rdavidsonjr
New member
Keep the info coming this is becoming more fruitful as it goes. I m alot analytical and I find the more input I get tends to make for better decisions. Will be helpful with my next project.
what is the most accurate 1000 yard deer caliber
- Thread starter rdavidsonjr
- Start date
- Status
Im on a 243 kick right now because thats what i just bought for a rifle. Im not looking to shoot 1000 yds more like 400 tops. Most of my shooting will be done from 100 to 200yds. I researched and read tons of write ups on all calibers when i was rifle shopping and what ive learned(in my opinon) is that the 308 will prob be best for what youre looking to do. Unless youre looking to kill a deer at 1000 yds then throw my opinion out the window.lol but 308 is a great deer caliber out to 200 or 300yds and has been used for long range shooting forever. Also, there is a wider range of bullets for the 308. I think you can shoot 110 or 120 grn all the way up to 200 grn.
I re-read the original post and now that you've pointed it out I see what you mean, the OP seems to want a rifle for deer hunting AND 1000 yard targets, not deer hunting at 1000 yards.
If you title your thread "what is the most accurate 1000 yard deer caliber" it's not too surprising when people come to the wrong conclusion.
Anyway, there are some limitations to that goal as well. Sights are going to be a challenge, because a rifle sighted in at 1000 yards requires shims / special mounts to give enough holdover, so much so that you'd have to switch scopes and mounts to do normal hunting.
In general there's no way to make a true dual purpose deer / 1000 yard target rifle. The two uses are so different that any attempt at doing both will result in a pretty serious compromise in one use or the other or both. I'd suggest making a deer rifle with some sort of quick change scope mounting system. If you get serious about 1000 yard targets, you're going to need a dedicated rifle anyway.
260 Rem / 6.5 Creedmoor / 6.5x55 would all be good choices.
rdavidsonjr
New member
best 1000 yard deer rifle
Sorry the OP was to broad and vague.Lets adapt the post to be more beneficial. I will try to do better in the future. Since the 1000 is an unrealistic target for a 300 -400 yard deer gun and scope without modification. And the weight of an actual competition 1000 yard bench gun is to much for hunting. I know the 308 is a top choice in 1000 yard and is more than adequate for deer. My intent is to get input into how the other lighter rounds between 243 and 308 stack up. Is there something that gives one an edge over the other. I've seen a lot of input on the 6.5 and 243 but there are several others. I have heard cost and bullet selection as some reasons. Are there others maybe powder fill, bullet weight,diameter and length balance, action length vs overall bullet length complications, or any adverse physical properties a bullet has that affect accuracy ect. Or is the 308 the best to fit the bill.
Sorry the OP was to broad and vague.Lets adapt the post to be more beneficial. I will try to do better in the future. Since the 1000 is an unrealistic target for a 300 -400 yard deer gun and scope without modification. And the weight of an actual competition 1000 yard bench gun is to much for hunting. I know the 308 is a top choice in 1000 yard and is more than adequate for deer. My intent is to get input into how the other lighter rounds between 243 and 308 stack up. Is there something that gives one an edge over the other. I've seen a lot of input on the 6.5 and 243 but there are several others. I have heard cost and bullet selection as some reasons. Are there others maybe powder fill, bullet weight,diameter and length balance, action length vs overall bullet length complications, or any adverse physical properties a bullet has that affect accuracy ect. Or is the 308 the best to fit the bill.
Brian Pfleuger
Moderator Emeritus
There are other factors, but it depends on if they matter to you. Most of them have nothing to do with accuracy.
I disagree that you need a special gun, optics or "shims". A 20 MOA base gives all you need and still allows adjustment for close range. A good scope will get you to 1000. Which one, depends on budget. There's a thread running here where the guy shoots over 1,000 yards with a Mosin (IIRC). Any modern rifle can do it. Again, depending on budget you're not going to get a gun that shoots world records but are YOU going to shoot WR groups even if you have a world record gun? Most of us aren't as good as our guns, even our $300 guns. Modern guns are plenty good.
Regarding the bullet, the Ballistic Coefficient takes care of everything you need to know about it's flight characteristics. The only numbers that matter is B.C. (G1 and G7) and muzzle velocity. BC is BC. It's caliber/cartridge independent.
What makes a particular cartridge better or worse in terms of accuracy? Usually, it's the nut behind the butt. Unless you're a world class shooter, the differences are academic.
I disagree that you need a special gun, optics or "shims". A 20 MOA base gives all you need and still allows adjustment for close range. A good scope will get you to 1000. Which one, depends on budget. There's a thread running here where the guy shoots over 1,000 yards with a Mosin (IIRC). Any modern rifle can do it. Again, depending on budget you're not going to get a gun that shoots world records but are YOU going to shoot WR groups even if you have a world record gun? Most of us aren't as good as our guns, even our $300 guns. Modern guns are plenty good.
Regarding the bullet, the Ballistic Coefficient takes care of everything you need to know about it's flight characteristics. The only numbers that matter is B.C. (G1 and G7) and muzzle velocity. BC is BC. It's caliber/cartridge independent.
What makes a particular cartridge better or worse in terms of accuracy? Usually, it's the nut behind the butt. Unless you're a world class shooter, the differences are academic.
rdavidsonjr
New member
Thanks Brian Pfleuger for the info and also several others that have made positive posts on the subject, forgiving me for sometimes being unable to state myself clearly. I'm not dreaming of world class results out of myself because I realize at 54 I've lost a lot of my eyes and steadiness. I've never really have done a lot of long range bench time. But in another post Bart B. pointed out if your going to bench shoot you just as well get as good a gun as you can so you can see your flaws, its the only way to know the absolute truth. In my older years I could see doing a lot more time with a low recoil caliber at the bench. I have a son that will eventually enjoy the gun anyways. He is about to get out of the Marine Corp. and I see spending some time with him doing what he knows best,weapons. He is capable of shooting the groups that Bart B. spoke of earlier in the post. He was over the range at 29 stumps for a good while earning one of his 2 Naval Achievement Awards for improvements to the Marine marksman scores and a list of other things. Well right now the 6.5 seems to have the edge unless anyone else can weigh in on the matter with some other details. And by the way I know the gun can out shoot me.
The 260 Remington seems to have a reputation for being easier on the barrels than others so that would be my choice (at some point enough shooting that becomes a factor. More energy with a larger bullet for the deer part and very good capability for the 1000 yd target shooting.
I disagree with Brian, I think you need a good rifle and a scope to shoot good groups. Can you take full advantage of a rifle as good as one of the premier shooters of course is not. Something more than today's econo rifle is needed for 5 or 10 shot good groups though. Call it the $800-1000 class.
In other words, a world class shooter is not going to take a Rugger American and do the kinds of groups they do. He would get the best out of it you could, but it would not be world class (and if he had a poor one vs a good one an average shooter would beat him). If you both had equal one he would score the best.
I disagree, 30-06 came first so the 308 is the skinny kid at the beach trying to bulk up. It does ok but its no 30-06 (grin)
I disagree with Brian, I think you need a good rifle and a scope to shoot good groups. Can you take full advantage of a rifle as good as one of the premier shooters of course is not. Something more than today's econo rifle is needed for 5 or 10 shot good groups though. Call it the $800-1000 class.
In other words, a world class shooter is not going to take a Rugger American and do the kinds of groups they do. He would get the best out of it you could, but it would not be world class (and if he had a poor one vs a good one an average shooter would beat him). If you both had equal one he would score the best.
I disagree, 30-06 came first so the 308 is the skinny kid at the beach trying to bulk up. It does ok but its no 30-06 (grin)
Once you get past 200 yards the wind separates the accurate shooters from the rest.
Rifle caliber has very little to do with it at that point. Looking at the last F Class mationals, the F Open and F/TR shooters had plenty of overlap in their scores, with a TR shooter placing in the top three.
Think about that, the wind put a 308 shooter over several 6.5x284s and some 7mm Magnums.
For actual hunting, a well fitted 308 is as good anything else out there. However I wouldn't want to lug a 308 designed for 1k match shooting around in the woods.
Still, a 308 with a 20 or 22" barrel will get you there, as it has for tens of thousand long range High Power compeitors with the M1A and AR-10.
Jimro
Rifle caliber has very little to do with it at that point. Looking at the last F Class mationals, the F Open and F/TR shooters had plenty of overlap in their scores, with a TR shooter placing in the top three.
Think about that, the wind put a 308 shooter over several 6.5x284s and some 7mm Magnums.
For actual hunting, a well fitted 308 is as good anything else out there. However I wouldn't want to lug a 308 designed for 1k match shooting around in the woods.
Still, a 308 with a 20 or 22" barrel will get you there, as it has for tens of thousand long range High Power compeitors with the M1A and AR-10.
Jimro
Brian Pfleuger
Moderator Emeritus
Brian didn't say you can shoot good groups with a bad rifle. Brian said almost any modern rifle is better than most any shooter. A shooter who can't beat 1 MOA doesn't need a 0.1MOA gun. Will they shoot better than they will with a 1 MOA gun? Yeah, but not as much better as you might think. With modern guns, you'd be hard pressed to find one that bad.
Look at the price difference though, between even a 1/2 MOA gun and a 1/10 MOA gun. Almost any modern center-fire rifle will shoot 1/2 MOA, certainly 5 shots, and with the right ammo most will do it "all day long".
My $400 Ruger M77 MkII in .204 Ruger topped with a $230 Mueller Eradicator hasn't put a bullet farther than 1/4" from POA at 100 in my memory, when I shoot for groups and use rests/bags. I'm no world class marksman either. The gun is better, I just don't know how much because I'm not better.
So, I ask myself why would the average guy want to spend $1100 on the action alone? Go about adding a $4-500 barrel, a $400+ stock, a $200 trigger, a couple/few hundred in gunsmith charges and a $1200 scope? If he's an average shooter his groups with that rifle might be 0.1-0.2 smaller than mine, they might be bigger than mine. He's got a $3,700+ setup versus my $630 setup and it gains him what?
Whatever that gain is, if he's got the money and wants to spend it, great! Have at it! No ordinary guy needs it though. A $400 Savage and a 1/2 decent scope, certainly total budget around $1,000 at most is better than most shooters.
Brian says almost any modern center-fire rifle will shoot 1/2 MOA, certainly 5 shots, and with the right ammo most will do it "all day long".
I agree. Once in a great while they will do that. And seldom, if ever at ranges past 300 yards with modern commercial center-fire rifles. It'll happen at 100 yards much more often than it does at longer ranges.
'Tis my opinion that one should determine the accuracy level required of their stuff by deciding what the greatest distance they'll accept the bullets missing their point of aim; where ever that is on the target when the round fires as they shoot it. Double that and that's the level your stuff has to perform at when you shoot it.
I agree. Once in a great while they will do that. And seldom, if ever at ranges past 300 yards with modern commercial center-fire rifles. It'll happen at 100 yards much more often than it does at longer ranges.
'Tis my opinion that one should determine the accuracy level required of their stuff by deciding what the greatest distance they'll accept the bullets missing their point of aim; where ever that is on the target when the round fires as they shoot it. Double that and that's the level your stuff has to perform at when you shoot it.
Bart B. and Brian are quite correct that most rifles are more accurate than most shooters, and that accuracy standards change with distance. Pretty much every rifle is accurate from a rest, if it isn't then change the load or fix the rifle.
The shooter is the weakest link in any system. Can the shooter take the recoil the exact same way every time? Can the shooter hold the rifle stead every time? Can the shooter get the exact same sight picture every time?
I like to use the example that if you give my AR-15 Service Rifle to David Tubb or Shirley Gallagher (or Bart B. or Kraigwy) it will be much more accurate than when I shoot it, even if they end up using my handloads.
Jimro
The shooter is the weakest link in any system. Can the shooter take the recoil the exact same way every time? Can the shooter hold the rifle stead every time? Can the shooter get the exact same sight picture every time?
I like to use the example that if you give my AR-15 Service Rifle to David Tubb or Shirley Gallagher (or Bart B. or Kraigwy) it will be much more accurate than when I shoot it, even if they end up using my handloads.
Jimro
A deer-sized target at 1000yds? I suppose if you really think you can hit that. But don't forget the Coriolis effect. The rotation of the earth will move you by 1" at 1000yds.
Perhaps it would be better to look into F-Class target shooting to tune up for that 1000yd deer.
I can do neither anymore; my eyesight isn't up to it.
Perhaps it would be better to look into F-Class target shooting to tune up for that 1000yd deer.
I can do neither anymore; my eyesight isn't up to it.
Brian Pfleuger
Moderator Emeritus
You'll notice that he's not talking about shooting deer at 1000 yards...
Sure giving David Tubbs your rifle and he may shoot it more accurate but that's not what he using in a match.
I'm not saying a factory rifle isn't accurate but there a point your not going to get that type accuracy that's needed in a match rifle.
About the only time you see factory rifle in BR is for the factory class that may be offered and you don't see a factory 308 in a Palma match.
The weak link has always been the shooter look at match result only one winner.
I'm not saying a factory rifle isn't accurate but there a point your not going to get that type accuracy that's needed in a match rifle.
About the only time you see factory rifle in BR is for the factory class that may be offered and you don't see a factory 308 in a Palma match.
The weak link has always been the shooter look at match result only one winner.
Get a Weatherby Vanguard with their sub MOA accuracy guarantee. Should be well under a grand, and a sub MOA rifle should be more than accurate enough for 95% of shooters, unless you're one of those talented competition shooters that can shoot 1'' at 600 yards already, you wont need anything more accurate than 'sub MOA' as others have mentioned you can make hits at 1000 with a Mosin Nagant, a rifle not known for it's accuracy, and will generally shoot around 3-4'' groups at 100 yards. If a Nagant can do it, no doubt a rifle that is guaranteed from the factory to shoot .99'' or less @ 100 yards, can certainly do it.
My service rifle has a NM free float tube, NM sights, Giessele SSA trigger, and is fully capable of MOA groups in my hands, and better from a rest. There is nothing stopping the RIFLE from hitting the 10 ring every time on a High Power target.
Heck, swap out the shooter name to anyone on the AMU service rifle team and they'd still shoot better than me
Jimro
While we're on the topic of accuracy i've always and continually asked myself...what's the difference between 1/2 MOA at a given difference between a 1000$ rifle and a 4000$ rifle? I've yet to figure it out. I have a firm belief that distance shooting is so much more dependent on you than the rifle that i would bet i can hand a world class shooter my 5R the way it is and he will be able to produce sub-MOA groups at distance. Yes i'm referring to past 600yds.
Don't get me wrong i'm not telling anyone to skimp on their build, my current rifle is going to be built ground up this year on a trued 700, bartlein #16 (or GAP #6), McM A5, etc. That said i currently own a 5R that has shot sub-MOA out to 400yds and held MOA out to 500yds. 600yds my groups start to open up but i don't put it on the equipment i think and know it's mostly me.
As the saying goes "it isn't the bow, it's the indian."
Some will disagree i'm sure, but this is JMO.
Don't get me wrong i'm not telling anyone to skimp on their build, my current rifle is going to be built ground up this year on a trued 700, bartlein #16 (or GAP #6), McM A5, etc. That said i currently own a 5R that has shot sub-MOA out to 400yds and held MOA out to 500yds. 600yds my groups start to open up but i don't put it on the equipment i think and know it's mostly me.
As the saying goes "it isn't the bow, it's the indian."
Some will disagree i'm sure, but this is JMO.
Saltydog235
New member
None of them because 90% of deer hunters can't shoot a deer accurately at 200yds much less 1000yds. 1000yd shots are irresponsible to the majority of hunters, hunting is about the ethical harvest of the animal. 1000yd shooting is about punching paper or ringing gongs or killing bad men by those trained to do it.
- Status