Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Hunter's Campfire Contradictions

The .264 caliber 6.5X55 will kill anything short of Cape Buffalo, moose are but fodder for it�s bark and bite, yet the .277 .270 Winchester is marginal when you get to 500 pound elk. The 6.5X55 140 grainer has an SD of .287, the 160 grain .270 bullet has an SD of .298. Seem like kissin� cousins to me.<P><BR>For dangerous animals who have to physically catch you to hurt you, one is a fool to use anything other than a CRF bolt action rifle. Lever action rifles throwing large diameter bullets from a .348 based case are okay too, but only if you live in Alaska and have a full beard. African game is practically immune to the American action. Use a semi-automatic rifle and no self respecting guide will let you in camp. .375 diameter is okay for the bullet size but only if you have a backup carrying something with a .416 sized bore, and .458 is better still.<P>For self defense against the cleverest animal in the world who is armed not with tooth, claw or horn but with a comparatively long range lead slinging instrument and who will attack from ambush, a semi-automatic pistol is the berries. A revolver is okay, I guess, if you are old fashioned. 9mm (.354 caliber) is fine with today�s bullets, although many still recommend .400 or .452 as better.<P>These are just a couple of the contradictions held in �popular� view that came to mind.<P>Can anybody think of any others? <P><BR>The world continues to verify Jim�s First Law of Wise Sayings � �For every wise saying there is an equal and opposite wise saying.�<BR>

The .30-30 in a Model 94 Winchester is an insult to an elk. The .44 Magnum in a Contender is Great Elk Medicine.<P>Ha!

The (6/mm, .243, 6.5, 7m/m pick one) makes a fine rifle for women and kids.<P>HoKay if it is good for them why isn't it good for me?<P>BCR

Ken-I got to respectfully disagree. I have killed many elk with a 30-30 winchester model 94, and I woulkd venture to say that in the past the model 94 has killed more game over the years than any other caliber combined. Placement is the key. bcat<P>------------------<BR>If you aint the lead dog the scenery never changes [img]http://www.hunttalk.com/icon/bcatrunningcat.gif.com/boykin][/img] <BR><A HREF="http://www.huntandlodge.com/Boykin/outfitter.html" TARGET=_blank>Boykin's Hunting <B>Homepage</B> </A>

Have a wallet stuffed full of green stuff and ALL doors are open to you. -- no

"Ken-I got to respectfully disagree."<P>Please, bcat, give me a break, willya?<P>My post compared two widely held contradictory views (thought that was what we're s'posed to be talking about here) � not necessarily my opinion on either side of that contradiction.<P>Do a good many hunters consider a .30-30 carbine almost criminally inadequate for elk? I think they do. Do I agree with 'em? Beside the point of this thread.<P>Do a good many hunters consider a .44 Magnum handgun completely adequate for elk? I think they do. Do I agree with 'em? Beside the point of this thread.<P>Are these two positions contradictory? I think they are.<P>Now, then. Where do you and I disagree? I betcha we don't. I fully agree with the rest of your post.<P>Care to take another whack at it?<P>Vaya con Dios, hermano!<p>[This message has been edited by Ken Howell (edited April 19, 2001).]

22lr is plenty adequete for deer, but anything less than a .357 magnum revolver is underpowered as a carry/self defense weapon. And 300 mag is just too much gun for elk, its not needed if i was a decent hunter? I dont get it. Frequent dicussion with a friends dad. Well maybe if i took up poaching with a .22 (out of a pickup window)id be a hunter then, right?

Ken-I rearead your post and see that ya are saying now "CONTRADICTIONS"!! Forgive me for taking it seriously! I am not a handgun freak at all!! bcat<P>------------------<BR>If you aint the lead dog the scenery never changes [img]http://www.hunttalk.com/icon/bcatrunningcat.gif.com/boykin][/img] <BR><A HREF="http://www.huntandlodge.com/Boykin/outfitter.html" TARGET=_blank>Boykin's Hunting <B>Homepage</B> </A>

Hunting bears with hounds is not fair chase, but hunting pheasants with pointers is "sporting".<P>An ethical hunter strives for a clean kill, which means choosing his shots accordingly, unless, of course, it has really big antlers, or the hunter spent a lot of money getting there, then any shaky shot is justified.<P>It is okay to bait a bear or a fish, but not a duck.<P>A proper sporting gentleman shoots birds only after they attempt to flee, but shooting big game on the run is careless. How many hunters intentionally spook the deer under their stand before shooting? Why do people lose sleep for weeks when they wound and lose a deer or an elk, but don't give it a second thought when they hit a bird that keeps flying or hits the ground running?<P>-al

A 30 06 is all the rifle anybody in the lower 48 has any business owning and I got mine right here in my 4wd diesel powered 4 door pickup that aint never hauled nothing heavier or dirtier than a sheet of plywood and aint never been off concrete.

Here's mine.<P>A 30-06 will do anything a 300 win mag will do. <P>Don

Haven't seen, lately, any of the extreme skeletonizing projects aimed at making a mountain rifle as light as possible, that used to be so popular. These projects involved shortening the barrel to the legal minimum and turning it down to a rifled soda straw, drilling out gobs of lightening holes in the magazine box, the butt, the fore-end, even the bolt body on some, wherever the fellow doing the job thought he could get by with eliminating another fraction of an ounce of steel.<P>Keeping score was totaling up all the tiny bits of weight saved � a few grains here, an eighth of an ounce there, etc.<P>These projects usually included also one or both of these romping contradictions:<P>� a huge, high-range variable scope instead of a lighter fixed-power scope (ounces of difference)<P>� a "sling" that a Clydesdale team could use to pull a house off its foundation, instead of a light, perforated shoulder strap (pounds of difference)<p>[This message has been edited by Ken Howell (edited April 19, 2001).]

OhYeah, Ken and then there is the muzzle break that has to be spot welded on because in any decent chambering that gnat weight rifle will kick the snot out of them as they are trying to learn how to shoot it. Seems sort of contradictory to trade weight for pain.<P>Then, too, you add up all the saved weight and generally find that it amounts to a BigMac or two.

gene - most of those 1-ton diesel dually cruisers you see have toppers and carpeted beds. Ya gotta wonder how many heavy gooseneck trailers they tow. -al

ELLIE MAE,you're right,I left that out!I got two DODGES with CUMMINS:a 3/4 ton 4wd and a flat bed one ton.Either pulls my L.Q. horse trailer.<P>That all sounds impressive,dont it? Rest of the story ne is a 91 model the other a 90.one has 270k and the other 170k on odometer.The trailer? It's a 1983 sundowner.<P>Point of all that is there is areal good old sorrel gets to ride in one side and as good adog that walks rides where he pleases and here I am doing my one finger typing bit on this machine instead of loading them up and heading to the caprock country and chasing cats or hogs.<P>THERE'S YOUR CONTRADICTION! I'M GONE.

A stack barrel tossing two rounds at phesants and a SxS tossing 5 rounds or more in hollywood. <BR>A post against whatever and 'having said that' I do it to. ~~~Suluuq<p>[This message has been edited by Rusty-Gunn (edited April 21, 2001).]

Here's one I'm guilty of: I cant go huntin with you Jake,soon as I get thru mowing the lawn,I gotta go get a few bales of hay for the horses.

How could you kill that living thing as that person munches on his/her veggy's and kills tens of thousands of trees to print out why its bad to hunt, fish or ranch. olefish

Here's one from a thread over at "2nd amendment", reprinted without permission from HOSS. It's a real gem, so I hope he doesn't mind...<P>Guns should be banned because some lunatic might go on a shooting spree, and anyone who would arm himself for fear of such a lunatic is just being paranoid.<P>-al

A common contradiction in western Montana, and other areas like this I'm sure, is the number of antilogging militants (a) using forests of paper to combat logging and (b) living in fancy log homes. As Huck Finn said about the ol' gal who was trying to reform him,<P>"[approximately] She dipped snuff. But that was different, 'cause she done it herself."