So that gun is in .300 win mag, correct? I like both cartridges, and my LGS (only five minutes from my house) stocks both .300 WM and .30-06. Like I said before, my range is limited to 300 yards, at which distance the .300 win mag or .30-06 would do well. I still haven't received a response yet from PAFOA, where I asked if anyone knew a long-distance range near Pittsburgh, and I though I would throw the question out here, on my favorite (by far) forum.
Like I said before, if I bring the gun maybe twice a month to the range (maybe very other range trip, as I must give each gun a fair share of time
), and shoot maybe 30 rounds each trip, that equals to 60 rounds a month and 720 rounds a year. During the warmer months (May through early August) I am a little busier, so I might only shoot 30 rounds a month or less, so realistically, I would maybe shoot 600 rounds a year. But even that is definitely stretching it, as I would probably only bring it on one every three range trips, so I would be pushing to get 400 rounds a year. If the .300 win mag costs 20 cents more per shot, for reloading, than it would be $80 more per year.
My main concern with the .30-06 is power, and if I ever wanted to go elk hunting or some kind of hunting in Montana or those states where the shots could be as long as 500 yards, I think I might want the extra energy of the .300 win mag. I just hate to buy a gun now, and then have buy another of similar caliber in a couple of years. I am not too concerned about overkill for close range brush hunting, as I have a .30-30 for that kind of hunting, and I am afraid the .30-06 would be too close to the .30-30. In general, I have got these energy figures for the three aforementioned rounds:
.30-30 - slightly under 2000 ft-lbs
.30-06 - slightly under 3000 ft-lbs
.300 wm - a little bit under 4000 ft-lbs.
What do you think?
Thanks,
John