rifle, scope combo

[digginfool]

Here's another interesting tip:

If you sight your scope for 0 at 75 feet, you will be pretty much zero'd in at 200 yards.  I'm not going to do the math for you here, but trust me it works.  For you doubting Thomas' out there that know a little more than basic math (think trigonometry and dynamics here), measure the distance from the bore of the rifle to the bore of the scope, calculate the angle at 75 feet and perform the calculations for 200 yards using the velocity and angle.  You will find that the bullet will be very close to zero (which represents the line through the scope bore) at that distance.  Certainly close enough to hit the kill zone of any game you're after.  Of course, nothing is better than time at the range dialing in your combination.  This technique is an excellent starting point.

[Fox17]

thanks. with those ballistics i may look into them. thats pretty impressive. i could kill anything with that. i found a recoil pad that slips on and lengthens the stock a lil, and it is good cause my arms are really long compared to most people. i dont mind the recoil that much though. one shot dont hurt. it is sightin it in.

also, do them lasers that sight your gun for you work? they look cool. they seem like they would work. any ideas?

[digginfool]

All three rounds are excellent all-pupose hunting ammo and will take down anything you might encounter in the Southeast and most anything in the lower 48.  There are as many opinions as there are hunters.  Without question, the .30-06 is the most popular round, mostly because it has been around nearly forever.  I was fortunate enough to be able to do numerous hunts using the 06 and 7mm Rem Mag side by side.  When it came time for me to lay my money down, I chose the 7mm.  You won't go wrong with either.  Good luck and happy hunting.

[Anoriginal]

Fox17

The 30-06 and 7 mag are both great. You'll be happy with either. The 7mag has more kick. 150 or more grains makes little difference. Most guys I know, including myself shoot the 150gr in the 30-06 too. I have several 7mags and several 30-06s and have always found both to be excellent rifles. Digginfools comments are right on regarding the 7mag's prowess. It is a great round. He's also right on the money about the 75' sight in. It will put you very very close at 200yrds with a 7 - 7.62mm bullet.

Bottom line, buy what you can afford and what you enjoy. Some guys like the 7mag because there is no doubt it offers more distance than the 30-06. Some guys like the 30-06 because it saves more meat than the 7mag. The .308 saves even more than the 30-06.

Some folks swear by the .243. I don't. In fact, I do not allow .243's on any of my hunts I guide or at any of my hunting camps. The .243 was designed as a varmit round and that's what it is good for. Sure, lots of guys argue that they've never lost a deer with it or "if you're a good shot, the .243 is fine". Well, that's fine with me if they're happy. But you're not hunting with me with a .243. I've seen too many lost deer, spent too many hours on my hands and knees tracking wounded game through the woods as a result of a .243. Just my opinion and like digginfool said, there are as many opinions as hunters.

Buy a .270, .308, 30-06 or 7mag and you'll likely be happy for any type of hunting you'll do (deer, hogs, even elk). Just buy quality in both the gun and scope.

[digginfool]

I couldn't agree more with Anoriginal's last statement; put more thought into the rifle and scope rather than the caliber.  Of the three (or even 4, if you are still considering the .270) we have spoke about, it's more about the quality of the scope and the time behind it that counts more than any other factor.  I would rather put a $700.00 scope on a $250.00 rifle than the other way around.  In regards to the 75 foot rule, he is correct in regards to it being true for the 7mm caliber but that is more a function of velocity than anything else.  Units of mass cancels out during the calculations and bullet diameter only figures into wind resistance, which for the difference we're talking about, is somewhat negligible even at these velocities.  Each of these calibers lose approximately 20% of their velocity (give or take a percent or two) at 300 yards.  The manufacturers have all made their 7mm rounds high velocity to make for a flatter trajectory, which most hunters want, particularly for long range shots such as when you are hunting elk.  To sum it up, it is velocity rather than caliber that dictates the distance you zero in near to have a zero at 200 yards.  For the .30-06 or .308, try zeroing in at 45-50 feet.  That should put you pretty close.  The reason for the shorter distance is that, relatively speaking, you are lobbing the slower bullet and need the higher trajectory to zero in at 200 yards.  In regards to meat damage, I have to agree to a certain extent.  I have seen terrible damage to shoulders when I have chosen to take a chest shot; holes big enough to nearly fit my fist through.  The damage from a .30-06 was more like I had shot it with an arrow; an exit wound barely larger than an inch or two.  I countered this by tending to make head or neck shots, particularly on long shots.  On long shots, it was more a function of ethics than anything else.  Aiming at the head resulted in a clean kill or a clean miss.  There is nothing worse than crawling through briars looking for a wounded deer that had run off to die.  Of course, if you have a trophy in front of you, you aim for the kill zone.  Otherwise, I'm just looking for the meat of a nice 2-year-old doe and I take the head shot.

[Fox17]

what would the recoil be compared to a mossberg 500 12 gauge? thats the only thing holding me back from the 7mm rem mag. i wont be the only one shooting it so it needs to not be too hard. is there a place to find recoil energy?

[digginfool]

Depends on what shell you're shooting.  I can go shoot trap and feel better than a session of checking the accuracy of the scope on my hunting rifle.  On the other hand, if I'm shooting 3-1/2" magnum turkey loads, I wouldn't want to shoot more than a couple times.  If recoil is an issue, go with the .270.  Personally, I think the 7mm Rem Mag kicks less than the .30-06 but Anoriginal disagrees.  One thing for certain, they both kick harder than a .270.  Be realistic with yourself; where are you going to hunt, what are you hunting for and how often are you going to hunt.  If you are buying the rifle for sport, don't do it.  You will find it to be a very expensive hobby.  These calibers run about $1.00-1.50 per trigger pull not to mention the $700-900 you'll spend on a decent rifle/scope combo.  It doesn't make any sense to have that kind of gun in the safe if you're not going to use it.  Buy a .22LR and plink away all day for a couple of bucks and sharpen your shooting skills to the max (which isn't a bad idea even if you buy a hunting rifle).  An AR15 (expensive) or an AK47 (not so expensive but extraordinarily durable) are also very cheap to shoot if the .22LR seems too mundane for your taste.

[Fox17]

well i have shotguns and .22s for just shootin. i need a rifle to hunt with. not a hobby. strictly hunting. i wont shoot it too much. just sightin it in and if i see a animal. i would use a rifled shotgun and slugs but they are as much as a rifle and dont shoot far. im gonna hunt in the southeast. from texas to florida to tennessee to west viriginia maybe. georgia, florida definately. well see. it is a .308 or a 7mm.