The Firing Line Forums

Go Back   The Firing Line Forums > The Hide > The Hunt

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old October 4, 2009, 11:02 PM   #26
freakshow10mm
Junior member
 
Join Date: January 23, 2008
Location: MI
Posts: 1,398
What happened was someone in marketing decided to print the kinetic energy figures and market that as the key to killing power.

Look at all the print ads from the hayday of cartridges. Nothing about energy. Some of the most effective cartridge barely broke 2,000fps (30-30 was the first IIRC). Hell the 8mm Mauser was a rocket in it's day and inspired the .30-40 Krag, .30-03, and the .30-06.

Then the magnum era began in the 50s and it's been downhill from there.

Rifle cartridges worth today that were developed after 1970? 7mm-08, 6.5-08 A Square (aka .260 Rem). That's about it. Nothing else comes to mind as being worth it.

22 Hornet
223
22-250
243
257 Roberts
6mm Rem
6.5x55 Swede
.308
.30-06
8mm Mauser
9.3x62
375 Holland
38-55
416 Rigby
45/70
458 Winchester

Just about all a community could ever want.
freakshow10mm is offline  
Old October 4, 2009, 11:10 PM   #27
Zildjian
Member
 
Join Date: October 2, 2009
Location: Ballinger, Tx.
Posts: 47
Changes

What I don't understand , is why do you need a high powered rifle 30-06 or a
.270 to shoot your quarry 50-75 or even a 100 yds away. Those calibers mentioned would work great at those distances. Even a handgun made today works great at those distances. The hunt has changed as did the weapons used today. Back then we walked to hunt, today you sit in a blind and wait .
Its not so much for the meat nowadays but for the trophy mount I guess. I may not always be right, but I'm never wrong..
__________________
Even a dead clock is right twice in a 24 hr. day
Zildjian is offline  
Old October 5, 2009, 06:37 AM   #28
Daryl
Senior Member
 
Join Date: July 11, 2008
Posts: 2,350
Quote:
What I don't understand , is why do you need a high powered rifle 30-06 or a
.270 to shoot your quarry 50-75 or even a 100 yds away. Those calibers mentioned would work great at those distances. Even a handgun made today works great at those distances. The hunt has changed as did the weapons used today. Back then we walked to hunt, today you sit in a blind and wait .
Its not so much for the meat nowadays but for the trophy mount I guess. I may not always be right, but I'm never wrong..
My granddad used a .243 that was made in 1956. I still have it, and I'm planning to use it this year.

I've shot a lot of deer at less than 100 yards, but I've also shot them at nearly 500 yards a time or two.

My hunt hasn't changed. I didn't use blinds much for deer hunting when I was younger, and I don't use 'em much today. Bowhunting aside, hunting deer here is mostly a spot-'n-stalk proposition.

I hunt for the meat on most hunts. A trophy is all good and fine, but I like the meat first and foremost.

However, I don't think your observations are wrong in a general sense. Magazine articles and such have changed the way most folks think of hunting, and an animal of less-then-trophy proportions is frowned on in many circles.

Which is why I pick my hunting partners carefully.



Daryl
Daryl is offline  
Old October 5, 2009, 07:21 AM   #29
roy reali
Senior Member
 
Join Date: August 23, 2005
Posts: 3,248
Another Theory

I do think alot of this new-fangled hunting technology is designed to make up for hunters' shortcomings. Espically when it comes to practice. We all can agree practice is one thing that can improve any hunters' success.

I don't mean practice shooting, even though that is important, I mean practice being in the woods. In today's world, we just don't seem to have the time to spend scouting and exploring nature. Mountain lions are so good at hunting because that is what they do 24/7. I believe that any fancy equipment, the camo clothes, the scents, the high-tech glasses, are suppose to somehow make up for lack of "real" practice. I suppose they can help. But nothing, I mean nothing takes the place of actual field time. Tiger Woods skills have more to do with the time he spends practicing then the fancy gear he uses. He could beat most of us with second rate clubs, I doubt many of us could beat him with the most expensive, custom fitted clubs.

Sure, fancy gear can help. Heck, I now use a GPS when I take to the woods. I admit, I have a lousy sense of direction. If our house wasn't so tall, I'd get lost in my own backyard. My GPS, however, will never make me a Daniel Boone of the woods.
roy reali is offline  
Old October 5, 2009, 07:37 AM   #30
Bella
Senior Member
 
Join Date: July 6, 2009
Posts: 313
roy

Nice reply. I think that the average deer hunter that has switched to some super-magnum caliber is trying to make up for the fact he might noy be able to stalk to within reasonable shoooting range. Our ancestors that depended on blackpowder rifles had no choice but to try to close the distance before shooting. Their time in the woods led to the skills needed to sneak up to a whitetail. Like you said roy, today's society doesn't provide many of us the luxury of that time in the woods.
Bella is offline  
Old October 5, 2009, 07:42 AM   #31
hogdogs
Staff In Memoriam
 
Join Date: October 31, 2007
Location: Western Florida panhandle
Posts: 11,069
Very good points Roy!
The polynesian sector in history could set sail on a simple vessel and land where they intended and return for family later... all with out a compass or formal knowledge of the sextant...

The native americans were able to stalk on wary quarry and easily feed the village with simple bows not cable of over 30 pound draw weight and arrows with brittle untrue points and less than rocket science fletching...
Brent
hogdogs is offline  
Old October 5, 2009, 09:37 AM   #32
sasquatch
Senior Member
 
Join Date: December 14, 2005
Location: Western WA
Posts: 1,347
Quote:
The native americans were able to stalk on wary quarry and easily feed the village with simple bows not cable of over 30 pound draw weight and arrows with brittle untrue points and less than rocket science fletching...
The two Native Americans I ran into last year while deer hunting in Eastern WA were both using .300 Weatherbys.
__________________
Just my 2ยข.
sasquatch is offline  
Old October 5, 2009, 09:40 AM   #33
Osageshooter
Senior Member
 
Join Date: August 27, 2009
Location: Overland Park, Kansas
Posts: 179
Lots of good comments. I guess I have been around long enough to see the magnum craze go thru change. What Weatherby started was seen as opportunity by most other companies. Now we have the "same thing only shorter" phenomenon, which as many point out, fills the needs of manufacturers more than hunters.

I am glad to see cartridges like the 260 and 7-08 get the respect they deserve when it comes to deer hunting. While a 30-30 harvests deer well, I would go for one of the former given a choice. No deer within 300 yards could be killed better or deader with a more powerful cartridge. They have low recoil and shoot pretty darn flat.

Bucking the Wyoming wind on 400 yard shots, I go with the 7 mag. For most deer hunting, I am grabbing the 7-08 or 260 most of the time. I do take the magnums that I bought in the 70s and 80s out once in a while to keep them from getting lonely.
Osageshooter is offline  
Old October 5, 2009, 09:58 AM   #34
Brian Pfleuger
Staff
 
Join Date: June 25, 2008
Location: Central, Southern NY, USA
Posts: 18,791
That was back before the radiation from all the nuclear tests caused the deer (and most every other creature) to grow armor plating. You can't just kill a deer the way you used to be able to kill 'em. They got armor now. Nuthin' short of a 300 Ultra Mag will kill a whitetail deer in todays world.



Seriously?

Two main things that I see:

1) The popularity of "Dead Right There". Somehow, some one got it in peoples heads that if you shoot an animal and it doesn't drop like a bomb hit it then you don't have enough gun. Suddenly, having to follow 3 or 4 foot wide blood trails 50 or 100 yards is just too much trouble. God forbid you've got the type of blood trail that's only a steady path a few inches wide and goes 150 yards.... can't be bothered with.... what's the word again.... "woodsmanship" of trailing a fatally wounded animal 100 yards. Get a real gun. By God, if you shot that deer with a 375H&H magnum, or something BIG if you're man enough, well, it would be laying right there where you shot... and when your shoulder healed up, in a few weeks, you could just drag it right out of the woods.

2)Internet (and gun store/box store) experts..... who have never shot a living thing with ANY firearm. They're convinced that it takes this or that new wonder cartridge to do the job and they spread the nonsense to any other armchair hunters who will listen.
__________________
Still happily answering to the call-sign Peetza.
---
The problem, as you so eloquently put it, is choice.
-The Architect
-----
He is no fool who gives what he can not keep to gain what he can not lose.
-Jim Eliott, paraphrasing Philip Henry.
Brian Pfleuger is offline  
Old October 5, 2009, 10:07 AM   #35
freakshow10mm
Junior member
 
Join Date: January 23, 2008
Location: MI
Posts: 1,398
Actually, a .375 H&H does less meat damage on a deer than a .270 Winchester.
freakshow10mm is offline  
Old October 5, 2009, 08:42 PM   #36
Swampghost
Senior Member
 
Join Date: April 18, 2008
Location: Florida, east coast
Posts: 2,106
freak, you left out the 416 Barrett! Still supersonic @ 2500 yds! The ultimate Elk, Goat or Grizz rifle. Lets call out all of the stops.

Personally, I kill for food. I've been through the trophy thing long enough that the palmetto bugs ransacked them, a bunch of wasted money.
__________________
NRA Patron Member
Swampghost is offline  
Old October 6, 2009, 09:18 AM   #37
Sportdog
Junior member
 
Join Date: February 28, 2006
Location: Southwestern Michigan
Posts: 369
Lots of Changes

Whitetail deer are more plentiful. Restrictions of choices of firearms. Smaller hunting parcels. Less access to hunting land. More educated and serious hunters. Camo clothing. Treestand hunting. Box blind hunting. More focus on "clean kills". DRT focus because deer don't understand property boundries. Cartridges and optics to take advantage of long range oportunities. My father didn't have fancy camo, used an old open sighted Argentine mauser, always tried to "track down" a buck, and was the least successful hunter I have known! He and his buddies only deer hunted the first week of season and it was an exception if anyone in the group killed a deer. I use all the latest technology and bring home the venison. I hunt deer from October 1 until January 1 with bow, shotgun, and muzzleloader. Call me crazy but give me that camo, scope sighted magnum, treestand, box blind, deer scents, etc and the results will speak for themselves. Using a fast and flat shooting rifle does not diminish your hunting skills or make you a poor shooter. There are guys with no hunting skills that are unsuccessful with 30-30's, just like guys that are unsuccessful with 300UM's. It's not the tool, it's the guy behind the trigger!
Sportdog is offline  
Old October 6, 2009, 01:01 PM   #38
Bella
Senior Member
 
Join Date: July 6, 2009
Posts: 313
Quote:
Call me crazy but give me that camo, scope sighted magnum, treestand, box blind, deer scents, etc and the results will speak for themselves.
Your kind of hunting gives me the warm fuzzies.
Bella is offline  
Old October 6, 2009, 03:54 PM   #39
ZeroJunk
Senior Member
 
Join Date: August 14, 2006
Location: Browns Summit NC
Posts: 2,508
I've killed more deer with a bow and muzzle loader than anything else. I've also blasted them with a 300 WBY. I never wear camo unless I'm bow hunting.

The guys I hunt with for the most part will kill deer with whatever you give them. All this business about magnums and big scopes to overcome poor hunting skills is just hunting periodical pundit regurgitation. Sometimes guys just like their toys.


If all we used was because that's what our father used this would be a boring world and the economy would go to crap.
ZeroJunk is offline  
Old October 6, 2009, 06:46 PM   #40
ZeroJunk
Senior Member
 
Join Date: August 14, 2006
Location: Browns Summit NC
Posts: 2,508
Here is a nice deer I killed with a muzzle loader. Just looking for an excuse to post it really.

ZeroJunk is offline  
Old October 6, 2009, 08:01 PM   #41
ligonierbill
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 20, 2007
Posts: 789
The difference? Money, mostly. I missed my first deer as a green kid with an old Mauser 98. When I fired, the 8-point I didn't see ran back through the drivers and almost ran over a fellow with a 30-40 Krag. He had just saved enough for a scope, but he fired point blank and missed! The next morning, he found a "bayonet" taped to his rifle. He was not amused. The deer I missed was killed on the next drive with a .35 Remington "corn sheller". Lots of wonderful rifles are debated on these forums--ain't it fun! As long as we remember that no magnum knock 'em dead will make you a hunter, we will do well. My shirt tail is still on the rafter of the "new" camp...built in 1943.
ligonierbill is offline  
Old October 6, 2009, 08:23 PM   #42
Dr. Strangelove
Senior Member
 
Join Date: August 1, 2008
Location: Athens, GA
Posts: 1,418
Money

Back when my grandfather was a kid in the NC mountains(1920's), many families only ate meat if they shot it. He put meat on the table hunting and trapping, there were few stores and little money. Hunting was a sustenance activity, not a sport.

Fast forward to today, when most folks think meat comes shrink-wrapped in Styrofoam trays. The majority of my friends have no idea how to cook, let alone process a deer carcass. We have more money now than in any time in history and a very well developed supply chain for our food. People are disconnected from the outdoors and where their food comes from. Hunting is a sport, quickly becoming a rich man's sport if you aren't lucky enough to live in a state with large public hunting areas.

As far as modern guns, camo, climbing stands, etc., well I know for a fact my grandfather would have used those things had they been available to him. He used a single barrel break action 12 ga and a Springfield .22 single shot that he and his brother saved all year for and ordered for $4.95 from the Sears Roebuck catalog. Later in life he was able to afford a Model 94 in .30-30. As another poster put it, they used what they had available and could afford, much like hunters today.
Dr. Strangelove is offline  
Old October 6, 2009, 08:29 PM   #43
bamafan4life
Senior Member
 
Join Date: January 4, 2009
Posts: 190
Quote:
what would happen to all these gun and ammo manufacturers and magazines we all read if all the gun gurus printed that all anyone needs is a .22, a 30/30 and a 12 guage. the economy and the gun world as we know it would come to an end.
thats exactly what i tell every new shooter and they always end up with something like 300wsm .17hmr and 20 gauge (like my brother hes 300 pounds and got a 20 gauge) and you never see them shooting them cause 1. they can not afford it. 2. they dont won't to scratch them. i mean theres some shooting rifles and some hunting rifles. in my mind by todays standards a good hunting rifle is a marlin xl7 a stevens 200 and the mossberg 100atr. because these rifles can be took through the brush, droped in the mud droped out of tree stands and still take that deer. now something nicer like a browning a bolt medallion .300 win mag. well seriously wouldnt you just die if it got scratched up?

im a firm beleaver in 30-30 but the guns are just to expensive now a new one is what 350-400$ for a marlin? a used winchester (post 64) is about the same. and you can get any of the 3 rifles i mentioned in just about any caliber for 300$ new? id take the bolt action.
bamafan4life is offline  
Old October 6, 2009, 11:13 PM   #44
roy reali
Senior Member
 
Join Date: August 23, 2005
Posts: 3,248
re:Sportdog

Quote:
I use all the latest technology and bring home the venison. I hunt deer from October 1 until January 1 with bow, shotgun, and muzzleloader. Call me crazy but give me that camo, scope sighted magnum, treestand, box blind, deer scents, etc and the results will speak for themselves.
When nature calls, do use camo toilet paper too?
roy reali is offline  
Old October 6, 2009, 11:24 PM   #45
Sportdog
Junior member
 
Join Date: February 28, 2006
Location: Southwestern Michigan
Posts: 369
I tried it once but the results of the operation were too inconclusive!
Sportdog is offline  
Old October 7, 2009, 06:37 AM   #46
ZeroJunk
Senior Member
 
Join Date: August 14, 2006
Location: Browns Summit NC
Posts: 2,508
Quote:
I tried it once but the results of the operation were too inconclusive
LOL
ZeroJunk is offline  
Old October 7, 2009, 09:17 AM   #47
nitetrane98
Junior member
 
Join Date: May 23, 2009
Posts: 143
Lots of good thoughts here.
I believe that a lot of new stuff is bought to attempt to overcome shortcomings, real or perceived, in ones current gear. A ways back somebody actually posted that they had missed a deer. First time I guess I've ever seen that. Well, I have too. I was using a 30.06 and had nothing to blame but myself. (well me and iron sights).
What I'm getting at is if I had been using, say, a 30.30 and saw the bullet kick up dirt in front of the deer, I might have thought the round had too much drop at 100 yds and I need something flatter shooting instead of thinking, "Well I aimed wrong." or misjudged the range or whatever. I might think, "Hmmm, a .308 will fix that problem." I think some folks buy what I call "energy insurance" for a less than perfectly placed shot. And there might be some validity in that.
nitetrane98 is offline  
Old October 7, 2009, 10:31 AM   #48
stingerspray
Junior Member
 
Join Date: October 7, 2009
Posts: 10
Whats changed is there's a bunch of cool new stuff to use. I like the idea of a kobra red dot sight on a saiga 308, as compared to a lever gun of any caliber. Nobody needs that to actually harvest deer, just personal taste. A lot of folks still like to use bow and arrow, muzzle loaders.

I've seen a pair of doe harvested with a 10/22, took less than 15 seconds to kill them both. It wouldnt be hard for any competent shooter to do that, but it is illegal in most places now.
stingerspray is offline  
Old October 12, 2009, 08:35 PM   #49
Jack O'Conner
Senior Member
 
Join Date: July 11, 2005
Location: Lancaster County, Pennsylvania
Posts: 1,520
Last 20 years has brought wide spread use of plastic stocked bolt action rifles. These rifles don't ring my bell but they're obviously very popular. Pricing for Marlin, Mossberg, and Howa bolt action plastic stocked rifles seem quite low to me compared to relative cost of living.

Don't be too worried that the glorious 30-30 is dying. More new rifles are available for this cartridge than ever before. Ammo has rec'd upgrade attention from Hornady to legitimize 225 yards shots at BIG mulies!

Amazingly, Ruger and Remington have spent vast sums to develop magnum hunting cartridges that will NEVER make the TOP 10 list. Yet writers can't pen enough crap about their perceived value. In contrast, 30-30, 243, 308, 270, 30-06 (no particular order) continue to outsell other ammo by extremely wide margins. The knowledgeable hunters who buy this "common" ammo are not in minority at all.

Jack

__________________
Fire up the grill! Deer hunting IS NOT catch and release.
Jack O'Conner is offline  
Reply

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 09:24 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
This site and contents, including all posts, Copyright © 1998-2014 S.W.A.T. Magazine
Copyright Complaints: Please direct DMCA Takedown Notices to the registered agent: thefiringline.com
Contact Us
Page generated in 0.12609 seconds with 7 queries