Advancing Technology, good or bad?

Canuck Bob

Canuck Bob

Regular
EE Expired
Rating - 100%
13   0   0
The recent thread on Lever Actions caught my attention.

Part of the discussion regarded advancing cartridge development and the continued use of outdated cartridges. Some see this as favoring the tried and true and some see it as hindering advancements.

I lean on the tried and true side for working guns carried regularly and the new stuff for the range.

Lever actions are one of my interests. In the last decades a number of fine cartridges came on the scene for the big bore Winchester 94. Now they are gone. I see this as part of the consumer ethic, first we had records, then 8 tracks, then cassettes, then cds and now internet downloads for our music. The transformation of the rifle as a specialized tool meant to last a generation at least to a consumer good meant to hold ones attention until next year.

On the other hand the developments in benchrest shooting have taught us a lot about cartridge design for accuracy and effecient powder use in the short fat BRs and PPCs. Certainly the WSM and WSSM cartridges are part of that trend.

Maybe us old dogs can learn a new trick, perhaps the young dogs can benefit from some nostalgia and decades of experience.
 
Bad or good, it keeps happening. Science and technology move merrily along, ethics and practicality be damned. Can't fight the tide, may as well join it.

I do find it funny how everything comes back around again if you live long enough to see it...
 
5440fight said:
Bad or good, it keeps happening. Science and technology move merrily along, ethics and practicality be damned. Can't fight the tide, may as well join it.

I do find it funny how everything comes back around again if you live long enough to see it...
Click to expand...

As I think about this circular march I realized that in my youth all of my hunting family members scoffed at scopes. Now most rifles don't come with iron sights. If they do the sights are cheap crap in many cases rather than the fine iron sights of the past. Now many AR styled weapons sport very well made and effective aperture sights.
 
I think the biggest issue is that everyone is so enamored with what's new, that they don't question if it's better. Case in point: All the guys and gals that can film with their phone, email, play games, watch movies, trade stocks, text, gps track etc. etc. - but the battery barely makes it through the day. Can't talk on it after 7pm, it's dead.

I like the new, but respect the past. You bring up scopes- almost all my guns have usable irons as a backup to optics. I like the ease of use of optics, but I don't want a piece of glass between me and do or die. If Simo Hayha (Finnish sniper credited with 505 confirmed kills with a Mosin Nagant, another 200+ confirmed with a smg) can do his bit for his country with iron sights, I figure they must work.

I've seen footage of a whole squad of yanks in Afghanistan pinned down by a fella who knows his way around a Lee Enfield. Cost to the yanks: 10+ men, heavily armed, tied up for a day, several AT rockets, air support, chopper for the wounded trooper (minor wound, in and out) = $100,000 +?

Cost to one wiley good 'ole boy afghan redneck and his Lee Enfield= $10
(I don't know what .303 goes for in that part of the world)

No casaulties on the other side besides the family in the hut accidently bombed.:mad:

http://video.nytimes.com/video/2010/04/19/world/1247467534488/the-inches-that-matter.html

Progress.
 
Occurs to me that once upon a time the following calibers and/or rifles qualified as "new fangled"...

94 Winchester in 30-30
30.06 Springfield
.250-3000 Savage
25.06 Rem.
Model 70 Winchester
.308 Win.
.243 Win.

Just to name a few.

You know?

...not to mention synthetic stocks, variable scopes, and Harris bipods.

;)

Technology moves on.

And the market place...us...sorts it all out.
 
I have asked that question lately as I wanted to fill the "gaps" in my cals. When I went and plugged a large range of WSMs and magnums against what I already had on the Winchester Ballistics Calculator it seems that aside from some big stuff like 7mm mag, 300 Win mag, 338 ect I was pretty well off with my 308 and 30-06. Since I handload the distance between the 308 and 30-06 should have spread a bit due to its larger case. I currently shoot a couple of old cals and old guns. Got a 110 yr old 1894 in 38-55 that will hunt next year and probably successfully with decent irons. I have a 1910 vintage BSA Martini action competition 22lr that put 3 bullets into almost the same hole at 25m-peep sights. I also use a CZ452 with a Nikon on it and my CZ527 223 sports an even better scope. Some have been providing dinners for a century. And are still quite capable. Do I want a rifle that costs $4 every time I pull the trigger? Is it really a lot better than what I have or can I make that up by learning to stalk better? Do I need a Hummer to drive to work? Choices. I cant afford to have them all so what I have will do nicely. This week, and maybe next......
 
I like good old stuff and good new stuff.

Too many people make the mistake of believing that old=good or new= good or vice versa.

Some old stuff interests me for it's historical value, even though it is less good than the new stuff...sometimes that makes it worth it to use it.

I'll never turn my Mystery Ranch pack in for a Trapper Nelson pack, but I'll sure use a .303 British in Ruger #1 ( a more perfect meld of old and new I have not seen);)

Some old stuff sucks really bad and some new stuff sucks too. it's a matter of picking through the crap and getting the best- or- what happens to interest you.

And if it interests you, that should trump everything else, unless you are looking for specific parameters to meet.
 
bogie said:
I have asked that question lately as I wanted to fill the "gaps" in my cals. When I went and plugged a large range of WSMs and magnums against what I already had on the Winchester Ballistics Calculator it seems that aside from some big stuff like 7mm mag, 300 Win mag, 338 ect I was pretty well off with my 308 and 30-06. Since I handload the distance between the 308 and 30-06 should have spread a bit due to its larger case. I currently shoot a couple of old cals and old guns. Got a 110 yr old 1894 in 38-55 that will hunt next year and probably successfully with decent irons. I have a 1910 vintage BSA Martini action competition 22lr that put 3 bullets into almost the same hole at 25m-peep sights. I also use a CZ452 with a Nikon on it and my CZ527 223 sports an even better scope. Some have been providing dinners for a century. And are still quite capable. Do I want a rifle that costs $4 every time I pull the trigger? Is it really a lot better than what I have or can I make that up by learning to stalk better? Do I need a Hummer to drive to work? Choices. I cant afford to have them all so what I have will do nicely. This week, and maybe next......
Click to expand...

Use what makes you happy...thats the most important thing.:)
 
Gatehouse said:
I like good old stuff and good new stuff.

Too many people make the mistake of believing that old=good or new= good or vice versa.

Some old stuff interests me for it's historical value, even though it is less good than the new stuff...sometimes that makes it worth it to use it.

I'll never turn my Mystery Ranch pack in for a Trapper Nelson pack, but I'll sure use a .303 British in Ruger #1 ( a more perfect meld of old and new I have not seen);)

Some old stuff sucks really bad and some new stuff sucks too. it's a matter of picking through the crap and getting the best- or- what happens to interest you.

And if it interests you, that should trump everything else, unless you are looking for specific parameters to meet.
Click to expand...

Exactly right!
 
That old stuff sure is fun to shoot. Everybody else wants to play too. Makes me really happy. Excellent irons too all around. Got a Henry Golden Boy thats almost new with what looks like Marbles sights that shoots really well too. Got to have some fun in your shooting otherwise its just another job. Maybe play with some silhouettes this year too. See if the club will set an "old guns no scopes" match or two. That would be almost as much fun as Cowboy Action. :)
 
I notice you mention the Win Big bore,I have one in .375 and love it,others
have one in .356,and 307waters . They whom love them re-load them.

Much like the 45colt and 45/70 trapdoor ,never give up on a gun you like

just because it's not popular. I reload my New Ruger Blackhawk 45 colt

with as much Cart BP as case will hold under a self cast two groved 255 grn flat nosed bullet.lubed with self made beeswax and bacon grease lube.

I use the same round in my Rossi Mod 92 ,and reload for my trapdoor as well.

We that love the old guns just don't give up!

I have a Remington Ryder #9 that is a single shot break open ,side ####

34 inch barrel shotgun in 28 guage ,it's 104 years old and I can buy shells for it!

Bob
 
If we look at it from this perspective... Older rifles and their cartridges had the best intentions in miind for what they were designed to do. Time marches on and newer and faster burner powders are invented, newer types of bullets constructed, smaller cases, lighter rifles etc etc. So how many hunters over the age of 50 have never shot a deer with a 30-30...? It still does it's intended job, at reasonable yardages.

So if you want big, go big, if you want speed... get it... If you wanna put meat in the freezer. Make sure it shoots as accurately as is needed and don't miss...
 
My 444 was new technology when I bought it. I've never regretted it because I was interested in heavy bullets during the Magnum craze at that time.

I just read on another forum (unsubstaniated info) that a 300 WSM just set a world record group at 1000 yards. The short fat cases sure seem effecient. One of the problems with advancing gun tech seems to be the limits of what we are trying to do. A new idea can only be marginally better than the old. A 6MM BR is outstanding but a 243 Winchester in equal equipment isn't too far behind.
 
I like guns. All guns.

Sure, I have my favourites, and some types dont really excite me enough to buy one, but I would never turn down the chance to handle or fire any gun I saw at the range.

I could easily hunt deer or bear with a bullpup rifle like the KelTec RFB one day and a Martini Henry the next day.

What does disappoint me is how LITTLE technology is advancing. A Mauser 98 based action has changed almost zero in the last 112 years. Compare that to most anything else in our lives.
It was only 66 years from the Wright brothers first flight (1903) to Armstrong on the moon (1969)

Whenthe big gun companies talk about a revolutionary new colour of stock stain, you know we are moving in slow motion!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom