Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Ask The Gunwriters Generally accepted truths about hunting, ballistics, gear etc. 1980 vs 2021

So, you like close quarter combat too. Good on ya!

I like trail cams, especially at bear baits. Before I had them, there was a lot of guessing, reading signs and hoping for a bear to show before it got too dark. I don't use them on Crown Land (Public Land), but with permission on private land, I saw how many bears were coming to the bait(s), when, sex and sizes. It was with amazement that I saw bears coming to the bait whenever they felt like it, not just on the edge of darkness! Many "trophy size" were coming early morning or even at high noon!

Trail cams transformed my thinking about the best hours for hunting bears over baits as well as their numbers, sizes and conditions. In one season I got educated while having previously hunted them every season for a number of years with blinders on!

Bob
www.bigbores.ca

Stock up (hoard) on reloading supplies that you don't need at the time but bought anyways.. Powder/primers & bullets all apply here.

Kind of like RL-26, 150's and the 270 Win...[/quote]

Yep. After trying RL-26 in my Model 70 Featherweight, and running some other tests, I decided not to switch, for several reasons: With 150s at 3100 it kicked like a light 7mm Remington Magnum, and I haven't hunted with any of my 7mm RMs for years. Also found 26 more temperature sensitive than I prefer, noticeably more so than H4831 Extreme--and also realized my wife and I have been using 150s at 2900 fps or so for decades and everything we shot died quickly, including animals up to bull moose in size.

Though for the last animal I took with my .270--a mule deer buck--the load was another old standby, a 130-grain with enough H4831 to get just under 3100 fps. It worked very well, and is more accurate than any of the RL-26 loads tried.

Like almost everyone on this thread, I've been an active shooter during all of the years in question, including hunting, military service, working in the industry, and competition. In that time, I’ve seen a ton of major changes for all shooters. The biggest is the internet, which lets us exchange information directly instead of hearing only what various marketing departments want us to hear. That alone has changed the market far more than any other single factor.

The second is the Global War on Terror. Various governments have put a lot of R&D money into gear, learning, and skill development. We now have a couple of generations of people who REALLY know how to shoot when the chips are down, and who know what gear they need. Some of those folks are teaching the trade and classes cost a lot less than you'd think. Combine that expertise with the internet and a lot of old legends just don't stand up any more.

Beyond that, and as pertains to rifles:

1. Rifles and ammunition are more accurate. The road to 1 MOA was long and costly in 1981. Now you can get 0.5 MOA with cheap rifles and factory ammo. A lot of machinery will get worn out making guns and ammo in the next few months. Manufacturers will replace it with better machinery and accuracy will improve even more.

2. Bullets are more consistent, so groups are smaller. Bullet companies have also refined BC figures to make getting hits at long range more predictable. Wind permitting, a beginner can get hits at distances that were once limited to experts. Smart folks won't use this to extend their maximum range, but to increase the chance of success at mid-range.

3. Bullets perform better on target. You can choose light monomentals to reduce recoil and increase penetration or much heavier jacketed bullets for higher BCs and better long-range performance but you still can't get both.

4. Propellants are temperature-insensitive so they’re more consistent, which helps to shrink groups. We've also filled in some gaps in the burn-rate chart so there are now far more shades of gray between 4350 and 4831 than there were in 1981.

5. Optics are better. People shoot a LOT more than they did in 1981. They have better rifles and ammunition so they shoot at longer range. Many folks have stopped holding over and started dialing so optics must track—and many of them do. We'll soon have a generation of shooters who have only known dialing. I suspect that the non-dialing scope will eventually go the way of the fixed 4x.

6. Rifles are lighter. In 1981, the only way to get a rifle as light as a Kimber Montana was to spend $2-3,000 on a custom. Now the Montana is a mid-price item and their Mountain Ascent—even lighter than the Montana—costs about what the Montana did (adjusted for inflation) when it was introduced. Plenty of other rifles are almost as light as the Montana at half the price.

7. Everything is cheaper. Obviously not so much during the pandemic, but certainly just before and hopefully again soon.



All together, these things have redefined standards for distance, precision, and weight. But we still have problems:

1. High-BC bullets and scopes that track have made flat trajectory less relevant but people still focus on the wrong things. They used to focus on velocity instead of on bullet construction and shot placement. Now they focus on BC instead of on bullet construction and shot placement.

2. We need better ways to understand terminal performance, especially with monometal bullets. A medium-sized wound channel end-to-end plus an exit is all the penetration we can use. Does energy still matter with a wound channel like that? How do we quantify the role of frontal area? Does something like the 358 Winchester with a 180-grain TTSX at 2,600 fps become the new giant killer?

The biggest issue is that while we easily dial elevation, most of us still can’t read wind.


Okie John

1980- Most EVERYONE KNEW that a .223 was waaaaayyyyyyyyyy too small to use on deer and hogs.

2021- Lots of people routinely hunt with these and still manage to kill deer and hogs...

In the 80's, lead was not much of a concern because there were no practical alternatives. Now, I won't shoot any game with lead. I won't shoot lead styphnate primers. I won't even have bare lead bullets on my bench. While I recognize that most shooters would consider me "paranoid," what's changed is that I can be like that without missing anything.

Without a doubt, laser range finders and dialing has come on the scene and taken hold for a large portion of shooters and hunters. I started with a LRF bowhunting in the 90's, and now I have a scope with a custom BDC turrent. On the other hand, I've switched to traditional archery and instinctive shooting, and I hunt only with flat-shooting cartridges using MPBR because a close stalk is far more appealing to me than a long-range shot.

In terminal ballistics, "the truth" has changed the most for handguns, but even with rifles there is a growing popularity to "just enough" rather than "more than enough."

One truth, no matter who says it: bullets matter way more than headstamps.

I would append to that sentiment that it's all about what bullet, where it hits, and at what velocity (and too much velocity can be a hindrance). Velocity and bullet should be on friendly terms in order to get the desired results. Maybe this was understood widely in 1981, but I didn't start fiddling with centerfire rifles until about 1993.

In 1980 it was necessary to hand load to be able to use the better bullets made by custom bullet companies such as Hornady, Nosler, Sierra, Speer, etc..
Otherwise, it was a rare rifle that would hold tight groups at +200 yards with factory ammo.

Now, if you don't really enjoy reloading, factory ammo can be bought with bullets from the custom companies that can hold tight groups at distance with some experimentation.

The more recent evolution of scope BDC reticles or scopes with dependable dialing abilities has canceled the need for extremely fast and flat shooting rounds for long range bullet drop guessing.

In 1980 feral hogs were not very common. Now, silencers and night vision scopes are big aids for much needed feral hog control.

The only thing that’s been a game changer for me as far as hunting goes is Merino wool and boots.

Glass of course has improved quite a bit, but one of my favorite scopes is still a 1990 VXIIc

I'd say the following sure are nice to have:

Thermacell anti-insect device
Synthetic hunting clothing
Laser range finders
Stainless steel rifle barrels
BDC-style reticles
Illuminated reticles
Digital cameras (including cell phones and trail cams)

Wow fellas! The brain-trust on this thread is very impressive.

Personally, I admit, as these pursuits have evolved and life moves forward, I find that the basic skills I gained as a youngster with a Sheridan pellet rifle or a little .410 are what I find most precious and pretty much now instinctive. (Funny what a hunter can kill with ‘little’ guns - I guess we’re all being reminded of this fact these days) With these early skills, I’m sure all of us older-time hunters & shooters have been able to adapt the new technology to make us more comfortable or more efficient but really dollar for dollar not all that much more effective.

How many frigid days did we all spend in Wranglers, a heavy set of Porro Prisms, normal hiking boots, aluminum frame packs and those cursed fingerless rag wool gloves freezing numb while we gutted some bomber game and God forbid didn’t even take a pic when that old 35mm film roll froze and wouldn’t advance thru the Kodak. Most of my best memories and relationships included a fair amount of suffering & sweating to achieve a goal.

Not sayin’ I want to go back to those pre- Goretex, Kuiu, rangefinder, dials & great bullet etc. eras but certainly look very closely at new ‘developments’ with a dose of skepticism as to what will actually benefit the cause.

Thanks to each of you for what you’ve shared. It’s a joy to know that many of us have quite a history to reflect upon.

Tim

I'm confused.

Monometal....BC is ballpark .400....no recoil to speak of....why can't I have both?

That's....puh puh poison!!

As already mentioned Warn clothing is the most important advancement since 1980.
In the 80s I was hunting Miss & Al. and suffered a lot.

Before 1996 I had no/little open territory to hunt. From 96 On I’ve hunted cutovers &
regrowth c/os so the LRF has been a great asset to me. I range objects in the areas I hunt
before game is seen.

I always range from the deer back to where I was.
VERY few Xs I’ve had the opportunity to range a deer before shooting.
This past season was 1 exception. I had time to range a deer at 199 yds
before shooting. I was in strange territory and wasn’t sure of distance.

THEN & now I seldom could see deer much past 400 yds. So charts & dialing are no
advantage to me. However Fast, Flat, bullets allow me to shoot fairly quick (ly)
to 400 w/o ranging - read chart - dial - then aim.

I do understand BC and trajectory. I have so long a deer Season I don’t have to
hunt in Rain or Hi Wind. I’m glad.

All said, I get along nicely using my preferred C C billets with decent B C.

So warm clothing & LRFs are the best improvements to me.

Jerry

An Addendum :

I remember the 70s—80s when 1 “ groups were the
goal and rarely achieved W/O handloading.

Whether it’s better bullets, metallurgy, barrels or
bedding <maybe a combination> we have seen great strides.

Jerry

Have circled back to this... and quality heavy for caliber cup-N-core bullets.




GR

The biggest game changer for me was...well two things.....when I learned to use pressure testing equipment, and when we invented the bullettesttube.
Charlie

Jerry,

My experience is that better bullets have made the most difference--along with factory rifles being bedded better. Have gotten well under sub-inch accuracy with quite a few older rifles using today's bullets, though I sometimes had to "adjust" the bedding--which was often as easy as free-floating the barrel with a plastic bread-bag clip behind the recoil lug.

I would agree with the better clothing. My new first lite jacket is so much lighter and more comfortable then the heavy wool I wore for the 20 years prior. Truly a game changer for me.