TR Forums

paulWTAMU wrote:

...I'm HAPPY in the 9 ring. I need to shoot more. Damn.

The accuracy is part of O'Connors evangelism for the .270.

well, my brother's giving me his old .308 this christmas (probably). He's buying himself a nicer one and giving me his savage axis. Free gun One of these days I'm going to go actually hunting with that or the 30-30. I like venison. And wild hog ribs are great.

Here in Vermont the lowly .30-30 has killed more deer than any other cartridge.

It's a fun cartridge to shoot too. I can put 100 rounds downrange and not feel sore the next day. I LIKE that! The problem is a lot of the shooting up here is fairly long range--lots of flat plains and prairie. I dont' know about a 200 yard shot with a 30-30

paulWTAMU wrote:

I dont' know about a 200 yard shot with a 30-30

Hold about 3 feet high.

I've been using 30-30's since I was about 14 years old and have never seen a drop like that. You should zero a 30-30 at 200, the differance is -~4" with a good gun and a good bullet. 30-30's are great gun at 200 yds, and I would have to say they have killed more deer in the last 50 years than probably and other caliber.

I think i've posted this before. but check out this free ballistics app from federal.
http://www.federalpremium.com/resources/ballistics_application.aspx

DLHM wrote:

I've been using 30-30's since I was about 14 years old and have never seen a drop like that.

Nothing personal, but it's a standard joke about the .30-30. Still kills more deer than anything else here in Vermont.

Darkmage wrote:

It was kind of weird counting out how much empty .223 brass I had in my reloading bin. That's not how I anticipated spending an evening.

Grab 20 cartridges and weigh them together. Write the number down. Now weigh your entire stash. Divide the second number by the first number and then multiply by 20 to figure out how many you have in total. Then you can spend the rest of the evening drinking beer.

Captain Ned wrote:

Whereas my dream is a pre-1964 Winchester Model 70 in .270 Winchester. They're out there for sure, but for stupid prices.

One of my co-workers still rants about the .270 that he purchased several years ago and then sold after two seasons. He says that "Every .270 rifle ought to be sold with a tracking dog. When you shoot a buck with the .270, he's dead, but he just doesn't know it yet, and he wanders off into the woods before he falls over."

Captain Ned wrote:

Whereas my dream is a pre-1964 Winchester Model 70 in .270 Winchester. They're out there for sure, but for stupid prices.

Just buy a new one. They're fine rifles.

Captain Ned wrote:

Here in Vermont the United States the lowly .30-30 has killed more deer than any other cartridge.

Fixed that for you. The 30-30 is not lowly, either. It's old, but it has more than adequate power for medium game in North America at 100 yards or less. Guys who hunt deer with 300 Weatherby Magnums have penis issues. 200 yard shots with a 30-30 are borderline irresponsible, though IMO.

JustAnEngineer wrote:

Darkmage wrote:

It was kind of weird counting out how much empty .223 brass I had in my reloading bin. That's not how I anticipated spending an evening.

Grab 20 cartridges and weigh them together. Write the number down. Now weigh your entire stash. Divide the second number by the first number and then multiply by 20 to figure out how many you have in total. Then you can spend the rest of the evening drinking beer.

That might work okay if all of your brass is the same headstamp, but if you have different manufacturers you won't get an accurate number.

The 30-30 can shoot 200 yards easy. Its a great brush gun with the lower muzzle velocity and rounded bullets they do not get knocked off coarse as much as say a 30-06. Bet i can hit any person running at 200yrds with a 30-30 and it will hurt a lot.

vargis14 wrote:

Bet i can hit any person running at 200yrds with a 30-30

Come on man. You're validating what Vrock just said about penis size, and I have something larger than a 300 Weatherby. Yes, I might have a small penis, but shooting and firearms are NOT a method of compensation!

Yeah. There's a few places I would bring a 30-30 around here but not many.

What kind of chaps me is that the 38-55 is basically dead I really, really want a gun in that cartridge but no one makes them. Yes, I know more modern cartridges are better but dangit I like the lever guns and 38-55 is fun (and if I ever move back up north, I think it'd make a nice elk round). I guess you can still get the Marlin 336 in .35 Remington though.

The 30-30 isn't underpowered, I just don't want to try a longish (for me) shot with it on a game animal. I hope to finally take a hunters ed course this fall and get a hunting license next year.

paulWTAMU wrote:

What kind of chaps me is that the 38-55 is basically dead I really, really want a gun in that cartridge but no one makes them.

Actually, it looks like Winchester is making it again. It's not cheap though.

http://www.winchesterguns.com/products/ ... mid=534178

On the note of weighing ammo, and I'm sure Vrock knows plenty about this, we use this to our advantage in the military. Oftentimes there are unrealistic percentages(based on the type of training) required back in expended brass by the Ammo Supply Point; they weigh the brass to determine how much is missing, we add rocks to get to where we need to be.

An example being that we need to turn back in 90% of brass from blank ammunition expended during a very mobile field training exercise. There being dozens of firing positions over several square kilometers during both day and night. A handful of individuals will never be able to pick up 90% of the expended brass.

Given my milsurp proclivities, I might go with something in 6.5mm Swede (if I didn't have my 7.5mm Swiss rifle, anyway) for deer hunting rather than .270. The accuracy should be at least equivalent, though of course you'll have less variety in loadings for a foreign cartridge and it's not quite so powerful, but otoh that means less recoil.

My favorite cartridge of all time is the 7mm Mauser. It's the basis of the 30-06 (and therefore the .270 Win), and it's suitable for any game in the Americas. Heck, it's even safari worthy, if you're a good enough marksman. Ask W.D.M. Bell. On top of that, it has lighter recoil and a shorter bolt throw than the 30-06, while maintaining a slightly larger caliber than the .270 Win. Unfortunately, it's fallen out of favor in the US, and most factory loadings are anemic to protect antique firearms, so finding a nice hunting rifle in that chambering and ammo for it is a challenge. But, if you handload, and you're not opposed to buying a European made hunting rifle, you'll have a weapon that fires what I think is the most versatile and best balanced cartridge ever designed.

bthylafh wrote:

Given my milsurp proclivities, I might go with something in 6.5mm Swede (if I didn't have my 7.5mm Swiss rifle, anyway) for deer hunting rather than .270. The accuracy should be at least equivalent, though of course you'll have less variety in loadings for a foreign cartridge and it's not quite so powerful, but otoh that means less recoil.

I have a M96/38, and I can tell you the 6.5 Swede is just tits. 7mm Mauser fan that I am, you owe it to yourself to add a Swedish Mauser to your collection.

So... would you all murder me if I bought a hi-point? I'm on a really tight budget, and I at least try to act my wage. My current home defense gun is a loaner (and really not very ideal for home defense, it's a Marlin Model 60), so I need to get my own gun very soon. Hi-point is cheap and nothing special (and ugly as sin), but I've heard that they are pretty decent guns for the price and the warranties are good. Not only that, but I wasn't planning on getting a 45 ACP pistol for awhile (next pistol I buy is CCW and 45 is too big), and I'd like to own one even if it is just a hi-point. Anybody have any experience with guns on the low end?

I'd really rather get a CZ in the long run, but they are pretty hard to find I come to find out. When I do scrounge the money for a CCL, a Mak or a CZ is looking like my carry pistol of choice.

Vinceant wrote:

So... would you all murder me if I bought a hi-point? I'm on a really tight budget, and I at least try to act my wage. My current home defense gun is a loaner (and really not very ideal for home defense, it's a Marlin Model 60), so I need to get my own gun very soon. Hi-point is cheap and nothing special (and ugly as sin), but I've heard that they are pretty decent guns for the price and the warranties are good. Not only that, but I wasn't planning on getting a 45 ACP pistol for awhile (next pistol I buy is CCW and 45 is too big), and I'd like to own one even if it is just a hi-point. Anybody have any experience with guns on the low end?

I'd really rather get a CZ in the long run, but they are pretty hard to find I come to find out. When I do scrounge the money for a CCL, a Mak or a CZ is looking like my carry pistol of choice.

I was going to get a Hi-Point a few years ago when I was looking for a gun to keep in the truck. I didn't want anything expensive since I'd lose it if someone broke in to my vehicle. Like you, I've read some of the online reviews of the Hi-Point guns and other than being very ugly and heavy, they seem to be somewhat reliable and easy to maintain. One review called them good tackle box guns. I went to a gun shop and the guy didn't carry Hi-Point guns. He had a very low opinion of them. I opted for a Smith & Wesson Sigma series .40 instead. The Sigma was about $299, so it was not terribly expensive. Much lighter than the Hi-Point pistols. I don't know of anyone who has one, despite them being inexpensive. From what I can tell, they are not all that easy to find. None of the local gun shops in my area even carry them.

I was considering one of the carbines, but they are also hard to find around here. The only downside to them is you cannot use aftermarket clips, and the standard clips are very small for the .40 and the .45 calibers. The reviews of the guns are generally positive, though, so I'm not sure why they have such a bad rap in the real world. I think it might have to do with them being so heavy. I'd like to have the .40 version since I think it would be a good weapon to have, if I can find a vendor somewhere in my area. Maybe some of the guys here have one and can give you better feedback.

Vinceant wrote:

So... would you all murder me if I bought a hi-point? I'm on a really tight budget, and I at least try to act my wage. My current home defense gun is a loaner (and really not very ideal for home defense, it's a Marlin Model 60), so I need to get my own gun very soon. Hi-point is cheap and nothing special (and ugly as sin), but I've heard that they are pretty decent guns for the price and the warranties are good. Not only that, but I wasn't planning on getting a 45 ACP pistol for awhile (next pistol I buy is CCW and 45 is too big), and I'd like to own one even if it is just a hi-point. Anybody have any experience with guns on the low end?

It will work fine for what it is. They're reasonably accurate but unrefined. They are heavy and feel clunky due to the blowback design, but like you said they do have lifetime warranties. I had a carbine for a while that I bought from Darkmage, it was a fun gun.

Vinceant wrote:

When I do scrounge the money for a CCL, a Mak or a CZ is looking like my carry pistol of choice.

If you're determined to get one of those, I'd go with the Mak, it's slimmer. There are better carry guns in that price range though.

Well, just making sure it wouldn't be a giant mistake to buy the 45 Hi-Point. For 160-170 the price can't really be beat. And there are several pawn shops around here that sell the hipoints. The local "real" gunshop doesn't, and neither does the big store Bass Pro, only the pawn shops.

I just found out that recently they've extended the warranties to be transferrable between parties, so a used one might be a good buy too.

Vrock wrote:

If you're determined to get one of those, I'd go with the Mak, it's slimmer. There are better carry guns in that price range though.

I'd love to hear some suggestions. 250ish for a CZ-82 is a pretty amazing deal, though (if I can find one).

In the $300 to $350 range, you can get a Ruger LCP or a decent snub nose .38 Special. Makarovs are not as common as they once were and will run you $350. I would recommend against a 9 x 18mm for defense because there isn't much quality self defense ammo out there for it. The CZ-82 is heavy, bulky, overly complex, and is ugly. It's better than nothing, I guess.

Yikes. 1300 bucks. Owch

has anyone else heard bad things about the newer runs of Marlins, like since Remington bought them out? My brother's asking for adviceo n what 45-70 to get (why he ask me I don't know). I've heard some disturbing reports of Marlin quality going downhill in the last few years, but the only other ones I know of are Rossi and Henry.

My friend has a stainless steel Marlin lever action in 45-70 and it is a nice gun.

yeah and I love my older Marlin 30-30. I just heard and saw some comments on really bad QC issues immediately post-buyout :X Trying to find more information to see if it's still an issue.

Vrock wrote:

My friend has a stainless steel Marlin lever action in 45-70 and it is a nice gun.

Do want.

Vinceant wrote:

So... would you all murder me if I bought a hi-point? I'm on a really tight budget, and I at least try to act my wage. My current home defense gun is a loaner (and really not very ideal for home defense, it's a Marlin Model 60), so I need to get my own gun very soon. Hi-point is cheap and nothing special (and ugly as sin), but I've heard that they are pretty decent guns for the price and the warranties are good. Not only that, but I wasn't planning on getting a 45 ACP pistol for awhile (next pistol I buy is CCW and 45 is too big), and I'd like to own one even if it is just a hi-point. Anybody have any experience with guns on the low end?

I'd really rather get a CZ in the long run, but they are pretty hard to find I come to find out. When I do scrounge the money for a CCL, a Mak or a CZ is looking like my carry pistol of choice.

They work better than you'd expect a handgun that cheap and ugly to, and Hipoint stands behind them when they don't.

That said, if you're scrounging to come up with $175 for a Hipoint, at $18-20 a box for 45 ball you're barely going to shoot it and if push ever comes to shove you won't know what you're doing and in all likelyhood you're going to miss. Pistol shooting isn't intuitive, it takes muscle memory and the only way to get that is regular practice. Clunky blowback pistols with awful sights and worse triggers don't make that any easier.

Concealment doesn't matter inside your house. Portability doesn't either unless you're intending to wear it from room to room. A $200 used rack shotgun is a more effective weapon - more practically accurate, enormously more destructive, a better handle for a flashlight, a better club - than any handgun at any price.

A detail I forgot to include was that a coworker had a bunch of 45 ammo he never used (bought it before he bought a gun and ended up never buying the gun). He gave it to me for pulling his ass out of the fire a few weeks back. So yeah, I have a bit of ammo already. It's not a LOT, but it will get me familiar enough with a weapon to at least semi safely fire it.

I honestly don't like the idea of using a shotgun for a primary home defense weapon. Too much potential for colateral damage, especially with pets and children (I have a lot of cats). Not only that, but a rifle is harder to store in a handy location than a pistol. If I was sticking to a rifle for home defense, I'd just get a cheap 22.