|
|
Post by drs on Jul 11, 2010 7:09:21 GMT -5
Easiest thing to do is say.35 or larger and exclude a half dozen cartridges that may not be considered mid range rounds. Have the regulations concentrate on allowing cartridges of .357" & above having a velocity higher than 1,400 FPS but < 2,000 FPS. This would fit the "Mid-range" criteria nicely. |
|
|
|
Post by swilk on Jul 11, 2010 7:46:08 GMT -5
LOL.
|
|
|
|
Post by duff on Jul 11, 2010 7:49:40 GMT -5
Who cares! Like most of these guys have pointed out, 90% of Indiana Deer hunters don't even know or care what a wildcat round is. They are not going to build a special round that require special order and reloading. It just won't happen.
Now if they were to legalize 30-06 or 30-30 I think you would see an increase in the popular readily availabl traditional hunting rifles.
|
|
|
|
Post by drs on Jul 11, 2010 8:00:44 GMT -5
lol you don't have to read it!  I certainly don't, but need to keep "tabs" on the "High Powered Rifles in Indiana Zealots" here. |
|
|
|
Post by M4Madness on Jul 11, 2010 8:48:28 GMT -5
Have the regulations concentrate on allowing cartridges of .357" & above having a velocity higher than 1,400 FPS but < 2,000 FPS. You'd have to have a DNR official present while every deer hunting rifle in the state was fired through a chronograph. |
|
|
|
Post by drs on Jul 11, 2010 9:22:37 GMT -5
Have the regulations concentrate on allowing cartridges of .357" & above having a velocity higher than 1,400 FPS but < 2,000 FPS. You'd have to have a DNR official present while every deer hunting rifle in the state was fired through a chronograph. Not quite. The velocities of various pistol cartridges, fired out of a 18" to 20" barrel is well publicized. |
|
|
|
Post by M4Madness on Jul 11, 2010 9:28:11 GMT -5
You'd have to have a DNR official present while every deer hunting rifle in the state was fired through a chronograph. Not quite. The velocities of various pistol cartridges, fired out of a 18" to 20" barrel is well publicized. What if someone uses a 26" barrel, or loads their own handloads hotter than a factory-equivalent cartridge? There are just too many variables to allow a blanket rule pertaining to velocity. |
|
|
|
Post by drs on Jul 11, 2010 9:31:42 GMT -5
While there aren't a great deal of .44 Magnums with 26" barrels out there, that is I never ran across one. But the velocity would still be below 2,000 FPS using a factory load. Besides the bullet styles and weights would still make it a short to medium range load despite the velocity.
|
|
|
|
Post by swilk on Jul 11, 2010 9:35:39 GMT -5
Let us know how it goes it you decide to approach the idnr with your idea.
|
|
|
|
Post by drs on Jul 11, 2010 12:13:50 GMT -5
Let us know how it goes it you decide to approach the idnr with your idea. Why can't you just be satisfied with the current legal PCR's? I mean it's like you & some have almost a "Walter Mitty" fixation, inthat, you must have a wildcat cartridge to hunt with or nothing will work. AGAIN, just be happy you can use your PCR's chambered for regular pistol ammo.  |
|
|
|
Post by swilk on Jul 11, 2010 12:32:50 GMT -5
As a man who knows as much as you should know, I was actually against the legalization of any PCR to begin with. Since their legalization I have never talked about any round that isnt legal under the current rules.
You on the other hand have repeatedly spewed nonsense about the DNR doesn't know this ... they never intended that ... when they find out they will outlaw them .... whatever.
Now you think they should change to include only rounds that shoot 1400-2000 fps. I was just telling you good luck and let us know how it goes if you decide to approach the IDNR with your well thought out plan.
|
|
|
|
Post by drs on Jul 11, 2010 12:55:35 GMT -5
As a man who knows as much as you should know, I was actually against the legalization of any PCR to begin with. Since their legalization I have never talked about any round that isnt legal under the current rules.
Why the change of attitude on PCR's then??
You on the other hand have repeatedly spewed nonsense about the DNR doesn't know this ... they never intended that ... when they find out they will outlaw them .... whatever.
I was saying they overlooked this "loophole" and should have done more research.
Now you think they should change to include only rounds that shoot 1400-2000 fps. I was just telling you good luck and let us know how it goes if you decide to approach the IDNR with your well thought out plan.
No plans to approach the IDNR as I did that back in 1987. I now live in KY. As for the velocity listed most PCR's, like the .357, .44 mag. and a few others, have velocities of 1,400 to 2,000 FPS in rifles.
Instead of spending money on a wildcat cartridge firing rifle that you may or may not be able to hunt Deer with; use the money to improve the habitat of your hunting ground, if you own some. Just my $.02 worth of advice.
|
|
|
|
Post by swilk on Jul 11, 2010 13:01:51 GMT -5
There was no loophole. They knew about wildcats. They included them in their official rule. Quit talking about something that does not exist.
My change in attitude is simply because a man can have his position in a social issue like this .... but if things go against him he should make the best of a bad situation. I didnt want expansion of PCR's to begin with. I am and have always been a "leave things alone" kind of guy with only a few exceptions. When they became legal I researched and decided that an extra gun in one of the legal calibers would be a nice addition to my safe.
You can say you dont like them all day long and I would never say a word .... but you keep talking about how the DNR didnt know and that is simply not true. Stop it.
|
|
|
|
Post by drs on Jul 11, 2010 13:12:28 GMT -5
There was no loophole. They knew about wildcats. They included them in their official rule. Quit talking about something that does not exist. My change in attitude is simply because a man can stand up for what he believes in .... but if things go against him he should make the best of a bad situation. I didnt want expansion of PCR's to begin with. I am and have always been a "leave things alone" kind of guy If you didnt want expansion of PCR's to begin with, then why do you want that .358 WSSM or anyother??  As for that "loophole" it does exists and the point at the beginning was to make FACTORY Pistol ammo legal to use in rifles, since they have about the same ballistics as the saboted shotgun loads, that I mentioned in an earlier post on this thread. The current legal PCR's do a fine job on Deer.  |
|
|
|
Post by swilk on Jul 11, 2010 13:14:56 GMT -5
I tried talking to a wall once ......
|
|
|
|
Post by hornharvester on Jul 11, 2010 13:23:30 GMT -5
There was no loophole. They knew about wildcats. They included them in their official rule. Quit talking about something that does not exist. My change in attitude is simply because a man can stand up for what he believes in .... but if things go against him he should make the best of a bad situation. I didnt want expansion of PCR's to begin with. I am and have always been a "leave things alone" kind of guy If you didnt want expansion of PCR's to begin with, then why do you want that .358 WSSM or anyother?? As for that "loophole" it does exists and the point at the beginning was to make FACTORY Pistol ammo legal to use in rifles, since they have about the same ballistics as the saboted shotgun loads, that I mentioned in an earlier post on this thread. The current legal PCR's do a fine job on Deer. DRS, What you are saying is simple not true... the IDNR knew there would be wildcat PCRs and plan for them. No where in the rules does it say they made the PCR law for FACTORY AMMO.... There is, was no loop hole in the PCR law. It simple states a case can be no longer than 1.625 and no less than a bullet of .357......now where is the loop hole? |
|
|
|
Post by swilk on Jul 11, 2010 13:33:02 GMT -5
It even specifically mentions "wildcats".
"This proposal does not restrict the cartridges to straight-walled, nor does it restrict the type of action for the rifle. This proposal also does not limit the cartridges to commercial types only; custom-made cartridges (wildcats) that meet the specifications in the rule would also be legal to use.
The DNR is not proposing to list all of the cartridges that would be allowed in this rule proposal due to the large number available and the possibility of wildcats (custom-made cartridges) that could be developed within the specifications of the rule."
|
|
|
|
Post by drs on Jul 11, 2010 13:47:58 GMT -5
The loophole exists in the fact that some here are hoping & planning to use a wildcat cartridge like your .358 wssm. It might be the right length but the state should have realized that powder capacity should also be included, as well as velocity. A Traditional PCR doesn't have a velocity of 2,700 FPS with a .358" 180+ grain bullet. Again, the whole purpose of PCR's was to give the Hunter a choice of either using a PCR or a regular shotgun sabot slug. I can't see the need of using a 2,700 FPS load unless you are shooting long range, which would be dangerous in most Indiana counties. I know of places here in KY where the landowner won't allow rifles, and some of those areas don't have subdivisions around or huge people populations either. On my 83 acres, there are places where my Ruger Model 77/44 is better suited than my .308 or .270 for Deer hunting as the range is < 100 yards.
|
|
|
|
Post by swilk on Jul 11, 2010 14:03:49 GMT -5
Better luck was had with the wall.
|
|
|
|
Post by Decatur on Jul 11, 2010 15:15:37 GMT -5
Drs, I don't know why you let your self get so worked up about this. No offense, but you live and hunt in KY now, so this doesn't even affect you.
|
|
