new deer rifle

W

wawantamonster

Guest
I've hunted with a Remington 700 BDL for years in 30-06 topped with a 3x9 leupold. On my long high hunt trips the metal rusts and stock absorbs water after a couple days of rain and snow(no complaints other than that). I'm selling some pistols and rifles to get some cash for a new mule deer/elk rifle and I'm thinking of sticking with 30-06(I don't handload-06 ammo is available everwhere and won't break the bank). I'm thinking of getting either a sako or the weatherby accumark topped with a Zeis 3x10 conquest. Is there any preference for one rifle over the other? Does anybody suggest a differnt caliber or make/model?(I would step up to a 300 mag but weighing a hair over 150LB., the recoil affects my accuracy). I plan on getting the stock refit with a trigger job regardless of the gun I choose. I hunt hard in wet weather for extended trips covering 5+ miles a day in rugged mountainess terrain, so light weight rifles would be prefferable but I don't claim to be an exceptional marksman so I'm worried the reduced weight might adversly effect my accuracy. Any suggestions would be apperciated.
 
If you are recoil sensitive and it sounds like you are DO NOT BUY A 30 CALIBER!!!. You will never enjoy it or shoot it well. I love your choice of scope I would love to have the Zeiss conquest. I suggest you buy a 270 by whatever manufacturer you like. The 270 is (imho)the best mule deer rifle available. Keith
 
Kingfish I like your recommendation. In the past I've shot a Remington 30-06 Mountain rifle. It is a tack driver but it is jumpier than I prefer it to be. Just got myself a Remington CDL in 270, it is a little bit heavier than the mountain rifle but I imagine with the increased weight and slightly lower caliber it will do the job quite nicely and will be a joy to shoot.

Just keep in mind recoil is a combination of several things, caliber, weight of rifle, and rifle design just being a few.
 
Sounds like you trust the 30-06, so that's going to be a hard habit to break. If your hunting elk as well, i'd personally not go any lighter than a 7MM of any make. Myself, i'm a fan of the 300 Weatherby in the Mark IV. It has long range power & punch, plus it's an extremely accurate and lethal combo. Personally, i feel you'd be wasting money buying the Weatherby Accumark, if you are wanting to stick to a standard caliber such as the 06. The Accumark has a 26" barrel, and is "free bored" which is definately not needed with that caliber. That heavy Weatherby action is over kill as well for that caliber. Have you ever shot a magnum with a magna ported barrel? The accumark has that as well, so you MAY be able to handle the 300. I also shoot an Accumark in the 30-378, and it's really not too bad, but i don't like the magna port. It in itself can make a guy flinch due to the sound and sight of all that power coming from the side of the barrel! My 300 in the Mark IV is NOT ported, and i absolutely love it! I trust it for any north american big game. If you going to stick to the "trusty" 06, i'd look into the Sako, (or even a Browning A-bolt) it's an awesome rifle as well, and better suited for your application. Good luck with whatever you choose!! SLAMDUNK
 
LAST EDITED ON Jan-10-05 AT 03:59PM (MST)[p]The killing capacity on deer out to 300 yards of, .260, 7mm-08, .270, .308 .30-06... IS academic.

So much has been written about mag power, ft lbs of energy, drop etc. There's a huge Bias on FPS and "flat shooting" but no one ever really qualifies the point. The difference of drop and energy at 300 yards with a 200 zero from one cal to the other will be imperceptible to the deer. The following is energy and drop at 300 yards on a 200 yard zero:

.260 1535 -8
7-08 1510 -7.9
.270 1595 -7.3
.308 1560 -8
-'06 1660 -7.5

That's on 140 grns for the first 3 and 150's last 2. Now you can then talk about sectional density, BE and bullet construction. Regardless, any of these rounds in a premium bullet is going to perform as close to identically as is measurable to the guy behind the trigger. So, you shoot what you shoot well. Want less recoil shoot the 7mm-08 or 260. Of course you can't pop into po-dunk gas station and pick up some 7mm-08 140's in nosler ballistic tip so availability and hand loading are considerations. If in fact ELK is a consideration and you want a one-fer gun, then I'd stick with the .30's and up because you can get much heavier bullets up to 220 grns. By the way I'd also bet that if you were handed 2 7 lb rifles, one in .270 and one in 06, if you weren't told and shot each of them... you wouldn't be able to tell them apart. Btw I own both.
 
For a lighter, weather-resistant rifle, you might consider the Kimber Montana or the Remington Titanium, but chambered in the 308 or 7mm-08 to reduce recoil in the lighter rifle. The recoil of the 308 in the these rifles would still be about 2 ft-lbs less than your 30-06 in the BDL, using 180 grain handloads.
Another choice, as already mentioned, is the nice handling Remington Mountain LSS (laminated stock with stainless action and barrel)chambered in 7mm08, 308, 270 or 30-06, and about 3/4 pound less than the BDL. I have a Mountain LSS in 260 that is a joy to shoot and carry.
You might want to compare ammunition/ballistics in Remington's website and see how little the 308 gives up to the 30-06 with factory ammo.
The 3.5-10 Zeiss Conquest is a ggod scope.

Doug/RedRabbit
 
why not a 270 wsm 160 nosler partition with 68 grs of retumbo truckin at 3000fps will nock down any thing you want to knock down kicks like a 270 knocks them down like the hammer of thor!
 
Thanks for the imput. I should further explain that the recoil of a 7mm mag doesn't bother me but 10 rounds of 220gr. safari ammo out 0f a .338 mag wearing a t-shirt does. I do want it to be a "one for all" rifle (that is, elk and deer)and have narrowed it down to either 1) a remington stainless barrel, composite stock 700 Sendero in 300 rem ultramag(I can't figure out if the action is stainless, any happy owners out there?) 2)a Sako 75 series stainless synthetic(which they don't make in 300 rem ultra mag anymore, so I'm stuck b/w 300 weatherby and the 300 win or trying to track down an older model) and 3)Weatherby Mark V series Deluxe. A big question I have is wether or not if a longer barrel will always be better(e.g. accuracy)if one doesn't mind trading for a few extra ounces.
 
wawantamonster-
Keep in mind that the barrel length doesn't necessarily impact accuracy alone. Barrel length is primarily for extra powder burning time for the magnum powder capacities. The 26" on the custom & some non-custom magnum rifles out there are a pretty "standard" length. I know a few guys shooting 30-378's that are using custom 29" barrels, found to be optimum in tests for all that powder to burn. The 30-378 looks like a powder keg with a bullet sticking out of the end!! I've read test data before, that states a 300 win mag has almost nothing over the 30-06 if a 22" barrel is used, therefore a 24" is a must, and 26" is even better. Yet on the flip side, a 29" is too long for the 300 win, the powder is fully burned up by the time it hits the end. Just a bit of info for ya to absorb. Good luck!!
 
thanks again. I've never been able to fiquire out the reasoning behind barrel lengths
 
Longer barrel is better for accuracy..Another option might be the 270 weatherby mag...The only downside is ammunition can be expensive and might be hard to find.
 
Look at the short magnum calibers in Kimber 8400.

223098.jpg
 
I have a Ruger Stainless .270 WSM and put a Vias brake on it. It won't rust, has plenty of energy for the big bucks and honestly kicks about has hard as my .243. I got a nice 4 point muley with it this year.

If you are sensitive to recoil, this is the way to go. I love it!

Brian
 

Click-a-Pic ... Details & Bigger Photos
Back
Top Bottom