Hunting with Military Guns

[FX1]

Bullet is a bullet doesnt matter what it is fired from. Just dont show up at my deer camp with a uzi because i will ask you to go home..

[lasersailor184]

http://www.sportsmansguide.com/cb/cb.asp?a=70846

I'm currently having trouble digging up the 2 round clips.  But I have seen them plenty of times at gun shows.


Ontop of that, it's relatively easy to load a full sized clip with any number of bullets in it that you want.

[FBBone]

My favorite hunting rifle is my M1903-A3.   Sub MOA at 300 yds, I love it!

[Odee]

Originally posted by lasersailor184
http://www.sportsmansguide.com/cb/cb.asp?a=70846

I'm currently having trouble digging up the 2 round clips.  But I have seen them plenty of times at gun shows.


Ontop of that, it's relatively easy to load a full sized clip with any number of bullets in it that you want.

Thanks Sailor... yer a peach for a squid.

[Excel1]

Originally posted by Halo
Since military guns are so effective and designed to take abuse and still function in awful conditions, how many of you prefer to use military guns for hunting rather than the usual civilian long or short guns?

If you do, which military guns do you recommend for hunting?

This presumes that the military guns meet federal and state hunting laws, e.g., magazines with limited number of cartridges, etc.  

For example, I'm not a hunter, but if I were, I'd try my replica M1 Carbine .30 caliber with a five-round magazine for varmints up to maybe small deer size within 100 yards.

I'm curious whether military guns are perceived as sufficiently accurate and cost effective because hunting places a premium on well-placed shots delivering the quickest and most humane kills.  

Kinda ironic, isn't it, that most military, law enforcement  and home defense applications accept slightly less accuracy since their emphasis is on knock down, stopping the assault.

The .303 cartridge and SMLE rifle has taken more deer in New Zealand than all the other calibres combined. For decades after WW2 deer were numerous but commercial hunting rifles were scarce and expensive, and commercial hunting ammo for them was even scarcer. The abundant supply of milsurp .303's, often un-scoped and feed with clipped ball ammo filled the needs of the deer cullers and hunters until sporting rifles and optics became more common and affordable. Plenty of hunters still prefer to use the SMLE, and since most deer in NZ are shot at ranges under 100 yards it's more than adequate and at no real disadvantage to today’s fancier sporting rifles/ cartridges.

I've owned two M1 carbines and although the M1 is a ton of fun to shoot imo it's too inaccurate for small game and too underpowered to reliably drop medium sized game at even relatively close range. I think 100 yards might be a stretch for it.

I don't think it matters whether someone uses a milsurp semi auto or bolt gun to hunt with as long they enjoy using it, and it fires a projectile with enough accuracy and energy with consideration to the size of game and ranges they'll be using it at.

[Masherbrum]

When I started hunting with my Father In Law, I used his surplus Enfield.   Back in the 70's he bought it and had the gun professionally cut to a monte carlo stock.    That thing was a blast to shoot.

[lazs2]

It used to be quite common for sporting goods stores to cut down the stocks on military bolt guns like mausers and sprigfields and add peep sights or a cheap 4 power scope and sell the guns for $50 -$100 for hunting...  ought six, 8 x 57 7x57.. carcano and swiss were all good hunting rounds and the guns were cheap and accurate for hunting..  You could shoot surplus ammo for fun and soft point for hunting.

I have an 8mm mauser with peep sights that was built like that in the late 60's or so..  It probly sold for 40-50 bucks and will shoot 2" groups or so at 100 yards... the stock is cut down and the barrel is cut down a few inches and recrowned.   It has a quicky glass bedding job and the williams peep sight with a swedged on front sight.   Someone put in a no name aftermarket trigger that seems pretty decent.

All these mods cost maybe $30 back in the day.   the gun is accurate and weighs about like a commercial sporter.

nowdays.. you can still buy a mauser for around $100 and cut the stock and bed it yourself.   8mm is a good hunting round.   use the sights it came with or cut down and recrown the barrel and add peep sights of maybe another $60  

Add a recoil pad and sling swivels for another 20 bucks or so and you are ready.

lazs

[Estel]

I used SVD-63 for elk and boar hunting few times. Really better if to compare with usual 12 caliber bullet.

[GrimCO]

Originally posted by FX1
SKS works great.. I have killed deer Hundreds of pigs coons and anything else that needed killing.

M1 Carbine might be on the weak side out side of 50 yards.

Their is nothing wrong with a military rifle for hunting. Only problem is that a Remington 700 .270 bolt gun is better than most assault weapons and cheaper.

Remington 700VLS 22-250 is hands down the favorite gun in my arsenal. You can literally drive tacks with it at 150 yds and lay out consistent 3" groups at 300 yds +. It's an amazing weapon. A work of art...

[Maverick]

For hunting I wouldn't use any of the semi's out there. It's not that I dislike the system or even their accuracy, it's just because most of them are heavier than anything I need to carry around to get the job done.

Having said that, I wouldn't use the M1 Carbine to hunt anything larger than a coyote. The round is extremely anemic, especially in plain ball format and is essentially like a .32 magnum pistol round. Less effective than a .38 special from a pistol with a decent HP loading. I've got an M1 Carbine and like shooting it but wouldn't hunt with it as long as I have anything else in a more capable cartridge. My SKS is far more capable than the M1 Carbine and just as fun to shoot.

The Garand and the M14 are just too darn heavy to tote all day long when the same cartidge can be fired from a much lighter bolt action rifle. With my eyes I also want a scope if at all possible now. I don't hunt large game with a .223 or other .22 caliber so my AR 15 is also out of the question even though with the national match barrel and improved sights it's better suited accuracy wise than the SKS.

I used to hunt deer with a black powder muzzleloading rifle (.45 and .50 cal). I felt it was more of a challenge to get inside 100 yards (my self imposed iron sight range limit) and take the deer with that style rifle. One shot is all you're likely to get. I enjoyed the hunt whether I took a deer or not. Most of the time I didn't but the hunting trip was always a great trip.

[Charon]

The round is extremely anemic, especially in plain ball format and is essentially like a .32 magnum pistol round. Less effective than a .38 special from a pistol with a decent HP loading.

I agree that it's a poor choice for hunting, but from a muzzle energy standpoint it's far more effective than a .38 special or even a .357 magnum, especially with hollow points. Comparison of muzzle energy barrel, 50 yards and 100 yards.

.357 (110 gr. Winchester JHP):     410     292
.357 (125 grain JHP):                    583
Carbine (110 gr. Winchester FMJ):967     778     622
.44 Magnum (240 grain)               1044

As you can see, it has more stopping power at 100 yards than a .357 does at the muzzle, and few would consider a .357 to be anemic. And a .44 magnum isn't that much more powerful. The carbine works just as developed, as a weapon far more effective than a .45 sidearm yet far easier to tote around for logistics and support troops and officers than the Garand.

Now, a good brush hunting gun to consider that I'm not personally familiar with is the Deerfield carbine, based, I believe on the M1 action (sure looks like one) but in .44 magnum with a 4-round magazine. It generates a muzzle energy of 1796 foot lbs.

Charon

[lasersailor184]

What, is america filled with girly men now?  A garand is too heavy to carry around?

[Airscrew]

Originally posted by Charon
I agree that it's a poor choice for hunting, but from a muzzle energy standpoint it's far more effective than a .38 special or even a .357 magnum, especially with hollow points. Comparison of muzzle energy barrel, 50 yards and 100 yards.

.357 (110 gr. Winchester JHP):     410     292
.357 (125 grain JHP):                    583
Carbine (110 gr. Winchester FMJ):967     778     622
.44 Magnum (240 grain)               1044

But Charon I would argue that when I had my Ruger SA .357 I never loaded 110gr or 125 gr bullets.  I used 135 FMJ and jacketed hollowpoints for target practice and small game, and 180gr FMJ when I carried during hunting, fishing, and camping trips.

what is the muzzle energy for the 135gr and 180gr.  also wont there be differences in muzzle energy depending on barrel length, primer type, and powder?

[lazs2]

there is a little more to it than just raw energy figures.   I have killed a few deer with a high standard .22 pistol.

The carbine is pretty marginal in accuracy and stopping power.   I would rather hit a deer with a .357 mag round than the carbine one.   the .357 is bigger around.

I have killed a hog with my 44 that an ought six had wounded.   the 44 anchors em... right now.   The ought six has double the energy of the 44 but it is not a big blunt round that expends all it's energy into the target.  Is it better to expend 1000 lbs of energy into the target or to expend 200 lbs into the target and another 1700 into the woods somewhere?

That being said...  with a little caution... any round will do.   the high standard dropped them little deer just fine if you hit em in the head good.

lazs

[Charon]

But Charon I would argue that when I had my Ruger SA .357 I never loaded 110gr or 125 gr bullets. I used 135 FMJ and jacketed hollowpoints for target practice and small game, and 180gr FMJ when I carried during hunting, fishing, and camping trips.

what is the muzzle energy for the 135gr and 180gr. also wont there be differences in muzzle energy depending on barrel length, primer type, and powder?

This from Chuck Hawks

For this article I shot the Hunter .357 Magnunm 180 grain BCSP load in my 4" Colt Ultimate Python revolver. This is a full power load driving 180 grain bullet (SD .202) at a muzzle velocity (MV) of 1200 fps and muzzle energy of 576 ft. lbs. from a 4" barrel, and it hits hard at both ends of the gun. The recoil is sharp and substantial, subjectively greater than the old Remington load that advertised a 158 grain bullet at a MV of 1550 fps, which until now was the stiffest .357 Magnum load I had encountered.

The carbine is pretty marginal in accuracy and stopping power. I would rather hit a deer with a .357 mag round than the carbine one. the .357 is bigger around.

I have killed a hog with my 44 that an ought six had wounded. the 44 anchors em... right now. The ought six has double the energy of the 44 but it is not a big blunt round that expends all it's energy into the target. Is it better to expend 1000 lbs of energy into the target or to expend 200 lbs into the target and another 1700 into the woods somewhere?

I see where you're coming from, there is always the velocity argument that is pushed with the 9mm but it does come down to dumping energy. Apparently the hollow point 30 carbines are fine for stopping power with smaller game and zombies and the soft points OK and both better than the FMJ. But my carbine is plenty accurate at 100 yards (more accurate than me with my limited practice opportunities) and I would rather have an carbine at 100 yards than a 357 magnum pistol and wouldn't feel underarmed at 25 yards. For that matter my "protection" .357 revolver is loaded with lead 38 special +Ps which I don't lose any sleep over figuring limited over penetration but enough to get the job done if ever required. Just pull the trigger twice if I had to.

If you take away the ancedotal stories from those who liked the added stopping power of the 30-06 you can find plenty of ancedotal evidence of soldiers and marines from WW2 to Vietnam who had no complaints with the M1, especially in jungle or urban environments. And, a LOT of people have actually hunted deer with these. I just get a bit tweaked by those who think it's some sort of .22LR or something.

BTW, the Taurus Thunderbolt seems like a neat little pump action (improved) pistol caliber carbine. You can currently find it in .45 colt and .357. http://www.gunblast.com/Taurus_Thunderbolt.htm

Charon