Thread: 25-06 why hasn't it achieved fame and success in New Zealand?

I've been pondering this for a while and after nailing a big bodied 8 point red stag at 170m with a 117gr federal power shok load recently, I've been seriously asking myself and drilling my brain..... why isn't it more popular?

Is it that its overshadowed by the .270,308/708 and its smaller rival the 243?or is it just that there's a lack of hunters whom use it and as such leading to its lack of familiarity?

or is it that 25cal has never really caught on in New Zealand sadly like the 257 roberts?

.25-06 Remington

have a read of that and see what the Americans think of it....

In my opinion,my dead serious opinion its without a doubt the best bang for your buck,minimal recoil at best,kills effeciently,flat shooting,good bullet selection,widely available and covers the species we have here with ease....

Please go ahead and offer your thoughts

I'd never heard of it until my uncle put me onto it the other day… looks so perfect for my needs (one caliber to rule them all, from wallabies to stags) that I went out and ordered one.

I am told that it really needs a 24" barrel to get the best out of it, which limits you to only a couple of models of rifle, and it is a little hard to find. Probably helps keep it in its niche.

Originally Posted by Rock river arms hunter

why isn't it more popular?

AAAAhhhhh says who? I know several guys with one, including myself. They were very popular about 15 years ago, just before the short mag fad. What fad are we in at the moment............ I would say 300 and 7 mm wildcats. Next fad, who knows?

Originally Posted by Rock river arms hunter

flat shooting,good bullet selection

From my perspective, these are the problems:

Flat shooting: Not actually a real thing.

Good bullet selection: It doesn't.

Agreed. It's trajectory is terrible, and shit selection of bullets.

In saying that if all I had was a 25-06 I wouldn't sit around crying about it.

Chris

Originally Posted by Rock river arms hunter

I've been pondering this for a while and after nailing a big bodied 8 point red stag at 170m with a 117gr federal power shock load recently,
Please go ahead and offer your thoughts

I think lot of guys early in there hunting years often think the same with whatever caliber or rifle brand they start having success with. New Zealand game can comfortably be taken with a wide range of rifles, cal and bullets so what makes a 25-06 any better or worse than the others? nothing really its just one of many options that within its limitations works just like all the rest.As to why its not as popular well who really cares? I dont base my buying decisions on opinion polls I buy what I want.

Yes it does require a 24" barrel,you loose about 70fps for every inch but its the sort of calibre that wants to be reloaded for even though I don't, so Sako's,brownings?rugers and remingtons off the top of my head.... In saying that though the above mentioned all make quality rifles suitable for most needs these days so you can't go wrong....

When you say terrible bullet selection are you saying that as in a comparison to 30 cal/7mm or is that a generalisation?
And by a terrible trajectory also being compared against what?

well yes I do have a bias towards it and I'm not going to Lie about it, I'm a firm believer in being confident in your ability to shoot a particular firearm accuratley thus bullet placement comes second nature.... It was the first larger centrefire that I could shoot confidently and as such love it for that alone....

Cheers for the criticism's!

A lot of calibers are much of a muchness. I don't know much about the 25-06 admittedly, but that's an awful big case to fill with less powder than a 7mm-08 takes.

You put it in the same category as .270,308/708 and saying it's smaller rival is the 243 when due to the bullet weight range (75-120g right?) and the unimpressive speeds they come out at I would think the .243 is a fairly apt comparison.

The 308/7mm-08 shoot much much larger bullets, faster, out of a short action rifle. Plus they're common as anything. All of that added up would make me think there are much better choices for me out there.

But each to their own, and if you're dropping animals with it, it's hard to argue with that aye?

Well thats the thing,it is commonly and regularly compared the the 308-708 and 270 by most people....

the 3006 isn't super duper common down here but then again ask anyone whose shot game with it and generally speaking they can only say good things.....

If anything being that it was developed using bullets designed for the .257 Roberts it is a magnum version in that sense..

Yes commonality seems to be the big thing, 308-708,270,243,300wm,223 and 7mm rem mag seem to be the most popular centrefires and as such demand creates the market... its Just a shame it hasn't caught on but hey It drops em good and it doesnt destroy the meat on the animal from experience.....

I think the commonality here is:simple things that work effectively... correct?

If you do the clickety dialing thing it probably doesn't really matter a damn what cartridge you choose, within reason. People that don't do that will never know the difference. Just get a damn rifle and go hunting. These threads make my head hurt.

For my uses, and this is strictly for my uses:


I see no reason for me ever to consider a .25 calibre. The highest BC (conventional design - not monolithic, commonly available), bullet available in .25 cal is the 115gr Berger VLD, with a G1BC of .466. Out of a .25-06, you can get maybe 3200fps from that, max.

In a factory rifle, I can simply buy a 6.5x55 or .260, and shoot a 140gr Amax, or Berger, or 139gr Scenar, or 142gr SMK, or... well you get the picture - any number of bullets with a G1BC of around .6, at 2700-2900fps. There is a Norma factory load shooting a 130gr VLD with a BC of .57 or so, at 2950fps.

The significantly higher BC of the 6.5mm bullet means that it catches up with the .25 cal bullet very quickly, in every metric: impact velocity, impact energy (more so, due to higher bullet weight), less wind drift, less drop, it also has more fractionally more frontal area. Ballistically it's no competition. "Flat shooting" is a much-used term that doesn't actually mean anything. At "normal hunting" ranges, there's no significant real-world difference in trajectory between most mainstream hunting calibres. At longer range, a slower, higher BC bullet will actually often have less drop anyway, not that it is relevant because drop is very easy to compensate for, with modern ballistics knowledge and rangefinders.

In terms of recoil, the numbers are much the same. In fact, if you compare my 6.5x47 load (140gr Amax, 2790fps, 42gr of powder) to a random .25-06 load I pulled off the internet(115gr bullet, 3200fps, ~54gr of powder), you'll find that the .25-06 actually has slightly more recoil, and a slightly faster recoil impulse - which is what makes recoil unpleasant.

And, to top it off, as you've noted the .25-06 isn't as efficient, and cutting the barrel short results in a larger loss of velocity. I'm getting that 2790fps from my 6.5x47 from a 20" barrel. You could cut a .25-06 barrel to 20" but you'd get a significant muzzle flash and a lot of noise, and you'd lose speed - not that the loss of speed would be real-world significant to normal "hunting" results, it would simply invalidate the purported reasoning behind selecting the .25-06 in the first place.


In a custom rifle, a .243 properly loaded will outperform the best .25-06 load ballistically, and various 6.5mm and 7mm cartridges do too, however some of them have downsides not present with the moderate cased 6.5mm cartridges, such as increased recoil, shorter barrel life, less efficiency etc.


For the "average" hunter, who doesn't understand ballistics, who doesn't shoot long range and doesn't fire enough rounds to care about things like efficiency, economy, barrel life etc, it's absolutely fine, although I have to question the wisdom of actively selecting it over pretty much anything else, if given the choice.

That's my effortpost for the week. Any subsequent responses will be sarcastic in nature.

Ive never seen you type so much truth....

It has nothing to do with BC.... Very few shooters need worry about BC... Even a longranger need not worry about BC until 500m or more.... Sure if you shoot shit far out, and stuff all of use actually do....

Lack of popularity of the .25cal in my mind has stuff all to do with its longrange characteristics or available pills... it has more to do with it being overshadowed by other cals.... .270 has shit BCs but is if not "the" most popular cal in NZ.... You have to remember the current LR fad has only been round a few years hunting and calibres has been around much longer....

So really to ascertain why it isnt a really popular calibre we have to look at all and every hunting style as a whole....
Not a BC inducing fad involving a small percentage of us, .270 proves that....

Originally Posted by baldbob

It has nothing to do with BC.... Very few shooters need worry about BC... Even a longranger need not worry about BC until 500m or more.... Sure if you shoot shit far out, and stuff all of use actually do....

Lack of popularity of the .25cal in my mind has stuff all to do with its longrange characteristics or available pills... it has more to do with it being overshadowed by other cals.... .270 has shit BCs but is if not "the" most popular cal in NZ.... You have to remember the current LR fad has only been round a few years hunting and calibres has been around much longer....

So really to ascertain why it isnt a really popular calibre we have to look at all and every hunting style as a whole....
Not a BC inducing fad involving a small percentage of us, .270 proves that....

Ah, I see you didnt actually read my post. Specifically, the first sentence.