Am I over thinking this?

[kooch]

I'll admit, some of this is simply a reason to change for the fun of it.

 

[elkguide]

I'll admit, some of this is simply a reason to change for the fun of it.

"How many more guns do you need?"
The answer is very simple....... "Just ONE more!"

 

[RockAndSage]

I'll have to look at this cartridge some more. The Fudd in me is skeptical of the 22s, despite the proof on that thread and what I've seen them do to a man. Old ways and "what dad taught me" are tough to overcome.

For sure. The issue for me when I first got on here and saw all of this, was what the limitations were with these small cartridges. I've seen .220 Swift and .22-250 smoke big game animals since I was a little kid, but when I got on here and saw people doing .223 it caused some hesitations. I knew the round could do it "just fine"...but how far out? On just how big of an animal?

Dig into that post, and you'll see an elk killed at something like 740 yards with a .223. That put the issue to rest for me, especially given that the wound photos are in there too - with witnesses to the shot. Because that's also 2x my ethical distances as a competent shooter - it'll kill anything I'd hunt, at distances 2x I'll take a shot at. Also, IIRC, there's at least one polar bear and/or a brown bear killed with .223 in that thread. And moose.

Bullet selection matters a lot, and the tipped match bullets seem to do the best. Especially Sierra's Tipped Match King bullets. But at least one of those bears was killed with an FMJ.

Something to keep in mind with all this, is that there's a virtuous cycle that happens with the smaller cartridges, esp .223: less recoil means you shoot it better in general (less recoil, less muzzle blast, less flinch/anticipation), and it means you shoot more per session comfortably. It also means you can shoot it in odd field-realistic positions easier. The more you shoot per session, the better you get, and faster - and that makes you want to shoot it more. Cheap ammo makes you want to shoot it more too. So you shoot it more often, and more per session. And you're challenging yourself even more, with smaller targets, field-expedient positions, faster shot times, etc. Next thing you know, you can thread a needle with that gun in ways you just couldn't with a heavier-recoiling gun, and are just far better as a shooter.

All of that tends to get lost in the discussion - the virtuous cycle, and its compounding effects.

 

[BCDJR]

Thanks again guys. I'm going to hunt with the .270 this Fall and get going on this rifle after I unload a few safe queens to make space and raise some funds!

If it all works out I'll pick up a twin rifle for the Mrs once the new rifle is sorted, probably in a different color so we can tell them apart.

You can have a muzzle break put on your .270 and try it.

 

[kooch]

Pencil thin barrel so it'd require some sort of adapter.

 

[TaperPin]

In your shoes I wouldn’t hesitate to get a 243 and call it good.

 

[HairyScandinavian]

Here you go OP, $630 minus a $75 rebate. 243 1:8 twist.

https://www.eurooptic.com/jrtxe315-tikka-tikka-t3x-lite-243-win-syn-224--barrel-mpn-jr

 

[kooch]

Here you go OP, $630 minus a $75 rebate. 243 1:8 twist.

https://www.eurooptic.com/jrtxe315-tikka-tikka-t3x-lite-243-win-syn-224--barrel-mpn-jr

Too soon!!! Thanks though. I'm not broke, but I need to thin the herd some before I get a new pet. I'm going to get rid of a couple that I just don't use. At that price, I could get a .223 AND a .243.

 

[MolokoMan]

Go for a 6 creedmoor. I would look into the Seekins PH3 personally. What a great brand and gun. They are a little pricey around $1.8k I think. Worth it in my opinion.