Macchina
Member
- Joined
- Nov 14, 2006
- Messages
- 998
A long, wandering post. Bear with me:
Almost every gun I've purchased has gone through the "how will I carry this while hiking/fishing/hunting" question. My first .357 was the 4.2" SP101 (the "kit gun" of 357s), my 22 handguns are all sized for putting in my backpack during hiking and their holsters reflect that use (full coverage with magazine storage). Most of my rifles are compact bolts (or especially lever guns) because the thin and svelte format just works so well for packing into the woods. The tube mag on lever action guns is so streamlined that I find them MUCH more practical than any high-capacity rifle with a large magazine breaking up its pack-able shape. Though I don't spend near enough time in the woods to warrant all my pack-able guns, I do spend a decent amount of time away from civilization (I go to my cabin every weekend), however I am by no means a full-time woodsman. I hike a few weeks each year, and the irony here is that I am a pretty lightweight backpacker except for the fact that I love to carry a well-designed woods gun even when I know I won't need one.
This revelation just came to me that I will not buy a gun that I cannot carry easily when out-of-doors. I don't have any large handguns, powerful (heavy) rifles, modern sporting rifles, etc. because they are not practical to carry in the field. I was wondering why I am not attracted to AR-15s or other bulky guns and I found out is why.
Once a year, some buddies and I try to get out for a long weekend where we don't bring food and must hunt, fish, and forage for what we eat. This trip has caused me to purchase many compact firearms (Henry 22 Youth, H&R 12ga that I cut down, a few 22 handguns, etc...) that will pack into a backpack.
I have a soft spot for guns like the new 22/45 LITE and I will be trading away my prized 442 No-Lock for one because it's so much more practical to carry for small game hunting (I was in the process of developing a .38 Special load for small game hunting with the snub, even though that is ludicrously impractical)...
I am selling my bull barreled .22 magnum (Pre-Remington Marlin 882SSV) so I can buy a carbine-length walking varmint gun.
I won't buy a shotgun that doesn't break-down into two pieces for packing. I won't buy a regular sized rifle if is also offered in a carbine length.
Do you find yourself doing the same? Please share...
H&R Breakdown:
An underground shot with the Henry Youth (I love this gun):
My very handy Marlin 1894 in .44 Mag:
My 3 last Ruger Purchases (Ruger 77/357, Ruger 357 SP101 4.2", and Ruger KLCR 357):
Out for Rabbit the first gun I ever bought (870 Supermag Express) and my first real carry gun (Sig P239 .40):
Where I fish (I always have a 357 on me after more than a few run ins with wild dogs):
What I catch:
Brown Trout:
Salmon:
Salmon running:
My favorite place to hike (a week-long trip around a local uninhabited island):
Enjoying some fire-cooked squirrel on one of our eat-what-you-catch trips:
How I camp:
And for Two:
Almost every gun I've purchased has gone through the "how will I carry this while hiking/fishing/hunting" question. My first .357 was the 4.2" SP101 (the "kit gun" of 357s), my 22 handguns are all sized for putting in my backpack during hiking and their holsters reflect that use (full coverage with magazine storage). Most of my rifles are compact bolts (or especially lever guns) because the thin and svelte format just works so well for packing into the woods. The tube mag on lever action guns is so streamlined that I find them MUCH more practical than any high-capacity rifle with a large magazine breaking up its pack-able shape. Though I don't spend near enough time in the woods to warrant all my pack-able guns, I do spend a decent amount of time away from civilization (I go to my cabin every weekend), however I am by no means a full-time woodsman. I hike a few weeks each year, and the irony here is that I am a pretty lightweight backpacker except for the fact that I love to carry a well-designed woods gun even when I know I won't need one.
This revelation just came to me that I will not buy a gun that I cannot carry easily when out-of-doors. I don't have any large handguns, powerful (heavy) rifles, modern sporting rifles, etc. because they are not practical to carry in the field. I was wondering why I am not attracted to AR-15s or other bulky guns and I found out is why.
Once a year, some buddies and I try to get out for a long weekend where we don't bring food and must hunt, fish, and forage for what we eat. This trip has caused me to purchase many compact firearms (Henry 22 Youth, H&R 12ga that I cut down, a few 22 handguns, etc...) that will pack into a backpack.
I have a soft spot for guns like the new 22/45 LITE and I will be trading away my prized 442 No-Lock for one because it's so much more practical to carry for small game hunting (I was in the process of developing a .38 Special load for small game hunting with the snub, even though that is ludicrously impractical)...
I am selling my bull barreled .22 magnum (Pre-Remington Marlin 882SSV) so I can buy a carbine-length walking varmint gun.
I won't buy a shotgun that doesn't break-down into two pieces for packing. I won't buy a regular sized rifle if is also offered in a carbine length.
Do you find yourself doing the same? Please share...
H&R Breakdown:
An underground shot with the Henry Youth (I love this gun):
My very handy Marlin 1894 in .44 Mag:
My 3 last Ruger Purchases (Ruger 77/357, Ruger 357 SP101 4.2", and Ruger KLCR 357):
Out for Rabbit the first gun I ever bought (870 Supermag Express) and my first real carry gun (Sig P239 .40):
Where I fish (I always have a 357 on me after more than a few run ins with wild dogs):
What I catch:
Brown Trout:
Salmon:
Salmon running:
My favorite place to hike (a week-long trip around a local uninhabited island):
Enjoying some fire-cooked squirrel on one of our eat-what-you-catch trips:
How I camp:
And for Two:
Last edited:
