Effect of gun caliber on moose - Nordic study

ushunter

New member
As there probably are a lot of hunters reading this forum, this post, that I wrote in another forum, might be of interest to to y'all:

"When researching for my new rifle, I ran into an interesting study that was done in Sweden, Norway and Finland in 2004-2005 on the effect of gun caliber on moose. This study might be of interest to the readers of this forum, as I've noticed often the question: which caliber is the best. To my understanding this study is quite unique and it is still ongoing.

Moose hunters in the three Nordic countries were given forms to fill out on questions ranging from gun caliber to shooting distance to the distance the moose ran after being hit before falling down. Information about hit area was collected also. By the time the first report was written, 4,456 forms had been returned, 2,032 from Finland, 1,462 from Sweden and 962 from Norway. Of all forms distributed, Finnish hunters returned 34% filled, Swedes 15% and Norwegians 24%.

The first report as published in a Finnish hunting magazine can be found here:
http://epaper.mmd.net/riista/epagereader4.php?pgNum=6&issue=94
Unfortunately, I could not find an English version, but I'll translate the most interesting data.

On the first page, table 1. ("Taulukko 1.") shows the most common calibers in moose hunting in the different Nordic countries. "Suomi" is Finland, "Ruotsi" is Sweden and "Norja" is Norway. The number after each caliber is the percentage of hunters using that caliber. For instance, in Finland the most common caliber is the 308 Winchester with 53% of hunters using it. "Muut" means other.

On the second page, the first picture ("Kuva 1.) shows the average shooting distance (in meters) in the different countries. Hunters in Finland shot from the shortest distance and the Norwegians from the longest. This was attributed to the hunting terrain differences between the countries.

The second picture ("Kuva 2") is perhaps the most interesting showing the average running distance (in meters) of an adult moose as a function of the caliber after the first bullet has penetrated both lungs (from a broad side hit). This study shows that an adult moose runs the shortest distance when hit with a .458. Interestingly the moose runs the furthest after being hit with a .308 with 30-06 being just a tad more effective in killing power (hey, I am just the messenger, okay?).

The study notes that a hit to the central nervous system was equally effective bringing the moose down, regardless of caliber.

The study concludes that using the biggest caliber will result in fastest kill resulting in better tasting meat (the longer the moose runs the more adrenaline is released into muscles affecting the taste). However, the authors speculate that the smaller calibers are more popular due to the cost of the rifles and ammunition. The smaller calibers are probably also popular in no small part because of the less punishing recoil and thus more accurate shots.

Note: To move back and forth between the pages, click on << Edellinen (Previous) or >> Seuraava (Next) at the bottom of each page."
 

fisherman66

New member
The only thing I learned (I am using that term loosely; since I probably could have told you beforehand) definitively is that I don't speak Finnish or which ever Nordic language that is.

It is interesting none the less, but without knowing how the study was conducted I find it hard to draw conclusions. I find it incredible that some of the most popular calibers had the slowest kill with the 30/06 and the .308 running neck and neck for the longest average distance run after being shot. The less popular ones tend to have a shorter kill walk. I wonder about the human variable (braggin' rights). I shoot a somewhat less popular cartridge, and all my game pile up right where I shoot them (except for a couple that walked with me back to camp and hung themselves on the meatpole; eager little buggers.)
 

Big-Foot

New member
The study concludes that using the biggest caliber will result in fastest kill resulting in better tasting meat (the longer the moose runs the more adrenaline is released into muscles affecting the taste).

Did it? I see that the mooses (meese?) ran shorter distances when hit with 6.5mm and the 7mm than they did with 9.3mm (.266 caliber) , the .308 AND the 30-06. I wished they had included bullet construction in the data because bullet expansion/penetration trumps caliber.

I say no critter will live very long after blood pressure loss. Put a decent sized caliber bullet through the heart/lungs and it dies. Hard kicking magdumb pyrotechnics are fun but they really aren't necessary for non dangerous game outside of Africa IMO.

Lies, damned lies, and statistics. :D
 

mountainclmbr

New member
Interesting that shows the average distance run by Mr. Moose after being shot is around 10m for the .458 and second is 45-70 at about 15m. I am surprised at how far back the .375 is at about 40m while the .338 looks to be about 20m.
 

ronc0011

New member
Now you’ve done it. You realize of course that you are going to be deluged with endless comments about “shot placement” and all the other devotees of the varmint calibers.

BTW as I live in Texas and we don’t really have many moose down here so I do find the 308 to be an acceptable caliber for pretty much anything I’m likely to run into. All that aside though, any thinking person is going to see that bigger is better, at least in terms of pure destructive force. Well actually “bigger and faster” is better.
 

FirstFreedom

Moderator
Interesting, but I don't think you can draw much conclusion from it; too many potential flaws to make it usable as a predictor of expected "takedown distance."

First, you've got reporter error (either intentional or unintentional) - some of the survey participators could give false info (ya think?) - to what extent I don't know. They might misreport the distance, and might misreport (perhaps unintentionally) that both lungs were hit when it was only one.

Then you've got factors not controlled for, which can throw off the whole thing. You've got to isolate bullet construction, which is an incredibly important factor. Then you've got to isolate whether or not significant bone was hit first (hit bone can fragment into the vitals causing more wounds/ faster bleeding).

You need a lot more detail to tell anything significant, but still, it's a fun camfire conversation-maker. :)
 

ushunter

New member
One of the flaws in the article is that it doesn't tell you the number of data points for each caliber, i.e. how many lung hits were with .458 vs. .308. You could have one or two with .458 and several hundred with .308. A quick math will tell you that over 1,600 or 36% of the moose were shot with a .308. So, statistically the data for .308 will be more accurate.

The hunting regulations for Finland (and I would assume Sweden and Norway as well) prohibit the use of FMJ bullets. The minimum bullet weight is 139 grain or 154 grain, depending on the muzzle velocity.
 

VonFireball

New member
I dunno, but I'd bet on a .458 taking down a moose faster than a .308. Who pays for this kind of garbage study?

Obviously, no research required, the .458 is gonna drop it faster than the rest. It's a mini cannon for crying out loud.

The study is a typical waste of tax dollars report commonly found in socialist scandanavia.
 

JohnKSa

Administrator
9.3mm is .366 caliber, not .266

Dunno about their conclusion in the general case. Clearly the really big calibers do better (the 9.3 being an anomaly in their "study") but if you're looking for a correlation in the chart, I think that it would be just as easy to make a case for a connection between how commonly the caliber is used and how long the moose runs after being shot.
 

ZeroJunk

New member
There have been some threads about bullet failure. Expanding too quickly or not at all. But, a .458 will always make a big hole. When it comes to killing something a bigger hole is more reliable.
 

Old Time Hunter

New member
Why would anyone even question these results?

They were all shot in the same place, at the same distance, and all weighed the same. Common sense should dictate that the .458 or .45-70 with a heavier bullet would be the most effective. Kinda like the 1 mile an hour locomotive and the 10 mile an hour Yugo....same theoretic amount of energy, but which one would knock down a brick wall first.

Size does matter...ask any woman.
 

Blue Duck

New member
Elmer Keith had it right all along. On bigger game, bigger bullets work pretty good. Still I figure the 458 data is a bit skewed, because it was probably based on only a few kills.
 

Big-Foot

New member
Size does matter...ask any woman.

I don't disagree, which is why it is hard to believe that the 9.3s(9.3x57, 9.3x62 or above) is less effective than the 6.5s(6.5x55 most likely and up) and the 7mms(7mm-08, 7x57, 7 Rem Mag and up). The 9.3x62 (.366 caliber, good catch JohnKSa) is a full on African big game cartridge for crying out loud, only slightly less effective on African game than the .375 H&H.

I don't completely discount the study. I just won't buy an elk, moose or brown bear rifle based on it. :)
 

ushunter

New member
The authors noted the odd results of 9.3x62. They speculated that it might be due to marginal hits at the edges of lungs or unfavorable bullet deformation after the hit.
 

GSoD

New member
Not too sure if a study is required but I shot two moose in this past fall with .308 and both dropped instantly.

Maybe Nordic Moose are more energetic than North American moose?
 

JohnKSa

Administrator
...if you're looking for a correlation in the chart, I think that it would be just as easy to make a case for a connection between how commonly the caliber is used and how long the moose runs after being shot.
I didn't mean this to be a joke.

Think of it like this. The more common a caliber is, the more likely there are to be less experienced shooters using it. The more unusual calibers aren't likely to be the result of someone asking "Gus" at the local firearm store what gun is best for hunting and are therefore more likely to be accompanied by a more experienced shooter.

I'm not saying that people who shoot .308s are automatically inexperienced--but ask yourself, how many newbie shooters do you know using a .338? Now how many using a .30-06 or .308? That's my point.

Dunno about the 9.3mm unless it's just a hard gun to shoot or maybe the only easily available ammunition is loaded solids--which would make sense for a rifle mostly used for dangerous game.
Maybe Nordic Moose are more energetic than North American moose?
I wouldn't think so, my understanding is that they're a good bit smaller, on average.
 

Niantician

New member
I don't think rifle cal has much to do with experience. Rifles, more than handguns are passed down from father to son. Or given to friends.
 

JohnKSa

Administrator
Rifles more, than handguns are passed down from father to son. Or given to friends.
I don't disagree, but I think that the majority of rifles are still purchased rather than gifted. And I think that even when rifles are passed down, it's still not uncommon for the recipient to hunt with a rifle that was purchased.

For example. One day my dad will pass me down his firearms. I'll keep them forever and maybe even use them a little at the range, but his tastes, wants and general ideas about firearms are very different from mine. None of his guns will ever do any practical duty again after he gives them to me.

Furthermore, even if rifles are primarily gifted rather than purchased, the more common calibers are more likely to be gifted, by definition. So I think it's going to work out the same regardless.
 

tINY

New member


I'd like to see the distance run plotted by country - tha'd make for interesting posts....




-tINY

 
Top