BIG GAME BULLETS
In recent years, hunters have seen their choice of bullets increase about four fold. They're coming from every direction. Some manufacturers claim certain bullets to be particularly well suited for very long ranges, which I regard to be anything beyond 400 yards. As for me, 400 yards is a full 100 beyond the range of what I will take a shot at elk. It's a matter of self-discipline. I want to be clear about this right up front... I think these 500-yard shots and beyond at elk, which we all have seen promoted over the past decade, are beyond lousy hunting practice. On the other hand, I regard shots of up to 500 yards to be acceptable on pronghorn, if the buck doesn't have the opportunity to run off and hide in the event of a non-fatal shot.
I began to shoot in match competition at 600 yards in the mid-1960s. The 1000-yard stuff came later. The idea that a person can take a hunting rifle -- even of varmint-rifle weight -- into the field, sighted in dead on as much as 300 yards, or equipped with a distance-compensating scope, and expect with high probability to hit the vitals and promptly drop an elk at 500 yards, is pure folly. That's the dream of a desk jockey whose regular toughest job is mowing the lawn, or maybe cleaning the garage once every ten years. It is not the way of a true hunter. Nonetheless, customers show up in gun shops across the country daily, trying to find the latest bullet that will carry oodles of energy to big game at extended ranges.
Last fall, a hunter who had spent over $4000 on a custom rifle (based on a 700 Remington action), and one of those scopes that clicks you right into those miracle shots, was boasting about his upcoming trip. He was planning to shoot a record-class elk at no fewer (his own words) than 700 yards. After considerable discussion, we eventually met at a 600-yard range near Des Moines, Iowa. Confident that he was "ready to go" (comfortable prone position acquired after about five minutes, bi-pod, scope clicked in, only a gentle breeze), I watched as it took him nine rounds to finally get one in the six-inch "X" ring. His first shot was 17 inches off center.
This wasn't the first time that someone with great expectations had to rethink their capabilities. In fact, it is with considerable confidence that I say few "long-range" shooters measure up to their hopes and dreams of fame and immortality.
Let's make some sense here... Hunters have discovered BC (ballistic coefficient), and have kind of become familiar with the G1 ratings. The higher the number, the flatter the bullet flies. Increased retained velocity means more downrange energy, too. But there's a downside. Generally, peak accuracy is more difficult to achieve as ballistic coefficient increases. Benchrest shooters know this, and that's why you see them using fairly "short" flat-based bullets of relatively low BC. Longer-range target shooters start switching over to boattail bullets when the distance gets beyond 300 yards. At Northwest Magnum, we casually refer to high BC bullets as "smart," whereas bullets that fall into more moderate and lower BC ratings are "dumb." For hunting, we definitely prefer dumb. Here's an example...
A customer recently complained that he could not get a (new product, very high BC bullet) to shoot well out of his 30-caliber magnum rifle. At 100 yards he was in the two-inch range, and at 300 he was grouping five to eight inches. Changing powder, primers, seating depth, etc., did not result in an improvement. We placed a box of 180-grain Sierra Pro-Hunter bullets on the counter and suggested he try them. "But what if I want to take a shot at 500 yards?" he asked. (This Sierra bullet is rated at a modest 0.407 BC.) To get to the point, we convinced him to try the 180-grain Pro-Hunters. He came back the next weekend with 300-yard targets of three-shot groups measuring as little as 2-1/4 inches. The largest group was right at three inches. Same rifle; no changes.
I have talked to a respected hunter and former guide (35 years at it) in this area, who said he seldom took a shot at elk at much over 200 yards. His cartridge of choice is a 300 Winchester Magnum. In all those years, he does not remember any customer needing to take a shot at 300 yards.
I had a regular customer some years ago that went elk hunting every year; New Mexico, Arizona, Colorado, Wyoming, Idaho, Montana, and Oregon. We used to post photos of his always trophy-quality results in the shop in Iowa. His cartridge of choice? The 338 Winchester Magnum, hand loaded with Reloader 19 and Hornady's 250-grain InterLock RN. The RN means "round nose." The ballistic coefficient of this little dandy is just 0.291, about in the same category as a London bus. He used to tell me that his guides were astounded at how the bullet would, even at 250 or 300 yards, seem to knock the elk right off their feet. He called it his George Foreman load, even though he stayed about three grains under loading book maximum.
These comments are not intended to direct the reader one way or the other, but rather are simply food for thought. Don't expect results of magic from new bullets. Stay practical in your thinking and in your bullet selections. And don't be too disappointed if high-tech bullets don't provide the results you're counting on. The old standards work just fine.
JDC