A Serious Question

Rotten said:
Uhm 🤔 what size of game are you talking about would be my 1st question. A elks vital zone is much larger than say a pronghorn. If you can't get inside of 400 yards of a game animal then your just trying to prove your marksmanship not hunting skills. Sorry I know I'm on the wrong forum for common sense talk where everyone can hit a deers heart at 1600 yards and never worry about tracking skills.
Click to expand...

I can't find fault in your premise.

Though, when we relocated to a different part of the state 20+ years ago, the typical hunting terrain changed considerably……often making a shot under 400 yards difficult.

So, we bumped the scope power up a bit, bought a decent range finder, and tried to make determinations as to our range limits in ideal conditions!

I'm thinking big game…….as in Pronghorn and larger. As I said, I may need to reevaluate my maximum range based upon the knowledge/experiences of those on this forum.

I never pass up a 20 yard shot, and then "reverse stalk" out to 1000 yrds for bragging rights! 😜 memtb
 
K.E.C. Darkside said:
This is what Happens when people give
Smart... answers.
Then they start a thread.🤣🤣🤣🤣

If I think I will have a shot past 300yds, I want to be confident that my rifle will consistently shoot 1/2 moa to 600yds.
Out to 300yds 1moa will get it done.

Rifle = Only a 6/5 Creedmore.🤣🤣🤣🤣
Click to expand...

1/2 moa…… you just reduced my maximum range and perhaps even changed my preferred cartridge ! 😉 memtb
 
memtb said:
I can't find fault in your premise.

Though, when we relocated to a different part of the state 20+ years ago, the typical hunting terrain changed considerably……often making a shot under 400 yards difficult.

So, we bumped the scope power up a bit, bought a decent range finder, and tried to make determinations as to our range limits in ideal conditions!

I'm thinking big game…….as in Pronghorn and larger. As I said, I may need to reevaluate my maximum range based upon the knowledge/experiences of those on this forum.

I never pass up a 20 yard shot, and then "reverse stalk" out to 1000 yrds for bragging rights! 😜 memtb
Click to expand...
Yeah your right the high plains sage brush is pretty hard to get close. Takes a lot more patience then not seeing game and just moving because your bored and not seeing the effects of your movement.
I've always wondered how many animals smelled or heard me before I knew how close I was to them. It wasn't until I had my first pointer dog that I realized how close I was to game and never knew it.
 
I like your criteria for a 600 yard rifle! Both of my Sauer 100's weigh 6.7 lbs without a scope. 6.5 Creedmoor & 30-06. Both gems for accuracy.
 

Attachments

  • 20231227_161952.jpg
    20231227_161952.jpg
    847 KB · Views: 29
I want a max of 3/4" with a 3 shot group with the cold bore shot being dead nuts repeatable every time. That said 3/4" is max and I prefer a 1/2".
I have a 6.5cm, a 6.5 Grendel, 270 win, two 308s, and a 6.5-06. The 6.5-06 is my over 500 rifle and my longest kill with it is at 895. I chose the 6.5-06 mainly because brass is readily available, it's flat shooting, and the 140 grain plus bullets carry a lot of energy at the velocity it's capable of. It's also a very accurate round and pretty easy to shoot. For 600 yards, if it had to use factory ammo, it would be either the 308s or the 270 with 140 or 150 grain bullets. I'm old school so a good 270, 280, 30-06 would work. 300 Win mag or 7mm REM mag would work fine too if you were after larger animals or needed a bit more umph. I'm just not into all the new cartridges. Except for the Grendel. 7 Saum is also a very interesting caliber for me except for the brass thing.
 
I believe the only reason for the introduction of the 7mag and 300 mag. Was that they didn't have range finders back then and it was a lot of huppla.
Same as today. If you look at or believe in ballistic charts your going to see about 2" difference in drop compared to the 06 and 270 win. The same stupid crap that they did in 98 or so with the wsm. And fast forward their doing the same crap with Needmores and prc needless ECT. My honest opinion is this buy a gun cambered in a cartilage that's available near you and shoot the hell out of it . Up down backwards and sideways.
 
Rotten said:
I believe the only reason for the introduction of the 7mag and 300 mag. Was that they didn't have range finders back then and it was a lot of huppla.
Same as today. If you look at or believe in ballistic charts your going to see about 2" difference in drop compared to the 06 and 270 win. The same stupid crap that they did in 98 or so with the wsm. And fast forward their doing the same crap with Needmores and prc needless ECT. My honest opinion is this buy a gun cambered in a cartilage that's available near you and shoot the hell out of it . Up down backwards and sideways.
Click to expand...

Quote: I believe the only reason for the introduction of the 7mag and 300 mag. Was that they didn't have range finders back then and it was a lot of huppla



That's kinda why I chose my rifle/cartridge. I got it before range finders were commonplace, and wanted a moderately weighted pkg., in a relatively flat shooting cartridge hopefully making the longer shots (of the day) a bit easier, and legal/sufficient/practical for most any game animal found on any continent!

Now…..I have to determine my limitations! 😉 memtb
 
Rotten said:
I believe the only reason for the introduction of the 7mag and 300 mag. Was that they didn't have range finders back then and it was a lot of huppla.
Same as today. If you look at or believe in ballistic charts you're going to see about 2" difference in drop compared to the 06 and 270 win. The same stupid crap that they did in 98 or so with the wsm. And fast forward their doing the same crap with Needmores and prc needless ECT. My honest opinion is this buy a gun cambered in a cartilage that's available near you and shoot the hell out of it . Up down backwards and sideways.
Click to expand...
I totally agree. The only reason I bought a Creedmore was that it was available in the AR 10. For my purposes it works well but it's limited.

I don't tolerate recoil well and I hate muzzle brakes so while the 7mag or 300mags work they certainly aren't my choice.
For the average hunting scenario and a max of 600 yards there's little that the new fangled stuff can do that the 30-06 or 270 or even the 6.5-06 hasn't been doing for 100 years. Particularly with the better bullets that we have today.

If big bears, or moose were on the list of possibilities the 338 win mag or possibly the 338-06 would make sense. But the 338 win is too much gun for my needs.
 
Last edited:
Maybe I'm looking at your question wrong but to me a group size at 100 yds tells you what your margin for error is. The cold bore POI is far more important for a hunting rifle. If you have a really good shooter and a 1.5 moa rifle you should be able to hit a 10" plate at 600 yds just about every time. Conversely, if someone can shoot a tight group off a bench but can't do it in the wild, it doesn't matter. I'd want a rifle that puts the cold shot within an inch of the rest for testing but make sure the operator can smack a plate at 600 off the ground on a bipod or a backpack or whatever would be the plan. Cold shot only.
 

Similar threads

V
Serious question
4 5 6
Replies
71
Views
4K
Will.284
W
H
OK......a serious question on .308 ammo
Replies
7
Views
14K
Boss Hoss
Boss Hoss
H
Serious question about caliber and elk potential
2 3 4
Replies
42
Views
8K
Dave Schenck
D
H
serious opinion
Replies
4
Views
1K
coyotezapper
C
K
Serious Long Range Elk Hunters
2
Replies
17
Views
4K
grit
G

Recent Posts

Top