Best Belted Magnum For Elk & Moose

Fella's;

I, rather recently, got a .338 Winchester magnum.  I don't find the recoil to be excessive compared to the .30-06.  Yes there is more, after all it throws a 75 grain heavier bullet (225 vs 150) at the same velocities as does the ought-6.  But I don't find the recoil to be "killer".  That being said, I'm not gonna go look for something that smacks my shoulder harder either.  There are reasonable & sane limits.  Far as I'm concerned if the .338 can't kill it, it proabably came out of a U.F.O. & I'd just as soon something military dealt with it first.

I got my .338 for four reasons.  Moose, Elk, Bear, and 'cause I wanted one.

900F

.358 STA.

Had this little beast chambered in an M77 MII a while back cause I thought it'd be about as close to a perfect elk hunting combo as there was.  Will be giving the 280 gr. A-Frame at 2800 fps it's first whirl on elk this fall.  Shouldn't be any complications if I do my part.  Imagine it'd put quite a hurt'n on Moose, as well, but don't have a hunt scheduled any time soon for one of those big guys.

On SADDLESORE's comments about using magnums to compensate for other shortcomings     ...     I hear comments like that alot.  I'd imagine there's varying levels of truth to the comments depending on the fella you're talking about.  I'm not really in a position to speculate why others choose the rounds that they do, nor do I waste my valuable time doing so.  For me, my reasons for choosing magnum rounds is pretty simple.  #1, I like them.  #2, I like the performance the offer.  And #3, I tend to shoot them just as well as I do the standard rounds.  In the end that's all that's important to me     ...     if ya like the rounds you're working with, they satisfy your needs and you can shoot them well, you're going to be extremely successful on game.  Later.  >>  klallen

Morning SADDLESORE  >>  Couple comments regarding your post.

There's no doubt fellas can get in over their heads when self-evaluating what they truely can and can not handle with regards to cartridge selection.  But ya have to make sure you keep this in the proper perspective.  It's a "people" issue, not a "cartridge" issue.  It almost sounds like you're blaming magnum cartridges for being harder to shoot when in reality, the cartridge has done nothing wrong.  It is what it is.  If you don't know what a cartridge is about going in, all fault falls on the shooter.  You can't look at a guy shooting a .340 WbyMag all over hell and blame the cartridge for his inaccuracies.  It's the shooter that has made all the incorrect decisions and deserves blame.  I think this is why magnums have the reputation that they do.  We tend to blame the round for inaccuracies instead of the guy pulling the triggers.  Wish that mentality would change.

As was mentioned by TAS earlier (and I'd completely agree), if a fella is taking 3 shots at an 18x18 target, being happy he barely hit it and packing his rifle away, thinking he's ready for hunting season, it wouldn't matter a hill of beans whether he's toting a .300 WinMag or a .308     ...     shitty marksmenship is a shitty marksmenship, no matter the cartridge you put in a persons hand.

I do believe magnums allow you to stretch shot distances, but I think it has just as much to do with the energy delivered at those ranges as it does actually getting from point A to point B effectively.  You mentioned the .270 and .25-06.  Just so happens I have both.  On smaller deer and antelope, I agree, lots of cartridges, small to large, work well at extended ranges.  But when we up the ante to larger game, delivered energy is what I'm looking for.  Even on our larger Mule Deer up here I see it as an advantage to be able to deliver 3400 lbs. of energy on game at 300 yds. (relatively close range, but we'll use it for example sake) with my 7.82 Warbird then to use my .270 (1799 lbs.) or .25-06 (1762 lbs.) at that same range.  Will all three kill?  Certainly and have done so many times.  Still, I like the added security with a heavier bullet.  Even my .358 STA, which starts out much slower then either my .270 or .25-06 gives me an energy advantage at 300 yds. (2800 lbs.) that I see value in.  Take a more exotic cartridge like the .338 Kahn delivering 4564 lbs. of energy at 300 yds. or more energy at 800 yds. then my .270 starts with.  No, at extended ranges, there's definite benefits if you choose to take advantage of them and you'll never be able to sell the notion that there is not.

On your last comment about the .30-30, I agree whole-heartedly with the vast number of animals taken with the round.  But wonder how much of this actually has to do with the simple fact it's been around since before there was hair rather then any real commentary on how great a cartridge it is?  If there's a specific value placed on cartridges because of sheer # of animals taken since it's creation, well, I'd imagine being introduced in 1895 would create a huge advantage for the .30-30 in this regard.  I don't give it that much credit, though.  You hear of folks having a "ho-hum" attitude towards certain cartridges for certain reasons.  I'm easily impressed, interested and excited about lots of different cartridges but even I look at the .30-30; a 170 gr. bullet at 2100 fps and I don't think it's the greatest round cause it's killed millions of animals in it's 110+ years of existence     ...     i get that "ho-hum" feeling.  Different perspectives for different cartridges, I suppose.  Chat with ya later.  >>  klallen  

klallen. You won't get any argument from me about poor marksmanship. I brought up the 30-30 just as an example that it will kill just as effectively. Everyone is also correct about there are guys out there who can shoot the big magnums accurately. It has just been my experience though that there are far more who can't

As for shooting past 300 yds, I just don't do it. Never found the need for it, nor can I see the need to deliver +4000 ft lbs into an elk or moose.

Dead is dead, and hitting them with more engergy than needed, just ruins  more meat  

My 130 lb. wife has taken my .300 mag wildcat to the range for sight in day and put a cloverleaf on the paper 2" high at the 100 yard line and left the other guys on the line shaking their head.

It's not that hard to just shoot the rifle. Most people that can't shoot them worth a hoot aren't much with a smaller rifle either. In fact most guys I saw at the range back when I was a member and shot there a lot are poor shots in general. Most never learn good mechanics, almost all of them are recoil shy, and very few know anything about a good trigger squeeze. Shooting a magnum isn't going to make up for any of that nor is any of it actually caused by the choice of rifle. A bad marksman is a bad marksman.

I like 30 caliber and up magnums if you're going for elk and larger game. A big hole bleeds more and dropping blood pressure and volume really fast is what kills them.

I like a magnum over, say a 30-06, for the reach it gives me. Some of the places I hunt are crowded and flat. Huge clear cuts that are hard to sneak in. The hunting is a lot of sitting and waiting for an elk or herd to show up and then getting one dead before someone else. It's not the wilderness experience with solitude and everything, it's a meat hunt. The last elk I shot with my rifle was a 320 yard shot. I lasered it, lined up, and put the elk in the dirt. I could have done it with a 30-06 I suppose but I like the way my magnum shoots.

Nobody really NEEDS a magnum. In fact I've killed as many and larger elk with a razor on a stick from 30 yards and less as I have with my rifle. Some people like them, a few can even shoot them well. Most people buy rifles they like for some reason, most of the reasons don't have anything to do with what they need.

What?  No 350 Wby fans out there in innernet land?