Best all-around caliber?

I hunt with a bow. This year I shot 3 does with black powder. Thinking of buying a rifle to use for various game. Thinking .243 or .22-250. Any thoughts?

.243 WCF will do anything the .22-250 will do and some things it won't.

Yelp. But both are fun calibers

up grading. started with side lock, then modern rifles ta archery. have the .243 savage great little rifle for deer & hog size. cant say bout 22.250 i got cheap posts. best wishes

For varmtis and small game I would go 22250, if you plan to hunt hogs/deer the 243 is a much better option in my opinion.

I have both and feel like others have said about it, the 243 does everything a 22-250 will do and more.

If you ever plan on hunting in another state for deer or antelope the 243 is the smallest caliber you can hunt big game with.

Another good thing about 243 is that you can find ammo just about anywhere you go and 22-250 is hard to find sometimes.

Of the two you mentioned for one rifle I would lean towards the 243 but do love the 22-250 also

I agree with most here that both are fun to shoot, but I'd lean to the .243 for versatility and reliability if you're planning on hunting anything more than varmints.

Yep. With factory loads from 55-100 grain the 243 has a lot of versatility for TX.

X 3

.270

x 4, love the .243

Ditto

105 howitzer

x5 love 55gr vmax @ nearly 4000fps in .243 will decimate any varmint; 100gr partitions take any game.

If those are your two choices, then definitely .243.

Beyond that, if you want real versatility, .30-06, 7mag, 300 win mag.

I currently have a Tikka 22-250 and am using 55gr. Hornady Super Performance for hogs, mostly; but for predators, I can also drop down to a 35gr. Super Performance.

But, if I were to choose between the .243 and .22-250 for my regular rifle, it would have to be the .243, since you can find bullets between .55 gr to 100gr. for that caliber, which would put you in a relatively good deer hunting caliber.

Both would be a step down from your muzzy, but above your bow!

I prefer the 243 for my all around go to gun, it will kill anything from deer to predators, if I am only deer hunting I usually bump up to a 270 or 308.

You have to factor in ammunition availability. .243 and .270 is fairly easy to find and won't break the bank. A 22-250 or 25-06 might be harder to find bullets for.

Bullets and arrows kill in completely different ways.

Put a broadhead thru the lung/ heart of an animal and it is just as deadly as any bullet

243 will serve you well

Of those two, 243.

I have each.

7mm-08. Look at the Bullet selection.

agreed of those two.

If its an open discussion, best all around considering every aspect, hard to not say 308

I would not consider either one of them a "all around caliber". But of those two I would take the 243 all day every day.

For smaller calibers, I like the .25-.06 and 7MM-08. Have them both and like them alot.

I like 7mm-08.

+1

This is in no way the best all around caliber IMO. It's overkill for pretty much every animal in Texas.

Unless, of course, you're just a horrible shot.

In regards to the OP, my wife's grandad used to hunt elk with a .243 for 20+ years in Colorado. And it did the job just fine as long as the shots weren't over 200 yards or so. Great caliber for Texas.

But my vote goes to the .270.

I love both. Most people would be more comfortable with The 243, but I am extremely confident in my 22-250 with the right people behind it. It's the shooter, not necessarily the gun. Meaning shot placement. Not gonna turn this thread into that, unless someone else does lolol, but whatever.

Go with 243. 22-250 leaves very little margin for error, because unless you have a good bullet that blows away heart/lung/liver or center of neck, you may not have your kill. Also, 243 has both "deer bullets" and "varmint bullets" whereas the 22-250 mostly only has the latter, with a few of the former.

.30 caliber bullet weights from 150 -220 and you can download it for Texas or upload it and go after moose, grizzly, brown bear, take it to Africa, or shoot it at very long distances. It is an extremely versatile round.

X2, based on ammo availability. Can run heavier bullets if you'd like. Sufficient out to 300-400 yds which is more than enough

The best all-around caliber/cartridge is not open to argument. It is actually, factually the .30-06.

Based on ammo sales and reloading component popularity, the old Springfield is still the leader (although I understand that the .223 is gaining ground).

So if you desire the "best all-around", you will want a .30-06. But if you are firmly set on either the .243 or .22-250, I would go with the .243, but with the understanding that it has significant limitations, especially when you hunt outside Texas.

Best "all around" caliber for Texas: .270 Win.

Best "all around" caliber for North America? .300 Win Mag

Best "all around" caliber for Africa (plains and dangerous game)? Trick question-because you're gonna need two. My two would be .300 Win Mag and .416 Rem.

Because we're talking "all around", if you're going to err, you should err on the heavier side....

YMMV

.243, without a doubt, when you see that deer at 568 yards, at 3 minutes before legal shooting time, and you know it's not a 4 point, you need to be like the rest of us and be able to drop it in its tracks. Yes to the .243.

I like your choices except Africa. Since you are backed up by a PH with a heavy gun when hunting dangerous game, I'd say .375 H&H is a good "all around" caliber.

I agree. But since I had to include elephant in my mind I bumped it up to .416. I actually have a .416 Rem and am anxious to shoot it to see how it compares recoil-wise to the .375. (I will never hunt elephant but may hunt Cape buffalo someday...)

How many foot-pounds of energy does a .243 bullet have at 568 yards?

I get 850 at 500 with a 100 grain bullet. Probably means something on the order of 725-750 at 568 yards. Not much energy left for a deer "dropping in its tracks."

The .243 is not a long range mid-sized game cartridge. It is a shorter/mid ranged deer cartridge and an any-range varmint round.

A little under 1100ft lb at sea level.

Would depend on how hot you load it. I used to load them like a fire breathing dragon.

Over kill comments equal Sissy Shoulder.

This

Back to the original post. OP never mentioned long range or Africa, or elk, or moose, only does. And probably coyotes and hogs since should all kill coyotes and hogs ever opportunity.

Yall have two tires in the ditch. Get it back on the road.

While I personally wouldn't use 243 for deer hunting many will but it is a very versatile round. I love it for yotes.

OK, I'm no expert. But I can google. I've googled 5 ballistics charts now and nothing is even close to that.

Regardless, if one advocates a .243 as a deer hammer at distance, one is mistaken. Even 1100 ft lbs. ain't "hammering" anything.

731 ft/lbs @ 560 yards right now, Melissa, TX. DA 300', 87 gr VLD.

I've taken roughly 75 deer with a .243 with no issue , most less than 200 yards, a couple out at 300. No problem with turkeys, yotes. I have had big hogs run off on body shots. I only shoot them in the head now. I gave this gun to my son who uses it now. I shoot a .270 the last 10 years. I have been very pleased with it.

Hit him right between the eyes.

That's roughly a 357 magnum at the muzzle.

For a 243, the 80 grain, Barnes Tipped TSX will produce through and through wounds on feral pigs shot in thorax.

I want a minimum of 2000 ft-lbs at impact.

What is the basis for that standard?

A 308 with 175 SMK will not work at 200 yards according to that standard. Lots of animals, and enemies in military and police conflicts, might find that standard unsupported by actual results.

Shot placement is far more important than power.

Yeah, wow!

How tough are whitetails?

My preference. I want enough energy at impact to knock the thunder out of them.



Your right, might be why I don't shoot nor do I like 308's.

I personally have used that combo for my longest shot on a deer - 475 yards by the rangefinder. It dropped where it stood with the first shot.

Just my experience. Everyone has to pick what works for them.

Whelen preached 1000 ft. lbs. as a deer minimum-most since have been fine with that as a rule of thumb.

And that's all I said. I simply said I apply that rule to myself, I didn't ask anybody else to nor suggest that they should. It's a rule that has worked well for me for over 40 years and I don't plan on breaking it.

I wonder what he thought was the ideal ft-lbs?

IDK. IIRC your 2000 ft-lbs was his elk minimum. I'm reading Boddington's latest rifle book and he agrees with Whelen on both counts. Boddington also prefers heavy-for-caliber bullets and, while he admits the .243/6mm is an adequate minimum mid-sized game round, his preferred minimum is .25/26 caliber.

He also loves the .30 cals for their added weight and bigger frontal area-which he believes translates to both more penetration and shock-neither of which are found on a ballistics chart.

He won't speak out directly against the long-range craze, but refuses to discuss anything above 400 yards in his book, basically saying that (largely because of wind effects) such shots should not be taken by any but professionals. Relatedly, says BC is the most over-talked about and least relevant factor in hunting cartridges these days-because of the long-range craze.

Boddington and I think very much alike-probably because his earlier books had such a big influence on me.

Agreed .243 is much better overall than a 22-250 but it AINT an all-around caliber ... in Texas or anywhere else.

To get closer (no such thing as ONE all-around caliber!!!!!!) to an all around you need to go to the 30 calibers. My preference is the 300 win mag. Mine shoots off the shelf factory loads with Remington 150 g managed recoil (Texas deer, varmit, and small hogs inside 200 yards); Hornady 180g SST superformance (larger pigs, anything outside 200 yards, and larger exotics, western US, and African Plains game), and Federal premium Nosler 200g trophy bonded bear claw (bear and really big African plains game -- eland)... all in a 2 1/2 inch group at 100 yards (each will shot 1 inch groups independently).

Even the 300 win mag will never be an all-around because it isn't even legal on African Dangerous Game, so you will ALWAYS need a minimum of 2 rifles. And if you have DG rifle and an all-around rifle, why not have a superhot little 22-250 or 6mm for varmits?

I don't hunt with a 243 because I don't think it's quite enough gun in some circumstances, or at least that was my opinion for a long time. Now I hunt with a 260 and use a 100 gr Nosler bullet at about 3000 to 3100 fps. That's 243 type performance, and it works on central Tx whitetails very well. I will say, however, that the 120 gr bullet is more effective on deer than the 100 grainer is. There is absolutely no doubt in my mind of that. I just use the 100 grainer as my all around pig, coyote, deer bullet.

If I was going to hunt larger deer, I'd use the 120 gr Nosler or move back up to my 270 with 130 gr Ballistic Tips.

Best all around caliber for varmint hunting (including pigs) is probably the 243. For deer, the best (to me) is probably the 270 or the equivalent. And I will also say that bullet BC, for hunting at reasonable ranges of 400 yards or less, is a number the Hunter doesn't even need to know. The Long Range guys need it, and we understand the why's and wherefore's of that.

257 Weatherby

Definitely a 243 if you are limited to those 2. Best all around for big game it is hard to beat the 30-06. You can find ammo just about anywhere and probably have the most choices in bullet weights. 55, 110, 130, 150, 180, 220. These are the one that I know of. Not sure if they still sell the 55s. I know they took them off the market at one time. I believe they also make a reduced recoil cartridge for the -06.

The .243 gets my vote of the two. I rotate my .243 and .270 hunting west texas, but I'd feel more comfortable with the .270 if a Mule Deer shot ever presented itself.

25-06

.308

X-2 and I shoot all three.

Loaded question.

Without selecting a caliber.

One easy to find

Inexpensive when compared to other calibers.

I love my 22-250. I got it primarily for coyotes and bobcats, but killed a 225 pound 8 point and a doe with it this season. I wouldn't make a practice of shooting deer with it long range, but it is well capable of putting down a whitetail. My main long range guns are a .270 wsm and a 25-06.

Match the shooter to the animal to figure out the tool. Terrain and distance are also a factor. There is a lot of difference in East Texas and SW Texas to consider. I don't know the OP nor do I know his size, age, shooting capabilities, terrain hunted, etc. A 22-250 might be all that he can handle. I know that I'll never shoot another 10 ga shotgun.

I've used just about every tool/toy from a 222 through 30-06 for WT, mulies, antelope and elk. As usual, it all depends on a lot of variables. There are a lot of technical reasons for one caliber over another but that's seldom the whole story.

My go to caliber has always been 30-06. I've never found an animal that was overly dead. I've only lost one WT, out of ten or so, with the triple deuce but that was my fault. I've lost 4 WT with my 30-06's in 50 years of hunting. As we all know, some animals just refuse to die in convenient places.

If he thinks that he might like to someday hunt other game like elk, etc, neither of his 2 choices are ideal. But then, who would want to confine themselves to just one gun?

Don't mind me I'm just passin' through!

Already been proven .270 can do the same thong on Africa a .30cal bullet can do...just saying.

.30-06! There is a reason it has been the military's preference since 1906! Most versatile round there is.

To me...the .30-06 is to rifles what the .40 cal is to pistols. A 9mm may shoot with less kick, and do the job, but when and if the time comes, I want something with knockdown and knockout power. The 9mm would be the .243 IMO.

.30-06. Ammo readily available in a lot of places in the world. Still a preferred caliber for medium-size plains game in Africa. Decent elk round. Lots of bullet and rifle choices.

I like these...and 25-06. I use both, but that 257 ammo is way on up there in price and hard to find.

I had three 30-06 until the boogie man decided to take what was mine.

I'm at 1012 ft/lbs @ 700 yds with a 115 berger VLD out of a .243

.243 is PLENTY for anything in Texas.

I simply do not believe that can be accurate.

Not biting on that either.

MV would have to be over 3,000 fps for that to happen.

Ding Ding Ding, we have a winner....

Anything can be done with the right combination.

No, it can't. Not within the physical parameters/limitations of a specific caliber.

.243 sucks

http://www.6mmbr.com/243win.html

Yes, it can, and has been done.

I plugged in that bullet at 3000 fps MV and Shooter gave 920.9 ft/lbs in the current conditions. Get the temp up to the 70's and it would gain some retained velocity and energy at 700 yards. So what's your MV?

I was using 70 as the temp @ this altitude 3080fps, it goes up higher if I use moly coated bullets..

Barrel length, altitude, air density.

There is OTC ammo available for the 243 in 105 Berger and 115 dtac.

Using a ballistic calculator. You can compare a wide array of variables if you know MV.

I'm not shooting a VLD that small at anything important.

No body is going to read this or admit to it. It goes against thier agruement

Close I would agree, far not so much

I've seen much bigger malfunction at 500 & 900 and wasn't fond of the 115 hog tests out of the 257.

Testing Carter's rifle had them stay in (1 jug) milk jugs from 300 out to 800.

It's beyond my comprehension that anyone would shoot at anything other than prairie dogs and varmints at 700 yards with a .243. Once again-square pegs and round holes.

When did math and physics begin to lie?

Not an apples to apples comparison

I'm not debating the math and physics. I'm not an expert. Googling charts every one I see has the .243 around 700-800 ft/lbs at 500 yards. I'll just say formulas have data inputs done by people and leave it at that.

It's just the same old different perspectives. I hunt to kill what I am after, not to go into the field to see how much I can push an envelope so I can tell someone about it. It's pretty basic common sense that IF one insists on hunting at long range, if you are really focused on killing an animal quickly (vs. experimenting), one should want more than a 90-115 grain bullet hitting an animal at 700 yards. Slow velocity,little bullet=lose/lose.But common sense is being discarded by many in favor of charts and formulas these days.

Charts an formulas are math and physics. Math and physics that has been tested, thus why they have actual meaning. They are not a hypothesis

Whatever.

There is a heckuva a lot more to real killing power than the energy chart. Several itty-bitty screamers shooting BB bullets can generate energy. At 700 yards, a .243 is a BB bullet. For heaven's sake, if you guys insist on those long pokes at animals, please get your heads out of the charts/calculators and at least use a heavier bullet to help compensate for the shed velocity.

It's supposed to have slowed down enough at those ranges to perform correctly.

So your saying a 150 gr 30-30 is more effective at 300 yards then a 243 with 115 dtac because it's a bigger pill.

The lack of shed velocity is exactly why the 115dtac is so effective and efficient at range, interesting concept isn't it. Funny how you poke fun of the math yet try to use it incorrectly to prove a point

What is correctly? Is still a thin jacketed bullet. Whole concept of a high BC non bonded core is to still open up at lower velocities . Sounds like it did what it was suppose to.

If your looking for a penciling through bullet.. Pick another bullet

One that'll reach vitals, thus performing, 2/3 didn't w/o even hitting any solid bone. If I'd have shot it with my set-up there wouldn't have been a whole day killed.

Anyone who hunts east TX knows the effective range of a .30-30 and why (mild loads, usually round/flat nosed bullets that shed velocity quickly, etc.). Unlike for many, calculators are just a starting point of reference for me. I know what works and at what ranges because I hunt. And I listen to other hunter's experiences. If you don't believe little bullets at slow/modest velocities are a poor combination we will find no common ground.

I'm not agruing an opinion NP. I'm only agrueing the math at range doesnt lie. If your going to use an argument by assertion, at least define the little bullet by grians and define slow/modest velocity with ft/s

Preach it Bobo, preach it!

I wont be killing anything bigger than a coyote at the 700 yard line with a 243. Just my personal limitation on a 6mm. But put my 7 Rem Mag in my hands and its another story....

I see he has no comment on the validity of the math. Also the OP is deer hunting, the need for anything larger than a 243 is pointless given his 2 caliber selections. Of the 2 he listed, 243 is a proven better choice. Also there is nothing moderate about 3000fps and 115 gr is the largest pill you can squeeze out of a 6mm so by caliber standards, it's a heavy load. Which again, goes against everything you believe to be accurate regarding this caliber. 1000Ft lbs is 1000 ftlbs regardless of what caliber or grain of bullet.

That last sentence proves you have no idea what you are talking about when it comes to killing animals. Pretty much standard-issue thought these days though.

If the sermon is so good why aren't you following the message?

Bobo and J McCoy are arguing with you the exact same points I have for, well, probably over a year. I'm glad I get a day off trying to beat the proven science and math into your thick head. They are doing a fine job so I will let them continue.

And again, you are wrong, and real shooters who also hunt are proving you wrong, and yet again you refuse to admit it.

No one has proven anything. Y'all call me stubborn. Which is funny. Exhibit 1: rifleman is relating real-world hunting experience on real-world animals. Yet, that cannot be accepted by those who won't look up from the charts. Who is really being stubborn?

It is merely straightforward common sense that using a .243 for medium sized game at 700 yards is a pretty bad idea. Again: little bullet/low velocity=lose/lose. Everybody used to know that.

his example is hand load that fits the ultra velocity realm. A bullet leaving a barrel a well beyond 3500ft a second, to the point it exceeded its design specs. not rock science what the results will be!!! His bud should of been using a bonded bullet.

His other example 257wby 115vld is using a bullet that I have killed well over 40 animals with. In fact just had another 100 rounds made.

So Ya, Let's talk real world.

Again charts are proven math not a hypothetical opinion.

You have a opinion no real world experience in the concept in which you are discussing, by your own omission

Berger VLD is a design that I don't love but in the context that we are talking about its second to none.




Again you have not defined what low velocity and small bullet is. If your going to use an argument by assertion, at least define the little bullet by grians and define slow/modest velocity with ft/

I've yet to get exit with the 115vlds regardless of distance, including a shoulder shot coyote pup at 425. Really throws a kink in my doubling up on first shot like I prefer to do. By 500 & 900yds that Tejas isn't running 3675 anymore either. That Accubond out of the RUM ate from tooter to rooter on the Muley trying to flee the scene of the crime.

NP states 1000 ft/lbs is needed for a deer.

Several ballistic calculators give data of a .243 producing 1000 ft/lbs at 700 yards. NP refuses to believe it.

Even though inputting known BC and known MV asking for external ballistics, and the calculator produces trajectory, retained velocity, and energy delivery on target. Take the produced data and go shoot it on a range. Ans when the elevation corrections come out exactly as the calculator predicted why can we not also believe that the energy delivery is also correct?

That is a bullet design argument. I perfer the AB in most cases also.

If you get an exist with a VLD then you are fastly approaching or have exceeded the impact specs of the bullet. period. It's not designed to exist. Partition, Monolithic, bonded.... Designed to exist. Berger VLD is designed explode and exhibit all its energy internally.

And I've seen what happens when all that energy is dumped into the first few inches...it'll knock them in the dirt on impact. But Bullet design is thrown into this argument bc it's making the ballistics argument. However, everyone knows the bullet has to do something once it gets there regardless of how pinpoint the accuracy is. I don't have an issue with folks shooting stuff that far, I've just seen too many times match-designed bullets that print well not perform. I'd suggest finding that happy medium with a better than avg BC and master it.

Btw, the Shiras those bullets almost cost the same guy met minimum B&C.

Now that I think about it, one of the first advocates for LR hunting encouraged large for cartridge partitions. 300wm pushing 200 partitions IIRC.

I think the " argument" NP is trying to make is for momentum. Which he has yet to make any points towards given the OPs specified request. Now if we would like to interject physics into this Force = Mass x Acceleration.

All you need to sufficiently take most north American game from a bow is 55ft lbs. Yet you're staying you need over 1000Ft lbs for a thin framed / thin skinned deer. If you were hunting elk, I might be inclined to agree you need a larger caliber. Perhaps a 6.5 mm or larger.

Shot placement trumps mass of projectile on deer, every time.

That equation can go to squat at impact with no weight retention, which will kill V, which will kill penetration. Even happens at 5k ft/lbs with a bullet that doesn't hold together.

Well, since arrows and bullets kill in completely different ways that comparison is kind of silly. People used to know that too.

The math can't take that into account. It only gets you to impact. Impact on the animal is where the rubber hits the road. Folks used to know that too.

John Taylor who shot more game than all of us combined felt a bullet needed a velocity of 2000 fps at impact to creat the "shock effect" that makes modern cartridges more effective killers than the older cartridges.

What's the velocity of a .243 at 500 yards and 700 yards?

My current conditions with a 115 VLD, MV 3000 fps.

500 yards 2199 fps
700 yards 1917 fps

Do you have the figures for a .300 Win Mag 150 grain started out at 3400 fps?

Folks used to NOT know how to make a solid hit as far out as we're talking now. That's out the window, and is attainable. All due to BC, chronographs, and free accurate ballistic calculators.

155 gr Berger, keeping apples to apples.

500 yards 2390 fps
700 yards 2035 fps

Gotta have the bullet.

I've also seen other bullet exceed thier designed purpose and fail including the accubond.

Again bullets are designed for impact velocities. Running them in the grey area makes for unhappy customers eventually.

Those first advocates pushed the partition because that's all thier was. Partition also at that time got a bad press for failing in the lighter bullets also, causing Nosler to make changes.

Life is a lot better when people realize every bullet on the market has impact limitations.

One that'll hold together better will beat one that won't every day of the weak. Have yet to have an AB do what the VLDs have. That includes making contact well above and well below min/max.

.270 'Nuff said.

Folks still know it well most. Infact every bullet made has an impact range under or above those ranges you are asking for trouble.

It takes less then 2 inches of tissue to get into the vitals of any cloved good game animal in North America.

You're right NP a Sherman tank ain't got any thing on a deer

Again going back to what this thread is about explain to me how the 115gr lacks enough energy to penetrate in to the vitals of a deer, then explain why the velocity and mass will not effectively destroy the soft organs.

And you're missing the boat, the VLDs are making impact in the velocity range.

your argument is void, why not just use solids.

Dead is dead, destroyed organs means a dead animal. Whether it be souped or small hole dead is dead.

The result you want is an opinion on what you prefer.

What was the Impact speed then? Don't forget to adjust for altitude.

He'll send me the info I'll run it.

But Ill say this running any cup core bullet that hot at the muzzle is a recipe to destroy bullet integrity

Bump that to a 210 VLD Hunting @ 2900 MV

500 yards 2215 fps
700 yards 1970 fps

However!

500 yards 2288 ft/ lbs
700 yards 1970 ft/ lbs

BC I want a mushroom over shrapnel...

I will say this. If I was at Bobo's place and he handed me a 243 to kill a pronghorn with, and told me it would get it done, I'd dry fire it to learn the trigger and move on.

That's what YOU want.

Rifleman would too. NP would not. I will give him lots of credit. He will not exceed his preset lower range limit. Which is very commendable and respectable.

That's your controlled energy transfer. Not shrapnel that may or may not reach vitals.

1600-2200 the 3600 impact was just ridiculous

On a side note, a 55gr .224 cal bullet didn't make it through shoulder either on that same deer..it had some bad luck.

They do now, since modern smokeless powder and bullet construction changed that.

3600 is what I thought you said muzzle was. What was muzzle velocity?

Is that legal in CO?

7mm 180 gr. VLD, 3080 fps MV. Impacted at 50 yards. He ran 50 yards and this was the scene. Most of that blood contains lots of lung tissue. I think it worked fine.

That's rough, probably closer to 3500...3675.

Nope...180" deer are in danger up there with a cpl wardens working areas the size of several of our counties.

I have a bobcat picture shot with the 115 VLD, it's a little gruesome, hit quartering and no exit at roughly 60yds.

I'm still trying to figure out why all wild animals are like tame cows on the HF/LF threads, but you can't get closer than 700 yards on these threads.

There are more VLD horror stories than you can shake a stick at. But the LR guys won't hear it because a target is a target.

Craig Boddington says in his latest book any shot over 700 at game is "stunting". He is right. Of course, I'm sure y'all could teach ol' Craig a thing or two.

In my case, you get deer that hole up in spots like this where what's behind her is basically what you have with a 360 view. Ain't no sneaking up on them. (That could go to the 10k HF thread). Luckily hers was where you could hit a little ridge and get to 400, on down it ain't happening.

Why in the hell are you shooting deer at 700 yards?

If you want a challenge do like normal folks and take up bow hunting.

I know some think I am stubborn and argumentative on the subject of long-range hunting. Guilty. But let me bring this full-circle and explain where I am coming from:

Guys who can consistently kill an animal at 500 yards plus are as rare as hen's teeth. They are the brain surgeons of the hunting world. They are super diligent, knowledgeable, and committed to their craft. But the difference is this: brain surgeons are licensed-they must prove their competence. Long-range hunters do not.

So books, articles, TV shows, equipment have proliferated-all dedicated to the idea that anyone can do it with the right equipment and a little know how. So you have a bunch of folks who think they are brain surgeons. They create more folks who think they can be brain surgeons too. And it's getting ridiculous. Folks get caught up in their own BS-and what might be done all of a sudden turns into what should be done.

The result is threads like this defending a patently dumb proposition: shooting at a deer or antelope with a .243 and a VLD bullet at 700 yards.

I like that. I've voiced my opinion on this subject many times here so no need to do it again but I must say that word describes it perfectly.

Not agruing if I would of shot that far, not my cup of tea either. But 243 with the 115gr dtac is very effective at range. The math doesn't lie.

I don't doubt the math, I doubt the fool pulling the trigger. Maybe you and some of the others are just that gifted, most are not.

Yep.

I wouldn't take the shot that far, but I also havent dedicated myself to range like those guys either.

You can't condone something that you can't phatom just because it's not your cup of tea.

I know guys with bow kills from 60-100 yards. I'm not going to be the one to take smack when you find out those guys shoot 100arrows a day to 150 yards, and bust nocks at 60-100 yard range. Doesn't mean they live for the 100 yard kill. Just means they know the limitations, and prepare for worst case.

But the agruement wasn't the shooter it was the caliber and bullet combo. Math doesn't lie it still carries the energy to be what most consider to be effective

Thanks, so a .300 Win Mag loaded pretty hot is about like a .30-30 at the muzzle at 500 yards and about like a .30-30 at 100 yards at 700 yards. I think that's what I would use for long range shooting if I did it.

223

Don't start.

Hold on, I've memorized this argument and it's going to be counter-productive to the current argument. Carry on.

Geez Louise guys...I'd be happy as a pig in poop if I could convince the State of Anywhere in the US to require a Shooting Test to Prove Proficiency at 100 yards...whether it was a moving target or not, like I had in Finland on a moving target for a Moose Permit, in order to QUALIFY for a Hunting License....any Hunting License for a Game Animal that the State requires you make a valid attempt to recover. That'll never happen in My lifetime I know.

As far as killing State managed Game Animals at Long Range, again I'd say Prove you can hit at xxxx yards for a License to hunt anything classed as a Game Animal...then go forth and slay an Ark Full...otherwise all the Wannabe's need to go work on thier provable skills and try again next year.

A very very very small % could do it with ease past even 2-300 yards unless they were sitting in a box blind & hunting over a feeder, shooting off a window sill, and I'd bet the same % of qualified LR shooters are here on THF & I have no problems with that level of achievement as they have EARNED THAT RIGHT WITH COMMITIMENT & HARD WORK. But, I'll say again, BUT ...IMO the great unwashed majority of weekend wannabe folks in the woods with a rifle today scare the poohwah outta me, and most likely could not reliably hit dirt past 50 yards on purpose unless they can duplicate the Shooting Range Bench Rest set of skill levels that they learned & think they are ready to kill sumthin at 500-1000 yards, from what I've seen.

Once upon a time I was a pretty fair Field Hunter - not great - but could reliably put meat on the table, and with some months of tuning and compensating caliber wise from the old days of shooting a 300WMg like most folks shot a 243 in those days, prolly could be effective again out to 200...300 probably ...and mebbe even ??400+ yards off hand or in field positions again....but at 700 yards??? that never happened way back when and will never happen now, despite all the advances in Equipment, and at my age and physical state of grace.

Dirty Harry's words of wisdom are precient here..." A man's gotta know his limitations" ...and RESPECT them and the Game Animal he's hunting.
JMHO & YMMV

I interrupt the thread for this important announcement:

Guy on a hunting show bowhunting elk hit a bull high above the back ham straight up from the back leg. Blood spurted and I figured he got lucky and hit the femoral. (He did and they found the elk.) The funny part was this: the host said "We looked at the video and it looks like the hit may be high and a little back, so we're gonna give him a little while. I think we may have caught one lung."

Sounds like he will be eating well to me.

Yes. He got lucky. Sling enough lead and arrows and luck will happen sometimes.

(That wasn't the point anyway. The "one lung" comment was. Just thought it was funny.)

Excellent explanation. Congratulations to the young lady on a trophy well deserved. She can shoot better n' me. Some ladies are flat-out deadly.

Hahaha. That is really what it boils down to.

One arrow and he was packing out a bull

Exactly

Deep down you know I have to.

is ya taken notes

Thank ya. Her first and only. She had calm nerves bc I made an executive decision that she was going to shoot it without her putting glass on it until it was time to shoot. So she got a 30.25" deer out of the deal even though it's not the best scoring deer for that particular unit. And the 140gr AB ate on it.

I do not disagree with that entirely.

I tell every single person that comes through my course that I am not trying to make 800 yard killers out of everyone. However, once you learn what you have to do, what the ammo, rifle, and scope has to do to hit repeatedly at 800 yards, 100-400 isn't so tough. Watching the steel swing at 800 and a second later hearing it, is how the fundamentals are driven home.

Almost everyone, young and old, have terrible trigger control. Plus there are other factors they introduce to the shot that they never even thought about. I tell them all, I want you to leave knowing how this all works and knowing what to practice.

.270 for TX or 300 win mag for larger game.

How bought a .223 its cheap to shoot about 10 dollars a box for monarch 55 grain soft points at academy. I've killed boat loads of deer, hogs,coyotes,and various other critters with the .223 I've field tested it and its approved 100% shoulder shots neck shots, its all good. Get you a good bolt gun and save tons of money on ammo. Ive shot big game with about 15 different calibers and the deadliest one I've used is the .223 All the energy is collected in the animal and not just a overpowered pass through. Don't let the size full you, after all they do use it in combat.