I agree with you. In many (if not most) instances - the result will be the same. With good shot placement, the odds of it being the same are increased exponentially. Certainly, if you obliterate the heart or both lungs or hit the spine with either caliber I don’t think it will matter one bit.

In some cases (maybe even a very few) the result will be different. Even with good shot placement - because the increased energy will cause additional wound channel (and other factors I am not knowledgeable enough to discuss intelligently). And in some cases the added energy can result in reaching/affecting vitals that would not have been reached/affected with the .30-06 (the increased “margin for error” so often discussed).

Those instances may never occur. With good shot placement, they almost certainly won’t.
But I would like to “edge up” if I can, mainly because the thought of tracking a brownie in the alders or preventing/stopping a charge is not appealing to me in the least.

OK, time for me to quit beating this dead horse, as I am the main guilty party.

Larger calibers come in handy with less then ideal shots or angles. I shot a pig the other day with a 243. The only shot I had was from behind. The pig left a blood trail onto the neighbors place. A bigger heavier bullet would have given better penetration. My 375 Ruger would have anchored before it took a step with the same shot placement. Either way the pig would be dead. It's just a matter of location.

In my mind I'm throwing a 200-220 grain partition out of either, I'm not worried about penetration in the least.

I agree. Its just the dead is dead crowd trying to basically say everything is equal with the same shot placement and it's not.

Agree. Just like shooting a deer with a Nosler Partition will likely kill a deer just as dead as a FMJ, but one would be a fool to think the bullet performance was equal just because the end result was "dead".

Found what I was really looking for earlier.

Here is a poll of favorite big game caliber and link from the Alaska equivalent to this forum.

Round # votes % of votes

.223 1 0.33%

.243 1 0.33%

7mm-08 3 0.98%

.270 11 3.61%

.308 20 6.56%

30-06 75 24.59%

.300 Win Mag 92 30.16%

.338 wm, ruger, -06 56 18.36%

.375 H&H or Ruger 43 14.10%

.458 or larger 3 0.98%

http://forums.outdoorsdirectory.com/show...-in-Alaska-2015


Here is an excerpt from the Alaska Department of Game & Fish with what seems to be well thought out comments. (emphasis added)

Select a quality bullet

If you presently own a rifle chambered for the .270 Winchester, 7mm-08, .308 Winchester or .30-06 and can place all of your shots in an 8-inch circle out to 200 yards from a sitting or kneeling position you can be a successful Alaska hunter. To be as effective as possible, these cartridges should be loaded with premium quality bullets that are designed to pass completely through a large game animal, if hit in the heart-lung area.

Big Magnums Not Needed

The rifle you bring hunting should be one with which you are comfortable. Because of the presence of brown and grizzly bears, many hunters have been convinced that a .300, .338, .375, or .416 magnum is needed for personal protection and to take large Alaska game. This is simply not true. The recoil and noise of these large cartridges is unpleasant at best and plainly painful to many shooters. It is very difficult to concentrate on shot placement when your brain and body remembers the unpleasant recoil and noise which occurs when you pull the trigger on one of the big magnums.

The two most common complaints of professional Alaska guides are hunters who are not in good physical condition and hunters who cannot accurately shoot their rifles. Because these hunters do not practice enough they cannot shoot accurately enough. They miss their best chance at taking their dream animal or worse yet, they wound and lose an animal. Most experienced guides prefer that a hunter come to camp with a .270 or .30-06 rifle they can shoot well rather than a shiny new magnum that has been fired just enough to get sighted-in. If you are going to hunt brown bear on the Alaska Peninsula or Kodiak Island, a .30-06 loaded with 200- or 220-grain Nosler® or similar premium bullet will do the job with good shot placement. Only consider using a .300, .338 or larger magnum if you can shoot it as well as you can the .30-06.

It is very popular now to purchase large magnum rifles equipped with a muzzle brake. Most muzzle brakes are very effective at reducing recoil. A .375 magnum with a muzzle brake recoils much like a .30-06. Before convincing yourself that you should use a muzzle-braked rifle, consider its disadvantages. A muzzle-brake increases the muzzle blast and noise to levels that quickly damage the ear. Even when just sighting in or practicing, everyone near you at the range will find the blast and noise bothersome. Anyone near the muzzle brake when the rifle is fired may suffer hearing loss or physical damage to the ear. You cannot wear ear protection when you are hunting and neither can your hunting partners or guide. An increasing number of guides will not allow a hunter to use a muzzle brake because of the danger of hearing loss.

Rifle Weight Reduces Recoil

Rather than rely on a muzzle-brake to reduce recoil, use a rifle heavy enough to reduce recoil. If you are planning on packing out moose meat, caribou meat, or a brown bear hide weighing hundreds of pounds, you can carry a 9- to 11-pound rifle including scope. A rifle of this weight in .300 or .338 magnum can be mastered with a lot of practice. You can also avoid using a muzzle-brake by selecting a cartridge that you can shoot comfortably and enjoy shooting enough to practice with frequently. For most hunters, the upper limit of recoil is the .30-06 or 7mm Remington Magnum®. A majority of hunters are more comfortable with a .308 or .270.


http://www.adfg.alaska.gov/index.cfm?adfg=hunting.firearms

Notice how that article specifically names a 200-220 grain nosler? I bet they don't mean ballistic tips

I have sure heard from a lot of guides that many, many of their clients do bring a brand new magnum they are not familiar with (and are about half scared of) with them on hunts.

This is the best line of that article.

“If you are planning on packing out moose meat, caribou meat, or a brown bear hide weighing hundreds of pounds, you can carry a 9- to 11-pound rifle including scope.”

12 gauge is used much more than 20 gauge in clays shooting and hunting.

Probably 1/2 the .308 is shot at ranges at paper.

Oh look at that!

"can place all of your shots in an 8-inch circle out to 200 yards from a sitting or kneeling position you can be a successful Alaska hunter."


"The two most common complaints of professional Alaska guides are hunters who are not in good physical condition and hunters who cannot accurately shoot their rifles. Because these hunters do not practice enough they cannot shoot accurately enough"

It has never lost its' stride. And in the world of AR hog hunting, much with thermal scopes, it (again) is becomming a highly desired combination.

I am 53 years old, have never “practiced” shooting a gun in my life, and don’t have any plans to start.

Some of us grew up roaming the countryside with a rifle in our hands. We didn’t come to shooting as a decision, we were raised in it. I don’t “practice” riding a bike or swimming either. I learned how to do both as a kid - and I still can.

Now, if I ever decide to ride my bike across America or swim the English Channel - some practice might be in order.

Just like if I decide to start sniping game at 500+ yards or become a competition benchrest shooter.

Those basic instructions/admonitions that Fish and Game Departments have to give these days are the unfortunate result of an influx of out of shape and inexperienced folks that a more urban society produces deciding they want to come to the big country and shoot them some stuff. They weren’t necessary 50 years ago. But, times are changing.

Blah, blah, blah.

100% chance you could be challenged making hunting shots, 300 yards and less, using whatever you have available, or just your body, and maybe your pack. No prone, no bench. Never have I had anyone out that wasn't challenged. 12 years old to 70 years old.

In two months there will be some whining about this very scenario.

Maybe so.

All I’m saying is that preaching that everyone is created equal and needs to “practice” shooting to be successful in the field is simply not true.
Your focus is on shooting - which is understandable because that’s your passion, you own a shooting range, and get paid to teach shooting.

My focus is on hunting. My passion is on: 1)locating my quarry, 2)getting in close, and then 3)killing it.

Without 1, 2 and 3 are irrelevant.
If you are skilled at 2 - 3 is not a huge deal.

70% of hunting is #1, 20% is #2, and 10% is #3. (Argue with the exact percentages if you wish, but the point still stands.)

You are a fine shooter and have much to teach. I’m sure more practice could help me some with #3. How much? Who knows. (Under 300, I’m not thinking a whole lot - but I could be wrong.) Nevertheless, that’s playing on the margins as far as actual hunting is concerned.

#3 gets all the ink with reams of stuff about load data, caliber discussion, rifle makes, optics ins and outs, and on and on and on and on.......

1 and 2 don’t lend themselves to a lot of ink/discussion - because the only way to improve at them is to get out in the field and hunt. It’s much easier to focus on #3 - go shoot off a few dozen rounds and then get on the computer and talk equipment, ballistics, sectional density, etc. I get it, and understand why.

But if folks really want to become better hunters, 90% of their time should be spent on 1 and 2.

In other words, hunting.

Ive been hunting my whole life. If you were to put me on a game animal at 300 yards in the middle of a flat field no bipod not pack all I had was me and the rifle I'm not sure If I would pull the trigger. I would have to see how steady I could get building a position off elbows and knees, but chances are I would not fire.

Exactly.

There are techniques to making that shot. And it is always difficult. I call that "fighting the wobble". You're going to sway, the trick is figuring out a way to reduce the size of the sway. Dry firing is very helpful. You know when you hear the "click" of the firing pin, where the reticle was. And you can call a hit or a miss. It only costs time, no money.

But when an animal is in the scope, and the adrenaline is pumping, it is even more difficult. That's where what we say in Fire, Police, and Military "train like you fight". Hopefully, when the adrenaline is pumping, you have some muscle memory to overcome it, and get the job done.

But, evidently someone else is an expert marksman, with zero practice. I think even Beethoven practiced.

Except this is the Rifles section....still.

If you want to talk about those techniques, please sit down on Microsoft Word and write an article about it. Then copy/ paste and post it in the Open Hunting section. No telling who might benefit from it. Or would you rather just bellyache about people talking about rifles, and shooting them, in the Rifles section, instead of acting on what you believe more people should spend more time on?

I used a large rock and prone position to take the longest shot I've made on a game animal. Although it's been a long time, I also shot 4H .22 rifle in high school and learned a few things there. Lack of practice has no doubt led to serious erosion of any skills I once had.

Lol you could look for days and not find a rock on our place

The dry fire idea was suggested to me on here from Chad, I was always skeptical of it damaging the firing pin so never did it, but it has proven to be a very good practice technique.

Tell you another trick. Almost everybody has a 6' step ladder at home. Use the rungs, at all heights, to support the rifle. Figure out what you do with your body to get the rifle still. Then, in the wild, you may find a tree branch, a fence, a trailer, something at those heights. You'll be better prepared to use said object to help support the rifle.

Dry fire is excellent practice.

My my parents were pretty lax in their rules, they trusted me not to shoot myself or anyone so from the time I was about 12 years old and on I had a gun cabinet in my room that had my rifles and shotguns in it.

I used to practice weekly dry firing using field positions and although I was just a bored kid killing time ( this was before iPhone, internet, etc.) it did carry over and I can say I’m a fairly proficient shot in the field.

I only shoot off a bench to zero my guns it serves very little purpose to shoot round after round from the bench if you are looking to practice. in all honesty if a person would plink a brick of .22's every quarter from various positions and yardage it would do wonders to improve their shooting abilities.


chevy,

the sitting field position is the most steady. get your rifle, get on your butt and rest both elbows below both knees until you find whats steady. ive taken several animals from this position and you will be surprised on how accurate you can shoot this way. offhand is the least steadiest and typically you will be reduced to a 75-100 yard max range from this position, and yes, you will wobble and move, what I do is control the wobbles and squeeze off when the crosshairs are about to cross where I want them to be.

Same here. Other than initial zero all shooting for every rifle I own is done in the field, in field conditions, from field positions. Unfortunately our deer, bear and moose don't visit the range much so the field is where I have to practice. Probably the toughest is at -20 in the wind standing on snowshoes offhand - my ethical range goes from 400 yards prone in the summer to 80 yards doing this when shooting my 1/2 MOA 260 rem.