Are the 30.06/270/280 Becoming Irrelevant?

So I've been looking for a bullet/cartridge combination to build another rifle around and realized that not a single long action, non-magnum caliber made the short list.
I looked in my safe and saw only short actions (.223, 6mm, 6.5mm, 7mm and 308) and magnum long actions (7mm and .338 caliber).

That started me thinking, are the 30.06 and its ilk really relevant anymore?



So have a little patience and I'll try to explain my way of thinking.

Say you hunt white tails in east/west/south/north Texas, a 30.06 would definitely put venison in the freezer but so would almost any short action cartridge without the added weight and recoil. The venerable 308 or even a 243 are still a great performers for any medium sized game. Even my antique model 94 can still reliably and effectivley take a deer inside of 100 yards. (Please don't start telling me about all of the deer you've taken with a slingshot/pellet rifle/BB gun/rocks/223/or just chased down on foot and tackled.This isn't that kind of thread.)

Pigs have become all the rage for hunters nowadays. I say if you can't use hand grenades or dynamite then a good AR 15 or AR 10 in anything you can chamber them in is a much better choice than a long action bolt action rifle. (High rate of fire combined with a high capacity magazine equals more dead hogs).

What about antelope in the lava fields of New Mexico? This is an animal built to be hunted with just about any short action cartridge. Sure, you spend most of the hunt walking, driving and glassing but do you really need the extra barrel length, and recoil of a long action rifle? Not when a 243 or 7mm-08 is more than enough rifle.

How about hunting elk in New Mexico, Arizona, Colorado or any of the western states? A 30.06/270/280 would foot the bill but in my mind a 7 RM or a 300 WM would be a better choice for bullet weight and terminal performance without sacrificing much for the added few ounces. After all, elk are big animals.
If you are counting ounces for a back country mountain rifle then a 7mm-08 or 308 will be more than enough gun if you use the right bullet all the way out to 400 or 500 hundred yards.

Maybe you have finally gotten the chance to go on a bear hunt (black or brown doesn't really matter), is your 30.06 going to be enough rifle to take a bear with one shot? I would be looking for at least a 300 WM paired with a really heavy, solid performing bullet. To be honest I'm probably not going bear hunting with anything smaller than a 338. I'm sure a 25.06 has killed a few bears, but come on, who's intentionaly going on a bear hunt with a 25 caliber rifle?

What about going on a varmint or prairie dog hunt? You could show up with a 25.06/270/280/30.06 pushing a lightweight for caliber bullet really fast and have a great time but is it worth the extra weight and recoil of the rifle? Give me a flat shooting 177, 204, 223 or 243 and watch how much powder I can burn up. I can just about guaranty that I will shoot more and kill more than anybody that shows up with a long action caliber.

What if you shoot a lot more than you hunt and want an all around rifle for targets and long range? How many people are going to rush out and get a 30.06? I'm pretty sure that the current fad for long range is something in a short action caliber like the 6.5 Creedmore or even the good ole' 7mm-08. Either of these can take you to 1000 + yards without having to deal with the size, weight and recoil of by a 280 AI.

Who wants to go to a PRS match and have to deal with having to shoot a 30.06 or a 280 REM all day? Last I saw most competitors are shooting 6mm or 6.5mm short actions.

Just in case you decided to build a dedicated, long range rifle are you really going to invest all of that money into 270/280/30.06? No. You're more than likely to choose a hot short action 6.5mm or magnum long action 7mm and then spend your time and money on range fees and bullets.

It just seems like the long action, standard caliber rifle is either overkill or just enough to get the job done.
Short action calibers will take almost any game in north America and when they aren't enough then a long action, magnum caliber is a better choice.

Is the 30.06 dying off? No, I hope not
Is the 30.06 obsolete? Not really.
Is there a valid reason you should buy a 30.06? Yes. If you can have only one rifle (and I mean only one rifle. ever.......) then get a 270/280/30.06.

If you can own two rifles then I recommend that you get a short action and a long action magnum.

If you can own a lot of rifles than go nuts and treat the rifles like golf clubs, one for every need.


I guess that's why my next rifle will be a 308 from New Ultra Light Arms. It just seems to fit a niche in my current inventory.

A 30-06 will do everything a .308 will, only better.

To me sounds like you overstate the power of short actions underestimate the 30-06 family and jump straight to magnums. Not a critter in North America I would feel handicapped chasing with a 270, 280, or 30-06 with an appropriate bullet.

I understand and agree with everything you just said

I have 3006 I would love to change but there is nothing I want with the long action

I still use a 30-06, my favorite round, but also like a 308. i just like a 30 cal, works for me and the ranges i am comfortable with. Dont own a 270 280 or a 6.5, but if i came across the right gun/deal id probably buy it since i dont have one and try it. But im sure id always end toting my 30-06.

I have shot all 3 at some point. I doubt they will ever be irrelevant, but they will never be new again either. Today hunters and shooters are drawn to new things even if it duplicates something that has a 100 year track record. I'm one of those people.

280AI will always be interesting to me.

I'm going to sell all of my rifles chambered for either the .30-06 or .270 and replace them with 6.5 Creedmoors.

Not.

I don’t have anything against all the “latest and greatest”, but I do feel like posting this meme (with appropriate newest ‘hot’ caliber inserted) sometimes.

The '06 family of cartridges aren't going anywhere.

I have lots of different calibers just because I want them.

But I’m under no illusion that I “need” them. I could get by with two rifles for NA and three for the world without a sweat. Maybe one and two, respectively-but I might sweat just a little bit.

I have a lot of caliber, but the 30-06 has been my go-to caliber for the last 3 years. I have become a fan of .30 caliber and larger. Hoping to add a 460XVR rifle to the heard this year

Yes it will with more weight, size and more recoil.




I never said a short action would do everything a 30.06 based cartridge would do. I said that a 30.06 is over power for most and under power for others.




The 280AI did make my long list. It really is a very capable chambering. I really loved my last two 280's.




Dude, that's just wrong on so many levels.........





I pretty much agreed with you already.





That's how I think of rifles too.





I guess I should predicate my semi-uneducated opinion little more.
I currently own and shoot a few rifles. From left to right.
223 Rem, 243 win, 6.5x47 Lapua, 7mm-08, 30-30 (My absolute favorite rifle. Ask me why later), 338 Edge. (Not Pictured for some reason or another, 7mm LRM and 6XC and a few others that I was too lazy to pull put of the safe)



I owned quite a few 30.06 based rifles and ended up selling them over the last few years. None of these had any real sentimental value to me so I never looked back and always invested the funds in a new rifle. I am a bit of a long range junkie even though I have taken a lot more animals with a bow than I think I ever will with a rifle so I tended to look towards downrange ballistics and terminal performance. Over the past couple of years that has started to change.

I have started looking at what I hunt, where I hunt and what it I need to harvest it.
For me the long action, standard calibers have always been an option but I found that I could most often get by with a short action, usually the 7mm-08 or the 6.5x47 Lapua. When I thought I really needed something with more knock down power I considered a 280 or 30.06 but always went with the 7mm LRM and 180 gr. bullets.
I took my first elk cow with a 280 but since then I have always carried either a 308 or 7mm LRM. There was nothing wrong with the 280 but I have wanted either a lighter, more compact rifle or something that could shoot a better, heavier bullet with a lot more authority. Since then I really haven't looked back. I even sold one of my Hill Country 280's on this forum.

I don't think the 30.06 will ever go away or really be obsolete but I do believe that there are better choices if you take the time to think about what you are hunting and what you need.

I cannot think of one animal that I wouldn’t think some caliber other than the .30-06 would be a better choice to use. Mainly because I either would want something flatter or something with more punch. For that reason, I have never hunted with one.

But the calling card of the .30-06 is that it is very versatile. Which is not a bad thing at all.

Don't do that.

Looking at it all from the opposite vantage point, there ain't a cartridge out there that's indispensable.

That’s true. But the .300 Win Mag comes close.

So I take from that most long post that I need to sell my 270 and buy 13 short actions to be more efficient.

280ai is my favorite rifle.

I don't feel that they are becoming irrelevant. The 06 has been around for a long time and it does the same job it did in the game woods for these many years. What I think is there are short action rounds that mirror (or maybe surpass) the performance on their long action brothers. But, I don't see the 25-06, 270, 280, 30-06, 338-06, 35 Whelen dying off.

A lot of coworkers family/friends and some of my infrequent buddies aren't gun nuts like some of us here and they go to the store and typically always purchase a 270 or 30-06 because of their credibility.

Since I was a small child I've watched the firearms industry try to outsell each other, with this one introducing this cartridge and another introducing that cartridge. What I haven't seen is any real advantage in what was being sold 50 years ago and today. The short mags are still short of the performance of the longer mag's. The 308 is still an under achiever when compared to the 30-06 as is the 300 WSM when compared to the 300 Weatherby. Screaming 6.5's have been around far longer than I've been around as have mediocre 6.5's. With the exception of the long magnums I see everybody still chasing the performance of the old standards. They can't beat it so they just try to out market it. As far as short action light rifles go you get what you pay for and pay for the difference. Why all of a sudden an 8.5 to 9 lb rifle is to heavy is beyond me.

^^Agreed

And I would pick the 280 out of those three.

There was a time when I would disagree but with the bullet selection for the 7-mm I will no more.

Of course, if someone gave me a .30-06 I would say "thank you" and would not change the rifle. I would develop a load for it, with something heavier than a 178 gr, and enjoy.

Trends come and they go. At the turn of the century, the beltless ultra magnums were the craze. Then came the short magnums, now it's nonmagnum short actions. In five years, it will be something else.

There’s a reason that every new cartridge gets compared to a 30-06, 270, or 25-06.

I have eight 30-06's, I am on the fence if the cartridge is any good

Curious, how you ended with eight 30-06's?

I wish the 338 federal would have taken off instead of the 6.5 creedmore.

The 30-06 and 270 have survived this long because of a number of reasons. Familiarity, tradition, results are some of those. Plus, it helps that for years you could find a box of cartridges for sale almost any small-town USA if needed. Not so with a lot of other cartridges.
I have always had an aversion to the 30-06 for some unexplained reason, and still don’t use mine even though I have several.

I love my 06's but lately I have been loading/shooting/hunting an even more marginalized cartridge, 8x57, and loving it. The thing that makes these old war dogs fun is that all the powder development that makes potent tiny cartridges, unleashes a new level of performance from these antiques. And often with longer, heavier, and more slippery bullets. Sure these may not be optimal in every/any metric, but they have gotten the job done for a very long time and continue to improve with time.

-ww

Its a long story but my Dad started it and my son is carrying an 06 now too.

Each one is interesting to me and there are a couple more that have eluded me over the years but I am still looking.

Irrelevant? Like animals just quit paying attention to being shot with one and move on? Or just not as popular as the new whizbang? The ‘06 and its offspring are still more popular than just about anything else from folks I talk to, both in Texas and out west-if magnums are excluded from discussion. If you take a trip to the desert or mountains and forget your whizbang ammo you will probably be S.O.L.! The ammo you can find almost everywhere will usually include the ‘06 and it’s variants.

Got called away and absentmindedly hit ‘submit’.. Anyway, on a more serious note, it sounds like that family of cartridges are obsolete for YOU. The cool thing is we have so many choices! I miss my 7mag, never missed any of my .300win mags, and would’ve had more fun with the .338 if it just didn’t seem to sit around waiting for big stuff. I finally decided to stick with .243 for my SA although I also have a .308. If I was going long action I’d probably go 7mag again-I just liked it!

30-06 and .270 - No way
.280 - Probably close based only on sales and the number of manufacturers who offer it. Ironically, the .280 is by far my favorite of the three.

This thread is funny. It shows a total break from reality for some.

I know it will be very hard for some to believe but the 270, 30-06, 7mm Rem Mag, 243 & 308 are still probably the most popular big game cartridges.

Cheap cup & core flat base ammo with terrible BCs are probably what a vast majority of hunters use.

Most hunters use scopes with a duplex with with no exposed turrets that probably costs under $400.

It's amazing those ill informed dummies manage to kill so many big animals every year.

Your comment here is actually quite insightful. Modern equipment is so good that just about anyone who tries can kill a deer at 75 yards with off the shelf standard grade equipment. Some of the people on this forum forget that we're typical members of an atypical group. 98% of the hunting public just wants to buy something cheap and good, zero it once and then shoot a deer at 50 - 80 yards. The active posters on this forum tend to be members of the other 2% ...

I'm a 2%er!

Yes. Yes it is.

Rifle calibers are just an easy, interesting and fun subject to discuss. But you’re right - most of the time we are talking distinctions that don’t really matter much.

For example, millions of words have been written seeking to define the perfect “sheep caliber”. Truth is just about anything from .243 through .338 would work just fine 98% of the time. But it’s fun talking about the other 2%.

The flaw in that question is black vs. interior grizzly vs. coastal brown actually does matter - a lot.

^^This. Same reason most bullets get compared to the Nosler Partition - they work over a very broad range of situations.

Do they still argue about the perfect sheep round? Layne Simpson answered that question in 1979. There’s nothing else to argue about now.

That was my point, my intention was not to disparage anyone. To your point, we argue over things 98% of the hunters couldn't care less about.

There’s a lot of 30-06 and 270 ammo sold every year, someone’s buying it.

I never wanted any other caliber than 30-06 when growing up, still my go to when deer season opens.

Based on this forum I would assume everyone is shooting at deer from 600-800yards

This forum is heavily laden with a few who think everyone who doesn’t think in terms of handloading, BCs, dialing, long range, FFP vs. SFP, building rifles, and a bunch of other stuff is basically stupid and deserving of either pity or derision - depending on the mood they are in at the moment.

you are so right, this is the Texas Hunting Forum NOT the Texas LONGRANGE Hunting Forum, great point.

I do both but too old to get deeper into the techno stuff. I'll leave this to Brian Litz

Actually, the perfect sheep round is .270 WSM. But, since it doesn’t come in the perfect sheep rifle (Sako Finnlight) - I just bought mine in .270 Win. Close enough.

There's also lots of people that forget some of us hunt hogs and coyotes a hell of a lot more days than we deer hunt. Those animals are 12 months a year. I'm going on my first and last deer hunt, for the season, next week. Historically, for the last 8 years, no doe has been shot farther than 250 yards.

If they would get the twist rates and bullets right for the .270’s, you might be on to something.

Are the 30.06/270/280 Becoming Irrelevant? Not at all. I think the 30.06 and .270 will continue on for many years to come.

I've never really heard of the .280 prior to this thread. But growing up it seemed the caliber I heard most for deer hunting is 30.06 And with the many offerings in bullet choices, its just a great round.

The .270, which is what I'm shooting, is a great flat shooting round with probably just as many ammo choices, and I think has less recoil.

Shouldn’t care about. Most agonize over details that are largely irrelevant.

I honestly expected even more pushback than I’ve seen so far.

Yes, I own what most people consider long range capable rifles but I was not advocating them over more traditional calibers. They are just what I chose to build or buy based on what I wanted to do.

Everything I stated is just my opinion. For me the 30.06 family fall into the gap and slightly overlaps the top end of the short actions and the lower end of magnums in performance. That’s why I posed the question/observation.

First thing I thought of after reading that statement was the 30-06 family sure is versatile, especially for the one rifle hunter. During the 2.5 years I sold rifles, most purchasers I sold to only had one bolt action centerfire that they used for everything. So I don’t believe the 30-06 family is already or is becoming irrelevant.

I went on a draw hunt with my Son and SIL early Dec. We each have a 308 and carried them, but I carried my old trusty 270 as a back up incase some one had a problem. Well my SIL had a problem with his rifle during the hunt. Nothing major with the rifle, but an issue that had us all questioning if he was still zeroed. We opted to put his up and I gave him my 308 to use. I felt just as ready to take on anything with my old 270 as I always had. I have always checked my zero on my hunting rifles each year. The old 270 was one of my first rifles I bought as when old enough. I had a 30/30 until thieves borrowed and did not return. I will keep the 270 for my son who loves it. I would give it to him now except I'm not through with it yet.

By the way you need another rifle because in the picture you have a scope that is looking for a good rifle. Good post though.

One of the reasons I seem to be spending less and less time on here, at least to me it seems like we're losing direction. It used to be a hunting forum.

So because people have goals and questions, and other people have answers to those questions it means we are losing direction? People are wanting to keep up with changes in equipment, and want to learn how to use it, it means we are losing direction?

The equipment, rifles/ammo/scopes, is far more capable than it was 30 years ago. "They don't build em like they ised to" That's right, it is all better now, with a few exceptions.

It doesn't take away from the fact "ya can't kill em from the couch". You still have t get out, and hunt. And many of these 2 percenters, and new thinkers are migrating away from the sit in a box blind 100 yards from a feeder, and wait for the timer, and then the animals show up right on que. I don't care if that's what some want to do. So someone else doesn't need to care if not everyone wants to operate that way.

I think where we are loosing direction is that FFP, 7mm08 or 7mag, berger-amax-eld, mil-mil turret scopes, tikka, and long range are not always the answer no matter what the question.

Ill be shooting deer with my 270 until the day I die

This is so true. Shooting deer under feeders is to hunting what McDonalds is to fine dining.
In all honesty, it's very hard for me to get excited about hunting whitetail for this exact reason. I'd rather do one spot and stalk hunt than ten box blind hunts.

I like all the calibers. Well except the 300 ultra mag I bought in high school. That thing was evil.

I'd rather hunt from a box blind then not hunt at all. The reality is Texas has almost no public land to hunt. Most of the hunting lease are small ( a few hundred acres) and set up to maximize the amount of hunters (box blinds & feeders).

This year I hunted from a box blind. I still had fun. Last two hunts were spot and stalk and I shot off sticks. I hunted low fenced Axis on 4,000 acres in Kerrville where I was the only hunter in camp. Last year, I hunted mule deer on 100,000 acres by Fort Stockton. Those spot and stalk hunts were awesome and I loved them but they were also expensive. Not everybody has the means to get access to thousands of acres to hunt.

You're exactly right. But when certain questions are posed, those are often the answers.

edit: I think much of this disdain comes from seeing the same question come up repeatedly, and those posters get the same answers from the same people.

I told my stepson last week, that if the task we're quietly stalking the creek bottoms looking for hogs, the .30-30 with irons still is, and always will be one of my favorite tools for the job.

No doubt about it. And as I said, if that's how someone wants (or has to) hunt, then good for them.

There will come a day when I'm too old to walk miles, carrying a rifle. And I'll probably be sitting in a blind with a heater and a book.

I had a Marlin 357 spitting 158s at 2050.....handy, mild blast and recoil.

A 6.5x54 MS would be another neat stalking rifle.....endless options, but not time for all.

As expected, a dedicated hunting forum will have protagonists for each of the subspecialties including rifles, optics, long range, bullets, seating depth, concentricity, etc... while the vast majority of hunters have no interest in such matters. They want to be outside, spend time with their family, put some meat in the freezer and get away from rat race of life.

I guide whitetail,elk and aoudad hunts on the looked down upon "high fenced" ranches in West Texas. The ranches stay booked up for a couple of years in advance. This year my hunters were:

30-06 elk
30-06 elk
30-06 aoudad
.308 deer
.308 deer

.270 deer
25-06 deer
300 win mag deer
30-06 deer

All of them shot factory loads and the were equally dispersed between Corelokts, Power Points and Federal blue box. The 300 win mag hunter did use factory Accubonds. We did have one rodeo with a poorly placed bullet on an elk which resulted in an all day recovery effort, but otherwise, everyone went home with a cooler of meat and a smile on their face.

I use the 30-06 exclusively. I cull deer and elk with it here in the states, and take it to Africa to shoot lots of game. I have shot the largest plains game there with no difficulty and even a buffalo(who had not read that it takes a 500 grain, 2700 fps, double rifle of English heritage to kill it). I have used it in Patagonia to make some really long shots on cull stags. It does everything needed to kill game effectively.

If you go into a gunshop in Africa or South America, they all have 30-06, .308 Win, 7 x 57, 7.62 x 39, .243, .223, 9.3 x 62 and 375 H&H. They also might have .300 Win, but not much else.

I don't think the '06 class of ammunition is going away. The '06 case is a great incinerator of powder and from .25 to .386 there are sizes for everyone.

That’s why I stated this in the original post....


If you want a truly versatile rifle then how about a 35 Whelen paired up with either a 200 grain Accubond or 225 grain Partition?

Jason, I didn't have an issue with anything you said. I was responding to the fast food analogy which I don't necessarily disagree with. I was just making the point that sometimes all you can afford or have access to is McDonalds.

Some of us are aware of how to hunt outside of sitting in a box blind 100 yards from a feeder. We are also aware that an actual hunting rifle doesn’t require a semi-custom LR rig, handloaded ammo, dialing, a 2lb scope, and a muzzle brake.

In 45+ years of hunting from Mexico to the Yukon, my longest shot has been 316 yards on a New Mexico pronghorn. I’ve been tempted to take one shot at over 400 yards in an actual hunting situation - 520 at a desert ram. I elected to stalk some more and get closer. Would I have killed the ram at 520? IDK. Would you? IDK.

What I do know: I kept stalking, got within just over 200, and am looking at him as I type this.

Killed a Dall ram this past year at 100 yards. Of course, it took a 1500’ vertical climb to get above him and put me in that position. Some couch.

Hunters who actually “get off the couch” and “don’t sit in box blinds 100 yards away from a feeder” know better than anyone that all the discussions about any and every new rifle, caliber, and scope to come down the pike may be fun, but are pretty much useless for 98% of us. And for those that buy into it and tote 12-13lb rifles around when not in their “100 yard feeder blinds”, it’s worse than useless. It’s a handicap.

Every time I read about or see on TV someone shooting at a game animal at 500 yards plus, all that comes to mind is that they need to work on their stalking - in other words, learn how to hunt.

I didn't think you took issue with anything. And I agreed with what you said.

25/06 30/06 35 whelen these will do it all its funny that there is still any argument. These guys match up still today !!

We'll have to agree to agree.

Some of these recent posts are getting heated. This is turning in to an entertaining thread.

NP,

I usually ignore you, but.

This section of the forum is titled "Rifles Shotguns & Handguns" and you're butt hurt over people talking about Rifles, Shotguns & Handguns. Well change the channel! I'll try and make this as organized as possible for you, evidently you need it.

•Of course someone does not need a custom rifle. As I said today, the equipment is better than ever. Plenty of mass produced rifles get the job done extremely well. When a guy is asking questions on what to BUILD they get answered. FAIL!

•Of course someone does not need handloaded ammo. As I said today, the equipment is better than ever. Plenty of ammo boxes off the shelf will get the job done extremely well. When a guy is asking about twist rates, bullet weights, powder charges, they get answered. FAIL!

•I've said more times than I remember, you don't have to dial a turret, learn and practice how to hold. FAIL!

•When someone wants to reduce recoil, one of the answers is in fact a muzzle brake. FAIL!

•520 on a ram? Depends on what the wind is doing. I brainstemmed a cow elk in September, so the distance is not a problem.

•Again, talking about the latest and greatest is what this place is partially for. If you do not want to change anything, fine, no one is trying to force you to do so. FAIL!

•A 12 to 13 pound rifle is not that heavy for some people. Look up what a Barrett .50 BMG weighs. Some of our best tote those in the mountains of Afghanistan. And you have even said you don't like to shoot the ultralite rifles, but today that is not your agenda, so you are flip-flopping, yet again. FAIL!

•Assuming someone that makes a clean kill from 500 yards can't stalk is just silly. I've killed a coyote at 10 yards as well as 600. Closed in on hogs at 20 yards 3 weeks ago. I'll repeat myseld yet again, having the ability to make shots that far is nothing more than a tool in the toolbox, in case it is needed. But you won't, or can't, accept that.

And I'm sure I just wasted several minutes addressing all this, one more time, because all you are going to do is dig in your heels, no matter how wrong you are. Nothing new under the sun.

The fact that the 30-06 is still a "standard" for comparison after 110+ years and the 270 has been holding it's own 90+ years says it all.

That said, I don't own either but grew up in a house full of 30-06s.
I don't need that much gun due to my limited shooting range available.
The closet I could get would be my "270 Lite" 6.8 pig gun.

I think it comes from people being stuck in their ways and closed minded. Its okay to do things that weren't don't by your dad, grampa, great grampa and on and on.

My uncle had an early Rem 700 in .30-06. I used it to kill a few deer when my uncle had a shoulder problem and swapped me for my .243 for use during the season. Only once do I remember the recoil while shooting a deer with it, and probably because I didn't have it shouldered exactly as I should. However, I remember every single shot I took sighting it in. Because nobody else wanted to shoot the 'buster', they made the kid do it, year after year. It was not pleasant to shoot.

Are they obsolete? No, but advancements have cut into their piece of the pie. Efficiencies in engineering/design have developed cartridges that are smaller, have less recoil, are cheaper to mfg, but produce results that are nearly as effective. The same thing is happening in the truck world. Now you get 1/2 ton trucks with 350-400hp, that tow as much or more than older 3/4 tons, and get better mileage than their predecessors.

Most of us have a lot more disposable income than people did 30-40 years ago. Even though most hunters can easily make do with one or two guns, it's not uncommon for guys to now have 4-5 rifles. So you can have a slim .243 for walking/stalking, a 6.5 or 7mm for BR and LR, a hot .22 for varmints, a .308/.338 Fed/.45-70 for hogs, an AR for hogs/plinking/defense/ammo dumps, and a .300+ magnum for elk/bear/moose/etc.

Agreed.

Agreed.

My issue is not that I want to “dig in my heels”. I’m fine with how anyone wants to skin their particular cat.
My only point is there is more than one way to do so. And some of those ways don’t involve an operating room, a scalpel, and and 300 days a year of practice on cat-skinning.

We all know you can shoot LR (and,lest we forget, you let us know regularly - on just about every thread). That’s great. I admire you for your skill in that regard. I really do. But not everyone who comes on here has it, needs it, or even wants it. Not everyone thinks it’s necessary to make it our life’s work to “practice” shooting, MIL/MIL holds, handloading, or any of a dozen other things you regularly preach to us about. That doesn’t make us lesser hunters.

My real issue is that the responses you just gave above are, by and large, not the responses you normally give when someone comes on this forum with a question about a rifle, caliber, bullet, or optic to be used for hunting. Your responses generally take the tenor that if one doesn’t build a braked rifle of 7mm caliber on a Tikka action with handloaded ammo and FFP MIL/MIL optic - one is not doing it right. And that just isn’t so.

The recent tt85 thread is the latest example of many.

Thank you for you invitation to “change the channel, but this forum is not the personal property of one or two people - no matter how much those one or two want it to be so.

From Rifles, Shotguns & Handguns


From Hog Hunting section, same day.

I like the 7mm-08 just fine for hogs and deer.

I guess you wanna ignore the first line completely.

Kinda surprised you haven't advised him to build a braked one to handloaded specs on a Tikka action with a FFP MIL/MIL scope though.

Never plan on owning any of the three mentioned. 6.5 Saum or 300WM for me if I need the extra power. Have a 7/338LM but that's just ridiculous.

Nothing I plan on doing that the 6.5CM won't handle with less recoil and great trajectory.

I will always have a 30-06.i'll leave it at that.

These cartridges are not irreverent! They are the standard to be measured by. I really think that gun and ammo makers need to hype the new stuff so they can sell to us the catchy names work and when your friend or brother gets new one you know you will soon.

Y'all calm down.

To the OP - NO they aren't going anywhere. They have always been/will always be a standard. I like to consider them some of our "Founding Fathers" so to speak. If I had to choose ONE rifle for anything it would be a 270. I hope my old trusty 243 doesn't hear that.

Here is a chart for sales by volume in the US for 2015 that is interesting:




http://knowledgeglue.com/what-are-the-most-popular-calibers-in-the-us/

Interesting that 308 now sells more than twice the volume of 30-06, which was a bit of a surprise.

Also interesting that 30-30 is still in the top 20 and ahead of 270.


Anyway, 308, 30-06, 30-30 and 270 appear to dominate the "deer hunting" rounds in sales volume.

Really interesting .308 Win and 7.62 X 39 beat .30-06.

But I suspect it has been that way for a decade, or more.

I’m having a real hard time swallowing that list. At a glance it has: 1) the .50 black powder outselling the .270 Win, 2)the .45 Long Colt being just behind it and in the top 20.

If you look at the entire list, it has the .50 BMG at #38 - ahead of 7mm-08 at #60 and the 6.5 Creedmoor at #69.

Uhhhh, nope.

I’m gonna look some more.

NP,

Please dig around for lists, I was having a hard time finding them other than a detailed industry report which costs $4,000 to access.

The long list confirms Scott's earlier observation.




Here is the long list:




http://knowledgeglue.com/what-are-the-most-popular-calibers-in-the-us/

12 gauge in two places - 4 and 23?
.40 S&W - #6 and .40 cal - #12?
.22 WMR - #26 and .22 Magnum - #28?

Those are all the same calibers/gauges.

Uh, uh.

Here’s a couple I found - not all inclusive, but interesting and more what I would expect:
Rifle ammo only (from Federal) and all ammo:

Lists are hard to find and it’s sometimes hard to tell what’s included. I think if a list includes worldwide sales and military uses that has a huge effect also.

Not sure what to glean from the Federal list as it is limited to rifle rounds made by Federal without numbers or percentages attached. How many 308 vs. 30-06 vs. 300 WM vs. 300 WSM? The Federal list is nice in that it excludes the pistol and shotgun rounds. Excluding the pistol rounds, the Top 10 list and the top five on the Federal list appear to be identical, and substantially similar after that.

The Lucky Gunner chart only shows two "deer rifle" rounds, 308 and 223 in its top 10 volume sales and that is giving the benefit of doubt to the 223. (I'm not including 7.62x39, guessing that is mostly preppers loading up for their AK's.) 270 and 30-06 did not even make that top ten list, which is a real surprise. Why do you think neither are on that Lucky Gunner top 10 list?

That long list likely includes sales to government agencies, which likely would explain the 50 BMG.

I don’t know. Don’t know a thing about it, its sources, etc. I’m just skeptical of that list for a number of reasons.

You may be right about the military effect.

They all show the same basic pattern of the most popular "deer rifle" rounds. The Lucky Gunner chart is the only one that appears to be different to a significant degree. 7-08 did not show up on either of the list you found, nor did 6.5 CM or many others that are popular here.

The NRA chart shows the 30-30 still outselling 270 like the other list does, which is a real surprise to me. Very few people in the forum talk about hunting with 30-30 and yet it is one of the most popular in the country. Just shows there is a lot of variation outside of the limited areas in which we live and hunt.

I’m thinking the 6.5 Creedmoor will show up more prominently when newer lists come out.



I’m surprised about the .30-30 still hanging so strong also.

Doubtless it is climbing and will continue to do so. It has been out for ten years, but seems to really have gained traction in the last 2 - 3.

Hornady is really working on innovating and building market share. Winchester and Remington ammo quality has slipped badly and is handing sales shares to Hornady and others.

Here's what Chuck Hawks has to say on the matter (Hate him or love him):

The following list was compiled from various online and print sources, including the major ammo manufacturers' sales lists and the sales of RCBS reloading dies. The various sources tend to parallel each other, with certain exceptions. Bear in mind that a lot (probably the majority) of .223 and 7.62x39 ammo sold is for plinking or "tactical" use, not hunting. The same probably applies to a lower, but still significent, percentage of the .308 ammo sold.

The .223, .308, .30-06, .30-30, .270, .243, 7mm Rem. Mag. and .300 Win. Mag. appear on almost all lists. The .22-250, 7.62x39mm, .300 WSM, .338 Win. Mag. and 7mm-08 Rem. have appeared on at least one list, but not others, while the .222 Remington, .30 Carbine and .303 British (once Top 10 stalwarts on most lists) have dropped back in popularity. The .300 Win. Mag. and 7mm Rem. Mag. swap places on some lists. Anyway, here are the averaged results based on the data that I could find. Consider it approximate.

USA (Averaged 2015 sales rank)

.223 Remington
.308 Winchester
.30-06 Springfield
.30-30 Winchester
.270 Winchester
.243 Winchester
7mm Remington Magnum
.300 Winchester Magnum
7.62x39mm Soviet
.22-250 Remington

Honorable Mention: .300 WSM, 7mm-08 Rem. and .338 Win. Mag.

Source:

http://www.chuckhawks.com/best_selling_rifle_cartridges.htm

That is more in line with what I would expect. Good analysis that the .223/5.56, 7.62x39 and .308 not all being used for hunting also.

That the .300 WSM sells so strongly even though the ballistic equivalent to its parent .300 WM is interesting too.

I'm surprised 22lr is not at the top.

I would not have been surprised if 12 or 20 gauge wasn't at the top because I would bet that trap, skeet, and sporting clays are probably the most popular shooting sports but I'm not sure which gauge is most commonly used for that.

Ya need to throw in one more number into that equation and that's what's used for plinking and hunting. I'm not going to go out and send 100 rounds of 270 or 06 against the side of a berm just to see how many bottles I can hit. That type of shooting is mainly reserved for pistols and rifles designed around military style rifles and rounds. I might go out and put a couple a hundred rounds out of my AR's just for fun but I'd never do it with any of my bolt actions. Just because certain calibers have a higher volume of sales is pretty meaningless unless you restrict the numbers to rounds fired while hunting. I know I'm not explaining this right but let's just say I don't hunt with the calibers I plink with.

Yes. That’s what Hawks is talking about above.
There are guys down the road from my place who will shoot more 9mm and .223 in one afternoon than total rounds I will fire in 3 lifetimes.

I was never sure if the “list” thing was for overall, civilian only, hunting only, or what.

A “hunting only” list would look much different than the other two.

It would be nice to see rifle sales by caliber for each year since 2010 or so. I do know that when I recently visited two of my LGS, they had more new guns in .308 and 6.5 Creedmoor than all others put together, ARs not withstanding. But that is a pretty small sample size in Lubbock, TX.

I wouldn't feel under gunned at all chasing anything, inclusive of bears, in north America with a 3006. 3006 is about what 150 fps slower than a 300 win mag, no critter on earth will know the difference.

Will it almost certainly do fine? Sure.

I just believe in erring on the upside rather than the downside - especially on stuff that can kill you if all doesn’t go perfectly.
The “minimum caliber” or “will it work” discussion takes on a whole new dimension with dangerous game.

And, yeah there is a difference between a .30-06 and a .300 Win, .338 Win, and .375 H&H. And yes, under certain circumstances - they will know the difference.

Large calibers exist for a reason. That the vast majority of the folks who chase coastal brown bear with something bigger is no accident.

http://www.cabelas.com/product/Best-Bores-For-Big-Bears/532060.uts

in a 150 grain loading its 365 fps slower than a .300 win mag and yes, critters do know the difference. the .300 win shines in 165 grain and up loadings.


however, the .30-06 is a great caliber. the .300 win mag is just better all the way around.


what I don't get is everyone touting these short action rounds and then chambering them in full size rifles. it saves maybe a 1/3rd to a 1/2 lb of weight....almost nothing.

in a model 7 rifle or something small like a Kimber Adirondack yes a short action makes a lot of sense. in a full size gun with a 24" barrel its ridiculous to say its better than a long action round of the same bullet caliber.

Cherry picking your load data can lead you to believe that. There is not that huge a difference and I do not believe they will know. I would also probably not pick a 165 for bears in either a 30-06 or 300 win mag. I'd be at least 180 and probably 200-220 grain in either and you can bet your life it wouldn't be a berger or eldx, probably a partition or maybe even an a-frame.

Yes there is no purpose in getting a WSM if the action size is the same and/or no weight savings result. IMO though a 1/2 lb. is worth saving if it's in a rifle you like anyway.

In my Finnlight it saved 1/4 lb. and just under an inch in length to go with the .300 WSM. That was worth it to me. YMMV.

An exception might be the .270 WSM because it gains 150-200 fps over the .270 Win.

That is from hornady website.

Tested with a 24" barrel

I wouldn't pick one load from one manufacturer and idolize or condemn a cartridge from it.

It's across the board a .300 win mag is superior to the 06', the .300 wby to them both and the .30-378 beats them al, including the ultra mag

Imo why I don't like a .30-06 is in a sporter weight gun you get almost magnum recoil without the performance.

If I am gonna get pounded either way I want the bullet to be sizzling. It's not a bad round at all but it's not a .300 win mag


The .270 and .280 is much more pleasant to shoot.

In same weight bullets they should be nearly identical.

The .30-06 is a fine round.

But it's not a .300 Win Mag - or a .338 Win Mag - or a .375 Ruger/H&H. That there (as I like to say) is just physics.

There are only two reasons not to use a larger caliber for large, tough and/or dangerous game:

1)It's all you have and you don't want to buy or borrow another rifle;or
2)The added recoil of the larger rounds poses an issue for someone/affects their ability to place shots with the same degree of accuracy (really the whole reasoning behind the article Jeff posted).

If either 1 or 2 is an issue, that's fine. It's probably better that the smaller caliber is used.

I took my first elk with a .338 Win Mag, and am glad I had it because it anchored him in a spot that saved about a half day an an arduous packing job. I have taken two of my three sheep with a .300 Win Mag and WSM, respectively. Took a big black bear with a .300 Win mag. I have never had an issue with the recoil of either round - sighting the rifles in or otherwise. I have never noticed recoil on any rifle in a hunting situation. In short, recoil up to .and including the .338 has never been an issue for me.

So, why would I consider taking a .30-06 on a brown bear hunt when I have used larger caliber rifles on other game with zero issues?

I guess all I'm saying is that if one chooses to go a little lighter than others choose to go - that's their prerogative. And that's fine. But it's not intellectually honest to posit that the reason for doing so is because "they're all the same" or "the animals will never know the difference". Because: 1)they're not and 2) in some circumstances, they will.

Irrelevant? No. Less relevant? I think so. For people who already have rifles in those calibers, they're fine. If you're picking a rifle out from scratch, why would you pick a .270 when the 6.5 creedmoor exists? Why would you pick a 30-06 when the .300WM exists?

Those caliber popularity charts were interesting. Can't believe 6.5CM was at #69 just 3-4 years ago. Would be very interested to see where it's at now. I personally believe that could be one of the biggest game-changer new calibers in the shooting industry that I will see in my lifetime.

More reading that I find hard to argue with:

Inside of 300 yards, where the vast majority of hunting and shooting is done, its irrelevant though.

I cant argue that. I have a 300 wby with a 200 grain partition load it likes and I have no issues shooting it. My statement is I want to see something I cant... the measuarable difference in how dead a 300 win mag makes a bear and how dead a 30-06 makes one. There is simply no way to test it because every animal is different, every shot is different etc. My guess is if you shot the same bear with either ceteris paribus, shot placement, bullet, etc. that you would never see a different result.

What's a ceteris paribus?

all else staying the same, economics term, sorry.

In other words shoot a bear with a 300 win mag, then rewind time and shoot the same bear at the same moment with the exact same shot placement with a 30-06 instead.

My comments weren't really so much related to the relevance of the differences between the calibers in terms of terminal ballistics on game, but the relevance of the caliber within the industry as a whole.

Cant argue that at all, but I would guess hunting is what drives the sale of 30-06 and 270.

I agree with you. In many (if not most) instances - the result will be the same. With good shot placement, the odds of it being the same are increased exponentially. Certainly, if you obliterate the heart or both lungs or hit the spine with either caliber I don’t think it will matter one bit.

In some cases (maybe even a very few) the result will be different. Even with good shot placement - because the increased energy will cause additional wound channel (and other factors I am not knowledgeable enough to discuss intelligently). And in some cases the added energy can result in reaching/affecting vitals that would not have been reached/affected with the .30-06 (the increased “margin for error” so often discussed).

Those instances may never occur. With good shot placement, they almost certainly won’t.
But I would like to “edge up” if I can, mainly because the thought of tracking a brownie in the alders or preventing/stopping a charge is not appealing to me in the least.

OK, time for me to quit beating this dead horse, as I am the main guilty party.

Larger calibers come in handy with less then ideal shots or angles. I shot a pig the other day with a 243. The only shot I had was from behind. The pig left a blood trail onto the neighbors place. A bigger heavier bullet would have given better penetration. My 375 Ruger would have anchored before it took a step with the same shot placement. Either way the pig would be dead. It's just a matter of location.

In my mind I'm throwing a 200-220 grain partition out of either, I'm not worried about penetration in the least.

I agree. Its just the dead is dead crowd trying to basically say everything is equal with the same shot placement and it's not.

Agree. Just like shooting a deer with a Nosler Partition will likely kill a deer just as dead as a FMJ, but one would be a fool to think the bullet performance was equal just because the end result was "dead".

Found what I was really looking for earlier.

Here is a poll of favorite big game caliber and link from the Alaska equivalent to this forum.

Round # votes % of votes

.223 1 0.33%

.243 1 0.33%

7mm-08 3 0.98%

.270 11 3.61%

.308 20 6.56%

30-06 75 24.59%

.300 Win Mag 92 30.16%

.338 wm, ruger, -06 56 18.36%

.375 H&H or Ruger 43 14.10%

.458 or larger 3 0.98%

http://forums.outdoorsdirectory.com/show...-in-Alaska-2015


Here is an excerpt from the Alaska Department of Game & Fish with what seems to be well thought out comments. (emphasis added)

Select a quality bullet

If you presently own a rifle chambered for the .270 Winchester, 7mm-08, .308 Winchester or .30-06 and can place all of your shots in an 8-inch circle out to 200 yards from a sitting or kneeling position you can be a successful Alaska hunter. To be as effective as possible, these cartridges should be loaded with premium quality bullets that are designed to pass completely through a large game animal, if hit in the heart-lung area.

Big Magnums Not Needed

The rifle you bring hunting should be one with which you are comfortable. Because of the presence of brown and grizzly bears, many hunters have been convinced that a .300, .338, .375, or .416 magnum is needed for personal protection and to take large Alaska game. This is simply not true. The recoil and noise of these large cartridges is unpleasant at best and plainly painful to many shooters. It is very difficult to concentrate on shot placement when your brain and body remembers the unpleasant recoil and noise which occurs when you pull the trigger on one of the big magnums.

The two most common complaints of professional Alaska guides are hunters who are not in good physical condition and hunters who cannot accurately shoot their rifles. Because these hunters do not practice enough they cannot shoot accurately enough. They miss their best chance at taking their dream animal or worse yet, they wound and lose an animal. Most experienced guides prefer that a hunter come to camp with a .270 or .30-06 rifle they can shoot well rather than a shiny new magnum that has been fired just enough to get sighted-in. If you are going to hunt brown bear on the Alaska Peninsula or Kodiak Island, a .30-06 loaded with 200- or 220-grain Nosler® or similar premium bullet will do the job with good shot placement. Only consider using a .300, .338 or larger magnum if you can shoot it as well as you can the .30-06.

It is very popular now to purchase large magnum rifles equipped with a muzzle brake. Most muzzle brakes are very effective at reducing recoil. A .375 magnum with a muzzle brake recoils much like a .30-06. Before convincing yourself that you should use a muzzle-braked rifle, consider its disadvantages. A muzzle-brake increases the muzzle blast and noise to levels that quickly damage the ear. Even when just sighting in or practicing, everyone near you at the range will find the blast and noise bothersome. Anyone near the muzzle brake when the rifle is fired may suffer hearing loss or physical damage to the ear. You cannot wear ear protection when you are hunting and neither can your hunting partners or guide. An increasing number of guides will not allow a hunter to use a muzzle brake because of the danger of hearing loss.

Rifle Weight Reduces Recoil

Rather than rely on a muzzle-brake to reduce recoil, use a rifle heavy enough to reduce recoil. If you are planning on packing out moose meat, caribou meat, or a brown bear hide weighing hundreds of pounds, you can carry a 9- to 11-pound rifle including scope. A rifle of this weight in .300 or .338 magnum can be mastered with a lot of practice. You can also avoid using a muzzle-brake by selecting a cartridge that you can shoot comfortably and enjoy shooting enough to practice with frequently. For most hunters, the upper limit of recoil is the .30-06 or 7mm Remington Magnum®. A majority of hunters are more comfortable with a .308 or .270.


http://www.adfg.alaska.gov/index.cfm?adfg=hunting.firearms

Notice how that article specifically names a 200-220 grain nosler? I bet they don't mean ballistic tips

I have sure heard from a lot of guides that many, many of their clients do bring a brand new magnum they are not familiar with (and are about half scared of) with them on hunts.

This is the best line of that article.

“If you are planning on packing out moose meat, caribou meat, or a brown bear hide weighing hundreds of pounds, you can carry a 9- to 11-pound rifle including scope.”

12 gauge is used much more than 20 gauge in clays shooting and hunting.

Probably 1/2 the .308 is shot at ranges at paper.

Oh look at that!

"can place all of your shots in an 8-inch circle out to 200 yards from a sitting or kneeling position you can be a successful Alaska hunter."


"The two most common complaints of professional Alaska guides are hunters who are not in good physical condition and hunters who cannot accurately shoot their rifles. Because these hunters do not practice enough they cannot shoot accurately enough"

It has never lost its' stride. And in the world of AR hog hunting, much with thermal scopes, it (again) is becomming a highly desired combination.

I am 53 years old, have never “practiced” shooting a gun in my life, and don’t have any plans to start.

Some of us grew up roaming the countryside with a rifle in our hands. We didn’t come to shooting as a decision, we were raised in it. I don’t “practice” riding a bike or swimming either. I learned how to do both as a kid - and I still can.

Now, if I ever decide to ride my bike across America or swim the English Channel - some practice might be in order.

Just like if I decide to start sniping game at 500+ yards or become a competition benchrest shooter.

Those basic instructions/admonitions that Fish and Game Departments have to give these days are the unfortunate result of an influx of out of shape and inexperienced folks that a more urban society produces deciding they want to come to the big country and shoot them some stuff. They weren’t necessary 50 years ago. But, times are changing.

Blah, blah, blah.

100% chance you could be challenged making hunting shots, 300 yards and less, using whatever you have available, or just your body, and maybe your pack. No prone, no bench. Never have I had anyone out that wasn't challenged. 12 years old to 70 years old.

In two months there will be some whining about this very scenario.

Maybe so.

All I’m saying is that preaching that everyone is created equal and needs to “practice” shooting to be successful in the field is simply not true.
Your focus is on shooting - which is understandable because that’s your passion, you own a shooting range, and get paid to teach shooting.

My focus is on hunting. My passion is on: 1)locating my quarry, 2)getting in close, and then 3)killing it.

Without 1, 2 and 3 are irrelevant.
If you are skilled at 2 - 3 is not a huge deal.

70% of hunting is #1, 20% is #2, and 10% is #3. (Argue with the exact percentages if you wish, but the point still stands.)

You are a fine shooter and have much to teach. I’m sure more practice could help me some with #3. How much? Who knows. (Under 300, I’m not thinking a whole lot - but I could be wrong.) Nevertheless, that’s playing on the margins as far as actual hunting is concerned.

#3 gets all the ink with reams of stuff about load data, caliber discussion, rifle makes, optics ins and outs, and on and on and on and on.......

1 and 2 don’t lend themselves to a lot of ink/discussion - because the only way to improve at them is to get out in the field and hunt. It’s much easier to focus on #3 - go shoot off a few dozen rounds and then get on the computer and talk equipment, ballistics, sectional density, etc. I get it, and understand why.

But if folks really want to become better hunters, 90% of their time should be spent on 1 and 2.

In other words, hunting.

Ive been hunting my whole life. If you were to put me on a game animal at 300 yards in the middle of a flat field no bipod not pack all I had was me and the rifle I'm not sure If I would pull the trigger. I would have to see how steady I could get building a position off elbows and knees, but chances are I would not fire.

Exactly.

There are techniques to making that shot. And it is always difficult. I call that "fighting the wobble". You're going to sway, the trick is figuring out a way to reduce the size of the sway. Dry firing is very helpful. You know when you hear the "click" of the firing pin, where the reticle was. And you can call a hit or a miss. It only costs time, no money.

But when an animal is in the scope, and the adrenaline is pumping, it is even more difficult. That's where what we say in Fire, Police, and Military "train like you fight". Hopefully, when the adrenaline is pumping, you have some muscle memory to overcome it, and get the job done.

But, evidently someone else is an expert marksman, with zero practice. I think even Beethoven practiced.

Except this is the Rifles section....still.

If you want to talk about those techniques, please sit down on Microsoft Word and write an article about it. Then copy/ paste and post it in the Open Hunting section. No telling who might benefit from it. Or would you rather just bellyache about people talking about rifles, and shooting them, in the Rifles section, instead of acting on what you believe more people should spend more time on?

I used a large rock and prone position to take the longest shot I've made on a game animal. Although it's been a long time, I also shot 4H .22 rifle in high school and learned a few things there. Lack of practice has no doubt led to serious erosion of any skills I once had.

Lol you could look for days and not find a rock on our place

The dry fire idea was suggested to me on here from Chad, I was always skeptical of it damaging the firing pin so never did it, but it has proven to be a very good practice technique.

Tell you another trick. Almost everybody has a 6' step ladder at home. Use the rungs, at all heights, to support the rifle. Figure out what you do with your body to get the rifle still. Then, in the wild, you may find a tree branch, a fence, a trailer, something at those heights. You'll be better prepared to use said object to help support the rifle.

Dry fire is excellent practice.

My my parents were pretty lax in their rules, they trusted me not to shoot myself or anyone so from the time I was about 12 years old and on I had a gun cabinet in my room that had my rifles and shotguns in it.

I used to practice weekly dry firing using field positions and although I was just a bored kid killing time ( this was before iPhone, internet, etc.) it did carry over and I can say I’m a fairly proficient shot in the field.

I only shoot off a bench to zero my guns it serves very little purpose to shoot round after round from the bench if you are looking to practice. in all honesty if a person would plink a brick of .22's every quarter from various positions and yardage it would do wonders to improve their shooting abilities.


chevy,

the sitting field position is the most steady. get your rifle, get on your butt and rest both elbows below both knees until you find whats steady. ive taken several animals from this position and you will be surprised on how accurate you can shoot this way. offhand is the least steadiest and typically you will be reduced to a 75-100 yard max range from this position, and yes, you will wobble and move, what I do is control the wobbles and squeeze off when the crosshairs are about to cross where I want them to be.

Same here. Other than initial zero all shooting for every rifle I own is done in the field, in field conditions, from field positions. Unfortunately our deer, bear and moose don't visit the range much so the field is where I have to practice. Probably the toughest is at -20 in the wind standing on snowshoes offhand - my ethical range goes from 400 yards prone in the summer to 80 yards doing this when shooting my 1/2 MOA 260 rem.

Maybe I could and maybe I couldn’t . But I won’t ever have to, because 1)in 98% of my hunting there are no flat areas where I can even see 300 yards and 2)when that’s a possibility, I always have at least a daypack and lightweight shooting sticks in it with me. Even walking back from the blind to the house. In that scenario, it’s the lack of a steady rest that makes the shot hard, not the distance.

The best (and easiest) way to prepare for the possibility of hard shots is to make plans ahead of time to avoid them entirely. So that’s where I choose to concentrate my time and energy. At normal ranges, that’s no trick. Find a rest, make a rest, or bring one with you.

First time I ever did the qualification in the Army I had maybe 15 hits out of 40. This is shooting open sights from prone supported with sandbag, prone unsupported, and kneeling. Targets from 50-300 meters. By the end of basic training I was hitting around 35 on average. So yes practice does help especially with confidence. I haven’t qualified in a few years but I’d bet with a couple tries I could be back in the 35/40 Range and that’s with full combat gear. The more you shoot the more confidence you build and the better you get. Especially true for uncomfortable hasty shots where you don’t have time to get as comfortable as possible.i prefer to do most my practice on hogs as it gives me a chance to practice on moving targets as well.

Exactly right.

In the next week or so, I should receive a new barreled action. It is a .223 A.I. and the action and barrel contour match my 6.5 Creedmoor. The point of those is called a "trainer". You're not costing barrel life on a competition rifle, but you still get the feel and maneuverability, all while burning less powder and a cheaper bullet. Being left handed, I have to wait 6 months on stocks. So I'll have a switch stock. Two screws, pull the 6.5 Creedmoor barreled action out, and replace with a .223 A.I. barreled action. Some guys even do this with .22 lr and shorten the distance. Same principle, modified positions.

The last page of this thread has been incredibly useful. As a kid who grew up with a bb gun shooting nothing other than birds in the trees, I never learned how to shoot any way other than offhand with a super-light rifle that wasn't very accurate. Dad was a fisherman, not a hunter, so I just never got into et either. I have recently (the last 2-3 years) spent a lot of time bench shooting, but I didn't realize til I took Jason's class how little that bench shooting can translate into field positions unless you practice.

Personally I am shocked that anyone thinks the 30-06 has enough recoil to snivel about. A properly designed stock, a good pad and proper technique make the 30-06 easy to shoot. But many would rather shoot snowflake cartridges than learn how to shoot, so sad.

Depends if you're talking about a hunter or a range shooter. A hunter thinks any recoil is acceptable because they're taking 1 shot. A range shooter wants to be able to run through 30 or 40 rounds and not have a sore shoulder the next day.

Besides, if you're shooting paper, why would you pick something with more recoil than you have to, especially when it costs more to reload as well?

Different job - different tool.

The title of the thread lists what are generally considered hunting cartridges today. Back in the Garand/Springfield glory days the 30-06 did pretty well on the long range circuit but this is 2018. As hunting cartridges all three will continue to serve well for many years to come.