Does it really matter

[pheasant sniper 1]

On a serious note..

I think we all have to remember and should take into account, not all stalkers are man enough to carry a .308..

 

[The Singing Stalker]

I'm man enough, just not rich enough

 

[callumity]

I incline to the view that the bolt action rifle was perfected about a century ago and smokeless powder and cartridge selection at least 80 years ago. Since then we have seen a few refinements in materials designed to reduce user maintenance and improve longevity but mostly BS and marketing designed to relieve punters of their 'ultimate' (last!) cash. Optics have been the late developers. The biggest variable remains the firer. That said, Scots deer law has it 'most right' in defining not a minimum legal calibre but a mimum bullet weight, type and velocity. That is what dictates the kinetic energy we seek to dump into our living target for the most humane kill. Small bullets increase the risk of wounding while excess recoil spoils accuracy. Heavy barrels for range accuracy & repeated firing, lighter for carrying and infrequent shots.
Micra for shopping, Audi for posing? I must be Mondeo man!

 

[The Ghillie]

I agree its your hobby and and if you want to spend your money on rifles or what ever thats you business, however in my case stalking is my livelihood, so I need a rifle that will do the job, used not only by me but by clients under the estate rifle clause, so rifle needs to be accurate and reliable, appearance is not important and as long as it shoots decent groups no need for it to clover leaf, my business is like any other a need to balance the books maximum profit from minimum expenditure, that does not mean that you have to be tight just that you have to be able to justify all
expenditure.[ rifles are not tax deductible]
No matter whether it is stalking or anything else there is a vast difference between doing something as a hobby and doing it as a business.

I agree with you there mate, matters not what your gear looks like as long as its fit for purpose! However the magazines are full reviews of the latest all singing all
dancing bits of kit that is going to turn you into an awsome stalker the day you aquire this new bit of kit to hang of what ever apendage is spare

Just a little off thread:- If your buisness requires specific equipment to function for the viability of that buisness then that equipment should be tax deductable eg:
PPE, veicles, ATV, rifle, consumables(ammo) larder... If this is your buisness, your own company or self employed I would be making sure that my accountant gets all the receits and a list of assets for him to deduct ofthe taxable income

Regards

Alec

 

[Paul at Fechan]

On a serious note..

I think we all have to remember and should take into account, not all stalkers are man enough to carry a .308..

 

[bogtrotter]

I agree with you there mate, matters not what your gear looks like as long as its fit for purpose! However the magazines are full reviews of the latest all singing all
dancing bits of kit that is going to turn you into an awsome stalker the day you aquire this new bit of kit to hang of what ever apendage is spare

Just a little off thread:- If your buisness requires specific equipment to function for the viability of that buisness then that equipment should be tax deductable eg:
PPE, veicles, ATV, rifle, consumables(ammo) larder... If this is your buisness, your own company or self employed I would be making sure that my accountant gets all the receits and a list of assets for him to deduct ofthe taxable income

Regards

Alec

Rifles and other equipment are not tax deductible in the normal sense, but are eligible as capital allowances the amount you can claim against tax is a percentage of the cost over several years, the actual percentage depends on the type of equipment and original cost quite complicated I think a job for the accountant.

 

[The Ghillie]

Indeed bud!

 

[ejg]

I incline to the view that the bolt action rifle was perfected about a century ago and smokeless powder and cartridge selection at least 80 years ago. Since then we have seen a few refinements in materials designed to reduce user maintenance and improve longevity but mostly BS and marketing designed to relieve punters of their 'ultimate' (last!) cash. Optics have been the late developers. The biggest variable remains the firer. That said, Scots deer law has it 'most right' in defining not a minimum legal calibre but a mimum bullet weight, type and velocity. That is what dictates the kinetic energy we seek to dump into our living target for the most humane kill. Small bullets increase the risk of wounding while excess recoil spoils accuracy. Heavy barrels for range accuracy & repeated firing, lighter for carrying and infrequent shots.
Micra for shopping, Audi for posing? I must be Mondeo man!

yes and no, how many deer were wounded in the last century due to bad equipment?
Good thing about hunting is nobody is really there to see, as long as the pals don't see the screw up..... when shooting targets one would need to invest more in the equipment because others see the results...
I think there is no mistake in trying to improve. People who own custom rifles have at least thought about improvement, thought of how could they improve on what the factory has to offer. In many cases factory rifles are more expensive than basic custom rifles and mostly not as good. Of course you are right that not all developements actually led to improvements.
Man and machine.... it is even more important that the hunter is realistic about himself and his equipment and judges the situation well before firing at a deer. If the rifle is only capable of 2" accuracy, well then adapt.

edi

 

[finnbear270]

On a serious note..

I think we all have to remember and should take into account, not all stalkers are man enough to carry a .308..

Throw & wait???, better off with a .270 Terry!

 

[Costas]

Edi

Agreed there's no mistake in trying to improve, The fault usually lies behind the decision on what it is you want to improve. You say basic "custom" rifles can be cheaper and better than some factory offering. I'm interested in knowing what information you are basing that on. As I have looked into this several times and have never come to that conclusion. The cost of an non-mass produced action, high spec'ed barrel, stock, bedding, custom trigger group, mounts and rings, and perhaps bottom end metal work, along with the rifle smithing time and their need to make a profit. Has always pushed the costs well above a good quality factory offering from one of the leading european manufactures of hunting rifles.
For example I was recently offered a very lightly used Sauer .308 for just over £800 complete with with a good quality european scope. As I am already adequately catered for in that calibre I passed on the opportunity to a good friend.

 

[Thar]

I have been involved in my fair share of calibre debates, one thing that I point out although I feel often gets forgotten is I believe to a large extent they are theatrical in nature. Give me a deer legal calibre and a good bullet irrespective of calibre in a rifle that will shoot 1.5 MOA and if me and the dog don’t come back with a deer it won’t be because of the calibre.

That said I am a shooter as well as a stalker, so I like to use a rifle of my choice, and reload ammo to perform to a standard that I find acceptable. When building a custom rifle most seem to try and build a rifle that will put bullet after bullet through the same hole, to me so long as it will shoot sub 1 MOA anything else is a waste of time in the field, few can exploit any more accuracy when shooting live quarry IMO. I want a light compact rifle, that fits well with my eye lined up with the centre of the scope as soon as my cheek hits the comb, the trigger must be good, but needn’t be a bench rest one, 1.5lb suits me. It must feed 100% and have a mag’ that holds at least 5 rounds. It is what I want and willing to pay for, will it bring me more deer perhaps not, but it will give me added enjoyment when stalking.
.
As for calibres well, rifle calibres are like women I can find something I like in most of them.

“Does it really matter?” no not a lot so long as it is deer legal IMO.

Unless it is a 6.5X55 because their s***

ATB

Tahr

 

[bogtrotter]

Unless it is a 6.5X55 because their s***

 

[old man]

MHO, FWIW, so long as the calibre is ethically big enough and capable for the quarry to be hunted and it's deer legal may be it depends on the amount of meat you want left?
A solid hit in the right place will always result in a kill.
I am always a bit concerned that people seem to be led to the conclusion that to the only way to go is custon build etc.
If you want to, and can pay the silly money and make the dealers richer, that's fine but it's just not so.
Provided the gun is in good order a £200 rifle at normal deer distance depends just as much on the "nut behind the butt" as a custom job.
If you are no good, a custom job won't improve your aim.
IMHO,The old saying of "beware of the man with only one gun" still holds true.
old man

 

[bogtrotter]

MHO, FWIW, so long as the calibre is ethically big enough and capable for the quarry to be hunted and it's deer legal may be it depends on the amount of meat you want left?
A solid hit in the right place will always result in a kill.
I am always a bit concerned that people seem to be led to the conclusion that to the only way to go is custon build etc.
If you want to, and can pay the silly money and make the dealers richer, that's fine but it's just not so.
Provided the gun is in good order a £200 rifle at normal deer distance depends just as much on the "nut behind the butt" as a custom job.
If you are no good, a custom job won't improve your aim.
IMHO,The old saying of "beware of the man with only one gun" still holds true.
old man

A man after my own heart

 

[pj1]

And I can't think of a better reason why FLDs should back off from the restrictive conditions that are put on some FACs. If the holder is experienced and has an open cert, then remove the conditions and leave it up to them to make the decision on what is a suitable or lawful firearm for the quarry.

Would probably save a shed load of public money in reduced administration as well.

oh yes. some one with sense. had open ticket on a 243 but not a 308 and no fox on 308 as and i quote "we dont want to encourage people using large calibres from veihcles at night" because i throw caution to the wind when it gets dark and regulary shoot foxs sitting on top of cars or on top of hills !

i think not

pj

 

[callumity]

It wasn't that long ago most deer were shot over open sights. I will take some convincing that rifle accuracy and bullet trajectories have improved that much since the Boer War but would readily accept that people shoot better with telescopic sights. All I am saying is that rifle practice has more effect on real world accuracy than chasing marginal ballistic improvements with an expensively crafted tool - much as you cannot zero until you can group. In effect this also underpins received wisdom about balancing expenditure between rifle and sights and it is the latter that have made most strides in modern times - but the thread was about projectiles and their launchers not guidance systems (including range finders, etc., to calculate drop and drift)

 

[Orion]

no fox on 308 as and i quote "we dont want to encourage people using large calibres from veihcles at night" because i throw caution to the wind when it gets dark and regulary shoot foxs sitting on top of cars or on top of hills !

I think not

Exactly my point. 99.9% of restrictive conditions could be removed or eased at a stroke and it wouldn't make one iota of difference to the use of firearms by responsible FAC holders.

And if anyone were stupid enough to shoot as per your illustration above, do we think that any condition at all placed on their FAC would make a blind bit of difference to their course of action? The majority of it is box ticking and a*rse covering.

 

[JabaliHunter]

The majority of it is box ticking and a*rse covering.

Ahhh, the art and science of bureaucracy! Served the Empire well for years....

 

[Kalahari]

Actually the Empire was run on minimal numbers of civil servants. Half the world was run on fewer civil cervants than we now have in one department!

David.

 

[Muir]

Thar has hit the nail squarely on the head, I think. I chime in my shiny dime's worth, saying that I believe that any rifle will take deer in the right hands, at a suitable distance, with the correct shot placement. I have lived in places where the 22LR is deer legal, as is the 22WMR. I have shot one deer with the latter. I have used 30 Carbine with expanding bullets and found it less than satisfactory farther than 50 yards. The 25-20 would, for me, need to be well under 50 yards with an 87 grain bullet but I know a cowboy who used it to shoot deer from horseback with no problems. I doubt if he was very far away when he fired.

As I've often said, here in the US some States post minimum caliber requirements and many, like my home State of Montana, are very lenient. The State leaves it to the hunter to be "ethical" in his or her choice of caliber and the skill to put a deer down with it. I'm good with that as well. If you tell me you can kill a deer cleanly with a 22 Hornet I'm Ok with it until I see you doing otherwise.~Muir