Enough to Matter?

The Actual Ballistic Differences In Most Popular
Big-Game Cartridges Just Don’t Seem To Stir Up
Passions Like They Used To

By Payton Miller

Many years ago I hunted with a guy—a serious rifle crank—who had fairly strong opinions on calibers. He was a believer in magnums, generally belted ones. When he asked me what I was using, I told him “a .30-06.” His response seemed to me to be rather dismissive:

“It’s an OK cartridge, I guess. But it’s pretty much done past 300 yards.”

Besides being an arguably dubious statement, this really didn’t upset me all that much. As a long-range rifleman, I myself was (and still am) pretty much done if the game is beyond 250 yards. Anyway, I suspect—like a lot of guys—I’ve read and heard more about 300-yard plus shots than I’ve actually seen. It wasn’t until later I discovered the difference in mid-range trajectory between his rifle and mine (assuming a 250-yard zero) was something on the order of a lonely inch—maybe.

Now I’m sure at 500 or 600 yards what he had would maybe hit a bit harder and require less holdover than what I had, but how much more (and less) I never bothered to figure out. I figured—rightly—my chances of ever taking a whack at anything that far off were slim at best. It was about then I started wondering: How flat does something have to shoot to qualify as “flat-shooting?”

I mean, I’d gotten the ’06 way back in the Age of Walnut (late Turnbolt Era) on the advice of my father who was a firm believer in getting what was popular and easily available ammo-wise.

“Get one of those new ‘gun magazine’ calibers nobody’s ever heard of, or some weird European metric thing,” he told me, “and you could be outta luck finding ammo someday.”

This old-style push-feed Ruger 77 .30-06 has been “in service” for a long,
long time. It predates these three super-premium loads but does a fantastic
job grouping all of them. Replacing it would be a matter of simply wanting
something new rather than any shortcomings in the rifle/cartridge combo itself.
It’s now on its third scope—a Nikon variable, generally left at 4X. The integral
mounting rings are original, although some buggered-up screws have been replaced
over the years.

To him there were only two calibers in the world—an ’06 or a .270 Winchester. Since Dad owned a .270, I—in a surprisingly sensible burst of teenage “rebelliousness”—had to get an ’06. As far as Dad knew, there were no other choices because nobody in his circle used anything else. He must’ve been on to something because now I’ve still got and still employ the same rifle—a very good-shooting “old-style” Ruger Model 77, although I do admit to changing out scopes on it once or twice.

Back in the good old days of “5 buck a brick” .22 ammo, gun magazines thrived on arguments over the relative merits of different rifle cartridges. Many took ballistic hairsplitting to awesome extremes. Sure, it was fun to stir up an argument about somebody’s choice in hardware, just so long as you didn’t seriously believe the fate of Western Civilization hung on 150 fps or a few hundredths of an inch in bullet diameter. Or for that matter a glowing review by a writer who’d just made a spectacular 1-shot kill on one specific game animal.

Of course these tempest-in-a-teapot controversies helped generate healthy competition—and technological developments—in the shooting industry. And to be honest about it, they still do. Even if you don’t have any burning desire to acquire the new .310 Afterburner, there’s a good chance any propellant-and-projectile developments which were a byproduct of its development may ultimately give a bit of a boost to your old .270—even if the Afterburner itself doesn’t live up to the claims of “revolutionizing long-range shooting as we know it.”

Barnes’ Cartridges of the World still ranks as the Holy Writ for
settling arguments over a vast number of cartridges—current,
obsolete, proprietary, military and wildcat.

Nope, they don’t sport the magnum moniker, but the .270 Winchester (left)
and .30-06 (right) are traditional hunting favorites and perennial Top 10
residents in terms of sales. Easy to find everywhere—from remote convenience
and hardware stores to big-box chains—their popularity is rooted in longevity,
established performance and reputation.

Honest Advances

Hornady’s LeverEvolution bullets and Superformance line of ammo are a pretty good examples of this, although I don’t claim to know whether or not they came about in developing new loads so much as improving existing ones. Either way, it’s pretty tough to argue the fact both projects reinvigorated a boatload of old favorites.

Many years ago Jeff Cooper said something to the effect we have all the rifle cartridges we need, what we need are better platforms to load them into. There’s more than a little truth to that, although it may seem like a wet blanket on all the fun. I tend to think a lot of caliber preoccupation is similar to brand loyalty—much the same phenomenon as why some guys prefer Coors over Budweiser or Ford over Chevy. Anyway, to be honest about it, there are plenty of other factors more important than cartridges, especially in an era of sophisticated optics and ranging systems, super-premium bullets and relatively inexpensive “off-the-rack” hunting rifles that will shoot as well as the high-dollar custom rigs of 20 or 30 years ago.

Oddly, with newer generations of shooters coming up who are devotees of the AR platform, this seems less of an issue today. It would be repeating the obvious to note more and more AR’s are showing up in hunting camps these days and most of their owners seem happily NATO-centric (as in 5.56 and 7.62), although both the AR-15 and larger AR-10 platforms have spawned their own series of new cartridges.

I’d imagine a good all-around North American big-game cartridge (leaving the big bears alone) would be something in the 6.5 to .33 caliber range, pushing a 130-to-225-grain bullet at a velocity of 2,700 to 3,100-plus fps. These parameters are probably pretty flexible at either end, depending on species and bullet construction. My old .30-06 still falls right in there. So does my long-ago hunting partner’s magnum.
So we’re all good to go.

Premium Pair

RIA’s Premiere Firearms Auction featured two quintessential American rifles from their respective eras. At top is a John Ulrich factory engraved (and signed) Winchester Model 94 from the Mac McCroskie Collection. Below it is a Jacob Dickert Lancaster flintlock long rifle with a unique “rattlesnake” patchbox. The December event—RIA’s last auction of 2015—netted nearly $15 million. For information on Rock Island Auctions, contact them at 7819 42nd St. W., Rock Island, IL 61201, (800) 238-8022, www.gunsmagazine.com/index

Springfield Sneak Preview

Since we have a hard time keeping a secret, here’s a preview of two new Springfield Armory guns which will be featured prominently (with a capital “P”) in an upcoming issue. First off is the Suppressor-Ready XD (M) in 9mm and .45 ACP (pictured). It’s a full-size number with—of course—extra-tall sights. It features a Flat Dark Earth frame along with its forged carbon steel/Melonite-coated slide. The next item will be the M1A SOCOM 16 CQB rifle. It features an AK-compatible pistol grip and an adjustable buttstock on an AR-type receiver extension tube. And, of course, it’s chambered in .308. That’s all we’re gonna spill for now, but we’re pretty excited over the prospect of getting our hands on both guns.

Read More Gun Insider Articles

Download A PDF Of The GUNS Magazine May 2016 Issue Now!