I never said .30 cal was "magic." I also never said your favorite caliber won't work. You keep trying to justify your choice by comparing a fast, high BC 7mm- with a basic non high BC, not heavy for caliber .30 cal. Shoot whatever you want, no need to get all bent out of shape and try to show me how wrong I am. My 300 WM and 300 WSM are in the 11-12# range including bipod and suppressor. I can spot my own shots, and practice with them out to beyond 1,000 yards regularly. Shoot whatever makes you happy. I've never seen so much emotion about a caliber choice, this is worse than 9mm v. .45 ACP.
Statistically speaking, you are more likely to experience
longer travel distance from the shot using .30 bores, compared to 6.5mm and 7mm, at least according to the over 14,000 samples from the Scandinavian Moose Hunting Survey that sampled hunters from Norway, Sweden, and Finland. They average about 200,000 Moose every year between those 3 nations. Sweden sees 100,000 harvests a year on average, Finland about 60,000, and Norway 40,000.
Moose are substantially larger and heavier than elk, so the vital zone solutions for penetration are a lot deeper than even your largest bull Elks here in the Rockies. Our elk don’t have much deeper vital zones than a lot of our more mature mule deer when you look at penetration depth considerations.
About half of the 14,000 samples in the Scandinavian Moose Hunt Survey used some type of .30 caliber/7.62mm, which were a mix of .308, 7.62x53, .30-06, and .300 Win Mag mostly. The next largest samples were 7mm and 6.5mm, lots of 7x57 Mauser, 7x64 Brenneke, 6.5x55 Mauser. The smallest segment of the survey were shooters using .45/.458 bores, who actually had the shortest average travel distances, but this can be attributed to smaller samples and more experienced shooters who tended to use those cartridges. They have caliber and bullet construction mandates there, with energy requirements as well in some places. At least Finland was like that when I got my hunting license and took the moving target hunting test at 75m. They’ve since amended that to a static test for Fudds who complained.
Anyway, average travel distances from the shot on moose were shorter with the 6.5mm and 7mm cartridges, with thousands of samples.
It’s easier to make consistent shot placement with most 6.5mm and 7mm cartridges compared to most .30 bores, especially as recoil and muzzle blast increase. The legacy 6.5x55 Mauser with its lower chamber pressure and muzzle velocity has been killing moose since the late 1800s, accounting for over one million moose there in the last 124 years.
I don’t believe these results are because of a terminal ballistics factor, but are more from “shoot-ability” and optics stability/endurance factors. When I break a shot on a .300 Win Mag, there is no way I can see what happened in the immediate aftermath of the muzzle blast and recoil. Optics take more of a beating as well historically, but we all know quality scopes have come a long way in the endurance/durability aspects.
Heavier rifles are also more difficult to carry and get into position with quickly, then maintain an ethical sight picture with while making the shot. Once you break the shot, you really need someone who is a trained spotter/observer that can assess if the shot was good so you don’t spook the animal with an unnecessary follow-up.
If you’re an occasional shooter who isn’t in a training regimen, buying a larger bore diameter is probably one of the worst routes you can take for these reasons. These are also the most likely hunters to not mount their bases and rings with thread-locker, apply improper torque to the rings, and don’t know how to set up the rifle/optic interface for ideal eye relief, ring height relative to cheek weld, or work the focus. Many are going off of low-paid, misinformed firearms retail sales clerks with zero experience. You can stand right there next to them and tell them, “I’ve been setting up rifles and shooting them for decades, here’s what I recommend.” They will then take the 20-something-year-old clerk’s advice because he has a shirt with the store logo on it.
Does everyone not remember the thread on here with George Gardner and others stacking elk like corkwood with 6.5 SAUM at long range using Berger 130gr Hunting VLDs?
So for a new shooter especially, I strongly recommend avoiding .30 bores with maybe .308 as an exception if you want to train with it regularly, and will use a lightweight suppressor like a TBAC Ultra 5 or 7 to take the muzzle blast away.
A 6.5 Creedmoor/.260 Rem/6.5x47 Lapua with 129-147gr is more than plenty to reliably and consistently anchor elk for sport. If our ancestors had access to any of the bottle-necked high power rifles we have today, they would feel invincible against all the large game they stacked like bricks using low-yield steel actions and black powder. They went genocidal on bison in North America in the 1800s, with long-obsolete firearms by today’s standards. (Although .45-70 probably accounted for the vast majority of the Bison genocide campaign sanctioned by the government.)
For those that are highly-experienced shooters who know how to set-up a rifle, we will get it done no matter what. The questions for us boil down to:
How much rifle weight do I want to carry?
What distances am I shooting at?
Do I want the rifle to be friendly for other members of my family/party?
For me, the only thing that would push me towards something larger than any of the 6.5-08 class of cartridges is long-range hunting. For all our common distances within 400yds here in the Mountain West region, 6.5-08 class will get that done easily all day long. If I am leaning on long-range, it will still be a 6.5+big boiler room or 7mm+ boiler room, not a .30 bore.
No matter what caliber someone chooses, nothing will compensate for a poorly set-up rifle/optic combo and lack of training. Choosing a larger bore with poor optics mounting and no training outside of zeroing will normally result in failure/unethical performance.
