Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Ask The Gunwriters Lightweight stalking woods rifle optimal caliber help

The easiest solution to this thread is to average the caliber and powder capacity of ALL the rounds mentioned. The result would be the perfect woods cartridge, as determined by a committee.

The big problem is that everybody posts an opinion of the ideal action/rifle as well, even though the OP only asked about a cartridge. It's hard to combine every rifle action possible into one boltleverpumpautosingleshot.

"boltleverpumpautosingleshot"

At 5lbs scoped, with a hydraulic stock that brings recoil to zero and comes with every accessory imaginable. Sounds like an all polymer AR15 with transgender issues...bet it woul sell though!

Guess I'm a bit finicky when it comes to what I desire in a rifle, what it eats and what I use it for. Sounds like a lot of you sure as hell have the same problem!

Regardless, I appreciate your opinions!

This^^^^, plus the fact all of us don't always make a perfect heart or lung shot on deer running through the woods. Sometimes a tree trunk gets drilled or a deer gets poorly hit and another shot is needed.

There is a reason many old timers used a Mod 94.

The best woods rifles ever made for deer in my Opinion is the Model 94 Winchester in 30-30 and the Remington Model 141 in 35 Rem.

I like short action bolts, so my recommendations would be in the 308 family like: 7/08,308, or 358. My current huckleberry is a 7/08 NULA topped with a M8-4x and spitting 120gr TTSX's. Very light recoil!

My buddy likes levers and his choice is 99's in 250/3000 or 300 savage. A pretty good choice IMO.

As a review:

4winds wants a 6 lb bolt-action rifle that he can shoot the hell out of, but he is concerned about the cost of ammunition, of the components, presumably, since it sounds like he does intend to handload for it. If he doesn't handload, the only economical choices are 7.62x39 or .223, due to the bulk and cheap imported ammo available.

The cartridge that he is going to shoot a hell of a lot of must be capable of reliably taking deer, pigs, and possibly a bear.

The cost of components becomes a major factor in shooting "a hell of a lot". For comparison, using Varget in the following cartridges with nominal weight bullets the charges are approximately:

223.........24 gr.
6.8 SPC....c28 gr.
7.62x39.....30 gr.
250 Sav...32 gr.
243 ........34 gr.
30-30.......34 gr.
257 Robt..37 gr.
7x57......37 gr.
260 Rem...38 gr.
6.5x55.....38 gr.
6.5 Crd....39 gr.
7-08........41 gr.
300 Sav....41 gr.
308 Win....47 gr.

More powder, more cost, more noise, more recoil, more power.

The cost of comparable brass and bullets will be proportionately less with the smaller cartridges. The smaller cartridges are also more pleasant to "shoot the hell out of", and are also more practical if assorted varmints make up a considerable portion of the live targets to be shot at.

Everything is a compromise. It is loony-fun to have so many choices. As you can tell by my sign-in name, the 250 Savage has been my favorite compromise for a general walk-around rifle for a few decades now. The above comparison just now helped me reinforce that choice, for me and my uses.

If you're willing to give up some range a Ruger 77/357 might fit the bill.

By your later posts, sounds like money would be no object to get what you want, and it further sounds like you already know which rifle you like best.

If talking fairly inexpensive out the box that is a turn key top performer, I use a 243 Sako A7 as a lightweight walkabout varmint rig. Mine is a first generation, and though they spec'd at just over 6-lbs out the box, mine, as well as several others that I weighed, came in lighter. Mine shoots factory loads into bug hole groups and the balance is perfection. I have a need to change scopes and to use a quick release mount for my pro light system, but otherwise if wanting to run a 2.5 or 4x scope, I'd use Talley lightweights and get rid off all the extra stuff I have on the rifle in the pic.

What would be most important to me, is fit in feel of the rifle reference my personal needs and wants. Just like boots and backpacks, what fits me may not fit you. For me, I've formed the opinion that the Sako engineers must use my identical twin when designing rifle ergos and dimensions. It is very easy for me to pick up their product straight from the box because the dimensions are pretty close to what they'd be if custom fit. For you, maybe that fit would be with the Kimber.

I chose 243 over 223 because in many locations I hunt, the 223 would be illegal for hunting medium and big game. With the 243 I can transitions from varmint to big game without any legal issues and accurate ammo is abundant to be found most anywhere I'd buy supplies. I handload, but numerous factory loads from numerous manufacturers can be found that shoot nearly as accurate, if not as accurate, as good handloads. When I bought my rifle, I believe they were on sale for under $500 bucks. They were actually about the same price as a Tikka because they were making room for the second generation A7. It is very easy to shoot extremely well from off a bench and from field positions. Great rifle to carry many miles yet extremely accurate to shoot inside 300 yards as it it were a heavy varmint rig.

Good Luck

223 is illegal in Virginia for Big Game Hunting. Must be 23 cal or larger

GaryVA,

That Sako A7 looks like an ideal walk-about rifle.

Back when the A7 first came out, a friend of mine who is not a loony and doesn't reload asked me to steer him into a high-quality, walk-about rifle for fun and varmints up to coyotes.

He insisted on a wood stock and I got him into a new A7 in .223, that he still loves to this day as his only centerfire rifle.

It sounds like you got a good deal at the right time. Nice rifle, even if it isn't in 250 Savage. (LOL)

Nifty, good summation. No bears, though. One of the guys in our hunting party shot a 400lb boar with a Nosler BT out of a 308 win. Wrong choice! He eventually got his bear after the guide shot it several times and everyone was very lucky the stars aligned for them, he was a big nasty fellow for a blackie!

So, deer/pigs on down.

I'm truly surprised less folks have piped up about the 223 with so many threads extolling its killing virtues on deer and pigs with the right projectiles. So much so, I was reconsidering what I would have thought a lack of performance on deer/pig sized critters with it.

Justin, I've looked at and handled a Ruger 77/44 at the LGS. Pretty cool gun but felt a little toyish and the stock was flexy. If I were in a pistol only state for deer hunting this would be my choice, luckily...I'm not.

Gary, you're right about finding that sweet spot from manufacturers and Kimber must have used my mold to come up with the fit of their rifles they really balance nicely for me in the 84 models.

I understand the effectiveness of carbines from semiautos and levers, particularly in this scenario, but let's just say to narrow the field my choice will need to be in a bolt action platform. I will reload for it and money needs to be 1000-1500. I've been intrigued with the 6.5 Gendel because the energy is close to the 30-30 within a range to maybe 300 yards. All of this while offering a decent compromise for recoil, component use, low blast and a great fit for the ultralight platforms mentioned. My only hang up is the availability, longevity and rifle conversion costs. With that said the Kimber 84 rifles are close enough to what I want in this scenario when it comes to the rifle build but for extensive shooting I'd want it in the recoil area of a 243 or less. Other very recoil sensitive family members may be shooting this in the near future as well, so I thinking a pleasant shooting killer from the muzzle end only.

For a walk about rifle in the woods, Id like light lever gun in 44/45 and shoot hardcast at a fairly sedate velocity. Won't tear up small stuff too bad but plenty for deer or a typical black bear

***NOT to start an argument.***

I've heard this before and 'simply' don't understand what the diff. is.

I've had several BLRs from 243,308, & 358. I also handloaded them and NOT lightly. I can't say I ever had 'hard extraction' problems.

I really don't understand why some have and I haven't.


That said, a BLR or Sav 99 are NOT bolt guns which the OP stated is his pref..

I think a short barreled 338Federal or 358W pump action rifle would make the ultimate stalking rifle. Something along the same lines as what the Benoit's used and made famous. The scope could be any number of different choices. 3x, 4x, the Zeiss 1.8-5.5 would be excellent. powdr

I'd roll a 223 or 243.

I simply have to add another comment on the .223. I recently spent some time, over several days, with a couple of brothers from Alaska. Both are young (the older, as I recall, is 29) but they have both been hunting a LOT since they were kids, since they grew up in the wilderness. They've killed basically every kind of big game in the state with the .223 Remington, including moose and grizzlies, and never had a problem--which is why both still use Savage 99's totally inadequate cartridge today.

Of course, it isn't legal for huge, ferocious game like deer in some states.

If there's a chance of black bears, and an occasional 300 yard shot, I'd probably pick the .308 Montana, though about a zillion other choices would work as well.

I do have a M1920 Savage in .300, BTW. It even came with a side mounted scope, though I've used it little. Decent 1920's can be had less than a grand.

Flip a coin until you get a winner from the 3 you've chosen.

You're welcome.

I just averaged the calibers and approximate capacity of all the cartridges recommended on this thread, and the result was a .29 caliber round holding about 40 grains of powder. This is obviously a job for a wildcat .29 with somewhat less powder room than the legendary B-29, probably the .300 Savage necked down. But there aren't a lot of .29 caliber bullets, so the Savage itself is more practical--if the collective wisdom of the Campfire sounds wise.

A .223 sounds more practical.