Choosing a caliber...

I will agree that the Berger 180 has a high BC, but how well will it KILL something????? Higher than the big 30s , maybe some, but 1 should really compare apples with apples ( preferably same types) to be of any value. Typically match type bullets perform VERY poorly on game, especially at closer ranges. So if a person is wanting ONLY a paper killer the Bergers are fine, and the wsm will probably work well. If a long range hunter is the plan then I would do more research on the bullets that will ACTUALLY do the job desired.

LRC well put. Some gun makers DO specialize in some very specialized areas, just like doctors do.
 
Last edited:
6,5-284

Why not try a 6,5-284?
It was a long time wildcat before getting recognized for what it really is: a great long-distance round.
Norma now makes ammo for it so its status is a bit more official.
PP.:)
 
Mauser, PP I like the 6.5s but I am not certain that either have what it takes , energy wise to kill a moose at 1000 yards, I would think 700 would be pushing it with a 6.5 , same with the 308 Win, Great for killing paper, probably a better choice than the 300 in that regard, but for real long range animal kiling better to have more retained downrange energy, and that can only be accomplished either with much greater speed or a heavier bullet, than any presently existing 6.5 is capable of.
 
alberta tactical rifle said:
Mauser, PP I like the 6.5s but I am not certain that either have what it takes , energy wise to kill a moose at 1000 yards
Click to expand...

ATR, I agree that a 6.5 would be pushing it for killing moose at 1000 yards. However, I was not aware that those were the intentions of JIP911. I thought he was looking for an accurate target round that could kill moose as well.
 
1000-yard moose? Even a stout 300WM load at this distance is lucky to be doing 1500 foot-pounds at ground zero. This is probably adequate, but marginal. An SKS shooting 7.62x39 is putting out these kind of numbers at 50 or so yards, and I don't think anyone would recommend an SKS for moose...

I'd be looking at .338 RUM or .338 Lapua for this sort of application
 
Nothing beats big bullet weight and velocity for moose "way out there"!
If in fact that is what is wanted, a lot of trigger time is also going to be needed , as well as a good range finder and optics that are up to the task.

A graduated reticle is a must , or at least a scope with enough turret to get you there also. unless you go with a picitinny style rail....
Cat
 
Mauser Oberndorf said:
ATR, I agree that a 6.5 would be pushing it for killing moose at 1000 yards. However, I was not aware that those were the intentions of JIP911. I thought he was looking for an accurate target round that could kill moose as well.
Click to expand...

After rereading the entire thread I think you read it more correctly than I did.

Cat you are right on about quality time at the range behind the trigger
 
prosper said:
1000-yard moose? Even a stout 300WM load at this distance is lucky to be doing 1500 foot-pounds at ground zero.
Click to expand...

In fact my own 300 Win Mag hunting rifle using 210 ULDs is only doing 1683 FPS with 1385 ftlbs of energy at 1200 yards, yet still kills the moose well.
I agree that that is pushing the limits for the 300, hopefully will have a rifle finished in 416 Barret for next season, to bridge the gap between the 338 and the 50
 
The great thing about bridging gaps - each time you do, you create 2 new gaps that 'need' to get filled :D

I forsee a .375 and a .458 of some sort in your future....
 
Thanks to all who have replied... Sorry if my intentions for this rnd were not clear, It seems many rnds are going to fit the bill and norrowing them down is getting even tougher with all the selection these days.

Bottom line is I want a round that I can work up various loads on and is drop dead effective on moose/deer out to 4-450 and can punch paper out to a 1000. I can honestly say I have never taken an animal past 450 and don't believe I currently posess the skills required for 450+ hunting. Thus, hopefully with this new rifle and some trigger time I can push that range out to 650-7

the 6.5-284 is a rnd that I know little about, but have seen some impressive "proof on paper" results. Is this considered an effective hunting cartridge?

I have long sang the praises of the various .308's I've owned over the years but I really want to try something different this time around.

Thanks again
 
Last edited:
Why in gods world, would you want to shoot at a moose at 1000yds?It's my belief, that there should be a difference in hunting and long range target-shooting.Shooting at such a distance at game is not only unethical,but also provides ammo for the anti-gunners and anti-hunters.Why not prove that you can shoot at the range and not use live-animals as an experiment.There should be some respect for the hunted.
 
varminter said:
Why in gods world, would you want to shoot at a moose at 1000yds?It's my belief, that there should be a difference in hunting and long range target-shooting.Shooting at such a distance at game is not only unethical,but also provides ammo for the anti-gunners and anti-hunters.Why not prove that you can shoot at the range and not use live-animals as an experiment.There should be some respect for the hunted.
Click to expand...

There are many paralells and similarities between long distance hunting and short distance hunting, the details of which should maybe be duiscussed in a different thread,
However, unless you have practiced it, don't knock it.
Just how far is "too far"? Who should make that rule?

I don't own or even like shooting semi autos, but i am not against anybody owning or hunting with them.
This is just an example of what I am trying to get across here, but I am hijacking here, sorry!
Cat
 
I wouldnt call that a Hijack Cat because it is an intended use for the rifle in question. I have argued this over and over with many, Each form of hunting has It's pros and cons and each has it's special skill set. Yet each in its own is unique and as much ethical as the other. What makes the difference is the man behind the bolt....(a term Cat loves to use, and one I've grown to repeat and steel, because it is the simple truth.). Each form of hunting requires a dicipline in the hunter that makes it ethical and humane. If you snap shoot at a deer without takeing the time to place your shot, take a chance at a deer through some trees thinking you might get it or other examples at 50-100yrds is no different than taking a 700+yrd shot without the proper skill set to accomplish it in a humane, disciplined, way. It is about being 100% confident in your abilities with a dicipline not to take or try the shot unless your are 100% confident of doing it. You have to know your rifle, your ammo what it will do exactly at what range and wearther condition. It is not the sport that is wrong it is some of the people trying it. If it is your bag do it right!!! so the rest of us don't suffer. I have watched hunters wound animals at ranges under 50 yrds, point guns at thier hunting partners and others out hunting......trust me...range is not the issue. It's the man behind the bolt. I have hunted long range for quite a while, It's my prefered way to hunt. All the game I have taken has been relaxed and been a one shot kill. Not bragging here, just wont take a shot if I cant garantee myself a one shot kill. We are all human and some day I may screw it up and have to take a second. But my goal is to never do that. To me Long range is more challengeing than stalking, It takes alot of time, patientce, homework, and most of all dicipline.

I'm a long range hunter and proud of it!

Just an opinion.
 
varminter said:
Why in gods world, would you want to shoot at a moose at 1000yds?It's my belief, that there should be a difference in hunting and long range target-shooting.Shooting at such a distance at game is not only unethical,but also provides ammo for the anti-gunners and anti-hunters.Why not prove that you can shoot at the range and not use live-animals as an experiment.There should be some respect for the hunted.
Click to expand...

Why , you ask? Simple , because I have the skill and the equipment to kill things at un-Godly long ranges. Read my signature, to me 1000 yards IS close range. I have spent the bulk of my life more than 40 years shooting long range, on average 20000 rounds per year at the range.
Every animal I have shot at long range has folded up dead on the spot, I think this is FAR less ammo for the aniti's than the fact that many animals are lost by bow hunters, road hunters, and shoot them through the trees hunters, who claim to be more ethical, because the animals have a chance. Yes a chance to slowly die from blood loss and wander around for an hour or more and be potentially lost, permanently.
Same goes for the bulk of the rifle hunters, that are not firearms addicts. Most hunters do not respect the game enough to "waste" a bunch of ammo practising the craft of shooting.
How many hunters do you know that spend at least 1 box per month at the range ,year round??
Damn few I would wager.
Any serous long range hunter will shoot several boxes of ammo a month just to keep the skill level up.
There are also the locational differences to consider. I defy anyone to sneak up on a moose (as dumb as they are) in the middle of a 2 section alfalfa field, like the 1 in central Alberta, the 1 I shot my moose in last year was mowed to 4" and a sheet of plywood has more character to creep on, a flatter piece of land I have never seen.
Don't get me wrong , I am probably the 1st to hammer someone for trying to pull off shots they are not equipped to make, that is unethical, but those of us who practice extreme long range shooting seriously would not try something beyond the means of our skill or equipment. Typically long range hunters spend FAR more time , not only at the range, but developing loads for optimum use, not just accuracy, but bullet performance. Typically spend HUGE amounts of money on specialty rifles dedicated for the task,optics, range finders etc, so tend to take the sport much more seriously than any other group of hunters known.
Hope that answers your questions
Hijack mode off
 
Last edited:
JIP911 said:
Bottom line is I want a round that I can work up various loads on and is drop dead effective on moose/deer out to 4-450 and can punch paper out to a 1000. I can honestly say I have never taken an animal past 450 and don't believe I currently posess the skills required for 450+ hunting. Thus, hopefully with this new rifle and some trigger time I can push that range out to 650-7

the 6.5-284 is a rnd that I know little about, but have seen some impressive "proof on paper" results. Is this considered an effective hunting cartridge?

.

Thanks again
Click to expand...

For the ranges you mention , yes the 6.5 either by 55 or 284 would work well.
Both are very capable to kill at that range, both will work wonderfully on paper out to 1000. The advantage these smaller calibers, they are similar in size to the 308 , is that recoil is light, but the 140 gr bullets have a high BC so work very well for long range. As will any hunting however bullet type and placement is everything.
 
the 6.5 is great, but IMHO, the 7mm is even better. Recoil is slightly higher, but the BC is significantly better. In a gun light enough to hunt with, the recoil may be a little high for precision shooting. Depends on your tolerance I suppose.

Barrel life is also a consideration with hot 6.5's. I'd imagine hot 7's are prone to short lifespans too, but I haven't heard as much about them.
 
prosper said:
the 6.5 is great, but IMHO, the 7mm is even better. Recoil is slightly higher, but the BC is significantly better. In a gun light enough to hunt with, the recoil may be a little high for precision shooting. Depends on your tolerance I suppose.

Barrel life is also a consideration with hot 6.5's. I'd imagine hot 7's are prone to short lifespans too, but I haven't heard as much about them.
Click to expand...

The thing to keep in mind with BCs is to compare the same weights and types of bullets.
Sierra lists the following
6.5 cal 140 gr SBT at .495BC
7mm 140 gr SBT at .377BC
Hornady lists
6.5 cal Amax 140s at .550
7mm Amax 162s at .625
The 7s typically work best with heavier bullets than what are commonly available for the 6.5s, so again it boils down to recoil , bullet weight and range.
The 6.5 is a great caliber, but has the same limitations as any other caliber that is limited in the upper end of bullet weight.
I agree with you that for the bit more recoil something like a 7Rem Mag would probably be a better all round hunter/ long range , do it all caliber. That would also be a step up from his current 308s.

I can not see a 375 ot 458 in my gaps future. I presently go 300 Win to 338 Win 338 Lapua to 358 STA-AI to 50 BMG, and soon 416 Barret to fill in between the 358 STA-AI and the 50.
I figure the 358 eclipses the 375 anyway, and the 416 will cover the 458 with plenty to spare.
 
alberta tactical rifle said:
Why , you ask? Simple , because I have the skill and the equipment to kill things at un-Godly long ranges. Read my signature, to me 1000 yards IS close range. I have spent the bulk of my life more than 40 years shooting long range, on average 20000 rounds per year at the range.
Every animal I have shot at long range has folded up dead on the spot, I think this is FAR less ammo for the aniti's than the fact that many animals are lost by bow hunters, road hunters, and shoot them through the trees hunters, who claim to be more ethical, because the animals have a chance. Yes a chance to slowly die from blood loss and wander around for an hour or more and be potentially lost, permanently.
Same goes for the bulk of the rifle hunters, that are not firearms addicts. Most hunters do not respect the game enough to "waste" a bunch of ammo practising the craft of shooting.
How many hunters do you know that spend at least 1 box per month at the range ,year round??
Damn few I would wager.
Any serous long range hunter will shoot several boxes of ammo a month just to keep the skill level up.
There are also the locational differences to consider. I defy anyone to sneak up on a moose (as dumb as they are) in the middle of a 2 section alfalfa field, like the 1 in central Alberta, the 1 I shot my moose in last year was mowed to 4" and a sheet of plywood has more character to creep on, a flatter piece of land I have never seen.
Don't get me wrong , I am probably the 1st to hammer someone for trying to pull off shots they are not equipped to make, that is unethical, but those of us who practice extreme long range shooting seriously would not try something beyond the means of our skill or equipment. Typically long range hunters spend FAR more time , not only at the range, but developing loads for optimum use, not just accuracy, but bullet performance. Typically spend HUGE amounts of money on specialty rifles dedicated for the task,optics, range finders etc, so tend to take the sport much more seriously than any other group of hunters known.
Hope that answers your questions
Hijack mode off
Click to expand...


Rick, you hit the nail on the head. It is amazing how many people you can run into at the range just B4 hunting season and can tell by there actions or equipment how much they actually shoot. I am by far no means as capable a shooter as you and will never be as I am not into long range. But there is one thing that I do and that is shoot my gun so I think I know it to the best of my ability. I unfortunatley have a hunting buddy whose son thinks he is the marksmen of our hunting group. I have never heard of someone wounding more game than him. I think he has no sense of distance and every buck he sees is the monster that we have been chasing!!!!!!

I will never forget this past fall at the range where there was this little sawed off runt sighting in his new gun. He must have weighed all of 120 lbs soaken wet. All I remember it was a 7mm Rem Mag. I have never seen someone flinch like that in my life. He must have jumped up about 4 inches every time he pulled the trigger. I admit that I am not fond of recoil but if I had to jump like that every time I pulled the trigger I would definately get a smaller gun or give it up all together.


Calvin
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom