Short Barrel Mountain Rifle

[jtmoose]

Please criticize this concept:

For steep mountain elk/black bear/deer
Mostly timber and brush, 95% of shot opportunity under 200yds

.308 Win
18" #4 or 5 contour barrel
Elite Hunter lightweight stock

Otherwise
I'm thinking a 300wsm with a brake but the same length & weight. The 308 would be better for practicing with though.

Overall, I just don't think I need a long barrel magnum for shortish range hunting. When I move to more open mountains I can worry about longer range shooting. Heck, would the 300wsm be OK for that too?

 

[yorke-1]

I'd lean more towards the 300 WSM just to make up for the velocity lost from the short barrel. Other than that I like the idea.

I happen to like 19" barrels and have never felt under gunned at any reasonable range. My favorite target gun for shooting out to 1200 yards is a 19" 284 Win Striker and I can keep up with any of the larger rifles out to that range. I figure that it's a suitable deer killer out to about 650 yards.

 

[Jerry M]

I would go with the .308 Win and no break. A short barrel is loud enough, buddy had an old Remington Model 600, but a magnum cartridge with a muzzle break will be an ear splitter.

Good luck

Jerry

 

[FEENIX]

Another vote for the .300 WSM with muzzle brake; load it with 215 Berger and you're golden.

 

[jtmoose]

How much longer would the wsm need to be to not be more obnoxious than the 308?

 

[northernexposure]

yeah, a magnum short barrel has a nasty bark to it. I bought a Savage Alaskan brush in 338win mag and it's nasty. yeah, it's only a 20" barrel and light weight... but its a nasty noise maker. Accurate enough for bush hunting or if a person had to pack it in.

 

[yorke-1]

The 300 wsm isn't that bad out of a short barrel. I had a 14" Savage Striker in 300 wsm that was loud but unbearable. No worse than an AR in 223 with any kind of brake on there. I wouldn't bother with the brake either. Recoil won't be as bad as you think.

 

[Bravo 4]

For short range (and short barrel) I would take a lightweight .308 any day.

 

[FEENIX]

For short range (and short barrel) I would take a lightweight .308 any day.

I would agree with you if elk was not in the mix. Elk can be tough; 3 years ago, one of my hunting buddy harvested a nice MT bull elk. However, it took 2 lung shots (passed through) but had to finished it with a third shot at the front shoulder.

All shots were at vital area and under 100 yards with 180g Barnes TTSX out his .300 Win Mag. IMHO, the bullet did it's job and shot placement are in the vital areas but the elk expired differently/less than ideal ... an excellent harvest and hunt nonetheless.

I'm not saying the .308 Win is not capable but the .300 WSM would be my personal choice/preference (that's what it boils down to lightbulb) out of the two. We can only advise but the OP has the ultimate decision (along with the consequences associated with the decision) to make based on sound advice ... preferably real world situations/results.

Cheers!

 

[Bravo 4]

I would agree with you if elk was not in the mix. Elk can be tough; 3 years ago, one of my hunting buddy harvested a nice MT bull elk. However, it took 2 lung shots (passed through) but had to finished it with a third shot at the front shoulder.

All shots were at vital area and under 100 yards with 180g Barnes TTSX out his .300 Win Mag. IMHO, the bullet did it's job and shot placement are in the vital areas but the elk expired differently/less than ideal ... an excellent harvest and hunt nonetheless.

I'm not saying the .308 Win is not capable but the .300 WSM would be my personal choice/preference (that's what it boils down to lightbulb) out of the two. We can only advise but the OP has the ultimate decision (along with the consequences associated with the decision) to make based on sound advice ... preferably real world situations/results.

Cheers!

I would tend to agree, however I don't think that with that bullet at that range you would have gotten less performance with a .308. Some could even read your post and say that the .300 seemed under gunned if it took all that to put it down. Personally I think that was a product of the type of bullet he was using and not the cartridge it came from. Not to get anything started as there are plenty of folks satisfied with the Barnes. That is just the same type of performance I have encountered, I've shot deer point blank (meere feet) with a .300 WM and 180 grainers and the deer didn't act hit. Took three shots and the last was between the eyes at about 75 yards. I don't care for them unless I want A LOT of penetration.
Elk are tough, on my first trip a guy shot one three times under 200 yards behind the shoulder with a .270 WSM with 140 Accubonds. It didn't flinch and he thought it was all misses, so another guy hit it twice behind the shoulder with a .300 WinMag and 180 Accubonds. It just walked over the crest of a hill like nothing happened, there it fell over dead. Then I watched one take two 300 grain matchkings and not flinch, the third round I put high shoulder and took him down. They are tough, but a .308 with that same Barnes bullet will probably darn near penetrate an elk from end to end under 100 yards.

Added: I wrote in the first paragraph that it may have been a product of the type of bullet, add to that bullet placement. I'm under the impression (with my limited elk experience) that if you expect a bang flop behind the shoulder shot you are asking for disappointment. I've killed lots of deer that way but elk aren't just big deer to me.

 

[FEENIX]

I would tend to agree, however I don't think that with that bullet at that range you would have gotten less performance with a .308. Some could even read your post and say that the .300 seemed under gunned if it took all that to put it down. Personally I think that was a product of the type of bullet he was using and not the cartridge it came from. Not to get anything started as there are plenty of folks satisfied with the Barnes. That is just the same type of performance I have encountered, I've shot deer point blank (meere feet) with a .300 WM and 180 grainers and the deer didn't act hit. Took three shots and the last was between the eyes at about 75 yards. I don't care for them unless I want A LOT of penetration.
Elk are tough, on my first trip a guy shot one three times under 200 yards behind the shoulder with a .270 WSM with 140 Accubonds. It didn't flinch and he thought it was all misses, so another guy hit it twice behind the shoulder with a .300 WinMag and 180 Accubonds. It just walked over the crest of a hill like nothing happened, there it fell over dead. Then I watched one take two 300 grain matchkings and not flinch, the third round I put high shoulder and took him down. They are tough, but a .308 with that same Barnes bullet will probably darn near penetrate an elk from end to end under 100 yards.

Added: I wrote in the first paragraph that it may have been a product of the type of bullet, add to that bullet placement. I'm under the impression (with my limited elk experience) that if you expect a bang flop behind the shoulder shot you are asking for disappointment. I've killed lots of deer that way but elk aren't just big deer to me.

That's why I clearly noted ...

I'm not saying the .308 Win is not capable but the .300 WSM would be my personal choice/preference (that's what it boils down to lightbulb) out of the two.

Your personal preference happen to be the .308 Win.

I provided a real world situation for the OP to help his decision making process.

Elk can be tough; 3 years ago, one of my hunting buddy harvested a nice MT bull elk. However, it took 2 lung shots (passed through) but had to finished it with a third shot at the front shoulder.

All shots were at vital area and under 100 yards with 180g Barnes TTSX out his .300 Win Mag. IMHO, the bullet did it's job and shot placement are in the vital areas but the elk expired differently/less than ideal ... an excellent harvest and hunt nonetheless.

We can only advise but the OP has the ultimate decision (along with the consequences associated with the decision) to make based on sound advice ... preferably real world situations/results.

As far your bullet choice comment and the number of shots required; we all know what adrenaline does, my buddy was from Georgia and his first time elk hunting ... we instructed him to keep shooting until it dropped ... and that he did. Like I noted above, all 3 shot placement were good and so as his bullet choice. The bullet performed as advertised. Having said that, the Barnes TTSX is not my personal preference as noted from my previous response ...

Another vote for the .300 WSM with muzzle brake; load it with 215 Berger and you're golden.

The bottom-line, the chambering and the bullet choice boils down to end user's personal preference.

Cheers!

 

[jtmoose]

Is there a lot of wasted powder using the 30 cal if using the wsm? If a 300blk can achieve efficiency with 9", what are the lengths for 308 and 300wsm that additional barrel length aren't dramatically necessary? How many fps would the wsm offer over the 308 in the same length? How much faster does all the powder burn over 30-06 and 300WM?

 

[FEENIX]

Is there a lot of wasted powder using the 30 cal if using the wsm? If a 300blk can achieve efficiency with 9", what are the lengths for 308 and 300wsm that additional barrel length aren't dramatically necessary? How many fps would the wsm offer over the 308 in the same length? How much faster does all the powder burn over 30-06 and 300WM?

Braise yourself, you just made it more complicated and this excites other folks ... wait for it .................. gun)

 

[jtmoose]

Actually, I have another thread in the ballistics forum more appropriate for my other questions.

I think the few that have chimed in to this thread feel the general idea of the short barrel 30 cal is valid regardless if I chose magnum or not. I am leaning toward the wsm at this point though.

I know guys that have harvested elk with both but I've heard about more being lost with a non magnum. My limited time hunting elk did make me want as many odds in my favor as possible because bulls aren't as easy to find as one might think.