Best Way to Select a Rifle Cartridge?

[Ron AKA]

I see this site gets a lot of questions as to what the best cartridge is for big game hunting in North Amercia. While this always generates a lot of discussion, I wonder if there is some rational way to get to the answer? To that end I went through an analysis of one way it possibly could be done. I will post it for comments and target shooting!!

Seems first to me that if you want to hunt moose/bear you need the energy to get it done. While there are some technical ways to do this, lets for sake of argument say that a 308 Winchester with a 180 gr. bullet does the job up to 300 yards. If that is the case, then is this the best bullet size and and caliber? Using the Remington factory load data, this cartridge gives 1557 ft-lbs of energy at 300 yards. So that leads to what other cartridges can deliver that energy at 300 yards, and for sake of error, lets say what can deliver between 1550 and 1750 ft-lbs at 300 yards. To take more would seem to suggest unnecessary punishment for the shooter. Then given that there is sufficient energy, then the next priority to optimize the chance of a good shot, is that the bullet have a flat trajectory. This is purely based on time of flight or velocity at impact (as a proxy). To that end I went through the Remington factory loads, and came up with the following short list. It is sorted by the highest velocity first (flattest trajectory). So here is the list of ideal cartridges for North American game listed in decending order. Except for the .308 which was used to set the "peg in the sand", I just picked the best available cartridge of the other calibers that met the criteria.

Cartridge, Bullet Wt, 300 Yd Vel, Muzzle Eng, 300 Yd Eng
270 WSM , 130, 2444, 3114, 1724
270 Win, 130, 2442, 2702, 1721
260 Rem, 120, 2334, 2392, 1560
264 WM, 140, 2326, 2854, 1682
7mm-08, 140, 2314, 2542, 1664
280 Rem, 140, 2309, 2797, 1657
300 RUM, 150, 2270, 2820, 1716
30-06, 150, 2270, 2820, 1716
308 Win., 150, 2219, 2648, 1640
7mm RM, 160, 2212, 2987, 1739
308 Win., 180, 1974, 2743, 1557
350 RM, 200, 1921, 3419, 1639

Note that the originally picked 308 load came almost last and behind a ligher bullet 308, and also in general the advantage of the ligher bullets!

Source of ballistic data:
http://www.remington.com/pdfs/07catalog-ballistics.pdf

Ok fire away..

[lazy ike]

How can I own this many rifles and not have one from the ideal list?

[mud slug]

280 rem dead center

"How can I own this many rifles and not have one from the ideal list?"

That sounds like as good a reason as any to buy another one.
Neat way to compare all those calibers. I developed a similar list when i picked my first new big game rifle (started with a very heavy weathered 30-06). I went with 270WSM as that's what all my buddies were getting and i wanted something that would shoot flat, considered most of those calibers at the time. The appropriateness of the calibers changes slightly based on which factory site you look at but gives an idea.

[roger]

Originally Posted by Ron AKA

300 RUM, 150, 2270, 2820, 1716
30-06, 150, 2270, 2820, 1716

must be a typograffikal ereror
3006RUM interesting config..
interesting concept thou .....ron

[catnthehat]

There are problems of course , with this criteria.
The first being recoil and hunter " managability ( tech term!).
Bullet energy is not everything.
I wouldn't be cought dead hunting (or even shooting for more than one round)
a 3oo Rum for the simple fact that I can't handle the recoil and detest the cartridge in general.
I would hunt moose and deer in a second, and have , with a 308 however.
I would never choose a 150 grain over a 180 in a 308 for the simple fact that I wouldn't be shooting moose at 300 yards with a 308.
My choice of bullet in the 308 Winchester BTW, and for over forty successful hunters That I have handloaded for is the 165 grain Game King ( a bullet that gets bashed so much that some people are surprised it will kill anything).
Just My opinion , however.....
Cat

[Canuck44]

Not sure those number are a good comparison. I think the lighter weights in the larger calibers ruins their BC's which drops their down range energy and speed. Try running 165 and 180 grainers in them and see what you get. Make sure you are comparing apples to apples. The federal ballistics program lets you graph and compare 6 calibers.

Oh and what about the 300 win mag? With a 180 grain accubond it has 2300+ ft lbs of energy at 300yrds.

[sullijr]

1.headstamp matches caliber of rifle
2.it has a pointy thingy in the end
3.the flat round thingy in the other end is not dented
4.wipe the mud and green stuff off of it
or
Would you like an opinion of what type and caliber of rifle to buy?

[Ron AKA]

Originally Posted by roger

must be a typograffikal ereror
3006RUM interesting config..
interesting concept thou .....ron

Actually no typo on the 300 RUM and 30-06, if you check the Remington link. Remington obviously chose to load the same bullet to the same velocity in each cartridge. In the RUM cartridge they call it a Power Level I. That is how the 300 RUM snuck into the short list.

Ron

[Ron AKA]

Originally Posted by catnthehat

There are problems of course , with this criteria.
The first being recoil and hunter " managability ( tech term!).
Bullet energy is not everything.
I wouldn't be cought dead hunting (or even shooting for more than one round)
a soo Rum for the simple fact that I can't handle the recoil and detest the cartridge in general.

Yes, that one kind of snuck in the back door. Remington probably to address the criticism about the recoil, loads some lighter versions. They call this one a Power Level 1, and there are also Power Level 2's and 3's. Those ones would kick more, but the Power Level I in the list should have the same recoil as the identical bullet at the same velocity in the 30-06.

Ron

[Ron AKA]

Originally Posted by Canuck44

Oh and what about the 300 win mag? With a 180 grain accubond it has 2300+ ft lbs of energy at 300yrds.

All of the cartridges that delivered more than 1750 ft-lbs at 300 yards were eliminated, as having more power (and recoil) than necessary.

Ron

[Okotokian]

LOL Only about a million assumptions made in your theory.... But it warms my heart to know that when I want to go Alaskan Grizzly hunting, my .270 is the second best gun around to do the job, right behind the .270 WSM.

I'm just having fun with you. Sort of a fun exercise you went through. Thanks.

[catnthehat]

Originally Posted by Ron AKA

Yes, that one kind of snuck in the back door. Remington probably to address the criticism about the recoil, loads some lighter versions. They call this one a Power Level 1, and there are also Power Level 2's and 3's. Those ones would kick more, but the Power Level I in the list should have the same recoil as the identical bullet at the same velocity in the 30-06.

Ron

Why shoot a 300 Rum at 06 velocities, That's just a little bit follish now, isn't it?

Besides, if I'm going to shoot a 150 grain bullet, it's going to be out of a
7X57, and it willl be a 160 anyways.....
Cat

[Ron AKA]

For those that like a little bit more "kick", I did do a short list of the group of cartridges that have the next step higher of energy at 300 yards. Instead of setting the energy window at 1550 to 1750, it was increased to 1750 to 1950. All other selection criteria remained the same. Here is the second short list (from best to not so best):

Cartridge, Bullet Wt, 300 yd vel, muzzle vel, 300 yd vel
7mm RM, 140, 2490, 3133, 1927
7mm RSAUM, 140, 2490, 3133, 1927
7mm STW, 140, 2467, 3436, 1892
280 Rem, 140, 2437, 2797, 1846
300 WM, 150, 2384, 3605, 1893
300 WSM, 150, 2364, 3671, 1861
300 RSAUM, 150, 2359, 3410, 1854
30-06, 150, 2298, 2820, 1758
35 Whelen, 250, 1823, 3197, 1844
375 H&H Mag, 270, 1780, 4338, 1900

There were some casualties from the first list including the .270, my favorite the .264 WM, and the good old .308. What impresses me is the Remington .280. This should have been a great cartridge, but from what I gather Remington were slow off the mark compared to Winchester with the 270, and never really got their act together. Assuming it was available in the gun I was interested in, this cartridge would be a prime consideration. I'm a handloader however, and that makes a difference.

Interesting that the 30 caliber cartridges still do not do well. I think this and the previous exercise suggests the average hunter still thinks "size matters" and buys guns with too big of a hole in the end!

Fire away..

Ron

[sbtennex]

7mm Rem Mag, factory Federal 165gr Game King, over 2000 ft/lbs at 400 yards....

270WSM still up there.
150 gr powerpoint (first load i looked at), WinchesterSite

Muzzle 3304
100 2737
200 2252
300 1839

This loads even better energy wise:

Bullet Type AccuBond™ CT® 140gr

Muzzle 3184
100 2779
200 2418
300 2097
400 1810
500 1555

Conclusion: there's about 50 different caliber/bullet combinations to do the job.

[Dick284]

The biggest fly in the oinment is your trying to introduce logic into a highly emotional subject.
By the way Ron who makes a better pick up truck, Ford, Dodge or Chevy/GMC?

[Ron AKA]

Originally Posted by Dick284

The biggest fly in the oinment is your trying to introduce logic into a highly emotional subject.
By the way Ron who makes a better pick up truck, Ford, Dodge or Chevy/GMC?

Well, Ford sells the most...

[Ron AKA]

Originally Posted by jrs

Conclusion: there's about 50 different caliber/bullet combinations to do the job.

Yes, if you are willing to take too much power there are a lot more cartridges. I cut them off at 1950 at 300 yards. Then there is the options of other brands of ammo or handloading.

Strikes me that one should select a cartridge in the caliber that is towards to top end of what the caliber can do, and have that a reasonable load for the biggest game you are going to hunt. Then this leaves you the option to go to the cartridge lighter loads for deer, coyotes, ... etc..

Ron

[Dick284]

Originally Posted by Ron AKA

Well, Ford sells the most...

They sell the most cause, Chevy's last longer.

See how nonsensical this becomes in a hurry.

Same as this caliber vs. that caliber sort of issues.
If they are starting out it's a simple 3 way race.
270Win, 308Win, 30'06.(youths excluded)
Available everywhere, made by every manufacturer, and more than capable for 90% of what will be hunted here, by 95% of the folks out there.

And gee whiz every magazine says the same thing as is posted on every outdoor board.

Debating it over and over and over, does'nt aid in a new hunter in making a choice, it makes for longer and longer and more confusing opinions for them to filter through, and I really mean filter.

[Ron AKA]

Originally Posted by Dick284

They sell the most cause, Chevy's last longer.

If they are starting out it's a simple 3 way race.
270Win, 308Win, 30'06.(youths excluded)
Available everywhere, made by every manufacturer, and more than capable for 90% of what will be hunted here, by 95% of the folks out there.

Well my F150 is 18 years old and still going strong...

I would break the longer list down to two. One would be I think as you suggest for those starting out, or not into handloading. However I would suggest it could be limited to two cartridges; 270 Win, 7mm RM. The choice between the two would be based on percieved need for power, and tolerance for recoil.

For those into handloading then it would change some, and I would suggest these three are the interesting ones; 264 WM, 280 Rem, & 7mmRM. Again choice based on power/recoil issues.

I can't make a case for any of the 30 caliber guns being suitable or necessary. They are either out performed by the smaller caliber ones (for example the 280 Rem over the 30-06) or are major over kill. I think the reason for that is that the ideal bore to case size in the reasonable muzzle energy values favours the bore diameters of 6.5 to 7mm.

Ron

[Dick284]

Like I said kick in the filters gang, cause if this goes on any longer no newbie is is gonna be able to figure any of Ron's, regurgitated material.

[Ron AKA]

Originally Posted by Dick284

Like I said kick in the filters gang, cause if this goes on any longer no newbie is is gonna be able to figure any of Ron's, regurgitated material.

I never thought for a moment that I would convert the "die hards". However, there was some hope that those that are approaching this with an open mind, may be given some carefully thought out ideas for consideration.

And to be clear, I am not suggesting that the 308 or 30-06 are bad cartridges and one should get rid of them. It is more that if you don't have a big game cartridge, these are things you should consider before you pick one.

I've often thought that it is unfortunate that cartridges are named by their bore size. Would the thinking on all this be different if cartridges were named by their case volume? This would be just like our car/truck engines where we probably buy by engine displacement, rather than piston diameter.

Things to consider...

Ron

[catnthehat]

Strange, I don't see the .303 Brit in there, and besides the 308, there are about a zillion moose killed every year with them.

Yeah I know, and lotss wounded, but you can'r blame that on the cartridge.
I heard of lots of guys shooting magnums that lost their moose last fall.
On the flip side, I know of not one moose that was shot at and lost with a .308.
Cat

[Dick284]

Originally Posted by Ron AKA

I never thought for a moment that I would convert the "die hards". However, there was some hope that those that are approaching this with an open mind, may be given some carefully thought out ideas for consideration.

And to be clear, I am not suggesting that the 308 or 30-06 are bad cartridges and one should get rid of them. It is more that if you don't have a big game cartridge, these are things you should consider before you pick one.

I've often thought that it is unfortunate that cartridges are named by their bore size. Would the thinking on all this be different if cartridges were named by their case volume? This would be just like our car/truck engines where we probably buy by engine displacement, rather than piston diameter.

Things to consider...

Ron

Oh so wrong Ronny.
I am neither a die hard nor a trend setter.
Heck for a 6 year period I killed everything including a bull elk with a 25'06 with 100gr. bullets. and prior to that I killed more deer(3 moose) than I can remember with a little semi custom 284 Winchester shooting 139gr. bullets.
Like I said your over complicating this with calibers which are for all intensive purposes adequate, but perhaps a bit less available in some locales. Like the 280 Remington, I like the caliber(got a 284 after all) but in the 3 places that sell ammunition in Drayton Valley(Walmart, CT, UFA) there has never been a box of 280 Rem ammo on the shelf. For someone who is choosing a new to hunting rifle, you better assume they dont reload so stick with the die hard calibers, (270, 308, 30'06, maybe 7mmRM) all 3(4) carry more than enough juice for killing any game animal in Alberta which is normally hunted to about 300 or so yards. Why must you muddy the waters to the point of turning it into a best truck debate.