Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
It has come to my attention that I will be a participant in a moose hunt in September. I've hunted with the venerable ball - .30 caliber, 1906 for my entire hunting career and it pains me to say that I may be undergunned with that round. I understand the rifle and the behavior of the round quite well and it will be a challenge to develop a similar familiarity and competency with a new platform. First part of the question:
Do I really need a bigger gun?
In the event that it is, in fact, plain as day that a .30-06 is a mouse-piller in Alaska and I'm an idiot for even asking... What do you think about the .338 win mag? If I get something huge like a .358 or a .375, I will never, ever shoot that gun again unless I go to Africa. A .338 would actually see some "every-year" use at least and in the event I do go to Africa it can come along; it does actually fill a niche for me. A smaller magnum would theoretically see even more action, but how many things am I really going to be reaching for a .30 caliber magnum over the old '06?
Anyway, just hoping for some Alaskan perspective.
Full disclosure - no first-hand Alaskan experinece - that said - from what I have read, the '06 or .308 - given a good bullet, and good shot placement - should do just fine. A lot of hunters favor the 220 grain in the 06 and it's availabilty across the counter, and that the faster twist of the 06 will stabilize it, is one of the 06's only real advantages over a .308.
Here are Layne Simpson's "10 deadly sins" - note that he says nothing in here to the effect you would not be fine with the 30-06, and would prefer you bring that rather than a bigger rifle you are less familiar with:
"Bringing more gun than one can shoot accurately." This is especially true of Africa, but it also applies to Alaska. It is a very common and pernicious error to assume that one will achieve better results in the field by the use of more powerful weapons. Power failures, when the bullet is well placed and penetrates fully, are almost unheard of. Bad shooting, on the other hand, is by no means uncommon. Many years ago we noted the inscription in a commercial advertisement which claimed that "Out where ranges are long you need Weatherby power." Mistake. Out where ranges are long (and even when they are not) what you need is to know how to shoot. The random shooter, who does not practice, is ill-advised to buy something bigger than what he is used to, since justifiably or not it may intimidate him. Recoil and blast are not problems with a well-seasoned marksman, but they may indeed upset the 20-round-a-year man. Use what you know you can hit with. Use the proper bullet and you will have no trouble.
"Poor physical condition." Hunting may not be the kind of activity that calls for entry into a triathlon, but it can be physically demanding, especially in mountainous terrain. We recently noted the conspicuous success of our shooters who were in top shape. Before you take the field find yourself a convenient hill and trot up it three times a week. You will be glad you did.
"Inability to spot game in heavy brush." This is a function of "the hunter's eye" and it cannot be learned by wishing. Generally speaking, the more hunting experience you have the better will be your target acquisition, but simple wilderness hiking, for those who can manage it, will sharpen up the skill conspicuously, especially if the individual makes a contest of it and logs his observations regularly on paper.
"Inability to shoot accurately from the offhand position." At least a third of your shots should be practiced from offhand, and against the clock. The one-and-a-half second interval I use when teaching rifle, from standard ready to hammer fall, is a good test. And you do not need a stop watch. Count to yourself, "one, two, three," at a convenient interval. On "one" you mount the piece to the shoulder. On "two" you acquire the reticle with the shooting eye. And on "three" you gently press the trigger. Clearly you can practice this at home without going to the range, and you certainly should take time to do this before going to the field. Another system I often use is to sit in front of the tube, with my rifle in my lap, and wait for a commercial to come on which displays zeros or "O's." If I can simulate a clean surprise-break every time an "O" appears, I am getting there. If two "O's" appear (as in Coors,) the bolt must be snapped between the two shots. When you get good at this you are well on the way, even without going to the range.
"Shooting offhand when a natural rest is available." Whenever possible, use a rest, and this is surprisingly possible. On my last trip to Southwest Africa, all four shots I took were from a tree or post rest. The late, great Elmer Keith was fond of using his "ten gallon" hat for this purpose when shooting from prone. And Jack O'Connor was fond of using his binocular case. If a rest is available, use it. Do not try to prove that you are capable of hitting the target from offhand.
"Inability to shoot quickly." See paragraph "4" above. Note that this is fully as much a matter of mental conditioning as of marksmanship. I have know several good shots, who had proved they could shoot quickly, go into a sort of paralysis when the Baker Flag was hoisted. This may be a form of buck fever, so inoculate yourself before taking the field.
"Choosing a bullet that goes to pieces without penetrating." Proper placement and penetration are the two things that will secure your game most reliably. Placement is the function of anatomical knowledge and marksmanship. Penetration is a function of bullet performance. There are some stout bullets on the market. Use one that is tried and tested.
"Unsafe gunhandling." This is a terror, and simply establishes that far too many people take to the field without any education at all in the principles of marksmanship. It is not confined to duffers. Too many times we have seen professionals handling their weapons in ways that would bring a stern reprimand from any competent rangemaster. By choice, go to school if you can. With or without school engrave the four principles of safe gun handling in your mind and do not ever let them fade out.
All guns are always loaded.
Do not let the muzzle cover anything you are not willing to destroy.
Keep your finger off the trigger until your sights are on the target.
Be sure of your target.
9. "Unfamiliarity with animal anatomy." Study your target's anatomy with great care whenever you see a picture of a four-footed beast in a book, a magazine or on the tube. Remember that your target is a three-dimensional object and pay careful attention to "target angle" (zero is coming straight in, 180 is running straight away, and so on in between).
10. "Admiring the first shot rather than continuing to shoot until the animal is down." This one brings pained recollection to me as I lost the best sable I ever saw by calling off the war immediately when the beast dropped to a hit on the spinal flange. Having been overgunned for most of my hunting life in North America, I assumed that when I got a clean surprise-break, my animal was secured. This is not necessarily true, and the bolt should be snapped instantly following a shot regardless of what you see through the glass. The ideal is to get your empty on the ground by the time you pick up your target after recoil.
Also from what I have read, assuming you are using a scope sight, any errors of magnification would be on the high side. For a dedicated moose rifle, and for most woods hunting, something 4X or less would work better than 4X or more. A variable should probably stay on minimum magnification, if somehow you have to take a longer shot, you'll have time to turn it up, although many would recommend checking the zero at minimum magnification, then not messing with it.
The deciding factor if you "make meat" or not is the Indian, not the arrow, IMHO.
Final thought - shooting a moose when he's standing in water is, I have read anyway, considerd very bad form.
I see that was covered before.
The .338 is also excellent, as is the .375, if you want to use the moose hunt as an excuse to buy either one, I'll just note that as the caliber goes up, so does weight and sometimes the length of the rifle. Just get plenty of practice, which can include dry fire, with whatever you want to use.
If you want to spend the bucks (did we talk about this one before?) you could go to a .376 Steyr Scout. Not many people have bought these but apparently most are satisfied with them.
A completely different direction to go would be the Marlin Guide Gun.
But to ramble back to where I started - the 06 will do fine if you shoot it well and use a good bullet, while the bigger guns won't redeem a bad hit, although with the .375/.376 or particularly the 45-70, you can probably get away with a mediocre bullet if you place it well.
I would not recommend the Marlin Guide gun for hunting in Alaska, unless you understand and can use its rainbow-shape bullet trajectory. How about if the OP has to take a longer than average shot on the only moose he has a chance to see before moose season ends?
For moose I would recommend any rifle the OP can shoot well out to 300 yards on a rest, from a .270 to a .375 H&H.
I would not recommend the Marlin Guide gun for hunting in Alaska, unless you understand and can use its rainbow-shape bullet trajectory. How about if the OP has to take a longer than average shot on the only moose he has a chance to see before moose season ends?
For moose I would recommend any rifle the OP can shoot well out to 300 yards on a rest, from a .270 to a .375 H&H.
Sincere question - you are there and I ain't - is a 300 yard shot realistic for moose hunting? I am under the impression you can almost always get closer than that, and in timber can't see 300 yards for the trees. Correct any misconceptions I have here.
Other than hunting, fishing, trapping, arm-wrestling Kodiak bears, fly-fishing for whales, saddle breaking moose, and baying at the moon with a pack of wolves, do men in Alaska engage in more sissified activities like golf, or is that a big no-no?
I only ask because I enjoy golfing, and when I see an opening in Alaska for a professional barfly, I'll be applying for it, and hopefully getting the nod so I can move to the state that's been pis-sing off Rhode Island for over 50 years.
Sincere question - you are there and I ain't - is a 300 yard shot realistic for moose hunting? I am under the impression you can almost always get closer than that, and in timber can't see 300 yards for the trees. Correct any misconceptions I have here.
The longest range that I ever shot a moose at was 248 yards....measured with a laser. That happened to be with a Marlin 1895M....the .450 Marlin version of the Guide Gun. The closest one I ever shot was at about 30 yards with a 7x57. Most of the ones I have shot were less than 100 yards away.
Other than hunting, fishing, trapping, arm-wrestling Kodiak bears, fly-fishing for whales, saddle breaking moose, and baying at the moon with a pack of wolves, do men in Alaska engage in more sissified activities like golf, or is that a big no-no?
I only ask because I enjoy golfing, and when I see an opening in Alaska for a professional barfly, I'll be applying for it, and hopefully getting the nod so I can move to the state that's been pis-sing off Rhode Island for over 50 years.
I work with a couple of avid golf nuts. They golf in the summer and hunt moose in the fall.
The longest range that I ever shot a moose at was 248 yards....measured with a laser. That happened to be with a Marlin 1895M....the .450 Marlin version of the Guide Gun. The closest one I ever shot was at about 30 yards with a 7x57. Most of the ones I have shot were less than 100 yards away.
How did the long shot with the Marlin work out? Why did you take the shot at that distance rather than try to get closer?
Full disclosure - no first-hand Alaskan experinece - that said - from what I have read, the '06 or .308 - given a good bullet, and good shot placement - should do just fine. A lot of hunters favor the 220 grain in the 06 and it's availabilty across the counter, and that the faster twist of the 06 will stabilize it, is one of the 06's only real advantages over a .308.
----deleted to save data----
If you want to spend the bucks (did we talk about this one before?) you could go to a .376 Steyr Scout. Not many people have bought these but apparently most are satisfied with them.
A completely different direction to go would be the Marlin Guide Gun.
But to ramble back to where I started - the 06 will do fine if you shoot it well and use a good bullet, while the bigger guns won't redeem a bad hit, although with the .375/.376 or particularly the 45-70, you can probably get away with a mediocre bullet if you place it well.
The 45-70 Govt is a pretty docile load unless you hand load. The cartridge is large enough to hold plenty of powder and I have done that. But factory loads are docile enough to be 'safe' in 45-70's that were built over a century ago.
If you look at the trajectory of factory 45-70 loads, they are only useful for a couple hundred yards maximum.
Of course one can buy a quality 45-70, Marlin GG for example, and do some nice "home brew loads". The reloading manuals, mine are in storage at the moment, ought to allow for variances in gun quality. Factory loads are generally made for the lowest denominator. I think that some of the smaller cartridge manufacturers make some hotter loads available...I imagine that caveats are accompanied.
I'm strictly going from memory and may be way off. I think factory loads have about 70 grains of powder. I think I put a lot more than that in a single shot. Keep in mind that you are pushing a very large bullet. Great for shorter ranges....but I'm a Colorado high country hunter.
Sincere question - you are there and I ain't - is a 300 yard shot realistic for moose hunting? I am under the impression you can almost always get closer than that, and in timber can't see 300 yards for the trees. Correct any misconceptions I have here.
Yes, all depends on how one hunts. For example, I know this guy who uses a .338 Lapua to hunt moose from a stand. In his case, the average shot is around 300 yards, but sometimes it's longer. For me the average shot is around 175-200 yards (about the middle point of the fields I watch for moose). But I killed one that was around 75 yards away, and as follows: I ride my ATV to my hunting spot (a rocky knob by the fields I have referred to), turn my ATV off and walk to a little blind I have nearby, and before I get to it I see this moose there (75 yards away), browsing, and no concerns whatsoever about me moving around! I could not believe my luck As I mentioned before, I measure different spots on the fields I watch for moose at. I didn't mention how, but I use an older (first generation) Leica 1200 LRF Scan rangefinder, but before and after the season, or just when bored and just sitting there on a chair in my blind.
But last year I see two moose about 400-500 yards away walking in my direction through the brush, too far for my level of confidence relating to a long shot. The two moose finally walked to perhaps 275 yards, saw me and turned broadside toward the trail to my left by the time I fired my rifle. Such a very long shot for the guy I was referring to above would have been a piece of cake out to perhaps 400 yards, but my self-imposed limit (with a solid rest, and a 225-grain TSX) is 300 yards. Even so, and after practicing on an 8" paper plate at 300 yards, I would be very apprehensive about it. I just don't want to take the chance to injure and lose any game I shoot.
I could be wrong about this, but to me it makes no sense as a hunter from the lower-48 to spend a bunch of money to hunt Alaska and not to bring a relatively flat-shooting rifle he or she can shoot well, just in case the only opportunity available is a long shot. For example, while caribou sometimes walk right up to you, sometimes hunters with small caliber but flat-shooting rifles take very long shots. Some people use the 6mm caliber to kill caribou at long distance, and so .22's (.220, .222, .257) and so forth.
Sometimes moose hunters don't see any moose to hunt, and may have to switch to caribou, or maybe to spot and stalk a bear or something. Sometimes, not always, getting any closer is not possible. For that reason my advise would be to bring a rifle he or she can shoot well at close range and long distance as well, just in case. Also, to bring one that the guide agrees with as a good choice of a gun, because it's the guide along the client having to take the responsibility of taking a long shot to stop an animal, or just to track it after the fact.
Last edited by RayinAK; 01-28-2011 at 08:22 PM..
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
As I mentioned before, I measure different spots on the fields I watch for moose at. I didn't mention how, but I use an older (first generation) Leica 1200 LRF Scan rangefinder, but before and after the season, or just when bored and just sitting there on a chair in my blind. 
