6.8 SPC as a hunting cartridge?


PDA






Paladin_Hammer
December 1, 2008, 07:12 PM
The 7.62x39mm just doesn't have the range we've been looking for. What ranges is the 6.8 SPC good for and is it effective enough at that range to down a Whitetail Deer? If nothing else, whats a low-recoil, lightweight rifle that can hit something 100-200 yards away and kill it?

Please note, if you try to convince me on a .223, I will tell you stories about shooting a year and a half old buck several times, a 2 year old doe so many times it ruined the meat, and never finding two other deer who are probably still walking around with two-or-so .223's in them (they went down, then got up, and we never found them).

No .308 Winchester or .30-06 either, it hurts his shoulder (this is for my old man).

If you enjoyed reading about "6.8 SPC as a hunting cartridge?" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!
gvnwst
December 1, 2008, 07:19 PM
For the 6.8 see this thread:
http://thehighroad.org/showthread.php?t=380279&highlight=6.8spc+good+deer

And what range are you wanting to shoot at? The 'x39 should do (http://thehighroad.org/showthread.php?t=405210)....

jerkface11
December 1, 2008, 08:39 PM
Please note, if you try to convince me on a .223, I will tell you stories about shooting a year and a half old buck several times, a 2 year old doe so many times it ruined the meat, and never finding two other deer who are probably still walking around with two-or-so .223's in them

Can we suggest more range time instead of a new gun then?

browningguy
December 1, 2008, 08:44 PM
The 6.8 should be effective on deer out to 200 yards I would think, longer than that I would look at the 6.5 Grendel. The .223 can be effective, we had two does headshot at under 100 yards this weekend with one, and with something like the 53 gr. Barnes TSX or 60 gr. Partition it's ok on body shots, although personally my minimum caliber for deer is a .243.

rbernie
December 1, 2008, 08:45 PM
The 7.62x39mm just doesn't have the range we've been looking for. What ranges is the 6.8 SPC good for and is it effective enough at that range to down a Whitetail Deer? The effective range of either (effective == 800ft/lb of energy or greater) is within 50yrds of each other or less, depending on load and bullet BC. If you're hunting within 200 yards, then either will do the job admirably.

I've used 7.62x39 on 5yr shots on a 500lb hog and for 200 yard shots on deer. I've used the 6.8SPC to equal success for both hog and deer.

frogomatic
December 1, 2008, 08:48 PM
i have to agree with jerkface...spend more time practicing those shooting skills. also, a little studying up on the anatomy of a deer would do a great deal. No offence intended, just being honest.

just out of curiosity, what kind of bullets were you using for those deer you had to shoot so many times?

woof
December 1, 2008, 10:26 PM
More practice is good advice for anyone, but the .223 is not adequate for deer at any range. The original poster might look at the ballistics for the managed recoil ammo in 7mm-08 with 140 gr bullet (on Remington website). Recoil is .30-30 level, maybe a tad more than x39, but much flatter shooting and enough punch out to 200 yds. Plus whenever you want you can use full power loads.

Jason_G
December 1, 2008, 10:36 PM
Ever thought about a 6mm Remington? More range than 6.8, flatter shooting, and hardly any recoil. I can tell you it works on whitetails. All I've killed with it have been DRT. Can be a pretty good round for a lot of different things if you reload, too. A .243 would be the next step down, but it's easier to find rifles chambered in .243.

Jason

rbernie
December 1, 2008, 10:57 PM
Frankly, my definition of a lightweight, low-recoil, highly effective field rifle suitable for deer-sized game inside of 250 yards is a H&R single-shot in 30/30 topped by a 1.75x-6x VXIII or similar.

But that's just me.

trstafford
December 1, 2008, 11:47 PM
Topped with a Leupold 2-7 compact scope.

http://cz-usa.com/product_detail.php?id=15

doctorxring
December 2, 2008, 12:36 AM
.

Basically the 6.8 SPC is a 270 Winchester minus 200 yards.

i.e. The killing power of the 6.8 SPC at 200 yards is equal to a bullet
strike by a 270 Winchester at 400 yards, using the same bullet.

To get at information on results being achieved
with the 6.8 SPC on hunting you need to go here --

http://68forums.com/viewforum.php?f=11

hogs, deer, elk...

dxr

.

DeathByCactus
December 2, 2008, 12:39 AM
Elks have been killed up to 287 yards if I remember right (might be more, it was on 68forums.com), with a 6.8mm. I got one for my new all purpose rifle, hunting included. 7mm magnum is just too easy. I'd also like to add that hunting deer with a .223 is illegal and wrong in all manners of thought. It isn't enough fire power to adequately stop and kill the animal and should never, ever be thought of as a hunting rifle for anything except varmints and maybe hogs. If it isn't illegal in all states, it should be.

Paladin_Hammer
December 2, 2008, 12:57 AM
To everyone knocking on my old mans marksmanship skills: He knows where to shoot a deer. Right behind the front shoulder, and a little low for the heart. Not low of the deer mind you, low of the shoulder.

He's been using these 62 grain rounds from Remington. Black box from what I remember. Using a bolt-action from Savage. Hasn't worked out to well so far.

From what you've all told me, the 6.8 has more energy to it. Anyone here ever actually use the thing and got one? One shot one kill that is. Pics of a kill would help. Along with any information on what kind rifle is available in the caliber. Please note, unless Ruger makes a Mini-14 that doesn't shoot like all crap, please don't say anything about AR-style or "evil" rifles. He won't shoot them because "I never shot a deer on a battlefield" mumble "whoever needs an assault rifle to kill a deer has the skill of a blind man". Now, I'm sure if a Ruger could shoot to a good inch or two inch group at 100-200 yards, he'd have no problem if it was wood, no pg or "evil" features (see above for reason).

DeathByCactus
December 2, 2008, 01:00 AM
http://www.68forums.com/viewtopic.php?f=11&t=4064&st=0&sk=t&sd=a&hilit=elk

Dead elk = dead deer.

http://www.68forums.com/viewtopic.php?f=11&t=4717&hilit=Deer

Deer...

http://www.68forums.com/viewtopic.php?f=11&t=4694&hilit=Deer

More deer...

http://www.68forums.com/viewtopic.php?f=11&t=4582&hilit=Deer

Even more deer...

http://www.68forums.com/viewtopic.php?f=11&t=4611&hilit=Deer

Yet another deer + a coyote...

http://www.68forums.com/viewtopic.php?f=11&t=4558&hilit=Deer

Doe!

http://www.68forums.com/viewtopic.php?f=11&t=4435&hilit=Deer

This isn't a 6.8 but its an awesome shot.

http://www.68forums.com/viewtopic.php?f=11&t=4492&hilit=Deer

Another deer...

http://www.68forums.com/viewtopic.php?f=11&t=4500&hilit=Deer

More deer...

http://www.68forums.com/viewtopic.php?f=11&t=4457&hilit=Deer

DEER!!!

... yeah I just searched Deer on the 68 forum then copied and pasted and this was only page 1 of the search...

R.W.Dale
December 2, 2008, 07:35 AM
The 7.62x39mm just doesn't have the range we've been looking for. What ranges is the 6.8 SPC good for and is it effective enough at that range to down a Whitetail Deer? If nothing else, whats a low-recoil, lightweight rifle that can hit something 100-200 yards away and kill it?

7.62x39 will do everything on game that 6.8 will only for less money and at a much lower smug factor. Doubly so inside the range you stipulate. Plus you can afford to get about 4x the practice for the same dollar amount.....which apparently he needs

I used my 7.62x39mm ar15 this year to bag a large doe at 278yds.

Bigfoot
December 2, 2008, 10:45 AM
Elks have been killed up to 287 yards if I remember right (might be more, it was on 68forums.com), with a 6.8mm.

Sounds like Constructors 5x5 Rocky Mt bull elk. It was 372 yards with the 110 Accubond launched at 2880 fps from a 20" 1:13 twist barrel. One shot behind the shoulder did it in. The Accubond didn't exit, the 110 TSX or TTSX probably would have.

R.W.Dale
December 2, 2008, 02:37 PM
Sounds like Constructors 5x5 Rocky Mt bull elk. It was 372 yards with the 110 Accubond launched at 2880 fps from a 20" 1:13 twist barrel. One shot behind the shoulder did it in. The Accubond didn't exit, the 110 TSX or TTSX probably would have.

As if killing a an 800 lb animal with a 110 grn bullet retaining right at 1000ftlbs of of energy is anything other than an irresponsible STUNT. I wouldn't be touting this as some great feat.

The Accubond didn't exit, the 110 TSX or TTSX probably would have.

I very very very seriously doubt either of these projectiles would have either unless they completely failed to expand which is entirely possible at those kind of impact velocities

Deer Hunter
December 2, 2008, 02:52 PM
Please note, if you try to convince me on a .223, I will tell you stories about shooting a year and a half old buck several times, a 2 year old doe so many times it ruined the meat, and never finding two other deer who are probably still walking around with two-or-so .223's in them

Get your bum to the range and practice.

I've seen deer shot numerous times with .308s. I've only ever needed one shot when hunting. And that includes the .223.

And I was using the cheapest SPs I could find.

Range time is what you need, not a "better" caliber.

Bigfoot
December 2, 2008, 03:27 PM
I very very very seriously doubt either of these projectiles would have either unless they completely failed to expand which is entirely possible at those kind of impact velocities

Impact velocity would be right at 2000 fps.

R.W.Dale
December 2, 2008, 03:55 PM
Impact velocity would be right at 2000 fps.


A little less for the barns because of the lower BC, prolly 1900 or so. Which is pretty low for a bullet of this type. I cannot speak for the barnes. But the much much more fragile SST and ballistic tips require 1600 to 1700fps MINIMUM impact velocities. The only Barnes I would use below 2000fps would be the 30-30 bullet or their handgun projectiles.

mgregg85
December 2, 2008, 04:01 PM
More practice is good advice for anyone, but the .223 is not adequate for deer at any range.

Plenty of deer are taken every year with the .223, it is easily adequate for deer within 100 yards if you can hit your target.

DeathByCactus
December 2, 2008, 06:14 PM
I've seen deer shot numerous times with .308s. I've only ever needed one shot when hunting. And that includes the .223.

It's illegal to hunt deer with a .223 in Texas. If a game warden catches you, you are in some trouble.

Cohibra45
December 2, 2008, 06:18 PM
"As if killing a an 800 lb animal with a 110 grn bullet retaining right at 1000ftlbs of of energy is anything other than an irresponsible STUNT. I wouldn't be touting this as some great feat."

Sounds like a great shot from a very good shooter and also a bit of jealousy to me!!!

Deer Hunter
December 2, 2008, 06:24 PM
It's illegal to hunt deer with a .223 in Texas. If a game warden catches you, you are in some trouble.

Cite that and I'll be happy to change my position.

Lonestar.45
December 2, 2008, 07:30 PM
It's illegal to hunt deer with a .223 in Texas. If a game warden catches you, you are in some trouble.
Today 02:01 PM


You couldn't be more wrong.

Fact is, it is completely legal, as long as it is not a rimfire. And the .223 folks are talking about here is not a rimfire.

Now, I would never hunt with a .223 for deer myself, I find .243 the smallest I'd feel comfortable with. But it's not illegal.

elmerfudd
December 2, 2008, 07:52 PM
People can and do take deer with rimfires, (I knew an orchard owner once who would give you free venison for the asking), but that doesn't mean it's a good idea. Personally, I'd say the same thing about the .223. Since there are more effective rounds out there and we're not talking about a survival situation, why not go with something more optimal like a .243, 30-30, .308 or any of dozens of cartridges that have significantly more power? The 5.56/.223 were cartridges designed to enable soldiers to pack a lot of ammo and for varmint hunters to kill small critters. They're pretty well suited to those tasks, but for 200# deer there much better cartridges out there.

Deer Hunter
December 2, 2008, 08:09 PM
Elmer,

You assume I see many 200 pound deer down here in East Texas. ;)

woof
December 2, 2008, 08:15 PM
The argument that a shooter who can reliably place a shot makes a .223 acceptable for deer fails. I will even grant that there are such shooters. Those shooters are few and far between and it is NOT just the ability to make the shot it is what shot is taken. I know yahoos who can shoot MOA groups all day but in the woods will take a shot at a deer that no-one should take.

I know, I know - that is about the shooter's values not the round used. But surely everyone would agree that the point of impact on most deer killed was less than optimum. Not yours of course, everyone here makes perfect shots. The argument that an optimal hit with a .223 is fine and there are shooters who can do that doesn't address the vast majority who can't or won't. No, I am not saying that more gun makes up for poor shooting. But if most deer are shot at less than optimal points, and THEY ARE, we should all want them shot with more than a .223.

I wonder how many people have come here who haven't fired 100 rounds in their life and have never been in the woods, leave persuaded that the .223 has killed lots of deer and that's what they should use. If you hunt deer with a .223 and you are satisfied with your results, fine. But don't suggest it to anyone you don't know to be equally expert.

Imagine your teenage son says, "there are plenty of drivers who could take that turn at 70." In a serious situation, skill is a dangerous thing to overestimate.

Float Pilot
December 2, 2008, 08:29 PM
Once I find a good cold weather load for the 6.8x43mm (270 Kurtz)I will try it out on some Caribou. Usually I can get within 100 to 150 yards during the winter before they figure out that I am there. You can always tell when the one guy in the herd with ESP figures out you are there.
After the first shot they (the herd) pretty much make the jump to light speed.

bearwolf
December 25, 2008, 12:02 PM
I have loaded up some 130gr hotcors for my 6.8spc. Haven't had a chance to get the loads worked up yet but can't wait to pop a hog or deer with it. As far as 223's go, be able to hit your target in the vitals and use a good stout loaded 65gr sierra gameking and it will stop any deer or hog that I will ever see or hunt in its tracks. If your taking 400yrd shots at running deer then you need to trade up to something like a 378 weatherby to increase your odds if not picking your shots wisely. Or if your bound and determined to use a AR style rifle, grab a 50 beowulf upper stoked with hot loaded rounds. Might give the 458 socom loaded up with some stout corbons. If that doesnt get the job done I dont know what will.

IndianaBoy
December 25, 2008, 12:29 PM
If you aren't using an AR platform, why hamper yourself with the 6.8?


The 243 Win or 260 Remington are much better choices in a bolt action.

MrCleanOK
December 25, 2008, 12:56 PM
I was wondering the same thing. Why are we talking about calibers traditionally associated with military style gas guns if your pops is a bolt gun guy?

.243 Win. is a nice, easy-on-the-shoulder round, pretty flat shooting, commonly available, and has killed a ton of deer.

ArmedBear
December 25, 2008, 01:19 PM
The 6.8 SPC has one purpose: to fit a more powerful round than 5.56 in a gun designed for 5.56.

If you're not looking for a deer-hunting AR or Mini-14, I have no idea why you'd even consider 6.8 SPC. As soon as you graduate to standard short-action calibers (.308-based), you have a whole collection to choose from, every one of which is a better hunting round. If you want something "different" that's got great ballistics and low recoil, get a .260. If you want something you can feed with Wal-Mart ammo, get a .243.

moosehunt
December 25, 2008, 01:47 PM
Regarding the guys original post, it seems that the concern is recoil. He asks for a cartridge with more energy than a 7.62x39 with less or no more recoil. We are not addressing the issue, and we must remember basic physics in response. The bullet energy is identical to the recoil energy minus the weight of the gun. Keeping a constant weight gun, any increase in bullet energy will give a proportionate increase in recoil, caliber being immaterial. It doesn't matter how that bullet energy is increased, be it speed or bullet weight. Bullet diameter is not a factor. Energy is mass (bullet weight) times speed. Within practical terms, energy of any given bullet is restricted by speed--we can't increase speed indefinately. That is why we have bigger calibers to get more energy. Higher energy gives a larger degree of error allowance in regards to killing animals. If one chooses to hunt deer with a .458 Lott, he has a larger degree of error allowance than if he uses a .338 Win Mag, which allows for a bit more error than a .30-06, which allows more error than a .243 and so forth down to a .22 short (which can and has killed deer). Now someone will jump up and down and say that bigger guns DON'T replace skill. Very correct, but the fact is that bigger DOES provide more room for error. Shoot a deer with a .600 Nitro Express and it is going down as long as you hit the body somewhere (and maybeso you are too!). The whole point is that the energy cannot be increased without increasing recoil and bullet diameter is not a factor. Of course the recoil can be counteracted by having a heavier gun. The original poster didn't want a .30-06 because of recoil, and that's fine, but simply for illustration, if that .30-06 were to be a 25# gun, the recoil would be minuscule--not practical, but factual. So, if he wants more energy than a 7.62x39 with no more recoil, he can get it in any number of ways, but the rifle weight must go up enough to compensate for the increase in energy to maintain equal recoil. It is simple physics and can't be altered.

Bigfoot
December 25, 2008, 03:24 PM
The OP is looking for a very low recoil hunting gun for his dad. Since the question about the 6.8 has been answered perhaps he wouldn't mind me suggesting another cartridge.

Palidin Hunter, if you haven't bought anything yet consider a Browning BAR in .243. http://www.browning.com/products/catalog/firearms/detail.asp?value=002B&cat_id=031&type_id=219 The BARs gas action reduces the felt recoil by about 20%. Combine that with the light recoil of the .243 and I'll bet even a little kid could shoot it. I own one in 30-06 and it shoots soft, is accurate, and hits with full authority.

Good Luck and Merry Christmas
Bigfoot

IdahoLT1
December 25, 2008, 07:13 PM
moosehunt and bigfoot have it right. Your pops cant go to a more powerful caliber and have the same recoil as the less powerful caliber, unless he goes semi auto. Remington makes an R25, which is their hunting version of the AR 15 chambered in .308 and .243. You might also want to check out a Winchester model 100, chambered in .308. Its going to look like a bolt gun but its semi auto with a 4 round capacity. Heres some options for you...http://gunbroker.com/Auction/SearchResults.asp?SearchResults.asp?SearchType=0&Keywords=remington+%2E308&Cat=3024

Maybe look into a 357 lever action, if you dont plan on reaching out too far.

longdayjake
December 25, 2008, 07:38 PM
the 6.8 is basically a 7.62x39 with a smaller bullet. The range is almost equal. The 6.5 is probably a better choice simply because you can put a bigger bullet down range and it will maintain velocity a lot better for a lot longer. It will shoot flatter as well. However, 6.8 is a lot easier to come by. The funny part is that the 6.5 grendel was designed from the 7.62 casing but out performs pretty much anything else in the ar platform as far as range goes. This is assuming that this guy wants to hunt with an ar at a distance.

If he is hunting deer with a .223 at distances farther than the 7.62x39 will shoot then that is probably the problem that he is getting into. His bullets are going to slow to do anything at that distance if he is shooting them out of a short barrel. Even more so if he is using heavy bullets.

Shawnee
December 25, 2008, 08:46 PM
The .243 would be fine for you Dad. So would a .30/30 but the .243 shoots flatter. Both rounds are common and have plenty of good factory loads available.

:cool:

woof
December 25, 2008, 10:39 PM
The 6.8 will have a bit less recoil than a .30-30, about the same as a .243 but it will be a heavier bullet than the .243. The 6.8 is a .270 light and does at 100 yards what a .270 does at 300. I think the 6.8 would be a great woods deer round and I'd love to have one in a cz carbine.

ArmedBear
December 25, 2008, 11:02 PM
The 6.8 is a .270 light and does at 100 yards what a .270 does at 300.

...which is why the 6.8 is sure hard to justify as a hunting cartridge...

If all you want is a 100 yard deer cartridge with low recoil, get a .357 lever gun. The recoil from mine is barely even noticeable, with a hard buttplate. Fun gun, great for plinking, light and handy, too.

oneounceload
December 25, 2008, 11:10 PM
try a short rifle like a Remington Model 7 in 7-08 - will handle any deer at your ranges

R.W.Dale
December 25, 2008, 11:22 PM
If all you want is a 100 yard deer cartridge with low recoil, get a .357 lever gun.

Nobody is saying that 6.8 is a hundred yd cartridge he comparison to 270 is simply to show a range where performance is comparable. A 270 win is good game killer well well beyond 300yds just as the 6.8 is out past 100

There's simply no comparison to a 357 at 300yd s a 6.8 spc will still pack more energy than a 357 carbine at 100. I wouldn't hesitate to use either a 6.8 or a properly loaded 7.62x39 on a deer inside 250yds. Try that with a 357 mag

The best thing about the 6.8 is it's ability to fit in the AR15 platform which to me after many years of skepticism I now reguard the best little hunting rifle to come along since the invention of the leveraction


What the heck, I just defended 6.8spc:eek:

ArmedBear
December 25, 2008, 11:31 PM
at 300yd s a 6.8 spc will still pack more energy than a 357 carbine at 100

Not if the .357 is loaded to its potential -- which isn't to say I'd want it for anything past 100 yards.

Then again, for a larger bullet that doesn't rely on expansion, energy is grossly overrated. All depends on what you want...

Still, why not just use a .243 if you want a 300-yard round for smaller deer?

As I wrote above, if you're not trying to shoehorn it into a gun designed for 5.56, I can't see a reason for someone, who isn't into experimenting with cartridges for the hell of it, to mess with 6.8.

R.W.Dale
December 25, 2008, 11:39 PM
with a 180grn .357 xtp loaded to an INSANE 1700fps a 357 carbine would pack 822fpe at 100yds

at a leisurely 2575 fps a 110grn 6.8 bullet packs 878 ft lbs at 300m

so no not even when loaded to well beyond "full potential" will a 100yd .357 equal even a 300yd 6.8



Still, why not just use a .243 if you want a 300-yard round for smaller deer?

As I wrote above, if you're not trying to shoehorn it into a gun designed for 5.56, I can't see a reason for someone, who isn't into experimenting with cartridges for the hell of it, to mess with 6.8.

By your reasoning every hunting rifle in the world would be either a 30-06 or a 375H&H. That's a world I don't want to be a part of:eek:

420Stainless
December 26, 2008, 11:47 AM
I just got a 6.8SPC Mini 14 with the same idea as you have for your dad. I haven't shot it yet (don't have time to mess with it during deer season and my range will be closed until March), but I think it will be a great short range cartridge for deer. Not sure there will be much difference between this and the Mini 30 from an effectiveness standpoint, I am just more intrigued by the hunting bullets offered in the 6.8SPC than the Russian. It packs about the same energy as a 30-30 but uses much lighter bullets, so I don't think I'd want to be taking very long shots with it.

Some part of the decision may depend on your dad's attitude about the hunt. Some folks would be crushed if the buck of a lifetime stepped out of the tree line 300 yards away and they had to pass on the shot. If that is your dad, you may be better off with something like a .257 Roberts, .260 Remington (some AR's are or were made for this one), or the afore mentioned .243 Winchester. Recoil will be more than the 6.8SPC in a Mini 14 equivalent weight gun, but not as bad as the .308 or 30-06.

I got the Mini in 6.8SPC to use as a combo hunting carbine and a family fun gun. I'll see how good I can do with the factory sights from 100 yards and determine whether or not I'll need a scope for hunting. Hopefully I'll be reporting on its actual effectiveness next year at this time.

IndianaBoy
December 26, 2008, 12:07 PM
The recoil dissertations seem to miss the point somewhat. It is intuitively obvious to the casual observer that a larger caliber will always equal more recoil in a gun of the same weight.

That does not mean that stepping up from a 223 to a 243 or 260 is not a valid option for a man who doesn't like the recoil of the 30-06.

Sheesh.

ryoushi
December 26, 2008, 01:29 PM
There is so much ignorance on display here on this thread. For once and for all, .243 and .260 Rem etc. do not work in an AR15. When most people refer to an AR or the AR platform they are talking about AR15s not the bigger heavier and much more expensive AR10. They are two different platforms altogether.

So one last time, .308 Winchester class cases are too long to fit in the AR15 magazine well. If you want to hunt big game with your AR15 at realistic distances the 6.8 SPC is a godsend. If you want to play with your online ballistic calculator, shoot zombies at 1000 meters or think anything under .30 caliber isn't...manly enough for you, shoot whatever you enjoy.

As to Constructor's elk, the man is not irresponsible at all. He's been after that animal for a few years now and passed up several opportunities with a muzzle loader because the elk was out of responsible range. The man knows his capabilities and his gear inside and out.

DarkCharisma
December 26, 2008, 01:41 PM
Please note, unless Ruger makes a Mini-14 that doesn't shoot like all crap, please don't say anything about AR-style or "evil" rifles. He won't shoot them because "I never shot a deer on a battlefield" mumble "whoever needs an assault rifle to kill a deer has the skill of a blind man".


It does not look like he wants an AR anyway, so this whole conversation about what can fit in AR's and what can't is a moot point.

JImbothefiveth
December 26, 2008, 02:10 PM
Why are we talking about calibers traditionally associated with military style gas guns if your pops is a bolt gun guy?
Because the cartridges discussed (7.62x39 and 6.8 SPC) are low-recoil deer cartridges, what he apparently wants.

Will Fennell
December 26, 2008, 03:03 PM
If you like bolt guns, and I with you on that one, for deer hunting.....something in .260 Rem or 6.5x55 Swede would seem to fill the bill nicely. Certainly works for me, and my wife is very happy with the low noise, low recoil Swede......here she is with her Tikka T3 in 6.5 swede and a DRT wild hog a couple of weeks ago.......

IndianaBoy
December 26, 2008, 03:16 PM
There is so much ignorance on display here on this thread. For once and for all, .243 and .260 Rem etc. do not work in an AR15. When most people refer to an AR or the AR platform they are talking about AR15s not the bigger heavier and much more expensive AR10. They are two different platforms altogether.

So one last time, .308 Winchester class cases are too long to fit in the AR15 magazine well. If you want to hunt big game with your AR15 at realistic distances the 6.8 SPC is a godsend. If you want to play with your online ballistic calculator, shoot zombies at 1000 meters or think anything under .30 caliber isn't...manly enough for you, shoot whatever you enjoy.

Kindly quote the post where someone suggested that it did. I saw one reference to the Remington R25, which is an AR-10. Everyone else is talking about bolt guns or a BAR, because they comprehend that the OP is not interested in an AR-15.

Float Pilot
December 26, 2008, 06:49 PM
In a 16 inch semi auto carbine: With the best boat-tails

110 grain Accubond 6.8 x43mm...............125 grain Ballistic tip 7.62x39mm
Muzzle vel 2,550 fps........................................2,300 fps
300 yards 1,884 fps.......................................1,670 fps
Marginal for anything over 100 pounds at 300 yards.

From a 20 to 22 inch bolt gun: using best boat-tail bullets with similar B.C.s

110 grain Nolser Accubond 6.8SPC...................125gr Ballistic tip 7.62x39mm
Muzzle vel: 2,725 fps............................................2,650 fps
300 yards: 2,009 fps.............................................1,961 fps

Don Gordon
December 26, 2008, 07:00 PM
What, nobody ever hear of the .30-30?? With Hornady's new Leverevolution ammo, the .30-30 is a 200+ yard rifle, is low recoil, and is handy. You don't have to question whether it's capable do you???

If he's waiting till next season, Savage is introducing the .250 Savage in a couple of their Bolt guns for 2009 which would also be ideal.

Otherwise pick up a .243 and shoot premium bullets in it.

Shawnee
December 26, 2008, 07:12 PM
"What, nobody ever hear of the .30-30?? "

Amen Don !

I suggested it thinking maybe the OP would like an excellent deer caliber that he could buy ammo for at Walmart and for which factory rifles are easy to find.
I have no idea why it is so fashionable to recommend off-the-beaten-path calibers that do nothing better than the common calibers.:confused:

:cool:

ArmedBear
December 26, 2008, 08:44 PM
an INSANE 1700fps

Insane?

125 grains at 1700 may be a max load for a revolver, but the same load in a Marlin carbine is good for close to 2300 fps at the muzzle.

ArmedBear
December 26, 2008, 08:48 PM
If you want to hunt big game with your AR15 at realistic distances the 6.8 SPC is a godsend.

That's true.

But if you don't, it's a superfluous exotic. The OP apparently has no intention of using an AR-15 to hunt big game.

R.W.Dale
December 26, 2008, 08:50 PM
Insane?

125 grains at 1700 may be a max load for a revolver, but the same load in a Marlin carbine is good for close to 2300 fps at the muzzle.


I omitted to add that this calculation was based on a 180grn XTP

sorry

Dr. Tad Hussein Winslow
December 27, 2008, 12:21 AM
It's a fine, fine choice for deer hunting. Almost perfect in some ways for whitetails - a goldilocks caliber of sorts. As krochus mentions, a tad expensive, but overall an excellent choice. Much has been written on bullet performance for this round - a veritable plethora of info - so choosing a very effective loading/bullet combo for deer sized game would be a breeze.

IndianaBoy
December 27, 2008, 04:16 AM
6.8 SPC.

Ammo: hard to find.

Ammo: expensive.

Ballistics: decent, but nothing special.

Advantage over 243 or 260 or 7mm08 or 250 Savage in a bolt action. Nonexistant.

The 6.8 SPC is a solution in search of a problem for anyone who is NOT seeking to hunt deer with an AR.

The 30-30 is fine but I have seen a lot more bolt guns with good butt pads than I have lever actions.

The 6.8 SPC is worth a look only if you are hung up on hunting with your AR. Even then the Grendel outclasses it and if you are going to shoot either you better handload.

woof
December 27, 2008, 07:03 AM
+1 Premium Sauces

420Stainless
December 27, 2008, 12:25 PM
The 6.8 SPC is worth a look only if you are hung up on hunting with your AR. Even then the Grendel outclasses it and if you are going to shoot either you better handload.

The 6.8SPC was designed as a battle cartridge for situations in which it was felt that the NATO cartridge does not have enough ooomph. That it could also work as a deer hunting caliber in a semi-auto carbine might be seen as an advantage to some folks (myself included - just got a Mini 14 in 6.8). The idea of having a semi-auto carbine that can do duty as a defensive weapon, hunting tool, and all around family fun to shoot gun appeals to me even if you think it senseless. Yes, a 30-30 lever gun or the Ruger .44 Mag. carbine can do all of those things too, but you can't slap a 20 round magazine into them like you can an AR (and maybe the Mini 14 someday).

I use my 10/22 for hunting small game as well. I'm sure some will say a bolt gun would serve the purpose better, but my 10/22 is extremely accurate and makes a much better range gun for the non hunters in my family to enjoy. My thinking is that the 6.8SPC will do as well, albeit much more expensive as many have pointed out.

nathan
December 27, 2008, 12:38 PM
I d say get the .243, very light and cheap ammo to boot. Leave the newer 6 .8 for military application.

rbernie
December 27, 2008, 12:46 PM
Advantage over 243 or 260 or 7mm08 or 250 Savage in a bolt action. Nonexistant.
I disagree that the benefit is nonexistant. The imtermediate chambering will use less powder, and even when recoil is similar it has far less flash/BOOM. That can sometimes be important.

Having said that, I largely concur with the notion that a downloaded 7mm08 is probably a better solution for most folk when considering a new bolt-action.

IndianaBoy
December 28, 2008, 09:17 PM
I don't think the 6.8 cartridge is senseless. Far from it. It makes perfect sense in an AR or a Mini.

Ammo cost and scarcity alone is a good reason to avoid it in a bolt action.

420Stainless
December 28, 2008, 10:09 PM
Sorry IndianaBoy - senseless was a poor choice of words on my part and I apologize. I understand your point - I just think the original question as to whether or not the 6.8SPC is a decent choice as a deer hunting cartridge was overridden by folks pointing out strengths of other calibers vs. it for certain specific conditions. I was trying to make the point that there may be some advantages to the 6.8SPC over the other calibers from a different perspective. While I like to use the best tool for a specific job, I also apreciate that sometimes one that can do many things well can also be enjoyable. In my case, I'd been eyeing a compact .260 Remington bolt gun for some time when I became aware of the Mini in 6.8SPC. They weigh about the same and have ballistic characteristics that are not all that far apart. I realized that my wife and kids, who don't hunt, would probably enjoy the semiauto more than the bolt. As a side bonus, if they get proficient with it, it could become a family home defense weapon as well. I'm not counting on that last part, but it is in the realm of possibility.

BullpupBen
December 29, 2008, 02:04 AM
If 6.8 is an option then how about 6.5 Grendel?
It is inherently a far more accurate cartridge and better for hunting, since it can take heavier bullets than the 6.8 and has a much flatter trajectory. They have about the same recoil, but I think 6.5 will be far more versatile. If you buy factory ammo then your old man could use Wolf ammo for practice which is cheaper than any 6.8 ammo, and Alexander Arms rounds for hunting, which have been known to get down below .5 MOA in good rifles. If he relolads then its a very easy cartridge to work with since you can use the supply of readily available 6.5 caliber hunting bullets, less so with the 6.8 since it only goes up to 115 grains.
CZ will hopefully come out with a 527 in 6.5 Grendel in 2009, if he doesn't want to use an AR.

Before anyone asks it, no I don't work for Alexander Arms..

If you enjoyed reading about "6.8 SPC as a hunting cartridge?" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!