help on choosing a gun
02-24-2002, 07:09 PM
#12
Fork Horn
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Manotick Ontario Canada
Posts: 115
RE: help on choosing a gun
I don't want to discourage you from buying a new rifle, but I've taken deer, moose and bear with a 30-06, and have had excellent success with it.
Now, if you need an excuse to buy the .270, why don't you get it for shooting deer, caribou and antelope at long range.<img src=icon_smile_wink.gif border=0 align=middle> <img src=icon_smile_big.gif border=0 align=middle>
Edited by - Rick Teal on 02/24/2002 20:10:24
Now, if you need an excuse to buy the .270, why don't you get it for shooting deer, caribou and antelope at long range.<img src=icon_smile_wink.gif border=0 align=middle> <img src=icon_smile_big.gif border=0 align=middle>
Edited by - Rick Teal on 02/24/2002 20:10:24
02-25-2002, 08:07 AM
#14
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Los Angeles CA USA
Posts: 192
RE: help on choosing a gun
According to Craig Boddington in his book "American Hunting Rifles", this is what he says about the 7mm Mag:
Pg. 98; "...7mm Rem Mag is not a death ray...but it does NOT shoot a great deal flatter than a .30-06, given similar bullet aerodynamics."
He adds; "The .30-06 isn't a 500 yard elk rifle, either, not by any stretch. Nor is it a charge-stopper for a brown bear. But if I had to choose betwen a 175 grain 7mm and a 180 grain .30-caliber (30-06), I'd go for frontal area. Better, I'd use a 220 grain .30-caliber (30-06), which no 7mm bullet can match." "...the point is that the difference isn't all that significant [between 7mm mag vs. 30-06]..." "None of this is said to knock the 7mm Rem Mag, only to put it in proper perspective as a very fine game cartridge but not a giant killer nor the ultimate in long-range performance."
A 30-06 bullet is bigger than a 7mm bullet, both in diameter, sectional density and bullet weight. So, enough said about the 7mm mag. In my humble opinion, it's a great round but not as "magical" as everyone says it is. Ditto for the .30-06. I think that the '06 though has more potential and all around is better than a 7mm mag, with the exception going slightly to the 7mm mag for distance. The bullet doesn't arc as much as the '06. However the arcing of the '06 is very very slight when compared to a 7mm mag.
Back to your topic regarding .270 vs. 30-06. Boddington believs (me too) that a .270 is marginal for elk (pg. 48). He also believes that a .30-06 is better.
Go with the '06. It'll take down anything North America has to offer.
Edited by - Hk45USP on 02/25/2002 09:12:31
Pg. 98; "...7mm Rem Mag is not a death ray...but it does NOT shoot a great deal flatter than a .30-06, given similar bullet aerodynamics."
He adds; "The .30-06 isn't a 500 yard elk rifle, either, not by any stretch. Nor is it a charge-stopper for a brown bear. But if I had to choose betwen a 175 grain 7mm and a 180 grain .30-caliber (30-06), I'd go for frontal area. Better, I'd use a 220 grain .30-caliber (30-06), which no 7mm bullet can match." "...the point is that the difference isn't all that significant [between 7mm mag vs. 30-06]..." "None of this is said to knock the 7mm Rem Mag, only to put it in proper perspective as a very fine game cartridge but not a giant killer nor the ultimate in long-range performance."
A 30-06 bullet is bigger than a 7mm bullet, both in diameter, sectional density and bullet weight. So, enough said about the 7mm mag. In my humble opinion, it's a great round but not as "magical" as everyone says it is. Ditto for the .30-06. I think that the '06 though has more potential and all around is better than a 7mm mag, with the exception going slightly to the 7mm mag for distance. The bullet doesn't arc as much as the '06. However the arcing of the '06 is very very slight when compared to a 7mm mag.
Back to your topic regarding .270 vs. 30-06. Boddington believs (me too) that a .270 is marginal for elk (pg. 48). He also believes that a .30-06 is better.
Go with the '06. It'll take down anything North America has to offer.
Edited by - Hk45USP on 02/25/2002 09:12:31
