Thread: First gun

Originally Posted by Dylan Pearson

My wallet is telling me a Tikka t3 7mm08, Or a .308

Make sure you actually handle a few different options before deciding and see what you prefer the feel/action/trigger of. Nothing wrong with Tikkas but other options (Remington, Savage, Howa etc) are just as good for similar or less money. Same with scopes, Bushnell/Weaver etc just as good as Leupold so see which one your eyes like best.

Originally Posted by GravelBen

Make sure you actually handle a few different options before deciding and see what you prefer the feel/action/trigger of. Nothing wrong with Tikkas but other options (Remington, Savage, Howa etc) are just as good for similar or less money. Same with scopes, Bushnell/Weaver etc just as good as Leupold so see which one your eyes like best.

+1, also check out the Nikon Monarchs, they seem to be a scope that few have used but those that do swear by them, I am one of them! For little more than the cost of a VX1 you get VX3 quality!

Originally Posted by Spudattack

Completely agree, there is no such thing as a "brush buster" even tests performed with a 375 H&H have given deviation of bullet path from small twigs etc.
My reasoning for a slow heavy bullet is more to do with lower impact velocities meaning less chance of bullet disintegration and/or massive meat damage.
I do not doubt the killing capacity of a .243 in close cover provided a suitable bullet, as you have mentioned, is used.

An 85gr barnes TSX pushed fast out of a .243 is a lethal combination!

Bullet placement still remains key and I don't think anyone meant that using a larger calibre was an excuse to shoot recklessly, however people are human and mistakes do happen and I believe the argument is that using a larger calibre could mean the difference between and anchored animal and one that you will never see again.

All good, take the point, the feds do abit of damage alright, nearly overkill on fallow lol. last one i shot smashed the shoulder to bits, then went out the other side and hit the leg just below the shoulder, blew the leg off apart from it was still attacted by the skin. I dont mind thou, i expect one shoulder to be stuffed, i bone them out anyway as normally miles from the car an cant carry a whole animal out anyway. As long as it stops them its all good with me.

Originally Posted by lloydcj

Yeah this is a good option, a few years ago lost all my rifles in a barn fire, bought a Mossberg 270 with a cheap scope and the first 2 shots at 90 meters produced 2 hinds from this bore sighted combo and it served its purpose for 3 years until getting another A-bolt

You went hunting with a rifle that had only been bore-sighted?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk. So please forgive my sausage fingers!!!

Originally Posted by phillipgr

30-06 could be a big kick for a young guy who hasn't got that much experience with centre fire don't you reckon?

Sent from my MT27i using Tapatalk 2

nah mate, no different to a 308, you cant just load them up with larger bullet weights

Originally Posted by R93

You went hunting with a rifle that had only been bore-sighted?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk. So please forgive my sausage fingers!!!

+1

I have done loads of research about this and I ended up with a .270. I wanted the flatest shooting and biggest knockdown possible witjout going to 300mag or bigger. Most guns these days are more accurate than I am so I got a cheap gun and a quality scope. Goodluck with your rifle.

I have done loads of research about this and I ended up with a .270. I wanted the flatest shooting and biggest knockdown possible witjout going to 300mag or bigger. Most guns these days are more accurate than I am so I got a cheap gun and a quality scope. Goodluck with your rifle.

Originally Posted by Remington700.270

I have done loads of research about this and I ended up with a .270. I wanted the flatest shooting and biggest knockdown possible witjout going to 300mag or bigger. Most guns these days are more accurate than I am so I got a cheap gun and a quality scope. Goodluck with your rifle.

7mmremmag?

I have done loads of research about this and I ended up with a .270. I wanted the flatest shooting and biggest knockdown possible witjout going to 300mag or bigger. Most guns these days are more accurate than I am so I got a cheap gun and a quality scope. Goodluck with your rifle.

Originally Posted by R93

You went hunting with a rifle that had only been bore-sighted?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk. So please forgive my sausage fingers!!!

Actually went to sight in early morning and the opportunity came up before that,lucky

yeah the 150 grain does literally knockdown , with big entry wounds

Originally Posted by deer243

Fair enough, but regards to bush stalking my mates father whose shot hundreds of deer over the years(job was a culler) bush stalking used a 222 then a 243 for years and years.

I'll assume he started with a 30 and was, no, learned to be a good shot with that. If he was culling there was also every chance there was shitloads of animals around, so you could pass up the tricky/marginal shots and not think twice.

Originally Posted by Wirehunt

I'll assume he started with a 30 and was, no, learned to be a good shot with that. If he was culling there was also every chance there was shitloads of animals around, so you could pass up the tricky/marginal shots and not think twice.

Originally Posted by Toby

7mmremmag?

The main difference is that the 7mm REM mag will burn almost twice as much powder ha