Feeling kinda left out of these new whiz-bang discussions?

Status
Not open for further replies.
Picher

Picher

Member
Joined
Nov 27, 2003
Messages
3,173
Location
Maine
Kinda slow this morning, so thought I'd create a bit of nonsense that might get the ball rollin'.

Lots of noise here about the Creed and other "newish" hunting cartridges. That's okay, but even "oldish" favorites can still get Job #1 done well.

I personally use the .270 "Win-nah" and .243 "Widdler" and you know what?...they still kill critters really dead...even with just one shot at the same and longer ranges than most hunters can manage.

So what? Nothing new...not much to get excited about...unless you don't have any rifles that are really capable of slammin' down that 300 yard deer in the field. That starts with the caliber choice, but soon needs to consider a great-handling rifle that is easy to carry and shoot...a great variable-powered scope that makes dawn and dusk bright and clear. And the most important part, a capable "nut" behind the buttplate!!

The deer's vitals don't really have a vote here, but really hate meeting your choice of cartridge and your delivery to them.

So relax. You don't need to get excited about exotic rounds, except to impress your buddies, should you need that ego boost. The game doesn't rate rounds they receive, because they don't have time...as long as you deliver it to the right places. And that takes practice, practice, practice.
 
You are absolutely correct in your analysis.
But, there's always a but....

The new stuff is specific to a very narrow field. Most new cartridges are designed for 600+ down range accuracy and dimensions that allow stuffing into short actions and "regular" AR size magazines.

Besides that any new cartridges create new interest in the shooting sports and that's a good thing!

For me I'm stuck in the old but have interest in the new "whiz-bang" discussion.

Smiles,
 
I’m not one to get irrationally angry every time a manufacturer tries to liven up the market around a technology that’s hit an evolutionary plateau, but when it comes to firearms, I’m definitely a bit of a traditionalist.

New bottle necked round that’s 50 fps faster than the other rounds of bore size in a case that’s 3mm shorter? Ok, that’s cool and all, but why can’t I find a decent combo gun with decent wood that takes a traditional rimmed round for a moderate price in the $1,000 to $1,200 range. Some of us will never afford a Blaser.
 
I love classic wood and milled steel hunting rifles, which to me possess far more character than contemporary plastic and stainless steel rifles. In particular, I dearly love my late-1940s Husqvarna Mauser 98 in .270 Winchester:

Husqvarna Mauser.jpg

Classic hunting iron will get the job done in the field as well as anything currently marketed. North American game is still built to the same specs, and assuming the hunter does his/her part, a deer shot with a 30-30 lever gun is just as dead as from something more high-tech. I will concede that the greater accuracy of modern production rifles is a real edge when it comes to long distance varmint shooting, but the difference there is more about rifle QC than cartridge choice. The .220 Swift is still pretty relevant for such old cartridge, though.

Having said this, there is also something undeniably practical about a lighter, more accurate and more weather-resistant arm carrying a greatly improved optical sight. I don't hunt at present, but if I was headed to the field I would take my Kimber 84M in .308 instead of my beautiful Heym Mauser 98 in 30-06. The Kimber is more than a pound lighter, about 2 MOA more accurate and can be washed off with a garden hose without damage if it falls into the mud.

Kimber 84M Hunter.jpg Western Field 724 AHEM.jpg

Shorter, lighter ammo is not such big a deal to a hunter carrying maybe 20 cartridges max, but many of the newer, shorter cartridges offer hunters the option of shorter and lighter actions and therefore rifles. After all, new rifles do need to be made, and personally I would choose the .308 Winchester over the 30-06 in a newly-purchased hunting arm. Beyond that, these new-fangled cartridges don't really interest me all that much. Granted, most of the stuff I handload is seriously obsolete military fodder ...

===

Not everyone buys a hunting rifle to hunt with it -- these days, probably most don't. Shooting holes in paper or dinging steel at long range is good fun, and while I myself prefer old military iron with downloaded ammo for this pastime, I won't object to someone choosing a rifle that shoots a spiffy new high-performance cartridge over one of the classics. Good sport is where you find it.

Bragging rights are a fundamental guy thing, a part of our competitive DNA, and bragging is often about insisting that one thing is better than another when nothing truly vital is at stake. Bragging is a big improvement over more unhealthy forms of disagreement.
 
Last edited:
Hunted many a year with 243 or 270. If that was all you bought you got most everything covered.
Added an 06 just cause I had a Grand at one time and had lots of left over ammo. 06 with 165-168gn or 270 with 150gn will do pert near same thing.
223 and 308 are nice because lots of ammo available since it's nato.
7.62x39 nice because inexpensive to shoot and will function pretty much as well as a 30-30.
22, just cause.
 
the thread title captures the essence of these debates over the past decades. it's not the people looking to improve everything that start these ego problem threads... it's the ones left out, trying to convince the pioneers that they have accomplished nothing, in order to salve their own egos.

things change. that's life. some group somewhere is probably having the exact same discussion on a lawn mower forum somewhere, where some guy says a rotary push mower cuts his grass just the same as someone else's newish zero turn mower.

i'd like to say in 40 years i'll look back at these debates and think how silly it was to waste time even reading them. but it seems the older people get the more likely they are to try to defend the past. so i guess if the world doesn't end in 2020, i can look forward to starting these threads to explain to 20yos from Generation XYZBBQ how we could kill things with gunpowder and lead just as well as the new lasers and energy weapons. w00t.
 
Picher said:
Kinda slow this morning, so thought I'd create a bit of nonsense that might get the ball rollin'.

Lots of noise here about the Creed and other "newish" hunting cartridges. That's okay, but even "oldish" favorites can still get Job #1 done well.

I personally use the .270 "Win-nah" and .243 "Widdler" and you know what?...they still kill critters really dead...even with just one shot at the same and longer ranges than most hunters can manage.

So what? Nothing new...not much to get excited about...unless you don't have any rifles that are really capable of slammin' down that 300 yard deer in the field. That starts with the caliber choice, but soon needs to consider a great-handling rifle that is easy to carry and shoot...a great variable-powered scope that makes dawn and dusk bright and clear. And the most important part, a capable "nut" behind the buttplate!!

The deer's vitals don't really have a vote here, but really hate meeting your choice of cartridge and your delivery to them.

So relax. You don't need to get excited about exotic rounds, except to impress your buddies, should you need that ego boost. The game doesn't rate rounds they receive, because they don't have time...as long as you deliver it to the right places. And that takes practice, practice, practice.
Click to expand...
And so here is a question that ties right in with the "great optic" part of your post: Have manufacturers pretty much given up on producing a top notch 1" tube scope? It seems like these days if it aint 30 mm it aint nothin'
 
My whiz-bang is 45-70, more accurately roar-thump. I don't really ever shoot over 100 yards though so it serves me well, not much on earth will laugh off a 400+ grain @ 1600 fps or even 700 fps for that matter.
I'm not a rifle guy though, I'll get a modern rifle sometime . kind of thinking 416 ruger, why? Why not. Whiz-bang enough or does it have to be called something cool like creedmoore or velociraptor ?
 
Picher said:
Kinda slow this morning, so thought I'd create a bit of nonsense that might get the ball rollin'.

Lots of noise here about the Creed and other "newish" hunting cartridges. That's okay, but even "oldish" favorites can still get Job #1 done well.

I personally use the .270 "Win-nah" and .243 "Widdler" and you know what?...they still kill critters really dead...even with just one shot at the same and longer ranges than most hunters can manage.

So what? Nothing new...not much to get excited about...unless you don't have any rifles that are really capable of slammin' down that 300 yard deer in the field. That starts with the caliber choice, but soon needs to consider a great-handling rifle that is easy to carry and shoot...a great variable-powered scope that makes dawn and dusk bright and clear. And the most important part, a capable "nut" behind the buttplate!!

The deer's vitals don't really have a vote here, but really hate meeting your choice of cartridge and your delivery to them.

So relax. You don't need to get excited about exotic rounds, except to impress your buddies, should you need that ego boost. The game doesn't rate rounds they receive, because they don't have time...as long as you deliver it to the right places. And that takes practice, practice, practice.
Click to expand...
I feel you. I hunt with a round that came out the year after the Massacre at Wounded knee (predates the Spanish -American war too) and was and hasn’t changed much the whole time. It still kills deer just as dead.
 
Last edited:
mshootnit said:
And so here is a question that ties right in with the "great optic" part of your post: Have manufacturers pretty much given up on producing a top notch 1" tube scope? It seems like these days if it aint 30 mm it aint nothin'
Click to expand...
It’s all about getting you to spend more. If you get a scope that doesn’t fit your rings, mount or other accessories you have to spend more re-buying those. I see the newer modern cartridges the same way. A lot of these new cartridges do thing la only marginally better than what already exists but if they can get you to buy it...
 
FWIW.. ( imho ) hunting and shooting can be quite different..plenty of great hunting rounds all ready available.
From 22LR clear through some of the Elephant sized rounds.
All of them are well proven throughout history... maybe a better word is vested. ? Choice a bullet / cartridge combo, suitable to your task, and you are good to go

However... not all those rounds will readily fit into a Semi Auto rifle, mainly an AR15 or a large frame AR. ... and that is where the differences lie between Hunting and Shooting.

IMHO, The "new and improved" versions of classic rounds is much more about the currently very popular AR platform.

Those same AR platforms are very,very easy to alter, Modular keeps coming to mind ... the AR family is crazy easy to replace a barrel , or free float the barrel... or crazy easy to change cartridge families.... add-on parts are available for every part on the AR. ( for better or worse )

All at a relatively moderate price.

Picher, as you said.. the newer rounds don't kill anything better.. but.... they can fit one of the most modular S/A firearms out there.

I carry a standard 300WM when I hunt Elk... but very rarely, do I take that to the range for a relaxing day shooting. 9 times out of 10... my AR's and pistols will go with me.
While my trusty bolt actions, wait for me in the safe.

For those shooting days at the range, which I find extremely relaxing, can last all day. I will have fired ample ammo in my "quest" to find the right load for that specific barrel.
And there is a great deal of personal satisfaction, knowing that the AR's that I altered ( barrels changed, upper to lower fit snugged up, careful attention to assm. details.. etc ) can shoot very small groups.
All stuff that I did at home. Order parts and assemble properly.. no truly special tools needed

Again, to me shooting is a little different then hunting. I have shot a mile, with a 300WM ( yes a bolt action , but my 6.5CM AR would readily and repeatedly do 1200yds, steel torso sized targets ) ... on that day it was all about shooting that mile and learning the "dope" to do it.

So I guess what I am saying, is, maybe its not the cartridge .. maybe its the platform that is shooting the cartridge.

Just my 2 cents, and certainly not arguing with anyone at all.

I will say ... its you fellas fault for introducing as ( slightly ) younger folks to S/A's.... ;) .... and I also blame the Marines for getting me hooked on AR's, then I figure out I can make them shoot better, I can easily smooth up a USGI trigger pull with paracord ?! .. in the field ?! ... boy howdy, the challenge was on..... and I haven't stopped since.

FWIW, my best shooting firearms ( precision wise ) are all AR's reliably producing nice small groups... all of them I have "enhanced" ( ? ) via barrel changes, upgraded various other parts with my own two hands... so there is a part of me that is proud of that.

I don't think I would have tackled a barrel change in a bolt action... maybe now, but not those decades ago.

So maybe the easy to alter AR platform is what really sucked me into firearms... not those danged new cartridges...They are all just along for the ride.

And if I want a .45 caliber brute of a AR ( 450 Bushmaster ) or a l want a long range cartridge... all it takes is sliding 2 pins, out and changing an upper.


Ehhh... I am rambling... again, it might not be those newer cartridges... it could very well be the platform firing them.

( In defense of bolt actions... I have a 1903A1, an 8MM Mauser, a Sporterized 30/06 Mauser , numerous lever actions 45/70 , 44Mag, 30/ 30, and a single shot thumper 458 Lott... so I am not just a S/A nut... rather, I am a gun nut :) )
 
Companies do not stay in business or pay their employees and stock holders on rifles they built fifty years ago. Therefore for those who do not buy anything new or have not in years, there is no vote there. And, some of the new stuff is better than the old stuff and stainless and plastic rifles lacking soul is a matter of opinion when drenched in a salt marsh or drenched in Alaska or sweating gobs in Arizona huffing up a mountain side. If you like to hold and pet your rifles then wood and blued steel is certainly beautiful but if you like to hunt with your rifles, at least for some, the stainless steel has an attraction.
 
I have much more interest in the exploits of the .318 Westley Richards or .40-82 Winchester than the latest overbore, short-action magnum shooting plastic tipped bullets out of a mostly plastic gun, and I am barely old enough to have actually been able to see Nirvana live.
 
3Crows said:
Companies do not stay in business or pay their employees and stock holders on rifles they built fifty years ago. Therefore for those who do not buy anything new or have not in years, there is no vote there.
Click to expand...

Good point -- I was thinking the exact same thing and could not agree more.

Then I considered for a moment about how I actually spend most of my 'gun dollars' from month-to-month: rimfire ammo, primers, powder, cartridge cases, bullets, storage stuff, gunsmithing and parts, scope rings, optics, gas to drive to the range, gun books and magazines und so weiter. I keep a budget and accurate insurance records. Just over half (19 out of 38) of the rifles I currently own were purchased used. Comparing the purchase prices I've paid, the guns themselves were an investment of $16,183 and the individual accessories for each total $13,775, not counting things like reloading dies, ammo components and research books. Since January, I've spent $1,449 on three 'new' (they were milsurp/used, actually) and at about $2500 on the support side, mostly books, loading components and optics. And I've sold more rifles than I currently own, usually taking a small loss each time. Looked from the perspective of my checkbook, a new firearm purchase is a rare event compared to how I spend all of my other gun dollars. Except for collectors who don't shoot, I suspect this is the natural order amongst customers of SHOT Show participants.

I suppose Weatherby could ignore my consumer 'vote', since I've yet to own one of their products; however, Ruger, Leupold, Nikon, Weaver, Warne, Berry's Bullets, Lee Precision, Hodgdon, CCI/Federal, Starline and Collector Grade Books should all probably send me a Christmas card every year for the money they've gotten from me. So on further consideration, my amended agreement would, "new rifle manufacturers do not stay in business or pay their employees and stock holders on rifles they built fifty years ago. Those who do not buy any new rifles or have not in years have no vote in this sector of the market."
 
Last edited:
Picher said:
So relax. You don't need to get excited about exotic rounds, except to impress your buddies, should you need that ego boost. The game doesn't rate rounds they receive, because they don't have time...as long as you deliver it to the right places. And that takes practice, practice, practice.
Click to expand...

That practice can come cheaper and less exhaustively with something that burns less powder yet can still deliver the payload.

It is the same as cars. A Camry will do the same thing as a Caprice. Cheaper, more efficiently, and new. Yup, just like cars, there needs to be a supply for new shooters, and they aren’t making the Caprice, good as it was, anymore. (Yes, I know, they still chamber .270, stay with with the car analogy.)

New drivers want efficient fuel injection and tech sync, not trunk space, nor a giant acreage of hood.

This does not lessen the glory of a Caprice Classic with a four hundred and a four barrel. Try getting a girl in the back of... never mind.

I’m just saying you’re not left out, your numbers are just different.

Just like you cannot put today’s morals on yesterday’s leaders, you can’t discount yesterday’s cartridges by today’s metric.
Just like you can’t judge a ‘68 Camero by its track time against a new one, pushing twice the horse power(BC), on a better chassis(modern rifle), with computer controlled Powertrain(case geometry) and state of the art suspension(vast amount of shooter data).

Then isn’t worse then now, it’s just older.


(Pssst! Just so you know, the Stick Flickers look down on your .270 Cheatchester. If it were better, the game would be deader, they aren’t.:D)
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

J
  • Locked
Need help in new rifle choice
2
Replies
33
Views
1K
jcollins1007
J
DAdams
  • Locked
Fill Out the Line Up
Replies
5
Views
500
Dionysusigma
D
D
  • Locked
Looking to pick out a first centerfire rifle
2 3
Replies
53
Views
3K
coyote315
C
1KPerDay
  • Locked
Theoretical long-range rifle on a tight budget. Difficulty: Left-hand. Hunting use irrelevant.
2 3
Replies
67
Views
2K
marksman13
marksman13
Eb1
  • Locked
Marlin 450
Replies
2
Views
368
NCsmitty
N
Back
Top