drjoker wrote:A one shot 50 bmg rifle is only $2200 and adding the scope you mentioned is $300. That's only $2500. If you bought a lower power rifle, say a .308 for $1000, I'm sure you'd spend the same or more money on a laser range finder, wind meter, and range computer. If you don't do so, then you'd have to spend a lot more time memorizing a bigger table because the .308 is affected more by the wind. I like to take out the game cleanly by severing the spinal cord at the neck. That way, the trophy is preserved and the meat is left untouched. Plus, I don't have to follow a blood trail through brambles and thorn bushes (ouch!) to get that deer. It just drops where it stood.
I hunt deer out to 300 yards with a .308 and have none of the issues you describe, and no, the .50 BMG is not a flat shooter, not even at 300 yards either. The reason it is a long range round is simple: that big
heavy bullet carries more energy/velocity further down range because of its sheer mass. But in flight, the .50 caliber bullet is affected by exactly the same gravitational force as a .308 bullet. Quoted muzzle velocities for .50 BMG typically reference its performance out of a 45" long M2 barrel. But maximum barrel length for a Bohica upper is 36", maximum barrel length for a Barret M82 is 29", and the barrel length of a McMillan Tac-50 is 29", so muzzle velocities for a civilian owned .50 BMG are likely to be lower than from an M2, and you can't really increase the powder charge too much for higher velocity or it becomes unshootable due to recoil in rifles that weigh less than the EIGHTY THREE pounds of an M2. Therefore, time to target over the distance of 300 yards is very similar between a .308 and a .50 BMG. Since time to target is very similar, the effect of gravity on the bullet will be similar. Remember that a hammer and a feather accelerate toward the earth at the same rate—32 ft per second squared. In fact, if you take into account the gravity of the falling object (anything which has mass has gravity, and the larger the object, the greater its gravity....simple planetary science teaches us this is true...), the mutual gravitational attraction of the .50 BMG bullet and the earth is even stronger than the gravitational attraction of the .308 bullet and the earth, and therefore, in theory, the heavier bullet would fall even faster. (If you don't believe this, consider that the earth still has a gravitational field despite being
within the gravitational field of the sun.) The reason the bigger bullet doesn't fall faster in any measurable way is that it's own gravitational field is too small to be of practical value in the equation, when the difference in time to target is a matter of tiny fractions of a second. That's simple physics.
So all of that is to say that the .50 is not a flat shooting round because "flat shooting" is strictly a matter of velocity. The less time a bullet takes getting to a target, the "flatter" it shoots, and .50 BMG muzzle velocities are not particularly much higher when compared to .308 caliber bullets like from a .308 or a .30-06, and it is considerably
less flatter shooting than either a .300 Win Mag or a .300 WSM (which also use a .308 diameter bullet). The .223 is much flatter shooting, and yet it is a much less effective bullet at long range because it loses its velocity over longer ranges. And as it slows down, it doesn't have enough
mass to penetrate effectively, nor does it have enough velocity for the bullet to perform (either to upset or to expand, depending on the bullet type). The reason that a .50 is a good long range round is simply because of its mass and the fact that the enormous case contains enough powder to drive that mass over a longer distance before the bullet meets the earth. But it still has to travel in an arc to make that distance. It isn't a laser beam.
THEREFORE: what
IS true is that holdover/holdunder for either caliber is minimal at 300 yards. Although I haven't hunted yet with my newest .308, it doesn't even have stadia lines on the reticle. Out to 300 yards, I don't particularly need them.
And I don't know where you got the idea that .308 users all depend on electronic geegaws to make their shots. The caliber was devised before those geegaws existed. You don't need 'em—although they can be useful if you know how to use 'em—and the simple fact is that the vast majority of hunters using non-magnum calibers smaller than .50 caliber don't even own them, so I don't know where you get off making that statement.
Final three comments.....
Not windy in Texas? Are you in the same Texas I'm in? Sure, there are days where there isn't much wind, but north Texas is
prairie. Of course there is wind on most days. It doesn't have to be blowing a veritable gale for the wind to affect a bullet's flight.......and then there's west Texas and the panhandle where a lack of wind would be remarkable enough to make the news.
And.... Have you actually
taken a deer with a .50 yet, particularly with this neck shot? If you haven't yet, GOOGLE this phrase "picture of .50 BMG wounds" and the top listing will be a YouTube video of a guy shooting a deer with a .50 BMG. The exit wound on the off-side is so large that it would be fair to say that most of the meat in the upper torso area was ruined. I would speculate that if you hit a deer in the neck with a .50 BMG, you would come close to tearing its head off......especially scrawny Texas deer. An elk or a moose would be different, but .50 caliber bullets have been known to nearly tear a man apart. The cartridge was originally designed for anti-
materiel rather than anti-
personnel use because of its enormous destructive power. It was meant to disable
vehicles. Using one on deer would certainly make for a quick kill, but it seems like it would be a big waste of meat.
And, and.... There's no such thing as a cheap .50 BMG rifle, and expensive rifles deserve good glass.....particularly if you plan to use that .50 at longer ranges. The $300 scopes I mentioned in my original posts will stand up to .50 recoil, but they are not particularly as good for use at longer ranges. The $800 10X fixed with the HD glass that I mentioned would be a very good choice if you were looking for fixed power optics. Here is a picture of it on my old M1A:
And here is a link to it's web page:
http://swfa.com/SWFA-SS-HD-10x42-Tactic ... 50717.aspx.
