BLR Caliber
04-14-2006, 11:18 PM
#21
Fork Horn
Thread Starter
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Colorado
Posts: 335
RE: BLR Caliber
I have shot 30-06, 300 Win Mag, 300 Wetherby, .307 (similar to .308), 270 and 30-30. I don't know that I really have a threshold for recoil. I can't say that the 300's or the -06 were really that bad. I know that I definitely prefer lighter recoil, though. I notice that when I'm practicing or sighting in even my 30-30 bothers me and I can start flinching if I don't focus and concentrate. My solution is to get sighted in and then do as much off hand shooting as possible and stay off the bench.
Today I looked at some recoild numbers on Chuck Hawk's site and just compared them to what the different configurations of the BLR might weight with a scope and it looks like the recoil in the 270WSM would be fairly significan't, due to the lightness of the rifle. I don't know that it would truly be unbearable.I did find another forum where they werediscussing the BLR andreferences were made to the high recoil in the BLR 270WSM. I know that is speculative, but finding someone with a BLR in the right caliberisjust not happening.
Looking at the benfit vs cost of the WSM, Imight be better off with the 30-06 or .308, all things considered. I know that either will do what I need it to do, but I was hoping to get a short action, a little better performance and similar recoil. I looks like performance will be compromised due to barrel lenghth and recoil will increase due to weight, and all this at a greater cost for the gun and ammo. The 300WSM would provide the same dilema.
Let me know if I'm thinking straight or not.
Spud
Today I looked at some recoild numbers on Chuck Hawk's site and just compared them to what the different configurations of the BLR might weight with a scope and it looks like the recoil in the 270WSM would be fairly significan't, due to the lightness of the rifle. I don't know that it would truly be unbearable.I did find another forum where they werediscussing the BLR andreferences were made to the high recoil in the BLR 270WSM. I know that is speculative, but finding someone with a BLR in the right caliberisjust not happening.
Looking at the benfit vs cost of the WSM, Imight be better off with the 30-06 or .308, all things considered. I know that either will do what I need it to do, but I was hoping to get a short action, a little better performance and similar recoil. I looks like performance will be compromised due to barrel lenghth and recoil will increase due to weight, and all this at a greater cost for the gun and ammo. The 300WSM would provide the same dilema.
Let me know if I'm thinking straight or not.
Spud
04-17-2006, 11:07 AM
#24
Nontypical Buck
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Bradford, Ontario
Posts: 2,205
RE: BLR Caliber
The BLR is a great little short carbine when chambered in the rounds it was originally designed for wich are .308 win based. I have handled the long action version and its a totally different animal that is heavy and does not balance near as well. A BLR in .308 win is actually one of the most popular rifle combos in Eastern Canada for deer and moose. There is absolutely nothing a 3006 will do that a .308 win won't. So if you are looking for a nicely balanced lever rifle then a standard BLR in .308 or .358 would be the way to go. If you want a magnum ( either .270. 7mm 0r .300 ) get yourself a lightweight bolt rifle like a Tikka T3 and it will be a joy to carry. It will kick a bit harder but when holding on an elk or deer you will never notice it. When at the range use plenty of sand bags and a recoil shield shoulder pad and you're all set. I love the original feel of a BLR but can't stand the long action version.
10-15-2012, 07:26 PM
#25
Fork Horn
Thread Starter
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Colorado
Posts: 335
Wow, sorry to resurrect a post. I haven't posted on here in a few years, but I was googling something and came across this old post of mine. I read through it and realized that I never came to a conclusion. So, 6 years later thought you might be interested in what I did. I went around and around on this and finally figured a few things out. I tried to stay with the facts and I went with the BLR in 270 WSM.
1. I looked at several guns and realized that long actions just don't fit me that well. I have stubby arms and they just don't reach. Not as big of a deal with a bolt gun, but has an impact with levers, pumps and some semiautos.
2. I did the math for the ballistics between .308 and 270 WSM in the various barrel lengths for the BLR and found that it did make a difference. My math tipped the favor to the 270 WSM.
3. The recoil on the BLR seemed pretty stout at first but I'm fine with it now. I shoot 140 grn accubonds, and group 1.5" at 200 yds.
4. A lot of smart people seem to have figured out that modern bullets are tough enough that bullet weight is less of a factor for penetration. I'm not smart but I'll learn from them and feel adequate with the 140 grn. I could go 130 grn in a tougher bullet, but the 140s shoot better in my gun. I'm zero'd at 200 and try not to shoot past 350 yds. Mostly inside of 200 so far.
5. I realized that I don't like bolt actions because most of them feel like the action binds up on me. I've found some that don't - Browning, Tikka, T/C all seem very smooth. I probably could have gone with a bolt in a 30 cal and been happy. I probably would have liked the 300 WSM. It seems to be readily available in CO, even in the small towns. 270 WSM is not. I still probably would prefer a short action. I do like the 270 WSM, though and I prefer a shorter barrel, even at the expense of some velocity.
6. I'm going for my first elk, 4th season this year. I feel fine and know that my gun and bullet will do the job. I got a really good deal on some federal ammo last year and as soon as I run through some of my stock, I'll start loading for 270 WSM.
Overall - very happy.
Take care and shoot straight.
1. I looked at several guns and realized that long actions just don't fit me that well. I have stubby arms and they just don't reach. Not as big of a deal with a bolt gun, but has an impact with levers, pumps and some semiautos.
2. I did the math for the ballistics between .308 and 270 WSM in the various barrel lengths for the BLR and found that it did make a difference. My math tipped the favor to the 270 WSM.
3. The recoil on the BLR seemed pretty stout at first but I'm fine with it now. I shoot 140 grn accubonds, and group 1.5" at 200 yds.
4. A lot of smart people seem to have figured out that modern bullets are tough enough that bullet weight is less of a factor for penetration. I'm not smart but I'll learn from them and feel adequate with the 140 grn. I could go 130 grn in a tougher bullet, but the 140s shoot better in my gun. I'm zero'd at 200 and try not to shoot past 350 yds. Mostly inside of 200 so far.
5. I realized that I don't like bolt actions because most of them feel like the action binds up on me. I've found some that don't - Browning, Tikka, T/C all seem very smooth. I probably could have gone with a bolt in a 30 cal and been happy. I probably would have liked the 300 WSM. It seems to be readily available in CO, even in the small towns. 270 WSM is not. I still probably would prefer a short action. I do like the 270 WSM, though and I prefer a shorter barrel, even at the expense of some velocity.
6. I'm going for my first elk, 4th season this year. I feel fine and know that my gun and bullet will do the job. I got a really good deal on some federal ammo last year and as soon as I run through some of my stock, I'll start loading for 270 WSM.
Overall - very happy.
Take care and shoot straight.
Last edited by spuddog; 10-15-2012 at 07:31 PM.
10-15-2012, 07:32 PM
#26
Nontypical Buck
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Wherever liberalism must be eradicated.
Posts: 2,734
Dang, I was all ready to scold for resurrecting the dead. But since it was the OP, wow. You put some thought into this. This might be another thread to share with a poster here looking for a similar caliber. One to be used for deer and larger game animals.
