Jagare
Well-Known Member
Jätte kul, Jagare
I think it's possible your meaning may have been lost to some though.
Yep i think it has
. The Heym- Ruger will be rebarreled in .308 
.Is the 308 the best rifle for all purposes
- Thread starter Galwyn
- Start date
Yep i think it has
. The Heym- Ruger will be rebarreled in .308 .
But that is a whole different discussion...
Helped guide a guy onto his first fallow buck last week. 170 yards, .243 shooting 95gr SST. Medium sized buck. High chest. Folded up on the spot.
I was worried before the shot - it was the first time I'd used the SSTs in anger (up until then had been using 90gr soft points). Was next to him, lined up on the buck with the .308 in case it went wrong. Clearly no reason to worry!
The deer man
Well-Known Member
Maybe? The 243 is a varmint rifle that can kill deer but the 308 is a better all-rounder in just about any country. No doubt you'll say you can kill boar, bear and anything else with a 243 but it's probably not sensible.
In answer to the original question the 308 covers quite a lot of bases but then so does the 7x64, 7x57, 7mm-08 and 30-06 to name a few - the 243 is outclassed by all of these.
tackb
Well-Known Member
the 243 is a fine calibre but as you say not sensible to stretch it's ability with bear and the like! BUT in the event of a bear attack (unlikely in Suffolk) I would rather have a 243 than my bare fists or a sharp spoon ?
a quick look at a few ammo manufactures listings will see the 308 has way more selection/variety than the other calibres you mention (although all fine calibres in their own right) this in my opinion makes the 308 a bit more versatile.
Chasey
Well-Known Member
At the risk of geting torn to shreads
I was led to beleive that:
Slow mooving large caliber has more chance of a through and through
Fast mooving small caliber has grerater hydrostatic shock so bigger knock down
Fast mooving large caliber has even bigger hydrostatic shock so even bigger knock down but causes a lot of meat damage
Now to reeeeeely put the cat amongst the pidgions.
Smaller 85 grain 243 balistic tip rounds. Very fast mooving so massive hydrostatic dammage and much less chance of a through shot so less issues with back stop
Head shots with balistic tip mean hit just about any solid part of the head and you will kill it. But with a slow mooving large bullit theres a greater chance of non leathel through and through damage?
Does any of this stand up?
I say again I am asking the questions bassed on what i have been told in conversations about stalking and I am not presenting this as my opinion or hard fact.
ATB
Chasey
I was led to beleive that:
Slow mooving large caliber has more chance of a through and through
Fast mooving small caliber has grerater hydrostatic shock so bigger knock down
Fast mooving large caliber has even bigger hydrostatic shock so even bigger knock down but causes a lot of meat damage
Now to reeeeeely put the cat amongst the pidgions.
Smaller 85 grain 243 balistic tip rounds. Very fast mooving so massive hydrostatic dammage and much less chance of a through shot so less issues with back stop
Head shots with balistic tip mean hit just about any solid part of the head and you will kill it. But with a slow mooving large bullit theres a greater chance of non leathel through and through damage?
Does any of this stand up?
I say again I am asking the questions bassed on what i have been told in conversations about stalking and I am not presenting this as my opinion or hard fact.
ATB
Chasey
Vipa
Well-Known Member
At the risk of geting torn to shreads
I was led to beleive that:
Slow mooving large caliber has more chance of a through and through
Fast mooving small caliber has grerater hydrostatic shock so bigger knock down
Fast mooving large caliber has even bigger hydrostatic shock so even bigger knock down but causes a lot of meat damage
Now to reeeeeely put the cat amongst the pidgions.
Smaller 85 grain 243 balistic tip rounds. Very fast mooving so massive hydrostatic dammage and much less chance of a through shot so less issues with back stop
Head shots with balistic tip mean hit just about any solid part of the head and you will kill it. But with a slow mooving large bullit theres a greater chance of non leathel through and through damage?
Does any of this stand up?
I say again I am asking the questions bassed on what i have been told in conversations about stalking and I am not presenting this as my opinion or hard fact.
ATB
Chasey
That's if hydrostatic shock actually exists!!!!!!! and if it does the old .600 jeffires needs dobbing in for a hot 243 when one is hunting elephant in Africa! lol
At the end of the day, you are trying to create the biggest wound channel possible so that blood loss is as great, fast and catastrophic as possible... a projectile that opens up to 1/2 and inch is going to do a better job of that than one that opens up to 1/4"... realistically, 'hitting' power is only important when dealing with bone and tough skin (pigs etc)
Last edited:
At the risk of geting torn to shreads
I was led to beleive that:
Slow mooving large caliber has more chance of a through and through
Fast mooving small caliber has grerater hydrostatic shock so bigger knock down
Fast mooving large caliber has even bigger hydrostatic shock so even bigger knock down but causes a lot of meat damage
Now to reeeeeely put the cat amongst the pidgions.
Smaller 85 grain 243 balistic tip rounds. Very fast mooving so massive hydrostatic dammage and much less chance of a through shot so less issues with back stop
Head shots with balistic tip mean hit just about any solid part of the head and you will kill it. But with a slow mooving large bullit theres a greater chance of non leathel through and through damage?
Does any of this stand up?
I say again I am asking the questions bassed on what i have been told in conversations about stalking and I am not presenting this as my opinion or hard fact.
ATB
Chasey
Sorry to say, but you are extremely misinformed. Your assumptions--literally all of them--are wrong.
provarmint
Well-Known Member
At the risk of geting torn to shreads
I was led to beleive that:
Slow mooving large caliber has more chance of a through and through
Fast mooving small caliber has grerater hydrostatic shock so bigger knock down
Fast mooving large caliber has even bigger hydrostatic shock so even bigger knock down but causes a lot of meat damage
Now to reeeeeely put the cat amongst the pidgions.
Smaller 85 grain 243 balistic tip rounds. Very fast mooving so massive hydrostatic dammage and much less chance of a through shot so less issues with back stop
Head shots with balistic tip mean hit just about any solid part of the head and you will kill it. But with a slow mooving large bullit theres a greater chance of non leathel through and through damage?
Does any of this stand up?
I say again I am asking the questions bassed on what i have been told in conversations about stalking and I am not presenting this as my opinion or hard fact.
ATB
Chasey
Yes, some of it does stand up, but different types of bullet at different speeds work in different ways, look at Brock and Norris vid 'bullet points ' on YouTube
caorach
Well-Known Member
Plus he's invented something called "hydrostatic shock" as a means of killing things. Does it feature in Star Trek?
Lupus
Well-Known Member
Sorry Southern, it's a myth and completely and utterly wrong!
Lungs fill the entire chest cavity in a normal health animal; both during exhalation and inhalation. It's why your chest expands and contracts as you breath. Your lungs don't inflate and deflate inside your rigid chest. They are in a vacuum. Compromise that vacuum and the lungs collapse. That's where these ridiculous photos come from showing internal organs and the lungs not filling the whole chest - there isn't a vacuum any more. Don't believe me, ask a vet or doctor.
Does make a good excuse for all those missed, sorry, I mean unrecovered deer though.
Wolfie
The deer man
Well-Known Member
The statement the OP made was originally made in the States but certainly the 243 is better than even a sharp spoon, I agree!
Calibre popularity does vary country to country, so where is Galwyn going to shoot with his one all-rounder rifle idea, just UK?
Sika stags in the rut will run off a lung shot, especially when alerted. Had one do 150 yards into woodland which took over an hour to find (no dog!). That's not unusual! I generally try to neck shoot, if possible.
pheasant sniper 1
Well-Known Member
Hi Chasey...Youve stated at the end of your post that none of the comments were your views or thoughts but what youd been told..
I think any man insinuating or relying on a round not passing through as a means of measuring the requirement of a backstop youd do well to stay clear of...
As a simple example of the idiot mentioning less of a backstop.. What would the scenario be if he missed ?
A fool youd do well to not have by your side imo..
Atb
Last edited:
Tell that to the roe i shot 2 years ago. He had a clear entry and exit wounds through upper chest cavity, both healing up nicely.
Was probably the unluckiest deer ever, over the course of a few weeks he was shot, hit by a car, run over by a tractor cutting grass
and finally shot dead
Was probably the unluckiest deer ever, over the course of a few weeks he was shot, hit by a car, run over by a tractor cutting grass
and finally shot dead
Lupus
Well-Known Member
If a bullet goes through the chest, fails to expand leaving small entry and exit holes, and doesn't destroy major blood vessels they can heal up if the skin or fat blocks the holes thus maintaining a vacuum. I've heard many accounts of deer being culled and on examination there being signs of healed entry and exit holes in the chest walls together with scar tissue going right through the lungs. These tales usually came from the years after the war, when use of 303s with military FMJ rounds was common place. The key here is scar tissue through the lungs. There is no void in the chest cavity of a healthy deer. If a bullet enters the chest cavity it will pass through lung tissue. It's physiology. Like I said, don't believe me, ask a vet or a doctor how lungs work.
Wolfie
Wolfie
Vacuum - wrong word - seal maybe?
Ian
Ian
Sinistral
Well-Known Member
Maybe there's a typo here. The bullet weight you quote isn't available in 'expanding' so not legal?
I don't think anyone is arguing that the .308 lacks stopping power. The detractors are saying that you rarely need that clout most, if not all, of the time.
TRUE
The second part doesn't square with the first part, so perhaps you ( Wolfe) are not in disagreement with the first part of your statement.
When the lungs are n exhale, a bullet can pass through the lung sac without hitting any lung tissue, only muscle or bone and skin on the way in and out of the deer. I have killed deer with old healed wounds through the chest, just above the heart. I have seen deer shot through the upper chest and run off, only to be shot a few days later with the closed holes and dried blood on them. Years ago, while hunting with a surgeon friend of mine, another hunter shot a doe at very close range with a 6.5x55 and it ran off. We found some dark blood on grass, came back the next morning with a tracking dog, found it, and I shot it as it made a go for a creek ( .38 Special at 25 yards, killed instantly). The Nosler had passed between two ribs going in and two going out. The chest was sealed up. No sign of lung damage when dressed her, only my bullet through the front of the heart.
That said, you can shoot an animal perfectly and not have it drop. The only deer I ever shot more than once, I shot 3 times as it tried to get to the woods after the first shot. This big mule deer went 50 more yards, and had 3 bullets ( .30-06 150-gr) through the heart. A lot of hunters have been mauled by "dead" bears, boars and big cats.
NOT TRUE.
The second part doesn't square with the first part, so perhaps you ( Wolfe) are not in disagreement with the first part of your statement.
When the lungs are n exhale, a bullet can pass through the lung sac without hitting any lung tissue, only muscle or bone and skin on the way in and out of the deer. I have killed deer with old healed wounds through the chest, just above the heart. I have seen deer shot through the upper chest and run off, only to be shot a few days later with the closed holes and dried blood on them. Years ago, while hunting with a surgeon friend of mine, another hunter shot a doe at very close range with a 6.5x55 and it ran off. We found some dark blood on grass, came back the next morning with a tracking dog, found it, and I shot it as it made a go for a creek ( .38 Special at 25 yards, killed instantly). The Nosler had passed between two ribs going in and two going out. The chest was sealed up. No sign of lung damage when dressed her, only my bullet through the front of the heart.
That said, you can shoot an animal perfectly and not have it drop. The only deer I ever shot more than once, I shot 3 times as it tried to get to the woods after the first shot. This big mule deer went 50 more yards, and had 3 bullets ( .30-06 150-gr) through the heart. A lot of hunters have been mauled by "dead" bears, boars and big cats.
Chasey
Well-Known Member
Plus he's invented something called "hydrostatic shock" as a means of killing things. Does it feature in Star Trek?
??? I cant take the credit for that
Hydrostatic shock - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Skip to min 1.11 as the begining is boring.
Similar threads
