Okay, I was thinking the other night about sectional density, velocity and recoil effect. Now the idea is to come up with the best game performance with the least recoil and i thought that the heavy end of the bullet spectrum at less than max velocity is key. Say a 30-06 with at least a 200gr bullet or a 175gr 7mm. Or a 250-275gr 338. Anything past these diameters and you start getting too heavy for good sectional density and recoil control. I'd like to stick with a standard, unbelted case such as 06. Is there any reason to go with a magnum when you can get all the penetration you need with a slower easier to control cartridge? I'm thinking that a 30-06 with a good 220gr bullet ought to perform like a 338-06 with 250s with less recoil. Or a 280 Rem with a good 175gr. Anybody have the numbers to prove which caliber is optimum? If you could pick a caliber and bullet weight, What would it be? Thanks.

Knowing the intended purpose of said cartridge would make the excercise more meaningful...

Swede,

Load the 180 gr bullet in the 30/06 and sight it in for 200 yds. This is really all that you need to know about big game rifles.

Also, order the liver and onions at the Curtis Inn. Tell them not to over cook the onions.

Brad: Sorry i left that out, I was thinking of deer through elk, The best balance of bullet performance,vs.recoil that can be had with either premium or standard bullets. Swede96.

Or load the 175 grain bullet for the 280. Or the 150 grain for the 270. It really is a matter of taste. not your taste, but the rifles taste for the type of bullet and velocity you want to shoot. I have a 7mm that loves 150 and 140's. Just a bit more particular about 175's, but thats what reloading is all about.

Savage is right about the 30-06, although I dont know if I have ever even shot one.

Swede96
Your thoughts/theories are good. Brads questions are valid. In the history of sporting arms bullets with a SD of above .300 have always done very well and have a reputation of being good "killers". Examples are the 6.5x54 160gr. the 7mm/275Rigby 175gr. the 318WR 250gr. and the 450/400 400gr [etc,etc,etc]. Velocities ranged from 2125fps to about 2400fps. These formulas will work even today, within range limitations. These ctgs made their reputation before scopes were in common use. Today, with scopes, hunters want to be able to make hits at longer ranges, which requires higher velocities for flatter trajectories. The question you need to ask your self is "how far do you except to shoot?"
And "how big an animal is this rifle for?"
One of the best ctgs for animals less than Cape Buff is the 9,3x62 [or the 9,3x74R in double rifles] with 286gr. bullets. For the "killing power you get the recoil is very mild. This ctg. is good to 250 yards no problem.
For the really big animals the 404 Jeffery [or the 450/400 in double rifles] has the best combo of "killing power vs. recoil."
I have used the 9,3x74R and the 450/400 in double rifles quite a bit and have been very happy with their performances.
For lesser big game 7mm 175 and the 30cal 220gr will perform very well.... But the 9,3 hits even whitetail deer like the Hammer of Thor and the recoil is no worse than the 30-06.

Swede, it's my opinion if you need more than the 30-06/180 grain combo you need a bigger 30 cal engine... like a 300 WM with a 180 or 200 grainer. Ditto the 280 Rem/160 grain combo... better to go to the 7 RM with the 160 -175 bullet. Game in the west is often shot at longish range and I'd certainly not want the handicap of a 220 grain bullet in a 30-06! Bullet construction has as much or more to do with penetration than a bullet's weight and SD. A lot of the fascination with heavy-for-caliber bullets hails back to the era when bullets were of simple cup construction where light bullets often broke up on bone. Today's "super bullets" (Partition's, Failsafe's, etc.) have changed things quite a bit. If you're hung-up on energy figures, forget it. As long as a good bullet is put where it needs to go and has enough velocity for expansion, you'll have yourself a dead critter... the rest is mental gymnastic's!

BTW, if your 30-06 will shoot a 165 grain Barnes XLC or Failsafe at 2,900 fps you'll have yourself a whale of a deer/elk killing rig that recoils lightly. Ditto the 308 with 165's. I've used the 165 X on deer in a 308 and, while it's more than is needed for that job (a bit too "hard" for deer), it's a great elk bullet and will penetrate as well as the 180 Partition.

I may give the 168 grain XLC a spin in my 06 this year...

Defintely depends on your hunting style.
If you're willing to get within 100 yds of the quarry, then you have a much easier time with recoil. You want a heavy bullet to go far, it has to push you and the gun as hard as you push it.
For deer and elk, light recoil, I'd take the heaviest bullet my 270, 275, 280 or 30-06 would shoot well and creep up on 'em.
Load it to about 2500 to prove a point.

The farther the game is from your shooting point, the more velocity you are going to need, and the more recoil you will have to endure.

If you are hunting on the East Coast, anything from a 6.5 to 30 caliber with a heavier bullet will do any job you need it to do. Even for Moose or Bear up in Maine. I don't think many people ( outside of Alaska) really have a NEED for a magnum. ( Having a desire for one, and justifying it by THINKING you need one is a different matter).

Compare almost any bullet above 6.5 mm in the trajectory charts, and you will find that zeroed 3.5 inches high at 100 yds, a velocity of 2250 fps will put you dead on at 200 yds. This is regardless if it is a round nose or not.

You mentioned 338/06. A 338 bore at low speed, is big enough and has enough sectional density, that decent shot placement is going to drop whatever you shoot, regardless of what it is. Even the biggest east coast thing I can think of, Maine Moose.

As I say, why does everyone need a 500 yd gun when the average deer is taken at less than 50 to 75 yds. Longer shots can exist in the West, but still alot of deer are taken at ranges of 100 to 150 yds at most. Alot of deer in the Western USA are still taken every year with 30/30s. I am sure the Canadian guys can verify the same in Western Canada.

Maybe a 30/30 with a 170 grain bullet is all you are looking for anyway.!

Bullet performance is determined almost entirely by its construction rather than weight.

The 30-06 with a 180 Partition or Failsafe will take any non-dangerous game just fine. I like the faster opening Partition for lighter game, and the Failsafe for heavier stuff, but it does not make much difference.

If you sight your rifle in to be 2" high at 100 yards, and no higher, you will be set to make any reasonable shot without fear of shooting too high at intermediate ranges.

There is probably no better all-around rifle than a 30-06 with a 180 Partition at 2800 fps. I get 2825 from a 22" barrel with 62 grains of RL22.

For all-around use on animals up through elk and moose in size, I can't think of a better-performing cartridge of modest recoil than the .30-06. Load up 180 gr. Nosler Partitions to 2700 fps. or better, zero for 200 yards, and you're set to go.

The elk I've taken with the .30-06 over the years went down either right away or within a few steps, and of course deer are easy meat for this cartridge wherever they're hunted.

If you need more peneration that 180 gr. bullets provide, it's time to step up to a .338 with 225s or 250s.

AD

[ 08-25-2003, 19:19: Message edited by: allen day ]

The metric we are implicitly discussing here is sectional density time velocity (SDV), which is both overlooked and critical in big game applications. You are looking for the optimal balance between SDV and recoil, which is a great idea.

The winner here is probably the 280 AI with 160 to 175 gr bullets.

280 AI using 127gr EXP Groove Bullets. You get efficiency, accuracy, speed, flat shooting and penetration with low recoil. Whats not to like?

Don

So by the looks of things, We are talking about 280 Rem through 338-06 both standard and improved. Now what about the 9.3x62? I hear it has no more recoil than a 35 Whelen but shoots 230gr to over 286gr bullets. Never shot one myself, But i have an Improved Whelen that is no kitten with stif loads especially with the 250 gr. Hornadys and Speers. Is it really all it is said to be ? Sounds like the ideal cartridge if you want a bit more recoil than an 06 based round. Any users of this one?

Best performance + least recoil = 6.5x55 Swede

In my mind no other cartridge fills this bill better than the 6.5x55 swede.

My second vote would go to the .270 win.

also the 275 Rigby is hard to beat.

I recently had to find the best performing - least recoiling rifle/cartridge for my wife to hunt deer and deer only.
We have it narrowed down to 2 calibers .30 WCF and a .243 win.

David

Swede96,

Since bullet weight and powder capacity will both increase felt recoil, isnt the real question here how much is just enough for the job? I think when Elk are in the mix, personally, I wouldnt want to go any smaller than a 7-08 pushing 160's. That would be bare minimum in my book with carefull shot placement. Of corse a certian deceased gunwriter would take exception to that opinion. A 308 doing 165's has also counted for many Elk head.

There is the efficency factor as well. An 8X57 is the virtual equivalent to the 30-06, yet Im not the only one who swears that it does it with less recoil.

If you do a little research you will find that the 30-06 and 220 grn bullets are nowhere near the equal to a 338-06 and 250's. The large bore will handle the heavier bullets much more efficently.

Actually, of late Ive been thinking that for Elk, a 338-06 pushing 225 grn bullets @ 2700 fs might be just what the Dr. ordered.

I hate to use the word energy, since its so controversial, but thats what this thread comes down to. When you add either powder or bullet weight, (the basic culprits of recoil) you get energy. And energy and efficency are the goal here. In order to get equal amounts of energy from a smaller bore you generally need a equally large bullet and a "greater" powder capacity, or vise versa. Otherwise your theory of less is more would be more accurate.

[ 08-26-2003, 07:53: Message edited by: Wstrnhuntr ]

Most disagree,but I use 150 grainers in my 30-06. I know they are too light,but the moose I shot and my wife shot with them,weren't on the internet to know that. Some that disagree use .270's? Nothing wrong with the .270 but they will be using 150's in it or even 130's and telling me 150's in 30-06 too light. I figure since the 30-06 will shoot through most anything,I don't need a faster .30 that will shoot through and exit to a farther distance. If I were moving up--which I see no need to do,I'd move to larger cal--probably an overgrown 30-06(35 Whelen).

Part of this thread is addressing recoil. I hate the stuff. One reason I like shooting cast bullets and .22 centerfires. Here is a formula I use for recoil. It is not a pounds number--its just a recoil factor to gain a comparison. Take bullet weight in grains and add powder charge in grains and multiply that number by velocity in fps. Divide that by 3500 and that answer by weight of the rifle in pounds. A factor of 20 and above is considered a kicker. It is non linear when you get down to 12 or so there is very little recoil and above 20 you can feel the difference in somewhat smaller changes.

I prefer the 7mm-08 with a 150grs Sierra bullet.

Swede, I believe your thinking is on the right track. Since a .30/'06 with a 250-grain bullet will not produce as high a velocity as you can get from the same weight slug in a .338" or .358" bore, using a similar powder weight, the recoil should be less. In addition, penetration should be at least equal or better, if bullet construction is the same for both. However, if you are using an expanding bullet, the larger ones should produce a bigger wound channel, producing more killing power.

I think!!

What this means is a 6.5, 7mm or .30 will give adequate penetration and less recoil, but requires more precise placement. Lower recoil, of course, means that more people can shoot it well.

(Swede, none are better in this respect than the 6.5X55 Swede using a 160 to 165-grain round-nose bullet)!! And you knew it, didn't you??

I really have to agree with David Thomas. I have a 6.5x55 in a Remington Classic. The recoil is minimal. It's an inherently accurate cartridge to boot. I use it for moose in Canada and so far so good. The sectional density is terrific. I want something that will do its work inside the animal, not go flying through into the sunset, and the 6.5x55 does exactly that with the 160gr bullet. Best wishes.

Cal - Montreal

Now that we have bullets that actually hold together (aka "premiums") the playing field is leveled considerably. And of course the bullet doesn't know what delivered it at a given velocity onto the target. The .308 Win is as good as any out to 200 or so. /06 will get you another 75 yds. .300s another 100 on top of that. Rough estimates but you get my drift.

If your ability to reliably hit the vitals ends say at 300yds, there's no point in shooting a heavier cartridge than /06; it would likely be counter-productive. I'd choose the cartridge based on what your ability or conditions will allow you to take advantage of.

Recoil (impulse) depends on the mass of the bullet, its velocity, and the weight of the rifle.
Every thing going forward is effects the recoil (coming back.
Penetration depends on the inertia mass x velocity. Wound cavity depends on the energy
Mass x velocity squared. A long thin heavy bullet such as the Swedish mauser will
have low recoil, hold it's velocity, and penetrate at long range. If you check the swede
against the 270 at 300 yds you will be amazed.
The argument that extra energy will make up for a poor shot seems to be popular with
"gunwriters" but is iffy.
Good luck!

Using a rifle on a species where people say stay off the shoulder means that you need to avoid a considerable part of the vital area and in so doing go considerably closer (with attendant risks) to the guts.

The sorts of game where people debate whether something is good enough tends to be big, rare and relatively hard to come to terms with.

When the barking dog and moose come towards you, at no point in the subsequent action does the hunter armed with a 30-06, 9.3x62 etc say 'if only I had had my 6.5x55'

If the hunter with the 9.3x62 hits the moose in the guts the result is no different to having had a 6.5x55 unless you can honestly say that you wounld have shot that much better (I doubt it)

If you're born in the area and these animals aren't so rare or difficult then a 6.5x55 for moose or a 222rem for roe deer could well add an element of fun. If you're on the 'trip of a lifetime' then it very definately does not.

In order to kill the animal the bullet has to hit it. Ballistic programmes are extremely poor at predicting trajectories of bullets outside the mid velocity mid weight. Round noses or really slow really heavy bullets (in my experience of 154 7mm RN and in a friends experience of 220gr 30cal RN) literaly fall out of the sky past 150
yards and 3.52 high is very high. What if the moose stands perfectly still looking at you with only head visible at 50yards and you have a good rest? It's the last day of the season and it's the first you've seen and you've a really good rest. Are you really going to pass? Are you really going to remember that the bullet is 2" higher than the cross hair?

This is a long way of saying I don't believe in pushing velocity or weight to either extreme.