Remington 700 mountain LSS versus Winchester 70 compact

Question:

I’m 5′5 and 155 pounds and my girlfriend is just a little smaller. Our length of pull as the rule of thumb is 12.75 to 13.  I have been looking for an ideal rifle for us for hunting game such as deer. Would appreciate anyone’s thoughts on these two rifles in regards to accuracy, power, recoil and general all-around quality.  I’m looking at 7mm for the Winchester and the .270 for the Remington.  I looked at the Remington model 7 but have heard mixed reviews. Visit the rec.hunting and rec.hunting.dogs FAQ Home Page at:         http://sportsmansweb.com/hunting/

Response:

>I’m 5′5 and 155 pounds and my girlfriend is just a little smaller. >Our length of pull as the rule of thumb is 12.75 to 13.  I have been >looking for an ideal rifle for us for hunting game such as deer. >Would appreciate anyone’s thoughts on these two rifles in regards to >accuracy, power, recoil and general all-around quality.  I’m looking >at 7mm for the Winchester and the .270 for the Remington.  I looked at >the Remington model 7 but have heard mixed reviews.

I have a Mountain LSS in 30-06.  I love it!  It fits me well and shoots around 1 MOA from the box, and is not particularly finicky about ammo or bullet weight.  Recoil is significant, but… it doesn’t hurt ME too bad, but as I said, the rifle fits me well.  I’d also consider 7mm-08 for the Remington; they just started offering that again in the LSS, I hear. I can’t tell you anything at all about the Winchester. If a Model 7 fits either of you, I would not be afraid of them.  I have one in 7mm-08, also the LSS version, and while mine was sort of a turkey, in the process of sorting it all out I "met" several different people who had M7’s that shot very well, straight from the box.  If you do look at a M7 LSS, check the stock up on the foreend to make sure it is not crooked (IE, pressing one side, probably the left side).  I have killed two deer with the M7 this year; after some effort, it’s a fine rifle and is certainly easy to carry around the woods.  And 7mm-08 is a great caliber; just about perfect for deer. As an aside, unless you are hunting wide open spaces, I think the 7-mag is a little too fast for deer… unless it’s going to be a deer/elk type of rifle, in which case it’s still too fast for deer at closer ranges but that’s better than being underpowered for elk, I guess! -jeff Visit the rec.hunting and rec.hunting.dogs FAQ Home Page at:         http://sportsmansweb.com/hunting/

Response:

rifle sling swivels

Question:

I’m looking for comments on installing a rifle strap swivel stud into a Remington SYNTHETIC stock.  Remington doesn’t recommend it, but others have said it’s ok and Remington is being conservative. any suggestions? Visit the rec.hunting and rec.hunting.dogs FAQ Home Page at:         http://sportsmansweb.com/hunting/

Response:

I’m looking for comments on installing a rifle strap swivel stud into a Remington SYNTHETIC stock. Remington doesn’t recommend it, but others have said it’s ok and Remington is being conservative. any suggestions? I have two M 700’s with synthetic stocks and they both came with swivel studs….not sure, but it shouldn’t take much to install a set. Bill Visit the rec.hunting and rec.hunting.dogs FAQ Home Page at:         http://sportsmansweb.com/hunting/

Response:

25-06 Youth Gun

Question:

>> I am looking for a youth gun in a 25-06 for my wife. She shot a friends >gun and really liked the caliber just the gun it’s self was a bit too big >for her. She is a little thing so I think she is going to have to have a >youth gun to fit her. Does anybody make a 25-06 in a youth model? If I can’t >find one I think we will end up with a Remington Model 7 in a 7mm-06.

You must mean 7mm-08? I have a Model 7 in 7-08, and it’s a nice package and great deer caliber.  Recoil is not bad at all.  Depending on your terrain, the 7-08 is probably a better caliber for deer than 25-06 (I’m ducking) but if you live in the big open country maybe it’s not.  Anyway, 7-08 is PLENTY for deer, judging by the two I shot with mine so far. I’m a big guy; I just wanted a compact rifle.  If my daughters ever want to hunt with me (they are little kids now), it may evolve into the youth rifle.  In the meantime, I really like the compactness and light weight and easy pointability of the gun. If you got the M7 with a laminate stock, it would be something you could have cut down if need be to fit her. This would be the way to go because I am pretty sure the youth model comes with a 18-1/2 inch barrel; you are much better off with a 20-inch barrel with the 7-08 round, I’m told.  I’m not sure if you can cut a synthetic stock down like that.  If you DO get a M7 w/ laminate stock, look carefully at the channel for the barrel, up in the foreend.  On mine and two others I’ve seen, the stock was crooked and pressing against the left side of the barrel.  THis is a pain to fix if you want to keep the factory pressure point, and generally it’s just easiest at that point to float the barrel. My stock also had a problem with binding one of the action screws badly, and the action was teetering on the recoil lug.  A bedding job fixed all of this.  But it was frustrating.  The laminated stock on my Remington Mountain Rifle is, on the contrary, straight and true and has been problem-free. Anyway, just give the stock a good once-over before you buy.  My Model 7 is a finicky rifle nad only shoots a couple loads well, but I’ve heard enough other folks say they get great groups from theirs, that I think I just got a lemon.  After much effort, mine shoots into about an inch at 100 yards with handloads, Federal Classic 150’s, and Hornady Light Magnums (wierd, huh?).  It shoots right on through a deer.  One of my shots was at a somewhat raking angle and from the looks of things that bullet still had plenty of pizazz as it left the deer. -jeff Visit the rec.hunting and rec.hunting.dogs FAQ Home Page at:         http://sportsmansweb.com/hunting/

Response:

the easy way (if you can’t find a youth gun) would be to buy a full sized rifle and have a gunsmith cut down the stock, or buy a aftermarket stock. mho Visit the rec.hunting and rec.hunting.dogs FAQ Home Page at:         http://sportsmansweb.com/hunting/

Response:

> I am looking for a youth gun in a 25-06 for my wife. She shot a friends

gun and really liked the caliber just the gun it’s self was a bit too big for her. She is a little thing so I think she is going to have to have a youth gun to fit her. Does anybody make a 25-06 in a youth model? If I can’t find one I think we will end up with a Remington Model 7 in a 7mm-06. > Mark

Check out the Remington Model 7 in the 260 Remington Caliber.  I don’t think you will be dissappointed.  Good luck to her. Visit the rec.hunting and rec.hunting.dogs FAQ Home Page at:         http://sportsmansweb.com/hunting/

Response:

Are you sure you dont mean a 7mm-08? "Mark Memmott" wrote … >If I can’t find one I think we will end up with a Remington Model 7 in a 7mm-06. > Mark

Visit the rec.hunting and rec.hunting.dogs FAQ Home Page at:         http://sportsmansweb.com/hunting/

Response:

I am looking for a youth gun in a 25-06 for my wife. She shot a friends gun and really liked the caliber just the gun it’s self was a bit too big for her. She is a little thing so I think she is going to have to have a youth gun to fit her. Does anybody make a 25-06 in a youth model? If I can’t find one I think we will end up with a Remington Model 7 in a 7mm-06. Mark Visit the rec.hunting and rec.hunting.dogs FAQ Home Page at:         http://sportsmansweb.com/hunting/

Response:

> I am looking for a youth gun in a 25-06 for my wife. She shot a friends

gun and really liked the caliber just the gun it’s self was a bit too big for her. She is a little thing so I think she is going to have to have a youth gun to fit her. Does anybody make a 25-06 in a youth model? If I can’t find one I think we will end up with a Remington Model 7 in a 7mm-06. > Mark

The New England Firearms rifle is available in 25-06 and you can put the youth stock on it for about twenty bucks. Visit the rec.hunting and rec.hunting.dogs FAQ Home Page at:         http://sportsmansweb.com/hunting/

Response:

Case Tumbling

Question:

Does anybody have any idea if there are any case tumbling medias out there that are more abrasive than either corn cob or walnut?  I have been tumbling some .223 casings which have been lying around for years and are heavily oxidized.  The two medias I mentioned above are not cleaning away much of the oxidation; but rather "polishing" it on the case.  Any input would be appreciated.  I was thinking of trying sand or a sand/walnut mixture. hdrider Visit the rec.hunting and rec.hunting.dogs FAQ Home Page at:         http://sportsmansweb.com/hunting/

Response:

I have several .223 Rem. casings which have been sitting around oxizing.  I am in the process of tumbling them, but the corn cob and walnut medias seem to only "polish" the oxidation instead of removing it.  I was wondering if anyone knows of any other medias which may speed this process up.  I have been tumbling some cases for as long as 72 hours, and would like to speed it up some.  I was considering trying sand as a media.  Anybody have any thoughts on this? Thanks, hdrider Visit the rec.hunting and rec.hunting.dogs FAQ Home Page at:         http://sportsmansweb.com/hunting/

Response:

use a media additive such as flitz.  i’ve bought once fired brass and have polished it to a almost new condition using flitz.  dont use too much. Visit the rec.hunting and rec.hunting.dogs FAQ Home Page at:         http://sportsmansweb.com/hunting/

Response:

The following things will work on bad brass. Try recharging your media with liquid car polish. If you do not want to use the liquid, recharge the media with powdered jewelers rouge. Before you put the badly tarnished brass into the tumbler, try cleaning it with a liquid brass cleaner like Lasso. Lasso is made as a pre-wash for brass. Goo Luck, Bandit > Does anybody have any idea if there are any case tumbling medias out > there that are more abrasive than either corn cob or walnut?  I have > been tumbling some .223 casings which have been lying around for years > and are heavily oxidized.  The two medias I mentioned above are not > cleaning away much of the oxidation; but rather "polishing" it on the > case.  Any input would be appreciated.  I was thinking of trying sand or > a sand/walnut mixture. > hdrider > Visit the rec.hunting and rec.hunting.dogs FAQ Home Page at: >         http://sportsmansweb.com/hunting/

Visit the rec.hunting and rec.hunting.dogs FAQ Home Page at:         http://sportsmansweb.com/hunting/

Response:

> I have several .223 Rem. casings which have been sitting around > oxizing.  I am in the process of tumbling them, but the corn cob and > walnut medias seem to only "polish" the oxidation instead of removing > it.  I was wondering if anyone knows of any other medias which may speed > this process up.  I have been tumbling some cases for as long as 72 > hours, and would like to speed it up some.  I was considering trying > sand as a media.  Anybody have any thoughts on this?

A couple: 1) Don’t use sand unless you like it ground into your rifle’s chamber at 50,000 psi. 2) Check with Dillon or Midway for case polishing additives. 3) Do not use brass polishing agents that contain ammonia as that may weaken brass that has a serious job to do. 4) Some brass is simply not worth reclaiming. Visit the rec.hunting and rec.hunting.dogs FAQ Home Page at:         http://sportsmansweb.com/hunting/

Response:

>The following things will work on bad brass.

They will work if the brass is still in decent shape, that is, not overly oxidized. I have had brass that has been stored for years and years which polished up to a like-new appearance. However, if the brass get exposed to any moisture or high humidity it can tarnish to the point where it will never look good again and that just might be the case with the original posters 223 brass. >Try recharging your media with liquid car polish. If you do not want to use >the liquid, recharge the media with powdered jewelers rouge.

The one I use is "No 7 Chrome Polish" and is available in most auto parts outlets and I have bought it at hardware stores. It does contain ammonium oxalate and what looks like jeweler’s rouge. After tumbling brass with media additives which contain ammonia for over 20 years I have never come accross any premature failure in the brass. I add the additive and let the tumbler run for 1/2 hour or slightly longer before putting my brass in. This allows the ammonia to dry out. Some of the regulars on the reloading email list have done the same and claim no problems with early brass failure. >Before you put the badly tarnished brass into the tumbler, try cleaning it >with a liquid brass cleaner like Lasso. Lasso is made as a pre-wash for >brass.

This might help out the original poster and if I remember right this stuff was available at Gander Mountain. Alex * Spinner of the WWWeb Page at: * http://www.well.com/user/amv/amv.htm Visit the rec.hunting and rec.hunting.dogs FAQ Home Page at:         http://sportsmansweb.com/hunting/

Response:

> Does anybody have any idea if there are any case tumbling medias out > there that are more abrasive than either corn cob or walnut?  I have > been tumbling some .223 casings which have been lying around for years > and are heavily oxidized.  The two medias I mentioned above are not > cleaning away much of the oxidation; but rather "polishing" it on the > case.  Any input would be appreciated.  I was thinking of trying sand or > a sand/walnut mixture. > hdrider

  Try corncob media, but charge it heavy with "Brasso" brass polish before putting the cases in. If the corrosion is into the metal, then you’ll have to throw them out, because the alloy turns brittle, and won’t be safe to shoot. Bob Gravity…  It’s Not Just a Good Idea….  It’s the Law. Visit the rec.hunting and rec.hunting.dogs FAQ Home Page at:         http://sportsmansweb.com/hunting/

Response:

Sighting in for deer/elk

Question:

  All ballistics tables, ballistic coefficients, etc. are obtained at sea level. If you live at higher elevations, where the air/barometric pressure/ temp./, etc are different your bullets will shoot quite a bit flatter. In other words, ballistic coefficients are higher as elevation increases.   Greg

– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text -> 3rd season opens November 3rd.  Yee-haa! > Dave Miller (my elk-hunting buddy) and I sighted in last weekend.  We > started on the 100 yard range.  My Ruger 7mm Mag had a new Simmons > Aetec scope mounted, so my first job was to get it zeroed.  First shot > was 15 down, 9 right.  The second shot, after many clicks, was 0 down > and 2 right.  A few more shots and it was where I wanted it, about > 2.5" high for a 250 yard zero with Barnes XLC’s. > Dave took two shots with his 7mm Mag and got a .6" group using Speer > Grand Slams.  Both shots were 2.9" high (also for a 250 yard zero) and > centered on the vertical centerline.  He figured he was ready for the > 200 yard range. > I took a couple of shots with my .44 Mag Browning carbine.  Both shots > were about 3" high and centered, good enough.  We packed up and headed > to the longer ranges. > There was a steady wind blowing at 10-15mph.  The 200 yard range is > across a small drainage, with the low point maybe 30 feet below the > shooting area and the targets.  We were both a litle high at 200, as > expected for a 250 yard zero.  A couple of shots at the steel target > with the .44 Mag and we backed up to 300 yards. > Funny things started to happen.  At 300 yards we were both 3" higher > than we should have been.  At 400 yards Dave was 7" higher than the > ballistic tables said he should be.  We figure the wind was getting > under the bullets and lifting them up as they crossed the drainage. > (at 400 yards they were 7" left due to the wind.)  We threw some .44’s > downrange toward the steel from 300 and 400, getting close but mostly > missing.  My last shot at 400 yards (with the .44) rang the steel and > we called it a day. > The next day I decided to go back and try my Super Redhawk.  I’ve been > trying for some time to get the Simmons red dot sight zeroed for 100 > yards, but it has been a PITA.  The first group at 100 yards was 3" > right, so I dialed in an adjustment.  The next couple of shots were > 10" higher and left. (?!)  I tapped the sight’s knobs with a live > round and it settled in.  The last 6 rounds went into a 4-1/2" group, > with 4 of them in a 3" subgroup in the bottom half of the 4" diamond > bullseye.  Even better, 3 of the shots were in a 1-1/8" subgroup in > the lower right of the bull.  Good enough! > Next I decided to try something I had never done before.  The Browning > .44 carbine has iron buckhorn sights, and I have always used the 2nd > notch with 240 grain bullets.  The question on my mind was where each > notch shot at 100 yards.  I started in the 1st notch and put 3 shots > 4" low.  Each successive notch gave about 4" additional elevation. > Last night I plugged the numbers into a ballistic calculator and > determined that the 3rd notch was a 156 yard zero and the 4th should > be zeroed right at 200.  (No, I don’t plan to use it for a 200 yard > shot – 125 is about the max I would try – but is nice to know where > each notch "should" shoot.) > This weekend Dave and I are going to shoot again.  We’ll go right to > the 200 yard range and work back to 300 and 400 yards.  (There is a > 500 yard range, but neither of us would want to shoot at that range > without a laser rangefinder, which we don’t have, so we won’t waste > any bullets there.)  This time we’ll forego the benches and shoot > sitting, kneeling and prone. > The elk are calling! > Jim Rogers > AKA Coyote Hunter > Visit the rec.hunting and rec.hunting.dogs FAQ Home Page at: >         http://sportsmansweb.com/hunting/

Visit the rec.hunting and rec.hunting.dogs FAQ Home Page at:         http://sportsmansweb.com/hunting/

Response:

> All ballistics tables, ballistic coefficients, etc. are obtained at sea > level. If you live at higher elevations, where the air/barometric pressure/ > temp./, etc are different your bullets will shoot quite a bit flatter. In > other words, ballistic coefficients are higher as elevation increases. >   Greg

I checked the ballistic calculator.  The elevation where we were shooting (6000 ft or so) would change things bout 1".  Still have 6" to account for. Jim Rogers AKA Coyote Hunter Visit the rec.hunting and rec.hunting.dogs FAQ Home Page at:         http://sportsmansweb.com/hunting/

Response:

> 3rd season opens November 3rd.  Yee-haa!

Interesting stuff huh? Always good to see some serious hunters who check what they are going to shoot. For my part, I hesitate to shoot on any game past about 200 yards and that with (pardon me) impressive shooting credentials for both rifle and pistol as well as years of commercial guide experience. Hope you do well with the season and I wish I could be there to cook up some liver and sourdough hotcakes for breakfast!! Ol Shy & Bashful – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text -> Dave Miller (my elk-hunting buddy) and I sighted in last weekend.  We > started on the 100 yard range.  My Ruger 7mm Mag had a new Simmons > Aetec scope mounted, so my first job was to get it zeroed.  First shot > was 15 down, 9 right.  The second shot, after many clicks, was 0 down > and 2 right.  A few more shots and it was where I wanted it, about > 2.5" high for a 250 yard zero with Barnes XLC’s. > Dave took two shots with his 7mm Mag and got a .6" group using Speer > Grand Slams.  Both shots were 2.9" high (also for a 250 yard zero) and > centered on the vertical centerline.  He figured he was ready for the > 200 yard range. > I took a couple of shots with my .44 Mag Browning carbine.  Both shots > were about 3" high and centered, good enough.  We packed up and headed > to the longer ranges. > There was a steady wind blowing at 10-15mph.  The 200 yard range is > across a small drainage, with the low point maybe 30 feet below the > shooting area and the targets.  We were both a litle high at 200, as > expected for a 250 yard zero.  A couple of shots at the steel target > with the .44 Mag and we backed up to 300 yards. > Funny things started to happen.  At 300 yards we were both 3" higher > than we should have been.  At 400 yards Dave was 7" higher than the > ballistic tables said he should be.  We figure the wind was getting > under the bullets and lifting them up as they crossed the drainage. > (at 400 yards they were 7" left due to the wind.)  We threw some .44’s > downrange toward the steel from 300 and 400, getting close but mostly > missing.  My last shot at 400 yards (with the .44) rang the steel and > we called it a day. > The next day I decided to go back and try my Super Redhawk.  I’ve been > trying for some time to get the Simmons red dot sight zeroed for 100 > yards, but it has been a PITA.  The first group at 100 yards was 3" > right, so I dialed in an adjustment.  The next couple of shots were > 10" higher and left. (?!)  I tapped the sight’s knobs with a live > round and it settled in.  The last 6 rounds went into a 4-1/2" group, > with 4 of them in a 3" subgroup in the bottom half of the 4" diamond > bullseye.  Even better, 3 of the shots were in a 1-1/8" subgroup in > the lower right of the bull.  Good enough! > Next I decided to try something I had never done before.  The Browning > .44 carbine has iron buckhorn sights, and I have always used the 2nd > notch with 240 grain bullets.  The question on my mind was where each > notch shot at 100 yards.  I started in the 1st notch and put 3 shots > 4" low.  Each successive notch gave about 4" additional elevation. > Last night I plugged the numbers into a ballistic calculator and > determined that the 3rd notch was a 156 yard zero and the 4th should > be zeroed right at 200.  (No, I don’t plan to use it for a 200 yard > shot – 125 is about the max I would try – but is nice to know where > each notch "should" shoot.) > This weekend Dave and I are going to shoot again.  We’ll go right to > the 200 yard range and work back to 300 and 400 yards.  (There is a > 500 yard range, but neither of us would want to shoot at that range > without a laser rangefinder, which we don’t have, so we won’t waste > any bullets there.)  This time we’ll forego the benches and shoot > sitting, kneeling and prone. > The elk are calling! > Jim Rogers > AKA Coyote Hunter > Visit the rec.hunting and rec.hunting.dogs FAQ Home Page at: >         http://sportsmansweb.com/hunting/

Visit the rec.hunting and rec.hunting.dogs FAQ Home Page at:         http://sportsmansweb.com/hunting/

Response:

3rd season opens November 3rd.  Yee-haa! Dave Miller (my elk-hunting buddy) and I sighted in last weekend.  We started on the 100 yard range.  My Ruger 7mm Mag had a new Simmons Aetec scope mounted, so my first job was to get it zeroed.  First shot was 15 down, 9 right.  The second shot, after many clicks, was 0 down and 2 right.  A few more shots and it was where I wanted it, about 2.5" high for a 250 yard zero with Barnes XLC’s. Dave took two shots with his 7mm Mag and got a .6" group using Speer Grand Slams.  Both shots were 2.9" high (also for a 250 yard zero) and centered on the vertical centerline.  He figured he was ready for the 200 yard range. I took a couple of shots with my .44 Mag Browning carbine.  Both shots were about 3" high and centered, good enough.  We packed up and headed to the longer ranges. There was a steady wind blowing at 10-15mph.  The 200 yard range is across a small drainage, with the low point maybe 30 feet below the shooting area and the targets.  We were both a litle high at 200, as expected for a 250 yard zero.  A couple of shots at the steel target with the .44 Mag and we backed up to 300 yards. Funny things started to happen.  At 300 yards we were both 3" higher than we should have been.  At 400 yards Dave was 7" higher than the ballistic tables said he should be.  We figure the wind was getting under the bullets and lifting them up as they crossed the drainage. (at 400 yards they were 7" left due to the wind.)  We threw some .44’s downrange toward the steel from 300 and 400, getting close but mostly missing.  My last shot at 400 yards (with the .44) rang the steel and we called it a day. The next day I decided to go back and try my Super Redhawk.  I’ve been trying for some time to get the Simmons red dot sight zeroed for 100 yards, but it has been a PITA.  The first group at 100 yards was 3" right, so I dialed in an adjustment.  The next couple of shots were 10" higher and left. (?!)  I tapped the sight’s knobs with a live round and it settled in.  The last 6 rounds went into a 4-1/2" group, with 4 of them in a 3" subgroup in the bottom half of the 4" diamond bullseye.  Even better, 3 of the shots were in a 1-1/8" subgroup in the lower right of the bull.  Good enough! Next I decided to try something I had never done before.  The Browning .44 carbine has iron buckhorn sights, and I have always used the 2nd notch with 240 grain bullets.  The question on my mind was where each notch shot at 100 yards.  I started in the 1st notch and put 3 shots 4" low.  Each successive notch gave about 4" additional elevation. Last night I plugged the numbers into a ballistic calculator and determined that the 3rd notch was a 156 yard zero and the 4th should be zeroed right at 200.  (No, I don’t plan to use it for a 200 yard shot – 125 is about the max I would try – but is nice to know where each notch "should" shoot.) This weekend Dave and I are going to shoot again.  We’ll go right to the 200 yard range and work back to 300 and 400 yards.  (There is a 500 yard range, but neither of us would want to shoot at that range without a laser rangefinder, which we don’t have, so we won’t waste any bullets there.)  This time we’ll forego the benches and shoot sitting, kneeling and prone. The elk are calling! Jim Rogers AKA Coyote Hunter Visit the rec.hunting and rec.hunting.dogs FAQ Home Page at:         http://sportsmansweb.com/hunting/

Response:

Grains?

Question:

If you were shooting 165 grain bullets and switched to 180 grain would, or how much would this throw off the accuracy of your gun?  Can you get away with it or would you need to resight in? Visit the rec.hunting and rec.hunting.dogs FAQ Home Page at:         http://sportsmansweb.com/hunting/

Response:

> If you were shooting 165 grain bullets and switched to 180 grain would, or > how much would this throw off the accuracy of your gun?  Can you get away > with it or would you need to resight in?

Depends on the individual gun (not just the make and model) … some are real sensitive, others seem oblivious.   Some will show more change in point of impact coming from changing brands of bullets that weigh the same than changing weight of bullet. The only way you’re going to find out what’ll happen in your gun is to go get a couple boxes of ammo and head for the range. Visit the rec.hunting and rec.hunting.dogs FAQ Home Page at:         http://sportsmansweb.com/hunting/

Response:

> If you were shooting 165 grain bullets and switched to 180 grain would, or > how much would this throw off the accuracy of your gun?  Can you get away > with it or would you need to resight in?

     I would take it to the range and see.  Rifles are individuals, some won’t show much change in impact with a minor change in loading, others will.  Odds are it will change point of impact, but by how much, can’t tell until you check it out.                            Scott Visit the rec.hunting and rec.hunting.dogs FAQ Home Page at:         http://sportsmansweb.com/hunting/

Response:

With any gun, when you change bullet weights, you should reconfirm your sight settings. Also, with a rifle, you should change your adjusted point blank settings. Example. if you sight in 1" high to be dead on at 200 and know you are 1 1/2 high at 50 with the old bullet, you need to recompute the trajectory for the new bullet weight and velocity. Good Luck, Bandit > If you were shooting 165 grain bullets and switched to 180 grain would, or > how much would this throw off the accuracy of your gun?  Can you get away > with it or would you need to resight in? > Visit the rec.hunting and rec.hunting.dogs FAQ Home Page at: >         http://sportsmansweb.com/hunting/

Visit the rec.hunting and rec.hunting.dogs FAQ Home Page at:         http://sportsmansweb.com/hunting/

Response:

>If you were shooting 165 grain bullets and switched to 180 grain would, or >how much would this throw off the accuracy of your gun?  Can you get away >with it or would you need to resight in?

The politicians answer is "probably". A rule of thumb is that different weight bullets, even different brands of the same weight, will shoot to a different point of impact (POI). How much the change is depends on the rifle. I have a 25-06 that will put Sierra 75g HPs and Speer 100g HPs to the same POI at 100 yds. But any 120g load shifts 2" low/2"left. I’m going to get nailed by the purists for this one , but , In the case of some wierd deal (like you forgot and left your ammo at home and your hunting buddy has the same caliber in a different weight), you could get away with it if _*you restrict your shots to LESS than a hundred yards*_.     I can’t remember having a bullet weight change move the POI over three or four inches at that range. And I’ve seen lots of hunters who couldnt keep their shots closer together than that.      Bill Van Houten (USA Ret)  "No matter how hard you try, you can’t throw a potato chip very far." "Linus" Visit the rec.hunting and rec.hunting.dogs FAQ Home Page at:         http://sportsmansweb.com/hunting/

Response:

- Hide quoted text — Show quoted text ->If you were shooting 165 grain bullets and switched to 180 grain would, or >how much would this throw off the accuracy of your gun?  Can you get away >with it or would you need to resight in? > I’m going to get nailed by the purists for this one , but , In the case of > some wierd deal (like you forgot and left your ammo at home and your hunting > buddy has the same caliber in a different weight), you could get away with > it if _*you restrict your shots to LESS than a hundred yards*_.     I can’t > remember having a bullet weight change move the POI over three or four > inches at that range. And I’ve seen lots of hunters who couldnt keep their > shots closer together than that.

No argument from me, Bill…and, given the adrenalin that starts to flow when you take aim on a game animal, it it likely that shaking the rifle will vary the shot more than a small weight difference. In most cases an increase in weight of a 165 grain bullet in a .30-06 to 180 grains (on a gun zero’ed at 200 yards) the difference at 100 yards is about 1/2".  Hell, I do more than that shivering in the cold. Yale Visit the rec.hunting and rec.hunting.dogs FAQ Home Page at:         http://sportsmansweb.com/hunting/

Response:

I’ve got a couple of ballistics texts here (Pesja for one, Rinkert the other) wherein I’ve learned that with a heavier bullet, the barrel travel time increases, therefore the muzzle rises more in recoil and the bullet hits a little higher on target (at similar ranges to a somewhat calculable distance where the heavier bullet will drop more for a given distance as it’s not traveling as fast and has more drag, etc). Generally, given this situation you’ve described, yes, you’d need to sight in the gun again and dope out the drop tables for THAT round in THAT gun. Have fun. Norm Balog, D.O. Family Medicine and Firearms Counseling NRA pistol instructor, RSO Socialist Occupied Maryland > If you were shooting 165 grain bullets and switched to 180 grain would, or > how much would this throw off the accuracy of your gun?  Can you get away > with it or would you need to resight in? > Visit the rec.hunting and rec.hunting.dogs FAQ Home Page at: >         http://sportsmansweb.com/hunting/

Visit the rec.hunting and rec.hunting.dogs FAQ Home Page at:         http://sportsmansweb.com/hunting/

Response:

>I’ve got a couple of ballistics texts here (Pesja for one, Rinkert the >other) wherein I’ve learned that with a heavier bullet, the barrel travel >time increases, therefore the muzzle rises more in recoil and the bullet >hits a little higher on target (at similar ranges to a somewhat calculable >distance where the heavier bullet will drop more for a given distance as >it’s not traveling as fast and has more drag, etc). > If you were shooting 165 grain bullets and switched to 180 grain would, or > how much would this throw off the accuracy of your gun?

As a practical example, I have 180-gn and 150-gn Partition handloads for my 30-06 that impact in the same place at 100 yards, even though the 150’s are going 200 fps faster. But anytime you change ammo you have GOT to re-sight your rifle, or at least check it.  And, as always, anyone who thinks that they will be attempting a shot on game over maybe 175 yards owes it to the animal to practice at those longer ranges and prove to themselves that they can hit a 6-inch circle (for deer) every time.  At the distance you can’t keep it in that circle anymore, you’ve hit your long range limit, regardless of the cartridge you are shooting… -jeff Visit the rec.hunting and rec.hunting.dogs FAQ Home Page at:         http://sportsmansweb.com/hunting/

Response:

– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text -> I’ve got a couple of ballistics texts here (Pesja for one, Rinkert the > other) wherein I’ve learned that with a heavier bullet, the barrel travel > time increases, therefore the muzzle rises more in recoil and the bullet > hits a little higher on target (at similar ranges to a somewhat calculable > distance where the heavier bullet will drop more for a given distance as > it’s not traveling as fast and has more drag, etc). > Generally, given this situation you’ve described, yes, you’d need to sight > in the gun again and dope out the drop tables for THAT round in THAT gun. > Have fun. > Norm Balog, D.O. > Family Medicine and Firearms Counseling > NRA pistol instructor, RSO > Socialist Occupied Maryland > If you were shooting 165 grain bullets and switched to 180 grain would, or > how much would this throw off the accuracy of your gun?  Can you get away > with it or would you need to resight in?

As soon as a bullet leaves the barrel it is subjected ot the law of gravity. if it is in the air for 1second it is going to drop 9.8 meters so the faster that tht bullet is going the less time it spends between the muzle and target so the less it is going to drop. A heavier bullet is more aerodynamic than a lighter bullet of the same make and design and has more momentum so it will not lose velocity as quickly in proportion to a light bullet. I think I got that right. Dan Hockly > Visit the rec.hunting and rec.hunting.dogs FAQ Home Page at: >         http://sportsmansweb.com/hunting/ > Visit the rec.hunting and rec.hunting.dogs FAQ Home Page at: >         http://sportsmansweb.com/hunting/

Visit the rec.hunting and rec.hunting.dogs FAQ Home Page at:         http://sportsmansweb.com/hunting/

Response:

NEF Single Shot

Question:

How good a gun is the New England Firearms single shot  Handi Rifle? I am thinking of getting on of these for my wife who is just getting into hunting. What calibers do they come in? Mark Visit the rec.hunting and rec.hunting.dogs FAQ Home Page at:         http://sportsmansweb.com/hunting/

Response:

> How good a gun is the New England Firearms single shot  Handi Rifle? I am thinking of getting on of these for my wife who is just getting into hunting. What calibers do they come in? > Mark

They’re available in a variety of calibers.  .22 Hornet, .223, .243, ‘06, and .45-70 come to mind as things I’ve seen; I think probably .270, .25-’06, and .308, also. Personally, I don’t think much of them.  The bores I’ve seen have been pretty rough compared to even cheap bolt actions so they copper foul a lot worse.  They’re made of stamped parts which have a lot of sharp edges which makes ‘em not operate real smoothly, and the triggers have been real bad. You get what you pay for; they run about $170 – $180 here … when you pay half the cost of a crude entry level bolt action, that’s just about what you get. If your wife means anything at all to you, and you would really like her to hunt, you might consider loaning her your good rifle and use one of  the NEF rifles yourself, but don’t stick her with a piece of crap unless you want to rouse her ire and make a non-hunter out of her. Tom Visit the rec.hunting and rec.hunting.dogs FAQ Home Page at:         http://sportsmansweb.com/hunting/

Response:

>Personally, I don’t think much of them.  The bores I’ve seen have been pretty >rough compared to even cheap bolt actions so they copper foul a lot worse. >They’re made of stamped parts >which have a lot of sharp edges which makes ‘em not operate real smoothly, >and the triggers have been real bad.

MY experience is exactly the opposite. I have found them to be very accurate, very good to excellent triggers and fast handling. I think they are the biggest bargain in the firearms market. Depending on your wife’s size, you may want to look at the youth versions also. fullotto Visit the rec.hunting and rec.hunting.dogs FAQ Home Page at:         http://sportsmansweb.com/hunting/

Response:

> How good a gun is the New England Firearms single shot  Handi Rifle? > I am thinking of getting on of these for my wife who is just getting > into hunting. What calibers do they come in?

I have one in .243 with a very short stock for my pre-teen daughters.  I like shooting it better than my .270. Even if it would have cost twice what I paid, it would have been a good rifle.  At just under $200 new, it was a fabulous deal.  *HIGHLY* recommended. — + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + Chris Barnes                                          AOL IM:  CNBarnes Visit the rec.hunting and rec.hunting.dogs FAQ Home Page at:         http://sportsmansweb.com/hunting/

Response:

Dick’s Sporting Goods stores just put the .243 and .223 NEF on sale.  $240 w/ a scope. mjb No affiliation just noticed the ad in the mailbox.

– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text -> How good a gun is the New England Firearms single shot  Handi Rifle? > I am thinking of getting on of these for my wife who is just getting > into hunting. What calibers do they come in? > I have one in .243 with a very short stock for my pre-teen daughters.  I > like shooting it better than my .270. > Even if it would have cost twice what I paid, it would have been a good > rifle.  At just under $200 new, it was a fabulous deal.  *HIGHLY* > recommended. > — > + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + > Chris Barnes                                          AOL IM:  CNBarnes > Visit the rec.hunting and rec.hunting.dogs FAQ Home Page at: >         http://sportsmansweb.com/hunting/

Visit the rec.hunting and rec.hunting.dogs FAQ Home Page at:         http://sportsmansweb.com/hunting/

Response:

> How good a gun is the New England Firearms single shot  Handi Rifle? I am thinking of getting on of these for my wife who is just getting into hunting. What calibers do they come in?

One of the gun rags I subscribe to ran an article recently on different rifles.  The NEF was the hands-down winner for accuracy in the caliber it was tested in. (.223?) Like Savage rifles, they have a reputation for being a little crude in the aesthetics area, but very good in the accuracy department. They’re pretty lightweight and will kick more than a heavier rifle in the same caliber, something you might want to consider. Jim Rogers AKA Coyote Hunter Visit the rec.hunting and rec.hunting.dogs FAQ Home Page at:         http://sportsmansweb.com/hunting/

Response:

.270 or .308

Question:

Forgive my ignorance but can anyone tell me under which conditions they would prefer to use either the .270 or the .308? From what i understand, the .308 has more ‘knock-down’ power at shorter range but the .270 has a better trajectory for the longer shots? Visit the rec.hunting and rec.hunting.dogs FAQ Home Page at:         http://sportsmansweb.com/hunting/

Response:

Both bullets have great abilities that come so close in a hunting scenario that it does not matter which one you choose.  I shoot both and can tell you that it really come down to pick the one you like best in the gun you like best.  It is a toss of the coin on this one. You can’t go wrong with either one. Scott Young

> Forgive my ignorance but can anyone tell me under which conditions they > would prefer to use either the .270 or the .308? > From what i understand, the .308 has more ‘knock-down’ power at shorter > range but the .270 has a better trajectory for the longer shots? > Visit the rec.hunting and rec.hunting.dogs FAQ Home Page at: >         http://sportsmansweb.com/hunting/

Visit the rec.hunting and rec.hunting.dogs FAQ Home Page at:         http://sportsmansweb.com/hunting/

Response:

A .270 is a .30-06 necked down to .270". For example, there is little difference between a 150 gr. .270 and .30-06 round. The .308 is a "short action" caliber, and you might prefer it if you want a more compact action / gun. It is a small step down from the .30-06, but the real world difference is small. Randy Wakeman Visit the rec.hunting and rec.hunting.dogs FAQ Home Page at:         http://sportsmansweb.com/hunting/

Response:

>Forgive my ignorance but can anyone tell me under which conditions they >would prefer to use either the .270 or the .308? >From what i understand, the .308 has more ‘knock-down’ power at shorter >range but the .270 has a better trajectory for the longer shots?

Yep.   In the bush I’d pick a .308.  In open country I’d pick a .270. But the difference isn’t great – there’s not much in it. The .308 also has the advantage of being a short-action round, which allows slightly lighter rifles and slightly faster reload times. Visit the rec.hunting and rec.hunting.dogs FAQ Home Page at:         http://sportsmansweb.com/hunting/

Response:

They’re close. I don’t know if there is anything one can do in the field, that the other cannot. If I was starting out again, I’d probably opt for the .308, to take advantage of shorter action and availability of cheap milsurp ammo. I am satisfied with the 270. The .270 is definitely superior ballistically – on paper – but not enough to matter in the field. And it does make an ever so slightly bigger hole…. Visit the rec.hunting and rec.hunting.dogs FAQ Home Page at:         http://sportsmansweb.com/hunting/

Response:

>Forgive my ignorance but can anyone tell me under which conditions they >would prefer to use either the .270 or the .308?

The .270 will kick a bit less with bullets of equal sectional density ( 130 vs 165 ) and will shoot a bit flatter.  FOr most hunting ( out to 300 yards ) there is very little difference in terminal performance on deer-sized game.  While some would call the .308 better for larger game, I’ve seen several of our moose shot with .270s with 150 Partitions – one shot, one dead moose. Remington ballistics for deer bullets at muzzle and at 300 yards: .270/130  3060 fps/2702 fpe     2259/1472     – 7.0" .308/150  2820 fps/2648 fpe           2009/1344     – 8.8" Not really much difference at all.  Either will work great.  The .308 is a better target cartridge for long range shooting, but both are very accurate cartridges in the right rifles. Jay T Visit the rec.hunting and rec.hunting.dogs FAQ Home Page at:         http://sportsmansweb.com/hunting/

Response:

"ever so slightly bigger hole" – I meant the 308 Are you in the market for a rifle? To hunt with? What type of terrain will you be hunting? Last night I was in very thick stuff, and kind of wishing I had one of these new Ruger .44 semi-autos. It was thick, out there, and no way did I need the reach of the 270. Didn’t see a thing. I’ll try again tonight. Visit the rec.hunting and rec.hunting.dogs FAQ Home Page at:         http://sportsmansweb.com/hunting/

Response:

> Forgive my ignorance but can anyone tell me under which conditions they > would prefer to use either the .270 or the .308? > From what i understand, the .308 has more ‘knock-down’ power at shorter > range but the .270 has a better trajectory for the longer shots?

Short action of .308 can be nice.  Both .308 and .270 proven hitters. Visit the rec.hunting and rec.hunting.dogs FAQ Home Page at:         http://sportsmansweb.com/hunting/

Response:

>"ever so slightly bigger hole" – I meant the 308 >Are you in the market for a rifle? To hunt with? What type of terrain will >you be hunting? Last night I was in very thick stuff, and kind of wishing I >had one of these new Ruger .44 semi-autos. It was thick, out there, and no >way did I need the reach of the 270.

I have one of those Ruger’s.  It’s pretty nifty.  I have not taken it out yet.  I may try to get a doe with it later this year.  It’s a great concept, but if the terrain is mixed at all, it’s scary too, because it really is a 100-yard cartridge/gun. -jeff Visit the rec.hunting and rec.hunting.dogs FAQ Home Page at:         http://sportsmansweb.com/hunting/

Response:

Take a look at the result from any match you can find.  Do you see any ..270’s listed?  Stick to the .308 for any and all mid-size game.

> Forgive my ignorance but can anyone tell me under which conditions they > would prefer to use either the .270 or the .308? > From what i understand, the .308 has more ‘knock-down’ power at shorter > range but the .270 has a better trajectory for the longer shots? > Visit the rec.hunting and rec.hunting.dogs FAQ Home Page at: >         http://sportsmansweb.com/hunting/

Visit the rec.hunting and rec.hunting.dogs FAQ Home Page at:         http://sportsmansweb.com/hunting/

Response:

>Take a look at the result from any match you can find.  Do you see any >..270’s listed?  Stick to the .308 for any and all mid-size game.

Beware hard and fast rules ! Just because .308s are used in known distance matches is no reason to rule out smaller calibers. Or lighter bullets. The .270 was developed (necked down 30-06) to make a flatter shooting, lighter recoiling mountain and plains rifle. Flatter trajectory means less problem with "holdover" at longer ranges. And less wind drift to figure.      Bill Van Houten (USA Ret)  "No matter how hard you try, you can’t throw a potato chip very far." "Linus" Visit the rec.hunting and rec.hunting.dogs FAQ Home Page at:         http://sportsmansweb.com/hunting/

Response:

>Take a look at the result from any match you can find.  Do you see any >..270’s listed?  Stick to the .308 for any and all mid-size game.

While I have personally found the .308 to be both a fine match and hunting cartridge, why on earth would someone discount one of the most popular and successful sporting cartridges ever developed?  To each his own of course, but tens of thousands of successful hunters have used the .270 on six continents for over 75 years – it has stood the test of time.  Either cartridge will work great for the original poster’s needs. Jay T Visit the rec.hunting and rec.hunting.dogs FAQ Home Page at:         http://sportsmansweb.com/hunting/

Response:

what do you mean by ‘match’? and i have heard that .308 ammo is cheaper but does that only apply to fmj?

– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text -> Take a look at the result from any match you can find.  Do you see any > ..270’s listed?  Stick to the .308 for any and all mid-size game. > Forgive my ignorance but can anyone tell me under which conditions they > would prefer to use either the .270 or the .308? > From what i understand, the .308 has more ‘knock-down’ power at shorter > range but the .270 has a better trajectory for the longer shots? > Visit the rec.hunting and rec.hunting.dogs FAQ Home Page at: >         http://sportsmansweb.com/hunting/ > Visit the rec.hunting and rec.hunting.dogs FAQ Home Page at: >         http://sportsmansweb.com/hunting/

Visit the rec.hunting and rec.hunting.dogs FAQ Home Page at:         http://sportsmansweb.com/hunting/

Response:

Hornady sabots; correction to previous post

Question:

> are designed for use with 150 grains Pyrodex in the newer > muzzleloaders that use 50 gr. pellets.

Ballistically you have two different animals. A 44 cal. is .429 diameter and a 45 cal. is .451 diameter. ASSUMING same bullet shape the 44 cal. will have a better ballistic coefficient. The downside is the plastic sabot is thicker and MAY be prone to blow by. For an awesome bullet check out Precision Rifle on the net. I bought some 235 gr. 40 cal. QT bullets last year and often put ten shots under 2 inches at 100 yds. good luck. mark. Visit the rec.hunting and rec.hunting.dogs FAQ Home Page at:         http://sportsmansweb.com/hunting/

Response:

In a previous post, I stated that Hornady apparently redesigned their 50 cal sabots without indicating a design change.  After carefully re-reading the identically designed labels on the old and new boxes, I discovered that while the old style I had been using were 44 cal slugs XTP, the new box read, in fine print, 45 240 XTPMAG.  These mag slugs are designed for use with 150 grains Pyrodex in the newer muzzleloaders that use 50 gr. pellets. I was fooled because the box and the label was absolutely identical to what I had been previously using and only the fine print indicated a difference.  I did not know the sabots were black until I opened the box at home. Sorry for the misinformation, but it points up how easily one can pick up the wrong ammo. Lena Visit the rec.hunting and rec.hunting.dogs FAQ Home Page at:         http://sportsmansweb.com/hunting/

Response:

broken air rifle

Question:

> Hello There, > I had an accident with my .22 air rifle i dropped it > comming down from the loft and the arm sheered so i can’t cock it any > more, i know this is probably a toy gun, but i was wondering if it was > fixable or if my rabbit hunting day’s are over any help posted would > be a great help, thankyou

What Brand is it? Was the ‘bolt’ a plastic part? My son has a Daisy BB and I have the booklet and addresses and phone numbers if ya need it. JB Weld (JB Quick) is an epoxy/glue I have fixed many things with, that I thought were history. — http://Sprite.viptx.net/~moomesa/index.html Visit the rec.hunting and rec.hunting.dogs FAQ Home Page at:         http://sportsmansweb.com/hunting/

Response:

Hello There,             I had an accident with my .22 air rifle i dropped it comming down from the loft and the arm sheered so i can’t cock it any more, i know this is probably a toy gun, but i was wondering if it was fixable or if my rabbit hunting day’s are over any help posted would be a great help, thankyou Visit the rec.hunting and rec.hunting.dogs FAQ Home Page at:         http://sportsmansweb.com/hunting/

Response: