Orion Jim
Member
I have to agree. They’ve mastered the science but the art is lacking. I have nothing but respect for how they perform but they are not contenders in the aesthetics competition.
How have hunting rifles changed as you've gotten older?
- Thread starter Hokkmike
- Start date
- Status
I have to agree. They’ve mastered the science but the art is lacking. I have nothing but respect for how they perform but they are not contenders in the aesthetics competition.
On top of yesterday's rifle, there used to be 1" scopes who's makers actually put heart and soul into those products, now you don't get the top level of quality, and advanced features unless you bump up to 30-34 mm tube. There are some nice 1" scopes, even better than the old Vari-X III in terms of brightness, but they dont represent the best of what is out there anymore. The 1" tube is an afterthought, and it's user does not deserve ED glass, etched reticles, or top notch adjustments
No, Colt used hard rubber, also known as Ebonite, on the SAA. Hard rubber is natural rubber that has been vulcanized for prolonged periods of time. The first true synthetic plastic was Bakelite (1909).
FL-NC
Member
I used mine in 6.5 CM twice this week to take 2 nice bucks with bullets going right where I wanted and no tracking required.
Zendude
Member
The cartridge size that used to be considered to be appropriate for deer hunting has changed. A 243 was commonly considered the absolute minimum but still pretty iffy for deer. The 243 and anything smaller was considered a varmint cartridge. A 270 and up was good for deer, but preferably something 30 caliber or larger.
That said, I am not a deer hunter, but I read alot of the magazines and manufacturers information as a kid in the 1970s.
That said, I am not a deer hunter, but I read alot of the magazines and manufacturers information as a kid in the 1970s.
Robbins290
Member
Never heard of "accuracy thru volume"
Somebody trot over and tell that short range benchrest guy that the adjustments on his 1 inch tubed Sightron target scope suck and his scope is an afterthought.
Why do you need an etched reticle if you don't need a complex one for long range work? Do you know etched reticles are not as tough and also add more glass surfaces to interfere with light transmission?
Are you aware that any given manufacturer may just use the same glass in their 1 inch and 30mm tubes? It's simpler and more cost effective to have one glass standard for appropriately priced offerings. The only thing the 30mm tube does for you is give you more adjustment room.
ED glass helps with the correction of chromatic aberration. Do you really think having that last nth of color correction in a hunting scope is that important? I would dare say the glass in scopes of a similar price range has gotten to the point that the average human eye would be hard pressed to tell the difference.
Jack Ryan
Member
- Joined
- Jan 29, 2019
- Messages
- 777
Yep, usually from people who couldn't hit a barn from the inside.
Nature Boy
Member
- Joined
- Apr 21, 2015
- Messages
- 8,239
Composite stocks and better optics
The last 1" Sightron I had sucked. It was a target scope. It was the glass You could not adjust the objective to see the lines and letters clearly at 225 yds. It was a 12 or 14 power. I had an earlier Sightron which was better.
With a leupold these days you dont get their best glass in a 1" tube. You have to get the VX5 or 6HD. 30 mm. Do you follow optics much?
redneck2
Member
Rifles are relatively far, far less expensive than they used to be
Rifles the average person buys today are far more accurate than ones in the past. Probably has as much to do with ammo as the guns themselves
Optics are vastly superior
There is a lot of attention paid to bullet performance on game, so we can get by with less powerful rounds that do just as well
Rifles the average person buys today are far more accurate than ones in the past. Probably has as much to do with ammo as the guns themselves
Optics are vastly superior
There is a lot of attention paid to bullet performance on game, so we can get by with less powerful rounds that do just as well
Riomouse911
Member
When I was a kid it seems the older folks had a dedicated rifle or shotgun for a specific purpose; a .30-30 with open sights for short range deer hunting, a .257 Roberts with a 4x scope for “ long range” hunting (maybe 250 yards), a Model 12 for turkey, a SxS for doves and quail, a rimfire to keep the raccoons out of the coop, etc. Many of my elders were children of the depression so I didn’t see a lot of gun duplicity or fancy excess; the guns were tools for a purpose. The ammo was cup and core Winchester or Remington, the shotgun shells Federal or Peters, the pickup had a rack in the window and the living room had a glass-fronted cabinet in the corner. No one had a collection just to have them to look at unless they were the mega wealthy oilmen with a Tiger skin rug and leather chairs in their library. 
Today it seems we as a society have more disposable income so buying more than one gun for a purpose “to try it out” isn’t uncommon. Nor is buying a $2,500 Python, or pistol customization or trying multiple add-ons to see what may work best and setting aside the stuff that doesn’t. (I think we all have a box full of grips, holsters, sights, scope mounts, etc. None of the elders that I knew ever did.)
Stay safe.
Today it seems we as a society have more disposable income so buying more than one gun for a purpose “to try it out” isn’t uncommon. Nor is buying a $2,500 Python, or pistol customization or trying multiple add-ons to see what may work best and setting aside the stuff that doesn’t. (I think we all have a box full of grips, holsters, sights, scope mounts, etc. None of the elders that I knew ever did.)
Stay safe.
Chuck R.
Member
When I was a kid it seems the older folks had a dedicated rifle or shotgun for a specific purpose; a .30-30 with open sights for short range deer hunting, a .257 Roberts with a 4x scope for “ long range” hunting (maybe 250 yards), a Model 12 for turkey, a SxS for doves and quail, a rimfire to keep the raccoons out of the coop, etc. Many of my elders were children of the depression so I didn’t see a lot of gun duplicity or fancy excess; the guns were tools for a purpose. The ammo was cup and core Winchester or Remington, the shotgun shells Federal or Peters, the pickup had a rack in the window and the living room had a glass-fronted cabinet in the corner. No one had a collection just to have them to look at unless they were the mega wealthy oilmen with a Tiger skin rug and leather chairs in their library.
Today it seems we as a society have more disposable income so buying more than one gun for a purpose “to try it out” isn’t uncommon. Nor is buying a $2,500 Python, or pistol customization or trying multiple add-ons to see what may work best and setting aside the stuff that doesn’t. (I think we all have a box full of grips, holsters, sights, scope mounts, etc. None of the elders that I knew ever did.)
Stay safe.
Could also be a combination of the buy now, pay later and a lack of retirement savings... I'm amazed at how many firearms websites now have those installment plans for purchases.
My folks also grew up during the Great Depression and my dad would cringe if he ever saw some of the silly chit I spend money on.
tark
Member
Sorry, but I can't agree with you on that, my friend. I have had too many old (50+ years old) rifles that will shoot groups as tight or tighter than many new rifles today. 25 years ago, when my eyes were better, I was shooting 1 1/2" groups at 200 yards with an old Ross military Mk III .303 made in 1910. Five shot groups, not three. Ammo was my handloads. When I lived in California forty years ago, I got sub minute groups at 100 with My 280 Ross shooting old Kynoch ammo. I still have both guns.
I have owned many rifles through the decades that performed equally well, with good ammo. Some were military, some, sporting. I once had a Model 70 Winchester ( pre - war ) that would practically put em' all into one hole. It was a 30-06. It was scoped, I forgot which scope. I should have kept that one.
Guns today are better than older guns in one main way. They benefit from the things learned during the evolution of the species. Mistakes made in construction and design are learned from and corrected. Stronger, lighter materials are developed and used in construction. More cost effective manufacturing methods are used. Guns today are very good.
But they are not FAR more accurate than the guns of yesterday.
hawg
Member
I was born in 1956. I got a 1903A3 for my 12th birthday. I shot it a lot and it was my deer rifle for a few years but I always wanted a 94 Winchester. When I was 15 a friend had one and had taken it completely apart and couldn't put it back together. I gave him 15.00 for a barreled receiver and a cigar box full of parts. 3 hours later I had a working 94 Winchester. That was before internet. I just tinkered with it until I figured where and how everything went together. That was my deer rifle for the next five years or so until I foolishly sold it back to him. My next rifle was an F.N. Mauser I slowly sporterized. I still have it and it's been my go to deer rifle ever since. I also wound up with another 94 and I have used it a lot too. I like blued steel and wood. I've hunted in all kinds of inclement weather and never missed a shot because of having a wood stock. I don't like synthetic. It's fugly and camo paint looks ridiculous on a rifle. I'm not one to baby a gun of any kind. I'm not going to cry if I lean it against a barbed wire fence and it falls and catches a barb. I'm not going to trade it off if the stock gets a scratch or a gouge. 30-06 and 30-30 are still my favorite deer calibers. Back in the day we actually hunted. We didn't plant fields and sit in a stand and wait for them to come eat. We got off our butts and got in the woods on foot and hunted them.
Chuck R.
Member
Back in the day, there was this thing called hunter "access". The ratio of huntable land to hunters was significantly higher.
Still hunting, or spot and stalk are my favorite ways of doing things, but with access to a little over 600 acres, approximately 180 of which are actually wooded, it makes for some pretty short hunts. Plus my greatest success would be in pushing the deer into the surrounding neighbor's fields (where they'd shoot them from stands).
I'm nostalgic as the next guy, but times change. Stand hunting for a lot of areas is now the most effective way..period.
hawg
Member
I can't argue with that.
wbm
Member
A few "new" cartridges that do what has been done....and really no better. So to me the past two decades have resulted in Redundant redundancy. Actually fun though.
Pudge
Member
I'll tell you what's changed. I use the same rifle I bought in 1982, and it's way heavier than it used to be. I could carry that thing like it was nothing. The same rifle on the same terrain today seems downright unkind.
d2wing
Member
- Joined
- Nov 10, 2008
- Messages
- 6,409
I bought my first hunting knife at a Holiday station, a few guns from the hardware store. I splurged once and bought a BDL at Scheels in Fargo.
.308 Norma
Member
Funny how that happens. The gold wedding ring my wife gave me in 1971 has shrunk so much I can't even get it on my little finger anymore, much less my ring finger!
However, as far as carrying the same rifle I was carrying over the same terrain in 1982 goes, not only has that rifle gained weight, the terrain has grown steeper and taller. But I figure there's a real explanation for the terrain changing - we've had a few earthquakes around here in the last 40 years. I think those darned earthquakes pushed the mountains upwards.
SwampWolf
Member
They've gotten lots uglier in the eyes of this beholder and have lost their irons along the way. In terms of aesthetics, as the years go by, O'Connor is rotating at a faster and faster pace.
d2wing
Member
- Joined
- Nov 10, 2008
- Messages
- 6,409
I have owned both of those rifles.
d2wing
Member
- Joined
- Nov 10, 2008
- Messages
- 6,409
My first, second and third deer rifles were 30-06 and I still have one. If you were a grown up and hunted your rifle was usually a 30-06.
Western Auto for me.
- Status
