HuntingNet.com Forums - View Single Post - 243..good for deer?
View Single Post
Old 06-08-2003 | 10:13 PM
  #29  
GTBuzz
 
Joined: Feb 2003
Posts: 114
Likes: 0
From: NW Georgia, USA
Default RE: 243..good for deer?

GTBUZZ, Let' s not turn this into a ' tire watering contest' , some people consider .308' s hard recoiling, bragging about being able to shoot a .30-06class for 100rnds doesn' t gain you any respect or recognition here,
I think you must have read into what I said and interpreted a meaning that wasn' t intended. Certainly no bragging on my part intended. In about 4000 posts of posting as either Buzz or GTBuzz on many of the more popular boards, I' m not a boaster or one that insults others. I like yourself shoot thousands of rounds per month from .22 LR up to hot rodded .45-70 rounds. All I was trying to state is that an averaged sized man, it really shouldn' t be any problem shooting several boxes of ammo off a bench in a .30-06 class rifle. In an 8 pound hunting rifle with no reoil pad, my personal limit is about 100 rounds of .30-06. For the unported Guide Gun I have, I always go for the Decelerator.

Most of the people I' ve seen that have trouble with recoil in a .308 class rifle are having it because they don' t hold their gun properly or the gun doesn' t fit them properly. I am NOT talking about youth or ladies here, mostly at least average sized guys. I have hunted with several BIG guys (6' 2 230+ pounds) that griped about the punishing recoil of a .30-06 and even a .270 Winchester. Taking a couple of them to the range resulted in them thinking their rifles had almost no recoil at all. I suppose I have been more amuzed at the comments of " I picked a 7mm/08 because of the lighter recoil than the .308" . If I had 2 of the same rifles, 1 in .308 the other in .7mm/08, I seriously doubt I could tell on either end which one I was shooting. When I say amuzed, it doesn' t mean that I am ridiculing anyone - I am just amuzed because I for the life of me cannot see a difference.
GTBuzz is offline  
Reply