But not Kentucky BourbonI for one like the old standards, 243, 270, 308, 30-06 and 300WM. As mentioned above they set the standard back in the day and with the improvements in powder, primers and bullets still lead the pack and have the added advantage of factory ammo available pretty much everywhere. I don't really have anything against the newer cartridges, but tend to disagree with the comment about R&D. You are correct, it doesn't pay for itself, but yet it does along with the hype put forward by the firearms writers. They hype up a new cartridge introduced by the manufacturers not necessarily because it is a new miracle worker, as the 6.5 Creedmoor was introduced. According to the gun writers it was the greatest thing since Canadian Whiskey. Were their comments made after a through personal evaluation under real hunting conditions or the information provided by the manufacturer? Based on their glowing reports a lot of new rifles and ammunition were sold, which is what keeps the world turning. How accurate were the original evaluations? Apparently not very since about a year later these same writers now having experienced the 6.5 Creedmoor did an about face and started talking about the limitations as these rifles started showing up on the used gun racks. After the Creedmoor experience hunters decided that it did not live up to the glowing verses published about it as he newest hunting rifle and reverted back to the old standby's, mostly of the 270, which at normal hunting ranges beat the Creedmoor hand over fist, or the 30-06 which for the most part outshines both of them at normal hunting ranges which for most of us mortals is 300 yards or less. The 6.5 Creedmoor does however have a place, and that is on the rifle ranges, the longer the better. It is a perfectly wonderful paper puncher at extreme ranges, but while it punches paper quite well there is a big difference between punching paper or through the hide of a living animal at longer ranges.
I don't really dislike any cartridge. They all have their own use and place in the hearts of each individual shooter. I shoot competitively as well as hunt. I own several rifles, all of which are listed in the first sentence of this missive and have owned many others over the years. They vary from mild recoiling rifles suitable for deer size animals to shoulder buster magnums that will safely take any animal (except maybe Sasquatch) on the planet. I do not necessarily like recoil any more than anyone else but do not hesitate to use recoil reduction when necessary. The 300WM and larger are shoulder busters. My 300WM has a good recoil pad and more importantly a muzzle brake that reduces the recoil to that similar to a 308. I haven't noticed any difference in the accuracy or velocity with or without the muzzle brake but I do still have the same shoulders that I was born with over 3/4 of a century ago.
But not Kentucky Bourbon.I for one like the old standards, 243, 270, 308, 30-06 and 300WM. As mentioned above they set the standard back in the day and with the improvements in powder, primers and bullets still lead the pack and have the added advantage of factory ammo available pretty much everywhere. I don't really have anything against the newer cartridges, but tend to disagree with the comment about R&D. You are correct, it doesn't pay for itself, but yet it does along with the hype put forward by the firearms writers. They hype up a new cartridge introduced by the manufacturers not necessarily because it is a new miracle worker, as the 6.5 Creedmoor was introduced. According to the gun writers it was the greatest thing since Canadian Whiskey. Were their comments made after a through personal evaluation under real hunting conditions or the information provided by the manufacturer? Based on their glowing reports a lot of new rifles and ammunition were sold, which is what keeps the world turning. How accurate were the original evaluations? Apparently not very since about a year later these same writers now having experienced the 6.5 Creedmoor did an about face and started talking about the limitations as these rifles started showing up on the used gun racks. After the Creedmoor experience hunters decided that it did not live up to the glowing verses published about it as he newest hunting rifle and reverted back to the old standby's, mostly of the 270, which at normal hunting ranges beat the Creedmoor hand over fist, or the 30-06 which for the most part outshines both of them at normal hunting ranges which for most of us mortals is 300 yards or less. The 6.5 Creedmoor does however have a place, and that is on the rifle ranges, the longer the better. It is a perfectly wonderful paper puncher at extreme ranges, but while it punches paper quite well there is a big difference between punching paper or through the hide of a living animal at longer ranges.
I don't really dislike any cartridge. They all have their own use and place in the hearts of each individual shooter. I shoot competitively as well as hunt. I own several rifles, all of which are listed in the first sentence of this missive and have owned many others over the years. They vary from mild recoiling rifles suitable for deer size animals to shoulder buster magnums that will safely take any animal (except maybe Sasquatch) on the planet. I do not necessarily like recoil any more than anyone else but do not hesitate to use recoil reduction when necessary. The 300WM and larger are shoulder busters. My 300WM has a good recoil pad and more importantly a muzzle brake that reduces the recoil to that similar to a 308. I haven't noticed any difference in the accuracy or velocity with or without the muzzle brake but I do still have the same shoulders that I was born with over 3/4 of a century ago.
Yeah, well I still hate it,
Canuck with no chainsaw 
