>deerbedead's example is not a problem
>of the cartridge, rather of
>knowing the situation. "400-450
>yards". So which is
>it: 400 or 450?
.
>
Packout, you are right on one point for sure. Knowing the situation is important, and I agree with that. The problem we had that day is that 15 years ago laser rangefinders were not available to the public. So we did our best, and thought that the shot was one that could be made. I don't remember pacing the shot off afterwards, and we don't know to this day what went wrong. The shot may have been off, or it may have been perfect, but the one thing that may have made more difference than any other thing we could have done is to shoot a heavier slug at the deer so that if the shot was true, the deer should be dead.
We always shot the Nosler solid base slugs and if I remember correctly they were 60 grains. They killed a lot of game for us, but using a small caliber like that is a bit risky on long range shots. We still love the 250 and shoot it a lot, but it stays home on the deer and elk hunts these days.
We do pack range finders now days and use them when possible.
Wish we had one back then.
So to the point I disagree on: The cartridge may well have been the problem, or maybe I should say it may have been the lack of "power" of the cartridge that allowed the deer to get away alive. The shot dropped the deer instantly, so it would have likely been either shot in the neck, spine, or the shoulders, as those 3 places typically drop an animal in it's tracks. If it was the shoulders, it probably didn't penetrate far enough to get to the vitals. If it was the neck, or spine, a larger cartridge may not have produced any different results than the 250.
So who knows, and why take a chance?