Do larger calibers really compensate for bad shots?

[yobuck]

A bigger bullet with lots of velocity will cause more bleeding than a smaller one, even on the less than desirable hits.
Ultimately they all die, but it's better they do sooner rather than later.

 

[PredatorSlayer]

We see a lot of comments and discussion, but we seem to have overlooked an important issue.

Getting a proper hit is a lot easier with smaller bullets than with huge bullets.

Too many of us (I am a reformed large bullet addict too.) follow the idea of big bullets as a cover for poor shot placement, plus macho bragging rights, but fail to realize that the recoil distracts us from being sure the shot is on the mark.

Reformed large bullet addict - love it. I hunt elk more than anything else except maybe coyotes. I hunt Idaho, Utah, Montana, Wyoming - so I know the cost of paying out of state fees (always DIY, never guided). I went from a 270 (first rifle at 14), to a 7mm to a 300 wby to a 300 Rum, picked up a 325 wsm along the way. Back down to a 270wsm - sold all my 7mm/300 mags recently and am probably going to go to a 6.5 as my main elk rifle. I am not small or recoil shy, in my late 30's 6.5 240lbs - these smaller calibers have killed just as effectively as the large ones that I owned.

 

[Bull 228]

I call BS

this guys "can kill with a miss" has been busted multiple times

I'm with you on this....I gotta throw the BS flag down at his death by proximity synopsis...but I'm no scientist.

 

[Sam Pace]

Ummmm .... no.

And I say no bc this kind of thinking creates a mentality that will create poor judgement for many unthinking hunters. "Hey ... I got a giant gun so I can take **** poor shots and I'll probably kill the animal."

There's probably a technical "yes" for many of us who think and occasionally make a bad shot where a larger caliber would help us. But for the unthinking many it's a giant "no" from me.

 

[betolatinlu]

Would you rather be shot wit a .22 or a .50 caliber?... I think that is the point of the statement... A 300 grain 338 bullet or a 95 grain 6.. bullet using your example... Marksmanship can be a factor in how either one preforms .... I guess how much more can dead be. This is a long range forum... So bigger heavier bullets that retain energy and buck the wind on the larger calibers that push the limits is always going to be preferable at long range .. Dave

Would you be DEADER if I shot you in the heart with a .22 rimfire or would you be DEADER if I shot you in the heart with a .460 Weatherby magnum ?

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?

 

[19elkhunter51]

The original question is a flawed question. My belief is you take the best shot that YOU are capable of taking. ANYONE that says they have never had a bad shot is one of two things: Hasn't hunted more than one season or is just an out and out bald faced liar. We were all the first one and we all detest the second one.
I guess for the most of us elk are the measure of a tough bullet/caliber consideration. I can shoot my 338 Edge just as well as my 22-250. Not everyone can handle the recoil of the big gun. If you are one of the people that can't handle the recoil, then shoot the biggest that you can shoot well. Don't take poor percentage shots and practice enough to make every shot count.
NOBODY that is an ethical hunter takes a poor shot. If you have hunted much you have had the bad shot. Some reason, not your fault, the animal moves, the scope got banged on a rock, it doesn't matter, still a bad shot. At that point it doesn't matter. You now have a wounded animal that you must pursue and QUICKLY put it down.
I shoot a 338 because I believe that a larger caliber bullet puts more energy in the animal resulting in a faster, cleaner kill.
My opinion for what it is worth.

 

[zb338]

Lets face it guys. We all know that the larger medium bore calibers such
as the .375 H&H have more killing power than the smaller stuff.

Zeke

 

[msmith57]

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?

you only need one KILL shot I used to hunt everything with a 22-250 from Elk to Gophers. ONE shot is all it takes never missed 50 yds to 1000 yds one shot kills is all it takes. learn to shoot your gun what ever cal it is. I've hunted with many cals from 22 to 45 30 cal is a better heavy brush gun than the 22 or 243 cals bigger 30 cal and 22-250 for long range. bottom line is Learn to shoot your favorite gun and it won't let you down.

 

[zog]

The way I look at it is not about a truly bad shot, but what about a kinda bad shot? A 338 close to the heart is gonna be a kill. A 22-250 close to the heart might not kill, or it would probably kill much slower. A 22-250 just above or below the spine would most likely result in a running deer. A 338 just above or below the spine will drop elk like a ton of bricks.

The bigger question is what do you shoot best? I went with smaller cal because I'm better at shooting it. Maybe I'm admitting to being a little wimpy, but my .270 groups are tighter than my 300 win mag, especially when shooting under pressure.

1951 says he can shoot his 338 as well as his 22-250. If that was me there is no question I would take a 338. But it's not me. A 338 would result in more chance of a bad shot for me.

 

[laker]

Won't take that shot?? Not from a keyboard ( or cell phone screen) anyways!! Lol. Just a small flaming... on paper, less than ideal, in the moment? Well I have had the opportunity to... well... ummm...let's just say-learn from mistakes. Even successful mistakes.

I used to make the excuse for not shooting Bergers because I thought I needed a bullet that could penetrate from any angle just Incase the shot came up. Then I started paying attention to the shots I was waiting to take and no time have I ever even thought about taking a hard quartering shot that puts the bullet through the hind quarter as I have always waited for a slight quartering shot or broadside shot. That's when I switched to Bergers and have nothing but success with them from broadside to quartering to frontal shots

 

[okie man]

a 225gr eldx out of a 300 mag is much better at punching through a elk shoulder than a 143 eldx out of a creedmoor!

 

[Deleted member 107796]

Getting a proper hit is a lot easier with smaller bullets than with huge bullets.

This is just not true if you are properly trained with a large caliber that shoots great. Many others have articulated that with whatever caliber, if you shoot it well you will kill well. It has zero to do with being macho, addicted or bragging unless you haven't grown up. As to the OP, you simply cannot discount whatever it is that increased downrange energy gives you from a large caliber, and that's the difference.

 

[ducky]

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?

Late to the party and haven't read all the replies, but I do believe larger calibers do help. However, they have to create bigger wound channels and cause more damage than smaller faster bullets. A gut shot animal is a gut shot animal, .243 Win vs. .338 Win I believe the animal will succumb to its injuries sooner with the .338 Win. This doesn't change the fact that you'll probably have to track both animals, you'll probably just find one sooner than the other.

I also believe that most hunters have a better chance of placing a more accurate shot with a .243 Win than a .338 Win. So possibly the insurance of a larger caliber is a wash because of the shootability of the .243 Win. Now would I choose a .357 Mag over a .243 for a deer rifle, not unless some stupid game laws required it.

I really like 6mm to .308 diameter cartridges for the majority of my hunting. I tend to lean towards the .270 Win for most of my hunting as it balances power and shootability and works well for the game and ranges I hunt mostly in Colorado. I'm not saying the cartridge I chose 20+ years ago to hunt with is perfect by any means, it is just what I keep going back to even though I try others from time to time.

 

[JASmith]

This set of articles give some insight into how much bullet is enough:

http://shootersnotes.com/ideal-bullet-weight/

The main point is that doubling over the recommended minimum weight does not appreciably increase the probability of kill or time to final collapse.

Go big enough that the animal has large portions of the body cavity blasted away will cause faster kills on average. But, are we talking about merely killing, or are we talking about harvesting game?