Page 1 of 5 123 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 20 of 96

Thread: Something to kick around. (Or, I ben thinking agin.)

  1. #1
    Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    SwampView AK, Overlooking Mt. Mckinley and Points Beyond.
    Posts
    8,815

    Default Something to kick around. (Or, I ben thinking agin.)

    Gentlemen:

    WHY would one choose a 338 Fed, or 358 Win, OR 338-08 or 35 Whelen,

    OVER a 308 or 30-06?

    OK, you could say "larger cal." but it's not that much, especially in 338, and you could say, "heavier bullet" but you very likely won't be shooting 250 grain bullets, and you can shoot 220s in the 30-06 and have better Sectional Density.

    Say, you can get more velocity with the larger base of the bullet, but Well, the bullet is SHORTER, (LESS SD)

    In such a case or cases, Why bother? Do you see a real advantage with the larger 33 or 35 cal.?

    Thanks
    Smitty of the North
    Walk Slow, and Drink a Lotta Water.
    Has it ever occurred to you, that Nothing ever occurs to God? Adrien Rodgers.
    You can't out-give God.

  2. #2
    Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Location
    Alaska
    Posts
    1,378

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Smitty of the North View Post
    Gentlemen:

    WHY would one choose a 338 Fed, or 358 Win, OR 338-08 or 35 Whelen,

    OVER a 308 or 30-06?

    OK, you could say "larger cal." but it's not that much, especially in 338, and you could say, "heavier bullet" but you very likely won't be shooting 250 grain bullets, and you can shoot 220s in the 30-06 and have better Sectional Density.

    Say, you can get more velocity with the larger base of the bullet, but Well, the bullet is SHORTER, (LESS SD)

    In such a case or cases, Why bother? Do you see a real advantage with the larger 33 or 35 cal.?

    Thanks
    Smitty of the North
    Smitty good thoughts. I'm new to caliber discussions and I'm a 30-06 shooter. One thing I've noticed up here in Alaska is the affection for bigger bullets by some.
    I then wonder is the affection driven by necessity or simply something else? Is it a bragging point or a compensation? Before I moved up here I hunted with a .243 and I struggled with getting the 30-06. I kept the .243 and it's getting passed on to the wife. Bigger than 30-06 just confuses me.

  3. #3
    Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    Anchorage
    Posts
    2,587

    Default

    These conversations come up on a pretty regular basis, and I rather enjoy them. To be honest, I just don't get the fascination with the heavy artillery up here. Everyone will agree that bullet placement is paramount over bullet size. For example, you can shoot a moose in the buttox with a 416 and he'll run away with a limp, but he'll still run away.

    Someone on these forums once stated that a bolt action 30-06 was Alaska's "do it all rifle" and I quite agree. In fact, I think it is North America's do it all rifle. Even at that, I have a 243 for caribou. (Although I never did rule out putting a 30 cal barrel on it.) I will also say I haven't yet shot a caribou with a 243 myself, but I know some folks in one of the villages who says that he and a handful of others use a 243 exclusively for all their hunting.

    I try to be pragmatic about shooting and hunting. I can see no discernible advantages in those heavier calibers, but they are significantly more expensive to buy ammo for. Even for reloading, they require more powder, so should be mor expensive to reload than a 30-06. I just don't see 338 bla blabla magnum as the most practical means to the desired end.

    Note: I'm no expert and my opinions and advice are worth exactly what you paid for them. They also come with a money back guarantee.

  4. #4
    Member hodgeman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Delta Junction AK
    Posts
    4,055

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Smitty of the North View Post
    In such a case or cases, Why bother? Do you see a real advantage with the larger 33 or 35 cal.?
    The main thing I've noticed with bigger bores are, not surprisingly, bigger wound channels. Is that reason enough? Maybe.

    I think the .338FED and the .35 Whelen to be very good ideas- and in the case of the Whelen, you get something like 90% of the performance of the bigger cannons with nominally more recoil than an '06 and the .338-06 is much the same.

    I believe with modern bullets the 220gr .308 bullets to be something of an anachronism... despite the high density I can't imagine one out penetrating a 180gr TSX, TBBC, ETip or even an AB and the increased bore friction makes for low MV and a trajectory like a thrown rock.

    That said. I am a real fan of the .30cal... and I've never found it wanting to date in everything from a .308Win to my .300 magnum.
    "I do not deal in hypotheticals. The world, as it is, is vexing enough..." Col. Stonehill, True Grit

  5. #5
    Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    Anchorage
    Posts
    2,587

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by hodgeman View Post
    The main thing I've noticed with bigger bores are, not surprisingly, bigger wound channels. Is that reason enough? Maybe.

    I think the .338FED and the .35 Whelen to be very good ideas- and in the case of the Whelen, you get something like 90% of the performance of the bigger cannons with nominally more recoil than an '06 and the .338-06 is much the same.

    I believe with modern bullets the 220gr .308 bullets to be something of an anachronism... despite the high density I can't imagine one out penetrating a 180gr TSX, TBBC, ETip or even an AB and the increased bore friction makes for low MV and a trajectory like a thrown rock.

    That said. I am a real fan of the .30cal... and I've never found it wanting to date in everything from a .308Win to my .300 magnum.
    Anachronism....now there is a word to my liking.

    In response to the latest and greatest TSX bullets, I ask the following question: did something change that makes older bullets, such as cup and core, less than lethal? Cup and core bullets having been successfully taking game all over the planet for several generations now. While I recognize the. "New and improved" status of the TSX, and I recognize the "March of progress" I don't see any reason to abandon cup and core technology, especially at twice the cost.

  6. #6
    Member hodgeman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Delta Junction AK
    Posts
    4,055

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by FL2AK-Old Town View Post
    Anachronism....now there is a word to my liking.

    In response to the latest and greatest TSX bullets, I ask the following question: did something change that makes older bullets, such as cup and core, less than lethal? Cup and core bullets having been successfully taking game all over the planet for several generations now. While I recognize the. "New and improved" status of the TSX, and I recognize the "March of progress" I don't see any reason to abandon cup and core technology, especially at twice the cost.
    I don't think "cup and core" bullets are out dated at all...heck I love them in many applications if not most applications. It's just that when you start getting into these very heavy for bore bullets like the 220gr in the '06 or the 250gr in the .338, you're giving up a lot of MV and effective range to get equal penetration to what's available with the mono metal and bonded bullets. Just seems like a poor trade off especially considering many of the .308 and '06 rifles don't shoot the heavy stuff all that well anyway. For my '06 and my .308 I'm perfectly happy shooting the Core Lokt and Power Point and bullet performance is certainly adequate at the velocity these generate. If I want to tackle bigger beasts I'll use a tougher bullet, not a heavier one.

    Where I leave the cup and core stuff behind is when MV goes north of 3000 fps. Most of the cup and cores won't withstand the impact velocity on close range shots and the newer controlled expansion and mono-metals actually work better when the speeds go up. In my .300 I've settled on the Accubond as the best choice for all my hunting since it expands well and stays intact from muzzle to beyond where I'll shoot. In my .257 Wby, I thought the TSX was the bee's knees considering a regular cup and core would become a grenade at 3500fps impact velocity.

    I think cup and core is great, providing it's used in proper application.
    "I do not deal in hypotheticals. The world, as it is, is vexing enough..." Col. Stonehill, True Grit

  7. #7
    Member The Kid's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    Los Anchorage
    Posts
    1,089

    Default

    IMO sectional density means jack squat when talking modern expanding bullets. Back when all jacketed bullets were of essentially the same construction it may have had some merit but not so much today. Think of comparing a 180gr Nosler partition's penetration with a 220gr hornady round nose, I would bet my lunch money that the 220 will lose. The contest gets even worse for the big heavy when we use a modern super bullet like the TSX or gmx in the lighter bullet's corner of the ring.

    Although the SD number is terrible I will bet a shiny new nickel that a 180gr 35cal TTSX at 2800fps will out penetrate any conventional 220gr 30 cal as long as the 30 is a SP. SD numbers fly out the window as soon as the bullet begins to expand because the SD is changing as the caliber increases with expansion.

  8. #8

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Smitty of the North View Post

    OVER a 308 or 30-06?

    Easy. Cuzz I already have the 30-06 and 308.

  9. #9
    Sponsor ADfields's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    Missing Palmer AK in Phonix AZ.
    Posts
    6,416

    Default

    Well it's as simple as this, larger caliber bullets kill better than smaller ones. Smaller caliber bullets fly better and need less energy (less recoil) to kill farther out becouse they waste less gas getting there. So turn the question around, why giv up the better killing propertys of the 338/358 pill for the range ability of 308 then never ever shoot over them at ranges where 30 cal has an advantage? If you will never shoot over 300 yards why not neck that case up?
    Andy
    On the web= C-lazy-F.co
    Email= Andy@C-lazy-F.co
    Call/Text 602-315-2406
    Phoenix Arizona

  10. #10
    Member mekaniks's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    Seward
    Posts
    206

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Smitty of the North View Post
    Gentlemen:

    WHY would one choose a 338 Fed, or 358 Win, OR 338-08 or 35 Whelen,

    OVER a 308 or 30-06?

    OK, you could say "larger cal." but it's not that much, especially in 338, and you could say, "heavier bullet" but you very likely won't be shooting 250 grain bullets, and you can shoot 220s in the 30-06 and have better Sectional Density.

    Say, you can get more velocity with the larger base of the bullet, but Well, the bullet is SHORTER, (LESS SD)

    In such a case or cases, Why bother? Do you see a real advantage with the larger 33 or 35 cal.?

    Thanks
    Smitty of the North
    In my opinion it depends on what you expect to do with the cartridge. .308 and 30-06 are both very good and very versitle rounds. Both will shoot a good range of 110 - 220 grains bullets and they both seem to preform at their best with 150 - 168 grain bullets. Very Very good all around calibers.

    That said, the .338 fed, 338-06 and .35 Whalen, which are essentially ballisticlly comprable to each other, all preform at their best with bullets over 200g.

    When I made the decision to go with a 338 fed it was because I wanted a larger dia bullet (.338) and optimal performance with 200+ grain bullets and still maintin the .308 case size.

    So to me its similar to making a comparison between the 7-08 and 308. The 7-08 will every thing a 308 will do, but a 308 will do some of it better. And vice versa....

  11. #11
    Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    SwampView AK, Overlooking Mt. Mckinley and Points Beyond.
    Posts
    8,815

    Default

    I'm thinking along the lines that any caliber needs a good SD bullet, no matter what it's made of. SD is a big part of BC, as well as important to penetration and terminal performance.

    (Bullets without lead gum up the works because they are larger for the same weight, and harder in composition.)

    You go UP in caliber with the same case, and you're gonna probably use a lighter/shorter/and less SD bullet for the sake of velocity.

    I dunno if a larger caliber kills better, or if it makes up for the poorer bullet, for range and penetration.

    Is there a HUGE difference in 30 cal. and 35 Caliber? If so, that could justify upping the caliber, and using the same bullet weight. Adding more of BOTH, would make more sense to me.

    Going from 308 to 338-06 or 35 Whelen, or goin from 338 Fed. to 338-06, or 35 Whelen.

    But NOT 308 to 338 Fed, or 358 Win. OR 30-06 to 338-06/35 Whelen.

    These are just examples of course, and the same principal could be applied to many cartridges, but which matters the most, bullet weight or caliber?

    Smitty of the North
    Walk Slow, and Drink a Lotta Water.
    Has it ever occurred to you, that Nothing ever occurs to God? Adrien Rodgers.
    You can't out-give God.

  12. #12
    Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    Anchorage
    Posts
    2,587

    Default

    My late uncle and I were having a similar discussion on 9mm and 45 cal at the rifle range one day years ago, and he coined this phrase: "Bottom line, bigger hole going in, more blood coming out."

    I don't believe that is the end all be all to this subject matter, but it's hard to argue with that statement. It was not enough to persuade me to go buy a 45 cal gun, and it's not enough to persuade me to buy a shoulder cannon, either.

  13. #13
    Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Veneta, OR
    Posts
    1,156

    Default

    the only examples I can add to this debate are elk which I've killed with 7mm / 150 ballistic tips as well as 338 / 250 Barnes X and more with 338 size pills than 7mm - They all died and tasted good but the ones that I remember as being "dramatic" have ALWAYS been with 338's and dramatic describes their endings well - I killed one moose with an 8mm / 220 and it wasn't going any direction but down - I've always liked 7mm's because that bore size just seems to work but for succinct results that garner a "wow !" from the gallery I think I'd be forced to pick the 338 - 200/210's work well but 225 &250 class are the "work horses" IMO

  14. #14
    Member hodgeman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Delta Junction AK
    Posts
    4,055

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by back country View Post
    the only examples I can add to this debate are elk which I've killed with 7mm / 150 ballistic tips as well as 338 / 250 Barnes X and more with 338 size pills than 7mm - They all died and tasted good but the ones that I remember as being "dramatic" have ALWAYS been with 338's and dramatic describes their endings well -
    Just using anecdotal evidence... my partner this year shot two caribou with his .338/180gr AB at 300yds... a bullet that was going really fast and has a pitiful SD. He absolutely flattened both of them in their tracks. They weren't any deader than the ones I shot with the .308 this year...but they were dead a lot quicker. Of all the shooting I've seen that was a straight up "turn out the lights" shot that didn't involve head or spine hits- the .338 accounts for most of them.

    On the bigger bull- that short, stubby bullet zipped straight through 5' of caribou on a quartering away shot.
    "I do not deal in hypotheticals. The world, as it is, is vexing enough..." Col. Stonehill, True Grit

  15. #15
    Member mekaniks's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    Seward
    Posts
    206

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Smitty of the North View Post
    I'm thinking along the lines that any caliber needs a good SD bullet, no matter what it's made of. SD is a big part of BC, as well as important to penetration and terminal performance.

    (Bullets without lead gum up the works because they are larger for the same weight, and harder in composition.)

    You go UP in caliber with the same case, and you're gonna probably use a lighter/shorter/and less SD bullet for the sake of velocity.

    I dunno if a larger caliber kills better, or if it makes up for the poorer bullet, for range and penetration.

    Is there a HUGE difference in 30 cal. and 35 Caliber? If so, that could justify upping the caliber, and using the same bullet weight. Adding more of BOTH, would make more sense to me.

    Going from 308 to 338-06 or 35 Whelen, or goin from 338 Fed. to 338-06, or 35 Whelen.

    But NOT 308 to 338 Fed, or 358 Win. OR 30-06 to 338-06/35 Whelen.

    These are just examples of course, and the same principal could be applied to many cartridges, but which matters the most, bullet weight or caliber?

    Smitty of the North
    Ok Smitty I will play, here are some sectional densities and ballistic coefficient from the Federal and Barnes books

    7mm 140g
    Barnes TSX- SD .248
    BC .394
    Fed Partition- SD .248
    BC .434

    .308 180g
    Barnes TSX- SD .271
    BC .453
    Fed Partition-SD .271
    BC .474

    .338 225g
    Barnes TSX- SD .281
    BC .386
    Fed Partition-SD .313
    BC .473

    .366(9.3) 286g
    Barnes TSX- SD .305
    BC .411
    Fed Partition-SD .307
    BC .494

    I included 7mm and 9.3 just for reference because they are on either side of what you are talking about. So now I forget the question????

  16. #16
    Member The Kid's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    Los Anchorage
    Posts
    1,089

    Default

    SD has nothing to do with BC. I could turn an aluminum bullet on a lathe with an enormous BC number and have an almost non existant SD because it would be super light. Likewise you could make a 500 grain 25 caliber slug that would probably be 4 inches long, but if it's shaped like a wadcutter the BC will suck.

  17. #17
    Member Akheloce's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    Homer
    Posts
    1,135

    Default

    IMO, I like big heavy bullets running at moderate velocities for maximum penetration and minimal meat loss. I hunt with both an -06 and a 35 Whelen.

    If I were limited to 180 gr, I obviously would use the -06. Until I can get a 310 gr bullet in the -06, I will continue to use my Whelen when feasible.
    ΜΟΛΩΝ ΛΑΒΕ

  18. #18
    Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    SwampView AK, Overlooking Mt. Mckinley and Points Beyond.
    Posts
    8,815

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by The Kid View Post
    SD has nothing to do with BC.
    YEAH IT DOES.

    SD is included in the calculation of BC. SD effects BC.

    "The three points that govern the Ballistics Coefficient are weight, diameter, and shape. The first two, can be used to create the Sectional Density".

    "The Ballistic Coefficient measures the bullet's ability to conquer air resistance. Mathematically, it is the ratio between the Sectional Density and the Coefficient of Form".

    Smitty of the North
    Walk Slow, and Drink a Lotta Water.
    Has it ever occurred to you, that Nothing ever occurs to God? Adrien Rodgers.
    You can't out-give God.

  19. #19

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by The Kid View Post
    IMO sectional density means jack squat when talking modern expanding bullets. Back when all jacketed bullets were of essentially the same construction it may have had some merit but not so much today. Think of comparing a 180gr Nosler partition's penetration with a 220gr hornady round nose, I would bet my lunch money that the 220 will lose. The contest gets even worse for the big heavy when we use a modern super bullet like the TSX or gmx in the lighter bullet's corner of the ring.

    Although the SD number is terrible I will bet a shiny new nickel that a 180gr 35cal TTSX at 2800fps will out penetrate any conventional 220gr 30 cal as long as the 30 is a SP. SD numbers fly out the window as soon as the bullet begins to expand because the SD is changing as the caliber increases with expansion.
    Kid, from what i've seen of the new fangled bonded and super bonded and TSX's and all the rest is little hole in little hole out. That is how it is with all of the standard cartridges. They turn into another animal when another 500 fps are added to them. Cup and core bullets act like varmint bullets in the super duper magnums but cup and core bullets work wonders when shot out of anything based on the 308 or 06 cases.


    All bullet makers are trying to out do each other and come up with something new and better their competition. I grew up watching Curt Gowdy kill brown bear after brown bear with a 30-06. He shot cup and core bullets. My older brother went to Alaska and paid lots of green backs to have his guide put a big bear in his lap. He was shooting a .416 Rigby with a 400 grain cup and core bullet when he pulled the trigger on a 9-1/2 footer standing broadside at 60 yards. He hit the bear right on the shoulder as the guide had suggested. That big bullet knocked that bear off his feet and the said you made a perfect hit. Two days later they gave up trailing the bear which got away walking on three legs.

    When Le got home he did all sorts of penetration tests and found out that those cup and core bullets running 500 fps slower penetrated a whole lot better. This was before the TSX's so they weren't considered back then but from his tests he realized his mistake. Had he been shooting a Swift "A" Frame he would have had a dead bear.

    From what I remember about Curt Gowdy's hunts with his trusty 06 was that he shot them in the boiler room rather than trying to break one down with a shoulder shot.

  20. #20

    Default

    A typist I am not. When I hurry I leave words out. The last post is proof. basically what I was trying to say is that cup and core bullets are as good as they've always been in the 308 and 30-06 family of cartridges. The new fangled bullets don't perform well at those velocities but are wonderful if your of the big and fast crowd.

    As for me, I shoot only cup and core bullets in my .223, 243,7mm-08,308 and 358's. I wouldn't be afraid to hunt anything on this continent with a 358 Winchester and a 250 gr Hornady round nose. Same could be said for 30-06 with a big bullet. I just so happen to like the 358 Winchester.

Page 1 of 5 123 ... LastLast

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •