I don't get to hunt big stuff anywhere but around the ranch...

 

Definately a 30-06 just because of the wide range of loads available for it.

 

Ditto. It's versatile, enough for just about all game animals, ammo is available worldwide. 'Nuff said.

 

Most people I figure are going to pick the 30-06, for all the above reasons stated.

Since 1906, in North America, there really hasn't been a reason to go elsewhere.


For me, I planned on some time in my life hunting for Alaskan Brown Bear (Kodiak), and hoped at one point to take a trip to Africa and get something really big.

I bought a 375 H&H 5 years ago--Sauer & Sohn Model 90 Lux. I love the rifle and although it is for all practical purposes overpowering for just about every animal in North America--sans a pissed off grizzly, kodiak, or polar bear--on a mature elk, moose, or bison it is just fine. You can get factory loads down to 230gr and handloads into the 180gr territory. It shoots extremely flat and carries plenty of energy downrange.

Factoring that with it's ability to stop anything else up to and including an elephant makes it, in my opinion, the greatest hunting rifle since 1912.

The .375 is one of my real enthusiasms in big-game cartridges. If I were going to hunt all over the world and could use only one rifle, it would be the .375. If I could have only two, one would be a .375 and the other would be my beloved Sako .270WSM

I love my "ought six" but in all seriousness the 270 is faster and flatter with nearly the same power, and if I find it not enough, then the mighty Holland & Holland definitely will get it done.

 

I use my .300 Weatherby for most any hunting. It'll take handloads down to around 135gn and my typical round is 180gn at around 3200 FPS.

If I were going to a bigger rifle I would personally skip the .338 and .375 H&H and jump to the 378 Weatherby Magnum followed by my favorite round, the 30-378 Weatherby Magnum. As it'll put a 200gn projectile out there over 3K fps.

The key for me is downrange trajectory and accuracy. I want a bullet with a great Ballistic Coefficient. I can properly place a lighter bullet on virtually any animal and I have at great distances. For my kills it's far easier to do with a lighter bullet and correct placement than relying on horsepower alone to take down an animal.

I have heard the arguments for years of the need for a heavier bullet to get the job done. But some of my hand loads took a bull moose at 300+ yards with a simple Nosler Partition in a Remington 30-06. One bullet fully passed through and the other was caught in the hide on the opposite side of the animal. I still have that bullet.

I have dropped Bears and bison with the .300 Weatherby at substantial yardage and I bagged a big bull elk at well over 500 yards this season.

I typically archery hunt so I am partial to my gear. But for an all around round, the 30 caliber has a huge range of bullets, can be loaded to shoot accurately and still provide a clean kill on any North American animal.

Most of the hunting public has small dog sized whitetail and blacktail deer, sub specie elk and so on. If I can kill elk, bear, moose and cougars with an arrow approaching ranges of 100 yards, why do you guys need cannons?

Dave

 

OK. I already gave my "conventional" answer above, but how about something a little less conventional? How about the Sharps model 1874 in .45-70 or even something a little more potent like .45-110. Yea, they are heavy and you've got to make your one shot count, but they are simple, reliable, amazingly accurate and have enough horsepower to drop any critter, anywhere in the world.

P.S. If you haven't ever seen the movie Quigley Down Under, starring the Sharps 1874 and Tom Selleck, do yourself a favor and check it out. Sure it's just a movie, but it kinda gives a person an idea of what these fine rifles were and are capable of. Nearly a half century or more before the .30-06, .300 Win Mag, .30-378 Weatherby, etc were even dreamed of, the Sharps rifles were the kings of the 1000+ yard shots.

 

[QUOTE=dieseldude03;240809]OK. I already gave my "conventional" answer above, but how about something a little less conventional? How about the Sharps model 1874 in .45-70 or even something a little more potent like .45-110. Yea, they are heavy and you've got to make your one shot count, but they are simple, reliable, amazingly accurate and have enough horsepower to drop any critter, anywhere in the world.

P.S. If you haven't ever seen the movie Quigley Down Under, starring the Sharps 1874 and Tom Selleck, do yourself a favor and check it out. Sure it's just a movie, but it kinda gives a person an idea of what these fine rifles were and are capable of. Nearly a half century or more before the .30-06, .300 Win Mag, .30-378 Weatherby, etc were even dreamed of, the Sharps rifles were the kings of the 1000+ yard shots.

I like the idea, I just need to have my glasses.

 

I've got a Sharps saddle ring carbine in 45/70 & while it's got a shorter barrel and not as long a range, it's still one heck of a rifle

 

Sharps are cool....hopefully I'll get the chance to own one someday.


I had a Weatherby Mark V and really liked it, but it just didn't quite capture my heart like they do for some people.

There are so many good choices it's hard to pick just one, but I stand by my trusty 375 H&H. I found a Remington XCR chambered in 375 H&H today at Sportsman's Warehouse. Didn't pull the trigger (no pun intended) as I have too much going on right now to buy another rifle....plus can only imagine how hard that would hit in a 7 3/4 pound rifle. ouch....

 

Remington 870 Express Magnum, Rifled Barrel, Scope take down just about anything at 100 yards and outside of that is it really hunting the animal???