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

[Deleted]
 

[Deleted by Admins]

[Deleted]
 

[Deleted by Admins]

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.

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.

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;

[Deleted]
 

[Deleted by Admins]

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.

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.

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

[Deleted]
 

[Deleted by Admins]

RE: Are we overgunned? Was Jack O'Connor right?
 

I would have to say to each their own. Where I hunt in PA the average shot is maybe 25-40 yds. If I'm in the thick brush I would have my .307, or hunting a field I would have my 30-06, 257 Robert or 6.5x55. Each of which will take whatever game I might come across cleanly. In the blowing snow the 30-30 or the 12 ga with open sights work the best. The Robert and the swede will switch role and become a ground hog or coyote gun with a change of load and zero the scope. Either way shot placement is what gets the meat in the back of the truck.

RE: Are we overgunned? Was Jack O'Connor right?
 

Here's a site that might add to the controversy a bit. For practical hunting ranges, I don't really believe magnums are necessary.http://www.eabco.com/Reports/report05.htm
https://www.eabco.com/Reports/report03.html



Alcohol, Tobacco, and Firearms... who's bringing the chips?

RE: Are we overgunned? Was Jack O'Connor right?
 

rather be over gunned than under gunned...and thats right you bring a knife to a gun fight your not going to last long...sure some guys are WAY over gunned by shooting big magnums in PA..i say PA because its mainly thick woods here and most shots are under 100yds easy..all mine are under 50 easy...sure there are a few guys hunting fields but still them are about the only guys that could possibly need a magnum to take their deer...just for the extra power and less drop..sure my 3006 blows a deer into next week when i hit them at 20yds but i rather drop them in their tracks and know there not moving than say lose it or have someone else shoot it on its death run from my double lunger with a little gun...its all on what you want though...

RE: Are we overgunned? Was Jack O'Connor right?
 

i think alot of it is just that i know at least i want and like to get a new rifle every couple of years. alot of us like having the newest and the biggest. it also doesnt help that almost every magazine you pick up these days about guns or hunting has some mention about how great these new magnums are and how much faster they are than the older calibers. personally i feel that what ever you have the most confidence in and shoot the best then use it.

RE: Are we overgunned? Was Jack O'Connor right?
 

As good as the .270 is, Jack O'Conner was paid to endorse it. His wife carried something else when she went hunting with him.
When you think about it why would a .277 bullet be better than a7mm(.284) or a 6.5mm(.264).
It was just another gimmick of the year, that worked, to sell more rifles. Like what is going on now.Some of the new cartridges will prove themselves but MOST will fall by the wayside.

RE: Are we overgunned? Was Jack O'Connor right?
 

You can't disagree with bullet placement. I carry a magnum and I am &quot;over gunned&quot; for just about every animal that I kill. The thing in the back of my mind is that when I make that &quot;not so great&quot; shot the magnum will bring the animal down where a lighter caliber will let it run. Nothing worse that tracking a moose a mile back in the swamp from the boat.
Confidence with the caliber being shot is the key. If you are comfortable shooting it, why not?

RE: Are we overgunned? Was Jack O'Connor right?
 

It sure looks like O'Connor was working for Winchester re: the .270. What his wife carried was a 7X57mm Mauser, mostly. She killed her elephant with a .30/'06 and a 220-grain solid. I think Jack used the .375 H&H for dangerous game in Africa and Alaska.

Keep yore powder dry!!

RE: Are we overgunned? Was Jack O'Connor right?
 

Wow, we're all over the place on this one.

First, let me start by saying this is not and endorsement of the .270 Win. I think any standard caliber of 6.5mm - .35 would fill the bill for an all-around rig.

Also, I am not &quot;anti-magnum,&quot; I just think too many people rely on &quot;magnum&quot; power to hopefully compensate for less-than-perfect shot selection.

As far as there being more cartridges and rifles to choose from today than when Jack was around, I would submit that the deer and elk haven't gotten any harder to kill during this same period of time.

As far as &quot;taking a knife to a gunfight,&quot; I have yet to see a deer or an elk carrying a scope-sighted .300 RUM.

I, too, think that all we really need is something from the .308/.30-06/7x57 class of cartridges.

Eldeguello is right about the 7x57 being O'Connor's wife's favorite cartridge. It was no accident she carried it. Jack himself often said it was probably the best all-around cartridge when recoil was factored in. On this point, he and Col. Townsend Whelan agreed.

I also think that the newer, larger-bore rounds make a lot of sense for most of our hunting, and I think the new .338-06 or the renewed .350 Rem Mag (not really a &quot;magnum) and .358 Win are perfect choices in the woods.

For dangerous game, .338 Win Mag on up.

Good Dogwork and Good Hunting

RE: Are we overgunned? Was Jack O'Connor right?
 

O' Connor was no different than all these &quot;expert&quot; gunwriters today that fill every possible gun magazine with the virtues of the WSM series. All are whores for Winchester.

[Deleted]
 

[Deleted by Admins]

RE: Are we overgunned? Was Jack O'Connor right?
 

Naw, we ain't overgunned. I mean, come on whats your objective? Retrieve the game. Not retrieve the game with the smallest gun possible. Every time I hear the Jack Oconnor things, it makes me want to gag. I have a reporter friend and he explains to make it in the writing business, you got to have an angle. Thats what Jack did. And alot of jokers buy it. Yea, sure the .270 kills just about anything, but so does 30-06, 25-06, .308, 7mm-08, and on and on and on. Nothing magical about it. Just punches a hole in critter, critter goes down. Plain and simple.

RE: Are we overgunned? Was Jack O'Connor right?
 

Bigcountry, my good friend, you are wrong! You of all people should know that we have gone too far in promoting ultra boomers that most average folks can't shoot, can't reload effectively and perform poorly on game because of &quot;over bored&quot; ballistics (what caliber did you kill your moose with?)

It's ironic, but we now hawk calibers with velocity so fast that it takes specially constructed &quot;super premium&quot; bullets to get the projectiles to perform the same as &quot;old,&quot; more mundane calibers utilizing standard bullets, like say, the .270 Win!

You also know that I'm not anti-magnum -- I own three (counting the 404 Jeffery that I got for cape buffalo in Africa). It's just that I think we have gone too far in insisting that these are the only thing to buy. In fact, an aquaintence new to hunting showed me his new whitetail gun recently. Bear in mind that this guy has never yet fired a gun in anger at any living creature. It was a 7mm Rem Ultra Mag! He read a couple of magazine articles and headed off to the gun shop to buy &quot;a gun that will reach out and get'em.&quot; (I'm glad the shop in question was out of .30-378s that day!)

Now you know, and I know, that this guy has no business shooting such a gun at whitetails. First, if he ever does master the recoil at the range (doubtful) and finds a load that he can shoot well (more doubtful), he will either blow deer in half, have total bullet failure due to too much velocity at close range, or take shots no mortal should attempt because he thinks his gun &quot;will reach out and get'em.&quot;

A .270 or .308 would have been more than enough rifle, and a much more effective rifle, for this guy to shoot anything he is likely to hunt in the next five years -- probably for the rest of his life.

RE: Are we overgunned? Was Jack O'Connor right?
 

Danny - That is why I really like the short &quot;magnum&quot; cartridges. They really are much easier to shoot than the real magnums, and they don't really give a huge performance advantage over the standard cartridges.

They marketing genius here, though, is that they have the word &quot;magnum&quot; in their names, and as such, will become very popular with gun writers and buyers. We'll all be better shots because of it, since we won't be getting the living h#$l kicked out of us, and we won't feel like wimps because we aren't carrying a &quot;magnum&quot; rifle into the woods.

I think this is the big gun and ammo companies concession, disguised very well by marketing hype, that we are indeed overgunned and should be shooting something more reasonable. <img src=icon_smile_wink.gif border=0 align=middle>

Good Dogwork and Good Hunting

RE: Are we overgunned? Was Jack O'Connor right?
 

I read about everything That I could find by Jack O Corror. He knew his stuff and although he did much of his hunting with the 270, he also was a big fan of the 30-06 and wrote about as much about the 375 H&H as he did about anything. He believed and rightly so that the 270 was the equal of almost all North American game. Calling him a whore for Winchester of anyone else is childish as hell and shows no respect for a great hunter and writer. If a guy needs a cannon to kill a deer then I guess they better use one. I don,t. Jack didn,t either.

RE: Are we overgunned? Was Jack O'Connor right?
 

There you are, my fine southern freind. I thought you might have dropped off the face of the earth. Or love Newf so much, you moved there. Just joking. Yesss, I shot my moose with a 30-06. But you missed what I was saying. I just want to make sure we don't have a society that shunnes new calibers. Like now, I am kinda winter lull, being bored, want something new. I load all the regular .270, 06's, and .243. But want to try out these WSM.

These days, as long was I can get a 150gr &gt;.270 caliber but less than .338 to go over 2800fps, I am happy with one stipulation for all game besides a griz. That stipulation is it has to be light. That big bruiser about killed me a few times. What do I use 100percent of the time on deer or boar. My trusty old semi remington .270 with 2&quot; groups. Why? It works and I think it would be bad luck to use anything else since I used it for almost 20 years. But it doesn't mean that Jack was right saying it was the best thing since white bread.

Oh yea, I agree that there are sheep out there that just follow. But I don't care. I was down in Ky deer hunting and stopped by the gun store. Some guy there said he don't go deer hunting unless its a .338RUM. I just shook my head and laughed. But it just typical talk I am used to at the old general store and gas station. No skin off my back. As long as I know better. And think about this GA, its good for economy for these good ole boys to buy new guns every year. Brings the price of std. calibers down a little. I know, I am getting a little overboard. Only downfall with what I am saying is it doesn't promote ethical hunting. You are right about that. You get these guys who sight in there guns once a year with 8 shots and bam, they are 500 yard shooter, (in there mind). Then you see deer you have downed that are wounded from bad shots or find them in the woods. It doesn't promote smart, ethical shooting.

Good to hear from you.

RE: Are we overgunned? Was Jack O'Connor right?
 

&quot;Calling him a whore for Winchester of anyone else is childish as hell and shows no respect for a great hunter and writer.&quot; If the shoe fits. Prove to me that he wasn't on the Winchester payroll. I have read some of his stuff and I wasn't all that impressed so no, I don't have that much respect for him just like I have no respect for many other writers. That's my choice so whether it is seen as childish or not I could care less.

RE: Are we overgunned? Was Jack O'Connor right?
 

I don,t know if he worked for winchester or not. If you have a job are you a whore for your employer? No need to bash the dead because you don,t see things his way. Sales of the 270 winchester proves that it did not need Jack or anyone else to sell it to hunters. I believe its sales are second only to the 30-06. All that said you certainly have a right to your opinion.

RE: Are we overgunned? Was Jack O'Connor right?
 

You know Frizz, this is one of those times I agree with you. I just don't know what people in america are thinking these days. People look so high to entertainers. Like football players, and even Nascar drivers and our good ole Jack O'connor. People forget that these people are not Gods. They are here to entertain us like a court jester. Now, I am sure that this man was probably a good man that got lucky in doing what he loved. And some merit in what he was saying. But saying he was the end all be all and so superior to the gun world. I don't think so. John Browning, maybe. Actually, John Browning, absolutely.

RE: Are we overgunned? Was Jack O'Connor right?
 

I think in general, yes we are overgunned. But like was said, that is the way the trend is today. Kinda like cars...not too long ago, you were lucky to get a car with 200 hp, not there aren't that many out there that are that &quot;weak&quot;.
I think the big guns definitely have their place, but way too many folks think you have to have one to hunt effectively. I know a bunch of guys that shoot whitetails with their only deer rifle, a .300 weatherby. More often then not, they get busted in the nose, or eye. It makes me laugh. Overkill for sure, especially on our 75-140lb deer.

Personally, I believe 100% that I could kill any big game animal in north america with my bow, much less my .280
I would like to eventually like to get a .300 (probably WSM). I think they definitely provide an edge at very long distances, and on bigger game....although I don't really think it is needed. I wouldn't hesitate to shoot an elk at 300yds with my .280 today. IMO, shot placement and bullet performance take precedence over caliber.

RE: Are we overgunned? Was Jack O'Connor right?
 

It is funny hearing all the responses to this question. I have a response also. Are we are overgunned? Probably. So what, everyone I know buys a gun not for practicallity but because they want it (me included). I have a 7mm Rem Mag. Do I need it to kill whitetails effectively? No. Do I want it because it is a larger caliber than a 30-06, yes. Am I overgunned? Not if I kill the animal and not waste meat. Most people I know compare their gun to a 30-06 because it has been the standard for many years. The 270 does the same. Just my 2 cents.

RE: Are we overgunned? Was Jack O'Connor right?
 

&quot;Sales of the 270 winchester proves that it did not need Jack or anyone else to sell it to hunters.&quot; Oh really? Then how do you explain the ho-hum existence of the 280 Rem? It is as good as or better in every category than the 270 Win yet it never got the &quot;push&quot; of a high powered gun writer.

RE: Are we overgunned? Was Jack O'Connor right?
 

frizzellr, you are absolutely right that the .280 is better than the .270 (and a whole lot of other calibers as well!!!) for most any purpose! But what I believe did it in (.280), is that Rem. came out with their 7 Mag. not too long after they introduced the .280, and all the high-powered hype was on selling the 7 Mag. (and has been ever since)!!

Keep yore powder dry!!

RE: Are we overgunned? Was Jack O'Connor right?
 

I've always felt that people are absolutely overgunned when taking the field. If you ask almost any guy/gal on these boards if a .243 is good for deer, he'd tell you it's marginal at best (or that he uses it), while someone who uses it a lot would say it's great...so why do people need .30-06's for deer. Or what about SKS's, great deer round if accurate, or .44 mags, GREAT round, but ask about them and you'll get &quot;marginal at best&quot; comments everytime.

It's not that we think that deer/elk/whatever are so tough, it's that we know we aren't...you have to make a good shot with a .44mag at fairly close range to do it quickly, and many guys just don't shoot enough to make that shot. I shoot a .30-06 so I can reachout and touch something, meaning I know I'm not going to hit the heart perfectly out there at 300yrds everytime, so I want a gun that will kill them if it hits them anywhere in the torso.

When my dad was younger, he used to hunt deer with the same .22lr that I now use for coon, and did very well with it, it's not legal here in KS, nor would I use it if it were, but I think that the fact that he ACTUALLY used it says a lot about the fact that we are overgunned, if a .22 can kill a deer, then a .243 would be like a SKUD missile, and a .300mag would be an ICBM, ABSOLUTE OVERKILL!!

I know that I am using a weapon that is too powerfull for my quarry, however, it doesn't bother me. Like I said, I have it in case I need to reach out and touch someone on a once in a lifetime shot/buck. However, once it takes it's deer for the year, I rack it and take my SKS, or my old mans .44, or my .44 revolver, and have done well with all three, which is CLEAR PROOF that I don't need a .30-06, but it IS a heck of a rifle/round, and I'll continue to use it for the rest of my life. I keep the others to challenge my ability, I have to make a great shot everytime with one of them, while with the .30-06, I can relax and enjoy the hunt. I know if I put the crosshairs on the frontal torso of a deer within 400yrds with that rifle, it will be struck within a millisecond and on the ground within 5seconds or less, a comfort I don't have with other rifles, because with the same margin of error (misplacement of impact if you will), I am less likely to do the job with a .44 mag rather than a .30-06. While the .44 mag will absolutely kill a deer if I hit it in the chest, it probably wouldn't be very accurate at 250yrds, and my error would also be increased. So I have a lesser likelihood of hitting what I need to, and I have less &quot;stank&quot; on it IF I get it there. So I shoot my first deer of the season with a .30-06, and couldn't be happier.

Screw the 10 ring, keep them in the zero!!!

[Deleted]
 

[Deleted by Admins]

RE: Are we overgunned? Was Jack O'Connor right?
 

I grew up reading O'conner and Page and Ackely spouting the wonders of igh velocity little bullets and bought into it right along with the rest of the masses. But the older I got and the more deer I shot, the more I gravitated towards bigger bullets at not so high velocity. I am convinced that the best way to kill a critter is with a big bullet at reasonable velocity rather than with a smaller bullet at extreme high velocity. One of the big selling points of the high velocity cartridges has always been that magical quality &quot;flat shooting&quot; That works best for little biddy targets like prarie dogs, but for a deer sized target under 300 yards which is about all the good rifleman can handle, it dont really come into play. I'm not saying the magnums are no good, only that I believe I know a better way of getting the same results.

RE: Are we overgunned? Was Jack O'Connor right?
 

Nomercy,
I think we have alot of people on our board that hunt very large game that can take a fair hit with a light caliber rifle and not flinch. So they recomend a larger caliber gun. I'll recomend a 243 for deer any day.

I've got two of my best friends. Both have only have one deer rifle. One uses a 223 (with open sights!), the other a 243. Neither one of them have ever had a problem with harvesting (and finding) deer. That's what they've always used and what they have confidence in. I wouldn't recomend a 223, but I know it has been done.

&quot;Hey ya'll, watch this&quot;

RE: Are we overgunned? Was Jack O'Connor right?
 

I too believe that the 280 is a better gun that the 270 I don,t have a 270 and have never shot anything with one. The reasons for the slow start of the 280 enen though highly touted by Jim Carmicheal are several&gt; First off it was called the 7mm express and the 7mm-06 people were confused and often bought ammo for the 7 mag for thier 7mm express. Even worse people tried to shoot 7 xpress in the 7 mag which caused blown up casings. Another reason is that Remington first only offered it in thier pump gun at pretty low velocity. Also the 270 had about a twenty year jump on the 280. The popularity of the 270 came in most because it was a flat shooting alternative to the 30-06. Did O Connor have anything to do with it? Most likely he influenced it use to some extend but he was far from the only one. O Connor was not a super hero to me but He was one of us a hunter and sportsman who tried to leave our sport a little better that he found it. As long as I am on the subject, I do most of my deer hunting with three rifles. A 6.5x55 swedish mauser, a 260 Remington and my favorite a 250-3000 Savage. I got the 260 because it is a left hand bolt action which I could not get the old Swede in a lefty. I have had two 270's I just never happened to be carring one when the opportunity arose. For Bears I use only a 45-70 of which I have three.
Sorry if I got sore I liked Oconnor, he is dead and I don,t care to see a good man called a whore for what he believed in. Enough said by me.

RE: Are we overgunned? Was Jack O'Connor right?
 

I haven't heard much about o'conner. All I know is that he used a 270 alot. And that he carried a 30-30 with him in grizzly country and killed at least two of them with it.

Being undergunned worked fine for him. But I wouldn't recomend it.

&quot;Hey ya'll, watch this&quot;

[Deleted]
 

[Deleted by Admins]