Bison can be hunted with 8mm Mauser, but not .303, .308, or 7.62x54r?!

[Firearm Encyclopedia]

I bought the Kar98k pretty much as soon as I seen it on theHunter so it's not like I'm unable to hunt it right now, likewise just today I bought the M91/30, and plan to also get the scope for it because my 1942 M91/30 has a replica 3.5x PU scope. My issue is 7.92x57 (8mm Mauser), 7.62x54r, and 7.7x56r (.303 British) are all in the same ballpark. First I'll point out how their Military loadings were during WWII as I recall them.

8mm (s.S. Patrone 1934): 198gr at 2500 ft/s from a 24" barrel.
Hottest standard infantry rifle cartridge in use during the war.

7.62x54r (Light Ball): 150gr at 2850 ft/s from a 29" barrel.

.303 (Mk.VII Ball): 174gr at 2440 ft/s from a 25" barrel.

So the 8mm is the hottest, but if you were to put a 150gr bullet in it then the muzzle velocity would likely be around 2900 ft/s or so, quite comparable to 7.62x54r's performance, and likewise if you put a 198gr bullet in a 7.62x54r, it'd likely still be around 2400-2450 ft/s I figure. .303 British is the weakest of the bunch. As you can see in comparing the Mk.III* to the Kar98k using their WWII ammo, the Lee Enfield uses a lighter bullet that's going slower in spite of having a SLIGHTLY longer barrel. All the same, it's been used MANY times to take down moose, how much more difficult could it be to take bison? People have even taken moose with .30-30, and I think even 7.62x39, which are weaker than .303 British. Now for commercially available softpoint ammo. It's all PPU soft points, to try and keep things consistent.

8mm: 196gr going 2182 ft/s (Likely the velocity was checked from a shorter barrel than the Kar98k. Perhaps an 18" or 20" barrel.)

7.62x54r: 150gr going 2838 ft/s (Must have still used a 29" M91/30 barrel for testing. Consistent with WWII Light Ball ballistics.)

.303: 180gr going 2461 ft/s (Seems to be loaded hotter than Mk.VII Ball which was widely used in both WWI and WWII; slightly heavier bullet going slightly faster. Better powder I guess, in fact they didn't even use powder during the war; Britain used cordite.)

I know that different bullet weights are available, in fact .303 and 7.62x54r practically use the same diameter bullet, about .311 or so. If that 180gr bullet was pulled out of the .303 and popped onto the 7.62x54r, it would likely have agood 2550 ft/s or so I figure. Anyways, you can do the research and find this info yourself no problem. I got this info from www.sportsmansguide.com so maybe when they were putting that 8mm Mauser info on the site, they accidentally typed in a 1 instead of a 4 or something for that 2182 ft/s, because it doesn't seem right, unless it was with quite a shorter barrel than the Kar98k's 24".

I believe if 8mm Mauser is going to be given the go-ahead to hunt something, then 7.62x54r and .303 should be brought along with it, because it's all in the same ballpark. You're splitting hairs by choosing one and leaving the others out. You may as well be saying "You can hunt 'this' with 5.7x28 from a 10" barrel, but not .22 Magnum from a 24" barrel. It's practically the same thing if you also use the same bullet weights. Either make it so 8mm Mauser is unacceptable for hunting Bison with, or make it so that 7.62x54r, .303, .30-06, and .308 are also acceptable for hunting them. In the end, they're all rifle rounds of roughly the same strength. Well actually, .30-06 has the most case capacity to my knowledge with its massive 7.62x63mm size. With a full load of powder, it'd probably be bordering on a magnum cartridge, but it's not designed for that kind of pressure, but I digress. Ultimately, they're all in the same league, with VERY comparable bullet diameters, and if you use the same bullet weight/barrel length, they all have VERY comparable velocity.

For example, if all 3 were shot from a 25" barrel with 174gr bullets, .303 British would remain at about 2440 ft/s or so, while 7.62x54r and .308 would likely be around 2500 ft/s, 8mm Mauser might be around 2550 ft/s, and finally if .30-06 is custom loaded to be quite substantial in power, I water it would spit that 174gr bullet at about 2600 ft/s at least. From weakest to strongest, there's an estimated 160 ft/s difference in velocity, with the almost the exact same bullet size, and with the exact same bullet weight/barrel length. That's not something worth writing home about.

In the game, I believe the .303 soft points are given a 150gr bullet. If that's the issue, then either give it 180gr bullets, or at least make 180gr bullets available so that the bisons can be hunted with it. It just isn't right to allow 8mm Mauser to get away with hunting something, yet saying .30-06, .303, 7.62x54r, and .308 just aren't good enough. So the simple answer is either make 8mm Mauser illegal to hunt them with, or legalize the four cartridges I just mentioned, because they're all very much in the same league. By the way, in Newfoundland, it's legal to hunt moose with .30-30, but it's generally advised not to. If I were asking for theHunter to allow hunting moose with .30-30, I believe I'd be asking too much, however in regards to .30-06/.303/7.62x54r/.308, I don't think it's a ridiculous request.

[Alf Tupper]

That's a nice piece of research and well presented, but you never mention actual muzzle energy, rather than mv and projective weight.

From wikipedia:

.303 can give between 2,500 to 2,600 ft lbs
7.92 Mauser - 2,900 to 3,000 ft lbs
30-06 - 2,800 to 3,000 ft lbs
7.62 x 54R 2,650 to 2,787

So they are not quite in the same ball park, and the .303 and the 7.62x54r are clearly less powerful than the other two cartridges BUT the % variation shall we say is small. The game devs draw these lines in the sand and personally I don't like them, as they are somewhat arbitrary, can be contradictory, and is some ways don't reflect what is allowed for hunting in real life. Eg I recall that 6.5mm Swedish was used by hunters of Polar bears as being cheap, and effective if you placed your shot well, plus I think was also used in African game hunting.

The other thing I'll note is that the ,454 handgun cartridge is delivering 1600 - 1900 ft lbs and is legal for all the big game in theHunter, so why can't you use .303 which is almost 50% more powerful?

My own solution is they get rid of permitted weapons completely (with certain exceptions) BUT to penalise players in some way for unharvested kills or kills that reach 0% harvest value as it was not an ethical/quick kill.

So - I do agree with you!!!

[Firearm Encyclopedia]

Originally posted by Alf Tupper:

From wikipedia:

.303 can give between 2,500 to 2,600 ft lbs
7.92 Mauser - 2,900 to 3,000 ft lbs
30-06 - 2,800 to 3,000 ft lbs
7.62 x 54R 2,650 to 2,787

While I believe Wikipedia to usually be a good source of info, energy is dependent on far too many factors to be summed up so easily. Bullet weight, velocity (which is heavily affected by barrel length, powder type, and amount of powder), as well as whether the bullet stops in the target or not. If it continues through, then not all that energy will be transferred, while if it does stop, then all the energy was thrusted into the target. If my guesstimations were correct in that if all four were given the same bullet weight/barel length, leaving the final variable as the amoung of powder in the casing, resulting in a difference of muzzle velocity as only about 150-200 ft/s or so, IF that's true, then all the cartridges are capable of roughly the same amount of energy. The biggest variable is bullet weight and loading.

So if I took a Mk.VII Ball cartridge loaded to the Military specs of over 100 years ago, then exchanged the 174gr FMJ bullet with a little 150gr soft point, it would likely be weaker than a commercial .303 with a 150gr soft point, and of course would be weaker than a commercian .30-06 with a 150gr soft point to a greater extent than necessary because that .303 is not loaded to its potential because over the past 100 years we've improved cartridge propellant quite a bit, giving better results than the cordite that was used. Let's try a different method of measuring these; what's the term... fluid capacity? Anyways, off to Wikipedia! Ah, there it is, case capacity, derp!

.303: 56.2gr H2O
.308: 56gr H2O
7.62x54r: 64.2gr H2O
8mm: 63.1gr H2O
.30-06: 68gr H2O

I know I said that I don't quite trust Wiki's limited information available for bullet energy because of all the variables that are depending on the bullet weight/propellant/propellant amount as well as barrel length, but this is a very simple aspect with, to my knowledge, almost no variables. Perhaps if you used a heavier bullet that is seated down farther in the casing, it removes some of the case capacity. I don't know, but this is a very clear way of figuring out a cartridge's maximum potential. We can clearly see that .303 and .308 is at the bottom of the spectrum, surprisingly enough .303 can apparently hold slightly more, which is very surprising to me. Meanwhile 7.62x54r can hold a little more than 8mm, but a single grain isn't something worth writing home about, meanwhile as expected, 7.62x63 (.30-06) is WAY ahead of the rest with over 3gr more than 2nd place and 12gr more than 7.62x51 (.308).

So let's work with this... let's say that all cartridges are using the same type of powder, and they're all given 150gr SP bullets. Relatively light for a rifle round, allowing for maximum capacity for powder, which by the way, is overloaded. It's given as much as can be crammed into it. Very dangerous of course, you would not want to do this with a .303 then shoot it from a Lee Enfield; the action isn't as strong as a Mosin or Mauser bolt. Should be ok in a Ross rifle though, very strong action, even if it doesn't do well in mucky trench conditions.

Now let's say that thye all have the same barrel length, and that .30-06, the biggest and baddest available by a good margin, is pumping that 150gr bullet at a solid 3000 ft/s. I'll now use the .30-06 as the control in this experiment. I'll see what the percentage is for the other cartridge in comparison to .30-06's whopping 68gr capacity, and then take that percentage in relation to that 3000 ft/s velocity, to see just how much the difference is if the shooters went ALL OUT and overloaded their ammo to give it as much 'oomph' as they can, but with the same bullet weights and barrel lengths.

.30-06: 100%
7.62x54r: 94.4% (So it's 5.6% weaker than the .30-06 in this situation)
8mm: 92.8% (so it's 7.2% weaker than .30-06, you get the idea)
.303: 82.6%
.308: 82.4%

.30-06: 3000 ft/s
7.62x54r: 2832 ft/s (Already my 150-200 ft/s guesstimation is not looking good.)
8mm: 2784 ft/s
.303: 2478 ft/s
.308: 2472 ft/s

Well clearly .30-06 is capable of firing a 150gr bullet faster than 3000 ft/s, because .308 should have a good 2800 ft/s if it's through a 24" barrel, and .303 should have about the same, even though I didn't know it had the same case capacity. I would have guessed it had less. I was going to do the same thing but with a heavier bullet resulting in lower velocities alogn with lower velocity deductions for the smaller rounds, but it seems like this experiment just isn't right. In order to get .308 at 2800 ft/s, I'd have to assume that .30-06 can fire that 150gr bullet at 3400 ft/s, which sounds like magnum capabilities, maybe even MORE powerful than magnum rifle rounds. So yeah, this comment is mostly gone to waste... bugger...

In the end, there's different laws all around the world on what cartridge you can use to hunt what animals. As I mentioned, in Newfoundland, you can take on moose with .30-30, which is quite a bit weaker than .303. Allowing that in the game would be rather foolish. Ultimately, glad you agree with my proposal; allowing the other cartridges as well or making it unacceptable to hunt bison with 8mm, especially since .30-06 has so much more case capacity thus potentially able to have more energy if the rifle can handle the pressure. I mean 8mm and .30-06 have similarly wide casings (Unlike .303 which is quite slim in comparrison, though likely with a wider rim due to being a rimmed cartridge), but 8mm is 7.92x57mm, meaning a 57mm long casing. .30-06 has a 63mm long casing. So if both casings are of very similar width, but one is that much longer than the other (Around 10% longer) then of course it's going to have a higher case capacity, meaning capable of being loaded hotter. So why allow 8mm but not .30-06? Why not that big fat 7.62x54r that seems ot have more case capacity as well to a lesser extent thanks to its width, in spite of having a shorter casing? It just doesn't make sense...

[Firearm Encyclopedia]

Now I see that .303 is also on the no-go list for Polar Bear as well... this is just getting ridiculous... you know the Canadian Rangers used the No.4 Lee Enfield and .303 right up until the last year or 2? Switched over the 7.62 Nato. I mean come on, this is just getting stupid...

[Alf Tupper]

Very simply - that's the way the devs have made the rules. It's an oversimplification IMHO, but there is some reasoning behind it.

The muzzle energy values I quoted from wikipedia are correct by the way, as they vary with both load and projectile, which is why I quoted two values for each cartridge. I use them as ball park figures for typical loads, rather than "what can you achieve with a hot load from an optimum barrel",as the game seems to base its values on over the counter ammunition rather than hand loaded variations.

To clarify that the typical loads for the .303 and 7.62x54 are not in the same class as the 7.92 and 30-06, so although I don't like the fact the devs have drawn a line, I can see why they have excluded the two less powerful rounds.

I'd still prefer it if you the player made the choice, and if you spent all of your hunting session tracking wounded animals because you were taking on big bull Moose with a 30-30 then more fool you! If you shred a small Mule deer with a 9.3mm and get a 0% harvest value - more fool you as well. It'd be better in my opinion if the player/hunter got to make those ethical choices instead of them being made for him/her.

It's also a roundabout way of selling more e-guns in the game... possibly.

[Zzabur]

Originally posted by Alf Tupper:

My own solution is they get rid of permitted weapons completely (with certain exceptions) BUT to penalise players in some way for unharvested kills or kills that reach 0% harvest value as it was not an ethical/quick kill.

This ^^