Visit the SWFA.com site to check out our current specials. |
Ultra Light Arms |
Post Reply | Page <1 2345> |
Author | |||
rustic
Optics Master Joined: September/30/2011 Status: Offline Points: 1461 |
Posted: January/31/2012 at 11:53 | ||
I do not or did not have a wind meter if that is what your asking? I don't recall the exact conditions it being over 2 years ago I would say gusty not consistent later in the day so the wind was most likely subsiding a bit. So, I would say moments of calm mixed with I guess 5-10 mph with the occasional gust throw'n in. An average November day in north western South Dakota. |
|||
rustic
Optics Master Joined: September/30/2011 Status: Offline Points: 1461 |
Posted: January/31/2012 at 11:56 | ||
No doubt that would be a bit more suitable for northern plains mule deer. |
|||
3 Tuns
Optics Apprentice Joined: June/28/2011 Status: Offline Points: 60 |
Posted: January/31/2012 at 11:59 | ||
A super light rifle is not really needed if someone is shooting over the hood of a truck. Perhaps a heavy barrel would make a larger cartridge possible. The gentleman that is in poor health is in a tough position if he wants to continue his hunting days afield. Surely a good compromise of recoil (reduced by rifle weight) and cartridge could be had. Best of luck to him.
|
|||
dillon_h
TEAM SWFA - Staff Woody Joined: July/28/2011 Location: SWFA Status: Offline Points: 306 |
Posted: January/31/2012 at 12:00 | ||
Like I said, I am not doubting your dads abilities with a rifle.
I am also not saying a .204 won't kill a mule deer either. Shot placement and what that bullet is going to do upon impact are the two things we are stressing here. He placed those three shots where they needed to be, nice shooting. The rounds penetrated enough to cause enough damage to effectively harvest the animals, luck. That round's effect on any target take a steep dive after 200 yards. Not to mention the stated weather conditions. Wind that is not very consistent, gusts and unknown wind speed would definitely be more than one red flag to add. Even with short breaks of calm, 40 grains isn't going to handle any kind of wind very well at 250 yds. The .204 worked, but there are definitely more effective and ethical choices out there. Thats all we are saying. We are glad to hear your dad is in the field after his operation and all wish him the best of times doing what he loves.
Edited by dillon_h - January/31/2012 at 12:09 |
|||
Dillon@SWFA.com
|
|||
rustic
Optics Master Joined: September/30/2011 Status: Offline Points: 1461 |
Posted: January/31/2012 at 12:04 | ||
I never said it would be the perfect rifle deer. But, that is what he bought and that is what we used. It worked out just fine. It was just on two does and a tiny buck and being a rock solid rest(hood of a pick-up) and being close(only 250-ish). Up there it hard to get any closer than 300-ish from any mule deer let alone with a pick-up. The "risk" was very small. |
|||
rustic
Optics Master Joined: September/30/2011 Status: Offline Points: 1461 |
Posted: January/31/2012 at 12:07 | ||
With no exit hole the internals were mush. |
|||
rustic
Optics Master Joined: September/30/2011 Status: Offline Points: 1461 |
Posted: January/31/2012 at 12:17 | ||
If you look later on in the thread I was saying .223 would work just fine for deer then I brought up the .204 and so on. I can see now it was a mistake to bring up the .204(sensitive subject) my bad... sorry. Originally I said "Not legal for elk. I was thinking deer(whitetail/blacktail/mule) coyote mountain lion. They look like good rifles." |
|||
rustic
Optics Master Joined: September/30/2011 Status: Offline Points: 1461 |
Posted: January/31/2012 at 12:25 | ||
What mean by center mass is "diner plate" at the front should. He is in his late 60's and has been hunting for a better part of sixty years. "Unethical"? Not too worried about that he has always followed and can read the hunting handbook as old as he is. Of course there was a time back in the stone age where thay had not yet printed "hunting hand books" |
|||
rustic
Optics Master Joined: September/30/2011 Status: Offline Points: 1461 |
Posted: January/31/2012 at 12:30 | ||
Again, I would have no problem using a very light rifle chambered in .223 for north-western plains/mountain mule deer. Sorry for bringing up the .204. |
|||
rustic
Optics Master Joined: September/30/2011 Status: Offline Points: 1461 |
Posted: January/31/2012 at 12:32 | ||
If you read the whole thread? He was using a savage 110... not an light rifle. |
|||
tahqua
MODERATOR Have You Driven A Ford Lately? Joined: March/27/2006 Location: Michigan, USA Status: Offline Points: 9042 |
Posted: January/31/2012 at 12:42 | ||
I am still
having a problem with this. I am glad that your father is up and hunting after such major surgery. But, almost all of your recent threads around here have centered on lighter is best. Now you propose a .204 as a viable deer caliber. Your statement on the 22-250 popularity for deer I find amazing. You are doing a huge disservice to any new or inexperienced hunters that visit this site. You have pushed your agenda beyond reasonable discourse. And, as in other threads of yours, I fully expect you to ramble on. |
|||
Doug
|
|||
rustic
Optics Master Joined: September/30/2011 Status: Offline Points: 1461 |
Posted: January/31/2012 at 12:42 | ||
There is no doubt there are better bullets and cartridges for that type of hunting. As far as the yardage it was around 250ish give or take hard to tell with no rangefinders and if you know what I mean by hunting around broken prairie among buttes. He is an old school type of guy... hates cell phones let alone rangefinders. Have heard him say " never needed one before why would I need one now" Of rangefinders and cell phones. I can just hear him now writing this. |
|||
dillon_h
TEAM SWFA - Staff Woody Joined: July/28/2011 Location: SWFA Status: Offline Points: 306 |
Posted: January/31/2012 at 12:56 | ||
I do not use rangefinders. But when it comes down to taking this specific shot, I would want to know whether it 200 yds or 250 yds. The 50 yards is going to make all the difference in the world unlike other cartridges that fly flatter, longer.
|
|||
Dillon@SWFA.com
|
|||
3 Tuns
Optics Apprentice Joined: June/28/2011 Status: Offline Points: 60 |
Posted: January/31/2012 at 13:01 | ||
"If you read the thread it was not for me." By your use of this phrase, I jumped to the conclusion that this was for your father, as he is in poor health and can not deal with any recoil. Best wishes to him. Surely no healthy hunter would be attracted to a varmit rifle such as the .204 for 250 yard shots on large bodied mule deer. Now I understand. Don't buy a ULA rifle, please. Unbelievable (literally). Out.
|
|||
pyro6999
Optics Retard OT TITAN Joined: December/22/2006 Location: North Dakota Status: Offline Points: 22034 |
Posted: January/31/2012 at 13:10 | ||
now i have heard it all, next your gonna tell me that 7x61 sharpe&hart is more popular than the 7 mag. dude the 22-250 is a about as good a coyote round as any, thats about where it should stop. i myself have shot deer with the 22-250, never again. i had shots inside of 60yds with a 55gr bullet not a 40gr and when shot in the neck with said 55gr bullet i wasnt real impressed with the quickness of the kill. i was born and raised in the west, deer rifle and 22-250 do not and will not ever be used in the same sentence period. now .270 and deer rifle on the other hand sound more like a common choice, even more so would be a magnum of some sort. i realize that tons of people in the is country use the .223 on deer, and i whole heartedly agree that with the proper twist and a heavy bullet MADE to kill deer sized game it works. i dont necessarily think its the best choice regardless of the situation. to me a .243 is bare minimum for big game. for years and years the standards i remember were that your rifle had to be at least .23 caliber to be considered legal for big game and hand guns had to be .41 caliber or bigger. there was a reason for that back then. times have changed in the last 25yrs, bullets have gotten better and better, but the fact still remains that small bullets leave small room for error. you can say placement matters all you want, and i will continue to argue that placement only covers you butt so much. im fairly certain that the window i have to shoot an animal and successfully harvest it with my .300wby or .375H&H is a lot bigger than if i used my .22-250. if i hit a deer anywhere between the front and rear legs with either of those magnums, im fairly certain its death to the deer right away. i cant honestly say that for my .22-250. and now you wanna go smaller yet?? i will pass on that. |
|||
They call me "Boots"
375H&H Mag: Yeah, it kills stuff "extra dead" 343 we will never forget God Bless Chris Ledoux "good ride cowboy" |
|||
Bitterroot Bulls
Optics Master Extraordinaire Joined: May/07/2009 Location: Montana Status: Offline Points: 3416 |
Posted: January/31/2012 at 13:22 | ||
I don't know rustic,
I wouldn't say the 22-250 is a common deer cartridge, at least with hunters I know. I know guys have used it for deer. I still think it is wise to use a heavier caliber for a number of reasons inluding the ballistic coefficients of the projectiles available. Your dad seems to have some special circumstances you are both taking into account. I like the idea of a caliber like the .260 Rem in a heavy gun for him, it shouldn't have much recoil at all. For you, I like the 7-08 in a nice lightweight package. It will fight those high country winds a lot better. Good hunting.
|
|||
-Matt
|
|||
rustic
Optics Master Joined: September/30/2011 Status: Offline Points: 1461 |
Posted: January/31/2012 at 14:00 | ||
I will be little clearer. The 22-250 while not the most popular(.270, 30.06, .308) it is one of the more common cartridges I see out in the field and on convenience/hardware stores shelves come November... deer hunting season. It is a lot more popular now than it was just 5 -10 years ago and getting more so every year can tell that by the low ammo prices.(Wal-mart has it priced about the same as .270, 30.06, .308 up here.)
Ballistics wise it is very flat shooting and good energy for what most consider a 300-ish max cartridge. From what I can tell most hunters do not feel comfortable going much past 300 with any cartridge. A mule deer is a thin skinned animal by all accounts therefore not very challenging for new bullet technology. I go back to what some Alaskan outfitters are saying 30-06 not "enough gun" for Alaskan big game(bear, moose, etc.)... utterly ridiculous(the 30-06 is still the most used cartridge up there to this day). The 30-06 has most likely killed more Alaskan"big game" than any other cartridge. Even the the lowly ballistically challenged 30-30 is probably second on that list. I guess someone forgot to tell those old-timers they were not using "enough gun" with inferior bullet technology. I am glad for their sake they did not hear the "news". Like with anything it takes time to prove something out and little confidence goes along way. Again, sorry for bringing up the .204 my bad. --------------------- * disclaimer * ------------------- I in no way encourage NOR discourage anyone from using a properly functioning Ultra-light rifle for Mule deer hunting also... I in no way encourage NOR discourage anyone from using any type of LEGAL ammunition for Mule deer hunting. Fine print: For I know nothing of the skill-set(fundamentals of shooting) nor of the competence(ethical hunting) nor of the confidence(being sure of the proper use of the tools of the trade) of the average hunter here. Therefore this is not my place to judge in ones quest to hunt Mule deer. Edited by rustic - January/31/2012 at 15:37 |
|||
Sparky
Optics Master Extraordinaire Joined: July/15/2007 Location: SD Status: Offline Points: 4569 |
Posted: January/31/2012 at 15:51 | ||
There seems to be two schools of thought on this from what I can see. Berger/hornady is advertizing if the bullet fragments before going all the way through the animal therefore releasing all energy in the animal. Other manufactures like nosler/barnes bullets advertize weight retention all the way through the animal. I personally use barnes tipped TSX's and the work fine for me. I guess... six to half dozen to the other?? /QUOTE] So you do know you are using bullets that do NOT meet SD law and you do it anyway!! And so your Dad is not capable of shooting something with more recoil, that makes it OKAY to disregard the ethics as well as the law? What makes you so special that you give the rest of us a bad name? See under legal firearms section. http://gfp.sd.gov/hunting/docs/BigGameRegs.pdf |
|||
Sparky
Optics Master Extraordinaire Joined: July/15/2007 Location: SD Status: Offline Points: 4569 |
Posted: January/31/2012 at 15:52 | ||
Are you ever going to answer this question?? |
|||
rustic
Optics Master Joined: September/30/2011 Status: Offline Points: 1461 |
Posted: January/31/2012 at 16:01 | ||
"Only soft-point or expanding bullets are permitted." the last I heard a polymer tipped bullet is a "soft point" The same tip type of tip that is on the barnes tipped triple shock I use. They are legal I HAVE CHECKED. |
|||
Post Reply | Page <1 2345> |
Tweet
|
Forum Jump | Forum Permissions You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot create polls in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum |