Go Back  HuntingNet.com Forums > Firearms Forum > Guns
Are we overgunned?  Was Jack O'Connor right? >

Are we overgunned? Was Jack O'Connor right?

Guns Like firearms themselves, there's a wide variety of opinions on what's the best gun.

Are we overgunned? Was Jack O'Connor right?

Old 01-25-2003, 09:57 PM
  #1  
Typical Buck
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Seattle, WA
Posts: 917
Default Are we overgunned? Was Jack O'Connor right?

I've been thinking about this a bit lately, with everyone recommending things like the .338 Lapua and the .300 RUM and such. Apparently, we really shouldn't go out into the elk woods with anything less than a .50-cal!

Anyway, I have shot and killed 29 big game animals in my hunting career, pretty evenly split between deer and elk, with an antelope or two thrown in for good measure. I have never lost anything I've shot at.

The shortest shot I've had was 15 yards. The longest (a mule deer), 377 yards. The longest shot on elk was 325 yards.

When I go through my journals and logs, and I recall everything as closely as possible, I can honestly say that all of these shots could have easily and efficiently been made with a .270 Win. I know it. I believe it. I stick by that statement.

I've used cartridges as big as the .338 Win Mag and the .300 Wby Mag, but I really didn't need them. I am truly starting to think that Jack O'Connor is considered the greatest gun writer of all time for a very good reason: He was right. <img src=icon_smile_approve.gif border=0 align=middle>

Good Dogwork and Good Hunting
seattlesetters is offline  
Old 01-25-2003, 10:17 PM
  #2  
Banned
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Posts: 27,585
Default [Deleted]

[Deleted by Admins]
Deleted User is offline  
Old 01-25-2003, 10:47 PM
  #3  
Banned
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Posts: 27,585
Default [Deleted]

[Deleted by Admins]
Deleted User is offline  
Old 01-25-2003, 10:52 PM
  #4  
Nontypical Buck
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location:
Posts: 3,516
Default RE: Are we overgunned? Was Jack O'Connor right?

We are not overgunned. He was wrong. Like a guy said on another post &quot;You don't take a knife to a gun fight&quot;. Good luck.
handloader1 is offline  
Old 01-26-2003, 01:02 AM
  #5  
Nontypical Buck
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Oakland OR USA
Posts: 2,929
Default RE: Are we overgunned? Was Jack O'Connor right?

Jack O'Conner may have been close to right at the time he wrote the articles about the 270 Win .But I also beieve times have changed and a lot of guns we have now weren't available then.
halcon is offline  
Old 01-26-2003, 01:04 AM
  #6  
Nontypical Buck
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Gleason, TN
Posts: 1,327
Default RE: Are we overgunned? Was Jack O'Connor right?

Overgunned? I don't think there is any such thing. Unless you are using a gun the ruins more meat than it saves.

If you know how to use it, a 270 will work fine for anything on earth. But some folks want something more &quot;suited&quot; to the game they hunt. A magnum rifle just takes care of more variables if you know what I mean.



&quot;Hey ya'll, watch this&quot;
kodiakhuntmaster is offline  
Old 01-26-2003, 01:21 AM
  #7  
Banned
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Posts: 27,585
Default [Deleted]

[Deleted by Admins]
Deleted User is offline  
Old 01-26-2003, 04:40 AM
  #8  
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Clifton Park New York USA
Posts: 367
Default RE: Are we overgunned? Was Jack O'Connor right?

Kodiakhuntmaster hit the nail on the head, in that some folks want something more &quot;suited&quot; to the game they hunt. Of the deer that I've shot, I could have taken them all with a .30-30, cleanly. I used a .30-06 on all but one, and a .50 ML was the weapon of choice on the last one. Did I feel &quot;overgunned?&quot; Well, on a couple of the deer shot with my '06, yes. Did it stop me from using one? No.

For the type of woods hunting that I do, I feel that a magnum is a bit much. Then again, it ain't me shooting the magnum. To each their own, I guess.

Muddyemms is offline  
Old 01-26-2003, 08:42 AM
  #9  
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: va USA
Posts: 580
Default RE: Are we overgunned? Was Jack O'Connor right?

I'm a firm believer in useing enough gun but I don't think most hunters need anything more than a 308 based round. The people that ask if they need a magnum are the one's that probably don't have the shooting skills to take advantage of the extra power. Shooting a 100lb doe at 50yds with a 300 magnum doesn't make sense to me but that is better than shooting deer at 300yds with a 22-250. I'm not anti-magnum I just don't think that a magnum is always the best option.
popeye is offline  
Old 01-26-2003, 08:55 AM
  #10  
Giant Nontypical
 
eldeguello's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Texas - BUT NOW in Madison County, NY
Posts: 6,270
Default RE: Are we overgunned? Was Jack O'Connor right?

If O'Connor is the best gun writer of all time, it is because he was a great writer!! There are others whose experience is just as valid, for example, Warren Page, Col. T. Whelen, and or course, old Elmer Keith himself. But I agree with you, almost every kill people make on big game (in North America!!), except for perhaps the great bears, could just as well have been made with a round based on the .30/'06 (or maybe even the 8X57mm Mauser) case!! There may be a few exceptions due to extreme range, but most of us have no business gambling on such shots!! But, if I recall correctly, O'Connor once wrote that &quot;the .300 Weatherby Magnum kills grizzly bears about like a .220 Swift kills jackrabbits&quot;. So I guess he was not totally agi'n such calibers!!

Keep yore powder dry!!

Edited by - eldeguello on 01/26/2003 09:58:01
eldeguello is offline  

Quick Reply: Are we overgunned? Was Jack O'Connor right?


Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service -

Copyright © 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.