What caliber next?

[Northwoods Hunter]

OK...I am basically a Deer/Bear hunter living in Big woods country. Shots are fairly close in thick cover and the bucks can top the 200lb mark (when you are lucky) :lol: I probably will go on a few Antelope, Muley or Elk hunts.

I already have a 7mm 08 Featherweight 70... .280 Rem and a .270 Sako 75 SS Lam. These are all more than adequate but very similar ballistically.
I want to add an agile, accurate rifle with a little more "thump" to round off my arsenal thats not a load to carry in the thick woods... maybe a .35 Whelen? .358? .308? 30.06?in a Mountain Rifle? Pump? or BLR lever?

Help...What would you choose? :?:

 

[Blaine]

Since you already have a 270 and 280, the 30-06 would not offer much more. I would go with a 300 win mag. That way if you ever have a chance to go elk hunting or something like that, you would be all set.

Blaine

 

[remingtonman_25_06]

I have kinda been thinking about getting a thumper for the same thing. Hunting elk in the timber. I was looking at the .444 Marlin, the 45-70, and the .450. The 35 Whelen would also be a good one. I think they are all capable of 200 yard shots. I personally dont have one, but I would lean towards a .444 in a Marlin.

 

[roysclockgun]

I do not shoot a 45-70, however, my friends who own them and reload, love the 45-70 and claim that they lose nothing when compared to the 450Marlin and 444. Modern handloads for the 45-70 make the newer 45s like the 450Marlin, unneccessary.

 

[Tom1911]

Northwoods Hunter,

I own a Guide Gun in .45/70 Gov't, and it is an extremely powerful gun. Right after it was released I read where that model had been used to harvest elephant! Make no mistake, properly loaded it is more powerful than the .338 Win Mag! However, there "ain't no" free ride, and with "magnum" loads in a .45/70 Gov't, it will literally kick the heck out of the shooter. BTW, I have been using Speer 400 grain bullets with it...until Nosler produces a similar one!

I ain't shot an animal with it...yet! That is because I have had shoulder surgery, and I am still wary about workin' up huntin' loads. But it does make an excellent fishing companion in areas where griz roams. Incidently, I have read that the Guide Gun in .45/70 Gov't is extremely popular in Alaska.

I have a .338 Win Mag, and if I can ever work out a brown bear trip, I would take my Guide Gun!

If you're looking for a substantial step up in power, a Guide Gun in .45/70 Gov't shooting "magnum" loads is the way to go! There ain't many rounds offering more power!


Take care,

Tom

 

[FOTIS]

300 mag..take your pick

 

[JD338]

300 Mag or 338 Mag would give you a nice jump in horsepower and cover long range hunting requirements.
45-70 woould be a thumper out to 200 yds with the right rifle/scope set up.

Regards,

JD338

 

[Richracer1]

If you are looking for a gun for elk, just load some 160 partitions in either your 7mm, 280 or 270. These will work just fine for close range. If your looking for something to chase bear, then the bigger calibers would work better. I dropped a nice cow elk last fall w/my 270WSM load w/160pt. Shot was about 50-75yds.

 

[roysclockgun]

Given that many modern bullets have more integrity than did the older variety, is 160gr still considered to be the lightest that should be used to take elk? Nosler Accubonds claim 60% to 65% weight retention. Solids claim even higher weight retention. Does this not indicate that one could use the same 140gr bullet for all deer, to include elk and moose? Would it not be advantaqeous to load one bullet for all deer hunting?
Hunters, for years, have been using the .270Win, loaded with 150gr Soft Point bullets for elk and moose. Are the bonded bullets of today not far better then the old Soft Point types?

 

[Tom1911]

roysclockgun,

Given that many modern bullets have more integrity than did the older variety, is 160gr still considered to be the lightest that should be used to take elk? Nosler Accubonds claim 60% to 65% weight retention. Solids claim even higher weight retention. Does this not indicate that one could use the same 140gr bullet for all deer, to include elk and moose? Would it not be advantaqeous to load one bullet for all deer hunting?
Hunters, for years, have been using the .270Win, loaded with 150gr Soft Point bullets for elk and moose. Are the bonded bullets of today not far better then the old Soft Point types?

Seasoned with age, I, too, see the logic of using one bullet for all ungulates, if possible.

The primary reason I would not want to go lighter than 150 grain bullets for elk when using my 7MM Rem Mag is because of velocity loss, which would limit accuracy and range. A longer bullet retains velocity better, which keeps the bullet spinning at greater velocity which allows for greater retained accuracy. Fact is, on impact, I doubt an elk would be able to tell the difference of what grain bullet did him in.! :grin:

A 140 grain .284 compares nicely with a 130 grain .277 bullet, and we all know the reputation of the famed .270 Win shooting 130 grain bullets.



Take care,

Tom

 

[roysclockgun]

Tom1911 wrote: "The primary reason I would not want to go lighter than 150 grain bullets for elk when using my 7MM Rem Mag is because of velocity loss....."

So you are saying that even though I can launch a 140gr bullet with faster MV from my 7mmRemMag, that down range, the 150gr bullet will be faster then the 140gr bullet? At what range would the 150gr overtake and surpass the speed of the 140gr?

 

[Northwoods Hunter]

Given the same level of pressure that is not possible.
A 150 gr loaded at the same pressure level out of a 7MM mag will have more downrange energy than a 140 from a .270, because the 7MM mag has more powder capacity.

But most people miss an important factor...INERTIA....thats what KNOCK DOWN POWER is.

Remember I'm talking UNDER 100 yds for this application.

If you look at simply speed and (POTENTIAL) energy a 130gr .270 bullet would seem to better a 200 gr bullet from .35 Whelen after 300yds. I will garantee that the 200gr bullet will be harder to stop by tissue/bone than the 130 gr pill, and hit with a LOT more authority.
I have shot over 20 Bear and guided clients on several more. Can you kill one with a 140gr bullet? Definitely. Would I prefer you to use 200gr bullet? Definitely!
Several inches of tallow and fat will absorb energy and the 130 gr loses it much fster than the 200gr.

Light bullets shed energy when encountering muscle and bone at a much faster rate...

 

[roysclockgun]

NOthwoodsHunter wrote: "But most people miss an important factor...INERTIA....thats what KNOCK DOWN POWER is. ......"

I appreciate what you wrote, however, my question was more concerning the idea that because "bonded" bullets retain more of their weight as they penetrate the bodies of the game, we should therefore be able to begin with a lighter bullet to achieve the same same penetration and "inertia". One example of this would be the fact that when I used to dig bullets out of dead deer, in many instances the old designed jackets had completely separated from the lead cores and therefore much of the "inertia" of the bullet was lost when that jacket stripped off the core and the retained weight needed to achieve effective penetration was lost! No? Conversely, with bonded bullets we can expect that the bullet will not fragment to the same degree and will hold together to a much higher degree, retaining weight and therefore retaining the ability to penetrate through inertia. No? In conclusion, my thought is that since bonded bullets do a much better job, in terms of retaining their integrity, then we used to be able to expect from older designed soft point bullets, then we may be able to go from using a 180gr bullet to using a 140gr or 150gr bullet. Starting with a lighter bullet can provide the opportunity to have higher MV and therefore, a flatter trajectory. The flatter trajectory removes much of the worry about "bullet drop", "hold over" and the high hump flight of a slower bullet. Perhaps I am all wet, but what I have written is based on field experience hunting deer, pronghorn and elk and a bit of varmint hunting, where targets are very small and flat shooting is very important.

 

[Northwoods Hunter]

One example of this would be the fact that when I used to dig bullets out of dead deer, in many instances the old designed jackets had completely separated from the lead cores and therefore much of the "inertia" of the bullet was lost when that jacket stripped off the core and the retained weight needed to achieve effective penetration was lost! No?

I too appreciate your input....the fact is that up here there is no bullet to "dig out". That leads me to believe you have a tendancy of using light to med calibers? Probably more open terrain.

Between my family and friends we have skinned and butchered 100s of game animals over the years and the bullets simply go through. The typical set up here is a .308 , 30.06 , 35 Rem, 45-70...bullets typically range from 165 to 300 gr. The deer/bear dont go very far at all. mostly bang/flop.

One of my friends (LongWinters)started reloading using 140 gr Accubonds out of a 7MM 08 last year....two kills at 50-60yds....the AccuBond bullets blew apart without exit. The deer went short distances...but they were only young 140# bucks.

I shot an Antelope this fall at 323yds with my "western" rifle...a .280 Rem. The 140gr AccuBond entered behind the rib cage and separated as it traversed the body leaving two holes exiting either side of the sternum . The starting velocity of my load was 2,800 fps but should have slowed down some in that distance.

I have always used Nosler...Solid base and Partition without fail. But with the Accubonds I will use 160-200gr from now on and I'm sure they will hold up better than the 120s and 140s and be just as deadly.

Just my opinion based on my experiiences...close shots... in this tyoe of thick terrain.

If you ever read of the Benoit family hunting in the Adirondack Mts...they strongly believed in the 30-06 with 180gr bullets for big bucks in heavy cover.

On the Wyoming Plains you could talk me into a .280...but I think I'll make it a 140 gr Partition next time! :grin:

 

[longwinters]

Actually I did get exit holes . . . both very small. See my post on it from back in Nov. But by the size of the exit holes I would guess that the petals were gone when the bullets exited the animals. No doubt the wound channels were very good, but it would be tough for any bullet to stay together when shot through the front shoulder (quartering towards) of a deer at 40 yards.

Long

 

[Northwoods Hunter]

Thats what RoysClock was concerned about...when the petals tear off you have major loss of weight retension...I.E. If you had found the remaining core it would weigh far less than the 140 gr you started with.
I suspect the same thing happened with my Antelope...the core exiting separately from the front end.

How about the other buck? Did you shoot them both hrough the shoulder?

Petals aren't supposed to tear off a "bonded" bullet. :roll:

 

[Jeff Olsen]

OK...I am basically a Deer/Bear hunter living in Big woods country. Shots are fairly close in thick cover and the bucks can top the 200lb mark (when you are lucky) :lol: I probably will go on a few Antelope, Muley or Elk hunts.

I already have a 7mm 08 Featherweight 70... .280 Rem and a .270 Sako 75 SS Lam. These are all more than adequate but very similar ballistically.
I want to add an agile, accurate rifle with a little more "thump" to round off my arsenal thats not a load to carry in the thick woods... maybe a .35 Whelen? .358? .308? 30.06?in a Mountain Rifle? Pump? or BLR lever?

Help...What would you choose? :?:

A BLR lever in 358 Winchester. Get the new one with the pistol-grip stock; it handles recoil and mounts your head into position better than the straight stock I've had both.

Or, a BLR in 325 WSM. I love mine.

Or, a Model 7 Remington rebarreled to 358 Win.

That's my vote!

-jeff

 

[Mighty Peace]

I will suggest a 300WM-Sako m75SS or LS model would be sweet, or maybe try a custom caliber like a 338-06. I very tempted on this one my self, along with a hunting buddy. We will see!

Good luck