Hunting rifle reccomendation

Savage axis .308

>>852030
300 or 308

I prefer Lever action and wood furniture so I would lead you to a Browning BLR 300 mag, but bolt action is likely to be more recommended for a few reasons

>>852038
Even better at the same price, Mossberg Patriot, it comes in many calibers. Wood and synthetic

I use a all weather henry repeater chambered in 45-70. But I carry a .22 pistol for smaller game

>>852040
i like lever action and wood furniture as well, thanks for the advice

I have shot 23 deer and 14 black bear with a winchester model 94 3030, and with proper shot placement none have gone more than 25 meters.
Depends on how you hunt and where you hunt though, my longest shot ever was 140meters and i spend most of my time walking so a handy light gun that can shoot a 6" gong from a field position is more important than shooting the cock of a cricket from a solid rest in a tree stand.
Plus you can get a model94 in half decent shape at a gun show or off the used rack around here for under 400 dollars.

>>852064
Then you already know what you want.

just get a lever action in 3030,4570 or 45LC

id personally go for a 45LC so you can carry a revolver that takes the same ammunition

>>852072
A .357 or .44 mag would do nicely as well, plus you can shoot .38 and .44 special for plinking and small game

>>852065
is there any bullet drop with these types of rifles?

>>852084
There is bullet drop with any gun ever anon. But to answer you question, yes. However it's very very easily accounted for and unless youre open in a relatively open area with damn long sight lines it won't matter much at all.

Considering the questions you're asking, no offense, but I don't see you taking a shit at 300+ yards. Most of your white tail and hog hunting will be under that an 30-30 has been doing that job fine for 100 years. Lever actions are also fun as fuck

>>852030
If you're talking wild boars, you want a semi auto so you can nail as many as possible if you come across a group before they scatter.

>>852030
Ruger Model 44 or Ruger Deerfield.

*pats op on back

Atta boy, sonny, you've thunk up an idea for a hunting rifle. Grampa would be proud.

File: IMG_20160519_183100.jpg (1MB, 2048x1536px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 2048x1536px

>>852064
>>852040
> prefer

Also I.

>>852030
It would help if we knew what kinds of ranges were likely. If it is 200 yards and closer, a 30-30 will do you just fine, if lever actions are your thing. It'll do the trick out further, but the 30-30 isn't known for having a flat long range trajectory.

Also, I'd stay away from the magnums, unless you live where the shots are likely to be further than 200 yards. I watched a 7mm Mag completely destroy an entire quarter of an elk 3 years ago because it was a 50yd shot. We cut the backstrap off and threw the rest away. The rib meat looked like blood soaked straw, and the entire shoulder was blood shot. It would have annihilated a deer in a bad way.

If you want something more modern for deer and pigs, look at the .243 Win or the .260 Rem. With proper bullet selection and shot placement, a .243 will still drop an elk at 500 yards, and a 260 will still knock stuff down at long range better than a .308 without the catastrophic damage at close range of the magnums.

File: 1366875470558.png (8KB, 256x256px) Image search: [Google]

8KB, 256x256px

>>852331

>>852030
30-06 is master race caliber
You can hunt small boars with it all the way up to bear and elk. One size fits all round. You can pick it up in a Remington 700 for cheap. Or if you want to spend more you could go with a nice wetherby.

Also,

>>>/k/

What would be reccomended for larger game like Elk or Moose? .375 H&H?

Almost any rifle will work well for deer and pigs. I have a .243 I let women and children use.

I have taken them with my 3030, normally short range and in the brush.

If I only got to choose one for every type of hunting in N. America. I would go with a 3006 and a good scope. It's been a good performer for almost a 100 years. But it is all a personal choice....shoot what you like and shoot well.

>>852030
There's a lot of different options actually.

30-30 is a great brush rifle, and if you plan on hunting in the woods, it will serve you very well. 20 gauge shotguns (rifled slugs) are also very nice for hunting in the brush, although you have a more restricted range.

.270 is a very flat shooting round, if you're out west and plan on just hunting deer this is the round for you.

.243 seems to be like a very good in-between range round for deer and hogs. It's something that would do quite well in thick woods or for longer shots in fields.

30-06 is a great all around rifle for larger game. Elk, moose, deer. You can also find a lot of old high quality rifles chambered for this. Old Remington 700's are great, especially ones that you can still use both a scope and iron sights with.

.308 is basically for large game, wouldn't recommend unless you plan on going to Alaska, same goes for 45-70.

.223 is nice for varmint, coyotes, ground hogs, etc.

Check out black powder though, you might end up liking it.

File: 1340780889962.jpg (2MB, 3489x2316px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 3489x2316px

KAC SR25 or SCAR 17

>>852420
That would work well. Or you could go for .375 Ruger for the same performance in a shorter action

>>852030

Nugget.

>>852461
>.308 is basically for large game

.308 performs pretty similarly to lighter loads of .30-06. It's nowhere near a strict large game gun the way you mean; in general, it's pretty good, versatile round that's suitable for pretty much all game you'll find in North America. It's main advantage over .30-06 is the potential for easier to find ammo, and the availability of the round in guns with shorter actions.

>>852524
>That horrible trigger discipline

File: IMG_20160710_143649.jpg (905KB, 2048x1536px) Image search: [Google]

905KB, 2048x1536px

>>852461
>.308
> wouldn't rexamend
Who are these people?

>>852620
>bolt is open and smoke is coming out of the chamber
He just fired a shot you fucking retard.

File: 1472401550307.jpg (29KB, 480x360px) Image search: [Google]

29KB, 480x360px

>>852620
>>852632

>>852620
Goddamn, you're dumb.

>>852030
AR-15

>>852686
+1 for this, if you live somewhere outside of Jew York, Illanoise, Commifornia, or New Joisey.

Get it chambered in .300 AAC Blackout, 6.5 Grendel, or .458 SOCOM and you can legally hunt deer anywhere you can do so with a rifle.
They also pack enough punch to stop a charging boar in its tracks, something that you want to consider if you're going to be hunting pigs.

>>852620

You're a retard. How did you make it this far in life?

>>852807

He fell for the .300 blackout meme. Lol.

>>852807
Or just keep 5.56

Seriously why do people think it's not adequate to hunt deer?

>>852048
Savage axis over the Mossberg Patriot all day home boy.

>>852136
Ah yes, two discontinued rifles that sell for $400-$800 used in decent condition and up to $2k NIB. Excellent advice. You know they make a 77/44 right?

>>852620
Until you can set off a primer with telepathy, you have to use your finger to pull the trigger if you actually wanna shoot

>>853067
Ruger American is in the same category and is also an excellent rifle.

>>853067
Sorry home skillet, but the savage axis has more problems then the mossberg patriot, look it up and cry

>>853001
It's basically an untapered 7.62x39 or rimless .30-30. Nothing memey about it. Easier to find than 6.5 Grendel, and unlike 6.8 SPC, it'll fit in a standard AR-15 magazine.

>>853015
I never said it wasn't, just that it'd be legal to hunt deer with anywhere that you can do so with a rifle.

>>852030
Saiga AK or an AR chambered in 7.62x39. You're good to 300 yards. Do you really want to walk any further than that?

.30-30 is also a good round with a max of about 200yds. I have a marlin 336 chambered in it.

Long distance I'd go .270 or .308

>>852632
>>852632
>He just fired a shot you fucking retard.
And his finger isn't even touching the trigger. He pulled or jerked the trigger instead of squeezing it. If he'd squeezed his finger would be on the trigger, not noticeably removed from it.

>>853475
>AR chambered in 7.62x39
My nigga. I've got one and I love that thing, I don't shoot beyond 400 yards so range isn't an issue really, it'll kill anything in my area (Texas), it's cheap to feed, and it's fucking fun.

Get a lever gun in .44 mgnum, relative light recoil and plenty of knock down power to take pig And deer out to 100 yards

>>852030
If you want a lever action a .45-70 is the answer.

File: 1357946051974.gif (238KB, 335x358px) Image search: [Google]

238KB, 335x358px

>>853475
you misspelt SKS and VZ58, but I forgive you anon

7.62x39 is a great round, even better with VMax or Barnes TSX bullets

>>852030
Tikka T3X in 6.5mm

File: Model94-600-7.jpg (149KB, 600x719px) Image search: [Google]

149KB, 600x719px

>>852030
>what would be a good first hunting rifle for pigs and deer?
Hells yes.

>>852030
K31 or a Mosin

>>852686
This.

>>854127
just get it chambered in 300 Blackout, more room for shot placement error

>>854139
>more room for shot placement error
by less than a 10th of an inch lol, which is nothing.

>>852030
I use an AR-10 (7.62mm) with a suppressor for hogs

I use a Lee-Enfield (.303 British) for deer

Hello. You almost all retarded and I will tell you why.
>>852040
>>852038
>>852048
>>853344
>>853067
>inexperienced hunter, also hunting pigs, yeah get a cheapo high power bolt action rifle, the shoddy construction and cheap materials are great for accurate deer hunting, and the low rate of fire and harsh recoil will have you taking out so many pigs!
>or get an expensive high powered rifle for those very tough to take 200 yard shots
>>852136
>>852075
>>852072
>>853568
>only hunting rifle
>in a pistol cartridge
>>852524
>spend shitloads of money on a kewl gun
>>852686
>>852807
>>854139
>get an AR-15, an AR-fags answer to literally any fucking scenario
>make sure you get it in a different caliber too so you can spend more and be extra gay
>>854327
you tried

>>853609
>>853573
>>853475
>>852063
Gods among men here tho

1. 45-70, can load it light enough for lil tiny critters or hot and heavy enough to take a moose or bear. Great for deer and will demolish a hog. Marlin 1895G(cheap gun too) 18.5in will give you 6+1 which with good accuracy can make a good dent on a group of hogs.
2. AK-47, not the BEST hunting rifle for deers, but if you are massacring hogs its perfect which outweighs any deer hunting. Its accurate under 300 yards and x39 ballistics are amazing when it comes to killing. Perfectly fine for deer but just pure bloodlust slaughter on hogs
3. >>852063 This nigga knows. Dont spend a dickton on a rifle and at least pick up a cheap .22 if not a .357. Good to have a backup gun especially with hogs, light .38 is good for little critters. In my state there is no additional permit for a lot of small critters and they have year round season, so if I'm hunting with a large rifle or out fishing or something I can shoot them any time.

>>854943
>use an old overly expensive underperforming round for CUZ LOL UR WRONG ^^^^^^.^^^^^^ LOOL
This is you.

>>854944
>age of round matters
>can kill any north american game is unacceptable performance
>thinks its expensive because ignorant
>oh its not that expensive but i still cant afford it because my mommy only pays me in GBP
this is you

>>854947
>can kill any north american game is unacceptable performance
Said no one ever. I said it's overpriced and underperforming. A 308 can do the same thing, better, for cheaper. L2redprepper.

>>854954
.308 is a meme caliber

>>854958
Kay buddy, I get it, you're pretending you're acting retarded.

>>854958
>X is a meme
im so sick of this shit, .308 is a good solid round and makes all kinds of game dead while having a flatter trajectory then 7,62x39

>>854958
the word meme is a meme

File: images.jpg (17KB, 334x440px) Image search: [Google]

17KB, 334x440px

Get a Lithgow LA101 Crossover in 22lr, maaate.

>>852030
Get a Marlin 1895 in .45-70 and be done with it. This cartridge will give you the flexibility to kill ANY North American big game. Moose: dead Old Ephraim: dead. Whitetail: dead. Bison: dead. Hogs: dead. Black Bear: dead. Polar Bear: dead. Gator: Dead. Lever action gives you follow up shots for dangerous hogs.

>>855294
Or just get a .308 and do the same thing for cheaper.

>>852030
.30-06 or .308 hard to go wrong with either.

>>853561
Yeah I don't understand the whole "GOTTA BE ACCURATE TO GAZILLION YDS" mentality. I don't want to walk 500yds just to look for a blood trail. Hell, all my deer have been taken with 00 buck.

>>853609
I've never shot either of those so I can't recommend them. Thankfully folks like you exist who can.

>>854979
.308 is a wonderful round that outperforms 99.999% of people's shooting ability. OP asked for a FIRST rifle that can do hogs and deer. To me that means semi-auto, >10rd mags, and lost cost. It's much cheaper to find rifles in 7.62x39 that are semi-auto, and being his first rifle it's likely that OP won't be taking shots at more than 100yds.

>>852030
None, because respect nature, dumb ass.

>>855876
>Yeah I don't understand the whole "GOTTA BE ACCURATE TO GAZILLION YDS" mentality. I don't want to walk 500yds just to look for a blood trail. Hell, all my deer have been taken with 00 buck.


Where I live, sometimes the critters are going to be in open grasslands. Accurate to a Gazillion yards comes in handy if you don't like belly crawling a half mile just to sneak up on a pronghorn or elk.

On the flip side, sometimes you are in the woods here, and the furthest shot that you'll get is 150yds. I watched a guy with a 7mm mag ruin an entire front quarter of an elk because he shot it at 50yds. We cut what was left of the front part of the backstrap off and threw the rest of the quarter away. It was that bad.

Bigger ain't always better. Just know the conditions you are hunting in and plan accordingly. Oh, and blasting a deer sized target at 100 yds doesn't take a lot of skill. Blasting one at 900 yds does. If you're going to pull the long range stuff, you're going to want to burn out a barrel or two getting good at it first.

Why the fuck is no one suggesting .223? I've used it for 20 years hunting deer, wild hogs (javolinas in TX), elk and mule deer in NM, etc. I have never owned a larger calibre rifle. I have large calibre handguns for funsies, but the .223 takes down a deer on the spot if you have good aim and consider the environment. The elk ran about .5mi before it collapsed and was dead by the time we found it. Wild hogs just die on the spot, and they're easy to creep on. Keep the .45 on the side in case they charge before you get a good shot. Unload that 1911 or Ruger in their face before they're at 5 yards. Best thing you can do for your hunting is learn to be more accurate and read the variables that will displace accuracy.

>>855876
7.62 is better for people who can shoot and aren't doing loooooong distance shots, like >200m. Friends have all used aught sixes and .308 for hunting since I've known them, but I stick to my 7.62 and have never had a deer run more than 10m before giving up.

>>855876
While I agree that x39 is fine for deer, there's nothing wrong with .308. A first rifle that can hunt hogs and deer doesn't mean it has to be semiautomatic as well, while the rifle in question isn't .308 its not like there's some magically thing that demands semiautomatic capability.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7ob0fgc0I7A

Not that you can't have semiautomatics in .308 mind you. Sure cost can be an issue, but again, it's what it is to you, to me, a rifle is an investment.

File: 1457084848500.gif (2MB, 353x234px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 353x234px

>>855891
If you're looking for tumblr, you're in the wrong place

File: 20160123_162217.jpg (4MB, 2988x5312px) Image search: [Google]

4MB, 2988x5312px

I love how non hunters go all gear queer over rifle calibers. I've seen deer killed with everything from .223 to 7mm RUM. There is no perfect choice.

>>854943
>savage-axis has shoddy construction
It must be nice never having held an ENTRY LEVEL HUNTING RIFLLE
>.308 recoil is harsh
Lol
>You shouldn'get get an AR-15, get an AK for hunting pigs
7.62x39 ballistics are trash, unless you're shooting through heavy brush. Even the commies ditched .30 cal for a low caliber, high speed round. The "shoot to wound so three men leave the battlefield" thing is a meme. Also, an entry level AR is priced way better than the equivalent quality AK. Also AR-15's have a better parts market.
>get a cheap Marlin .45-70
And you complained about the Savage being cheap trash. OP wants actual advise, not your retarded opinions based off of nothing.

>>853344
I would agree.

>>853395
>>854943


I've owned both and work in a gun shop bud, Savage Axis are great because you can get one with a cheap scope for less than 300, it has a smooth action and if you don't spring for the Accutrigger you can easily modify the trigger to bring it down to 3 pounds from the stock 7-9 pounds. If later on this NEW hunter wants to upgrade he can sell it quickly and spring for something "nicer" or he can just buy a boyds laminate stock for about 75-90 depending if there is a sale and get a nicer scope and rings.

Bottom line OP is a NEW hunter and this is a great introductory rifle that shoots 1 MOA all fucking day. In fact, at this point any gun the OP buys will shoot better than the OP is able.

>>855939
Using .223 is illegal in most of North America to hunt deer with.

>>855970
>There is no perfect choice.

I.e. a good reason to buy another gun;)

>>855980
This. If you're going to get into shooting benchrest matches or heavy customization, the Savage probably isn't the rifle for you. However, if all you're going to do is hunt with it, the Savages are a great bang for the buck. I don't own one, as I'm partial to 700s for boltguns, but I have fired them and they are more than good enough to whack a deer at 200yds with. This isn't modern warfare that the OP is prepping for.

>Using .223 is illegal in most of North America to hunt deer with.

It's legal in my state, but really, if you are going to do it, it had better be in a region where the shots are going to be 200yds or closer, and you had better know what you're doing when it comes to bullet selection. For elk, the state does require .243 or larger, however.

>>856041
Jesus Christ .243 on elk lol the guides here will tell a client to go the fuck home if they use anything smaller than 30-06 to hunt moose.

>>856236
So long as you use something around 100gr and so long as it is bonded, a .243 will do just fine on an elk. Bullets in that weight range are going to have a sectional density around that of a 180gr in 30 cal, meaning that they will penetrate about the same as a similarly constructed 180gr 30 cal moving the same velocity. With the right load and bullet, you ought to still have the same energy as a 44 mag at the muzzle out to around 500 yards. So, if you'd blast it with a 44mag point blank, figure you're good with a .243 out to 400 or 500 yards if you stick with the heavier bullets. Assuming you can hit the sweet spot at that range, that is.

It's not ideal, but it will do the trick.

I'm personally a fan of the 6.5mm cartridges. They won't hit as hard as your non-magnum 30 cals up close, but if you stick with something like the 140 Bergers or 142 Noslers, they'll hit harder down range because those bullets cut through the air like a 210+ gr 30 cal bullet does, and the heavier bullets in 30 cal really don't come into their own until you're talking 300 Win Mag and bigger.

>>852030
3030 is perfect rifle.
Taken all of my deer with it.
Pencil sized entrance wound sharpie sized exit wound

>>852030
Just get an SKS and be done with it. It will kill anything you need dead, takes plentiful ammo, costs about tree fiddy, and has a nice wood stock.

Also, remember to affix bayonet in case a boar charges.

>>855970
>There is no perfect choice.
You'd be right if .308 wasn't a thing.

>>852030
5.56/.223 in an AR platform would be your ideal hog gun because the ammo is cheap and you can slam through a magazine much faster than any bolt action platform. However, this caliber is a bit light for deer. with decent shot placement, you can certainly take deer with a 223, but it's in that territory where you risk inhumane kills/lost deer.
30-30 is a decent deer gun if you live in a brush-heavy area and don't plan on taking a shot past 150 yards. could damage meat on a hog if you make a close-quarters shot
.243 is a decent all-around gun, you can get a 100-120 grain bullet for deer or a 55 grain bullet for hogs

File: 1470663258989.jpg (10KB, 250x250px) Image search: [Google]

10KB, 250x250px

>>854943

>he cant into .44 magnum

>>856280
But a beginner will be more successful with a rifle that has less recoil than most .308s

>>852030

CZ 550 in 6.5x55 Swede or 30-06. 6.5x55 is very versatile, plenty of different loads for long distance target shooting or intermediate/large game. CZ also makes a very sexy rifle. If you're on a budget, Savage Axis or something Ruger. If you like hunting with irons, K31 or any sort of Swiss rifle isn't a bad choice.

>>856471
Speculation.

While a full power cartridge CAN introduce bad habits, with proper instruction and honest self criticism, it isn't as big an issue as some would have you believe.

>>855294
this
>>855876
>.308 is a wonderful round that outperforms 99.999% of people's shooting ability. OP asked for a FIRST rifle that can do hogs and deer. To me that means semi-auto, >10rd mags, and lost cost. It's much cheaper to find rifles in 7.62x39 that are semi-auto, and being his first rifle it's likely that OP won't be taking shots at more than 100yds.
this
>>855943
all 3 of the rounds you mentioned are 7.62. 7.62x51(308), 7.62x63(.30-06), and I assume you are talking about 7.62x39(ak-47/sks/vz58)
>>855970
seriously, it almost doesnt matter, but OP want suggestions. its more about rifle features/quality and shootability
>>855973
7.62x39 ballistics are not trash, fuck you little baby rounds that go right through, instead of a fat .30 that tumbles and kills. AR-15s are meme trash. AR fags will suggest an AR-15 for literally any fucking situation you can possibly think up.
.308 recoil is a bit harsh for a new hunter, there are going to be needing a lot of target practice to get to know the rifle, the first shot they take aint gonna be at a deer. on top of that, firing multiple shots at pigs all day, OP is going to be flinching shots all over the place.
>>856294
ah look, another ar-15 fag reccomending it for any situation imaginable.
>30-30 will damage meat on a hog
who the fuck eats nasty hog meat

>>856499
>6.5x55
>plenty of different loads
Not in the USA. Better be a handloader.

File: 1452741840197.png (22KB, 362x352px) Image search: [Google]

22KB, 362x352px

>>855046

>>856756
>not handloading
Get a load of this scrublord. It's like you don't even want lower ammo costs and match-grade accuracy.

File: IMG_20160221_081208.jpg (941KB, 2048x1536px) Image search: [Google]

941KB, 2048x1536px

>>855980
> FMJs are illegal in most states
FTFY.

>>855960
>rifle that can hunt hogs and deer doesn't mean it has to be semiautomatic
Any hog rifle should be semi-auto.

File: pick_of_the_litter_800.jpg (173KB, 800x264px) Image search: [Google]

173KB, 800x264px

I want to get a proper hunting rifle but I'm just gonna use my M39 for this year and maybe the next.

If it's good enough to kill gommies it good enough for deer.

File: ishygddt.jpg (23KB, 600x600px) Image search: [Google]

23KB, 600x600px

>>852620
>pulling the trigger

ISHYGDDT

>>852631
Are those M14 variants? Is it realistic to hunt deer with these?

sorry not /k/

>>857560
>If it's good enough to kill gommies it good enough for deer.
isn't this a gommie gun used to kill non gommies?

>>856277
>bayonetting a charging boar

I would like to someday know this feel

>>852072
This. You can also get 2.5" .410 ga shotshells that make grouse/small game takable with the 45lc

>>852409
My fave. Still, the 3030 has taken more NA game than any other caliber. Most shots are under 100m and it works at that range.

I'm a fan of magnums tho, for larger elk/bear/moose, etc.

Nice thing about the '06 is that you can load from 80 to 220 grain bullets fr it, depending on what you're doing.

>>852461
.308 actually is a lot less potent than the '06. Both use the same diameter slug, but the '06 has a larger case, and hold more powder.

>>853015
I took my first deer with 22-250, same slug diameter as .223/5.56 Nato, but up to 4000fps.

Centerfire .22 are legal here for deer, but you should be trying to limit the range in order to keep impact to 700ftlbs on deer size game.

>>854066
I had a 6.5 Arisaka I could shoot .5" groups offhand with. Loved that gun. Never should have sold the it.

>>858118
> a lot less
> citation needed

If 10% is "a lot" to you?

>>858119
>.222-250
> 4000 fps
> citation needed

Maybe .220 Swift.

Doesn't antbody actually into external ballistics?

>>858151
no

>>858109
It was a Finnish gun used by the Finns to kill Russians.

>>858146
Sure. If my boss gave me a 10% bonus tomorrow, I'd celebrate because that would fall into the "a lot" category.

The .30-06's advantage over a .308 is significant in the 180+ grain bullets. You could load 200s or 220s in it and hunt grizz. I suspect most guides would not allow you to use a .308.
But for 100 yard shots on, say, whitetail deer or hogs? Both are so overkill that the difference effectively doesn't matter.

(I'm not >>858118 btw)

>>852030
30-30 is exactly what you want.

Ammo is cheap, the gun is light and easy to carry around, it doesn't kick too hard and ts plenty capable for the vast majority of ranges most game is shot at. As for putting a scope on it, I wouldn't. The tradeoff of a scope is that while an aimed shot can be quite accurate, target acquisition is slower.
For times where a quick follow-up shot is critical, a scope not only won't help you, it will cost you game.

>>852084
Yes, but inside of 150 yards you won't ever need to worry about it. Just point and shoot.
Unless you are regularly hunting in wide open areas like the Great Plains, you won't ever need more gun than that. After all, it's hard to shoot game at 300 yards when the trees and hills are blocking your view (and your bullets) of anything more than 50 yards away.
And for reference, the vast majority of game is shot at 80 yards or less.

>>854115
Wrong answer.
While the K31 is a great gun, it shoots a cartridge yhat is essentially a hard-to-get 308, and the guns are now about as expensive as a new production beginner tier hunting rifle.

The Mosin was popular for a long time because the guns (and especially the milsurp ammo) were dirt cheap. That time has passed. Now likewise they are just rifles that shoot hard-to-get ammo that's roughly comparable to 308. And for the money they command today, one could buy a used hunting rifle in a much more available caliber.

All that said, if you have ammo for them they're wonderful hunting rifles. I have an old, soft-kicking 6.5mm Italian Carcano that I love to take hunting. But would I recommend it for a beginner? Hell no! The ammo is a special snowflake and expensive, and there's a lot of shitty stuff around that isn't built to spec and won't feed right.
I'd much rather they get a first rifle that shoots ammo they can find at Walmart.

>>855980
>Using .223 is illegal in most of North America to hunt deer with.

Actually the list of states where it's legal outnumbers the outlawed ones, but you're right that it isn't allowed everywhere.

Here's a list of state and Canadian province caliber regs from a few years back. As the .223 gets older and more used, I'd expect the list of states that allow it is longer now.

https://thefiringline.com/forums/archive/index.php?t-524145.html

>>856280
...which is why beginners can't shoot it as well as a rifle in .223, right?
There is no perfect cartridge.
There can't be, because every aspect of ballistics has a different best case scenario.

>>856616
>who the fuck eats nasty hog meat
You mean "pork"?
You'd be surprised.
I hear there are even grocery stores and restaurants that sell the stuff. Do a pretty good business with it too.

>>858939
A few years? That list is from 2008 and doesn't list sources

>>859011
kek

some people just don't like bacon i guess?

>>859078
I actually am not a big fan of bacon, that Canadian bacon is pretty dope though.

>>859047
>all that damage control
It's a list, and I'd be willing to bet money there hasn't been a huge wave of anti-223 sentiment in the hunting world in the intervening years, especially not with the WWII-vet "fuddy-ought-six" partisans now dying out and the .223 partisan Vietnam vets in the prime of their hunting years.
Also, where's YOUR evidence to prove YOUR claim that it's illegal in most states? I haven't seen any data from you.
It's your turn. Put up or shut up.

Any mauser style bolt action in 30-06 would be more than enough and be flexible enough for other game.
As far as recoil goes that personal, I was shooting a 30-06 and 12g shotgun with 3" solid slugs at age 14 and never gave a fuck, some people are sensitive and it has nothing to do with body size or toughness. These days I shoot a 300WM for Sambar deer, I can shoot deer out to 300yds without worrying about adjusting for drop. Im no sharp shooter but wont hesitate firing on a deer out to 500yds.

>>858242
Correction, it was a Russian gun (Maybe even a Tzarist gun!) that was dropped by a dead Russian who was killed by a Finn, who then rebuilt the shitty Russian gun into a fine Finnish gun, and then proceeded to kill even more Russians and even some Germans with it.

Fucking Finns like to remove people.

Also, I want to take my M39 out for my first deer hunting trip. Something about wandering through snowy woods with it just seems right.

>>859426
I was simplifying it but yeah.


Those Finns were real good at killing commies.

>>859436
They're also really good at killing their livers.

It feels kinda unpleasant to spend $60 on 80 rounds of 7.62x54r, but I have to figure out which SP groups the best in my rifle.

Going to get one box each of 150 grain PPU, and 203 grain Wolf, Brown Bear, and Silver Bear ammo.

I need to get a sling for it too,.

>>859418
That's all true, but it depends on the terrain too.
If you're out on the open grasslands or desert a 300 yard shot may be the closest you can get.
Back where I am, the forests are thick and underbrush is everywhere. It's a rare shot that's over 100 yards away, because you can't see farther than that. Here a 30-06 is overkill, to say nothing of your magnum, and what you REALLY want is a compact gun that doesn't get hung up on the millions of little twigs and branches you have to trudge through and is quick to the shoulder. That's why 30-30s sell so well around here. They're ideally suited for the local conditions-small, not bulky, easy to carry-and the cartridge does everything you need it to without beating you up.

>>859452
Yep you are 100% correct about the terrain, no point getting a flat shooting magnum if you are in the scrub, I have a Sako Finlight which is a joy to walk with but you gotta pay for it, my go to scrub gun is a cheap russian 30-06 double rifle with red dot scope.

>>856963
Said no one credible ever.

>>859006
>which is why beginners can't shoot it as well as a rifle in .223, right?
Speculation, disregarded.

I agree that there's no magic bullet mind you.

>>859485
If it's speculation, it's a speculation that's been shared by the US Military for close to 60 years now in their findings.
Recoil is a thing, and it affects how well people shoot. Not saying people can't learn how to take recoil better-they certainly can-but when they're starting from zero, not having to worry about a rifle pounding their shoulder into mush is one less thing to worry about.

File: IMG_0149.jpg (4MB, 4032x3024px) Image search: [Google]

4MB, 4032x3024px

I use an economy model savage 99 in .308 as my brush gun. 308 is pretty universal for hunting deer/bear/moose in this part of ontario

>>858118
.308 is only 50fps-100fps slower than the 30-06 for bullets that weigh less than 180gr-190gr. The 30-06 only really starts to shine when you get to 190+gr bullets. After 200gr, there is no comparison.

http://load-data.nosler.com/load-data/308-winchester/
http://load-data.nosler.com/load-data/308-winchester/

>>859549
> economy model
You gpt a rope belt to go with that, Jethro?

Crosman Marauder Air Rifle

File: pepemon.jpg (50KB, 600x600px) Image search: [Google]

50KB, 600x600px

>>859086
Heresy!

>>859460
There is a point in not getting a flat shooting magnum is you are going to be shooting in the scrub. You'll ruin an entire quarter of a fucking elk at 50 yards with a magnum. I live where the critters might be in the scrub and they might be in the plains, so I like to have either a .308/30-06 with ~150gr bullets, which will still wreck the hell out of an elk up close, or two different rifles.

>>859566
A .257 Weatherby Magnum is the perfect deer and elk cartridge.

Deny it.
>Protip: you can't.

>>859573
I'm having trouble finding .260 Rem brass. $200 for 200 pieces of Lapua brass is what I could find. I"m just going to order 500 Rem .308 brass, neck them down and turn the necks. Your shit is going to fucking rare. Besides, looking at the BCs of the bullets, a 6.5mm would be better. It won't wreck it up close like a magnum, and the bullets cut through the air well enough to still carry some punch way the fuck out there.

File: IMG_20160918_085025.jpg (1MB, 2048x1536px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 2048x1536px

>>859577
Don't cry to me! As if necking down .25-20 is harder than finding it?

File: IMG_20160918_085231.jpg (1004KB, 2048x1536px) Image search: [Google]

1004KB, 2048x1536px

>>859583
Damn it!

>>859547
>If it's speculation, it's a speculation that's been shared by the US Military for close to 60 years now in their findings.
Are you speaking on some kind of findings I'm not aware of, or are you speaking about the switched from full power to intermediate cartridges?

If the former, please share the information with me, if the latter, you're taking it far out of context. The only reason that had to do with recoil, was recoil on full auto, which sure from a physics standpoint it's easier to control full auto 5.56 than .308, however you are hopefully not hunting as if you're trying to suppress an enemy position. It had nothing to do with semiautomatic fire.

Objectively, is it one extra thing to worry about? Sure, but it's not a magical issue that overrides the fundamentals, as long as the fundamentals are good, your shot will be good. The only time firing a full power cartridge starting would be bad, is if you were scared of the rifle, lacked the ability to self correct, and had no proper teacher in the matter.

That's why it's speculation, it has no basis in fact, everyone takes things differently.

>>859628
> not him

All true.

But the Arizona State Marksmanship Team Juniors all have the discipline, basics and proper form (better than I) and to a young nam and woman they all shoot the mouse guns.

And are REALLY fucking sharp with them! Doesn't mean they can't shoot either the M-1 or M-1A, but they win with the ARs.

>NRA Service Rifle separates the posers.

I haven't hunted deer yet but I traded my Marlin 30-30 for a Remington 7600 in 30-06 for pigs and it's just a better all-round rifle and round. We can't use semi's over here in Australia. Really good when chasing a mob of pigs on a quad bike, I use 180 grains but they are over kill.

>>859547
The only reason the US switched from 7.62x51 to 5.56x45 is because it's, and the gun that fires it, is lighter, which means you can carry more ammo.

Infantry don't really do the killing, anyways, at least not in US Doctrine. They're just there to move, take and hold positions.
Most of their shooting is supressive, in which case the more ammo the better.

Fire Support's the one that does the killing, that being Planes, Helos, Artillery, and Mortars.

>>859560
>look at me, sitting here in my tree stand over a huge pile of corn, a guide sitting next to me, and a $4k rifle/scope combo
>I don't even want the meat, the guide guaranteed me a 15 point buck or my money back

>>859566
Not sure about that, Ive nailed and seen a few deer shot at less than 100 yards with a variety of magnums (300wm, 300wsm, 300wby) and never saw anything like what your describing.
Im of the oppinion that you should shoot what you are comfortable with, for me squeezing off a few rounds in a big magun is no big deal and despite what you are saying I dont think you cant kill a deer too much.

>>859774
> $4k rifle/scope combo
>expesnive
Pick one cletus

>>859560
Bullets come out of it all the same, buddy. Since a 70s E model is not at all collectable I don't feel bad about dings and scratches taking it in the bush

File: IMG_20160918_141944-1.jpg (266KB, 961x1993px) Image search: [Google]

266KB, 961x1993px

>>859774
No need to be a stuck up snotnose cunt, Jethro. Go to a gun store and look through the used sling bin.

.>>859802
I know, I've got one. But, I went the extra mile and put a period Weaver K4W "TV veiw" 'scope on it and put up an extra big $8 for a correct period leather carry strap. I like things proper.

Pic related.

>10/10 for making me dig it out of "The Pile" for a pic

Another great caliber I haven't heard mentioned, in a 25-06.

It's very versatile. You can get a 75gr bullet and hunt coyotes, Prarie dogs and woodchucks, or get a 120gr and be able to take game as large as Elk.

For hogs, deer, and that size game, it's ideal. Personally I wouldn't use it for Elk, but it can be done.

>>859794
>3k rifle
>1k scope
Yeah, that's pretty expensive for a rifle you're going to be using under 20 yards, richboy.

>>859836
.22-250 does the exact same thing in a more available cartridge.

>>859887
There is NO WAY a .22;250 is remotemy as versital as a .25-06.

> ballistics motherfucker, do you speak it?

>>859886
Dont be a hater and go and shoot your "tactical" remington

>>859886
> this division is suffering from proportional disparity

I am more prone to a 1:1$ rifle:scope MINIMUM.

A ratio of 1:2$ rifle:scope cost EASY.

Ex:$400 rifle = $400 scope min.
Better ex: $800 rifle = $1000+ scope EASY.

Get into my current world and you're considering a $1200 rifle with a $280,0 34mm tube.

You can see why I favor the irons, it's cheaper. But it's all about sight picture.

> know your target and what lies beyond

File: IMG_20160229_172337.jpg (2MB, 2048x1536px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 2048x1536px

>>859955
> more
I mean if you've got a Rem 597 @$125 ('98 USD) fuck it, put a $40USD Simmons 22MAG on it and don't look back.
Note, I hate that rifle.

Bhut, a nice Rem 541S would deserve a decent Nikon Prostaff or Leupold MkIII.

TBQH, I've got a custom 10/22 that wears an $850 Trijicone TR23 and I love it!

Really, spend the price of the rifle (or more) on your scope you cheap bastards!

>Something like pic related

>>858122
never sell a gun
>>858114
retarded meme cannon, 45lc and .410 are both a shit
>>859011
are you retarded? invasive boar is literally inedible trash meat. it is not the same as the shit in the store.
>>859770
wholly incorrect. a lot of the world is moving towards smaller/faster rounds for ballistics. it has nothing to do with weight or amount of ammo because its not that big of a difference. US military still uses and carries around the fuck out of 7.62x51 you dip.

>>852030
So OP after reading all the retarded shit in this thread what gun are you gonna get?

>>856616
>ar-15 fag
nigger, i only buy bolt action rifles. I don't have the time or ambition to tinker with a build-a-gun platform, but I can recognize that some people like guns in this style because of the function or ability to mod. check your autism
>nasty hog meat
invasive species or not, you have to make an attempt to utilize the carcass. if you don't want to eat it, don't fucking hunt it

>>858114
taurus judge/s&w govenor pls leave

>>859992
you have lost your god damn mind if you think people are eating these fucking hogs or that they are in any way obligated to eat them

nobody eats them, they are disgusting, people often kill like 5 to 50 on an outing, nobody is gonna eat 600 pounds of shit tier hog. coyotes dont even eat that shit, its fuckin fertilizer. it tastes like shit and is full of parasites and disease. they are dirty disgusting destructive animals. i will murder them indescriminately with no dignity and shit on their corpse. wild boar = feral pig.

>>860003
wild boar =/= feral pig i meant

wild boar tastes like cheap shitty steak. feral pig tastes like putrid anal juice. i would rather eat a crow. my 4 year old son blew up 17 baby pigs with tannerite then i lit them on fire. i regularly hunt feral pigs with a baseball bat.

>>859955
Yep this.
$2000 sako
$2000 Kahles
Wont have to buy another big game gun ever again
Its the cheap cunts that keep bouncing between guns/calibres/scopes
I have 4 guns in my safe and have no need for any more

>>860003
>>860007
you seem really asshurt about it, i sincerely doubt you're pleasant to be around

>>859642
I'm not arguing that they're softer on followup shots, again, physically they are, they simply have less recoil.

I'm saying a full power cartridge does not inherently instill bad habits because the shooter will inherently be flinching more.

>>859978
>it has nothing to do with weight or amount of ammo because its not that big of a difference.
The ammo literally weighs less than half the weight of 7.62x51. Yes, weight was most certainly a factor in decision, or rather, the ability to carry more ammunition in general.

>>860017
jokes on you, i was only pretending to be retarded

>>859790
I watched an entire quarter of an elk ruined from a ~50 yard shot with a 7mm Mag. The entire shoulder was bloodshot and the rib meat looked like blood soaked straw. I shot mine with an '06 at a similar range probably 45 minutes later and ruined probably 20lbs of meat, and that bullet fragmented. Another one was shot with a 300 win mag when the first one was shot at a little further, and it didn't ruin too much, so close doesn't always mean carnage, but it sure as hell can. It could be as simple as hitting a couple of inches over and hitting some bone vs not that causes it to go one way or another. I helped skin and quarter all three, BTW, so I got to see the comparison up close.

All three folded instantly though.

File: 1466397201090.gif (3MB, 426x426px) Image search: [Google]

3MB, 426x426px

>>860047

>>860048
Fair enough man, cant argue with that.
For me a few kgs of wastage is no big deal when im targeting 200-300kg animals up to 2hrs hike from camp.
I also like what you described as folding instantly, nothing worse than losing a wounded animal or seeing one run down a gulley towards the thick thorny stuff.

>>860058
I'm probably just going to go to a 260 Rem. Check out the G7 BC (Appropriate for boattails) on the 142s here:

http://www.nosler.com/accubond-long-range-bullet/

I live at 5,000 ft (~1500m) altitude, and out of a .260, those puppies will still have about 1,000 ft-lbs energy (medium loads for a 44mag have about that at the muzzle) at 1000 yards at my altitude. Not as much close range carnage, and it'll still hit hard way out there, plus very manageable recoil. Those are bonded bullets too, so if penetration is an issue, they'll do the trick.

>>860071
.260, .270 and .280/AI are all top-tier western game calibers if you hand load, especially the .280 AI. 7mm bullets range from tiny little things that would probably be barely adequate for antelope to 180gr+ bonded torpedoes that can reliably drop moose at several hundred yards and the versatility of the AI case gives you a lot to work with.

>>852030
Pigs and deer is in the 30-30's wheelhouse all day long, especially if you're in the woods.

Who the fuck uses a gun to hunt pigs? You jump on their back and knife the fucker just behind it's front leg. Even a fucking child can do it.

>>856280
Doesn't fly as true as other fudd calibers like 30-06, 270 or 7mm rem mag. 308's can also ruin alot of good meat.

>>860551
> proving children can post on a >18 board

>>860610
Have you ever been to a NRA Service Rifle competion? .308 flies truely enough to 600 yrds. With iron sights.

>>859971
I don't see the point when I can hit any deer at 80 yards with irons. I can cluster 5 with my .308 within 5 inches

>>860650
> I don't see the point of marksmanship
> 80 yrd 5 shot , 5 inch group

It goes without saying.

>>860661
>gear=marksmanship ability
Nope
The average deer is shot at 72 yards. And the size of a deer's vital area is 9 inches in diameter. So it's not nearly as demanding as any sort of marksmanship competition.
I get that it's nice to have shiny things, and scopes are nice because you don't have to line them up like irons, but for most hunting situations you don't need them at all. It's just more weight on your rifle-and more money out of your pocket-for minimal benefit.
In fact, scopes actually hinder you at close ranges.
The tradeoff of a high power scope is a tiny field of view, so now you're searching with your rifle for the deer that's right in front of you. That takes time which you may not have.

>>860801
> scopes
> NRA Service Rifle

Son...

>>860803
>thread is about rifles for hunting
Son...

>>860808
> 80 shots for the record on Regional Match Course is for practice

Try this every weelend and get back to me about you awesome 5" 80yrd groups.

Son...

>>852030
243, 270. Anything over is overkill but if all you have is 30 caliber rifles then thats fine too.

>>852461
>not using .270 to shoot coyotes in the face at 100 yards

>>860810
I'm the fag shitposting about .270 below you but fuck you and your fudd muh overkill you faggot

>>860809
>I can't into reading comprehension

Nobody said they're "awesome", just that that is all that's required.
You'd know this if you'd have been following along with the discussion.

>B-but I-I'm a certified range queen!
We know you are princess.

>>860810
Hell, even 270 is much more than enough for deer. Deer are fucking easy to kill.
its just not so grossly obvious that anyone will make a huge issue about it.

You want to talk about overkill? My first time hunting in 20 years I saw a guy bringing back a small must've been 80lb doe that had half of its side missing. He'd hit it broadside with a 45-70 at 40 yards.

File: Screenshot_2016-07-19-04-34-49-1.png (108KB, 274x363px) Image search: [Google]

108KB, 274x363px

>>860889
> death from above

Back to your treestand Tarzan.

>>852420
You're honestly fine with 30-06 for Elk. For Moose 375 H&H is appropriate/

>>854943
touch of the 'tism?

>>860895
I killed my last buck on a stalk, but thanks for projecting.
I'm sure it made you very superior to us dumbass redneck plebs who didn't get the memo that hunting now consists of shooting stationary paper targets placed out in the open.

>>860951
I'm sure the buck are fearless after your max point blank range, 80yrds.

File: image.jpg (90KB, 720x608px) Image search: [Google]

90KB, 720x608px

>>860978
>can't even range estimate like me
>Probably never got a 10x in his life
>out of the way hunters
>can't even afford a proper service rifle to compete
>I'm gonna punch the hell out of that paper for u
>don't even know about punching paper

>>861002
> says .308 is inherently inaccurate

>>861056
Not him you're arguing with, but
>860610
>Doesn't fly as true as other fudd calibers like 30-06, 270 or 7mm rem mag.
...Is not entirely wrong.
It's a function of the 308's slightly slower velocity, which equals more flight time to the target, and of course more wind drift given the same bullet as a higher velocity caliber, most obviously the 30-06. That said, to think this isn't predictable and can't be accounted for is foolish.
Also, the shorter receiver length required for 308 vs the '06 means there's less receiver flex under recoil, which makes guns that fire the 308 more inherently accurate at distances out beyond 500 meters, and that extra stiffness more than makes up for the extra inch or two of wind drift.

>>861093
> more
> less

Thanks for clearing that up.

Oh, quantify that for me in moa? Tia.

>>860917
I know you didn't just imply that .30-06 isn't appropriate for moose.

>>861136
> its not
But .303 Brit is, because God Save the Queens!

And 'Oh, Canada' and moose are queer and stuff.

>>861103
Receiver stiffness differences between 308 and 30-06 are good for about a 0.2moa difference in the 308's favor. So not really much to care about inside of 500 meters, but out beyond that it gets noticeable.

>>860917
>>861136
This, 30-06 is just fine for something Moose sized. In Australia .308 was used more than any other calibre to take Asiatic water Buffalo which are very much a Moose sized animal and .223 is the calibre normally used by Camel cullers who generally prefer headshots.

>>861257
Just because you can doesn't mean you should.
I'm sick of little bitches complaining about "muh overkill" calibres, when you are hunting a BIG ANIMAL you should use a BIG CALIBRE, fuck even the littles re-coil shy bitch can squeeze of a couple rounds from a big magum, these guns are not generally designed to be shot all day, if you want a plinker get a .22.

>>861266
>when you are hunting a BIG ANIMAL you should use a BIG CALIBRE
Why?
>Just because you can doesn't mean you should.
As can be said generally of life and some would say it of eating meat, let alone hunting an animal - who draws the line and where?

>>856616
who refers to anything other than 7.62x39 as "7.62?" wtf mate do you even international traffic of arms and large munitions?

>>861289
Yeh I love seeing a wounded animal run a couple hundred yards down a Gully into thorns to die slowly .
When i hit a deer i want it to go down within a few yards.

>>861306
So put your shot in the right place, an animal mishit with a .375h&h is still an animal mishit and a hooved animal shot in the boiler room with a .308/30-06 is still a dead animal, outside of maybe a few examples from Africa.

> too much gun

It's a thing.

Me? I want a .338-06. That might just be awesome for Roosevelt Elk!

For Merriam Turkey -.17HMR

For white tail - .243 Win, .260 Rem, 6.5 PPC

>>861346
No shit you put a shot in the right place, but a moose hit in the shoulder with an '06 can still run a few yards, you will always have a better chance of a quick and ethical kill if you bring more footpounds with ya

>>852030
mosin nagant from pre ww2 get gun i love it 7.62x54r is big enough for any north american game

File: image.jpg (83KB, 983x651px) Image search: [Google]

83KB, 983x651px

>>861523
Maybe, maybe not.
Terminal ballistics are complicated.
It depends on how much the bullet deforms upon impact, among other things. And if you push a bullet faster that it was designed to perform at, it will splatter, deform, and won't penetrate well at all.
If you want maximum penetration from your projectile, you should try to ensure that your impact velocity is just above what is required to make the bullet deform.
There's a whole lot of bullshit and fuddlore out there about "what REALLY knocks 'em dead", but this site does the best job I've seen at trying to explain what really goes on at the point of impact, as written by a professional ballistician. Here's the relevant section on deforming bullets, but the whole site is a great read if you're really interested.

http://www.rathcoombe.net/sci-tech/ballistics/methods.html#deform

>>861306
I've shot a white tail deer in the fucking head with a 30-06 and it still ran for 60 yards. Shut the fuck up.

>>861581
Oooohhh tough guy

>>861581
That's because the chin is not a vital area

>>861523
What >>861576 this guy said, it's not all about energy, it's all about combining the right projectile with the right impact velocity and push come to shove it doesn't matter what you hit an animal with, some will fold and others will get up and haul ass. There's a video on youtube of a Whitetail or Muley, can't remember atm which gets hit with a .50bmg from under 100yd, when I first watched it I thought he missed initially, it ran 50 yards or so then dropped like a stone, had an orange sized hole on the backside of it's ribcage.

>>861576
>>861681
Also, check this site out, excellent info on how various pills perform, useful ranges for particular pills in particular cartridges etc etc
>http://www.ballisticstudies.com/

>>861596
And I suppose the deer that ran 50 yards and collapsed in a creek without a heart is in the "not vital" category too? Buddy hit the heart with a slug and that's what happened.

File: 20160921_202928.jpg (2MB, 3264x1836px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 3264x1836px

Finally got a scope on my marlin. Might actually do some rifle hunting this season.

>>861266
>big animal = big caliber
thanks to modern ballistics, this isn't really true anymore. shot placement is key, and a smaller caliber will still drop a large animal humanely.
Note, I am not advocating trying to hunt dangerous game or big game with a .22lr, but you can leave your compensation caliber at home

>>861764
>compensation calibre
Yeh nah bro, I will happily bring my flat shooting magnum with me knowing I will be able to humanely despatch game at twice the distance you can

>>861789
So you seem to have some understanding of the purpose of oversquare magnums.

>>852030
Ruger American is gtg

>>861759
Relax dude, it was a joke.

Anyway, you see that shit when hunting.

In the ballistics site I linked to, the author recounted a story from buffalo cullers, where about 1 in every 8 bison shot through the heart would just drop like a stone while the rest would just bleed out and die in a more normal timeframe.
What's more, the ones that dropped like a stone had tremendous tissue damage all throughout their circulatory system. They finally surmised that those bullets impacted at the exact moment when that particular animal's heart was at full compression, and the resulting gigantic pressure spike throughout their whole circulatory system overwhelmed every system instantaneously.
So it's not always about your own skill, where you aim or the effectiveness of the bullet. Sometimes it's just good old luck-or the lack thereof.

>>861789
>twice the distance you can
Seriously, who the hell wants to walk hundreds of yards? Unless you're in the midwest I simply do not understand this desire to walk more than a hundred yards just to find a blood trail. Yet another reason I love bow season.

>>860801
>The tradeoff of a high power scope is a tiny field of view, so now you're searching with your rifle for the deer that's right in front of you.

This. If I'm hunting with a 3x9, it will be kept on 3 power most of the time. Just looking at the Viper HS-T, on 16 power, it is going to have a 7.4 foot field of view at 100 yards, compared to 27.4 feet on 4 power.

>>861789
long distance shots rarely end humanely, you should work on your stalking/calling skills more. your long distance shot is impressive at the range, but giving a wounded animal 20 minutes to flee is just sloppy

>>860801
>It's just more weight on your rifle-and more money out of your pocket-for minimal benefit.
In fact, scopes actually hinder you at close ranges.

My 2-7 weighs 200gm, if you can notice 200gm on a rifle you're a better man than me. As far as them hindering you, bullshit - if the FOV is a concern to you and it shouldn't be because you've clearly shouldered a rifle after seeing game and deciding you want to take it, then you learn to shoot both eyes open, which isn't a hard skill to practice.

Irons are fun and excellent for honing your skill but there will always be an optical solution which is superior in every shooting application you choose to name, the caveat being it's hard to damage irons and they never fail but it's not hard to have a rifle with both just in case.

>>862141
IMO, you should master iron sights. Why? Because when your adrenaline is pumping, having mastered irons means that you've mastered the other aspects of shooting, plus extras over optics/holo sights. If you can kinda sorta hit the target under pressure with irons, you are going to fuck shit up with optics.

Keep in mind, the most deadly (i.e. most kills in history) sniper preferred iron sights.

>>862167
And during what time period and what stage in scope development did he make these kills?
Stfu
>>>>relevance

>>862170
WTF are you talking about? I'm telling him that if he doesn't have these skills, he should develop them NOW. It is 100% possible to get a rifle with iron sights and to start mastering it today. Then every Vortex or Nightforce is at his beck and call. Fucking moron.

Test

>>862137
>Internet expert

>>862167
I agree with you, I was simply arguing that optics are not a hindrance but a help, unless of course a person chooses the wrong sights for the job he's trying to do. It irritates me that more and more new rifles come without sights, such a cheap thing to do in the manufacturing process but having said that, personally I wouldn't choose irons as a primary sight on anything bolt action.

>>862167
I just know that you have never actually used a firearm before

>>862167
>Why? Because when your adrenaline is pumping, having mastered irons means that you've mastered the other aspects of shooting
Yeah because you can't master the fundamentals with anything besides irons.

>If you can kinda sorta hit the target under pressure with irons, you are going to fuck shit up with optics.
There's a legitimate reason most modern militaries are standardizing optics, the red dot was designed to speed up target acquisition during stressful, fast engagements. It would do nothing but help you.

>Keep in mind, the most deadly (i.e. most kills in history) sniper preferred iron sights
I'm sure this is a fallacy somewhere. The ranges the kills were made were short, the conditions the shooter was in favored short range kills as well, and could cause scope fog, and he was fighting very poorly trained and equipped conscripts.

Also, his kills were likely blown out of proportion, most were confirmed only by him, not that he wasn't a talented sniper, he did earn the nickname from his enemy and garner kill squads against him, but it was common practice those days for propaganda and personal fame to pad your counts.

File: IMG_20160313_180117.jpg (3MB, 2048x1536px) Image search: [Google]

3MB, 2048x1536px

>>862167
> irons
> Carlos Hathcock
> Chris Kyle

No.

>>862254
To be fair chris kyle exaggerated many stories and was an overall fuck.

>>862254
>Who is Simo Hayha

>>862257
> what are confirmed kills

>>862278
> what are unconfirmed kills

>>862246
I just know that I probably have more than you, on account that I don't actually know how many I have between the two full gun safes and the the firearms squirreled around the house.

File: IMG_20160923_103719.jpg (340KB, 1440x1886px) Image search: [Google]

340KB, 1440x1886px

>>862308
If you're implying that Hayha's kills are unconfirmed, maybe you should do at least a tiny bit of research.

http://controversialtimes.com/military/10-deadliest-snipers-in-history-1-is-absolutely-crazy/
>Nicknamed the “White Death” for his totally white camouflage and eerie white mask he wore in combat, the Finnish marksman amassed at least 505 confirmed sniper kills during the Winter War between Finland and the Soviet Union. He recorded an additional 200 kills

Please find me a source that describes his kills as unconfirmed.

>>862326
Please find me a source that describes his kills as confirmed.

>>862141
Optics don't do anything if you don't have breathing, bone support, trigger discipline, sight picture, and follow through mastered.
Scopes are only a breeze once you are good on iron sights. I can hit human size targets at 500 yds with iron sights only because I can get good bone support, shoot during the respiratory pause, and slowly squeeze the trigger while having proper sight picture. When I have a scope it's a complete piece of cake.

Hell, I've killed deer at 50 yds with 9 pellet buckshot and no rear sight. I trust my pattern to 70, but that's it and even then I'd be hesitant to take the shot.

>>861596
In the brain pan actually.

>>862368
>having any difficulty shooting targets at 500
Legit sniper here, majority of my military shooting was done on the CompM4. When I went on to the M110, I got decent within a couple days, having no real experience with irons.

AKA, you're full of shit.

>>862368
>Optics don't do anything if you don't have breathing, bone support, trigger discipline, sight picture, and follow through mastered.
No sights do, there is no inherent advantage to iron sights other than durability and simplicity.
>Scopes are only a breeze once you are good on iron sights
Scopes are a breeze once you get decent at shooting, doesn't matter what sight type you're using.

File: image.jpg (2MB, 2592x1936px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 2592x1936px

243

>>862345
You could check the link, dipshit.

>>862376
>there is no inherent advantage to iron sights other than durability and simplicity.
...and they don't get fucked up by the weather, and they're faster to acquire the target.
There may be other advantages too, I just can't think of them right now.
Needless to say, there are still more than enough reasons to recommend that a shooter be at least familiar with iron sights.

>>862392
>...and they don't get fucked up by the weather
Covered that in durability and simplicity, although a half decent scope isn't bothered by weather.
>and they're faster to acquire the target
Bullshit
>Needless to say, there are still more than enough reasons to recommend that a shooter be at least familiar with iron sights.
Did I imply otherwise?

>>862387
Or you know, you could tell me where they're confirmed, seeing as the link says nothing of the sort besides "ITS CONFIRMED"

Again, it's Simo's account, furthermore it wasn't out of the ordinary for everyone in the period to blow up counts for propaganda reasons.

>>862345
I just gave you two sources that say they're confirmed kills. Your turn.

>>862431
>they say nothing legitimate about confirmed kills
Still waiting, some random person saying its confirmed doesn't mean it's confirmed any more than some bum on the street screaming about 9/11 being an inside job.

>>862370
>brain on a deer
>a vital organ
Pick one.

Well this thread's gone to complete shit.
Sorry OP. A few of us tried.

File: image.jpg (2MB, 2448x3264px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 2448x3264px

>>859443
Same. I'm gonna buy a few boxes of x54r soft points and see what groups the best.

File: IMG_20151202_190701.jpg (1MB, 2048x1536px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 2048x1536px

>>862659
> a few boxes
Confirmed fag.

>>862693
>buying multiple boxes of hunting loads when I'm testing ammo

Lrn2read

File: 20160923_130616.jpg (2MB, 2059x1034px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 2059x1034px

I use my Rossi ranch hand in 45 colt. Its my bush gun because it is so compact. Have a full size stock on it so I can aim properly. Perfect for 150m and under. Used for deer and coyotes

>>854958
I hope a bear rapes you

>>853067
>Anything besides a Browning, Springfield, Winchester, or Weatherby for a rifle
>Shame

>>863134
You're a moron!!

>>863269
>hating on Savage rifles

That's like hating America you unculured swine. The accutrigger is pure sex.

I kill rabbits on from my back porch with a red Ryder bb gun

>>852030
ruger mini. werks erry tiem.

>>862625
Are you fucking retarded? Survey says yes.

>>862371
>getting "difficulty hitting targets at 500 yds" out of that post
>do you even reading comprehension

I never said I had difficulty. I stated the reasons why I can hit a target that's the same size as my front sight post at that distance. I did my shooting with an M16A2 with iron sights and then moved to the M16A4 with an RCO once I got to the fleet.

>>864078
So you were nothing interesting then, and you're old as well. That's why you hate on optics?

>>863379
No, but I was joking.
People do that sometimes, especially when the mood gets tense.
And speaking of which, you need to lighten up a little bit.

Seriously though, deer are fucking dumb. They may have it all over us in the senses department, but as far as intellect and adaptability goes there is no mistaking them for any sort of predator.

File: 177 e2.jpg (12KB, 721x230px) Image search: [Google]

12KB, 721x230px

>>852030
.300 Memeout AR

>>864086
I wasn't hating on optics. I love scopes. I was making the point that someone can't just pick up a rifle with a scope on it and expect to shoot well. Perhaps I could have gone about it, but if you can shoot on iron sights accurately you can pick up a scoped rifle and perform just as well or better.

>old
M16A2s were phased out of boot camp less than 8 years ago. Apparently you're a baby.

>>864834
>M16A2s were phased out of boot camp less than 8 years ago. Apparently you're a baby.
Well I went 8 years ago and we used M4s with CompM4s sooo.

>boot camp
Oh, marines? Right. Forgot they hung onto hand me downs.

Your logic is flawed though, someone with no rifle experience isn't going to be able to shoot it well, regardless of the optic, unless they're some kind of prodigy.

And yes, people can absolutely learn the fundamentals on a scoped rifle, you don't HAVE to start on irons, it's just seen as ideal because it's not only cheaper, but it's just a natural progression.

I'm not saying don't learn to shoot with irons, I'm saying how our brains acquire skills doesn't depend on irons or glass.

>>865058
Summed it up exactly

>>855904
>blasting (a deer) from 900 yards...

>>855904
>Blasting one at 900 yards

>>855904
>Blasting one at 900 yds does.
I am not a hunter but isn't 900 yds deemed unethical, i.e. You're not likely to hit it unless you're SuperSniper® Chris Kyle? I thought hunters were supposed to kill their prey w/finality (one shot, Max two) to prevent Bambi's suffering.

File: image.jpg (287KB, 812x883px) Image search: [Google]

287KB, 812x883px

>>858109
Get a load of this fuggboi

>>860003
>>860007
t. Kebab

>>864646
> owning a .300 Blackout without a stamp

That's the meme.

>>859955
>>860016
Sometimes common sense is as hard to except as common truth.

Not for these anons.

>>865924
>I am not a hunter but isn't 900 yds deemed unethical?
It all depends on the hunter, their equipment and their skill level.
Some people dedicate considerable time and practice to shooting at super long ranges. For those people a shot at 600 meters or even longer isn't that big of a challenge, skill-wise.
Then there's everyone else. For the rest of us, even 200 yards away is a chancy thing and you should try to close the range. Either because of the rifle, the other equipment, the terrain, our skills as shooters (most often this one), or some combination thereof.

>>867710
> some combination

Like wind.

People that don't regularly shoot long range, 200-600+ yrds, can not factor wind properly when wind is a factor.

And distance.

People that don't regularly shooy long range can not properly gauge distance properly.

Typically underestimating.

>>867784
Yep.
Which is why anyone who knows anything about shooting tells beginners to get as close as they can before that shoot to increase the chances of a clean, humane kill.
But the decision is ultimately up to the shooter to decide. So if you know-and I mean REALLY know-what's involved to get the bullet there and feel you can put it where you need it to be, then take the shot. If there are questions or uncertainty in your mind about doing that, don't.
Simple as that.

>>858106
It looks like they're Ruger Mini 14's. That said if they're in .223 it would be possible but not recommended to shoot deer with them, If it's in 5.56 It would be more realistic especially with the right load and shot placement.

>>865924
>I am not a hunter but isn't 900 yds deemed unethical
Any bullet at 900 yards is more humane than an arrow or bolt at 50.

You miss a vital with an arrow exsanguination can take hours. You're usually compelled to give chase. An arrow in a wound slows down bleeding, you know like the ER advice you get to 'never pull out' a foreign object that's punctured you.

A bullet hit pretty much anywhere will kill them quicker. It doesn't have the same problem.

>>862345
Honestly, with how the Soviets just threw bodies at their opposition, I find it hard to doubt someone can amass such a kill-count.

File: IMG_20160710_143755.jpg (866KB, 2048x1536px) Image search: [Google]

866KB, 2048x1536px

>>858106
> M14 varients

Yes. M1As. I built them as Match guns, basically M21 clones. Taper reamed flash hiders, solid spring guides, Douglas air gauged bbls, short chambers, TRW trigger groups, match sights. Sequential serial numbered , forged Enterprise rcvrs.

These guns will never mount bayos.

.308 Win basically "minute guns", so yeah, good for deer.

>>868403

Not quite, M1 for scale.

File: 1274732693.jpg (42KB, 585x220px) Image search: [Google]

42KB, 585x220px

If you're not hunting squirrels, you should be using .50.

Alternatively, if you're shooting squirrels, you should be using a .50.

>>869078
got a little peeper do ya

>>869078
And I passed on an AR50 upper.

Prolly would have roughed up the lower, but I'm seeing lowers approaching $49/ea.

> prairie dogs duck and cover

>>852030
any 30-30
especially if its a hand me down >;}

>>863124
That is sexy as fuck.

Any reason you went with 45LC?