7.62x39
- Thread starter ratherbefishin
- Start date
Preach brotha!
So tired of the 30/30- 7.62x39/300 blackout comparison. If those rounds are similar then my .338 WM is basically a 180 grain 30-06 right?
Cmon Brad, a guy with your experience must have sluiced a few deer at spitting distance with iron sights. More like grouse hunting than bench rest shooting...
bearkilr
CGN Ultra frequent flyer
- Location
- Nowhere, ......just past the middle
I've never really cared to use calibers that work "under ideal conditions" nor use live animals as a test media for potentially inadequate cartridges.
I'd much rather use one that works under all conditions I might encounter.
If an SKS cost $1500 and ammo was $65/box, no one would be using it.
I'd much rather use one that works under all conditions I might encounter.
If an SKS cost $1500 and ammo was $65/box, no one would be using it.
Don't disagree with you Conner..... But the majority of the guys that start and participate in these threads seem to want to justify their use of an SKS for hunting with little to no experience..... The best I have seen in this thread is a small fawn take next to point blank to disprove my theory......
I love your posts, but I still strongly feel that we owe it to our game to chase them with something better....
I have no problem using an SKS for deer hunting out to whatever reasonable range you consider it accurate. However, it's not a 30-30, you can't shoot 170Grain bullets at 2000fps out of it. You need to pick your shots. I like a challenge, and I've been hunting long enough to know when to pass on a shot, even yes, that buck of a lifetime. It's not worth wounding it.
I have, and will use an SKS on occasion. Same for the 44-40, I've even used a 38-40. All very effective if you don't push them. (Well maybe you could shove the rifle off your shoulder as you fire so it's faster eh?)
The 44-40 is similar power to a 45ACP
It's funny, a ridiculous amount of game including deer, elk and moose were killed with 44-40's in rifles that were no more accurate than an SKS, but some think the more powerful 7.62x39 is not up to the task. Someone kills a deer with a 44-40 and people say "COOL!" Use an SKS and we get TSK TSK!
Very good point Gatehouse, while I don't see a reason to deer hunt with a 22LR when you have a better caliber on hand, I don't understand all the magnumitis here on CGN. I have hunted with fellas that use 458's and 375 H&H for deer, but that doesn't make it a minimum or a requirement. If you are hunting bush land and can never see farther than 200 yards in an opening, there is no reason for a large belted magnum to take down Bambi cleanly.
Take a deer with a 30 Remington pump and you'll get kudos as well, weird....
Take a deer with a 30 Remington pump and you'll get kudos as well, weird....
- Location
- Somewhere on the Hudson Bay Coast
The 44-40 is similar power to a 45ACP
It's funny, a ridiculous amount of game including deer, elk and moose were killed with 44-40's in rifles that were no more accurate than an SKS, but some think the more powerful 7.62x39 is not up to the task. Someone kills a deer with a 44-40 and people say "COOL!" Use an SKS and we get TSK TSK!
Without some significant modifications being made to the stock and trigger, an SKS isn't much of a rifle, whereas a CZ-527 provides a compact rifle with the balance, trigger, and accuracy to please an enthusiast. Given that the CZ costs a thousand bucks, that leaves lots of money on the table to tweak the SKS, but I'd no more choose an SKS over a CZ-527 than I would an M-305 over a M-70 Winchester, but then my tastes run to bolt guns.
As for the 7.62X39 cartridge, a .30 caliber, 150 gr soft point, at 2100 isn't a .300 magnum, but its well above what's needed to ethically harvest medium sized game at moderate ranges. It would prove to be a good novice's cartridge due to its mild manners even when fired in a small, light weight, rifle. Cast bullet loads, make it a dandy small game cartridge, so again we see that handloading optimizes versatility.
Well said Boomer. Killing performance is more complicated than comparing cartridge specs. A 44-40 lead bullet would mushroom to a vastly effective projectile.
The shot shell 410. is very popular yet it is at its best in the hand of a proficient shooter with the skills to make it effective and is not considered a good starting gun for novices to hunt with. Using proper ammo in a marginal or adequate rifle in the hands of an experienced, ethical hunter can result very effective kills. One of the top goals in hunting (used to be feeding your family) should be to effectively "kill" the animal, we all know crippling animals or leaving to die a slow agonizing death happens more often than realized or admitted.
The shot shell 410. is very popular yet it is at its best in the hand of a proficient shooter with the skills to make it effective and is not considered a good starting gun for novices to hunt with. Using proper ammo in a marginal or adequate rifle in the hands of an experienced, ethical hunter can result very effective kills. One of the top goals in hunting (used to be feeding your family) should be to effectively "kill" the animal, we all know crippling animals or leaving to die a slow agonizing death happens more often than realized or admitted.
So if we use an expanding lead bullet in s 44-40 it's more effective than a soft point from a 7.62x39? Is that what you mean?
I'm not sure I would want much expansion given the low velocity.
Last edited:
a 123 gr. at 2300 is nothing to sneeze at either.
I think the opposite end of the spectrum causes the exact same issue. In my neck of the woods somehow just about everyone suddenly decided they needed and .300 wm. The heavier recoil coupled with lack of practice has made average/bad shooters even worse. I think just as many animals or even more are poorly hit with the bigger stuff.
A few years ago I tried to talk a new hunter into a .308 or .270 but he wanted a 300. The reason? He had been out hunting a couple of times with buddies and their .270s and 7RMs hadn't knocked the deer right over. A 270 wasn't adequate for deer!
Very well said.... No doubt the cartridge is capable within limits.... And the fact that cheap practice rounds that could be turned into reloaded brass are readily available is a plus.....
Actually, he is a very intelligent guy, and excels in his field. And I hear he's turned into a pretty good hunter, although I haven't seen him in years. He just didn't know much about guns and was relying on campfire talk. He didn't realize that some of the talkers may have been taking ass or gut shots, which explains why they didn't keel over.
Years ago my hunting partner who was also a surgeon, was hunting feral goats on one if the gulf islands and his weapon of choice was a 22 magnum...he took neck or head shots only at ranges under 50 yards and according to him,dropped every goat in its tracks..he was a world class accomplished hunter taking everything from tigers in India to moose,elk ,grizzlies black bear and a polar bear in Nunavit with a 308.He generally used a single shot 243 for deer ,everything else including the tigers were shot with his 308.Heck of a shot and He only had the sight in one eye too.He believed in getting close,taking his time and putting one careful shot right behind the shoulder,then sitting down and waiting before following up...John shot the tiger that was on the wall in the 'Bengal Room' at the Empress in Victoria,his widow has the other one for sale
Last edited:
