John, Really liked the article, had it for lunch instead of home made veg soup. Liked it so much I took my JC Higgins Mod 50 to the range and shot it w/factory irons, 45 gr. I-4895 and 180 Sierra RN's. Shot all in 3" at 100 yd. Yep you can shoot coyotes at 200 yds. w/no knobs! Thanks-Muddy

What's the title of the article?

I guess eating a magazine would at least be better than reading soup.

"Over-Engineered? Rifle Features That Really Aren't"

Definitely a good article. It agrees with my thoughts - that's what makes it so good. Seriously, it is nice to see something questioning the trend toward "tiny groups uber alles" and gimmicks that contribute nothing toward the end purpose of the rifle but actually detract from it.

I liked it. Granted there's hunters/shooters out there that can use the high tech stuff for hunting situations but there's probably more of us that should stay with basic rifles & scopes that there's less to go wrong with. High tech for me is knowing where the top of the bottom vertical coarse plex post will hit on long shots.

Yep, I was a purist for several years. .30-06 and a Leupold 4x scope.

IIRC on the Leupold 4x the subtension between the tip of the duplex crosshair and the intersection was 7 MOA; 7" at 100, 14" at 200 etc. Seeing how much crosshair covered the animal gave me a simple decision to make - "too far" or "in range".



Of course, that was in the unenlightened dark ages of the 1990's. When the 21st Century rolled around I went high tech and got a 3-9 variable...

I'm down to 1 3-9 scope, and three 2-7s. The rest are either 4 or 6x, except for the 10x on the big Bob and the 12x on the Swift. Both for groundhogs. And all my deer rifles are sighted dead on at 200yds. With no magnums in the group, a dead on hold at 250 and a 6" high hold at 300 works. That said, my longest ever shot on game was my mule deer at 270yds, lasered. Where I hunt deer in PA, the long range conditions are available, but the deer seem to come out in the 10-130yd ranges. Works for me.

I know what you mean.

I exaggerated a bit in my post, I did have a one year fling with a 7mm RM back then.

Saw a nice elk one year out in a wide open area just too far to be comfortable shooting at with the .30-06 in hand and the range it was sighted for. So I bought a 7mm RM and a Leupold 3-9 and practiced all year with it out to the longest distance on our range, 550 yards. Got to where I could put that bullet in an 8" circle from prone all the way out there.


The following season, armed with my death ray and scanning the hills for three counties in all directions, an elk walked out of a patch of woods 30 yards in front of me.

The 7mm RM still worked...

I have a friend of mine that believes one must have a death ray to hunt elk. He starts shaking when he sees my rem760 carbine 18inch barrel with 220round nose down loaded to 30.40 velocities.
His comment is that wouldn't be much good over 100yards. The only issue is, although he is incorrect, is every elk i have shot has been less than 50 yards.

Rocket science, eh?

Great article, although no one will believe it!

I've hunted Wyo for 30 years with the same guide. A .30-06 (or functional equivalent) will take any and all big game in Wyo using a 6X scope in his opinion. He has the trophies to prove it.

Oh yeah, he doesn't own any Camo clothing either.

I am rarely compelled to respond to written articles, but the one concerning present day offerings to the hunting fraternity is one that pushed me to write. I am of an older generation and perhaps have views that are unpopular today. It seems obvious that these items are available because we buy them. We buy them because we believe they will make us successful in attaining our goals. There are a significant number of hunters I know that I believe are missing many benefits and joys of the hunt while concentrating on elements that are more obviously hyped and publicly admired. In these days when all actions are known and seemingly published for everyone's perusal, we should be aware that what hunters do and how they do it influences the attitudes of those who make decisions about the future of hunting. Each must make his own decisions, but all of us will have to abide by the outcomes of the debates.

But don't we all start out that way? As a kid approaching the age where I could be licensed I poured over articles and catalogs agonizing over such things as should I use modified or improved modified for pheasants. And of course the perfect shot size. As I got older I began to actually observe what was going on around me and enjoyed the process even more. One memorable event while sitting for deer was watching a vole step out of a hollow log, yawn, stretch and look around like some little old man. He shivered a little and stepped back into his hole and had a nap before beginning his day. Hilarious. Didn't see a deer but it was well worth the trip for that and antics of other creatures kicking about the mountain. Now I see the latest and greatest gadgets as complications that detract from the overall experience. If my eyes allowed me to go back to open sights I would.

It was a real good article; and it made me think that pretty much all of us start out that way. Been there; done that, in my case anyway. Now at the ripe old age of 64 I can look back at all that and chalk it up to experience. Now I know what works for me and why and why I've got preferences about certain things. Some label me as "old school" but I usually tell them that "old school" is usually (but not always) a synonym for "more experienced". You still have to be open to new things but that doesn't mean you have to embrace every new development the moment it comes out.