Less recoil than .308 but more power than 30-30

Status
Not open for further replies.
Rglong81;

Take a good long look at the 6.5 X 55mm Swedish Mauser. Very tolerable recoil combined with extremely high sectional density and ballistic coefficients. You'd be going to a bolt gun, but so what? Coyotes and deer are no problem whatsoever at any reasonable range. I live in Outer Montana & hunt elk with mine, and I don't have to hunt up to ridiculously short range either. Take the time & do the research, IMHO it perfectly fills the niche you are saying you want covered.

900F
 
My vote is the 260 Remington all the way, right in the middle for recoil but fast. The 6.5 Swede and the 260 are ballistic twins. The 260 is really a 6.5 x 08, it's based off of the 308 case necked down to 6.5mm. Awesome caliber!
 
rglong81 said:
.308 in my Ruger Gunsite isn't bad. After a handful of 10 round mags it gets tiring. So I have been looking for something that fills that gap between .308 and 30-30 recoil and power wise in a handy rifle.
Click to expand...

So after say 40 - 50 rounds through your .308 (a handful of 10 rd mags) in a sitting you get a little recoil fatigued? That seems pretty normal, 50 high powered rifle rounds in a sitting is a pretty good range trip. Why don't you just shoot the .308 until you get tired, then switch to your .30-30 or something like a .223 to do the rest of your shooting on a given day?

I guess I'm not seeing a need for another caliber here, most people are not going to put hundreds of .243 or .260 down range each range trip either. If it were me, I would augment your existing collection with a decent .223 bolt gun, that way if you wanted to put tons of rounds down range during a trip, you wouldn't have to contend with much recoil or expense.

Edit: Better yet, you could get a Ruger GSR in .223 so that you could put endless rounds through the .223, then switch to the identical .308 when you needed the power. I'd just shoot the .308 until I got tired, and then switch to a .22, but that's just me.
 
Last edited:
Craig, we are speaking the same language, and I agree. My only argument was that it was not a true statement, and there are already plenty of misunderstandings floating around gun forums. To quote myself from the previous post, "More energy will always represent more capacity to do more damage, regardless of whether it is efficiently utilized or not or actually does said damage or not." The intended meaning of that line was roughly the same thing as I read in your last post. It is there, though it may not have any definitive effect. The "damage" wasn't specifically meant to refer to living creatures though, only the portions about tissue destruction. There are situations where the energy helps like some hard barriers, metal, etc. Again, I think our view of it is more similar than dissimilar.
 
And my point is that the statement about the 6.8 producing "30% more power" is misleading at best. Because it isn't 30% better at any of those things I mentioned. It shoots flatter, I'll give it that but the 170gr .30-30 is capable of taking larger critters. Same for the .270WCF it shares bullets with. It shoots much flatter due to a higher BC and higher velocity but is not capable of taking larger game. Nor does it kill deer any deader. The difference in energy is a product of the increased velocity but it tells us nothing useful whatsoever.
 
I was ignoring the KE bickering, but now it's getting kind of ridiculous. Craigc, what larger game is .30-30 capable of taking that .270 is not? That line of reasoning was absurd.
 
Far be it from me to talk you out of a new gun purchase but I think the real answer to your needs is reloading your own ammo.

.308 is one of the most common bullet sizes out there. If you reload you can make your own ammo in anything from 110gn .30Carbine bullets behind light loads of moderate to faster pistol powders for super soft recoil plinkers at the range for target practice. Or you can load up to some of the heavier and more effective bullets with stronger loads for hunting larger game. Or you can do whatever you wish in between these two extremes. To me this makes a lot more sense then looking at a new rifle. And this is coming from a big fan of the 7mm-08.

You say that you have fit issues with the RGS. Why put up with a rifle that does not fit you? If you like the action and the barrel is nicely accurate then I think I'd be looking at a stock swap to make the rifle fit better. If it doesn't fit you then it's not going to be a whole lot of fun to shoot at the range.

Now if this is more than just about recoil then there may be a good reason for a smaller caliber. Any of the smaller caliber '08 based cartridges that use smaller bore bullets is going to use the pressure from a case of powder to move out faster and have a flatter trajectory. So depending on what you're hoping to accomplish there may be some advantages to a switch to another caliber if that will suit your needs.

I know I looked around at some of the options and went with the 7mm-08 thanks to a fairly good selection of bullets that have a higher than average BC value. But that was then and this is now.

But the 7mm and other sizes has no where near the range of bullet shapes and weights as the .308. For maximum flexibility and versitility you already have the right caliber. You just need to reload your own ammo to access the truly "out there" options.
 
Doesn't Remington make their Managed Recoil in .308?

I've used the .30-06 to great effect, and the recoil is very mild, about like a 30-30.

Great stuff. Buy a box and check it out. As rbernie says, it's cheaper than a new rifle.
 
I'll suggest the .25-06. It's a flat shooting, lower recoil caliber that'll work really well.
 
7.62x39 has far less power that a 30-30. That's just dumb. Look at an energy chart or compare bullets. 45/70 is also a poor choice in your situation.
In about that situation I went with a 7-08 and love it 2/3 the recoil of a .308 and not giving up much on power. .257 Roberts or Savage .300 are good choices. 243 or 6MM Remington are good with quality soft point bullets.
 
Another error is that necking down a case will give you a faster flatter shooting bullet. Sometimes it does but more often it chocks down enough that there is much less than you would think.
In the 7-08 that I shoot there is much less recoil but little or no gain in velocity. That is mostly a myth although it does happen in some calibers like the .243. There you do gain considerable velocity and flatter shooting bullet.
 
I was introduced to another (not yet mentioned) venerable cartridge that is medium recoiling and flat shooting: the 7x57 or 7mm Mauser. I got a Ruger #1 single shot in 7x57. Its a 6 lbs. single shot rifle with a falling block action. The rifle is beautiful and carrying it in the field is a joy. One would expect it to kick like a mule. Instead, I have a pleasurable rifle to shoot and with a Leupold 3x scope on top its a nice 200 yard rifle in a flat shooting caliber that is all but forgotten in today's magnum arms race.

If you ever wanted to consider a classy rifle and the sophisticated 1-shot, one-kill philosophy of Jeff Cooper, look at a Ruger #1 in 7x57. It might just scratch an itch you never knew you had.

RugerNumber1A7x57withLeupold3XpixA.jpg
 
Last edited:
6.5x55, hits like a .308 but with less kick and blast. So far have shot two cow elk, seven hogs, and two Barbary Sheep, all DRT.
 
Craigc, what larger game is .30-30 capable of taking that .270 is not? That line of reasoning was absurd.
Click to expand...
Pay attention, that's not what I said. I said the 6.8 is not capable of taking larger game than the .30-30. The .270 can utilize up to 160gr bullets. Both are suitable for critters roughly the same size. The .270 just has more reach.
 
Sounds to me like some fine reasoning to get into reloading.
Roll your own to create 30-30 and 308 cartridges with whatever potential energy numbers ya want!
Happily shoot whatever flavor you like at that moment...then buy a new (or old) rifle to congratulate yourself on a decision well made.
 
CraigC said:
It shoots flatter, I'll give it that but the 170gr .30-30 is capable of taking larger critters. Same for the .270WCF it shares bullets with. It shoots much flatter due to a higher BC and higher velocity but is not capable of taking larger game.
Click to expand...

Pay attention yourself, that's a direct excerpt. You said the .30-30 is capable of taking larger critters, but the .270, while it shoots flatter is not capable of taking larger game. If you didn't mean to say exactly what you said, then that's unfortunate, but none of us are mind readers here.

As for the actual OP, it seems pretty clear that he doesn't really have a terrible, burning need for another more intermediate rifle, but mostly just wants another sub-.308 caliber. Nothing wrong with that, I've bought many rifles with much shakier excuses. I still think .223 would be best based on cost and ubiquity, but .243 is also lots of fun and is a little more powerful if that's desirable. With the .243 you can shoot everything from 55 gr screamers up to respectable 100 gr deer loads.
 
Last edited:
As Corn-picker said: .260, 7mm-08 or 6.5 creedmore is what i would look at.

I would go with an AR10 style in .260. Maybe have a DPMS GII chambered in .260. If an AR10 is too heavy, then a Tikka or Rem 700 bolt.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

Z
  • Locked
Comparison of .30-30 vs .308 Marlin Express
Replies
12
Views
9K
Z_Infidel
Z
W
  • Locked
Is there a commonly used rifle round less powerful than the AR15?
2 3 4
Replies
85
Views
5K
Art Eatman
A
R
  • Locked
recoil question, 308 vs 30-06
2
Replies
35
Views
7K
Vern Humphrey
V
S
  • Locked
Pros and cons of .308 and .30-06?
Replies
24
Views
4K
artherd
A
A
  • Locked
.30-06 v .308: which has greater felt recoil
2 3 4 5
Replies
108
Views
20K
Redneck with a 40
R
Back
Top