Poll - One all around single cartridge under conditions

[USAF Ret]

The contradiction in the above two statements speaks for itself, but thank you for finally acknowledging my point. There is no 100 gr option in that bullet class for 7mm, which is exactly why a 6.5mm caliber is an advantage when recoil is a primary consideration. For ANY type of bullet in 7mm, there's a lighter equivalent option in 6.5mm (or .257/.243/.224) that will do the same job.

It's a physics-based fact that lighter bullets at similar velocity = less recoil. You acknowledge this relationship when comparing .243 to .264 bullets, as well as the equal weights = worse ballistics in larger calibers relationship when comparing .284 to .308 bullets. An individual that's not attached to the emotional aspects of 6.5 Creedmoor vs 7mm-08 comparison should realize the same relationships hold true there as well. Arguing over 2grs of powder mass difference (not all of which is even moving at muzzle velocity) is a Red Herring in a world where a 20gr bullet mass difference is the average between the two calibers.

For every 7mm bullet you’d shoot, there’s a lighter bullet in 6.5 that will do the same thing in flight and on impact with approximately 20% less recoil. 20% is noticeable for the average guy, and even more so for someone packing a physical injury.

"For every 7mm bullet you’d shoot, there’s a lighter bullet in 6.5 that will do the same thing in flight and on impact with approximately 20% less recoil. 20% is noticeable for the average guy, and even more so for someone packing a physical injury."

So, in that calculation would you put the 7mm-08 139 LRX up against the 6.5 CM 127 LRX? Basically you are getting the same in flight and on impact?

 

[USAF Ret]

I wondered the same thing so didn't vote. 30-06 is so clearly superior to 308 makes you wonder.

Because last time I shot my 30-06, I got through about 4 rounds and knew to stop. It hurt. The pain was worse the next day in my neck.

 

[cal30_sniper]

"For every 7mm bullet you’d shoot, there’s a lighter bullet in 6.5 that will do the same thing in flight and on impact with approximately 20% less recoil. 20% is noticeable for the average guy, and even more so for someone packing a physical injury."

So, in that calculation would you put the 7mm-08 139 LRX up against the 6.5 CM 127 LRX? Basically you are getting the same in flight and on impact?

Yes, I would.

The values you'll see that make this easy to measure are SD and BC. BC will govern the exterior ballistics in flight, and it's pretty straightforward as a physical principle.

Typically if the bullet is from the same manufacture and line, with similar sectional density (which is a calculation of frontal area vs length), it's going to have similar terminal performance on game at the same impact velocity. This is not as clear cut as flight performance (aka "exterior ballistics"), as things like different jacket thicknesses etc can come into play, but holds true as a general rule of thumb. There are instances where certain bullet families have high and low performers based on reported results, a lot of which are tabulated quite well in the depth of these forums.

It's important to remember here is that energy doesn't kill animals, terminal performance of the bullet does. Terminal performance is dictated by bullet construction and impact velocity, NOT the bore diameter or grain weight of the bullet.

 

[BuckSmasher]

Because last time I shot my 30-06, I got through about 4 rounds and knew to stop. It hurt. The pain was worse the next day in my neck.

In that case I wouldn’t hunt elk and would get a 556 or a 6.5 Grendel.

 

[mt terry d]

Judging by this thread:

.223 for bear, mountain goat, deer, elk, and moose.​

I don't see how any one of your choices wouldn't do the job just fine; but not a one
will make up for poor shot placement or poor bullet design.