Deer cartridge only ??????

[deerhunter10]

I know this question has been asked a lot of different ways and can be argued for ever, however I am going to be specific. Forget what you own, because I believe were all a little bias when we own it and shoot it. So that being said, if you had to pick a DEER ONLY cartridge/caliber with MILD to MEDIUM recoil, and your avg shot was 300 yards and your furthest shot where you felt comfortable was 350. Keep in mind, none of this stuff that you can use it for elk or pronghorn etc, as a reason to buy or build this gun. It is for big white tail/mulie only, that in my opinion should deliver at least 1600-1800 lbs of energy at that distance.

I pose this question one, I respect the honest opinions on this forum, and two there are alot of new calibers  and bullets out there that may or may not outperform the old ones. Such as a 270wsm is fast and flat but it punches a smaller hole than say the new Federal .338 that is a bit slower with not as good of trajectory but punches a bigger hole, potentially causing better bullet upset. IE bigger entrance, bigger exit, more blood loss better tracking, but actual energy transfer and recoil may be the same. What caliber would you chose?
Deerhunter 10

[mattmillerrx]

I like your question.  The mild to medium recoil compined with 1600-1800 ft/lbs at 300 yrds is hard to find.  I am at work right now and did not have access to my load manuals and point blank software so I jumped on Remington's website.  First to come to mind was the old 30-06, next the 270 win neither made the criteria of ft/lbs at first until I changed the loads around and then both did.  I hunt with the 270 win so I will throw it out due to bias, I just bought a 30-06 1903a3 for target use and have not hunted with it but may some day and am not biased to it yet.  I ran several much larger calibers that may have exceed your recoil criteria and most were running in the 1500's I was surprised.  I did not run any of the new Mag calibers and am not yet a fan of them, others can tell you about those.  I wanted to find the lightest recoil caliber that provied 1600 ft/lbs
(it was the 270 on Remington's website), however the 260 rem I was hoping would be it, it hit 1560 so I know it will meet your requirements with hand loads if you do that.  The 280 Remington with core locks came in at 1657 at 300 yrs( as all the numbers are) but with there accutips it was 1817 ( this is my pick based on your criteria).  My reason is it gets the job done and is a little more unique than say a 30-06.  By the way I left out the 30-06 it will meet the 1600 with several loads and the 1800 on many a couple exceed the 1800.  This is all based on the numbers so that is as unbiased as you can get ( other than my opinion of the mag calibers which was left out mainly because I have no real experience with them).  I prefer a different type of set up myself, I like to hunt with the deer closer in and have started using a .44mag marlin for main deer gun but understand the need for a 300 yrd gun and theses types of shots are fun in there own right and takes some good practice and good equipment.  I think this will be an interesting thread, let us know what you decide to go with and good hunting to ya.

MGM

My pick was made on the assumption that you would make sure you had your ammo with you before leaving for your hunting destinations and would not be forced to try and locate it in some small town of 100 people.  Which I am sure if you don't do this you will have a hard time finding it but come on, your not going to leave your ammo at home are you?

[300S+W]

       .25-06 w/115gr Nosler Partition @ 3200fps.

til later

[RaySendero]

My 270 Winchester and my reload meet the 300 yard energy criteria.

A 150 grain Sierra GK over IMR-4350 chronoed just over 2,900 FPS - sighted in at 200 is 1.4" high at 100 and down 6.7" at 300 yards.  This just isn't data from a balistic program - I've also shot those distances to verify.

At 300 yards it still has 1,809 Ft-Lbs of energy - At 400 its 1,547.

This rifle/cartridge has served well as my highline/beanfield rilfe for the last 8 years.  It has produced more bang-flops than the other deer rifles I own.  Think you'll be satisfied with a 270 with a 24" (or+) barrel.

[kevthebassman]

Well, I think your energy requirement is going to eliminate many fine deer cartridges that are perfectly capable of doing the job, and your requirement that the recoil be mild to moderate really puts you in a tight range of cartridges that get the job done.  If you consider cartridges like the 30-06 to be mild to moderate, then you're in business. 

If, like me, you find the '06 to be a bit on the heavy side when paired with a light-weight rifle, then I think you would benefit from lowering your energy threshold just a bit to include fine deer-busters like the 7mm-08, .260 Rem, and others of similar performance.

[canon6]

My 6.5X55, with 120gr NBT @ 2900, is still showing 1431 fpe at 300. Below your threshold but it has killed very well at that range.   Doug

[Pinkerton]

Just read Chuck Hawks article 338 federal, he states the factory loads are getting 1800-1900 FPE at 300 yrds. I always wanted the wildcat version, I'm thinking it would fit the bill nicely.

[Dave in WV]

Since the range is out to 300-350 yards I'll say a .270 or .280. The .270 & 7mm WSMs will work but they kick harder and whether or not they'll survive is still to be seen.

[BBF]

 My vote goes to the .257 Wby

[WyoStillhunter]

The 300 yd. energy threshold you prefer is arbitrary.  I argue in favor of placing a properly constructed bullet in the right spot over energy.  Therefore, given your question I would choose .270 Winchester.  I have never owned one, BTW.  I think it fulfills all the criteria with a variety of factory ammo or handloads.

[kevthebassman]

I don't think that ft/lbs of energy is much of an indicator of killing power anyway.  WyoStillhunter gives good advice; a properly constructed bullet and good shot placement are 10 times more important than retained energy.

[Kurt L]

I also would vote 270 winchester plus ammo would be easy to find and much cheaper than
most mag rounds and reloading you would use less powder than a mag round and the old
270 win is not real hard on brass.

[Cheesehead]

The 7mm Remington Magnum fits all the paramaters of the origanal post. Excepting one, I have owned one for years so I must disqualify it.

Cheese

[Varmint Hunter]

280AI

[tn_junk]

.308 Winchester.
May not quite get the FP's at 300 but it will do the job.

alan

[mannyrock]

  No question about it:


.25-06  and
.257 Weatherby

   Either of these will solidly kill large deer at 350 yards, and you won't even have to hand load.  Between these two, the  .l257 Weatherby would be better for the task.  Indeed, it was designed for this task.

   Your setting of the minimum  required ft. pounds of energyat 350 yards is a little arbitrary.  A well constructed .25 caliber rifle bullet, hitting with 1,000 to 1,200 ft pounds,  will certainly kill a deer stone dead.  You may be focusing a little too much on  ballistics charts.

    My favorite round is the .308 winchester, but it doesn't quite fit the bill here.

Best Regards,

Mannyrock

[Freezer]

   I really like this question and will have to do some research but I'd rule out the 25-06.  I and my brother have them and they kick!  I'm going to lean toward 260, 6.5x55, 7-08, and 308.  As I see it the only problem with short mags is the lighter the weapon the higher the recoil.  I don't understand the 1600-1800 foot lbs.  1000 to 1100 should be enough for deer.  For a competent shooter this would bring the 6mm Rem and 243 into play.

[mattmillerrx]

Lots of great calibers have been mentioned, some, although in our books will do the job and have done it, does not meet his criteria.  We all have criteria, so you can not knock his 1600-1800ft/lbs.  I did a little googling to see what I could find. And here is a little article about what it takes to kill a deer and makes a lot of good points although there is no mention of 300 yrds it is still valid here I believe.  He also discuss my favorites quite well as examples.  I also prefer TKO to ft/lbs as my how dead you killed it meter but know its limits as well.
http://hunting.about.com/od/deerbiggame/a/bulletperforman.htm

I just saw the previous post after posting the above,  I have shot dads 25-06 and carried for a few years on my deer hunts.  It was a rem 700 with the black plastic stock and is pretty light.  Recoil as we all know depends on several factors one being gun wieght and even with this light gun it was not that bad, at the time I was only 15-16 years old.  I think it falls in the mild-medium criteria but would have to handload to meet the 1600 ft/lb mark.  He did not give us an example of what he considers medium or heavy recoil so this is a guess on everyones part.  I am trying to remain unbiased as he has ask but I do feel the .270 win fits the bill perfectly.

[deerhunter10]

Those were awesome responses, that's why I like this forum so much. Let me clarify the 1600-1800 lbs of energy. After countless hours on the phone and internet talking with gunsmiths, and bullet manufacturer's, gun manufacturer's, guides etc. For stopping power in a rifle that seemed to be the consensus. Now with a shotgun and a slug totally different deal, the 1000-1100 lbs seemed to be the avg after my research, I'm not saying their right, that's just what they all seemed to lean towards. As far as what I personally consider medium recoil would be 30.06, I believe a 7mm rem mag is on more of the heavier side. I am a big believer in shot placement and bullet construction, and if you can combine that with a caliber you can effectively and ethically shoot at that 300-350 distance you have your DEER ONLY gun.

Lets be honest recoil effects most people, but they don't want to admit it. So in some degree it's factored in. I tend to shoot my daughters  Howa .243 better than my Sako 7mm rem mag. The .243 groups 1/2 inch while the 7mm groups 1 1/4 and yes I've shot them with all different kinds of premium factory ammo. My groups tend to open a bit from the .243 all the way to the 7mm. So I believe there is a slight flinch factor involved a bit every time the recoil goes up, that's why I posed this question. Can I handle the recoil of course I can, but I was curious to see if there was a caliber out there that could do what my question asked. It sounds like the 270wsm is the front runner without having to mess with to many different loads. With maybe the .280 right on it's coat tails, and the 30.06 and .308 with some tinkering on bullet weight. Thanks again guys I'll keep looking for more responses.
Deerhunter10

[beemanbeme]

If you're calling a 30-06 a "medium" kicker then a .280 is what you're looking for. Personally, I wouldn't hesitate to use a 7-08 under the conditions you outlined but it doesn't make the cut in the energy department.  It does come close and it's negligible recoil, innate accuracy, and excellent selection of bullets permits precise bullet placement which, like WY said, has to count for something.

[mannyrock]

  Yes I agree.  Most people would not view the 30-06 as a medium kicker.  It would be regarded, especially for young shooters or women, as definitely in the heavy, uncomforable, class.

  Given your clarification of the parameters, I now totally agree that the .280 is EXACTLY what you are looking for.

  Also, I don't mean to be critical, but the advice given to you about 1,600 to 1,800 ft pounds being a minimum reliable foot pounds for "stopping power" on deer, is simply not true.  Take for example the .35 Remington. It has far less ft. pounds than this at 100 yards, but drops deer stone dead at that range.  The same is true of a standard factory loaded 45-70.  Don't take my word for it, go over to the lever action rifle board, and the marlin lever board, and listen to the hundreds of testimonies to this fact.  I have killed more than 30 deer in my lifetime, and most were killed with no more than 1,200 ft pounds, and none of them walked more than 40 yards before dropping dead.

     The only bad kill I ever had was shooting a deer with a soft point 30-06 at 80 yards, a little too far back from the shoulder. The deer was hit with about 2,400 foot pounds of energy.  The round went clear through, and knocked the deer down.  The deer rolled over, got back on its feet, and ran almost 300 yards through very heavy woods before it fell down for good.  It was still alive when I found it, and I had to give it a dispatching shot, at point blank, with another 30-06 round.  What a mess.  This is an example of what happens when you have too much foot pounds for the game and range you are shooting.

  Foot pounds of energy is an important factor, but it is  simply ONE of the 4 or 5 things you have to factor in when selecting the right round.  It is not the litimus test.  .

  Again, the .280 seems right to me given your thoughts.

   By the way, the manner in which you are focusing on knock-down power is probably best computed by looking at the Keith Taylor relative knockdown power  index.  This formula is posted (and can be automatically computed) on the Beartooth Bullets main website.  All you do is plug in the caliber, weight, velocity etc., and you will be given the computed index.  I think you would find this very interesting, and the .280 would probably come out about right for what you want.

Best of luck,

Mannyrock


   

[wi-deerhunter]

7mm-08  Remington

[Freezer]

    I didn't knock the criteria, I was curious about it.  My brother and I both shoot 25-06.  Mine a NEF heavy barrel, his a Rem 700 varmint.  We have been shooting the Hornaday 117gr Lite Mags.  Neither of use like the recoil.  Most of us know the formula for recoil and recognise that "felt" recoil is subjective.  That said though I can handle strong recoil but after a few shots I'll flinch.  My two primary deer rifles are a 308 Savage 99f and 280 Rem 700 (and I don't care for my 280's recoil on a bench).  I prefer the 25-06 for long distance coyote and varmint and relagate my 450 Marlin to bear and pig.  
    That said I like the article mat posted, very informative.  I've never considered the 243 or 6mm Rem a good deer cartridge though many argue with me about that.  My starting point would be 257 Roberts.  I'm in the process of building a Muaser sporter chambered in 6.5x55 because I feel for a handloader this cartridge is the most efficient, flatest shooting, lite recoil cartridge available and it's bullet coefficient is very high.  The 260 Rem follows close behind and for someone who doesn't handload would be a better choice since the 6.5x55 factory loads are loaded mild for the older weaker Mauser actions.  
    I'm a big fan of the 280 but believe like the 6.5x55 you must hand load to bring out it's full potential.  For that reason I'd suggest a 270 to those who don't roll their own.  I feel the same about the 7-08 vs the 308.   Besides ammo avaliability and bullet selection is far greater in more stores for the 270 and 308 for the non loader.
    I have never shot the short mags but have read allot about them.  My opinion is wait and see which one survives, a 325 short mag is great, and the shorter the action the less the rifle weights and the more the recoil.  
     JMHO

[ms]

308 OR 7MO8

[T.R.]

Accuracy is what it takes to make consistent kill shots at the distances you've described.  I'll go with .308 and light magnum ammo by Hornady.

Of course, its always possible to stalk closer.  This statement was not made by theory.  I've stalked mule deer & antelope many times in open country to close the shooting distance.   The hunter who is unwilling to stalk closer has defined his own abilities within a negative context. 

TR

[Graybeard]

I chose and would choose again the 7-08. It is to me about the PERFECT choice as a deer rifle. Our old original Remington Model Seven in 7-08 with 18.5" barrel is not the most accurate rifle around the house but it's been here since a few months after the combination came on the market and has been used first by me then our oldest son and is now my wife's rifle with the stock cut to fit her 4' 11' size. That rifle in all the years we've owned it with all three of us using it on game from deer to varmints to hogs and exotics has never ever missed on game and never ever required a follow up shot to kill what it has been pointed at in over 25 years of use. Come to think of it I don't recall ever missing or requiring a follow up shot with any of the other 7-08s I own or have owned over the years. It really is my favorite deer rifle bar none and I'd not hesitate to use it on elk either should the chance present itself when I held it in my hands tho I'd likely not take it on an elk hunt as I have more appropriate choices available to me.

[30WCF]

7mmWSM is my choice. I love it, not too big and not too little. Shoots flat, short action, recoil isnt terrible. Just a great all around caliber.

[rem700-3]

My personal biased choce, .270  I dont own a 7-08 but some guys I hunt with do and I have used one a few times . I have seen  (conservitave estimate) 75 deer shot with the 7-08 used in very competent hands to youngsters and the longest tracking was 35 yards, most were dead right there.  If I were to buy another rifle just for deer it would be the 7-08.

[mattmillerrx]

I am with you on the stalking, that makes hunting a lot more fun to me.  Not to knock the guys that like to take the long shots they are fun too but I have termed this type of hunting deer sniping and I got bored with it.  I even use some of my bowhunting setups during rifle season.  I successfully stalk a deer to within 50 yrds this last winter with my wife behind me for all but the last 30 yrds,  There was a 30 mph wind so no chance of it hearing me and it didn't, it was a blast.  I plan to do more of that in the future.

I too have been thinking of getting the 7mm-08, I think it is a great round.  I really like the .257 roberts and would love one of those as well.  I too know many that are not fans of the .243 for deer.  I am ok with it, use heavy for caliber bullets and know the limits and you will be fine, but I would prefer to keep my shots around 100yrds with it.  You will like the 6.5 x 55 another great round.  Man I need more guns will have to work on that.

[mannyrock]

Dear Guys,

   Well, I noticed something pretty interesting.  As I understand it, 7mm expressed in our inches is .284 caliber.    It seems that the top three cartridges being suggested in the replies to fit the parameters that the poster is looking for are the following:

       .270 Winchester (which is actually .278 caliber, or virtually a 7mm)

       7mm-08 (which is a 7mm)

       .280 (which is virtually a 7mm)

   So, in order to satisfy the long-range aspect (300 yards) that was specified by the poster, plus the minimum foot pounds he wants at that range, the weight of opinion and experience has comed down pretty solidly on the side of a 7mm round, instead of a .30 caliber round.  Given the love of Americans for the tried and true .30 calibers, I find this pretty interesting.

Best Regards, Mannyrock