Campfire Debate_Ultimate NA Big Game Calibre Sans the big bears

[elkhunter11]

Originally Posted by Salavee

In the same caliber, at the same terminal velocity and the same POI and meeting the same resistance , the same bullet design, but with the higher SD will penetrate farther. Period. Also, check out momentum .. another key factor. SD and Momentum are the workhorses, regardless of bullet design.

What happens in the 2 or 3 milliseconds after impact is the result of bullet construction.
Some like their bullets to pencil thru, others like them to shed some fragments enroute, while others like them to do both. Those are matters of a shooters bullet choice. That's why every bullet available isn't a TTSX or other monometal. They have their place - just not every place.

If the bullet passes through the animal as usually happens with the 150gr TTSX out of my rifle, then no more penetration is possible. As well, if you use a heavy for caliber monometal bullet, the impact velocity will often be lower, and may not be high enough to properly expand the bullet, so the wound channel may be much smaller, and the animal may not bleed out and die as quickly as a result. So using a heavier bullet with a higher SD can be a handicap in some cases.

[Salavee]

Originally Posted by elkhunter11

Once the bullet expands to larger than it's unfired diameter, the SD starts to decrease. And as a bullet sheds weight, it's SD also decreases. A 140gr monometal that retains 90% of it's weight , will actually have a higher SD than a 175gr cup and core bullet that sheds 40% of it's weight. So which is more important, the unfired SD, or the expanded/remaining SD?

Which one did the most internal damage? I'll pick that one.

[Mountain Guy]

Back to the original question... its weird that the first person on your list is O'Connor and you exclude the .277.
Don't know what to say.

[Salavee]

Originally Posted by chuck

The truth is the truth. Outside of a solid, no bullet that expands does not have its SD completely altered during the work portion of its flight. If you want to hang onto SD measure it once it’s finished. Then you might have an argument. This is not rocket science and I propose that you are completely wrong in your thinking. If you’re not, give me a good argument to the contrary.

You are absolutely correct. It is not rocket science.

First of all , I don't think there is any "work" involved during a bullets flight.
I believe the term used is "goes to sleep".
No arguments from me Chuck but I think you require some serious study on the subject of sectional density and the contribution it makes toward a bullets ballistic coefficient and terminal performance. Prove out all the comments you have made - to yourself. I really don't care.

[Don_Parsons]

I typed up one crazy post at 3am, but being so far left to right with nothing down the middle forced me to save it for another thread.

Lots of tribes, 1 to 15 mm spears, s trip around the world and camp fire stories. LOL. The good ones that is.

Oh well, hopefully a day will come as I share the Hunter Gather story of then to now,,, or is it from now to then. Ha

Don

[brendan's dad]

7mm Rem Mag with a 150 grain TSX at 3020 fps. This is my go to set-up that I use for everything. Flat shooting, hard hitting, and recoil is on par with a 30-06.

[bobinthesky]

Originally Posted by 270person

Uh no I haven't quite simply because anyone that would try a 1000 yd shot on an animal is an idiot.

Have you ever considered that one of, if not the, largest grizz ever shot in Alberta succumbed to a .22?

Neither mean much is my point.

I never mentioned shooting animals at 1000 yards and there you go with the personal insults again....

If you don't get my point about the 1000 yard velocities of the two calibers then you don't get very much at all!

Have you considered that your comments about a grizz being killed with a 22 contradicts all that you have been saying so far? It certainly points out how little thought is behind your arguments.

[bobinthesky]

Originally Posted by brendan's dad

7mm Rem Mag with a 150 grain TSX at 3020 fps. This is my go to set-up that I use for everything. Flat shooting, hard hitting, and recoil is on par with a 30-06.

It's interesting that you compare your load to a 30-06 because if you look at the reloading and ballistics charts and compare your 7 mag load to a 150/3006 load, you'll see that there is very little difference between the performance of the two out to 300 yards.

[Kurt.Hanger]

I’m a fan of the STW. Not a lot of choices out there if you’re buying ammo over the counter but who doesnt reload or at least know someone that does. It’s a great caliber.

[Don_Parsons]

Originally Posted by bobinthesky

It's interesting that you compare your load to a 30-06 because if you look at the reloading and ballistics charts and compare your 7 mag load to a 150/3006 load, you'll see that there is very little difference between the performance of the two out to 300 yards.

I'm guessing the idea of 7mm Mag compared to the 30/06 was ment in context to the same recoil...

In a way that is. This is how I read his post

Don

[bobinthesky]

That's how I read it too Don, just pointing out something that few people think about.

[Don_Parsons]

Yes, I have to agree that Wayne and Jack are both invited to the camp fire yet their 270's are not in the list of 7mm's.

Both are strong advocates of 270 winchester, I can see the flames burning higher and higher.

Oh boy.

https://www.fieldandstream.com/scien...ng-range-shots

Don

[HoytCRX32]

Originally Posted by Don_Parsons

I think they are all fine cartrages.

Yes, 270 is not a 7mm, but the thread does state that Jack O'connor is at this camp fire, so with all due respect his favorite cartrage might want to get drawn into this debate.

Why some folks might ask.

Under the 25.4 conversion factor what caliber is the closest to 7mm?

Hard to imagine that after all these years that no one has challenged the real math.

But then again what would Jack O'connor, I, and many others know about this.


Just saying since Jack is at the camp fire. LOL

Don

This^^^^

Jack O'connor was a staunch .270 fan, often saying you needed nothing else

[BuckCuller]

Originally Posted by elkhunter11

If the bullet passes through the animal as usually happens with the 150gr TTSX out of my rifle, then no more penetration is possible. As well, if you use a heavy for caliber monometal bullet, the impact velocity will often be lower, and may not be high enough to properly expand the bullet, so the wound channel may be much smaller, and the animal may not bleed out and die as quickly as a result. So using a heavier bullet with a higher SD can be a handicap in some cases.

Monometal bullets are ment for nearly 98% weight retention and optimal expansion at higher speeds.
This weight retention is ment to give a good wound Chanel and great penatration at the same time.
That's why I shoot lighter bullets in the monometals, I will not shoot over 500 yards because the bullet velocity drops below optimal expansion speed.
To date I have only recovered one bullet and that was from a blue wildebeest through one shoulder directly through the spine and then through the other shoulder and lodged in the hide. The rest of the game I've taken the bullet has just blown through.

[Kurt505]

Originally Posted by HoytCRX32

This^^^^

Jack O'connor was a staunch .270 fan, often saying you needed nothing else

That's just because the 7mm express wasn't invented until Jack was 55

[270person]

Originally Posted by bobinthesky

I never mentioned shooting animals at 1000 yards and there you go with the personal insults again....

If you don't get my point about the 1000 yard velocities of the two calibers then you don't get very much at all!

Have you considered that your comments about a grizz being killed with a 22 contradicts all that you have been saying so far? It certainly points out how little thought is behind your arguments.

You have gone so convoluted thinking I'm insulting you, which I'm not, that you've lost touch with the entire discussion.

So 7-08 is just as potent as all the other 7's and miles ahead of the 277's because it's a 284. Gotcha. You're 100% incorrect but I gotcha.

[270person]

Originally Posted by Kurt.Hanger

I’m a fan of the STW. Not a lot of choices out there if you’re buying ammo over the counter but who doesnt reload or at least know someone that does. It’s a great caliber.

Best of the 7's bar none. Wish I had one.

[270person]

Originally Posted by Kurt505

That's just because the 7mm express wasn't invented until Jack was 55

How big a difference between the two you figure Kurt? Use 150gr bullets in the 277 equation. Most people think 270 and 130 gr right off the bat which is unfortunate.

[270person]

Originally Posted by Don_Parsons

Yes, I have to agree that Wayne and Jack are both invited to the camp fire yet their 270's are not in the list of 7mm's.

Both are strong advocates of 270 winchester, I can see the flames burning higher and higher.

Oh boy.

https://www.fieldandstream.com/scien...ng-range-shots

Don

Two damn smart guys and damn good with a rifle. Most of the talk around here is 243 being enough for pretty much everything so maybe Jack was on to something way back then with those fancy under 30's.

[270person]

Originally Posted by Don_Parsons

Yes, I have to agree that Wayne and Jack are both invited to the camp fire yet their 270's are not in the list of 7mm's.

Both are strong advocates of 270 winchester, I can see the flames burning higher and higher.

Oh boy.

https://www.fieldandstream.com/scien...ng-range-shots

Don

Two damn smart guys and damn good with a rifles. Most of the talk around here is 243 being enough for pretty much everything so maybe Jack was on to something way back then with those fancy under 30's.

[Kurt505]

Originally Posted by 270person

How big a difference between the two you figure Kurt? Use 150gr bullets in the 277 equation. Most people think 270 and 130 gr right off the bat which is unfortunate.

How big of difference where? On paper or in the field? Truth be told I think the only difference you'll see is on paper unless you compare to an Ackley, and even then you're only looking at marginal gains.

I could see the gun writers making a bigger deal of it than the hunters though. I can almost guarantee that if the 7mm express came out 50yrs sooner Jack would have been all over it.

[brendan's dad]

Originally Posted by Don_Parsons

I'm guessing the idea of 7mm Mag compared to the 30/06 was ment in context to the same recoil...

In a way that is. This is how I read his post

Don

My comment was more to point out that even though it is the “7mm Remington Magnum”, the recoil is not as fierce as most other “Magnums.” Most shooter can handle recoil up to 23-24 lbs and after that it starts to get uncomfortable. The 7mm rem mag and 30-06 are both at the top end of that tolerable recoil.

[elkhunter11]

Originally Posted by 270person

How big a difference between the two you figure Kurt? Use 150gr bullets in the 277 equation. Most people think 270 and 130 gr right off the bat which is unfortunate.

Most people think 130gr, because it is likely the optimum bullet weight for the cartridge. The point in choosing the 270win over the 30-06 was to use a lighter bullet for a higher velocity a d flatter trajectory.

[270person]

Originally Posted by elkhunter11

If the bullet passes through the animal as usually happens with the 150gr TTSX out of my rifle, then no more penetration is possible.

You feel penetration, to the point of complete pass throughs at times, is the key factor in killing an animal elk? Some might argue that point if so.

[Chukar Hunter]

So...here I try to resurrect an old post with a new twist and WWIII just about breaks out.

I have enjoyed reading EVERYONE'S opinions. However, I am convinced that many did not read the content of the post properly. Knowing how progressive JOC and some of the other old timers were, I have little doubt that they would stick with their core and cup bullets such as the Bronze point or the Silvertip in an age where bonded bullets are flying at least 50% more effective and kill just as good, if not better.

Same goes for the choice of bore diameter. If we study the published and tested BC's for all bullets, we will quickly realize the superiority of the 6.5 and the 7 mm bore versus the 30's and and larger. Its simple math. My argument for the 7 mm vs the 6.5 especially in a cartridge like the 280 Rem is that heavier spitzers such as the 160 or even the 175 grain can be launched with authority and maintain enough velocity for expansion and knock down power at 500-600 yards. The 6.5 pretty much plateaus at 140 grains and the 270 at 150 grains.

I never debated that a 6 mm or a 0.277 bullet can not kill a Moose or elk. I love both bores and have both and hunt with them. Its like cyanide; A trifle will kill just as fast as a spoonful. However, we are talking about efficiency, mild recoil, availability and other criteria that I mentioned in the original post.

Yours in good hunt'n

[elkhunter11]

Originally Posted by 270person

You feel penetration, to the point of complete pass throughs at times, is the key factor in killing an animal elk? Some might argue that point if so.

I like a bullet that will reach the vitals under the worst circumstances, and under better circumstances that usually results in pass throughs. But with adequate velocity for proper expansion, it also results in a fairly large wound channel., which results in animals bleeding out very quickly. My current t go to hunting rifle is a custom 7mnstw that drives the 150gr TTSX at 3400fps, and it leaves very impressive wound channels, so tracking is rarely required. I used the 140gr TTSX in my previous 7mmstw rifles, but my current rifle is slightly more accurate with the 150gr TTSX.

[270person]

Originally Posted by elkhunter11

Most people think 130gr, because it is likely the optimum bullet weight for the cartridge. The point in choosing the 270win over the 30-06 was to use a lighter bullet for a higher velocity a d flatter trajectory.

Wasn't my point in choosing one but with the advents in technology the 140 and 150 outperform the 130's in my books.

Actually 150 LR Accubonds will shoot very nicely against the same bullet in 7mm. Slightly better BC and sectional density. Not quite as much zip of course but there isn't as big a gap as some would suppose.

[270person]

Originally Posted by Chukar Hunter

So...here I try to resurrect an old post with a new twist and WWIII just about breaks out.

I have enjoyed reading EVERYONE'S opinions. However, I am convinced that many did not read the content of the post properly. Knowing how progressive JOC and some of the other old timers were, I have little doubt that they would stick with their core and cup bullets such as the Bronze point or the Silvertip in an age where bonded bullets are flying at least 50% more effective and kill just as good, if not better.

Same goes for the choice of bore diameter. If we study the published and tested BC's for all bullets, we will quickly realize the superiority of the 6.5 and the 7 mm bore versus the 30's and and larger. Its simple math. My argument for the 7 mm vs the 6.5 especially in a cartridge like the 280 Rem is that heavier spitzers such as the 160 or even the 175 grain can be launched with authority and maintain enough velocity for expansion and knock down power at 500-600 yards. The 6.5 pretty much plateaus at 140 grains and the 270 at 150 grains.

I never debated that a 6 mm or a 0.277 bullet can not kill a Moose or elk. I love both bores and have both and hunt with them. Its like cyanide; A trifle will kill just as fast as a spoonful. However, we are talking about efficiency, mild recoil, availability and other criteria that I mentioned in the original post.

Yours in good hunt'n

The only point that causes me to raise an eyebrow in your entire posting is the whole 500 yard concept so many put forward. What would you say is the percentage of those shots made by the average medium to large game hunter Chukar? The vast majority of the animals I've killed are at 200 yds and under and I'd bet most here, being honest, would say the same. Outside of the sheep and goat hunters of course.

So we're talking what? Well under 5% of the kill shots made annually in Alberta?

If we're talking those kinds of shots on moose and elk then imo the big 30's are the only way to go. Better kill rates on shots that are off the mark. Pretty hard to argue when you watch moose get blown off their feet with 338's. Only problem with them is not everyone can shoot them well.

[270person]

Originally Posted by elkhunter11

I like a bullet that will reach the vitals under the worst circumstances, and under better circumstances that usually results in pass throughs.

How do you think the deer standing directly behind the ones you shoot at feel?

"Dang I wish this guy was shooting cheap soft points"

[Pathfinder76]

Originally Posted by 270person

How do you think the deer standing directly behind the ones you shoot at feel?

"Dang I wish this guy was shooting cheap soft points"

Are you seriously advocating shooting at deer with something behind them based on bullet selection?