Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Hunting Rifles A buttstock shell holder that works!

I know this is the hunting rifle forum but I’m posting here for traffic. I picked up a really nice and functional handmade leather buttstock shell holder. I know how everyone loves to bitch about them and complain about how they lose ammo, don’t fit right, tarnish brass and are generally worthless. Well I found this guy who hand stitches them himself and sells them off his facebook page. They look very nice, are built well and definitely don’t lose or tarnish your brass cartridges. I’ve had nylon ones, neoprene ones and leather ones from Galco and other name brands. This one is better than any of them by far. I suck at posting pics so I’ll leave his info and you can check out his page. I got a plain black leather one for my Ruger 77, 35 Whelen and I’m very happy with it. And I’d rather give my money to the little guy making a good product with his hands rather than a big company spitting out some machine built product by the thousands.

Seymour Leather Craft Custom Leather Goods
Owner: Ed Seymour. (607)422-6551
www.facebook.com/seymourleathercraft

bubba buddies, unite!......

Opinions vary depending upon your style of hunting. If you’re sitting in a blind all day or hunting from the truck I suppose you wouldn’t have a need. However the majority of my hunting is following a set of tracks or still hunting for a few miles so it’s nice to have an extra few shells handy. Accessible on the buttstock is better than fumbling through your pockets or pack looking for them.

That'll tarnish brass just like any leather cartridge holder will. Just get a little moisture trapped in there and don't pull the cartridges out, and they'll tarnish just like ever other cartridge holder. If the rounds aren't inside a zippered pouch, there is a good chance you'll lose some eventually. Leather will expand and contract with changes in temp, and will eventually stretch. It isn't immune to any of the problems you mentioned in your OP.

However, if your happy that's all that really matters.

Much snugger than any other leather production one I’ve had and certainly much better than any synthetic fabric made. We’ll see on the tarnishing in time I guess.

Not a buttstock carrier but have carried one of these on my belt for years.

Belt carrier

+1

+2

Thank you for posting.

Do you happen to have an email address for them? Don't have Facebook.

If you don’t like it move on. Don’t believe anyone asked your opinions. Just sharing for those interested

Nope but you could probably fire him a text.

Been using Uncle Mikes (there are other manufactures) butstock shell holds for a long time. Use the sling stud to hold them in place. They last a long time, when it wears out, throw it away and get another. Pretty cheap.

My rifles all carry at least three rounds and extra's are carried in a jacket pocket. I don't care for the looks of those elastic bands around the butt stock. Anyway if it takes more than even two shots the animal is likely gone anyway!

There are two ways to quickly ruin the balance of a hunting rifle:
No. 1…attach a suppressor
No. 2…attach a buttstock ammo carrier

I can’t understand why anyone would put a butt carrier on a hunting rifle. Usually two shots and the chances are it is done or gone.
The suppressor I can understand for range use.

🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤩🤩🤩
Use one on a lot of my rifles, I like having 9 rounds right on the gun.
Grab my rifle, I've got ammo.


Seeing how it aggravates so many, and reading the comments?
Makes me like them more.



Upset balance?


M7 is butt heavy from the factory.
Tikka muzzle light.
It might affect them noticeably, never used one on either.
It's not noticeable on guns reasonably balanced to begin with.

Even have a sling with loops.
Quickly decided that weight flopping around wasn't for me.

Agreed. Some might not like it or find it useful with their particular style of hunting. If I’m sitting on a stump for the day I get it. However I prefer to track or still hunt. I might cover ten to fifteen miles and might get a crack at more than one deer. Having four in the rifle and another five or so on the buttsock makes sense. I don’t see the issue with balance either especially when I’m ripping off a shot through the irons at fifteen to twenty yards within a second or two at a bumped deer.
Not to mention that my intention is to get a decent guy a little extra attention about his product that he’s getting going and that he makes by hand. Like I said, I appreciate something that’s quality, hand made by the little guy who takes the time and care and puts some pride into their work rather than some generic product that’s puked out by some machine every ten seconds. If the folks who came on here to bitch about it can’t get that through their thick skulls they’re just letting their ignorance and true character shine through.

Mine hold five, more than I need, keep 10 in my pocket for the hell of it. I don’t like the way they look either, but many have them on their rifles.

Given the diversity of this site, anything that anyone posts is likely to attract a position counter to the OP's. Most of the time the counterpoints are presented with an explanation as to why, 'cause everyone is entitled to express their opinions. What other people think is good to hear, otherwise you could become myopic, but that doesn't mean that their comments are useful to you and your situation.

I like the elastic buttstock cartridge carriers, but I mostly use them to quietly carry cartridges in the right side pocket of my camo-orange vests. They are my preferred means to quietly carry extra cartridges, but I can't remember the last time that I needed any of those cartridges. The only rifles that I have them installed on at this time are Ruger American Predators and on those rifles I use the Beartooth comb riser style for the comb riser attribute, leaving the cartrdige loops empty.

You make a great point 260.


It's good to offer a counter, in a respectful way.


One of the biggest things I've learned from the 'Fire, and find most interesting,
is how different things are.


Including results with similar items.

You and I posted differing opinions in the 6.5x55 thread.
My results with 140gr bullets were not good. Downright bad.
120s are the cat's meow. For us.

You like 140s or 160s. Getting results you like, obviously.


I've read of guys shooting Sierra 165 BTHPs out of 300 mags and loving them.
Pass through, say it's a tough bullet. Recommend it for elk.

I've killed numerous deer with that bullet from a 20" 308.
And it's been the most dramatic thing I've ever killed deer with.
Including early BTs out of 7mm and 300 mags.

Double fist exits, often seeing a cloud of hair and gore.
Like the instant kills, hate losing front ends.
Gave up on it.


Here is where so many go off the rails.

I have no way of knowing why others have different results.
Shot placement is a big thing, but not how most wanna argue.
It's not necessarily about ability, like they like to puff up and claim.
Shooting shoulders, ribs, nervous system...rear end?
Same gun, load, different placement, can have much different results.

It's educational to try to understand why others have different results,
instead of claiming my experience is somehow more valid and implying
someone else is lying, or just stupid. I bet there will be numerous guys never
get this far down, they will be searching the mentioned thread, expecting to
find where we were duking it out!