the moose os on the opposite end, you will end up with a 20-80 yard shot. 950 yard shot is rediculous at best, and irresponsible at worst. the last thing i am going to want to do is try to get a moose out of the water. when i shoot, i want it to go down, NOW! having to track a wounded moose is going to be between a very dificult, to a very dangerous job. if it is still capable when you find it, you are going to be in serious trouble. do the aminmal right, and yourself a favor. be a responsible, respectable hunter and get a good, quick, clean, ethical, one shot kill. the 300 win mag is plenty capable of it, but not at 950 yards!

jbkebert
April 9, 2011, 05:00 PM
To many video games is why people think they need to shoot 950 yards on anything. I hear the same thing in NE Kansas and NW Missouri if you can't get within at least 100 yards of a whitetail around here your just lazy.

gofastman
April 9, 2011, 11:46 PM
moose at 950yds?

sounds like a good excuse to pick up a .416 Barrett :evil:

grubbylabs
April 10, 2011, 11:29 AM
Well x wrench have you seen where moose live around here? I am not saying I would but you could easily have a shot at a moose as long as you wanted to take out here. You are just as likely to see a moose cruising a ridge line as you are an elk in some areas, so a 1,000 yard plus shot for the right shooter and equipment is a real possibility.

H&Hhunter
April 10, 2011, 04:32 PM
Guys real simple here a 1,000 yard shot is never necessary on a game animal. I know guy are doing it just because, but it's a stupid human trick and not a for real need when hunting.

Ankeny
April 14, 2011, 12:47 PM
How many places can one even see a moose at 950 yards? All over in the high sage brush moose areas in western Wyoming. I shoot a lot of long range rifle but 950 yards is just too far for me to chance a shot at a big game animal. I can understand why an accomplished long range shooter would consider such a shot under ideal conditions in the quest of an ego gratifying personal best...but I use prairie dogs when looking for bragging rights. Folks who think they can gear up and make one shot ethical kills at 800-1000 yards a norm under real field conditions need to get out more.

ghostwriter
April 15, 2011, 07:03 PM
@shaggy430
OK, I can't hold my tongue any longer and guess I might as well throw this out there for you. As I gather from your very antimant post, you feel the Sierra MatchKing bullet is NOT for hunting big game, ESPECIALLY a moose.

Well, I have to tell you... I wasted a perfectly good 200 gr SMK bullet to show you and the others on this board that this bullet (200 gr SMK) has the EXACT cutaway as the bullets used in the very high priced FUSION ammo expressely made apparently for big game, at least that's what it says in the ad for them. They say in the ad that the superior shape of the boatail is preferred basically to provide better and flatter trajectory... imagine that, a target bullet performance for placing the bullet where it belongs and with enough energy to do the job. I really don't see any difference in the two bullets except the sierra has a better 'shape' with the same case and core construction. No difference.

Of course if you believe a bullet with a lead core and a copper jacket can be "pre-programmed" then this is of little value to you. If you believe everything you hear or read, then you are a perfect example of a retail marketing target. They will market an old product with fancy new magic print that makes everyone who just reads and accepts it as the truth just to continue their sales figures in the upward direction.

It should also be noted that Cabella's doesn't sell a 200 gr. FUSION cartridge for the 300 win mag but they do sell a 180 gr. one. Just for kicks I ran the ballastics on both (assuming both were sierra matchking's at 2900'/sec muzzle velocity) and you'd be interested to know that at 500 yards, MY 200 gr SMK has about 2127'/sec velocity and 2008 ft lbs of energy... and the 180 gr only has 2025'/sec and 1640 ft lbs of energy.
Considerably less.
SO, using a little logic here, I gather that the FUSION cartridge is less of a BIG GAME cartridge than my handloaded one. If you go out another 100 yards further to 600 as I previously drew my own personal limit at, the 200 gr has 1987'/sec and 1753 ft lbs vs. the 180 gr at 1872'/sec and 1400 ft lbs of energy.
Now I ask, in a very nice way... Which one would you prefer to shoot the moose with at 600 yards... the FUSION Big Game cartridge OR my handloaded 200 gr SMK target (?) round? Here's a little picture to help make that decision for you.

Ankeny
April 16, 2011, 02:42 PM
I hate to get into a lot of thread drift, but I did have a pretty good conversation with one of the bullet technicians at Sierra about the SMK for hunting. According to him, Sierra simply does not recommend the SMK for hunting because it was designed for paper punching and they haven't tested it for hunting. From a construction point of view, the jacket is thinner and softer than their hunting bullets and the the core is also softer. The concern would not so much be bullet failure at long yardage as it would be bullet failure at close yardage with high velocity. FWIW, folks use Berger bullets for hunting and they have thinnner/softer jackets, and as soft or softer cores than the SMK.

dprice3844444
April 16, 2011, 03:12 PM
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/.300_Winchester_Magnum
http://www.longrangehunting.com/forums/f17/300-win-mag-effective-range-67/

dprice3844444
April 16, 2011, 03:16 PM
http://www.dtic.mil/ndia/2009infantrysmallarms/tuesdaysessioniii8524.pdf

ghostwriter
April 16, 2011, 04:46 PM
HOLY CRAP! That's what I'm talkin' about. Excellent report there dprice3844444. Where do you guys come up with all this cool stuff? This is exactly what I'm referring to. Did you see the objective for the 300 win mag...(?) reach out to 1500 yards accurately. Nice info. I belong to Lens board as well and did read up on that stuff your link pointed to. Very interesting group but they mostly are extreme long range hunters like me and have personal experience at those yardages and have seen for themselves the performance of various loads and projectiles. That accounts for a more valid opinion on the longer distances and higher confidence of success I think.

As far as the bullet performance at close range... I'm thinking the closer the target is, the better your ability to place the shot perfectly. In other words more generic... If you try good shot placement at 600 yards (where apparently the bullet performs better) the circle of probability hits is much larger than at 100 yards or 200 yards.

I haven't cross cut a Berger yet but your observation about them being thinner and less dense lead alloy (?) internally is interesting, and lends ev en more validity to my choice of the SMK 200 gr bullet. It seems to be in the middle between the FUSION bullet assembly and the Bergers.
I have some 168 gr VLD's coming to test in my 300 win mag so it'll be intersting to see what happens. I should probably take some gelatin out see how they expand, or don't expand. Should be very eye- opening.

dprice3844444
April 16, 2011, 05:17 PM
i just googled the same question you asked

ghostwriter
April 16, 2011, 05:22 PM
NICE! Great minds think alike. LOL

dprice3844444
April 16, 2011, 05:23 PM
now,your shots at that yardage are also going to be determined by what type of hunting rifle you are using.standard hunting rifle off the rack,i'd shoot it first and work up to that yardage to see if it will handle that yardage to see what gives.at the yardage you are looking at,your looking at a match grade sniper rifle type,which is going to be way heavier.remington makes a nice bolt action sniper rifle in 308/300win/338 lapua,that might work better.my 300 win knight kp1 single shot,400-500 might be stretching it,but untill i can get it to a range,i'll never know.

H&Hhunter
April 16, 2011, 05:55 PM
Hunt with SMK's if you wish..But do so at great risk of loosing and seriously wounding an animal.

Especially on thicker skinned bigger boned animals like a moose.

Quoted from Sierra.

Question:

Can I use a MatchKing bullet for deer hunting? They shoot just great in my rifle, so they should be just super for hunting use, right?

Answer:

No, it's not recommended. The MatchKing bullets are designed for pinpoint accuracy; with no consideration given to what might happen after impact. If the bullet has arrived on target accurately, its job is done at that point. Hunting bullets must perform in a certain manner after impact. Penetrating ability, expansion characteristics, and even profile must be considered when designing a hunting bullet. Use MatchKings for matches, and game bullets for hunting.


ghostwriter,

The fusion bullet is a bonded core bullet the SMK is not. Do you understand the difference between the two?

ghostwriter
April 16, 2011, 11:11 PM
I have to take issue with your scarey comment,

"...Hunt with SMK's if you wish..But do so at great risk of loosing and seriously wounding an animal.

Especially on thicker skinned bigger boned animals like a moose."

since many of those size animals have been taken over the past decades, long before these speciality bullets hit the market.

I have located some verbage from Sierra that makes pretty interesting reading, I believe it was written years ago when they had just released their 200 gr SMK bullets and were being inundated with inquiries as tot he uses that were acceptable.

"...Sierra States that "the Hollowpoint Matchking Bullets are FOR HUNTING and will cause Hydraulic shock damage on big game due to the Hollowpoint in the Matchking Boattail bullets they Make. They were requested by and are for hunters who need performance at longer ranges , and They perform more reliably than lead tipped expanding bullets !"
With the Hollow points , the airflow over the nose is less sensitive to Imperfections encountered with the nose of lead soft point bullets , making them more stable in flight, hence More accurate down range.


http://www.chuckhawks.com/hunting_bullet_guide2.htm

Is a very good guide summary showing the various types from various mfg's.
I agree to a point that many of the "modern day" high technology bullets have their niche in the world and you could write a novel on their proper intended use.

I do understand bonded bullets. Some are hot forged (?) where the molten lead is dropped in the copper jacket at 800-900 degress and thus bonds the lead core to the copper jacket. Some are chemically bonded... the bottom line is, there's a copper jacket and a lead core, haulin butt at several thousand feet per second and whatever you tend to argue about, that bullet is going to tear stuff up when it hits.
Where it hits is up to you. If you need every technologically cutting edge advantage available and can afford to fill your reloading shed with every bullet made to reload into every specific need you might have, congrats on your position. I, on the otherhand, use a tried and true bullet, it's performance is very familiar to me and in my hands, I'd consider myself a surgeon in the right situation where others would tend to watch thru the glass and let their trophy pass for lack of confidence and predicability at making the shot with the rifle of their choice in their skilled hands.

Here's a nice bit of reading comparing some 165-168 gr sierra mk's to others of similiar design, and it's very interesting the results they got. All are acceptable in my book. Just one more bit of proof that bullet placement determines YOUR longest distance to take game at.
http://arealmansreviews.blogspot.com/2010/09/fnar-review-fifth-range-test-100-yards.html

I simply posted the Cabella's ad showing a cross section of the bullet they describe as being the one for that big trophy takedown, next to the SMK target bullet I reload which is very prdictable (to me) out to the max ranges I shoot.

I can hardly wait for the next generation bullets to come out, you know, the ones' with micro-chip computers in them that guide the bullet to it's target.:rolleyes:

H&Hhunter
April 17, 2011, 03:09 AM
ghostwriter,

Congratulations on your surgeon like ability with a rifle.

Here is the link from the manufacturer that specifically warns against using SMK's for hunting. SMK's have never been and will never be intended for hunting use and that has NOTHING to do with newer technology bullets nor did I recommend new technology bullets in my post. I simply applied Occams razor to point out that it doesn't matter how the cross section of the bullet compares they are fundamentally different due to the bonding process which keeps the bullet from explosively separating from it's jacket allowing more predictable terminal performance and better predicts penetration.

I use standard cup and core bullets all the time. That has nothing to do with SMK's they are not a hunting bullet.

You can argue and post links all you want but when the manufacturer strongly recommends against using the bullet for hunting that's good enough for me. And with the accuracy I get from many hunting bullets I have no reason to use an SMK for hunting. Game Kings work just fine at reasonable velocity.

The link

http://www.sierrabullets.com/index.cfm?section=techservice&page=faq

ghostwriter
April 17, 2011, 03:34 AM
thank you.

In regards to the OP.
I think trying for a moose beyond 500-600 yards is ill-advised.

Sunray
April 17, 2011, 04:50 AM
"...moose beyond 500-600 yards is ill-advised..." Even that is pushing it if you can't hit a 9" pie plate at those distances. A 950 yard hunting shot is rediculous. A 190 grain bullet doesn't have enough energy at that distance and when sighted in at 200 it drops 39.8" at 500, never mind 950.
"...Hydraulic shock..." What? There's no such thing as 'hydraulic shock'.
"...reach out to 1500 yards accurately..." That has nothing whatever to do with hunting.
"...Sierra States that..." Rubbish. "ballistic performance match shooters need to fire at long ranges under adverse conditions."

shaggy430
April 17, 2011, 09:59 AM
Ghostwriter, I've done nothing more than provide you with what Sierra and Hornady state about their own bullets. I can see it has been eating you up inside as you have gone through all of this trouble. I apologize for providing you with the information from their websites. Please take shots at extreme distances at large animals with thin jacketed bullets all you wish.

On a separate note, I am planning on taking my pickup to the moon. Will you please cut it in half to determine if it is suitable to make the trip?

Art Eatman
April 17, 2011, 11:15 AM
The Good Lord did not intend that meese be shot at 950 yards.

If you enjoyed reading about "300 win mag effective range on moose" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!