The fact that you think it lacks common sense simply shows your ignorance of the topic.
You should stick to something that you actually know something about. Like trying to make up for poor shot placement with a bigger bullet.
Are you a Keith or O'Conner advocate
- Thread starter Lefty Dick
- Start date
The fact that you think it lacks common sense simply shows your ignorance of the topic.
You should stick to something that you actually know something about. Like trying to make up for poor shot placement with a bigger bullet.
There are, without doubt, some mighty fine game killing bullets on the marked today. However, there have have mighty fine killing bullets on the market for many years. Me thinks the modern ones are a bit over hyped.
I am posting again, the part from JackO'Connor's article on the beginning of the 270, where he talks about the first bullets Winchester developed to go along with their new creation. This article was written in 1960, so O'Connor rates the first ones as the best he has seen, and that includes some pretty "Modern" type bullets.
The Nosler partition was well known at this time, and it is still one of the best. However, the German RWS firm developed a bullet in the 1930s, that true German sportsmen like to say was teh bullet that Nosler copied, but didn't do as good a job as the original!
Herters developed a "best in the world," game bullet. Strangely, some pretty savvy shooters agreed with them on this. I think it had the word, Banana, in its name. And either it, or the RWS bullet, had the designation, "H", bullet.
In my wee, tiny, meagre bit of experience, I thought the Dominion Copper point expanding, as loaded in their factory ammunition, was just as good as the Nosler. However, I am backed in this view by a man who lived east of Prince George, in the heart of the grizzly bear country, shooting grizzlies when not even a tag was required for them. He shot a great many grizzly and swore by a 30-06, with factory loaded 180 grain Copper Point Expanding bullets.
As a point of interest, Jack O'Connor states that the 130 grain bullet, as loaded in the "Canadian", CIL Dominion ammunition, chronographed the fastest of any factory loaded 130 grain 270, that had chronographed.
In short, I think people with no knowledge of these older bullets, shouldn't maintain that all old bullets were far inferior, to the modern bullets.
Here is O'Connors word on the early 270 bullets.
I am posting again, the part from JackO'Connor's article on the beginning of the 270, where he talks about the first bullets Winchester developed to go along with their new creation. This article was written in 1960, so O'Connor rates the first ones as the best he has seen, and that includes some pretty "Modern" type bullets.
The Nosler partition was well known at this time, and it is still one of the best. However, the German RWS firm developed a bullet in the 1930s, that true German sportsmen like to say was teh bullet that Nosler copied, but didn't do as good a job as the original!
Herters developed a "best in the world," game bullet. Strangely, some pretty savvy shooters agreed with them on this. I think it had the word, Banana, in its name. And either it, or the RWS bullet, had the designation, "H", bullet.
In my wee, tiny, meagre bit of experience, I thought the Dominion Copper point expanding, as loaded in their factory ammunition, was just as good as the Nosler. However, I am backed in this view by a man who lived east of Prince George, in the heart of the grizzly bear country, shooting grizzlies when not even a tag was required for them. He shot a great many grizzly and swore by a 30-06, with factory loaded 180 grain Copper Point Expanding bullets.
As a point of interest, Jack O'Connor states that the 130 grain bullet, as loaded in the "Canadian", CIL Dominion ammunition, chronographed the fastest of any factory loaded 130 grain 270, that had chronographed.
In short, I think people with no knowledge of these older bullets, shouldn't maintain that all old bullets were far inferior, to the modern bullets.
Here is O'Connors word on the early 270 bullets.
A few years back I watched someone at the range hit the 200 meter steel ram over an over again using a 45Colt revolver...and by hit I mean it made quite a respectable thump. I have no doubt that in a hunting situation a Deer would have been in a freezer by the end of the day.
Also keep in mind.357 was originally designed for deer hunting, and methinks a good 44Mag would make a great hunting handgun/Bear defense gun for a bow hunter.
Last edited:
Johnn Peterson
CGN Ultra frequent flyer
- Location
- Chemainus B.C.
The fact that you think it lacks common sense simply shows your ignorance of the topic.
You should stick to something that you actually know something about. Like trying to make up for poor shot placement with a bigger bullet.
Oh, so it's a common sence to decission to hunt Bear with a 223? Graphic of all your ability and worldly knowledge, or lack thereof. More a showing of your ignorance and lack of good judgement.
Use of a larger caliber, heavier bullet isn't the reasoning behind trying to make up for poor shot placement but if that hasn't sunk in yet, in all likelihood it never will.
Sometime in the next 40 years when your ability and experience reaches the 2% level of that of people like Keith, write a book and send me a copy. I promise to give it a respectful 2% of my attention and consideration. In the meantime, stick to something you know, like flipping burgers.
A experienced with a lot of knowledge man wearing a big cowboy hat still beats a self professed know it all, with a little knowledge in a pink tu tu.
With either of my matching fixed sighted s/s 5.5" Ruger Bisley Vaquero's in 45 Colt I can hit a 8" X 10" target every shot @ 100 yards (when I do my part) with 300gr jacketed or hard cast bullets @ 1280fps.
It is not a feat to do and when I figure out the hold over I can hit the 210 meter gong almost every shot as well.
This is with fixed sights so I can see how easy it would be to do it when you practice a lot with your tools and Keith did for how many years.
]
I wouldn't say it's common sense to just pick up a .223 and go bear hunting, but armed with a bit of knowledge and used within it's parameters, the .223 will kill bears just fine. Your statement just goes to show (again) that you are completely ignorant of the topic.
"Less than ideal" or "Poor shot placement"- it's the same thing, as much as you want to pretend it's not. Are you are going to argue that game shot through both lungs with a .270 isn't going to die?
Insults again? Poor little thing...I must have hurt your feelings?
I wouldn't say it's common sense to just pick up a .223 and go bear hunting, but armed with a bit of knowledge and used within it's parameters, the .223 will kill bears just fine. Your statement just goes to show (again) that you are completely ignorant of the topic.
ll.
"Less than ideal" or "Poor shot placement"- it's the same thing, as much as you want to pretend it's not. Are you are going to argue that game shot through both lungs with a .270 isn't going to die?
Insults again? Poor little thing...I must have hurt your feelings?
]
I wouldn't say it's common sense to just pick up a .223 and go bear hunting, but 1) armed with a bit of knowledge and used within it's parameters, the .223 will kill bears just fine. Your statement just goes to show (again) that you are completely ignorant of the topic.
ll.
"Less than ideal" or "Poor shot placement"- it's the same thing, as much as you want to pretend it's not. Are you are going to argue that game shot through both lungs with a .270 isn't going to die?
Insults again? Poor little thing...I must have hurt your feelings?
1) Shot placement many times is not up to the shooter like when the animal moves just as you squeeze off your shot resulting in a poorly hit animal.
I'm betting that a less than ideal shot placement from a 223 that hits a front leg/shoulder or hind quarter will not get the job done or at least it isn't worth the risk to the animal.
Which is why I cannot promote using a marginal cartridge like so many on this site.
Johnn Peterson
CGN Ultra frequent flyer
- Location
- Chemainus B.C.
]
1/I wouldn't say it's common sense to just pick up a .223 and go bear hunting, but armed with a bit of knowledge and used within it's parameters, the .223 will kill bears just fine. Your statement just goes to show (again) that you are completely ignorant of the topic.
ll.
2/ "Less than ideal" or "Poor shot placement"- it's the same thing, as much as you want to pretend it's not.
3/ Are you are going to argue that game shot through both lungs with a .270 isn't going to die?
4/ Insults again? Poor little thing...I must have hurt your feelings?
1/ I would hope not!! It's a dammed poor choice at the best of times. Definately not an ethical choice!
2/ Not really. 'Things' don't always go according to plan, possibly with the exception of your years of 'flawless perfection' and when that occurs, your Bear is more likely to sustain a more serious wound from a slightly pulled 45-70 hit than from the same with a 223. If that's all you have under certain circumstances, that's all you have. But to go out purposefully hunting Bear with a 223 does little but help add to the defination of ignorance.
3/ Never ever did (remember) with, that quality of shot. If a bow can do it I'm dammed sure a 270 can as well. Those weren't the perfect shots in question and you know it.
4/ No insult intended. Merely an honest comparisson between the likes of you and people of Keiths ability and experience. That's why an experienced man wearing a cowboy hat win hands down over wanna be know it all, in a pink tu tu. Send me your book of 2% knowledge, and I promise to read it. Hurt my feelings?? Good luck It would take a lot more than your opinionated 2% to accomplish that.
This is great guys I'm hanging out at home with the wife and son today trying to do a little reloading between playing with the little guy and the honey do list...
It's only 3:30pm but I think I'll go pour a Centennial and Coke sit back and enjoy the chit chat...
]
A man has to use good judgement when shooting at an animal...If there is a risk of making a poor hit, he shouldn't shoot, and that includes if an animal is likely to move far enough to spoil the shot placement. Much of this can be minimized by shorter distances and observing the animal before shooting.
I wouldn't suggest shooting a bear in the shoulder or ass with a .223.
I'm not "promoting anything." I am suggesting that anyone using any cartridge use some judgement before shooting, and base that judgment call on the parameters of what you and your rifle/cartridge are capable of, as well as field conditions, distance and animal behavior.
A man has to use good judgement when shooting at an animal...If there is a risk of making a poor hit, he shouldn't shoot, and that includes if an animal is likely to move far enough to spoil the shot placement. Much of this can be minimized by shorter distances and observing the animal before shooting.
I wouldn't suggest shooting a bear in the shoulder or ass with a .223.
I'm not "promoting anything." I am suggesting that anyone using any cartridge use some judgement before shooting, and base that judgment call on the parameters of what you and your rifle/cartridge are capable of, as well as field conditions, distance and animal behavior.
Yup, it's a poor choice to pick up ANY rifle or cartridge and go hunting without some knowledge of how it will perform.
In your uninformed, ignorant opinion.
[
In your uninformed, ignorant opinion.
The shots in question were the ones with poor shot placement. Is that the fault of the .270?
[
Maybe I didn't hurt your feelings. Maybe that man crush you have on me has resurfaced....
Does the thought of me in a pink tutu turn you on? It must, because you've mentioned it a dozen times in your posts. Sorry, I'm not interested in men.
D*mn it slow down I haven't had a chance to pour that drink yet my little guy had me fill his swimming pool with warm water...
He is 2 years and 1 month old now and he runs around with his older brothers old Red Rider BB gun aiming it and saying "coyoteee boom, coyoteee boom"...
Ok ok back to the subject...
Sh*t happens at the worst possible time not always but the odds are that it will, which is why I don't (here I go again) use/promote marginal cartridges for hunting any animal I mean where does it stop?
Anyone up to using a 17HMR with 20gr XTP's in the perfect scenario it could also kill a bear.
He is 2 years and 1 month old now and he runs around with his older brothers old Red Rider BB gun aiming it and saying "coyoteee boom, coyoteee boom"...
Ok ok back to the subject...
Sh*t happens at the worst possible time not always but the odds are that it will, which is why I don't (here I go again) use/promote marginal cartridges for hunting any animal I mean where does it stop?
Anyone up to using a 17HMR with 20gr XTP's in the perfect scenario it could also kill a bear.
Johnn Peterson
CGN Ultra frequent flyer
- Location
- Chemainus B.C.
Gatehouse;3224985Maybe I didn't hurt your feelings. Maybe that [B said:man crush [/B]you have on me has resurfaced....
Does the thought of me in a pink tutu turn you on? It must, because you've mentioned it a dozen times in your posts. Sorry, I'm not interested in men.
There you go again, wishfull thinking. Didn't hurt my feelings, strike 1. Not interested in your 'man crush' thing, strike two. But if that's what 'turns your crank', go for it, San Fran is the place for you. I can just see the headlines now, "Princess Tu Tu" parades the streets of San Fran and all the ###s have been scared straight. Strike 3, you're a born loser.
Keep going, post more of your ignorance and give us graphic example of how you can make ignorance legible.
Johnn Peterson
CGN Ultra frequent flyer
- Location
- Chemainus B.C.
My basic contention, exactly.
Not unlike my Dad shooting three Mule Deer with a 22LR. Can it be done? Obviously yes. Is it a good or ethical choice?? Depends on your defination or level of ethics. If it was all I had in that particular instance at that point in time, you use what you've got. IF you have the option of choice, more appropiate 'stuff' is out there. In all fairness and respect to the game, use it!!
]
Dude, you are the one that keeps talking about me in womans clothing. You've mentioned it quite a few times on this thread alone.
It's kind of creepy.
Dude, you are the one that keeps talking about me in womans clothing. You've mentioned it quite a few times on this thread alone.
It's kind of creepy.
Ethical hunting is always an interesting debate. Which is more ethical of the two? Using a .223 on bear with a property constructed bullet or cowboy hat wearing yahoo pumping rounds through a 4" .44 magum at a running deer that is 600 yards away? Read the article of Keith's great "feat" here.
http://www.handloads.com/articles/default.asp?id=34
Then give this link a try and input the data for a .44 magnum at 600 yards. Take note of the drop and energy at 600 yards.
http://www.handloads.com/calc/
The only term appropriate is "slob hunter."
http://www.handloads.com/articles/default.asp?id=34
Then give this link a try and input the data for a .44 magnum at 600 yards. Take note of the drop and energy at 600 yards.
http://www.handloads.com/calc/
The only term appropriate is "slob hunter."
Johnn Peterson
CGN Ultra frequent flyer
- Location
- Chemainus B.C.
]
Dude, you are the one that keeps talking about me in womans clothing. You've mentioned it quite a few times on this thread alone.
It's kind of creepy.
There we totally agree, but it wasn't me wearing 'your' costume. If your Tu Tu 'fits', you go girl. I'm sure you can find someone that shares your interests. 
SorryMy gal was just tidying up some things and dropped a RIFLE magazine on my desk in front of me. Ironically, the cover said "Big results form Small Cartridges" and there is an article by Brian Pearce on the .223.
I am sure some members here are familiar with Brian Pearce. To say he is a disciple of Elmer Keith is probably an understatement. He loves big revolvers and appears to like cowboy hats too.
To make a long story short, he has seen the .223 perform on many deer, with both broadside, shoulder and quartering away shots.
"Every deer hit correctly in the vitals has gone down with a single shot"
His son took a mule deer with a single shot at over 300 yards, something I wouldn't personally do.
"As long as bullet placement is correct, along with a proper bullet, the little cartridge has proven reliable"
So here we have a fairly well known gun writer who clearly admires Elmer Keith and he is saying the same thing I keep saying- Use a good bullet and put it in the right place, and smaller cartridges will work just fine.
Contrary to what some believe, placing a shot correctly really isn't all that difficult. At least it hasn't been difficult for me, or the people I hunt with.
I am sure some members here are familiar with Brian Pearce. To say he is a disciple of Elmer Keith is probably an understatement. He loves big revolvers and appears to like cowboy hats too.
To make a long story short, he has seen the .223 perform on many deer, with both broadside, shoulder and quartering away shots.
"Every deer hit correctly in the vitals has gone down with a single shot"
His son took a mule deer with a single shot at over 300 yards, something I wouldn't personally do.
"As long as bullet placement is correct, along with a proper bullet, the little cartridge has proven reliable"
So here we have a fairly well known gun writer who clearly admires Elmer Keith and he is saying the same thing I keep saying- Use a good bullet and put it in the right place, and smaller cartridges will work just fine.
Contrary to what some believe, placing a shot correctly really isn't all that difficult. At least it hasn't been difficult for me, or the people I hunt with.
There you go again...Talking about your sick fantasies online.
Am I the only man you fantasize about or are there others?
Actually, never mind, I know that you get obsessed with people online and will have to respond, but I really don't want to know.
