hunting with 357,44 mag,454,500

[Shooter98]

ooh, what about the 22 hornet or 222?

 

[rodell]

Hard to top a 12 gauge slug. I've had it go through small trees.

 

[phishisgroovin]

Have yet to hunt wiht it, but i recently picked up a Sporting arms Seville .44 magnum, 7-1/2" stainless.


Need to replace the sight insert though.

 

[Spitpatch]

Thank you all for playing, wonderful parting gifts for each of you. MA Duce came closest, but needed to remember this test was done in the mid-70's, before the .260 was developed. (Maybe Ma Duce wasn't developed yet either, so was operating under a handicap???)

Jim Carmichael suspected just from personal experience, that the cartridges with "brush buster" reputations weren't really all they were cracked up to be, and his opening hypothesis was that NO cartridge is a good brush buster: NO shot at game should ever be taken when the target is obscured by brush, as there is NO cartridge that will not be severely affected as to bullet accuracy and terminal performance. His original hypothesis was generally borne out, and his conclusion after the testing was exactly that: NO CARTRIDGE CAN BE COUNTED ON TO MAKE ITS WAY ACCURATELY TO A TARGET OBSCURED BY VEGETATION, AND UPON ARRIVAL, RELIABLY EXPAND! Sorry, Rodell, not even a 12ga slug.

Jim's initial "champion cartridge" for the test was the old .45-70 Govt., in the factory 405g jacketed loading. A slow moving freight train if ever there was one. This pumkin-roller just had to drive right through all those wimpy dowels and arrive powerfully on target, right? Alas, it was not to be. Severely deflected by sometimes the very first dowel, and often to the point of keyholing a foot or a yard off target! Other members of the reputed "Brush Busting Cartridge" club fared similarly: .444 Marlin, .35 Remington (and .350 Remington), 358, etc. Yes, 12ga and 20ga slugs were tried, and slugs were so severely deformed by their trip thru the dowel forest, that sometimes they would not even arrive on the backing board. Yes, Rodell, they went though the wood, but went through to where?

Things got a bit better when High-velocity, smaller diameter stuff was tried, but the results were still miserable. The ol' .30-06 220g roundnose would sometimes get through and arrive on the paper, but just as often, it would arrive already expanded (as evidenced by the hole in the target). Other times it would keyhole, and more than once, no impact point could be discovered. Other garden variety North American cartridges gave similar results, with the ol' .30-30 holding its own against cartridges of greater "Brush Busting" reputations. (They ALL did crappy.) The light stuff (.223 wasn't a popular civilian offering yet, so .222 Magnum, .22-250, etc), all had their bullets blowing up on the first or second dowel they smacked, rarely arriving on target.

And here's where Ma Duce gets the consolation prize: There was ONE cartridge/bullet combo that seemed to get through the dowel forest almost every time, but accuracy was ALWAYS AND WITH EVEN THIS CARTRIDGE severely affected. (Deflections in the 8-10" range for this best example). Also, more than one recovered bullet showed that the dowels had damaged the bullet in flight so much, that its expansion qualities were negated. (In other words, even if the bullet did hit a deer's ribcage, it would not expand.)

The winner? (And remember, we use the term "winner" loosely: all the cartridges failed Jim Carmichael's criteria for a good "Brush Busting" cartridge: to be able to punch through foliage, arrive somewhat accurately on target, with good expansion delivered.):

The .264 Winchester Magnum, in the factory Winchester 140g loading. Jim's theory for its "sucess" (again a term used loosely), was exactly as Ma Duce deducted: That bullet is very, very long, and very, very fast, but not as frangible (easy to break up), as some other fast long bullets tried (like .257 Roberts 100g, .243, etc.). Jim could not believe the result, and so repeated some testing with this cartridge, especially against the 7mm Magnum in the heavy roundnose "Brush Busting" bullet weight. The .264, for some reason continued to do less miserably.

Again, the lesson here is that NO cartridge does this task well. Next time somebody talks about their "brush buster", if it is not a .264 Magnum, they are urinating into the wind. If it is a .264, they are merely standing downwind from their own farts.

Thanks guys. This was fun.

 

[MA Duce]

MA Duce came closest, but needed to remember this test was done in the mid-70's, before the .260 was developed. (Maybe Ma Duce wasn't developed yet either, so was operating under a handicap???) You ARE kind sir.....in the mid 70's I was winding up my second hitch in the Coast Guard. As for operating under a handicap.....opinions vary.....

 

[Stomper]

I reject your reality and substitute my own... .50 BMG... bring on them dowels! LOL

 

[Spitpatch]

Stomper, we are sending you to remedial reading class. An exception was explained for the absence of the .223, since it was not a generally used sporting cartridge of the time. That exception would naturally extend to the .50 BMG for the same reason, and I guess we should add the 8-inch Howitzer to that list as well, since most assuredly, someone right now is designing a shoulder-fired bolt gun, proclaiming it a sporting weapon. I can envision the magazine article now:

"Recoil was not as bad as might have been expected, and for stout-willed manly individuals like myself, unaffected at all by recoil, I found it quite tolerable."

I am now currently gluing telephone poles in random order to railroad planks in order that your suggested entry, Stomper, can compete. I throw down the gauntlet, sir, and we shall see!

As for MA Duce, during that same time period, I was fighting the South Dakota Theater of the Vietnam War, and not a single Communist overran my post, by Gawd. What you interpreted as kindness toward your years was merely my incorrect assumptions based on the predominate age group on this website being of greener issue than you or myself. You among all people should know that you nor I deserve any kindness.

 

[Stomper]

LMAO.... nice.

 

[ZigZagZeke]

Both of these are chambered for .357 Mag. I plan to take them deer hunting at some point. The No. 1 Remington rolling block sporter rifle has a 30" barrel. I haven't chrono'ed it yet, but should be approaching the 1800 fps mark.

 

[DeanMk]

Zeke,

If you handload, try using a slightly slower powder for the rolling block.
The typical pistol powders use up all their energy before the bullet leaves the long barrel and performance can actually decrease, because of that.
I've seen test results from '94 Marlin's chambered in .357 Mag clocking approx. 1850 fps, using factory 158 gr. loads.
That's a REALLY nice looking Smith. 627?



Dean

 

[Stomper]

Question... if you take a six-gun deer hunting, aside from the obvious of leaving a chamber empty, how do you comply with the max. of 5 shots? Are you required to have some sort of "plug" in one chamber? I have a 3" SP-101 in .375mag so its not an issue for me, but I also have a S&W Highway Patrolman w/ a 6" barrel I think would be more effective, but its a six-gun. I ask because you are required to have a limited capacity mag for rifles, and have never even thought about using a pistol for deer hunting until recently.

 

[MA Duce]

Stomper, we are sending you to remedial reading class. An exception was explained for the absence of the .223, since it was not a generally used sporting cartridge of the time. That exception would naturally extend to the .50 BMG for the same reason, and I guess we should add the 8-inch Howitzer to that list as well, since most assuredly, someone right now is designing a shoulder-fired bolt gun, proclaiming it a sporting weapon. I can envision the magazine article now:

"Recoil was not as bad as might have been expected, and for stout-willed manly individuals like myself, unaffected at all by recoil, I found it quite tolerable."

I am now currently gluing telephone poles in random order to railroad planks in order that your suggested entry, Stomper, can compete. I throw down the gauntlet, sir, and we shall see!

As for MA Duce, during that same time period, I was fighting the South Dakota Theater of the Vietnam War, and not a single Communist overran my post, by Gawd. What you interpreted as kindness toward your years was merely my incorrect assumptions based on the predominate age group on this website being of greener issue than you or myself. You among all people should know that you nor I deserve any kindness.

My post was never overran either...but then it was an 82ft boat moving out at 20 knots along the coast .....As for your telephone poles...I have seen .50 rounds go completely through a steel hulled boat.....make several layers.

Kindness???? We don't need no stinking kindness...

 

[jer fly]

Stomper.... I believe the 5 round max is for semi-automatic rifles only. The Winchester 94 and a host of other long time hunting rifles all carry more than 5 rounds, And you don't have to leave an empty chamber under the firing pin on double action revolvers. As far as hunting with a .357, I have used my Smith & Wesson 28-2 with a 4 inch barrel to take several deer, and believe the 6 inch version to be even more capable.

 

[DeanMk]

Jer Fly,

Re: Carrying six gun fully loaded.

"...you don't have to leave an empty chamber under the firing pin on double action revolvers."

Not neccessarily true. It depends on the age of the weapon.
In modern revolvers, they use a transfer bar. Because of this, it is considered ok to carry that six gun with all 6 chambers loaded.
On older guns, there is no transfer bar safety, thus the old practice of leaving one chamber empty. This way, the hammer can be at full rest (as opposed to half cock) without fear of shooting off your own foot.
This applies to both single action and double action revolvers.

This brings another question to my mind.

There was a time when Washington State law said that the projectile fired from a "legal hunting arm" MUST retain 1000 ft./lbs. of energy at 100 yards.
If it didn't meet that criteria (such as a .22 rimfire, for instance), it was illeagal to use that arm for the purpose of hunting deer.
Does this requirement still exist?
It used to be clearly noted in the regs.
The reason I ask, is that it seems that even the magnum pistol cartridges would fall short of that, at the given distance.


Dean

 

[jer fly]

DeanMK... Sorry for the confusion, I was referring to the 28-2 in question, although I am unaware of any double action where the firing pin comes in contact with a loaded round when at "rest". The idea of leaving an empty chamber under the hammer comes from older single action revolvers, and I have never heard of anyone leaving a empty chamber under the hammer on a double action revolver.

 

[Stomper]

Jer Fly,


This brings another question to my mind.

There was a time when Washington State law said that the projectile fired from a "legal hunting arm" MUST retain 1000 ft./lbs. of energy at 100 yards.
If it didn't meet that criteria (such as a .22 rimfire, for instance), it was illeagal to use that arm for the purpose of hunting deer.
Does this requirement still exist?
It used to be clearly noted in the regs.
The reason I ask, is that it seems that even the magnum pistol cartridges would fall short of that, at the given distance.
Dean

I was perusing the Oregon hunting regs. the other night, and when hunting game it has to be a centerfire cartridge (hence no .22LR) and they list the species of deer, black bear, cougar, pronghorns, as .22 cal min, i.e .223, .22-0X etc.

For larger game like elk, big horns, rky. mt. goat, the minimum caliber is .24 so that exludes .223 and the like, but in ALL cases has to be a centerfire cartridge.

Western Gray Squirrek you can use any rifle, handgun, etc. the sky is the limit.

The info is on pg. 30 of the 2011 regs. go to www.dfw.or.us where I believe you can get the regs in PDF format to further research for yourself.

 

[Stomper]

Stomper.... I believe the 5 round max is for semi-automatic rifles only. The Winchester 94 and a host of other long time hunting rifles all carry more than 5 rounds, And you don't have to leave an empty chamber under the firing pin on double action revolvers. As far as hunting with a .357, I have used my Smith & Wesson 28-2 with a 4 inch barrel to take several deer, and believe the 6 inch version to be even more capable.

Yeah, thanks! I just caught that tonight while re-reading the regs... applies to semi-auto rifles... sheesh talk about "parsing words" sometimes!

 

[DeanMk]

DeanMK... Sorry for the confusion, I was referring to the 28-2 in question, although I am unaware of any double action where the firing pin comes in contact with a loaded round when at "rest". The idea of leaving an empty chamber under the hammer comes from older single action revolvers, and I have never heard of anyone leaving a empty chamber under the hammer on a double action revolver.

Not a problem, jer fly.
I suppose I should apologize as well. I didn't realize you were commenting on that revolver in particular.
Call it my little bit of pragmatism, after having been lambasted on other internet forums, because I've left a rock or two unturned, in the past.
As for a specific firearm, two that come to mind off-hand are the Colt and the Smith & Wesson "1917" revolvers.
Basically, if you pull the hammer back and see that the firing pin is built into the hammer, leave a chamber empty.
If the firing pin is built into the frame, look at the face of the hammer and see if there isn't a tit sticking forward, at the top of the hammer's face.
If that tit isn't there, leave a chamber empty.



Dean

 

[DeanMk]

I was perusing the Oregon hunting regs. the other night, and when hunting game it has to be a centerfire cartridge (hence no .22LR) and they list the species of deer, black bear, cougar, pronghorns, as .22 cal min, i.e .223, .22-0X etc.

For larger game like elk, big horns, rky. mt. goat, the minimum caliber is .24 so that exludes .223 and the like, but in ALL cases has to be a centerfire cartridge.

Western Gray Squirrek you can use any rifle, handgun, etc. the sky is the limit.

The info is on pg. 30 of the 2011 regs. go to www.dfw.or.us where I believe you can get the regs in PDF format to further research for yourself.

Well, ask a stupid question....Of course, I should've just looked up the regs myself!
Sorry.


Dean

 

[orygun]

Anyone have some good load suggestions that I could try in 41 mag?

Put me in the camp that prefers the Hornady 210gr XTP. A little over 22 gr of H110 is MAX in my Ruger, but only in R-P cases. Using Starline brass it's over max in my gun.
This load in a Ruger Blackhawk 6 1/2" 1350fps
Marlin 1894 1850fps
Wouldn't have a problem hunting deer with either of these at any reasonable distance I could reliably hit them at.