Why I don't use push feed rifles for dangerous game

Status
Not open for further replies.
H&H
"I'd like to submit that if you can shoot a .338 the .375H&H should not be a problem for you. The .375H&H is very simular in recoil to the .338."

I have no doubt of that, since I have shot both and a .458WinMag. As far accuracy, the .338 I used to own would shoot less than MOA with factory, so did my friends .375 I shot. See the problem was that I just could not take the recoil, it was brutal to me. I had a hard time going thru one box of shells off the bench. It was enough that I did not like shooting it any more so I sold it and picked up a .300WinMag. It may very well be because of the stock desigh since the .458 I shot which had a custom stock, did not bother me that much. Maybe I'm just a woose.
:D

I have never hunted big bears but I do have friends who are 10+ years older than me that have. They all have told me that you need to shoot the biggest caliber you can proficiently, minimum of .338, .375 is better and .458 behind a good cool headed shooter as a back up.

I'm not afraid of recoil but if it's too painful to practice my shooting with, I won't. See, I'm big believer in pain. With large calibers you need to practice alot. Maybe one day when I have enough money to have a custom built with a stock to fit me and designed to reduce recoil, I'll get a larger caliber gun, but for now due to economic reasons, I'll just talk about it and dream.:)
 
10mm. I have shot a .223, but I sold it. I'm not exactly anything close to an expert in the area of long guns. I'm just trying to learn. :) I like Art's take, though. If the sight picture was right when the shot was fired, the shoulder will have to just recover later.
 
Slydlok,

we've had some in depth discussion on the subject of recoil. but 90% of precieved recoil is stock design and face slap. If you've got a quality recoil pad on your rifle and the stock fits you the shoulder really isn't much of a player...

I also don't recomend shooting a big gun (the definition of big depends on your background) from a bench. After you've got your zero get off the bench and shot from field positions. The felt recoil will be less.

I can shoot my .458Lott or my .470NE all day long from a standing or seated position. The bench is just too much abuse on the cheek bone after about 10 rounds with either rifle. I don't like getting hit in the face anymore than the rest of us. :)
 
H&H, I agree with you completely. I lived in CA when I owned the .338 and most ranges I frequented would not allow shooting other than from the bench. The times I took it out to the "sticks", shooting from standing was least abusive, sitting was not as bad as benching but still hurt, again attributed to the stock, I think.
I love shooting big bores, they are alot fun, a real kick in the ass if you know what mean. My favorite jackrabbit gun was my Marlin 1895 .45-70, never hit one past 150 yards but came real close, use to impress my huntin buddies or at least they acted like it. Those guys never tried it with that Marlin, I don't know if they were afraid of the recoil or did not have enough confidence in their shooting ability.
 
Worst smacking I ever took was from a buddy's .270. The stock and scope combo just didn't work for me.

My Ruger M77 in .458 was unpleasant to shoot while a CZ (???) in the same caliber using the same ammo was quite nice.

It's all in the stock and sights. IMHO! :)
 
It's all in the ... sights.

Could you explain your position on this? Are you saying the position/weight/design/model of the scope plays a vital role in percieved recoil?
 
Are you saying the position/weight/design/model of the scope plays a vital role in percieved recoil?

WhiteKnight.

Yes sir that is a completely true statement.

99.9% of all of the scopes I see are mounted to high. when a scope is mounted to high it does not allow the shooter to have a solid "cheek weld" to the stock. In other words his face is forced off the stock so he can raise up to see the crosshair in the scope. this allows the rifle to accelerate and jump up to slap the shooters face in recoil.

If the shooter has a solid cheek weld his face will roll back with the stock in recoil and the precieved recoil will be less. A scope needs to be mounted pretty darn low for most shooters. I have yet to see a picture in a gun rag that has the scope mounted even remotely low enough.

Type and scope postion also play a roll in this process. Stock design and fit is another place that really makes a difference in precieved recoil.
 
How low do you consider low?

I surmise that for many hunters/shooters such as myself, one simply chooses a ring style (ie Burris Signature Zees) and a base (ie factory installed weaver base) and then purchases the ring height barely high enough for the scope to clear the barrel/bolt.

This is the route I have gone with the majority of my guns, and I don't see any "better" way, unless you have a suggestion.

Also, do you believe that a cheekpiece or stock comb-add on would solve this problem?
 
This is the route I have gone with the majority of my guns, and I don't see any "better" way, unless you have a suggestion.

WhiteKnight

Well it's alittle more involved than that. How low you can mount your scope depends on alot of things like the make of the rifle,the scope and in particular the size of the objective bell.

The very lowest scope set up you can have in a stock gun and scope mount set up is to use a 32MM objective bell scope like a leupold VariX 3 then use leupolds QD's bases topped with weaver low rings.

On a model 70 it will give you about as low as possibly can go on a laymen mount job.

If you choose to use bigger scopes or a rifle that doesn't allow the use of low bases and ringfs then your only other option is to modify the comb on the gun. I like the to use the Cheek eze pads from Brownels. they are cheap easy to install and very comfortable on the face.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top