Looking for non-restricted semi-auto center fire rifle suitable for deer hunting

FiveBillionAcres said:
USSR2K, it's because it's too much like an AK-47 and the AK-47 is prohibited because only bad guys use it in movies. They were going to prohibit the AR-15 too however it was used in competitive shooting and thus was allowed to be "restricted". Basically they went through a Firearms Digest and simply banned all the "scary" looking rifles. The M14/M1A were not in there and thus didn't get banned, or perhaps it's because if they were, they looked so normal without a pistol grip and the nice wood stock. The FN FAL is pretty much in the same class as the M14 and it got prohibited.

I'm not sure most people want to haul around an M-14 in the bush though, it's not a light weight gun.
Click to expand...

Thanks for the insight
The funny part is that the same is written in the Act. Something along the lines of too much military look. SAKO TRG looks damn scary for me
 
Buddy of mine uses his M14 for deer hunting, works like a charm and no harm in having a quick followup avaliable if needed.

Mind you it does have a bayonet lug on it and a flash hider, so I'm not sure if it's possible to use it for "sporting purposes" with those nasty military features on it.
 
themarauder said:
Mind you it does have a bayonet lug on it and a flash hider, so I'm not sure if it's possible to use it for "sporting purposes" with those nasty military features on it.
Click to expand...

Explain this?:confused: Are there hunting regs that say no bayo lug or flash hider type firearms can be used for hunting?
 
CZ 858 Tactical 2. I plan on taking mine hunting next year. Under 100 yards I am confident that it will do the job and is the coolest looking hunting rifle you can own right now. Unless you want to spend $2000, and put a troy stock on an M-14. For under $1000 bucks I have a tacticooled 858 that I can take hunting. Thats why I went with the full stock option. Prolly gonna get a collapsible stock eventually but for the bench and hunting the skeletonized stock with the cheek weld is great.
DSCF1630.jpg
 
SKS with a good bore and a proper SIDE MOUNT scope is a cheap and easy way to get semi-auto. If you're hunting, you should have no trouble keeping them in the "pie plate" at under 150m. Not a good choice if you need to reach out though... The CZ I shot at a buddy's place was nice and they ARE brand new rifles.
The SVT is neat but they're long, heavy, a bear to clean and difficult to get parts and shells for. The supply of "bulk" 7.62x54r is currently kinda spotty. If you WANT one, go for it. They're a crowd pleaser at the range and look bada$$ =) If you go that way, make sure your new rifle has the grooved receiver for the scope mount.

The Polytech M305 and 2009 edition of the Norinco M14 are getting rave reviews. They look great and shoot a readily available cartridge. FYI, most of the older Norinco stuff is pretty good, but by the time I was done having my 2007 shimmed/indexed/adjusted and replaced the mystery wood stock and soft op-rod... $800 now I think? And the rifle was still in the plastic when I got it.

Rolling off topic...

"Don't hunt with something in a 7.62x39 class cartridge. It is pretty weak if you are outside of spear range IMO.

One option is an SVT-40! Practice with bulk ammo, then hunt with norma, or reload. An M-14 will work as well of course. I have successfully used both. The SVT definitely looks odder."

I love these threads. I cannot for the life of me understand why people keep saying this. If it will kill a man it will kill a deer. End of story.

Practice with "bulk" ammo? LOL. You practice, drill and sight in with the ammunition that you will hunt with. Good god. 40 year old milsurp FMJ to NORMA? Ummm. No.
 
Great to see this thread come back alive, thanks guys!

How about the FN FNAR? Looks HORRIBLE but I'm sure it shoots well.

I actually ended up getting an M-14S but I can't afford to "do it up" I have too many expenses right now. Seems to shoot okay though.
 
7.62x39 small cartridge???? ARE YOU HIGH???? 7.62x39 is big enough to take just about anything I mean Indians use to take bear with a head shot from a single shot cooey for darn sakes.... All these people buying HUGE caliber hunting rifles NO NEED 30-06 is the biggest you should ever go and 7.62x39 is more than large enough to hunt with
 
Pay no attention to these nay-sayers, 5BAcres.

You can totally hunt deer successfully with 7.62x39. Most of your opportunities are probably going to be at close range anyway. Unless you're worried about not being to be able to blow a leg or two clean off a full-power rifle cartridge is not necessary. For poking holes in critters the 7.62x39 is more than adequate.


carbonrod said:
Don't hunt with something in a 7.62x39 class cartridge. It is pretty weak if you are outside of spear range IMO.
Click to expand...
When did you turn into such a hater?;)
 
I'm not going to be able to hunt this year anyways. Maybe next year though. Just too expensive and I don't have enough connections to people to teach me. Hunters Ed wasn't really that helpful.
 
Guerrilla said:
7.62x39 small cartridge???? ARE YOU HIGH???? 7.62x39 is big enough to take just about anything I mean Indians use to take bear with a head shot from a single shot cooey for darn sakes.... All these people buying HUGE caliber hunting rifles NO NEED 30-06 is the biggest you should ever go and 7.62x39 is more than large enough to hunt with
Click to expand...

:D
You'll hear people decry a 7.62 x 39 and yet go hunting with a Ruger 96/44 that shoots a punier pistol cartridge (.44 Rem. Mag.) with a garden hose trajectory.

A guy camped in a trailer parked just next to me popped a deer on Manitoulin Island a couple of years ago with a Ruger Mini-30 (7.62 x 39). It was a one shot kill & the buck looked pretty dead to me. If they're not dead you'll find out in short order once you start gutting & skinning them.;)

***If you're using the 7.62 x 39 for hunting make sure you buy/hand load the cartridges with a proper expanding hunting SP bullet and not the FMC military stuff and remember that this isn't a 400 yard cartridge........you're talking 150 - 200 yards maximum.

Let common sense be your guide. If you're going after mountain sheep or hunting moose from 30 foot high tree stands in the vast open clear cuts of Northern Ontario a gun in 7.62 x 39 shouldn't be in your ATVs gun boot.

I own a Ruger 96/44 as well as a Ruger Mini-30 and would take either of them hunting in a heartbeat.

For close range, heavy brush hunting they can't be beat.
 
Classic Green .223 said:
If you want a semi auto for deer, you can't go wrong with a BAR or a ruger deerfield .44 mag, just remember the .44 is only good out to about 125yds.
Click to expand...


:D
The Ruger 96/44 lever action is a good gun too.

My 96/44 is light as a feather & quick pointing.

I find those box mags can be a PITB.

I understand a new 9 shot mag is available but I haven't been able to find one in Canada.

P1030205.jpg


Those Ruger .44 Mag. semis are getting scarce.

Ruger quit making them in the mid 80's I believe.
 
Chizzy, I went and looked and I can't find any minimum caliber, energy etc for big game in Ontario… strict Hunter Orange regulation, but apparently a center fire .17 is good enough for a Moose. Of course I could be wrong, and I kind of hope I am. Though I do like leaving people to their discretion in general.

I went here http://www.mnr.gov.on.ca/en/Business/FW/Publication/MNR_E001275P.html downloaded the complete PDF at the bottom at searched for words like "minimum" and "caliber" and "mm" etc.

If anyone can find it, please let me know, I've been asked this several times through my website at http://www.howtogetagun.ca/. I'm not sure why I get asked, I seldom get any other hunting questions… but that one comes up a lot.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom