Choosing the perfect Caliber
09-28-2010, 10:59 PM
#11
Boone & Crockett
Join Date: Feb 2003
Posts: 10,679
If you liked the .280 but recoil was borderline a problem then simply get a 7mm-08. To 350 yards it gives up literally nothing to the .280 as factory loaded and it will take any non dangerous game on this continent reliably with out question.
30-06, .270 Weatherby, 300WSM, .270WSM, 7mm mag, 7mmWSM, etc... ALL have more recoil than the .280 Remington.
FORGET about a muzzle brake. The excess noise they create will permanently damage your hearing with a single shot unless you are willing to wear some type of hearing protection in the woods with you when you hunt.
It also was on the border of respect/fear as far as the recoil goes. See, soaking wet I'm maybe 145 on a good day. I'm a scrawny type dude, with little upper body strength. My .280 had just enough recoil that sometimes I could feel the scope barely touch the hairs on my eyebrow, but not enough to actually hit me.....
What I'm looking for is a rifle that can successfully hunt anything in North America, without having more recoil that my .280
What I'm looking for is a rifle that can successfully hunt anything in North America, without having more recoil that my .280
Right now I'm thinking that a 30-06 with a muzzle brake and recoil pad would be my best suited choice,
09-29-2010, 03:59 AM
#12
Nontypical Buck
Join Date: Mar 2004
Posts: 2,445
Get a 308 or 7-08 in a rifle that fits you. I have a Savage youth model with a 24 inch barrel that is perfect for my frame. A micro-medallion, Ruger 77 Ultralight, Remington Model 7, etc. should be good for your size. Install a scope properly, and you'll have no trouble with the scope hitting you.
Most guys are carrying rifles that are too long, especially when they have a few layers on for hunting. Install a better recoil pad if you need to, but keep in mind you may need to adjust stock length.
Skip the muzzle brake.
Most guys are carrying rifles that are too long, especially when they have a few layers on for hunting. Install a better recoil pad if you need to, but keep in mind you may need to adjust stock length.
Skip the muzzle brake.
09-29-2010, 04:11 AM
#13
Giant Nontypical
Join Date: Nov 2004
Posts: 5,425
I've got one more observation...I live in North Carolina, I'm 55 and have hunted since I was a youngster...I know loads of hunters that bought a rifle larger than needed for our smaller southern deer with the intention of "going out west"...
1) Most never go...
2) If you can afford to go, you can afford another rifle for elk, or can borrow a buddy's...
3) Most have a flinching problem because they are using more gun than needed...
There is nothing wrong with owning larger caliber rifles...The first centerfire should be one that is adequate, but one that the owner can shoot comfortably so they gain experience and confidence in their ability...
1) Most never go...
2) If you can afford to go, you can afford another rifle for elk, or can borrow a buddy's...
3) Most have a flinching problem because they are using more gun than needed...
There is nothing wrong with owning larger caliber rifles...The first centerfire should be one that is adequate, but one that the owner can shoot comfortably so they gain experience and confidence in their ability...
09-29-2010, 05:14 AM
#14
Nontypical Buck
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Western Nebraska
Posts: 3,393
1) Most never go...
2) If you can afford to go, you can afford another rifle for elk, or can borrow a buddy's...
3) Most have a flinching problem because they are using more gun than needed...
There is nothing wrong with owning larger caliber rifles...The first centerfire should be one that is adequate, but one that the owner can shoot comfortably so they gain experience and confidence in their ability...
09-29-2010, 06:07 AM
#15
Typical Buck
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Virginia
Posts: 542
I second this opinion. I bought a 30-06 with a muzzlebrake and it split my ears the first time I shot a deer with it. My ears rang like I had been at a concert for hours. I removed the muzzlebrake and put on a solid piece and the problem is solved. Muzzlebrakes are only good if you are going to use hearing protection. I doubt that I will ever own another gun of any kind with a muzzlebrake.
09-29-2010, 06:31 AM
#16
Typical Buck
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: SE Wisc
Posts: 677
Forget the muzzle break. All you need is a 308 or 30.06. Either will do what you ask. throw in the 7mm-08 if you want even less recoil. I have all 3 and would not feel undergunned with any of them for Elk and certainly not for deer.
If you put a nice recoil pad on the 30.06 it reall tames it. One of my guns came with one and to be honest, i can't usually tell the felt recoil difference between the 06 and the 7mm-08. But that's all you need.
If you put a nice recoil pad on the 30.06 it reall tames it. One of my guns came with one and to be honest, i can't usually tell the felt recoil difference between the 06 and the 7mm-08. But that's all you need.
09-29-2010, 10:23 AM
#17
Giant Nontypical
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location:
Posts: 5,130
I "third" these comments !
Quote:
"There is nothing wrong with owning larger caliber rifles...The first centerfire should be one that is adequate, but one that the owner can shoot comfortably so they gain experience and confidence in their ability... "
and I "fifth" no muzzle break !!!
Short answer : Already said 7MM-08, or .308 for the recoil shy.
Quote:
"There is nothing wrong with owning larger caliber rifles...The first centerfire should be one that is adequate, but one that the owner can shoot comfortably so they gain experience and confidence in their ability... "
and I "fifth" no muzzle break !!!
Short answer : Already said 7MM-08, or .308 for the recoil shy.
Last edited by Sheridan; 09-29-2010 at 11:32 AM.
09-29-2010, 10:56 AM
#18
Banned
Join Date: Sep 2010
Posts: 220
Hi guys, this is my first time on this forum and I would like to get your alls input on something. I need some help on deciding which caliber rifle I want to buy. Now, I did do some searching, and have learned quite a bit about which calibers are good for what I want to do, but I have an additional factor thats needs to be thought about. Recoil.
Here's where I'm at. I live on the Eastern Shore of Maryland. Around here about the only thing you need a rifle for is whitetail or sika. So I had a Remington .280, and I loved it. But, the person I had entrusted the storage of my rifles too no longer has them, and I'm left having to start from scratch.
For around here, my .280 was perfect. It also was on the border of respect/fear as far as the recoil goes. See, soaking wet I'm maybe 145 on a good day. I'm a scrawny type dude, with little upper body strength. My .280 had just enough recoil that sometimes I could feel the scope barely touch the hairs on my eyebrow, but not enough to actually hit me.
What I'm looking for is a rifle that can successfully hunt anything in North America, without having more recoil that my .280, and ammo that is reasonable cost($20-40 for a box of 20). So, I'm thinking that I will certainly need a recoil pad for the stock, and a muzzle brake.
I had been leaning toward a .270 Weatherby Magnum, but after some reading on this forum I've decided that a .270 is too small for things such as elk. I have similiary discard a 7mm and 7mm Magnum, due to a 30-06 being ballistically superior with bullets weighing 180gr and above.
Right now I'm thinking that a 30-06 with a muzzle brake and recoil pad would be my best suited choice, but would like the input and suggestions of hunting pros such as you guys for any other cailbres and then a rifle suited to me in the decided-upon caliber.
Thanks!
Here's where I'm at. I live on the Eastern Shore of Maryland. Around here about the only thing you need a rifle for is whitetail or sika. So I had a Remington .280, and I loved it. But, the person I had entrusted the storage of my rifles too no longer has them, and I'm left having to start from scratch.
For around here, my .280 was perfect. It also was on the border of respect/fear as far as the recoil goes. See, soaking wet I'm maybe 145 on a good day. I'm a scrawny type dude, with little upper body strength. My .280 had just enough recoil that sometimes I could feel the scope barely touch the hairs on my eyebrow, but not enough to actually hit me.
What I'm looking for is a rifle that can successfully hunt anything in North America, without having more recoil that my .280, and ammo that is reasonable cost($20-40 for a box of 20). So, I'm thinking that I will certainly need a recoil pad for the stock, and a muzzle brake.
I had been leaning toward a .270 Weatherby Magnum, but after some reading on this forum I've decided that a .270 is too small for things such as elk. I have similiary discard a 7mm and 7mm Magnum, due to a 30-06 being ballistically superior with bullets weighing 180gr and above.
Right now I'm thinking that a 30-06 with a muzzle brake and recoil pad would be my best suited choice, but would like the input and suggestions of hunting pros such as you guys for any other cailbres and then a rifle suited to me in the decided-upon caliber.
Thanks!
First you complain about the recoil of a 280 Remington and then you talk about wanting to buy a .270 Weatherby Magnum?
You obviously don't know anything about firearms.
The .280 belongs to the 30-06 Springfield class of firearms, since the 25-06, 270 Winchester, 280 Remington, 30-06 and 35 Wheelen are basically the same shell - with a few modifications to make it fit in the proposed caliber rifle it was intended for.
The weight of the bullet and the amount of powder and the type of powder is gong to determine how much the gun kicks to a large extent. Beyond that, unless some type of recoil dampening system and muzzle brake is employed - the recoil for most of that class of gun is going to be the same. As a matter of fact, a heavy rifle should kick less then a light weight / featherweight rifle will.
When you get into Weatherby Magnums you can almost double the felt recoil. It just all depends on which scale you use to measure felt recoil.
I had a .300 Weatherby once and it was made out of a 1917 Enfield rifle which was a very heavy rifle at that time and was the predecessor of the Model 721 Remington rifle which later became the Model 700 Remington.
Rule of thumb is - the further south you go on the eastern side of the USA - the smaller the deer gets. A .280 Remington was a good rifle, enough to handle what you want to do and if you decide to go hunting elk - you can always buy something else or borrow someone else's gun.
My opinion is - if you do not like the recoil of a .280 Remington then don't buy one. But you never feel the recoil when you are shooting at a deer. Only when you are shooting target practice.
Maybe a .243 Winchester would be a better option for you.
A 30-06 is not much better then a .270 Winchester or a .280 Remington when it comes to shooting Elk. Shooting Elk is all about bullet selection and bullet placement. The same is true for hunting deer, bear, turkeys or any other game.
Last edited by Mr. Deer Hunter; 09-29-2010 at 11:02 AM.
09-29-2010, 11:24 AM
#19
Nontypical Buck
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Western Nebraska
Posts: 3,393
First you complain about the recoil of a 280 Remington and then you talk about wanting to buy a .270 Weatherby Magnum?
You obviously don't know anything about firearms.
The .280 belongs to the 30-06 Springfield class of firearms, since the 25-06, 270 Winchester, 280 Remington, 30-06 and 35 Wheelen are basically the same shell - with a few modifications to make it fit in the proposed caliber rifle it was intended for.
The weight of the bullet and the amount of powder and the type of powder is gong to determine how much the gun kicks to a large extent. Beyond that, unless some type of recoil dampening system and muzzle brake is employed - the recoil for most of that class of gun is going to be the same. As a matter of fact, a heavy rifle should kick less then a light weight / featherweight rifle will.
When you get into Weatherby Magnums you can almost double the felt recoil. It just all depends on which scale you use to measure felt recoil.
I had a .300 Weatherby once and it was made out of a 1917 Enfield rifle which was a very heavy rifle at that time and was the predecessor of the Model 721 Remington rifle which later became the Model 700 Remington.
Rule of thumb is - the further south you go on the eastern side of the USA - the smaller the deer gets. A .280 Remington was a good rifle, enough to handle what you want to do and if you decide to go hunting elk - you can always buy something else or borrow someone else's gun.
My opinion is - if you do not like the recoil of a .280 Remington then don't buy one. But you never feel the recoil when you are shooting at a deer. Only when you are shooting target practice.
Maybe a .243 Winchester would be a better option for you.
A 30-06 is not much better then a .270 Winchester or a .280 Remington when it comes to shooting Elk. Shooting Elk is all about bullet selection and bullet placement. The same is true for hunting deer, bear, turkeys or any other game.
You obviously don't know anything about firearms.
The .280 belongs to the 30-06 Springfield class of firearms, since the 25-06, 270 Winchester, 280 Remington, 30-06 and 35 Wheelen are basically the same shell - with a few modifications to make it fit in the proposed caliber rifle it was intended for.
The weight of the bullet and the amount of powder and the type of powder is gong to determine how much the gun kicks to a large extent. Beyond that, unless some type of recoil dampening system and muzzle brake is employed - the recoil for most of that class of gun is going to be the same. As a matter of fact, a heavy rifle should kick less then a light weight / featherweight rifle will.
When you get into Weatherby Magnums you can almost double the felt recoil. It just all depends on which scale you use to measure felt recoil.
I had a .300 Weatherby once and it was made out of a 1917 Enfield rifle which was a very heavy rifle at that time and was the predecessor of the Model 721 Remington rifle which later became the Model 700 Remington.
Rule of thumb is - the further south you go on the eastern side of the USA - the smaller the deer gets. A .280 Remington was a good rifle, enough to handle what you want to do and if you decide to go hunting elk - you can always buy something else or borrow someone else's gun.
My opinion is - if you do not like the recoil of a .280 Remington then don't buy one. But you never feel the recoil when you are shooting at a deer. Only when you are shooting target practice.
Maybe a .243 Winchester would be a better option for you.
A 30-06 is not much better then a .270 Winchester or a .280 Remington when it comes to shooting Elk. Shooting Elk is all about bullet selection and bullet placement. The same is true for hunting deer, bear, turkeys or any other game.
You actually think the recoil of a .35 Whelen is the same as a .25-06?.....
