Ok so I found an amazing spot to bear hunt this year. But it's all cross canyon shots, 300 to 1200 yards from one side to the other in almost all the canyons I'm hunting. I don't want to shoot at animals passed 800 yards, but I need the rifle to be capable of farther. Most shots from what I'm experiencing will be in 450 to 750 yards which falls within my comfort zone

I want to buy a factory rifle less then $1800 + $1000 for a scope. With a $3500 limit to include mounts, rings, etc

Calibers are up in the air. It just needs to have big knock down power out to my comfort zone of 800 yards and the capability to kill passed that if a perfect shot presents itself.

Caliber from 7 mag and up will work fine. I prefer that caliber myself, but I also shoot 180 gr Berger hunting VLD's. You might check out Hill Country Rifles Harvester series. They will run around 18-1900, but they are reputed to be real shooters. The Remington Sendero is popular after it has been accurized by a good gunsmith. Because you are looking for something this year, it sound like a rifle ready to go, out of the box is what you need. The Weatherby sub-moa rifles have a good reputation, and would fall withing your price range. A really great set-up might be one of these rifles and a Nightforce scope. For this kind of shooting a scope up to the task is mandatory. One last resource would be to buy a good used rifle. I would suggest going over to longrangehunting.com and keep an eye on the classifieds.

Not looking for this season. My deer/elk seasons open the next few days. So bear is out of the picture unless I stumble upon one.

I'll be buying the rifle in the next month or two and getting a lot of practice throughout the year to be ready for August 1st and back into the Alpine areas

http://www.cooperfirearms.com/build-your-own



W

With a $3500 limit, I would buy a Savage LRH in .300WM or a used Remington Sendero in the same caliber or maybe .300 Ultra if I could find one for around the $800.00 price of the Savage then save the rest of the budget for optics. I guess what I'm getting at here is that I would be looking to spend the bulk of my money on glass rather than a rifle.

Bob

my recomendation would be to keep the distance as close as possible for bear. reason being that as a general rule you will get only one decent shot. they wont stand around like a deer and let you shoot at them. when they start moving they
wont stop till they clear the ridge top.
so that being the case any of the standard magnum calibers will
be all you need.

Id look for a 7 or 300 RUM if you can handle it well, and then put a Zeiss on it, and shoot the piss out of it!

ER Shaw is making rifles now to your specs. You might build it and ask for a price. My understanding is that the new Shaw barrels and I assume rifle shoot very well.
Pick a Caliber you like, find a high BC bullet and like Casey said, shoot the piss out of it. A 7mm variation with a 168 Berger or 280 Berger is about perfect for long range.

Kique

Black bears I assume?

Everything mentioned so far, the 7RM/RUM and the 300 mags will do just fine. Had a 300 Win for more than 30 years.

But along with my very much liking for the 30 and 375 calibers, my last addition was to get something right down the middle by adding another caliber that I have always been very fond of.

Went for the gusto. A factory 338-378 Mk5 Wby Accumark w/brake. A very powerful long range, anything you want to hunt (either short range or longer and extended ranges) on the N/A continent rifle and cartridge.

More expensive to reload? Yep. Brass cheap? Nope. Loud? Yep.

But! Moving 300 grainers including the new 338 cal hunting VLDs @ about 2800 to maybe 2900 fps "has its appeal" and will leave no doubts assuming of course as always with any cartridge, that you do your jobby well with proper bullet placement.

More cartridge than what you need? Sure is. But nevertheless, the 338-378 is quite a tantalizing round.

I'd say skip the drama and set yourself up a 7 Remmie topped with something 10x at the top end with good solid turrets. Spend a lot on bullets and powder, not brass and more barrels.

Sounds like you have been shooting LR already. If so, what have you been shooting?

It might work for you, as is.

.........Well I happen to think that a 338-378 barrel if well taken care of, will get about 1500 to 2000 rounds down the bore.

With the exception of an avid range junky and when used as an occasional hunting and range rifle, most 338-378 owners if not all of us, will more than likely never need to replace their barrels or lose any sleep thinking about it.

If talking about reduced barrel life, let`s not forget that the 7RUM and 264 Win (especially the 7RUM), aren`t exactly known for being kind where barrel life is concerned. Maybe the same or little worse on bores than would be a 338-378?

Another perspective....Taking into account all the other costs for hunting and shooting as a whole ie; apparel, transportation (air and ground), tags, fees, scopes, spotters, binocs, accessories, equipment, PHs, guides, plus costs for all the other misc stuff, any brass and powder cost differences between a 7RM vs a 338-378 when taking everything into account, will be somewhat more trivial.

I shoot a custom weatheby vanguard 308, topped with 2-7 redfield. As far as long range is concerned. I shoot a bit with buddies and their rifles.

If you like to shoot a bunch, practice a bunch, kill a bunch, and do so practically, stick to the 7mm or 30 cal stuff of modest capacity (7 Rem, 300 Winchester). I shoot quite a bit, and have shot the 7mm bullets out to 1,000 yards and killed with them. They straight up blow schit away.

Most 50 BMG owners probably don't burn the barrels out either.

Check out this: https://www.24hourcampfire.com/ubbth...ceased_via_Scenar_bullet_pix#Post4977783

Take a look at what Scenarshooter is killing with his 308.

Nuff said huh Tanner....

I dunno' if that's it all, 'nuff said and all that. But that's just what I think. I'm trying to be practical here.

I like practicality too: 7mm with 162 A-max and 30 cal 178 or 208 A max at long range just makes sense.....Am I right???

You are! The 178gr HPBT works damn well out past 6-700 too, and it's pretty windy where I'm at currently. But to really kill stuff past 500 yards you need to step up to the 300gr Berger at 3k. That's the only way.

Nope....

I'll betcha' a soda. As soon as you get to 501 yards, the furry targets are impossible to kill.

Ok, you win..... Or maybe I should use this homemade emoticon instead....Seems fitting....:

Woofer, I forgot about the Cooper Excalibur. That would be another excellent choice. I've had 5 Coopers and they are great rifles.

..........Well in that case which may or may not occur with me as far as the wind is concerned, then I guess I`ll be well prepared using a 300 grain VLD from my 338-378 @ between 2800-2900 fps. Thanks for your "that`s the only way" quote!...

This.....

CZ-550 UHR

i built a 300 Norma Mag just for that reason, long range bear. 208Amax @ 3100fps. Built to match a Sendaro,30-06 rem action and rock creek bbl.HS stock
I shot beside a 338 Norma a few times and talk about POWER!
that 300SMK made the steel bounce at 750 and 1k when mine moved it and the 338 knocked tgts down after my 208 hit them. I had to shoot first because they were gone after the 338 hit them.

care to up the anti a little on that?

ive gotten one at a little over 700 with a 7x300 weatherby using a 162 hornady.
and that wasent an amax. simply an old 162 hornady match bthp.
ive also killed a deer with that combo at slightly over 1200.
but to be honest i wouldnt attempt another at that distance with it.
those are the distances the big 338s start to dominate.
but then a 338x378 aint exactly a big 338 anymore is it?

yobuck, I was being slightly facetious

I think the best way could be also be the easy way.Go through Remingtons custom shop and order a Remington 700 Sendero with a 28"bbl. chambered in .340 Weatherby Magnum and free bored for the 225 Gr Barnes TTSXBT. I would also add their muzzle brake.
Not many custom built rifles can out shoot the Sendero and there isn't many calibers that can get to 3K with 225 Grains.

You could also just buy a SS SPS in 338RUM and stock it.. One and done....

W

yes, you could but i don't think you would get the accuracy you will get from a custom pipe.I feel the HS stock is too light and would prefer an A3-A5 McMillan or similar Manners over my current set up, and a slightly stiffer bbl in 338.

buy a sendrero in 7mag , 300 win , 300 or 338 rum or maybe a 6.5x284.(savage) spend the rest on glass(nightforce) and components. After the bbl goes re barrel it and keep shooting.Everyone makes upgrades for 700's. If you dont like remm. buy a savage,Lots of good barrel options for them .What is far today is close tomorrow . Also gonna need a good rangefinder and ballistic program and spotting scope. oh yeah and a gym membership to go get what you shot.

You don't mention what Bear we're talking about... So if I was going for BIG Bear at 400 yards I'd say use a 300 Weatherby Magnum cartridge

As for the bullet; a 200 grain Nosler Partition is a good choice.

As for the rifle I'd look out for a Weatherby Vanguard Sub-M.O.A. like this:

http://www.gunsamerica.com/98085621...Weather_Vanguard_Sub_MOA_300_WBY_MAG.htm

And buy yourself a good 6x or 8x fixed power Leupold Scope.

I found a Remington sps in 300rum for $400, might pick that up if I can get passed the ugly stainless finish.

As far as bear goes. I'm after black bear, but the area I'm hunting I'm seeing quite a bit bigger then average bear. Missed one in the 400lb range and put a stalk on a solid 500lb bear (let him walk because I was 2 miles back in by myself). Out of 13 this season all but 2 were 250lbs or bigger (same bear multiple times? Idk)

get it! excellent start the action is worth that. Krylon paint will fix the stainless steel really fast and cheap.

what state are you hunting? I may PM fro some bear hunting tips!

Yes. Get it and re-stock. Send in for cerakote to get past the ugly. They shoot, well.

For glass, don't overlook the Votex Viper PST scopes.

With this setup, there's tons of budget left for brass, bullets and powders.

i figured you were, and i was also as it applied to your 338x378.
i have quite a few friends owning them. it is a fine long range cartridge. whats your velocity with a 300gr about 3000/3050 fps?

I don't shoot one

next time you do that let me know will ya. id love to watch

I'd definitely grab that RUM for 400 bucks. Besides, if it shoots, suddenly it ain't so ugly. mtmuley

Sounds like you got yourself a good deal! If it was me I may be concerned about obtaining 300RUM ammo. I suspect that 300 Weatherby ammo is easier to locate. Good hunting to you!

It's late, I'm tired but I just couldn't help myself.....


So the requirements are for 450 yards out to 750 yards on medium/big game. $3,500 budget. The op has a 308win with a 2-7x redfield. Says that 750 yards falls within his comfort zone yet has no LR rifles, but he shoots with buddies a bit and uses their rifles so he's good for half mile cross canyon shots...... right?


Given those parameters we have posters suggesting, 7lb 7mm RUM's, 300 RUM's, and 338 RUM's. 338/378 Weatherby's, 340 Weatherby's, 28in barrels, 225gr Barnes TTSX's (really????), and Ziess scopes.



Can we get a reality check please.



Seems to me we have a bunch of guys suggesting the latest gun they bought, or their cooked up fantasy LR dream gun without a whole lot of busted caps at LR to base that suggestion on. Tanner and BSA seem to be the only ones in reality land.


From the info provided I am 99.99999% sure we have an individual with very little long range experience. Given that anyone that shoots LR a lot has at least one rifle and scope capable of LR shots (not a 2-7x Redfield) and would know what calibers, cartridges, rifle type, and scopes are suitable for 750 yard shots. Don't you think? You guys really think a 7lb 338 RUM with a Ziess scope and launching 225gr Barnes bullets is the best answer for 800 yard animals for someone with little experience? Heck for someone extremely experienced?


Why don't we come back to reality. Minimally experienced shooter? 800 yard cross canyon shots? (probably the toughest winds to deal with and the hardest to call). So not only have we crossed into true long range shooting, but added the most difficult shooting conditions as well. Then we add a lightweight 300 or 338 super magnum rifle shooting bullets that will barely expand or fail to expand at the distance required? On top of it he's going to mount a Ziess hunting scope? Really?



What his needs tell me is that he has crossed over from general hunting rifles into dedicated LR rifles. He didn't say bear hunting with the occasional 5 or 600 yard shot, he said his shots will be from 450 out 750 yards as a general thing.

I am a big fan of lightweight and normal hunting rifles. I.E. under 10lbs. They can be used exceptionally well out to 600+/- yards and if I have a very good spotter I might push one out to 800yds or so. Past that 600 yard zone I do not expect 1st round hits in anything but the most perfect conditions on deer size targets. I would guess 70-80% at 800 with my general hunting rifles and a trained spotter from field positions. That's with 300 Win Mags. 7mm RM's and WSM's, 243win's, etc. Not guns with truly big recoil- a la Reminton Ultra Mags and 338/378 Weatherbys.

For 800 yard shooting I'll skip right over my hunting rifles and go straight to my dedicated guns. I personally would start and stop in on the 7mm Remington Magnum or the 7mm WSM and like cartridges. Why? Because with good bullets they offer good terminal performance at LR and will match or beat the big .338 guns in drop and drift to 1K or so while having half the recoil. The medium 30 caliber rounds such as the 300WM, Weatherby, WSM, etc work well too. Keep in mind though, given the same level of recoil and the same amount of powder burnt, the 7mm's crush the 30 cals in drop/drift.

For under 1k rifles I'm not talking about 18-20lb behemoths. My sniper competition partners rifle (which I actually shoot the comps with) is about model perfecto. 7WSM, 24in barrel, Manners carbon fiber stock, Bushnell HDMR 3.5-21x50mm scope, shooting 162gr Hornady AMAX's or HPBT bullets. With loaded 5 round mag and short bipod it weighs about 12-13 pounds I believe. It shoots extremely well and most importantly is consistent enough for true 800 yard work.


I am not a fan of hunting scopes for dedicated LR use. 800 yards is well past the "close enough" range, and no regular scope from Zeiss, Leupold, Bushnell, Swarovski, etc. has the precision, durability and reliability for true LR use. SWFA's SS, Nightforce, [u]some[u] Leupolds, Bushnell's HDMR, Hensoldt, March, possibly the Ziess Diavari, and the S&B PM series offer the precision and consistency that is needed.




If I were the OP I would do a couple of things. First I would buy an SWFA SS 3-9x42 scope- Located here and mount it to the 308win he has. Then I would take a thousand dollars of his budget and buy reloading components. I would pick any bullet suitable for LR, i.e. Berger 155gr VLD, Lapua Scenar 155gr, 155gr Sierra MatchKing Palma, 175gr SMK, Hornady 168gr or 178gr AMAX or BTHP, buy Varget and find a load that will average under 1.5 MOA for 5 round groups and then quit worrying about loads and take those 1,000 to 2,000 rounds he loaded and shoot all of it this year from field positions learning how to make wind calls, dial the scope correctly and quickly and find out what he is really capable of. If he is really smart he would attend a LR hunting/shooting course that is at least 2 days long taught by someone that honestly knows what they are doing, thereby cutting the frustration and learning time dramatically.

In addition on the absolute lightest side I would buy a Winchester Extreme Weather in 7mm RM or 7WSM or even better a Coyote Light in 7WSM, or on the heavy side a Tikka T3 Varmint in 7mm RM, a Savage LRH or 110 Tactical or whatever they call the heavy barrel version these days, a Remington Sendero, etc., all in either the 7mm Remington Mag or 7mm WSM. Then either put another SWFA SS 3-9x42 on it, or if he just has to have more power get the 5-20x50 version of the same scope. Find a load with 162gr Hornady AMAX's or BTHP's, with around 70gr of H1000, that will consistently group 5 rounds at 1 MOA or under, and then shoot it just enough to get a feel for the difference in wind holds between it and the 308win.





There is your $3,500 budget with guns and scopes that are setup for success. Basically I just described a light LR Tactical/Sniper competition rifle because that is exactly what it is. If the op has a Rangefinder capable of ranging animals at 1k, a good spotting scope and does the above he will be smoking things at LR by next year. If he follows some of the advice given above he will have an expensive, painful toy and will probably be another "hunter" talking about killing at LR rather then actually doing it.......

10# 7 RM model 700. An 8 inch gong isn't tough at 700+. I don't see the need for uber highend builds for hunting. Just my opinion.

I can tell ya' the one thing I would do for sure. And that is listen to FormD.

And be realistic! 800 yards is a really, really long ways, especially when your target has a pulse.

You`re forgetting a little somethin. My 338-378 Accumark has a brake. Using the 225s, recoil is on par with that of firing a 180 gr 30-06 and weighs 10.8 lbs w/scope. My 31 year old daughter has benched the thing shooting many rounds in one session without a problem.

Secondly, he asked for opinions. Although opinions can be based on things we don`t own using overall knowledge alone, we can also base a few opinions on what we do own whether those opinions are practical or not. The OP can make the decision as to the practicalities of what he reads.

I`m a 30 cal nut and very fond of the 7 mags although I don`t own a 7mm. I also like you am a big fan of the lightweight more compact rifles. Have one!!

But a 300 grainer of the Berger VLD variety fired out of a 338-378 at say 2800-2900 fps, will not only buck the winds better than anything from a 30 or from a 7mm, it will also offer the same or better long range trajectories in most cases as well.

I understand your argument against more recoil especially for someone in the beginning phases of long range shooting and hunting.

But imo, the 338-378 is kinda like havin a big piece of cake and eatin it too. Its only drawbacks are its rifle weight and its approx 48" of rifle OAL which was considered before I bought mine with the understanding that its use would be for LR open country hunting. For myself anyway, those two issues along with any added reloading costs are of no mind or consequence. But that`s me.

For L/R open country and at the bench, the 338-378 Accumark isn`t all that much of a beast as most would think or assume. It is a loud SOB though! But my hearing protection can handle it........

Darn well said Formid, only thing I'd add and have refrained from as it's been a long week and I don't need the drama but here goes......

I have no problemo with trained shooters taking deer/elk/lopes at long range. But to me (and I have a bit of bruin experience) I find the idea of taking shots at bruins past 500 yds to be fairly silly.

Dober

That sps is a good starting place, then send it to Hill Country Rifles for accurizing. Next put on a scope with proven turret function. I use a 2.5-10 Nightforce on a light weight 270 WSM, and it has worked well on marmots out to 600 yards. You need these good turrets for long range shooting. Vortex is less $ and a good reputation.

Thanks for that post Formidilosus

This rifle will be dedicated for bear hunting only. My Preferred shots will be well under 100 yards...but in reality the area I'm hunting will not allow it. It's VERY steep terrain, thick brush, with open berry patches and meadows thrown in amongst the brush. Your only option is shooting across the canyons. I've tried stalking bear here and it's just too steep.

I do have enough experience in LR shooting to know my own limitations. Roughly 1000 rounds under the supervision/teaching of guys who shoot on alot bigger scale. But as I posted before I plan on buying this rifle soon and practicing all year to be ready. I'm not planning on just buying a rifle and thinking I'll kill a bear at any given distance passed 300 yards. And I still will try getting as close as possible, closer is always better. (I'm not stupid nor do I have a "I killed a bear at blah yardage" ego)....I just know what it's going to take to kill bears in this given area and want to be prepared

A smaller, cheaper, less recoiling calibers is always an option. I've owned both a 7wsm and 270wsm which I shot regularly to 500 yards not quite true LR shooting. But I'm familiar with what the 7wsm can do

Again I just want to build a rifle with the capabilities to kill at the ranges I listed. It's better to be prepared when the time comes....instead of wishing I didn't have to let a huge bear walk due to limitations of my equipment. I will be the one to make the call on what shots I take. My equipment shouldn't decide for me

I agree with Formid and the others completely. Take his advice.


Formidilosus,

The Bushnell HDMR, Sightron SIII, and SS 5-20x50 are obviously excellent scopes, but I notice you never mention Vortex (or the SIII, for that matter). Have you guys played much with the Viper PST scopes? If so, what are your impressions of the model line? How about the Razors?

I'm kinda leaning towards bigsqueeze on this one. Specifically because the header ends with --bear rifle. Shooting bears at long range with pees isn't a good idea. You need mega foot pounds at extreme ranges and a big hole to really clobber a bear. They are one of the toughest critters especially in the autumn when they are all loaded up with fat.
I've even hit bears with my 378 shooting 300 grain bullets near 600 yds and all I found wheen I got where he was - a puddle of blood and pieces of bone laying on the ground and the bear is nowhere to be seen. We didn't have TSX bullets in those days. Remember a 378 will hit at 3000 ft/lbs at 500 yds. A 308 wouldn't even have that at the muzzle.

378,

You talking browns or black bear? The OP is targeting black bear, I don't see how one would shrug off that kind of oomph...

7mm and 308 are too small a caliber to hunt any large bear at those distances. I stand by my post.

exactly what i thought too? 308win!?



1200yds max ALMOST eliminate 7mm and "dont want to shoot past 800 but need a rifle capable of farther"
big knock down power and capability to kill past that?

7mm is nice and flat to 1k as you say "they crush the 30's in drop/drift", but the above states 1200yds. Hmmm?

7mm-162Amax@3200fps vs. 300Norma vs 300RUM- 208Amax 3200fps. 7mm lovers always eliminate the "energy" factor while praising them over the 30/338's.

i also stated the sendaro contour was a bit light and i would prefer a Manners and slightly stiffer bbl.

450-750 falls in his comfort zone doesn't sound like a new guy with no experience and wanting to learn to go to 1200. personally passes up the 7mm and leans to 30Mags or 338level i would think?

a 7 Weatherby (7-300) wouldnt be bad or 7Rem Mag/7WSM set up to shoot 180 Berger would be a minimum choice i would think in 7mm but i would still preferr a 30 Mag or 338

bigsqueeze,

The big 338's are great rounds and phenomenal at LR, however they are not needed under a thousand. A 338/378 and 300gr Bergers is an extremely expensive combo. Not to mention the gun to go with it. Some say their Accumarks shoot very well but I have not seen one that is consistent enough for 1,000 plus yard shooting, nor is their design tailored to that.









Hey I'm all for it. While I tend to lean more with Dober when it comes to bears, I hope you kill a monster. For 1k and under, with the occasional shot out to 1,200 or so I still would pick a good 7mm launching 162's or the 180gr Berger. If you are intending to consistently shoot past the 800-1,000 yard range then that is another story and you step into the next class of guns. This is where really big 7mm's, 300's, and the 338's start ruling the roost. It's also where 18-20lb guns start coming in, Nighforces, S&B's, SWFA SS 5-20x50 HD's, Bushnell HDMR's, etc scopes are absolutely needed.











I look for reliability, durability and consistency above all else first. Then I look for features. While the Sightrons are supposed to track well they do not have the features that I require, nor do I have enough information on their durability, so I have never bought one and we hardly ever see them at classes/matches.

As far as Vortex.... My partner was a sponsored shooter for Vortex for a while (so consequently I used them). We had two 5-20 Razors go down on us in matches. Both with the same issue. If you put more than 12 in/lbs of torque on the scope rings it crushes the tube to the point where it locks the parallax adjustment up. Both times were exactly the same- everything was working fine and then in the middle of a stage the gun goes boom and everything went blurry. Turning the parallax knob did not adjust it at all. Loosen the rings up and POP it works.

The first time it happened was to Jeff. Vortex told him his rings were to tight, so we loosened them to 15-16 in/lbs. The second time was to me. We took them to the range and played with it and anything more than 12-13 in/lbs and you risked it locking up. After that he had a 1-4x Razor lose zero in a major 3-Gun match and left Vortex.

The first Viper PST's I played with were very cheesy. The power rings could be twisted fore and aft about 1/16th to almost 1/8th of an inch showing a gap front and back. Now I've heard that they have fixed them, but I also see that there are quite a few with issues still.

I'm not trying to badmouth them but for me, given the issues I've had and the fact that there are truly bombproof scopes both below and just above the Vortex price points I skip right over them.








378Canuck and rem06,

There has been plenty of discussion on "energy" lately, but suffice to say ft pounds of energy is not a wounding mechanism and there is no such thing as "knockdown power". Tissue damage is what kills and the 7mm's with the correct bullets destroy enough tissue at 800-1,000 yards for reliable killing. Yes the big 30's and 338's with the right bullets will damage more, however the other factors they bring tend to not make it worth it.

Formidilosus, I don't want to hijack this thread, but the "knockdown power" thing gets thrown around too much. While tissue damage kills, what are your thoughts on "hydro-static shock"? PM me if you'd like as to not re-direst the OP. Thanks, mtmuley

Well the OP did state "knockdown power" so I think it fits with the discussion unless he states otherwise.....


First I have to ask what your definition of "hydro-static shock" is?

This is what I would be looking to build/buy for 1k and under....





The flash hider is for this-

.........................Formidilosus,,,,,,,,,,Well I did stipulate a few things earlier on this thread regarding the 338-378. It is more power than needed and certainly is more expensive to reload. It is a bit on the extreme side of things.

And IIRC the OP was looking to spend around $3K. Maybe I was mistaken. The new Accumarks go for about $1700 + whatever the scope/rings costs are which will depend on the choice.

So with those stipulations made in my beginning post plus the descriptions the OP described, imo the 338-378 Accumark (although extreme and over the top), would nevertheless make a very good choice. The best choice for most? No!

But then again, some of us are not like most folk when it comes to our choice of firearms.

I will throw something else out: My buddy has a Savage custom shop 7WSM in an Accustock or whatever they call it. You can order the barrel contour about however you want if they have that available. His is like a #4. I shot it lot on Saturday and have shot it last winter. IF you are serious about the ranges you suggested, I propose that you get a Savage custom shop rifle in 7WSM with a #5 or heavier barrel. Mount a decent scope on it. I like a minimum of 20X for those long shots. Others may disagree. I can recommend the Nightforce 5.5-22x50 NXS for starters. You can go cheaper and get a Weaver 4-20 Super Slam or similar for about 1/2 the money.

The rifle will probably cost you about 750?

Jeff's rifle is easily a 1/2 MOA rifle at 600 yards- the longest I have shot it to date.

We use 180 Bergers and SMKS. Out of a 26" barrel I got 3050-3100 fps on Saturday. I think our accuracy node was about 2980 so I have to back off on the loads I just tried (.68 MOA this time around).

Your slightly heavier barrel will help with the longer shots just a little. You will be well under budget and hard pressed to find a more suitable rifle without spending another grand.

For those who are poo-pooing the long ranges shots at bears, I am inclined to agree. BUT, I have 3 friends that are fanatical bear hunters. They shoot bears at long range every year with good results. Last year Todd shot a 600 pound (estimated) boar at 700 yards with a 270 WSM. It was marginal and the bear didn't die immediately. This year he shot his boar (only 400 pounder) at 600 yds with a 7RUM and the 180 Berger. Shot him right through the heart and die on the spot.

With bears, you have to make good shots as they don't leave the best blood trails. Mine took 2 hours to track 300 yds this year! I used a 260AI. Next year I won't. I will wring out my 340 Wby from here on out.

My longest bear has been only 500 yard and it was shot with a 300 Weatherby. Recoil is more but a very fine long range round.

I guess I don't have a definition of "hydro-static" shock. I also really can't subscribe to the whole concept as of right now. Just looking for other opinions. I've read about it some, and there are supporters on both sides. What's your take? mtmuley

I don't see how a 3000 ft/lb shot on a bear, finding blood and bone, has much to say in this equation. Other than shot placement, that is....

This might turn into a slight rant but it's not intended at you...


Unfortunately it is a term that a lot of people (including writers...) throw out there yet there seems to be no solid definition in common usage with hunters. I hear everything from an "electrical shock" to the system to a bursting of the blood vessels from too much pressure.

One thing is certain- there is little credible evidence of its existence or what really causes it. No one seems to be able to truly explain it nor replicate it. One animal shot in the lungs with a bullet at high velocity folds up as if electrocuted yet the very next one shot in identical circumstances runs 100 yards.



What we do know is the mechanisms of wounding and how that relates to tissue damage. We can measure how deep and how wide a hole a bullet makes. Velocity certainly helps create a bigger temporary stretch cavity and when you combine that with a bit of fragmentation you can get extremely large wounds. I know from terminal ballistics testing and my own experience killing hundreds of animals that the bullets/rounds that create the widest wound channels while still penetrating enough to reach the vitals kill the quickest.


In general I have a low tolerance for minutiae and mental masturbation. I do not care if a scope delivers 1% more light transmission or displays slight chromatic aberration on the very fringes of the view. I could generally care less about the fit and finish, nor do I care what the recovered weight of a projectile is or how perfectly it resembles a shiitaki mushroom. I do greatly care that my scopes hold their zero no matter what, that when I dial 3.2 mils or 11 MOA that the scope moves the reticle exactly 3.2 mils or 11 MOA every single time. I do care how much tissue a bullet destroys and how fast the animal dies.



So I guess until or if someone ever figures out how I can transmit "hydro-static shock" to an animal, I will pay attention to how deep and how wide a path the bullet makes......

I think you and I have a similar opinion on this phenomenon. Some say that high velocity transfers this "shock" to an animal. I've transferred a bunch of velocity to quite a few animals and I can't verify "hydro-static shock". Nor can the hunters that claim it's existence. Thanks, mtmuley

I would like to add frontal area and i am certain there will be those that will add bullet consruction,weight and design etc...
some like 2 holes and some like one?

anyhow i don't think anybody is recomending a 6mm or even a 6.5mm? although as flat a shooter that a 7mm is (and kicks a 30's ass!) LOL i think a 6.5 is better than a 7mm cuz it shoots flatter with even less recoil !!!!!!!

sorry, not directed at you Mtmulie

Get the 300RUM, a few pounds of Retumbo,FED215M, Remmie cases, and top it off with a 200 Accubond.

Mine is a 700SS BDL, I bedded in an HS stock.

1.5" groups at 300, 3150MV.

No blackie will hold that bullet at any range you care to touch one off.

Tony

there ya go! that will work just fine! I don't see a black bear of any size not falling down to that with a decent shot. H1000 does just as well with @ 1gr less powder if Retumbo don't give you enough speed

How bout a 264 WM with a 160 woodleigh?

[
So I guess until or if someone ever figures out how I can transmit "hydro-static shock" to an animal, I will pay attention to how deep and how wide a path the bullet makes...... [/quote]

I'm not a scientist to explain ft/lbs of energy, shock or any other of these terms. But I know that if I shoot a large bear with a 22 versus a 378, I will deduct by the wound on the animal that the 378 is more powerful. At least if I can't figure that out I'm sure the bear will.

Bankwalker,
Your request seems like a tall order. What do you think the energy of a 7mm will be at 800 yards?

Damn, I guess I had better release these 2 because I unwittingly used a 7mm.

620 yds.


728 yds

Sorry fellas, My Bad.

Nice to see ya back on 24hr JB.

Thanks Stoney.

Yessir

Not sire why the OP hasnt just bought a Sendero in 264 WM or 7mm RM and scoped it with a 3.5-10X40 already.

140 Amaxs or 162 Amaxs, done and done.

John you know you can't use dead animals to prove a point on here.

Welcome back!

Glad to see you back posting, too.

What bullets were you using?

I have no experience on large bear at short or long range, but I'm curious about some of the target bullet suggestions. Is the A-max a big-bear bullet?

I shot both those bears with the 180gr VLD. The AMAX opens too fast for my taste when muzzle velocity approaches 3000 fps. I would also say the VLD is too soft when launched over 3250fps.

We killed 5 bears with 6 shots (all 7 mm 180gr VLDs) on that trip, I shot my grizzly twice. Every one else killed their bears at under 200yds.


Keep in mind the larger caliber AMAXs (7mm or 6.5), or any bullet for that matter, are "softer" than the same bullet in the .22 cal. Jacket thickness relative to caliber is heavier in the small caliber.

I would be fine shooting a 600lb boar smack on the shoulder at 25 yds with the VLD but would not use the choose the AMAX for such a shot.

Thanks BOB.

Cool picture. I guess the grins are easy to come by when everyone is successful.

Another glad to see you back Mr. Burns.
I have long been a fan of the 7 rem mag. My current long range rifles launches the 180 gr. VLDs at 2980 fps. These bullets are missiles and I would not hesitate to shoot a bear at the 1K mark.
Flame away if you must, but I have used this combo enough to have total confidence in it's capability.

John, good to see you back as I enjoy your posts.

But please stop interjecting facts into the conversation........sheeesh.

Nice shooting, probably one out of a thousand could pull it off. But you need to review the original post. The fellow states that his comfort zone is between 450-750, I'm judging similiar to yours. Cross canyon was 1200 yds, so a 7mm would have lost steam long before arriving there.

The OP also said he doesn't want to shoot past 800, so why worry about 1200?

Calibers are up in the air. It just needs to have big knock down power out to my comfort zone of 800 yards and the capability to kill passed that if a perfect shot presents itself. [/quote

300 magnum would be a better choice in my opinion, although I wasn't even talking magnums in my post. 7mm magnum doesn't fit the bill for big knock down power at 800 yd and a lot less further. It would be a better long range unit on sheep or coyotes at those distances not large bears. I've seen to many wounded bears in my day to support this round or lesser.

What is knockdown power?

Don't holes in flesh and arteries kill animals?

No. Knockdown power does. Silly freshman.

Guess I better stay all 4 years!

Good plan. First year has a lot of knockdown power, but it gets easier after that

Hopefully more penetration and less knockdown power...? Probably too far.

FPE os the only thing that matters in killing critters.

Like I said in previous post, I'm not a scientist but if you check the ballistic charts you would see that a 168 SMK fired from a 7mm magnum at 2950 ft/sec will have only 982 ft/lbs energy left at 800 yds. Some pistols have more energy than that. Would you shoot a large bear with a small caliber pistol? This is probably why the USA military never adopted this round in sniper circles. I mean they must know something about knockdown power and the energy required to pierce body armor. Of course I can see some idiotic comments coming like "Dude -Bears don't wear body armor" Please leave the stupid comments out of a serious discussion, have a good day.

Talk about a bunch of stupid comments in one post...

You have a guy here who is well known for long range kills. He has photographic evidence of long range kills with this "sub par" round. You admit to not finding a bear you with with your death ray...

As for the military using the 7rm, you're right they don't. But they do use a 300 WM, which is ballistically duplicating the 7RM. So that stupid comment is moot.

It's obvious that some postol rounds do have that much FPE at the muzzle. But you certainly wouldn't want to stretch that round too far, right?

As for FPE killing, how's this for FPE? This proves shot placement, holes in vitals are what kill. Energy is just a reference point, not a concrete guideline.

Nice. No attack on the shooter with the grin but he can't take pictures of the animals that crawled away or run off wounded, now can he?

Go ahead ask him and his hunting pards how many do that.

Your completely missing the point. Its not about drop in inches, it's nots not about knockdown power or enregy, it's not about feet per second. IT'S ALL ABOUT SHOT PLACEMENT AND RENDERING ORGANS UNABLE TO SUSTAIN LIFE! Know your rifle, know your load and know the environmental affects of the round, but a hole in the heart and/lot lungs and eat a steak...

Your completely missing the point. The only straight shot to the heart without hitting muscle or very massive bone structure is in the ass, and even there is a lot of [bleep] and guts to go through.

Front leg forward, heart and lungs are easily accessible.



Even on elk, too...

Hitting a 5 inch heart at 800 yds or more, Hmmmmm??????


Nice pictures.

Lungs are much larger. And just as deadly. In case you didn't know.

I make it a point to never hunt animals that wear body armor.

I knew I was setting myself up for that. LOL

I took for granted for a good many years the talk about minimum foot pounds of energy being required to kill such and such animals;I said "took for granted",not "believed" Really I paid very little attention to energy figures over the years, relying more on what I saw "work".And sort of concluded that bullet action had more to do with wounding capability than energy tables.The two are not the same near as I can tell.Energy figures do not take bullet construction and action into consideration.

Since then LR hunting has become more prevalent, and the big question in my mind was..."Gee...those bullets are really slowing down....they can't have much punch way out there".But I think the LR hunters have taught us a thing or two if we think about it.

I think the answers lies in the ability today to make bullets that (a) retain as much velocity as possible,and (b)can penetrate enough to reach vitals, and still (c)expand reliably at low impact velocity.

Because it is the expansion (mushrooming, fragmentation, call it what you want) that is the mechanism that destroys soft gooey stuff like hearts and lungs,not energy figures.

So that if a 180 gr 7mm bullet is lazing along at a paltry 1200 fps,penetrates to vitals and expands properly to induce trauma to the right soft gooey stuff,it is still a terrible shock to an animals vitals system,because that 180 grains of bullet has to go somewhere and destroy something....not much different really than if a surgeon went in there with a scalpel and made a hole in these vitals which would induce severe hemorage,a drop in blood pressure and swift death, which we all know can happen.

And apparently animals are more vulnerable to this kind of trauma than we previously realized,even at long distance....there seems to be enough empirical data (dead animals killed at 600,700,1000 yards?)) out there today to determine that such bullets fired from 7mm and 30 caliber magnums retain enough velocity to cause this kind of trauma inducing bullet action.I don't know how to integrate energy numbers into this, but they are for comparitive purposes only and my view is there is not much correlation between energy numbers and killing effect anyway.JMHO.

The one caveat in all this(really true at any range) is that you have to hit the vitals....and under some circumstances you may have to hit bone before you reach the vitals.Nevertheless,these LR bullets today, striking at modest velocity, are very long and have a lot of bullet material for their caliber and maybe retain just enough length to penetrate reasonably well at low impact velocities.Seems to be enough to do the killing.

I hit a 300 pound black bear with a 140 gr Bitterroot @3100 fps from a 280 Remington,and a bit above where the heart is located in the photo above....he collapsed to the shot,never rose and died within seconds while I watched.

Would a 180 gr 7mm Berger have killed him as neatly if he were hit in the same spot at 700 yards? I dunno, I never did it,but I think he would.

I shot a bigger bear with an arrow and he went about 15 yds then collapsed. The arrow went in his gut through his lung and got a piece of his heart. Mostly luck I believe, since if I would have shot while he was facing me I couldn't have penetrated to his heart. He was running away from me in a left direction. I still can't support shooting animals at those distances talked about in this post. Do we need to hope on luck to pull off the shot.

Using FPE to rate lethality is an exercise in futility

Here is the exit in the rib cage of a 6X7 bull Elk. The exit was created by a 180 grain bullet with an impact velocity of aproximately 2600 FPS which calculates to 2700 FPE




This exit in the the same elk's rib cage and was produced by a 440 grain flat point hard cast fired from a 500 JRH revolver at 850 FPS for 888 FPS




Ths most destruction was created by the round with the least amount of kinetic energy

Of course not...we shouldn't shoot at those distances unless we are "sure".

If you go to www.longrangehunter.com, the owner of the site, is also a LR hunting rifle builder, and I'm sure can give you a lot of well founded advise.

Get the 300 RUM and put a good scope and mts on it and pickup some brass and ammo. Good Luck! Randy

Hell! .338 Lapua or a .300 Win Mag. otta do ya.

This thread is totally predictable, because it is just like every other that involves "long range" hunting. I remember when long range was 500 yards, the argument was the same, only about shorter distances. There is always the "stupid stunt that can't be done, irresponsible to try" contingent, and then this other group who have been doing it long enough to know it can be done, and is no stunt for the capable long range rifleman.
As for the 7 rem mag, it has proven itself many times over, for several decades, as both a heavy game and long range round.

Brad, shooting at animals past 300 yards is not ethical. You know that.

I'm an old boy, but a bad boy. What can I say?
I don't think those 1100 yard marmots cared if I was being unethical, they were dead anyway.
I managed to pop a couple at 560 up on Hagerman Pass sunday... with my lowly 8 lb 270 WSM.
No bears and too many hunters in Lime Park.

Dang, we oughta' get both 270 WSMs rocking on the marmots up there soon! I've never been to Hagerman.

Well I have shot a few small bears with a large pistol.








I often wonder at how quick some are to offer advice in endeavors they have no experience.

The big trick in killing bears at distance is hitting places that are really important to the bear in the very near future. No amount of horsepower will fix bad shooting but stout recoil will sure add to the marksmanship problem.

Bears at distance are also more of a challenge than most game because they tend to not stand still out in open areas and there is always a little more adrenalin in the hunter when the quarry has teeth and claws.

Shooting bears at distance is never something to take lightly but if you are worried about your ability to hit them right with a 7mm Remington then you have no business taking that shot with something that is even harder to shoot well.

378�s story of losing a bear at 600yds with a 378 should dispel the myth that shot placement is not just as critical with the big bruisers as it is with a more moderate cartridge.

JB, that third pic down is one for the magazines..

thx for chiming in John how's that 28gu Browning M12 doing expanding on doves? LMAO! is 9 shot better or is it 8's? :)7 1/2 and at what range

frontal area does have something to do with it?

too freakin bad we cant shoot bowling balls at them

oh yeah, a 7mm kicks the 30's ASS! out to 1k (i might add?)
but after that to 1200? well, 30cal 208Amax@3200 will do it but i want a 338 it makes the steel bounce!!! damn that 300SMK hits hard! live through that!

Like I said I've killed bears with bow and arrow and they don't have much in the kinetic energy department, that's why you need to wait for the shot or pass it up if you can't place well.
Not everyone is ready to do that especially if they came 3000 miles to hunt bear with you and it's the last day of hunting.
Sometimes horsepower doesn't make up for bad shot placement but no horsepower will certainly not help either. I also note that most of JB bears are in wide open areas, which you don't find much of where we hunt, so most time your shooting through brush and trees on most of the game we hunt here in northern Canada. They are not canned hunts on private land and 7mm do poorly going through even a few branches. Nice bears by the way.

Let me understand this correctly, most of your comments in this thread have been directed towards long range shooting and now your advising that most of your shots involve close range and shooting through brush? "Brush busting" and long range ability seem to be at odds with each other.

To get back to the original post it was mentioned 500lb animals were a possible target, when did that require more than a 7mm or 30cal? Bullet construction and placement will be far more important than extra weight. I can appreciate a desire for an exit wound but a bullet placed through the pump or pipes will lead to a dead animal.

Now on the other hand if someone wants to pick a big boomer just because they like it then have at it and let your personal desires lead the way. I have a .35 Whelen that is one of my favorite rifles and loading fat bullets brings a certain level of confidence but I also accept the reality that a properly placed bullet from my .270 will give exactly the same results.

Small bushes and twigs grow at all ranges.

This thread has taken a turn toward stupid. Canuck, sounds like you are a short range brush buster and a big rifle is just what is needed for your hunting conditions. This thread isn't about that.

Here you go....338LM. This bear was 570 meters, across a canyon with plenty of wind. I'd seen a nice brown boar the night before in the same place. I was packing my .308 and didn't want to risk a poor hit due to the fickle wind in that canyon. I've taken a few nice black bears with the .308 at those ranges(450-600M)but there was little or zero wind.

I agree with this, especially the practice and training part. I've seen a lot of hunters miss entire antelope with very expensive rifles and scopes, and these were animals they'd ranged with a laser range finder. The vast majority can't reliably hit vital zones at 500 yards and miss entire animals past that because the haven't spent much time reading wind and shooting at long ranges, and what little they have done was off a bench under no pressure.

Nice bear!

Scenarshooter, that is a very nice bear, and an excellent choice in a long range round.
My LR rifle is a 13lb 7 rem mag. Those high BC 180 gr. VLD's cut through wind on a different level than even the 140 gr VLD's I'm shooting in my 270 WSM. But if I were going up in caliber, it would be to one of the big 338's. I've been shooting marmots with that 8lb, scoped, WSM, out to 600. It does pretty good even out to 750, but gets blown around pretty good if there is much wind. I have had pretty good success out to those ranges with sporter weight rifles, as long as I'm using high BC bullets, but for me, that is about the limit for a lighter rifle.
The OP specified a max range of 750. Given a good caliber and the right bullets, this is entirely do-able, IME. At long range wind becomes much more difficult than range. Gravity is pretty stable and easily compensated for.
As one poster mentioned though, without lots of practice and the right tools for the job; range finder, anemometer, ballistic charts or computer, it is not as easy as some can make it look.

Good to see ya back John!

Bob

Smartest thing you've ever posted and 100% correct.

Logging in on my phone. So I can't go through the thread very well to respond to any positive or negative feedback. In fact I can barely load this page haha
But I thank everyone for their input. I know there has been some good posts made sense I last logged in.

I'm still looking to build a "long range" bear rifle. But after watching a seasoned shooter wound 2 bear on shots over 800 yards....that just is not an option for me. While I do want to be able to make those shots with confidence, I just don't see me putting myself in that situation to leave an animal wounded...at any range

My new objective is building a rifle for bear hunting. But I'm keeping my shots under 700 yards (if my range finder can't read the distance 750 yards max. I have no reason to be shooting). 700 yards is a pretty reasonable limit with regular practice.

I still expect people to criticize that distance. But I shoot that on a regular basis. And again I know my personal limitations.

I'm not sure about which rifle/caliber/scope setup I would go with.

Pat did you reach for the .338 based on external ballistics or concerns about terminal ballistics at that distance?

That bear was killed with a 250gr scenar at just under 3100fps at the muzzle. With a .6+BC it was the best choice considering the spot I hunted. I've since found an even better load with the 300gr Berger Hybrid with a .818 G1 BC at 2840fps. I have other rifles that deliver enough snuff at that range to kill a black bear clean, but the Lapua just gets the bullet there with a lot less "swag".