|
Post by mbogo on Dec 20, 2006 19:41:34 GMT -5
Yes, kids can use a .410 but it is marginal for deer at best. Don't you think sending kids into the woods with inferior weapons will lead to more wounded deer.
You didn't answer my question.
I thought you only bowhunted? Thirty rounds could not exactly be considered intensive practice and certainly wouldn't be enough for a beginning shooter.
|
|
|
Post by swilk on Dec 20, 2006 19:43:03 GMT -5
At what range are you able to produce 4" offhand, open sighted groups and with what weapon?
Dont read anything into my question..... I am just curious. I cannot shoot very well offhand and I have seen many, many, many people who cant shoot 4" groups with a scoped weapon and a bench at 100 yards.
|
|
|
Post by pbr on Dec 20, 2006 19:45:45 GMT -5
I put that many through my Winnie in a half hour of shooting. Just one day at the range is at least 250 shots. No sore shoulder either.
Not sure how you can do that. “Several different brands” is at least 3 and 3 different sizes shells makes it at least 9 different shells. One would think you would have to shoot each variation multiple times to see which one “shoots well in your gun.” I can believe it about the "4 shots to tell my scope was right on the money", but to see which one of the 9 different shells shoots well in your gun only takes 4 shots??
.
I don’t think so. No way can you convince me that a kid likes to shoot a slug gun. Did your kids ever shoot a pistol cartridge rifle?
I’ve worked with a lot of kids too in getting them into shooting. NEVER have we introduced a kid to shotgun shooting by using slugs. We went to the very lowest kicking stuff we could get. Most time that was a .410. The bigger kids got to shoot the heavier guns, but it was still low kicking shells. Absolutely no slugs
My personal opinion is that .410s should have never been legalized for deer hunting in the state of Indiana. They are way too marginal of a load. The pistol cartridge rifle are MUCH better suited for deer sized game. Just look at the ballistics and make an honest comparison.
LOL.. what makes you think I’m an “urbanite”?
|
|
|
Post by ridgerunner on Dec 20, 2006 20:09:05 GMT -5
When did I say I only bowhunted? I'm pretty sure I posted a picture a couple weeks ago of a buck I shot on Thanksgiving day with a my 12ga.
I gun hunt only if I don't fill my buck tag in archery as a last resort, which has been twice in 15 years counting this year. 30 rounds is enough for me. I put one round right through the heart of the buck I shot this year, and one shot last year right thru the heart on a buck. I don't need intensive practice, I know my limitations, unlike some..I've taken two shots, in two years and dropped two bucks.That's good enough for me.
I been shooting the same shotgun for 15 years, I only need a few shots to make sure the scope is on from year to year. Intially when I first purchase a gun I can have it shooting 3 inch groups at 100 yards in a 5-8 shots, but I will try several different loads and brands to see what shoots best. After that it's just a matter of checking my scope from year to year which usually involves me shooting 4-5 shots to check the scope and another 20 or so for practice. It's never failed me yet.
How many do you shoot each year? I have to say I've set at the gun range all day before shooting and most gun hunters I see, come and go in less than a hour. They might shoot 8 slugs and the majority never even go to the range..
As far as a 4-10 being an inferior weapon....if thats the case then why does Mossberg, Remington, Winchester and etc....keep manufactuering this inferior 4-10 shotgun.
I know plenty of kids who have taken deer in the past two years with 4-10 shotguns. Of course their not taking 200 yards shots at running deer either..As far as the 4-10 being inferior thats just ignorant...you're talking about something you obviously know nothing about. A .45 cal pistol round is alright, but a 4-10 slug isn't...LOL...Tell that to my son, he's killed several deer the past two years with his inferior gun...LMAO..
|
|
|
Post by ridgerunner on Dec 20, 2006 20:27:25 GMT -5
Okay pbr..., you know it all! Tell me how it is!..... My kids love shooting slug guns, in fact my daughter is now 15 and shot 3 1/2 magnums out of a 20.ga turkey hunting this year. No my kids haven't shot a pistol cartridge rifle. There's no need to, talk about an inferior weapon....We can do all the hunting we need to do with a bow or the shotguns we have.
I also have a few rifles for coyote, squirrel hunting, Ruger 10-22, Savage 17hmr, 22-250 Savage., a couple pistols for PP (Colt 10mm elite) (Thompson Auto Ordinance model 1911.45 cal)..
|
|
|
Post by dbd870 on Dec 21, 2006 6:54:51 GMT -5
Regardless of any of this I have yet to hear a logical argument against adopting this rule change.
|
|
|
Post by mbogo on Dec 21, 2006 8:42:11 GMT -5
Between my pistol and muzzleloader I shoot in the neighborhood of 350+ shots a year and practice dry firing them a lot more than that. One would think after all this time and with all the resources of the internet available to verify facts, that you would know better than to post such a silly statement. A slug from a 3" .410 which weighs aproximately 95 grains, fired from a full length shotgun barrel, has 788 ft.LBs of energy at the muzzle and only 403 left at 50 yards. tinyurl.com/ym3wdtA 180 gr. .357 magnum bullet fired from a 4" handgun barrel has 557 ft.lbs. at the muzzle and 473 left at 50 yards. Not much better, but still better than a .410 anywhere but the muzzle. tinyurl.com/pln82A 250 gr. .44 magnum fired from a 6.5" handgun barrel has 840 ft. lbs. at the muzzle and 620 left at 100 yards. It is easy to load or with a little searching buy .45 Colt rounds that will nearly equal this performance. tinyurl.com/y2m27mA 240 gr. 44 magnum fired from a standard rifle barrel has 1650 ft.lbs. of energy at the muzzle and 988 at 100 yards. tinyurl.com/y888dz
|
|
|
Post by dec on Dec 21, 2006 9:49:50 GMT -5
Guys, this arguing about who here shoots more and what is POINTLESS. More pointless battling among our own. What everyone is missing is that WE, the people that frequent these types of forums, are NOT the average deer hunter. We in general obsess about hunting and shooting. We are typically going to shoot a lot, some more than others. The AVERAGE deer hunter does NOT do this. Again, no amount of ballistics info, no cheaper ammo, no less recoil is going to matter to the AVERAGE deer hunter. The AVERAGE deer hunter in this state goes out a couple Saturdays and Sundays during gun season only. They only think about hunting for a couple week a year and the rest of the year it is work, family, NASCAR, football, golf, etc. I'm not talking necessarily about the Friday night Wal-mart guys or even the SLOBS. The average deer hunter takes it just a slight more serious than those guys do. These are not bad guys, they just aren't that serious about it. I can rattle the names off of probably 50 or so that I personally know in and around my town. The AVERAGE hunter will not benefit from these guns, so I simply don't think you can use those arguments to get legislation passed. HOWEVER, I do think these guns can be beneficial to those who do like to shoot and shoot often. I do think they are a viable option for us as deer hunters. I do think they are a viable option to the wives, girl friends, and youth of US die hard hunters that want to share what we love with those we love. Guys there is no need to puff the chests out and boast how much you shoot, what you shoot, or how far you can shoot. It is like me arguing I'm a better bow shot then someone. It is pointless and counter productive. (but if anyone wants to go one on one with a bow let me know )
|
|
|
Post by greghopper on Dec 21, 2006 10:42:24 GMT -5
Regardless of any of this I have yet to hear a logical argument against adopting this rule change. What you think the common Joe will think when they hear your hunting with a Rifle???Or some Old Timer??? Think they might be worried???
|
|
|
Post by drs on Dec 21, 2006 10:50:19 GMT -5
Regardless of any of this I have yet to hear a logical argument against adopting this rule change. What you think the common Joe will think when they hear your hunting with a Rifle???Or some Old Timer??? Think they might be worried??? They will mostlikely want to hunt with a rifle that fires pistol carttridges like the .44 Mag.
|
|
|
Post by Old Ironsights on Dec 21, 2006 10:52:28 GMT -5
At what range are you able to produce 4" offhand, open sighted groups and with what weapon? Dont read anything into my question..... I am just curious. I cannot shoot very well offhand and I have seen many, many, many people who cant shoot 4" groups with a scoped weapon and a bench at 100 yards. I'm currently 6" offhand at 100yds with my 20" .357 Lever and Magtech 158gr ammo. Not where I want to be yet, but will be by next season. (I've only had the gun since July). I use a Williams Foolproof and Merit adjustable aperature with an XS ramp in front. I'm 4" at 100 with any not-shot-out AR-15/M16 and stock sights. On a windless day I can get around 2.5" - 3" with my 513T .22 and Match Ammo. We'll see what hapens after my eye surgery in Jan, but I like to practice...
|
|
|
Post by Old Ironsights on Dec 21, 2006 11:02:11 GMT -5
As far as a 4-10 being an inferior weapon....if thats the case then why does Mossberg, Remington, Winchester and etc....keep manufactuering this inferior 4-10 shotgun. I know plenty of kids who have taken deer in the past two years with 4-10 shotguns. Of course their not taking 200 yards shots at running deer either..As far as the 4-10 being inferior thats just ignorant...you're talking about something you obviously know nothing about. A .45 cal pistol round is alright, but a 4-10 slug isn't...LOL...Tell that to my son, he's killed several deer the past two years with his inferior gun...LMAO.. A .45 Colt, even in subsonic cowboy loadings, is significantly more powerful than a .410 slug. A .410 slug ranges from 96gr to 110gr in factory loadings. YES they can and do take deer humanely at ranges of 50yds and less. My cylinder bore 9410 groups Remington 1/5oz fosters to 5" at 50 yds. However, I am just not comfortable with that light of a bullet. I want at least 158gr. Interestingly, you can't use a .40 muzzleloader for deer because the projectile is too light but you can use a .40 (most .410 slugs are .388 - .395 nominal) sub 100gr Foster in a .410. That's sort of interesting. IMO. However, I do think the .410, particularly out of the Marlin & Winchester actions, has the potential to produce at least .41Mag (if not .44Mag) energies and velocities at 100yds with a correctly designed psudofoster loaded in a full-brass (CBC) hull. Prototype should be in pressure & range testing by March. ;D
|
|
|
Post by Old Ironsights on Dec 21, 2006 11:05:28 GMT -5
Regardless of any of this I have yet to hear a logical argument against adopting this rule change. What you think the common Joe will think when they hear your hunting with a Rifle???Or some Old Timer??? Think they might be worried??? Only if folks like you continue to be intent on lying to them about their range...
|
|
|
Post by dec on Dec 21, 2006 11:11:32 GMT -5
With all due respect, I doubt many will lie to anyone about the effective range of these rounds. Unfortunately what will happen is that many of these folks will only pick up on the word "rifle". To them it will simply mean 300 yard range and equate it to an -06 or similar high powered rifle.
You guys need to wake up to the fact that the Average Deer Hunter is a very ignorant person. They do not care to take the time to understand this stuff like most of us do.
I see both sides of this argument very clearly and I am still leaning in support of these guns, but honestly, you need to admit to yourself that the average guy will get tunnel vision when he hears the word "rifle".
|
|
|
Post by greghopper on Dec 21, 2006 11:14:25 GMT -5
What you think the common Joe will think when they hear your hunting with a Rifle???Or some Old Timer??? Think they might be worried??? They will mostlikely want to hunt with a rifle that fires pistol carttridges like the .44 Mag. LOL...I dout it....
|
|
|
Post by mbogo on Dec 21, 2006 11:19:34 GMT -5
Well, if people are "ignorant" enough to believe the things being said about pistol caliber rifles by certain individuals, then why would they want a measly .30-06? ;D
Not being a member of an internet hunting forum is not a sign of ignorance, nor is being a member a guarantee of intelligence.
|
|
|
Post by greghopper on Dec 21, 2006 11:20:23 GMT -5
What you think the common Joe will think when they hear your hunting with a Rifle???Or some Old Timer??? Think they might be worried??? Only if folks like you continue to be intent on lying to them about their range... Hay Irorsight...You a Hunter or Just a Shooter? When was your last Deer kill or any game Kill??? I think i remember you saying TWO YEARS....really
|
|
|
Post by Old Ironsights on Dec 21, 2006 11:25:36 GMT -5
I see both sides of this argument very clearly and I am still leaning in support of these guns, but honestly, you need to admit to yourself that the average guy will get tunnel vision when he hears the word "rifle". That's why traditionally Pistol Caliber Long Arms have been called Carbines... ;D
|
|
|
Post by Old Ironsights on Dec 21, 2006 11:38:10 GMT -5
Only if folks like you continue to be intent on lying to them about their range... Hay Irorsight...You a Hunter or Just a Shooter? When was your last Deer kill or any game Kill??? I think i remember you saying TWO YEARS....really I am a shooter and wildcatter by avocation, largely because in the past 20 years I have not lived in any one state longer than 6 years. I simply haven't had the opportunity to either learn the terrain or establish relationships with land owners/other hunters. So, no, without paying some "outfitter" a couple of grand, and with special interest groups actively trying to limit my opportunities to hunt, I haven't hunted since I left Alaska in 95 and haven't killed a deer since 85. (And that one I took with a single shot from an iron sighted Savage 99E Lever in .308 Winchester.) But I hardly see what that has to do with a basic knowledge of firearms and trajectories or purposefully trying to scare people into believing somthing that isn't true.
|
|
|
Post by dec on Dec 21, 2006 11:48:29 GMT -5
See mbogo ... there is no point in even discussing this. I'm NOT against these guns. You and these guys are arguing selling points that IMO are should not be used in this case.
Get a clue. MOST OF THE AVERAGE DEER HUNTERS ARE VERY IGNORANT. Yes there are die hards that don't get on the internet. I never said that only die hards are on the internet ... did I? Us on the internet are a very small percentage (though that grows every day) of hunters. Still go out and talk to guys. Most guys are too busy with life in general to dedicate that time to what we all are so passionate about. To most of them a slug gun is a shot gun (meaning they think a .410 is as good as a 20 or 12). A muzzleloader is a muzzleloader. And a RIFLE IS A RIFLE. They will pick up a .45 or other rifle and expect it so shoot like a 30-06 (probably the only caliber any would relate to a rifle). They simply are NOT going to educate themselves. That is the problem I have with the arguments being used for legislation passage.
Old Ironsights, trust me I know what a carbine is as do a lot of us. But again, the average deer hunter that spends little time outside of hunting season simply equates it to a "rifle".
|
|