Forums
New posts
Search forums
What's new
Articles
Latest reviews
Author list
Classifieds
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles and first posts only
Search titles only
By:
New posts
Search forums
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Forums
Rifles, Reloading, Optics, Equipment
Rifles, Bullets, Barrels & Ballistics
Do larger calibers really compensate for bad shots?
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Gcan" data-source="post: 1740828" data-attributes="member: 102867"><p>I agree with you. </p><p></p><p>Like I said. Lots of factors. From a purely academic standpoint, Bigger is better. Clearly, not in every "person's" case. Recoil sensitive is certainly a factor. Big kicks more than small. Big generally weighs more than small. People who cannot shoot probably shouldn't hunt or they should limit their distances. So, notwithstanding the human element, is a big caliber at speed more forgiving on a marginal shot than a small caliber at speed. Absolutely. </p><p></p><p>I'm going back home to hunt whitetails in a few weeks. I'm taking a 300SAUM and a 460 SW mag. I could take almost anything from 243-458. For the hunting I'm doing, the 300SAUM is big enough for all the conditions I expect to encounter. Is it a lot for deer? Perhaps at 100 yards, but not on corn fields or power lines where undisturbed deer are often found @ 600 plus. For the walks to stands where shots are likely under 150 yrds, I'll use the 460 SW. </p><p></p><p>In a vacuum bigger Is better. However, what we do, where we do it, how we do it and when we do it must be part of the question. Otherwise "is bigger better?" is no more relevant than "how far is up?"</p><p></p><p>g</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Gcan, post: 1740828, member: 102867"] I agree with you. Like I said. Lots of factors. From a purely academic standpoint, Bigger is better. Clearly, not in every ”person’s” case. Recoil sensitive is certainly a factor. Big kicks more than small. Big generally weighs more than small. People who cannot shoot probably shouldn’t hunt or they should limit their distances. So, notwithstanding the human element, is a big caliber at speed more forgiving on a marginal shot than a small caliber at speed. Absolutely. I’m going back home to hunt whitetails in a few weeks. I’m taking a 300SAUM and a 460 SW mag. I could take almost anything from 243-458. For the hunting I’m doing, the 300SAUM is big enough for all the conditions I expect to encounter. Is it a lot for deer? Perhaps at 100 yards, but not on corn fields or power lines where undisturbed deer are often found @ 600 plus. For the walks to stands where shots are likely under 150 yrds, I‘ll use the 460 SW. In a vacuum bigger Is better. However, what we do, where we do it, how we do it and when we do it must be part of the question. Otherwise “is bigger better?” is no more relevant than “how far is up?” g [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Forums
Rifles, Reloading, Optics, Equipment
Rifles, Bullets, Barrels & Ballistics
Do larger calibers really compensate for bad shots?
Top