|
Joined: Jun 2004
Posts: 4,949
Campfire Tracker
|
Campfire Tracker
Joined: Jun 2004
Posts: 4,949 |
A lot of good work can be done by getting straight behind your rifle and loading the bipod before the shot. I run a standard weight Tikka in .270 and call most of my own shots in the field. To much magnification or being to close will clearly alter results.
I would also agree a brake would offer more of a difference than going to a heavier barrel.
Hunt hard, kill clean, waste nothing and offer no apologies.
"In rifle work, group size is of some interest...but it is well to remember that a rifleman does not shoot groups, he shoots shots." Jeff Cooper
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jul 2001
Posts: 60,178 Likes: 20
Campfire Kahuna
|
Campfire Kahuna
Joined: Jul 2001
Posts: 60,178 Likes: 20 |
There is a big difference between calling your shots and actually seeing the bullet impact. Or is that what you mean?
“Montana seems to me to be what a small boy would think Texas is like from hearing Texans.” John Steinbeck
|
|
|
|
Joined: May 2003
Posts: 10,435 Likes: 1
Campfire Outfitter
|
Campfire Outfitter
Joined: May 2003
Posts: 10,435 Likes: 1 |
The 204 definitely rides well enough to watch the bullet fly and hit. Or at least the Ruger M77-2TGT does that. The Fireball with 40s in 221 makes it possible to self-spot as well. I can only imagine what a 17M4 or 17FB would do -- or maybe the 20 version of the Fireball?
Lots of options here, and it really is more fun to see the shock wave and watch the hit.
Up hills slow, Down hills fast Tonnage first and Safety last.
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jun 2004
Posts: 4,949
Campfire Tracker
|
Campfire Tracker
Joined: Jun 2004
Posts: 4,949 |
MD, Fair question. When I say I am calling my shots it is probably better referred to as seeing the impact. For me it means I can see the game react to the hit or an impact on a steel target. I might not be able to see where I hit a prairie dog but enough to see parts fly.
I make no insinuations I can see an impact from a position other than prone and need a decent field of view to do so. I ran a .243 as a match rifle for a while and it had a brake on it so I could call impacts for corrections. The brake allowed me to be sloppy in my form when trying to get hits fast and still see impacts not only prone but when kneeling, sliding off a barricade or other unconventional positions.
The other thing that is helping me now is I shot a max of 9x in the field and most of my work is done with even less magnification.
Last edited by varmintsinc; 08/29/15.
Hunt hard, kill clean, waste nothing and offer no apologies.
"In rifle work, group size is of some interest...but it is well to remember that a rifleman does not shoot groups, he shoots shots." Jeff Cooper
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jul 2001
Posts: 60,178 Likes: 20
Campfire Kahuna
|
Campfire Kahuna
Joined: Jul 2001
Posts: 60,178 Likes: 20 |
Thanks for the clarification.
With the lighter-recoil cartridges mentioned, such as the .17 Fireball, I can see the bullet hit a particular place on a prairie dog, even with a medium-high magnification scope of around 15X.
Some rifles allow you to see PD pieces coming down, particularly a little further out where the rifle has a chance to come down out of recoil before the bullet hits. But what I'm talking about is clearly seeing the actual impact of the bullet, at any range.
“Montana seems to me to be what a small boy would think Texas is like from hearing Texans.” John Steinbeck
|
|
|
|
Joined: Aug 2006
Posts: 983
Campfire Regular
|
Campfire Regular
Joined: Aug 2006
Posts: 983 |
JB, I had a short light MK II in 204 for a truck coyote rifle in 204. It shot GREAT, but it was hell to quickly chamber a round and I sold it. The straight sided sharp shoulder'd case and the short magazine wanted to push them up and left every time when smartly operating the thing. This did not really help when after Wiley. I'm with you as to the recoil and seeing hits though and that little light rifle was not bad in that respect. I kept several hundred cases, 3-4 boxes of 32 Hornady's and the dies for future reference though. The first load I shot was a max charge of H-4895 and the 32's (this was before cases were available and I used 222 mag cases reformed) went over the chrony a touch over 4,000 and all day into 3/4". I never shot anything else out of it. It was gopher killing machine as far as you could see em w/a 4x12 VX3, it's too bad it wouldn't feed very well, unless you fingered them in one at a time, hard to do when the dog is running looking over his shoulder. It was fully as fast as my old 77V Swift but didn't have the horsepower. I have loved the look on GS's faces when the bullet hits since I shot my first over 55 years ago and the 204 ctg. is one of the best.-Muddy
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jul 2001
Posts: 60,178 Likes: 20
Campfire Kahuna
|
Campfire Kahuna
Joined: Jul 2001
Posts: 60,178 Likes: 20 |
I had a standard Ruger Mark II sporter in .204 for a while, and it was also very accurate. It didn’t have the feeding problems of yours, but “controlled round feed” with the little cartridge didn’t happen. Instead it essentially worked as a push-feed. The .204 I have right now is a “parts gun” on a Remington 700 action, and it feeds perfectly.
“Montana seems to me to be what a small boy would think Texas is like from hearing Texans.” John Steinbeck
|
|
|
|
Joined: Nov 2010
Posts: 64
Campfire Greenhorn
|
OP
Campfire Greenhorn
Joined: Nov 2010
Posts: 64 |
Thanks to all of you for your comments, will try 40 gr bullets first,, then go from there. Have second thoughts about rebarreling,, for the cost better to just get anothergun. keep this one as a walkabout sporter, , So many decisions,,,, would like to know Shrapnels true idenity any hints anyone.... I lived in Bozeman around 1977;; just wonder??
|
|
|
|
519 members (22250rem, 01Foreman400, 1badf350, 1Longbow, 222ND, 160user, 49 invisible),
2,144
guests, and
1,156
robots. |
Key:
Admin,
Global Mod,
Mod
|
|
Forums81
Topics1,193,236
Posts18,504,472
Members73,994
|
Most Online11,491 Jul 7th, 2023
|
|
|
|