What caliber would you start a hunter with?

[asilmas]

I live and hunt in Oregon, hunting mostly deer, elk, and the occasional pronghorn. I am looking to get a couple of young hunters into the sport and am curious about your experience for a young hunter and a caliber of choice. I am looking for something that is capable of all of Oregon's big game, has reasonable recoil, long barrel life, and ample ammunition availability. Something they can use now and well into the future. I have narrowed my selection down to either a 6.5 Creedmoor or a 308 with reduced recoil loads. Any experience going either way?

I know there are other great options, but I am sold on either of these two avenues...

I bought my son a mossberg patriot 308 when he was 12. Great caliber for pretty much all game but the gun itself was super inconsistent. We did kill a bear and a cow elk with it no problem.

 

[crgchck]

I live and hunt in Oregon, hunting mostly deer, elk, and the occasional pronghorn. I am looking to get a couple of young hunters into the sport and am curious about your experience for a young hunter and a caliber of choice. I am looking for something that is capable of all of Oregon's big game, has reasonable recoil, long barrel life, and ample ammunition availability. Something they can use now and well into the future. I have narrowed my selection down to either a 6.5 Creedmoor or a 308 with reduced recoil loads. Any experience going either way?

I know there are other great options, but I am sold on either of these two avenues...

I love both the .308 and the 6.5.. however with starting a youngster out, I’d go .308!!
If the kid loves to shoot, inexpensive .308 ammo is readily available just about anywhere. If you load, it will be easier load heavier rounds for a more forgiving load.
I’ve (5) kids (3) of them hunt.. one started w 7-08, the next.308, and my youngest 6.5cm
I’d go .308 for so many reasons

 

[Choupique]

My kids will probably start with a .223 AR15 with a supressor. Seems like the perfect kids rifle.

 

[SDHNTR]

No AR’s or auto loaders for kids! I’ve seen way too many get excited in the heat of the moment and forget some basic firearm safety, with a hot chamber.

 

[crgchck]

No AR’s or auto loaders for kids! I’ve seen way too many get excited in the heat of the moment and forget some basic firearm safety, with a hot chamber.

Agreed!! They’re also stupid awkward for me to hunt with. I couldn’t imagine a kid sitting in a climber with one.

 

[Choupique]

No AR’s or auto loaders for kids!

It'll be single-loaded, just like my old man did for me. The adjustable stock, overall small size and negligible recoil make it perfect for little people.

 

[Amos Keeto]

It'll be single-loaded, just like my old man did for me. The adjustable stock, overall small size and negligible recoil make it perfect for little people.

BUT.....there are better calibers for deer hunting than the .223.
The AR in 7.62×39 with soft point hunting ammo is basically a "semi auto .30-30".
It'll kill the heck out of anything on the North American continent!

I have a shoulder implant and shoot an AR on 6.8mm Rem SPC. Does a fantastic job and recoil is negligible.

 

[eric1115]

BUT.....there are better calibers for deer hunting than the .223.
The AR in 7.62×39 with soft point hunting ammo is basically a "semi auto .30-30".
It'll kill the heck out of anything on the North American continent!

I have a shoulder implant and shoot an AR on 6.8mm Rem SPC. Does a fantastic job and recoil is negligible.

I'd take a .223 with 77TMK's over any .30-30, 7.62x39, 6.8spc, 6.5Grendel option. It'll kill the heck out of anything on the north American continent and is the absolute easy button in terms of rifle setup and ammo selection (though availability can be challenging at times)

If one must do something different, 6mmARC (or now 22ARC) win by a mile for me. Heavy for caliber beats light for caliber.

 

[eric1115]

It'll be single-loaded, just like my old man did for me. The adjustable stock, overall small size and negligible recoil make it perfect for little people.

I've used AR's for little people in the past, and a bigger issue than single loading vs a few in a mag in my experience is quietly chambering a round.

I really think a kid should carry their own rifle, and I'm quite disinclined to have them carry with one in the pipe. When it comes time to chamber a round, it's easy to do so quietly with a bolt gun, much less so with an AR. Ground blind/stand hunting, easy (chamber when you get there, no need to handle the weapon after that till it's time to shoot). Western hiking/spot and stalk, not so much.

 

[Fishey05]

I would say 6.5

 

[LostWapiti]

I would say 6.5

6.5-300 WBY?

 

[Amos Keeto]

6.5-300 WBY?

The "Mother-in-Law" gun!
You know! The one you want your m-i-l to shoot off a bench!

A .460 Wby Mag!

 

[roadrunner]

Also, do not worry about energy. This provides no indication about how a given bullet will perform. Instead lean on minimum FPS for terminal performance. For example, Hornady ELDM and ELDX expand reliably down to 1800 FPS, whereas partitions, accubonds, and barnes all copper bullets typically need 2000-2200 fps impact velocity.

You do realize there is a direct relationship between energy and velocity, right?

The reason they print "impact velocity" is because there is a directly related amount of energy associated with it. Conservation of energy is what matters...

 

[jjohnsonElknewbie]

You do realize there is a direct relationship between energy and velocity, right?

The reason they print "impact velocity" is because there is a directly related amount of energy associated with it. Conservation of energy is what matters...

Yes. I do. However, all that conversation does is complicate and confuse the matter. If the minimum impact velocity for terminal performance is 1,800 fps, that's all a guy has to worry about for a given cartridge/bullet combination. Look at a ballistics chart for said cartridge and keep shots inside the effective range based FPS.

Energy alone does not describe expected wound channel or killing capacity of a given cartridge/bullet. This has been discussed ad nauseum on here, and I'm not taking the OP down this completely unnecessary rabbit hole.

 

[PredatorSlayer]

You do realize there is a direct relationship between energy and velocity, right?

The reason they print "impact velocity" is because there is a directly related amount of energy associated with it. Conservation of energy is what matters...

Energy is way over rated. Minimum velocity for bullet expansion is all that matters.

 

[roadrunner]

Yes. I do. However, all that conversation does is complicate and confuse the matter. If the minimum impact velocity for terminal performance is 1,800 fps, that's all a guy has to worry about for a given cartridge/bullet combination. Look at a ballistics chart for said cartridge and keep shots inside the effective range based FPS.

Energy alone does not describe expected wound channel or killing capacity of a given cartridge/bullet. This has been discussed ad nauseum on here, and I'm not taking the OP down this completely unnecessary rabbit hole.

Velocity alone certainly doesn't describe it at all. The only reason it's used is because we think in terms of an object moving and the end result of it. We see a car colliding into another car and can see the damage. We observed before the collison that both vehicles were moving. We therfore conclude that because the cars were moving, at whatever speed, damage occurred - aka, the more speed, the more damage.

To say energy doesn't matter is incorrect. The impact velocity is a result of how well the energy was conserved from time = 0 (at the muzzle) to time = n (at impact).

The pic of the side of the cow elk shown in the .243 use on moose thread clearly demonstrates the effect energy has on ballistics performance. If all the energy were retained in the bullet, there would be no wound channel other than a pencil sized hole. We want the energy of the bullet to dissipate in the most efficient manner. Part in deformation (fragmenting), part in tissue disruption, and the remainder carrying through to exit.

It being discussed "ad nauseum" here causing "rabbit holes" suggests a lot of strong but misguided opinions being held...

 

[jjohnsonElknewbie]

Velocity alone certainly doesn't describe it at all. The only reason it's used is because we think in terms of an object moving and the end result of it. We see a car colliding into another car and can see the damage. We observed before the collison that both vehicles were moving. We therfore conclude that because the cars were moving, at whatever speed, damage occurred - aka, the more speed, the more damage.

To say energy doesn't matter is incorrect. The impact velocity is a result of how well the energy was conserved from time = 0 (at the muzzle) to time = n (at impact).

The pic of the side of the cow elk shown in the .243 use on moose thread clearly demonstrates the effect energy has on ballistics performance. If all the energy were retained in the bullet, there would be no wound channel other than a pencil sized hole. We want the energy of the bullet to dissipate in the most efficient manner. Part in deformation (fragmenting), part in tissue disruption, and the remainder carrying through to exit.

It being discussed "ad nauseum" here causing "rabbit holes" suggests a lot of strong but misguided opinions being held...

This is exactly what I'm talking about. The OP asked for recommendations on a "caliber" to start a new shooter. Suggestions have been provided and varied based on recoil as a top priority and effective range as the next priority.

Of course energy is important in how bullets work. However, going down the rabbit hole of physical technicalities, unless the OP is interested, is also what I was trying to avoid.

Manufacturers provide a minimum impact velocity for given bullets to expand reliably to kill stuff. The average guy just needs to follow this guidance when choosing the bullet/cartridge they want to use. It's that simple. Tipped match bullets typically require lower terminal velocity (1800ish fps) to expand reliably. Bonded bullets and monos typically require a little more (2000-2200ish fps).

 

[171farm]

Depending on the size of the hunter 243 might be a better option.

 

[roadrunner]

This is exactly what I'm talking about. The OP asked for recommendations on a "caliber" to start a new shooter. Suggestions have been provided and varied based on recoil as a top priority and effective range as the next priority.

Of course energy is important in how bullets work. However, going down the rabbit hole of physical technicalities, unless the OP is interested, is also what I was trying to avoid.

Manufacturers provide a minimum impact velocity for given bullets to expand reliably to kill stuff. The average guy just needs to follow this guidance when choosing the bullet/cartridge they want to use. It's that simple. Tipped match bullets typically require lower terminal velocity (1800ish fps) to expand reliably. Bonded bullets and monos typically require a little more (2000-2200ish fps).

Agreed.

 

[MikeDeltaFoxtrot]

My son could easily shoot 308 or 6.5CM bolt guns at the age of 10. I like 308 for its all around versatility and ubiquitous ammo.

If you hand load, you can easily make reduced power loads until the kid is bigger.