Intermediate cartridge compact bolt actions

[armoredman]

I am very fond of my CZ 527M, great little carbine. I have hit out to 300 yards with it, but the bullet drop starts to become astronomical quick. Within 200 yards any man sized target can be hit from the standing position. I also only use iron sights on it - never could find a scope for it I really liked. The magazines are a bit of an issue, and I have a custom 10 round mag, which I think is the ONLY 10 round CZ 527 7.62x39mm magazine in existence, works great. Looks weird.
It's light, handy and works great for me. I also reload and cast for it - the 129 gr NOE bullets seem to work the best, for me, sized to .311, hard lube or powder coated.

 

[Picher]

With the 500 yard shooting. The 7.62x39 is barely supersonic and has a 10ft drop. 300 blackout will have the same issues, as well as the 6.5 (I think on the 6.5).

I have the 7.62x39 in my mini 30. I wouldn't shoot at those ranges. At 200? That's about as far as I'd shoot with my mini. Now a bolt action with that cartridge can do it. But 500? Ehh...

The .223 would suit better for those ranges. Some places don't allow for .223 deer hunting though. I'm also not a fan of the .223 for deer due to 1000lb energy cut off. (Although I will readily admit that a good shot will negate the need to stay at 1000lbs.)

For hunting and 500 yard ranges. Your 30-30 is probably pretty competent (though I cannot speak from experience.)

A .243 would do all with no sweat but I'm not sure if that's in your list.

A professional deer-culler who baits and shoots with a silenced .223 often kills 40 or more deer in an evening, but never shoots beyond 100 yards. He usually shoots them in the head-neck at under 50 yards. He mostly works on over-populated islands in a controlled situation. He's also not restricted to using a 5-shot rifle capacity like regular hunters. I'd never recommend hunting Maine deer with a .223, except for a very good shot, maybe hunting from a tree stand. There are just too many better deer cartridges out there that it doesn't make sense to be so under-gunned.

I killed a couple of deer with a .22-250, using previously-available solid-based Nosler handloads, but never felt comfortable with it in the woods and missed a couple of deer with it, probably due to deflections. Since then, I've used .30-06, but more recently .270 and .243 because I sit more than I used to.

JP

 

[Rogue909]

A professional deer-culler who baits and shoots with a silenced .223 often kills 40 or more deer in an evening, but never shoots beyond 100 yards. He usually shoots them in the head-neck at under 50 yards. He mostly works on over-populated islands in a controlled situation. He's also not restricted to using a 5-shot rifle capacity like regular hunters. I'd never recommend hunting Maine deer with a .223, except for a very good shot, maybe hunting from a tree stand. There are just too many better deer cartridges out there that it doesn't make sense to be so under-gunned.
...
JP

I'm surprised to hear a silenced .223 as the go to for him. I would assume that this is where a larger slower (like .300 blackout?) Would shine. I thought that you're supposed to use slower rounds with a silencer, although I have no experience to support that.

I have heard game control persons using .223 for multiple reasons. Cost/round, report, easier on shoulder, etc.

That said, I think you are right on the assessment of not coming in under gunned. Your friend who shoots 40/evening shoots more in a night than most do in a year... He probably has the patience and skill to use a .223 (probably a .22!) correctly.

 

[mpd61]

The 6.5 Grendel isn’t in the same performance class as 243win. BUT - that does come with advantages... a 6.5 Grendel barrel will last about 4x longer than a .243win barrel. It’ll eat about 30% less powder along the way too.

We have a handful of 2.8” cartridges getting compared against a few 2.3” cartridges in this thread, standard short action cartridges being compared against those for mini-actions.

Both have their place, both have their purpose. But the 243win in a 700 isn’t the same type of rifle as a 6.5 Grendel in a 527.

+1
I have a CZ 527 carbine in 7.62×39. It is beautiful, built like a rock, fun to run, and economical.......

In the context of this OP, the 6.5 Grendel is the CARTRIDGE you want. Anybody thinks it's "expensive" and needs to be reloaded to afford is misinformed;
http://ammunitionstore.com/products...wolf-wpa-military-classic-500-round-case.html

$5-6 a box is pretty much plinking cheap IMHO.....BTW it's a cartridge that has reach too!

 

[adcoch1]

I have a cz 527 in 7.62x39 and it is my favorite brush gun, short, handy, light, and laser accurate, I also just picked up about an hour ago a Ruger American Predator in 6.5 Grendel, so we'll see how that goes. But reading up on ballistics is why I chose the Grendel over the Creedmoor (for now), it seems to be "just enough gun" very much like the x39, but with a lot more potentially accurate yardage available. It is really cool though, that it takes ar mags...

 

[north east redneck]

Recently picked up a Mossberg MVP Varmint in 5.56. It uses AR mags. Has a 24" medium bull barrel. Stock is nice, trigger I'm very happy with.
Put a Vortex 6-24x50 scope on, and added a Harris Bipod.
These can also be purchased as a package deal. They come with a non Harris bipod and a lower powered Vortex scope.
.223/5.56 is nice shooting and nice on the wallet.

 

[mpd61]

.223/5.56 is nice shooting and nice on the wallet.View attachment 799204

Agreed 100%, but it can't do all the 6.5 Grendel can do

 

[fpgt72]

223 has the disadvantage of not being the cool kid anymore.

 

[Legionnaire]

Having read through the thread, I'm not sure what a bolt action in .223 buys you over your AR15. I have couple of bolt action .223s, but I'm not an AR guy; the bolt actions get shot far more frequently than my ARs. But the 5.56/223 is basically the same cartridge regardless of platform. So while I see some value in having a bolt action in the same cartridge as your AR, I don't see the gain from adding a bolt in the same cartridge.

The 7.62x39, .300BLK, and 6.5 Grendel were all designed for semi-auto rifles. They are fine cartridges. But if you're looking for a bolt action, why not a cartridge that was designed for one? I don't own a rifle in 6.5 Creedmoor and have no intention of buying one because I have rifles in other cartridges that are equivalent (.260 Rem). Nevertheless, that's the first cartridge I'd look at were I looking for an intermediate cartridge bolt action. There are a growing number of factory loads for it and reloading components are readily available. As an alternative, I'd give serious look at the .243 Win. It's a classic, and there are many factory loads available for it. Or if you want to get in on the latest craze, a 6mm Creedmoor would fit the bill.

Personally, I would pass on the cartridges you have listed unless I also planned to buy/build a semi-auto in the same cartridge. Having guns that shoot the same cartridges can be efficient--although there is no guarantee that the same loads will shoot equally well in different rifles. I'm just not particularly a fan of bolt-action rifles built around semi-automatic cartridges. I'd rather shoot a cartridge optimized for the bolt action platform.

 

[Varminterror]

I’m not sure I would say anything about the 6.5 Grendel is optimized for a semiauto, in any way it would not also be so for a mini action bolt gun.

 

[Legionnaire]

Yes, don't mean to overstate the case. Last sentence should have read, "I'd rather shoot a cartridge designed for the bolt action platform."

 

[mpd61]

Oh my goodness...........
I think one half of the title is "Compact" bolt actions. Perhaps the OP meant "Micro" bolt actions? In that context everybody suggesting 6.5 Screemoor and .243 Wins are starting to leave the arena. Of the four (4) rounds identified in the OP, pretty sure Grendel is the most versatile, longest reaching, and as cheap (steel case available) a choice.

 

[Legionnaire]

Perhaps. If the Ruger American Predator is in the mix, though, the cartridges it is chambered for might be considered. And in post #21, the OP said he was looking at the .243. There are a lot of cartridges that fall under the general heading "intermediate," and lots of actions that can be considered "compact."

 

[mpd61]

Perhaps. If the Ruger American Predator is in the mix, though, the cartridges it is chambered for might be considered. And in post #21, the OP said he was looking at the .243. There are a lot of cartridges that fall under the general heading "intermediate," and lots of actions that can be considered "compact."

No, no, no!!!
The initial conviction displayed in post #1 trumps the wavering exhibited by post#21.
Stop rationalizing just so you can include .243 Win and the Ruger Predator. What's next, Memes of Jack O'Connor advocating the 6.5 Creedmoor to replace his cherished .270???
Just Kidding! But seriously folks, how about that Grendel, right!?!?

 

[Legionnaire]

I will concede that "Grendel" sounds cooler than "Creedmoor."

 

[Varminterror]

I will concede that "Grendel" sounds cooler than "Creedmoor."

Unfortunately, having been in high school in the ‘90s, the moniker “Grendel” just doesn’t appeal to me. Way too similar to grundle...

I’m more entertained by the 6.5 Grendel than the 6.5 creedmoor, especially considering the prospect of the Grendel in a mini bolt action.

 

[Varminterror]

I might add perspective to my statement above - I’m not one of the guys who is biased against the 6.5 Creedmoor simply because it is new. The 6 Creedmoor has quickly become one of my favorite cartridges, but I am far more entertained by the 6.5 Grendel than the 6.5 Creedmoor.