Setting the rules of the road.  So, we are going to advocate going with the smallest caliber you think you can get by with.  But how do you compare them?   What are the parameters or measurements you would use to quantify or qualify the results to get an accurate comparison?  This is how I am going to approach this and come up with a score.  This is all with a baseline of comparison shooting a small .224 caliber like the .223 Rem, 222 Rem or 22 Hornet. Recoil Tolerance Score of 0-100:  How many people out of 100 can shoot 100 rounds through said rifle and enjoy each shot and would come back and come back to do another 100 rounds immediately afterwards like they could with a small .224 caliber? Group Size Deterioration Score 0-100: How many people out of 100 could shoot said caliber without increasing their average group size by more than 50% when compared to what they could shoot with a .224 caliber?  Fundamental Deterioration Threshold 0-100:  How many consecutive shots do I think the average person could shoot before fundamentals start to deteriorate?  I feel 99% of the shooting population could shoot up to 100 rounds with a small .224 caliber. Accuracy Deterioration Score 0-100:  How many people out of 100 could maintain the same level of accuracy with this bigger caliber that they could achieve with a small .224 caliber? Wolf Precision Custom Rifles.  www.wolfprecision.net Online Long Range Shooting School.  https://www.wolfprecision.net/online-long-range-shooting-school.html