Best large bore for suppressed bolt action?

[1stmarine]

I don't think there is anyone against any specific weight just a general concern. I can see someone going heavier for extremely dense brush hunting like some areas in the world. 300 grainers do already well but
a 500gr 45/70 is going to show less deflection when hitting the thickest brush. Now is that enough concern for a decision to simply go bigger? for most possibly not, or perhaps it could be a compounding set of needs.
Have you seen those black magic slugs for very dangerous game and close encounters? I think that is another good reason for grain + hardness but like craig said, even a softer slug sent to meet a white tail is not
going to make a difference. I have taken the deer with the Beowulf and I see the broad wounds but I don't think it is more effective than lets say the 35 gunner specially when I can put more energy and shoot a lot
flatter with the 35 so, less becomes more in the end taking all things into account.

 

[hq]

Yes, we've been here before. My eyes glazed over with your 1000gr 12ga slug for deer nonsense.

It's admittedly a bit difficult to forget all your glazings from that eventful pair of monologues, or the fact of only one of us having actually downed game with subsonic loads in practise and having first hand experience on the subject to back up his argumentation. What's the tally now, have you made any effort at all improving from your nil/zilch/zero to catch up with my hundreds of subsonic kills? Seven more down here since last year. How about backing your theoretical claims with something - anything - concrete first-hand facts from the real world? I'm sorry to say this and absolutely no offense intended, but nothing seems to have changed since last time and every time you write on the subject it sounds like Mother Theresa is attempting to write a hardcore XXX-guidebook.

 

[CraigC]

Been hunting with handguns for 30yrs, genius.

 

[hq]

Been hunting with handguns for 30yrs, genius.

And still haven't bothered to learn the basics of terminal ballistics, which apparently still limits your argumentation to simple "nonsense"-"genius" -vocabulary and blatant denial of presented, undeniable and relevant facts. Quite an achievement. I kind of wish I had known that sheer denial of scientific facts and just presenting oneself as an expert was an option when I started writing my first scholarly article about in-flight and terminal ballistics in mid-1980's, I could've spent all my time imagining things, spitting on the ceiling, calling myself a "handgun hunter" (hence the ultimate authority on ballistics without resorting to unnecessary details like facts... ) and using blanket denial as "arguments" too, instead of spending all this time actually studying the subject.

This thread is quickly becoming a dead ringer of the earlier ones and everything (and nothing, by some participants) has already been said and done.

Now, back to the subject at hand, if you please.

 

[CraigC]

It's actually quite the opposite of all that but believe whatever you want. Study the subject? You make some wild assumptions and accusations, bordering on personal insults, in an effort to discredit something you clearly do not understand. I'm about to commence to building 30 feet of new bookshelves to accommodate my library, 99% of which relate to the shooting sports. I can think of a few you need to study yourself. One of the guys you argued with in the other thread has written three that you might benefit from but you'll have to open your mind first and dispense with some of your misconceptions. You are stuck on outdated nonsense like kinetic energy and believe in mythical concepts like "energy transfer". I always automatically assume that anyone who refers to the laws of physics has very little real understanding of terminal ballistics. If high school physics lessons could be used to explain away terminal ballistics, we wouldn't be having this argument. As I said, you're relying on concepts that do not apply. With subsonic big bore rifles, just as with handguns, there is no hydrostatic/hydrodynamic shock. You don't get the same effect as with high velocity rifle cartridges. All we can do is punch a hole in the right place and wait for the wound to take effect. The fact that you think a bullet that exits is a failure explains a lot. Jesus, Elmer Keith wrote about this 80 friggin' years ago. I don't know how things are done in Finland but the tens of thousands of handgun hunters in the United States who hunt with cast bullets out of handguns every year understand all of this. And yet you denigrate some of the very loads we have used for a century because you obviously want your critters to flop over dead regardless of what you shoot them with. Hence the 1000gr 12ga slug nonsense and the idea that a .44/.45 must expand to be effective. Which is also absurd. Equally absurd is your referring to using a 250gr .44/.45 handgun as "tickling it with a peashooter", along with other denigrating comments like "I honestly can't call a person who intentionally chooses even 50 yards of tracking instead of a considerably more probable DRT by the choice of equipment a hunter. I wouldn't imagine anyone with the slightest sense of ethics enjoying that, much less advertising and belittling it on a public forum".

All this tells me that you're sitting on a very high horse but are not quite as informed as perhaps you should be.

 

[unspellable]

There is a group of wild cats based on a 458 Winchester case shortened various lengths. The 1.5" version was used in a Winchester Model 70 on a trial basis by the military for sniping in thick woods with a suppressor. Later it turned up in the civilian world sans suppressor in a Winchester Model 1894. I think the 94 used a 2" case.

 

[LoonWulf]

There is a group of wild cats based on a 458 Winchester case shortened various lengths. The 1.5" version was used in a Winchester Model 70 on a trial basis by the military for sniping in thick woods with a suppressor. Later it turned up in the civilian world sans suppressor in a Winchester Model 1894. I think the 94 used a 2" case.

I wasnt aware a 94 could take a belted mag case? Granted the .450Marlin is similar, but its on a larger frame lever.

 

[unspellable]

One of this group of shortened 458s was called the 458 American, I seem to remember that one as ending up in the 94. I fist ran into this in a magazine article on the 94 many years ago. These days you can find some info on this in Cartridges of the World. I think which version gets mentioned depends on which edition you have. My 11th edition mentions the 1.5 inch version under military cartridges.

 

[unspellable]

2 inch version is in edition 11 under wild cats.

 

[CraigC]

Actually, at the end of production they did produce a model 94 in .450Marlin, along with .444.

 

[hq]

There seems to be no fix to thick. Considering how unfruitful providing cold hard data to you has been so far I probably shouldn't counter yet another of your rants with facts, but let's conclude this that a properly designed subsonic projectile can create a peak hydrodynamic shock of 1100-1200psi, well over twice the flesh tissue injury threshold in inflicting a substantial secondary wound channel, and the duration of the peak (volume and severity of damage) is dependent on terminal ballistic retention of projectile velocity, as determined by [cue in trumpet fanfare] projectile mass.

But as you implied, all this (and much, much more) doesn't exist in your personal version of reality, because you're a handgun hunter who knows everything by default because he's a handgun hunter, so I'll leave it at that and refer to my opening sentence in this post. Be well.

Yawn.

 

[jmorris]

I don't consider a 450 Marlin as a belted magnum round. It's basically the same round you handload for your 45-70 Marlin except it won't chamber in a 45-70.

 

[Float Pilot]

Rebarrel to .458 American

A M-98 action or even a shorter Yugo M-48 works great for the 458 American ALSO KNOWN AS The 458 x 2 inch American. It loads just like a 45-70 for a wide range of power and loads smoothly from a bolt action.

 

[LoonWulf]

I don't consider a 450 Marlin as a belted magnum round. It's basically the same round you handload for your 45-70 Marlin except it won't chamber in a 45-70.

Agreed, dimensionally tho its similar to the .458x2

I didnt think the 94 was large enough to take the cartridge, but im not a levergun guy....yet.

 

[CraigC]

There seems to be no fix to thick. Considering how unfruitful providing cold hard data to you has been so far I probably shouldn't counter yet another of your rants with facts, but let's conclude this that a properly designed subsonic projectile can create a peak hydrodynamic shock of 1100-1200psi, well over twice the flesh tissue injury threshold in inflicting a substantial secondary wound channel, and the duration of the peak (volume and severity of damage) is dependent on terminal ballistic retention of projectile velocity, as determined by [cue in trumpet fanfare] projectile mass.

But as you implied, all this (and much, much more) doesn't exist in your personal version of reality, because you're a handgun hunter who knows everything by default because he's a handgun hunter, so I'll leave it at that and refer to my opening sentence in this post. Be well.

Yawn.

You think this is the first time I've had this discussion? Nothing new here. You make the same mistake that many other rifle hunters do. You're accustomed to a bang-flop and try to get it out of something that is incapable. That's the reason for your 1000gr 12ga load and is the crux of the issue. WE, the collective of American handgun hunters, have been dealing with these misconceptions for decades and obviously still do. Big bore handgun cartridges, like big bore subsonic rifle cartridges, don't kill like high velocity cartridges do. That's a FACT. Some folks try to make handguns into rifles with light bullets at extreme velocity but it never quite gets there because you need over 2000fps to start seeing that effect. The FACT that you seem to be completely resistant to, is that a medium to heavy weight big bore handgun bullet kills game with extreme regularity and doesn't need to expand to do so. It just doesn't do it as quickly as a rifle and lies in the middle ground between rifle bullets and arrows. An arrow damages tissue with its cutting blades, a handgun bullet does it with crushing flat nose, diameter and mass. NOT with hydrodynamic shock. Neither produces bang-flops.

What I'd like to know is the reason behind your aversion to a 50yd blood trail, to the point of questioning the ethics and integrity of those who find it acceptable.

I also suggest that we keep our rhetoric on the subject and refrain from making personal comments such as yours above.

 

[NickEllis]

I also suggest that we keep our rhetoric on the subject and refrain from making personal comments such as yours above.

A charge equally applicable to the both of you. Cool it.

 

[hq]

You think this is the first time I've had this discussion?[bullsnip]

But of course not, and like a broken record you seem to have learned absolutely nothing, haven't bothered (or most likely been capable of) to study the physics involved or, Heaven forbid, doing anything about obtaining first-hand experience on the subject. All we hear is the same old clichés, many of which being harsh generalizations originally intended to illustrate some aspects of a far more complicated issue to the likes of yourself who don't have a snowball's chance in hXll to comprehend the science behind them. Like advice of paying less attention to (ever-present, no exceptions) hydrodynamic shock in some cases, which you - to our great amusement - have interpreted that that the whole factual unavoidable phenomenon doesn't somehow exist below an arbitrary velocity threshold. And now you have nominated yourself the spokesperson of the whole handgun hunter community? Jesus Christ, now you're beginning to sound like an MD thesis project.

I sent a few snippets of your most legendary writings like the nonexistent hydrodynamic shock to a couple of my US-based hunting slug suppliers, who promptly proceeded to laugh their proverbial behinds off. FYI a number of my handloads I've brought up, including most 750-1000gr 12ga slugs, are made of commonly available, factory produced reloading components specifically intended for hunting. While you're at it, you might want give JC at Dixie Slugs a call and tell him that their quite fantastic 870gr DGS and all heavy paradox loads including bullets and cartridges are "nonsense" because you speak for every handgun hunter on the planet and know everything about ballistics. You're quickly becoming a real celebrity, you know.

 

[Sam1911]

Well, this devolved sadly into a case of proving one's opinions via insult. And that simply won't fly here at THR.

If you can't say what you need to say, and prove your point without ridiculing the other person, WE DON'T WANT TO HEAR FROM YOU. At all. Ever.

 

[H&Hhunter]

Thanks Sam I was just going to say the same....

In any case I am not much of a suppressed guy but I have played with several really cool hunting rifles that were surpressed and extremely quiet. One was a CZ 527 that had been converted to .300 Whisper. The can was a sure fire of some kind and that rifle was basically silent with a 200 gr hunting bullet. Sierra soft point I think. The other was a .308 with a fast twist barrel that used 240 gr bullets. Also very quiet and it will punch through both shoulders of a big hog at over 100 yards.