drfatguy

I would not buy a .30-378 or a Warbird because I won't shoot at unwounded game at the distances which justify the ballistics. A Warbird does at 700 yards what a .30/06 does at 300. My first rifle I purchased for my self (after working for the summer in a pineapple field) was a .264 Win Mag. I would have been better served by a 6.5 Swede. I could handle the recoil and the noise (noise causes more flinch than most know). I couldn't utilize the ballistics. This is true with most hunters. Most hunters today can't utilize the ballistics of a .308 Win. How are they going to get the most out of a Warbird? If someone wants to buy a Warbird, more power to them. I live in America, so I will die for someone's right to buy something I would never purchase. I use to live in the west, on the desert, now I live in the Upper Penisula of Mi and can see no reason whatsoever for the .300 Weatherby a friend owns. One can't see more than 100 yds much less thread the needle between the branches to take advantage of the superior ballistics. I believe a .35 Remington is the perfect cartridge for the UP. More frontal area for a stronger smack than the .30/30. My experience is the Mags to the super Mags make hitting at long range easier not add to the abilty to generate quicker kills. I haven't shot at an animal langer than 250 yards for years (I started stalking and it was more fun) and now live wheremost shots are measured in feet. I havelived where the sky meets the earth but found most deer killed their needed the ballistics of a .30/30 (within 150 yards) not a Warbird. The longest shot I ever took on a deer or elk was 320 yards. The .264 made this easier than a 6.5 swede but not much. I just don't understand the desire tohave the Fastest .30 Mag. I guess some of us are stalkers and someare shooters and this makes the world go around.

Dr Fatguy