38-55 and 375 Moose guns?

daisygordoninc · Post by **daisygordoninc** » Mon Apr 07, 2014 5:36 pm

Still thinking about what Winchester 94 to take moose hunting this fall. What about 38-55 or 375 ?
Has anyone taken a moose with either of these guns?

Gordon

7.62 Precision · Post by **7.62 Precision** » Mon Apr 07, 2014 5:45 pm

I haven't, but would gladly do so!

BrentD · Post by **BrentD** » Mon Apr 07, 2014 7:21 pm

daisy, i have had much the same conundrum. I feel like my .38-55 Marlin would work fine if loaded with smokeless loaded to about 1700-2000 fps and a lead bullet and maybe 150 yds or so.

But I'm going to AK next year and I decided to opt for a vintage 1895 Marlin in .45-70 that I can use with blackpowder and lead out to 200+ easily.

But all of this is somewhat supposition. I haven't shot a moose. Yet.

7.62 Precision · Post by **7.62 Precision** » Mon Apr 07, 2014 8:27 pm

The .38-55 was the "benchrest" cartridge of its day. Have some faith and plan for a little longer practical hunting range than 150m!

However, a vintage 1895 Marlin is way cool, and I would have a hard time taking the .38-55 over it.

BrentD · Post by **BrentD** » Mon Apr 07, 2014 8:40 pm

7.62. I have no problem in the accuracy of the .35-55 and I have shot many targets and a few deer and antelope with one. However, in a lever gun, they use a diminutive bullet that is just too light to make me comfortable about penetration on a moose, possibly quartering onwards and with the bullet leaving the muzzle at only 1500 fps at best (because I will use black) and shedding velocity like crazy, no, I don't like it for a moose past 150 - though I haven't really got any hard data to make that call one way or the other.

vancelw · Post by **vancelw** » Mon Apr 07, 2014 10:08 pm

I've not shot a moose with my .38-55, but wouldn't hesitate to if I could get close enough.
I think 150 yards is a very reasonable goal. Not because of the limitations of the round so much as the limitations of my eyes and iron sights.
I have a tang peep on my Chief Crazy Horse. Using Barnes Original .377" 255 gr bullets (I can't remember my fps offhand and it's pouring rain

so I can't go to the reloading room) I got complete penetration through both shoulders of a mature Mule Deer buck a couple of years ago. He never knew what hit him.

Yeah, he was a hair over 150 yards away, but I had a steady rest and all the time in the world to aim.

JerryB · Post by **JerryB** » Mon Apr 07, 2014 11:36 pm

Is a 255 grain cast bullet in 38-55 really diminutive?

BrentD · Post by **BrentD** » Tue Apr 08, 2014 6:22 am

It is in my book.

TedH · Post by **TedH** » Tue Apr 08, 2014 8:49 am

I would have no problem shooting a moose with a 250 gr. bullet in that caliber, though I would opt for the higher pressure 375 Winchester, and get the most velocity out of it, mostly to flatten the trajectory. A 250 gr. cast or jacketed bullet at 2000 fps will do just fine. Many moose are killed with much lesser rounds every year.

BrentD · Post by **BrentD** » Tue Apr 08, 2014 9:03 am

Certainly we can all do however we please. I'm just not going to be one of them that uses the .38-55.

Hopping it up to 2000 fps and using copper bullets might be fine and dandy, but it's not within the realm reasonable if you like that sort of thing, but I don't feel it is a reasonable load for my 93 and more importantly, I don't have any interest in such envelope pushing smokeless loads anyway. Maybe the OP will go for it but I would not bet a moose hunt on it. And I would not consider a 200 yds quartering onwards shot viable - even with such a load. But that's just my opinion.

Brent

TedH · Post by **TedH** » Tue Apr 08, 2014 9:48 am

Sir you apparently missed the part where I said I personally would opt for the 375 Winchester, which the OP stated was one of his considerations, and a 250 gr. bullet at 2000 fps is certainly a reasonable load with that cartridge.

Canuck Bob · Post by **Canuck Bob** » Tue Apr 08, 2014 10:44 am

From a practical point of view the 375 would be a good choice, more powerful and in an angle eject if you plan a scope.

hfcable · Post by **hfcable** » Tue Apr 08, 2014 1:26 pm

[quote="vancelw"]I've not shot a moose with my .38-55, but wouldn't hesitate to if I could get close enough.
I think 150 yards is a very reasonable goal. Not because of the limitations of the round so much as the limitations of my eyes and iron sights.
I have a tang peep on my Chief Crazy Horse. Using Barnes Original .377" 255 gr bullets (I can't remember my fps offhand and it's pouring rain

so I can't go to the reloading room) I got complete penetration through both shoulders of a mature Mule Deer buck a couple of years ago. He never knew what hit him.

Yeah, he was a hair over 150 yards away, but I had a steady rest and all the time in the world to aim.[/quot

that is a very good bullet in my old 1894; have taken several caribou with it, and penetration was excellent. results were excellent. wouldnt hesitate to use on moose, but would try to keep range under 125 yds or so , but that is just me and my rifle......that is our limitations.

7.62 Precision · Post by **7.62 Precision** » Tue Apr 08, 2014 2:21 pm

BrentD wrote:7.62. I have no problem in the accuracy of the .35-55 and I have shot many targets and a few deer and antelope with one. However, in a lever gun, they use a diminutive bullet that is just too light to make me comfortable about penetration on a moose, possibly quartering onwards and with the bullet leaving the muzzle at only 1500 fps at best (because I will use black) and shedding velocity like crazy, no, I don't like it for a moose past 150 - though I haven't really got any hard data to make that call one way or the other.

I was joking more than anything - target shooting is not the same as hunting.

The good thing about .45-70 is it can penetrate well even going slow (this is true with the .38-55, too). There was good reason the big .45 and .50 calibers were favored for big game, especially at distance, in the BP days. The .45-70 can definitely give you a margin.

.38-55 and .375 are fine for moose. My wife has an old 1893 Marlin that I will probably rebore to .38-55 for moose and bear.

tman · Post by **tman** » Tue Apr 08, 2014 4:14 pm

Moose are sucessfully taken with bow and arrows, muzzleloaders and handguns. A 38-55 loaded with a hardcast 255grn bullet is a better choice than the aforementioned. Moose were killed for over 100 years with the .44 henry rimfire flat, the 44-40 and the 30-30. Propery loaded the 38-55 exceeds them and the .375 WCF. becomes overkill. If you know how to hunt and shoot, don't let anybody tell u you can't. Good hunting to you.

BrentD · Post by **BrentD** » Tue Apr 08, 2014 4:39 pm

tman wrote:Moose are sucsessfully taken with bow and arrows, muzzleloaders and handguns. A 38-55 loaded with a hardcast 255grn bullet is a better choice than the aforementioned.

Really? That they have been successful is certain (so have .22 rf), that a .38-55 is better is really pretty hard to back up. Sort of depends which muzzleloader for example and what distances might be involved.

I've hunted moose with .54 roundball flintlocks and it may or may not be better than a .38-55. Within 75 yds, I would argue it was probably just as good, certainly no worse. I've hunted them with .45 caliber muzzleloader too, and it is far superior to a .38-55.

Just what sort of limits will one place on one's shot selection is a big part of this discussion, but I would place a lot more restrictions on that selection with a .38-55 than I would with my .45 underhammer.

.38-55s are nice. I have two and have had others. But they are not a "big bore" rifle by any means and I think lever gunners tend to overrate them for some reason. The .40s and .45 levers were invented for good reasons. Moose might be one of them.

tman · Post by **tman** » Tue Apr 08, 2014 5:02 pm

They were invented for hunters convinced that what they allready had was inadequite and they needed to buy the new and improved version. A Well tested marketing tactic for hunters with more money than brains. The one's that didn't bite still take their Moose and Heavy North American game cartridges that WAll StREET advertisers diss as inadequete. If you want to hunt moose with a 416 REM Mag., by all means do it and have fun. just don't tell me that a cartridge with over 100 years of moose getting ain't gonna get the job done. A 255 grain hardcast at 1800 fps. will hammer the biggest moose that ever walk the earth. IT WON'TBOUNCE OF OF IT!

hfcable · Post by **hfcable** » Tue Apr 08, 2014 5:44 pm

tman wrote:They were invented for hunters convinced that what they allready had was inadequite and they needed to buy the new and improved version. A Well tested marketing tactic for hunters with more money than brains. The one's that didn't bite still take their Moose and Heavy North American game cartridges that WAll StREET advertisers diss as inadequete. If you want to hunt moose with a 416 REM Mag., by all means do it and have fun. just don't tell me that a cartridge with over 100 years of moose getting ain't gonna get the job done. A 255 grain hardcast at 1800 fps. will hammer the biggest moose that ever walk the earth. IT WON'TBOUNCE OF OF IT!

really the 45/70 was invented BEFORE the 38/55 was introduced. it came out in 1873 in the springfield trapdoor, and the 38/55 i beleive was in 1876 and introduced first in single shots as a target round. the 45/70 very specifically was meant to be able to knock down the horses the hostiles were riding. as such it did quite well, and does well today. the 38/55 does very well also , but i do not think it has the potential penetration and ' put them down ' power as the 45/70 on large mammals. if you consider what the buffalo hunters used, the 45/70 was probably the minimum although it was used extensively in that role as well.

i like my 38/55 but my 45/70 is my main go to rifle.

tman · Post by **tman** » Tue Apr 08, 2014 6:50 pm

Once again, use what makes YOU happy! But don't try to tell me that a 38-55 won't take moose.

BrentD · Post by **BrentD** » Tue Apr 08, 2014 6:51 pm

tman wrote:Once again, use what makes YOU happy! But don't try to tell me that a 38-55 won't take moose.

No one said it wouldn't. A .22 rimfire would get the job done with the right circumstances.

hfcable · Post by **hfcable** » Tue Apr 08, 2014 7:09 pm

tman wrote:Once again, use what makes YOU happy! But don't try to tell me that a 38-55 won't take moose.

i know it will take moose, very readily . i have a friend who shot a large bull with a winchester commemorative 38/55 and USING the stupid commemorative ammo, which is think is barely 1200 fps. moose was about 90 yds out, and the shot took out the lungs and dropped it within 2 seconds at most.

a friend using the same 38/55 load that i use, shot through a caribou at 125 yds, and also dropped the caribou in line on the other side which was 25-30 yds further on.

no question it will work and work fine.

EdinCT · Post by **EdinCT** » Tue Apr 08, 2014 8:04 pm

I had a friend who grew up in Maine and shot a moose with his 38-55 when he was a boy. Said it killed him dead quick. Also a 44 mag handgun is used for moose 240 gr bullet at 1350 same, same with the exception of better sectional density with the 377 bullet.

7.62 Precision · Post by **7.62 Precision** » Tue Apr 08, 2014 9:50 pm

BrentD wrote:No one said it wouldn't. A .22 rimfire would get the job done with the right circumstances.

I almost got killed by a moose that someone shot with a .22 rimfire in the wrong circumstances.

For me the argument between the two about poor shot angles does not really apply because I hunt for meat and, unless I was desperately hungry, I'm going to take shots that don't mess up a bunch of meat. Any angle that might be a problem for .38-55 in a moose is going to be messing up some meat, for sure.

On the other hand, I can understand that someone who is spending a lot of money to travel or pay for a guide is going to want to be able to drop a moose from any angle to secure that trophy.

7.62 Precision · Post by **7.62 Precision** » Tue Apr 08, 2014 9:53 pm

By the way, where are you hunting moose this fall?

vancelw · Post by **vancelw** » Tue Apr 08, 2014 11:46 pm

Y'all have daisygordoninc scared to respond on his own thread

He asked if either of two calibers would do the job on moose. Found out he needed a third caliber.

This could get expensive.

While we're in the business of comparing apple to oranges...
A Remington 405 gr JSP in .45-70 has a muzzle velocity/muzzle energy of...1330/1591
My .38-55 with a 255 Barnes Original .377 has a muzzle velocity/muzzle energy of...1880/2002

At 150 yards those numbers are:
.45-70 Rem 405... 1106me/1100mv
.38-55 Barnes 255...1527me/1321mv

So, would my diminutive .38-55 255 gr bullets ever kill an elk, or should I take my trapdoor .45-70 instead?

tman · Post by **tman** » Wed Apr 09, 2014 4:16 am

Guess we can cross the 45-70 off the list along with the other 2 rounds

TedH · Post by **TedH** » Wed Apr 09, 2014 6:35 am

Yep, cross it off. In all reality, you need at least a 50 BMG to kill a moose.

daisygordoninc · Post by **daisygordoninc** » Wed Apr 09, 2014 11:07 am

I will be hunting in the Caribou District in BC

daisygordoninc · Post by **daisygordoninc** » Wed Apr 09, 2014 11:10 am

I killed 2 bears last spring in BC with a Winchester 356 and Marlin 45-70 guide gun. Both were plenty
of gun, made two good shots. I want to use some of the other 94s I have, thus want to use the 38-55 or
375, or both on Moose.

BrentD · Post by **BrentD** » Wed Apr 09, 2014 11:12 am

daisygordoninc wrote: I want to use some of the other 94s I have, thus want to use the 38-55 or
375, or both on Moose.

Then do it. Just limit the shots you take accordingly.

Blaine · Post by **Blaine** » Wed Apr 09, 2014 11:12 am

I better sell my .375...I'd be taking my life in my hands using it in Washington Bear/Cougar country

...(Buffalo Bore has a 38-55 that can be used in .375 that is a 255gr at about 1950fps, and 2150 fpe....

)

BrentD · Post by **BrentD** » Wed Apr 09, 2014 11:14 am

BlaineG wrote: I better sell my .375...I'd be taking my life in my hands using it in Washington Bear/Cougar country )

Who told you that

Blaine · Post by **Blaine** » Wed Apr 09, 2014 11:15 am

BrentD wrote:
BlaineG wrote: I better sell my .375...I'd be taking my life in my hands using it in Washington Bear/Cougar country )
Who told you that

We need a sarcasm "smiley"

Griff · Post by **Griff** » Wed Apr 09, 2014 12:16 pm

Either will do the job just fine! There are limitations to both... just like there are limitations on the .416 Rem mentioned.

BrentD · Post by **BrentD** » Wed Apr 09, 2014 12:21 pm

Griff wrote:Either will do the job just fine! There are limitations to both... just like there are limitations on the .416 Rem mentioned.

I think the limitations to the .416 are a little different than the limits to a .38-55

Blaine · Post by **Blaine** » Wed Apr 09, 2014 12:37 pm

FWIW (thread drift, a little bit) I know that powerhouse rounds like 30-06, or 300 mags with premium bullets will go through our little black tails without opening up, and sometimes they just keep running forever, even with a couple hits....30wcf softpoints on the other hand, are designed not to do that, and are devastating on deer.....I guess my point is to match the calibre, and bullet to what you're after. ( I never worried too much when I hunted with a 45-70...if it's brown, it's down.)

tman · Post by **tman** » Wed Apr 09, 2014 2:21 pm

TedH wrote:Yep, cross it off. In all reality, you need at least a 50 BMG to kill a moose.

Even the 50 BMG is kinda on the light side. Nothing short of a cruise missle for the guaranteed fictional DRT. Be sure to wear your tactical wielding hood and ear protection.

7.62 Precision · Post by **7.62 Precision** » Wed Apr 09, 2014 2:31 pm

BrentD wrote:
daisygordoninc wrote: I want to use some of the other 94s I have, thus want to use the 38-55 or
375, or both on Moose.
Then do it. Just limit the shots you take accordingly.

Isn't this the case with all calibers? We limit our shots to ranges and angles appropriate for the caliber. We limit angles to those that don't destroy a bunch of meat.

Any angle that I would shoot a moose with a .45-70, I would shoot it with a .38-55. I could drive a .45-70 into the heart of a moose lengthwise through his hindquarter, but destroying that much meat would make me cry.

tman · Post by **tman** » Wed Apr 09, 2014 3:26 pm

Daisygordoninc has already shown great intellegance for his choice of the GREAT .356 WCF. So I conclude that he is a very knowledgable on cartridges and hunting. To try to dissmiss the 38-55, as inadequite for moose is to deny over 100 years of hunting sucess with it and lesser calibers. Perhaps the .338-375 Weatherby, in 20 years will be regulated thus, when something new and improved, tactical, shooting extra special, extra expensive premium bullets is sold to hunters.

BrentD · Post by **BrentD** » Wed Apr 09, 2014 3:27 pm

Blaine · Post by **Blaine** » Wed Apr 09, 2014 3:58 pm

BrentD wrote:

BrentD, I'm not exactly sure what you are chagrined about.

BrentD · Post by **BrentD** » Wed Apr 09, 2014 4:04 pm

I'm not chagrined at all - except maybe at the seemingly pervasive human trait of reading much more extreme meanings into other people's statements.

BrentD · Post by **BrentD** » Wed Apr 09, 2014 4:04 pm

I'm not chagrined at all - except maybe at the seemingly pervasive human trait of reading much more extreme meanings into other people's statements.

Blaine · Post by **Blaine** » Wed Apr 09, 2014 4:07 pm

BrentD wrote:I'm not chagrined at all - except maybe at the seemingly pervasive human trait of reading much more extreme meanings into other people's statements.

I'm probably guilty of that on occasions....

I guess if you took a hundred good hunters, and, told them to line up available calibres in order of their effectiveness against large deer, you would get 100 difference answers.

Canuck Bob · Post by **Canuck Bob** » Wed Apr 09, 2014 5:25 pm

You guys can use a ruler to measure it and post the results (yardstick in some cases).

Why such argument over a 38-55 for moose? Gord wants to use a 94, outstanding idea and one that warms my heart. It is a question rarely asked.

If I understand things correctly you have access to either a 38-55 or a 375 in your collection. I still vote for the 375 as it is the more powerful. When in doubt pack the big gun when moose is on the menu. Either one will do the job. Sneaking around good game country in BC I would want to use a gun from my safe high in power. There is no doubt you understand the limitations your choice will result in. For me I wouldn't use my 32 Special 94, choosing my Marlin 444 instead. However if I was out hunting deer and bumped into a moose I had a tag for I would use my 32. I also understand hunting with a vintage cartridge. I use a half dozen and have bought one bolt in 40 years. If you use your 38-55 you are required to share the full story with pics. That is a bragging trophy moose in my book regardless of spread.

I think it is Paco who wrote a story about hunting Pronghorns with a 30-30 94. Talk about marching to one's own drum!

I certainly wouldn't buy a 45-70 if I had a 38-55 in the safe, unless I wanted one. I've never wanted one. So I certainly wouldn't recommend a fellow sportsman should just for a hunting trip.

I also don't buy into the idea that using a 338 Winchester Mag MOA rifle with a 50mm scope and built-in range finder will offer an advantage or increase a guys chance when using marginal placement. Marginal placement is another way to say tricky angles and a quarter of ruined meat, long range wounds, shooting after dark, etc.. It is my experience it is often someone so equipped who gets skunked only to show up next year with 375 Ruger and a 60mm scope. The only folks I knew who regularly brought home moose every year for decades used Lee Enfields and would question a guys manhood for using a scope. I wish I had turned out to be 1/4 the hunters they were.

vancelw · Post by **vancelw** » Wed Apr 09, 2014 6:59 pm

7.62 Precision wrote:
BrentD wrote:
Then do it. Just limit the shots you take accordingly.
Isn't this the case with all calibers? We limit our shots to ranges and angles appropriate for the caliber. We limit angles to those that don't destroy a bunch of meat.

Exactly my thoughts!

vancelw · Post by **vancelw** » Wed Apr 09, 2014 7:08 pm

Canuck Bob wrote: Gord wants to use a 94, outstanding idea and one that warms my heart. It is a question rarely asked.
I think it is Paco who wrote a story about hunting Pronghorns with a 30-30 94. Talk about marching to one's own drum!

???? I guess I'm lost. I've used a .30-30 and .38-55 on pronghorns....In fact, finding a very old .38-55 case on the prairie is what inspired me to do so.

I have also had numerous old codgers tell me .45 Colt is inadequate for mule deer...maybe the original loads are marginal, but I've killed several mule deer with my +P loads and whitetail with my original power loads.

Pick your weapon, choose your shot, have fun. And quit worrying about what the other guy is doing as long as he is killing game humanely and safely....

tman · Post by **tman** » Thu Apr 10, 2014 5:36 pm

BrentD wrote:I'm not chagrined at all - except maybe at the seemingly pervasive human trait of reading much more extreme meanings into other people's statements.

Perhaps paranoia? Didn't jump on your replies. It's April 10, go ahead and prove that wrong and take it personal.

BrentD · Post by **BrentD** » Thu Apr 10, 2014 5:58 pm

tman wrote:
BrentD wrote:I'm not chagrined at all - except maybe at the seemingly pervasive human trait of reading much more extreme meanings into other people's statements.
Perhaps paranoia? Didn't jump on your replies. It's April 10, go ahead and prove that wrong and take it personal.

Sure. Whatever you say.

t.r. · Post by **t.r.** » Sat Apr 12, 2014 8:38 am

My boss hunts bears in Maine each year with his Marlin in 35 Remington. He has taken two really big 'uns weighing over 300 lbs. Yet they were no match for the mighty 35!

Winchester's 375 is very close to the 35 in the numbers department but with heavier bullets available. I doubt if a moose can stand up to a well placed bullet.

I'm no expert moose hunter; I've taken only one bull during a Saskatchewan hunt back in the 1980's. I hunted with my .308 rifle shooting 180 grain Remington core-lokt ammo. Distance was approx. 125 yards and I fired two quick shots into the chest organs. The moose trotted about 50 yards into a marshy area and toppled over. It was a lot of effort to remove the meat!

TR