I've been thinking about grandkids and smaller calibers again. Specifically, what happens when we remove the option of larger game like elk, waterbuck or roan? What if the game were strictly limited to whitetail deer, mule deer, caribou, reedbuck, cob, impala? or possibly hartebeest at the max?

Such a limitation removes the need for 30 caliber, in my opinion. The 308 and 30-06, plus magnums, all make excellent deer rifles but they are also intended to be used for larger species. Personally, I would include the 264 WM, 270Win, 280 Rem, and 7mmRM in that category of being more than a deer-only rifle, but I included the 264, 270 and 7-08 for those who may choose them as best DEER-only. (Elmer Keith would have limited the 270 and sub-30 to deer-only status.) So I see 270 Win and 7-08 as potentially the largest DEER-only rifle rifles, though I personally would choose below them.

On the other end, while the 243 Win is certainly adequate for deer, I think that many would agree that there are better choices for a DEER-only rifle. Let's see. Most of the options in the poll are similar in recoil to the 243, as least significantly below a 270//30-06.

A BEST deer-only cartridge should be capable of taking a deer from any angle and out to 400, even 500 yards. We can leave the extreme long range questions (over 500 yards, more practically, over 400 yards) out of this discussion. The rifle should also be reasonably lightweight for extended periods of carry in the woods.

Question:
What would be the best DEER-only cartridge?
(DEER-only, means that it absolutely will not be used for elk, waterbuck, or roan, etc.)

Choices:
243 Win
257 Roberts
25-06
260 Rem
6.5 Creedmoor
6.5x55 Swede
264 WM
270 Win
7-08 Rem

 

7.62x39 would get my vote.

quote:

Originally posted by 4sixteen:
7.62x39 would get my vote.

Sorry to have left that out. It may not be the most common round in bolt actions, nor so useful at 300 yards.

quote:

Originally posted by 4sixteen:
7.62x39 would get my vote.

True about the 300 yds.

On the other hand, a derivative of the 7.26x39 by way of the PPC family of cartridges does extraordinarily well on deer to well past 200 yards.

With more than 30 factory loads, the 6.5 Grendel is a true deer harvester and is available in both AR and Bolt Rifles.

7x57 for me since we are staying in the smaller caliber range. Adding the 400-500 yard situation, I would not use any of the listed cartridges (or the 7x57). Personally, I would not take any shots at that range unless the conditions were ideal. Were I to hunt where long range would be highly possible, I would shoot a 300 win mag.

Safe shooting

270...still one of the better choices.

I picked the 243

When mine get to that age I plan on letting them shoot my 6mm. Sitting in the blind and rifle having the varmint barrel should work and mild recoil.

7x57

quote:

Originally posted by SFRanger7GP:
7x57 for me since we are staying in the smaller caliber range. Adding the 400-500 yard situation, I would not use any of the listed cartridges (or the 7x57). Personally, I would not take any shots at that range unless the conditions were ideal. Were I to hunt where long range would be highly possible, I would shoot a 300 win mag.

Safe shooting

Well, the idea is how small can we go and still handle deer excellently, any angle, including the 300-400 yard range.
You are saying 300 mag, because of the farside of "normal" range.
That's fair, and I apologize for leaving it off the list.

Still, for deer, (think puku in TZ, cob in Uganda) I wonder if the 270 or 6.5 Creed couldn't handle that magnum distance, anchoring from any angle with today's bullets and being enough of an overkill so that magnums wouldn't add anything? (Ironically, I ask this as someone who routinely uses a 338WM on deer.)

quote:

Originally posted by Saeed:
I picked the 243

And tens of thousands agree with you across the US.

It does make one wonder if the surge for the 6.5CM isn't a kind of mini-magnumitis on the 243?

What can the shooter shoot accurately out to 500 yards is the biggest question then bullet of next importance then cartridge.
500 yards at any angle you have to look at impact velocity and the bullets functionality.

more like marketing hype that finally paid off.

I too would use the 7x57 for under 300yd deer hunting.

can't say would, I have to say do.
only I ackleyed one of them and didn't the others.
that extra 100fps made no difference except in holdover.
I know you didn't put elk and bigger stuff on the menu but if it were I'd change the name to 8X57 and carry on with my day,,, err which I do.

anyway I see you got the 'updated' higher pressure version there, the 7-08 will do just as well as the 7X57 has always done.

I have two .257 Roberts rifles (Dakota 76 LH and Ruger No. 1) specifically for deer, antelope, javelina, and coyotes. Perfect choice up to 350 yards, IMO.

It seems a boring 243 will fit the bill with minimal recoil but I find it boring. A custom 257 Bob or an off the shelf 6.5 CM appeals to me.

quote:

Originally posted by boom stick:
What can the shooter shoot accurately out to 500 yards is the biggest question then bullet of next importance then cartridge.
500 yards at any angle you have to look at impact velocity and the bullets functionality.

I will stick my neck out and say 90% of deer hunters have no business shooting at 500 yards.

In my two years in the US, and after seeing so many deer hunters come to the range to sight their rifles, I am absolute certain of what I said above.

I have many who could not hit the backing paper the target is on.

I have seen many who 1 or 2 shots in the 1 foot square target out of 5.

I have seen some with semi auto rifles who could not get their rifles on target at all - because they did not have the intelligence to put a target very close to see how far off they are at 100 yards.

A classic example was 3 individuals who were trying to sight an 8mm Remington Magnum rifle for deer.

When I asked them why such a large caliber, the answer was “we want our deer to drop dead! We do not want to use it into the next county!”

Those are some of the ones who could not put more than one bullet out of 5 on the target.

It was quite funny that day.

I was at the range shooting a custom rifle built fir me by Shilen.

Chambered for the 220 Weatherby Rocket!

The range master, saw a small spider on my target - about the size of a quarter.

He asked me if I could see the spider - I had a 24X scope I think.

He then asked the three gentlemen shooting the 8mm RM to watch it.

I fired a shot, and in place of the spider was a 22 caliber hole!

This was at Bailey’s House of Guns in Houston, Texas.

The Baileys were friends, and I used to shoot quite a bit at their range.

I voted for the .270, but only because you specified 400+ yards.

However, the .270 is a fully adequate elk+ cartridge. I just got back from Afica where I took game up to wildebeest and kudu with the guide's .270 shooting el cheapo Hornady American Whitetail 140 grain ammunition. Most of my shots were one-shot kills.

For kids, the .243 is by far the best of those you name: Fits in a short action, has mild recoil, and its flat trajectory allows longer shots.

quote:

However, the .270 is a fully adequate elk+ cartridge.

Yes, the 270 should probably be called a fully adequate elk cartridge.
So how far down from a 270, giving up elk power, is the cartridge still 100% for deer, but becoming marginal on elk?
That would be the one to vote for.

quote:

I will stick my neck out and say 90% of deer hunters have no business shooting at 500 yards.

I concur. No question.

Still, a 100% deer cartridge needs to be able to handle 0-400 yards 100%.
And if so, it is probably still pretty good at 500, should the rifle, situation, and hunter be up to it.

Never was a fan of the 270 for no really good reason but am fond of 25's and 6.5's. I'd likely choose a 25-284 that I have or a 6.5 RSAUM if I wanted more reach.

There are no flies on the 6.5 creed other than every jackwagon has one and thinks it's a 600 yard elk rifle. But it really IS an excellent round and one I chose for my daughter's first deer rifle.

For deer I think short action, more compact and handy.

Here in California, the hippieish populace have made deer so tame all you need is 100 yards and most could be hunted with a recurve bow. I often see bucks just off the side of the road.

quote:

Originally posted by 416Tanzan:

quote:

Originally posted by 4sixteen:
7.62x39 would get my vote.

Sorry to have left that out. It may not be the most common round in bolt actions, nor so useful at 300 yards.

Done it. Dropped a Deer at about 300 yards with the 7.62x39. And at closer ranges. Respectable Deer round. Works great.

I suppose a 250-3000 or 7x57...and nostalgia calls for a 25-35..any of which I could make do with, but the 7x57 makes more since...so I'll go with that one...

I voted for the Creedmoor. Not because it's MY choice as much as because you old fogies (I'm 66) LOVE to bash it...with zero credible reason.
It is one helluva deer cartridge but I've opted for something akin to the 264 WM but in a wildcat variant. 6.5 x 280 AI. Why/ Because I can.

Hand down, I've killed more mule deer with a 25-06 than all others combined (I've used several if not most on the list)

Zeke

Depending on terrain, I carry a 25-35 or a 257 Roberts for deer, unless a combination hunt is possible; then it's the 7x57/12ga or the 12x12/32-40. I wouldn't hesitate, though, to take larger game with the 257 or the 7x57, depending on conditions. I still think it's 90% where you hit it, and only 10% what you hit it with that counts. I've seen bang/flop with the 30-30, and seen deer lost with full-deck 8mm and 30-36 hits. By the way, the 6.5x55, 6.5x54MS, and the 6.5 Arisaka all take deer effectively--or maybe emphatically would be a better term.
windy

Although I used to say-- .25, (250-300,257, etc)
Today -- a 6.5

Though with these modern projectiles, (monos, bonded etc) darn near any centerfire will do .223 and up
(except at long range and BIG deer)

IF in were to ever pay BIG money on a Long Distance Hunt (like these TV shows) for really big deer , I would take my Heym HPPR 300 WinMag

I am not a deer shooter but have probably shot as many pigs, goats and big red kangaroos as Americans have shot prairie dogs.

270 is my pick. Probably because of the volume of shooting we are not as shot placement minded. The 243 is good but when compared over lots of animals and years where there is variation in projectile the 270 comes out in front.

The first question I would ask is on what terrain? If it's really open than the .270 would be at the top of my list. But if it's forest country than something like maybe the 7x57 would work great.

Saeed's right about the average American shooter, most are pretty pathetic. So a low recoil rifle would be the better choice regardless of terrain.

For me and where I live in the Cascade mountains hunting Columbia blacktail and the occasional mulie I've pretty much settled on the 6.5x55 because it accurate, low recoil and works well in a light handy rifle. For those who like the other similar 6.5's just substitute your favorite. But if I hunted in the lower elevation thicker country a .30-30 would do just as well. I guess I'm one of the few who still have respect for it.

I do have to wonder about the ranges suggested in the OP. 500 yards at least to me is a very long way out there particularly with a young shooter. In fact I've never shot at any deer anywhere at anything close to that range. I prefer to stalk closer to make a surer shot. If it doesn't work than so be it.

The original post also mentions a few animals that to me aren't in what I consider in the deer class and would prefer a larger caliber. The hartebeest comes to mind.

Bottom line is in what terrain are you hunting, what kind of deer are the target species, who is the hunter and their capabilities plus personal preferences we all have which also can't be ignored are going to determine what's the best cartridge choice.

quote:

The original post also mentions a few animals that to me aren't in what I consider in the deer class and would prefer a larger caliber. The hartebeest comes to mind.

Thank you.
I agree, but some areas have small hartebeests and some areas have large mule deer, so I added hartebeest as a maybe. Having said that, I also prefer more than a 270 or 30-06 for hartebeest. The larger calibers put them down with more authority, which means that the smaller caliber lose out on being "best" when the size gets to hartebeest and above. The hartebeest is a kind of border animal all around. That is why many use 338 or 375 or similar for all-around plains game. Yes, the 7x57, 30-06, etc, do great most of the time, they're just not the "best."

A further update at 32 votes:

The 270 has 11 votes as the distinctive leader as a DEER-only choice.

Close on its heels would be the 6.5--.264" medium-capacity bores. They have nine votes between the 260Rem, 6.5 CM, and 6.5Swede (leaving out the 264 WM as a more powerful class). The 260Rem, 6.5 CM, and 6.5Swede primarily differ in barrel twist, which only comes into play with extra-long, high-BC projectiles for more than 400 yards. So for practical hunting, they are equivalent.

What becomes clear is that a majority consider the .264" to .277" area to have a significant advantage over the 24 and 25 calibers even for "deer-only" hunting. Presumably, as DEER-only cartridges, the majority are not considering the 26-27 cal for elk, although they can certainly be used for them. It would seem that the .264" and .277" size becomes a watershed for many. About half consider .264" and under to be DEER-only cartridges, and by default about half would consider .277" and more powerful/larger cartridges to be dual purpose, both good deer AND good elk calibers.

quote:

Originally posted by 416Tanzan:
A further update at 32 votes:

The 270 has 11 votes as the distinctive leader as a DEER-only choice.

Close on its heels would be the 6.5--.264" medium-capacity bores. They have nine votes between the 260Rem, 6.5 CM, and 6.5Swede (leaving out the 264 WM as a more powerful class). The 260Rem, 6.5 CM, and 6.5Swede primarily differ in barrel twist, which only comes into play with extra-long, high-BC projectiles for more than 400 yards. So for practical hunting, they are equivalent.

What becomes clear is that a majority consider the .264" to .277" area to have a significant advantage over the 24 and 25 calibers even for "deer-only" hunting. Presumably, as DEER-only cartridges, the majority are not considering the 26-27 cal for elk, although they can certainly be used for them. It would seem that the .264" and .277" size becomes a watershed for many. About half consider .264" and under to be DEER-only cartridges, and by default about half would consider .277" and more powerful/larger cartridges to be dual purpose, both good deer AND good elk calibers.

Many years ago I had a fair bit to do with the Weatherby custom shop. The bloke that ran it said at times the 270 Wby outsold the 257 and especially any custom shop stuff. He said because of the rifle cost lots of customers wanted a more all round calibre and especially with Elk included so the 270 Wby would get the nod.

Actually I reckon when case capacity is equal or very similar then both Americans and Australians prefer the 270 bore size to the 7mm bore size. Just look at the 270 Vs 280, 270 WSM Vs 7mm WSM and 270 Wby Vs 7mm Wby.

quote:

Saeed's right about the average American shooter

I would hazard a guess that most on this board are not even close to the average American shooter.

My observation over the years is that 90% percent of gun owners do not practice much.

7% practice enough to decent shots.

3% are us gun nuts who live eat and shoot more then any of the other cam even think about.

That said I picked the 7mm-08.

It is interesting that the 257 Roberts is 15% and the 243 is 9%. Just goes to show that gun forums are not at all representative of general shooter population.

AR and Australia's biggest gun site are the same in the sense you would think a 375 H&H is behind every second bush and a 9.3 X 62 is behind every third bush.

As I’ve said before, I was totally against the 6.5CR, but after trading for a Browning X-Bolt Hells Canyon Speed, I’m completely sold on the cartridge. The accuracy is incredible. Now maybe it’s just because of the X-Bolt, but I’ve heard the same results with the 6.5CR with the Ruger American. And I was a nosayer for so long about the 6.5CM.

I picked the 264WM because of the 500yd requirement. I think it gives you a slightly better chance at shot placement at that range then my actual favorite deer rifle - the 270.

As for American shooters, like fine wine, most become better as they age.

I remember watching three young men (teenagers probably) taking turns shooting a brand new 300 Weatherby rifle.

At 100 yds, they were barely on paper. One of them exclaimed "It don't shoot accurate, but it sure shoots hard!".

BH63

quote:

Originally posted by Saeed:


I will stick my neck out and say 90% of deer hunters have no business shooting at 500 yards.

I am always amazed by how many people, when talking about trajectory, discount a difference of two or three inches at 500 yards, saying you can't detect it in the field. (Typically seen when discussing load trajectories and the merits of one vs the other, discounting the fact that most people should be using a rangefinder for anything past 150 yards anyway.)

With an accurate rifle you can absolutely see a difference of two inches. In other words, dial two clicks below your 500 yard zero. If you don't see a difference, you shouldn't be shooting at an animal 500 yards away. Put another way: if your wobble area at 500 is two inches, you probably shouldn't be shooting at an animal.

quote:

Originally posted by mdstewart:
As I’ve said before, I was totally against the 6.5CR, but after trading for a Browning X-Bolt Hells Canyon Speed, I’m completely sold on the cartridge. The accuracy is incredible. Now maybe it’s just because of the X-Bolt, but I’ve heard the same results with the 6.5CR with the Ruger American. And I was a nosayer for so long about the 6.5CM.

Me, too!
I tended to think of the 6.5CM as a wanna-be 270 (or wanna-be 7-08 or 280) with a lighter shove but with lighter power, too. There is a slight ballistic advantage to the 270 in hunting situations. However, I think that part of my antipathy to the 6.5 was that I saw the 270 as also capable of being loaded with premium bullets and being more than adequate on larger game like hartebeest and waterbuck, though certainly not "best." The 6.5CM still leaves me a little cold on the idea of all-around plains game or elk. (Yes, I know it can do a good job, maybe most of the time, I just think that a careful hunter should probably pass on a few more shots with the 6.5 on big animals.)

But it dawned on me that the 6.5CM would not need to pass on deer-sized shots if the situation was within the skill of the hunter. The 6.5CM would be a do-all cartridge on deer-sized game, out to 400 yards. That realization led to this poll to see what others thought. I think that quite a few of you on this thread feel similarly. The medium capacity 6.5's don't need to play second fiddle to more powerful deer rifles, yet they probably provide a real advantage in hunting situations over a 243, 257, and 223. (I didn't bother to include the last, for reasons unstated.)

So I've learned to respect the 6.5 and I give it respect while acknowledging it has approximately 2/3 the recoil of a 270. (6.5CM in the 12-13 ft# range, 270, 17-19 ft#.) Pretty attractive.

quote:

Originally posted by 416Tanzan:

quote:

Originally posted by mdstewart:
As I’ve said before, I was totally against the 6.5CR, but after trading for a Browning X-Bolt Hells Canyon Speed, I’m completely sold on the cartridge. The accuracy is incredible. Now maybe it’s just because of the X-Bolt, but I’ve heard the same results with the 6.5CR with the Ruger American. And I was a nosayer for so long about the 6.5CM.

Me, too!
I tended to think of the 6.5CM as a wanna-be 270 (or wanna-be 7-08 or 280) with a lighter shove but with lighter power, too. There is a slight ballistic advantage to the 270 in hunting situations. However, I think that part of my antipathy to the 6.5 was that I saw the 270 as also capable of being loaded with premium bullets and being more than adequate on larger game like hartebeest and waterbuck, though certainly not "best." The 6.5CM still leaves me a little cold on the idea of all-around plains game or elk. (Yes, I know it can do a good job, maybe most of the time, I just think that a careful hunter should probably pass on a few more shots with the 6.5 on big animals.)

But it dawned on me that the 6.5CM would not need to pass on deer-sized shots if the situation was within the skill of the hunter. The 6.5CM would be a do-all cartridge on deer-sized game, out to 400 yards. That realization led to this poll to see what others thought. I think that quite a few of you on this thread feel similarly. The medium capacity 6.5's don't need to play second fiddle to more powerful deer rifles, yet they probably provide a real advantage in hunting situations over a 243, 257, and 223. (I didn't bother to include the last, for reasons unstated.)

So I've learned to respect the 6.5 and I give it respect while acknowledging it has approximately 2/3 the recoil of a 270. (6.5CM in the 12-13 ft# range, 270, 17-19 ft#.) Pretty attractive.

I don't know about the 6.5; I will get one soon, but for an out of the box rifle, the X Bolt is amazing. Shot my .308 yesterday at 500 yards, once prone and once sitting with a bipod. Held .4 Mils (1.44 MOAO) for wind and 3 mils for elevation. First shot hit 2.75 inches low perfect windage. Second shot (sitting with a bipod) hit the 2.75 inch square on the top.

I shot my Stiller/Brux Lapua before that and hit the square twice with a .5 and .7 MOA wind hold, but that gun was a lot more quid.

This is not a hard one 270 Win. This from a 30/06 guy. Or I use to be.

I voted 6.5 creedmoor.

I have a 270 k-95 attaché being built for me and a 30/06 k-95 attaché barrel on order.

Between 6.5, 30/06, 308, 300 win mag, 7mm rem, 7x57, 300 h&h and one day a 270 I don’t need another deer rifle. Actually I plan to stop buying more rifles other than military collector.

I plan to uneconomically spend some $$ putting new triggers, McMillan stocks ect and playing around with my existing rifles.

The 6.5 creedmoor will be around for a long time. My blaser r8 in 6.5 is the most accurate rifle I have and it loves cheap factory ammo.

My time to buy new guns is done. I am glad I acquired my 6.5 rifles and did not call it quits before then.

To me the more interesting question would be what is the best deer bullet for the range of rifles listed and how that bullet ties into the terrain where the deer are hunted.

Mike