Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Backpack Hunting Preferred caliber?

Never noticed recoil while hunting or nosie for that matter. If you have time to think about the recoil when you shoot at game and flinch then hunting sounds a little boring for you. I can't put more than 10 rounds down the tube off the bench with my 6.25 lb 350 RM in one sitting. I will admit by round number 6 I start a little flinch, might open up the groups an inch or so. While hunting all bolt rifles are the same to me weather its a 10 pound 223 or a lightweight hammer like my model 7.

BTW, my Model 7 350 RM broke my cheap bench rest and cracked the plastic peice between the stock and the recoil pad. Previous owner broke a reticle on a Leupold 4x. Shes a brute but if your going to kill something you might as well kill it real good.

Which defies Delgue's stated intent. He said he wanted ONE rifle, a good one. A strong fit man should not need a "sub-caliber device" to enable field practice for shooting ungulates. Brown bears? Yes. Deer/elk? I don't think so.

Of course mid-bore rifles that kick a bit aren't an issue for one or two game shots typically, but if the range time isn't accumulated prior to the game shots, you'll never be able to shoot for schit, and that is a fact. 308 class cartridges kick less, barrels last longer, and they are cheaper to feed, especially for the reloader.

If you aren't gearing up for long-range hunting, then a magnum's extra velocity is typically much ado about nothing, it is overkill. And if you are gearing up for LR hunting, an ultralight rifle isn't a good idea, IMO.

I'll really start a pissing match on this one... I think inside 300 yards, anything that's a 30 caliber between 2700 FPS and 3300 FPS and critters don't get any deader any faster. Long ago, I had a 700 remmy stocked in a LWAG Summit in a 338 WM. A 225 grain .338" bullet leaving the muzzle at 2850 is a noticeable step up in mojo. It also gives a guy the confidence that if the shot angle is less than ideal, you're upping your odds of a pass through quite a bit.

But, I got real sick of carrying around a 8 3/4 pound gun, and my Model 7 in 260 was right at 6 1/2 Lbs all up. I stacked up a few Mulies with 140 Partitions and couldn't believe how well it killed [bleep] for a pop gun. So now I compromise and use a 308

I'm betting my Montana in 308 is every bit as nasty a kicker as my old 8 3/4 338 WM. I rarely shoot it more than 20 rounds in a trip to the range. Its not that its a lot of recoil. A gun that light stabs you quick...

+1

If I were going to do it all over again, and was only going to have one rifle to hunt everywhere in America (Alaska would be on the menu) I would put together a 7 1/2 pound 338 WM with a squishy recoil pad and a muzzle brake.

I agree TAK I was just using my experiance as an example. I am just the type of guy that has a differant rifle/caliber for every type of game and terrian I hunt. It works for me but most would be better off with one rifle to do it all, hence the 308 win recommendation.

Would I hunt the black bears in my area with a 308 win? Yes of coarse, but I have seen a bear absorb a perfectly placed 30 cal bullet and keep going(twice). I hate having to track a bear in my country where it might be very hard to find, even though it will die from that wound. I take the one and done approach, i can sleep well that night knowing the animal I killed died a quick and somewhat painless death.

This is a valid arguement. A bearskin can soak up quite a bit of blood before it starts to drip and leave a blood trail. Thick terrain that offers fleeting shots and seldom a perfect broadside shot opportunity combined with difficult tracking in thick cover are a valid arguement for larger (but not necessarily faster) calibers.

Bears are the fly in the one-rifle ointment/solution. I guess the above applies to elk in thick timber as well, though I think what a lot of you Westerners call thick really isn't

For me the same does not apply to elk in the same terrain I hunt bears. I have no problem going out in the thick timber with a 243 win, because I am a neck shot kind of guy when it comes to elk. I hunted Elk for a couple days last year with my 243 kimber Montana because I banged up my other rifle bear hunting.

Oh yes TAK, I hunt some thick [bleep]. You know the kind of stuff you can hardly walk through and it takes you over a hour to travel a mile. I wear micro spikes evn though there is no snow. Longest shot could be 30 yards if you line up the trees right. Most guys just wait for the Elk to cross a road because they know guys like me are in the thick kicking them around.

Given the 3.0" length of the NULA action, I would build something off the .284 case rather than something off the .308 Win case. Either the original .284 or a 6.5x284 would get some serious thought.

Another route would be to build something like:



30-06 on LH Model 70, fwt contour barrel, McMillan mtn rifle stock that comes in at the top of your weight range.

I think the old Greek maxim "know thyself" definitely applies to this discussion. I don't really want to shoot a full box of .30-06 ammo from even a typical sporter-weight gun (close to 20 ft-lb of recoil per shot) in one session if I don't absolutely have to - I just don't find it fun. I can shoot more than that in one session, and have done so, (and I've been proficient with a .30-06 when I've practiced) but I don't enjoy that level of recoil. Going through a box of .243 ammo in a similar weight gun (around 10 ft-lb of recoil per shot) is a lot of fun. A second box of .243 ammo is still fun. While different stock designs give different "felt" recoil, I still think that I don't want more recoil from a lightweight mountain rifle than is the equivalent calculated for a sporter-weight .30-06.

If a gun and load that puts out 16 or 18 ft-lb of recoil is more than adequate for the task, why would I want to needlessly abuse my body with 50+ percent more recoil? Somewhere between 10 and 20 ft-lb of recoil is a good place for me if I want to practice with the gun very much and enjoy doing so. I've read some people saying that around 15 ft-lb of recoil is the most that the majority of people comfortably shoot, and that 20 ft-lb is a practical upper limit for most people, and I think that's probably true. I know we have some guys on this board who are totally exceptional and for whom 40+ ft-lbs of recoil is nothing, but most people enjoy shooting a lot more when the recoil is at a little more reasonable level.

A 6.25 lb (all up) .308 is going to generate right at 20 ft-lb of recoil with a 150 grain bullet at 2750 fps muzzle velocity (you might check what John Barsness says about the 150 grain Accubond and the .308 Win). A 6.5 lb (1/4 lb more than the .308 all up) .30-06 can be loaded to recoil at a similar level (with certain powders) for a similar muzzle velocity with more upside potential available. I think either a .308 or a .30-06 (loaded to a certain level) in a NULA produces about the most recoil that the large majority of people want to deal with. Again, "know thyself" and what is right for your desired use.

For Montana, 300 Win Mag (or even step up tot he 338 Win Mag)... good for everything from antelope/mule deer to Elk/Moose and is enough in the event you cross paths with a grumpy ole griz. Also can handle sheep and goats as well at extended distances.

I really need you to explain to me exactly how the same bullet traveling 300-350fps faster (300win/mag vs 308win) would change a close-range encounter with a 400# grizzly?

Let's use a Barnes 180gr for an example.

As a guy that lives/backpacks/hunts in grizzly country (and has had more than one encounter), I'm perfectly happy with a 308 Win. Bearspray is more reliable than any cartridge anyway.

As to the "I never feel recoil in the field crowd"... well, duh.

But a flinch acquired at the bench will unconsciously translate into the field. Anyone who thinks otherwise is deluded.

redfoxx, I agree with you, as does at least one very successful retired Montana guide. Either a 300 or 338 WM would be nice to have should you encounter a big brown. However, Take A Knee "ain't buying it". While I do agree with him that the 308 Win is a great round, I just think I'd want something bigger for a grizzly.

More speed equals more energy which should also translate to deeper penetration of the same bullet right? I am no expert but thats what I would think. It would be a small amount of difference between 308 and 300 mag, not enough to justifie packing around a long action rifle.

Just exactly how is a 30cal 300win/mag "bigger" than a 30cal 308? And there ain't no "big browns" anywhere near Montana, which is where the poster was asking for rifle advice for.

I'll ask you the same question Biggs. How is an extra few hundred fps impact velocity gonna change a griz encounter?

Right, off a bench. I only shoot off the bench for load development and sighting in. After that its all off hand and kneeling positions where the recoil does not bother me. This round of practice is after the load is chosen, sighted in and just before the start of the season.

Nope, but I got the answer I expected. This ain't how modern game bullets work. Even something like a Barnes won't always give more penetration with more velocity because it expands faster at a higher velocity.

A lot of guys got mauled and stomped to death in Africa for the old hands there to figure out that something in the vicinity of 2400fps was the sweet spot velocity for a frontal shot on a big critter intent on your demise. That's right where a heavy bullet 308 lives.

I had to take a shot at it. Now that I think about it when moving faster the bullet will expand a lot more rapidly. Do we have any links to tests/studys that can back this up? I am thinking you might be right. You kinda baited that question with the barnes bullet didnt you? Or does that apply to all "hunting" bullets like noslers partitions and such?

Wow, we have gotten way off track, oh well its some good info.

"Off the bench" is an anachronism for practice... on paper, with precision.

So there is no cartridge that recoils enough to bother you?

Do tell...