3855WIN
Well-known member
I like the idea, but why not just do the same thing with one rifle?
Which Caliber?
- Thread starter RugerHawg413
- Start date
3855WIN
Well-known member
I learned to appreciate the .308 WIN when my son used it to great effect from age 7-14. Excellent caliber.
Buffs35
Well-known member
You spelled weatherby wrong...
VikingsGuy
Well-known member
I gather the thinking is the .223 is much cheaper to shoot in volume and super low recoil, so practice here first, develop good habits and trigger control and the move up to your "high power" hunting rifle. Sure, you could just start with your .308, but my guess is folks put far fewer rounds down range with a .308 than a .223.
Last edited:
44hunter45
Well-known member
My 264WM has two notches on it. Not beating my chest. Both were cows who did not know we were there. Both one shot kills, 160 yards and 400+(so my oldest says
) . Far more have fallen to the trusty old M77 Mk I in .30-'06 from 6 to 150 yards. I put my opinion of "Long Range Hunting" in my tag line so I wouldn't have to keep typing it.To get really proficient you have to shoot a lot. A 223 is economical and has long a barrel life. At distance it will magnify any wind reading errors.
Last edited:
buffybr
Well-known member
What's that old saying about "great minds working together?"
Here's a picture of my 3 Weatherby Vanguard rifles. On top is my .300 Wby that I re-stocked in Fancy walnut to fit me, and it is my favorite elk rifle. Below it are my .308 Win and .223. I lengthened their stocks to match my .300, and they all have similar triggers and Leupold CDS scopes. Other than recoil, when I shoot them, they all feel the same.
A couple of days ago I posted "...I go to our range at least once a week, all year. Part of every trip, I shoot one or two rifles from field positions at the steel gongs at 200, 300, and 430 yards. The Weatherby Vanguard chambered in .308 Win that I have now, I specifically bought for inexpensive, light recoil range shooting at these gongs..." What I didn't say in that post was the second rifle that I usually shoot every week was a Vanguard chambered in .223.
Like the posters above stated, the .223 is very economical and has very low recoil. I only shoot reloads, and for comparison, I load 84 grains of powder in my .300 Wby and I weigh each load. I load my .308 Win and .223 on my Dillon loader and just "throw" the powder charges, 45 grains in the .308 and 27 grains in the .223.
I actually shoot more .308 shells than .223, especially at the 430 yard gong because I can't hear the .223 hits as well as the .308 hits. And like FLS posted, wind drift is more noticeable with the .223 than it is with the .308 Win.
I enjoy ringing the steel gongs, and the more practice that I do with my smaller cartridge rifles, the more confident I am when hunting with my .300 Wby.
Dougfirtree
Well-known member
One of the most helpful things I've done in making judgements about what's an appropriate rifle, range, etc. is to just not pay attention to what cartridge the rifle shoots. It's pretty much irrelavent. I just want to know: What's the weight of the bullet, the ballistic coefficient and the velocity AND.... what kind of bullet is it? If you pick a well-constructed bullet and it's got a bit of weight to it and you keep it going fast enough to open well and you keep your shots to a range that guarantees a reasonable amount of energy (personally, I go for a minimum of 1200fp or so for deer and 1500, or so for elk), all you need to worry about is hitting your target. Who cares what numbers are stamped on the back of the case? Modern bullets are amazing. Some of them will open nicely, punch through bone and still retain 90+% of their weight. If you're ok with using a 180 grain powerpoint from a .30-06 on elk, but you're worried about using a 140 grain E-tip from a 7mm-08, I'd say you just haven't done the math very well.
3855WIN
Well-known member
So two rifles and scopes are more economical than one?
VikingsGuy
Well-known member
The premise is that a new/newish hunter needs to get a lot of rounds down range to build skills. If you reject this then there is no point arguing cost, you are just arguing that shooting more than a few hundred rounds a year is not necessary for a new hunter, cost or not.
If you accept the premise that new shooters need to shoot a fair bit (at least for discussion purposes) let's check out the math. If a hunter was to go out and shoot 50 rounds per weekend for their first summer of shooting that is about 1,000 rounds (either with a "trainer .223" or their hunting rifle). As hunting season nears they put another 100 rounds down range with their big game hunting rifle. For the following 4 seasons (seasons 2-5) the hunter shoots 500 practice rounds a year and 50 rounds of hunter round as season tune up. This is a lot more than some guys shoot, but certainly not excessive for somebody who is trying to go from zero to elk in a year or two.
Scenario 1 - The one gun. $650 7mm08 rifle + $500 scope + cheap green box corlokt ammo for hunting and practice ($0.85 per round today on ammoseek). End of year one total costs = $2,085. End of 5 year costs = $3,955. At this point the 7mm08 has 3,300 rounds down barrel and either needs a barrel now or should have gotten on in year 3. So if you add $400 for barrel swap that gets you to total 5 year cost = $4,355.
Scenario 2 - The two gun. $450 .223 rifle + $650 rifle + $500 scope (swap scope to hunting rifle in fall and back to .223 after season) + cheap Hornady .223 fmj for practice ($0.30 per round) and cheap green box for hunting rounds ($0.85). End of year one total costs = $1,930. End of year 5 total costs = $2,590. At this point you only have 300 rounds in your hunting rifle and 3,000 in your .223 - You certainly don't need a new barrel in your 7mm08, but you may be getting close on your .223 trainer.
Scenario 2 is obviously cheaper, plus you have a .223 for varmints and predators and have saved your shoulder a lot of recoil (even with the low recoil of a 7mm08).
Last edited:
tzone
Well-known member
600 yds at an elk is a hellova poke for either of those two choices.
I can't give advice on shooting a critter with either of them at that range.
I can't give advice on shooting a critter with either of them at that range.
tzone
Well-known member
ImBillT
Well-known member
- Joined
- Oct 29, 2018
- Messages
- 3,821
For any of those who think the 6.5 isn’t good enough for elk, I must add one more thing. If you think a 140gr bullet from a 7mm-08 is suitable for elk, then you unknowingly think a 140gr bullet from a 6.5CM is equal to it or better.
This is by far the best advice so far!!
My only critique is to get with schmaltz and order a vx3 for the main rifle and a vx freedom for the 223 (should be reasonably close to the budget) because I’m lazy and don’t like the inconvenience of swapping around scopes once zeroed!
buffybr
Well-known member
But I see all of those guys on TV shoot their elk at 800, 900, and 1300 yards. One gunmaker even advertises his rifles are "1000 yards out of the box."
Practice? I don't need no stinking practice!
Only disagree that a 7-08 will need a new barrel at that point.
tzone
Well-known member
6.5 is fine for elk. One of my good friends uses a .243 for them. He's a hellova shot too I might add. Practices more than most and would be one of the few people I would trust to make a 600 yds shot on an elk.
tzone
Well-known member
But I see all of those guys on TV shoot their elk at 800, 900, and 1300 yards. One gunmaker even advertises his rifles are "1000 yards out of the box."
Practice? I don't need no stinking practice!
All of my rifles will shoot to 1000 yds out of the box. Just not by me. lol
tzone
Well-known member
Pretty much anything but a .22lr would need a new barrel after that many rounds
