Caliber Choices - Comparison and Applications

Re: Caliber Choices - Comparison and Applications

ten years ago i would have said stick with the 30-06 but recent popularity of the 6.5 cartriges will sway my opinion. I have a 6.5x55 and have had for several years. they are excellent shooters with moderate recoil and with recent (long range) projectiles being developed for use in the 6.5x47 lapua and 6.5 creedmorre. It's hard to overlook a cartrige that will give you give you the same speeds as the above mentioned while keeping cost to reload down via cheaper brass
 
Re: Caliber Choices - Comparison and Applications

I've been looking at getting a new varmint gun and was comparing the 22-250 and 243. After doing some research on both and comparing external ballistics while the 22-250 has a real high muzzle velocity at the barrel is drops sharply at around 600-700. The 243 though looks awesome has much better ballistics. Think 308 vs 300 win mag in regards to decreasing muzzle velocity.
 
Re: Caliber Choices - Comparison and Applications

Just bought a 6.5x55 SE. Its has a Remington LA and 22"bbl
With a N/F scope on top. Came with 200 rounds of lapua brass
Bullets and reloading dies. The only thing I don't like about it is the short bbl.
I'm thinking about having a 28" heavy bbl put on it and I'm wanting a AICS stock.
I gave $2000.00 for it all. What do you all think? I did shoot it and it grouped under .5 at 100yrds. I would like for some real info on this cal.
 
Re: Caliber Choices - Comparison and Applications

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Chanonry</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: LT JGB</div><div class="ubbcode-body">So lots of people are writing about the 22-250, 308, 223, 300 win mag, and 338 lapua ...

Any thoughts on the .270 WIN or the .243 WIN?</div></div>

270?

Limited range of bullets, only 1 (?) hpbt bullet. I could never find decent brass so could not get it to load as consistently as 308. With consistent rounds it shot well, ballistically pretty good. Fine for hunting and this is reflected in the rifles that are chambered for it. For anything else I would have needed a custom so not flexible enough and i got rid. Having said that nothing that I shot with it got up and ran away !!</div></div>

Lots of hunting rifles come chambered in .270 Win, but I haven't read of their use so much in tactical rifles. My presumption is that the .277 caliber seems a good compromise between knockdown power and felt recoil if you're comparing to a .260 on the low end (which is probably a bit small for an elk or big mule deer) and a .300 Win MAG on the high end (notorious for heavy recoil). Seems strange to me though that a rifle that seems to be such a good compromise within the hunting spectrum is not a player in the tactical spectrum ... I realize that being a long action round is a downcheck in comparison to a .308 Win.

Another option is the 7mm , which is a bit heavier than the .270 WIN (.284 caliber), but then you're into the more expensive magnum round vs a standard length round. Is the extra knockdown power it provides worth it for hunting most North American game? I suspect that a .270 will suffice in most instances, but I would rather have a 7mm Mag or .300 Win Mag if I was going to hunt a moose or brown bear.

When it comes to choosing between the 7mm Mag and the .300 Win Mag, my conclusion from what I have read on this and other forums is that they are nearly identical except that the .300 Win Mag kicks harder since more juice is needed to push the heavier pill. For the record, I own a .300 Win Mag because that's how my Surgeon XL came chambered, and the Badger FTE brake makes recoil a non-issue.

Any thoughts or comments from the experts?
 
Re: Caliber Choices - Comparison and Applications

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: blue_ridge</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Bohem, Are you sure 7x57, 257 Roberts and 6mm Rem (necked down from 7x57 case) are short action cartridges? 57mm seems longer than your avg short action receiver will fit. As a comparison, you have 6.5x55 listed under long action and it is 2mm shorter. </div></div>

.257 Roberts as commercially loaded is short action but provides satisfying improvement in performance when the bullet is seated out further in a long action. A long throated .257 Robt. approaches 25-06 ballistics with a lot less barrel wear due to reduced power charge.
 
Re: Caliber Choices - Comparison and Applications

It's not at all surprising that the 6mm PPC, darling of the benchrest crowd for many years, is missing from this list of tactical calibers. Boasting only 3100 f.p.s. with a 65 gr. bullet it's anything but a long distance caliber.

Formal benchrest matches (NBRSA or IBS) are only fired at 100 and 200 yards usually (300 yards rarely) so it's no wonder that this highly efficient, but dinky caliber, is ignored by the tactical shooting crowd, including hunters.
 
Re: Caliber Choices - Comparison and Applications

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: The DL</div><div class="ubbcode-body">I may have missed it but what about the 280 rem. or 280 AI as a viable choice in 7mm? </div></div>

Both are excellent and provide increases in performance over the 284 Win without going to a magnum bolt face.
 
Re: Caliber Choices - Comparison and Applications

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: bohem</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: The DL</div><div class="ubbcode-body">I may have missed it but what about the 280 rem. or 280 AI as a viable choice in 7mm? </div></div>

Both are excellent and provide increases in performance over the 284 Win without going to a magnum bolt face.</div></div>

So I'm curious then, why is the .270 Win a more common hunting rifle than the .280 Rem? I just browsed all the Remington bolt action rifles at Cabelas ... not a single offering in .280 Rem. I am not stating that .270 Win is a superior round because the .280 has a better ballistic coefficient and is capable of higher velocities for bullets of the same grain; that being said, it just isn't as popular. Any thoughts as to why?

On the other end, is the 30-06. The .280 will have less recoil, and the lighter bullets will actually have more energy downrange since they have a better ballistic coefficient ... illustrates one of the weaknesses of 30 caliber quite poignantly. However, the 30-06 is right up there in popularity with the .270 WIN. I say again, what gives?
 
Re: Caliber Choices - Comparison and Applications

Remington screwed the pooch on how it launched the 260 Rem and that is just the latest example of Remington totally mismanaging a caliber release. The 280 Rem and later the 7mm Express (identical chambering, both released by Rem) were sorely mismanaged as well.

The 270 is not really even a newer release than a 7mm variant as there were military trials on the 7.4mm (what we call 7mm's) and the true 7mm (what we call 270's) in the 1920's based off the 30-06 and 30-03 cases.

The 30-06 is wildly popular for the same reason that the 308 is: It was the mainstay of the US Military for more than 5 decades and 2 world wars.

The 270 is probably the lowest performer of the 3 these days now that there is such a variety of phenomenal 30c and 7mm bullets out there, the 27c variety is lacking in terms of the bullet choice.

The bullet choice is discussed in other pages of this thread on the 270 Win at least 1 other time. It's a "chicken or egg" kind of question.

The 260 Newton is the precursor to the 6.5-06 as known today. It's almost unheard of outside long range BR type guys who were shooting it for many years there. It has superior ballistics to the 270 as well. It's a phenomenal target and hunting round but it enjoys almost no popularity. Why is that?

Overbore? Barrel cost? Performance? The performance issue is easy IMO. Modern powders and the performance that they provide have developed at a pace faster than the majority of people can learn to use them.
 
Re: Caliber Choices - Comparison and Applications

How about the 35 Whelen!!! I have a custom m70 Winchester. I can push a 225 gr nosler to 2825. Shoots .6 (5 shoot) groups all day long. I have shot it as far as 800 yards and can make consistent hits on steel. I would like to try it at 1000 by I just don't have the room. That's just some of the pros

Cons,

The best bullet is from nosler. Bc is only rated .421
 
Re: Caliber Choices - Comparison and Applications

Just a chart of some windage and drop comparisons.
CaliberComparison-Elevation.png

CaliberComparison.png


The data that made the charts..
CaliberData.png
 
Re: Caliber Choices - Comparison and Applications

260 Remington

Pros:
• Brass is easy to attain/make from other cartridges in this case family (.308, .243, etc.)
• Many excellent bullets with high BC (Lapua 144gr FMJ BT with .636, JLK 140gr VLD with .630, Berger 140gr Match VLD with .612)
• This cartridge approaches 6.5-284 velocities when Ackleyized
• Good balance of barrel life and case capacity
• Barrel life is better than 6.5-284
• Wide range of powder choices
• Full range of hunting and tactical applications
• Mid to long range applications
• Low recoil
• Many different factory rifles chambered in this round
• Lapua brass available for this cartridge
• Friend envy

Cons:
• Expensive factory ammunition
• Barrel life is shorter than more common military cartridges
• Friend envy
 
Re: Caliber Choices - Comparison and Applications

Many people claim 243 Win has shorter barrel life, but I haven't found that to be so. It is truely a triple threat....varmint, medium size game and target. Cheap brass, dies, bullets, etc. Why shoot anything else. 7mm-08 is great, but may as well go 308 Win. No doubt efficient, max barrel life and resale.
 
Re: Caliber Choices - Comparison and Applications

I'm considering rebuilding my Rem 700 .300 RUM into a .338 Edge. I'm considered building a .338 Lapua, but there is considerable cost involved with that project. i've read a few articles about the .338 Edge and it looks as though you can achieve similar ballistics with the Edge. All of the .338 Edge data seems to be from rifles with 30" barrels though and I have no intention of trying to deal with a tactical rifle with 30" of barrel sticking out, closer to 40" with a suppressor. Any input would be appreciated.
Thanks,
 
Re: Caliber Choices - Comparison and Applications

interesting

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: jerry1</div><div class="ubbcode-body">I think everyone owes Bohem thanks for this thread. I suggested the 6BR and anyone can see my comments on an earlier page. Bohem is totally correct that the BR does not work well in repeaters. Perhaps it would be useful to make a short list of my general "cons."
Nonstandard boltface is a con.
Need for a custom action is a con.
Recoil above a 30-06 is a con.
Cost above a .300 Win Mag is a con.
Calibers with few bullet choices is a con.
Barrel life below 3000 rounds is a con.
Calibers that don't feed well is a con.
Need for a custom twist is a con.
Special brass, rare brass, or poor brass is a con.
Calibers that can't agg. under .500 is a con.

Hopefully this is food for thought. All other opinions are respected.</div></div>
 
Re: Caliber Choices - Comparison and Applications

thx! thx!! & thx!!!! i printed the start of this string, so i would have it for reference!! will be returning & will read all of this string. thx again!!!!
 
Re: Caliber Choices - Comparison and Applications

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: lonmower</div><div class="ubbcode-body">does anyone follow this post any longer?</div></div>

From the number of views (117000) a lot of folks review this thread. The contributions may fall off but that may be because so much has already been covered. It certainly is an informative read, especially for the newer shooter.
 
Re: Caliber Choices - Comparison and Applications

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: msflyer</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: lonmower</div><div class="ubbcode-body">does anyone follow this post any longer?</div></div>

From the number of views (117000) a lot of folks review this thread. The contributions may fall off but that may be because so much has already been covered. It certainly is an informative read, especially for the newer shooter. </div></div>

flyer is right. I've read the whole thread twice now and its helped me decide on my next DTA conversion. Thanks to all that contributed, lots of good info.
 
Re: Caliber Choices - Comparison and Applications

I agree that Remington has handled several of its new cartridge introductions more poorly than it should have. The .260 and .280 come first to mind.

More recently the .30RAR was high on my list of choices for a shorter range .30 caliber match chambering, until Remington screwed up (yet again) and altered the rim diameter away from the highly popular and more conventional .473". The resaons came down pretty much solely to lawyer-speak. One of the dumbest moves I've seen Remington make. Ever.

I eventually went with .30BR, but at what I suspect was an otherwise unnecessarily greater expense in brass and dies. If so, I especially thank Remington for their role in a therefore more difficult choice.

The .30BR is beginning to look like a stellar choice; but I also suspect it could have just as easily, maybe even more easily, have been an equally stellar accomplishment for the .30RAR.

It is by such marketing choices that Remington continues to fail to sieze new markets. I'd lament it, but after all, it's just Remington again, and simply more of their same disappointing track record.

Greg
 
Re: Caliber Choices - Comparison and Applications

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Greg Langelius *</div><div class="ubbcode-body">I agree that Remington has handled several of its new cartridge introductions more poorly than it should have. The .260 and .280 come first to mind.

More recently the .30RAR was high on my list of choices for a shorter range .30 caliber match chambering, until Remington screwed up (yet again) and altered the rim diameter away from the highly popular and more conventional .473". The resaons came down pretty much solely to lawyer-speak. One of the dumbest moves I've seen Remington make. Ever.

I eventually went with .30BR, but at what I suspect was an otherwise unnecessarily greater expense in brass and dies. If so, I especially thank Remington for their role in a therefore more difficult choice.

The .30BR is beginning to look like a stellar choice; but I also suspect it could have just as easily, maybe even more easily, have been an equally stellar accomplishment for the .30RAR.

It is by such marketing choices that Remington continues to fail to sieze new markets. I'd lament it, but after all, it's just Remington again, and simply more of their same disappointing track record.

Greg</div></div>

I'm glad to see this thread alive and well. It seems it got too far back on my list and I just never visited it enough to see any of the good posts or good questions someone might like an opinion on.

I agree with Greg wholeheartedly on Remingtons blunders. They do have one extremely strong thing in their favor though, the 700 action. It's just the favorite and that's the way it's going to stay for a while. IMO, there is not that much wrong with it. But, there are things that I wish were more right with it.

From the time this thread started a lot of the high performance small 6mm cases have now made their way into the competition worlds and the problems that some of them have encountered have been solved up to the point of better, or I should say, useful and consistent useability. That said, the two top choices I would have are the 6mm XC or 6mmCM. (Creedmoor,... the Competition Match sounds like a great one too!) Lower volume to save on recoil and barrel life. Plenty of high BC bullets to choose from. Shoots flat, and beats the wind pretty well. 6mm's still aren't really heavy enough to 'buck' the wind. Once it really starts blowing they get beat up on pretty bad compared to the 'heavies'.

In 6.5 you can go with any of the three mid-size cartridges and have an excellent set-up for accuracy. All can push really good BC bullet out at very competent speeds. I'll mention the 6.5x47, the 6.5 Creedmoor and the .260. Again great selection of bullets. For all out, "I don't give a damn about the barrel" performance there is the 6.5-.284 or the 6.5-06. It gets even more extreme when you go 6.5 WSM or .264 Win. They get there the fastest, and that's how your barrel burns out. Anything above the first three are barrel eaters for the sake of winning that day.

The reason I like the 7mm's is because with the basic two, the 7mm-08 and 7x57 you can get to a mile with the heavier but still reasonable VLD type bullets. The 6.5's can get that far and shoot flatter as can the 6mm's, but both of those smaller calibers drift more at optimum velocities. AT 1k and One mile. Just like the two smaller calibers you can get a lot of life out of the smaller cases, but as you go up you start seeing barrel burners. 7WSM and 7mm Rem mag are two examples. I've also seen a 7mm WBY compete and burn barrels out every 1000 rounds.

The big problem to me for the .30 cal is in order to get competitively high BC bullets you have to go over 200 gr. Which in turn just means you have to use more case to get them out there fast enough. Which leads to more recoil and barrel wear. As noted above, the .308 really is the fat kid at the track meet. It runs the race but isn't a winner. It doesn't wear barrels out. But get big and competitive, like the .300 Win Mag (and most other .30 cal mags) you wear barrels out a lot quicker. The only upside to that is you have high BC bullets that weigh more and you're going to have less wind drift at competitive velocities.
Anything bigger than .30 needs an even bigger weight advantage, but that is happening.
 
Re: Caliber Choices - Comparison and Applications

Definitely agree that the .308 is not what it used to be ever since the long range gun manufacturers started building guns that are more effective at pinging steel past 1k I.e. The 6mm. & 6.5 creedmore, .284's.... Although, IMO the .308 is one of the most challenging rounds to shoot,hence, it teaches fundamental marksmanship to beginners. I believe that if you can consistently put rounds on target at 1 thousand yards with a .308, you are wayyy ahead of the game in terms of wind calling and down right marksmanship. I shoot a GAP Crusader w/ hand loaded 175 smks at 2678 fps. I hit 1k a pretty good bit but it is TOUGH! The bullet actually arches 31.3 feet bf it impacts. That's a hell of alot of bow. Just my thoughts
 
Re: Caliber Choices - Comparison and Applications

I appreciate the 2 posts on the 300 WSM but I have a couple questions as yet unanswered.

Background:
Elk hunting rifle for timber and clearcut ridge to ridge shooting. Will need to be able to shoot anywhere from under 50 yards up to 1000 yards.

I am building a 300 WSM on a Rem 700 SA
24" Kreiger 5R with 1:10 twist standard Palma taper
bedding it into a Bell and Carlson stock with full aluminum block.
optic will be a Leupold 4.5-14 X 56 with B&C reticle

Question:
Should I consider another cartridge? (still have not purchased an action and the barrel is 19 weeks out so there is time to make changes)
Will I be able to open the receiver up and lengthen the follower if needed to load longer hand loads?
Should I stay with SA or build off of a LA?
What kind of barrel life should I expect?
Has anyone else built or owned a similar set up rifle that can give me their own pro's and con's?
 
Re: Caliber Choices - Comparison and Applications

Consider building on a Remington 700 LA even though you are considering the 300 WSM because it will open up more choices down the road. Have you considered the 325 WSM, just asking?

Brad, at East Coast Precision Rifles told me to always build on a long action because if you want to re-barrel you will have so many options available.
 
Re: Caliber Choices - Comparison and Applications

I have not done any research on the 325 WSM. A good friend of mine recommended 300 WSM and I know the the AMU was using it as their 1000 yard gun in competition so I started down that road.

Good point about the LA giving more caliber options in the future. I am certain that I will have this rifle for a long, long time.
 
Re: Caliber Choices - Comparison and Applications

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Khavic</div><div class="ubbcode-body">I have not done any research on the 325 WSM. A good friend of mine recommended 300 WSM and I know the the AMU was using it as their 1000 yard gun in competition so I started down that road.

Good point about the LA giving more caliber options in the future. I am certain that I will have this rifle for a long, long time. </div></div>

First, the .300 WSM will work just fine for both. As you heard the .300 is the AMU cartridge for 1k yds. and it works well. I suggest if you do get one, have the barrel twisted in 1-9" so you can stabilize the .240 SMK through the transonic range better. Do that and you won't need a bigger gun to get anything else done. I understand it's a hunting rifle, but it never hurts to go the extra little bit to also make it a viable long range target rifle.

You won't go wrong with the 700 action. However, you can also get some very good Savage and Winchester Actions. Howa and Vanguard are also two up and coming actions. You can get most of the others for less than the Rem 700. On the other hand you can get any of the custom precision actions, mostly based on the Rem 700 for that extra little margin of better accuracy.
 
Re: Caliber Choices - Comparison and Applications

i just finished a build in 6.5x47 Lapua. aside from all the obvious ballistic advantages this cartridge has over many of its predecessors one of the greatest advantages im discovering is the ease and simplicity of load development. so far its seems that i cant go wrong with bullet selection, powder charges, or seating depth. everything i put down range results in acceptable groups. i easily achieved my velocity goals. its not picky. less time spent chasing that magical accuracy load and tinkering in the reloading room and on the bench is a big plus for me.
 
Re: Caliber Choices - Comparison and Applications

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: lonmower</div><div class="ubbcode-body">does anyone follow this post any longer? </div></div>

This is an amazingly helpful post for those of us that are new. And, as new rounds come out (especially some of the revised .30 cal) it will be good to see how they fair and read opinions. I am intrigued by the 300 BLK
 
Re: Caliber Choices - Comparison and Applications

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Khavic</div><div class="ubbcode-body">I appreciate the 2 posts on the 300 WSM but I have a couple questions as yet unanswered.

Background:
Elk hunting rifle for timber and clearcut ridge to ridge shooting. Will need to be able to shoot anywhere from under 50 yards up to 1000 yards.

I am building a 300 WSM on a Rem 700 SA
24" Kreiger 5R with 1:10 twist standard Palma taper
bedding it into a Bell and Carlson stock with full aluminum block.
optic will be a Leupold 4.5-14 X 56 with B&C reticle

Question:
Should I consider another cartridge? (still have not purchased an action and the barrel is 19 weeks out so there is time to make changes)
Will I be able to open the receiver up and lengthen the follower if needed to load longer hand loads?
Should I stay with SA or build off of a LA?
What kind of barrel life should I expect?
Has anyone else built or owned a similar set up rifle that can give me their own pro's and con's? </div></div>

I have a 300WSM and suggest getting it in a short action, if you go long action then a 300WM or 300RUM would be a better choice, the allure of the 300WSM is its efficiency and ability to be fed from a short action.

Since this is for a hunting rifle, I suggest firing the 210 Berger hunting VLD's, or 180gr. Barnes TTSX (or 175 gr. LRX), you can get around 2900fps with the Berger and about 3050-3100 with the Barnes and still be able to magazine feed them through a short action.

I personally love the caliber and look forward to experimenting with it further (I have tested the 200gr. LRX and 230gr. Berger otm's, still have a lot more testing of both, in addition to testing the 208gr. AMAX). This round has a lot of potential, and performs well with bullets of all weight. Don't let anyone tell you that it doesn't perform well with bullet weights higher than 180gr., the 300WSM matches the velocity of the 300WM (albeit 50fps slower) on all bullet weights.
 
Re: Caliber Choices - Comparison and Applications

I've been part fo this conversation for some time, and I've been thinking about what it's uncovered that's valid but not part of any growing trend. If this conversation is going to bring about any real benefit, that's probably an area that needs some greater attention.

When you want to drive a nail deeper, you either get a bigger hammer, or you get a longer, thinner nail. With bullets, you either go from a .308Win to a .300WSM, or from a .308 to a .260. Both solutions address the same issue, achieve improvement, and do it in completely different ways. Each has proponents, each for good reasons.

I like the thinner nall approach. It does not require me to 'man up,' which is probably something of which I am probably no longer capable, and of which I am certainly no longer willing.

I see discussions of Magnums, and 'hard target capable' chamberings. Neat stuff. Really.

Also way outside my own personal orbit. When I think about performance upgrades, I think more in terms of necking down. My answer to beefing up the case capacity is going from the .308/.260 to the .30-'06/.280.

There I go again; harping on the .280. Sounds almost like I did a decade ago, only then I has harping on the .260.

Well, we all know how that turned out.

My question now is, is there another rabbit still left in that hat?

I think there just may be.

Hey, Savage? You listening? How 'bout a Savage F Open, single shot LA, .280 Rem, 1:8" twist, 30" barrel.

Greg
 
Re: Caliber Choices - Comparison and Applications

I hear ya, to each his own. I perfectly understand the "longer nail" approach, sure makes shooting more pleasurable going with this methodology, but I'm very young and like the "bigger hammer" approach. I have plenty of "longer nail" cartridges, I have the 7mm-08 and 270, and since I am basically the caretaker of all the firearms in my large family, I use many others, such as the 243 and 25-06. the 300WSM is my first rifle taking the other approach and also my first magnum, and I can tell you I really enjoy this cartridge and all that it offers. Its great for hunting almost any game imaginable, I took my rifle elk hunting last year in Utah right after I got it and took a massive bull, it didn't take a single step, this was with factory cor-bon 165gr. lead free rounds (which were $65!!!).

BTW, the 280 is an amazing cartridge, it has great performance and I plan on rebarreling the 721 I have in it after I shoot out the barrel.
 
Re: Caliber Choices - Comparison and Applications

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Greg Langelius *</div><div class="ubbcode-body">I've been part fo this conversation for some time, and I've been thinking about what it's uncovered that's valid but not part of any growing trend. If this conversation is going to bring about any real benefit, that's probably an area that needs some greater attention.

When you want to drive a nail deeper, you either get a bigger hammer, or you get a longer, thinner nail. With bullets, you either go from a .308Win to a .300WSM, or from a .308 to a .260. Both solutions address the same issue, achieve improvement, and do it in completely different ways. Each has proponents, each for good reasons.

I like the thinner nall approach. It does not require me to 'man up,' which is probably something of which I am probably no longer capable, and of which I am certainly no longer willing.

I see discussions of Magnums, and 'hard target capable' chamberings. Neat stuff. Really.

Also way outside my own personal orbit. When I think about performance upgrades, I think more in terms of necking down. My answer to beefing up the case capacity is going from the .308/.260 to the .30-'06/.280.

There I go again; harping on the .280. Sounds almost like I did a decade ago, only then I has harping on the .260.

Well, we all know how that turned out.

My question now is, is there another rabbit still left in that hat?

I think there just may be.

Hey, Savage? You listening? How 'bout a Savage F Open, single shot LA, .280 Rem, 1:8" twist, 30" barrel.

Greg </div></div>

All very good points Greg.

My first precision rifle that wasn't a 30-06 was a 280, built it 2 years ago after looking at the 284 and the 7 SAUM and 7WSM... First time I shot it past 300yd included 1st, 2nd, and 3rd round hits from 570-1200yd

I have a 7/300WSM right now that barely gets used for a few different reasons, none of which include the fact that it's a friggin hammer... but it's a lot of caliber for stuff inside of 1000yd. A LOT of caliber.

The little 6's going 3k+ are great, the 6.5's are excellent, and the small-medium bore 7's are excellent. If I still had a long action, standard bolt face I would be building it into a 7mm with around 65-70gr of water capacity.
 
Re: Caliber Choices - Comparison and Applications

When I picked my first long(er) range rifles in the early 80's there was no internet. The only source of information I had was the large collection on re-loading manuals and gun mags that I had.

I went into it with a fairly clean slate, few caliber biases, no need to support an agenda other than to get what research would give me the most flexible caliber ( note NOT cartridge) that I could get.

Previously my only rifles were 30-30 Win, .35 Rem, .308 and 30-06. All had performed for my purposes and I'll admit that I had a slight bias toward the .30 caliber.

I was going on a hunt out west with my dad, and needed two rifles, so since I reload it was only natural that both at least had the same caliber for the sake of supplying my load bench. I wound up with a Remington 700 ADL in 280 and a Winchester 70 in 7mm mag. Ultimately I also got a Remington XP100 in 7BR for silhouette shooting.

It could be said that a .300WM or some other such cartridge could have filled my needs, at the cost of load efficiency, additional recoil, and lower barrel life for the sake of a couple of hundred FPS with similar bullet weights.

After all these years and newer sports coming to be popular like "F" class I still can't think of a more appropriate caliber (7mm bullet not the cartridge) that continues to serve my needs.




So I guess I'm in the "thinner, longer" nail camp, and probably always will.
 
Re: Caliber Choices - Comparison and Applications

325WSM is simply a 300WSM necked up to accept 8mm bullets, its performance is roughly similar to the 8mm Rem Mag I believe. The 300WSM is a much better long range performer and has a much wider bullet selection, the 8mm round has never really caught on in the states and there isn't a great bullet selection. The 325 is all but dead.

There is a wildcat cartridge based on the WSM called the 338WSM or 338 redneck, its a 300WSM necked up to accept .338 diameter bullets. It's performance mirrors that of the 338WM, minus about 50fps.
 
Re: Caliber Choices - Comparison and Applications

I just started my first build, i really was wanting a 6.5cm but i ended up going with a 300wsm, ive seen alot on here about both.. it really seems to me its personal prefrence on what you using it for... Im wanting something to start my son long range shooting, im putting it on a 1.5 aics stock with atlas and monopod. I can wait to get this thing in his hands and see him smile ear to ear!!! Thanks to mike williams on here hes making it possible and another fellow hide member for the stock!