Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Ask The Gunwriters Hunting Rifle Accuracy

When I first started hunting, I was told by my mentor that to cleanly take a Whitetail you had to able to hit a dinner plate offhand at 100 yards reliably. Seemed to work quite well in fact. Now days any rifle, that can not get to about MOA is a disappointment. Do I need that accuracy probably not.

And paper dinner plates is all ya needs. If ya can hits one at the range you expects game to be, youse are goodly.



Gentlemen, please be seated. We'll be taking questions now.



Excuse me, Thomas Atkinson, Beardsley Nugget. I'm the sports editor. I have a question. I recently bought a new pound of H4350. I believe that it is made by Hornady. The can does not look the same as the can that I was using. I bought the old can in the 1960s at a gunshow in Seemyville. It's a great show, even if the arena is a bit small. Anyway, it wasn't a full can, but the old man that was selling it has been in attendance there for years, so I trust him.

I'm shooting a 303 with 180 grain bullets. I bought the rifle in 1959 at Sears. I'm not really sure what the make of it is. All I know is it cost me $19. It might have been a sale.

My question concerns this new pound of powder and the wind. Because I've got fresh powder, will a five or six mile per hour quartering wind have the same affect on the bullet as the old propellant? I'm down to four lead tipped bullets and may have to switch over to plastic tipped bullets. Do they really make plastic tipped bullets? An acquaintance of mine says that's all you can get. Is he pulling my leg? Wouldn't they melt going down the barrel? Wouldn't that affect accuracy? The melting part I mean.

Would the wind affect the plastic tipped bullets more than the lead? Lead is heavier than plastic, after all. My buddy reminded me that a half ounce of plastic definitely weighs less than a half ounce of lead, so that's got to affect the trajectory, right?

Cool old pics Steve.

One non-smoker in the bunch.

Blow up the picture and look between his fingertips.

good to see you posting a bunch Steve.....always enjoyed your humor....

Thanks guys.

These photos prove that if we shoot less and smoke more, we will all be successful in the field.

Yep, I see it now. Heck of a lot handier than one of those pipes, I'd say, in spite of how neat they look.

I think that was the design philosophy behind the F4 Phantom.

Ah J79s. I was with 104s for four years. They used one J79. I always thought that Phantoms smoked more because of the grade of fuel used.

We had one fellow who used to smoke when he flew. More than once, servicing technicians returned his bean bag ashtray - complete with two butts in it. That guy must have smoked a lot, considering the time in the air was less than an hour without external tanks.

439 Sqn plane in Germany. Not my old unit, but the paint scheme was better than 441 Sqn. This was painted up for a Tiger Meet. The 439 Sqn sqn slogan was "Fangs of Death", which changed to "[bleep] of Death' of course.

Dayum, that's almost an Ingwe paint job!

Always thought the Starfighter was a beauty...never could decide which I preferred most, the 104 or the B58. Sleeksters by any measure.

So Steve, I was at the range today and one of the projects was a 50-60s vintage Savage 24; .30-30/20. Shooting lead at about 1600 fps, two slightly different charges of SR4759. 2 Groups of 5 for each charge @ 50 yds were 3" for 16 grains and 2" for 16.5 grains. 311041 GC, LLA lube at 2.57" OAL. 9# trigger and fired on my two hind feet (THF). The 16 grain charge printed to POA while the 16.5 went to the 4 o'clock and 4" from POA.

The 20 bore shoots a very loose pattern of #3 buck at 25 yds.

It was a gorgeous day!

Did I do anything that was statistically significant? Can I kill hogs at 10 yards with this rig?

Dan

PS: I would strap on a 104 in a heartbeat if it wasn't a German crater maker.

You're undergunned. Everyone knows a 30-30 won't take hogs. Use the 20 ga instead with shot bigger than No.6.



They didn't call them widowmakers fer nothin'.

The CO of my old sqn was on final approach, but was coming in too hot. I guess he wanted to be on the drag chute and brakes quickly, so when he touched down, his left hand was ready to yank the chute handle. He pulled, the chute came out and it ripped off the back.

I thought that he would lift off, do a loop and try landing a second time. Although this sounds laughable in a 104, some aerodynamic braking and liberal use of the brakes would have stopped him before he ran out of runway. But he didn't do that.

No doubt panic set in. He was screaming down the runway much too fast and knew that he'd have to take the barrier. He went for his arrestor hook button, but hit the tip tank jettison instead. Two tanks tumbled gracefully through the air and littered the grass. Oops! Then he managed to find the arrestor hook.

Except that this was a 104. He was too late with the hook and the hoof bounced a couple of times off the runway, jumping the cable. He buried his plane nose first into the dirt mound off the end of the runway. Luckily, no one was hurt. He was a Lt.Col then, but retired a Lieut.Gen.

Bury My Heart at Wounded Pride!

Yeah! Drinks all 'round!

Oh Jesus...I think I just cracked a rib!

We should have drinks some week.

D

Some time I'll tell you about the guy who decided to drive his plane off the end of the runway into a culvert in Deci, Sardinia. (Decimomannu Air Base, Italia)

You know, I don't like to speak ill of most other countries, but next to France, well, the Italians sure are different.

Vietato fumare! Except around flammable things like gas, oil and other stuff...

I have had a few skinny barreled rifles that would shoot under an inch at a hunnert for three shot groups.

I've had a few fat barreled rifles that would shoot under .6" at a hunnert.

But I've only owned two rifles that would shoot under a half inch at a hunnert and I still have both of them but their barrels are too fat to enjoy lugging them around.

Most of my hunting shots these days are from 150yds to 300yds and the rifles I use most often for that are "magnum contour" Remingtons that will consistenly group 3 shots under 1.5" any day in any reasonable wind with my handloads.

From this thread I learned what cankles are, Victoria Principal was VERY HOT in her prime and that there must be a lot of internet rifle owners on this forum.

I've met quite a few people that supposedly owned them at ranges and it almost always seemed that there was some crazy reason they wouldn't shoot under 2" that day. Must have been the rifle gremlins. LOL

I've owned a few 2" rifles myself and some of them never got better and they got sold but seriously if you're the typical hunter that rarely if ever shoots beyond 150 yards and you're familiar with your rifle and a reasonably good shot that doesn't loose his or her cool under the pressure of game shooting then 2" is way more than adequate in my opinion.

Now back to the pictures of Victoria Principal....

Bob

What do you consider to be a skinny barrel?

They didn't call them widowmakers fer nothin'.

The CO of my old sqn was on final approach, but was coming in too hot. I guess he wanted to be on the drag chute and brakes quickly, so when he touched down, his left hand was ready to yank the chute handle. He pulled and the chute came out and ripped off the back.

I thought that he would lift off, do a loop and try landing a second time. Although this sounds laughable in a 104, some aerodynamic braking and liberal use of the brakes would have stopped him before he ran out of runway. But he didn't do that.

No doubt panic set in. He was screaming down the runway much too fast and knew that he'd have to take the barrier. He went for his arrestor hook button, but hit the tip tank jettison instead. Two tanks tumbled gracefully through the air and littered the grass. Oops! Then he managed to find the arrestor hook.

Except that this was a 104. He was too late with the hook and the hoof bounced a couple of times off the runway, jumping the cable. He buried his plane nose first into the dirt mound off the end of the runway. Luckily, no one was hurt. He was a Lt.Col then, but retired a Lieut.Gen.

Bury My Heart at Wounded Pride!

Yeah! Drinks all 'round! [/quote]

had this exact same thing happen with the 172 a couple days ago


....

[did NOT have the same thing happen with the 172]

That's because Cessnas pull themselves through the air. They actually don't fly. They pull themselves along on a layer of air, sorta like pulling on a rope, only higher up.

Jets employ the suck - squeeze - bang - blow principle to move through the air. So you can say that jets suck. Or that they blow. It's all very aerodynamical and punchy.

That's nothin' special. Lot if folks think helicopters fly. Not true.

They beat the air into submission.

What jets do is an unnatural act.

the "best" jets are turbofans, where they let the turbine spin somewhat of a propellor