Oldschool shooter
Member
Have you given any thought to the 257 Roberts? Better in nearly every way to the 243 for deer, definitely not punishing on recoil. I know it's a kind of oldschool cartridge, but still a dependable round.
First centerfire rifle I ever shot was a .30-06 running Remington corelokt 180s (cause it was a 700, duh )."suck it up and learn to deal with it"
I think your way over thinking this lead thing. I shoot thousands of rounds a year including cast lead bullets I load myself and physical showed no lead. Your probably drinking tap water that at some point went through a lead pipe.
6.5 Grendel and 7.62x39 would be good rounds for a kid. 30-30 and 243 will have significantly more recoil. Forget about 454, that’s going to kick like a mule. For a kid that age hunting, shots should be 150 yards or less. I would start with a 223 due to ammo cost and get another rifle for deer when you get to that point.
First centerfire rifle I ever shot was a .30-06 running Remington corelokt 180s (cause it was a 700, duh ).
I've still got a pretty good flinch unless I'm shooting at game, or consciously walking through my sight, breathe, break routine.
I'm nearly positive that if I hadn't gotten wacked by that 06, over, and over, and over, again as a kid I'd be a better shot while practicing.
You should see me with a handgun, 6-10" low left, 3-6" groups at 25yds. Doesn't matter if it's a 9 or 44, I flinch the same way.
Shotgun? Don't load it, and it's hilarious.
Its not even that recoil hurts me anymore, I shoot a .375 Ruger that delivers some significant numbers.
I KNOW it's not painful, but that initial lesson is hardwired in there now. Unless I have a focused objective, I'm going to flinch.
I'll never tell anyone they need to shoot a bigger gun, unless they NEED to shoot a bigger gun.
I totally agree, if the kid in question shows that they can handle the recoil and WANTS to step up to a larger cartridge, I totally support that.Not trying to hijack a thread, but i guess my point is, don't underestimate what a 12yo can handle, and some kids are eager to "step up", so to speak, to what they perceive as an adult level of participation
I get the first part. If the second part was truly a concern, I'd be dead long ago.I was looking to upgrade to centerfire for two reasons: increased range on targets, and to get away from lead styphnate priming compound in filthy rimfire ammo.
Also whatever you buy make sure to get something with a comfortable length of pull for them. They are going to need something in the 12 inch range to comfortably handle the rifle and a front rest to take the weight of the rifle during practice and while hunting. A decent shooting tripod of some kind for hunting.
I'm getting some great ideas and information from this thread. My current thinking is a lightweight bolt-action rifle in 6.5 Grendel would be an ideal deer gun (I'm ready to go with the 527). But I'm reluctant to introduce it after experience only with .22LR. The boys are not recoil-macho or anxious to shoot big guns. When I was a boy, I was. Now I'm like Loonwolf, and vulnerable to interference from involuntary reactions. For myself, I've adopted the "suck it up and learn to deal with it" approach too. Honestly, I've seen results with that. I'm convinced you can't really overcome something without facing it. Avoidance is just that. On the other hand, I've got a boy who's showing good skills, doesn't want recoil, and I owe it to him not to jack him up. I've got another boy who needs to work on basic skills, the fundamentals, and I owe it to him not to jack with him while he's working on those things. He would be better served to stay on the rimfire for a while than to go to even a low-power .243 or .264, but I'm determined to get out of the rimfire. Therefore, I'm probably going to go with a step between .22LR and their first deer rifle -- probably a .223-based chambering or one of the Hornets.
The lower recoil of the smaller cartridges will be a safe bet, and bullets are considerably less costly (.223 and .243 varmint/target bullets for reloading are both quite a bit less than .264). I'm sure a .223 or .300AAC would be fine for first deer under 50 yards, but long-term, years from now, they'd be too limiting for a primary deer rifle when you don't want to pass on a 200-yard shot. Long-term, I'm not sure we have much purpose for a bolt-action in .223, but it seems like a logical next step even if we'll have to get to 6mm or 6.5 by the time we're ready for deer.
As for downloading bigger cartridges, the problem becomes the weight of the rifle. I have an 8 pound magnum that I don't really love. To me, even as an adult, a 6 pound mini action sounds a lot more appealing to spend days in the woods with. I don't see one of the lighter mini-actions as ever being outgrown if they can carry the energy for medium game out to 300 yards. People will probably go through a period in their life where they want a 3000 ft.lb rifle, or a 1500 yard rifle, but they will come back to just what's needed for the job.
I totally agree, if the kid in question shows that they can handle the recoil and WANTS to step up to a larger cartridge, I totally support that.
In my case, I'd never fired anything larger than a .22
Had I shot some other rifles, or shotguns before that 06, I would probably have been better prepared.
I think somewhere between 5-10ft/lbs of energy, and as little blast as possible, is a good starting point.
After that, step up when the shooters skills, tollerance, and desire allow.
In that vein of thought, I consider the Grendel, x39, .223 and other similar options, better choices than even the .243, 6.5cm, and others of that performance level.
This is when used in firearms sized/weighted to be comfortable for smaller shooters to carry, and operate unaided.
Excellent point, and one I totally agree with.The .223, for me, isn't a suitable deer hunting cartridge except for a hunter experienced enough to use it accurately and with the restraint/knowledge to recognize and pass up sub optimal shots. Many beginning hunters have neither the accuracy nor the restraint, imo.
Now maybe I could download the 6.5 Grendel and not have to worry that there's too big of a jump from .22LR. I'm also considering a CZ 527 in .223 or a Ruger 77 in .357.
This is about the same experience I had as a kid.First centerfire rifle I ever shot was a .30-06 running Remington corelokt 180s (cause it was a 700, duh ).
I've still got a pretty good flinch unless I'm shooting at game, or consciously walking through my sight, breathe, break routine.
I'm nearly positive that if I hadn't gotten wacked by that 06, over, and over, and over, again as a kid I'd be a better shot while practicing.
You should see me with a handgun, 6-10" low left, 3-6" groups at 25yds. Doesn't matter if it's a 9 or 44, I flinch the same way.
Shotgun? Don't load it, and it's hilarious.
Its not even that recoil hurts me anymore, I shoot a .375 Ruger that delivers some significant numbers.
I KNOW it's not painful, but that initial lesson is hardwired in there now. Unless I have a focused objective, I'm going to flinch.
I'll never tell anyone they need to shoot a bigger gun, unless they NEED to shoot a bigger gun.
The CZ 527 Carbine I had in 7.62x39 sure surprised me with its recoil. It wasn’t a hard recoil, but it was certainly more sharp than I was expecting.