Deer cartridge only ??????

[deltecs]

As I said, if it is your only rifle,then you have little choice. Even if it were my only rifle, I certainly wouldn't lug it around for long to shoot WT deer before it was traded off on a 7-08 or something of that sort.

I don't know if "magnum" originated in europe or here as a term to denote a larger than normal cartridge.  The H&H was originally called a Super.  The use of a light bullet at high velocity is fairly new (all things are relative) because of bullet technology. The early attempts at driving light for calibre bullets at hyper velocities in a hunting application were met with poor results or outright failure.  Roy Weatherby's hype for his rifles did not help matters.  My personal opinion is I just can't understand driving a hunting bullet a pointless 3300-3500fps. What is gained?  Puleese don't tell me trajectory. 

If you are loading the 120gr bullet down to @ 2500-2600fps then you may be doing something but you're still dragging around a rifle that is considerably heavier than say a model 7 in .260 or 7-08 (in which BTW I shoot 140gr bullets) 

The 7mag's attraction among the know ledgable is it's relatively light recoil, it's wide application, and it's inherent accuracy.  But also, one could ask why, in America, are V8's and loud tailpipes in favour? 

I'm with you.  I've never seen the need for belted rim cartridges or super velocity rounds on any game.  The sportsman hunts, not target practices.  The magnum is best relegated to snipers, not for big game.  There is nothing a belted magnum cartridge can do that a full rimless one will not.  It is strictly a marketing technique since the phase out of cordite and not needed.  Weatherby used blown out .375 H&H hulls for his propietary rounds and marketed them well, therefor the popularity of so called magnum rounds.  The venerable 7x57 has been around for over a 100 years and it still with modern rifles, modern powders, and modern bullets will not only get the job done extremely well, it is the ballistic copy for a host of newer 7mm rounds.  In a 22" barrel on a chonograph, every velocity check on the 7mm magnum was quite a bit less than published velocity.  My associates will not even test their 7mm mags through it anymore as they all do not believe the results.  All the other rifles tested have velocities within published ranges.  Just too short of barrel for complete powder combustion before the bullet leaves the barrel and results in muzzle blast and wasted powder. 

[mcwoodduck]

Beeman,
Wait a minute.  The "Magnum" rounds were developed in the 1950's in an effort to drive the same for caliber or heavy for caliber bullets faster to gain range.  Yes I know 300H&H was around long before that but the word magnum was associated with the Winchester short Magnum of the 50's.  Over time the short was dropped and reintroduced in the 90's with the WSM line of rounds.  If you look at two popular rounds of the 30's and 40's 300 Savage and 30-40 Karg the 300 Win was developed to extend the power of the bullet and flatten the trajectory.  These were designed in the era when more people had moved out of the country and into the city with greater disposable income but less free time and did not have the time to practice shooting as often.  5-9 inches of drop at 300 yards is acceptable to take a shot and you really do not need to be an expert to shoot deer or other animals on your long weekend hunting trip to open country.
With current bullet technology ligher bullets can bu used to a- go faster and flatter or b- same speed to reduce recoil in a given case.
 
Deltics,
We all started talking about the 7mm Mag and different loads for it when we found out that he had one.  I agree that the 7X57 round is a classic hunting round as has been used all over the world to take everything.  Bell used it as an Elephant round.  The new Remington reduced recoil rounds are loaded to about 7X57 speeds.  It would be perfect for the rifle he already owns and is familar with.  I think a 308 would be a more versitle round, as ammo is availabe every where, it can be had in a short action, there are more factory loads for it and the bullets range from varmint, low recoil big game, big game, and large game like Elk and Moose. ( I know we are only supose to talk about deer here)  Oh yea becase of the shorter case it is more accurate than 30-06 and can drive 165 grain bullets faster with the same powder than it's parent CTG. The 308 will also have less recoil than the 7X57 in a given bullet weight driven to the same speed due to the length of the bullet and it has more contact with the barrel surface.  The 7 has a better SD in the same bullet design but like the recoil it is only marginally so and not noticed by either the shooter or the deer.  Again the majority of the "classic" deer rounds were based on the bolt rifle and the military ammo of the late 1880 and 90's.  Yes I know the 7X57 is the base case for almost all rounds. 
 

[Brithunter]

Ahhhhh actually the Belt on the Holland & Holland cartridges was there to aid extraction in SxS doubkle rifles which is also why the pressures are kept down and do not run modern "Magnum" pressures. That and of course they were meant for tropical use  The Magnum label was attached by Griffen & Howe as a marketing ploy to help sell the Non American cartridge in the US as they required a proper length action of which America was short of. That's why Winchester developed the so called "Short Magnum" to fit 06 length actions. "Magnum" in America was like "Big Block" and Big Bore" in the super car fields it sold them  .

As to high velocity cartridges, weel I am rather partcial to the original 270 Winchester which is no slouch and am very interested with the original high velocity cartridge to 280 Ross of 1906 and oen day will have a rifle chambered for it  original specs call for a 0.287" bullet of 140 grains at 3100 fps  quite outstanding for 1906. Of course the Ross got a bad name as a wounder by hunters using the wrong bullet type of dangerous and heavy game. was that a cartridge fault or the fault of uniformed shooters?

I wonder how the Ross would perform with todays far better bullets and powders?

Now the term Express when applied to a cartridge implied that the lighter weight usually Hollow Pointed bullet at an elevated velocity hit home like an Express Train.

As for Mr Bell well he also use a .303 Metford then the 7mm Mauser that he brought back for the Boer War were he operated as a scout then he switched to the .256 Mannlicher. This was to reduce weight as they walked into the bush and carried everything with them and then carried the Ivory back. The 303 used 215 grain bullets, the 7x57 173 grain and the .256" (6.5x53R & 6.5x54MS) used 156-160 grain bullets and the Mannlicher rifle was also lighter.

[Lone Star]

Ahhhhh actually the Belt on the Holland & Holland cartridges was there to aid extraction in SxS doubkle rifles...

Where did that fantasy history come from?  The belt on the original .400/375 H&H cartridge was there for headspacing since the shoulders of this cartridge (and the later .375 and .300 H&H Magnums) was small and heavily tapered.  The belt insured proper headspacing yet cycled through magazine rifles better than rimmed cases would.  These belted cartridges were designed for bolt action rifles, not doubles.  H&H designed rimmed versions of some of their belted cases for improved extraction in doubles.







.

[beemanbeme]

I believe Lone Star has it correct.  Many of your European cartridges have a "flanged" version for the single and double barreled rifles. The powders of the day --cordite-- were very heat sensitive and bullet technology being what it was, extraction, positive extraction for a following shot was of paramount concern.

And the Ross had the same problems encountered today, driving an inadequate bullet at excessive speed.  Folks that try to compensate velocity for marksmanship are chasing a dream.  I heard too many of those tales when Weatherby brought out his line of rifles:  "oh yeah, shoots flat as a tabletop out to 500 yards. Don't need no hold over at all!"  "I believe the bullet actually rises, you've got to aim low out to 300 yards."  "Yup, its got that thar kinetic energy. Hit 'em in the foot and it'll blow his heart up."  And so the magnum shooters got the name of incompetent game maimers. Some of which was deserved. Bullet technology has caught up, I'll admit. We are blest with an array of excellent bullets. If folks will use them.  But speed has become an end in itself.  And in a hunting bullet, I don't understand why. Like these folks that weigh and measure and compare to a gnat's butt their hunting ammo.  To what end, I don't know. Maybe it's because we can.  A 120gr bullet @3200fps can't do anything a 160 @ 2900fps can't only better.

[deltecs]

The design of the .280 Jeffrey with todays modern rifles and powders would have the same ballistics and make a better 7mm round than the Rem Mag.  The case capacity is the same with a shorter, larger circular mil powder inginition column, and longer neck for loading heavy for caliber bullets without decreasing powder capacity.  All in all, it was a better design than the .280 Ross and had larger capacity.  This cartridge was developed about 1915, so there really isn't anything new with belted magnum designed cartridges.  It is the powder and more uniform bullet construction that has enhanced the higher velocity rounds, but as for case design, many obsolete rounds could and would have filled this niche beautifully.  I'd like to have a .333 Jeffrey for Alaskan game.  Excellent sectional density bullets, good velocity with all rounds, neck length more than substantial for loading heavy for bore bullets, and easily chambered in standard length actions.  Effectively, it is a .338 Win Mag without the belt using a larger diameter case.  Ballistics would be indentical for all practical purposes.  The same would apply with the .280 Jeffrey and the 7 mm mag. 

[beemanbeme]

There has been several modern rounds developed, even with the word magnum added to their names that offered superior service but they didn't have the magic belt and so withered on the vine.  To much of the shooting public, American anyway, if it ain't got a belt, it ain't a magnum.  And many will still tell you that the belt is needed to contain the awsome pressures generated. 

In a forum like this, you're not exactly dealing with a true cross section of the shooting public.  When I hear stuff like the above, I kinda let my eyes glaze over and nod sagely.

[mcwoodduck]

Deltics,
You may also want to look at 330 Dakota or 8.59 Galaxy as a 338 Win Mag replacement.    Driving 250 grain bullets 2900 and 2750.  Also there is 350 Rigby if you want to go to a slightly wider bullet. Or the 325 WSM if you want a smaller bullet.

[deltecs]

Deltics,
You may also want to look at 330 Dakota or 8.59 Galaxy as a 338 Win Mag replacement.    Driving 250 grain bullets 2900 and 2750.  Also there is 350 Rigby if you want to go to a slightly wider bullet. Or the 325 WSM if you want a smaller bullet.

The Dakota rounds were right on for evolution from belted rim cartridges, however they too became insensed with higher velocity for marketing.  I don't need any more velocity than the .338 Win mag.  I just don't like the belted rim, so won't buy one.  The Dakota rounds and others are substantially larger in case capacity than the Win mag.  So we are back to excessive muzzle blast from unburned powder for bore size.  Not necessary or wanted, along with more recoil from more velocity.  The .325 WSM and .338 RCM have extremely short necks with powder capacity reduced if using heavy for bore bullets.  The same with the .338 Win mag.  The .350 Rigby round is fine too, and would satisfy my particular wants and requirements, except for the bolt face change from .473 bolt face to the larger Rigby base, which is in between the belted mags and 06 size bases.  It is an odd base size much like the Newton, so magazine followers must be modified.   Too much machining, when one can use factory headstamped .333 Jeffrey rounds in a rebarreled standard action with minor magazine and bolt face changes.  I was hoping when it first came out that the .338 RCM would have the same powder capacity as the .338 Win mag in a slightly shorter case with sufficient neck length.  It isn't.  The case capacity of the .338 RCM is the same as the .338-06 A Square, so I don't see the need to buy one.  I'd rather have the 06 for the much longer neck would not reduce powder capacity in heavier bullets.  Rather than the .350 Rigby, I'd buy a factory 9.3X64 and accomplish the same thing.

[mcwoodduck]

Deltics,
Sorry I miss understood that you wanted  a case with out the rim but not the magnum speeds.  The Jeffery round has an odd case head of .538 and it threw me off.   I thought that the cases based on the 416 Rigby would be easier to make as there are brass and dies available.  Rifles are made for it so followers for the mag are available.
The 338 -06 would be a great round and would also increase you magazine by an extra round over the 416 based cases.  From what I have read about the 338-06 it seems to do best with the 200-210 grain bullets.  But the 210 grain Nosler Partitions are great as far as design and available.  At one point Someone was loading it.  I remeber reading it 7-8 yeasrs ago and liked the round.  I want to say Nitrex or A squared.  But no one was making a 338-06 as a factory rifle at the time and having just gone through the little head aches of a custom rifle I was not willing to have another one made.  I had a Siameese made into a 45-70 and understand your not wanting to do all the machining, re machining, sanding and laping so a round, not made for an action will work.  I understand that 338-06 will work fine with a simple barrel change and reaming, but I the 333 Jeffery and it's odd ball case you would be back to the same changing everything.
I ended up getting a 338Win Mag.  I shoot the 225's out of it by Remington and have not had a problem.  I also have a 375 H&H and like wise the belt is not a problem.  I've never had the belts cross or lock up, failing to feed a round from the magazine.
Hey! Ruger is making rifles in 338 Federal and Hornady and Federal are loading ammo.  It's a the same as 338-06 only based on the 308 case.  Again best with the 200 to 210 projectiles. 
There is also an Ackley version of the 338-06 to increase volume.

[AtlLaw]

...338 Federal ...
It's a the same as 338-06 only based on the 308 case.

AWK!!!!     HERITIC!!!!  I bet you call Godzilla a lizard and say the .358 is the same as the 35 Whelen!!      

[captdp]

I believe the designation 'MAGNUM' was first used by S&W to describe their 357 and was 'borrowed' from the large Champange bottle. capt david

[deltecs]

The .333 Jeffrey case at .538 is only .003" larger in radius than the .338 Win mag base, so very minor machining of the bolt face and lightly filing the magazine follower would be simple.  Using a much larger cartridge base means more machining and experimenting on the magazine follower for reliable feed.  The Rigby case is immense in size and takes a brevet action length to use it.  My point was that quite a few antique rounds existed without the belted rim that if used today with modern powders and rifles, would be ballistically comparible to standard belted magnums.  I'm not looking for increased velocity above the common magnums, as I believe them to be more than adequate without further velocity increase.  What I'm looking for, is a full rimless cartridge with a base of .532-.538", 1/10" shorter than the magnum case lengths, with a minimum neck length of .4" that uses a standard 06 length action and magazine well, with the same or similar ballistics as existing Win and Rem mags.  There would be no loss of magazine capacity, a slight reduction in chamber pressure without a resultant loss in velocity with the capability of complete powder combustion per bore size in 22-24" barrels.  Is that too much to ask?  Some obsolete rounds fit this requirement and could be just as reliable and effective as the current belted mags.  The belted magnum in modern weapons was only a marketing technique, nothing more, and started by Weatherby.  Winchester in the middle 50's started chambering and making belted rims cartridges and others picked up the trend.  Then others removed the belt by using the original 404 Jeffrey case as a parent case, to further increase velocity with minor alterations to market these as having more energy.  Energy is a square of velocity, so more velocity, more energy.  It isn't necessary above the velocities of the exisiting Win and Rem mags.  Use a bigger bore if one needs more. 

[mcwoodduck]

Heritic??? If you think 100 FPS in a given bullet weight is the difference between godzilla and a lizard then I'll change my screen name.   (I would like to add that while godzilla is 40 feet tall and breaths fire, he is still fictional)
I agree that 358 Win and 35Wheelan are not in the same class.  35 is 300 Fps faster with a 200 grain bullet and the 358 really does not do what it should with the 250's in factory loads.  But looking at the reloading manual we are back to 100Fps in the 200 grain bullets.  On that same note.  Would I pack up and go home if I were handed a 358 Win  with factory ammo on a black bear or Moose hunt?  No.  Would I rather load up one of my belted rounds and hunt?  Yep.
The 308 case does not drive the heavy for caliber bullets as well as the 06 case does.  With some of the starndard to light for caliber (185-210) weight premium bullets the 338 fed will work well on all big game.  to paraphrase cheese head:  it ain't gonna bounce off.
I look at 308 and 30-06 as the same round in the 150 to 180 grain bullets.  If you read the Nosler reloading book it has the 308 driving a 165 grain bullet faster, yes! faster than the 30-06 loads by a whopping 9fps but it's still faster.  Other than that they are with in 25 -35 fps of each other.   The only place 30-06 has a large leg up on the 308 is with the 200-220 grain bullets.  Again with the premium bullets heavy projectiles are really not needed.  If heavy bullets are needed I bring a larger caliber.
   I know Deltics was talking about 250 grain bullets out of the 333 Jeffery but what he saves in the cost of brass for the British round he could shoot the premium 200-210 bullets out of 338 fed or 338-06.   

[Brithunter]

Ahhh in this scenario I would reach for the orignal case  and either a 9mm Mauser (9x57) or more likely the 9.3x57mm Mauser neither of which have belts and neither of which are high velocity numbers, by todays standards that is, but both have excellent reputations on large and medium game. Whilst I do not have a 9x57 rifle I do have the 9.3x57 in a light Husqvarna model 46  that has an old classic Bushnell Scopechief 3x sitting a'top it.

[AtlLaw]

...godzilla... is still fictional

Oh yeah!?  Says who!?   

Would I rather load up one of my belted rounds and hunt?  Yep.

Well, that says it all.  You obviously one of those "if it ain't a belted magnum it ain't squat" types.   

If you read the Nosler reloading book

I read it all the time!  Especially when I want to see grossly inflated velocities!     I guess the only way I can resolve this is by getting a 338 Fed (I think I've been through this in another post somewheres!?) and do a comparison!     Sounds reasonable to me.  Seems to me I've got a M700 SA laying around somewhere... and a .308 take-off barrel... I know I've got an extra 700 stock or two... Darn!  Another project!  See the work you caused me! 

I know Deltics was talking about 250 grain bullets out of the 333 Jeffery but what he saves in the cost of brass for the British round he could shoot the premium 200-210 bullets out of 338 fed or 338-06.

Yeah but... the Jeffery is COOL!  And cool is always the overriding factor!  BTW, do you know what the 333 Jeffery spawned in 3 old timers (O,K &H) right here in the U.S. of A?  And do you know what that spawn spawned?  Here I go, making a flat statement like I knew I was right!     watch me get my legs cut off at the knees! 

Hey Duckie, if you don't mind, put some emotions in your post, I wouldn't have answered if I thought you took my response seriously but I gambled that you knew it was tongue in cheek.

[AtlLaw]

I would reach for the original case  and either a 9mm Mauser (9x57) or more likely the 9.3x57mm Mauser

Is you a closet short round freak or ain't you been paying attention!?       WHY take a 9.3x57 when you could use a 9.3x63 and darn near double the velocity with a given bullet or drive bullets weighing almost twice as much at the same velocity!?  Why, the case is 6 mm longer for crying out loud!  that's .243 diameter which is the same diameter as the bullet in the .243 Winchester cartridge!  And if you don't think that's a lot, just say something like "the .243 is marginal" and there will be an invasion force heading for England before you can say Magna Carta!  Remember, no matter what some underendowed people would like to believe, size DOES matter!     Now having proved beyond any doubt the advantages of a case 6 mm longer, let's go back to the original comparison.  .338 Whelen and .338 Fed case lengths: 62mm - 51mm = 11mm difference.  Almost twice the gain over the 63mm - 57mm for the 9.3!  And, having already shown the benefits of that 6mm in the 9.3 cartridges, can you imagine what DOUBLE that gain is in the .338/06 over the .338 Federal!   

Pure, undeniable logic my boy... 

[mcwoodduck]

Alt Law,
LOL.
I wasn't sure if you were joking or if you are one of the Cooper cool aid drinkers that 30-06 is the king, and if it ain't a 45 ACP it ain't worth owning.
The only down side I see to the 333 Jeffery is the .333 bullets it uses.  I would like to see it use .338 and get  better bullet technology.  Yea, yea it's only .005 of an inch and they would work if a 338 barrel is used.
I suggested other cartridges only to make reloading componets easier and even the cheap soft points in 338, 358, 9.3, 8mm would be better and current factory loaded calibers would give a wider variety than the 333.
I like your suggestion of a 9.3X62.  Holly cow is it a thumper.  CZ is making rifles in it.  I have been thinking of one as a camp cannon when Elk hunting and replacing the factory sights with tritium night sights.
Good luck with your 308 project.  keep us informed as to what you find out.  You may like the 06 special. 

[Drilling Man]

  7-08 Rem...

  DM

[Freezer]

   What in the heck does this have do do with a deer cartridge?  Your guys must be dumbacrats,  Mudding up the issue with senseless rhetoric 

[Freezer]

    Boy if that don't stir up the hornets nest nothing will

[deltecs]

Alt Law,
LOL.
I wasn't sure if you were joking or if you are one of the Cooper cool aid drinkers that 30-06 is the king, and if it ain't a 45 ACP it ain't worth owning.
The only down side I see to the 333 Jeffery is the .333 bullets it uses.  I would like to see it use .338 and get  better bullet technology.  Yea, yea it's only .005 of an inch and they would work if a 338 barrel is used.
I suggested other cartridges only to make reloading componets easier and even the cheap soft points in 338, 358, 9.3, 8mm would be better and current factory loaded calibers would give a wider variety than the 333.
I like your suggestion of a 9.3X62.  Holly cow is it a thumper.  CZ is making rifles in it.  I have been thinking of one as a camp cannon when Elk hunting and replacing the factory sights with tritium night sights.
Good luck with your 308 project.  keep us informed as to what you find out.  You may like the 06 special. 

   What in the heck does this have do do with a deer cartridge?  Your guys must be dumbacrats,  Mudding up the issue with senseless rhetoric 

I think my meaning got a bit mis construed.  I'd like to see the .333 Jeffrey case with a .532 base and .338 bore.  I could wildcat one, but I'd rather have commercial brass with proper headstamped.  .338 RN for a name as example.  RN rimless nitro.  Where I sometimes hunt deer, there are lots a very big brown carnivors also hunting.   It only makes sense to be prepared for an encounter.  The .338 Win although not perfect for such encounters will get the job done effectively, and so would my ideal .338.  It would kill deer without too much bloodshot meat, but have a larger hole.  In areas that don't have the big bruins, I use a .234 Win or 6mm Rem for deer.  I've never had a problem with them using heavy bullets.  I was just commenting on my dislike for belted magnum cases and never saw the need for one in modern hunting firearms under any circumstances. 

[DakotaElkSlayer]

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.

Correct me if I am wrong, but isn't your KE requirement at 300yds. more than a .45-70 at the muzzle?!  You are firmly entering the .270/.280 realm with your requirements which is now putting you into the deer/elk rifle.  Not even deer in ND are that big.

Jim

[mcwoodduck]

Deltics,
You should start your own question on the wildcat section.  This has gotten way off track of the original question.
but, If your looking for a case that is .532 at the rim and can fit in a long action with out a belt, I think your going to have to make your own out of the 300 Remuington Ultra Mag and cut it back to fit in a long action, then shoulder it to take 338 bullets.  At this point you can make the neck as long as you want.  Heck you could call it 338 Giraffe and give it a .6-.8 neck.
it just sounds like a lot of work to douplicate what the 338 Ruger, 338-06,  338-06AI, or 325 Winchester ( yes I know it's an 8mm) does.  You still have not said why you don't like the Belt and why 338 Win Mag that is available in almost every store in elk and bear country is not acceptable.  I just like the idea that if  Mr. Murphy gets hold of my ammo I can get more at the store rather than have to wait for Fed Ex to deliver some from home.
Hey the 300 Rum variable power level may be your answer.  Get one of the hotter 338's like the 330 Dakota or the 8.59 Lazzaroni rounds and just load them down.  2900 Fps with a 250 grain bullet is a top end.  It can easily do 2500 -2650.

[AtlLaw]

Mudding up the issue with senseless rhetoric

Why Freeze!     Thank you my boy!  I appreciate the compliment!    I don't get many which hurts since I make my living mudding up issues with senseless rhetoric!   

What in the heck does this have do do with a deer cartridge?

Because my 338/06 is a great deer cartridge of course!     I use 180 gr. Nosler BT's and they can be driven, so Hodgdon says, at 3000 FPS!  Unfortunately Nosler discontinued that bullet and while I've probably got enough to last my lifetime, if anybody sees any, pick them up for me!

Your guys must be dumbacrats,

Now we been nice and friendly like and you have to go getting nasty!  They ain't nuthin in me resemblin no 'acrat!     Well, I did vote for George Wallace more then once...   

[Freezer]

  No nasty intended (well maybe just a little)    

    I just found it strange to be reading about 333 Jeffery, 9 Mauser, 9.3x61, 338-06, 300 Dakota and 358 for someone who wants a deer gun only!  The fore mentioned calibers would work fine as a deer, elk, moose and bear cartridges but is far more than you'd need to drop even a giant Mullie, not to mention the recoil and weight of the rifle.  For that matter I find the 7 Mag more cartridge than most hunters need for deer just as I feel the 243 is at very best marginal for deer.  I won't knock the 8 Mauser because to do so would be like knocking the 30-06 though I contend there are slightly better cartridges for deer if that is the only thing you want the cartridge to do. 
   If someone is trying to find one deer cartridge chances are they don't hand load.  The cartridge they chose should be readily available in any store.  That would make the 270 Win a hands down winner and eliminate my favorite cartridges 

    As for politics we can all screw up now and again, I voted for H Ross Perot once   And I didn't have sexual realtions with that woman.

[mcwoodduck]

I broke up with a girl in College cause she voted for Perot.  Figured if she was dumb enough to throw away her vote and help to get slick Willie in office I could do better.
Oh well I'll at some point have to admit that I voted for a Democrat.  I plan to vote for McCain in 08.  Why is our choices are a millitant pinko commie and a so so pinko commie liberal.

[TribReady]

Don't you hate it when you're reading multiple posts and post in the wrong spot?          


As far as a deer cartridge only, I'd go with 7-08, but the 270 may be the all around best with ammo available everywhere (had to add this to stay on topic    )

[jro45]

The deer cartridge I would use the 270 with a Burris scope and shoot a 130gr bullet. It could reach out to 600 yds.

[Freezer]

    I 'm stuck here in Kaliforniastan working for the Peoples Republic Of Bazerkeley  But I must gladly admit I'm the most evil person that ever roamed their streets!  I'm a blue collar, conservative, praticing Catholic Christian, Republician, Boy Scout Leader, that had two sons in the Sea Scouts, a military veteran and a card carrying member of the National Rifle Assoc and California Rifle and Pistol Assoc.  If it weren't for me these nut cases out here might think they're right. (OK....correct)

    That said back to the subject.  I hand load so caliber choices for me can get very interesting.  I own a Rem 700 chambered in 280 with a 4x12 Leupold.  I feel I can do any hunting in the lower fouty-eight with that.  A while back I had to make a decision between a BLR in 7-08 or a Savage 99f in 308, either I would be scoped with a 2x7 Leupold.  As a matter of practicality I kept the 308.  If something doesn't go right on a hunt (I always take two rifles) I wanted a rifle I can get ammo for at the local sports shop no matter where I am.  280, 25-06, 7TCU and 7.65x53 (some other rifles I own) just aren't that common cartridges in a mom and pop store.  No matter where I go to hunt the 308 Savage goes with me and I won't feel limited with it.
    As you can see I like some exotic calibers (7TCU in a Rem Model 7 being my favorite blacktail rifle) but I'm not a big bore or magnum fan.  Heavy recoil makes me flinch.      My next project is a 1908 Arg Mauser (7.65x53) to be re-barreled and chambered in 6.5x55 Swede.  They shoot moose with that in Europe!  For a hand loader I feel it's one of the most versatile cartridges you can own followed closely by the 260 Rem.  Alas neither is a good cartridge for someone who will limit themself to one rifle and I doubt mom and pop will carry it.
    For the one gun person the 270 will do triple duty, lite bullets for ground hog to 400 yards, heaver for deer and antelope to 400 yards and the heaviest bonded bullets could be used for caribou, black bear and elk should the need ever arise and mom and pop should have all those choices on their shelf.  As a matter of fact use your deer ammo on ground hog and you'll never have to readjust the scope and it will be good pratice for deer season.    
    The only question should be which Leupold, 3x9 or 4x12?  Forget about the VX III a person who limits themself won't want or need to spend the extra cash!