Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Ask The Gunwriters How do you rate/ choose cartridges

one thing i remember many years ago on a visit to wolf publishing's office in prescott was the answer to a question i had. Being a banker and newly married, i only had money for one rifle what should i buy. The uniform answer from the writers there at the time was to buy a remington 30.06 bdl in left hand.
i did. I went on to acquire a lot of other rifles, but that bdl would have served for everything. They told me it wasn't the best for most things, but would handle just about everything given the bullet availability from light to heavy. They were right i think.

Not having the first hand experience, I largely was influenced by the "30-06 is never wrong" mentality. I now use the performance level of the -06 as a guide knowing anything in N/A can be killed with -06 performance levels. More is, well, more, for no reason in my estimation. Less may be fine for certain situations, but not ideal, in my mind, for a one rifle to do all. For whatever reason, the 338 Fed appealed to me. It's different. It closely mirrors the -06 performance, although in a short action and with a fatter bullet. That has goods and bads. The bad is reduced long range performance. I've concluded that any meaningful performance loss is well beyond the ranges I ever intend to shoot anything. The fatter bullet doesn't make smaller holes and so far I've been quite pleased. I can go with a 160 at 3000+ or a 200 in the 2600s depending on what feels 'right' for a given hunt. When hunting, it feels just right.

These days, I choose interesting rifles chambered for rounds I already have brass, bullets and dies for or can get cheaply. Can't see where cartridge choice makes much difference, certainly not for the stuff I hunt. My Hornet would be an exception now, but when I bought it, good Winny brass was about $20 a bag.

Time was when most folks had one rifle and used it for just about everything. Now, with premium bullets that stretch capabilities a bit, and Trail Boss that makes it simple to crank out practice and small game loads, that concept still makes a lot of sense.

'Course a fellar needs a few spares.

I look for a balance of flat shooting, hard hitting, and tolerable recoil. For each hunter this will likely be different.

For me the 270 Winchester fits this balance better than any other cartridge. While it is true the 280 or the 30/06 would also fall into this category if loaded with a 150 gr bullet at around 3000 fps I still choose the 270 because on average it has better BC and SD than its counterparts.:)

I also look for nastalgia rifles. To stay with the theme of nastalgia I use a slightly heavy for caliber Cup and Core bullet in a cartridge that pushes sane velocities where cup and core bullets work well. For me the ultimate nastalgia cartridge is the 7X57.

I've recently acquired a 6.5X55 Swede with an 8 twist and I'm thinking this rifle may end up being used as longer range open country deer and antilope rifle.




Shod

I prefer to use what has worked for others instead of analyzing stuff to death.

30-06 for practically everything through elk and moose or, since I hand load, I prefer a .300 magnum.

.223 for Eastern varmints because a 30-06 makes too much noise. .223 components are, of course, more available than other varmint calibers.

.270 for longer range deer and pronghorn. A .270 130 grain bullet has the same BC as a 190 grain .308 but far less recoil.

.375 for dangerous game--brown bears in Alaska or African stuff. Such a hunt costs $15,000+ so why not buy an optimum rifle for it? And your PH or guide won't let you shoot at long range.

Many other cartridges will do basically the same jobs as these with only slight differences in performance.

I just grab whatever hasn't been out to "play" in a while - as long as it's suitable for the "game" at hand.
When not out to "play", the 204 or 243 get the nod - 204 mostly, 243 during big game seasons, or if I've seen a lot of cat or bear sign. (I don't need to get clawed or chewed)

We males are an analytical bunch that like to quantify and qualify everything into tidy categories (ie, "ratings") that fit our linear thinking.

But, of course, life (and by extension death) doesn't generally work that way. The more open-minded experience one has, the more one knows this is fact (note "open minded", ie. experience is often wasted on those half asleep with inflexible prejudice).

Put a good bullet in the boiler room and death is the result. Decent velocity coupled with a controlled expansion bullet does marvelous things.

So, having said that, there's nothing I'd not hunt in NA with a 270 and 150 Partition... except a rabbit I wanted to eat. Even then, a head shot would work. I have no desire to hunt Africa, but if I did I can't imagine a 270 and 375 H&H wouldn't cover all the bases.

Of course there are dozens of other variations on the brass cylinder that would do the work of the 270/150 NP. I could be equally happy with a 308 Win and a 165 too... after all, cartridges are more alike than different.

I rate cartridges as less important than the rifle they're housed in. Within reason, of course.

Brad,

In the early 1990's Eileen was using an Ultra Light Arms .270 for all her big game hunting (this was a decade before ULA became NULA), with one load, the 130 Partition at about 3100. She'd always wanted to take two antelope out of one herd, and back then we were hunting some BLM land near Ft. Peck Reservoir I'd been hunting since around 1980.

We found a herd maybe 3/4 of a mile away, and eventually stalked within 350 yards. There wasn't a mature buck, so she dropped the biggest doe. The rest of the herd, confused because their leader was lying down, bolted a little, but after calming down moseyed our way, disappearing into a draw, appearing again at less than 100 yards. Eileen shot another doe, and at the report a nearby cottontail jumped up, then stopped under a sagebrush. At that point Eileen was definitely in her meat-hunting mode, and shot it in the head.

Maybe a 150 Partition at 2900 would have saved the bunny's "front quarters," though I doubt it. But the hindquarters and backstraps ate fine.

Great story John. That Eileen of yours is some fine woman. I'll bet she doesn't do a lot of hand-wringing about cartridges... likely the result of a lack of testosterone!

Yes indeed the 270 works, rabbits to elk. It's hard to imagine a finer round for Montana IMO.

Would've been less damage to the cottontail if she used a .460 Wby.

If you're shooting at deer at 700 yards, you should be in another sport... like shuffleboard..

I rate/choose my cartridges "With great prejudice."

If I see a rifle with a nice stick of wood,and I can afford it,I buy it regardless of caliber.Rifles and cartridges have always been bought in phases.The 22 LR phase,the lever action phase(Still going on)the short action phase,the magnum phase.Been through all of them including the latest cartridge out phase.Some times two ,three phases can be going on at one time.Sometimes it confuses me??

I've been through a few phases myself. The lever action phase and the hunting revolver phase lasted awhile. The magnum phase was short and although I had 5 different chamberings I never took a magnum afield.

bangeye, I do it a little different. Get rifle/caliber proper for the biggest most dangerous game I will ever hunt, and use it for everything. I do, however, occasionally use a .223Rem. for prairie dogs. memtb

I want one to pick up where the other leaves off in the ass department.

223,260,7RM

30-06 for all

For centerfires, here are my categories.

Varmint rifle: .222rem to .243 Rem class.

General purpose hunting rifle. 6.5 Sweed to 30.06 class. This is your "old reliable", bolt action rifle with mid power optics suitable for antelope to elk at normal hunting ranges.

Thumper. .32+ Magnum for elk, moose, bear etc. .338 Win Mag is the quintessential cartridge in this range.

Long Range: 7mm STW, Ultra Mag etc., high powder optics with dials.

Brush gun. Lever action with iron sights.

Me - Its always been the rifle that caught my eye!
Not the cartridge.

As far as cartridges, my picks have simply been "time tested"!

Matter of fact, The "newest" cartridge I ever owned in a rifle was introduced in 1956.