Author Topic: In a year and a month (Read 831 times)

eagl · « **Reply #30 on:** September 04, 2006, 10:45:00 PM »

Hmm.

I'll go with my gut here, and recommend that nirvana not listen to lasersailor on anything gun related

Get a .22 and shoot the heck out of it. Get a .22 pistol too, when you're able to. Practice and have fun with it. Then do your research and decide if you want a more powerful gun. If you do, you should think about WHY you want a more powerful gun. Then find the gun and round that matches what you want, and then buy that one.

Buying a powerful gun just to be manly is something a gun nut or "enthusiast" does... But if you want to be a "shooter", put a little thought into it first. In the meantime, shoot the hell out of the .22 'cause they're cheap, fun, and you can learn a lot of good techniques and habits with them. Buy something bigger when you think you need one, not because somebody tries to question your manhood over the size of your gun. There's always some tool out there with a bigger gun, so the earlier you get over caliber envy the happier you'll be

That said, my recommendation for a nice "second rifle" is a .223. Most of them kick enough to teach you about recoil, they can be used for both light hunting and plinking since .223 ammo is cheap, and there are a lot of options out there from bolt action to autos. I have a ruger mini-14 and it's nice and rugged but it isn't very accurate. Some of the M-16 variants are much more accurate but because they look scary, some states have banned them and that means they are typically very expensive. A bolt action .223 would be a good intro to hunting rifles and a lot cheaper to practice with, but to be honest I wouldn't even hunt deer with a .223 because of the possibility of making non-lethal shots if you don't get your shot placement just right. But I have a .223 to practice with because it's loud enough and has just enough recoil to keep my natural flinching reaction completely under control, so I don't flinch when firing my real hunting rifle, a 7mm Rem Mag Browning A-Bolt.

eagl · « **Reply #31 on:** September 04, 2006, 10:51:23 PM »

Toad has a good point about gun "fit", but I'll throw in the thought that even if a gun doesn't fit quite right, there are lots of custom aftermarket stocks you can get that will let you find a stock that fits you perfectly even if you can't get that perfect fit from a factory stock.

My 10-22 doesn't fit me perfectly, but I wouldn't trade it for a different gun that came from the factory with a different stock. If it mattered to me enough to change the stock, I'd just find an aftermarket stock with the right dimensions and shape and swap it out myself. Changing out a stock typically involves little more than removing a few screws, bolts, or pins, checking to see that the new stock fits right, and then bolting the new stock into place. If that's still too tough, any halfway decent gun repair shop should be able to do this in less than an hour if you don't insist on anything too advanced like glass bedding or other "accurizing" work.

Toad · « **Reply #32 on:** September 04, 2006, 10:53:08 PM »

An accurate .243 Win bolt is a logical step up from the .22 if one wishes to hunt. Works great on prairie dogs thru coyotes on up to decent sized deer. Mild recoil, a pretty inherently accurate cartridge and reasonable price on ammo.

Pretty good ballistics out to about 300 yards too. 95 grain silvertips sighted on at 200 are only 1.4 high at 100, 2.5 low at 250 and 6.5 low at 300. It'll do for most deer hunting.

nirvana · « **Reply #33 on:** September 04, 2006, 10:56:22 PM »

I'm not a fan of pistols, mostly because i'm not as accurate with them, one thing I never understood is why you have to be 21 for a pistol but 18 for a rifle or shotgun, politicians:rolleyes: I'll keep my eyes open, still have a while to look, thanks for the advice!

Toad · « **Reply #34 on:** September 04, 2006, 10:59:13 PM »

Eagl, stock fit is not as critical on a rifle because it will have either a scope or a rear sight. Your body will almost automatically compensate to line the eye up with the sights. You'll "crawl" the stock to get the eye in the right position.

A shotgun for upland/waterfowl has no rear sight at all. The stock positions the eye to be line of sight down the barrel. With no rear sight for a reference, it's much harder for the body to automatically compensate. It's hard to be "sure". So stock fit on a shotgun is much more critical than it is on a rifle.

eagl · « **Reply #35 on:** September 04, 2006, 11:02:14 PM »

Agreed Toad, about stock fit on shotguns and on rifle caliber. I almost got a .243 for my first real hunting rifle, but I didn't want to own more than one hunting rifle so I went with the one gun to rule them all

I seriously considered 30-06 but went with 7mm Rem Mag because it shoots flatter and can still take anything from varmints to Moose. Yea it's a tad light up on the Moose/Elk end of the scale, but it has the ballistics and energy to back up the claims so that's what I did. A .243 would be great for deer and the like, but you'd need a bigger gun for bigger game and I just didn't want to have to do everything twice... Two types of ammo, 2 guns to clean, 2 guns to practice with and remember bullet drop rules of thumb for, etc. It's bad enough switching from my .223 to the 7mm.

I did wimp out a bit with the 7mm, and I got a rifle equipped with Browning's "BOSS" system. It's an adjustable anti-recoil device that both reduces recoil and lets you tune barrel harmonics to enhance accuracy. I tuned it for the one round I planned on shooting the most, and from went from a 2.5" 3-shot group at 200 yards to a 1.5" 3-shot group at 200 yards. Not bad for an afternoon's worth of shooting

Toad · « **Reply #36 on:** September 04, 2006, 11:15:06 PM »

I started on a .22 Winchester 290 auto. Then I got into shotgunning big time. Finally bought a rifle in college; a .270. Shot that at everything for about 16 years until I went elk hunting. Bought a .300 Wby for that. I've bought a few other .22's in the meantime but I still only have two personal centerfires. The .270 and .300; never found a true need for anything else.

I gave my son's .22's to start and 6mm Rem Model 7's. The 7's are very early production and shoot decently but not excellently. They have, however, used them on everything up to deer sized game. They're full grown now and ready for bigger guns but they are both on the "kinda broke" side. I think guns will have to wait.

JTs · « **Reply #37 on:** September 05, 2006, 02:25:37 AM »

winchester model M97 worked extremely well for me while crawling around tunnels in S.E. Asia and it can be found with a bayonet.

nirvana · « **Reply #38 on:** September 05, 2006, 10:02:18 PM »

After looking at them, I had my heart set on a Garand but i'm just not sure I can get my parents to go for it, plus the ammo is a bit more expensive. Basically the question now is, hardwood or synthetic?

Dago · « **Reply #39 on:** September 05, 2006, 10:08:10 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by nirvana
After looking at them, I had my heart set on a Garand but i'm just not sure I can get my parents to go for it, plus the ammo is a bit more expensive. Basically the question now is, hardwood or synthetic?

Hardwood is for looks and feel, synthetic is for accuracy and weather. When a wood stock gets damp, it can warp slightly imposing a side or twisting load on the receiver and barrel, effecting accuracy.

I prefer wood, love the look and feel, but a long range working gun is best in synthetic.

Maverick · « **Reply #40 on:** September 05, 2006, 10:14:45 PM »

Problems with a wooden stock can be handled by scraping the barrel chanel, glassing it and sealing the wood against moisture. It takes some work but it can cure the problem of warping and still leave you with a wooden stock.