I follow this forum closely. I read every entry. I enjoy it. Maybe I am just old with not enough to do. However, I must express my opinion on some of the advice that we give to the newcommers.

Understand that I have guns of all sizes both single shots & revolvers. I do not shoot the little ones much at all because they do not hurt. I am old and jaded. I prefer to know when it goes off. I also tend to hunt with the bigger calibers & somewhat heavier bullets. However, that is because I choose to do that, not that it is necessarily needed.

As advice is sought about this caliber or that or this weight bullet, some of us express our opinions & leave it. Others express their opinions & at every opportunity thereafter reinforce their opinions. I understand that opinions are just that & your opinion (whatever it is) does not much affect me. Some of our readers are likely less experienced and less seasoned.

Calibers & bullet weights --- Most of us hunt deer sized animals & maybe hogs. If I did not know better, in reading this forum I would think that a hog is a next of kin to a T-Rex. Therefore it takes a super big something or other to kill it. Granted that the big one will kill it, but a hog is a hog. Believe me that it can be killed efficiently with a lot less. I have likely butchered more hogs than most posting here (I used to work in a packing plant plus I live in Texas). I understand what it takes to kill a hog.

What is important here is ---- it is much more important where you hit them than what you hit them with. I will give an example of a person that I know who regularly hunts elk in Colorado in the public lands. I do not agree with what he does or the way that he does it, but it will illustrate my point. This person hunts with a 223 rifle (illegal by the way). On his last hunt, he killed two bulls & one cow with three shots. (they party hunt -- which I also not not agree with). But did he need a super mag shooting an umpteen grain bullet of some kind to kill a bull elk. Obviously, not. He hit them right and the 55 gr bullet killed them dead. A few years ago a young lady that I knew drew a once-in-a-lifetime tag to hunt a specific area in NM. She was 12. She used her 243 rifle & killed a bull elk that was near the record book with one shot. She also put the 100 gr bullet where it needed to be.

I am afraid that sometimes we do not do our new collegues any favors when we emphasize the large calibers & heavy bullets. Clearly, more recoil is associated with the bigger calibers and heavier bullets and that may deter the important issue. For those who have the experience & skill to use them, no problem. However, for the newer shooter, he might be better served with a caliber or bullet weight that he can shoot very accurately than with one with which he is less competent.

Just my $.02.

Makes sense to me.Ive seen posts where the person was wondering if a 44 mag was big enough to hunt deer with.

Agreed. It takes a lot of practice and discipline, as well as strength, to control some of those beasts. The key to accuracy is the grip, and if you can't grip the gun with confidence and consistancy you won't shoot well. A man's got to know his limitations ;-)

Excellent post Marvin, I've said similiar things to members on the phone before. We get alot of newcomers and I've seen alot of very overly opinionated persons get carried away with advice that might fit them or be something for someone experienced to try but not a newcomer. There have been more big revolvers found used in gunshops because of either ego or bad advice than for any other reason. They get their new toy home and take it out and shoot it and then take it right back and trade it in on a rifle. I remember when the 500 Smith came out, they were backordered for months but within a year or so the market was flooded with used guns and it's not even a "bad" gun for recoil, in fact it's mild compared to an SA in smaller calibers. I think anyone new to this sport is served best by having a small caliber like a 22 or 38 to practice trigger control with and then a 41 or 44 to start hunting with until they are proficient with it. For some that will be the top for their recoil tolerance for others they will move on up to big bores. The other thing that alot of guys fall into (including myself when starting out) is that they need the most expensive custom ammo or have to push a gun to it's limits to kill a deer. The truth is for deer sized animals most factory jacketed ammo in a 41 or 44 will kill deer all day long and I've known guys that use cheapo Remington 240gr HP ammo and kill deer all the time. I personally hunt bear spring and fall including during deer season and I hunt elk so I shoot bigger guns with premium bullets pushed hard. There are 400-500lb bears taken all over this state every year but if I lived where you didn't see a bear much over 200lbs and didn't hunt elk I'd probably mellow out. I have recently purchased a 45 Bisley and loaded it with 250gr XTP's pushed to 1300+fps and it's my new iron sighted deer gun but I know it will kill a bear at reasonable ranges and with my damaged wrists I'm not tearing myself up or developing flinch because my wrist hurts everytime I pull the trigger like it does with my biggest guns. There is a time and place for the big guns but they aren't necessary a good part of the time. If I were asked and I've actually posted this the perfect all around revolver for North America is the 45LC if you reload and the 44 if you don't. I love my 454, 475's, and 500's and I still use them but not when I'm dealing with avg size animals. Ok I've ranted now so I feel better.

I think this post is great. Would be nice for every new person to read.

My preference for heavier bullets is based on the numerous failures I have experienced and witnessed in the field. Perhaps the miscommunication lies I how one should load their heavier bullets because you can typically run a heavier bullet slower than a lighter bullet and still get the desired results. Now, I am willing to bet I kill more wild hogs than most - it's an occupational necessity for me. While they are not bullet proof, if they have a thick gristle plate they sure as hell are harder to punch through than any whitetail. Placement is everything most definitely, but if your bullet can't or doesn't reach the vitals it's a moot point. That explains my personal obsession with heavier bullets. If that means heavier recoil, so be it. I hope the one asking for advise has the sense to do some testing and practicing before deciding to use a particular load on live game. Big-bore handguns aren't easy to shoot or master. For me that is one of the appeals. I have never suggested that the neophyte pick up a .50-anything to hunt with. One must work their way up in my opinon. I hunted last month with my .500 maximum. Was it necessary? Not only no, but hell no. I could have easily gotten away with a .357, but what fun would that have been? I hunt with the big stuff because I enjoy it - period, and that is a good enough reason for me.

Whitworth,

I am with you on using the bigger stuff because I want to. I definitely do not need to. I am sure that many of us receive certain satisfaction from hunting with something that is unique or bigger or louder than the others.

I have worked with some of my cousins --- moving them to handgun hunting. They were experienced rifle hunters. However, after 4 years of effort, one cannot handle revolvers bigger than the 41s and another finally moved up to 44s. However, they have used the smaller calibers successfully and are now dedicated handgun hunters.

I know that Rod "hit the nail on the head" when he gave the example of 500 S&W. The FA 454 also fits that category. Many buy them, but few learn to shoot them. Many "preowned" ones are for sale.

I was not always as old and jaded --- as I am now. When I first started shooting hunting handguns, I did not like to be hurt. However, like an old bullrider, I got over it. No pain, No glory. My primary point is that may be difficult for us to differentiate our current status from those who are just starting out.

This reminds me of the “fixed” vs. “mechanical” broadhead debate… LOL

It is almost as debatable as the jacketed vs. hardcast…

I remember reading an article in 2006 over the 30-06 Springfield. There were a lot of articles written that year over the 30-06 simple because it was the 100 commemorative. I bought ever magazine with a 06 article and still have many of them saved in a three ring binder. Humorously, 50 years ago the 06 was on the heavy side for elk hunting. Today it is on the light side.

I think a couple of variables come to mind. Today, Americans own more firearms than we did 50 years ago. The mentality of a duel firearm isn’t as important because hunters just buy a firearm to meet the needs of each individual hunt. What I can say is that an Elk can be killed with a 22 cal bullet. However, if “I” get to go on an Elk hunt it will be a once in a lifetime opportunity and the first gun I will grab will be my SSK 16.5in Encore barrel in 35-06 JDJ. Is it overkill, I truly hope so because the next barrel I will grab is my 15in TC “Custom Shop” in 338-06. Why, because I can. No more, no less…

Ps, my side arm of said hunt will be my 5in SRH in 480 Ruger.

I think the main reason that we lean towards heavier bullets is just to insure our success rate. I know people that hunt deer with a 158gr 35cal XTP. After I have used them on 6 raccoons, “I” wouldn’t use anything less than a 180 XTP or a 158-160 hard cast. (it was the expansion of the bullet and not the penetration that was the issue. It penetrated a full 12in in a boar coon shot from the rear, however, the chest cavity looked like it had been shot with bird shot…)

I had a LOOOOG talk with a user who has shot a lot of game with a handgun. He encouraged me to shoot a 300gr XTP projectile over the 240gr XTP. Simply put, the 240gr XTP would do the job on a broadside shot, no questions asked. However, this friend explained to me that if the shot was not perfect, the heavier bullet would penetrate and still ethically take your game. He then explained that he shot a hog with a second shot as it was walking away and the 300gr XTP bullet still penetrated to the vital organs of the pig.

Honestly, IMHO, this is where I feel like a good cast bullet makes up for weight, it penetrates. I bought a 265gr Ranch Dog mold in 44 cal mold for this reason. (The 240gr RD was not available when I bought it.) But I bet it will do everything I need out of my 4 5/8ths SBH, adequately and with a little less recoil than the 300gr projectile. Even more importantly, I know I don’t have to run it “balls to the wall” to get it to do its job!!!

I am not here to debate hard cast vs jacketed, I am simple trying to say that every combination has its place.

I am glad we are so passionate, it means we care!!! Sometimes we need to remember that there is more than one right answer…

With the greatest respect and admiration,

Duane

Ps, my son is starting out with a 22 Short Match. His next TC barrel will be a 357 Mag or 7mm TCU. For a hunting rig he will start with a 357 Max or a 7-30 Waters. I totally agree with matching shooter with the right handgun.

The fixed vs mechanical broadhead debate was settled for my by the state of Oregon, they outlawed mechanicals

As for your SRH and SBH you have to get them back first

It is not as simple as hard cast vs jacketed. All hard cast bullets are not created equal and neither are all jacketed. The Sierra JHC (jacketed hollow cavity) has a 1 1/12 percent antimony core and a fairly heavy jack, this bullet doesn't over expand and penetrates well. The Remington SJHP ( semi jacketed hollow point) has a thin scalloped jacket and the core is pure soft lead. This bullet expands quickly and will open as large as a 1/2 dollar, therefore is not a deep penetrate IME the pentration is about like a 45 ACP with hard ball ammo.

Unless a hard cast has a wide meplat then the wound channel will not be as large as it should be IMHO

Often the question in these thread is which caliber is best for hunting ___________ (fill in the blank) The answers are on caliber for the intended game, not which caliber a new shooter should start with.


Heavy bullets do not always kick harder than lighter ones that are ran hard. I prefer the heavier weights in my revolvers. That means 158 to 180 in 357's, 280 t0 300 in 44's, 325 in 45 Colt, etc


They are not always needed but the revolver is sighted in with them and ready to go if the need arises

I guess people missed my sarcasm as well with the parallelism"s"… I wasn't trying to debate bullet construction, I was just trying to say it, Ethics, was a controversial subject. LOL

If it seamed I was that is my fault and I should have been more clear. I was trying to show positive examples of both...







LOL I went with the fixed because of my bad experiences with mechanicals penetrating on hogs. So I guess that would make the fixed a hard cast??? LOL

Hay look, they even have different designs of broad heads... I guess that means they are not all created equal...



Ps, let my know how much I am going to owe the piper for the extra work!

I think what wtrooper was trying to say was "let's not mislead newbies". I love big single shots & others love big bore revolvers, but let's not tell a newbie that they need a bore larger than .452 or the like to kill a deer. Just like a 300 gr. whatever(jacketed or hardcast) is needed for deer. The same could be said for most hogs/boar we hunt. I agree it's better to use heavier than lighter, but it's not necessary. I have seen several posts where one would be lead to believe that a 44 Mag is not enough for elk or a 460 S&W was a small gun. I too like heavy for caliber bullets, but they are not really needed for what most of us hunt. I think many of us, myself included, have guns more than capable of handling Africa's big five, but they're just not necessary for most if not all of the NA big game we will hunt. This would be like telling Madeline Kay that her 454 wasn't enough gun for large game after she's traveled all over the world taking big game with it.

Conversely, I think we do the neophyte a disservice when we suggest the bare minimum as well. It's a balancing act, but certainly the newbie needs to work their way up to the bigger calibers. But I don't like to sugar coat the fact that shooting big-bore revolvers means that they will experience often debilitating recoil. It's just the nature of the beast.

Deer are not hard to kill. I settled on what I call my whitetail load that uses a standard, double crimp 300gr XTP over H-4227 for 1400FPS+. The reason for the 300gr bullet is that I cannot wa1t for the perfect broadside and take the shot at any angle except up the "kazoo" otherwise any caliber from 357 up will work

When my FA`s 475 was new I bought Buffalo Bores 440gr WNGC ammo running at a MV of 1325FP and Grizzly Ammo`s load using a 400gr
JFP Hawk bullet at 1300FPS. The big pigs were almost the same size and when I shot the first one with the cast bullet through the front leg and into the heart the animal was down within 5 seconds. I then made a gut shot on the 2nd pig with the 400gr JFP and chased him until I could put him down. Now you and I both know that if I had shot the 2nd pig with a 41 in the "right" place he would have gone down within seconds. So like trooper said above "its more importnat where you hit em then what you hit em with"....

Franchise, thanks for the phone call today! Now that you have brought me up to speed and we are on the same page this helps. WT, you are spot on!!! I apologize for not reading/interpreting your post correctly…


You are absolutely right, there is a happy medium that isn’t that hard to find!! Just go read Rod's post, I think he covers it better than I ever could...


Those are my feelings as well!!! I like a little "overkill" but that is just me...
My main thought originally was not to start a new shooter off with an experts “minimal requirement” gun in a hunting situation. I just like having a little more buffer room. EG, I know users who would start a new hunter off with a 223 for deer hunting. Will it work… … … Yes it will, but there is little margin for error. To me, it would be like starting a youngster off with a .410 shotgun which IMHO is an experts gun. Please, shoot the 357 Mag as much as you want. Yes, please shoot 1000’s of 22’s. But when it is time to start deer hunting bump up to the 41 Mag, 44 Mag, or 45 LC IMHO. (The 357 Mag will work for deer hunting and is a great cartridge. But, IMHO, you NEED to be more selective on shooting components, which is the reason I generally leave this one out of the line up. Like others on this forum, I have biased towards certain bullets and weights because of personal experiences...)





A perfect example of why the users on this forum keep suggesting and recommending heavy for caliber bullets. Do you need them, by all means no. We use them for the “Murphy’s Law” factor…


I truly feel like if we didn’t care, this thread wouldn’t even be here!!!!!!!!!! Just goes to show you by how much time and energy we have put into our post that we are really passionate about our sport.

With that thought in mind, As much as I want to promote handgun hunting I would rather see a new shooter dust off his trusty rifle and use it over a handgun they are uncertain with or do not have confidence in. Just my thoughts so take them for what they are worth.

Somehow I missed this post until now.

It is a good one and definitely belongs in "Shooter's Bench,"
if not "Handgun Hunting."

I am of the school that goes along with start light, gain confidence and proficiency through practice, then move up to a more than adequate caliber according to the animal pursued. Hunt sensibly, matching target to your own gun and ammo and personal abilities; and use Murphy's Law as a guideline, as it ESPECIALLY applies to hunting big game as well as predators.

Put into game killing terms, that is why I do not like the .17 calibers for coyotes; and I do like the .421's and bigger for deer and the .454's and bigger for elk. Even though many others disagree. This is what "I" have found out works best for "me."

Another note about game animals here. It was mentioned "deer are not hard to kill." Maybe, but size matters. A mule deer in Colorado can weigh live 300 pounds or more. Some smaller varieties of deer barely weigh 100 pounds. Etc etc.

Even though I agree with all of the posts regarding lighter calibers for newcomers, I think they need to realize that some of the smaller calibers are "bare minimum" (as Whit stated) and that depends on gun, load and game plus throw into the mix shooter ability and game fever and excitement; that there is nothing wrong with going over "bare minimum," and that going with a sensible degee of "overkill" is a better choice because of good ol' "Murphy's Law."

Someone famous once said "Use enough gun." I think the real meaning was "more" than enough gun. It made sense then and still does now.

JMHO

i think that a 44 is something anyone can shoot well rather quickly with the standard loads. it's a cheap, easily affordable and attainable first step that can in fact be one's last step they ever need. same goes with a 45 colt. if loaded properly one can easily start with a 454 or 475 and end it just right there as well and buy an affordable factory gun i.e. ruger or bfr. really, if more than 5 people on this board hunt an elephant with their handgun in the next 10 years it'll be a miracle. i asked the question on another board about how many over 1000lb animals another member had shot. the answer was "one" and it is an animal that has been taken very very cleanly with a 44 mag on hundreds of occasions by other hunters, if not on thouasands of occasions. same goes for brown bear. until ya get to pachyderms then you either go bigger or simply buy a punch bullet or use a barnes buster or corbon penetrator in the above calibers i listed and learn to shoot well.

liking much larger mega mags are great and that truly is enough of a reason to use them but we gain very very little by doing so. use what ya want but to the new hunters just get a .41 thru 475 and be done with it. then if something else floats your boat get it but you'll have mastered shooting by then.

Dang, tradmark, stop being so reasonable!

Remember when the 44 mag was king, BIGGER is always better if you are accurate.4 or 5 years ago there were used 500 S&W x frames in the local gun shops, many only had 4 or 5 rounds shot through them, most of us work our way up with big bores, conditioned I guess.

Tradmark, I asked the same question on this handgun hunting forum several months ago "How many game animals have you taken over 1,000 pounds? There were very few that had, very few. I think common sense about cartridges & ballistics goes along way. If your round was designed for squirrels(22 LR) don't use them for deer of any type and the same can be said for using rounds designed to drop a charging Cape Buffalo for deer of any type. Both (extreme) choices will work, but just don't seem to be the best choices. I don't know how many true bullet failures happen, I know some do, but I think most & I'm including myself in this, it's shooter failure = bad shot placement. Guys, don't forget the gentleman who started this topic was talking about deer & hogs. If needing a round designed to take large african dangerous game gives one confidence to shoot a deer or hog, more power to you. I've done it w/ my 376 Steyr & 416 Barnes, but it sure as heck didn't give me any more confidence, I was just practicing for larger game down the road.

That's a bit of a contradiction, David. If you practice for larger game down the road, then it is giving you more confidence in the firearm, the load/bullet combo, and your ability to hit what you are aiming at. So, it is giving you more confidence in a number of ways in my estimation. I have been close to animals that are potentially dangerous (of the two legged and four legged variety), and there is comfort in knowing your chosen weapon/load/bullet are up to the task at hand. But, I think also, that shooting rifle cartridges gives one a much different perspective as your ballistics basically mirror their rifle counterparts. Revolver hunters are limited in their velocity potential, so we have to look elsewhere for advantages -- like diameter and bullet weight. Not trying to be argumentative here, but there are big differences in the ballistics of your .376 Steyr and .45 Colt.

But, are we using more than we need to? Probably, but if I am doing my job correctly, the animal will never know I am using too much gun! LOL!

Whitworth, I don't disagree with you. When it comes to shooting deer I know that whether I place a 300 gr. bullet from my .375 through the vitals of a deer or a 125 gr. ballistic tip that sits on top of 20.6 gr.'s of H110 from my 30/221, I'll have a dead deer. The Steyr is alot more powerful than the whisper, but I don't feel undergunned with the whisper.
Having knowledge about what each round will do does give me confidence, but I know the Steyr is not needed to handle a deer. I have just as much confidence in the whisper. That's where having knowledge of your/mine, bullet/round combo is important. I, like you, like using hard kicking big bore rounds for hunting, but, I, like you, know they are not necessary for deer size game. I will never and have never suggested using varmint rounds like the 223 for hunting large game, I think that is foolish.
I agree to use what you like & to practice with what you hunt with.

It is amazing how many of our responses have bounced around this statement... LOL

RE: Franchise:



Whit, that is pretty well said; I can live with that!!!

yeah, but what i was ineffectually driving at in my first post about how many had shot animals over a thousand pounds is that, we here, typically run around acting like mildly recoiling guns like a 44 mag or a 45 colt are somehow stepping stones for the "necessary" bigger calibers. unless you're shooting stuff well over the two thousand pound category it's just not even an issue. if you doubt this, watch lynn thompson on the handgun hunting down under video. the common response to this is "well he's a great shot." right, and so can anyone with a 44 mag. but the comment implies that a larger caliber would make up for poor shooting and it won't. that's the most dangerously misleading comment to any new shooter. you couldn't have found the difference on the buff lynn thompson shot with a 44 from a 500 smith had he been using one. those buff got hammered and so will ANYTHING any of us here are likely to be shooting in the near future. i may go shoot an elephant in the next two years. i will just use a punch bullet and be done with it and will not be undergunned in the least. that said, neither will anyone here in north america simply with a 44 or 45 colt. i go bigger for better trajectory. in the next year or so i will be able to post videos of similiar sized animals being shot with different calibers. i look forward to the experts being able to tell what's shot with what based on the "shock" on the animal. we'll see who can tell the difference on what!

Couldn't agree more -- not a necessity in the least. Personal choice!

I started this thread and am very pleased with the ensuing discussion. It appears to me that we are all in agreement. Shoot something big enough to do the job ---- but more importantly something with which you can hit where you look.

Otherwise, shoot anything as big as you want. The caliber cannot be too big. There is no such thing as overkill. Dead is dead. However, one maybe be better served with a somewhat smaller caliber if he shoots it a lot better.

My father used to say, "beware of the man that has only one gun. He probably knows how to use it." Proficiency with the gun is more important than the size of the hole in the barrel, IMHO.

Precisely!!!!!!

I couldnt agree more, I am definetly one of the younger shooters and have the school of thought use what the you can
handel consistently and prepare for the worst case scenario.

I have not come from the school of thought "all you need is 50 lbs and a cut on contact broadhead" , no question it works but i want more insurance, I guess it why I love big bores, Its a challenge to shoot big bores and I am no master and will probally never be but I will become more and more consistent, and will never need question my equitment

Interesting thread and lots of good advice. Anytime a question is answered an opinion is going to be offered. What I would tell a younger shooter is get a good mid caliber firearm,some good ammo and become proficient with it and don't read or look at magazines or the internet,and don't look back. If you don't read or hear someone say it can't or shouldn't be done you'll never know the difference,and your freezer will always be full.

WT,

Great initial post and lots of good input by everyone - I started handgun hunting with a 44, using light-for-caliber bullets...since that time, my handgun inventory has grown (substantially), with the majority of the additions being heavier and larger caliber revolvers. Could I have shot everything with that initial Ruger Redhawk and the load I developed for that gun? Certainly - but I chose to challenge myself with mastering the harder recoiling handguns.

That being said, I have developed a fondness for the .41 (silly accurate FA's) and my last 2 revolver purchases have been in .357 (8 3/8" S&W 686 and a Dan Wesson 357 Maxi Super Mag). I'm sure the .357's will get some action this season, but I'll place limitations on myself when carrying those afield. Just like with the bigger hammers, it all comes down to personal preference and the challenges of handgun hunting.

Took a lot of white-tails with a 357 mag before someone told me I needed a bigger caliber. If that S&W is anything like the few I have let slip through my hands it will be accurate.Let me know how it does for curosity purposes.

every 686 I've shot has been accurate, I haven't owned the other 357's smith makes but I've had 38's, 41's, 44's and both X frame's and they were all shooters. Smith has great quality control and builds an excellent firearm.

Cotton - will do! Bought this one while chasing another revolver on G'Broker (ugh)...the full underlug on those longer barreled S&W's get me every time.

Rod - I do like the 686's - have a 6" gun that is unscoped. Have several Smith's from 17HMR to 460S&W. Haven't been dissatisfied by one yet - and there will be a 657 in the stable one of these days

SCHunter,

My first "hunting revolver" was a 657. I still have it. It has had some work done on it, but it will almost rival my FA 41s in the accuracy department.

My Dad’s 6in 686 will be one of two guns you will have to pry out of my cold… well, you get the idea…

The other is a 100+ year old Colt DA in 38 sp that my Great Great Grandfather carried as a piece officer and my Grandfather carried in Vietnam. Nuff said IMHO… Oh, Ps, It has the original leather holster as well…

I am looking at 357 molds as we speak for my Dads 686 and 10in Contender barrel. With the help and advice of JWP I think I have found one… a 165gr with a 75% meplat.

Ps, it is a great privilege and honor for me to be able to work up loads for the person who not only got me into hunting/shooting, but the person who honed my skills as a marksman.

He may not be the marksman Mr. Ernie is, but I would NEVER want him shooting at me in any capacity!!! LOL

Pss, Contrary to popular belief, I do own two 357's. A Mag and a Max. LOL

I have been in situations where I turned down a shot because a .45-70 was too small. If you have ever been downhill 15 yards of a big brown bear in wide open country with the hammer cocked and finger on the trigger, you can appreciate that there are times and places where size really does matter. I don't think I would have had the courage to pull the trigger on less than a RPG under the circumstance. But that being said, I would not have any issue shooting a big bear with a .45LC under other circusmtances. In fact, I may have been more comfortable shooting a .45LC rather than a .45-70 Contender in the instance I described because of the extra 5 shots it would have offered.

I think the biggest factor in advising the "newbie" is his prior hunting experience and knowledge of ballistics and bullet performance. If he can comprehend the limitations of the gun and has the self-control to hunt within his and the guns limits, then he can hunt with a wide range of guns. For this reason, the true newbie to hunting and handguns probably needs a bigger gun/bullet combination that an experienced hunter that is new to handguns. There is no real advice that can be given without considering the person on the receiving end of that advice.