PDA

View Full Version : Examining .30 caliber magnums


Marshall Stanton
04-09-2002, 11:36 AM
Comment on the Open Sight article:

Examining .30 Caliber Magnums (http://www.beartoothbullets.com/open_sight/archive_open_sight.htm/13)

We appreciate your comments on this article.

MikeG
04-09-2002, 02:04 PM
Timely article... I just sent off a check for my newest hunting rifle - a .35 Rem!

Fireplug
04-11-2002, 12:33 PM
Mr. Stanton,

The only shortfall of your important article is that not enough hunters will see it compared to the masses that will read over and over the hype for the latest thing nearly burning more grains of powder than the bullet it propels. The evergrowing "cult" of long range big game shooting is devoid of ethics and realism. True long range shooting belongs in only two places: the range and the battlefield. I agree that we owe our great game animals and the ethos of the hunt far more.

I would not be forthright if I did not state that I classify the new generation of short magnums separatly from the larger cased "over" bore magnums. I wish them great success, since they are simply bringing the many advantages of short actions to proven existing velocity levels. They also promise some exceptional medium bore offspring, rather factory or wildcat. *

You also state the fact that most game is shot witin one hundred yards, often well within, and we have reason to suspect that much of the game shot with even these exagerated long range rifles and cartridges will be as well. How many wounded animals will there need to be for the "long range cult" to learn which bullets can perform at the impact velocities of the largest of these cartridges at short range. Bullet failure at near range caused by the unrealistic quest for long range perfection is no less a shame than the poorly placed long range shot.

Great Article
Thank You,
Fireplug

04-16-2002, 02:15 PM
I couldn't agree more.  i really wish folks would by more .308 or 30-06 and shoot more then buying gadgetry and hype.  I use to carry a full blown 338 win mag with all the goodies and shot my last few animals at 40 yards.  So I switched and now use pistols and a 45-70 and keep my 30-06 for times when needed.   I am finding the older I get the more my Dad really knows.  So let's shoot more and leave the barrel burners to the battlefield and range.

caster
04-17-2002, 07:50 PM
Mr Stanton
 I wish you had been around about 50 years ago when I was going through  my early shooting days. Back in the late 40's and 50's the only thing was to shoot faster and farther than any one else. I remember the day when I stood with a bleeding nose ,a swollen lip and a whooper-dooper magnum in my hands and I asked "When am I going to enjoy hunting again?" Oh I"d killed my quary, but at a h--- of a price.It was then that I went back to my 30-06 and decided tha a magnum was not for me. You have made a very excellant arguement against the BIGGER AND BETTER crowd.
 COGRATULATIONS
  TBC

IDShooter
04-23-2002, 08:19 AM
Marshall,
     Couldn't agree with you, and Fireplug, more. I also see a benefit to the short magnums, since they develop velocities just a little higher than a heavy 30-06 but in a short action. Some people deride the advantage of a short action rifle but I like them. They balance different, and I think the balance and feel of a rifle are of the utmost importance, far outweighing bolt throw, increased potential accuracy or any of the other advantages of a short action. I like a rifle with a slight weight-forward balance, but I don't want to have to carry a very heavy or extremely long rifle to acheive this. A short action helps.
          Just my ramblings!          IDshooter

alyeska338
04-23-2002, 09:40 PM
Well said ID.  I'll second that notion.

LeoCal
04-26-2002, 11:54 AM
I agree for the most part with the article. My first, and likely last, elk was taken with my old 30-06 with Nosler partitions at a range, according to the guide's laser rangefinder, of 340 yards (also confirmed later by trajectory tables). The bullet went through the ribs, both lungs and smashed the shoulder on the farside. Yes,  I'm real proud of that shot.
However, to make the shot I had to hold over his back a bit, and I wonder what would have happened if it was struck on the near shoulder.
Anyway, I recently bought a Ruger #1 in 300 Weatherby. Why? Not for power, but for flatter trajectory, and to me there's a mystique to this round that makes me want to master it. It's almost as old as I am so it can't be considered as new, and I believe Ross Seyfried when he says it's the best of the 30s.

IDShooter
04-26-2002, 10:10 PM
Leo,
       Sure can't argue with your choice 'cause you got the shortest action of all! And I believe trajectory is the only reason to use that much speed, because I think any .308"  bullet going fast enough to penetrate and expand will kill properly.  ID

04-29-2002, 01:21 PM
Am I the only one who is bothered that the magnum rifles usually hold 3 cartridges in the magazine while the rifles in .308-.30/06 usually hold 5?

whitehunter35
04-30-2002, 08:02 PM
Sir,

I do think that these trends are extremely good marketing, and trying to goad a gullible public into an undue feeling of confidence in these rifles capabilities.  Guys that choose equipment based on what they erad in ballistic charts, will eat them up.  And....most likely end up putting a $40 scope, shoot soft bullets, and zero them for fifty yards.  That is until they develop a rabid case of the flinchies.

Having said that, I have a rig that i consider a speciality rig, for hunting the fields behind pappaw's.  Its a Rem sendero 7mm rem mag, and i handload a 140 grain nosler ballistic tip over a nosler max dose of RL22.  It has a 6-18x vaible, a harris bipod, and the trigger has been worked over slightly.  This thing is heavy, and except for pap's and busting paper way out yonder, it doesn;t get much play.  It is a heck of allot of fun, although its not extremely flexible.

I have never used it in a tree stand.  Its not a rifle that i would consider packing over mountins, or care to pack on an elk hunt.  I don;t use it to shoot when its windy, as when its windy i still hunt the firebreaks and log trails.  I don't take any shots less than 200 yards, as i think the bullett would be too destructive up close.  Mostly it is used to fill out the tag after i have a buck hanging, so pap can make some bbq jerky for my soldiers.(although lately, i have been requested not to do that anymore, as the flatulance is remarkable)

I know both fields, and have some dozer piles out there that serve as range markers, although to date, i have held dead on my three critters i have killed, (330, 305, and 275)  I have lots of confidence in it.

My point is, if a fellow can handle the recoil, and uses some judgement, i could see using a overbore rifle of some fashion as a special use item.

One man's opinion.

Steve

halfbreed
05-19-2002, 08:51 PM
whitehunter 35, i have argued this point many times. although i do not have a long range rig at this time. someday i will. halfbreed

Arizona Ranger
02-14-2004, 03:40 AM
Ah,Marshall you took many words right out of my mouth.
Often,I have said the same thing,all that is new isn't really after all.
Many of the younger people I know,when I tell them I have a wildcat (30/338),don't even know the term..
Many as you stated have really been around for years.
Most people nowadays think if it dont run 3000 fps or faster that for some reason it'll bounce off a deer skin.
If we're honest,many of us are "overgunned" for what we hunt.
The 30/378 I had many years ago as a wildcat,and I wore out a barrel in less than 1000 rounds,and this was "babying" it all the way.
I think as you stated our present day mainstream gun writers are sold out to the big guys,and they seem to promote "long range" hunting.They'll do a pretty write up on the latest gee whiz flash bang magnum and what a clean kill they got at 600 yards and everybody runs out to buy it thinking they can do it too,when most come away worse off than before.
Altho,I dont have a problem with magnums (pretty much immune to recoil),I only have two "magnums",the 30/338 and a 375 Holland,for the most part they arent necessary,and with the two I have and the 458 winnie I had,they can be downloaded,and made even more versatile.People seem to think they need every gain in velocity they can find,when it just aint so,I mean for years the Holland firm made the only readily available rounds referred to as "magnum" (300 and 375),and evrybody hunted with calibers and bullets that by todays standards would be considered inferior,yet they did a better job and were more ethical for the most part than most of us.
I'm just glad I don't have to have the "New and Improved Deer/Elk/Moose/Bear Slayers" that appear every year it seems.
Jus My Two Cents...
Jack

HiPressure
02-16-2004, 06:43 PM
Good article!
I shoot 2 of the magnum 30's, the Winchester and Weatherby. My reasoning when I bought them was to be able to load a heavier bullet for bigger game. I do not subscribe to the idea of shooting deer at 400+ yards, preferring to actually hunt instead of snipe. Most people I know should not try to make a 200 yard shot on varmints, much less a 300 yard or farther shot on deer or elk. The current emphasis on velocity comes at a cost in recoil that most people are not ready for. For example, when I take a magnum to a public range, shooters there always want to know what it is...I tell them and their eyes light up. If they are polite, I'll let them try a few shots. Most of them can't keep 3 rounds in the black at 100 yards using a rest. Then, they shake their heads and say "If that was my old 06, I'd put 'em all in one hole." Maybe so....until you look at their targets and see the shotgun pattern. Most won't work to shoot to that level of recoil, much less what a high velocity 30 or bigger will dish out. I think that in a couple more years we'll see a glut of slightly used "short magnums" for sale cheap as these folks blame the rifle/cartridge/bullet when they miss or make a poor shot instead of looking in the mirror.
Dang, you wouldn't guess this is a hot button topic for me, would you?
Good shooting,
HP

Arizona Ranger
02-17-2004, 03:41 PM
HP I think you are right about the used shorts in a few years,and I'll be the first to say I wont be in line to get one.
Most people cant hit well with anything if they admitted it.
Course out of all the "hunters" I know including myself,I can count on one hand how many of us shoot throughout the year.
Granted range time isnt a cure all,but it helps..The Practice that is..
I saw one guy at th range last year who "only bowhunted",and had a Mini 14 with iron he was sighting in "for his wife" to take deer hunting..sets a little target up at 50 yards shot it three times,said "that's good enuff",packed up and left..
Go Figure..
Jack

mikej
02-20-2004, 09:42 AM
Good article. There are a few writers out there, such as John Barsness and Ross Seyfried who deplore the long range sniping trends that are being foisted on the public by marketing today, but more need to join the chorus.
I have 2 .300 WM's. One is a hunting rifle and one is a "tactical" rifle that is used for targets only. I have a personal maximum range for every weapon that I use for hunting, whether it is my recurve, or the .300. This maximum is based upon my own abilities, knowledge of which is gained through extensive shooting in competition and on the target range. After seeing what the wind can do at the 600 yd range in highpower competition, I will not consider a shot longer than 300 yds. at a game animal with any rifle regardless of "banjo string" trajectory. The guiding principle should be, get as close as you can possibly get, then 20 yds. closer.
I hunt primarily in FL and GA, but I have hunted in NV, CO and MT for elk and mule deer. In some locales you could get long shots, but after witnessing a fellow shoot an elk four times at extreme range before finally bringing it down, I swore I would never be guilty of that. Wounding an animal due to uncontrollable actions such as animal movement or deteriorating wx conditions is one thing, but to deliberately attempt to shoot an animal where even perfect conditions make it a difficult shot is, to my mind, an ethically criminal act. But, we see how much ethics are revered in our society these days. thanks for the article, it is on point.