Hello, I'm not a regular member here, although I come in and lurk once in a while. I have a question relating to what cartridge may best suit my hunting, so if you'll bear with me I'll probably be asking questions only a neophyte would ask. First of all, I'm not a newbie. I'm 50 years old and I've been shooting and hunting since I was a kid. Mostly I'm an upland bird hunter, but I do go after mule deer every few years in eastern Washington. I bought a .250-3000 Savage Model 99 in 1973, and that's all I've been using since. It's a great rifle and a good cartridge. My interest in deer and elk hunting is growing more and more, and I'm finding that I'm getting more opportunites to hunt mule deer, elk, sheep, and antelope, in Montana. In other words, more wide open country that what I'm used to. I have a Remington 760 pump, in 30-06, which belonged to my dad, and although I treasure that rifle because it was his, I've never cared for it. It fits me poorly and the recoil is awful. I'm in the market for a new rifle, in a caliber that would be appropriate for close shots as well as long range. I grew up on Jack O'Conner, and tend to admire the .270 with the 130gr Nosler, but I know there's so much more to choose from. I recently shot an older Ruger Model 77 with the tang safety, in .270, and I really liked the rifle. I expected more recoil from the rifle, but I was mildly surprised. The .270 is definitely on my mind.



A close second is the venerable 30-06. I've studied ballistics and handloading charts since I was a kid, and I could never figure out how the .270 could be all that much better than the 30-06 with smaller bullets. In theory, anyway, an 06' handloaded with 165gr or 150gr bullets should have only a little less flat trajectory than the .270, right? Probably no more than a couple of inches lower at, say, 300 yards? Or am I wrong, and does bullet coefficiency and sectional density come into play and make the 130gr .270 a smart bomb? In other words, are the differences between the .270 & 30-06 at long range, say, on antelope, all that different or are they miniscule? This is a tough choice since the 30-06 is better suited to all types of game, in my opinion. A local gun shop has a used, but mint condition Winchester Model 70 featherweight (new manfactuter) in 30-06, with a 4x10x Leopold variable, all for $595.00. It feels nice.



Two last choices: I've talked quite often about the Rem. 7mm mag with a coworker. I've always shied away from the thought of this cartridge because of recoil, but he assures me the recoil is no worse than shooting a similar bolt gun with heavy 30-06 loads. Since it really is a "super" .270 I have to think it would be ideal for open prairie country in Montana and Wyoming.



7mm-08: I can't think of anything I've read about this cartridge that is negative. I know it's not really a .270, but from what I've read it will do just about everything, even kill elk at sensible ranges. I have to admit that one of the reasons I like this cartidge is because of the Rem. Model 7 SS rifle. It's lightweight and mounts very well for me. I don't know if it's really in the running in conversations about the above mentioned cartridges, but I thought I'd mention it. I've purposely left out the 300 magnums. Because of recoil and weights of the rifles I would shy away from them.



One of the things I have NOT done is to look at the new short magnums, such as the 270WSM, and 300WSM. I just don't know much about these rounds.



I would appreciate advice from you more experienced big game hunters.



Thanks,

Cliff

Seattle

270 is my favorite all time cartridge. Craig Boddington killed a bull elk at 400 yards with a 270 using 150 Partitions. I just read in one of my latest magazines where he stated that of all the elk he's killed (or maybe even seen killed), the 2 killed with 270 cal. bullets (270 Win and 270WSM) fell the quickest. This is coincidence I'm sure but it is worth repeating.

However, the new short magnums do offer a bit more edge in terms of trajectory. My brother owns a new 300 Remington Short Action Ultra Mag in the Remington BDL Rocky Mnt. Elk Found. edition. It shoots very very nicely. And recoil is less than our 270's and they all have Pachmyr decelerator pads. The 300 has the new Remington recoil pad made by limbsavor technology. It is great. I can shoot that 300 SAUM all day with 180 bullets and have no problems whatsoever.

I do not think you'll find a Winchester or Browning in 300 SAUM but you will in WSM. Ruger also makes the WSMs. I have a bunch of rifles and if I were in your shoes, I'd probably go with the following and in this order:

300WSM
300SAUM
270WSM
270Win
7WSM
7SAUM

My brothers little 300 SAUM feels like it weighs about as much as my Mathews bow (2lbs). It is light as can be with his NIKON scope 4.5x14. If they made one in left handed and stainless, I'd buy one tomorrow.

Another thought: with all the newer bullets that are out, like the Barnes Triple Shock, the 'marginal' elk calibers (like the good ol 270), have now become ADEQUATE/GOOD elk calibers. This is especially true on long quartering shots. I have a friend in Cortez, Colorado that killed a heavy bodied bull last season with a 270Win using 140 Barnes Triple Shocks. The shot was 330 yards across a canyon. He hit it high in the shoulder where the spine meets the scapula and dropped it. The bullet took out some spine bone fragments with it out the exit hole.

You have so many choices. Good luck.

Cliff, Welcome to AR. Let me answer your question as quickly as possible. They would all work. At the practical ranges which game should be shot at, all are flat enough and have enough energy if the proper bullet is placed in the proper spot. There is so much quality factory ammunition available these days that with just a little research... you're in. From what you are saying recoil is an issue with you, so stick to the .270, maybe the '06. The '06 is probably more accurate than the .270 based only upon the manufacturer's mentioned. Since they are used rifles, maybe the dealer would consider a trial run to the range? Small and lighter rifles do carry nicely and the Model 7 SS could be a inner. If you think about it, we shoot alot less than we carry. But when we do shoot, well I don't want to miss. Bottom line is that any standard cartridge and rifle action combination will get the job done, so pick one that feels good and shoots straight. Good luck!

Cliff,
If you use a good bonded or partition-type bullet, you are good-to-go with either the .270 or /06 for any game either is appropriate for. I'd choose the rifle I liked the most given those two caliber choices.

My .270 is an old M77 and I have a pet load for 150gr Partitions and there is no need for any other load for any purpose I might use it for. The nose expands as fast on a whitetail as it does a woodchuck and the base just drills on through.

The /06 sounds like a good deal (not sure what a 4x10x is) but if it's a Leupold you are assured that even if there is a problem it will be fixed at no cost.

As you notice, we will discuss the various nuances, both real and imagined, of how many angels can dance on the head of a pin until the cows come home. None of your suggestions would be a bad choice!!!!!! Were it me, I'd grab that deal on the '06 with the leui scope so fast the stock would smoke. And be very comfortable that you have made a wise choice. The '06 has been killing stuff very dead for almost 100 years and will probably continue to kill stuff for another 100 unless we elect a couple more Democrat presidents. Would it be my first choice??? No but only because there are other rifles that will do the same thing that are a little more "exotic". But, when you factor in the fact that you would be paying for a well made rifle with a Leupold scope less than you would pay for a NIB rifle alone, that '06 will look better and better.

Wstrnhuntr,

You are a very negative person.

We have simply given you facts and you refused to accept that we are stating the truth.

You are twisting the whole concept. Recoil to most all normal shooters is the felt push of the rifle upon firing. If you apply recoil to other instances such as machinery than you would be on the right track but, in firearms you are not.

Yes, if you had the same weighted rifles, same charge, same weight bullet, same barrel length, etc., etc. and you stuck them in a vise and fired them the pressure would be the same from both but, YOU KNOW that we are talking about the meaning of recoil to the shooter or "Percieved Recoil."

Why do you think Recoil Pads were invented!

IT IS A FACT that certain synthetic stocks deliver MUCH less recoil to the shooter. Look at Beneli's new stock design. The stock gives when the gun is fired which leads to less recoil to the shooter.

Certain synthetic rifle stocks don't give much but, alot of them do and they significantly reduce recoil to the shooter.

Wood doesn't give much at all and that is why the shooter feels so much more recoil.

Why do you think Shock Absorbers, Rubber Mats, springs, etc. etc. etc. were invented?

You can keep your BS statements to yourself. Until you have expierienced dozens of diff. synthetic stock and wood stock configurations you have nothing to say.

Yea, lets keep it to the facts!

Reloader

Well, since the used '06 is not longer an option, I'd go with a .280.

Cliff,
You've gotten a lot of opinions here and they obviously will work. Given that you are NOT recoil sensitive I'd really recommend stepping up in caliber over .277! This little bullet works but not as well as a bigger diameter one that has as high a sectional density. The 7mm Rem Mag, .300 Wm and others of this caliber and performance are the best all around beauties you can find. The case design isn't as important as capacity. The best Elk bullets for these are the 175's in the 7mm and 200 in the .300 and with the added case capacity they'll be able to shoot as well as the standard cartridges with lighter bullets.
I have a 7mm Rem Mag that I find myself using more and more. I've been using 140gr bullets for deer, (worked great) and packing 175's for Elk (when not using the .338 WM). To me the recoil is quite managable. With the 7mm it's hard to imagine a rifle that is any more capable of as wide a variety of game that is as effective.

steve -

i can imagine that penetration was just fine with the bullet you mentioned, but what was EXPANSION like on thin-skinned game such as antelope?

i am looking for a good all-around bullet for my 7x57. i was considering the 160-grian SGK, but perhaps yours is worth a look.....

To add a little confusion to the matter -

I have killed 4 elkv (Wyoming and OK) with a .280 Rem in a M70 Featherweight.
My hunting partner has killed 33 elk (Wyoming and Montana every year) with a .270 Sako.
We both shoot Nosler Partitions - he loads and I use Federal Premium. I shoot the .280 because my wife gave it to me as a birthday present, he shoots the .270 because Jack O'Conner told him it was the best gun for the task many years ago.

I bought a .300 Win Mag I am going to try out this year, just for fun.

I have seen elk shot with a .338 mag in a Ruger M77, a .458 Win Mag in a Ruger No. 1, a .300 Savage in an old gun(?), a .30-06 in a Rem 700 ADL.

I have seen elk wounded with a .300 Win Mag.

All in all, shoot what you like and put the bullet in the right place - the elk dies quickly if you do.

Have fun and good luck.

Cliff,

None of the Rounds you mentioned are bad ones to have.

The 7mm Remington Mag would probably be the best if you are going to hunt Elk and Deer. Your friend was right about the recoil being equal to a 30-06 in a similar style rifle. Now if you are talking wood stocks, the 7mm will have quite a buck but, if you are talking synthetic, recoil is very managable.

I have a Wood Stocked Savage 30-06 that kicks noticably more than my Syn. Model 700 7mm RM. My wife shoots the 7 Mag w/ ease. She is very recoil shy so, that should give you a hint on the recoil of the Syn. Stocked Rifles.

W/ a good 150 grainer in any of the cals mentioned, you should be able to take any of the game you mentioned w/ ease.

The 7mm RM will be the Flatest of the Group (with 150+ bullets) But the difference would only be noticeable from distances past 300 yards.

Good Luck!

Reloader

Well, I'll throw in my vote as:

PLEASE NO MAGNUMS, go for the .270!

While that .250 of yours would be up to the tasks mentioned (with a good dose of luck and patience), I agree that your range would be limited on most large game. And besides, it's an excuse to pick up a new rifle!

If your like me, you like rifles with a shorter length of pull. I really like the Remington pump guns, but they are too long for me (which can be remedied by getting a youth sized 20 gauge stock for they run at 13" LOP) the Remington Model 7 is just right. The Featherweight 70, also seems to be slightly shorter, it's comfortable to me too.

The 30-06 is an effective, reliable, economical cartridge, and I will never own one...to plain-vanilla for me, and they kick too much for my taste. The .270 will take care of any herbivore in North America, and not beat you up in the process. Lots of premium ammo is available for tougher species, and cheap ammo is all over the place for practice.

And just in case your "old" .250 needs some sun, you can send it here to CA for some TLC!

79

That 30-06 Featherweight w/Leupold is hard to beat at that price. Good quality 180 gr. bullets for everything. That'll cover just about anything you want.

Cliff, Welcome!



I hope you find your time here fun and informative. (sometimes the informative make it fun! )



You have made good choices and really any of them would and do work. The comments about the .270 being mild are very true and if you are recoil sensitive then this may well be your best choice. The .270 is definately not my first choice though!



I see you're an Upland hunter so You're most familiar with recoil compared to shotguns. Not trying to put down anyones suggestions but, the advantages of a bigger bullet for Elk are pretty well accepted. Some will never want to admit the .270 is on the small side for Elk but the popularity of the .338 and .300 Win Mags for Elk should indicate something. The advantages of the Mags is that you can push a heavier bullet along with the same trajectories as a standard cal with lighter bullets. The 7mm Rem Mag with 175gr bullets closely duplicates the performance of the .300 H&H mag with 180's. It is one of the most versitile cartridges available and doesn't kick much more if any than the '06, and to me feel about like a 12ga.



The felt recoil of your fathers rifle is most likely due to the poor fitting stock. The advice of snatching up the scoped '06 isn't bad. Especially if it feels good! You may find that because of the way it feels, handles, carries,ect. that you shoot it very well, and it is, as has been said, a very good rifle that has been working for decades.



Personally I really like the .25 cal for deer, and use a .338 WM when chasing Elk. My 7mm RM is taken as a back up to the .338 unless it's a deer/elk combo hunt situation. My '06 spends dang near all it's time in the back of the safe now. Not because of any real reasons, it's just how I feel about things right now. If it really came down to it, my 7mm RM would be enough to handle the hunting chores enough to justify selling off more than a handfull of rifles from my safe, just don't tell my wife!!