My Perfect General Purpose Rifles Ramblings (Long)

Status
Not open for further replies.

Charles S

Member
Joined
Dec 27, 2002
Messages
1,026
Location
North East Texas
I write this in my personal quest for my perfect rifle. Let me define my personal rifle: A rifle to be my general purpose hunting rifle and my every day carry rifle.

I also posted this on the sister sight: TFL

The first question to be answered is: does a general purpose rifle exist? Noted author and hunter Jim Carmichel does believe that they exist. In Mr. Carmichel’s book The Book of the Rifle he once wrote: “There is no shortage of all purpose rifles - where are the all purpose hunters?” Mr. Carmichel defines the all-purpose rifle as a rifle that will be convenient to the successful hunting of all North American big game. Carmichel further specifies that the all-purpose rifle should have the following qualities. The all-pupose rifle should be fast handling and accurate. Carmichel does not specify a weight limitation, but does provide a recommended cartridge list for North America that starts with the 270 Winchester and ends with the 30-06, the only magnum included in his list for a general purpose cartridge for North America is the 7mm Remington Magnum.

Noted author and shooter Jack O’Conner felt that the all around rifle should generally be a bolt action with a barrel length of around 22 inches. Mr. O’Conner felt that the ideal rifle should have low power optics and further specifies a four power range that were mounted in quick detachable mounts, to facilitate the utilization of fixed sights as a back up. Mr. O’Conner’s caliber selection starts with the 270 and includes the 308, 30-06 and the 7X57. Mr. O’Conner further elaborates that the rifle should weigh no more than eight pounds including all accessories. Mr. O’Conner does state the importance of a good sling on the rifle.

Let us further narrow our choices for the perfect rifle for me. Clyde Ormond’s Book Hunting states a rifle should weigh no more than 1/20th of your total body weight. That means for myself at a body weight of 191# my rifle should not weigh more than 9.55 # loaded and ready to go. I am going to choose a little more stringent standard. My hunting generally involves a lot of walking and fully intend on continuing this style of hunting. Further, I intend to hunt in the mountains. I want a rifle that is no heavier than 8 # ready to go. This is roughly a 15% reduction in the recommended weight. Mr. Carmichel states the rifle should be capable and convenient to hunt all game I intend on hunting. I will further state that I think the rifle should be capable of handling all situations that I will encounter while hunting.

My hunting trips tend to involve inclement weather. My luck is such that if I have planned a hunting trip, the weather will not cooperate. I am not going to complain because I have had some excellent success in inclement weather. I am going to specify that the rifle should be an all weather configuration.

The above specification have just ruled out all pump and auto loading rifles in current production. There are very few leaver actions that will meet my specifications.

At this point it could be suggested I buy a Winchester Model Classic Stainless in 375 H&H Magnum. This rifle weighs 7# 4 oz put a great Leupold 3-9 Compact Scope that weighs only 8.8 oz with rings mounts and a sling you come in under the maximum recommended weight limit (total weight should be around 8# 10 oz) and this rifle will handle anything that walks in North America.

While I agree that this is one solution, the biggest problem with that approach is that Mr. Carmichel specified that this rifle be convenient to all the game I intend on hunting. This rifle is less than ideal for hunting white tails in the thickets of the South, there are better choices for hunting antelope and while it would be perfect for hunting the big bears in Alaska, this rifle is probably awkward for Black Tail in the West.

Ideally the platform will have no greater recoil than 40 foot pounds this is about where I start to have problems on the bench. With anything that recoils about 30 foot pounds I really have to concentrate after the first 10-20 rounds. This requirement rules out all caliber greater than the 338 Winchester Magnum.

The game I primarily hunt is the Southern White Tail, I also hunt Feral Hogs the largest of which generally are no larger than 400#.

The land I hunt is primarily pine thickets and deciduous forest. I do hunt clear cut areas and right of ways where shots can be as far as the one is willing to shoot. I do not intend on making a shot that is longer than 300 yards on the really large game.

What kind on accuracy does this type of hunting require? If one assumes that a White Tail deer has a 8 inch kill zone and the longest shot I will take is 450 yards, that means my rifle can shoot an 8 inch group at 450 yards in field conditions, so lets say we want a 1.5 MOA rifle and this will give me a greater margin of error. A 1.5 MOA rifle will shoot a 6 inch group at 400 yards.

I would like to hunt antelope, mule deer, the bigger Northern White Tail deer, Black Tail deer, Cous Deer, Moose, Caribou, and Elk. I have no desire to hunt the bears, but I do fully intend on hunting in bear country. If I can avoid a confrontation I will, but I intend on defending myself if necessary.

The easiest way to work this out is to start with the minimum caliber necessary and work up. People with more experience than myself state that the minimum energy for White Tail is 1000 foot pounds and this energy should be delivered with a bullet with a sectional density of no less than .210. The same sources would suggest that the minimum for Elk is 1500 foot pounds of energy with a sectional density of no less than .270. Most experts also recommend that the minimum caliber for Elk starts with .264.

In the standard calibers the 6.5X55 Swede is the base caliber that can meet these requirements. In the short action calibers the 260 Remington meets the requirements set forth. In the magnum calibers the 264 Winchester Magnum easily meets these requirements, the 140 gr bullet has a sectional density of .287 higher than the 180 gr 30 caliber bullet with an initial velocity of 3100 FPS the 264 Win Mag has retained energies of greater than 1500 foot pounds at 400 yards. In the newer short magnums the 270 Winchester Short Magnum easily meets these minimums.

The above paragraph establishes the minimum caliber requirements. The next choice is which caliber not only meets the minimum requirements, but can perform the above mentioned task at a minimum, conveniently and ideally will perform all the task well.

An additional caveat is; the ammo should be available at major retailers. This rules out the 6.5X55, 264 Winchester Magnum, the 7X57, the 8-06, the 8 mm Remington Magnum, the 338-06 and the 338 Winchester Magnum. This is not really a problem because that leaves us with the 270, 280, and 30-06 in the long. The 7-08, 308 and the newer 338 Federal in the short actions. The 270 Winchester short magnum, 7mm short magnums and the 30 caliber short magnums in both the Remington and Winchester offerings. The 7mm Remington magnum and the 300 Winchester and Weatherby magnums are also available.

Additionally since so much of the hunting describe happens in heavy cover the barrel length should be restricted to 23-24 inches. Because of efficiency issues this really rules out the 300 Weatherby magnum. Since a lighter rifle is desired the heavier recoiling calibers are less desirable.

Noted rifleman, author, and warrior Colonel Jeff Cooper recently stated expressed the following thoughts.

In considering the matter of firearms design, I have long given importance to the factor of handiness, portability and ease of use. It has always seemed to me that a rifle should be compact, comfortable to use, and as light as recoil effect permits. This is because I have always considered hunting to be an active pastime, not something one does riding around in a vehicle or sitting in a blind. Times change, and I discover, somewhat to my distress, that huge and unhandy sporting rifles seem to have great appeal to some sorts of hunters.

I agree that a rifle should have good handling characteristics, be maneuverable and easy to carry.

Continued
 
So my ideal rifle is a 7-08, 308, 270, 280, 30-06, 270 Winchester Short Magnum, 7mm Short Magnum, 300 Short Magnum, 7mm Remington Magnum or the 300 Winchester Magnum, in a stainless steel configuration, that weighs no more than 8# including the scope and sling. This rifle will have no greater than a 44 ½ overall length, this dictates a barrel length of no more than 24 inches and this rifle will preferably have a backup sighting system.

I have had cheaper scopes fail, a Simmons ATEC catastrophically, a Tasco and a Weaver have both fogged on me. I have never had a good scope fail, I have used Nikon and Leupold without problems. I have had a rifle fall (the rope in the stand was frayed and broke) about 16 feet land on a Leupold Vari X III scope in Weaver rings and bases and it did not break the scope (honestly it did not even change the point of impact). On an important hunt I want a back up, so I think QD mounts and rings with open sights or QD mounts with two scopes. I am not sure which I would prefer. Honestly in today’s market few rifles have sights, it would probably be easier to have a backup scope. I have a used Leupold fixed 4X that would work well.

My current solution for optic failure at this time is just to take a second rifle

For the main optics I think an intermediate power variable 2-7 or 2.5-8 should be about perfect.

Honestly caliber is less important to me than platform, shorter and lighter is better. I currently own a 30-30, 308s, 270s, 30-06, 300 Short Magnums, and 300 Winchester Magnums. I will probably go with a non-magnum with 22 inches of barrel and lighter overall weight.

I appreciate any input or thoughts. We have had a lot of caliber discussions lately and I am interested in everyone’s input. Do I own the perfect rifle? No, none of my current rifles meet all the requirements set forth, on the closest one all I need is a backup set of optics. Honestly the rifle that is closest to my perceived requirements is what I reach for anyway.
 
My all purpose rifle is a pre-64 Winchester Model 70 in .30-06. While I like fixed power scopes, I have a variable on this one, because I also carry a Hammond Game Getter. This is a case with an off-center chamber for a .22 nail-setting blank. With a swaged 00 buckshot in the mouth, it makes a fine squirrel and small game gun. This gives me a true all purpose rifle.
 
I very much like Weaver scopes, have found my V10 almost indestructible by normal use, set and forget. It's taken the bumps and heavy use in stride. It is a better quality scope than the VariX 2 IMHO. I have it mounted on a little 20" barreled stainless M7 Remington short action in Millet rings with "iron sighter" upper rings and the gun is chambered in .308 Winchester. It is a 1 MOA gun. It's short and handy in a box blind and light in the canyons. I don't think I can do much better as an all purpose hunting rifle and I've forsaken my other guns for this one this last decade or so since I got it. I has hammered coyotes, hogs, and deer, ridden in boats and bouncy 4x4s and on motorcycles, stalked the island flats, the Texas hill country, and sat in my stand and in all that time, I've not had to adjust the scope not even once, though I check the sighting every year before deer season. Longest shot I've made with it was something under 400 yards on a coyote. I have ultimate confidence in the gun now and that's half the battle in a good hunting rifle IMHO. I do not worry whether it will do the job.

BTW, Simmons just plain SUX. :D I've had one go bonkers, too. I think the word is out, don't see 'em advertise like they used to. Wonder if their sales have fallen off or if there are still suckers out there? Said by a one time Simmons sucker. :rolleyes: I ain't much for Tasco, either. Scopes don't have to be expensive to be good, though. Bushnell and Weaver have always treated me right. In fact, Weaver was lauded by "Gun Tests" some years ago and that's why I originally wanted one. "Gun Tests" wasn't wrong, mine's been fantastic.

attachment.php
 
Here is the one I had built specifically to be my all purpose hunting rifle.

275_Rigby.jpg

.275 Rigby (7x57) on a VZ24 action, 24" barrel, synthetic B&C stock, KG Gunkote finish. It shoots the heavy bullets really well from 154 gr. to 173 grain, and is decent with 140 grain TSX's. It goes on every hunt with me, even if I have a different rifle for my primary gun.

But I have several that could be an all around, I don't mind semi autos so my BAR in .270 or '06, HK SLB 2000 in '06, and a Dumoulin bolt action I'm currently building up in .300 Win. I'd feel comfortably gunned for anything except the biggest bears at close range with any of these.
 
Vern Humphrey,

An interesting solution. Honestly I am thinking of refinishing my 30-06 in a more durable finish and making it my go to rifle (honestly my 30-06 or my 270 is what I reach for most of the time.

I had never thought of your solution for small game. I would like to know more.

MCgunner,

I think Weaver are good scopes now, the one that I had fail on me was older (after the original K Series). I think the original K series were very good scopes for their time and are still very serviceable scopes. For a while after the original K-series I don't think Weavers were very good. From what I see now the newer Weaver scopes are very good. I was not disparaging the newer Weaver scopes, the older cheaper Weaver I was using on a 30-30 fogged so bad I could not use it. I ended up taking it off, checking my iron sights and continuing the hunt. I ended up killing a decent 6 point buck at 80 yards around lunch time. If I had not had open sights the hunt would have been over.

browningguy,

Very nice. I have always loved the 7X57. Great looking gun.
 
Contact Brian Hammond at [email protected]. The Hammond Game Getter sells for about $40 (depending on the current rate of exchange between Canada and the US) but in my opinion is well worth it. I've dropped many a squirrel while deer hunting with mine.
 
One thing I might add is my Model 70 (Fionn MacCumhaill is his name) has a Redfield peep snuggled under the scope objective. There isn't room for the disk, so it's a ghost ring, but unscrew the steel buttplate and there is the peep disk in a little hollow in the stock if you need it.:D
 
http://www.jack-oconnor.org/jack_oconnor_hunter_conservationist_writer.htm

Jack O'Connor (American writer)
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Jack O'Connor (January 22, 1902 - January 20, 1978) was best known as a writer for, and later the shooting editor of, Outdoor Life magazine.

Now I am not Jack O'Connor and I haven't hunted the big game of the world.

If it was not for his books, I would not be the hunter that I am today.
Back in the day, I probably would have also been a writer were it not for the fact that I hated english class in school and wouldn't have passed except for the fact that the teachers knew that if they flunked me that I would be back in their class again the next year..
They sure as heck didn't want that....

If you read Jack's autobiography you will see that all the big name's in wild west, were still alive when he was a kid.

Compound that with a wild west that was full of game.
During WW II the men folk was off fighting a war..

The poor guy didn't have to do much more than point his rifle in any direction to kill something..
You could even hunt buffalo back then - without going to some game farm and paying outrageous fee's to shoot some poor tame animal in a cage....

Jack's biggest problem was that there was no MAGNUM calibers like there are today.
Even if there was, you still had poor bullet designs along with little money during the depression to shoot them with..
A man had to make due with what he had on hand.
You couldn't just walk into a general store in some little old country town and buy a .300 Winchester Mag rifle or ammo..

Jack died before the day of Nosler Partition bullets and Barnes X bullets and all the new firearms that we have today.

A gun is nothing more than a tool.
In the right hands any gun with the right velocity and bullet and scope will get the job done..

Living in a farming community, I can tell you for a fact of times where kids I knew came home from school and went out behind the house or the barn and shot trophy animals with nothing more than a 410 shotgun or a 20 ga with punkin balls...

Sometimes little kids have all the luck, because they do things that grown men would never think of doing..
Making noise and walking around and getting lost and wearing the wrong clothes and doing things that the deer never expect..
Deer pattern people just like people pattern deer.

Even Jack's belief's on scopes do not hold true today due to the fact that scopes are much clearer now then they were 20 years ago.. The objectives have gotten bigger and the coatings are now multiple. A cheap $300 scope that you can buy today in any good gun shop would have cost $5000 in 1964 money...
Back then the lenses were all ground by hand on a machine one at a time and it was a very expensive time consuming process.

Other than on a custom gun, you could not get a fiberglass stock and there was no carbon fiber stock on any rifle. They had to make sure that the wood stock did not shrink or swell or warp..

In 1925 the 270 Winchester was the cats meow. One of the first new cartridges developed after The Great War - not of a military derivative..

Also the only cartridge know to have had been designed and developed and sold during a crisis ( The Great Depression ) and still be in manufacture today.

For that matter of fact, the model 70 Winchester came out in 1936 and was the longest running manufacturer of continous operations to manufacture a model of a rifle during the depression that was still being made 70 years later...

I will stick with my '06 and 270 for the deer and little stuff and use the .300 Winchester Mag for anything bigger than that.... It's all the gun you will ever need....

Jack knew a little more than he let on.. Shot placement not rapid fire or some large miracle caliber would harvest animals.

Give a guy a good gun and a good caliber and a good scope and a good bullet and he will bring home the game.

I have a bolt action '06 that was probably made in 1936 by Savage Arms that has killed over 100 Pennsylvania Whitetails. It even harvested 4 deer in one sitting by one hunter - all of them on the run, at long range and the gun only held 4 rounds.

I wonder how many people with their 7mm08's or 25/06 or 22/250's could say that?
 
My ideal rifle has somewhat different specifications.

The one rifle I've found that can meet those specifications is the No5 Enfield.

It fires a potent cartridge (I'm willing to handload, so finding it in every 7-11 isn't a big deal). 180-gr of .30 cal will do in most animals on this side of the planet.

10 round magazine, reloads from chargers.

Has iron sights graduated for the cartridge.

Can mount a "scout" scope using an XS mount without removing the irons (Leupold M8 2.5x would be my choice), and without making it impossible to load with chargers.

Is accurate (I'd prefer a Lithgow, as I've never heard anyone with one having the "wandering zero" problems the Brit rifles have.).

Is good ol' wood and steel.

Is the fastest turnbolt around.

Is handy and just "feels good".
 
The 300 Winchester Magnum

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/.300_Winchester_Magnum

The Winchester Manufacturing Company -
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Winchester_Repeating_Arms_Company

The Winchester Magnum family
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Winchester_Magnum

If it was not for Winchester and Mr. Browning we would not that the .50 BMG, the Browning Automatic Rifle 30 Caliber, or the 50 caliber bullets that they shot which was also the shape that we used for the first supersonic airplanes - since we knew that they could hold up in high speeds - above the speed of sound since the bullets that they shot could also travel that fast..

The M1 carbine, the M1 and the M 14 rifle......
 
You're selling yourself short here:

the ammo should be available at major retailers. This rules out ...

Within your stated parameters you can find a number of rifles, as I'm sure you're aware. But I don't think choosing a commonly produced cartridge is nearly as important as it used to be. It's never been easier to find cartridges or buy the material to make them. What used to take literally years of searching can be done in half an hour on Midway and Graf & Sons. When the writers you cite were in business, the idea of using a European metric round or some moribund or experimental cartridge for a basic hunting rifle was absurd. But these days everything has changed. There's no reason you can't set up an ideal hunting rifle in 9.3x64 or 8x57JS, for example. And certainly no reason you couldn't have one in 7x57, 6.5 Swede. Besides, most of the ones you listed are in fact available at major retailers.
 
I almost forgot, I also have the 300 Weatherby magnum in the Mark V. I really don't carry it much, it is just too long and to heavy for stalking. Mine is almost 47 inches long and weighs over 9# scoped, accuracy is adequate, nothing special, but not bad either.

Honestly I just don't, for me, see the 300 as a general purpose rifle. I have several and really like them. I have even built a, relatively, light weight 300 Winchester with a Shilen barrel that shoots incredibly well. The 300 Winchester has won several 1000 yard matches.

For me and what I currently hunt (my perceived needs) and what I will hunt I just don't see that a magnum is necessary, yes it increases my maximum point blank range and puts significantly more energy on target often with a bullet that has a higher sectional density and will provide great performance from oblique angles.

The cost is a rifle that is either significantly heavier or one that recoils significantly more and a rifle that is longer, and louder. Do magnums have their place? Yes, will I carry one elk hunting? Yes, is it my first choice in a general purpose rifle? No. I just don't see that the increase in range and energy is worth the trade off in size, weight, and cost. Like I stated my style of hunting often involves very long walks, weight and size are important to me.

Cosmoline,

Good point. Honestly I have a soft spot for the 6.5X55 and the 7X57 and have thought really hard about building or buying my next rifle in either of those calibers. I am really leaning toward the Swede.

Great discussion, this is what I had hoped for. Thanks guys.
 
While my choice is not for everyone it works for me. It started life as an Argintene Mauser in 30-06. It now has Lyman irons plus a

Bushnell 2-6 pistol scope forward mounted. The barrel is 19" and the overall length is 39". She weighs 8lbs 0oz. and her Timney trigger

breaks clean at 4. The balance point is at the front ring and she shoots about 1-1/4" with talored loads (1-1/2 to 1-3/4 with factory

fodder). For me it handles very nice, can buy amo anywhere, easy to carry easy to shoot. She may be ugly, but if I could keep only one

rifle from the safe this is the one.


steve's 005.JPE
 
Mine started out as a Brazilian Model 36 Mauser 98 in 30-06 with a shot-out barrel. The barrel was replaced with a like new Husqavarna 23 1/2 inch "pencil" barrel in 30-06. I shaved down the military walnut stock and added a good recoil pad after I had shortened the length of pull to my prefered 12 1/2 inches then finished it with multiple coats of tung oil. I honed the trigger, glass bedded the action, and molycoated it and the barrel. I added a 6X42 Scopechief in honed rings and a handmade leather sling. Weighs 8 pounds 2 ounces loaded and shoots where I want it to.
 
Mine started out as a Model 94 Winchester in 3030. It was bought new in 1957, but over the past 50 years it has been modified, and has evolved. It is now a Model 94 Winchester in 3030 with a Lyman receiver sight, not much finish left on the stock or bluing on the barrel. I'm real reliable out to about 270 yards with it over a pickup hood, or against a tree, and with a REAL good and solid rest 300 yards.
I just didn't realize until reading all this, I was undergunned and out dated. I need to read more gun magazines, and get out more. :confused: :eek: :D
 
de,

I am very impressed with your shooting abilities with your 30-30. You are much better with yours than I am with mine. My Winchester 94 also wears the Lyman receiver sight, it is short, light, very handy, and very fast. I love to carry it when I am stalking through the bottoms looking for deer or hogs.

I love to practice with mine out to 250 yards, I find great pleasure in being able to shoot little groups out that far with open sights in my 30-30.

I do not believe, for me, that the 30-30 is a general purpose rifle.

One reason for that belief is ballistics. I have now hunted for about 25 years and I have a firm view of how I like to hunt and what I can do.

My 30-30 is sighted in with a 150 yard zero with 170 grain bullets because I use it in very thick cover and do not want a big rise above the line of sight. This zero effectively gives me a maximum point blank range (MPBR), no holdover of 200 yards. One can increase the MPBR to about 230 yards by changing to a 200 yard zero, the 30-30 is 4 inches high at 100 and about 7 inches low at 250, at 300 yards the 30-30 is now 18 inches low and will drift 20 inches with a 10 mph cross wind. You can flatten the trajectory a touch by switching to 150 gr bullets and increase your MPBR to 240 yards.

The 270 has a MPBR of 325 yards with my chosen load and is less than 12 inches low at 400, provides more than 1500 foot pounds of energy at 400 yards and has less than 20 inches of wind drift at 550 yards (it simply is less work for me and give me a bigger margin of error).

The 30-06 has a MPBR of around 300 yards with my chosen load and is about 18 inches low at 400, provides more than 1500 foot pounds of energy at 450 yards and has less than 20 inches of wind drift at 500 yards (it simply is less work for me and give me a bigger margin of error).

I routinely have the opportunity and occasionally kill game at around 400 yards. The 30-30 is over 55 inches low at this range. I kill game that ranges is size from 40# to 350#; if you assume deer size game require 1000 foot pounds of energy the 30-30 can do this to 200 yards.

I will hunt elk, elk have been killed and will be killed with the 30-30. I just would like a little more margin of error. People who routinely hunt elk do recommend 1500 foot pounds of energy, the 30-30 can deliver this at 50 yards.

The energy recommendations are not new nor are they advertising from a gun magazine they are derived from Clyde Ormond’s Book Hunting this book was published in 1972.

Lastly, for hunting, speed is of the essence. I find I am much faster with a scope, both at close range and at long range. I simply do better with the single sighting plane a scope provides. I find that even in thick cover a low power scope 1.5 to 2 is very fast and at 300+ yards 6 works very well. I do no like a scope on my 30-30, I have tried it twice a low power 1.5 to 5 and aimpoint, they interfere with the balance and handling characteristics of the gun.

For me the 30-30 is a great gun, and mine would be the last one to go. Not only do I love it for its handling and the game I have taken with it, I love it because, like most, it was my first big game rifle and was owned by my Grandfather. Is is my perfect general purpose gun? No, it simply does not meet the criteria I have decided on. Is the 30-30 a great gun? Yes, I love mine.
 
Well Charles S, my post was mostly for humors sake, althought I do routinely practice at those ranges with the aforementioned rifle. I have only been hunting for about 50 years.
My training is somewhat different than yours however. I have approximately 400 hrs recognized and approved by the Texas Commission on Law Enforcement regarding weapons and tactics. I was before retireing a qualified instructer (since 1977) to, and did train tactical methods regarding, revolver, auto pistol, fighting shotgun, assault weapons, SWAT, and Tactical K-9 training and deployment, along with some countersniper training. I suppose I have fired about everything that was available to LE until 12 or 13 years ago when I left LE after 20 years. I to have searched for the perfect all purpose rifle and have come to the conclusion that everytime I thought I had found it, some clown with a typewriter would write another article. Solution? I quit readin em.
As a sportsman I have settled on 4 rifles, depending on the task. Would one do all? For the most part yes, but I have found we Americans want instant gratification and we're willing to pay for it. I have seen very few expert articles in the gun mags, but a hell-of-a-lot of articulate opinions. One of my favorite examples is the thickness of a deer's ribs protecting the heart-lung area. If one compared the thickness of the afore mentioned deer REALISTICLY with the thickness in the same area the rib on an elk, moose, or even a buffalo, one would question the need proclaimed by the gun rags of ANY magnum. I would lend far more credence to bullet selection and placement. I have been reloading since 1970, and this bullet issue can play a major role. Now would I use a 3030 to stop a charging grizzley trying to mess up my fishing trip. Only if I had to. I would prefer an automatic shotgun with Hi-Viz front sight, sighted in at 50 yards, with a 1 oz magnum slug.
As all this info I have given is virturally worthless to the average sportsman, and off topic, I would once again concede my original post was more about humor and the custom rifle. No offense intended.:)
 
No offense intended.

None taken, I was just giving you an honest answer as to why my 30-30 is not my go to rifle.

I to have searched for the perfect all purpose rifle

I think most serious hunters keep that in the back of their mind. I am down to about 3 rifles I reach for 95% of the time and 3 more that I use for special needs.

It may be pointless, but I really like the idea of a single reliable, accurate, light, and handy rifle with plenty of power, but not obnoxious recoil that I can carry and use for the vast majority of my hunting needs. A go to rifle. I like the idea of a backup sighting system, because I have had scopes fail, only one of my current rifles has a backup sighting system.

I am not really interested in a magnum, I just don't think I need the power a magnum offers to do what I want to do.

Honestly in Clyde Ormond’s Book Hunting he states that the 270, 280 and 30-06 are the absolute minimum cartridges for elk hunting and that the 300 H&H represents a good caliber for elk. A lot has changed since 1972, bullets are better, the newer high energy loadings allow a 30-06 to get very close to what the 300 H&H can do. I just don't think that magnums are necessary for most of todays hunting situation. I am not disparaging them I own more than a few, I just don't think they are ideal for a general purpose rifle for me.

This may be a pointless search, honestly both my 270 and 30-06 bolts meet most of my required needs. I just need backup sights on both and a more durable finish on the 30-06.

I really just want another rifle and was thinking of using the opportunity to build myself a stainless, light weight rifle with sights and QD mounts. Cosmoline had some excellent advice. I may choose to build a rifle in an more obscure caliber that meets all the criteria I have set forth. The 6.5X55 sure looks good as does the 7X57.

While I certainly am no where close to your level of training, I have had some rifle courses and shot some 1000 yard matches, while I am certainly not an expert, I am not a beginner either.
 
Charles S, I don't believe there are any experts. Some may know more than others, but, it is an evolving process. My views now of what is necessary is somewhat different that 20 years ago. For instance when the double tap method on pistol training came out, it was because of the annemic 9mm being adopted by agencies who wanted high capacity pistols. Many officers found out right away they (the nines) were not good stoppers. In many cases marksmanship went farther out the window. Contrary to poplular belief, police officers can be very bad shots, relying on spray and pray technic. The high capacity 9mm lended to this mentality.
Another instance was the Texas Dept of Public Safety taking Winchester and Marlin 3030s out of trooper units and replacing them with high capacity magazined Mini 14s. Talk about a loss of accuracy. As I continued to instruct and train officers, and educate myself in training seminars, schools and reading stats of officer involved shootings I came to the conclusion that heavier calibur, MORE TRAINING, and marksmanship were the key to survival. Six rounds were almost always more than enough if applied properly. Switching back and forth from rifle to rifle does not help my skill, although I do so anyway. I also cannot find the perfect do anything rifle either, and have settled on three or four.
 
30/06......6.5 Swede

My "Go To" rifle.....my main rifle.....they rifle that have the MOST confidence in.....the rifle that I have killed the most game with[over 150 head of big game] happens to be a 30/06.

The rifle that I hunt the most with lately is a .308......I don't consider the "power level" of it and the 30/06 any different for what I am hunting....whitetails and wild hogs.....but the .308 happens to be stainless and slightly lighter, which is why it gets used more on local, less "important " hunts.

I have had the oppourtunity to get a new rifle just to "play with"....a rifle that basically doesn't cost me anything, and it doesn't really matter if I love it or not, it doesn't matter if I use it or not......and I chose a 6.5 Swede.

I have always admired 6.5 bullets.......I have dressed over 200 head of game taken by .264 win mags, and I have always wanted another rifle that shot LOOOOONG skinny bullets:p But, I did not want another MAGNUM...lately I've had .270 Short Mags, and .300 Win mags.......I'm tired of the NOISE....tired of the hassle:rolleyes: I wanted a mild, calm rifle...but one that was very capable. After studying all that I could, and talking to folks that have used many cartridges.....I settled on the 6.5 Swede in the SAKO 85. Its got decent barrel lenght.....so maybe I can get close to 2800 fps with a 140 bullet, or maybe with the new 130 Accubond from Nosler.

The last few years, I've backed off the number of whitetails I've sent to the freezed......I've been just handgun hunting and passing on a lot of deer. Well my fiance REALLY loves the low fat nature of Venison....and cooks it at least twice a week.....next year, Bambi is in serious trouble:neener:
 
this has been one of the better threads lately. since this is not one of the end of world threads,and since i want a 338win mag,i think there is enough availability you should still keep it in play.
 
since i want a 338win mag,i think there is enough availability you should still keep it in play.

Honestly, if I lived out West and Elk were my primary game I think the 338 Win would be an excellent choice, for me with deer and hogs as my primary game I think it is a bit much.

Great round, I have always wanted one also.
 
Let me throw a couple thoughts your way just to see how they strike you. I was reading this thread late last night, so bear with me if you already ruled out this first notion: How about a single-shot? I don't know about the Brownings, Winchesters, or T/Cs, but H&R makes a stainless model. With something like that, you could get (for example) a 26"-barreled .280 Rem that would be no longer than a 22" sporter barrel on most repeaters.

Another thought is one of the new Marlin XLR lever guns (also stainless) in .308 Marlin Express. That would give you essentially .308 Win ballistics in a lever gun. Of course, you could get a Browning BLR or Savage 99, but I don't know whether those were ever available in stainless. I mention this option because you seem to really like your .30-30.

How do those concepts strike you?
P.S. Neither of the above is my "go-to" rifle at present. Mine is an A-bolt in .30-06 w/BOSS.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top