View Single Post
Old June 30, 2009, 01:06 AM   #53
Tikirocker
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 11, 2007
Location: NSW, Australia
Posts: 915
Danthaman,

I'll address your comments not as a criticism of your own choices - these may be perfect for your own environment - but rather to highlight where your assertions don't apply to mine.

Quote:
This has yet to be stated, hunting small game is ideal for food because if oyu take down a moose and have less than 10 people to feed, the meat will rot.
Maybe in your part of the world - where I live, the most commonly encountered game will be Kangaroo and Wallaby, this type of game is not so big that it is unmanageable but is not small enough that you I would want a smaller cal than .303. Professional Roo hunters going back 100 years have used the .303 as standard Aussie bush cal and it does a superb job of dropping a jumper.

Realistically, if I am in a survival situation I don't want to risk a light cal on a food source and scare away my one chance at a meal because I didn't drop it first time. A .303 or .308 will drop a big Roo and not destroy the animal - like the Aborigines for 50,000 years before you toss the entire Roo on a fire and you've got your cooked food supply for days to come. If you know what you are doing and work fast you can strip Roo meat with a good knife and hang it out to make jerk ...

In the Aussie bush I'm not looking for small game in the daylight hours ... and I'm rarely coming across it as most of it is nocturnal. For that job I would be setting falling traps of stick and stone while I sleep. I can still keep my .303 cal gun for day and hunt at night without any great expenditure of energy by use of traps. This is called working smart.


Quote:
The .308 will literally destroy any small game you shoot.
That's why I'm not using it for small game ...


Quote:
However, if the hide or bones of big game is needed, the kill can easily be accomplished with a .223 placed right behind the shoulder or in the head. As many veterans will testify, shot placement is faaar more important than power.
Nothing wrong with .223 but I'd rather have the extra oomph of .303/.308 to cut down on possible errors on my part where food is a survival issue. I could miss badly with a .303 round but still do enough damage with a miss to put my dinner down and not have to chase it into the bush. When you are surviving you want to cut down on any activity that wastes energy and maximize your chances of eating. I don't trust the .223 to buck the bush I'd be shooting through, or make up for my mistakes if my shot isn't perfect. In survival I'm not trying to shoot the tightest groups or show off what a great target shooter I am ... I just want dinner come hell or high water.


Quote:
Any rifle in .308 will typically be heavier than one in .223,
In most cases that may be correct ... not in the case of the No5 Mk1 Jungle Carbine I chose for the job. The weight of the No5 Mk1 is 3.2kg or 7bl's 1oz ... that is very light indeed and allows me to carry plenty more .303 on me.


Quote:
... and one can carry far more .223 ammo than .308 without compromising thier stamina by carrying tons of .308 in a survival situation.
I have hiked 500 miles on foot over the French Pyrenees Mountains and across Northern Spain ( On the Camino Santiago ) with a 20kg pack, 100 rounds of .303 would not cause me any great deal of fatigue I assure you. .223 ammo is not that much lighter than a .303 or .308 round, the difference is negligible.

What works for you is not necessarily what works for others ...

Tiki.
__________________
The Lee Enfield forums - http://www.surplusrifleforum.com/viewforum.php?f=27
Surplus Rifle Forums - http://www.surplusrifleforum.com/index.php

Last edited by Tikirocker; June 30, 2009 at 07:05 AM.
Tikirocker is offline  
 
Page generated in 0.04969 seconds with 7 queries