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="ducky" data-source="post: 1706864" data-attributes="member: 94420"><p>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.</p><p></p><p>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.</p><p></p><p>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.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="ducky, post: 1706864, member: 94420"] 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. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Forums
Rifles, Reloading, Optics, Equipment
Rifles, Bullets, Barrels & Ballistics
Do larger calibers really compensate for bad shots?
Top