Why change calibers with age?

[Dookie]

I hear this a lot, from a lot of different people. Generally in relation to hunting.

Start a young person out on a 243 (or similar) caliber, and when they get older, or just bigger, move them on to a bigger (better) round.

It seems to me that a novice shooter would be better suited to a round with more killing power (I did not say knock down power) as they are not as steady, and not as good of a shot. I know all about the recoil issue and I know why we should start novice hunters on smaller calibers, NOT the point I am trying to make.

If a person starts with a 243(or 30-30), can safely take deer, elk, yetti, why would they have to move on to a "real" caliber? Why does someone need to learn on a lower powered round and THEN move on to a 30-06 or 7mm.

I have a friend who moved here from Texas, one of the first things he mentioned to me was the fact that our area is in love with big caliber bullets. I had never thought about it, but everyone I know had 2 or 3 large caliber rounds, 30-06, 300 win mag, 338, ect, to hunt our 150 pound whitetail instead of having a smaller caliber, 243 or 30-30, that they started on, for smaller game and a large caliber for moose and elk.

I guess my question is (it is almost 2AM). WHY do we need to move UP in power as we get to be better shots, even though are range does not change, our needs do not change, just our own personal size? If it is good enough for smaller people to hunt with why are they not suitable for older (bigger) people?

Have people just forgotten that a 30-30 is not a 100 yard hunting rifle? That we now have to have a 338 lapua to take a small buck at 200 yards. That somehow a 22LR is not good enough to humanly take a tree squirrel at 30 paces and we now have to have the HMR.

 

[DRYHUMOR]

With age, comes wisdom. (hopefully)

I think some of it is common old peer pressure. And, gun mag writers.

At some point in time, most folks that move up in size work back down.

The cost of the recoil, ammo, rifle, etc. And the realization that a smaller caliber will take deer as well as the big calibers.

 

[Shawnee]

"WHY do we need to move UP in power as we get to be better shots, even though are range does not change, our needs do not change, just our own personal size? If it is good enough for smaller people to hunt with why are they not suitable for older (bigger) people?"

Good post, Dookie ! The short answer to your questions is: We don't have to "move up" or "graduate" to a more-powerful-than-necessary" caliber.

As to why some people think shooters need to "graduate" - there are multiple reasons most of which boil down to non-thought.

* Ordinary braindead Machismo (which is the Hispanic term for Stupidity). The guy who buys his kid or wife a .243 to hunt the same game in the same area as he does but buys himself a 30/06 is the Absolute, Guaranteed, First-Class North American Example of unthinking Stup... er Machismo. All he needs is his Stup... er "Machismo" sign.

* Mindless following of peer signals - The Sheep-le concept. Baaaaa. Everyone down at the Dew-Drop Inn Bar and Radiator Shop uses a .30/06 so "Baaaaa" - Gimme dat thurty-ought-six an' a box 'a shells. Sure thing, Joe - and here - don't forget Yer sign !

*The gun writers and their occupational agendas. After all, they make money fostering that Stup... er Machismo. Name of their game - Fleece the Sheep-le. Been working since 1900, at least.

* Urbanization. A super-high percentage of shooters who get no game experience until the day after they've bought what the gun fibb... er scribblers and the chick on loan from the Walmart jewelry counter advised them to buy. That's it - No Thought required.

* The change in mindset (from thought to non-thought). Today's American thinks technology is the answer to everything. It doesn't occur to them that the person needs to bring something to the table from within themself. That mindset is everywhere - in sports, in music, in education, in driving, ad nauseum. If the battery on the remote-key car opener fails the driver thinks they are locked out of their car even though they are holding the "old-fashioned" key in their hand.

* The rejection of Responsibility that characterizes several generations of Americans. That's where all the "What's the Best..." discussions come from. If the deer doesn't drop dead (and cleaned) into the back of the pick-up it's the rifle's fault, or the bullet's fault, or the scope's fault, or the trigger's fault, or the jacket's fault, or the sling's fault, or the Game Warden's fault, or my partner's fault.

* Misinformation dies hard. We still listen today to apple sauce that was being brayed thither and yon back in the 1920s. Heck, the "big calibers are better than small calibers" silliness dates back to the transition from black powder to smokeless powder. And a lot of the corral dust has been generated intentionally by gun and ammo makers for no other reason than to fill their pockets.

I know some Monolith will want to cry because I use the "S" word (or "M" word). But what else can it be called?

Handgun hunters, shotgun hunters and bowhunters kill a couple million deer, plenty of hogs, some bear and some Elk in this country every year - and the Sheep-le know that - yet "Baaaaa" - Ya gotta have a "man's" gun that can shoot 1000yds. How can that be anything but Stupid?



Then there is "Woof's" answer - trigger jerks are crazy.

 

[woof]

The logical reason is that young shooters are probably going to start with whitetails where say .30-30 is perfect and you don't want them developing a recoil flinch. You also don't want to take a youngster and have him even thinking about long shots. But when he gets older maybe he will have the opportunity to hunt bigger game, and maybe he will need something flatter shooting that retains plenty of energy out at range.

That's the logic. The real reason is we all want as many guns as we can get and are willing to make up all sorts of crazy reasons why we need them.

 

[MachIVshooter]

It seems to me that a novice shooter would be better suited to a round with more killing power (I did not say knock down power) as they are not as steady, and not as good of a shot. I know all about the recoil issue and I know why we should start novice hunters on smaller calibers, NOT the point I am trying to make.

You've answered your own question when you consider the parameters set for youthful hunters who cannot shoot as well. Because a youngster typically lacks the experience, discipline, and physical strength (stability, when translated to holding steady an extended 7-8 pound rifle), their maximum ranges will be shorter, hence there is no need for a rifle that can cleanly kill game at much greater distances.

Couple this with the fact that lighter recoil promotes better marksmanship, and you can see why a 12 year old is better off with a .243 for killing a whitetail doe at 140 yards, where his dad might need the extra ooomph of the 7mm mag to nail that once-in-a-lifetime buck standing on the next ridge 447 yards away.

Once should match the tool to the intended task. Understanding and employing this logic is not a function of "First-Class North American Example of unthinking Stup... er Machismo" as Shawnee said, but weighing the pro's and con's and matching the recoil of the weapon to the shooters ability to tolerate that recoil, and then selecting game type and determining maximum range accordingly.

All this said, I usually hunt elk with a .25-06. Not because I cannot tolerate the recoil of my .375 Ultra, but because I can put 5 bullets in a quarter at 100 with the .25, where my groups are nearly double with the sledgehammer .375. On the other hand, if I'm to be hunting a densly wooded area where I may not be presented with a nice neck or chest shot and might need to break the shoulder of the elk because it's the only thing showing through the trees, I'll use the .375. In this instance, a younger or smaller shooter who cannot handle something with over 80 ft/lbs of recoil would have to pass on the shot and wait for another opportunity.

 

[Marlin95]

Have people just forgotten that a 30-30 is not a 100 yard hunting rifle? That we now have to have a 338 lapua to take a small buck at 200 yards

true with hornady leverlution you can go to about 250 yards on deer so there is no need to move up to "a real mans gun". When the novice shooter actually does move up to say a 30-06 or 375 H&H.The person that told him to move up is probably afraid to shoot the gun

 

[winchester243]

IMO, depends on the kid. I started my 3 kids on the .243, they were 12 and not very big and while they shot my .270 at the range they were a little intimidated by it. One son was only 85lbs when he started hunting. He was successful with the .243 and developed good shooting skills/confidence. When he got bigger he wanted his own gun in .270 so I got him one (also freed up the .243 when his younger brother started hunting with us). My daughter always liked the .243 (she had it 1st), but she's since gone off to college and doesn't have time to hunt anymore.

Now my youngest son who is now 16 and weights 180# and could easily shoot a bigger caliber, but he doesn't want to, he likes the .243 too much for hunting deer. When I offered to buy him his own hunting gun he told me he would rather have a M1 Garand.

 

[Shawnee]

"...might need the extra ooomph of the 7mm mag to nail that once-in-a-lifetime buck standing on the next ridge 447 yards away."

Gotta say - that's one of the oldest rationalizations for use of heavy-powered rifles (and "hail mary" shooting) there is.

In one of my Hunter Safety classes a long-time hunter attended because his kid had to attend. When I stated rifles should always be unloaded in vehicles he stated flat-out that when he was coming in from the stand on his hunting lease HIS 300 Win Mag is, and always would be, loaded because if he saw the famous "buck of a lifetime" on the way in he was "going to be ready".

The very next week he stood up in front of the class and admitted he had been wrong because the previous Sunday his rifle had gone off inside their Jeep and blown out the bell housing 2 miles from anywhere at 0-dark-thirty.

That "buck of a lifetime" that is always standing on the other side of the Mississippi River is as lame as a three-legged horse.

As for short shots to break shoulders in dense cover - even a 30/30 can do that. And if the shot is so screened the bullet has to "plow through brush" - it's nothing but reckless "hail mary" shooting even if the shooter is using a .458 Winchester.

Deer and Elk hunters can certainly use a .500 Gibbs if they want, but it has nothing at all in the World to do with "graduating" or "growing into" anything.

P.S. A .243 has more ft/lbs. of energy at 447 yds than a 210gr. .44 magnum has at the muzzle - and the drop (with a 275yd. zero) is only 16". That "buck of a lifetime across the canyon" is in serious trouble.

 

[Crazy Fingers]

Start off with developing good habits with lighter recoiling calibers. Developing a terrible flinch because the gun is beating the crap out of you is a surefire way to hamper your marksmanship. I developed a flinch from just a few rounds of .300 Mag when I was starting out, and it has taken a while to correct it.

By the way, in my opinion the .243 is not some pea-shooter. It is, after all, just a necked down .308. It is a serious cartridge capable of taking serious game. Personally, I think it has a fair amount of recoil and muzzle blast. Certainly it's not bad, but you know when you squeeze one out. Those who say it "has no recoil to speak of" are overexaggerating.

 

[Shawnee]

To be fair to shooters... the "bigger is better" psychosis is bigtime in golf too. One of my Florida golf partners has a B-in-L who always shows up with the latest, biggest driver on the market - I have yet to see him break 100.... IF he used his driver or 3-wood.

But one time my partner and I talked him into joining us for a round playing with nothing but a 7-iron, a sand wedge and a putter. The B-in-L shot a 90, his first (and likely ONLY) time ever below 100.

It was because he didn't slam his ball into trouble off the tee and thus didn't need three or four "hail mary" shots on every hole trying to make up for lost ground. In other words - he used a club he could handle to make his first shot count!

I'm telling on the B-in-L but it happens that my 2nd-best game ever has been a 77 shot with nothing but a 5-iron, an 8-iron, a sand wedge and putter. And when my woods turn on me (happens often) I go straight to the limited clubs routine until I can sort things out. If I hadn't paid so much for my driver and woods :banghead: I probably wouldn't bother with them.

Like many - I get on the tee box and get my hands on that driver and the "Grip it and Rip it" Demons get me and the ball sails off across the Berring Straits. Then - with typical golfer Machismo, I decide that just because I couldn't hit a straight ball down a mown fairway from a tidy tee box doesn't mean I can't hit that little green from 300yds. and standing to my waist in poison ivy behind a Loblolly Pine. :banghead:

I know some of you know what I'm talkin' 'bout !

 

[Art Eatman]

I guesss those of us who grew up with .22 rifles from way-young are lucky. We learned all about sight picture and eye-finger coordination at an early age.

My first "real rifle" was a 1917 Enfield. Just turned 16. I was about 5'-10" and 125 pounds, and that steel butt-plate danged near beat me to death. Not that I was a skinny kid, but I had to spin around three times to cast a shadow. Stand sideways and stick out my tongue, I looked like a zipper.

I dunno. I don't think it matters all that much what somebody uses, if they shoot enough to get "all married up" with the rifle they like. Confidence, to go along with skill. Call it a Zen thing, I don't care. Inside of a couple of hundred yards, I'm about as happy with a .243 as an '06. Out around 400 or 500, Mr. Zen sez to go with the '06. Lord knows, I've messed around with bunches of different cartridges through the years.

Some of the decisions that come about when you get older have to do with what your body can handle. My legs told me to give up on that 9.5-pound rifle and a dozen-mile day. "Sit still, stupid, and shoot him next to the jeep trail!" Arthritic shoulders are God's way of telling you about softer recoil pads and cartridges with a bit less thump on the back end...

 

[Shawnee]

I think if there are any calibers that a person "grows into" or "graduates to" they are likely the .243 or 6mm or .257 Roberts or 30/30 and such. It's a matter of experience and skill development that enables someone to "outgrow" the self-doubt and non-thought that causes them to use Machismo calibers.

 

[elmerfudd]

It's just a matter of not wanting to create problems for a beginning or smaller shooter. Smaller calibers kick less and someone who's 12 years old and weighs 97 lbs. is probably going to have miserable time shooting a 30-06 and end up with a terrible flinch from it.

Now as to why we need to move up, I'm not sure we really do. A 30-30 or 7.62x39 will do everything a larger rifle will on game around where I live, provided you're talking about animals smaller than elk. The biggest bunch of hype that I see hunters buying into around here is with faster, flatter shooting cartridges. West of the Cascades, and I suspect in about half of the rest of the country, the woods and brush are thick and 98% of shots are at 200 yards or less. There's no need for a 7mm Rem Mag for that kind of shooting.

 

[H2O MAN]

I started with .30 caliber rifles and .45 ACP pistols.
I drifted down to the smaller caliber weapons only
to return to .30 caliber rifles and .45 ACP pistols

 

[Ridgerunner665]

All I want to add to this is...bigger can be better, up to a point.

There's nothing wrong with a 243, 25-06, etc., but there is nothing wrong with a 270, 280, 308, 30-06 either...and they do increase the effective range a bit (and within reasonable limits)...no matter how you slice it.

I see no reason to hunt deer with ANY type of magnum rifle round...there are no benefits to it.

 

[gregormeister]

I started hunting with a 243. and a 30-30..Years down the road I still have the 30-30s but upgraded the 243. to a 270. and an ought six. My son will start with the 30-30 and we'll see what happens. I like the killing power of my 270. and thats why I've stuck with it.

 

[hotlead]

I cant hit a driver to save my life. So I resort to the trusty 5 on the box....Makes the day more enjoyable for me....

 

[Reid73]

Blame Elmer Keith. His 'bigger is always better' philosophy has largely triumphed over the 'shot placement is paramount' approach of (.270 and 7x57 enthusiast) Jack O'Connor.

Related article: "Cannons in the Field", by Chuck Hawks.

 

[homers]

Usually there is no need to move up, but why not have an excuse to buy another gun? I still use the 243 on deer when appropriate, love my 7x57, but I am looking for a 30-06. Why, because I want another gun, not because I need one.

 

[ranger335v]

"At some point in time, most folks that move up in size work back down. The cost of the recoil, ammo, rifle, etc. And the realization that a smaller caliber will take deer as well as the big calibers."

Roger that. My first "store bought" rifle was a .243, to be used as both a varmit and deer rifle. It was plenty successful with both. Then I got a .30-06, less for it's "killin" power but with the hope of getting some longer shots across farm fields.

That worked too ... but I missed the challange of real "hunting", getting closer. Now, I often use my .243 again, or the lever 336 in .35. Just like them to use them better than my really wonderful old 06 in most situations.

 

[oregonhunter]

A .243 can and will kill an elk, but why not use a .300 mag or 30-06 if you want to and are comfortable shooting your selected rifle. I hate all these why use this why use that threads. If everyone only had .243's and 30-30's there would be NO gun industry. Don't get me wrong I own one of each and have tremendous respect for both cartridges, but some of you people need to get the chip off your shoulder.

 

[gbran]

I've owned a 30'06 since I was 14 years old. I bought a .308 for my 13 year old grandson for his first deer rifle, which he did manage to bag a deer with. My other grandsons will be getting something in the range of a 270, 308, '06 or 7mm mag, etc.

 

[coyotehitman]

Heavy kicking caliber + undersized or unprepared person usually = flinch development.

 

[22-rimfire]

It is all about developing good shooting habits. For me, I grew up with a 22 rifle and it really didn't matter if I started with a 243 or 30-06. It depended entirely on what I was planning on using the rifle for. I chose a 243 first as I could use it for varmints and deer. Bought a 270 win a couple of years later for deer or other mid-sized game animals. I like the larger bullet because it tends to put the animal down quicker. Anything about 30-06 like the 300 win mag and you start to get abused with recoil for no rational reason in terms of use. But the 243 is just fine if you place your shots reasonably well. Deer run a ways with larger holes in them too if no bones are broke.

 

[tribbles]

For one of my former supervisors, his rationale was completely different. He said his wife agreed that he could buy a gun a year without argument if the caliber matched his age.

Needless to say, he's looking forward to turning fifty.