Training rifle & Hunting load

[Frostbite]

Good day gents,

I have read numerous times that one should practice with one's chosen hunting load. I agree.

I also see advantages to choosing a friendlier load with regards to both the finance an recoil departments: one can shoot more of that load and possibly become a better shooter this way.

I know, one can buy lots of hunting ammo with the money needed to buy the matching practice rifle and matching scope, but lets be a little biased and imply that life with only one rifle would not be as fun, and that more ammo then that is going to be burned in practice anyway, because we like to practice, don't we?

However, making gun diversity fun and useful might benefit from being, even so slightly, financially guided for some of us. I, for one, shoot a lot of .22 LR just because it is a lot cheaper then .270 Winchester, but I also enjoy the lesser recoil. I know I am not alone.

Ballistics of both calibers, however, are quite different.

Using a well known free online calculator (http://gundata.org/ballistic-calculator/), I came up with the following result, inspired by the availability of the same rifle (X-Bolt, but I suppose it is not the only possibility) in both interesting calibers shown.

Take a good look at the drop numbers! They are quite similar up to 450 yards, which is enough for me.

What do you think about this? Are there many other such good combinations commonly used?

 

[Sunray]

Hi, Frostbite. If you aren't already, please join us at www.canadiangunnutz.com. There's a French language forum if that applies.
Your Gun Data calculator is comparing a 55 grain .223 Rem with a 150 grain .270 Win. Not a .22 lr.

 

[Hookeye]

I think folks are overthinking this stuff.

Getting a good shot opportunity is tougher than making a good shot.

 

[illinoisburt]

For practical hunting ranges you won't find a whole lot of difference in the ballistics for most rimless centerfire bottleneck cartridges. The old adage of sighting in 1-1/2 or 2 inches high at 100 yards and hold dead-on center of chest to 300 yards is still very much true. The "laser-shooting" magnums only extended the dead-on hold to maybe 350 yards or so.

Check out any general ballistics table of factory ammo like this one:

http://www.hornady.com/assets/files/ballistics/2015-Standard-Ballistics.pdf

It's only been in the past decade or so with the advent of reasonably priced laser rangefinders and vastly improved lower cost rifle/optic combos that longer range hunting has become practical. In truth, realistic shot opportunities beyond a few hundred yards at game animals are not common.

Unless you are specifically trying to develop a training regimen where you are regularly shooting beyond 300 yards, it's very likely you won't notice enough difference in ballistics to matter in a hunting situation. The whole point of the practicing is to build muscle memory of the rifle as a platform. It is more important to use a budget- or shoulder-friendly rifle with similar or identical ergonomics, sight picture, and fit than anything else.

 

[jmr40]

Take a good look at the drop numbers! They are quite similar up to 450 yards, which is enough for me.

The drop among almost all common calibers out to 450 yards is so similar as to not matter unless you and the rifle are capable of 1" groups at 450 yards. It takes a better than average hunting rifle and shooter to do better than 5-6" groups at that range. The difference in drop among most everything from 30-06 to 300 WM is within 3" and even 308 is within 5-6". In other words 10 shots fired from a 308, 30-06, or270 and 10 shots fired from a 7mm or 300 WM at 450 yards would overlap on the same target.

 

[Skoghund]

I shoot the same rifle down the range and for hunting. I use a heavier bullet for hunting,.308 180grn norma Oryx and 124grn Sellior and belliot down the range. I have a Mauser M03 and have a scope for hunting and a scope for down the range. It takes a couple of seconds to change scopes with the Mauser scope mounts and the scopes are always on zero after changing them. I also have a Aimpoint to put on for driven boar.
I shoot a fair bit of .22 as well but not as much as i should.
The range i shoot on is a running moose range and i shoot about a 1000 rounds a year through the summer.
Practice is always good for improving rifle skills and good fun as well

 

[Frostbite]

Sunray,

Your Gun Data calculator is comparing a 55 grain .223 Rem with a 150 grain .270 Win. Not a .22 lr.

Yes, I know, the whole point is to shoot something similar in ballistics and as close to possible as for the weapon system or platform, yet less costly in money and recoil. .22 LR is not ballistically similar to .270 Win, hence my interest for .223 Rem.

Thank you for the invitation. Yes, I would be clearer in French, definitely.

jmr40,

The drop among almost all common calibers out to 450 yards is so similar as to not matter unless you and the rifle are capable of 1" groups at 450 yards.

and
illinoisburt,

For practical hunting ranges you won't find a whole lot of difference in the ballistics for most rimless centerfire bottleneck cartridges.

Good to know. I am not currently capable of 1" groups at 450 yards and do not think I will ever get there. As I understand it, this means all standard hunting calibers could be used in combination with .223 training if one uses basically the same rifle and scope on each rifle, which would produce a more efficient training than, say, shooting lots of .22 LR, like I do, from a very different rifle than the one used to hunt.

I was just very surprised by how close the two rounds are. I did not know it was the same for all common calibers, I had not researched it.

Skoghund,

I shoot the same rifle down the range and for hunting.

I also do it, but not enough, and I would like to shoot more rounds of something more similar to my hunting rifle. For now, it is just a lot of .22 LR year long (3000 rounds is a lot for me, I know it is not for others) and a little .30-06 and .270 Win before hunting season.


After thinking about it, two barrels for my Encore (currently a muzzleloader only) and one scope they could share would be cheaper than two new rifles and scopes. Definitely not as fun, probably not as accurate, but cheaper.

I do not nor do I plan to reload.

Any suggestion for a better combination than .223 Rem (training) and .270 Win (hunting)?

Moose would be the biggest critter hunted, primary focus being on white tailed deer, and I do not enjoy recoil so much... I just shoot slugs from my 12 gauge when I need some recoil, it brings me satisfaction at low cost.

I recently read interesting stuff about the .25-06, but I am not sure it is readily available around here (I would have to check) and I don't know if it is enough for 2000 lb animals at 150-250 yards. I know the .270 Win is enough for that.

 

[Peakbagger46]

Do you reload? The 69g matchkings would fly more like the .270 wind drift wise and are not expensive to load with reloader 15 powder.

Sorry, just read that you don't reload.