Are there any cartridges better than the .30-06?

[jonn5335]

I'll be a bit nice when I hold my tongue enough so that all I say is, "Where did you get your information"?
the Nosler #6 manual lists the fastest velocity with a 180gr bullet for a SUAM being generated with IMR 4831. The charge is 8.5gr more than a what is used in a 30-06. There is about a 250fps difference in those loads.
However RL22 takes "only" 5 more gr in a SAUM to gain a whopping 30fps difference.

The fastest loads for these two cartridges are about 150fps difference (with different powders) but there is still quite a variance in charge weights. When you drop the charge weights in the SUAM to match what you can put in an 06 case, then the 06 is about 200 fps faster.

If you do the math, the SAUM is faster, but NOT more efficient than a 30-06.

My data list a 300 saum w/180 grain bullet moving 2900fps w/ a 55 grain charge of IMR 4064 vs the average charge in my data to push a 30-06 w/180 grainer was 55 grains at 2700fps both barrels were 24" My data also list 3 lighter charge weights for the 300 SAUM pushing a 190 grain bullet at 2700 fps then any pulished 06' data I have.

 

[Spitpatch]

This from Mr. Ruby: "If all I had was a 250-3000 I would use but be very careful of my shots."

Curiously, I have found that my .30-06's do not come with an attached certificate of exemption from the requirement to be very careful of my shots. I have also searched every inch of my .276 Ackley Magum, my .350 Remington Magnum, each and every one of my .45-70's. If the paperwork is somewhere attached to these guns, I cannot find it. Perhaps it was one of those "redemption forms" I should have filled out and returned to the manufacturer upon purchase in order to receive my immunity certificate.

Sadly, I will resign myself to suffering under the onerous and burdensome responsibility to be very careful of my shots regardless of what caliber I shoot. Happily, I have numerous .250-3000 Savages that comfortably instruct and allow me to fulfill this responsibility without much trouble.

 

[JGRuby]

Spit patch thanks but some of the shots that I would take with a 30-06 I would not use a 250-3000 on - perfect example - I have shot a deer in the south end that killed a deer that I suspect that I would never have made with your 250-3000. Ended up getting a deer that ate well. I sure as heck never plan to hunt elk with a 250-3000. I owe more respect to the animal then to use a marginal cartridge. When there are better choices why use a marginal cartridge?

James Ruby

By the way - thanks for loking for your instructions - never hurts to read the manual.

 

[Spitpatch]

"I am not in the regular habit of shooting big game in the fanny."

Jack O'Connor

As to the assignment of the .250 as "marginal" for elk, neither I, nor the two elk I dropped with it would approach utilizing such a term to describe its effectiveness and entire adequacy for the task. Up north, Sister Rosie, numerous Caribou and two Moose would also shun usage of the term.

As to "respect to the animal", I would wager most concientious hunters would assign the badge of respect more readily to a peer who carried his well-practiced and familiar .250 after elk and utilized its ease of shots well placed than any self-described "hunter" that spoke easily and matter-of-factly about deer he "shot in the south end", regardless of what caliber he regularly does it with.

 

[JGRuby]

I bet if you shot a grizzly in the eye enough times with a 22 lr it would kill it as well, however that is not a good choice. A 250-3000 is such a good caliber that unless you order a custom rifle - you cant buy a new rifle. There must be a reason that in todays world that most 250-3000 are collector items. Yeah - I shot a deer in the south end - it ate well and as I get older I have less desire to take shots like that with any caliber. Because many elephants were harvested with 303's and 7X57 mausers does not make them good big dangerous game rifles. Weatherby shooting cape buffalo with a 257 weatherby is not considered by many as a wise shoice. The question becomes becaue you can do and it worked once or twice should you do it? You keep shooting deer with your 250-3000 and I will continue to use my 7mm mauser or 300 savage. We will both be happy.

James Ruby

 

[JGRuby]

Even though I think highly of the 300 Savage and 7mm mauser I do not proclaim that they are better than the 30-06 as a general purpose rifle. Very few if any rifles are manufactured in those two calibers.

James Ruby

 

[Spitpatch]

"A 250-3000 is such a good caliber that unless you order a custom rifle - you cant buy a new rifle. There must be a reason that in todays world that most 250-3000 are collector items."

Aside from "available in a new gun" being a very limited and sorry criteria for evaluation of a "good caliber" (examples on both sides of this are legion: great calibers no longer currently chambered, and crappy calibers currently offered), it is an inaccurate statement on its face alone:

Savage indeed offers its 14 Classic and 16 Weather Warrior in the good caliber.

And, yes, there is a great reason that in today's world just about any rifle chambered in .250 becomes a collector's item: those who have used it recognize its great worth. Thank you for pointing out this quality of the cartridge that I had not thought of, but you are absolutely correct.

Elk hunting with a .250 is not an experiment or a stunt, nor unwise. It works. (Not only in my own experience, but in the experience of those with wider usage of it than myself who make a living documenting their experience).

 

[MilesTeg]

Plenty of do all cartridges. If I had to pick one it would be the 9.3x62.

 

[osprey]

Spitpatch, while I respect your opinion and don't doubt the effectiveness of the 250-3000 in trained hands, it would not be my recommendation for an all around gun for an inexperienced hunter. My first choice would be the 7mm-08 followed by the 308. They exhibit about the perfect blend of speed, bullet weight choices, recoil, and gun availibility. For these reasons I think they would be a better choice than the. 250-3000.

 

[JGRuby]

"A 250-3000 is such a good caliber that unless you order a custom rifle - you cant buy a new rifle. There must be a reason that in todays world that most 250-3000 are collector items."

Aside from "available in a new gun" being a very limited and sorry criteria for evaluation of a "good caliber" (examples on both sides of this are legion: great calibers no longer currently chambered, and crappy calibers currently offered), it is an inaccurate statement on its face alone:

Savage indeed offers its 14 Classic and 16 Weather Warrior in the good caliber.

And, yes, there is a great reason that in today's world just about any rifle chambered in .250 becomes a collector's item: those who have used it recognize its great worth. Thank you for pointing out this quality of the cartridge that I had not thought of, but you are absolutely correct.

Elk hunting with a .250 is not an experiment or a stunt, nor unwise. It works. (Not only in my own experience, but in the experience of those with wider usage of it than myself who make a living documenting their experience).

I am happy that they still make the cartridge and am apprently wrong - I have never seen a new rifle in that caliber but will take your word for it. I disagree with your logic for using a 250-3000 as a elk cartridge however. I dont believe that you can convince me otherwise. Odds of finding that cartridge in a genral store I would think to be limited and yes good carridges tend to be popular cartridges, meaning with wide availability. Guess we will have to disagree. The closest I can come to agreeing is the 257 roberts for deer. I like classics but I do not confuse what I want a cartridge to with what it actually can and should be used for.


I also think very highly of my 9.3X62 mauser. If I did not have one I would have one made or buy one.

James Ruby

 

[joebu]

I've done little hunting but hung out with my Dad alot as a kid. He had a 30/06 and a .243 and he ALWAYS grabbed the .243-even for bear. It weighs about half as much and he could kill anything with it- as others have said being a good shot is key. I personally would prefer the .270. One thing that noone I've seen has mentioned is that body build does change what type of gun you may prefer and we run small in stature- Dad was about 5'6"- so smaller guns are easier to balance and unload quickly. Speed over power basicly.

 

[salmonriverjohn]

The facts are that the .250 is an excellent caliber, there are many excellent calibers. It boils down to personal choice, spitpatch believes in his, JG believes in his. I still insist that the old -06 is mine, there in lies the reason there are many different choices. As a do all caliber you make your own choice, but I know which one I'm grabbing if I had to grab just one, and I have more than one man probably should,,,, or not

 

[orygun]

Oh jeez, now you guys are making me want to take that .243 elk hunting just because "I shouldn't"!

Actually, I think what Spitpatch feels about his 250 is very similar to the Swedes and their 6.5x55, especially if using long for caliber bullets. Bullets like that penetrate like crazy.

 

[deen_ad]

that the .223 fills a nitch very well but heck,

You left out the 5.56 loading which is not the same as a .223 loading.

 

[JGRuby]

Oh jeez, now you guys are making me want to take that .243 elk hunting just because "I shouldn't"!

Actually, I think what Spitpatch feels about his 250 is very similar to the Swedes and their 6.5x55, especially if using long for caliber bullets. Bullets like that penetrate like crazy.

There is a big difference the sweede will handle a lot heavier bullets -the 250-3000 is pretty much limited to 120gr or lighter bullets.


James Ruby

 

[salmonriverjohn]

Yes, but the 6 MM Remington does what the other two do only better, and the .25-06 fills that other void. So another debate could be made for those two also.

On the next step up the scale we could say that the .338 Win.mag is the best all around "Magnum" cartridge given the criteria we've judged the others by. But then we would have all the rest of the Magnum crowd extolling the virtues of their favorites, preaching the merits of this caliber or that one.

I have an old Springfield 87-A .22 that belonged to my Grandfather who gave it to me as a kid of 10. I am very fond of it and can shoot that slow triggered, tired old rifle like nobody's business, why? Because I've been shooting it for a half a century and I'm comfortable with it.
A rifle or caliber doesn't have to be THE best to be YOUR best, its the one that you shoot best that counts. Lets face it folks, the old thudy-thudy has probably taken more deer, bear and elk than all our favorites anyway

 

[salmonriverjohn]

You left out the 5.56 loading which is not the same as a .223 loading.

True! Its in there though, if only in spirit. Thanks.

 

[jonn5335]

Is there any better flavor of ice cream then vanilla?

 

[orygun]

There is a big difference the sweede will handle a lot heavier bullets -the 250-3000 is pretty much limited to 120gr or lighter bullets.


James Ruby

I don't think I'd call a 140gr a "lot heavier". Pretty minimal difference in diameter, weight, FPS, BC and SD.

But, someone mentioned personal preference. I'll still take my '06 over any of this "girlie" stuff!!

 

[Spitpatch]

Spitpatch, while I respect your opinion and don't doubt the effectiveness of the 250-3000 in trained hands, it would not be my recommendation for an all around gun for an inexperienced hunter. My first choice would be the 7mm-08 followed by the 308. They exhibit about the perfect blend of speed, bullet weight choices, recoil, and gun availibility. For these reasons I think they would be a better choice than the. 250-3000.

Correct, and fully agreed. My entire premise rests on the attributes of the .250 toward GAINING the experience (and MAINTAINING the experience) to NOT be an inexperienced hunter.