Inconsistency and Hypocrisy in What Is Enough Gun for Large Animals

[Sabre]

I'm curious what makes people very against moderate sized calibers for hunting large animals, but the same people are ok with using a bow on those same animals?
I'm speaking of any large animal, but it does seem extra odd in the case of animals like buffalo. A lot of people have voiced that even the .375 is underpowered. Some even argue that it is unethical to the animal and puts people at horrible unnecessary risk. But, then someone says they got a nice buffalo with their bow and everyone cheers it on.

Outfitters will often have the client shoot many extra times on a large animal with a decent sized rifle to make sure there is no extra risk of danger, and also so it does run further away and cause more work. But, often shot with a bow, they give time, and do their best not to follow up with a rifle. Sometimes following up with an extra arrow or two.

A .223 or 5.56 round creates temporary cavitation which destroys organs, blood vessels, etc in its wake to 4.5-6 inches. That's wider than a Broadhead, and would do it with massively more energy than a bow. But, obviously if someone shot a very large animal, especially buffalo with that round or wanted to, they would be chastised and mocked. But with a bow, they are exalted. Even if they said they would stick to bow ranges.

Additionally, many people have said they don't think a bolt action is a good idea on dangerous game because of time to reload, and that a double is much better because you can have a second shot almost immediately. But the general hunting population seems to really like and enjoy when people take their single, like a Ruger #1 with them for large animals, even DG.

To me, all these things seem at odds with themselves. I'm interested in hearing a discussion of why you are ok with bow hunting large or DG, but not a .375 (or even smaller, if it were legal, say a 30-06). Or why you are not ok with a CRF bolt action, but are ok with a Ruger #1 single shot, or similar.

Or any other similar conversation about logical contradictions when it comes to hunting.

 

[mark-hunter]

I am in "bigger the better group", I do not hunt with bow, or with pistol, or with crossbow.

I believe following:
Unless you hit vitals, and the animal is wounded, then it will expire due to bleeding.
Bigger hole, bleeds better. That is undisputable fact.

Also, I hate tracking on spoor. So, I prefer the animal down as soon as possible, and if there is a need for blood spoor to track, then bigger hole again, bleeds better.
This applies for plains game in my book, and hunt on northern hemisphere.

DG is different and exemption for me is 375 which I use.
I think 416 is better.
But for 416 I have problem sourcing ammunition, and have no use of this caliber on old continent.
So, 375 as legal minimum on DG, which is usable on plains game, and large animals on old continent, and local availability of ammunition made me compromise to down gunning myself.

Plus finances:
relatively small number of dangerous game that I will hunt.
I can not shoot 100 buffalos in next 10 years, for financial reasons.
So, for a few of DG, I already had hunted, and will yet take eventually in the future, 375 is my compromise.
If I would be planning to realistically hunt 100 buffalos, and should I had the finances for that, I would go for 416. Then it would be justified.

Following my 375 compromise, and for hunting DG before the hunt I always give a green light to my PH for back up shot, if he finds it necessary. He should have bigger gun than me, to back me up.
So far on two DG I collected this was not needed, but I felt it was necessary precaution, to have my mind at peace.

 

[Altitude sickness]

“A .223 or 5.56 round creates temporary cavitation which destroys organs, blood vessels, etc in its wake to 4.5-6 inches. That's wider than a Broadhead, and would do it with massively more energy than a bow”

au contraire mon frère . Measure the slugs of momentum of a .223 bullet at the muzzle and then measure the slugs of a 1000 grain arrow moving 300 fps. It’s not even in the same galaxy of numbers.


Broadheads and bullets kill differently. From an adequate bow setup, Broadheads penetrate much deeper and would leave at least a 1” hole. A .223 would barely get through the hide.

The discussions on rifle action and size of caliber at .375 and above are interesting and have value. BUT ! No matter the caliber or action design. It’s the bullet that does the work.

A properly designed bullet from a .375 is all you need. A poor bullet design from a .505 Gibbs is no bueno.

It’s the bullet

 

[BeeMaa]

This feels like bait and I'm not taking it.

Use what your guide or PH recommends (or similar) and have fun doing so. If you don't have a guide or PH, there are many esteemed members of AH you can seek for council or do the research from the countless threads therein.

Cheers and happy hunting.

 

[Odinsraven]

For sanity and safety's sake - the largest calibre you can shoot comfortably - I have culled Giraffe with everything from a 303 Brit with FMJ (high neck shot) to 458 win mag with chest shot both worked perfectly - However I would not attempt a chest shot with a 303 Brit - would it work yes probably - but not going to waste half a day tracking down a wounded Giraffe to prove my point. I have hunted with Bow and crossbow - they kill completely differently ...Indeed a roe deer I had a pass thru and it went back to eating until the shaking of the head and it dropped. I am in two minds about bow hunting DG - As to be fair it is certainly at the limit of what a bow can do - I personally would not do it - yet I cant find it in my heart to question those who do.

Doctari culled 500 plus Buff with 9.3x62 and was happy with the results. But that is a professional and we are mere amateurs!

 

[farmer_john]

I'm curious what makes people very against moderate sized calibers for hunting large animals, but the same people are ok with using a bow on those same animals?
I'm speaking of any large animal, but it does seem extra odd in the case of animals like buffalo. A lot of people have voiced that even the .375 is underpowered. Some even argue that it is unethical to the animal and puts people at horrible unnecessary risk. But, then someone says they got a nice buffalo with their bow and everyone cheers it on.

Outfitters will often have the client shoot many extra times on a large animal with a decent sized rifle to make sure there is no extra risk of danger, and also so it does run further away and cause more work. But, often shot with a bow, they give time, and do their best not to follow up with a rifle. Sometimes following up with an extra arrow or two.

A .223 or 5.56 round creates temporary cavitation which destroys organs, blood vessels, etc in its wake to 4.5-6 inches. That's wider than a Broadhead, and would do it with massively more energy than a bow. But, obviously if someone shot a very large animal, especially buffalo with that round or wanted to, they would be chastised and mocked. But with a bow, they are exalted. Even if they said they would stick to bow ranges.

Additionally, many people have said they don't think a bolt action is a good idea on dangerous game because of time to reload, and that a double is much better because you can have a second shot almost immediately. But the general hunting population seems to really like and enjoy when people take their single, like a Ruger #1 with them for large animals, even DG.

To me, all these things seem at odds with themselves. I'm interested in hearing a discussion of why you are ok with bow hunting large or DG, but not a .375 (or even smaller, if it were legal, say a 30-06). Or why you are not ok with a CRF bolt action, but are ok with a Ruger #1 single shot, or similar.

Or any other similar conversation about logical contradictions when it comes to hunting.

Im in the camp of its where the hole goes that matters more than how big it is.
Skill trumps caliber any day.
And while I have not gone hunting in africa yet. Id be willing to put money on betting a ph would prefer a client to have a 375 they can shoot like a lazer beam over a 700 nitro they can barely handle the recoil of and developed a bad flinch.

 

[coreydb]

Everyone has their own opinion, some from experience, others like to repeat second hand information or other's mistakes as gospel. I too, have my personal "opinions" based on my own experiences with the guns/calibers I used. A bow kills differently with the point continuing to cut the lungs as it runs. I like to kill my game DRT and not chase them at all. Based on this alone, it's bullet selection and placement that determines what is adequate. I killed wildebeest with a .25-06, .308 and .375H&H, all between 150 and 350 yds. How do you determine what caliber is enough when all do the same job?

 

[Elkeater]

I used to be in the bigger is better camp. Now im in the I use better bullets and an accurate rifle camp. I’d rather see someone use a smaller rifle they can shoot accurately than a larger rifle they just can’t shoot well. I get tired of following up on wounded animals.

 

[DieJager]

I'm in the camp of do what you want do to. If you think it is enough do it. If you have a rifle of any kind , a bow or spear etc. Good luck to you. Follow the law of the land and you are good to go.

 

[Luvthunt]

Give me a big hole the bigger the better in the right place. Heart, lungs, spine and brain. First two you may need to track some the last two the probability of not tracking is good. Never say never.

 

[tomahawker]

People, am I right? We just like to argue. As men our prowess with guns and hunting is always a bit of dick measuring contest. Always has been. Never forget Bell laid em low with a 22 short at 150 yards.

 

[russ473]

“A .223 or 5.56 round creates temporary cavitation which destroys organs, blood vessels, etc in its wake to 4.5-6 inches. That's wider than a Broadhead, and would do it with massively more energy than a bow”

au contraire mon frère . Measure the slugs of momentum of a .223 bullet at the muzzle and then measure the slugs of a 1000 grain arrow moving 300 fps. It’s not even in the same galaxy of numbers.


Broadheads and bullets kill differently. From an adequate bow setup, Broadheads penetrate much deeper and would leave at least a 1” hole. A .223 would barely get through the hide.

The discussions on rifle action and size of caliber at .375 and above are interesting and have value. BUT ! No matter the caliber or action design. It’s the bullet that does the work.

A properly designed bullet from a .375 is all you need. A poor bullet design from a .505 Gibbs is no bueno.

It’s the bullet

Agreed but at the same time a proper bullet still needs proper shot placement, some people are only comfortable shooting upto a .375 and pull shots with any bigger calibre causing wounding

 

[375Fox]

I don’t think you can compare bullets and arrows. They kill differently. I think you could discuss archery hunters vs rifle hunters. I really object to the wounding rate I see from archery hunters. I also object to long range hunting. That comes down to a hunter’s decisions I disagree with more so than the equipment in most cases.

I’m not necessarily against moderate cartridges taking larger game, but I think there is an acceptable range. I see no need to step outside of that. Certain cartridges have proven they have the energy to cleanly and efficiently kill game. Certain bullets have proven penetration and performance on game when paired up with those calibers. I take a pretty strong objection to someone saying a 223 is suitable for all game because of a 77 gr TMK bullet when many hunters don’t have the discipline to wait for a perfect shot or don’t understand why their 55 gr varmit bullet isn’t the same. I take the same objection to those here saying you need a 458+ on buffalo to find out they only use solids or cup and core bullets to form their opinion. I’ll take something in the middle 270-375 with bonded bullets for all game. It’s proven in most hunting situations last 100 years made better with new bullets. I don’t care if you use a bolt, double, or single shot to hunt.

 

[Mark A Ouellette]

I’ve killed a couple good-size white tail bucks with a crossbow. Both ran 100 yards and died. As @Altitude sickness stated, broadheads kill differently than bullets.

Personally, I DO NOT want my PH have to assist me in the kill. Oh, that happens but to try to prevent it I want to place as large and powerful a bullet in the animal’s kill zone as I can accurately shoot.

If someone else desires to shoot with less powerful cartridges, it’s their money. I don’t need to prove anything by shooting a zebra with a .243 or 6.5 Creedmore. Both will kill but I like the concept of Taylor’s Knock Out Blow (Factor). Call it insurance or spare energy for if needed!

 

[bimbo]

Hi guys
This time ,second my opinion ,u aint given a lone wrong answer!Don t forget that hunting field have let us.I think that some times somebody are "undercovered", which for business reason,want to be agree about big bore rifle only and not for a true real reason...!

 

[Vinootz]

To each his own as long as the job gets done properly.

 

[AZDAVE]

With either a rifle or a bow shot placement is first and foremost!!!

Having hunted with rifle , muzzle loaders and bows.

Bows kill by hemorrhage effect,cut a razor sharp hole through the heat and lungs and when the animal runs out of blood it dies.

Rifles and muzzle loader kill by energy dump of the bullet and secondary hemorrhage.

There are several theory's and thousands of pages of hunters to scientists writings you can read through to make your own decision.

As most PH's say bring the largest rifle you shoot well.

Understand the limitations of the rifle and your skills and don't take shots that are outside that combination. I would bet a case of good beer that folks who shoot outside their skills wound more DG and have tough followup than any other cause.

Most people can learn to shoot a 9.3-375 well. As you go up the recoil scale the numbers of people drop off rapidly on what they can handle and shoot well. Only you can decide where your limit is. if it is at the 308-338 level don't hunt big DG animals by bringing a 9.3 or bigger that you are afraid of!!!

 

[ThinusS]

I hunt alone when I hunt myself, no tracker or backup. Obviously, when I PH, I have my client with me, but in this case, he/she is the hunter and I carry an appropriate rifle. I have never bow hunted, however, for a few years I hunted using a .357 magnum revolver with 4" barrel and open sights. I hunted a fallow deer, half a dozen warthog and a springbok. I limited myself to 30-meter shots and that made for very challenging hunting. My closest shot was a warthog boar at 7 paces. The springbok hunt was one of the most challenging hunts of my career as a hunter.

Then one day, a friend who is a very experienced hunter and PH, asked me if that 4" .357 with open sights would be the gun I would pick for following up an animal that I wounded with it? I have not hunted with it since.

Is it ethical or even sensible to start a hunt with a weapon that you would not trust to finish that hunt if something went wrong? I would most certainly not follow a wounded buffalo, or even a warthog, with a bow.

 

[V.Veritas]

I don’t like picking on bow hunters, because they do hunt in close quarters and they are looking for a different experience.

But rephrasing the question this way: what rifle caliber/ bow would you choose for hunting DG if your PH has to back you up with the same caliber/ bow? Would it influence your decision?
Would you still use a 6.5 Creedmore just for kicks or would you reach for the largest bore you can accurately use?

 

[dlmac]

I am a mixed bag and opinion kinda guy. I like big for caliber bullets, but not for everything. I like good bullets and premium bullets if they can be found. I do bow hunt also, but only elk, deer and would like to try black bear. I an all cases keep the range appropriate for the weapon and shot placement with and weapon is key or maybe that should read KING. OK, that is my convoluted opinion.