Efficient Cartridges for Short Barreled Hunting Rifle?

[BigBlue 94]

I think I've heard of there being issues with the .44 in bolt actions, something to do with cycling issues. I know Ruger has been making the 44/77 for years now, so it can't be too bad.

Its all in the magazine... I have a ruger semi auto 44mag. Never had a feed issue with the rotary mags.

 

[JShirley]

If I wanted a 16" barrel deer rifle, I'd probably get a .300 BO or 7.62x39mm. Oh, yeah, I do have those.


(I really, really hate a lot of muzzle blast.)

If you wanted a "thumper" designed from the ground up for serious performance from a short barrel, and money wasn't a major consideration, 8.6 BO would be a candidate. A 16" 8.6 will have no problem taking anything smaller than a moose, out to at least 200 meters.

If you believe the velocity is a bit inflated, just take the 12" data, instead of the 16".

 

[skfullen]

I have a CZ Carbine in 7.63x39.
It is accurate and soft shooting. Muzzle blast is not bad at all.

I would sure give the x39 a look.

 

[someguy2800]

My two short barrel hunting rifles are this 16" 7.62x39 AR15



And this nearly identical 16" 358 yeti. The 358 yeti is basically a high pressure 35 remington made to fit in an AR15.



Both of them wear large krink brakes with baffels inside them and both are extremely soft on the ears to the point that my hunting partners can't tell when I have shot because they think the noise came from too far away to be mine.

 

[d2wing]

.308 will probably be the most efficient. I am a fan of the 7-08. Anything based on the .308 case would be a good option.

I agree with this. Having shot dozens of deer over a few decades with many cartridges, I have settled on a Tikka T3 in 7-08. Nearly ideal. It's promptly killed every deer I have shot at. Moderate recoil, nice size rifle, very accurate and effective. And it can reach out if needed.

 

[BushMaster-15]

For hunting purposes on small to large frame game under 500 yd. , a .308 is Ideal or any of it's close neighbors . 16" ,18" 20" barrels aren't gonna make a significant difference in performance losses .

 

[JShirley]

For hunting purposes on small to large frame game under 500 yd. , a .308 is Ideal or any of it's close neighbors . 16" ,18" 20" barrels aren't gonna make a significant difference in performance losses .

"...but the blast might not be pleasant." Fixed it for you!

@someguy2800, what brand are those brakes? I'm setting up some 11" uppers. I have a Midwest "Blast Can", but if there's something better that's not super expensive...

 

[Legionnaire]

A Remington Model 7 in 7 mm/08 would be ideal if you can find one. They are light and mine was very accurate.

That's what replaced my .308.

 

[Macchina]

Don't discount 357 Mag and 44 Mag. Excellent 16" barrel rounds and there powder is pretty much all burned up by them. Much less blast but still plenty of power.

 

[BigBlue 94]

Don't discount 357 Mag and 44 Mag. Excellent 16" barrel rounds and there powder is pretty much all burned up by them. Much less blast but still plenty of power.

I have two 44mags with 16-18" barrels. They are pussycats compared to a mini-14.

 

[MachIVshooter]

.243 Winchester
.260 Remington
7mm/08
.358 Win
Just to name a few.

.243 does NOT do well in short barrels. .260 rem/6.5 creed are OK, not great. Things improve a lot with the 7mm-08 and .308 in shorter tubes, larger bores are even less affected.

I build integrally suppressed rifles with 18" barrels that are heavily ported from 14.5 on, making them effectively 16 inchers. 7mm-08 and .308 win can still muster 2,500-2,600 FPS with 150 gr bullets and standard loads. 6.5 creed 140 grain loads drop down to about 2,400, and .243 becomes quite anemic.

If you stick to rounds that have a bore area to powder charge ratio similar to or better than the .308, you'll be fine. Pass on magnums or high velocity rounds like the .25-06, .270; those critters really need 24" & longer tubes to realize the potential that makes them what they are. .30-06 actually still does quite well in short tubes as well, unless you're trying to push the heavies, the 200 gr+ bullets.

 

[jmorris]

My XP-100 in 7mm BR, is one of my most enjoyable to hunt with. So much so I bought a model Seven to convert to 7BR for hunting at night (pigs). The Seven, in 7-08, has an accuracy disadvantage but even downloaded, to duplicate 7mm BR ballistics, has always done the job on whitetail/hogs and such.

 

[Varminterror]

.243 does NOT do well in short barrels.

What’s it not doing well?

My current 15” 6 creed started life as a 14” 243win for a lot of years before I rebarreled it - if it wasn’t doing something well, I guess I missed it. Pretty sure it has a smaller overbore ratio than the 14” 300wsm I had as well.

Ernie has a 375 Cheytac pistol, pretty sure his overbore ratio is pretty high compared to a 243win, and it’s working well for him, seems like I’ve seen video taking it clear out to 2k.

 

[MachIVshooter]

What’s it not doing well?

Making velocity. .243 Win loses over 300 FPS going from 24" to 16". In contrast, .308 & .30-06 will only lose about 150-180 FPS from 24" to 16".

Moreover, the small bores like .24 & .25 cal are heavily dependent on high velocity for efficacy. A 100 gr. .244" bullet at 2,500 has a lot less thump for putting critters down than a 150 grain .284 or .308 pill at 2,600.

 

[Varminterror]

A 100 gr. .244" bullet at 2,500 has a lot less thump for putting critters down than a 150 grain .284 or .308 pill at 2,600.

You might be loading to a lot higher pressure than I was to get a 14” barreled 308 to 2600fps.

 

[MachIVshooter]

You might be loading to a lot higher pressure than I was to get a 14” barreled 308 to 2600fps.

I never said 14"

16", and 18" with twenty-seven 3/32" ports starting at 14.5"

Our .308 post sample is 13", though, and still sees over 2,500 with 150s (factory loaded ZQI ball ammo)

 

[gotboostvr]

Making velocity. .243 Win loses over 300 FPS going from 24" to 16". In contrast, .308 & .30-06 will only lose about 150-180 FPS from 24" to 16".

Moreover, the small bores like .24 & .25 cal are heavily dependent on high velocity for efficacy. A 100 gr. .244" bullet at 2,500 has a lot less thump for putting critters down than a 150 grain .284 or .308 pill at 2,600.

But if that performance is still sufficient for the intended purpose, what's it matter?

 

[MachIVshooter]

But if that performance is still sufficient for the intended purpose, what's it matter?

That's for the OP to decide. I don't see that we're entertaining the minimum acceptable velocities for killing game species A at a range of B with bullet weight C. I only answered the question posted, and overbore rounds suffer a great deal more when you start lobbing off inches.

 

[Offfhand]

Don't overlook the .250 Savage (AKA .250/3000). It was designed for short barreled rifles and punches far above it's weight.

 

[Nature Boy]

I’m going with .358 win (if you reload)

I freely admit it’s more sentiment than science.

I know it works from a short barrel having harvested a few thousand pounds of meat with it

 

[WVRJ]

I had a Model 7 in 243 with an 18 1/2 inch barrel.Average velocity with 100 grain bullets over the chronograph was 2,505 FPS.Same action with the 19 inch 308 barrel that's on it now runs a 150 grain Hornady soft point at 2,850 FPS.Dramatic difference,mainly due to the piston effect.More area for the powder gas to push against means more velocity in a given pressure range.I'm putting together a 338-06 for this coming deer season,and its barrel is 19 1/2 inches.It runs 185 grain bullets at 2900 over the speed measuring device.Rifle weight goal is no more than 7 pounds with scope,sling and 5 rounds of ammo.I did part of the load development in a Magpul Hunter 700 stock because the recoil is rather stout,and I know when it's in the fiberglass stock that I'm reworking for it there will be a large increase.And I don't believe in muzzle brakes.Larger bore sizes work better in shorter barrels,but they suffer from a BC disadvantage due to the fatter bullets.

 

[MachIVshooter]

.Larger bore sizes work better in shorter barrels,but they suffer from a BC disadvantage due to the fatter bullets.

Which is what makes 7mm-08 & .308 (and even .30-06) very well balanced rounds for shorter barrels, still having respectable BCs with lighter bullets they can drive at decent velocities.

That said, if ranges are more moderate, .338, .358 and .375 caliber cartridges are a great choice. .35 Rem does very well from short barrels, and with a more sedate bark for the unsuppressed crowd if you need a <200 yard deer round. Stepping up, you have the .358 Win, .35 Whelen and .350 Rem Mag, which also don't need really long tubes. .350 rem mag has a similar same bore area to powder charge ratio to .308 Win, .35 Whelen is slightly lower.

To do the math, just divide powder charge by bore area in inches. The higher the number, the more velocity will suffer in short barrels

.243 Win 45 gr charge = 962

.25-06 55 gr charge = 1,062

7mm-08 46 gr charge = 726

.308 Win, 46 gr. powder charge= 617

.30-06 52 gr charge = 698

.300 Win Mag 70 gr charge = 966

.300 Rem ultra mag 100 gr charge = 1,342

.35 Whelen 57 gr charge = 566

.350 Rem Mag 60 gr. charge = 594


For reference, the highly efficient .22 LR and .45 ACP score about 44

 

[someguy2800]

I never said 14"

16", and 18" with twenty-seven 3/32" ports starting at 14.5"

Our .308 post sample is 13", though, and still sees over 2,500 with 150s (factory loaded ZQI ball ammo)

View attachment 1089308

View attachment 1089306

View attachment 1089307

just curious, what does it cost to build something like that on a customer rifle?

 

[citizenconn]

350 legend, 300 hammer, 30 AR, 6.8 SPC

I second the .350 Legend and 6.8 SPC. I don't yet have any personal experience with the .300 HAM'R. I would also add the 6.5 Grendel and the .450 Bushmaster.

 

[MachIVshooter]

just curious, what does it cost to build something like that on a customer rifle?

It depends on what all needs to be done with the host rifle to make it happen, but they're typically in the $1,300-$1,400 range all said and done.