Do larger calibers really compensate for bad shots?

[Stgraves260]

I have seen this mentioned in several threads lately. My experience has been a gutshot animal with a 338 is just as bad as a gutshot animal with a 243. I am not convinced bigger calibers allow for a materially greater margin of error, especially if you are shooting a berger type bullet or one that expands well. What are y'alls thoughts?

Nothin beats a well placed shot.

 

[IdahoCTD]

No way. a gut shot is a gut shot. It will still suffer and more than likey ruin some meat and make your pack out much harder.

Since your new around here lets hear your experience with large calibers. I've killed 40+ elk with calibers from 6.5x47L to .416 Remington in centerfire rifles and over a dozen with muzzleloaders. I've witnessed probably close to double that many more shot by other people as well. You'll never convince me that a Berger, or any bullet for that matter, out of a 6.5x47L will kill anything shot anywhere better than a .416 Remington. The question of ruining meat was never mentioned and is kind of a given with a bad shot anywhere in a animal as is the suffering and the potential for a worse pack out.

A buddy and I did a lot of bullet and caliber testing on bears shot off of bait. If you've never seen big calibers work it's pretty spectacular. Our bait was 165yds from our shooting position and we shot 12 bears off of the same bait pile one year. The land owner wanted as many shot as possible so we had tons of people get tags and come shoot bears. A lot were shot with a 458 Lott and 460 Weatherby. Either of those with a modified brass Cutting Edge bullet is so spectacular it's like shooting rockchucks with a magnum rifle. The bears would literally go limp and turn basically turn into Jello. I've shot bears with smaller magnums and generally speaking that is not the normal reaction when they are hit.

 

[Orange Dust]

Often after a bad hit it is the difference between complaining about chasing a wounded animal all over creation, and wondering "what happened"?? None or very little blood and no idea where he went. While both are equally bad, and cause great pain and suffering, it can last for days with a little gun, hours with a big one. We havent even discussed what happens when you only get one lung due to angles. Shot a big whitetail buck one time A little over 500 with a 257 wby. Looked perfect broadside in 12x scope, but wasnt. Bullet hit right where intended. Punched a little over 1" hole through one lung and lodged on the other side where the diaphram meets the ribs. Killed him the next afternoon with a 300. Shot him in the neck so got a good look at the first hit. Neither lung collapsed. Several of us agreed he would have lived if infection didnt kill him. Shot another with a big 7 about the same distance. He took a step right when the gun went off. Result gutshot. He went about 40 yards and bedded. Eased up on him and shot him again. This was deer, not elk. Little guns have their place, but experience has shown over and over that for long range hunting big game there are better options IMO

 

[toddlouis]

Since your new around here lets hear your experience with large calibers. I've killed 40+ elk with calibers from 6.5x47L to .416 Remington in centerfire rifles and over a dozen with muzzleloaders. I've witnessed probably close to double that many more shot by other people as well. You'll never convince me that a Berger, or any bullet for that matter, out of a 6.5x47L will kill anything shot anywhere better than a .416 Remington. The question of ruining meat was never mentioned and is kind of a given with a bad shot anywhere in a animal as is the suffering and the potential for a worse pack out.

A buddy and I did a lot of bullet and caliber testing on bears shot off of bait. If you've never seen big calibers work it's pretty spectacular. Our bait was 165yds from our shooting position and we shot 12 bears off of the same bait pile one year. The land owner wanted as many shot as possible so we had tons of people get tags and come shoot bears. A lot were shot with a 458 Lott and 460 Weatherby. Either of those with a modified brass Cutting Edge bullet is so spectacular it's like shooting rockchucks with a magnum rifle. The bears would literally go limp and turn basically turn into Jello. I've shot bears with smaller magnums and generally speaking that is not the normal reaction when they are hit.

The question was does bigger calibers really compensate for bad shot placement and I answered simply as possible that a bad shot is a bad shot no matter the caliber. Lol. I've killed deer and one elk with a 243 with great shot placement but I've also been on the bad end of shot placement from rushing, angle, etc with a 300 win mag and 210 grain bullets.

I'm not trying to convince you of anything or say calibers that I'll never personally shoot aren't spectacular in killing. But shooting bears that you've baited isn't here or there since, I'm assuming, this is about long range hunting.

 

[IdahoCTD]

And once again you'll never convince me that a bad shot from a 6.5x47L will kill an animal faster than a .416 Remington no matter the bullet used in the 6.5x47L. So yes big calibers can compensate for poor shot placement. Displacing more tissue causes more blood loss no matter where it is in the body. Larger calibers displace more tissue and cause more blood loss then smaller ones. Explosive bullets like Bergers and Amax's/ELD-M's can make small calibers kill like big ones but big calibers and big bullets are in a league of their own. I don't think the reference was strictly for long range hunting as it applies to hunting at any distance. Believe it or not bears on bait are super edgy and can run like crazy with fatal hits sometimes. It's amazing the punishment they can take can run off at times. Without experiencing what large calibers can do to animals you'll never be able to form a completely accurate opinion on killing power.

 

[Don A Parsons]

I've noticed that too Idaho,,, good old 30/06 sptizer SP 150 grain'ers or the 190 gr Speere Grand Slams,,, the black bears at 66 feet from the tree stand didn't suck them up very good... Ha

They would puff up like a marshmallow hooked up to a air compressor... LOL...

Mostly small blacks in the 385 to 450 lb range...

Even Elk and Moose with the GS'S took it bad in the 2 to 300++ yard,,, I like my Aught-Six,,, its easy to shoot and well balanced in the recoil department,,, 11 lb canon I call it,,, a bit heavy to pack around threw the day,,, but I managed as I'd use it as a walking stick... LOL...

My 300 """Walter-B""" had some legs,,, it was easy to push the limits with that pipe,,, but it was far and few when that would happen in Eastern Canada or along the Rocky Mountain Range... Purhaps this is why I've scaled back to a cartridge a bit smaller than the 06,,, just me i guess...

Hopefully the critters close the gap now days,,, I'm more than willing to except them at the door step,,, the long distance walks are now limited to 7 to 10 Mile rounders,,, some days I'm lucky to make it 1 mile... Ha...

Taking in the day in the trees is good enough,,, different story if others choose to push the limits... Find what works and give it a go is what my old friend would say... What works for you might not work for me as he'd grab for his old rusty rifle,,, life works out that way I guess... Nothing written in stone that can't be chipped off to relabel with new ideas...

The pie plate is the same size as when I started hunting back in 77,,, hopefully I still have the hands to get a peace of it... Ha... Standing down is a common thing in the hunt fields now days,,, our cattle ranch seems to keep our freezer full,,, that's a plus...

Cheers from the North

 

[Orange Dust]

The question was does bigger calibers really compensate for bad shot placement and I answered simply as possible that a bad shot is a bad shot no matter the caliber. Lol. I've killed deer and one elk with a 243 with great shot placement but I've also been on the bad end of shot placement from rushing, angle, etc with a 300 win mag and 210 grain bullets.

I'm not trying to convince you of anything or say calibers that I'll never personally shoot aren't spectacular in killing. But shooting bears that you've baited isn't here or there since, I'm assuming, this is about long range hunting.

The point is the 300 is a normal cal for elk. Same shot with a 378 wby and there would have been an elk laying under the cloud of red mist. You have to use a large for animal cal to pole axe them with a bad hit. All things being equal the bigger and more powerful gun, the shorter the chase after the shot. A 300 RUM with 200 gr bullets will result in drt to whitetails in the paunch within its point blank range, but i would neither want to clean or eat it afterward. This extra power is wasted until the animal is further than that where it becomes a blessing. Most of the true long range guns require very careful bullet placement under 400 yds, even more so than normal guns, not because of losing the animal, but absolutely ruinung it. Everything is a compromise.

 

[Coyote_Hunter]

I think a lot depends on bullet performance. I've killed elk with 7mmRM, .30-06, .300WM, .338WM and .45-70. Given a bullet that expands reliably but retains enough weight to penetrate deeply, I'll take the damage from the bigger bullets, especially if placement is less than perfect. On poor placement the benefit is questionable to negligible.

Several years ago I shot a cow elk at 400 yards, plus or minus a couple. (We lasered the tress beside it.) The cartridge was a 140g North Fork SS from my 7mm RM. From the blood color, it hit the liver on a broadside and exited, leaving the most massive blood trail I've ever seen - ribbons of blood 2-3" wide and 2-3 feet long, with blood waist high on the brush on both sides of her trail. We expected the cow to be down around the next clump of oak but no such luck. Instead we trailed er over a ridge, across a small valley and over a high ridge before the blood trail petered out. She got to the edge of the property and could have gone onto one of several neighboring ranches where we didn't have permission to go. Looked for her until dusk, then again the next morning with no success. Having seen the damage from both, I am convinced using a 225g AB from my .338WM would have resulted in a different ending. Even though considerably slower, the .338 225's make bigger holes and do more damage than the 7mm 140's.

Although not a fan of frangible bullets in most cases, this was one case where using a Berger VLD or similar might also have resulted in a happier outcome.

 

[memtb]

I have followed this thread, first with interest, which has now transformed into disbelief. There have been several comments that have bordered on fantasy. If these parties actually believe what they've stated....they are delusional. I've hunted most of my life, and for the last 36 or 37 years with what many would consider "overkill". I've used it on game from WhitetailAntelope sized game to Moose, at ranges from less than 10 yards to over 400 yards.....and have yet to witness some of the "claimed" dramatic results from cartridges of considerably less diameter and often less velocity. I honestly question if some of these comments are coming from people that have actually hunted big game....with something other than a keyboard! memtb

 

[maximini14 223]

I have seen this mentioned in several threads lately. My experience has been a gutshot animal with a 338 is just as bad as a gutshot animal with a 243. I am not convinced bigger calibers allow for a materially greater margin of error, especially if you are shooting a berger type bullet or one that expands well. What are y'alls thoughts?

 

[JASmith]

Some say a hit anywhere on the body by a 50 BMG anywhere will kill. Interestingly, I know three people who where shot by one and survived.

The hits where, of course, on the legs and two of them required extensive hospitalization. The third was back on duty within about a month or six weeks.

Shot placement is more important than size of the bullet with hunting rifles. The larger calibers make getting precise and accurate hits more challenging. So, the answer to the title is NO.

 

[Tony Formicola]

In my experience I wouldn't use a larger caliber with the thought of fixing a bad shot although there may be some small amount of that effect in some cases...Every shot is different. Instead I like a to bring enough gun because in my experience it offers more shot placement opportunities. For instance within the appropriate range, with the right cartridge/bullet and on the appropriate size game a quartering on shoulder shot is my absolute favorite shot to take. With too light of a bullet, with too much or too little velocity at too close or too long of a range that same shot could prove tragic.

 

[DJ Fergus]

In my experience I wouldn't use a larger caliber with the thought of fixing a bad shot although there may be some small amount of that effect in some cases...Every shot is different. Instead I like a to bring enough gun because in my experience it offers more shot placement opportunities. For instance within the appropriate range, with the right cartridge/bullet and on the appropriate size game a quartering on shoulder shot is my absolute favorite shot to take. With too light of a bullet, with too much or too little velocity at too close or too long of a range that same shot could prove tragic.

I agree you, especially on the quartering shots. I'm not going to specify caliber & velocity limits for anyone else but I have my own personal limits. I've had worst case shots on the largest mass of shoulder bone to go wrong with too small of caliber, when velocity was ideal. I remedied that with a solid copper Barnes in that particular rifle, but it was a trade off and we just don't use that rifle much anymore. Cross wind at long distances is a definite factor that will eventually have to be dealt with. I have my personal limits on caliber & bullet selection set so that I can punch through on the worst case shoulder shot when the wind is hard to judge.

 

[Ingwe]

Some say a hit anywhere on the body anywhere will kill. Interestingly, I know three people who where shot by one and survived.

The hits where, of course, on the legs and two of them required extensive hospitalization. The third was back on duty within about a month or six weeks.

Shot placement is more important than size of the bullet with hunting rifles. The larger calibers make getting precise and accurate hits more challenging. So, the answer to the title is NO.

my argument is that a large caliber does not make up for poor placement BUT a large caliber will do more damage than a smaller one on a poorly placed shot.

In a perfect world non of us miss but I would rather track an elk hit in the guts with a 375 than one shot with a 243.