I have a question....30-06 has not been been used by the US in any way since WW2. I may be wrong with the exception of a few snipers in Viet Nam. I do believe that the prefered round is .308 Nato or 7.62x51. I believe at 200 yards it shoots Zero and at 400 yards it shall be -26.04" I don't thing the Military picked the .223, .308 rounds as battle rifles for fun. the >308 is and have been tried and proven. Check stats, the .308 Win is the flattest and most accurite out there. Want to see 4-6 MOA, look up the 7.62x54. Get something in a .308 and enjoy the long haul.
Help me choose a caliber for Remington 700 BDL
- Thread starter Dogger
- Start date
RiverRider
New member
Karsten, I think you missed the boat by a tad...
The .308 IS one of the most accurate cartridges around, but as far as being the flattest shooting?? Not by a long shot. Flat shooting rifles combine a bullet of a high ballistic coefficient (dependent on sectional density, bullet shape, and in the dynamic world - high stability in flight) with high velocity.
If we wwere all capable of judging range within just a few yards, we could all get by just fine with rifles that produced muzzle velocities down around 900 fps, as long as they were ACCURATE. They wouldn't need to be flat-shooting.
That's the difference. What I am saying is that the .308 would likely be the best cartridge of all for a big game hunter who could precisely estimate range. But range estimation is not easy, so we want rifles that make range estimation errors inconsequential. That's what makes higher velocities so desireable.
The .308 IS one of the most accurate cartridges around, but as far as being the flattest shooting?? Not by a long shot. Flat shooting rifles combine a bullet of a high ballistic coefficient (dependent on sectional density, bullet shape, and in the dynamic world - high stability in flight) with high velocity.
If we wwere all capable of judging range within just a few yards, we could all get by just fine with rifles that produced muzzle velocities down around 900 fps, as long as they were ACCURATE. They wouldn't need to be flat-shooting.
That's the difference. What I am saying is that the .308 would likely be the best cartridge of all for a big game hunter who could precisely estimate range. But range estimation is not easy, so we want rifles that make range estimation errors inconsequential. That's what makes higher velocities so desireable.
River Rider,
You have me confused as to the most accurite. then again it is an age thing I guess. In an earlier post it was stated that the 30-06 have a favorite by some, then the .308 by others and then we have these strange sounding things like 25-06 and I have read a few posts and things about .17 cal somethings. Trust me, I will never be an expert nor can anyone on caliber so I make the best of what I have. I limited and got rid of stuff to keep reloading and changing dies to a minimum. I am left with 4 45 ACPs, 4 rifle in 7.62X39 (I buy the cheap stuff) .308 Winchester model 70. Soon to have an M1A
I have a load for the .308 that seems pretty flat to me but you be the judge. At 100 in is 2.25 high, at 200 it is 0 and at 300 it is -9.04 and at 400 it is -26.25. To Me that is flat and accurate as well. .50-.75 MOA is not too bad, I don't think.
Try the load, CCI #200, IMR4064....42 grains, Speer #2034 165 grain BTSP will push 2485 FPS.
Not being rude but I guess it is true, older shooters like the 06, a bit younger the .308 and younger the .223 and the lighter calibers. It does make sence though if you think about it. I am 45 my father had a .308, my grandfather gave me a 300 Savage. It does made sence what was said about age and calibers though it you think about it.
But it has been very interesting and informative to say the least. It does seem that we all are looking for that perfect long range rifle, without spending $7000 for a Manlicker or how ever you spell it. I saw one today and had to order my stuff, look at an M1A and tell then to put it on the floor.
Try the load
Karsten
You have me confused as to the most accurite. then again it is an age thing I guess. In an earlier post it was stated that the 30-06 have a favorite by some, then the .308 by others and then we have these strange sounding things like 25-06 and I have read a few posts and things about .17 cal somethings. Trust me, I will never be an expert nor can anyone on caliber so I make the best of what I have. I limited and got rid of stuff to keep reloading and changing dies to a minimum. I am left with 4 45 ACPs, 4 rifle in 7.62X39 (I buy the cheap stuff) .308 Winchester model 70. Soon to have an M1A
I have a load for the .308 that seems pretty flat to me but you be the judge. At 100 in is 2.25 high, at 200 it is 0 and at 300 it is -9.04 and at 400 it is -26.25. To Me that is flat and accurate as well. .50-.75 MOA is not too bad, I don't think.
Try the load, CCI #200, IMR4064....42 grains, Speer #2034 165 grain BTSP will push 2485 FPS.
Not being rude but I guess it is true, older shooters like the 06, a bit younger the .308 and younger the .223 and the lighter calibers. It does make sence though if you think about it. I am 45 my father had a .308, my grandfather gave me a 300 Savage. It does made sence what was said about age and calibers though it you think about it.
But it has been very interesting and informative to say the least. It does seem that we all are looking for that perfect long range rifle, without spending $7000 for a Manlicker or how ever you spell it. I saw one today and had to order my stuff, look at an M1A and tell then to put it on the floor.
Try the load
Karsten
RiverRider
New member
Karsten, I think I see where you are confused...
A flat shooting cartridge is one that propels its bullet at high velocity. The bullet will have a high ballistic coefficient (it has a streamlined shape) so that it does not lose its velocity rapidly due to the resistance offered by the air it is passing through.
An accurate cartridge is one that repeatedly places its bullet in the same spot, shot after shot.
A firearm does not have to be flat shooting to be accurate. It can have a rather rainbow-shaped trajectory and still hit where it is aimed because of the fact that it has been sighted in to hit (generally speaking) the point of aim at some predetermined range.
As an example, a .300 Wonderwhumper may sling its bullets at 4500 feet per second and have only 6 inches of drop at 400 yards when sighted in 1/2 inch high at 100 yards, but it may still be woefully inaccurate.
On the other hand, a .300 Whisper may push its bullet at only 1000 feet per second, and have 200 inches of drop at 400 yards when sighted in 2 inches high at 100 yards, and yet still be a tackdriver. It will have a "rainbow" trajectory, but we can still hit a bucket at 500 yards because it is an accurate round in an accurate rifle, and we can sight the rifle in to compensate for the trajectory.
You may or may not realize, but the typical high powered rifle has to be sighted in to shoot a little high (1-1/2 to 3") at 100 yards so that it will be dead on at some longer range, say 250 yards. The less flat-shooting a rifle is, the more the trajectory must be compensated for to be able to hold dead on and hit a distant target.
Take your .308 as an example. Shooting 165 grainers at say, 2750 feet per second, and you wanted to be able to hold dead on and hit a pie plate out to as far as possible, then you would have to sight in the rifle so that the top of the trajectory was no more than about 5 inches high. The top of the trajectory would be at around 150 to 175 yards or so. You would sight the rifle in to shoot about 2-1/2 inches high at 100 yards. As the bullet passes 100 yards, it is still rising to the top of its trajectory until it is reached (at about 175 yards or so), and then the bullet begins its downward fall. The bullet will then pass through the line of sight, somewhere beyond 200 yards. It continues to fall, and at some point is more than 5 inches lower than the line of sight. I would guess this range to be around 250 to 300 yards. As long as the pie plate was within 250 or 300 yards, you would be able to hold dead on and hit it. That is the "point-blank range" concept.
A flatter shooting round allows a longer point-blank range, and range estimation for hold-over becomes much less important.
I do not dislike a cartridge for not being flat-shooting, nor do I like a cartridge just for BEING flat-shooting. I have nothing against the .308, and I happen to admire the .223 and have two rifles in that caliber. I just happen to think that for all-around use, there are better choices than .308, and that's just my opinion. It's all subjective, and you are welcome to have your opinion too.
I hope you don't feel like I jumped all over you. Sometimes I am not very tactful, but I really do just want to help. I hope I have cleared this up for you.
-RR-
[Edited by RiverRider on 01-25-2001 at 10:02 AM]
A flat shooting cartridge is one that propels its bullet at high velocity. The bullet will have a high ballistic coefficient (it has a streamlined shape) so that it does not lose its velocity rapidly due to the resistance offered by the air it is passing through.
An accurate cartridge is one that repeatedly places its bullet in the same spot, shot after shot.
A firearm does not have to be flat shooting to be accurate. It can have a rather rainbow-shaped trajectory and still hit where it is aimed because of the fact that it has been sighted in to hit (generally speaking) the point of aim at some predetermined range.
As an example, a .300 Wonderwhumper may sling its bullets at 4500 feet per second and have only 6 inches of drop at 400 yards when sighted in 1/2 inch high at 100 yards, but it may still be woefully inaccurate.
On the other hand, a .300 Whisper may push its bullet at only 1000 feet per second, and have 200 inches of drop at 400 yards when sighted in 2 inches high at 100 yards, and yet still be a tackdriver. It will have a "rainbow" trajectory, but we can still hit a bucket at 500 yards because it is an accurate round in an accurate rifle, and we can sight the rifle in to compensate for the trajectory.
You may or may not realize, but the typical high powered rifle has to be sighted in to shoot a little high (1-1/2 to 3") at 100 yards so that it will be dead on at some longer range, say 250 yards. The less flat-shooting a rifle is, the more the trajectory must be compensated for to be able to hold dead on and hit a distant target.
Take your .308 as an example. Shooting 165 grainers at say, 2750 feet per second, and you wanted to be able to hold dead on and hit a pie plate out to as far as possible, then you would have to sight in the rifle so that the top of the trajectory was no more than about 5 inches high. The top of the trajectory would be at around 150 to 175 yards or so. You would sight the rifle in to shoot about 2-1/2 inches high at 100 yards. As the bullet passes 100 yards, it is still rising to the top of its trajectory until it is reached (at about 175 yards or so), and then the bullet begins its downward fall. The bullet will then pass through the line of sight, somewhere beyond 200 yards. It continues to fall, and at some point is more than 5 inches lower than the line of sight. I would guess this range to be around 250 to 300 yards. As long as the pie plate was within 250 or 300 yards, you would be able to hold dead on and hit it. That is the "point-blank range" concept.
A flatter shooting round allows a longer point-blank range, and range estimation for hold-over becomes much less important.
I do not dislike a cartridge for not being flat-shooting, nor do I like a cartridge just for BEING flat-shooting. I have nothing against the .308, and I happen to admire the .223 and have two rifles in that caliber. I just happen to think that for all-around use, there are better choices than .308, and that's just my opinion. It's all subjective, and you are welcome to have your opinion too.
I hope you don't feel like I jumped all over you. Sometimes I am not very tactful, but I really do just want to help. I hope I have cleared this up for you.
-RR-
[Edited by RiverRider on 01-25-2001 at 10:02 AM]
And finally, here comes the definative answer to the original question!!!!!!!!!!!
Of the 4 calibers listed, the first is too small for elk, and the other 3 are way less than ideal for varminting.
What you really need to do is buy 3 of these calibers. That should be your intermediate range goal. (heck, you might even want all 4). Until then, forego either the varminting requirement, or the elk requirement, and plan on getting a second gun before the need arrives.
My guess is, you will postpone the elk rifle, in which case you should buy the 25-06 first.
Just as an aside, the 7mm-08 is a TRULY GREAT cartridge. It is mild in recoil and kick, is essentially just as powerful as the .270/.280, and you get to use a short action rifle (Oh, what a joy!). If you don't want to plan on buying more than one rifle, of those 4, that would be the one "I" would buy!!
(Please excuse the apparent arrogance - it really is just a case of strength of conviction)
Mike
Of the 4 calibers listed, the first is too small for elk, and the other 3 are way less than ideal for varminting.
What you really need to do is buy 3 of these calibers. That should be your intermediate range goal. (heck, you might even want all 4). Until then, forego either the varminting requirement, or the elk requirement, and plan on getting a second gun before the need arrives.
My guess is, you will postpone the elk rifle, in which case you should buy the 25-06 first.
Just as an aside, the 7mm-08 is a TRULY GREAT cartridge. It is mild in recoil and kick, is essentially just as powerful as the .270/.280, and you get to use a short action rifle (Oh, what a joy!). If you don't want to plan on buying more than one rifle, of those 4, that would be the one "I" would buy!!
(Please excuse the apparent arrogance - it really is just a case of strength of conviction)
Mike
Ah, interesting responses... I am leaning heavily towards the 25-06 in the BDL, or the 260 Remington/7mm-08 in the 700 mountain rifles... or the 260 in a Model 7...
I have paired it down to three calibers. But which of these 3?
Currently, I have a 7x57 Mauser in a Ruger M77 Mark II... so... perhaps to be a little different the 260 Remington or 25-06 edge ahead of the 7mm-08...
What a dilemma...
25-06 in the BDL...
260 in the Mountain Rifle...
260 in the Model 7...
But that 7mm08 would be so sweet... and could make comparisons with the 7x57...
I have paired it down to three calibers. But which of these 3?
Currently, I have a 7x57 Mauser in a Ruger M77 Mark II... so... perhaps to be a little different the 260 Remington or 25-06 edge ahead of the 7mm-08...
What a dilemma...
25-06 in the BDL...
260 in the Mountain Rifle...
260 in the Model 7...
But that 7mm08 would be so sweet... and could make comparisons with the 7x57...
RiverRider
New member
Yeah Dogger...leave a couple of 7s in a closet overnight...all alone...you could end up with a bunch of iddy-biddy 7mm pistols, huh?
CLARIFICATION:
In my previous post about trajectory and point-blank range, I used approximate, "for example" figures. In my laziness, I did not look up this stuff. I approximated. All I wanted to do was draw a rough sketch of a principle, not quote a ballistics table. I thought I made that kinda clear with phrases like "about" and "for instance" and "say, 2750 fps..." So, if anyone wants to take a critical look at the numbers I used, feel free, but that's not the point!
CLARIFICATION:
In my previous post about trajectory and point-blank range, I used approximate, "for example" figures. In my laziness, I did not look up this stuff. I approximated. All I wanted to do was draw a rough sketch of a principle, not quote a ballistics table. I thought I made that kinda clear with phrases like "about" and "for instance" and "say, 2750 fps..." So, if anyone wants to take a critical look at the numbers I used, feel free, but that's not the point!
I have to throw the Model 7 out -- it isn't a long range rifle, and wouldn't fit the once in a blue moon elk gun criteria...
Bummer.
That narrows it down to the Model 700s in 260 Remington the 7mms, and the 25-06... Whoa!! The 270 just snuck into the final pack again!!
Now, to juice things up a bit!! A buddy of mine is offering a 30-06 in the Ruger M77, like new, for $350!!! Dilemma!! Dilemma!!!!!
Bummer.
That narrows it down to the Model 700s in 260 Remington the 7mms, and the 25-06... Whoa!! The 270 just snuck into the final pack again!!
Now, to juice things up a bit!! A buddy of mine is offering a 30-06 in the Ruger M77, like new, for $350!!! Dilemma!! Dilemma!!!!!
huntschool
New member
Rifles
Rusty:
I had ju-just fi-finished gr-grading 25 su-subjective wildlife ma-management papers a-and m-my eyes were crossed and m-y fingers were fat.... Sorry
Thanks ART. 6mm Akley Imp.
Rusty:
I had ju-just fi-finished gr-grading 25 su-subjective wildlife ma-management papers a-and m-my eyes were crossed and m-y fingers were fat.... Sorry
Thanks ART. 6mm Akley Imp.
Art Eatman
Staff in Memoriam
Dogger, I'd never recommend the '06 to somebody who didn't handload; storebought ammo costs too much, and .308 in bulk is so much cheaper...
For a handloader, though, it's probably the most versatile cartridge of them all. You can go on up in bullet weight to 180- or 220-grain for the bigger stuff, or load bullets in the 80- to 110-grain range for varmints. The 150- and 165-grain bullets are great on deer. It is accurate with mid-range loads, and you can even meddle around with a low-noise squirrel load.
For a hunting gun, it's as accurate as it needs to be, if sub MOA suits. For normal hunting distances, it's as flat-shooting as it needs to be.
I've killed deer and coyotes with the .243, .25-'06 and .270. The .223 is a fun varmint cartridge. A 7mm-08 or 7X57 is probably as much gun as most folks will ever need, along with the venerable .257 Roberts, if deer hunting is the main game. The .308 is a good all-around cartridge.
I dunno. I just keep "coming home" to my Ol' Pet, the '06...
, Art
For a handloader, though, it's probably the most versatile cartridge of them all. You can go on up in bullet weight to 180- or 220-grain for the bigger stuff, or load bullets in the 80- to 110-grain range for varmints. The 150- and 165-grain bullets are great on deer. It is accurate with mid-range loads, and you can even meddle around with a low-noise squirrel load.
For a hunting gun, it's as accurate as it needs to be, if sub MOA suits. For normal hunting distances, it's as flat-shooting as it needs to be.
I've killed deer and coyotes with the .243, .25-'06 and .270. The .223 is a fun varmint cartridge. A 7mm-08 or 7X57 is probably as much gun as most folks will ever need, along with the venerable .257 Roberts, if deer hunting is the main game. The .308 is a good all-around cartridge.
I dunno. I just keep "coming home" to my Ol' Pet, the '06...
, ArtPeter M. Eick
New member
Go for the 7-08. Mine is great (700BDL stainless). I shoot 3/4 5 shot groups with 120 grn re-loads all day long. With 100 grns and no wind it will even go better. I have had no problems putting food on the table with it and it is easy to carry and use. I have a 4.5x14 leupold scope on it and not a problem since day one.
Now, with that said, I am looking for a 25-06 sendero for some good south texas shooting. I know of 7-08 would be fine, but I just want something different. Besides I have a 6.5x20 leupold just waiting for it.
Now, with that said, I am looking for a 25-06 sendero for some good south texas shooting. I know of 7-08 would be fine, but I just want something different. Besides I have a 6.5x20 leupold just waiting for it.
Dogger--If it was me, I'd go with the "Classic" in 7mm-08...the BDL's are commonplace, but not everyone has a "Classic"...the "Classic" stock seems to fit me very well...I think that the 7mm-08 will fit the bill nicely--heavier bullets are available, its a short action, PROBABLY more accurate...even if its' NOT a .308!!!....mikey357
Art Eatman
Staff in Memoriam
Classic; 7mm-08.
, Art
, ArtPoodleshooter
New member
7mm-08. You stated that you want to use it for elk someday. Well, the 7mm will do everything the 25/06 will do to varmints, and the 25/06 probably won't bring down an elk reliably. The 25/06 may be flat shooting, but by the time you notice any trajectory difference between it and bigger calibers, you've lost the retained energy and penetration you needed to make the kill on big game in the first place! 117-120 grain bullet tops, or 175grs? Seems like an easy choice to me
The .25-06 is one of the best deer cartridges ever. I know that this is a strong statement, but those truly in the know, know. 115 and 117grain bullets do the job. It is accurate, mild recoil and serious deadly on deer sized game.Not for elk, however.
If you are going to use the same gun for elk someday, then the .280 is the best of your choices.
BTW, nothing wrong with any of your choices, IMO. YMMV.
If you are going to use the same gun for elk someday, then the .280 is the best of your choices.
BTW, nothing wrong with any of your choices, IMO. YMMV.