Need help: fill gap or adjust rifle

[stx.dead.I]

Hunting elk mule deer and bear from 10-400 yards

*Do I change out the scope and get a folding chassis for the 300 or get a caliber to fill the gap between 300 and 6.5 focusing on a folding stock while being mindful of weight

I have a Howa Precision 300 win mag and a ruger American 6.5cm. Both suppressed

Shot an elk cow at 160yds with the 6.5cm but I am not confident in it killing elk consistantly, especially at longer distances.

I like the 300 but it is very heavy and long.
5-25 vortex 33oz on it 13lbs unloaded

 

[butcherboy]

No reason to get a new rifle. Those will work just fine. I would however get a lighter scope on that 300 and a longer barrel for the creedmore. Carry your rifle attached to your backpack with some kind of quick release if you need to take it off quickly.

 

[gman82001]

Why do you think a 6.5 cm can’t take elk out to 400yds?

 

[IAm_Not_Lost]

Almost any caliber will work for elk out to 400 yards. 6.5 Creed, 308, 270 Win, 30-06, etc.

Your 6.5 is perfectly fine.

 

[Marbles]

Read the 223 thread, if you still don't feel the 6.5 is enough, then go get a new rifle in a hot 7mm.

P

Thread '.223 for bear, mountain goat, deer, elk, and moose.'

Jun 3, 2019

DON'T HAVE TIME TO READ 176 PAGES? HERE'S THE CHEAT SHEET.

---

“Bullets matter more than headstamps.”

“Spent primers offer the supreme tutorial”.

I’ve read it here and elsewhere online. It got my attention. I started digging and asking questions and listened.

The 77gr TMK delivered by a .223 is where I ended up after many discussions and objective data regarding bullet performance and numerous pics of field results.

Now for the delivery system. Accurate. Repeatable. Reliable. Reasonable weight to afford steady shot placement and the ability to spot my own impacts...

• PNWGATOR
• Replies: 11,127
• Forum: Firearms

• 
• 
• 

Or, just get a new rifle.

Me, I would sell both and get a 1:8 Tikka 243, but, then you would be a member of The Cult and listening to parrots, so probably shouldn't do as I do, rather get a hot 7.

 

[jkoehle1]

Use a 16 inch 223 if youll never shoot past 400 and enjoy the ammo savings.

 

[stx.dead.I]

Why do you think a 6.5 cm can’t take elk out to 400yds?

Idk, I feel like it's smaller than everyone uses... Lack of experience I reckon

 

[gman82001]

Idk, I feel like it's smaller than everyone uses... Lack of experience I reckon

You have nothing to worry about read the . .223 77tmk thread and the 6mm success thread then take your gun pick a bullet that does what you want at the minimum velocity for your max yardage and go kill things. I’m not one to talk a person out of buying a new gun by any means but you seriously have nothing to worry about.

 

[Marshfly]

Idk, I feel like it's smaller than everyone uses... Lack of experience I reckon

Don't worry what anyone else uses. You have a 100% success rate on elk with the 6.5 it sounds like. So do lots of other people. Ignore any doubt you have, use some flavor of ELDM, and go kill stuff.

 

[IDVortex]

Unpopular opinion, but sell the 300 and buy a 6arc. The 6arc in a rifle would get you the yardage you want(plus more), will teach you that the 6.5 is enough gun for what you need, and if you want more power or more range use the 6.5. Build a 6arc with the folding stock, suppressed, and a simple but leight scope. You'd enjoy it.

 

[cbat]

I have been shooting 6.5s long before the creedmore came along ,but I have 1 of them now. If you load it with as heavy a bullet that shoots good you will be fine . I shot an audad at 1152 yards with my 6.5 x 284 Win mag.
140 gr Hornady A -Max

 

[eric1115]

Lots of guys that kill LOTs of stuff have been migrating to smaller and smaller bullets. I'm down to a 6mm 109 grain ELDM for my do-everything bullet. Lots of guys have documented excellent results from 77-88 grain .22 cal bullets from .223, 22CM, etc.

All that said, I would (and did) sell both rifles (a so-so .308 and a really sweet shooting 7mmRM in my case) and do one well set up rifle. I ended up with a Tikka .243AI in a Rokstok and added another suppressor. Zero regrets. You could sell both rifles and fund a Tikka 6.5CM, get a suppressor and a really reliable scope like a SWFA 3-9 or Maven RS1.2 depending on where the budget lands, maybe enough left over for a Rokstok. Buy a case of 143 Precision hunter or 147 Match and be miles ahead of the two-rifle setup for very little out of pocket.

 

[TaperPin]

Hunting elk mule deer and bear from 10-400 yards

*Do I change out the scope and get a folding chassis for the 300 or get a caliber to fill the gap between 300 and 6.5 focusing on a folding stock while being mindful of weight

I have a Howa Precision 300 win mag and a ruger American 6.5cm. Both suppressed

Shot an elk cow at 160yds with the 6.5cm but I am not confident in it killing elk consistantly, especially at longer distances.

I like the 300 but it is very heavy and long.
5-25 vortex 33oz on it 13lbs unloaded

A 7 mag and 160 gr Partitions or Accubonds is very versatile at those ranges, kills better than 270 or 6.5 PRC, and is still fairly easy to shoot in light weight rifles - not much more than your heavy 300 mag. It was to be primarily a deer/antelope setup, but has killed elk so well it’s become a do it all rifle. I still have a 300 mag in the closet, but for cows and meat bulls the 7 mag generally gets used.

 

[MT-nuffgun]

Big difference between the thickness of a “meat bull” and a “trophy bull” . So much so that you have to step up to the 300 from the 7 rem mag. WOW

 

[IDVortex]

Big difference between the thickness of a “meat bull” and a “trophy bull” . So much so that you have to step up to the 300 from the 7 rem mag. WOW

Mature bulls get to their size due to body armor.

 

[TaperPin]

Big difference between the thickness of a “meat bull” and a “trophy bull” . So much so that you have to step up to the 300 from the 7 rem mag. WOW

I wouldn’t take a weird angle shot on a meat animal. Likewise I wouldn’t hesitate to take a trophy animal from most angles. It’s a popular line to regurgitate that you would simply wait for a better angle, or that fragmenting bullets penetrate as deep as needed for any shot, but most people know that’s just not realistic.

You should shoot whatever combination you want. If what you are using works it shouldn’t be hard to sell to people. My combinations work with boring regularity and has since the 7 mag first came out.

 

[HandgunHTR]

A 7 mag and 160 gr Partitions or Accubonds is very versatile at those ranges, kills better than 270 or 6.5 PRC

Define "kills better".

To the OP, your 6.5 Creedmoor has already proven to you that it will kill an elk. Just because "most" people are using bigger cartridges doesn't mean they are somehow better. It just means that they too lack experience.

I am going to side with some of the others here and say, ditch the 300 altogether, buy something in .223, 6ARC, or 6.5 Grendel, learn to be a consistent shot in all field positions and then if you feel the need to go bigger to get more distance, then buy something with "mag" in the name.

 

[MT-nuffgun]

Idk, I feel like it's smaller than everyone uses... Lack of experience I reckon

There is a thread on the 6.5, 6mm, and 223 on this forum. Pages upon pages of in-depth results of these calibers killing many different critters. If you read them, you will soon find out just how capable your 6.5 creedmoor is with the right bullets.

 

[TaperPin]

Define "kills better".

To the OP, your 6.5 Creedmoor has already proven to you that it will kill an elk. Just because "most" people are using bigger cartridges doesn't mean they are somehow better. It just means that they too lack experience.

I am going to side with some of the others here and say, ditch the 300 altogether, buy something in .223, 6ARC, or 6.5 Grendel, learn to be a consistent shot in all field positions and then if you feel the need to go bigger to get more distance, then buy something with "mag" in the name.

The hypothetical argument all cartridges kill equally well is nonsense. My 243 has killed a cow elk, but she ran over 300 yards. It doesn’t take a rocket scientist to see a 270 simply works better, or 7 mag over 270.

Fragmenting bullets aren’t new and the attempt to argue they are better is older than I am. High BCs are new, but cup and core match bullets are as old as great great gramps. If fragmenting bullets were the best thing to ever happen to hunting it should be an easy sell - it should be obvious for everyone to see when hunting side by side hunting buddies. Since the 22 highpower came out at the turn of the 19th century there has always been a small following for fragmenting bullets, but most hunters don’t care for the trade offs when making the decision based on observable results.

Many here are figuring out the fragmenting vs non fragmenting debate for the first time, but I felt satisfied with the debates that drove my choices since the 1980s and those choices have consistently produced ever since. My serious hunting buddies don’t have bullet or cartridge debates - we use plenty of gun, practice to be accurate in the field and reliably kill everything we shoot at.
Healthy debate is fun and makes people think, but the odds of changing my mind are slim after hearing the same arguments for 40 years.

I’m somewhat disappointed hunting rifles haven’t evolved more. They should be better than they are. I have a 1961 receiver in a classic wood stock with an ancient 8x fixed scope, heavy steel rings, shooting bullets that haven’t changed since the 1950s, and a cartridge as old as the receiver. There’s no reason why a “modern” mountain rifle shouldn’t have evolved enough to totally spank this combination at 500 yards. Society has accepted heavier, quieter, less capable as somehow being better.

 

[HairyScandinavian]

OP, this is a great time to buy a new rifle. I think you should just do you'll have a new rifle, 3 is better than 2 without question. You get to keep your current rigs and build something with specific purpose in mind.