Author Topic: handi: what is enough gun (Read 5311 times)

Chas. · « **Reply #30 on:** February 11, 2009, 12:48:33 PM »

The OP seems to want to define the practicality of a firearm in terms of killing. Well, some of us don't hunt, we just shoot for the fun of it.

Don't get me wrong, I don't have anything against hunting, I used to hunt myself. It's just not for me anymore.

The liveliest thing I kill now is a pie plate. But I'd rather kill one of those with a 45-70 than a .22, although either will do the job.

45-70.gov · « **Reply #31 on:** February 11, 2009, 04:07:52 PM »

Quote from: handipardner on February 09, 2009, 07:28:30 AM

most of us dont think about making a gun pleasant to shoot but we should. For some a handi in a 30-06 in a pallet stock is not pleasant to shoot especially off a bench. How can we make a handi be enough gun and pleasant to shoot?

seems like the 30-30 winchester is flatter shooting with pointy hand loads
357 is more pleasent but not as flat shooting but real pleasent with 38s.......and cheapper to feed
i like the thump hole stocks

forget those stupid noisy ports....save that waste of money for a loading press or more bullets

handipardner · « **Reply #32 on:** February 11, 2009, 06:07:28 PM »

I appreciate all the great comments. Enough gun applies to target shooting/plinking as well as hunting.
If a gun is slapping your cheek, almost hitting your eyebrow, hurting your shoulder, tearing up your knuckles
and you cant bear to take one more shot then you shouldn't be shooting that gun. You need to fix it.

This is also being recognized with the benchrest shooters that have moved to more efficient rounds such as
260 rem, 6.5-284, 6.5x55 etc. Shooting should not be an ordeal.

My hope is that if you have such a gun you ask yourself why you continue shooting a weapon that is hurting you?
Many americans hunters have been sold because of marketing on the false idea that if the gun isnt hurting you it wont hurt the game. What we can learn from the early blackpowder and cartridge shooters is that most present day calibers are are more than what is needed but also that shooting involves knowing and managing your gun. If you dont know how to aim and where to aim the BIGGER GUN is not going to make the difference. Offhand shooting for many is a lost art. I am struck by many hunters who need 3 or 4 more shots to take down a deer.

I should say however that I asked one of the BIG GUN proponents on this board why the field mice that I shoot with the 30-06 don't bang flop and was told I need to take brain shots or get a heavier gun. So maybe I'm wrong.

jlwilliams · « **Reply #33 on:** February 12, 2009, 01:18:21 AM »

I'd like to add that one of my favorite Handi barrels is my .223 because it's an accurate shooter that you can shoot all day. Not only because of it's modest recoil, it's also an economical round to buy. I find that .223 bargain basement ammo seems to be fairly accurate. Really good compared to some other rounds (7.62x39 budget stuff is not so accurate). Feed it good ammo and it becomes a really accurate rifle.

I've never used it for hunting. There is some disagreement over the .223s suitability for deer hunting. The argument is settled for me by the hunting regs in my state. They don't allow 22 centerfire, so I don't have to think too hard about if I want to use it.

Point remains, the .223 is a nice shooting, low recoil round and Winchester white box ammo won't break the bank.

handipardner · « **Reply #34 on:** February 15, 2009, 04:35:46 PM »

I have been reading the thread on the worst recoiling guns.
If THE BIG GUN is actively hurting you where you are confused or your limbs feel numb, or black and blue or in pain YOU SHOULD ASK YOURSELF WHAT THAT RECOIL IS DOING TO YOUR BRAIN. This is not a hypothetical question. The swedish military is finding evidence of microbleeds in the brains of soldiers from weapons fire and we now know from Iraq that concussive effects cause brain cells to die over a period of time and this damage is not picked up with the best neurological tests. What we now know is some individuals are more susceptible to neurological damage than others. Older individuals are probably more susceptible. THE REGULAR USER OF THE BIGGER GUN MAY HAVE LITERALLY BECOME MORE STUPID. Bigger blasts are more likely to harm your hearing. Bigger guns expose you also to more lead especially with cast bullets and possibly mercury. If you are hunting for food nontoxic rounds such as the barnes probably make more sense. I still hunt and shoot but I dont want my guns harming me. Just my two sense.

Oldshooter · « **Reply #35 on:** February 15, 2009, 04:46:18 PM »

"Just my two sense." Ah ha!!!!! that'd be "two cents" I see what you mean about microbleeds.

handipardner · « **Reply #36 on:** February 15, 2009, 05:34:14 PM »

I have to agree that "two cents" is technically correct however my hope is that my poetic phrase "two sense" conveys good sense and common sense which is lacking in many big gun shooters. Since I am not a willing BIG GUN shooter I cant explain my microbleeds.

Oldshooter · « **Reply #37 on:** February 15, 2009, 06:00:41 PM »

Was just pulling your leg! I think you may have a valid point! Look at all the old prize fighters, like Ali. it is obvious they have been hit two many times in the head too hard !

Chas. · « **Reply #38 on:** February 16, 2009, 01:49:54 AM »

Ali has been diagnosed with Parkinson's. That may not be a good example of what you're trying to convey. Hmm....or maybe it is a perfect example.

gstewart44 · « **Reply #39 on:** February 16, 2009, 04:35:15 AM »

Quote from: handipardner on February 15, 2009, 04:35:46 PM

Bigger guns expose you also to more lead especially with cast bullets and possibly mercury. If you are hunting for food nontoxic rounds such as the barnes probably make more sense.

handipardner - I agree with your observations that excessive recoil and muzzleblast are detrimental to body and mind. However I do not believe there is any scientific proof that hunting with cast lead bullets has ever ruined or harmed any meat due to lead contamination. Our forefathers survived in this country for hundreds of years harvesting game with big slow moving chunks of lead, yet the only reported cases of lead poisoning were of those on the receiving end of a firearm.

That it "makes more sense" is the same flawed excuses that PETA and the Tree Huggers out in Kalifornia are using to legislate away hunting as we know it. First ban lead bullets because of environmental and game meat contamination, substitute with ever more expensive "nontoxic" ammo, then make the nontoxic ammo harder to acquire. It is part of their win by attrition mentality. If more obstacles are put up (financial and availability) then fewer hunters will take to the field.

handipardner · « **Reply #40 on:** February 16, 2009, 04:41:08 AM »

"Was just pulling your leg! I think you may have a valid point! Look at all the old prize fighters, like Ali. it is obvious they have been hit two many times in the head too hard !"

Dear Mr. Oldshooter

I apologize for misreading your post. I had just finished shooting my 50BMG handi and my leg was too numb to feel that you were pulling on it. I was also confused about what you were saying. Too many big words. I did however get that squirrel at 2500 yds. Will post pictures later.

with sincerest apologies

Handipardner

Oldshooter · « **Reply #41 on:** February 16, 2009, 05:51:54 AM »

Quote from: handipardner on February 16, 2009, 04:41:08 AM

"Was just pulling your leg! I think you may have a valid point! Look at all the old prize fighters, like Ali. it is obvious they have been hit two many times in the head too hard !"

Dear Mr. Oldshooter

I apologize for misreading your post. I had just finished shooting my 50BMG handi and my leg was too numb to feel that you were pulling on it. I was also confused about what you were saying. Too many big words. I did however get that squirrel at 2500 yds. Will post pictures later.

with sincerest apologies

Handipardner

#1 dont worry about apologizing to me I have very thick skin, and it is all in fun!
#2 Glad you were not offended, would not want to offend someone that can shoot anything and hit it at 2500 yds
#3 We could use your skills in Afganistan, if you haven't been there already

petemi · « **Reply #42 on:** February 16, 2009, 07:34:21 AM »

If I were allowed to keep only one "gun", it would have to be a 12ga. shotgun...... If I were allowed to keep one "rifle", it would be my Handi .45-70. They're both "enough gun".......red squirrels to bear, certainly anything in the lower 48.

Pete

LaOtto222 · « **Reply #43 on:** February 16, 2009, 02:05:52 PM »

I have been reading this thread with interest. I recently read a magazine article were a guy was using a 7mm mag for moose. He felt under gunned until he found a 30-30 case in the woods. The local guide said that many natives use 30-30 for moose. I think guys feel they need to carry big guns, because they are going to only get maybe one chance at a trophy at who knows what distance, so they want to make sure they nail them when the opportunity presents it self. Oh sure they enjoy the hunt, but they like showing or telling about the trophy they got more. Some one that really enjoys the hunt can get by with smaller guns, because they will pass on a questionable shot. They will tell their grandchildren about the one that got away with no regrets. Good Luck and Good Shooting

petemi · « **Reply #44 on:** February 17, 2009, 05:26:28 AM »

LaOtto, I agree with you 100 percent. I don't own a magnum, except my .357s. But I always carry enough gun to do the job with the weapon, game, and expected range in mind. I never try to use the lightest round to kill the biggest beast. I use the one that will drop him where he stands. As a kid, I killed a deer with a .22LR; it doesn't make it a deer rifle.......and, I'd only try it again if my very life depended on it.

Pete

handipardner · « **Reply #45 on:** February 17, 2009, 12:46:43 PM »

"Ali has been diagnosed with Parkinson's. That may not be a good example of what you're trying to convey. Hmm....or maybe it is a perfect example. "

The important lesson is not to have your brain rattle to much in your scull. This all not well understood. With the boxers they called it punch drunk. Depression and memory problems and movement disorders are some common symptoms. Dont over do it with big guns.

I had talked to someone who shot about 10,000 rounds per year and he had lost the ability to do basic math and prepare a bill.

This also applies to heart disease since many patients are on plavix and or aspirin which makes them more likely to bleed. Lead can also contribute to heart disease.

LaOtto222 · « **Reply #46 on:** February 17, 2009, 01:34:12 PM »

Pete - your 45-70 and 308 has all the bases covered. If you want to shoot big game at 500 yards, you might consider a 7mm, 300 mag or maybe a 338 mag just because they shoot flatter. Personally I would not shoot at anything over 300 yards unless it is small and I can use a small flat shooting caliber rifle on it. Just limit your self to what your gun will do. There ain't nothing in this hemisphere that you can't kill real quick with a 45-70 or 308; if you limit yourself to what your gun will do. Every one knows you like the 45-70. I have to admit that you can shoot (and kill) any thing with it. But I think you have to admit that while it may be able to kill at 500 yards, the hold over is atrocious, so you limit yourself. Good Shooting to you Pete

BBF · « **Reply #47 on:** February 18, 2009, 04:59:21 AM »

I would think your location and game available would be the criteria for what is enough firearm. Hunters in States that have nothing bigger or more dangerous then deer and antelope would be well served with non mag cartridges up to 30 cal. If I was living in rural Alaska I would consider the 30 cal as light/marginal.

handipardner · « **Reply #48 on:** February 18, 2009, 01:25:25 PM »

" However I do not believe there is any scientific proof that hunting with cast lead bullets has ever ruined or harmed any meat due to lead contamination. Our forefathers survived in this country for hundreds of years harvesting game with big slow moving chunks of lead, yet the only reported cases of lead poisoning were of those on the receiving end of a firearm."

The evidence shows that jacketed bullets going at centerfire velocities leave lead invisible to the eye up to 18 inches from the wound in medium size big game animals. Lead bullets at these velocities also produce lead fumes
that are minimized by 95% if the bullet is jacketed.

Our forebeares shot cast bullets at significantly lower velocities and the lead was softer so it may have disintegrated less. I dont know what lead levels then came from hunting with lead bullets. In the past, people had much higher exposures to lead, mercury and arsenic and these compounds were also used in medications. We dont fully understand what effects those levels had on populations.

The one thing that is certain is that lead is toxic. I hunt big game and in my case I try to break bones when I shoot so I no longer use lead bullets.

We now know that there is no safe level of lead and children and young adults are more vulnerable to lead because of neurological and other health effects on growing individuals. Heart patients should also try to keep lead levels low.
IMHO

This is a summary of the evidence as best I know it.

I will respond to your other points tomorrow.

handipardner · « **Reply #49 on:** February 20, 2009, 08:58:44 PM »

"That it "makes more sense" is the same flawed excuses that PETA and the Tree Huggers out in Kalifornia are using to legislate away hunting as we know it. First ban lead bullets because of environmental and game meat contamination, substitute with ever more expensive "nontoxic" ammo, then make the nontoxic ammo harder to acquire. It is part of their win by attrition mentality. If more obstacles are put up (financial and availability) then fewer hunters will take to the field."

There will always be opponents to hunting. And efforts to reduce toxins will not stop. I just read today that there will be a global treaty to reduce mercury in the environment. The real threat to shooting and hunting however is the disappearance of the rural way of
life and the reduction in habitats. The decline in small farms and of viable rural communities which had a stake in maintaining habitat and passing on the traditions of shooting and hunting are the biggest threat to hunting not PETA.

The federal governemnt which subsidized big corporate farms and globalization are the main culprits. Recently the internet has resulted in a reduction of individuals spending time in the outdoors.

These things go in cycles and in the west there may be an increase in rural communities because of the internet, gas finds and biofuels.

"I recently read a magazine article were a guy was using a 7mm mag for moose. He felt under gunned until he found a 30-30 case in the woods. The local guide said that many natives use 30-30 for moose. I think guys feel they need to carry big guns, because they are going to only get maybe one chance at a trophy at who knows what distance, so they want to make sure they nail them when the opportunity presents it self. Oh sure they enjoy the hunt, but they like showing or telling about the trophy they got more. Some one that really enjoys the hunt can get by with smaller guns, because they will pass on a questionable shot. They will tell their grandchildren about the one that got away with no regrets."

The big gun get at it at all cost ethic has been a corruption of traditional fair chase values and has been coincided with the decline in rural communities and the increase in city folk hunting and big company marketing. This does not protect wildlife and habitat or result in sustainable hunting.

I believe the sentiments of gstewart44 and laotto222 and many on this board to preserve the rural way of life and pass it on to children and grandchildren is laudable and important but you need to focus on the real enemies: antirural forces and a corruption of traditional
rural/hunting values. Our most ancient forbears: the hunter gatherers cherished nature and apologized to the game for killing it because we are all part of the cycle of life and death.

We all live and die and when we kill something to eat or for sport we are not heroes. The hunting videos with the music and the hi fives disrespects the traditional hunting values and has resulted in unnecessary reduction in game.

When you or a loved one is sick or in need or dies we are no different than this koala that wants to live.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-XSPx7S4jr4

gstewart44 · « **Reply #50 on:** February 21, 2009, 08:46:25 AM »

Handipardner - Thanks for your insight. Indeed the reduction in hunters are due to lifestyle changes as well as corporate and political pressures.

Your decision to harvest game with copper and not lead is sound in that you can salvage more meat from your game. I recently have been in "conversation" with several environmental types who were trying to quote the North Dakota "study" on lead in ground venison donated to food kitchens. the validity of that study is a discussion for another time (for me) but after reading your quote of "busting bones" on your quarry, copper/non toxic will allow more meat to be utilized.

Keep the posts coming and welcome to the family at GBO.

handipardner · « **Reply #51 on:** March 06, 2009, 07:14:10 PM »

BBF sayes

"I would think your location and game available would be the criteria for what is enough firearm. Hunters in States that have nothing bigger or more dangerous then deer and antelope would be well served with non mag cartridges up to 30 cal. If I was living in rural Alaska I would consider the 30 cal as light/marginal."

The big magnum hunters with big caliber bullets believe in shock and awe effects which I see little evidence of even in Africa with the biggest weapons. The only shock and awe that occurs is to the hunter.

If you have read my posts I believe in breaking bones to incapacitate the animal quickly. The 30-06 clearly can do it with todays bullets.
The 30-06 can also be loaded to almost winchester magnum levels though I dont believe that is necessary.

It is my opinion that the the .280 and the .270 are good for any game except grizzlies and polar bears. I believe the 30-06 with 190 and 200 grain bullets is good to handle any game including dangerous game in the Americas.

If I were hunting grizzly at short distances a 12 gauge shotgun with slugs is probably a wiser choice.
I have seen a couple of polls that say in Alaska the 30-06 is the most popular cartridge but I dont know how accurate that is.

Here is David Petzal on the field and stream gun nut blog

.270 vs. .30/06 Revisited. Again.
Well, this one got opened up again (actually, it never closes) so here’s what I can put forth:

I’ve shot probably ten times as much .30/06 ammo over my career as I have .270. Just about all of the guns I test for the magazine are chambered for the ’06. That’s because it’s the most popular and useful cartridge around, and with the huge variety of ammo and bullets available, you’re bound to find something that works for any given rifle.

On the other hand, I’ve done far more hunting with the .270. I like the higher velocity and lighter recoil. Most shooters will do better with a .270 than with an ’06.

I have yet to see any real difference in killing power between the 130-, 140-, and 150-grain .270 loads. There are big differences, however, in bullet make and type.

The most useful bullet weight for the ’06 is either the 165 or the 180. It depends on what you’re hunting. The load that deserves more popularity is the 200-grain. Right now, I don’t know of any factory that loads it, but it turns the ’06 into a fearsome killer of large animals. I had one .30/06 that would give me 2,700 fps with that bullet, and it was hell on wheels.

For whatever reason, it’s not unusual to find a .270 that will shoot all three bullet weights into the same group at 100 yards. However, it’s extremely rare to find an ’06 that will print any two weights together.

handipardner · « **Reply #52 on:** March 07, 2009, 01:06:13 PM »

Two self explanatory recent posts on recoil effects

the first from graybeard handi area :

" Re: H&R in 450Marlin
« Reply #3 on: March 05, 2009, 03:28:30 PM »

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

skifastchad sayes

I have 2 450 marlin handis.

My 18" h&r 450 marlin with a synthetic stock is NOT the first gun I shoot if I take several guns to the range. After 10 shots of lever-evolution ammo, I'm done for the day. It beats my shoulder up so much that I can't hold any of my other rifles still enough to hit anything.

My uncut barrel gun has a heavy hardwood stock with a recoil reducer and it is really no worse than a 270 or 30-06.

It all depends on the weight of the gun."

the second from phil bourjaily on the field and stream gun nut blog:

http://www.fieldandstream.com/blogs/ammunition/2009/03/bourjaily-i-hate-3-12-inch-turkey-load

mcwoodduck · « **Reply #53 on:** March 07, 2009, 03:38:10 PM »

Three things
1) Yes 6.5X55 is a great round. So are all of the pre WWI boltaction Military rounds. 7X57, 8X57, 30-40, 303 brit, 30-06 and so on.
With europe there is only really one type of terrain where they hunt moose and elk and those calibers work well.
2) here in the US there are a wide variety of hunitn terrains from Deep woods to bean fields on the same farm. The variety of calibers and the magnum calibers were a way to extend the range of a rifle for the working man. The guy who lives on the farm probably can judge distance and has all season to get his game. The factory / office worker does not get out into the field as much as he would like and the added speed of the bullet allows him to shoot flatter and possibly take a longer shot and go home with his game in the week he has to hunt.
3) choices and the freedom to be able to try to build the better mouse trap is what has made America great. So while Jack O'connor liked 270 bullets and Keith liked 334/ 338. both thought they had a better answer to how to improve the 30 for hunting. And since we can have as many choices as we can afford here. I think why not. What ever you think is best your have your reasons for picking it based on what, where, and how you hunt. Also determins what bullet weight and style you use too. i have some of the 156 grain 6.5X55 Norma loads. I now understand why the 6.5X55 is usually on a long action.

handipardner · « **Reply #54 on:** March 09, 2009, 06:49:17 PM »

interesting self-explanatory article on cartridges bullets and African hunting from someone that knows. It even mentions the 45-70 must be referring to Petemi.

http://www.norma.cc/assets/rifle.jan09.pdf

mauser98us · « **Reply #55 on:** March 10, 2009, 06:00:03 PM »

Don't forget the Swedes. They use the obsolete 9.3x57 for everything

handipardner · « **Reply #56 on:** March 11, 2009, 01:32:53 PM »

I think it is great that we have all these different calibers and cartridges and people will do what they wish in terms of their choices.
The variety in the US is also because of a long history with abundant game and varied habitats. The introduction of the magnums
coincided with an aggressive marketing effort by American gun makers to distinguish themselves from older traditional cartridges.
The 264 7mm 300 and 338 458 mags of the fifties and sixties are well designed cartridges but their claimed superior effects on game were largely marketing hype.

I still hunt deer but have you met baby?

http://news.aol.com/article/pet-deer/370355

dannytoro · « **Reply #57 on:** March 12, 2009, 01:00:26 AM »

What's enough Gun? The cartridge I've never met of course! There are so many it's tough to chose just one. I'd love to say just the 30-06, but that would insult my fondness for the .308Win and 7mm Rem Mag. For years I loved hunting with the 338 Win Mag. Certainly overpowered for South Georgia, but plenty effective none the less. I also have to admit having a crush on the old 250-3000 Savage, having enjoyed toting a neighbors Kenny Jarret Ultralight a few trips. There's a 300 Win Mag in the rack for those bean fields and trips to wide yawning spaces of Labrador. It is so hard to say what is best because everyone will have a cartridge that suites their needs. Currently I just acquired a new 500 S&W Handi-rifle, and want to try something different with it. Not having the funds for one of those fine 50-90's or 110's like Spencer replicas, I still wanted to see how hunting with those big old cartridges of yore worked. So I'm going to learn about bullet molds and those heavy weight bullets over 400 grains. Reading about Billy Dixon's famous 50-90 shot sort of stoked a curiosity about just what these class of bullets could do. I'm retired and have nothing better to do, my size and history of working with industrial equipment have nearly killed my pain sensory system...

.....So why not...

STUMPJMPR · « **Reply #58 on:** March 12, 2009, 02:09:29 AM »

I believe 30-06 or any caliber based off of the 30-06 case is more than enough gun for anything that walks the earth. I read an article a while back that was testing a Bakail double rifle. The gun writer went to Russia and went on a bear hunt with a 30-06 double rifle. The Russian bear was a little bigger than our Grizzly. It was a one shot kill if I remember correctly.

Also, I have read that more elephants have fallen to 7.62 NATO ball rounds than any other cartridge.

These wouldn't be my first choice for dangerous game just for the sake of poor shot placement you could have a big problem on your hands, but they are capable rounds.

petemi · « **Reply #59 on:** March 12, 2009, 04:09:13 AM »

I suppose I'm bigoted. I'm not enchanted with my Handi '06, but I think it's the ejector with sticking cases and not the caliber. The two rifles of choice now are Handis in .357 mag. and .45-70, both extractors. They're sub-MOA shooters, and handle anything I have here from red squirrels to black bear. I've killed 'chucks out to 200 yards with the .357 and deer over 200 with the .45-70. If I had to sell everything else, I'd keep those two and my 20 ga. single, and I'd still be good to go.

Pete