I get file too large. What am I doing wrong?

Mike

could be a firewall limit in your security, or it could be that your picture resolution exceeds the website capacity. Save a copy at 50% resolution and see if that allows you to post it

I'm seeing a coyote sleeping under your EG...

Are you hosting in the 'Fire's awkward photo gallery or hosting in an off-site gallery such as Imgur? I find that uploading photo files to Imgur and then dropping them here to be way easier.



My "flying" instructor.

Or, since Roy can flaunt his "shot of the century" again, I can show the best deer I ever shot with a Savage, again.

I was trying to use the image gallery. JeffG that was the pic I was trying to post. I haven't posted pics since photo bucket started charging a fee.

Mike

In a slightly related matter, I finally figured out how to make an album in the Fire photo gallery. Now, how do I proceed in moving a photo from there and inserting it into a post?

Once you have your pics in the image gallery, open your album and right click on the pic you want post, then click on "copy link location". Go to the thread you want to post the pic in and click "use full editor". In the tool bar is a box with a pic (just to the right of the smiley face), click on that and paste your image there. Hope this helps.

Lee

Tag

Nice! What happens when you make a mistake?

Success!

Polecat, thank you so much! This should be a sticky right under Rick's on how to create a gallery.

25-35, 100gr NBT 125yds

VERY NICE! 25-35, how cool is that!


Lee

It's Mike right? That's a nice one, has a good neck on him. I got a 25-35 from the estate of a friend. Only it's a Ruger #3. I was hoping to hunt it this year, but, I'm stuck on my 303 F. It's the only Savage cartridge I haven't taken a deer with yet.

I'll tell you- it's VERY cool!!

Thanks for the comments. That is my best buck in 60 yrs of hunting and with a 99!. Using a paper plate for a bull at 100yds with a white ring around the front bead it is scary accurate with the 100gr NBT.

OUTSTANDING!

Anybody else fond it ironic that Savage made a 25 caliber rifle that shoots a 100 gr. Nosler BT great before they made the 250-3000 with 1-14" twist, that doesn't?

That is a great looking animal.

Bully! Good show!

I don't find that ironic at all.

The engineers at Savage were given the number "3,000" and worked backward to find a bullet length/weight and twist that got them to 3000. A classic case of reverse engineering. And hence marketed and sold a chit load of rifles and made their shareholders a ton of money. A brilliant piece of ingenuity on their behalf.

The 25-35 was washed up in 1915 regardless of how well is shot 117 grain bullets at 2300 ft sec
The 250-3000 Savage put in on the fast track to obsolescence.

In business, If you are not changing, you are dying.

It's all about the twist.

That's what Chubby Checker said. What a great hunt with a classic caliber, iron sights at 125 yards no less. Just perfect.

I know why they did what they did in 1915, but hanging onto that twist until 1960 was pretty dumb.

I'm agreeing with you there....

If the 250 got a 10-twist post WWII the 243 would never have been invented

Except for the fact that almost all 243 ammunition is 100gr or less, and you can make 250-3000 ammunition that shoots well that's 100gr or less.

The 243 is more flexible in that it can handle many longer 100gr bullets than the 250-3000 can.. but I'm not sure the 250 would have kept the 243 at bay. Winchester marketing and all.

I do think if they'd switched to a 1 in 9 or 10 twist in the 30's, that it would have continued to sell far better than it did.

All true but the then current 250 Savage with the 1-14 twist made it easy for the 243 Win to take it's business.

The 250 would have had a tremendous advantage if it had been 1-10 when the 243 Win came out becasue it would have been able to handle 115-120 grain bullets, something the 243 would not have been able to keep up with. The 250 would have remained relevant.

As the 250 Savage was with the 1-14 twist in the early 50's, the introduction of the 243 sent the 250 into a predictable tailspin that it never really recovered from.

The problem with manufacturers making 250-3000 ammunition heaver than 100gr is that it wouldn't work in old rifles at all.

Manufacturers don't like that. Customers yell at them.

But in general I agree.

Should I try 117's in my 1 in 10" 250? Hadn't thought of that before.

They should work. I'd rather have the 100gr and velocity than the heavier, slower bullets.

Thanks Rory

This. In the quarterbores and less speed is your friend, given typically available bullets. The .25-35 got away with 117's because those bullets were/are designed for modest velocity.

Even in my recently acquired Ruger No.1 in .250 with its fast twist barrel I plan to apply 87's. Yes, I'm buying into Savage's philosophy of 100 years ago. Speed kills in the smallbores.

I tried 117's in an old 1-14" 250-3000 just to see what would happen. Somewhere around here I have the remainder of that box.. need to load them up for my model 11 in 250 Savage.

I would not want to be shooting at big mule deer, caribou, elk, plains game, bear, etc., etc with said medicine.

Not totally undoable with a 257 heavy for caliber slug.

That is where the 250 could seperate itself from the 243. If you going to shoot 87 and 100 grain pills, one could make the aruement they might as well be coming out of a 243.

I wouldn't necessarily make that arguement, but one could...