# What caliber would you suggest



## LostLouisianian (Oct 11, 2010)

I am going to standardize my hunting guns into a single caliber for a variety of reasons. I will however keep my .30-06's.
Here is the scenario, we will primarily hunt deer with an occasional elk or pronghorn hunt. Nothing larger than elk, no bear either. So in an effort to consolidate to a single caliber that will do a reasonably good job on game from pronghorn to elk I would like the collective input from UWN. I know Karl is already screaming 200 grain from a .30 cal round...LOL. Seriously though this will be used by my daughter who is in her 30's and 5'3", my grandson who is as big as his dad and 15, and in the future an up and coming 3 year old grandson when he gets to 10 or so. I will use it as well and I have shoulder issues that crop up from time to time. I want something that can provide clean and ethical kills at ranges no further than 300 yards and preferably something that is flat shooting to make up for any mistakes in range estimation (added later) and that has light recoil..IF POSSIBLE. Let the fun begin. Thanks for your recommendations


----------



## Critter (Mar 20, 2010)

You already have it, the 06. It can be loaded heavy or light, long range or short, it will do it.


----------



## colorcountrygunner (Oct 6, 2009)

.270 win gets my vote, but you have plenty of other good choices between what you already listed and some that you haven't even listed.


----------



## MuscleWhitefish (Jan 13, 2015)

I love my 06, however my sister claims it has too much recoil. 

The 6.5 creedmoor has a good sectional density bullet and can kill anything without murdering your wallet. 

The next choice would be the 7mm-08 for the same reasons.


----------



## Ducksanddogs (Oct 9, 2016)

I think your 06 is the answer there. I did the same thing and consolidated my guns. I have my 7mm rem mag and it's zeroed to 200 yards but it does anything I need it to do. I've been a big coyote hunter from my days in Nevada and I use my 7mm on them and I also use my 7mm on spike elk. I think you'll be able to make the same argument with your 06. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Jmgardner (Sep 17, 2014)

i agree with muscle white fish. if its 300 and in and you want reduced recoil, id say you could just about take your pick out of the .243, 7-08 or 6.5. i own the 6.5 now that will become primarily my wife (5'5" 105 lbs so doesnt handle recoil well) and im still very interested in the 7-08. probably because I've never had one. but for a short range gun on a mid to small size game, it just seems like it would be so nice and easy to shoot.


----------



## colorcountrygunner (Oct 6, 2009)

I'm an 06 fan as well, but one of your considerations was light recoil. The 06 has the heaviest recoil of all the choices you listed. The other choices can do what you need it to do with less recoil. If recoil wasn't a consideration I would be inclined to say 06 as well. The .260 Remington would be an excellent choice for a light recoiling round to take deer, lopes, and the occasional elk.


----------



## Trooper (Oct 18, 2007)

.308 tried and true. Easy on the wallet, easy on the shoulder, ammo available everywhere, chambered in everything, mil surplus ammo for practice.


----------



## waspocrew (Nov 26, 2011)

Kinda surprised to see the .308 didn't get the nod for a while - It'll do anything you could ask of it with your given range of 300 and in. Load it light or load it up a little heavier depending on the game you're hunting.


----------



## KRH (Jul 27, 2015)

Based on deer being the primary quarry, your shoulder issues, and the fact that grandchildren and a woman will be using the gun I'd give the 7mm-08 a shot. It's an extremely flat and accurate shooter with low recoil. Assuming the correct amount of practice I'd also have zero worry shooting an elk this round under 400 yards. The Savage 11 and Tikka T3 are both affordable lightweight shooters that come in 7mm-08. Good luck


----------



## LostLouisianian (Oct 11, 2010)

KRH said:


> Based on deer being the primary quarry, your shoulder issues, and the fact that grandchildren and a woman will be using the gun I'd give the 7mm-08 a shot. It's an extremely flat and accurate shooter with low recoil. Assuming the correct amount of practice I'd also have zero worry shooting an elk this round under 400 yards. The Savage 11 and Tikka T3 are both affordable lightweight shooters that come in 7mm-08. Good luck


Haven't looked at the Savage 11 but handled a Tikka yesterday and left drool all over it. Great fit and smooth as butter...


----------



## swbuckmaster (Sep 14, 2007)

Critter said:


> You already have it, the 06. It can be loaded heavy or light, long range or short, it will do it.


Just because you can load heavy or light doesn't mean it will do it accurately. "Twist rate"

Sent from my SM-G900V using Tapatalk


----------



## swbuckmaster (Sep 14, 2007)

My vote for do all is a 6.5 creedmore or 6.5x284

Sent from my SM-G900V using Tapatalk


----------



## KRH (Jul 27, 2015)

LostLouisianian said:


> Haven't looked at the Savage 11 but handled a Tikka yesterday and left drool all over it. Great fit and smooth as butter...


Both would be solid weapons regardless of the caliber you choose. Good luck


----------



## CPAjeff (Dec 20, 2014)

I voted for the .243 - it's deadly on deer and antelope, I would not hesitate to use it on elk, recoil is nonexistent, and the list goes on and on - I am not bias or anything!


----------



## swbuckmaster (Sep 14, 2007)

CPAjeff said:


> I voted for the .243 - it's deadly on deer and antelope, I would not hesitate to use it on elk, recoil is nonexistent, and the list goes on and on - I am not bias or anything!


Since he has a 30o6 it's not a bad option to go with the .243 but I like the 6 creedmore better. I think with 105 to 108 grain bullets it hits harder, has better brass life. No need to fire form like the 
.243AI

Sent from my SM-G900V using Tapatalk


----------



## Critter (Mar 20, 2010)

My only objection to the 6.5 is that he will need to reload them. I was in Sportsman's a week or so again and got scared when I saw the price on a box of 20 for the 6.5 Creedmore.


----------



## LostLouisianian (Oct 11, 2010)

Critter said:


> My only objection to the 6.5 is that he will need to reload them. I was in Sportsman's a week or so again and got scared when I saw the price on a box of 20 for the 6.5 Creedmore.


Experienced reloader with more equipment than Carter's has little pills so I actually plan on reloading for whatever I go with even in .30-06


----------



## Lonetree (Dec 4, 2010)

CPAjeff said:


> I voted for the .243 - it's deadly on deer and antelope, I would not hesitate to use it on elk, recoil is nonexistent, and the list goes on and on - I am not bias or anything!


I voted .243 as well, only because 6mm Rem. was not listed. Like was mentioned before, here is were twist rate can have an influence on things.


----------



## Critter (Mar 20, 2010)

LostLouisianian said:


> Experienced reloader with more equipment than Carter's has little pills so I actually plan on reloading for whatever I go with even in .30-06


Then you can reload the 06 from 110 grain bullets up to 220+ (just for Karl)

What more do you need?

Notice I didn't say what more do you want? My gun safe if full of needs and wants.


----------



## swbuckmaster (Sep 14, 2007)

Critter said:


> Then you can reload the 06 from 110 grain bullets up to 220+ (just for Karl)
> 
> What more do you need?
> 
> Notice I didn't say what more do you want? My gun safe if full of needs and wants.


An o6 shooting 110 grain bullets would probably shoot a 4" group at a 100 yards. Not good enough group for varmints!

Sent from my SM-G900V using Tapatalk


----------



## swbuckmaster (Sep 14, 2007)

Heck an 06 is a good gun for everything but varmints imho.

22 250 would be fun

Sent from my SM-G900V using Tapatalk


----------



## Critter (Mar 20, 2010)

swbuckmaster said:


> An o6 shooting 110 grain bullets would probably shoot a 4" group at a 100 yards. Not good enough group for varmints!
> 
> Sent from my SM-G900V using Tapatalk


I didn't say that you would be able to hit anything past the end of the barrel.



swbuckmaster said:


> Heck an 06 is a good gun for everything but varmints imho.
> 
> 22 250 would be fun
> 
> Sent from my SM-G900V using Tapatalk


In a Ruger #1V


----------



## swbuckmaster (Sep 14, 2007)

I think I'm going to build a light weight 6.5 caliber in creedmore or 6.5x284 with a proof barrel. 

With a 140 grain bullet it's plenty capable of taking elk, deer, antelope and coyotes out to 500+ yards and beyond. Light enough to pack all day. Recoil is light enough to spot your hits with a break. 

Imho the modern 6.5's runs circles arround your grandpas 30o6 and is a do all weapon. 

Sent from my SM-G900V using Tapatalk


----------



## Bax* (Dec 14, 2008)

That's a hard vote for me. Its a tie between the .270 and 30-06.

I voted 30-06 though, mainly because I like the cartridge so much and love the history behind it. And lets face it, 30 cals are cool.

But I agree with the versatility of the cartridge too. However, I still think the .270 is pretty versatile too.


----------



## Lonetree (Dec 4, 2010)

swbuckmaster said:


> An o6 shooting 110 grain bullets would probably shoot a 4" group at a 100 yards. Not good enough group for varmints!
> 
> Sent from my SM-G900V using Tapatalk


My grandfather use to load 30-06 rounds down, just for grouse that were less than 25 yards. Within that particular range, they were spot on. One round for deer, one for taking off grouse heads(kept in shirt pocket).

Like you said though, not a varmint gun. And flat shooting was mentioned. In which case 6.5 or .243 come out really well. Not knocking .308 by any means though. For a truly all around cartridge as per the listed requirements, it would be hard to beat 6.5, with the exception of the recoil part. With my personal preference being 6mm/.243


----------



## Lonetree (Dec 4, 2010)

I should add, with that trade off for the recoil of 6.5, you will pick up the ability of stabilizing ~50 grains more in bullet mass(over .243), with a bullet that still falls on the smaller side diameter wise(better cross section).

And then think about synthetic stocks for reducing recoil. You can get a 25% recoil reduction doing this, on top of pads.


----------



## LostLouisianian (Oct 11, 2010)

Lonetree said:


> I should add, with that trade off for the recoil of 6.5, you will pick up the ability of stabilizing ~50 grains more in bullet mass(over .243), with a bullet that still falls on the smaller side diameter wise(better cross section).
> 
> And then think about synthetic stocks for reducing recoil. You can get a 25% recoil reduction doing this, on top of pads.


Some of my guns have 2 recoil pads on them. Not sure I understand how a synthetic stock reduces recoil, please elaborate. I was planning on going synthetic anyway though.


----------



## Lonetree (Dec 4, 2010)

LostLouisianian said:


> Some of my guns have 2 recoil pads on them. Not sure I understand how a synthetic stock reduces recoil, please elaborate. I was planning on going synthetic anyway though.


It is multifaceted. They are hollow(typically), have no grain structure, and therefor flex very differently than wood. This allows them to absorb allot more recoil. This goes for fiber glass stocks as well as thermoplastic stocks. This is one of the reasons why carbon fiber is not always the best option for stocks(But my favorite). You have to build a carbon fiber stock as a hybrid carbon fiber/glass layup so that it is not too stiff. Otherwise it ends up being stiffer than wood, and transferring even more energy than wood. With a pure carbon fiber stock also being much lighter weight, the recoil is then even worse because of this stiffness and lack of mass.

I started playing around with synthetic stocks for weight, but found there is allot more going on there(typically no weight savings). Most of the synthetic stocks that are available for less than $100 are thermoplastic(injection molded), and will weigh very close to the same as wood(this is intentional). But, you get reduced recoil, and also get consistency. After swapping stocks aback and forth on several rifles, it is amazing how much the consistency can be depending on the specific rifle. I have been told that consistency is flinch factor, and it may be a part of it.


----------



## brendo (Sep 10, 2013)

25-06, 7mm-08, 243, or 260 Remington I had the same criteria as you when I was looking and settled on 25-06. I kinda wish I would have went with the 260 rem but I'm still happy with my choice.


----------



## Lonetree (Dec 4, 2010)

brendo said:


> 25-06, 7mm-08, 243, or 260 Remington I had the same criteria as you when I was looking and settled on 25-06. I kinda wish I would have went with the 260 rem but I'm still happy with my choice.


260 Rem is another really good 6.5 choice. That would kinda put you somewhere between .243 and 6.5 Creedmore, at least for it's middle of the road bullet weights and velocities. So for an all around cartridge it could fill allot of requirements. I had a coworker that swore by that round, it is definitely in that arena of being quite versatile.


----------



## AF CYN (Mar 19, 2009)

I decided I was going to be a "one gun man" about 20 years ago. I did a ton of research and bought a 7mm08. It's done great on everything from coyotes to elk. 

Of course, being a "one gun man" is a bad idea. I've since acquired a 45-70, but I haven't hunted with it yet.


----------



## CPAjeff (Dec 20, 2014)

LostLouisianian said:


> Experienced reloader with more equipment than Carter's has little pills so I actually plan on reloading for whatever I go with even in .30-06


I gotta change my answer after this ^^^^. I'd go with the 6.5 Creedmoor.


----------



## ridgetop (Sep 13, 2007)

I'd look at a .280 or .257 short mag.


----------



## BPturkeys (Sep 13, 2007)

What the *ell are you thinkin man. What's the fun in only owning one caliber?? I recommend a minimum of three...Varmint/dogs/lopes...deer...elk, and then fill in as needed as open slots in your safe arise.
But gee, given you already own a '06, just go with it, hardly anything more versatile than a good old '06.


----------



## LostLouisianian (Oct 11, 2010)

ridgetop said:


> I'd look at a .280 or .257 short mag.


Is there much difference between a .280 and the 7Mm-08?


----------



## AF CYN (Mar 19, 2009)

LostLouisianian said:


> Is there much difference between a .280 and the 7Mm-08?


They're very similar. The .280 has a slight ballistic edge. Most 7mm08 loads are around 2800 fps with a 140 gr. bullet, the .280 is around 2950 fps with a similar bullet. However, Hornady loads stuff that will go that fast in the 08.

The 08 is a short action, the .280 is long action. Many folks prefer short actions when given the choice.


----------



## LostLouisianian (Oct 11, 2010)

BPturkeys said:


> What the *ell are you thinkin man. What's the fun in only owning one caliber?? I recommend a minimum of three...Varmint/dogs/lopes...deer...elk, and then fill in as needed as open slots in your safe arise.
> But gee, given you already own a '06, just go with it, hardly anything more versatile than a good old '06.


Oh I don't own just one caliber...um I think I have 8 right now. I am just wanting to standardize my hunting needs down to a single caliber. Not going to get rid of anything. Heck I have calibers sitting right now I haven't even shot yet.


----------



## .45 (Sep 21, 2007)

LostLouisianian ....I'm gonna try a 6.5 Creed this year, unless the 25-06 gets here in a decent amount of time. Sure not much kick to the Creedmoor.


----------



## .45 (Sep 21, 2007)

AF CYN said:


> I've since acquired a 45-70, but I haven't hunted with it yet.


It's tough to draw an animal that would require that big ole 45-70, I've had mine for years and haven't used it yet. Only on paper...:|


----------



## LostLouisianian (Oct 11, 2010)

Here is where I am at so far. After mucho consideration and great input I have decided to narrow down my choices to a short action rifle. My two primary evaluations are the 6.5 CM and the 7MM-08. The differences seem to be very minimal for my use case between the two. I don't think I can go wrong with either one. I am leaning to the 7 because it "appears" that their are more choices for hunting bullets to reload in that caliber. I'd love to hear from 6.5CM shooters who reload.


----------



## PBH (Nov 7, 2007)

i'm surprised there aren't more 6.5x284 votes. Especially for a "do all" gun. Deer, elk, moose....It's a 7mm without the recoil and you get to keep your hearing.

7mm.08 is a girl's gun.


----------



## bowgy (Oct 10, 2007)

I voted 30 06 since both my daughters have taken deer with that caliber in their teens. One daughter took her first at 14 and the other took her first at 13.

The boys in school didn't believe that they shot 30 06 rifles for the deer hunt. They would come home from school telling me that and I told them to invite them out and we would take them shooting and show them.


----------



## LostLouisianian (Oct 11, 2010)

PBH said:


> i'm surprised there aren't more 6.5x284 votes. Especially for a "do all" gun. Deer, elk, moose....It's a 7mm without the recoil and you get to keep your hearing.
> 
> 7mm.08 is a girl's gun.


Now that's funny because when I purchased my grandson a 7-08 in December the clerk asked me if it was for a girl.


----------



## swbuckmaster (Sep 14, 2007)

My vote out of 6.5 creedmoor and 7mmo8 is the 6.5 creedmoor. I however wouldn't go with either because I like the 6.5x284 better.

Reason is 6.5 creedmoor has better wind bucking characteristics then the 7mmo8 so it's inherently more accurate with distance. 

6.5 and 7mm08 have almost the same KE and a deer or elk wouldn't know the difference.





Sent from my SM-G900V using Tapatalk


----------



## swbuckmaster (Sep 14, 2007)

If you must go short action I'd look at the 6.5 saum

Sent from my SM-G900V using Tapatalk


----------



## Critter (Mar 20, 2010)

LostLouisianian said:


> Now that's funny because when I purchased my grandson a 7-08 in December the clerk asked me if it was for a girl.


Are you sure that the clerk wasn't Karl? -O,-

Did he try to sell you some 200 grain bullets for it?


----------



## LostLouisianian (Oct 11, 2010)

Critter said:


> Are you sure that the clerk wasn't Karl? -O,-
> 
> Did he try to sell you some 200 grain bullets for it?


Come to think of it he did ask if I was shooting coyotes because if I was after anything bigger than a fox the 7-08 simply was not an ethical choice


----------



## ridgetop (Sep 13, 2007)

I think the 7mm-08 would be a good choice for what you have described using it for.


----------



## LostLouisianian (Oct 11, 2010)

ridgetop said:


> I think the 7mm-08 would be a good choice for what you have described using it for.


Should I get a pink one since it's a girls gun?


----------



## 7mm Reloaded (Aug 25, 2015)

I would just get your kids a 308 or 270 and shoot smaller grains and skip all the fancy pancy guns


----------



## PBH (Nov 7, 2007)

7MM RELOADED said:


> I would just get your kids a 308 or 270 and shoot smaller grains and skip all the fancy pancy guns


hmmm...270. There is a lot of truth in this ^

http://www.sportsmansguide.com/prod...-remington-bushnell-scope-41-rounds?a=1788295


----------



## Huge29 (Sep 17, 2007)

270 is close, but I think a short action is a feature that will help a lot for this application. There are lots of 6.5s that would fit the bill as long as it isnt the 6.5x284. 260, Creedmoor, SAUM, etc. I personally ended up with the 6.5x47 lapua for the lapua brass, small primer (allowing higher pressure) and softer shoulder requiring less resizing. 
As I looked into what all of the long range guys are using it was a pretty unanimous decision among the different 6.5s. The SD and BC are pretty impressive and still in a 130 or more commonly 140 grain pills. Most of those cartridges are clearly reload only, but the Creedmoor is getting to be lots more popular and much more widely available, but still not certainly as easy to get as the majority of those on the list above. 
Mine is a 25" barrel with radial brake, my 11 year old who is a lightweight put one right down the center of the bullseye with no recoil issues at all. He shot his 7mm-08 in youth size (20" barrell??) and it had lots more recoil, but is still a great cartridge. 
Cant go wrong with most of what has been suggested, but guys who I very highly respect as serious shooters all seem to have 6.5s. 
Best of luck!


----------



## LostLouisianian (Oct 11, 2010)

Huge29 said:


> 270 is close, but I think a short action is a feature that will help a lot for this application. There are lots of 6.5s that would fit the bill as long as it isnt the 6.5x284. 260, Creedmoor, SAUM, etc. I personally ended up with the 6.5x47 lapua for the lapua brass, small primer (allowing higher pressure) and softer shoulder requiring less resizing.
> As I looked into what all of the long range guys are using it was a pretty unanimous decision among the different 6.5s. The SD and BC are pretty impressive and still in a 130 or more commonly 140 grain pills. Most of those cartridges are clearly reload only, but the Creedmoor is getting to be lots more popular and much more widely available, but still not certainly as easy to get as the majority of those on the list above.
> Mine is a 25" barrel with radial brake, my 11 year old who is a lightweight put one right down the center of the bullseye with no recoil issues at all. He shot his 7mm-08 in youth size (20" barrell??) and it had lots more recoil, but is still a great cartridge.
> Cant go wrong with most of what has been suggested, but guys who I very highly respect as serious shooters all seem to have 6.5s.
> Best of luck!


Thanks Huge, that's pretty interesting. I'm going to load up a few rounds for the 7-08 sitting in the gun cabinet and shoot it to judge the recoil. Based on that I will either stick with the 7-08 or take a look at a 6.5. Essentially I would like a bullet in the 140 range as a minimum. I guess 130 would do the job for my use. I really don't want to go lighter to any extent even though shots will be no longer than 300 yards.


----------



## swbuckmaster (Sep 14, 2007)

If you have a 7mm08 no need for another. 
6.5 creedmoor with 140 grain will out perform the 7mm08 in recoil and wind drift. Get you some lapua brass with small rifle primers and it will get you more fps then the .260 remington. 
Barrel life is arround 3500 to 4000 shots from what I've heard

Sent from my SM-G900V using Tapatalk


----------



## swbuckmaster (Sep 14, 2007)

Gun works is susposed to be comming out with a light weight titanium action for under a 1000. Put a carbon fiber proof barrel, trigger, stock ect and you could have no need for any other hunting rifle out to 500 yards. Your back will thank you later. 

Sent from my SM-G900V using Tapatalk


----------



## Huge29 (Sep 17, 2007)

That 7mm-08 loaded with Barnes ttsx and using low recoil method with h4895 is hard to beat. The 120 pills hit nearly like a 140 due to 96% weight retention.


----------



## wyoming2utah (Sep 12, 2007)

swbuckmaster said:


> I think I'm going to build a light weight 6.5 caliber in creedmore or 6.5x284 with a proof barrel.
> 
> With a 140 grain bullet it's plenty capable of taking elk, deer, antelope and coyotes out to 500+ yards and beyond. Light enough to pack all day. Recoil is light enough to spot your hits with a break.
> 
> ...


I am currently in the market for a new rifle too...I have been really considering the 6.5 creedmoors and the 6.5x284s. I am wondering what your opinion is on the 6.5 creedmoor and its ability to tackle really large animals like buffalo. I am hoping to draw a buffalo tag in the next few years and want a gun that will work well for elk and buffalo. Obviously, the 6.5x284 would be the better of the two, but the ammo is more expensive and harder to find. How do you think the creedmoor would handle a buffalo?


----------



## swbuckmaster (Sep 14, 2007)

I would think the Creedmoor would handle a buffalo if you kept the shots close (200 and under) Scandinavian moose hunters have been using 156 grain norma Alaska soft points out of a 6.5x55 for quite some time. 

If I was stuck with using a 6.5 for that application I'd go 6.5x284. This way you don't get stuck pushing the bullet in the case to feed the rifle. The long action gives plenty of room. 


Sent from my SM-G900V using Tapatalk


----------



## swbuckmaster (Sep 14, 2007)

If you have a choice or option to hunt buffalo with a larger caliber like LostLouisianian does with his 30o6 I'd always go larger caliber.

It is a once in a liftime hunt. I would argue to my wife for a chance to buy new gun in 300 ultra mag. 

Sent from my SM-G900V using Tapatalk


----------



## LostLouisianian (Oct 11, 2010)

swbuckmaster said:


> If you have a choice or option to hunt buffalo with a larger caliber like LostLouisianian does with his 30o6 I'd always go larger caliber.
> 
> It is a once in a liftime hunt. I would argue to my wife for a chance to buy new gun in 300 ultra mag.
> 
> Sent from my SM-G900V using Tapatalk


I would SOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO love to hear what Karl has to say on an appropriate buffalo gun. I'm thinking hellfire missile might be his minimum.


----------



## LostLouisianian (Oct 11, 2010)

I am going to deviate a little here because I keep hearing the 6.5CM has less recoil than the 7-08 and I am not disputing that it may. Question is, I think Newton's law says something like for each action there is an equal and opposite reaction. Given Newton's law wouldn't the actual (not felt) recoil be identical regardless of caliber if the bullet weight and muzzle velocity are the same? Now felt recoil is a different subject all together. Just curious for opinions from actual shooting experts here. My reason is if I am going to compare apples to apples then the apples need to be apples and not tangerines or pears right? I do love pears though and don't care for tangerines.


----------



## swbuckmaster (Sep 14, 2007)

I think your correct 140 grain going the same speed out of 7mm vs 6.5 should have a equal amount of recoil if the rifles weighs the same. 

The only way i could maybe see a difference is the 7 mm displaces more air going down the barrel. Not sure if you could feel the difference though. 

I think the average 7mm08 in 140 grain factory load may have a slight speed increase over the factory loaded 6.5 creedmore but the higher BC of the 6.5 creedmoor evens things out over distance. The sectional density of the 6.5 evens things out when it hits the animal because the 140 grain 6.5 is more frangible and puts alot of KE in the animal when it expands. The 7mm08 has more surface area and stiffer jacket. So it puts its energy in the animal different is all. They really are pretty similar until you extend the distance and I'll give the edge to 6.5 on paper. Your 300 yards and closer won't make a hill of beans difference in those two calibers. 



Sent from my SM-G900V using Tapatalk


----------



## Utmuddguy (Aug 25, 2013)

LostLouisianian said:


> I am going to deviate a little here because I keep hearing the 6.5CM has less recoil than the 7-08 and I am not disputing that it may. Question is, I think Newton's law says something like for each action there is an equal and opposite reaction. Given Newton's law wouldn't the actual (not felt) recoil be identical regardless of caliber if the bullet weight and muzzle velocity are the same? Now felt recoil is a different subject all together. Just curious for opinions from actual shooting experts here. My reason is if I am going to compare apples to apples then the apples need to be apples and not tangerines or pears right? I do love pears though and don't care for tangerines.


Two cases with equal case capacity running the same pressure and bullet weight would make sense that they would have equal recoil the problem is the 7mm-08 has a slightly higher case capacity (1gr h2o) and the 140gr 7mm bullet is a larger diameter giving more surface area for the pressure to act on so with the 140 bullet the 7mm will deliver higher velocity and recoil than the 6.5 with every thing else being equal. I'd be willing to bet the average hunter won't know the difference.


----------



## willfish4food (Jul 14, 2009)

LostLouisianian said:


> I am going to deviate a little here because I keep hearing the 6.5CM has less recoil than the 7-08 and I am not disputing that it may. Question is, I think Newton's law says something like for each action there is an equal and opposite reaction. Given Newton's law wouldn't the actual (not felt) recoil be identical regardless of caliber if the bullet weight and muzzle velocity are the same? Now felt recoil is a different subject all together. Just curious for opinions from actual shooting experts here. My reason is if I am going to compare apples to apples then the apples need to be apples and not tangerines or pears right? I do love pears though and don't care for tangerines.


I'm not an expert shooter, but I think at least part of that difference will come from powder charge. Looking at the two loads, the 7mm-08 takes between 2-5 grains more powder to achieve the same velocity as the 6.5CM with the same powder. That's 2-5 more grains in the energy equation to produce recoil.

The other thing that might be playing a role here is how the bullet gets to that speed. Pressure and acceleration curves differ between different cartridges. The difference is in milliseconds, but still different. Spreading the recoil energy over a longer time will result in a lower peak for felt recoil. This is the same thing your thick recoil pads are doing for you. They spread that energy over a few more milliseconds of time, and the difference can be drastic.



Utmuddguy said:


> I'd be willing to bet the average hunter won't know the difference.


Hey, when I've got a deer in my crosshairs, I don't feel the difference between my 300 WM and my 6mm Remington.


----------



## LostLouisianian (Oct 11, 2010)

willfish4food said:


> Hey, when I've got a deer in my crosshairs, I don't feel the difference between my 300 WM and my 6mm Remington.


I don't notice recoil when shooting at game either but when taking target practice I do. Unfortunately at times my shoulder will let me know of the recoil even if I don't notice it. That's the primary reason I sold my .300 WinMag. You should see what I do to go duck hunting...LOL


----------



## Utmuddguy (Aug 25, 2013)

willfish4food said:


> I'm not an expert shooter, but I think at least part of that difference will come from powder charge. Looking at the two loads, the 7mm-08 takes between 2-5 grains more powder to achieve the same velocity as the 6.5CM with the same powder. That's 2-5 more grains in the energy equation to produce recoil.
> 
> The other thing that might be playing a role here is how the bullet gets to that speed. Pressure and acceleration curves differ between different cartridges. The difference is in milliseconds, but still different. Spreading the recoil energy over a longer time will result in a lower peak for felt recoil. This is the same thing your thick recoil pads are doing for you. They spread that energy over a few more milliseconds of time, and the difference can be drastic.
> 
> ...


----------



## bowgy (Oct 10, 2007)

LostLouisianian said:


> I would SOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO love to hear what Karl has to say on an appropriate buffalo gun. I'm thinking hellfire missile might be his minimum.


Seems he has left us for about a month, he has been raising some hackles over at utahconcealedcarry.com;-)


----------



## LostLouisianian (Oct 11, 2010)

bowgy said:


> Seems he has left us for about a month, he has been raising some hackles over at utahconcealedcarry.com;-)


I wonder if he is recommending a .454 Casull as a minimum for concealed carry...LOL


----------



## swbuckmaster (Sep 14, 2007)

LostLouisianian said:


> I wonder if he is recommending a .454 Casull as a minimum for concealed carry...LOL


Deseret eagle

Sent from my SM-G900V using Tapatalk


----------



## bowgy (Oct 10, 2007)

swbuckmaster said:


> Deseret eagle
> 
> Sent from my SM-G900V using Tapatalk


As long as it is the .50 cause you know the .44 mag just won't do.

Top Of Page .... Yes! Another angel got his wings.


----------



## 7mm Reloaded (Aug 25, 2015)

LostLouisianian said:


> I am going to standardize my hunting guns into a single caliber for a variety of reasons. I will however keep my .30-06's.
> Here is the scenario, we will primarily hunt deer with an occasional elk or pronghorn hunt. Nothing larger than elk, no bear either. So in an effort to consolidate to a single caliber that will do a reasonably good job on game from pronghorn to elk I would like the collective input from UWN. I know Karl is already screaming 200 grain from a .30 cal round...LOL. Seriously though this will be used by my daughter who is in her 30's and 5'3", my grandson who is as big as his dad and 15, and in the future an up and coming 3 year old grandson when he gets to 10 or so. I will use it as well and I have shoulder issues that crop up from time to time. I want something that can provide clean and ethical kills at ranges no further than 300 yards and preferably something that is flat shooting to make up for any mistakes in range estimation (added later) and that has light recoil..IF POSSIBLE. Let the fun begin. Thanks for your recommendations


Looks like the 270 Win ,wins. My 115 pound daughter loves it.


----------



## LostLouisianian (Oct 11, 2010)

7MM RELOADED said:


> Looks like the 270 Win ,wins. My 115 pound daughter loves it.


The .270 was high on my list but I narrowed down the choices to a short action. Will I ever own a .270....most likely but it won't be the one I standardize on.


----------

