Quantcast
  1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.

Ruger Deerfield Carbine

Discussion in 'Rifle Country' started by Jason_W, Nov 18, 2010.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. Jason_W

    Jason_W Member

    Joined:
    Mar 4, 2010
    Messages:
    1,610
    Why did these rifles end up discontinued? Seems like a neat concept, though the crescent buttplate is a strike against it IMO.
     
  2. greyling22

    greyling22 Member

    Joined:
    Aug 6, 2007
    Messages:
    4,267
    Location:
    East Texas
    lack of demand I assume. I would have bought one had they bothered to build a magazine that took more than 4 rounds. I mean really, who builds a 4 round semi-automatic gun?!
     
  3. Jason_W

    Jason_W Member

    Joined:
    Mar 4, 2010
    Messages:
    1,610
    Yeah. A better buttstock and more magazine options and it would have been formidable for a variety of purposes.
     
  4. Maverick223

    Maverick223 Member

    Joined:
    Dec 19, 2008
    Messages:
    11,262
    Location:
    28078
    I agree magazines and lack of chambering options and magazines with a decent capacity. Although I remember hearing about someone modifying Desert Eagle .44Mag. mags to fit...don't know how well that worked out though.

    :)
     
  5. TexasPatriot.308

    TexasPatriot.308 Member

    Joined:
    Jul 9, 2009
    Messages:
    2,283
    Location:
    Luling Texas
    wished I hadd bought one for hogs here in Texas..seems like the ideal gun likea model 94
     
  6. Welding Rod

    Welding Rod Member

    Joined:
    Mar 23, 2008
    Messages:
    1,773
    Location:
    PacNW
    I had one... loved it except the damn limited magazine capacity.

    I would buy another if they would take a detachable 10 rounder (or higher).
     
  7. HOOfan_1

    HOOfan_1 Member

    Joined:
    Aug 11, 2010
    Messages:
    4,698
    Location:
    Virginia
    My dad had one and said it was a jamomatic
     
  8. Jason_W

    Jason_W Member

    Joined:
    Mar 4, 2010
    Messages:
    1,610
    Maybe chambering it in 10mm would help with some of the feeding issues inherent to rimmed cases in semi-autos. It wouldn't quite have the power of the .44, but still enough for deer at woods ranges.
     
  9. Clipper

    Clipper Member

    Joined:
    Apr 15, 2006
    Messages:
    2,243
    Location:
    Mt. Morris, MI.
    You mag capacity guys crack me up. A carbine is supposed to be small & light, and mag capacity gets heavy. And just how many rounds do you need to kill a deer? Not to mention, some states (like mine) have a capacity limit for deer hunting...Still doesn't stop some guys from trying to spray down a running deer. I've had to hit the dirt a few times myself because of guys like that. I'm just as glad Ruger had sense enough to limit capacity and bulk on what is supposed to be a deer carbine.
     
  10. uspJ

    uspJ Member

    Joined:
    Dec 26, 2009
    Messages:
    603
    Location:
    Georgia
    I wish Ruger would start making them again. I've been trying to buy one off a friend for years but he refuses to part with it.

    The capacity doen't make that big of a deal with me for hunting, but a 10 rd detachable mag for plinking would be nice.
     
  11. Fremmer

    Fremmer Member

    Joined:
    Oct 9, 2009
    Messages:
    2,284
    The rounds just can't perform like other rifle rounds can in terms of performance.

    They could have called it the Ruger manfield and made it to take 20 round mags, and it might have sold better. I guess ol' Bill wouldn't have liked that, though. :D
     
  12. CraigC
    • Contributing Member

    CraigC Member

    Joined:
    Jan 27, 2006
    Messages:
    14,272
    Location:
    West Tennessee
    You get a 300-400fps boost over handgun velocities making it a legitimate 150yd carbine. How many hunters really need a rifle that can shoot further than that? Recoil and muzzle blast are also far less than rifle rounds as well. There's a very good reason why pistol cartridge leverguns are very good sellers. Because lots of folks recognize their utility and the fact that you can't make a 300yd shot is unimportant.


    Because it's a hunting rifle, not an entry weapon. Let us not forget that most states have laws regarding the capacity of semi-autos used for hunting. :rolleyes:


    The original went away because they were too costly to produce. They were entirely machined from steel billet and the design was not compatible with investment casting. The Deerfield went away because of lack of sales.
     
  13. kaferhaus

    kaferhaus Member

    Joined:
    Nov 26, 2004
    Messages:
    739
    Location:
    Mobile, Alabama
    One of the handiest hog rifles ever produced. I've been kicking myself in the ass for 15yrs for selling the one I had...
     
  14. Jason_W

    Jason_W Member

    Joined:
    Mar 4, 2010
    Messages:
    1,610
    I'm a huge fan of pistol cal carbines in general. Most hunting terrain here in the northeast is pretty thick with a 100 yard shot being incredibly rare, unless you're hunting a clearcut or field. My experience has been that bucks learn to avoid the open areas during legal hours anyway.

    Short, light, carbines are a lot easier to work through the thick stuff than a bolt rifle with a huge scope. I could be wrong since I've never tried it myself, but I have a suspicion that all the parts protruding from an AR style rifle would snag on brush.

    As far a pistol caliber being "inferior", it won't bounce off, and how much less meat ruined by a "slow" and heavy round at close range as opposed to a high velocity round at 35 to 50 yards?
     
  15. CraigC
    • Contributing Member

    CraigC Member

    Joined:
    Jan 27, 2006
    Messages:
    14,272
    Location:
    West Tennessee
    I agree, around here it's impossible to even see 100yds until all the leaves fall off. I've never had a shot at deer beyond 100yds and my single long-legged rifle (.270) has been dormant for five or six years.
     
  16. Fremmer

    Fremmer Member

    Joined:
    Oct 9, 2009
    Messages:
    2,284
    I think you get a lot more out of a .270 Winchester than a .44 Mag, but to each his own I guess. Range is irrelevant, because I want better performance from a dedicated hunting round that will penetrate bone and put it down hard (at any range). To each his own, though, using a deerfield might be fun sometime, too.

    I'm telling ya, they should go with the Manfield Carbine with 20 round mags. Now one of those would be interesting....
     
  17. Jason_W

    Jason_W Member

    Joined:
    Mar 4, 2010
    Messages:
    1,610
    A .44 mag at 100 yards or less will clear straight through any broadside deer, especially considering wide meplate, heavy, hard cast bullets.
     
  18. Fremmer

    Fremmer Member

    Joined:
    Oct 9, 2009
    Messages:
    2,284
    Sure it will, most of the time. But not as well as a .270 Winchester.

    Dead's dead, though. I hear ya there.
     
  19. CraigC
    • Contributing Member

    CraigC Member

    Joined:
    Jan 27, 2006
    Messages:
    14,272
    Location:
    West Tennessee
    Mmmm, hmmm. Put down the energy tables. The .44Mag will shoot clear through any whitetail, elk or moose that walks the earth with the proper bullet. And not just broadside either. Sorry sir, the .44Mag carbine gives up NOTHING to a rifle cartridge, inside its effective range of 150yds.
     
  20. Fremmer

    Fremmer Member

    Joined:
    Oct 9, 2009
    Messages:
    2,284
    Yeah it does, which is why people use the rifle rounds like the .270 for hunting rather than using a 44 mag, 10mm, or any other handgun round. And when you're going out to the 150 yard range, I'd certainly much rather have the .270 for both accuracy and effectiveness. Sorry, but reality is that the rifle round will perform better, which is why everybody uses them.

    I don't even have an energy table, but I'm not surprised that they show more energy from a .270 than the handgun rounds. That's one reason they're more effective.
     
  21. Jason_W

    Jason_W Member

    Joined:
    Mar 4, 2010
    Messages:
    1,610
    I find pistol cal carbines more fun to shoot than most centerfire rifle rounds which goes a long way in my opinion.

    An irony that has always perplexed me is that often the same hunter who bowhunts in the early autumn, and hunts with a muzzle loader in the late autumn (muzzleloaders these days essentially fire pistol bullets) will call any modern deer rifle that isn't in the 30-06 class inadequate. At bow range, a .44 mag or .357 magnum round from a carbine will mess up more vital tissue than a broadhead, yet many consider the above rounds poor choices for deer at any range. It's perplexing.

    Granted, if I was on a spot and stalk hunt for mule deer or elk out where a person can actually see past 50 yards, a pistol caliber wouldn't be my first choice, but in the thick stuff, give me something that is short, light, relative wide in bore diameter and offers a quick follow-up shot.
     
  22. rallyhound

    rallyhound Member

    Joined:
    Sep 12, 2005
    Messages:
    291
    Location:
    Minnesota
    I've shot about 15 deer now with my deerfield and the simple fact is that at 50-100 yards the 44 mag simply does more damage and drops them faster than a rifle round.

    They go all the way through and the holes are bigger ( rem 240 semi jacket).

    They are lighter and shorter and easier to carry.

    I use a shotgun scope on mine and target acquisition is faster than a 3x9 on heavier rifle (like a bolt action).

    I have hunted with the same 4 guys for 10 years or so and every one has switched to a Deerfield 44 now.
     
  23. bhk

    bhk Member

    Joined:
    Jun 17, 2006
    Messages:
    1,040
    Location:
    Wooded acreage in rural midwest
    I've shot three close range deer with a four-inch .44 magnum, and tissue damage was as great or greater that I note with my .30-06. An expanding .44 slug make a pretty good sized hole. The .44s kill a lot better than many folks realize.

    I still use my 7-08 or 30-06 for hunting from stands that might produce long shots where good triggers and nice scopes shine, but the .44 is a real killer at closer ranges where open sights or low power scopes excel. I am sure it would be ok out to 150 yards or so if your shooting platform allowed for the necessary accuracy. I just shot a 9-point buck and a doe this week with my 7-08. Any more deer next week will be taken with a .44 mag. Marlin.
     
  24. Otony

    Otony Member

    Joined:
    Jan 19, 2003
    Messages:
    500
    Location:
    Pacific Northwest, on the Dry Side
    CraigC wrote "The original went away because they were too costly to produce. They were entirely machined from steel billet and the design was not compatible with investment casting. The Deerfield went away because of lack of sales."

    Can you substantiate this claim that the receiver is machined from billet? I am highly doubtful that it is correct, but I could be wrong of course. If you examine a Deerfield closely, the receiver shows fairly obvious signs of being the same sort of casting used on other Ruger firearms. Indeed, it is not too dissimilar from a Mini-14 receiver, which is a known cast item.
     
  25. Maverick223

    Maverick223 Member

    Joined:
    Dec 19, 2008
    Messages:
    11,262
    Location:
    28078
    The originals were milled from solid stock, but they absolutely were compatible with the investment casting process, which is what spawned the Deerfield (essentially the same gun, but with a cast receiver). BTW, Ruger investment castings are of very high quality (it is the backbone of their company) and have proven to be equals of most comparable forged receiver/bolt, and is sometimes better. The only fault I see, is the quality of the finish is often not as good as their forged counterparts.

    :)
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page