Advice Please??

Thank you for explaining your use of the term "head height". I understand what you are talking about, now.

However, I don't consider it a valid, or useful term, just a confusing one, since the cartridge "head" is the case base, and the space you are talking about (how much bullet can be exposed) is not a feature of the cartridge, but the rifle itself.

If you're not going to load to the industry spec max loaded length, then your limits are the bullet you're using, the barrel you're using and the magazine length (if you're using a repeater).
 
ALCON:

I get the distinct impression that the OP is looking for a first (or near first) high-powered rifle.
In that case, I'd stick w/ a long-established/universally available cartridge that fills the reqm'ts soup to nuts.

Very difficult to beat the `06 in that circumstance
 
Thank you all for the advice I really appreciate it. I have no doubt that 308 is an excellent choice for a lot of people. However every single 308 my family has ever owned has been plagued by various issues and problems so that’s a caliber that I was going to stay away from. I don’t doubt that it is an excellent option for what I am looking for but I just don’t want to deal with the headaches that it has caused for us in the past. We’ve had Savage 110’s, Remington Model 700’s, and a Browning X Bolt all with a variety of different problems that for my family we’ve been turned against that caliber.
 
Thank you for explaining your use of the term "head height". I understand what you are talking about, now.

However, I don't consider it a valid, or useful term, just a confusing one, since the cartridge "head" is the case base, and the space you are talking about (how much bullet can be exposed) is not a feature of the cartridge, but the rifle itself.

If you're not going to load to the industry spec max loaded length, then your limits are the bullet you're using, the barrel you're using and the magazine length (if you're using a repeater).
Click to expand...

Head is a classic term for bullet.

I agree we can talk all day about custom reamers, throating reamers, ideal freebore, mag lengths, etc, but this all comes for free when a person buys a PRC, Creedmoor, Western, ARC and maybe a few others to a lesser extent. My point is the accuracy, ballistic performance and just capability are built into those and it has been revolutionary. I would argue that it makes buying other cartridges a slight disadvantage, unless the plan is to rebarrel/rebuild from the get go.
 
However, I don't consider it a valid, or useful term, just a confusing one, since the cartridge "head" is the case base, and the space you are talking about (how much bullet can be exposed) is not a feature of the cartridge, but the rifle itself.
Click to expand...

Exactly. He is talking about headspace.
 
advice

Ok, you asked. You're looking for one rifle to do everything, a tall and if not impossible, an impractical request. Targets 100-1000 yds and enough rifle to hunt elk as well. Seems a bit much. On top of that, an optic that will be adequate for 1000 yds will be a whole lot of scope to lug around for whitetails or bear in the Alleghenies of PA or anywhere else. You really need to consider two rifles, or more precisely, two rifles chambered for different cartridges.

Dunno what access you have to shooting ranges, but 1000 yd ranges do not grow on trees, heck, a 600 yd range is not all that common in a lot of places, north Alabama for one. But if you do indeed have such opportunity, either at known or unknown distance shooting on paper or steel, the 6.5CM has a big following. Bamaboy has a couple of rifles so chambered and they are mild shooting, exceptionally flat past 300 yds to way out there and ammo is now very common. If you intend to shoot say 50-100 rds in a day at steel or paper, the difference in the recoil of a 6.5CM v. anything bigger will be much appreciated. The 6.5CM will also suffice as a deer and hog rifle as well. As I am a hunter first, taking deer typically under 100 yds, I do not need the range or the trajectory that the 6.5CM offers so do not own one myself.

The fly in the ointment is ....elk, and to some limited extent, big black bears. I will likely never get to hunt elk, but I know that an elk is not a whitetail. While a BIG whitetail runs 200 lbs +, a big bull elk can approach 800lbs, heck, maybe more. PA grows some real whopper black bears too, there are about a dozen on record, in recent years, that are in the 800 lb range. Bamasister killed one in the 500lb range, I have the skull in my den. I think a 6.5CM can surely take an elk,(or black bear) they are certainly not bulletproof, but the old adage of "use enough gun" comes to mind. I would not want to travel from the Pittsburgh area to the Rockies, to have to pass an elk on the hunt of a lifetime, or worse, LOSE an elk, due to a quartering shot wisely untaken or a bullet not getting to the vitals and escaping. unrecovered. It'd be a long drive home.

So, for my do all North America hunting rifle, I'd go with the old standby '06. A close second would be a .270 loaded with a premium bullet if elk or blackies were the quarry. Ammo everywhere, a wide selectin of bullet types, rifles in abundance, and not too much of a kicker for most folks to shoot well. Coming back to target shooting, 150 rds or so thru a SPORTER weight '06 or even a .270 over the course of a weekend, say at some type of match would be unpleasant for most of us. I've done it with an 18 lb rifle in .308, no problem, but a 8lb sporter would be painful. Hence, two rifles.

To confuse the issue, if the "light" target rifle will in reality only be shot much to 600 yds or under (most of us, way under) I would give serious thought to a .223/5.56 with a fast twist barrel to utilize heavy match bullets. Cheap to shoot, and ammo everywhere (usually). A pussycat to shoot.
 
Head height reference in this article
Click to expand...
Interesting. Never heard the term before, nor bullets referenced as 'heads' either.
bamaranger said:
Ok, you asked. You're looking for one rifle to do everything, a tall and if not impossible, an impractical request. Targets 100-1000 yds and enough rifle to hunt elk as well. Seems a bit much. On top of that, an optic that will be adequate for 1000 yds will be a whole lot of scope to lug around for whitetails or bear in the Alleghenies of PA or anywhere else. You really need to consider two rifles, or more precisely, two rifles chambered for different cartridges.
Click to expand...
Yup, my initial thought was that based on the requirements, the OP really wants two rifles, maybe even three.
 
I read the reference; it is described as: "For starters, the best modern cartridges have a lot of head height. That’s the distance from the case mouth to the end of the magazine."

I take this to mean that it's purely a function/limitation of the magazine. Still a bit confusing, I think what they are really saying is that these cartridge designs reduce encroachment of the bullet shank into the case capacity, especially with newer high BC/SD bullets.

I give the hunter the benefit of the doubt that funny things come up in conversation during those campfire conversations.:)
 
30-06 with a 3x12(15?) will be more than enough out to the limits of ranging.
Anything more is just fluff at this stage of the OP's 3-sigma uses.

(We're really reading/making too much of all this) ;)
 
mehavey; agreed, several of the cartridges with the right bullets will cover the gambit. any scope with 10x or more is more than enough to hit targets at a grand, and anything from 7mm up is considered adequate for hunting up to elk size game; if you don't push the range to far, the 6.5 is ethical.

edit, of course i assume that everyone knows that shot placement is important.
 
That’s the distance from the case mouth to the end of the magazine
Click to expand...

Kind of arbitrary and confusing, IMHO. Language is exact for Engineers for a reason.

At first it seems to me the author is trying to discuss Length to Lands. It's not super critical AFAIK and some bullets like longer jump to the lands than others.

In the context of the articles definition, Cartridge Overall Length (COL) is limited by the magazine design as well as pressure concerns. Exceed the COL and you have a single shot rifle. I don't think we need another term to describe the same thing.

As long as the message is conveyed that is okay for the short term but it much better to learn the correct terminology. One reason why we have these threads, So we can all learn. :)
 
"For starters, the best modern cartridges have a lot of head height. That’s the distance from the case mouth to the end of the magazine."
Click to expand...
Actually, it's not strictly correct (putting a 6mm BR cartridge into a 338 LM magazine probably is not going to make it shoot better); but I think we can put this one to bed.:)
 
We need a separate head height thread. This guy has a real question and needs debate on that question.

So, for my side of the debate, I vote that a person should focus future rifle purchases on rifles with chambering that use the new fast twist, high bc, high head height design elements. Creedmoor, PRC, Western, etc. if another reason, go ahead and buy that 308, 30-06, 7 rem mag, 300 Win Mag….those are all fine rounds capable of decent accuracy and decent results, even with their bullets jammed into their powder area. I have used these for years.
 
Nathan said:
...go ahead and buy that 308, 30-06, 7 rem mag, 300 Win Mag….those are all fine rounds capable of decent accuracy and decent results, even with their bullets jammed into their powder area.
Click to expand...
LOL!

"Decent results?" "Decent accuracy?"

Seriously?

I've owned all of those except the magnums (which are unnecessary) plus owning the .270, .280, .257 Bob, .243 and 7mm/08 and they all did a lot better than decent.....most gave superb accuracy and superb results.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top