Looking for a new caliber


PDA






Shadow Shock
August 20, 2007, 12:43 AM
My dad and I are looking for a new caliber to hunt deer and hogs with. We stress shot placment to the max, we dont use huge calibers to cover up for lack of skill, because we can shoot very well (plus it's completley unethical). We have been using our Remington 700 in .223 for the last six years. Three years ago, we added a Rossi single shot .243 to our collection. Neither of these calibers have ever failed us. We've filled our tags (5 per person here in TX) every year, and never had a deer run off on us. However, my dad wants to upgrade to something bigger. I've taken deer at 300yd with the .223, and he;s taken one at 450yd with the .243. Now we want something that has a lot more knock down power at longer ranges. My dad told me to post here with the criterea of what he's looking for.

Personally, I'd rather a .308, but my dad made it clear that I have no choice in the matter. He told me to ask strictly about calibers, not to worry about the guns (although I know it will be single shot or bolt action). .30 caliber cartriges are out due to recoil. I'm 15, but I can handle the recoil no problem. However 8 years ago, my dad broke his neck, and excessive recoil hurts him a lot. He's looking for something preferably in the .260 to .280 range. We need it to be flat shooting for long range accuracy, and have the power to knock the piss out of a deer or hog between 50yd, and 500+yd. We've been using cartriges that kill cleanly, but we'd like something that is a bit overkill, so as to make sure beyond a doubt that when a deer or hog goes down, it wont be getting back up. We cant use some obscure cartridge, because we need relatively avaiable ammunition. We hunt a lot of Piney Wood Rooters (super-tough hogs) over in East Texas near a ho-dunk little town that doesn't even sell earplugs. So were not likely to find a box of .25-06 or .280 out there. Plenty of .270 though. My dad wants to know, what caliber would yall recomend, what weight, type of bullet, etc. I think .270 is our best option, but if yall would recomend this, what weight? Soft points or hollowpoints? What brand of amunition? Thanks in advance.

If you enjoyed reading about "Looking for a new caliber" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!
Bartkowski
August 20, 2007, 01:16 AM
A .308 win. isn't a bad choice. They have a little less recoil than a .270 according to chuck hawks recoil table, and a larger bullet diameter. Since its so popular finding ammo is no problem.

Orr89rocz
August 20, 2007, 01:28 AM
well i think pushing a 243/6mm out to 400 yds on deer is abit pushing it...thats a far shot for such a light bullet.

a 270 is a very nice choice. my choice would be a 270 WSM. if recoil is a problem, then i'd might stay away from it as it probly has abit of a kick to it...probly like an 30'06 or more... i'm not sure i've never shot it. in a good gun tho, it could be tame. a 7mm mag would be great for really long range but abit heavy for close range stuff. I've shot one and its not bad but closer ranges just kills the meat on deer, my friend has had the experiences.

25 WSSM seems nice, gives performance like that of a 25-06 and winchester makes a coyote model 70 with a bull barrel on it and varmint type stock for under 600 bucks. probly a very capable gun out to 500 yards on deer. still on the light side but with great shot skill, it can kill deer.

7mm-08 remington is a very nice piece as well. mild on recoil but flat enough out to 400-500 yards. delivers better performance over the 308 too out past 400 yards. that be a great choice.

most factory guns tho dont have very good thick barrels for long range shooting. If you make a custom rifle with a heavier barrel then look into the 270 WSM. it will be mild behind a properly built 8-9 lb rifle. FLAT shooting too.
Else i'd try the new 25 WSSM or 7mm-08. those be my choices for a mild recoiling gun that still can get the job done at long range.

problem with the WSSM and WSM its fairly new and a few private shops wont have ammo. you'd have to stock up or else go something else.

with teh 270 winchester, i'd go with a 130 grain and shoot a ballistic tip for long range stuff. Winchester ballistic silvertip, nosler ballistic tips, hornady SST, swift Scirroco bonded, etc, those are all good bullets and loads.

W.E.G.
August 20, 2007, 01:42 AM
FAL

http://i227.photobucket.com/albums/dd7/rkba2da/DSCN3092smaller.jpg

Jimmy Newman
August 20, 2007, 01:44 AM
I love 7mm-08. It has been perfect for me on deer in TX. I shoot the Hornady light mag 139gr SST. I've never recovered a bullet because I've never had one fail to go through. This load is 100fps slower than the Hornady light mag 140gr load for the .270.

It's 3000fps/2777ft-lbs at the muzzle, according to Hornady's website. Some people claim that 1300ft-lbs is the least energy you should hit a deer with, and this load stays above that out past 500 yards.

If you want more than 500 yards range, you're going to be looking at a pretty serious rifle, both in terms of cartridge power and in terms of cost to get a rifle that shoots consistently enough to make good shots (as well as a LOT of practice).

eliphalet
August 20, 2007, 01:47 AM
With what you've said maybe a 270 using a 130 grain bullet. Fills what your asking and is available nearly everywhere. A good recoil pad will do wonders for your dad's shoulder, and felt recoil, neck I am not sure.

Orr89rocz
August 20, 2007, 01:59 AM
depending on what rifle, Knoxx makes a compstock that has a recoil reducing spring inside. plus a limbsaver recoil pad and maybe even a muzzle brake or porting will do great on taming down a heavier load

Grumulkin
August 20, 2007, 08:55 AM
We need it to be flat shooting for long range accuracy, and have the power to knock the piss out of a deer or hog between 50yd, and 500+yd.

Pretty funny!!! And what do you mean by knocking "the piss out of a deer?" You want all this with low recoil and, I suppose you have something against muzzle brakes and wearing hearing protection?

For flat shooting without a muzzle brake and with low recoil, I'd recommend a 22-250. For flat shooting with little recoil and more horsepower, I'd recommend a 7mm Remington Magnum with a brake. I don't know if they'll knock the piss out of anything but a lot of animals pee when they die if that's good enough for you.

auschip
August 20, 2007, 10:14 AM
Well, your requirements are a little unrealistic, but something that gets close to what you are looking for is the 6.5x55. It has a good ballistic coefficient out to the longer ranges, and you can hand load for it or buy ammo. You won't be able to find it at the local academy, but it isn't scarce either.

halvey
August 20, 2007, 10:20 AM
He's looking for something preferably in the .260 to .280 range. You answered your own question.

sansone
August 20, 2007, 10:28 AM
my personal favorite is .243 but since you are looking bigger, how about
7mm-08? same case as .243+308 but bullet size fits nicely between the two. you kinda need to reload for it because popularity lags a bit. If recoil is not an issue then .270 would be my choice for long shots

Orr89rocz
August 20, 2007, 10:34 AM
i have a 6.5x55 and i like it but its definately 300 yards or less. it has way to much bullet drop past that. I just started using it for varmits at standard shots ranging from 100-200 yards but shots at 250-500 will present themselves and its just hard to dial that combo in if your guestimations in range is off.

Plus it doesnt have good energy at those long ranges to take out a deer. neither do the fast 22's but i guess they are capable of enough penetration to kill one.

knock the piss out of a deer at 400-500 yards? I'd go for a 300 ultra mag with some porting and nice heavy stock with good recoil pad. I have shot one on a bench, nothing special just a long barrelled factory remington 700. the recoil was mild in my eyes... just abit more than a 30-06. almost like my 35 whelen to be exact. a better pad and some weight to it, and its a light kicking gun lol

kir_kenix
August 20, 2007, 10:38 AM
if you didnt mind buying ammo off the net i would say 6.5x55 swede. sounds to me that it would fit your bill in every single way. flat shooting, mild recoil, good availability of hunting bullets for the reloader...
next best is pbly either 7mm-08 or the good ole fashion .308, the most versetile cartridge in the world.


edited to add: orr beat me to it i guess!

jmorris
August 20, 2007, 10:40 AM
How available does your ammunition have to be? If you want to find it in every old country store you’d better stick with the basics 243, 30-30, 308, 30-06 and 270. IMO .223 at 450 yds at deer/hogs is pushing it a bit, but if that works for you great. What then does “longer ranges” mean to you? If you are talking about 800yds +- finding what you want is not going to be easy. Having the necessary ballistics to be effective at that range and mild recoil is opposite of what physics teaches us. FWIW the 7-08 is all the rifle I’ve ever needed in east Texas. With the trees and terrain on the area we hunt its not often one can see 300yds.

Picknlittle
August 20, 2007, 12:51 PM
I'll continue to stand by my "if I could only have one rifle" gun, and that is my .35 Whelen. Not too big for deer, but plenty for anything on this continent. Also, it's a ***** cat compared to my 06. Go figure!

I trust it in my hands out to about 300yds. I only trust my 06 in my hands out to about 300 yds.

xd45gaper
August 20, 2007, 01:02 PM
6.5x55 swede! that is going to be my next caliber for deer hunting in FL they dont get giant down here and long range shots where i hunt are really not needed. if ill be some where that requires shooting long range i have a .308.

im looking at the CZ 550 FS in 6.5x55 swede

Shadow Shock
August 20, 2007, 01:17 PM
Thanks guys. Btw, I just put what my dad wanted me to put, I don't agree with it all.

"What then does “longer ranges” mean to you? If you are talking about 800yds +- finding what you want is not going to be easy. Having the necessary ballistics to be effective at that range and mild recoil is opposite of what physics teaches us."

Not that far! I would need a LOT of practice before I'd trust myself to make a shot like that. The thing is, at the property were we do most of our hog hunting, the place were we see the most hogs is a large feild with a few ponds and an earth ramp. From the best spot to sit, we frequently see hogs coming out of a corner at aproximately 550yd. We have been creeping up on them, but due to the position of the ponds (and often the prescence of cattle), it's hard to get much closer without getting noticed and have our prey run off. Also as to the availability of ammunition, I personally don't see why it really matters that much, because if we take 1-2 boxes of ammo with us, that'll more than last us.

I'm still gonna work on my dad to try to get a .308, but in his words, "It kicks like a God damn mule!" I havn't shot one, but it cant be that bad, certainly not worse than a 3 1/2-inch magnum 12-ga shell. Also my dad is predujiced against semi-auto rifles for hunting so the FAL is out W. E. G. I havn't heard of 6.5x55mm before, but it seems good from what y'all say. I'll tell my dad y'all's suggestions when he gets back from work.

Orr89rocz
August 20, 2007, 01:36 PM
i love my 6.5 swede, it doesnt kick at allll and is very accurate but just isnt that flat shooting... its too slow and needs hot loads to get its potential. I'd rather have my 6 mm remington. it has more velocity, more energy and is alot flatter shooting than the swede.

if you get a 308, get a varmit gun or tactical type 308. it will have some weight to it and the kick will be like the 6.5 swede. I have a BLR browning 308 and the kick isnt bad with 150 grain loads. its a fairly light gun too so a nice weight bolt action will be a TAME little rifle. Still think if you do that kind of shooting most of the time, i'd go with a short mag in 7mm or 270. table top ballistics out to those ranges and develop good energy. with a proper rifle it wont kick at all! my next gun may be a 270 WSM. I'd like to sell a few off first to make room

B.D. Turner
August 20, 2007, 01:47 PM
It sounds like the rifles you have now are doing the job. How many shots on deer do you get beyond 400 yds.? Not to poke you but your looking to fix a problem that could be fixed with a little more polishing of your hunting skills such as stalking.

35Rem
August 20, 2007, 01:53 PM
7mm-08
Put a limbsaver recoil pad on whatever it is, and you might think you are shooting the 223...BUT the deer/hogs won't think so!

kmrcstintn
August 20, 2007, 01:53 PM
some smaller stuff with snot to them:

.25-06, 7mm-08, .257 Ackley Improved, .257 Weatherby Mag, 7mm Remington Mag, 7mm WSM, et al

good luck...

about you comment concerning larger calibers being used to make up for lack of skill...pish posh...some people hunt in states that mandate minimums and/or require shotgun slugs...

slugs make mighty big holes...guess we're bad shots!!! :neener:

myself... short range & thickets -- .357 magnum lever action carbine or meduim/long range open areas --.30-06 pump action rifle or back-up 12 ga pump action shottie w/ rifled choke

MCgunner
August 20, 2007, 02:14 PM
I've killed more deer with a .257 Roberts loaded to about .25-06 velocities than any other caliber. I hunt mostly with a .308 now days, but that .257 will get it done on ANYthing in this state except maybe some of the exotics like Nilgai.

Some possibles with light recoil that I like other than the near extinct .257 Roberts would include....

.25-06
.260 Rem
.7-08
7x57 (had one of these, sweet caliber)
.270 Win
.280 Rem (I like this caliber being a reloader)
6.5x55mm Swede


Any of these are light recoiling and will kill anything in this state except that you'd want a .300 mag on something like a Nilgai. Hogs and deer at any reasonable range, no problem. Also, you're talking about long range. There is an ethics question you have to answer, too, no matter how good a shot you are, when you start talking extreme ranges. I like to keep anything I'm shooting at inside 350 yards. If I can't get closer, I'll pass the shot. Just too many variables to consider when you start getting out there, even if you're using a good range finder. Any of the above calibers has enough energy and flat enough trajectory for shots inside 500 yards theoretically. Within my personally hunting range limit, they surely do. Some of the eastern guys that have never hunted out west will scoff that shots shouldn't be taking over 200 yards or even 100, you should get closer. But, they need to go out west and chase mulies a bit. They'd change their mind. LOL! I will STILL consider anything over 350 too far and I'll try to get closer, though, even out in New Mexico's mountains.

Another thing, if you'll look up ballistic coefficients on the 6.5 and 7mm bullets, they're about the best there is, which translates into less velocity loss which translates into flatter shooting. I've got a 7 mag because I liked the 7mm bullet variety and BCs and wanted a magnum rifle. It ain't very easy on the shoulder, though. You wouldn't wanna go there if recoil is a concern. LOL

Art Eatman
August 20, 2007, 03:18 PM
The 7mm08's 140-grain bullet is only l10 grains less than the most common .30s, but the muzzle velocity is the same as for a .308.

I think I'd focus more on the absorptive quality of an after-market recoil pad, and the proper fit of the stock. That is the best way I know of to reduce recoil, besides using a heavier rifle.

Art

DogBonz
August 20, 2007, 03:42 PM
The 6.5 Grendel. Although finding a bolt gun chambered in 6.5 Grendel may be a little tough, if you look at the numbers, it is a great cartridge. After 300-400 yards its ballistics are superior to those of the 308, but it recoils about only half as hard.

The 7mm-08 is an excellent cartridge as well, and is far more popular, and is growing more and more popular. The 6.5x55 would also serve you well, especially if you reload.

Shadow Shock
August 20, 2007, 03:43 PM
"about you comment concerning larger calibers being used to make up for lack of skill...pish posh...some people hunt in states that mandate minimums and/or require shotgun slugs...

slugs make mighty big holes...guess we're bad shots!!!"

I'm sorry if it came accross wrong, but i wasn't meaning that all people who use large calibers are bad shots, I'm just stating the fact that a lot of really bad shots use majorly overkill calibers to make sure that if they hit the animal at all, chances are it will be dead or crippled and can be finished off with a point blank shot. A .22lr in the hands of an experienced hunter with excellent skills is better than a .30-06 in the hands of someone who doesn't know what the hell they're doing. Of course .22lr is illeagal to deer hunt with, but more deer have been killed with it here in Texas than just about anything else.

Shadow Shock
August 20, 2007, 03:49 PM
And no, we no longer reload. We used to reload shotgun shells, but my dad doesnt feel like it's worth his time anymore. I'd like to load, but he doesn't see much need when he can just stop by Academy or the hardware store and get a box of bullets.

esmith
August 20, 2007, 03:54 PM
If recoil is such a big deal then just use a recoil pad. If you were thinking of getting the .270 win then consider that cartridge has about the same recoil of a 308 and 30-06. It usually depends on what kind of rifle you have that determines the recoil. If the rifle is light and has a short barrel it is going to kick more. But those three rounds are very similar in that aspect.

Some of the most common ammo you are going to find will be 30-06 or 308 and since it kicks in the area of a 270, you may as well just get a recoil pad and go with the 308.

kmrcstintn
August 20, 2007, 05:21 PM
shadow shock...

i was jestin with my response...hence the :neener::neener::neener:

no offense taken...

I do agree there is a mighty difference with a good recoil pad...eg: the .30-06 pump rifle I spoke of is an mid '70's Remington 760 Gamemaster; this is when they routinely put a hard plastic buttplate on the stock; without a recoil pad, I wasn't very thrilled to shoot more than 10-15 rounds with full bore loads...expecially true for my father who is 40 years older and nearly 60 pounds lighter than me; I had a pre-gel Limbsaver pad installed...what a difference!!! recoil is now like a slightly stiff .30-30!

7mm-08 would make a good all around shooter as well as .270; both are 'below' the blast and punch of a 7mm remmy mag, but effective on most medium and large critters

later!

MCgunner
August 20, 2007, 06:22 PM
If recoil is such a big deal then just use a recoil pad. If you were thinking of getting the .270 win then consider that cartridge has about the same recoil of a 308 and 30-06. It usually depends on what kind of rifle you have that determines the recoil. If the rifle is light and has a short barrel it is going to kick more. But those three rounds are very similar in that aspect.

Well, yeah, but then recoil tolerance is subjective. I've been pelted my whole life with goose loads in 12 gauge and recoil is just one of them things you put up with for me. I don't happen to think my 7 mag is all that bad. I've fired up to 375 H and H and not seen a problem with it. Yeah, it pushes ya back, but just roll with it. My little M7 is light and short in .308, but I can sit down at the bench and shoot it all day long. It don't feel that bad to me, lighter than the big 7 anyway, LOL. When I'm bench shooting magnums, I wear a Past recoil shield, but I don't need it in the field, don't even notice the recoil when I'm shootin' at game.

But, you're certainly right, if a person doesn't like a lot of recoil, you can make the gun heavier. There are ways of doing that to an otherwise light gun, like adding lead to the stock. But, a heavy barrel gun will run the weight up there and a big, heavy scope. There are lots of "sniper" or varmint/target heavy barreled rifles to choose from. Of course, if you have to tote that thing over mountain passes, it can be a pain. It's a trade off, I guess. I accept the recoil of the .308 in the M7 (not that bad) for the light weight and handiness of the rifle. It's a sweet shootin' little rig. In .260, it'd recoil less and probably shoot further considering the BCs of .264" bullets. I think a .260 is all you need in Texas, too. I got the .308 before the .260 came along, but I sorta wanted .308 anyway. It does everything I need it to do.

One thing about .308, if you don't handload, you have a heckuva selection in loads to choose from, probably more than any other caliber outside of .30-06. That might be handy just to find a load that will shoot under 1 moa (what you need for long shots you're talkin' about). With a limited selection of loads, might be hard to find a good, accurate load. I handload so that's not really a consideration. I have very accurate pet loads for my rifles and they cost a lot less per round than Federal Premium.

HankB
August 20, 2007, 07:35 PM
However 8 years ago, my dad broke his neck, and excessive recoil hurts him a lot. He's looking for something preferably in the .260 to .280 range. We need it to be flat shooting for long range accuracy, and have the power to knock the piss out of a deer or hog between 50yd, and 500+yd.ANY cartridge which is going to be hard-hitting at 500 yards is going to have some serious recoil; if the .308 and .30/06 are out because of your father's injuries, that limits you a bit.

Now, perhaps in the right rifle, a .308 or .30/06 might be manageable. Browning makes a semi-auto that reduces the peak recoil impulse substantially - couple it with a thick recoil pad and a muzzle brake, and your dad may be able to handle it. (Though the muzzle brake WILL increase the volume of the shot.)

In smaller cartridges, if you want to make a substantial improvement over your .243, you'll have to move up to 7mm. I'd be thinking 7x57 Mauser - it has a reputation for being mild recoiling with standard loads, which are all you need for deer. Out to a couple of hundred yards, it will do the job . . . but 500 might be stretching it a bit. (No, I'm not going to stand out there and let someone shoot at me!)

Shadow Shock
August 20, 2007, 09:19 PM
When my dad got home from work I mentioned the comments about the 7mm's, .30-06 and .308 etc. My dad said "Jesus Christ! Why do these people want to use f****** cannons on these little bitty deer!" I wouldn't consider them cannons, although they are a bit big to be using on whitetails here in TX. He asked me to remind y'all that in Central Texas where we live, deer are a lot smaller than in most other places. The heaviest deer I have ever seen here was only 180 lbs. And that was extremely rare. I've shot 2 year old does under 80lbs.

Art Eatman
August 20, 2007, 09:45 PM
And most of the time in central Texas your shots are not gonna be anywhere near the 500 yards that you called for.

I suggest that reality is mostly inside of 200 yards, and a .243 would be plenty good to 300.

If you go out Manchaca Road to Slaughter Lane, you'll find what once was my stomping grounds. Deer, turkey, spear and dart points. I grant you won't find much of that now, but up until 30-some years back it was fun country. I took many a deer in that area.

I've walked many a mile around the hills north of Uvalde, in the Indian Creek country.

I killed as many deer with my .243 as with my '06.

Art

Shadow Shock
August 20, 2007, 10:18 PM
True most of the shots are much closer than 500yd, but one of my dad's good freinds has a property here, and a bigger one in East Texas. Both of these places have feilds were you can get a 500yd shot easy. It is mainly because of this that we want a bigger rifle.

Orr89rocz
August 20, 2007, 11:11 PM
can you just adjust your setup differently so you dont have to shoot that far? i mean i love the idea of a challenging far shot, but i'd rather get in closer if possible

Kimber1911_06238
August 20, 2007, 11:34 PM
.257 roberts. light recoil, flat shooting

my mistake, .257 roberts actually has less energy. looks like a .260 is the next best thing....in reality, i'd just say use a .243 and limit shots to 300 or so yards. problem solved :)

HankB
August 20, 2007, 11:47 PM
Your first post stated " . . . we want something that has a lot more knock down power at longer ranges . . . "

People have made reasonable suggestions based on that, and your father's reaction is "Jesus Christ! Why do these people want to use f****** cannons on these little bitty deer!"

I live in TX too, and these Hill Country deer aren't that big . . . but if you want "a lot" more knock down power at longer ranges, you're going to have to go up to a 7mm or .30 of some sort. An incremental step up to an ordinary .257, .25/06, or 6.5mm - fine choices though they may be - will not give you "a lot" more knock down power over that .243.

From his reaction, it sounds like your father has already made up his mind, has sent his son out to seek advice, and is PO'd that he's not getting enough validation . . . maybe he still has some growing up to do. :(

Art Eatman
August 21, 2007, 12:49 AM
My '06 has four feet of drop at my 500-yard range. I have held as much as two feet of windage in what seemed like no more than a "good breeze". I reckon the Devil would be selling ice cubes before I'd use less performance than an '06 if I were planning on beanfielding...

You want little or no recoil? You can flat-out forget about 500 yards and clean, ethical kills.

Art

mod700
August 21, 2007, 01:46 AM
i would probably go with the 7mm 08 or 270. you could reach out a little farther with the 270 but recoil is worse.

Shadow Shock
August 21, 2007, 01:51 AM
Kimber, I'm just posting what he tells me to, as I have stated, I'd rather a.308, or maybe a .30-06. However compared to a .223, a .270 has a good bit more power to it. And yes it does seem kinda like he's allready decided, although no he doesn't have anymore "growing up to do".

marksman13
August 21, 2007, 02:21 AM
Your dad needs to be realistic. You got to give a little to get a little. If he wants better performance and more knowckdown power, he is going too have to trade some recoil for it. A 308 in the right rifle with the right set up is not a hard recoiling rifle. Buy a heavy rifle, add a muzzle brake and a recoil pad and almost anyone can shoot it.

Personally I would recomend either the 7mm-08 or the .260 Remington. He won't get the kind of performance he is dreaming about, but he will be taking a step up from the 243. Good luck. Sounds like your dad is as ignorant as mine when it comes to guns and ballistics.:D

Davo
August 21, 2007, 03:38 AM
Like Scrooge McDuck used to say...Shoot smarter not harder.
7mm-08, 6.5-08, .308(it is a fairly light recoiling round), .270, or .280. The 6.5 sweede is always good too.
BTW im jealous of the fact that you both get 5 deer a year. I hope to one day hunt deer but im in Kali.

marksman13
August 21, 2007, 03:51 AM
no deer hunting in kali? I didn't know that...interesting stuff. What is the reason?

Davo
August 21, 2007, 04:52 AM
Not many hunt here, and the few places that are public are heavily hunted...its not impossible but pretty tough to get a deer each year.

kmrcstintn
August 21, 2007, 10:49 AM
now that 500 yards is in the mix...that changes things alot...now there is bullet drop, windage, and retained energy considerations to throw into the mix...

minimum: 7mm Rem Mag or 7mm Win Short Mag
preferred: .300 Win Short Mag or .300 Win Mag

you're gonna need the extra ooommmph to get the retained energy at long distances...especially if you have to factor in sloping shots uphill or downhill

again...good luck

learningman
August 21, 2007, 12:41 PM
If you have all the stuff for reloading then maybe a Remington Sendero in a 246 win mag. The gun is heavy enough to absorb alot of recoil and the 264 is a mild kicking magnum. If it's beanfield shooting your doing, then use a bean field rifle.

Orr89rocz
August 21, 2007, 03:47 PM
thats my advice, use a proper gun for the long range shots, and build the rifle around the cartridge. if you cant handle recoil, set up the gun with a thick barrel, a heavy stock/scope, and recoil reducers such as pads, porting/brakes, etc.

300 ultra mag in a factory 9-10 lb rifle wasnt bad off the bench...not bad at all! add some porting and nicer recoil pad, and it will be tame like a 6.5 swede.

06
August 21, 2007, 05:42 PM
SS, Guess what I will endorse using-duh-lol. Have been using an '06 for many decades and have never had one to get lost. I try to never take a shot that will not positively kill an animal. Deer hurt just like we do and I will not injure one if at all posible. We raised one from a bottle and "Abel" was housebroken. She was the best dog we had. I love to hunt and enjoy venison but what ever you shoot, make it a clean shot. I often carry a shotgun with OO for low light and close up shots but have dropped deer as close as twenty feet with 'ol betsy. Now it has been retired and I replaced it with a Md 77 Ruger stainless with composite stock. I like an '06 for many reasons but mainly for its long distance ability. I shoot 150 grain Silvertips but carry a few heavy rounds for posible brushy shots. Get yourself an '06 w/pad and vents and you should be happy. Mine have neither but the recoil is a bit heavy. wc

Brian Williams
August 21, 2007, 06:23 PM
1. 7mm-08
2. 6.5x55 swede
3. 6.5 grendel
4. 260 rem

read about them and then decide.

Jimmy Newman
August 21, 2007, 08:22 PM
I'm afraid I'm going to have to side with everyone else on this one. If .308 and .30-06 and .270 and 7mm mag are all "******* cannons," well, then it just takes a "******* cannon" to get any power left over at 500 yards.

With present firearms technology, it'd take a miracle to get a rifle with good retained power and reasonably flat ballistics out to 500-600 yards with recoil in the same neighborhood as .223 or .243. You can't have everything.

It's kind of like asking for a car that can do 0-60 in three or four seconds, can tow a 25' boat, can do serious offroading, and gets 50mpg to boot :).

Orr89rocz
August 21, 2007, 10:01 PM
With present firearms technology, it'd take a miracle to get a rifle with good retained power and reasonably flat ballistics out to 500-600 yards with recoil in the same neighborhood as .223 or .243. You can't have everything.
Well that would be a heavy rifle with a muzzle break..that could work, but i do get what your saying... in a lightweight sporter, it isnt gonna happen.


It's kind of like asking for a car that can do 0-60 in three or four seconds, can tow a 25' boat, can do serious offroading, and gets 50mpg to boot

well i know a few diesel trucks that can do about 3 out of those 4 lol

eliphalet
August 21, 2007, 10:57 PM
What kind of hunting do you do?
If your hunting from a stand or not much walking a heavy gun will absorb a buncha recoil.
I know a guy who has a 300 RUM he has it weighing 15 pounds for recoil, but he doesn't walk the woods with it.
YOu can learn some of how weight will effect recoil here.

http://www.biggameinfo.com/RecoilCalc.aspx
Just a thought.

jmorris
August 22, 2007, 10:58 AM
Using a 308 load as an example there is 19.7” more bullet drop at 550yds than 500yds. That means you are going to need an accurate range finder to make a good shot. Further the difference in a 5mph wind and a 10 mph wind is 12.5”, so an accurate way of measuring wind speed is also needed, not to mention a ballistics card so you can utilize the data you have measured. Once you have the laser range finder, anemometer and ballistics card and practice (the most important part) as much as possible you will figure out that it’s more than likely going to be easier to get a better (closer) shot. If not, at least you’ll have the tools you need to get the job done right. An animal is not an old barrel set out to plink at. FWIW if your field is 500yds across put a feeder in the middle and the longest shot will only be 250yds, and a feeder is much less expensive than the above equipment.

Orr89rocz
August 22, 2007, 04:12 PM
some states you are not allowed to feed the game and hunt over that feeder. If 500 yard shots would be the norm, i'd have windage flags setup all over the place and practice all the time

Il Duca
August 23, 2007, 08:08 PM
I built myself a Savage 10 in .358 Winchester and fell in love with it. Now I'm looking for a BLR in the same.

GunTech
August 23, 2007, 09:44 PM
260 remington or 7mm-08. Both have very good long range performance, although I give the edge to the 6.5 owing to the good selection of high BC bullets. Th 260 is basically the Swede in a smaller case with higher pressure. It fits into a short action and ammo is relatively easy to find.

The 6.5 Grendel is only superior to the 308 if you do what Alexander Arms does and compare the 6.8 grendel shooting a Lapua Scenar against M80 ball. If you load a 308 with 155 Lapua Scenars for an apples to apples comparison, the 6.5 Grendel is not quite so impressive. They also test the 6.5 Grendel out of a 24 inch barrel. Try to find a 6.5 Grendel with said barrel. Most ar ARs with 20" or less of tube.

The 6.5 Grendel firing the 123 Laupa scenar has a muzzle velocity of 2650 fps and a BC of 0.547

A 308 using the 155 scenar has a muzzle velocity (at M80 pressures) of about 2800 fps and a BC of 0.508

At the muzzel, the 308 has 2698 ft-lbs vs 1918 ft-lbs for the 6.5 Grendel
at 500 yards, it's 1449 vs 1064 for the Grendel
at 1000 yards, it's 720 vs 554

The Grendel only beats the 308 if you give the 308 a poor bullet and the Grendel a bullet with a very high BC. Not a fair comparison at all.

hamourkiller
August 25, 2007, 08:19 AM
.257 Weatherby will float your boat! 100gr bullet @ 3400+ FPS will kill em like a laser gun! If you need more weight head on up to 120gr @ 3200FPS but recoil returns. Try the .257 you will not regret it. 25-06 will work too but I like the Weatherby round.

Have fun

If you enjoyed reading about "Looking for a new caliber" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!