Rank These Calibers (As Objectively as Possible)

[rcmodel]

Is there some kind of list of these numbers for each round that I can reference to?

Download this free and play with the numbers till your hearts content.

http://www.remington.com/pages/news-and-resources/downloads/remington-shoot-software.aspx

I might add that having the power to kill a deer at 500-600 yards is not nearly as hard to do as hitting a deer in the kill zone at 500-600 yards.

rc

 

[meanmrmustard]

Kachok:



CB900F:



I'd like to learn more about numbers used in these two comments. So, 1800fps and 1000ft/lbs is considered a "benchmark" of sorts for effectiveness against deer? And assuming perfect conditions (remember, I'm more interested in theory on this topic since I'm incapable of remotely approaching what we're discussing), whichever caliber can achieve these benchmarks at the furthest distance would be the "winner" of this exercise? Is there some kind of list of these numbers for each round that I can reference to?

I've used .223 rem that hit those marks in spades, but it's not exactly a heavy BC-friendly round on deer. Couldnt convince the dead deer of that. But, past 200 yards, what does one consider a performer?

 

[jmr40]

With modern loads and bullets in any of them you'd be spliting hairs to pick one over the other. This is an 8 way tie.

You could pick and chose selected loads and make them come out in order you wish. Some of the older chamberings and 100 year old loads don't look as good at first glance, but once you load them to their potential they are as good as anything.

 

[The_Armed_Therapist]

I might add that having the power to kill a deer at 500-600 yards is not nearly as hard to do as hitting a deer in the kill zone at 500-600 yards.

Believe me, I'm well-aware. I probably couldn't hit anything I intended to hit at 500 yards. Hopefully someday!

 

[Walkalong]

.260 rem ain't that bad. It's a competitor for sure.

For sure, but not on the list.

I might add that having the power to kill a deer at 500-600 yards is not nearly as hard to do as hitting a deer in the kill zone at 500-600 yards.

Definitely.

All the calibers listed should be able to kill a deer at 500 yards, if you can hit it. In a good gun, they should all be reasonably capable if the shooter is.

The .308 has been used for target competitions, as has the 6.5X55 Swede, the -06 and .270 have good reps for accuracy, and can get the job done, so I'll stick with them.

 

[meanmrmustard]

For sure, but not on the list.

Definitely.

All the calibers listed should be able to kill a deer at 500 yards, if you can hit it. In a good gun, they should all be reasonably capable if the shooter is.

The .308 has been used for target competitions, as has the 6.5X55 Swede, the -06 and .270 have good reps for accuracy, and can get the job done, so I'll stick with them.

Touché, and well played Pimpernel, well played.

 

[Jim Watson]

Agree with rc and Walk.
These are all "full power" cartridges, enough for armies to go to war with back when range was more important than rate of fire. Or close derivatives in the case of .270 and 7mm 08.

I am not a good enough shot to stretch any of them for a sure kill by power alone.

But you have to have a rifle to shoot them out of and it is not reasonable to separate caliber from gun... unless you are going full custom, which the OP seems not to be interested in, being that he finds a .260 Remington expensive.

I can't say I have seen what I would call a "nice" 7.62x54R sporting rifle. Lots of enthusiastic DIY but not a fine rifle.
I think something like a Lee Speed .303 Sporting Rifle looks elegant, but I don't think it is a long range rifle by modern standards, no matter how many leaves it has on its sight.
No doubt a K31 is a well made military weapon, but again, I have not seen one I would hunt with if there were other choices.

The others come in Mausers, Springfields, Winchesters, and Remingtons. Those look and feel like rifles to me.

 

[meanmrmustard]

Agree with rc and Walk.
These are all "full power" cartridges, enough for armies to go to war with back when range was more important than rate of fire. Or close derivatives in the case of .270 and 7mm 08.

I am not a good enough shot to stretch any of them for a sure kill by power alone.

But you have to have a rifle to shoot them out of and it is not reasonable to separate caliber from gun... unless you are going full custom, which the OP seems not to be interested in, being that he finds a .260 Remington expensive.

I can't say I have seen what I would call a "nice" 7.62x54R sporting rifle. Lots of enthusiastic DIY but not a fine rifle.
I think something like a Lee Speed .303 Sporting Rifle looks elegant, but I don't think it is a long range rifle by modern standards, no matter how many leaves it has on its sight.
No doubt a K31 is a well made military weapon, but again, I have not seen one I would hunt with if there were other choices.

The others come in Mausers, Springfields, Winchesters, and Remingtons. Those look and feel like rifles to me.

No K31 you'd hunt with? Blasphemy. Can't think of a rifle with irons I'd use OVER a K31, having now gotten acquainted with it and the caliber. Scoped, deadlier still.

You're opinions may vary. My fiancé told me recently I need to respect others subjective ness more...I'm working on it guys.

 

[R.W.Dale]

No K31 you'd hunt with? Blasphemy. Can't think of a rifle with irons I'd use OVER a K31, having now gotten acquainted with it and the caliber. Scoped, deadlier still.

You're opinions may vary. My fiancé told me recently I need to respect others subjective ness more...I'm working on it guys.

I can think of lots of rifles with irons I'd use over a k31

They're fine rifles but for accuracy and with irons aperture sights rule the roost. Tangent sights need not apply.

 

[akodo]

Are some of these more inherently accurate than others?

- no, not until you get into $3000 benchrest rifles

Do some lose fragmentation around certain distances?

- depends entirely on bullet weight and design for each chambering. Not an issue either way.

In other words, which one is the most likely to cleanly take a deer at the furthest distance? Which one is least likely to do it?

All things being the same...premium bullet, shot in exactly the same place, etc etc, then more energy = more potential to do deer dropping damage. When energy levels are nearly identical, wider bullet tends to do better. Exactly how much width equals how much energy is undetermined.

So this means a 416 Rigby gives a minuscule edge on dropping a deer cleanly as compared to a 30-06 or 243 or whatever, right?

NO. Shooter is a human right? Humans are impacted by recoil. Heavier recoiling rifle makes it more likely to develop flinch.

Heavier recoil means a slower follow-up shot if one is needed. If the user is already winded from say hiking up a hill to get the shot, this is greatly increased.

Even if there is no flinch, heavier recoil fatigues the shooter more than lighter recoil. This affects how well a shooter can practice and how long a shooter can practice. Regular practice is probably 100 times more relevant to which is going to give you the best results vs which cartridge is best for dropping deer.

This all favors a lower recoiling gun, which equates to a lower powered cartridge.

Added onto this, what is the cost of loaded ammo, what is the cost of components for handloading?

In general, this also equates to a lower powered cartridge.

Honestly, in the hands of a very skilled shooter who shoots regularly has no flinch and cost to practice is irrelevant, the 30-06 is probably on top.

But here's the other thing. The difference between best and worst among that list is astronomically small. (Assuming equal quality load, bullet, etc)
I'd rate the best at 99.9999999999
I'd rate the loser at 99.9999999998

Once you have 'enough' power, while extra power is in theory good, the change is so small as to be irrelevant.

So once you go back in and factor in the human susceptibility to recoil, economic factors, and the like, the lowest recoiling round that cleanly gets the job done actually wins out. That's why I'd add something like the 257 Roberts, 25-06, or 250 Savage to your list and crown it king. Because a guy with the quarter bore has more than enough power (those round can all take elk) and the recoil is low enough which means you gain more on your trips to the range, and hopefully you make more trips.

 

[akodo]

In factory loadings (if you're asking you don't handload) 30/06 dominates your list as it will launch the heaviest hunting bullets with the highest BC faster than the others.

Then comes
270
308
7/08

I disagree. The 30-06 can be found with 220 grain bullets, but so can the 8mm mauser.

As far as sectional density, the 30-06 and 308 are actually the worst. If firing bullets of equal sectional densities, those two give the lower performance simply because you have to have a heavier 30 cal bullet to have the same sectional density as a lighter .277 bullet.

Sectional density seems to allow a cartridge to more efficiently use it's energy. To bring a 30-06 up to the range of sectional density as is commonly found with the 6.5 swede and 270, you got to be slinging 200 or 220 grain bullets, but few people use those. Really, the only people who do are those who are going after bear with their 30-06

However, when shooting deer sized animals and elk sized animals, most 30 caliber users use 150 grain and 180 grain respectively (they want the less recoil and flatter trajectory) but when you compare what the smaller calibers use for standard deer and standard elk, they have superior sectional density, so they use energy better.

Unless you are hunting using 200 grain or heavier 30 caliber bullets, I think you'd be better off with a smaller caliber. And this isn't just for white tail, this is for elk too. The 270 and the 7mm-08 are wonderful elk cartridges.

6.5x55 and 30-06 are both capable of the minimums (1800fps and 1000ft/lbs) out to 700 yards so I put them in a class well above the others though neither has a top notch trajectory with those heavy, high BC bullets.
270 win has the tighter trajectory with it's light 130gr bullets but they loose alot more speed over distance so their maximum range is reduced.

NOT TRUE!

The standard hunting weight for white tails for the 30-06 is 150 grain, for the 270 it is 130 grain.

Grabbing two random high quality winchester rounds...power max bonded.

the 270 starts out faster and the 30-06 never overtakes it. At 400 yards the 270 is going at 2032 and the 30-06 is just at 1882. Energy at 500 yards the 270 has 950 and the 30-06 has 922. With a 300 yard zero the 270 hits 21 inches low to the 30-06's 24 inches low.

The picture is the same if you compare 150 grain elk loads in 270 to their equivalent 180 grain elk loads in 30-06

As for the 6.5 swede, it just doesn't have the bullet availabilty, about all you'll find is a 140 grain, which puts up very similar numbers (1836 fps at 400 yards, 878 ft-lbs at 500 yards, 28 inches low off a 300 zero at 500 yards) Of course that small long bullet has a nice sectional density number, which means the round tends to perform very effectively on the animal.

Your statement about the 130 winchester is TOTALLY off base.

All 3 are great rounds.

None of these differences are significant, however the 270 winchester wins in all categories.

Of course the insignificance is compounded by the fact that most deer are shot at 100 yards not 500 yards regardless of what the guys bragging at the bar say.

 

[jim243]

I might add that having the power to kill a deer at 500-600 yards is not nearly as hard to do as hitting a deer in the kill zone at 500-600 yards.

LOL, I have to agree. Unless your planning on shooting deer at 1,000 yards, it doesn't make a hill of beans dfference which one of these you would use. They all will be effective at deer distances (50 to 200 yards). LOL

Jim

 

[HOOfan_1]

I'm just wondering which of these calibers have the greatest range, flattest trajectory, and are most likely to take down deer at the furthest distances.


.30-06 springfield
.308 winchester
.270 winchester
.303 british
8mm mauser
7mm-08 remington
7.62x54R
7.5x55 swiss
6.5x55 swede

Hmm if range is your biggest criteria IMO

.270 WIN
.30-06 and 7mm-08 in a tie
6.5x55, .308 and 8x57 in a tie
7.62x54R and 7.5x55 in a tie
.303 British

 

[Kachok]

[/B][/COLOR]
The standard hunting weight for white tails for the 30-06 is 150 grain, for the 270 it is 130 grain.

Grabbing two random high quality winchester rounds...power max bonded.

the 270 starts out faster and the 30-06 never overtakes it. At 400 yards the 270 is going at 2032 and the 30-06 is just at 1882. Energy at 500 yards the 270 has 950 and the 30-06 has 922. With a 300 yard zero the 270 hits 21 inches low to the 30-06's 24 inches low.

The picture is the same if you compare 150 grain elk loads in 270 to their equivalent 180 grain elk loads in 30-06

As for the 6.5 swede, it just doesn't have the bullet availabilty, about all you'll find is a 140 grain, which puts up very similar numbers (1836 fps at 400 yards, 878 ft-lbs at 500 yards, 28 inches low off a 300 zero at 500 yards) Of course that small long bullet has a nice sectional density number, which means the round tends to perform very effectively on the animal.

Your statement about the 130 winchester is TOTALLY off base.

All 3 are great rounds.

None of these differences are significant, however the 270 winchester wins in all categories.

Of course the insignificance is compounded by the fact that most deer are shot at 100 yards not 500 yards regardless of what the guys bragging at the bar say.

!?!?!? I was not talking any factory fodder off the shelf garbage, I am talking about custom handloads designed for shooting long range. My 200gr AB 30-06 loads have a much higher BC then any 130gr .270 cal as do my 140gr 6.5x55, sure they are slower out of the muzzle then my 270 but at range they are moving faster thanks to the more streamlined bullets. That is the difference between shooting flat and shooting far. If we are talking the the context of grabbing whatever 150gr BS is gathering dust on the shelf of your local hardwear store then yeah the 270 is the better of the two but that is not really a fair comparison of what they are capable of.
BTW I have absolutly no problem using 200gr for deer hunting seeing as down here we can run across some very large hogs while hunting as well, so bringing a little extra never hurts. Not knocking the 270 though, great caliber, I have used them for many years and have yet to have any issues with them.

 

[RPRNY]

FWIW, I agree entirely with Col Mustard's listing.

 

[meanmrmustard]

I can think of lots of rifles with irons I'd use over a k31

They're fine rifles but for accuracy and with irons aperture sights rule the roost. Tangent sights need not apply.

We will agree to disagree.

We're also veering here, it's the calibers under scrutiny, not the rifle.

 

[Scrumbag]

Well, I am British and I'd go with the .30-06 as my top choice because of the flexibility in available ammunition.

Load light 125gr for fast and flat right up to 220gr for if you want close in hog work. Most people I know who shoot one (I can't due to silly local laws on military calibres) just shoot pretty much everything with a 165-180gr bullet they know well in terms of drop and drift.

ATB,

Scrummy

 

[HOOfan_1]

!?!?!? I was not talking any factory fodder off the shelf garbage, I am talking about custom handloads designed for shooting long range. My 200gr AB 30-06 loads have a much higher BC then any 130gr .270 cal as do my 140gr 6.5x55, sure they are slower out of the muzzle then my 270 but at range they are moving faster thanks to the more streamlined bullets. .

What range are we talking about?

200 gr. .308 bullets with a BC of .600 launched at 2600 FPS is still dropping farther than a .270 150gr. bullet with a BC of .496 launched at 2800 FPS according to several ballistics calculator. The .308 bullet has about 400 ft-lb more energy though.

The .270 runs out of the magical 1000 ft-lb. range by 700 yards, while the .308 bullet runs out at about 900 yards. So I guess that begs the question...is the hunter willing to take shots out beyond 600 yards?

 

[Sav .250]

Very subjective to say the least. To compare 2-3 guns maybe but to compare 9-10, not much clarity will come out of that pile. J s/n.

 

[pilotlight]

.308 Win. is number one, because of availability and cartridge power.
30.06 would follow a close second, and then 54r.
Since 308 is a NATO round, you can find battle packs of it
for less $$$. 30.06 can be found through the CMP for reasonable
prices.

 

[The_Armed_Therapist]

I did my own little experiment with the link that RCMODEL posted. Using the same type of Remington ammo for all of the calibers I listed (minus 7.5x55 swiss and 7.62x54R since they don't make ammo for these), I gathered information based upon the 1800f/s and 1000ft-lbs numbers that was suggested here. I realize a deer could be, and frequently is, taken down cleanly with less than this. I just chose this as a benchmark because it was brought up.

The "y" number is the maximum yardage that BOTH 1800f/s and 1000ft-lbs is maintained. The "-" number, of course, is the bullet drop at that yardage.

6.5x55 140gr. 408y -40.16
.30-06 150gr. 418y -35.74
.30-06 165gr. 412y -36.35
.30-06 180gr. 423y -40.55
.270 130gr. 471y -42.87
.308 150gr. 388y -31.19
.308 180gr. 389y -34.58
.303 180gr. 206y -6.89
8mm 170gr. 147y -2.19
7mm-08 140gr. 499y -55.26

Just for kicks, I also ran the following using the same type of ammo:

.243 100gr. 341y -18.12
.25-06 100gr. 359y -18.34
.25-06 120gr. 444y -37.09
.260 140gr. 505y -59.80
.300mag 180gr. 606y -82.05

I can already point to several potential flaws in this. How about you guys? What is flawed or potentially flawed?

Based on the 7 that I originally posted that Remington loads, 7mm-08 seems to be the winner as far as having the benchmark power at the furthest distance to cleanly take game. It surprises me since I didn't really know much about that round and didn't seriously consider it... only included it because of its relative affordability of ammo.

I'm equally surprised how poorly 8mm and .303 hold up. Additionally, the .243 surprised me as almost approaching the .308 loads and the .25-06, too, because I just didn't know anything about it. Not surprised by the .260 and .300 mag, though.

 

[HOOfan_1]

I'm equally surprised how poorly 8mm and .303 hold up. .

You can hand load 8mm, .303 and 6.5x55 to be much hotter than what any factory load will be.

The rest on that list usually come with pretty hot factory loads.

6.5x55 and 8mm have much more potential from handloading than the .303 though.

 

[One_Jackal]

I love to hunt. I will travel almost anywhere to hunt. One problem I experience traveling is transporting ammo. Lots of airlines make it difficult to carry ammo. I often forget to bring ammo when I am driving. I don't reload and have no intentions of starting. Only the 30/06, 308 and 270 even make it on my list. If I can't get ammo for a hunting rifle anywhere I don't want it. My favorite round is the 30/06. The 30/06 will handle a wide variety of bullets from 150 grain to 230 grain, not to mention all the different types of bullets.
2cnd 308
3rd 270

The rest aren't even on my radar.

 

[The_Armed_Therapist]

For this exercise, I'm completely discounting handloads since, like One_Jackal, I don't do it and have no intentions of starting. Hence, I'm just interested in factory loads for this thread.

I do wonder why the 8mm is so underloaded, though... I don't know much about loading, but I always assumed that 8x57 would be a very large bullet requiring a lot of powder. Since it performs not very powerfully relative to the others, I'm just assuming that it isn't loaded fully. Why do they do that? Would it just be a very heavy-recoiling round if they did?

Also, availability isn't a primary concern in the exercise, either... But I did exclude some ultra unavailable rounds and/or those that are too pricey (based upon my arbitrary cut-off).

 

[jmr40]

Freedom Freak, you must have chosen some very underpowered loads along with some very poorly shaped bullets for your comparisons
My 30-06 loads maintain 1800 fps and 1000 ft lbs of energy out to just under 600 yards with 150, 165 or 180 gr bullets.

My 308 and 165's will do so out to 500+.