First Safari - I’ll hunt plains game - What caliber?

[WildWill]

I've already said on this thread my preferred bullet is a 180gr Partition or accubond in a 30-06 or preferably 300 win mag. But sense this has become a referendum on the 243. thought I'd share my experience. Bought one a few years ago in anticipation of my son beginning hunting. It has been quite lethal on pronghorn, deer, and javelina so far with 100gr Partitions. Wouldn't be my first choice for a safari but would have zero concerns killing impala sized or smaller game with one either.

 

[BlueFlyer]

For this trip, I would like to buy a nice bolt action rifle such as the Anchutz 1782 D, which comes in 6.5 Creedmoor, .308, and 30-06. What is the lowest recoiling caliber of this bunch that you would find suitable for the trip?

Dessert Eagle - after all this hooha have you got any closer to choosing a calibre?

 

[Bob Nelson 35Whelen]

Already lots on this thread disagreeing with you my man. The idea that “most if not all” PH would recommend larger calibers is antiquated and wrong

@Daisy
Sorry to disagree with you on a couple of things.
Most people shoot smaller calibre better than a bigger calibre.
Any shooter who has spent enough time behind the but if a rifle should be able to shoot said rifle accurately and proficiently regardless of calibre.

A PH would NOT RECOMMEND a calibre that he deems inadequate for the game hunted. They are there to make sure the client gets within range, has a good shot and an appropriate calibre and projectiles, especially on a DG hunt. A PH would prefer a client to use a gun they can shoot well than one they can't handle. They also recommend a minimum calibre with good projectiles usually .270 and above. Preferably 7 mm and bigger
They have a minimum calibre and energy requirements for a reason. You can't stung game to death with an inadequate calibre.
Just my observations.
Feel free to disagree but close on 60 years of shooting tells me a thing or three.
Bob

 

[Bob Nelson 35Whelen]

Most people do that on deer at home. Many more people shoot 6.5, 6, 223, 243 on deer now than the larger calibers.

The larger calibers are pretty much relegated to a few folks here.

All that said. I like large calibers too. They are fun to shoot. But in 6’5 230.

The smaller calibers do as well, or better, in the vast majority of cases.

@Daisy
When you hit an animal with a smaller calibre it may die quickly.
When you hit the same animal with a bigger calibre it imparts more shock to the system and tends to kill quicker.
You need to read Nathan Foster's actual studies of various calibres in game. It will enlighten you.
Ballistic studies by Nathan Foster. Many here have read it.
Bob

 

[double rifle newbie]

usa as big and heavy a caliber as u can shoot effectively and accurately so u are spending more time hunting and not tracking.

 

[Daisy]

@Daisy
When you hit an animal with a smaller calibre it may die quickly.
When you hit the same animal with a bigger calibre it imparts more shock to the system and tends to kill quicker.
You need to read Nathan Foster's actual studies of various calibres in game. It will enlighten you.
Ballistic studies by Nathan Foster. Many here have read it.
Bob

I’ve read every major ballistics book and paper. I love the stuff.

Energy doesn’t kill an animal IMO. Tissue damage kills an animal. Modern bullets cause more tissue damage than older ones.

Only time energy matters at all is withe dangerous game.

If a bullet passes through then most of the energy is given to the dirt or tree or whatever on the other side.

Give me a smaller caliber faster fragmenting bullet any day of the week.

Go read the “223 for deer, bear, elk” thread on another site. Just google what I have in parentheses and read 100’s of examples.

Individual experience is tricky. You could have been doing the wrong thing your whole life, not know it, but think it’s the right thing. You have to look at data from multiple sources to actually get the full picture.

 

[Daisy]

Killing the Energy-Killing Myth — Ron Spomer Outdoors

I read a recent “Best Cartridges To Hunt Elk” blog that advised, and I paraphrase, “Most effective elk cartridges need to be flat-shooting and hit with enough energy to effectively dispatch a big bull.” And that’s a lot of bull. Because energy doesn’t kill.

www.ronspomeroutdoors.com

 

[shootist~]

Energy doesn’t kill an animal IMO. Tissue damage kills an animal. Modern bullets cause more tissue damage than older ones.

And a bigger fatter bullet causes more tissue damage. And has the momentum to penetrate deeper when needed.

 

[375Fox]

I’ve read every major ballistics book and paper. I love the stuff.

Energy doesn’t kill an animal IMO. Tissue damage kills an animal. Modern bullets cause more tissue damage than older ones.

Only time energy matters at all is withe dangerous game.

If a bullet passes through then most of the energy is given to the dirt or tree or whatever on the other side.

Give me a smaller caliber faster fragmenting bullet any day of the week.

Go read the “223 for deer, bear, elk” thread on another site. Just google what I have in parentheses and read 100’s of examples.

Individual experience is tricky. You could have been doing the wrong thing your whole life, not know it, but think it’s the right thing. You have to look at data from multiple sources to actually get the full picture.

Energy alone doesn’t kill. That’s actually a direct quote from the article you posted and I agree with it. I’d also agree to certain modern bullets can cause more tissue damage than older bullets. If a bullet passes through SOME energy leaves with the bullet. That’s simple physics. Energy is difference of 0.5xMassxVelocity squared on entry and exit. Energy transfer is seen in the amount of shock/bloodshot meat outside the wound channel. Larger calibers also mushroom to larger sizes than smaller calibers creating larger wound channels and more energy transfer. In the case of your cutting edge bullets larger calibers break apart into larger petals that should penetrate further than smaller lighter petals from smaller calibers causing more tissue damage. There are a number of lead varmit bullets designed to fragment that achieve minimal penetration are you advocating for those as well on plains game with small calibers? I hope not. Killing an animal ethically on shoulder/heart/lung shot is a combination of bullet performance, energy, penetration, and shot placement. A larger caliber using same type of bullet with the same sectional density will kill more efficiently. That’s a simple fact. If it was a question of using a larger caliber and an improper bullet vs a smaller caliber and a proper bullet I’d go smaller caliber, but no one should be forced to make that choice with current ammo availability.

I’ve read part of your referenced 223 thread on the other forum. It’s an unethical stunt that shows total disrespect to the animals they hunted. Even the bullet manufacturer of their target bullet choice recommends against hunting with that particular bullet. It also goes against your philosophy since it’s extreme heavy for caliber and moderate velocity in 223.

 

[Daisy]

Energy alone doesn’t kill. That’s actually a direct quote from the article you posted and I agree with it. I’d also agree to certain modern bullets can cause more tissue damage than older bullets. If a bullet passes through SOME energy leaves with the bullet. That’s simple physics. Energy is difference of 0.5xMassxVelocity squared on entry and exit. Energy transfer is seen in the amount of shock/bloodshot meat outside the wound channel. Larger calibers also mushroom to larger sizes than smaller calibers creating larger wound channels and more energy transfer. In the case of your cutting edge bullets larger calibers break apart into larger petals that should penetrate further than smaller lighter petals from smaller calibers causing more tissue damage. There are a number of lead varmit bullets designed to fragment that achieve minimal penetration are you advocating for those as well on plains game with small calibers? I hope not. Killing an animal ethically on shoulder/heart/lung shot is a combination of bullet performance, energy, penetration, and shot placement. A larger caliber using same type of bullet with the same sectional density will kill more efficiently. That’s a simple fact. If it was a question of using a larger caliber and an improper bullet vs a smaller caliber and a proper bullet I’d go smaller caliber, but no one should be forced to make that choice with current ammo availability.

I’ve read part of your referenced 223 thread on the other forum. It’s an unethical stunt that shows total disrespect to the animals they hunted. Even the bullet manufacturer of their target bullet choice recommends against hunting with that particular bullet. It also goes against your philosophy since it’s extreme heavy for caliber and moderate velocity in 223.

Your last paragraph is totally untrue

 

[375Fox]

Your last paragraph is totally untrue

Which part? You are welcome to read it on sierra’s website “MatchKing® and Tipped MatchKing® bullets are not recommended for most hunting applications.” If you don’t think 77 gr is heavy in 223 I don’t know what to tell you. I stand by my statement an unethical and irresponsible stunt that shows total disrespect to the animals they hunted.

 

[Doug Hamilton]

I’ve read every major ballistics book and paper. I love the stuff.

Energy doesn’t kill an animal IMO. Tissue damage kills an animal. Modern bullets cause more tissue damage than older ones.

Only time energy matters at all is withe dangerous game.

If a bullet passes through then most of the energy is given to the dirt or tree or whatever on the other side.

Give me a smaller caliber faster fragmenting bullet any day of the week.

Go read the “223 for deer, bear, elk” thread on another site. Just google what I have in parentheses and read 100’s of examples.

Individual experience is tricky. You could have been doing the wrong thing your whole life, not know it, but think it’s the right thing. You have to look at data from multiple sources to actually get the full picture.

And that, class, is why professional hunters always carry a .22-250 or .243 when backing up hunters on dangerous game or while hunting in elephant country.

 

[Ridge Runner]

For the Eastern Cape, use something flat that will stretch out, and know where it hits to 300m at a minimum.

The '06 from your list for sure. And a 300WM or 7mmRM would be even better.

Actually....300m to 400m would be maximum not minimum. My PHs have always asked what my max comfort shooting distance is. Then try to stalk up to animals to my comfort range. But there will be times a 200+, 300+, 400+ shot is all you get.

Please don't shot the messages or send hare mail, and this is a rough paraphrase of the consensus of the PHs at one particular outfitter and echo by other PHs I have covertly asked their opinion on long range shooting/shooters.

The consensus is; hunters from certain US state(s) commonly claim they are consistent at shooting (hunting animals at) over 400, 500, 600, 800, + yards. Yet they can hit an animal at minus 200 yards. [In fact: based on their multiple experience] These hunters miss or wound more animals than they kill at the normal [hunters wanting less than 150 yard max range shots] hunters wanting close range shots.

There is a reason why long range shooters miss short yardage shots. But that is for another thread. And I learned from experience through archery of all means.

 

[WildWill]

I’ve read part of your referenced 223 thread on the other forum. It’s an unethical stunt that shows total disrespect to the animals they hunted.

Well said! Just because you can do something dosen't mean you should.

 

[Daisy]

And that, class, is why professional hunters always carry a .22-250 or .243 when backing up hunters on dangerous game or while hunting in elephant country.

What does hunting elephants have to do with plains game hunting?

Humor usually hides poor arguments

 

[Neophyte]

Just get a .338 Win Mag or a .375, H&H or Ruger, and call it good.

 

[NIGHTHAWK]

Actually....300m to 400m would be maximum not minimum. My PHs have always asked what my max comfort shooting distance is. Then try to stalk up to animals to my comfort range. But there will be times a 200+, 300+, 400+ shot is all you get.

Please don't shot the messages or send hare mail, and this is a rough paraphrase of the consensus of the PHs at one particular outfitter and echo by other PHs I have covertly asked their opinion on long range shooting/shooters.

The consensus is; hunters from certain US state(s) commonly claim they are consistent at shooting (hunting animals at) over 400, 500, 600, 800, + yards. Yet they can hit an animal at minus 200 yards. [In fact: based on their multiple experience] These hunters miss or wound more animals than they kill at the normal [hunters wanting less than 150 yard max range shots] hunters wanting close range shots.

There is a reason why long range shooters miss short yardage shots. But that is for another thread. And I learned from experience through archery of all means.

I shoot distance really accurately. I have the shirts to prove it! But my longest hunting kill shots have never been over 400: 2 were with my .243 - one at 380 yards and one at 369 yards. Otherwise a few 300 RUM on Elk at 325 yards +/- and 330 yards on Black Wildebeest with a 7MM REM MAG. I don’t count Prairie dogs with my .22-250, but that is another little custom rifle that shoots lights out with laser accuracy to well beyond 500 Yards.

300 RUM will go with me to Sonora Mexico for Mule deer in November this year and that will likely be less than a 200 yard shot.


300 RUM:

 

[Andrew62]

I've taken dozens of the animals you have mentioned using my .308. I have used Barnes, Maker buffets and some norma ammo with great success.

 

[Grumpy gumpy]

Actually....300m to 400m would be maximum not minimum. My PHs have always asked what my max comfort shooting distance is. Then try to stalk up to animals to my comfort range. But there will be times a 200+, 300+, 400+ shot is all you get.

Please don't shot the messages or send hare mail, and this is a rough paraphrase of the consensus of the PHs at one particular outfitter and echo by other PHs I have covertly asked their opinion on long range shooting/shooters.

The consensus is; hunters from certain US state(s) commonly claim they are consistent at shooting (hunting animals at) over 400, 500, 600, 800, + yards. Yet they can hit an animal at minus 200 yards. [In fact: based on their multiple experience] These hunters miss or wound more animals than they kill at the normal [hunters wanting less than 150 yard max range shots] hunters wanting close range shots.

There is a reason why long range shooters miss short yardage shots. But that is for another thread. And I learned from experience through archery of all means.

I think you misunderstood what Tim was saying, I think you’ll find he meant the minimum standard that a shooter should have is to know where his rifle will hit out to 300 mtrs, ie: from zero to 300 mtrs.
Gumpy

 

[Doug Hamilton]

What does hunting elephants have to do with plains game hunting?

Humor usually hides poor arguments

I was making a point. Try to focus and follow along. A PH in dangerous game country will always carry the most powerful rifle he can get. None of them will buy into a theory that says a smaller caliber is better. Find one, just one, that will carry a 7x57 when he may have to stop a big dangerous animal.

Theory that falls apart in the face of hard facts is not much of an argument.