Caliber Selection... Again

[Hall256]

No he dont you just made that up.....

He probably did....that is why I always remember a very wise quote from our 16th president Abe Lincoln "never believe a 100% the information found on the internet". If Lincoln said it, it must be good advice.

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G891A using Tapatalk

 

[16Bore]

He probably did....that is why I always remember a very wise quote from our 16th president Abe Lincoln "never believe a 100% the information found on the internet". If Lincoln said it, it must be good advice.

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G891A using Tapatalk

Well of course I made it up. That's gold, Jerry. Gold I tell you....

Man, I guess for my moose hunt in the Yukon next year I should just throw my Cooper .300 win mag in the ocean and buy a 6.5 Creedmore. When the outfitter asks me what happened to my .300 we discussed, I will just show him this thread. I'm sure he will change his outlook then.

You'll get cool points.

 

[luke moffat]

Man, I guess for my moose hunt in the Yukon next year I should just throw my Cooper .300 win mag in the ocean and buy a 6.5 Creedmore. When the outfitter asks me what happened to my .300 we discussed, I will just show him this thread. I'm sure he will change his outlook then.

Growing up here in Alaska and seeing several moose fall to a 243 and knowing several people that only hunt moose with a 243 I would have no qualms about using my 6.5 creedmoor on a moose. Heck the 6.5 shooting 143s is better than the my 308 with 130s and I know that works just fine as well.

I gotta ask how many moose have you seen shot to base your opinion off of?

 

[luke moffat]

Again how many moose have you seen killed? What are you basing this off of?

I have seen roughly 50-60 moose shot (hardly makes me an authority on anything)...only about 20 or so of those where shot with magnums.

Maybe not a huge sample size and likely not as many moose as you have seen killed no doubt, but just my limited experience.

I agree I likely would have a seen a lot more moose killed if I wasn't running up my post count up here....who knows maybe even seen as many killed as you??

I'm not saying your 300 WM is a bad choice by any means. Heck I have seen it work on 6 or 7 moose just fine. Just saying they moose weren't any more dead than the ones shot with a 243, 7-08, or 308.

 

[GKPrice]

And I would also add, the folks whose opinions I value most are the ones who are up there with one rifle, maybe two. And they are out doing actual work every day, getting their hands dirty and their backs sore....not running up thousands of post counts as an authority on an internet forum.

I

If I've learned anything since joining Rokslide I've learned to contemplate what I say BEFORE I put it in comment form - There are many "worlds" out there when you consider "my world" as a basis to establish opinions - As example, I haven't been a very big advocate of shooting elk with the .243 or even the 6.5 CM, but after contemplation I recalled that right after my Uncle emigrated to BC Canada he saw nothing but .243 and .22 Hornets in local loggers hands, used for deer and black bears, as a landed emigrant he had to wait several years before allowed to possess a firearm but he became close friends with several of the loggers living as neighbors at the end of the inlet, hunted with them ALOT for years and saw what a skilled hunter and marksman could do to a big black bear with a .243, Brno if I remember right - When my Uncle finally got his permit they all teased him for shooting a 30.06 - We're straying off topic here but think about which might be tougher to kill, a moose or coastal black bear .... As Luke says, "might not be the best choice but what works, works", who are any of us to condemn or even judge another's choices ?

 

[GKPrice]

And I would also add, the folks whose opinions I value most are the ones who are up there with one rifle, maybe two. And they are out doing actual work every day, getting their hands dirty and their backs sore....not running up thousands of post counts as an authority on an internet forum.

It would appear that you've been chatting with one of "those" right here ??

 

[GKPrice]

I

If I've learned anything since joining Rokslide I've learned to contemplate what I say BEFORE I put it in comment form - There are many "worlds" out there when you consider "my world" as a basis to establish opinions - As example, I haven't been a very big advocate of shooting elk with the .243 or even the 6.5 CM, but after contemplation I recalled that right after my Uncle emigrated to BC Canada he saw nothing but .243 and .22 Hornets in local loggers hands, used for deer and black bears, as a landed emigrant he had to wait several years before allowed to possess a firearm but he became close friends with several of the loggers living as neighbors at the end of the inlet, hunted with them ALOT for years and saw what a skilled hunter and marksman could do to a big black bear with a .243, Brno if I remember right - When my Uncle finally got his permit they all teased him for shooting a 30.06 - We're straying off topic here but think about which might be tougher to kill, a moose or coastal black bear .... As Luke says, "might not be the best choice but what works, works", who are any of us to condemn or even judge another's choices ?

I just remembered that even in my 20's I was sort of opinionated - because I liked those loggers and spent a lot of time up in B.C. with my uncle I took it upon myself to get a brand new Browning BBR (weight was not an issue in this case, these boys were "ANIMALS" and besides, lightweight rifles were not in vogue yet) in .270 Win, took it up and we gave it to the one brother that my Uncle had become closest to, he never used it, he shot it "a little" and we decided he didn't feel he needed it, always used the 243 and always killed stuff with it (.22 Hornet was their "deer gun")

I APLOGIZE !! I WANDERED OFF TOPIC ... AGAIN

 

[GKPrice]

I responded to another posters comparison of 600 yard stats between a 6.5CM and a light for caliber projectile for a .270WSM, and stated that I don't believe that such a metric (600 yards) is appropriate for declaring the 6.5CM superior to the .270 WSM in the context of big game hunting (the majority of which occurs at far closer ranges).

Then here comes Luke and you attacking me. I have not condemned anyone or their caliber. Yet anytime I state my preference, you guys attack me and say that I am putting people down? LOL. You and Luke may be the authorities on this forum and in the eyes of your followers here, but I am not impressed with either of you, or anyone who acts like you guys do. You are both obviously very insecure people who are worried about what everyone thinks and use this forum to put other people down and feed your egos.

Key part here might be "stated that I don't believe" - "attack" ? really ? simmer down there Man ! we're all fellow Roksliders here ...... if I can do it most anyone can

 

[luke moffat]

Doc,

I am very sorry you feel I attacked you for your caliber choice. That was not my intention at all.

Your 300 WM is more than capable for moose and will work just fine.

I am not sure why you felt I attacked you simply by giving my experience in the game you are hunting. I am far from an expert and never claimed to be.

What exactly did I do to attack you or make you feel as though I was insecure?

Simply saying other options other than magnums kill moose in my experience hardly makes me insecure. I apologize for sharing what little knowledge I have with you on the topic that goes against your experience with killing moose.

It certainly wasn't my intention to piss ya off or make you feel inferior. I just assume you were basing your opinion on caliber choice off of actually seeing moose killed.

I also don't recall seeing myself revert to name calling nor accusing you of insecure and such....that seems much more of an attack than anything I posted by simply sharing my experience. No different than what you did sharing your experience for the caliber you prefer based on the moose you've seen killed.

Doesn't make either of us more correct in any way. Truth is any of those calibers will work just fine so its just fun to pick what you feel comfortable with. For you it apparently is a 300WM and there is certainly nothing wrong with that. I wish you the best on your hunt and would still share a campfire with you certainly.

 

[ScottinPA]

Gotta throw it out here - plain vanilla .30-06.

 

[wildwilderness]

If you want a light weight go short action, short barrel. If you want elk as an option at the ranges you listed the easy choice is:

.308 win with a Suppressor! Forget the muzzle brake, way too loud. You could go with an 18" barrel, with the Suppressor it will get the speed back up, mild recoil and sound. Your wife will love it, and you can shoot heavy bullets for elk, 165gr or go light 130-150 gr. for deer just fine.

 

[robby denning]

Doc, easy man, I saw no "attacks" on you any more than on me. We don't all have to agree.
Thanks


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[GKPrice]

Gotta throw it out here - plain vanilla .30-06.

Hey man !! '06's ain't coool, haven't you heard ?

 

[GKPrice]

If you want a light weight go short action, short barrel. If you want elk as an option at the ranges you listed the easy choice is:

.308 win with a Suppressor! Forget the muzzle brake, way too loud. You could go with an 18" barrel, with the Suppressor it will get the speed back up, mild recoil and sound. Your wife will love it, and you can shoot heavy bullets for elk, 165gr or go light 130-150 gr. for deer just fine.

what length penalty would it be to choose a standard long cartridge ? say, '06, 270, 280, or 338-06 ?

 

[JWP58]

I simply responded to another posters comparison of 600 yard stats between a 6.5CM and a light for caliber projectile for a .270WSM, and stated that I don't believe that such a metric (600 yards) is appropriate for declaring the 6.5CM superior to the .270 WSM in the context of big game hunting (the majority of which occurs at far closer ranges).

Then here comes Luke and you attacking me. I have not condemned anyone or their caliber. Yet anytime I state my preference, you guys attack me and say that I am putting people down? LOL. You guys are putting me down. You and Luke may be the authorities on this forum and in the eyes of your followers here, but I am not impressed with either of you, or anyone who acts like you guys do. You are both obviously very insecure people who are worried about what everyone thinks and use this forum to put yourselves on a pedestal and feed your egos.

I damn sure wouldn't ever want to sit around a fire with either of you guys, I can tell you that right now.

These are the days of our lives.....

 

[elkguide]

I damn sure wouldn't ever want to sit around a fire with either of you guys, I can tell you that right now.

I would consider myself very lucky to share some time around a campfire with either of you guys and I'll bet that we'd have some stories to tell as well Doc, if we could sit around poking a log or two.



(of course I'm one of those crazy ones that thinks that I can kill things with a Kimber, so maybe you guys all might want to think about inviting me!)

 

[robby denning]

If talking 7mm vs 270WSM/Winchester/whatever... Someone show me a 270 load that will beat or even keep up with a .797BC at 3000fps.

If I understand what you're asking, there isn't one but won't a bullet with that high of BC be pretty heavy and more recoil and not a good match for a 6lb unbraked gun?

 

[wildwilderness]

what length penalty would it be to choose a standard long cartridge ? say, '06, 270, 280, or 338-06 ?

Maybe 1/2"? also a little weight on the shorter bolt/action. But that's not the full reason. Longer action cartridges generally need a longer barrel to burn all the powder, so you are loosing efficiency with extra powder. If you have an 18" barrel and shooting a standard length cartridge or magnum there is a lot of wasted powder burn.

Putting a 6-7" Suppressor on the rifle will make it a joy to shoot (Since he want the wife to shoot it) So that will add weight and length. So saving any length and weight in a short action, and a shorter light contour barrel, and the lightest stock will make it an easy carry rifle. With the Suppressor on the end of the 18" barrel it will be back to 24" like a lot of standard rifles.

 

[luke moffat]

Maybe 1/2"? also a little weight on the shorter bolt/action. But that's not the full reason. Longer action cartridges generally need a longer barrel to burn all the powder, so you are loosing efficiency with extra powder. If you have an 18" barrel and shooting a standard length cartridge or magnum there is a lot of wasted powder burn.

Putting a 6-7" Suppressor on the rifle will make it a joy to shoot (Since he want the wife to shoot it) So that will add weight and length. So saving any length and weight in a short action, and a shorter light contour barrel, and the lightest stock will make it an easy carry rifle. With the Suppressor on the end of the 18" barrel it will be back to 24" like a lot of standard rifles.

While it is true some extra powder is wasted. My 18" 325 WSM still was able to get 200 grainers to 2800 fps.

But I am not much of a magnum fan in general these days.

 

[Mtslackcountry]

HA HA this thread is really going places.... I currently have a 280, 300 win and a 7mm mag. After sifting through all the bullshit in this thread I am liking the idea of the 6.5 for shooting steel and what not. If I get one I am still gona pull out the big dogs when hunting...