The .500 mag is no more

[Casull]

Redhawk, I respect your opinion, and I know that the statement about the 30-30 killing more deer and bear than any other cartridge has been written in magazines hundreds of times.  However, I would offer that the 30-06 is the top cartridge in this category.  The 30-06 has been around almost as long as the 30-30, and it has topped sales in ammo, reloading equipment and rifles for years.  I believe that the 30-30 runs somewhere around 7th or 8th in sales of the foregoing.  As to Lloyd's statement that the 30-30 kills as well or better than the 30-06, I suppose that within its limited range, the 30-30 might do as well as the 30-06, but how in the world would it kill better than the 30-06, which carries the same diameter bullet, but with 50% more energy.  No disrespect to anyone, just voicing my opinion.  BTW, keep up the good work guys, I'm learning more every day.

[Redhawk1]

Redhawk, I respect your opinion, and I know that the statement about the 30-30 killing more deer and bear than any other cartridge has been written in magazines hundreds of times.  However, I would offer that the 30-06 is the top cartridge in this category.  The 30-06 has been around almost as long as the 30-30, and it has topped sales in ammo, reloading equipment and rifles for years.  I believe that the 30-30 runs somewhere around 7th or 8th in sales of the foregoing.  As to Lloyd's statement that the 30-30 kills as well or better than the 30-06, I suppose that within its limited range, the 30-30 might do as well as the 30-06, but how in the world would it kill better than the 30-06, which carries the same diameter bullet, but with 50% more energy.  No disrespect to anyone, just voicing my opinion.  BTW, keep up the good work guys, I'm learning more every day.

Casull, you are correct. By no means was I trying to take anything away from the 30-06, it is a great round. I just wanted to reply to others that said the 30-30 was worse than a wrist rocket.    Boy is this way off topic from a 500 mag. :-D  :-D  

[dukkillr]

Remember the 30-30 round has counted for more bear and deer killed than I think any other single cartridge.

The slide rule has done more complex arithmetic than any calculator although no one uses a slide rule today.

More amputations have been done without anesthetic than by any other method, but I suspect you'd vote for that "new fangled pain stuff" yourself.

I don't know anything about the 500, but that attitude that simply because something is old and widely used means it's the best drives me crazy.  People should be smart enough to judge each individual question on it's own merits rather than simply defer to something that's older or more widely dispersed.

[Redhawk1]

Remember the 30-30 round has counted for more bear and deer killed than I think any other single cartridge.

The slide rule has done more complex arithmetic than any calculator although no one uses a slide rule today.

More amputations have been done without anesthetic than by any other method, but I suspect you'd vote for that "new fangled pain stuff" yourself.

I don't know anything about the 500, but that attitude that simply because something is old and widely used means it's the best drives me crazy.  People should be smart enough to judge each individual question on it's own merits rather than simply defer to something that's older or more widely dispersed.

I think you are going to deep into the subject, to prove no point what so ever. If you did not understand my intension when I posted my response to the 30-30 and 30-06 I think you need to go back and reread the whole thread, because it is obvious you missed something.
Just for the record, I don't even own a 30-30 but I know from past experience, it will kill a deer dead, even with them round nose bullets. You don't have to be a rocket scientist to understand that simple concept.

But exactly what was you point in your post? Nobody said old cartridges were the best it was your assumption. My reply was to Dino Darnell  
and his remake and I quote "  I would rather have a good wrist rocket than a .30-30 for deer."  

No need to try to turn this discussion into another closed thread.

[mk454]

wow, and wally johnson actually used a 30/30 as a lion stopper for years, said he never knew he was undergunned for lion till someone told him so.  who'd have thought he was undergunned for tennessee whitetails. :roll:

anyway, i'm way more accurate with my .454 at extended ranges than i am with a .44 just b/c the diff. in trajectory is so great with the loads i'm shooting.  that said, someone's gonna have to do better than they are right now to convince me that a hardcast through the vitals with either is gonna kill anything any "better" than the other.

btw, and i'm not sure if this is keyboard jockey stuff or what, but the only advantage the .30/06 has over the 30/30 is extended range and being chambered in more accurate bolt actions to take advantage of that range.  that said, killing on deer at 100 yards is most certainly not one of the advantages of the 30/30.

oh, btw, my .454 outpenetrates with the right load anything i've yet to shoot out of my .375 HH in any penetration tests i've done.  not sure what that proves but i will say the .375 is better @300 yards, but at 25 anything is dead with either.  same goes for .44 and .500 smith.

[jeager106]

WOW!

Did this thread ever take on a life of it's own! :-D  :-D
Well anyway my point was only that the .500 magnum is not superior to any decent handgun round at ranges normal for a revolver with open sights.
Out to around 100 yards.
I'm talking about OPEN SIGHTS UNDER FIELD HUNTING CONDITIONS.
The .500 will not kill deer or black bear any deader than a .44 magnum or other calibers of that persuasion at that stated distance.

How this got into a 30-30 Winchester bashing thread I haven't a clue.
Frankly the 30-30 in it's factory 150 and 170 flat nose load is about IDEAL for deer sized game.
Yes kiddies I said IDEAL.
I'm talking about deer, not T-Rex. Deer.
I'm talking about sensible woods ranges of less than 150 yards.
The 30-30 is an ideal deer cartridge.
Even the Winchester 94 carbine is accurate enough to put a bullet into the chest of a deer at 150 yards.
The 30-30 in a Marlin 336 and a low powered scope makes an even better combination.
The 30-06 is a great cartridge. The only thing that makes the '06 a better deer cartridge (and that is arguable) is the fact that the '06 will reach out further than the 30-30.
That's all.
Most of my buds that hunt the abundant deer in the great State of Wva. quit using the .308, 30-06, and others of that class and went to the 30-30.
They have killed literally hundreds of the rather smallish Wva. deer.
The 30-30 shines at the normal 35 to 75 yard woods ranges and it won't blow half the venison all over the woods as did the more powerful rounds.

If deeer is your game the 30-30 is about perfect for anything udner 150 yards.
If you desire a handgun the .41, .45 Colt, .44 mag, .454 are all perfectly suitable for ranges of 100 yards and under.
The only reason for using a handgun bigger than those I mentioned is because you want to.
If you want a .500 mag for deeer then by all means you should buy one.
My uncle had a friend that used a .338 mag for Pa. whitetail.
Not because he needed all that power or range but because the .338 was the only rifle he owned.
He shot it well.

I have no idea what slide rules and amputations have to do with hunting cartridges.
 :roll:  :?:

[Redhawk1]

jeager106, wow we do agree. That was my point also.  :-D

[Scott T]

You know, everyone is entitled to their own opinion.

However, not too many have actually shot enough deer with a variety of handguns for that opinion to be valid.  I find this kind of thinking predominates with those who have never really tried the big bores or cannot afford to play with them and thus want to run them down.  

That being said, there is no way you are going to convince me, all things being equal,  that a deer or bear or coon or possum or anything else will not go down quicker if hit in the same place with a .512 bullet vs a .429 bullet.   Big hole in and big hole out.  More air in more blood out.

[Dino Darnell]

I have to agree with Scott T about the bigger hole theory. I have killed several deer with handguns,a revolver with a large diameter bullet that will cleanly punch through the vitals of a whitetail kills as good as a fast moving smaller diameter bullet from a rifle type cartridge in my experiences.

[DakotaElkSlayer]

WOW!

D

How this got into a 30-30 Winchester bashing thread I haven't a clue.
Frankly the 30-30 in it's factory 150 and 170 flat nose load is about IDEAL for deer sized game.
Yes kiddies I said IDEAL.

Now, there's the opening of a BIG can of worms!  :eek:  

Jim

[Scott T]

To me the difference is pretty easy to see.  When slapped with the big round, even at my low velocities, it seems that the deer generally quiver and fold up.  Hogs have dropped in their tracks.

This is with a 410 gr LFN.  I imagine my WFN would have the same or better effect.

Now, I have a good friend who I will be hunting with this weekend.  He shoots a .454 Casull and has been having difficulty anchoring hogs with cast bullets.  He is probably going to a 300gr XTP to improve terminal performance.

I'll see if we can get some photos this weekend.

[Redhawk1]

You know, everyone is entitled to their own opinion.

However, not too many have actually shot enough deer with a variety of handguns for that opinion to be valid.  I find this kind of thinking predominates with those who have never really tried the big bores or cannot afford to play with them and thus want to run them down.  

That being said, there is no way you are going to convince me, all things being equal,  that a deer or bear or coon or possum or anything else will not go down quicker if hit in the same place with a .512 bullet vs a .429 bullet.   Big hole in and big hole out.  More air in more blood out.

I am not disagreeing with you, but dead is dead. I have shot a lot of deer with 357 Mags, 44 Mags. I have shot Hogs with 44 Mags. I have shot a deer and a bear with my 500 Mag. All one shot kills from the 357 Mag to the 500 Mag. I no longer use 44 Mag on down for any big game hunting, I now only have several 460 Mags and a couple of 500 Mags. I like big holes, leaves good blood trails if needed, but with good shot placement I don't worry to much.  But if someone shot me in the chest ay 50 yards with a 44 Mag or a 500 Mag, I don't think I would be able to tell the difference.  :-D

[MS Hitman]

Now that Scott has brought up the question of experience/experimenting with various loads on deer and this thread was started by jeager106; jeager106. how many deer have you killed with handguns, especially revolvers?  

This is not a challenge, but I do want to know what level of experience you are basing your opinions on and am wondering often have you been bloody up to the elbows looking to see how a particular bullet did perform on a deer.  Or for that matter, I would be interested in hearing about anyone else's experiences on deer.

[mk454]

wow, i have some cousins that have farms all over the panhandle here in texas and to say we've gotten to clear out some hogs is the understatement of the year.........that said, you've got a friend having a hard time anchoring hogs with a .454?  wow, what dang cast bullets is that guy using?  i've shot more than my share mostly with corbon penetrators from 320 -360 and then again with xtp's.  never had one instance where anchoring a hog was in doubt.  then again, my cousin hasn't had a prob with his super redhawk .44 and the garrett's he uses.  oh well, i guess your bud needs a .500!!!!!!!!!!

[358Win]

Wow, this subject really gets some wild opinions.

For deer I like the 41 Mag.

If I was going to spend a lot of time wandering around in Alaska, where a chance encounter with a large grizzly was a possibility then a 500 would start looking like a must have item.

Although in truth I'd probably just stick with my 358 Winchester BLR.

[Scott T]

Well Hitman, you know me, so I know why you did not ask me that question!  

Of course, I also know that you have killed far more game with a pistol than I will ever see.  I don't know anyone who has the trigger time you have.  Hell, I don't know anyone who has even come close!

I am happy to defer to your expertese in these matters.

[James B]

IMO The 44 Mag is effective on all NA big game out to as far as most hunters can place a bullet properly with a handgun. A scoped handgun with a dead solid rest is another matter. From using the scoped condender and shooting from a stand where I have a good rest, 200 yards is no trick. However rifle cartridges in the Encore or Contender are the way to go IMO.

[Redhawk1]

Now that Scott has brought up the question of experience/experimenting with various loads on deer and this thread was started by jeager106; jeager106. how many deer have you killed with handguns, especially revolvers?  

This is not a challenge, but I do want to know what level of experience you are basing your opinions on and am wondering often have you been bloody up to the elbows looking to see how a particular bullet did perform on a deer.  Or for that matter, I would be interested in hearing about anyone else's experiences on deer.

MS Hitman, I have been handgun hunting about 20 years now. Like I posted above I have taken a lot of deer with 357 Mags, 44 Mags and 454 Casull. I have not had a chance at one yet with my 460 Mag, but not for a lack of trying. Any more I would rather handgun hunt than any thing else. I have taken a lot of deer some hogs and bear with handguns. The most damage I have seen with any of my handgun kill was my black bear I took last October. I used my 500 Mag with a 370 gr. hard cast bullet at about 1700 fps. Both shoulder were destroyed and the lungs were jello. Bone fragment made about 20 little exit holes in the hide and my taxidermist let me know about them. Like I said before I love big bore handguns. I do understand that large bore bullets cause a lot more damage then a smaller diameter bullet when hit in the same spot. But I also know I have almost 95% one shot kills with my handguns. In my opinion shot placement is key to my success. My agreement with jeager106 statement about "all things being equal" was dead is dead. Is there more damage with a larger bore bullets over the smaller bore bullets, heck yes there is.  I have not had very many recovered bullets, seems I get a lot of past through with my handguns. I have recovered some bullets and still have a few for keep sakes. But where I find all my data I need is in the tissue damage on the animal I have on the ground.  

I know some guys like to blow smoke up peoples butts, but when I post I am posting from actual hands on experience.  I see why you asked the question you did, I myself get frustrated when someone give there opinion without actual hands on experience. I often wonder what make them such an authority on the subject, if they have never done it.

[DakotaElkSlayer]

I know some guys like to blow smoke up peoples butts, but when I post I am posting from actual hands on experience.  I see why you asked the question you did, I myself get frustrated when someone give there opinion without actual hands on experience. I often wonder what make them such an authority on the subject, if they have never done it.

 :shock:   Wow...maybe we should get a new forum called, "Ask the Expert" so only people with such vast handgun experience would be allowed to reply?  :roll:  :roll:  :roll:  :roll:  :roll:

Jim

[jeager106]

O.K. guys.
Everyone pull in the claws, let the fangs and hair go away and lets get back into persepctive.
I LOVE CONTROVESY.
Not infighting, not bad mouthing, but controversy.
It stimulates thought.
Now please notice I defined certain parameters when I said the .500 magnum was no more effective than, say a .44 magnum, on deer sized game.
I said from a revolver, with open sights at handgun ranges of less than 100 yards.
I stand by my statement.
I doubt the deer would know the difference if it was killed by a .500 magnum or a .44 magnum.
Dead is dead is dead.
The .500 is no more effective than any of the earlier "big bore" handgun hunting rounds.
Now understand this:
At ranges of under 100 yards the 30-30 is just as effective at harvesting deer sized game as is the .300 Winchester Magnum.
Think about that.
If all other factors are equal, i.e. bullet weight, bullet contruction, shape, etc., size of the targeted game, distance to the targeted game, shot placement, the 30-30 and .300 magnum are equally effective.
The hunter using the .300 magnum gains only one thing.
RANGE.
Period.
That cannot be said of the .500 magnum vs the .44 magnum class handgun hunting cartridges all other factors being equal.
The .500 (and others giants of that ilk) is no more effective because of:
1) limitiations of sights
2) limitations of the shooter.
All that power generated by the .500 is simply waisted on game the size of our whitetail deer.
Now there is nothing wrong with using any handgun you want to hunt any game you want.We are allowed to do that.
The ONLY point I was making is simply that the .500, the .460 and such monsters gain the hunter absolutely NOTHING in effective killing power over the .44 magnum class cartridge for the deer sized target.
Now if I were very wealthy and had  the opportunity to take Cape Buffalo with a handgun I'd choose the biggest, baddest, caliber I could handle and then make sure that I could at least out run my guide!
I still maintain that the 30-30 is about ideal for taking whitetail deer at ranges of about 100 yards and closer.
That of course is only my opinion. Your mileage may vary.
I've taken a number of deer. Most with the 12 gauge as where I live we are not allowed centerfire rifles.
I've taken 50 + deer, only two with a handgun, five with bow, two with muzzle loader, the rest with the 12 bore.
I've seen literally hundreds of deer taken with shotguns and slugs.
I had a buddy that owned a butcher shop. He processed thousands of harvested deer.
I helped him and his employees skin more deer than I can count.
I can tell you that it's very difficult to see the difference in damage done by a 20 gauge and 12 gauge slug.
The deer shot by the 20 bore was every bit as dead as the deer shot by the 12 bore slug.
The damage to the tissue was about equal.
The 20 is about 62 caliber, the 12 is about 72 caliber.
The difference between those two diameters is far greater than the difference between a .429 and .500 handgun bullet.
I fail to understand why some think the .500 diameter bullet is a much better killer than the .43 bores?
That is really splitting frog hairs isn't it?
Any .44 magnum and any .500 class magnum will shoot through the biggest whieteail in the woods.
That means that any calibers of that class will waist enough KE to sent the bullet downrange.
I'd like to hear a logical argument showing that the .500 is more effective under the outlined parameters than the .44 magnum on deer.

[MS Hitman]

jeager106,

I may be wrong, but from the content of your posts you have come to this discussion prejudiced to your conclusion.  Also, I see two issues you  bring up and these are cartridge performance and shooter ability.

By extending your line of thought and constraints, all things being equal, a .44 magnum is no more effective than a .22 Long Rifle in a revolver with open sights and does not extend the effective range at which a person may kill a deer.  After all, dead is dead, correct?

A major advantage the .300 magnum has over the .30-30 is the bullet weight and the velocity to make good use of that advantage.  I have shot 190-220 grain bullets from various 30-30s and the cartridge is just not able to move the bullet fast enough to offer expansion or penetration to get the bullet out the other side in most cases.  Now they usually spin around and do all sorts of damage once in the deer.  The .300 Win Mag is more closely akin to the old "bolt of lightening".  

In my experience, all things being equal, the .475 Linebaugh is more effective than the .44 Mag on deer because all variables outside of bullet weight and diameter are constantly diminishing once you pull the trigger.  Through considerable patience and if the deer cooperate, I have been able to make very similar shots on deer with different calibers.  I can tell you from my testing that a .475 or .45-70 for that matter will out penetrate a .44 mag when taking a shot that diagaonally transverses the deer's body.  Most of the .430" bullets stop in the guts, the .475s so far have gone out the back.  This is with the .475 bullet starting about 400 fps slower than the .44 mag bullet.  Shot presentation is much less an issue, because I have the confidence I can reach the vitals from any angle of the deer.  Same goes for the .500 Linebaugh.  

Another matter to consider is the difference between killing and stopping.  The two are not the same and many people with limited or no experience have a diificult time understanding the difference.  Although this concept is more suited to the hunting of dangerous game, it does have its application in deer hunting, to wit.  If I am hunting in open woods, a .44 mag will do just fine and I still carry one regularly.  I have great confidence in my ability to kill a deer as far as I can see it provided I have good presentation.  If it runs a ways, I can trail it up and retieve it.  If I am hutning close to a particularly nasty cut-over, I am going to use a cartridge that will better stop the deer by breaking down the animal, thus preventing or reducing the chance of it getting into thick cover and me losing it.

Like I stated above, it sounds to me like you have already made up your mind on the matter.  I just offer the above discussion for thinking purposes.

[Redhawk1]

I know some guys like to blow smoke up peoples butts, but when I post I am posting from actual hands on experience.  I see why you asked the question you did, I myself get frustrated when someone give there opinion without actual hands on experience. I often wonder what make them such an authority on the subject, if they have never done it.

 :shock:   Wow...maybe we should get a new forum called, "Ask the Expert" so only people with such vast handgun experience would be allowed to reply?  :roll:  :roll:  :roll:  :roll:  :roll:

Jim

I don't know why you took offence to my post??   I don't claim to be "Expert", but I do have a lot of handgun hunting experience. But what makes you think that someone with little or no actual handgun hunting experience is remotely qualified to give good advice or have a opinion based on fact?

If you took it personal, maybe you should ask yourself why.

[Redhawk1]

jeager106,

I may be wrong, but from the content of your posts you have come to this discussion prejudiced to your conclusion.  Also, I see two issues you  bring up and these are cartridge performance and shooter ability.

By extending your line of thought and constraints, all things being equal, a .44 magnum is no more effective than a .22 Long Rifle in a revolver with open sights and does not extend the effective range at which a person may kill a deer.  After all, dead is dead, correct?

A major advantage the .300 magnum has over the .30-30 is the bullet weight and the velocity to make good use of that advantage.  I have shot 190-220 grain bullets from various 30-30s and the cartridge is just not able to move the bullet fast enough to offer expansion or penetration to get the bullet out the other side in most cases.  Now they usually spin around and do all sorts of damage once in the deer.  The .300 Win Mag is more closely akin to the old "bolt of lightening".  

In my experience, all things being equal, the .475 Linebaugh is more effective than the .44 Mag on deer because all variables outside of bullet weight and diameter are constantly diminishing once you pull the trigger.  Through considerable patience and if the deer cooperate, I have been able to make very similar shots on deer with different calibers.  I can tell you from my testing that a .475 or .45-70 for that matter will out penetrate a .44 mag when taking a shot that diagaonally transverses the deer's body.  Most of the .430" bullets stop in the guts, the .475s so far have gone out the back.  This is with the .475 bullet starting about 400 fps slower than the .44 mag bullet.  Shot presentation is much less an issue, because I have the confidence I can reach the vitals from any angle of the deer.  Same goes for the .500 Linebaugh.  

Another matter to consider is the difference between killing and stopping.  The two are not the same and many people with limited or no experience have a diificult time understanding the difference.  Although this concept is more suited to the hunting of dangerous game, it does have its application in deer hunting, to wit.  If I am hunting in open woods, a .44 mag will do just fine and I still carry one regularly.  I have great confidence in my ability to kill a deer as far as I can see it provided I have good presentation.  If it runs a ways, I can trail it up and retieve it.  If I am hutning close to a particularly nasty cut-over, I am going to use a cartridge that will better stop the deer by breaking down the animal, thus preventing or reducing the chance of it getting into thick cover and me losing it.

Like I stated above, it sounds to me like you have already made up your mind on the matter.  I just offer the above discussion for thinking purposes.

MS Hitman, I understand the point jeager106 makes. His all being equal statement and I agree with it. "That cannot be said of the .500 magnum vs the .44 magnum class handgun hunting cartridges all other factors being equal.
The .500 (and others giants of that ilk) is no more effective because of:
1) limitations of sights
2) limitations of the shooter.
All that power generated by the .500 is simply wasted on game the size of our whitetail deer. "
I also understand your point with the stopping power, which I agree with also.  I shoot deer, bear and hogs in the shoulder with my big bore handguns, it breaks them down and makes tracking a lot less work. Take out there front legs and lungs and they do not travel far at all, the added energy produced by the 460 mag or 500 Mag transfers to the deer, bear, hog  or what ever your animal of choice is.  It is a no brainier and I think we all agree that dead is dead.

As for my post above with my statement, "I know some guys like to blow smoke up peoples butts, but when I post I am posting from actual hands on experience. I see why you asked the question you did, I myself get frustrated when someone give there opinion without actual hands on experience. I often wonder what make them such an authority on the subject, if they have never done it."  My point was and here is a blow up example, just because someone changed a tire on a car does not make them an mechanic or qualifies them to give advice on how to rebuild a motor. My intension was not to offend anyone, just to point out my thoughts.

[Scott T]

Examining the corpses of dead deer really does not tell one much about how well the bullet performed for this simple reason:  ALL OF THOSE DEER ARE DEAD.

Well, of course they are just as dead if killed with a .22 or a 12 ga.  Your buddy would not be cutting up the corpse if they were not dead.  To compare dead deer and say that they are just as dead proves nothing.

Now, observing a deer that has just been hit with a certain cartridge, and seeing how quickly he goes down does lend something to the conversation.

All those deer that your buddy cut up, did they have little tags on them to tell you how far they ran?  Could you tell from looking at the bullet or slug holes how many of them dropped in their tracks?  Can he tell you the difference in the quality of the meat between a deer that runs several hundred yards before he bleeds out and one who drips right there?  I can sure tell the difference at the table.

To say that there is no difference in the killing effectiveness of the .44mags and the .500, using your criteria, is about like saying that there is no difference in the killing power of a Mack truck and a .22.  After all, both have killed many deer and the deer that they killed were just as dead.

The point being, that some of us have shot a lot of deer with pistols, Hitman is an example of someone who has vast experience in this regard.  I take his observations much more seriously than I would someone who may have killed a couple of deer with a .44 but have never seen a deer shot with a .500.

Though everyone is entitled to their opinon, some opinions are more valuable than others.

[MS Hitman]

Gentlemen,

I'm not the least bit offended by others remarks or observations concerning this topic.  It is my opinion that some may be overspeaking their level of experience just as it may be that some think the same of me.  My point of asking about experience levels is to get an idea of from what basis or foundation one speaks.  Just please understand I will not allow myself to be subjected to or limited by another's constraints; I have enough of my own right now.  If another person cannot or will not shoot at a deer past 35 yards, 50 yards, or whatever range, I do not feel obligated to share or accept such a limitation for myself.

Everyones experiences, perceptions and opinions are going to be different in some manner.  As Redhawk stated, it would indeed be a boring discussion otherwise.  I'm smart enough to know that I can learn something from anyone else and consider the day wasted if I do not.

The big bore revolvers are considered by some to be overkill.  That is their opinion and they are entitled to it.  Fortunately, I have had the opportunity to shoot a good many deer and other game animals with a wide variety of handguns of different calibers and bullets.  God willing I will continue this experiment for some time yet.  

My problem, if you want to call it that, to the beginning of this discussion would be that someone who appears to have rather limited experience would be making such broad and blanket statements.  Get a .44 Mag and a .500 Mag; go out and kill two or three or four dozen deer with each and then come back with a basis on which to portray these statements as fact.

[mk454]

so to raise another question.  what's more effective?  a 500 smith or a 454 out of a rifle?  how about a .475 linebaugh vs. the 500 smith, .475 has shown to be the better penetrator almost 100% of the time.  how about the smaller diameter 45/70 out of a bfr vs. the 500 smith.  garrett and buffalo bore 45/70's vs. the equivalent .500 smith.  

why does the 500 alaskan seem to penetrate worse than all the above rounds when it's clearly the superior cartridge?

that said, i know there's no easy answers, but i've never seen any difference in the deer hitting the ground with the big un's vs. .44 mag.  sometimes they run, sometimes they don't.  i've seen elk nearly poleaxed with a .308 in the vitals only to have a .448 in the vitals run a few hundred yards.

[Scott T]

Amen Hitman. :-)

[DakotaElkSlayer]

I don't know why you took offence to my post??   I don't claim to be "Expert", but I do have a lot of handgun hunting experience. But what makes you think that someone with little or no actual handgun hunting experience is remotely qualified to give good advice or have a opinion based on fact?

If you took it personal, maybe you should ask yourself why.

    Oh no, I didn't take offence; I just thought the original statement was a bit much.  Experience is only as good as the person actually understands what is actually happening and why.  Physics, biology, and a little common sense will take one a heck of a long way in the world of ballistics.  
  Remember, it was those experienced gun writers who told us how important KE and hydrostatic shock is when it comes to killing... :-D

Jim

[jeager106]

Examining the corpses of dead deer really does not tell one much about how well the bullet performed for this simple reason:  ALL OF THOSE DEER ARE DEAD.


Beg to differ with you on this point. Examining the dead deer is a good inidcator of tissue damage.
The only way to tell if an living critter drops in it's tracks is to witness every critter as it is hit.
That is something that might be difficult to to.
For example I shot one buck with a 30-30 and it did drop in it's tracks. I took a doe with a .54 caplock and it too dropped in it's tracks. Those two examples are conclusive of nothing.

Well, of course they are just as dead if killed with a .22 or a 12 ga.  Your buddy would not be cutting up the corpse if they were not dead.  To compare dead deer and say that they are just as dead proves nothing.

I said that examining dead deer in the butcher shop was a good way to determine apparent effectiveness. I said nothing about determining stopping power.  I know very well the difference between a lethal wound and a stopping wound. A ' stopper' is more accurately called "instantainious incapacitation" and may or may not be lethal


Now, observing a deer that has just been hit with a certain cartridge, and seeing how quickly he goes down does lend something to the conversation.
Yes indeed. You are quite correct. However it is diffictul to see hundreds of critters as they are hit isn't it?

All those deer that your buddy cut up, did they have little tags on them to tell you how far they ran?  Could you tell from looking at the bullet or slug holes how many of them dropped in their tracks?  Can he tell you the difference in the quality of the meat between a deer that runs several hundred yards before he bleeds out and one who drips right there?  I can sure tell the difference at the table.

That was  a pointless argument.  How something tastes at the supper table is even more pointless and proves nothing about terminal ballistics.
Your point about eating dead animals was what exactly? :?

To say that there is no difference in the killing effectiveness of the .44mags and the .500, using your criteria, is about like saying that there is no difference in the killing power of a Mack truck and a .22.  After all, both have killed many deer and the deer that they killed were just as dead.

Mack trucks and .22s have nothing to do with anything in the contest of this converstation.

The point being, that some of us have shot a lot of deer with pistols, Hitman is an example of someone who has vast experience in this regard.  I take his observations much more seriously than I would someone who may have killed a couple of deer with a .44 but have never seen a deer shot with a .500.

Though everyone is entitled to their opinon, some opinions are more valuable than others.

NO doubt about that! :-D

By the way. I've never killed anything with a .44 magnum.
The only two deer I've taken with a handgun were taken with a 2" .38 spl. and a Smith 4506.

[Scott T]

Well, before you get your panties in a wad, remember that you asked this question:

"That being the case; that 50 to 100 yards is a practical maximum range for us to be slinging lead at deer and black bear can anyone explain to me why the .460, the .454, the .500 are more effective than your everyday common run of the mill .44 mag, the .45 Colt loaded to potential, and the .41 magnum?"

I think several of us have answered the question quite thouroghly.  I know you don't like the answer, but we certainly cannot help that.