John S-yeah believe it or no I too use the old 175 Semi Noz quite a bit. When I started to get to know Mr Hagle in the mid 80's he toted that bullet. When I heard Noz was going to the pointed I was off and buying all that I could of the old style. They sure put critters into the old "Nozler Nap" toot sweet. Fact is the other night we were out hunting for lopes with a stick when we came across old Renyard the Red Fox, the old Mashburn and the 175 Nozler made quick work of him as he stolled away at about 150 yards. Plenty of penetration even on a raking shot-grins.

Don--about the dangerous game personally there isn't much this fella wouldn't take on with one of the 300's (that I was intimate with like my old 700 that is on it's 7th tube). On this side of the pond for sure no problems (at least for me). On the other side of the pond excepting for M Bogo and Jumbo I wouldn't hesitate either. So that said I would guess that there are 2 critters on this world I'd prefer not to hunt with a 300. Unless of course Noah has let some more out that I haven't heard of yet. grins

Now on my terms, yeah you bet I'd take on both of those critters. But I'd prefer something a bit bigger if they decide to take a swing at me.

Personally I do not find the big 30's all that offensive (ubless they have tubes that measure less than .65 at the muzzle). I burned out 2 300 Wby tubes these last couple of years. Plenty of chucks/yotes and other big game has taken the old "Nozler Nap' from my 200's. That is about the only bullet I use for the most part and for all anymore. It seems to kill em all quite easily.

Enough of my thoughts for the night, you all have a super night and I hope to heck that tomorrow finds you on the hill (where we all should be) and not in front of the puter or TV.

"GET TO THE HILL"

Dog

'06.

Funny thing is, I don't own one.

I have a .270 and a .300 WM.

I love the fact that we have such a large abundance of rifles and cartridges to choose from.
That said, I feel that we sometimes forget the fact that every animal on this planet was hunted with smoothbore charcoal burners, successfully. Think about it.
I own several rifles of various types and brands. I own several because I spent many years in pursuit of the newest fastest "toy".
A few years ago I started using an old 30/30 for still hunting deer and found I liked the gun better than anything I owned or had ever handled.
I proceded to try every load i could find and to become intimately familiar with their trajectories.
I have taken 450 lb. bear, 400lb. mulies and whitetails, 400lb. hogs and 3 large elk with this rifle. All were taken with factory ammo.
I'M not saying it is the best rifle for anything, just that if I respect it's limitations it wiil do the job, and so will every cartridge rifle combo suggested in this thread.
I guess my point is, build the rifle you want to fit you, become intimate with its ballistics and get out there and hunt.

[ 09-15-2002, 15:57: Message edited by: TERRY8mm ]

Terry-some good points there, I am gonna hunt one of my lopes this fall with the 30/30. I think it'll be a ton of fun.

A person should be defianately be intimate with their rifle.

Lastly me thinks you may want to recalibrate your scale if it is telling you that you're taking 400 pound muley's or whitie's. Either that or you were just a kidding us.

"GET TO THE HILL"

Dog

Heya Mark! I'll call you today. Went down the canyon looking for Yogi's this past week... only saw a mama and her cub. Chokecherries are thick and ripe.

Don... Connecticut? Been there done that. Believe it or not there's a much wider world beyond the western fringes of your vision which sounds as if it ends at the Hudson River.

The 300 Mag's can be loaded down to 308 Win levels with H4895. A 308 or 30-06 (I like them both) can never be loaded to equal a 300 Mag for flat trajectory and shear smashing power, particularly with 200 grain bullets. For the West and the rest of the world, I can't imagine a better one-rifle-rifle than some sort of 300 Mag, the "standard" Win Mag being at the top of the heap in my mind. If you never venture beyond the N.E. USA, then I wholeheartedly agree that the 300's aren't needed... in which case a 308 Win would seem more than enough for evrything, deer to moose.

As to the general premise of a "one-rifle-rifle", personally, I think two rifles would be more practical. My pick would be two stainless M70's, stocked and scoped identically with 22" barrels and chambered in 270 Win and 338 WM... hey, I have those two! However, the 300 Mag's combine (in a compromise) the flat trajectory of the 270 and the smashing power of the 338 WM... not a bad compromise!

Brad

Since I did not read this thread for the last day or so I don't know what was deleted or edited. This is a good thing it seems.

Since others took the inititive to make peace I offer to do so also. It was Shelley I believe who wrote in a poem "to keep a friend you keep the grain and blow the chafe away".

Nebraska,

Now back to rifles. Others suggested that you not sell all your guns and this is a good idea. You should have a backup.

As to the cartridge just pick something that you like and make it work. It seems that indeed you live in the Great Plains where the ranges can be long and the opportunity to practice at long range is handy. So go ahead and get a .257 Weatherby.

But as Franke says keep a rifle around that has a cartridge in it similar to a 30/06 for backup. This could be a .300 Magnum also (Don glances over towards allen with a friendly grin). Heck you can load a .300 Magnum down a little and then it's just a 24/6" rifle that weighs a little more.

Well...In regards to hunting in the "lower-48," I imagine that any of the cartridges mentioned would be fine, including the .338-06 and .35 Whelen.

But if you ever include bears in Alaska, then I would step to the great .338WM.

You really wouldn't think so, but there are some absolutely Huge deer coming from the soy bean fields these days.

This past season my brother and I both took bucks that weighed over 275, field dressed. They were weighed by our local warden.

I figure any good mule deer by the amount of sweat involved in getting him to the truck, I think a couple musta' went over 500. lol.

I really don't need much gun, to be honest, I never shot at anything past 250 yds. in my life. Other than groundhogs and targets. I have been playing with an m44 rifle, for deer just to have a cheapo rifle to carry on the 4 wheeler. I think the 7.62 x 54r is way more cartridge than is needed for deer, but is very accurate out to 250 yds.,even in the 200gr. loads. Hell, I killed my first deer with a .32/20 Winchester.

Interesting thread ... I have to say I'm in the .300 Win Mag crowd, too.

I came close to paring down to a two rifle battery: either a .270 Win and .338 Win Mag or a .30-06 and a .375 H&H. What changed my mind was twofold: I learned about the work of D'Arcy Echols, arguably one of the two best rifle makers in the US, (before discovering this website), and he only makes his synthetic Legend model in magnum calibers, so I chose .300 Win Mag as my all around centerfire rifle for the world. The other reason was that I don't have a great inclination to hunt dangerous game, and if I do decide to, I'll borrow or rent a bigger bore to do so. I'm past the days of buying a dedicated rifle for just one or two hunts. In North America, the .300 Win Mag is considered the minimum for brown bear, so what else is needed for a one gun hunter?

Once it comes down to it, .270 Win, .280 Rem, .308 Win, .30-06, 7 MM Rem Mag, .300 Win Mag or .338 Win Mag (and the new short mags) will all do pretty much the same job on deer-sized game out to 300 yards. Beyond 300 yards, the magnums have the edge. Take your choice, but decide on the quarry first.

What I have found interesting is that two of the most active and highly respected hunters (and outfitters) in the world, Keith Atcheson and Jack Atcheson, Jr, have chosen .300 Win Mag and .338 Win Mag, respectively, as their personal all around rifle caliber choices.

[ 09-16-2002, 01:31: Message edited by: Wayne Nish ]

-06

Jack of all trades master of none could apply to an all around rifle.

For a woods rifle a .300 magnum will be heavy, clusmy and subject to bullet blow up at close range. Better to carry a ligher 30/06 for better bullet action and handy size. They even hold more shots however that means nothing to me.

For dangerous game I have a study done on the shooting of brown bears and the .300 magnums took the most shots to get the job done of any caliber so they are not very good here either. The best was the .375 H&H by the way.

For longish range shooting of medium and smaller sized game the .300 magnums can't be the best as the recoil is really mean.

So there you have it. We need lots of rifles. Thats not all bad.

Now if Nebraska goes antelope hunting and has a .300 Mag loaded with 180's and the bullet goes just under the animal he can write it off to yanking the trigger or the trajectory. If he shoots at one with a .257 Weatherby and hits it dead center he will say he has made the right choice. You can write a what if now for some other game.

Don, your perspective is clearly Northeast woods deer hunting. I agree, in that environment a .308 Win or .30-06 are ideal. To that extent, a 28 gauge shotgun is sufficient for woodcock and grouse, but a 12 bore will kill bigger birds more efficiently. That makes a 12 bore more versatile for worldwide use.

A guy like myself is more likely to go elsewhere than locally for a big game animal. Then the 7 MMs and .300s begin to look better.

Nebraska asked about a one gun battery. Why muddy the discussion? Additionally, why advise him to have a backup? I thought all of your factory rifles are perfect.

[ 09-16-2002, 01:18: Message edited by: Wayne Nish ]

Wayne,

A backup is for when you slip and fall and your rifle breaks or the scope goes bad. I have tape over the muzzles of my hunting rifles to keep stuff out.

It's why I carry three anchors on the boat.

"Be Prepared."

Don Martin29,

What are your views or thoughts on:

1) Weatherby rifles

2) Roy Weatherby

Mike

Mike375,

Rather than answer your question why don't we save that for another thread? But to give a reply I will tell what I learned in a gunshop long ago from the owner. I was in there looking around and in comes a young man and he asks for a Weatherby shotgun! In the course of the inquiry the owner goes into the back of the shop for something and being that I am not shy! I say to the customer. "Why not just get a Remington 1100? They are the standard."

The customer leaves and the owner say's to me "Never change a customers mind when it's made up. Just sell them what they ask for" Now this advice was in the context of the situation.

So if Nebraska keeps mentioning "Weatherby" then let him try one. This is not a final decision when you pick a rifle within your means.

Don Martin29,

Why don't you express your views here. To early in the piece for another Wby thread as Saeed has just got his new server up and running, so again, what do you think of Wby rifles and also Roy Weatherby.

Mike

Don,
if i am correct, which i am, you were replying to my post about the 300 weatherby when you said, "only if you like plastic inlays and getting your ears blown out" well i bet you wouldn't say anything of that sort about an ultra mag because its not a weatherby. so tell us, what is wrong with a weatherby rifle/roy weatherby.

The Ultra Mag's have too much capacity for most bore diameters. Even in .375 it's just too much for that weight bullet. If you need some really big bore going fast at least they solve the belted problem.

A line of Ultra's of standard length would be nice however. Too bad they came out with that long length.

Brad,

I think the Rem Ultras were aimed at shooters who hunt and the WSMs at hunters who shoot.

I also think the full length case was meant to help more Ultra sales go via Rem 700s than would have been the case with a 2.5" case length.

Just recently I was talking to our version of your Pac-Nor and at that stage they had not done a 300WSM but had done plenty of 300 Ultras. Probably a different market down here where people see the short rifle as a 308 thing and can leave the brass on the ground.

Mike

Mike-
I think your phrase about "shooters who hunt and hunters who shoot" is one of the best I've read in regard to the buyers of these rifles!
Most of the really keen big game hunters that I know are not gun cranks and rarely do any range work except to check the sighting of their rifles. They might set up a few gallon jugs of water on the 4th of July and have a friendly "contest" but past that, forget it. Most of them are adequate marksman, meaning they can hit a standing deer or elk at 100-200yds with a decent rest.
On the other hand, many of the avid bird and waterfowl hunters I know are very much "shooters" and do quite a lot of clay target shooting, via trap, skeet or sporting clays competition.
Regarding the Ultra cartridges and to a lesser extent the larger Weatherby rounds, I see more of these in the hands of "hunters" which is really not a good thing because they are difficult to master w/o some serious practice. When in the hands of a "shooter" they can and do produce some marvelous results but the ability to handle them doesn't come like a prize in the Cracker Jack box!

John,

I was thinking if I want to get a 300 Ultra I should jump in now before DonMartin29 buys them all up They should be super accurate without the belt

As you know, for genuine hunting we have discussed many time the pluses of the 180 grain 30 cal at the 3100 to 3200 area.

Actually, Australia is an interesting place to look at the 30/06. For many years out here military calibers were not legal in much of Australia. By the time they were made legal the 308 had come out. So the 30/06 had to sort of do its own thing. Except for a few pockets, you rarely see new 30/06 rifles in Australia. Those that are about are mainly conversions etc.

On the larger size, if it is not a 270 or 308, it will be either a 7mm Mag or 300 Mag. In fact at our big range the chances of seeing a 30/06 in a commercial sporter like M70, Rem 700 etc. would be less than the chances of seeing a big Wby as in 378 and 460.

In reality the 7mm and 300 magnums maintain the 270 trajectory to the limityes of recoil. To maintain it at even 338 needs a 338 RUM to duplicate the 300 Win and a 338/378 to duplicate the 300 Wby and as you very well know that is one big leap in recoil.

Mike

If you are going to have only one gun, it should be more capable than one exactly suited for a particular task. It will have to be the supreme generalist, not a specialist.

I do not know where you live and what condition you hunt in. I also do not know whether you handload or not. If you don't, then a wildcat or oddball is not a wise choice. When I look at my battery of firearms, there are two standard cartridges which I feel confident will handle anythink I might encounter in the lower 48 states, and be pretty handy in Alaska: the 7mm Remington Magnum and the 300 Winchester Magnum.

Of the two, I believe the 7mmRemMag is closer to the 257WtbyMag, but its ammo is more available. It can be very accurate in a well setup rifle, and recoil is not severe. The range of bullet weights is 130 to 175gr, and they are made by all the good makers.

You can get a reload that will shoot a 130gr Speer bullet within a 6" circle out to 300yds. It will only drop another foot in the next 100yds. The 175gr will hold that 6" circle out to 275yds and only drop 20" at 400yds with a sensible reload. The 130gr is a heck of a antelope/deer load, and the 175gr will take animals up to Zebra with ease.

I believe this caliber's performance is based upon its light recoil and excellent balistic coefficient. In sum, there is no substitute for shot placement and the available bullets will penetrate sufficiently to cause a good wound channel.

Lastly, it can be built on either a M70 or M98 action which means you will start with a reliable rifle for which you can pick up a few extra springs and parts to keep it working when you are "up the creek." Best of luck. Ku-dude

Mike,
I believe you have it! The 270 type trajectory is a very desirable attribute, as O'Connor used to say.
When you get past the 30cal bore, achieving 270 type velocities and trajectories becomes difficult in more ways than one. But, for a shooter that is willing to endure the practice and discomfort of firing off a 338RUM or similar, the effects on game are very worthwhile, IMO.

John, a good friend who's guided a fair amount of hunter's onto really large bull elk has emphatically told me he's seen more decisive, one-shot kills on the big boy's with the various 33's than any other caliber, particularly when the ranges get longish. His only rifle is a 270 but he'd like to add a 338 WM to it. As I tend to do a bit of backpack style hunting, I like short, light rifles so a 22" bbl'd, 8 lb-ish 338 WM fits my needs/ideas well. There's no doubt, however, the 338 UM is more (much more) of a good thing. I doubt, however, I'd want one with a 22" bbl. or 8lbs!

Brad

Brad,

How about an 8 pound 378 with 22 inch barrel an no muzzle brake.

Actually, these blokes buying 378s in recent years are missing out on the 378 in its raw form. These days the 378 has the 416 barrel profile and comes with the Accubrake.

Those older Japanese 378s with their straw like barrels did not recoil but rather launched a personal attack on the shooter.

Mike

Mike, as a current 300 WSm user I'm actually unsure where these rounds fit into the scheme of things, though i do believe there's more than a little truth to what you've said about the RUM's vs. WSM's... I'd never thought of it that way, but the more I've reflected on it the more truth I think there is to it.

As to the WSM's, I had very high hopes when they were announced. Now I've come to think they're more a solution in search of a problem than anything else. As a backpack-hunter I liked them conceptually... lot's of power in a smaller, lighter package. The belt v. non-belt thing meant little or nothing to me, though certainly many see belt's as a minor crime. Regardless, the "short-fat-bastard's" (SFB's) are quite critical in regard's to feeding. Mine feed's... but just OK. I like (as one fellow on this board described) my cartridges to "feed like slippery sausages." The WSM's, at least in my CRF M70, feed "stiffly" and "hard"... it's a bit difficult to describe. Too, the magazine holds three cartridges... just. There's about a knat's wing's worth of room when you close the bolt on the top round. This tends to beat the hell out of the case. My M70 is wonderfully accurate and beautifully finished (for a factory M70) but I'm in more doubt than ever about the WSM's viability... at least in a CRF action.

Brad

Hey Nebraska, uhhhhh...you still listening??

Given these responses I wouldn't blame you if you weren't. With a few exceptions most of the posters are completely ignoring your questions at this point.

Your earliest threads laid out some priorities....flat shooting, mild recoil, fairly light rifle, accurate (duh!).

This thread started with the premise of ONE RIFLE FOR 99% DEER HUNTING & (POSSIBLY) A GUIDED ELK HUNT SOMEDAY.

In addition to what you've stated, I'll make a guess that you don't have nearly as much hunting/shooting experience as many of your respondents. This inexperience may severely limit your ability to handle some of the bigger calibers that have been suggested. (especially if you want a fairly light gun) So...........????

Don't lose sight of your goals.

Many of the cannons suggested here are great for expert shooters, but maybe not for you.

You are asking for a 99% DEER rifle, YOU DO NOT NEED A "ONE GUN FOR NORTH AMERICA" capability.

A good quality bullet from a .257 wby will not exactly bounce off an Elk. Besides, (YOUR GUIDE WON'T BE LETTING YOU TAKE STUPID SHOTS). If you (do) go Elk hunting, you'll do fine!!!

You made a pretty good case for the rifle that you WANT.

Not one poster has given you a solid reason not to go with your choice. Unless they totally ignored what you were asking for.

All most of them are doing are spouting off about (their) own expertise with (their) favorite toys.

JimF

The obvious answer is the 30-06; the 257 Weatherby and the .280 Remington are 30-06 cases with smaller bullets, bor what that's worth. Most of my hunting partners use 30-06, differing somewhat in bullet choice, and they're seldom any further than 20 miles from the nearest box of ammunition for sale.

Having said that, the 7mm Remington has a longer point-blank range on the sage flats and sufficient energy for elk at reasonable ranges.

Tom

Hi Brad

I wonder about the short magnums and whether they will end up where the 6.5mm and 350 Remington Magnums did. I am still puzzled as to why they did not find wider acceptance once the benefits of short fat cases were recognized, a la 6mm-284.

Tom

JimF....yeah, I'm still listening. Thanks for restating the original question.

For the record, if I ever have the time, opportunity, and financial means to start hunting elk+ sized animals on a regular basis, I'll invest in a 338WM or 375 H&H and learn to use it. Therefore, we can safely avoid the tendancy of lopping elk+ rifles onto deer- discussions without fear of being told we are undergunned. The TKO value of a super-boomer isn't really of value in my case. I like flat trajectories but not at the expense of heavy recoil. So, as Jim restated, I'll be after 99% deer and smaller game at medium to long range. I call long, 400 yards, but may move further out as my ability dictates.

[ 09-17-2002, 22:48: Message edited by: Nebraska ]

Nebraska,

I don't see how your thread got hijacked. In fact for a long thread this one has stayed amazingly close to on topic. Normally by 40 or 50 postings the thread bears no relationship to the original topic.

You mentioned a possibility of guided bear hunt but deer 99% of the time.

Most of the recommendations sat around the 270, 7mm Rem, 30/06 and 300 Magnums. You said the rifle was to be semi custom so someone usually wants a bit of flexibility in that case.

By the way, I would still stick with my 270 or 7mm Rem recommendation. Your last post did not change that.

Mike

[ 09-16-2002, 21:11: Message edited by: Mike375 ]

Hi Tom, the 6.5 RM and 350 RM definately feed smoother than the WSM's... they have a 25 vs. 35 degree shoulder and a smaller body diameter... Relly, the 350 RM "stretched" (throated to take advantage of the 3" M70 short action) would surpass the 35 Whelen and make a dandy cartridge. I've never cared for the 6.5 RM, but a "stretched" 7mm-6.5RM would be really neat, edging out the 280 slightly in a short action.

Too bad these co's got fixated on the fat rounds... "beltless" short cases with the same body diameter of the 375 H&H and no more than a 25 degree shoulder would have been nicely balanced and easy to make feed properly... sometimes less is more!

Brad

Mike, some folks don't realize that, like all real conversation, these threads can meander a bit into area's that were not originally posted for comment... big deal! Often the best information comes from these stram-of-thought "meandering's"... as to Nebraska not getting his question answered, I think he's gotten information in spades! As for me, I suggested some sort of 30 cal... that's my honest opinion... now he's thrown a 338 or 375 into the mix. That changes the original post in which case I'd suggest a 270 on the light end paired with a 338.

Sheesh...

Brad

Brad,

I am in big 416 mode at the moment, have even ordered the Richard Corbin bullet making gear so I can make some varmint 45/70 type bullets in 416. Maybe I will recommend 416 Wby next time

With the RUM and WSM, if you think it about it from a marketing view point, they were probably the only two real options.

To have used a thinner case for the WSMs, they would have wound up back at the 30/06 capacity or a bit bigger and I guess both the 6.5 and 350 Rem would have left some memories.

With the RUM, a thinner case would not have given enough extra "chronograph potential" for people to trade out of 300 Wins etc.

I think before most shooters will move away from something that is well established, there needs to be the perception of considerable improvement or change. Such an example being the introduction of the 7mm Rem. Big gains perceived as compared to the 270 and 30/06.

Mike

Hey Nebraska:

It's good to hear that you still have your goals in sight. It's interesting to see what pops up on these threads (even recently

FWIW: I'm a 25-06 shooter but would be equally happy with a .270 or a .257 if I were in your shoes. As nice as the 280 is, it might limit the resale value of your finished rifle sometime down the road.

JimF

Hi Lloyd

Oh, my. I thought I remembered reading that Roy Weatherby's magnums were essentially belted 30-06 cases. Oops. The 240 Weatherby is much like that, nearly the same case capacity as 6mm-284. Now and then I get mixed up a little.

Tom