6 PRC recoil vs. 7-300 NMI recoil. Through the scope.

[huntnful]

what? the 7-300 nmi showed about double the muzzle jump of the 6 prc. that's exactly what the "RS narrative" is about.

Absolutely. I wasn’t attempting to disprove anything. I just wanted to see if it affected POI under equal shooting positions that weren’t prone or 100% stable. That 6 PRC is also a pound heavier than the 7-300

 

[Ucsdryder]

what? the 7-300 nmi showed about double the muzzle jump of the 6 prc. that's exactly what the "RS narrative" is about.

1. You can’t shoot anything bigger than a 6mm accurately in “hunting positions”. Look at the group posted.

2. You can’t spot shots with anything bigger than 6mm. 10x at 275 yards proves otherwise.

Don’t forget the 6mm was heavier.

 

[huntnful]

1. You can’t shoot anything bigger than a 6mm accurately in “hunting positions”. Look at the group posted.

2. You can’t spot shots with anything bigger than 6mm. 10x at 275 yards proves otherwise.

Don’t forget the 6mm was heavier.

I need to work on that bipod only positioning. It’s good enough fir stability of the rifle and breaking the shot. But terrible for recoil management. I may just shoot that kneeling as well next.

Seated just doesn’t feel like I can get any body weight behind the gun to mitigate the recoil.

I’ll continue to work on that one for sure. I know the bullet is going where the shot breaks at least. I would just like to see it better.

 

[WeiserBucks]

Patently false, not conducted in novel terrain . . . . . . . . . . grin.

 

[Ucsdryder]

I need to work on that bipod only positioning. It’s good enough fir stability of the rifle and breaking the shot. But terrible for recoil management. I may just shoot that kneeling as well next.

Seated just doesn’t feel like I can get any body weight behind the gun to mitigate the recoil.

I’ll continue to work on that one for sure. I know the bullet is going where the shot breaks at least. I would just like to see it better.

My issue with seated is that I’m no flexible. I can’t sit Indian style without leaning back against something. I much prefer seated with my feet out to the side. I’m not as stable kneeling. My favorite by far is Indian style with my back against a rock/tree and my pack under my armpit with the gun butt resting on the pack and a tripod out front.

 

[huntnful]

My issue with seated is that I’m no flexible. I can’t sit Indian style without leaning back against something. I much prefer seated weight my feet out to the side. I’m not as stable kneeling. My favorite by far is Indian style with my back against a rock/tree and my pack under my armpit with the gun butt resting on the pack and a tripod out front.

Yes I intentionally didn’t want a back rest, because I wanted more instability to test POI differences.

A back rest for me is night and day with recoil management and stability.

I try to find a backrest for when I make coyote stands for sure

 

[huntnful]

Patently false, not conducted in novel terrain . . . . . . . . . . grin.

I only hunt from gravel roads… lol.

 

[WeiserBucks]

I only hunt from gravel roads… lol.

I try to stick to pavement, less wear and tear on my cyber truck and way more comfortable for prone/kneeling shots than gravel.

 

[mxgsfmdpx]

My issue with seated is that I’m no flexible. I can’t sit Indian style without leaning back against something. I much prefer seated with my feet out to the side. I’m not as stable kneeling. My favorite by far is Indian style with my back against a rock/tree and my pack under my armpit with the gun butt resting on the pack and a tripod out front.

You look really young for a 65 year old man.

 

[Ucsdryder]

You look really young for a 65 year old man.

Was that a compliment?

I remember in elementary school the PE teacher yelling at me for not touching my toes when stretching. I’ve never gotten past about mid calf.

 

[mxgsfmdpx]

what? the 7-300 nmi showed about double the muzzle jump of the 6 prc. that's exactly what the "RS narrative" is about.

Folks will in a way, see what they want to see, whether it's more than double the muzzle rise, or a skilled shooter like @huntnful is, getting back on target quickly.

Add in adrenalin, camouflaged terrain, steep terrain, etc. is where the shit shows can happen. I've never seen anybody on this site say "you can't spot shots" or "get back on target quickly" with heavier recoiling guns. All I've seen is "it's much easier to spot shots and get back on target or stay on target the entire time"... Which is true in what I've seen.

 

[Schmo]

1. You can’t shoot anything bigger than a 6mm accurately in “hunting positions”. Look at the group posted.

2. You can’t spot shots with anything bigger than 6mm. 10x at 275 yards proves otherwise.

You’re misquoting what has been said. It’s not been said that it’s impossible. What has been said is that it is easier to shoot accurately and spot shots with smaller calibers. Tell me it’s just as easy to shoot small groups with a 300WM as a 223. Tell me it’s just as easy to spot shots. It’s not. You know it, and everyone else that has shot enough knows it.

 

[Timberline001]

Love your stuff. It’s great seeing it side by side like that. I agree with you on muzzle brakes. Cans are great for the smaller rounds but I’ll continue to run a 4 port brake on my magnum and wear plugs around my neck when I’m hunting areas I feel the magnum is needed.

 

[huntnful]

Folks will in a way, see what they want to see, whether it's more than double the muzzle rise, or a skilled shooter like @huntnful is, getting back on target quickly.

Add in adrenalin, camouflaged terrain, steep terrain, etc. is where the shit shows can happen. I've never seen anybody on this site say "you can't spot shots" or "get back on target quickly" with heavier recoiling guns. All I've seen is "it's much easier to spot shots and get back on target or stay on target the entire time"... Which is true in what I've seen.

Oh absolutely. I wasn’t testing or trying to disprove any of those things.

I was testing for significant POI change in non optimum positions between the two recoiling platforms.

 

[Macintosh]

@huntnful this is great, thanks for posting. Its been a bit of a narrative that “people shoot lower recoiling rifles better”, but without hard data its hard to have a “productive argument” () about it. This is one of the first times Ive seen anyone do more than blow hot air at it though, so good on you.

I think it would be really interesting to do 1 or more of the timed hunting rifle drills using both rifles. I know there is some disagreement in how important the amount of time is for various people, but that at least tests both a first shot and follow up shot from a variety of positions that are standardized so it would give a quantifiable baseline for the factors that the low-recoil crowd says are important. I tried posting up a challenge like this a couple months ago but it was hunting season and no one was interested. Maybe it’s time?

 

[huntnful]

@huntnful this is great, thanks for posting. Its been a bit of a narrative that “people shoot lower recoiling rifles better”, but without hard data its hard to have a “productive argument” () about it. This is one of the first times Ive seen anyone do more than blow hot air at it though, so good on you.

I think it would be really interesting to do 1 or more of the timed hunting rifle drills using both rifles. I know there is some disagreement in how important the amount of time is for various people, but that at least tests both a first shot and follow up shot from a variety of positions that are standardized so it would give a quantifiable baseline for the factors that the low-recoil crowd says are important. I tried posting up a challenge like this a couple months ago but it was hunting season and no one was interested. Maybe it’s time?

I absolutely plan to do that as well. Some form of timed mutli shot/position type stuff with the equipment that I normally hunt with.

 

[Deadspace]

Haha I’m sure if I ran groups, it would be slower with the 7-300 and the 7-300 hits may open up slightly. But no, I don’t think it’s drastic as it’s proposed sometimes. With a properly weighted rifle for each cartridge/caliber anyways.

That’s what I’ve been thinking lately. I’m not sure how to calculate it but how heavy does a 7-300NMI shooting 180s have to be to have similar recoil to a 6 creed shooting the 115s in a 7lb suppressed rifle?

I was shooting my 6 creed and 6.5 PRC the other day and they both felt very close in recoil and the only real difference I noticed was the PRC would jump up and over a few mils and the 6 creed just moved up a couple mils. Both suppressed and within a pound of each other and each were shooting stout hand loads. One with 115s and the other with 156s. Both in Rokstoks as well.

 

[huntnful]

You’re misquoting what has been said. It’s not been said that it’s impossible. What has been said is that it is easier to shoot accurately and spot shots with smaller calibers. Tell me it’s just as easy to shoot small groups with a 300WM as a 223. Tell me it’s just as easy to spot shots. It’s not. You know it, and everyone else that has shot enough knows it.

It’s absolutely easier to spot shots with a lesser recoiling rifle.

The small groups thing, is a bit skewed from my perspective, after now spending a decent amount of time behind small and large cartridges.

But it’s important to make it clear that I’m not talking about a tikka ultra light in .223 and a tikka ultralight in 300 win mag. Because I think that’s what most people try to compare and how it’s rationalized I feel.

A properly built and weighted 30 cal is a piece of cake to shoot, AND shoot small groups with.

EASIER than a 22CM? No. Just as easy? I haven’t proven otherwise.

Just talking group shooting, I really don’t expect to shoot any smaller groups with my 22CM than my 7-300 NMI or 300 NMI when I’m legitimately just shooting for groups. They’re different weights of course though.

And also distance is rarely factored when talking about this. Shooting for groups we’re talking here, I could never consistently outshoot either of my larger guns at 1000 yards, with my smaller guns. The environmentals just affect them too much. Making a random impact with both is whatever. But shooting actual groups, the big guns shoot smaller during a random day at the range at 1000 yards.


So here’s my thoughts prior to this test:

I KNOW my larger guns shoot small groups

I KNOW they consistently shoot smaller groups at longer distances than my smaller guns, I can still spot the impacts, AND have more error forgiveness in wind call. Wound channel is debatable, so we’ll leave that out.

So that covers close and long range for actually hitting shit.

What I did not know was how instability at those mid ranges would affect my POI. That’s what I was testing.

So far, for my hunting style 0-1000 yard western hunting, I cannot prove that a small gun is going to put more animals on the ground for me.

That is with guns that I’m willing to carry, with supports I'm willing to use and carry, at distances I’m willing to shoot, in the reasonable time durations I will take to make those shots at the various distances, in the variety of terrain that I’ve hunted in.

It’s important realize that this is just one persons perspective and a small amount of testing. I am just testing and sharing as I go.

Yeah I could rack the bolt faster on a SA and yeah I’d have a little less reticle movement when the shot breaks allowing a slightly faster follow up, but I haven’t found that to be an animal costing issue at all during my hunts.

Different circumstances and hunt styles for different people may absolutely have different results.

 

[huntnful]

That’s what I’ve been thinking lately. I’m not sure how to calculate it but how heavy does a 7-300NMI shooting 180s have to be to have similar recoil to a 6 creed shooting the 115s in a 7lb suppressed rifle?

I was shooting my 6 creed and 6.5 PRC the other day and they both felt very close in recoil and the only real difference I noticed was the PRC would jump up and over a few mils and the 6 creed just moved up a couple mils. Both suppressed and within a pound of each other and each were shooting stout hand loads. One with 115s and the other with 156s. Both in Rokstoks as well.

Good question. I think to have equal recoil, the weight would have to be insane. But to have manageable recoil, not so much. I’ll do the calculations in a bit!

 

[RockAndSage]

It’s absolutely easier to spot shots with a lesser recoiling rifle.

The small groups thing, is a bit skewed from my perspective, after now spending a decent amount of time behind small and large cartridges.

But it’s important to make it clear that I’m not talking about a tikka ultra light in .223 and a tikka ultralight in 300 win mag. Because I think that’s what most people try to compare and how it’s rationalized I feel.

A properly built and weighted 30 cal is a piece of cake to shoot, AND shoot small groups with.

EASIER than a 22CM? No. Just as easy? I haven’t proven otherwise.

Just talking group shooting, I really don’t expect to shoot any smaller groups with my 22CM than my 7-300 NMI or 300 NMI when I’m legitimately just shooting for groups. They’re different weights of course though.

And also distance is rarely factored when talking about this. Shooting for groups we’re talking here, I could never consistently outshoot either of my larger guns at 1000 yards, with my smaller guns. The environmentals just affect them too much. Making a random impact with both is whatever. But shooting actual groups, the big guns shoot smaller during a random day at the range at 1000 yards.


So here’s my thoughts prior to this test:

I KNOW my larger guns shoot small groups

I KNOW they consistently shoot smaller groups at longer distances than my smaller guns, I can still spot the impacts, AND have more error forgiveness in wind call. Wound channel is debatable, so we’ll leave that out.

So that covers close and long range for actually hitting shit.

What I did not know was how instability at those mid ranges would affect my POI. That’s what I was testing.

So far, for my hunting style 0-1000 yard western hunting, I cannot prove that a small gun is going to put more animals on the ground for me.

That is with guns that I’m willing to carry, with supports I'm willing to use and carry, at distances I’m willing to shoot, in the reasonable time durations I will take to make those shots at the various distances, in the variety of terrain that I’ve hunted in.

It’s important realize that this is just one persons perspective and a small amount of testing. I am just testing and sharing as I go.

Yeah I could rack the bolt faster on a SA and yeah I’d have a little less reticle movement when the shot breaks allowing a slightly faster follow up, but I haven’t found that to be an animal costing issue at all during my hunts.

Different circumstances and hunt styles for different people may absolutely have different results.

Great stuff. One factor I'd appreciate hearing a bit about, is the amount of formal long-distance rifle training you've had (whether an actual class or an experienced mentor/instructor teaching you on the side as a friend, etc), and how often you practice and the types of round count you might get per session or per year on the bigger guns. In short, what kind of serious instruction and follow-up practice is necessary to shoot these guns at this level?

The more I've been paying attention to all sides of this argument, the more I seem to be seeing a parallel with aviation - lots of time in low-performance platforms before gradually increasing in size and capability, as you get certain performance benchmarks of your own. There's a lot to be said with small calibers in just increasing your overall round-count due to cost and recoil and not developing a flinch, and I think the average shooter gains a lot from just going out and doing it on their own. But if someone wants to reach your level with a big magnum - what kind of training and performance benchmarks are along the way?