The most efficient hunting cartridges

Good work - thanks.

Some thoughts -

1. This is an atypical use of the word "efficiency" with regard to cartidges. Recoil to Energy Ratio is more decriptive, but is several words.

2. Shorter ranges would improve the results of most of the "least efficient" in relation to most of the "most efficient", and would eliminate arguments about the BC of the bullet chosen as a significant factor.

3. It would also be interesting to have three lists broken down according to energy:

- less than 1500 ft-lbs;
- 1501-2000; and
- 2001+.​

because if you "need" 2200 ft-lbs, less than that, but with higher "efficiency" doesn't cut it.
 
Last edited:
Hitzy said:
What are the results using more realistic hunting ranges like 100-200 yards?
Click to expand...

Comparing most efficient vs least efficient at 100 yards. The difference is pretty similar to the spread at 500y (100y the 6.5cm has 83% better bullet energy for recoil than the 375R, at 500 yards the spread is 79%

6.5 Creedmoor 140gr Accubond @ 2855 fps
45.0grs powder
BC .462
Recoil = 15 ft lbs
100y energy = 2211 ft lbs
Ft lb bullet energy per ft lb recoil = 147.4

375 Ruger 300gr Accubond @ 2625 fps
74.1grs powder
BC .494
Recoil = 50 ft lbs
100y energy = 4024 ft lbs
Ft lb bullet energy per ft lb recoil = 80.5

I feel 500y is a more useful distance to compare, since it allows projectile aerodynamics/velocity retention to shine

300 Win Mag 200gr Accubond @ 2905 fps
72.2grs powder
BC .524
Recoil = 36 ft lbs
Muzzle = 3747 ft lbs
100y energy = 3327 ft lbs
500y energy = 2003 ft lbs
1000y energy = 984 ft lbs
Ft lb bullet energy per ft lb recoil = 55.6 (500y), 92.4 (100y), 104.1 (muzzle)

8mm Rem Mag 200gr Accubond @ 3010 fps
81.1grs powder
BC .450
Recoil = 42 ft lbs
Muzzle = 4023 ft lbs
100y energy = 3508 ft lbs
500y energy = 1946 ft lbs
1000y energy = 847 ft lbs
Ft lb bullet energy per ft lb recoil = 46.3 (500y), 83.5 (100y), 95.8 (muzzle)

You can see the 300wm 200gr load has a 9% better bullet energy per recoil figure at the muzzle. At 100y, it's grown to 11%, at 500y 20%, and at 1000 yards the 300wm has an advantage of 35%
 
AlexF said:
Look it up, the 7mm Mauser cartridge is pretty much optimal for most hunting since 1892!
Click to expand...

I have to agree with this. I haven't done the math or research but whenever I try another caliber I go back to the 7x57 because of the low recoil and great results. I have never had to go looking for an animal that I have shot with it.
 
Going way back to 1888, looks like the 8x57 would be right in there. In fact, looks like the old military cartridges do well.
 
Andy said:
It would be interesting to have three lists broken down according to energy: less than 1500 ft-lbs; 1501-2000; and 2001+. If you "need" 2200 ft-lbs, less than that, but with higher "efficiency" doesn't cut it.
Click to expand...

sure, I am not suggesting a 6.5cm is the ultimate 500 yard moose rifle because it has the most energy for the least recoil. A 223 Rem loaded with the 70gr Accubond blows the 6.5cm out of the water for energy per recoil (2960 fps, 25.2grs powder, 5 ft lbs recoil ~ 500y energy = 504 ft lbs) = 100.8 ft lbs energy per recoil ft lb, which is 23% more than the 6.5CM. I would not personally use the 223 70gr AB on deer past about 200 yards. Still a useful way to compare one cartridge to another. I'll continue to hunt with my 375 Ruger even though it beats me up :HR:
 
Good thing those deer I shot with my 25/06 can no longer access the site. Hopefully their brothers aren’t members. Haha
 
todbartell said:
sure, I am not suggesting a 6.5cm is the ultimate 500 yard moose rifle because it has the most energy for the least recoil. A 223 Rem loaded with the 70gr Accubond blows the 6.5cm out of the water for energy per recoil (2960 fps, 25.2grs powder, 5 ft lbs recoil ~ 500y energy = 504 ft lbs) = 100.8 ft lbs energy per recoil ft lb, which is 23% more than the 6.5CM. I would not personally use the 223 70gr AB on deer past about 200 yards. Still a useful way to compare one cartridge to another. I'll continue to hunt with my 375 Ruger even though it beats me up :HR:
Click to expand...

When do you figure those 70gr accubonds will hit the shelves?
 
Slimbo said:
When do you figure those 70gr accubonds will hit the shelves?
Click to expand...

Nosler has made some. Grafs & Sons in USA shows them as in stock. MidwayUSA shows "overdue" - - seems like they'll be hard to source up here in Canada for a while, but I could be wrong. I ordered some in early 2018 and still waiting
 
Slimbo said:
When do you figure those 70gr accubonds will hit the shelves?
Click to expand...

todbartell said:
Nosler has made some. Grafs & Sons in USA shows them as in stock. MidwayUSA shows "overdue" - - seems like they'll be hard to source up here in Canada for a while, but I could be wrong. I ordered some in early 2018 and still waiting
Click to expand...

Here ya go. Just have to wait for the next import.

https://www.irunguns.com/parts-gear/reloading-equipment/nos-22-cal-70gr-accubond-50-ct
 
Mr.Bartell . I am just getting into looking at cartridge stats. I have been a hunter for awhile though . Thank you for posting all of this information I'm going to use it to determine my next caliber of choice ! Also do you have a degree in mathematics ! LOL
Leavenworth
 
Great info!

So often we hear of people receiving "ballistic BS" from gun stores or hunting guides. They won't be getting all the BS when customers walk into your store! :)
 
Good work, Mark!! I really think that the 7x57 is a contender for a mild, but very effective hunting round.
I have shot a lot of game with this round, everything from small island Blacktails up to and including Moose and Elk.
I have 2 rifle so chambered ATM, a Remington 700 "Classic" and a Winchester M70 "Featherweight" both shoot
sub - moa, and just get the job done. :) Dave.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom