300 Mag or 30-06,?

[flmason]

What's the general concensus, is the belted mag performance enough greater to even lose sleep over?

How's ammo availability tend to be for 300 mag?

[FPH]

In Fl either would be fine.......ammo for both has been consistantly available here.

[charles p]

Until you hunt elk, stay with 30-06.  Even then an 06 is plenty good.

[FPH]

We did go for a short period of time when 06 was unavailable, but .300 Win Mag was always available.

[JPShelton]

It's a personal choice kind of thing.  A .300 Mag obviously shoots flatter and hits harder than a .30-'06 does.  Whether you need that flatter trajectory and added ooomph is something that you're in a better position to answer than anyone else. 
 
I HAD a Ruger No.1 in .300 Weatherby and I HAD a Ruger No.1 in .375 Holland and Holland.  I HAVE a Ruger No.1 in .30-'06.
 
I've had the good forutne to go to Botswana twice for plains game hunts.  The first time, I took a No.1 in .375 H&H and a Model 1903 Springfield in .30-'06.  I never fired a shot out of the .375 H&H the whole two weeks I was there.  The second time, I didn't bother to bring it.
 
I've shot around 14 elk.  I killed around 6 of them with a .270.  I killed about that same number with a .30-30.  I killed a couple with a .50 caplock muzzleloader.  Never killed a single one with a belted magnum and not because I didn't have one at my disposal to use.
 
The farthest shot I've ever taken on a pronghorn was about 175 yards.  I killed it with my .30-30.
 
The farthest shots I've ever taken on big game were both around 275 yards. 
 
The biggest animal I've hunted is eland.  Killed them dead with 220 grain round nosed Barnes solids out of my Springfield.
 
So, for ME, there isn't any big game hunting I want to do that I can't get done with the .30-'06 I already have. Were that not so, I'd still have one the .300 Mags I once owned, or the 9.3 x 62 I once owned, or the .375 H&H I once owned.
 
I'm not saying there is no performance advantage to the .300 Mag v. the .30-'06.  Obviously, there is.  I'm not saying .300 Mags aren't useful.  I'm saying I don't have a use for one and don't see that changing anytime soon.
 
Your milage, as they say, may vary.  I expect it does. 

[Empty Quiver]

I went with the 300 mag. Never had a car too fast, nor a woman too pretty.


But I will say this, if ammo cost is a condition you might want to sit with a pencil and use real world figures. For me ten rounds down the tube is about all I want, ( Tikka Lite will hurtcha in a thumper ), and once the thing was sighted in and I was comfortable it doesn't get much trigger time. About a hundred rounds the first year, forty the second and twenty some per year thereafter. Cost isn't an issue any more.


If you are thinking fun at the range I would certainly steer you towards the 06. In the real world you may never find a situation that requires the Win Mag anyway.

[flmason]

I went with the 300 mag. Never had a car too fast, nor a woman too pretty.


But I will say this, if ammo cost is a condition you might want to sit with a pencil and use real world figures. For me ten rounds down the tube is about all I want, ( Tikka Lite will hurtcha in a thumper ), and once the thing was sighted in and I was comfortable it doesn't get much trigger time. About a hundred rounds the first year, forty the second and twenty some per year thereafter. Cost isn't an issue any more.


If you are thinking fun at the range I would certainly steer you towards the 06. In the real world you may never find a situation that requires the Win Mag anyway.

We're thinking alike I think. 06 strikes me as the conservative choice. And when I look around at energy and velocity figures, it looks to me like 06 can come very close to 300 in the extremes, so sexy as a belted magnum is, I'm thinking it's best to resist the urge.

Most of the budget bolt guns I'm looking at offer it as an option, but I'm a big 06 fan when I actually want to use jacketed bullets.

I will say this after looking at some the entry bolt guns... they really are not built as rugged as the milsurps. They seem almost fragile by comparison. I mean the Edge has a plastic "spring" to hold it in the gun. I think so do the pricier Savages too.  When I compare that to the magazine in Mosin or 98 type action (granted they're floor plates) it's like... what is this junk?

But they seem to work. And by most accounts the current budget crop (Axis, Stevens 200, Mossburg ATR, Marlin XS7 (?), etc.) are all claimed to be between 1 and 2 MOA out of the box... I guess you just can't use them like a milspec gun.

So yeah, I'm leaning heavy towards 06, myself. With (gasp) plastic stock and such. Thinking, something that water and snow won't mess up too bad.

[Lloyd Smale]

id agree with ohters. If you NEVER shoot past 300 yards and the absolute biggest animal you will shoot is elk then its hard to beat an o6. Ranges past 300 yards even on deer ill take a 300 mag and if personaly i was to go elk hunting it would  be with a 300 mag as i have both and couldnt see risking a 5k hunt to prove a point. All that said ive got a 300wsm, a 300 win mag a 300 wby mag and a 300 ultramag and a lowly 06 and if i had to trim all my rifles in every caliber down to one it would be that lowly o6 that stayed.

[Mikey]

flmason:  we had a discussion about this a few years back with one fellow speaking to both calibers and their use on a Moose/Elk hunt in the northwest, I believe.  The issue was that nobody used the 300, everybody used the 06, which was pretty much a beater type camp rifle stuffed with store bought 180 gn soft nosed slugs.  Accordingly, and iirc, alll critters taken, including a couple of large moose and elk all fell to the 06 at ranges to and even beyond 400m.
 
I think the real issue is whether you would reload for the 300 and if not, the 06 should suffice for any game animal in the lower 48 and beyond.  I wouldn't lose any sleep over the choice, I would just use the 06...

[drdougrx]

I agree.....the 06 is adequate, unsexy and dependable....I have both a 300 and an 06.  I've shot some pretty nice black bears.  One with the 270, another with the 06 and a third with a 300. Not much difference in the killing.  I've used the 300 on a canada moose as well.  No problems putting it down.  I think if I'm on a really expensive, kinda once in a lifetime hunt for non-dangerous game that could be far and away, I'll take the 300 just in case.  But really, I use the 300 because I own it and not because I need it.

[RevJim]

 If not a handloader, the Hornady Superformance (Light Magnums) and the Federal High Energy will run with a lot of factory 300 Winchester! I shot my first cow elk with the Hornday 180 LM (it clocked 2910 out of a 23" barrel. The Federal 180 Partition HE load clocked 2970! ( I think Federal only has one HE load now, but its a good one, Tipped Trophy Bonded) I gave that rifle and the HE loads to a Missionary friend in South Africa and he shot everything, including Eland with that combo. I have had 300 Wins, 300WSM, 300 RUM. I found the 300 RUM gave me more oomph over the '06 to make it worth using as a long range rifle. Then I went to 7mm RUM, then I realized I never shot anything over 300 anymore, so fell back to a .270 and a 35 Whelan Improved. My only caution to you on buying any rifle is to remember "You only buy quality one time". My own personal view I've adopted from others is "Life is too short to hunt with an ugly gun", lol.  I have never used any of the entry level rifles you spoke of, and if I did, I'd have to give the Marlin XL7 a try. However, I have an acquaintance who bought his daughter a Mossberg 4x4 and she loves it. I have relatives down in SE Texas that use the heck out of the Savages, they hold up well in the wet/mud/ 4 wheeler deer seasons there. "You pays your money and you takes your chances" (with all of them!) Good luck to you!

[flmason]

Sounds like 06 is going to be my horse.

I can't imagine not handloading, to be honest. It's part of the game to me. So much so, my most recent purchase was a 45-70 handi, simply so I could use cast, plain base bullets and still take down large game if I wanted to.

That's my only bummer for any 30 cal. rifle... to get the capability they are capable of, your in gas check, paper patch or jacketed-land. They are what they are because of that 2700 fps capability.

And well... home made jacketed bullets are more than I want to get involved in. I really like simplicity.

Where they not so expensive... and not the real thing anymore, I'd be looking at Winchester 1886's. (Would still like to find a pristine as possible M1903 at some point too... just missed one a few months back... still bummed over that.)

So OK, I'm convinced, since I don't ever foresee taking expensive hunting trips, the 06 hits all the other points so well, if but because it's probably still the best selling round going. (Well maybe behind 308 or 223 these days?)

So what's everybody's thoughts on the "one notch above bottom feeder" models of the major makers?

Been looking at M77, Savage 110,111,116, and similar.

I'm attracted to the M77 since it's a CRF Mauser derivative. But it is a little more pricy in the stainless than the savage.

But, the Savage has such improvements as a plastic magazine latch and such. Yet, everyone claims they are tack drivers.

But to be honest, my reference point for rifles is milsurps. Seems to me any Mauser, Mosin, SMLE, etc, in good shape is a way better gun than any of the sporters. (Or am I just wrong?)


But... (third but in a row...) finding good examples means searching and study.

A Ruger M77 or Savage 110, Vanguard 2, etc. you can pretty much just say, "ship one" and have a reasonable expectation of it being good. OTOH... I can't make myself do that with the milsurps. (Am I wrong here too?) I mean what the heck. even a Mosin M38 or M44 in good shape is fine hunting rifle in my opinion (might need accurizing of course).


Anyway, goal here was initially to add an '06 to the collection, but the 300 mags are available in most of those models too.  Have to admit, still feeling a sense of loss on an really nice M1903 I just missed a while back.

[flmason]

It's a personal choice kind of thing.  A .300 Mag obviously shoots flatter and hits harder than a .30-'06 does.  Whether you need that flatter trajectory and added ooomph is something that you're in a better position to answer than anyone else. 
 
I HAD a Ruger No.1 in .300 Weatherby and I HAD a Ruger No.1 in .375 Holland and Holland.  I HAVE a Ruger No.1 in .30-'06.
 
I've had the good forutne to go to Botswana twice for plains game hunts.  The first time, I took a No.1 in .375 H&H and a Model 1903 Springfield in .30-'06.  I never fired a shot out of the .375 H&H the whole two weeks I was there.  The second time, I didn't bother to bring it.
 
I've shot around 14 elk.  I killed around 6 of them with a .270.  I killed about that same number with a .30-30.  I killed a couple with a .50 caplock muzzleloader.  Never killed a single one with a belted magnum and not because I didn't have one at my disposal to use.
 
The farthest shot I've ever taken on a pronghorn was about 175 yards.  I killed it with my .30-30.
 
The farthest shots I've ever taken on big game were both around 275 yards. 
 
The biggest animal I've hunted is eland.  Killed them dead with 220 grain round nosed Barnes solids out of my Springfield.
 
So, for ME, there isn't any big game hunting I want to do that I can't get done with the .30-'06 I already have. Were that not so, I'd still have one the .300 Mags I once owned, or the 9.3 x 62 I once owned, or the .375 H&H I once owned.
 
I'm not saying there is no performance advantage to the .300 Mag v. the .30-'06.  Obviously, there is.  I'm saying .300 Mags aren't useful.  I'm saying I don't have a use for one and don't see that changing anytime soon.
 
Your milage, as they say, may vary.  I expect it does.

Well, I guess I'm just young enough and just old enough (51) to have some vague memory of the pre-magnumitis days... but let's face it... by the time I was born in '62... magnums were old hat, par for the course.

It is interesting that you're taking elk with .270. I hear opposed opinions to that idea in what I've read.

Granted shot placement is everything, even if the round is overkill. Once the bullet will do the job... it's my job to do it right.

[JPShelton]

It's a personal choice kind of thing.  A .300 Mag obviously shoots flatter and hits harder than a .30-'06 does.  Whether you need that flatter trajectory and added ooomph is something that you're in a better position to answer than anyone else. 
 
I HAD a Ruger No.1 in .300 Weatherby and I HAD a Ruger No.1 in .375 Holland and Holland.  I HAVE a Ruger No.1 in .30-'06.
 
I've had the good forutne to go to Botswana twice for plains game hunts.  The first time, I took a No.1 in .375 H&H and a Model 1903 Springfield in .30-'06.  I never fired a shot out of the .375 H&H the whole two weeks I was there.  The second time, I didn't bother to bring it.
 
I've shot around 14 elk.  I killed around 6 of them with a .270.  I killed about that same number with a .30-30.  I killed a couple with a .50 caplock muzzleloader.  Never killed a single one with a belted magnum and not because I didn't have one at my disposal to use.
 
The farthest shot I've ever taken on a pronghorn was about 175 yards.  I killed it with my .30-30.
 
The farthest shots I've ever taken on big game were both around 275 yards. 
 
The biggest animal I've hunted is eland.  Killed them dead with 220 grain round nosed Barnes solids out of my Springfield.
 
So, for ME, there isn't any big game hunting I want to do that I can't get done with the .30-'06 I already have. Were that not so, I'd still have one the .300 Mags I once owned, or the 9.3 x 62 I once owned, or the .375 H&H I once owned.
 
I'm not saying there is no performance advantage to the .300 Mag v. the .30-'06.  Obviously, there is.  I'm saying .300 Mags aren't useful.  I'm saying I don't have a use for one and don't see that changing anytime soon.
 
Your milage, as they say, may vary.  I expect it does.

Well, I guess I'm just young enough and just old enough (51) to have some vague memory of the pre-magnumitis days... but let's face it... by the time I was born in '62... magnums were old hat, par for the course.

It is interesting that you're taking elk with .270. I hear opposed opinions to that idea in what I've read.

Granted shot placement is everything, even if the round is overkill. Once the bullet will do the job... it's my job to do it right.

Well, I'm not taking elk with a .270 NOW.  I haven't been elk hunting in a long time -too long, in fact.  But I don't think they've become bulletproof while I've been "out of the game," so to speak.  If I were to go elk hunting next season, I'd load up my .30-'06 and my .30-30 and call it good.  I wouldn't feel the need to rush out and buy an "elk rifle."
 
Back when I was hunting elk every year, I had a Ruger M77MkII in .270 that I shot really well from field positions.  That's the main reason that I used it.  There were others, too, but I never had any doubt that the .270 would kill an elk dead with one well placed shot at reasonable range.  My uncle that I usually elk hunted with had a three decade head start on me and got along fine with a .300 Savage and a .30-30.
 
Oh, and I fat fingered my post in this thread when I typed "I'm saying .300 mags aren't useful."  I intended for there to be the word "not" in there, as in "I'm not saying..."
 
I don't think I've got a use for one now, but I've owned a few, and might again, someday.  That No.1 in .300 Weatherby I had was a heck of a lot of fun to shoot and selling it is something I occasionally regret doing.

[mcwoodduck]

The main difference between the two is the 300 Win will push a 180 grain bullet the same speed as the 30-06 will push a 150 grain. 
the longer you are planning on shooting the more use you will have for the 300 Win with lighter bullets.  Same bullet just a little faster.
My buddy uses a 300 Win for everything wiht 180 grain bullets at alittle faster than 30-06.  He shot is royal elk with it, he shot a Javilina with it as well as a number of pigs and deer.
I really think it is a toss of a coin between the two.
I ended the argument by owning a pair of 308s and a 338 WIn mag.   
Oh and I do have a 30-06 as a loaner gun that my Uncle is using till he finds something he wants more.

[flmason]

The main difference between the two is the 300 Win will push a 180 grain bullet the same speed as the 30-06 will push a 150 grain. 
the longer you are planning on shooting the more use you will have for the 300 Win with lighter bullets.  Same bullet just a little faster.
My buddy uses a 300 Win for everything wiht 180 grain bullets at alittle faster than 30-06.  He shot is royal elk with it, he shot a Javilina with it as well as a number of pigs and deer.
I really think it is a toss of a coin between the two.
I ended the argument by owning a pair of 308s and a 338 WIn mag.   
Oh and I do have a 30-06 as a loaner gun that my Uncle is using till he finds something he wants more.

Now there's a solution I like... one or two of everything.

But gonna have to keep to one this year.

It's down to which rifle at this point. Debating an M77 All Weather vrs. a Savage in stainless. Any thoughts there?

When you can only do one, it becomes a wrestling match with yourself. Especially when (much like the 336 v. 94 question) there's good and bad points on both sides... nothing to hang your hat on. Geez I hate when there's not a clear winner.

I keep reading the M77 is basically a 98 Mauser... a good thing... but seems like there's lot of talk about them being less accurate... and that the angled recoil lug makes things odd... and that Ruger flat out states.. "don't float the barrel"... very odd...

The Savages on the other hand, seem to have a great reputation for accuracy... but I just can't get past those magazines with a *plastic* latch.

Can't someone just make an affordable 1886 Winchester in stainless, LOL!

All kidding aside though. I'd have thought by now someone would've come up with a CRF bolt gun, with a floating bolt head... like a Mosin or Savage... and a full width bolt body like a Weatherby Mark 5, and lastly, the Savage barrel nut.

The shortcomings and advantages of each design have been know for decades. That one final design that gets rid of all the downsides hasn't happened, baffles me. But I'm an engineer.

So, basically, if I don't trip over a SS lever gun I just love, or something like an M1903, pretty much gonna be the Savage or the M77.

Anyone tried the Nikon BDC scopes... good thing or hype?

[FPH]

The Ruger American or the Remington 700 have received high praises around here also.....just to add to your decision.

[RevJim]

 We have a Ruger 77 Hawkeye All Weather in our family. Its in 338 Federal, and a gem dandy little rifle. The Savages have been around so long that Parts are easily available, plus they have pretty goo customer service. The Marlin XL7 has the barrel nut, Savage trigger, Remington safety, its just not stainless ( I don't know if you can even get it in stainless) Outers Tri-Lube keeps all my guns from rusting in wet snow/rain up here in Utah, its fantastic stuff. I think the Ruger 77 AW is a good bit more expensive than either the Savage or Marlin, but I think its worth it...to me.

[mcwoodduck]

Since it is your one Rifle.  You can buy or reload more 30-06 for the same price as 300 Win.  More ammo means more shooting and the more you shoot it the better you are going to be with it. 
I have a buddy that has to have the best.  So he used most of his budget for his one hunting rifle on the Rifle, the Scope, the Boyt case, the safari aluminium case, the ammo holders, and finally a couple boxes of premium projectile ammo for his 338 WM.   When we get ready to go hunting or just out for a day at the range he only shoots a few rounds, and I mean a few.  I would not shoot that few as I would not want to clean the rifle for three rounds.
I shoot the cheap (at least then it was) Remington 225 grain Soft points and could buy two boxes of the Remington cheap stuff that is more than enough for all game and I get to shoot my Used rifle a lot more for the same budget.  OK I spent a lot less for the same quality.  I believe the core lok slogan of "deadliest mushroom in the woods.  I have also killed deer with Winchester and Federal but the Remington has the cheapest 338 Win.  But we are not talking about the 338, you need to look at what ammo is available in your area most often and at multiple stores for the same brand and weight and sight in with it.  if you like hte 150, 165 or the 180 grain all will work on North American antlered and horned game. 
I would look at the used racks for a quality rifle and then remount the scope (remember the scope is often incorrectly mounted and could be a problem with accuracy.   If you find one in 300 Win or 30-06 it really does not matter and you may get a better deal on the used 300 WM or even one of the Short mags if you reload (not sure how ,ong the WSM will be around).   The benefits of the 300 WSM are what is killing it.  Most are built on a 308 size frame and they make the rifle light like a 243 for mountain hunting, but the light rifle recoils more.  If you are not recoil sensetive, really would not matter, see what the best deal you can get.    And Save a good chunk of your budget for AMMO! 

[JPShelton]

All kidding aside though. I'd have thought by now someone would've come up with a CRF bolt gun, with a floating bolt head... like a Mosin or Savage... and a full width bolt body like a Weatherby Mark 5, and lastly, the Savage barrel nut.

The shortcomings and advantages of each design have been know for decades. That one final design that gets rid of all the downsides hasn't happened, baffles me. But I'm an engineer.

So, basically, if I don't trip over a SS lever gun I just love, or something like an M1903, pretty much gonna be the Savage or the M77.

Anyone tried the Nikon BDC scopes... good thing or hype?

Savage actually did make a CRF version of the 110 action for a time, but it was, if I recall correctly, only available in belted magnum calibers -big ones, like .338 Win Mag and up.  I think it was called the Model 112 Safari or something like that, but I don't remember.
 
I don't own a Savage now, but the one I did own pretty much made me a huge fanboy for life.  If I were buying a new rifle today, it would be a Savage Model 14 Classic in .250 Savage.  I'd go for the Savage on the basis of past and very positive experience with a Model 10 Sierra in .243 that I bought in great condition used for $200.00.  Until a later purchase of a Remington 721, that Savage was the most accurate hunting rifle I had ever owned or shot.  It had no problem grouping down to .550" or less with factory ammo in spite of a pencil-thin, 20" barrel.  I liked everything about the rifle -three position safety, trigger feel, light weight, compact diminsions, handling dynamics, accuracy, and so on.  I thought it was ugly because of the "black on black" look.  I fixed that with a can of olive drab Krylon Fusion.  The only thing I didn't like about the rifle was the high bolt lift / cocking effort compared to other brands.  A small nit to pick.
 
Here's another thing that influences my thinking.  I shoot A LOT.  Enough to have barrel wear be a real concern.  Thinking in terms of high volume use, Nicholas Brewer's 110 action is an engineering triumph.  Yes, it was designed to be slapped together by relatively unskilled assemblers.  The bonus I reap from that is a rifle I can gunsmith myself on my dining room table.  No matter WHAT might wear out or break on a Savage 110 based rifle, I can repair it myself if I can obtain the part.  No gunsmith trip required.  I could even manage to rebarrel one, I think.  Even if I farmed that job out, I can't think of too many rifles that would be cheaper or easier to rebarrel than a Savage 110.
 
If I had the space in my gun room, I would have another Savage because it would be the only rifle I would ever need, I could maintain it doing most of the work myself, and it would outlive me.  And I was more than a little bit impressed with the one that I had. 
 
I don't have the room for another rifle, but when I do, I am thinking about a building a semi-custom on a stainless Savage action with a stainless barrel chambered in .250 Savage and cut to the same profile as that which was on my Sierra. It would be a blind magazine, stocked with green and brown laminated wood, and scoped with a 2-7X Leupold.  It might be a .260 Remington, instead. 
 
Like I said, I don't own one now, but I am a biased huge fan of the Savage 110 action after owning one.
 
JP

[Lloyd Smale]

savages control round feed was obtained by simply opening up the bottom of the bolt head so the cartridge would slip up under the extractor which was not a mauser style claw extractor, just there standard extractor thats used in all there bolt guns. Something remington could do too if they thought it would sell guns. Bottom line is controled round feed is only really needed for about 1 percent of hunters. Even alot of dangerous game hunting is done with remingtons. Personly im not going to give up the option of dropping ammo in from the top for control round feeding.

[BBF]

Since you hand/reload why not go with the 300 Win. You can always load for 06 performance level if you like and keep the extra power for situations that may come up on occasion.

[SHOOTALL]

Lots of good info here. I have hunted with both and like both. No need to repeat so I will just note to get the performance out of the 300 WM you need a 24 + inch bbl. while the 3006 is good with a 22 inch bbl. Yes Ruger has just come out with a Guide rifle with 20 inch bbl that comes in 300 WM and 3006. They claim it's really loud  .
 Any way if long shots in open country is your game go 300WM if you hunt in close cover the 06 might be a better choice. If cost of ammo is a concern 06 is better priced most of the time.

[flmason]

Since you hand/reload why not go with the 300 Win. You can always load for 06 performance level if you like and keep the extra power for situations that may come up on occasion.

Primarily the reasons mcwoodduck cites. I'm thinking 30-06 is more common, and probably strong enough. Probably the best of the .30 cal. cartridges from the battle rifle era. Of course it was last to the party too.

Was primarily wondering if the extra push was significant enough to justify the cost and lesser popularity of the round.

Sounds like, if you really are pushing the edge, it may just be. But considering my last purchase was a 45-70 because I wanted something that could do the job without jacketed bullets, paper patch or gas checks, etc... I'm thinking '06 is good enough for me. It's just easy to think... "well... heck it's the same gun... same price... maybe I *should* go with the magnum?" 

In handguns I always have gone for the biggest cartridge in the model. Once we hit the bottleneck rifle cartridges though... that right there is so much more performance than I'm used to using... I'm probably just getting a case of "biggest and best-est".

[tomtomz]

I see great used 300 Win Mags for good prices all over. It seems that a lot of guys buy it in
Featherweight and don't put strong enough rings on them and have a lot of problems with
Them and sell them for something else.

If you want a sporter, 30-06 is more forgiving to the shoulder. That said, I love
my Parker Hale FN Mauser with white bolt in 30-06. It is just one helluva shooter
even after many hundreds of rounds of everything from soup to nuts through it, 
and a firing pin spring strong enough for milspec ammo. 8 pounder.

I also love my Pattern 14 Remington in 300 WIN MAG, 28" Barrel, and a huge,
powerful scope. Recoil isn't bad, but it will knock you out of your tree stand if
you let it. Ten pounder.

All of that said, my 257 WBY is a poontang sweet shooter and my go-to rifle which is
almost always nearby on a big hunt. It has taken more alfalfa-fed 300# mule deer
than any of my others. Bang-flop.

[flmason]

I see great used 300 Win Mags for good prices all over. It seems that a lot of guys buy it in
Featherweight and don't put strong enough rings on them and have a lot of problems with
Them and sell them for something else.

If you want a sporter, 30-06 is more forgiving to the shoulder. That said, I love
my Parker Hale FN Mauser with white bolt in 30-06. It is just one helluva shooter
even after many hundreds of rounds of everything from soup to nuts through it, 
and a firing pin spring strong enough for milspec ammo. 8 pounder.

I also love my Pattern 14 Remington in 300 WIN MAG, 28" Barrel, and a huge,
powerful scope. Recoil isn't bad, but it will knock you out of your tree stand if
you let it. Ten pounder.

All of that said, my 257 WBY is a poontang sweet shooter and my go-to rifle which is
almost always nearby on a big hunt. It has taken more alfalfa-fed 300# mule deer
than any of my others. Bang-flop.

Wow, you have the medium bore rifle spectrum pretty well covered there.

Well, despite wanting something like the GSR that could go both ways (hunting + scoped or SHTF) I gave up finding the stainless one for now and went with the M77 All Weather in 30-06. Wondering if backup iron sights can be gracefully mounted on it somehow. Given my druthers... for 06... there was a pristine M1903 I missed a few months back... that really wanted. For whatever reasons, slick as sporters are, I just prefer the full military stocks. Especially the american ones that have compartments for oilers and whatnot.

I think between 125 gr. and 220 gr and that case volume I can cover alot of ground.  Lots of choices in that range. Granted the magnums are even moreso.

Only regret is that, unlike say a 45-70 guide gun, jacketed or at least gas checked bullets are needed for it to really perform like a 30 cal. rifle.

Wish someone would come up with a cost effective way to DIY for jacketed bullets other than say paper patching, or Corbin equipment.

 No doubt those 300 mags end up back on the shelf on occasion. Have to admit, decades ago... first 8mm Mauser I shot with hot milsurp ammo... hated it... sent me scurrying back to an M1 Garand I had. so I know the feeling. All these years later, I still remember by my reaction to that 8mm slapping the bejeezus out of me. (Only weighed about 165 in those days, LOL! ) 

These days I don't worry about it. And if it ever gets to me, I can always handload to whatever level I want.  But man, I'll never forget that Mauser slapping me, LOL!. Was a Turkish one. Bunches of them were coming in after some ban ended back then. They were like $89 each... wish I could get good 98 Mausers for twice or three times that these days. It was in really good shape. I can remember thinking... "Who was this thing supposed to kill? Me or the other guy, what with that butt cap?"

Ironically, when I saw M48's these days, with the cap... had to have one, LOL!

So this is a first for me... a commercial bolt gun. And a sporter no less. I don't know what I'm thinking, buying such fragile gun. It must be a full moon! LOL!

Last minute I was thinking about of those Zastava M63 things, but forked over the $$$.

BTW - Despite being a fan of the mil designs... Weatherby's are definitely and attractive gun. I can see how you ended up with one of those. If it's a Mark V, almost to pretty to take into the field, really.

[BBF]

I've had several different rifle/cartridges combos with ported barrels. Most were after market done by Magna Port if I recall the name properly. One factory ported rifle was a Marlin in 450 M and even with the porting it kicked  more than I liked using factory ammo.

[Graybeard]

Let's bring this one back up and see if folks might want to talk more about it.