I've been hunting our new lease in South Miss. Several of our plots are less than 50 yards long and not as wide. While sitting in the blinds I've been thinking a handgun would be an ideal weapon to be hunting with.

I've got plenty of experience with handguns in the duty/cc context. I've not hunted much with one. So here is my question to those of you with experience in handgun hunting. Would you be satisfied using a .357 mag. at the above ranges or would you step up in caliber? Keep in mind this will be for southern deer hunting and the occasional hog.

Along with caliber feel free to share what bullets have been most dependable.

Ruger Super BlackHawk Hunter in 44 mag. Or if your lucky enough to find one, in .41 mag. Either one of those calibers will easily kill deer or hogs with regular old Factory Ammo.

A .357 mag will no doubt kill deer. Hell, ive killed them with my Glock in .357 Sig Caliber. But that was with optimum conditions, and a perfect shot at 20 yards.
But if you want to stretch your shots out to 100 yards, I think you'd be better served with a .41 or .44 mag. JMHO. Though.

A properly loaded 357 mag will work at the ranges you suggest. A 41 or 44 mag will work better if you can shoot them well.

I personally would feel comfortable with the 357 Magnum for 50 yards and under , in a handgun bigger is usually better for hunting . I will probably use my Glock 20 in 10 mm on the Boar Hunt this Spring with the Hornady 200 XTP loaded with Hod Longshot in Starline Brass

I actually have a good amount of range time with a 629 and Redhawk out to 100 yards. I'm comfortable using the caliber. I no longer have either gun so stepping up in caliber is going to require a purchase. Not a terrible predicament to have to suffer!

Dang good recommendation, Bea. My Glock 20 is one heck of a good hunting handgun. I've killed a truckload of feral hogs with mine using the Hornady 200gr XTP over a max handload of AA-9. I'm getting 1350fps out of mine with that load.

And it's my favorite handgun for when I'm Bowhunting in the Rockies for Mule Deer & Elk.
I wouldn't be afraid to use it on a Grizz in the Lower 48, in an unexpected oh ShiiTT confrontation, if that's all I had with me, either. But for Grizz Country, I carry a spare 15 round mag loaded with Buffalo Bore's 10mm 220gr hard cast loading going around 1200 fps.

I use a GP-100 in 357 mag with a 6" barrel. Seems my eyes are not what they used to be so I had to put a 2x7 Burris on it. The scope sure makes putting your bullet where it needs to go alot easier.

I load a 158gr Hornady xtp with a max charge of win 296. I limit my shots to around 50yds and so far have been very impressed with the proformance of that bullet and load.

Ive used both the 357 mag and 44 mag revolvers for deer and hog hunting for decades , either produces a fatal wound if well placed, but if you hit a deer or hog well that doesn,t always insure an instant DRT kill., and distances traveled after a hit with the 44 mag tend to be shorter in my experience

Ive loaded a hard cast 44 caliber 300-310 grain lyman or LEE gas check bullet over 20-21 grains of H110 powder in my 44 mag for decades , (start with 19 grains and work up a 1/2 grain at a time ) it shoots clear thru most hogs and deer exiting and still going strong so be aware you don,t want to shoot a deer with a second deer directly behind the first, and I,d also point out that occasionally even well hit game runs 40-80 yards after bullet impact

http://handloads.com/loaddata/default.asp?Caliber=44%20Magnum&Weight=All&type=Handgun

If you've heard hand guns just don,t put deer down and a 357 mag is just not up to the task, I can tell you from DECADES OF experience that yes theres a difference, and the 44 MAG PROPERLY is a bit more effective, but the 357 MAG LOADED WITH A GOOD 158 GRAIN SOFT POINT OR THE BULLET I'VE USED FROM NEI (link below)FOR decades is 100% lethal in the hands of a decent shot and you can get complete pass thru shots with decent hard cast bullets in most hand gun calibers suitable for hunting, yes you make a good point that the 357 mag doesn,t always seem to put a deer down with near the authority that as an example a 44 mag does but its been my experience that results are a good deal more about exact shot placement, than any change in caliber, within certain limits.
Ive used both caliber hand guns for 40 plus years
http://www.neihandtools.com/catalog/index.html

a stiff load of blue dot, 2400, OR h110 and this gas check bullet has done the job for decades, but remember shot placements critical with a hand gun, and a 6"-10" BARREL LENGTH ALLOWS YOU TO HAVE BOTH A LONGER SITE RADIAS AND GET THE FULL BENEFIT FROM THE POWDER BURN.

http://www.handloads.com/loaddata/default.asp?Caliber=357%20Magnum&Weight=All&type=Handgun

+1.............

A survey was done long ago between the .357 and .44 mag. The .357 lost 50% of deer hit while the .44 had 100% recovery. The .41 is a "tweener" but can work better then a .357, the .44 is better. Most .40's in autos are as good as the .41. But the .44 is better.
I don't like the stuff about perfect hits when hunting, few if any can do it 100% of the time, it is bull to the highest degree. It is a revolver and 99% can't handle it off hand.
Guys shoot 2" to 4" groups at 25 yards and tell you they hit deer in the spine at 50 to 100 yards. Get over it, it is a lie.
You have buck fever, hold a revolver off hand and can place a shot exact, where do you come from?
What you want is a caliber that works if off a little on the hit. The .44 will do it. The .357 is sad and must be perfect but I forget there are so many perfect shots on the net.
Some do it as I see but the average hunter CAN'T. I suppose I could use a .357 but I don't like it. I hunt to kill as fast and clean as I can so iffy guns are never used.
My deer hunting starts with the .44 and the best ever is the .475 Linebaugh in the BFR.

I tend to agree with this. Although I have heard of good results with the 357 with the proper bullets, I personally stay with the 41 or bigger. Just not willing to take the chance.
Have had really good luck with the 41mag, and flat love the 475L.

i agree with bfr i've shot deer with 357 in my younger days and while only lost one.I hunt with with 475 or 500 most of time with once in a great while the 41 mag which only shot one doe with and while i didn't kill it she walked in front of my partner and he killed it.

with all that sai if you have funds step up to a 44

I agree that the 44 mag is higher on the food chain than the 357. I do not agree that a 357 will loose 50% of the deer shot. I never lost nor had a problem killing deer or hogs with a 357 when I used one, but now use 41 mag or larger as the larger bores are definitely more decisive.

My inclination if choosing to step up in caliber was going to another 629. A couple of you have talked about using your Glock 20s. To be honest, that had not occurred to me. The 10mm is a step up. What interest me the most is getting a capable hunting cartridge in a handgun that can readily double up for CCW use. I went back and looked up an article in Shooting Times written by the late Greg Rodriguez where he was using a 1911 10mm on his place for those very reasons.

"...was using a 1911 10mm on his place for those very reasons."

Don't get Safariman started!

Jerry

Jerry, all are welcome to the table!!!

Not sure why one would ever choose a 41 over a 44, and i own both. I have read all of the bullschite reasons and they are, well, schite. Buy about any 240 or + gr load and go kill the wimpie deer. Ammo is easier to find as are components if you are a hand loader.

I can't see why anyone that owns both can't see the advantages of the 41 mag. I know for a fact that I can shoot the 41 with full power loads faster accurately than I can the 44 mag with 240's at full power.

I felt the same as EdM until I gave the 41 a fair comparison and then The 41 became a favorite. The 41 is a deer killing machine. 210 bullets of the same design as 240 in the 44 will out penetrate the 240's.

I would not hesitate to use the 41 mag on elk, not in then least.

Having used the 41 a great deal for many years I can tell you it doesn't take a back seat to the 44 at all. I know I sound like a broken record defending the 41 but it just flat works. I only use 230 gr Keiths or 250 gr LBT's but 45 years of success with a cartridge has to mean something & its not just on deer. Elk, bear, feral hogs & moose have been victims & all were with one shot.
Is it magic...no, but neither is the 44. If you are shooting factory ammo you are looking at 12 ft lbs of recoil in the 41 maggie as opposed to 16 ft lbs in the 44, thats 25%. I've also stated many times that if it came down to one gun it would be a 44 for me but not by much because I can't see much difference.

Dick

i shoot a 230grain keith style bullet out of the .41. or can, that's a .410 bullet. I shoot a 240grain keith style bullet out of the 44mag, that's .429. I don't see much difference.
now i am playing with the 310grain keith style bullet in the .44, which 41 i don't think goes that heavy.
but i don't see where in the majority of cases the 44 overwelms the 41.
i think that 310grain lee i am running at about 1000fps.
Now i am also running a 285grain SAA bullet, keith style, through the .45 colt. With the 8inch tube smith, it is doing about 1100fps. I don't see a lot of difference in them within normal distances.

A survey was done long ago. It was fact. It was because of bullet performance. Most made for people shooting. Super fast expansion and no penetration.

The .41 suffered at the start with poor hunting bullets. It was made for police and humans but they could not take the recoil so it was fading. Nothing wrong for hunting with a good boolit. For many years there were no bullets/boolits worth a darn.
It is a caliber with a following but darn near going away.

There's a certain point where you just get too much bullet weight for any caliber, it might still be shooting accurately but anything can be over done. I'm only talking up to 250 grs in the 41 maggie, beyond that the 44 rules, but then you can drag the 45 Colt into the fight & its a whole new ball game. Anyone thats REALLY used the 41 maggie will tell you how good it is & how close it is to the 44 (my favorite)

Dick

I could not ever see a need for a bullet over 250 grains in the 41 mag they way they penetrate.

I've used a GP100 in .357 mag, and a .44 mag SuperBlackhawk.

I am a huge fan of the .44 mag over the .357 from a handgun. Either will do the job at the distances you describe though.

If I were going out to purchase a new hunting handgun for deer, it would not be a .357. I'd pick .41 mag, .44 mag, .44 special, or .45 colt. However, if I had a very accurate .357 already I would not hesitate to use it.

My first choice bullet is the 158 grain XTP HP. Most any 158 grain JHP works ok broadside into the rib cage. If you have to shoot from a forward quartering angle, then maybe a little more weight would be good. I am very intrigued by the Speer 170 grain JFP but I haven't had a chance to shoot any yet. A Barnes X (140?) would be another interesting option.

Tom

A .357 is simply a .44 Magnum set the "stun"!

In all seriousness, I will take a .44 pretty much every time. One of the significant advantages of a larger bore is that you don't have to push them nearly as hard.

Personally I prefer the big, slow, easy push of the .44 over the sharp snap of the .357.

There really is no need to push a heavy for caliber, big bullet past 1200ish, when you are hunting under typical and reasonable ranges/ conditions.

With higher velocities, most of the time you are only gaining a slightly flatter trajectory. Those said trajectories are most often not really an issue under average conditions.

I would use your current situation as a perfect excuse to acquire a Redhawk, Blackhawk (Bisley) or Model 29 Smith and Wesson. A great .44 from S&W is the 5" Classic. In my usage of various lengths of .44 barrels I found the 5" to be a perfect "compromise" between packability and shootability. For purely shooting and less emphasis on packing, the 6.5" Model 29 is Pure Joy.

For the regulars here, yeah I know I sound like a broken record...



Cheers all!

So is the 44 Mag that much better than a 41 Mag? I have both, and much prefer the 41 mag.

after watching several friends use a 41 mag I see the results are a bit more similar to the 44 mag than the 357 mag , but with only a few deer and hogs being shot, with the 41 mag compared to the 44 and 357 , Id be reluctant to suggest its any less effective than the 44 if properly loaded and used.
a quick look at load data suggests the 44 has a small but noticeable advantage


44
http://handloads.com/loaddata/default.asp?Caliber=44%20Magnum&Weight=All&type=Handgun


41
http://handloads.com/loaddata/defau...ype=Handgun&Order=Powder&Source=

357
http://handloads.com/loaddata/defau...ype=Handgun&Order=Powder&Source=

I don't necessarily think the .44 is that much better. I think it is an advantage to shoot Elmers favorite for logistical reasons.

Though if a person forward projects and buys components before they become scarce and the ammo companies are only producing the most popular calibers,a guy can be well set up.

As far as in the field use, unless you are using the heaviest bullet weights, I doubt a person or animal would know the difference.

I've been carrying/shooting a .44 since my teens, so I am inclined to stick with what has proven to work for me.

My personal "magic formula" for deer handguns is .40 cal minimum, 200 grain bullet minimum, 1200 fps minimum. I've often thought about trying to locate a Buckeye Special in .38-40 / 10mm.

For deer I don't think the .44 is particularly better than the .41. It's not worse, either. In a practical sense, availability of bullets and cases is more important than performance differences.

The place the .44 separates itself from the .41 is bigger game like maybe black bear but particularly elk. Look for a .41 caliber jacketed bullet over 220 grains. OTOH, most every bullet maker makes 300 grain .44s and I think there are a couple heavier. While saying that, though, if you switch to cast bullets, everything that can be said in favor of the .44 over the .41 can also be said about Ruger-level .45 Colt over .44 magnum.

Tom

sooner or later bob will convert you to the darkside with the .41magnum

you made me go back and look at some of my reloading notes:
as i have a buckeye special ruger in 38.40/10mm.
using a 200gr xtp and same round in a glock 20 and the blackhawk:
glock ruger
1212 1318fps
1211 1302
1218 1303
1213 1290
1224 1301
says a lot for accuracy no 9 powder in my opinion.
as i mentioned .45colt, this was fired out of a 8inch tube smith model 25, 270keith style saa cast to 282grains, with 2400
1034fps
1045
1007
1005
1028
1022 These were not "ruger only" type loads. so the .45colt gave up 20% or so velocity, but 200grain to 280 grain bullet. Which to me it works out in the wash.

45 Colt

Not sure we're saying exactly the same thing or picturing exactly the same situation, so I don't necessarily want to argue, but I can't agree either.

For deer, 200 is enough to be reliable. Once you reach 100% reliable, more weight is not better, it's just more weight and recoil.

On the flip side, my perception, shooting iron sights out to the edge of my comfort zone, is I don't have to hold over at 1200 fps. I do at 1000.

To me it matters. To you, I don't know. Go with what makes you happy, I'm not telling you you're wrong for you, only why your answer isn't right for me.

Once we're talking about something bigger than deer, I'll probably grab the loads you've chosen and cut the range to 40-50 yards instead of 90-110. When the question changes, generally so should the answer.

In the .45 Colt, my 7-1/2" barreled blackhawk shoots very well with 300 grain speer or hornady bullets and 22.5 to 23 grains of Win 295, roughly 30,000 cup and a hair under 1200 fps. There's not a lot I wouldn't hunt with that in the lower 48 states. Eventually I'll probably get an LBT mold in the 320-350 grain range and slow them down a little, but .. no rush while I have a big pile of jacketed bullets.

Tom

I appreciate the experiences shared so far. Some have promoted the use of a 10mm Glock and that idea intrigued me. I've looked into the caliber more and would be comfortable using it.

Today I went to local shops to find a M20 and one of the new S&W M69s. Did not find the M69 but was able to check out the M20. I reconfirmed my previous opinion that the Glock just does not fit my hand. For the time being I'm holding off making a purchase until I check out the M69 unless I come across a deal on a M629 I just can't pass up. Given that I have brass and dies for the .44 mag. that seems like the most sensible choice.

I think you are making a good choice. IMO there is no compelling reason to pick a .41 over a .44 unless you just happen to like having a less common caliber. Anything the .41 can do the .44 can do as well or better, the ballyhoo about slightly less recoil notwithstanding. They are peas in a pod, but ammo, component, and gun availability favors the .44. You are setup to load .44 so I would go that route.

Talk recoil for a second. The .41 has a very slightly smaller frame and a fluted cylinder, less weight. I find the .41 is less pleasant to shoot with a sharp recoil and more noise.
I have shot too many .357's that had sharper recoil then the .44 with double the muzzle blast.
Go to your gun shop and find .41 rounds, you need to load your own. They are not stocked because hardly anyone uses them.
My friend has his .41 here until he comes to shoot, I don't like it but can shoot my SBH .44 all day and I use a 330 gr boolit.
Shoot a SBH hunter with a 7-1/2" barrel and you will wonder where the recoil went.
But recoil does not bother me at all and my .500 JRH and .475 BFR's are no worse then the .44. But to have a .357 bash my knuckle worse then a .500 is kind of stupid.
I can shoot through pain but sure do not like it.
You are on thin ice if you tell me the .357 or .41 kicks less.

HA!

The Force is strong in this one

Being an Idahoan and a long time reader of Keith, coupled with hunting lots of the same grounds, converting me away from the .44 that I have shot since a kid will be pretty tough.

In the not so distant pass I had 13 different hunting handguns 10 were in .41 RemMag and 3 were in various .41 caliber wildcats. I now have only one a .41 wildcat left. At the height of my .41 usage I loaded one load for all of those guns; a 250g WFN LBT over 17.5g of 2400. That load measured 1134-1265fps depending on the action. I had both revolvers and TC Contenders. That load killed things very dead very quickly. I'm now loading the Barnes 180g XBP in my Contender .41 wildcat. Always said if Barnes made a 190g X I'd switch and never look back. Their 180 is close enough.
The two problems you will have with a .41 RemMag is; first, ALWAYS having people telling you that you must have a .44 or larger to kill deer; second, is finding a .41.

If all I had was a 357 revolver I'd use it to 75 yds for deer with top level loads, like those available from Buffalo Bore or Underwood, but if hogs were in the mix, I'd think twice about carrying a 357 in the field.

Actually, I personally wouldn't buy a 357 handgun today, as there are so many more interesting options...A 10mm being one of those. Having up to 15 hard hitting rounds in your hand is a significant step up. The G20 is a decent balance overall and worthwhile getting used to it. Unless your hands are tiny, you can adapt to the Glock. I admit it's not comfortable, but in spite of that I have no problem shooting it well.

You can do some good work with a 44 Ruger SA, though mine is a 45. Even moderate 44 loads are more better than a 357

Now a 357 rifle is a very different animal...

I love 'em all!
Got 'em all and shoot 'em all.
.357 maximum, .41 magnum, .44 magnum, & .45 Long colt ...
The .357 maximum wins! Every time!
But if quibbling needs to be done, use the .444 marlin and let the elbows be the fulcrum!
Enjoy the smell of burnt powder.

I would definitely put a low power scope on whatever you choose. For me at least my ability to shoot consistenly well past about 30 yards goes up dramatically with one.

For deer hunting don't be concerned with fast follow up shots or hi-cap mags...won't be an issue.

I know where some are.

I once felt the same about the 41 Magnum. But, then I bought a 45 Colt & never looked back. I don't own 41 Mag anything now.

Most is bull, telling about boolit placement when most can't hit a gallon jug at 50 yards. True, prove me wrong. .357 shooters say where you hit a deer counts and defend it. It is all a wash. The amount of revolver shooters that can hit anything is so small past 10 yards it is funny.
The worst thing a revolver shooter will say is to hit the right spot. buck fever and shakes. long range.
Come here and I want to see any of you bust a gallon jug at 100 yards off hand.
The reason for large calibers is for a shot a few inches off. But .357 shooters are experts.

Sounds like the start of a fairy tale.
What survey,when, on what animals.what conditions.
NO and I repeat NO catridge has a 100 % Recovery rate(unless only 1 was shot in the so called survey ) ,whether rifle or handgun.
You are as full of it as a Christmas turkey.
You are truly a legend in your own mind.

funny how great minds come to the same conclusion, i have been using 17.5grains of 2400 with that 225-230grain bullet, wfn.
as to finding a .41, rjm kind of took care of that for me, just have to look in the safe.
this thread has made me think of something tho. I have a .44mag barrel for a thompson contender that i have never used, i am going to have to fire some stuff through that and a chrony just to see what the relative difference is.

i think quite a few people can do that. Watched a guy that posts on here regularly with too many letters pop a gong repeatedly at various rondy's with a 1911 off hand. but i don't think a gallon milk jug at 100 is all that much for someone experienced with a handgun.

I'm still trying to figure out why buck fever is such an epidemic in BFR's world. I guess it's all in who you associate with...

A .357 will do the job at that range - but if I were looking at buying a gun for that purpose, I would go with the .44mag or .45 Colt.

BFR's claim that the larger calibers will make up for poor shooting is pure bunk. His "everybody gets buck fever" claim is likewise bunk.

The real problem with handgun hunting is poor range estimation. The bigger calibers work better because they carry more momentum for better penetration at longer distances. When you use a round that doesn't penetrate well beyond 50yds, range estimation is critical. If that buck is standing closer to 75yds than you thought, penetration gets into "luck" territory. A bigger, more powerful round will make up for that to a point.

But a miss is still a miss.

I would recommend either, 357mag, 41mag or 44mag. Good bullets abound in any of them.
Get a good pistol, my recommendation is for it to have a low power scope, get a good portable rest you can use.
Nothing beats a steady rest for shooting game, for rifle or pistol.
Make sure you can hit a pie plate at 50yds consistently and then go kill something.

Sounds like there are pleanty of internet commandos here who will tell you what is "best".

I have used my 44mag RSRH on several occasions for killing deer. Used a 250gr bullet and a 300gr HP in it, they both worked well.

I have hunted with my 41mag but I haven't seen anything to shoot at when toting it.

Good luck! Get out there and practice and have fun with whatever you decide.

I don't know bfr, or do a lot of handgun hunting.. All of my game has been taken with a .44 mag. or 45 Colt.. But when I read his post on shooting game I guess I read "excitement" rather that a real case of the shakes associated with buck fever.. Don't you experience some excitement when you see a nice buck, or to a degree even a doe, and you know you are going to shoot?? I do, and I have shot hundreds of head of game.. Excitement is part of the thrill of hunting.. My excitement raises when I am trying to make a good shot with a revolver on a big game animal.. I do like a little more power rather than a little less.. As some one said range estimation is very important with a sixgun.. My last game was a doe antelope taken with a .44 mag, but a load on 10.5 grains of Unique and 235 gr. Keith style HP.. I had a friend with me, and he ranged it as I got set for the shot.. 98 yards.. When I knew that, I was little less tense as I knew the doe was well within my skill range.. One shot did the business.
Here we can't shoot over bait, and antelope are constantly moving around.. A good broadside shot is likely to change quickly.. When a guy is shooting over bait or a food plot at animals that are unaware of his presence, and a known range, the situation changes quickly.. A six gun of less power and range would work fine, and not used until conditions were right..

The "excitement" is a result of adrenaline that enhances all the senses and creates a tunnel-vision effect that amplifies concentration.

Fine motor skills, like trigger control, tend to be over-amplified, but that is why repetitive practice is so much more important with a handgun, so that skill will be in muscle memory.

Sight alignment and target acquisition is enhanced, vision is enhanced, and time is stretched. Without these effects, we would have died out as a species long ago, but the adrenaline junkies survived... they is us!

If you don't feel that, hunting may not be your thing.

In that case sky diving is a proven substitute...

Excitement is one thing - but BFR speaks of (all) handgun hunters going to pieces and unable to make a killing shot. And then he implies that the answer to that is going to a bigger caliber...

I have hunted with them all. I guess I fall under the term "hard core handgun hunter", I love the challenge.
From 22, 357, 41, 10mm, 44mag, 454Casull. I have come full circle and back to the 44mag for all my hunting needs and back to open sights. Its light enough to carry all day but still have plenty of power. I am a reloader for all my hunting rounds and like a bullet to expand rather than a solid. There is two schools of thoughts on this and have found the newer controlled expanding bullets drop em quickest. It also keeps my loads down to a mid level and still opens up the bullet. I don't have to push them as fast and in turn keeps my accuracy up for longer range shots. My longest handguns shot in my carrer was two years ago at 175 yards on a large mature doe. I hit her with a 240XTP on a broadside shot and she dropped like a bag of sand. It was a bang/flop as if she was shot with a 300 Win Mag. I'll post some pictures. The full story is on Hornady's web site since I use Hornady components. Shows that a 44mag handgun has plenty of snot even out past the normal range.

175 yard Handgun shot story at Hornady Web Site

Some of you guys might have already seen this on the S&W forum but I'll post the link too. It gives a little more details.
S&W forum discussion of the hunt.

Here are some pics. Obviously I do practice long range handgun shots (alot) and don't recommend them unless you are very confident you can make them.









Another critter taken with my trusty S&W classic 22. I took him in the neck.

He was such a nice grey fox and since it was a handgun kill, I had my taxidermist mount him cleverly under a black bear I killed years before. I think it came out great.

[img]http://i272.photobucket.com/albums/jj182/TheMystro1971/Foxmountnet.jpg[/img]

I have a couple of fine old .357 mag revolvers, and if pressed, would not be afraid to use them on deer - assuming I was very sure of the shot, good rest, un hurried shot, etc. I like them better as defensive weapons. Dad discouraged 3 mean drunks with one of them one day at his shop, and I will always own that revolver. A 5" N frame is also a fine vintage piece, and I would not be afraid to load it heavy.

I messed a little with a long barrel 41 in college, drinking the silhouetter's Koolaid about shooting flatter - which does matter at 200 yards. But in the end I bought a .44 S&W Classic, and will always own a couple of them. They shoot very well, and make bigger holes than a .357. Shoot clean through critters, too. I find the 5" Classic, like MS, to be a real well balanced gun, even with heavy loads, and not bad to pack.

I've since added a .480 Ruger, and I may go for a .475, maybe even something bigger, to make bigger holes

I've got euro pistols, single shots, 1911's, and other flavors, but in mind handgun hunting starts at .44 caliber.

Love the .45 Colt, it's my favorite but my next single action is going to be a Blackhawk in .41 Magnum, and I'm looking forward to it. That's not to take anything away from the .357 Mag though, it would have zero issues taking deer, heck I know people who with one shot from a G17 downed a deer quickly, which is to say that deer aren't that hard to kill.

bfr..,

A survey was done long ago between the .357 and .44 mag. The .357 lost 50% of deer hit while the .44 had 100% recovery

HORSEFEATHERS!!!

That must have been a survey of wannabe pistol shooters or arm chair hunters. I was a conservation officer for six years in the state you claim to live in. During that period (1970s) every officer in the state carried a 4" M19 S&W .357. With that superb weapon we killed wild dogs, finished off crippled game including deer and bear and even a few scumbags. Not one of us ever complained about lack of fire power. In fact, I only heard complaints when the department switched to the .40S&W.

One winter I carried a 1917 S&W in .45ACP under my jacket as a second gun. After using it in a number of situations, I traded it off as it was decidedly lacking in power compared to the .357.

I have personally killed enuff deer with that 4".357 to fill the bed of several pick ups, the longest shot being across Big Coal River about 80yds or so, and never lost one.

So, in my experience, the guy who says a .357 won't cleanly kill a deer either hasn't tried or can't shoot.

O

Fre..,

My guess is, if he really does own those monster magnums he claims to have, the Dude doesn't have buck fever but a world class flinch.

O

You did not see what I said at all. It was the first bullets that were were not right for deer. Same with the .41. It IS NOT THE CALIBER. The wrong bullet has to be placed exactly and I am right that almost all hunters CAN'T do it.
Sounds like you were feet from a car hit animal most of the time.
I would love to see you shoot a 4" at 80 yards to kill animals with ANY caliber. I bet if I put a bottle of water at 80 yards you will never hit it.

maybe you should practice more.....hell i could hita pop can at 100 with a 22 pistol 7 out of 10 shots with a gun with fixed sights that was lobbing the bullets like an old fashioned catabult.....a centerfire with a flatter trajectory would make it alot easier......100 yards is prolly farther than i would shoot a deer off hand with a revolver, if im gonna be shooting that far might as well just pack a rifle, but the shot is far from being extremely difficult....

Judging others by yourself again???

i think he would chit himself if he ever watched Paladin shoot

I had the buck fever when I started deer hunting, archery. But with the string tension it went away. I have had the shakes but after so many deer it is no longer there. I have over 255 deer with the bow.
But I see friends that come to hunt. They can put all shots in the bull on paper but can NEVER hit a deer. My neighbors all hunt and to hear the amount of shots is crazy, they can't hit with the rifle. One friend missed 7 deer last season but is a good shot.
It is no detraction to those with control but so many just can't do it with an animal. Some are calm but most are not.
I lost count but have over 550 deer kills and still will not bluff you that I can shoot a deer in the spine or in the eye. Deer move, are at all distances and angles. I prefer a deer walking and even hit better on a running deer. I prefer the smooth movement of the gun instead of trying to hold steady on a standing deer.
I kill deer off hand with revolvers well over 100 yards but prefer 20 or less.
Ask Craig how many deer he has killed.
Yes some here do shoot good but let me replace your .22 with a .500 and show me.
I will bet a lot of money that Craig can't hit a bottle at 50 yards with my guns and will make tater furrows in the ground. I will put him on stand with deer all over to see him fail.
I know how stinking hard it is to shoot revolvers, don't blow smoke about shooting targets and not animals. Most can't shoot 5" at 10 yards.
I met those guys. White House security guy came to shoot his Glock. Big tough guy, full of himself. He put a large target at 10 yards and missed paper with most shots. My friend Pete came down, asked if he could shoot the Glock. He poked the center out. I was busting targets at 100 yards with revolvers. The big POS left and never came back.
I meet the bluffers all the time and keyboard experts are worse.
Craig does not believe because he does not know because he is a bad shot and can't load right.

We're so unworthy of Jim's presence.



No shooting, just reading. Doesn't hold a candle to Jim's magical half inch groups on paint cans but it is realistic and most importantly, it did really happen.

Sure, but how high did you aim? The Ruger Mark I was on at 25 yards and the bullet crossed the line of sight again at 80 yards. That means you were not aiming at the can and that is OK.
The Ruger will be 53" low at 200 yards but I can hit steel there with the right hold over.
My best 500 yard group with the 45-70 BFR was aimed at a tree branch 26" feet high. ( Not sure, spotter told me where I was.) No way to measure. Craig would run down with a tape to tell me I was wrong!
Hey Craig, show targets without lying.
JWP is fading away from sites because of lies and hatred. Personal hatred. You should see the PM's, the man is brain damaged.

I feel cheated. I missed out on seeing all the bad shooting and buck fever that my friends were supposed to exhibit. Would have been fun to see.

It must be a regional thing....

Is that a group? The SRH can do 1/2" 50 yards. Looks like a 10 yard group to me.
How about three shots at 100 yards from my SBH off hand.

You're so predictable it's hardly even funny. Such an idiot, you goad people into posting pics as "proof" and then, just like clockwork, you do just what you did right there. For all to see, in a nutshell, what a spiteful, narrow-minded and willfully ignorant moron you really are. Nobody believes your half inch group nonsense, unless it's YOU who's shooting at 10yds.

You get the shakes when the bottle runs dry???

Give it up Craig. You have no idea what a SRH will do. You can't make a revolver shoot.
The three left cans were shot at 200 yards with revolvers. SRH and others. The right one shot twice at 100 yards.
Call me a liar. But you show nothing. You don't like cans and make fun but you are a loss to those that want to learn. I can tell how but you just can't.
I have been going crazy with PM's and E mails to help and no one is denied,. I will do my best for all. You offer nothing.
I want NOTHING other then to help because we are shooters and a brotherhood. Respect and friends. Something you have not learned. I see you bashing your hands and screaming bloody murder.

Show something or shut up.
I start at 50 yards and go to 500 meters so for you, stupid, that is 547 yards.
The only thing you can prove is when you drop a boolit on your foot. The SRH group you showed would be about right at 700 yards.
You love Elmer but he was RIGHT and you can't do it.
I was shooting the .44 in 1956 to 400 and all the way to 550 yards off hand but you think 10 yards is far.
You should buy a rifle but don't hunt here, I don't want crippled deer.

Do you keep every can you shoot?



Travis

I have killed deer with the .357, .41 mag, and the .45 colt, and I hand load for all of them.

But if limited to one handgun for deer hunting it would be the .44 SPL. Covers all the bases very well. Accurate, hits hard, and very pleasant to shoot. A 240 hard cast at 1000 fps works very well.

Can't pass up an opportunity to bash some body that isn't even involved.

Again with the "measuring" contest. Pathetic is not a strong enough word. For the record, smart guy, I don't claim to be a fantastic shot. I don't even claim to be better than you. I'm just more truthful. You don't even see the hypocrisy of your own posts. You ask for pics as "proof" of something, yet discredit any pic posted by anyone but yourself. Fact is, anyone can post anything and claim it is whatever they wish. I shot the target above at 50yds. It was the last group of the day, with a sixgun I hadn't shot in several years, getting the new MatchDot on paper and doing some preliminary testing. It was four shots instead of five because I had a misfire in my last ten rounds. That is the truth. I just as easily could've claimed it was fired at 100 or 200yds but unlike yourself, I'm not here to be "top dog" or to get my ego stroked. I'm here because I love this [bleep] and have dedicated more of my life to it than not.

I have no doubt that the SRH could do better with a tailored load and/or in better hands. None whatsoever. However, it is the rare revolver that will shoot an inch or less at 50yds. Your claims of bone stock Rugers shooting that well are simply bullshit. That is typically the realm of Freedom Arms or custom line-bored five-shot Rugers. I'm not talking about a one time fluke but consistent results. Unlike you, I don't do all my shooting from the bench and only do it for testing purposes. You see, in the real world, 4MOA is good accuracy from a revolver.

As for the rest of what I do, I picked up and moved 750miles from where I grew up to have a place to shoot and hunt. Both of which I do year round. No, I don't take a bunch of pictures of the critters or paint cans that I shoot. I never felt the need and because like I said, anyone can post anything on the internet and make whatever claim they like.

You don't want to help people, you want to be revered like Taffin but don't have what it takes to make it so. That is the cold, hard truth.

A preliminary shot of my new gun room, my latest offering in the dick measuring contest. You know, that thing I spent all that money building that I don't really need because I don't "do" anything. Douchebag.....

You don't know diddly-squat about brotherhood, pal. Give it a rest. You have no credibility here. None.

Fine with me and I don't need a special room. That is 7 yard shooting at the most.
You see, I am not a better shooter then most and can be worse. I only claim to make the revolver shoot because of a lot of work.
Yes, I keep cans to show you how a revolver can shoot.
But I have a stack of targets too.
How about the last two bullets I had at 200 meters on a cardboard chicken. Open sights from Creedmore.
I was shooting the pistol and finished with the .44 SBH.
Craig can't show anything, he just loves the keys on the board.

What, no snide comment about my new gun room, oh master of the two shot group?

You'd cry if I told you how much money I make pecking on this keyboard.

You now claim to have lost count at over 550 deer, yet here in June of 2012 you claimed to have killed 420 deer averaging 6 to 7 deer a year.



http://www.handgunhunt.com/forum/ubbthreads.php/ubb/showflat/Number/110930/page/0/fpart/4#top


#110773 - 06/16/12 10:52 AM Re: Pros and Cons: Bow vs Gun! [Re: Gregg Richter]
430man
addict


Registered: 01/18/04
Posts: 694

Offline
I always loved bow hunting and am somewhere around 300 bow kills on deer.
I have had bows where you could never hit a deer or squirrel because of the high frequency noise you cant hear. Others do not bother them.
Gun fire does not bother deer, only a bullet hitting close to them or the sonic boom as it misses. Revolvers have been great and I have shot many deer in a group where the deer not shot stayed there. I shot one from a herd once and it fell. The rest of the herd bedded close. I have had to climb from a stand and shoo deer away.
The wrong bow will scare a deer faster then any gun.
To hunt from 30' or even 20' is too high. 12' to 15' is best and from the ground is even better. Your chances of a good hit decrease with the height.
I limit shots with the bow to 20-25 yards but can extend the revolver to 100. I still like 25 yards though. Make the revolver like a bow with extended range. Both kill the same.

Top Notify Email Post

_________________________________________________________________________


#110846 - 06/17/12 10:00 AM Re: Pros and Cons: Bow vs Gun! [Re: wapitirod]
430man
addict


Registered: 01/18/04
Posts: 694

Offline
Originally Posted By: wapitirod
I think something else that comes into play to is you boys in the south and east are used to being able to shoot alot of deer with high success rates. Here in the west most mule deer hunts are on a draw so you may only be able to hunt with a firearm every 2 to 5 years but bow seasons are normally general tags. Where I'm at you can hunt blacktails on a general tag but statewide the success rate is around 10%. The point being when you can only take one deer a year if your lucky you put more thought into how you want to try and take it.

Yes, move east!


I shoot 5 to 7 deer a season but only until I can not give meat away. My yard is full of deer every day. I put two in my freezer and give neighbors deer.
Down south I guess they are like rats!
In your situation, you need a rifle or you will not have any venison.
Deer in the woods are still deer in the woods and very hard to get a shot at no matter how many are here. But chances are much better.
I remember the days if you seen a deer in Ohio, you called the paper. I still managed a bow kill every season, then PA, Mich and WV. Even then I would get 4 deer.
As more deer are allowed I have to quit because I just get tired of cutting meat.
I wish you could hunt with me.

Top Notify Email Post

_________________________________________________________________________


#110869 - 06/17/12 01:57 PM Re: Pros and Cons: Bow vs Gun! [Re: jwp475]
430man
addict


Registered: 01/18/04
Posts: 694

Offline
Originally Posted By: jwp475
Originally Posted By: 430man
Originally Posted By: wapitirod
I think something else that comes into play to is you boys in the south and east are used to being able to shoot alot of deer with high success rates. Here in the west most mule deer hunts are on a draw so you may only be able to hunt with a firearm every 2 to 5 years but bow seasons are normally general tags. Where I'm at you can hunt blacktails on a general tag but statewide the success rate is around 10%. The point being when you can only take one deer a year if your lucky you put more thought into how you want to try and take it.


Yes, move east!

I shoot 5 to 7 deer a season but only until I can not give meat away. My yard is full of deer every day. I put two in my freezer and give neighbors deer.
Down south I guess they are like rats!
In your situation, you need a rifle or you will not have any venison.
Deer in the woods are still deer in the woods and very hard to get a shot at no matter how many are here. But chances are much better.
I remember the days if you seen a deer in Ohio, you called the paper. I still managed a bow kill every season, then PA, Mich and WV. Even then I would get 4 deer.
As more deer are allowed I have to quit because I just get tired of cutting meat.
I wish you could hunt with me.



How many Deer have you taken with a handgun?


I do not count anymore, but maybe 125 or more. Much easier then archery! Many on a dead run in the thick too. I have been here over 25 to 26 years and around 5 a year with revolvers. Sometimes more, sometimes less. Sometimes I get 3 with a bow, sometimes 1. Depends, archery is more work. I get lazy.
Somewhere in there are a few with a rifle and ML and even a cap and ball revolver. Maybe 2 with a single shot pistol.
I am entirely sick of gutting and cutting meat.
It gets old and after I pull the trigger it is "oh, nuts, more work."
My question is 'How many deer have you killed JWP?" I am not proud, it is a life that I thank God for. It is meat to eat, not a thing to brag about. I do not waste an ounce.

________________________________________________________________________


To have reached 420 deer at 6 per year he would have had to have shot them over a 70 year period averaging 6 per year.

He has now taken another 130 since June 2012. WOW, just WOW!!!

I have shot ground squirrels with an S&W K22 with Bushnell phantom 1.2X scope and 22LR hollow point ammo.

They have really got to be stupid to let me get that close.

jwp..,

If bfr.. is telling the truth and does live in Jefferson Co. WV, he does live in, or is near, a deer rich area. It would be easy enuff to kill 130 deer since june 2012. If you poach!

I believe we have read his confession. Or perhaps he's just making stuff up. It's just so hard to tell.

O

I am on pins and needles waiting for his incoherent, rude reply.

You now claim to have lost count at over 550 deer, yet here in June of 2012 you claimed to have killed 420 deer averaging 6 to 7 deer a year.
Not true, the number was higher. Same as what you said about my bow kills, it was LESS at what you post. 225 to 250. lost count. Don't add your own numbers.
I did deer shooting with unlimited tags for control. But now I am limited to tags. Yes 7 deer is enough. Go to VA and see the amount that can be shot, March hunts with 60 deer in a herd and two shot at a time. We have the ability to shoot two deer a day now before tagging in WV.
You continue to lie. You add stuff to suit yourself. You change my numbers all the time.
How about showing the deer you shot instead. Small animal and you need large after spending $10,000 to hunt. Me, a deer is shot with a 10 cent round. An animal you can't hit.
You never shot a deer with a bow but I shot one with a long bow and wood arrow last season. I used recurves for years, then compounds. But you never killed a deer with a bow.
Come here and I will put you in a stand to see how freaking stupid you are with a bow. Off hand with a revolver on a deer at 100 yards from you would make a good video.
Many see through you and your bull pucky. You are a master in your own mind.

Read the posts those are your claims, your numbers not mine. You also claimed to have killed 6 to 7 deer a year in June 2012 no more some times less so to be generous at 7 deer per year to have killed 550 would take 78.57 years, without ever taking less than 7 per year. How old are you?

Again you either show your ignorance or flat out lie, because I have never, ever spent 10,000 dollars for hunt.

The thread that I posted the link to is locked and has been since June 2012 which means that no one could change the numbers that you posted. Again you can't keep up with the lies and BS that you post.

Wow. Didn't we kill Baghdad Bob? I could swear he's posting as bfrshooter on the 24hrcf.

any ethical hunter has to know his limits and abilities ,the worst thing we can do is try to makeup for poor shot placement by upping the power level and hoping for the best ,know your own personal limits and adhere to them ,whether bow ,handgun or long gun

BFRSHOOTER obviously has a chip on his shoulder with regards to education, books and folks who are able to spend $10,000 on a hunt. In addition to anyone who is successful in the firearms industry. Apparently the more you spend on guns, shooting and hunting, the less hardcore you are. Or something......

Now you state the truth Craig. I do not read books and bull from those that need to spend thousands to hunt. I do not read books with writers that sell stuff for the rag.
Trophy hunters are the worst, shoot a big buck and go back the next day for the rack, no way to eat the spoiled meat. Shoot arrows in deer with half penetration to show a hit for the camera.
Still, show me. How about off hand with a rifle at 100? You need a rest to hit the CNS every shot so you think you can do it off hand with a revolver. You still need a rest. A backpack, sticks, prone.
Double lungs with a wrong bullet in a .357. But you are better, hit the spine all the time.
I am sad with the deer I have shot, some I know shoot 17 to 20 a season. I will not waste meat so I need to quit. Not a single deer is wasted. I will not kill to waste.
I really could kill a hundred a year easy. My time in the woods is a few days. For seven deer, maybe 16 hours total.
JWP has a few pictures shown over and over again. You have none.
Come on, show a deer. Show targets. Your fingers get sore on the keyboard.

You really don't have a clue. Your knowledge and experience is so narrow. You're just bumping around in the dark. You think Elmer Keith is selling stuff? What about Ed McGivern or J. H. Fitzgerald, Townsend Whelen, Julian Hatcher, Theodore Roosevelt, William Frazer, Roy Dunlap, Charles Haven, Frank Belden, John Taylor, Edward Crossman, Charles Askins, F.C. Ness, Walter Roper, Frederick Courteney Selous, F.W. Mann, W.W. Greener, Walter Winans, Phil Sharpe, Eugene Cunningham, Arcadi Gluckman or R.L. Wilson? You think those guys are making money when I read their works? No dumbass. The fact that you think reading books on Colt factory engravers, Patersons, cartridge conversions, military pistols, Colt, Remington, S&W and Winchester collections, African adventure, Indian craft, leatherwork and myriad other subjects is a waste of time tells us a lot about you. Really everything we need to know. The scope of your knowledge and experience is so narrow and that you are painfully ignorant beyond measure but are too stupid to know it.

You are too narrow-minded and that chip on your shoulder precludes you from even considering the fact that people who spend a lot of money on hunting might know something you do not. They might have a broader spectrum of knowledge and experience than you. They might have learned something about life that you can never even comprehend. You think they have piles of money laying around and wonder where to throw it. The truth is, they are probably more committed than you. You want to talk about liberals? Your attitude is typical of that of the "Occupy Wall Street" crowd of brainless entitlement morons. You covet and resent those that have more than you. You are a self-appointed martyr for those that have nothing but think it's never their own fault.

Let's set aside the fact that anyone can post pics of whatever they want and claim it is whatever they wish. Or that you discredit any picture that is ever taken. I don't take pictures of targets. I don't care to see pictures of targets. Pictures of targets, for the most part, do not impress or inspire me. I have folders of targets from load testing but it is a rare thing for me to take a picture of any of them. Your retarded logic leads you to believe that if there are no pics, it didn't happen. Your entire position depends on it. You are immeasurably stupid to think this grants you a position of moral superiority. I want to see pics of guns, knives and leather in natural settings. I couldn't give a [bleep] less for pics of targets or friggin' paint cans. I work from home and shoot on my own property. I guess I should start taking stupid assed pictures of all the inanimate objects that get shot up just to shut you up.

I have never been a fan of pictures of myself so I do not take them. I've been self employed and working from home 365 days a year for ten years now. I have to work every single day so for that time, I have hunted in the afternoon. 99.99% of the time when a deer falls it's dark by the time I could take pics. I killed a nice little 7pt buck this past season and shot him in the near-dark. So you think I worried about taking pictures? No dumbass, I did not. Does that mean it didn't happen? Only to idiots like yourself. Do I care if you believe me or not? I can't begin to describe to you how much I don't give a damn.

I do have a handful of pics of dead critters that I will post, even though I know you will do your damnedest to discredit them. All it will do is prove my point. That you're a first class deranged moron.

Fox killed with one shot from my Old Model Single Six, in a trot at 35yds.


Mangy coyote popped at 100yds with a 165gr cast bullet.


Since you're such a big fan of dead does, here's one shot at 80yds with a Ruger .270, ugly picture taken at dusk. Wow, be still my heart.


Here's another taken at dusk, 300gr Hornady from the .405 blew up on the shoulder and I needed a brain shot to put her down. I killed two hogs with my 4 5/8" Super Blackhawk on that trip, no pics. I guess it didn't happen.


Did get a pic of Dad and one he hit on the run with his Acusport Bisley .44Mag.


Oh boy, here's some targets.


Three in the same hole with the Bisley Hunter, let's piss ourselves!
[img]http://photos.imageevent.com/newfrontier45/sixgunsii/large/Bisley%20Hunter%20.44%20-%20011.JPG[/img]

Eureka! A piss poor pic of a target with holes!!!
[img]http://photos.imageevent.com/newfrontier45/sixguns/SandW%20M29%20-%2015.JPG[/img]

Well this had to happen, there's a picture! What range I wonder, could be anything, this is the internet.
[img]http://photos.imageevent.com/newfrontier45/rifles/large/P1010036_1.JPG[/img]

Now we really have something here, a rare treat for the eyes, me AND dead deer from 15yrs ago. Two does, shot together with a levergun about one second apart. One shoulder, one between the ears. My comrades thought it was somebody else with an automatic. Dead does are the winning hand so this should settle the argument, or something.....



Oh snap, fifty yard targets, or was it a thousand??? Nobody knows....

Now tell me what any of that REALLY proves?

So when I make my first trip to Africa in about two years, does the $10-$12,000 indicate that I am 'less' committed? I've been thinking about elk hunting with a traditional muzzleloader. If I spend $8000-$10,000 to do that, I'm a poser?

Here's a newsflash cretin, most people have to pay to hunt. It is a rare privilege to own enough property to hunt on or to be able to hunt someone else's for free. I no longer have to pay to hunt deer, turkeys or small game. Everything else costs money. Who the hell do you think you are to judge people who have to pay to hunt as inferior to yourself? The a$$hole that only EVER kills does a stone's throw from his porch???

Again, let us hear about the handgun skills you've developed other than bench shooting? Let us hear how fast you can reload a single action. How good is your point shooting? Come on, you're the guru and we're all just skill-less posers, tell us what all you can do so that we can hold you in even higher reverence!

It proves you are an honest man, thank you for the pictures. That changes everything. I have a new respect for you.
Why can't we be friends? I don't want to argue.
Can we forgive each other about things we said? I am sorry.

So you're playing the part of the downtrodden diplomat now???

It doesn't prove a damn thing.

What do you two guys really think of each other? And what's the point?

Just the trophy cans.

I can count on half a hand, the number of guys I've hunted with who routinely carry a camera with them. When you hike for miles in Rocky Mountain country, weight and bulk saving is a good thing - but when you shoot 'em off your porch, it doesn't matter so much. Heck - even when I do carry a camera, I'm usually too busy to bother with it. I don't know anyone who takes a camera to the range, and none who will take the time to photograph targets - although some of us have saved targets for load comparison.

I guess all those dead deer, elk coyotes, rabbits, and grouse never happened.

BTW - I don't need to take a rest to make a killing shot at 100 yards with a handgun either. A knee, maybe - but not a rest. Dang...I have NO pictures to prove that. Maybe I can gin one up....Nah...not worth my time.

Guess I can't be your friend, bfr - I'll never post enough pictures.

im usually packing a camera but thats cause the wife and i have the newspaper here so there is usually a camera in the truck and its just habit that i carry a point and shoot....course im always the one taking pics so there are rarely pics with me in them....that said i get bored fast shooting paper so after sight in im usually shooting critters and other reactive targets so i really dont have pics of groups ive shot....more power to the guys that love punching paper i just find it boring and would rather be shooting ground squirrels and jack rabbits....

Baghdad Bob, you nailed it!

That's the same velocity I get with my 45 Super 200 gr loads in my 1911.

I have three Ruger 45 Colt SBH's that shoot an inch or less off the bench at 50 yds, bone stock right out of the box. The target squares are 1".

My Ruger 45 Colt Bisley shoots MOP....minute of pig

gez Dan that one actually had decent teeth

Real nice cutters on that one Dan.

I saw his smile coming from 80 yds away!

Say cheeeeze ?

Denny.

BTW, to all. I PM'd BFRS one time a year or so ago to ask a question. Well, the PM turned into a phone conversation and within a few minutes Jim aka BFRS had invited me up to his place to hunt.
'nuff said, Denny.

Did you go?

What happened to this nonsense???