Help me decide: Minimum caliber for larger NA game

[LongRange1982]

For the ranges you're discussing (up to ~400 yards), i'd recommend the 30-06 or the 7mm Remington Mag. I have both, 7mmRM will reach out further with more kinetic energy, however the 30-06 shoots wider / heavier bullets for large game at closer range (think Taylor KO factor). Past 400 yards, i'd consider a 300 magnum of some sort.

All that a "magnum" does over it's non-magnum counterparts is extend your reach. Doesn't necessarily mean you can kill bigger and more dangerous creatures with it. You want more killing power?, you'll need to step up to a larger caliber (i.e. 338s are more effective killers on big game than any 30 caliber, and up the ladder in comparisons you can go). What i've been taught: 100 FPS increase gives you an extra 25 yards in range. E.G. 300 Winmag is about 300-400 FPS faster than a 30-06, which will give you 75-100 yards additional range over the '06.

I also own a 28 Nosler (no muzzle brake), and it is a LASER BEAM. But, it's a major increase in recoil, ammo is more expensive, and you'll burn your barrel out faster than the 7RM, if that's something that would concern you. I love mine, but it is a niche cartridge for extreme long range trophy hunts where one shot means everything. I've haven't had the opportunity to hunt with mine.

If i were recoil sensitive and wanted to step up to a cartridge w/ more killing power than the 6.5 CM on Big Game, i'd most likely buy a 7mm Remington Magnum. Put a scope on it, a good recoil pad (Limbsavers are great), and with a 26" barrel, it should weigh enough where you don't have to put a brake on it. You can't go wrong with the 7RM or a 30-06, as recoil is very similar. Shoot 160-175 grain bullets for Elk sized game and up, w/ properly constructed bullets, and you will bring home the bacon.

Best of luck w/ your decision!

 

[WildRose]

For the ranges you're discussing (up to ~400 yards), i'd recommend the 30-06 or the 7mm Remington Mag. I have both, 7mmRM will reach out further with more kinetic energy, however the 30-06 shoots wider / heavier bullets for large game at closer range (think Taylor KO factor). Past 400 yards, i'd consider a 300 magnum of some sort.

All that a "magnum" does over it's non-magnum counterparts is extend your reach. Doesn't necessarily mean you can kill bigger and more dangerous creatures with it. You want more killing power?, you'll need to step up to a larger caliber (i.e. 338s are more effective killers on big game than any 30 caliber, and up the ladder in comparisons you can go). What i've been taught: 100 FPS increase gives you an extra 25 yards in range. E.G. 300 Winmag is about 300-400 FPS faster than a 30-06, which will give you 75-100 yards additional range over the '06.

I also own a 28 Nosler (no muzzle brake), and it is a LASER BEAM. But, it's a major increase in recoil, ammo is more expensive, and you'll burn your barrel out faster than the 7RM, if that's something that would concern you. I love mine, but it is a niche cartridge for extreme long range trophy hunts where one shot means everything. I've haven't had the opportunity to hunt with mine.

If i were recoil sensitive and wanted to step up to a cartridge w/ more killing power than the 6.5 CM on Big Game, i'd most likely buy a 7mm Remington Magnum. Put a scope on it, a good recoil pad (Limbsavers are great), and with a 26" barrel, it should weigh enough where you don't have to put a brake on it. You can't go wrong with the 7RM or a 30-06, as recoil is very similar. Shoot 160-175 grain bullets for Elk sized game and up, w/ properly constructed bullets, and you will bring home the bacon.

Best of luck w/ your decision!

The easiest way to get more energy on target is to increase the velocity, not the diameter of the projectile.

M X V2=Energy. In English, it is the velocity which is squared not the Mass.

 

[chav0_12]

The easiest way to get more energy on target is to increase the velocity, not the diameter of the projectile.

M X V2=Energy. In English, it is the velocity which is squared not the Mass.

I think he's talking from the school of thought that describes frontal area as having greater killing power. Energy is a good measurement but ultimately it's about velocity at impact. IMO bullet design and construction at sufficient velocity kill more and better than energy.

 

[WildRose]

I think he's talking from the school of thought that describes frontal area as having greater killing power. Energy is a good measurement but ultimately it's about velocity at impact. IMO bullet design and construction at sufficient velocity kill more and better than energy.

But without ample energy no bullet is going to perform optimally.

There's a strong argument for the larger frontal section being more effective as is easily demostrated with controlled expansion bullets such as the Peregrine VLR4 and Nosler Accubond. The potential for hydraulic shock and hydrostatic shock go up pretty well exponentially as the bullet expands.

It requires however a given amount of energy to properly expand those bullets and the harder you run them the more they expand. Now if you push them beyond design capacity and they start shedding massive amounts of mass it starts going to other way pretty fast.

Terminal ballistics is a lot more complex topic than most people think it is. To most folks it's just buy a box of ammo with whatever bullet shoot, pick up dead deer and go home.

When you get into long range hunting it gets pretty complicated fast because you lose so much velocity beyond 600yds there's so little energy remaining when the bullet makes contact it takes a much softer expanding bullet or more frangible bullet to do the kind of damage needed for a quick, clean, humane kill with a single shot.

That's why it's so difficult to find a bullet that performs ideally at both short and long range. Tapered jackets with cup and core bullets help a lot but without a stop, being that a cannelure or second section like the Nosler Partition they become extremely explosive at closer ranges from 0-400yds.

Then consider the differences in MV from cartridge to cartridge even using identical bullets of the same caliber.

Just a whole lot of variables here, too many for easy answers and simple solutions unfortunately.

 

[Veteran]

I think he's talking from the school of thought that describes frontal area as having greater killing power. Energy is a good measurement but ultimately it's about velocity at impact. IMO bullet design and construction at sufficient velocity kill more and better than energy.

You missed his point entirely.

Given a choice of a heavier bullet ( of any given construction or type),
which is more important...a heavier bigger bullet or more velocity?

Because the force or energy delivered to an animal in knockdown shock and power is the product of the mass or weight of the bullet times the velocity squared
the velocity is the more important of the two... Assume the type of bullet is the same. Just its weight goes up. You can use any kind of bullet you want to.

Increasing the weight of the bullet is minor in the total knockdown force the animal gets hit with.

Because mathematically any time you square a variable in an equation it vastly outweighs the other variables in an equation in its contribution to the calculated effect.

In other words 3000 x 3000 is a hell of lot bigger number than going from 150 gr bullet to 200 gr. bullet
when you calculate energy or knockdown force or shock the animals system has to absorb.

And what makes the most difference on energy or force the animal is hit with? It is velocity, but velocity is a function of energy. You cant divorce the two.




..

 

[Goldengun]

You missed his point entirely.

Given a choice of a heavier bullet ( of any given construction or type),
which is more important...a heavier bigger bullet or more velocity?

Because the force or energy delivered to an animal in knockdown shock and power is the product of the mass or weight of the bullet times the velocity squared
the velocity is the more important of the two... Assume the type of bullet is the same. Just its weight goes up. You can use any kind of bullet you want to.

Increasing the weight of the bullet is minor in the total knockdown force the animal gets hit with.

Because mathematically any time you square a variable in an equation it vastly outweighs the other variables in an equation in its contribution to the calculated effect.

In other words 3000 x 3000 is a hell of lot bigger number than going from 150 gr bullet to 200 gr. bullet
when you calculate energy or knockdown force or shock the animals system has to absorb.

And what makes the most difference on energy or force the animal is hit with? It is velocity, but velocity is a function of energy. You cant divorce the two.




..

My calculator doesn't agree. I hear what your saying, not agreeing or disagreeing, but as I calculate velocity increase vs mass increase(fps vs grains)it seems to be fairly even. But what amount of velocity is equal to what amount of mass(ie, is 1 FPS equal to 1gr of weight)?? How do you compare? Trying to understand.

 

[chav0_12]

You missed his point entirely.

Given a choice of a heavier bullet ( of any given construction or type),
which is more important...a heavier bigger bullet or more velocity?

Because the force or energy delivered to an animal in knockdown shock and power is the product of the mass or weight of the bullet times the velocity squared
the velocity is the more important of the two... Assume the type of bullet is the same. Just its weight goes up. You can use any kind of bullet you want to.

Increasing the weight of the bullet is minor in the total knockdown force the animal gets hit with.

Because mathematically any time you square a variable in an equation it vastly outweighs the other variables in an equation in its contribution to the calculated effect.

In other words 3000 x 3000 is a hell of lot bigger number than going from 150 gr bullet to 200 gr. bullet
when you calculate energy or knockdown force or shock the animals system has to absorb.

And what makes the most difference on energy or force the animal is hit with? It is velocity, but velocity is a function of energy. You cant divorce the two.




..

I agree that they're completely related when taking a bullet down range. Retained energy means more velocity down range. My point is that for a specific bullet design to function properly it's the velocity that effects that. I understand how the math works. Bullet performance is dependent upon velocity not energy. Energy, though, will get the bullets velocity down range, that along with good external ballistics will keep that velocity higher longer. Personally I don't take energy into consideration when considering a bullets performance on game. That was my point. Idk how much sense that makes as I've had a few beers and it might've just been a jumbled mess of words.

Ultimately, I think my point was missed, talking about frontal area.

 

[Eric Muncy]

New guy here. Hear me out and throw your opinion in the ring. I own a Bergara B14 HMR in 6.5 Creed. Has been an excellent gun, exactly what I was looking for, zero issue. Casual weekend bench shooting, can also drop a deer.

Now I'm in the market for something bigger or a step up in being adequate for larger game. I don't plan on any thick-skinned African hunts in the near future, so assume just North America, probably nothing more than bear/moose.

Thoughts:

• I already have a 6.5 Creed, so I don't really need something specifically to overlap with that. I'm good up to deer, possibly elk, and looking for something in the elk and up range. Maybe I'm just a wimp, but heavy recoil does take some of the enjoyment out of it for me. I prefer something that I can comfortably practice with, sight in, multiple shots, and never be already preparing myself for the slam when about to squeeze off a shot at game. For this I love the 6.5.
• I am not turned off by the chassis/AR-style look of some modern rifles. I do appreciate the modularity/adjustability, and adjusting cheek weld or length of pull is a must. Function over traditional appearance for me.
• To meet some of my recoil requirements and to not get into the heavy hitting rounds, I'm content to accept that energy will only be high enough for my larger game targets out to 3-400 yards. At some point down the road, it will probably get a suppressor, so overall optimum barrel length is a factor.

Question: Lightest recoiling caliber, available in a gun model that is somewhat adjustable, at least minimally capable of ethical moose/bear shot at 300 yds? For sake of argument, ignore cost (of ammo), ammo availability, and assume factory loads. Not looking to build anything at this time, so a factory option in gun model and ammo.

I realize all of these are giving up something in some area or another, but options I have researched:

• 6.5 PRC – really that much better than 6.5 Creed? A lot of overlap with what I already have, borderline good enough for moose. I do really like the recoil, ballistics, and lots of gun options. I hear people shooting elk at 1000yd with them, and while not something I plan to do, does make me think a good shot at 300 would probably drop a moose.
• .280 AI – Hard to find options chambered in this, can get an Xbolt
• 6.8 Western – Really like what I'm hearing about this one, meets a lot of my requirements, hard to find a gun I like chambered in it, also available in xbolt. Doesn't bother me that it's a new fad, and ammo is available.
• 28 Nosler or .300 PRC – Incredibly capable rounds, I doubt I would enjoy shooting it very often, considering recoil. Would give me some ability to tackle even larger game. Maybe I could get manageable with a brake?
• Sig cross/.277 fury – I like the portability/adjustability of the rifle, and think the cartridge is intriguing, but probably not much more adequate than my 6.5 for bigger game? Big pro here is the ballistics out of a 16" barrel. Even with a suppressor, a very small/compact package, plus folding.

Props if you actually read this far. All opinions welcome.

270 WSM

 

[COBigJohn]

New guy here. Hear me out and throw your opinion in the ring. I own a Bergara B14 HMR in 6.5 Creed. Has been an excellent gun, exactly what I was looking for, zero issue. Casual weekend bench shooting, can also drop a deer.

Now I'm in the market for something bigger or a step up in being adequate for larger game. I don't plan on any thick-skinned African hunts in the near future, so assume just North America, probably nothing more than bear/moose.

Thoughts:

• I already have a 6.5 Creed, so I don't really need something specifically to overlap with that. I'm good up to deer, possibly elk, and looking for something in the elk and up range. Maybe I'm just a wimp, but heavy recoil does take some of the enjoyment out of it for me. I prefer something that I can comfortably practice with, sight in, multiple shots, and never be already preparing myself for the slam when about to squeeze off a shot at game. For this I love the 6.5.
• I am not turned off by the chassis/AR-style look of some modern rifles. I do appreciate the modularity/adjustability, and adjusting cheek weld or length of pull is a must. Function over traditional appearance for me.
• To meet some of my recoil requirements and to not get into the heavy hitting rounds, I'm content to accept that energy will only be high enough for my larger game targets out to 3-400 yards. At some point down the road, it will probably get a suppressor, so overall optimum barrel length is a factor.

Question: Lightest recoiling caliber, available in a gun model that is somewhat adjustable, at least minimally capable of ethical moose/bear shot at 300 yds? For sake of argument, ignore cost (of ammo), ammo availability, and assume factory loads. Not looking to build anything at this time, so a factory option in gun model and ammo.

I realize all of these are giving up something in some area or another, but options I have researched:

• 6.5 PRC – really that much better than 6.5 Creed? A lot of overlap with what I already have, borderline good enough for moose. I do really like the recoil, ballistics, and lots of gun options. I hear people shooting elk at 1000yd with them, and while not something I plan to do, does make me think a good shot at 300 would probably drop a moose.
• .280 AI – Hard to find options chambered in this, can get an Xbolt
• 6.8 Western – Really like what I'm hearing about this one, meets a lot of my requirements, hard to find a gun I like chambered in it, also available in xbolt. Doesn't bother me that it's a new fad, and ammo is available.
• 28 Nosler or .300 PRC – Incredibly capable rounds, I doubt I would enjoy shooting it very often, considering recoil. Would give me some ability to tackle even larger game. Maybe I could get manageable with a brake?
• Sig cross/.277 fury – I like the portability/adjustability of the rifle, and think the cartridge is intriguing, but probably not much more adequate than my 6.5 for bigger game? Big pro here is the ballistics out of a 16" barrel. Even with a suppressor, a very small/compact package, plus folding.

Props if you actually read this far. All opinions welcome.

You have a Creed.... you don't need any of the calibers listed in your post.

Here are some great compliments to your 6.5..... and if I were a 2 gun guy.... and low recoil was a desire......

338 Federal would be at the top of my list.

Next would be a 30-06.

 

[WildRose]

You missed his point entirely.

Given a choice of a heavier bullet ( of any given construction or type),
which is more important...a heavier bigger bullet or more velocity?

Because the force or energy delivered to an animal in knockdown shock and power is the product of the mass or weight of the bullet times the velocity squared
the velocity is the more important of the two... Assume the type of bullet is the same. Just its weight goes up. You can use any kind of bullet you want to.

Increasing the weight of the bullet is minor in the total knockdown force the animal gets hit with.

Because mathematically any time you square a variable in an equation it vastly outweighs the other variables in an equation in its contribution to the calculated effect.

In other words 3000 x 3000 is a hell of lot bigger number than going from 150 gr bullet to 200 gr. bullet
when you calculate energy or knockdown force or shock the animals system has to absorb.

And what makes the most difference on energy or force the animal is hit with? It is velocity, but velocity is a function of energy. You cant divorce the two.




..

Actually energy is a product of velocity.

The energy of a 200gr bullet at rest is 0.

 

[chav0_12]

Actually energy is a product of velocity.

The energy of a 200gr bullet at rest is 0.

I do believe what Veteran was saying is that, while that is true, the energy of a 0gr bullet at 5k fps is also 0. Well, because it's nothing.

 

[WildRose]

My calculator doesn't agree. I hear what your saying, not agreeing or disagreeing, but as I calculate velocity increase vs mass increase(fps vs grains)it seems to be fairly even. But what amount of velocity is equal to what amount of mass(ie, is 1 FPS equal to 1gr of weight)?? How do you compare? Trying to understand.

I'm no mathematician but I think you'll find there is not a direct 1:1 relationship but a logarithmic relationship between the two.

Pull up load data for any round you choose that includes both velocity and energy and look at how they both increase or decrease proportionally.

 

[WildRose]

I do believe what Veteran was saying is that, while that is true, the energy of a 0gr bullet at 5k fps is also 0. Well, because it's nothing.

No, then you have the energy equivalent to a 200g bullet x 25fps, not 0.

Using a handy online calculator that amounts to .27ft-lbs. Negligible but not zero.

Bullet Energy Calculator (Foot Pounds)

This reloading article provides a ballistic calculator that helps you compare different weight bullets, at any velocity, to see which one will hit harder.

larrywillis.com

 

[chav0_12]

No, then you have the energy equivalent to a 200g bullet x 25fps, not 0.

What? 0grs at any velocity is going to produce ZERO energy. M x V^2 when M = 0 is still 0.