miltary arms for hunting??


PDA






brian923
April 27, 2009, 11:43 AM
i have always wondered why so many say that military (surpluse rifle) should not be used for hunting?

my qustion is just to see how many men and women here use their military arms for hunting as well.

i want to take my garand and k98 mauser out for some hunts. i think that these guns are more than capable for cleanly taking game all around this wonderful contenent. what do you think?

thanks, brian

If you enjoyed reading about "miltary arms for hunting??" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!
jacob.elliott
April 27, 2009, 11:46 AM
2 mausers an enfield a Japanese arisaka and an sks. I own all and all have killed game very quckly and very DEAD.

jimmyraythomason
April 27, 2009, 11:52 AM
Eight 98 Mausers(Gew98 and K98),Chinese SKS and U.S.G.I. .30cal Carbine. All game takers. DO NOT use military FMJ ammo to hunt with!

jak67429
April 27, 2009, 11:56 AM
Enfield, M1A, SKS If my AR for prairie dogs counts then all 4. Forgot my Dads 8mm mauser.

MCgunner
April 27, 2009, 12:56 PM
Oh, they'll work, but I prefer a nice, light, handy scoped hunting rifle for serious meat collection. When I started hunting, early 60s, people really weren't into the surplus military thing all that much. Heck, there were still countries using the K98. LOL My first deer rifle was a Remington M722 in .257 Roberts. It's still neigh on the perfect deer rifle for Texas and hard to improve on. For sure can't be improved on with an SKS or other military gun IMHO. I've killed one deer with an SKS. I'll keep my hunting rifles for hunting. The SKS ks just fun and that's why I have it. Makes a neat ranch gun, too, for bumming around on the place. Will take vermin or a hog at the ranges I'm likely to see 'em down there. Even without a scope, though, it outweighs my M7 Remington in .308, isn't as accurate, nor as powerful. But, it has its place and it CAN be used for taking game, I've done it. But, I have much better hunting rifles.

lukepriebe
April 27, 2009, 01:40 PM
Took my first deer with an M1 cabine and my dad has killed more than his fair share if deer with his Garand.

steveracer
April 27, 2009, 01:44 PM
I shot a deer two years ago with a 1911. Does that count?

CoRoMo
April 27, 2009, 03:08 PM
Brother uses an 8mm Mauser for elk. Quite adequate.

paintballdude902
April 27, 2009, 03:46 PM
i have taken my enfield fr-8 m1 carbine and my mosin

that have all taken an animal without a problem

mbt2001
April 27, 2009, 04:35 PM
The Moisin Nagant is a legitimate and deadly hunting rifle. Likewise the .30-06 round and platform has been used extensively in North America, as has the .303 been used in Africa from the Enfeld platform.

The .308 has also been used from surplus rifles on game to great effect.

So I am not sure who told you that "you are not to use them" they were mistaken.

hso
April 27, 2009, 04:42 PM
The term "sporterized" comes from altering military surplus Enfields and '03 Springfields and SMLEs to make them more suited to hunting. You can find endless examples of '98 Mausers that were put into "sporting" stocks dating from just after WWII on. Heck, there are plenty of sporting stocks for Mosin Nagants available.

So, there are plenty of milsurp rifles that have been taken to the hunting camp in original or modified form.

Olympus
April 27, 2009, 05:32 PM
I guess I've never heard anyone saying not to use military surplus rifles for hunting. Most military rifles are chambered in great rounds. They're also usually well worn so people don't hesitate to take them into the woods. They generally heavier than modern rifles and the sighting systems are slightly more crude than modern rifles. That could be why you've heard that before. But as long as you know how to shoot your prospective rifle accurately, I say take the milsurp rifle to the woods. It might even make you feel like you're in the old days again!

caribou
April 28, 2009, 02:58 AM
A Finned M-39 Mosin Nagant is my all around Hunting rifle.

Ive used an K98k, 1917 enfeild , an M-91 , and a Czeck M-24.
I love my M-39!

I also use Czech milsurp ammo , because its Soooooo Goood.:D
Mil surp ammo come in Big boxes, usually, so I can shoot all Month long.

The Rifle was made to be able to stand up to the use I give it, is Very accurate and has a "Coolness" all its own.

Mp7
April 28, 2009, 05:09 AM
isnīt the K98 the base for most bolt action hunting rifles today?

MCgunner
April 28, 2009, 08:44 AM
isnīt the K98 the base for most bolt action hunting rifles today?

The design, with modifications, yes. The actual gun, no. Most modern hunting rifles don't have claw extractors or static ejectors, not that this isn't a desirable feature on a Mauser, it is, I'm just sayin'. You will find sporting guns with "controlled round feed" advertising the point, though I can take it or leave it. I guess it's a good feature for a dangerous game gun, but I've never had a problem with my Remingtons feeding. Some bolt guns use 3 lugs and 60 degree bolt throws for a little more speed (Browning A bolt). But, they are all on the original Mauser pattern much as most semi auto pistols, while they might not resemble the 1911, use John Brownings locked breech idea in one way or the other.

Sporterizing military bolt guns used to be popular 50 years ago because you could pick up a K98 mail order in VG condition for 25 bucks or less and modify it cheaper than buying an equivalently good sporting arm. Back then, gunsmiths worked pretty cheap, too. Those days are over. You can buy a Remington 700 cheaper than you can buy a K98 and turn the bolt, drill and tap,mod the stock, etc. Savages are excellent sporting rifles, very accurate, and can be had for cheaper than a decent surplus K98 BEFORE the mods. There is no longer an economic reason to sporterize a military gun, not when such quality sporting rifles can be had for such a reasonable price.

And, hell, if I can shoot game with a friggin' handgun, a black powder Hawken rifle, and even practicing up with my re-curve bow, though I haven't shot game with it, why couldn't I use my Mauser or my Hakim in 8x57 if I wanted to? I've used a LOT less caliber/weapon to kill deer and hogs.

Art Eatman
April 28, 2009, 10:59 AM
Brian, I've never heard the word "shouldn't" used about hunting with military surplus rifles.

Up until the 1950s, there were no really lightweight alternatives. And, not all that many options for cartridges if you got away from lever actions.

In today's world, as McG pointed out, sporterized military rifles are not cost effective. And, nowadays, there are beaucoup options for cartridges that are much different from the common-use military.

And even the most common military cartridges, the .223 and the 7.62x39, have had development of hunting bullets.

Dr. Tad Hussein Winslow
April 28, 2009, 11:26 AM
A Finned M-39 Mosin Nagant is my all around Hunting rifle.

Cool. Keeps you pointing into the wind at all times - is that the idea? :neener: :D

Caribou shows us that the proof is in the pudding up there in verycoldland.

i have always wondered why so many say that military (surpluse rifle) should not be used for hunting?

I've never heard that - where do you live that people say this?

Pulse
April 28, 2009, 01:25 PM
never heard that one should not use military surplus rifles for hunting, but i sure as hell heard that one should not use military surplus ammo for hunting.

Dr.Rob
April 28, 2009, 03:28 PM
Would not hesitate to take my Kar98K hunting. I'd load it with softpoints of course, but no hesitation with the rifle or caliber.

Eric F
April 28, 2009, 03:42 PM
Well I had a mosin nagant then moved to an enfield RFI 308 oh and a daewoo dr200 for varmits for a while although not a military surplus it is a civilian copy of a military rifle.

Reid73
April 28, 2009, 04:30 PM
Perhaps Brian was thinking of Jim Zumbo's comments (http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1786994/posts):
I call them “assault” rifles, which may upset some people. Excuse me, maybe I’m a traditionalist, but I see no place for these weapons among our hunting fraternity. I’ll go so far as to call them “terrorist” rifles.

They tell me that some companies are producing assault rifles that are “tackdrivers.” Sorry, folks, in my humble opinion, these things have no place in hunting. We don’t need to be lumped into the group of people who terrorize the world with them, which is an obvious concern.

Hunters and shooters are an opinionated lot. The above is one person's opinion, and I'm sure it is shared by others. It's also easy to find hunters who dislike handguns, magnums, lever actions, etc. etc. However, the 'bottom line' is that everyone is free to use whatever firearm they prefer, as long is it complies with applicable legal requirements/restrictions.

i sure as hell heard that one should not use military surplus ammo for hunting.Yes, I agree. It just isn't suitable (or humane).

hoosier8
April 28, 2009, 04:37 PM
All rifles used for hunting were originally derived from military rifles so it should come as no surprise that the current batch will be used for hunting. The flintlock, lever action, and bolt action rifles can trace their history back to military development before ever being used for hunting. You would not think twice about taking a lever action rifle hunting today but when they were first used for hunting, there were those that thought it was a bad thing and unfair for the animals.

History tends to repeat itself.

They tell me that some companies are producing assault rifles that are “tackdrivers.” Sorry, folks, in my humble opinion, these things have no place in hunting. We don’t need to be lumped into the group of people who terrorize the world with them, which is an obvious concern.

I do hear this all of the time from certain people.

Would a person be terrorizing the world with their once military style rifle they use for hunting? Is it accurate? If a particular style of rifle, as defined by Congress (where the definition of "Assault Weapon" was made with the AWB), has no place in hunting, then no rifle has a place in hunting. If history were known and rational thought used, one would come to the same conclusion. Right now there is no formal definition of Assault Weapon with the retirement of the last AWB, only the fear bandied about as fact by those aspiring for the power to control what you think and do. I, for one, will not let them.

WardenWolf
April 28, 2009, 04:37 PM
Most states have laws restricting ammo capacity on firearms used for hunting. Typically the rule is 5 rounds for rifles. By the same token, military rifles frequently could hold more rounds than this. Plugging a fixed magazine isn't exactly the easiest thing to do, either, due to the leaf springs, and, until recently, you were unable to come by 5-round Garand en bloc clips (CtD has them). These laws frequently made it difficult or even outright impossible to hunt with a military firearm.

This is why I'm glad I live in Arizona. The magazine capacity limit applies exclusively to semi-automatic rifles, and it says nothing about detachable magazines, so you can have a true 5-round magazine, not just 4+1. Or if you've got a centerfire handgun as a sidearm, you can load the magazine to its maximum capacity. The only real restriction is no FMJ ammo.

Deer Hunter
April 28, 2009, 04:52 PM
i sure as hell heard that one should not use military surplus ammo for hunting.

Yes, I agree. It just isn't suitable (or humane).


Not all military surplus bullets are created equally. You are kidding yourself if you think they are.

Take bulgarian 53 grain 5.45 and place it next to some Wolf 70 grain 5.45. Look exactly the same, and convential wisdom would say that the 70 grain stuff, if one had to choose, would be better.

But the bulgarian causes a MESS when it hits something. Whereas the wolf just kinda pokes a small hole.

Now let's talk about Caribou's choice. Czech Silvertip lightball. It's a 148 grain bullet traveling at around 2800 fps out of his rifle. It does this when it hits things.

http://www.brassfetcher.com/images/762x54mm%20148gr%20Czech%20silver%20tip%20block1.JPG

Courtesy of Brassfetcher.com

Don't ever judge a bullet by its cover. Just because you spend over 2 dollars a round on your newest wiz-bang bullet combination from X company doesn't mean it'll do any better than what has been availible for years. On another thread I discussed the potential downside of buying premium ammunition for casual hunters, arguing that because the ammo costs so much they usually don't practice nearly enough with it to become proficient. I have seen this personally with the guys that hunt on my land. They put a round through their gun at Carter's Country at the 50 yard line and then come out and try to shoot a deer at usually closer distances.

I'll say it again, the bullet is not the most important thing about obtaining a clean kill. I use the cheapest serbian soft-points I can find at academy and use them in my FN FAL when it comes to fill the freezer.

Ask the deer if they care one way or the other.

WardenWolf
April 28, 2009, 05:13 PM
You're quite correct in that, Deer Hunter. I chose .223 68 grain Black Hills hollowpoints for my javelina hunt, primarily because it was the only non-FMJ round I could find above 55-grain and at or below 68, and 68 grain was the exact optimal weight for my rifle's twist rate. I had originally wanted to use soft points, but none were available. Every single round went straight throught. No expansion, no tumbling. Not a single bullet or even a fragment was left in the animal. It took a perfect shot to the vitals (heart and both lungs) to put the animal down.

Were I to do this again, I would go for a lighter weight bullet in a design that is more likely to expand. This round was clearly too much for a javelina at 100 yards. Even my guide, an experience hunter, was surprised, as he had thought 68-grain was the bare minimum (he later told me he didn't want to discourage me, so he didn't say anything until later). No, a 68-grain bullet will go clean through if it doesn't mushroom. I had originally wanted to use soft points because I knew soft points were guaranteed expansion, whereas various things can affect hollowpoints. But, to bastardize a certain quote, "You go on the hunting trip with the ammo you have, not the ammo you would like to have."

Sunray
April 28, 2009, 10:10 PM
"...military (surpluse rifle) should not be used for hunting?..." That'd be milsurp ammo, not the rifles.

stevelyn
April 28, 2009, 11:40 PM
This is why I'm glad I live in Arizona. The magazine capacity limit applies exclusively to semi-automatic rifles,........

This is why I'm glad to be living in the Free Republic of Alaska. We have no nonsensical ammo capacity restrictions for hunting except for water fowl.

bucktail
April 29, 2009, 07:41 PM
Plenty of game has fallen to milsurp rifles. If that's what you want to shoot, go for it. Most of the bolt action milsurps are heavier than the current available sporters as mentioned. They typically come with steel butt plates, which make them less comfortable to shoot than something with a limbsaver for example. If you want to scope it, you generally need to bend the bolt, drill & tap, and possibly rework or replace the safety. If you want a trigger with light pull and no creep, you will need to rework or replace it.
With the semi automatics, most of them with the exception of the SKS and a couple of others will cost more than a good bolt or lever rifle. Much of what I wrote about the stocks and triggers applies as well, and most of them to be D&T'd for the scope as well. They will also weigh more, and will have more moving parts than many of us are comfortable with on remote hunts.

Many of both types are becoming collectible, and are not cost competetive with factory sporters.

MCgunner
April 29, 2009, 07:49 PM
Me, I'm kinda hooked on my Hawken. I think I'll use that this year mostly. Oh, I'm sure I'll tote a handgun now and then, too. Now, as I said earlier, if I can do that, shooting an Enfield is cheating. :D

WardenWolf
April 29, 2009, 08:38 PM
Some designs, like the PSL, make fine hunting rifles. Your $700 to $750 gets you an accurate scoped semi-automatic in a very good caliber. This makes it very competitive pricewise with modern bolt actions. At 9.7 pounds with the scope attached, it's also of reasonable weight. As sold, they are very well suited for hunting applications. However, the PSL is a modern design from the 1970s. As such, it shares little in common with more traditional military arms.

The previous generation of rifles typically had to be drilled and tapped to accomodate optics. While this worked fine during service, it is rarely practical to scope these rifles now that the original designs intended to be mounted on them are obsolete and no longer manufactured. And since modification destroys their collector's value, it is a financially unsound decision, as well. That said, there are still many fine Turkish Mausers available that can be had for as little as $250. These can make a fine addition to any collection, and are a very good value at their price.

Big Daddy Grim
April 29, 2009, 08:40 PM
My M-14, M1, and my 1903 all great huntin guns.

lgbloader
May 1, 2009, 12:30 AM
I've hunted with a M1 Garand, M1A, and a Mosin. Never went with the SKS, AK, or AR but I would if I wanted to.

LGB

bearmgc
May 1, 2009, 01:29 PM
I use my Swede Mauser, sporterized, to hunt antelope. Privi Partisan makes a decent 6.5x55 soft point round.

EricTheBarbarian
May 1, 2009, 04:56 PM
works just fine, although I wasn't using surplus FMJ but wolf gold soft points.

bucktail
May 1, 2009, 10:04 PM
Those are reasonably popular in the north woods among the budget minded.

rhino57
May 2, 2009, 07:32 PM
When I was a young hunter back in the early 60's I can remember most hunters in Virginia used surplus military arms to hunt Deer. A few had modern rifles but not many. I can also remember so many were vets from WW2 and Korea, my Dad was also, those were friends the type of folks we hunted with.
I myself hunt with a AR-15 knock off in 6.8 SPC and love it!:)

Texpatriate
May 2, 2009, 07:52 PM
Took my first deer with a spoterized argentine Mauser, and I just finished building a 6.8 SPC AR-15 for my go-to deer and hog rifle. It's not "technically" military, but it is so-called "military style". People that say that kind of thing are fudds that don't think very hard about much of anything. Bolt actions were standard issue "military weapons" as recently as WW2, and continue to be for sniper units. With a 5 round mag my 6.8 SPC AR-15 is functionally and ethically no different from Mr. Fudd's Remy 7400 or Browning BAR.

desidog
May 2, 2009, 09:22 PM
Military rifles were designed for hunting.....man - the most dangerous game.

Bezoar
May 2, 2009, 10:08 PM
its nice to have a 1200 dollar rifle that can put hyper velocity 60 grain bullets into an animal at a 1000 yards.
However those of us who use a milsurp rifle in 6.5x55 swede, 30-06, 7.62x51, and 7.2x54r actualy have rifles that have sufficient cartridge power to put a heavy 150-200 grain bullet through a deer or elk at that range and not have to pray you can get a head shot.

my muzzleloading rifle weighs more then a 91/30 or garand, and gets less range and muzzle energy then they do. Yet most people say a mil surp is ungainly and just to damned heavy to carry around in a blind while sipping coffee.

6x6pinz
May 2, 2009, 10:20 PM
I thought all military rifles were made for hunting? Seems people forget that they were made to hunt up animals that had firearms as well. One of my first requirements for any firearm I buy is it must be able to be used for hunting and will be used as such. My AK47 is very deadly on javelina as is my SKS. It should be noted that not all AZ game and fish officers are real keen on the use of these firearms for hunting, though they can do nothing about it, at this time anyway.

tbrowning87
May 3, 2009, 07:36 PM
I have been using my mosin nagant m39 and my mauser k98 to hunt with for years, they both seem to be more than capable of taking down game very easily. My only problem is that the guns arn't made for modern scopes and it seems the only way to mount a scope on them is by butchering them up. So just last elk season I bought a second hand weatherby 7mm mag. But I still prefer the way the old guns shoot.

MCgunner
May 3, 2009, 08:00 PM
For hunting humans, massed full auto fire is more important than MOA accuracy. AK accuracy is non-existent, but I guess it's good enough for 100 yards, woods hunting. I wouldn't use one in the New Mexico canyons on mulies, though. I'll take my Remchesters, thanks. They come in some pretty impressive calibers, like .338 Win Mag if you want power, or 7mm Rem Mag or just plain ol' .30-06. You ain't gotta shoot a military rifle to get a military caliber, ya know. :rolleyes:

rbernie
May 3, 2009, 09:01 PM
I've hunted with Mausers, Enfields, and AR15s chambered in 7.62x39/6.8SPC.

Anything that can keep a 3" group at 100 yards is plenty accurate for most hunting.

Vern Humphrey
May 4, 2009, 01:56 PM
I've killed many a deer with military arms -- primarily a '93 Mauser in 7X57 and an M1917 Enfield in .30-06. I've killed elk with Bigfoot Wallace, my custom '03 Springfield in .35 Brown-Whelen. I've also taken deer with a sporterized M96 Swedish Mauser in 6.5X55.

In general, military rifles tend to be a bit heavy and cumbersome, with less than optimum sights (with notable exceptions.) At one time, almost everyone I knew hunted with a sporterized military rifle of some kind. But the cost of sporterizing military rifles has gone way up, and the cost of those same rifles has escalated as well.

Nowadays, you can take a $600 Springfield, spend $500 sporterizing it, and wind up with a rifle that will sell for around $300 at a gun show. It's cheaper to buy a Remington, Winchester, Browning, Savage, etc.

jaholder1971
May 5, 2009, 12:14 AM
My first deer rifle was a scoped M1A and 150 grain spitzers.

My current primary deer rifle is my VZ24 scout rifle re chambered into 7X57.

jojo200517
May 5, 2009, 01:49 AM
The Romanian PSL makes a fine hunting rifle in my opinion.

AK-47 plus I picked up a 5 round mag at a local pawn shop. Finding the soft point ammo is hard in 7.62 x 39 but it seems to work fine on white tail deer.

Rembrandt
May 5, 2009, 05:51 AM
FN-Fal makes a great Antelope rifle....but a little heavy.

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v405/Rembrandt51/antelopehunt.jpg

Vern Humphrey
May 5, 2009, 11:30 AM
My current primary deer rifle is my VZ24 scout rifle re chambered into 7X57.
How do you rechamber an 8X57 to 7X57?

buck460XVR
May 5, 2009, 12:08 PM
I bought a M1917 in the 60s for $25. Spent $35 to have new sights put on it and have the barrel recrowned and another $40 for a Herter's stock blank that took me a winter to finish. Puts the cost at less than a dollar a deer over 50 years. Can't say that for my modern guns. The M1917 is still accurate and still goes hunting with me, but more outta nostalgia than anything else.

VingThorr
May 5, 2009, 12:09 PM
hey ericthebarbarian,

nice boots. let me guess, watertown, NY?

EricTheBarbarian
May 5, 2009, 08:59 PM
yea pretty close, and you won't find a warmer pair of boots than the mickey mouse boots

metalrat4225
May 6, 2009, 08:40 AM
It has been my understanding that military ammo is intended to injure and wound, but not kill. That way the wounded need medical treatment, hospitals, food, it creates more of a drain on the enemy!. Sends them bankrupt quicker. Sporting ammo is made to expand to do more damage to the vitals of your game animal [ and not the two or three standing behind it] and if exiting, to leave a bigger hole and blood trail.
As the Indians have said," Any gun shoot good, Good Gun!"
Happy hunting.

Art Eatman
May 6, 2009, 09:44 AM
metalrat4225, that myth about "wounding" has been around forever--and it's as much BS now as it was when it started. Military ball ammo bullets are cheaper to produce than hunting bullets, for one thing. Expanding bullets were seen as being inhumane by western nations and world policy obviated their use. Still, it's more a $$$ issue in production than humane-ness in war.

Vern Humphrey
May 6, 2009, 11:20 AM
Military ammunition, like everything else in the military, is based on a Required Operational Capability (ROC) document.

Find me a ROC for ammo that says, "This ammo must wound, but not kill."

jaholder1971
May 6, 2009, 03:53 PM
Quote:
My current primary deer rifle is my VZ24 scout rifle re chambered into 7X57.
How do you rechamber an 8X57 to 7X57?

The guy I bought it from took the old barrel off and put one of those 21" FN 7X57 barrels on that Sarco was selling new in the white a few years back.

He also restocked and bedded it. He ended up selling it to pay some bills.

Vern Humphrey
May 6, 2009, 03:59 PM
The guy I bought it from took the old barrel off and put one of those 21" FN 7X57 barrels on that Sarco was selling new in the white a few years back.

My comment was a joke -- you can't rechamber an 8X57 to a 7X57, you can only rebarrel it, as your friend did.

You could rechamber an 8X57 into an 8mm-'06 by using a .30-06 chamber reamer. You would then expand the necks of .30-06 cases to 8mm and load 8mm bullets. That, by the way, is a great wildcat, just about equal to the .338-'06.

jimmyraythomason
May 6, 2009, 04:26 PM
All of my deer hunting these days is done with ex-military Mauser 98s. They no longer resemble there former selves. Except for a few special use rifles,I have retired my "commercially" produced rifles.

jaholder1971
May 6, 2009, 10:40 PM
Quote:
The guy I bought it from took the old barrel off and put one of those 21" FN 7X57 barrels on that Sarco was selling new in the white a few years back.
My comment was a joke -- you can't rechamber an 8X57 to a 7X57, you can only rebarrel it, as your friend did.

You could rechamber an 8X57 into an 8mm-'06 by using a .30-06 chamber reamer. You would then expand the necks of .30-06 cases to 8mm and load 8mm bullets. That, by the way, is a great wildcat, just about equal to the .338-'06.

I'm actually considering building a rifle in .338/06. I've got a M70 with a rusted out .30/06 barrel that I'm debating what to do with. It's down to either 8mm-06, .338-06 or .35 Whelen.

Vern Humphrey
May 7, 2009, 10:26 AM
You can have the barrel reamed out and re-rifled. I have a custom Springfield that was built in the late '60s in .35 Brown-Whelen, the most radical form of the Whelen. This thing drives a 225 grain Nosler Partition Jacket to 2800 fps.

MD_Willington
May 11, 2009, 11:22 AM
one of the guys at the AK forum uses a Krinkov, yep a Krink.
'
The 5.45x39 round makes a terrible mess of a deers lungs and heart, but it works.

If you enjoyed reading about "miltary arms for hunting??" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!