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="zog" data-source="post: 1706844" data-attributes="member: 102742"><p>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.</p><p></p><p>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.</p><p></p><p>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.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="zog, post: 1706844, member: 102742"] 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. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Forums
Rifles, Reloading, Optics, Equipment
Rifles, Bullets, Barrels & Ballistics
Do larger calibers really compensate for bad shots?
Top