# New big game rifle help



## tommyp (Sep 16, 2011)

Hey guys. I'm in the market for a new big game rifle. I've shot my dads old browning A-bolt medallion for my whole life, and that one is starting to throw shots high every other shot. I've narrowed it down to 2 choices, and they are the Venture and the Rem 700 ADL. Can anyone tell me the difference between ADL, BDL, and CDL? I personally like the Remington, but my dad recently bought one of these new T/C's and supposedly it shoots awesome. Only problem with it is that his scope hits him in the face every time he shoots haha, is that because that gun is made smaller than most? He shot a ruger for a while, and that never came close to happening. Any help would be great! Thanks!
-Tommyp


----------



## xxxxxxBirdDogger (Mar 7, 2008)

The ADL loads bullets from the top and empties bullets by cycling the bolt. The BDL and CDL models have a hinged floorplate to load and unload through the bottom of the gun. The CDL has a straight comb stock and the BDL is Monte Carlo. The BDL has a jeweled bolt that the ADL lacks. The BDL is currently the only model offered with open sights, though that has changed over the years. They should all shoot the same with equal scopes. 

I've always shot Remingtons and Brownings so I can't comment on the T/C.


----------



## waspocrew (Nov 26, 2011)

I think the 700 is a great rifle and most ADL models can be found for a decent price at most stores. However, I wouldn't mind paying just a little more and getting a new 700 SPS that has a hinged floor plate (I'm pretty sure it's an the old ADL with a floor plate). I like being able to empty shells without cycling the bolt. Necessary to have? Not at all. Once you start looking at a CDL, the price goes up a bit though. I've never shot the T/C, but I've heard good things about them. I'd give your dad's rifle a try at the range to see if you like it. Maybe the scope needs to be adjusted for eye relief a little. Trying out his rifle may make the choice a little easier for you. Also, what caliber are you looking for and what caliber is your dad's T/C ?


----------



## tommyp (Sep 16, 2011)

I'm looking at a 7mm rem mag, and that is what my dads tc is, too.


----------



## JuddCT (Sep 7, 2007)

My father has a 7 mm rem mag in the BDL. It is a sweet gun and has taken a lot of Elk/Deer.


----------



## Al Hansen (Sep 7, 2007)

JuddCT said:


> My father has a 7 mm rem mag in the BDL. It is a sweet gun and has taken a lot of Elk/Deer.


+1 I also shoot a Remington BDL (LH) in 7MM Mag. It's a wonderful round.


----------



## GaryFish (Sep 7, 2007)

Can't go wrong with the Remington 700 in any iteration or standard caliber. I've had my eyeball on the one at Walmart for $447 - camo synthetic. Sweet looking set up. I favor the 30-06 over the 7mm, but both are great rounds and are great for anything in Utah.


----------



## JuddCT (Sep 7, 2007)

GaryFish said:


> Can't go wrong with the Remington 700 in any iteration or standard caliber. I've had my eyeball on the one at Walmart for $447 - camo synthetic. Sweet looking set up. I favor the 30-06 over the 7mm, but both are great rounds and are great for anything in Utah.


I have the Remington 700 30-06 (camo synthetic stainless steel barrel). I really like this gun as well.


----------



## James (Oct 7, 2007)

> I'm looking at a 7mm rem mag, and that is what my dads tc is, too.


I am just shaking my head. I have several friends who got either 7mm mags or 300 mags 
and without fail first shot, scope ring around the eye. After that they couldn't hit the broadside of a barn if they were in it, because of the flinch. Please select a scope with a long eye relief and avoid this problem. Or just get a 30-06 or 270.

I like the 700 ADL. It is pretty light though so the recoil is heavy.


----------



## tommyp (Sep 16, 2011)

I've shot a 7mm, and the kick was not bad, it did have a limbsaver on it though. I think I'm going to pick up an adl on Thursday  And the gun I have is a 270, and I love it. There has just been a few shots that I've wished I'd had a 7mm, because of the distance. That's my reasoning behind the bigger caliber choice


----------



## Critter (Mar 20, 2010)

James said:


> > I'm looking at a 7mm rem mag, and that is what my dads tc is, too.
> 
> 
> I am just shaking my head. I have several friends who got either 7mm mags or 300 mags
> ...


It sounds like they didn't have the scope installed properly or adjusted. I know a lot of hunters that us magnum rifles from the 7mm up to a 416 Weatherby and none of them have gotten a black eye from the scope.


----------



## Cooky (Apr 25, 2011)

The choice of which big game rifle to buy should always boil down to which one has the prettiest walnut.


----------



## waspocrew (Nov 26, 2011)

So a 7mm right? You've got yourself a great caliber there... just practice and get used to it. I'd for sure look at a scope with a forgiving eye relief distance to make sure you don't give yourself a black eye. Have fun! A new rifle is always a fun time... I just did some "Christmas" shopping and picked up a new Tikka the other day!


----------



## sawsman (Sep 13, 2007)

Cooky said:


> The choice of which big game rifle to buy should always boil down to which one has the prettiest walnut.


Yes! :O||:


----------



## Loke (Sep 7, 2007)

tommyp said:


> And the gun I have is a 270, and I love it. There has just been a few shots that I've wished I'd had a 7mm, because of the distance. That's my reasoning behind the bigger caliber choice


Do you know what the difference is between your 270 and the 7mm Remington Mag? The real answer is .007 inch of bullet diameter and 10 grains of bullet weight. That is 7/1000 of an inch in bullet diameter, and 1/44th of an ounce of bullet weight. The velocities are the same. All you get with the 7mm mag is more powder costs, and a bit more blast and recoil. The blast and recoil come from the extra powder that is burned. As for the A-Bolt "throwing every other shot high", try tightening the guard screws. I'll bet they are a bit loose. Tighten the front one as tight as you can get it with out messing up the screw, the rear one fairly tight (but not as tight as the front one), and the middle one just tight enough that it won't fall out.


----------



## Fishrmn (Sep 14, 2007)

Loke said:


> Do you know what the difference is between your 270 and the 7mm Remington Mag? The real answer is .007 inch of bullet diameter and 10 grains of bullet weight. That is 7/1000 of an inch in bullet diameter, and 1/44th of an ounce of bullet weight. The velocities are the same. All you get with the 7mm mag is more powder costs, and a bit more blast and recoil. The blast and recoil come from the extra powder that is burned. As for the A-Bolt "throwing every other shot high", try tightening the guard screws. I'll bet they are a bit loose. Tighten the front one as tight as you can get it with out messing up the screw, the rear one fairly tight (but not as tight as the front one), and the middle one just tight enough that it won't fall out.


Don't forget the belt. You also get a cartridge that headspaces on the belt instead of the shoulder. What a waste. Ya gotta hand it to Remington though. they did a great job of marketing the 7MM.


----------



## Critter (Mar 20, 2010)

I have to agree that the 270 is a fine round but the 7 mag does shoot a bullet a couple of hundred feet faster for those extra grains of powder. That along with the capability of going to a heaver bullet if you want. Granted it doesn't need the belt but when it was developed in the early 60's was all the rage in new cartridges. Also from a reloader point of view you don't want it to head space on the belt but on the shoulder for case life.


----------



## Loke (Sep 7, 2007)

a quick check of Chuck Hawk's web site gave nominal velocities for a 140 grain bullet in the 7mm Mag at 3100 fps, and 3000 for a 150 grain bullet. My 270 Winchester with 130 grain TSX give 3150 fps over my Chrony, and Hornady 140 BTSPs are going 3000. It sounds to me like the the only difference is .007" bullet diameter, and 10 grains of bullet weight. And you get all of that extra performance for the cost of 20% more powder. That translates to 20% more recoil and muzzle blast.
The last time I looked, you could get 160 grain Nosler Partitions for the 270. Barnes used to make a 180 grain Original, but it is no longer in the catalog. The heaviest bullet listed is a 175 grain bullet in the 7mm. Less than 10% more bullet weight is not going to make a bit of difference one way or the other when the bullet hits its target.


----------



## Loke (Sep 7, 2007)

Fishrmn said:


> Don't forget the belt. You also get a cartridge that headspaces on the belt instead of the shoulder. What a waste. Ya gotta hand it to Remington though. they did a great job of marketing the 7MM.


And the fact that Remington introduced it in the model 700 at the same time that Winchester "imoroved" the model 70 didn't hurt much. Throw in the "barrel burner" myth that got attached to the 264 Win Mag and you have marketing genius at work.


----------



## Mrad (Mar 25, 2011)

I'm not dogging on the 270 I own two of them and have shot several deer and elk with the 270.

But, the 7mm shots flatter and hits harder. Just the facts.

Who gives a crap if it's belted? Never bothered me.

If I had to choose between the two I'd go with the 7mm.


----------



## tommyp (Sep 16, 2011)

Fishrman, where are those guard screws on the gun? And just like mrad, I love the 270, but the 7mm is the next step up. And would be great to have for situations like longer shots on elk.


----------



## Loke (Sep 7, 2007)

Not the facts, just your perception, and the marketing hype from the manufacture and the gun writers that they support.


----------



## GaryFish (Sep 7, 2007)

I love the "flat shooting" and "hard hitting" arguments. Especially for a hunting rifle. The more I compare the standard hunting rounds - 270, 7mm, 308, 30-06, 300 win, etc..... The more I realize that for hunting purposes, there are absolutely no functional differences between any of them out to 350 yards. And anything past 350 yards in a hunting situation has too many other variables (wind, slope, temperature, hiking heart rate, buck fever, etc.....) that predictable accuracy will only come to the shooter that spends a whole lot of time and ammunition practicing. And again, if that is the case, then the choice among any of the standard cartridges really doesn't matter because the shooter will adjust to the needs of the particular rifle. Otherwise, its just luck.


----------



## tommyp (Sep 16, 2011)

Yeah, i love the 270, and have also shot my share of big game with it, but on the longer range shots on bigger animals, like elk, the 7mm is going to do the job better than the 270. The 270 pushing a 160 grain bullet is not going to be nearly as hard hitting or flat shooting as the 7mm pushing a 165 grain bullet.


----------



## Loke (Sep 7, 2007)

Yup. I guess that thickness of the rifling grooves will make the difference of the bullet completely penetrating an elk lenghthwise, or bouncing off of its hide. And the 1" difference in trajectory at 300 yards is way more than nearly the same.


----------



## tommyp (Sep 16, 2011)

Haha i'm sorry loke, i didn't mean to offend you. You are right about those ballistics though, and i think staying with the 270 is something worth looking at. The ammo is so much cheaper. I looked and the energy of the 7mm 165 grain in ft/lbs at 300 yards is 2043, and that of the 270 shooting a 150 grain (Couldn't find a 160 grain) is 1709. Is that a significant enough difference to worry about?


----------



## Critter (Mar 20, 2010)

When you start arguing calibers for a rifle you are going to open up a hornets nest. Some like the smaller calibers and some like the larger ones. What you need to do it to buy the one that you like and want. A elk that is killed with a .25-06 is just as dead as the one that is killed with the .300 magnums. The one thing that is interesting to me is that those that shoot the .270 claim that it is the start and end of the best out there. But then that is why there are different calibers out there and you get to pick the one that you like the best or should we all go back to the 1800's and use a .45-70, but then you would get them that argue that the .45-110 is a better round for killing elk.


----------



## Loke (Sep 7, 2007)

Retained energy is more a factor of bullet shape than anything else. A high ballistic coeffecient has less wind resistance and will carry its velocity better out to the longet ranges. Target bullets will have the highest ballistic coeffecients, but are not designed to penetrate a big game animal. What you need to compare are bullets of identical construction and that are designed for hunting big game. If you want a valid comparison, look at the sectional density and compare bullet weights that have the same (or nearly the same) numbers. in the .277 vs .284 diameters, compare the 130 to the 140, 140 to the 150, and 150 to the 160. You will find that they are nearly identical. At the same velocities, they will have the same trajectories, and nearly the same retained energy. The 7mm Remington will have a slight advantage in the numbers with heavier bullets. But not enough to matter one bit to the animal that you are shooting. And the 270 Winchester will have less recoil and muzzle blast. And that YOU will notice, especially when practicing. And less painful practice means more practice shooting right, and less practice flinching.


----------



## James (Oct 7, 2007)

My friends who got whacked with the scope brought me their rifles to sight in because as I said earlier, they couldn't shoot without the flinch. The 300 Mag was a fine rifle and was accurate. I did move the scope a bit further ahead. The owner did finally learn to shoot it and made some good kills. The friend who had the 7 MM Mag, never did learn to shoot it. Too bad.

In any case, if you think you can handle the recoil and noise from the mags, go for it.

That much power is not necessary though. The important thing no matter what gun you carry is *learn to shoot*. Learn where that bullet will be at any range up to 500 yards. Any of the rounds discussed will quickly end an animals life if you are good enough to put one in the boiler room. I have seen people who actually taped a ballistic chart to their stock so they could remember just how high to hold at whatever range. Then there are those who carry a range finder.

In the end the *skill of the shooter* is much more important than the caliber.
Have you considered a 300 Mag?
Any way there is nothing wrong with a new rifle. One can never have enough guns.


----------



## GaryFish (Sep 7, 2007)

1/4 mm movement of the end of the barrel will do more to throw a bullet off the point of aim at 350 than any ballistic coefficient, density, or .007 inches of bullet diameter. Shy of a full bench rested, sand bagged rifle, it doesn't matter in hunting situations. It really doesn't. Which is why any fan of any rifle can argue it being better. Because they all are better. And when you start cherry picking comparing 150 gr. vs 140 grain this that or the other, it only proves the point further. If you think the 7mm is better? It is. If you think the 270 is better? It is. If you think the 308, 30-06, 300 win, or any other bullet of the day is better, it is. 

Enjoy your new rifle! Have fun, and I hope to see it too short to sit on the antlers of a big old bull elk next season when you post your pictures up here.


----------



## longbow (Mar 31, 2009)

I know a few guys, (me for the last few years) who keep very detailed records on every rifle/caliber they own. Know the speed the bullet was going when it hit the animal. They analize every animal's wound channel they kill. Not just the exit hole but the whole wound channel. They want to know exactly what their rifle/caliber/bullet did, and they keep records of that too. THESE guys can tell the difference. Most hunters can't. The deer or elk won't care. Lot's of misinformation out there too. A guy I work with says Berger bullets suck because he shot a bull behind the shoulder with his 3-hunnert ultry mag and the bullet "splashed" just inside the skin and they lost the bull. How would he know? He lost the bull!! I asked how he knew it splashed just inside the skin and he says they're "known for that." I bet he can't handle his 300RUM and blamed it on his bullet.
I admit, I'm a member of the "bigger is better" crowd. My advise though, is to pick one of the afore-mentioned calibers that you can handle really well and get that. Don't even think about what caliber it is just pick one you can handle. If it's a .234 then so be it. You'd be WAY better off with that than trying to shoot my .408 CheyTac at elk. 
With a gun you shoot well and a good bullet...watch out elk!

P.S. And fer hell's sake hunters, get out and practice...alot!!


----------



## Loke (Sep 7, 2007)

Here is the question that needed to be answered. If he knew that "they are known for that" , not penetrating and "splashing" on big game animals, What the hell was he doing shooting it at elk?


----------



## longbow (Mar 31, 2009)

Honestly Loke, I don't know. I've had really good luck with Bergers hunting bullets. I think someone told him that after the hunt and then all of a sudden that was his excuse.


----------



## Huge29 (Sep 17, 2007)

I have an ADL in 30-06 and the SPS DM (detachable magazine) in 243. The magazine is very nice to have over having to cycle out all of the rounds. That ADL is so light that you will really feel the recoil, I was taken back by so much recoil as I was used to my old BAR that is semi auto thereby absorbing a lot of the recoil. Either way, great rifles!


----------



## GaryFish (Sep 7, 2007)

Back to your original question - Can't go wrong with the Remington 700 in any variety.


----------



## Loke (Sep 7, 2007)

A few years ago I bought my kid a 700 SPS. The only thing that I'm not a big fan of is the stock. But it is very accurate, and comes with a 24" barrel in the standard calibers. The SPS is the replacement for the ADL. The BDL had a hinged floor plate, and a black fore end tip with white spacer. The CDL has replaced the BDL, and has a satin finish to the stock instead of the high gloss. There are also many other options for whatever your budget allows. Remington's web site is a good place to waste a lot of time. For hunting in Utah, pick any caliber from 25-06 to 338 UltraMag and learn to shoot it well.


----------



## Mrad (Mar 25, 2011)

FACT the 7mm shots flatter and hits harder than a 270.

Why can't you just say OK.

It burns more powder, and has more recoil too. That's a fact.

But seriously if you can't handle the recoil of a 7mm then stick with something you can.

And if you're limiting yourself to under 300 yards, you don't need the 270 or 7mm. I'd shoot a 260, 243, 7mm-08, or some other sissy caliber :O•-:


----------



## Loke (Sep 7, 2007)

I also shoot a 300 Mag in a 7 pound mountain rifle. I shoot it just fine. The point I am making is that there isn't enough difference in the external ballisics of the two to make any difference at all, and even less difference in their terminal performance. When you compare the two cartridges in barrels of identical lenghth, the 7mm becomes even less flatter and less harder. 


Yup, I'll just shoot one of those short cased sissy calibers (308) just like all of those sissy Marine Corps and Army snipers. And I'll limit myself to their sissy shooting distances, too.


----------



## longbow (Mar 31, 2009)

Loke said:


> Yup, I'll just shoot one of those short cased sissy calibers (308) just like all of those sissy Marine Corps and Army snipers. And I'll limit myself to their sissy shooting distances, too.


Sissy :mrgreen:


----------



## longbow (Mar 31, 2009)

Loke said:


> The point I am making is that there isn't enough difference in the external ballisics of the two to make any difference at all, and even less difference in their terminal performance.


Good point Loke. There is a difference, but not alot.

Now let me throw this in. How about getting a Savage? Unless you're like me and just stick with the ol' familiar, tried and true 700 for well.... familiarity reasons, you should look into a new Savage. They're great shooters right out of the box.

How about a Howa? I just bought two barreled actions for some project guns. One in a .308 Sissy and the other in 22-250 Sissier. Have you seen the new two-stage Howa triggers? Sweeeet!


----------



## swbuckmaster (Sep 14, 2007)

Why limit your picks from 7 mag, 270? If it were me id go with the 270 short mag. 


Sent from my DROIDX using Tapatalk


----------



## Loke (Sep 7, 2007)

Now there's an oxymoron. Short Magnum. Another recycled marketing ploy to sell more guns. Not that I'm against selling more guns. Remington tried it back in the '60s with the model 600 and 660. Chambered in the 6.5 Remington Magnum, and the 350 Remington Magnum. The 6.5 was an attempt to duplicate the 270 Winchester in a short, ugly rifle. The 350 was a chubby 35 Whelen. Since most of you have never heard of them it shows just how successful they were. The ballistics were wonderful, they just were not new and improved, in spite of all of the marketing hype. If I really felt I needed the extra power that the "new and improved magnum of the day" provided over and above what my anemic 270 Winchester can provide, I will simply take ten steps closer to my target.


----------



## GaryFish (Sep 7, 2007)

Again - There is no functional difference in flatness or knockdown relative to hunting out to about 350 yards, among any of the standards. And beyond that, while hunting its a total crap shoot due to wind, slope, fog, buck fever, etc..... 

Let us know what you get for your new 7mm. Hope you use it for decades of great hunting!


----------



## Cooky (Apr 25, 2011)

GaryFish said:


> Again - There is no functional difference in flatness or knockdown relative to hunting out to about 350 yards, among any of the standards. And beyond that, while hunting its a total crap shoot due to wind, slope, fog, buck fever, etc.....
> 
> Let us know what you get for your new 7mm. Hope you use it for decades of great hunting!


You're right.

We should all just shut up, go buy a silver and plastic Savage 30-06, put a cheap Vortex 3X-9X scope on it and once a year somebody can post where the Federal Premium with Barnes bullets is on sale cheapest&#8230; 

I'm bored already&#8230; Now what to you want to do? :O•-:


----------



## Loke (Sep 7, 2007)

We could argue about how much better a 308 is than a 30-06.


----------



## Cooky (Apr 25, 2011)

-_O- 

Thanks, I needed that.


----------



## GaryFish (Sep 7, 2007)

If you are going to be that way, why the love affair with the 270? Isn't it just a 30-06 with caliber envy? and to me, the 7mm is downright un-American. Ballistics aside - I hate the metric system, and I don't trust any cartridge that is based on it. And the short magnums- aren't those for guys that try to convince people that smaller is better? That is just sad! :-(


----------



## waspocrew (Nov 26, 2011)

Loke said:


> We could argue about how much better a 308 is than a 30-06.


I love my 308!


----------



## Huge29 (Sep 17, 2007)

I have to agree with Loke. I ran ballistics charts on my 243, 30-06 and 7 mag and was amazed at how similar the charts are in there given bullet weights, however the recoil difference is significant not to mention the price of ammo, as Loke mentioned.


----------



## Mrad (Mar 25, 2011)

I won't argue that there's a whole lot of difference between most the popular calibers at normal/average hunting distances. Because there isn't.

But if you really want to reach out and touch somebody-especially in the wind, high BC bullets, and lots of powder (velocity), are your best friends.

Hence the beauty of the 338 lapua, 338 edge, the rums, the Allen mags, the tejas', etc...

Can you imagine how boring it'd be if all we had was the 30.06? Which IMO could be used to take almost ever creature that walks the earth. If loaded with the right bullet.


----------



## Loke (Sep 7, 2007)

Mrad said:


> Can you imagine how boring it'd be if all we had was the 30.06?


Which is why we have the 270.


----------



## Critter (Mar 20, 2010)

Mrad said:


> Can you imagine how boring it'd be if all we had was the 30.06? Which IMO could be used to take almost ever creature that walks the earth. If loaded with the right bullet.


The .30-06 has taken every big game animal that walks the earth along with the British 303. Which is one thing that the 270 can't say. :mrgreen:


----------



## Loke (Sep 7, 2007)

Really???? Do you really believe that in its 87 years, someone, somwhere, hasn't shot every animal on earth with a 270? Back in the late '70s there was an article in Petersen's Hunting magazine about a couple of hunters that were cornered in the bush by a rogue elephant in Africa. All they had was a 270 and soft point ammo since they were hunting plains game. The resourseful hunter pulled the bullet from a round, reloaded it boat-tail base forward, and proceded to dispatch their tormentor with a single well placed shot to the elephant's brain. The 270 is very much capable of killing every animal that walks this earth. It, along with its ballistic triplets the 6.5 and 7X57 Mauser have done just that.


----------



## GaryFish (Sep 7, 2007)

Isn't the 270 just an excuse for guys that can't handle the recoil of a 30-06? ;-) All kidding aside - I go back and forth for my next rifle on the 270, 308, and another 30-06. The rifle will be a Remington 700, but the caliber is where I'm going back and forth. Maybe I'll go Huge's route and get a 243. Who knows. 

Now the 303 brittish? That was my first rifle. It was a total piece of crap. I hated that rifle. It was a military surplus rifle, that somewhere along the way, the stock had been shortened by about 3 inches off the butt. It still had the military peep sights, with the flip up adjustable ranging sight. The rifle fit fine for my 12 year old frame, but it kicked the he!! out of me. I shot several grouse with while deer hunting, but never fired it at a big game animal. After shooting a few boxes through that, I took a new resolve to work harder on the ranch to earn money to buy a "real rifle." Not knocking the cartridge - it seemed to perform somewhere between a 30-30 and a .308. But that particular rifle was horrible. I've been sour on the 303 brit ever since.


----------



## Loke (Sep 7, 2007)

A good friend of mine studied gunsmithing from P. O. Ackley. He told me that one day he asked Mr. Ackley why he hadn't designed a 30-06 Improved. Mr. Ackley's response was "They already did. It's called the 270 Winchester."


----------



## GaryFish (Sep 7, 2007)

Yea, I can see that Loke. Putting in a smaller bullet, fewer bullet choices, less downfield energy, less performance, less distance, are all marked improvements! ;-) That makes sense to me. Because we all know that a deer taking a 150 grain bullet that is out of a 270 will run 2.3 yards further than the same deer hit with a 150 grain bullet out of a 30-06. And that is everything.


----------



## Loke (Sep 7, 2007)

GaryFish said:


> Yea, I can see that Loke. Putting in a smaller bullet, fewer bullet choices, less downfield energy, less performance, less distance, are all marked improvements! ;-) That makes sense to me. Because we all know that a deer taking a 150 grain bullet that is out of a 270 will run 2.3 yards further than the same deer hit with a 150 grain bullet out of a 30-06. And that is everything.


you have your data confused. Since the 150 grain 270 bullet has both a higher ballistic coeffecient, and higher sectional density, due to its longer length, it will retain its energy and penetrate better than the shorter, chubbier, 30 caliber bullet. This will allow the 270 shooter to anchor its quarry 2.3 yards sooner than the shooter of the obsolete and anemic 30-06.


----------



## shortbreath54 (Apr 23, 2009)

Okay here goes I have had a 270 since 1965 shot way to many deer and 23 elk with, did my time in Viet Nam using the good old M14 168 gr. Match kings worked great out to 900 meters at least for me. Love the 270 but I want to be able to shoot back out to my old ranges from 1971.Now I have old eyes old legs.Wanted to step up bullet weight just a little too 220 gr max but normally 190 gr match king.Love Remington,Browning Ruger not winchester tried a new Savage model 111 long range hunter 300 win mag. Accutrigger, accustock and the thing shoots great,Have only used factory ammo just trying to get brass, but 4 shot 4" group at 500 yrds with cheap factory federals is very hard to beat. So look around and don't out of hand dismiss the savage as silver and plastic or cheap I have over $1400 into this rig and can't wait to start reloading and dialing it in even tighter.I am not a believer in most people shooting at game beyond 300 yards due to wind ect. but if the set up is perfect I feel that I can extend that considerably due to equipment and practice practice practice. Have fun with the new rig and don't forget practice practice every chance you get


----------



## longbow (Mar 31, 2009)

Poor Tommyp, I bet his head's just a swirllin' by now.


----------



## tommyp (Sep 16, 2011)

Exactly right, longbow!! Haha


----------



## Loke (Sep 7, 2007)

So to unswirl your head, here's my advise. Decide which brand of rifle you prefer. I prefer the Remington 700. The older the better. I just love the used gun racks, they usually have some great deals on good rifles. Then decide what your primary quarry will be with that gun now. Don't buy based on what you want to hunt in ten years. You can get another rifle then. Decide how much recoil and muzzle blast you can handle now. Be honest with yourself. Nobody is impressed that you shoot a 340 Super Mega Magnum when you have a super mega magnum flinch to go with it. (Although it is really funny to watch someone shoot that has a mega magnum flinch. Especially when they try to shoot after you have removed the round from their gun when they don't know.) Decide how much you can afford to pay for the ammunition, make sure you factor in lots for practice. Decide what your ammo availability needs are. Some cartridges you can buy just about everywhere. Others you can't. This is something to think about if you hunt a long way from home. If you have ever forgotten your ammo at home you can appreciate this advise. Then go out and get whatever you decide best fits your needs. Then post pictures on the forum so we can congratulate you on your purchase.


----------



## GaryFish (Sep 7, 2007)

And after you do all that, Loke will make you a great deal on one of the Remington 700s in .270 from his collection. ;-)

Loke has great advise. He is a wise man.


----------



## Springville Shooter (Oct 15, 2010)

I think it's funny how people say to go from a 7mm to a 30-06 to decrease recoil. I've shot alot of rounds from both cartridges and would bet a large sum that a blindfolded shooter could not tell the difference by recoil. Fit of the rifle, weight, and bullet weight have alot more to do with felt recoil. Both are good, but the 7mm wins all categories hands down in my book. Actually, if you load, I think that you can get better performance with LESS recoil in the 7MM simply because of the higher BC and SD of lighter bullets. That being said, I don't think that it is reasonable to think that the average hunter will be able to shoot farther with a 7MM than a 30-06 or 270, ballistics are simply too close on these rounds to really amount to much unless you are really getting to the nitty gritty. I do prefer the 7MM for a number of reasons. I really like the 280 Rem also and think that it deserves alot more attention than it gets. I always recommend the 308 Win to those who will be hunting deer and elk at normal ranges and want less recoil. As far as flinching, this is a result of not enough practice, not too much recoil. Anyone can dicipline themselves to overcome recoil and muzzleblast. My daughter was shooting prairie dogs out to 500yds with my 7MM Dakota with no muzzle break when she was 11 years old.--------SS


----------



## Loke (Sep 7, 2007)

GaryFish said:


> And after you do all that, Loke will make you a great deal on one of the Remington 700s in .270 from his collection. ;-)


Nope. But Cabelas has a couple of really nice ones on the used rack. A couple of CDLs. Gorgeous. Wish I had the money.


----------



## tommyp (Sep 16, 2011)

Well, I'm already very comfortable shooting a 270. I'm sticking with that. Thanks for bringing attention to the unimportant ballistic differences, loke! I'll be posting pics of my model 700 asap! Thanks again, guys!


----------



## longbow (Mar 31, 2009)

There ya go Tommyp! A 270 is all you'll need for most of your hunting needs and the 700Rem is a great action.



Springville Shooter said:


> As far as flinching, this is a result of not enough practice, not too much recoil. Anyone can dicipline themselves to overcome recoil and muzzleblast. My daughter was shooting prairie dogs out to 500yds with my 7MM Dakota with no muzzle break when she was 11 years old.--------SS


Well said SS! The more you shoot the better you learn how to react to recoil.

If you can get to Perry anytime before you buy your new gun, PM me and I'll let you shoot anything I have from my .204 to a.338 Edge.


----------



## Loke (Sep 7, 2007)

Springville Shooter said:


> Anyone can dicipline themselves to overcome recoil and muzzleblast.


But not everyone will. Most people are taught to fear the guns that they are shooting by well meaning shooters that have no idea how to teach shooting. The first thing out of the "teachers" mouth is something like "Now make sure you hang on to it, 'cause it has quite a kick to it". They teach the new shooter that they are going to get the snot beat out of them before they have a chance to pull the trigger. The teacher should focus on trigger control, breathing, and making sure that the rifle is being held properly before a live round is fired. How much dry firing did you do in the military before you were given your first live round? There was a good reason for that. They should also make sure that proper hearing protection is used properly. I also believe that muzzle plast is a bigger contributor to a flinch than felt recoil.


----------



## tommyp (Sep 16, 2011)

Yeah, and I figure if there is a hunt where I feel I will need a 7mm, I can just use my dads. Thanks again! And longbow, I might take you up on that. ( after Christmas, of course haha)


----------



## 2full (Apr 8, 2010)

I have used my BDL bolt since the mid 80's. has killed a ton of deer and elk. 
Good 'ol 30-06 that has been a great gun that stills shoots very tight groups.
Best gun I have ever had.
Got it from my Dad.


----------

