Winners & Losers

[270man]

Fellow Prophets:

I just read that Remington has dropped its SAUM (Short Action Ultra Magnum) line of cartridges. Seems that Winchester won out with its short magnums (300WSM, etc.). The news prompted me to dig out a 2001 article by gun writer Jon Sundra in which he predicted that the market would not support both of these manufacturer's products. He was correct. Sundra also made some dire predictions about such cartridges as the 376 Steyr, the 338-06, the 7mm STW and the 338RUM.

I only have limited experience with the 7mmSTW and none with the others. Sundra says the 7mmRUM is better than the STW and the latter will eventually die out. I haven't followed any of these to find out how well they are selling but Sundra was right about the short action cartridges that were available in 2001.

All this causes me to consider my own predictions about the "whiz-bang" cartridges that have been introduced in recent years. Seems to me that the Winchester line of SSM (Super Short Magnum) cartridges haven't done very well. There are probably others. I am currently shooting and reloading for the 260Rem and wonder if it will last.

I'm too lazy to generate a poll on this subject but if someone has the energy, it would be interesting to see which cartridges get the most votes for lasting power and those that are predicted to fail.

270man

[wrenchman]

The ultra mags were nice but i didnt thing they would last of all the shorts new rounds the 300 wsm is doing the best and might be around for a while.
I also like the fact rem is chambering the 7mm08 it is mice but then again it is based off the 308 and if you needed you cound size down some brass.

[GoodOlBoy]

I am not much on new fandangled anything. There are so many good older cartridges, why do it? Particularly if you don't see any advantage other than having a shiny new blah. When a cartridge line is described as being "as accurate as a 25-06" or "as flat shooting as a 270" then why wouldn't I buy a 25-06 or a 270?

STW cartridges have been around a long time, and they have fans, the short lines have been around a short time and have fans. The companies don't drop them due to lagging sales, they drop them so they can move on the the next ultra mega super short wide long magnum to sell more guns in new actions and new calibers. There are VERY popular calibers out there that are custom build custom load only, and there have always been fad calibers (219 zipper).

Again if I want something that shoots like a 30-30, 308, 30-06, 270, 243, 25-06, 223, 222, 45-70 then THATS the caliber I will buy. Why? Because in ten years I don't have to pay premium prices (I mean above and beyond what we pay anyway) for components to load my calibers because they ARENT oddball stuff. If I am going to shoot something oddball it will be something that likes cast lead and black powder.

Shoot what turns you on and don't worry about if it is around tomorrow, but don't whine when you buy something that disappears and has absolutely no way to form a case from something else.

That's my 2 cents.

GoodOlBoy

[Larryjk]

Many of the new cartridges have specific "nitches" they fill that are very narrow. In addition, many are not that friendly in popular actions. I mean that they don't feed well, or hardly at all, out of the staggered magazines most actions use. The PPC variations are difficult to make feed and aren 't popular for that reason. Some of the more common cartridges don't feed well in staggered box magazines. When you put a short, fat cartridge in a staggered box magazine made for a longer, slim cartridge, you will normally have problems. Remember that box was designed for the 57mm case; 7mm and 8mm. So it actually feeds a little better when you make the box a little longer and run cartridges of 06 length (62 mm) through them. And there are some cartridges that are real "zoomers" in a rifle when fed factory ammo, but you find you can't duplicate that performance with available reloading components. I also wonder if new cartridges are tested in "tight" bore barrels. They always give great velocity that can't be duplicted. Give me the velocity on a five random barrel selection and then you have believeable velocity. Then we have the old "well you can make that cartridge on a short throw action". Bid deal! Learn not to short shuck a regular length action and that fantastic advantage is lost. You do save a few ounces on the weight of the action if it is short.

[jplonghunter]

Larryjk

All good info,however, a 30-06 case is 63mm in length.

jplonghunter

[Jack]

I agree with Larryjk- the niches for new cartridges these days are quite narrow. A lot of companies introduce things to have their own headstamp on them, on the theory that promoting their name will eventually lead to more sales of guns, ammo, or both. Hence you have Hornady introducing a 30 cal cartridge for lever guns that is a ballistic duplicate of the 307 Winchester. Slightly different case, but it doesn't do anything the older cartridge didn't- except say Hornady on it.
I don't mean to pick on Hornady- they all do it. The Remington SAUM line is another example.
On paper ballistics can sell some rifles- like the ultra mags and the STW's. These cartridges have a narrow niche, but I bet a lot of them get sold so someone can have the biggest/fastest/baddest. That's fine- but, after the buyer shoots them a few times, they get rid of them- too noisy, too much recoil, too expensive.
There are always some big bores being introduced, too, for the folks that think bigger is better. Most of those won't last, either. Some of the big monsters would be excellent on an African Safari, but how many people do you know that go on african safaris? I see a whole lot of the really big guns at gun shows, with a partial box of ammo, and no sign the bolt has even been worked much. A few shots at the bench and the buyer discovers his 270 wasn't so bad a rifle after all. :)
Woods cartridges in bolt actions have a long history in the US of not selling. I expect the 376 Steyr will go the way of the 358 Winchester- we all talked about what a good round the 358 was, but we didn't buy one (me included).
Firearms makers and ammo makers will introduce anything they think will sell, and keep it in their line as long as it is selling. When it doesn't sell, they'll drop it.
An example of a narrow niche for a new cartridge is the 450 Marlin. There may be a demand for that round for people that don't handload for their Marlin lever, but, time will tell if there is enough demand to keep that one afloat. A handloader can get the same performance from the much more common 45-70.
The truth is, there is very little need for any new cartridges.

[Mr. 16 gauge]

My experience has been if there is a small niche, then a small company will fill it.....not one of the big boys. They are usually too busy and will eventually loose money on the deal, then discontinue the product, leaving the user stuck with useless products and scrambling to find something else that will work......this goes for just about everything: cars, medical devices, & guns and ammunition.

It's kind of a revolving door: gun shop owner doesn't want to stock guns/ammo that's not going to sell; buyer doesn't want to buy gun/ammo if it isn't available locally, ect.

Also, as someone else has said, these guns look good on paper, but are usually more gun that most folks can handle, esp. if they only shoot 'em a couple of times a year. Case in point were two fellows I met while mule deer hunting in Montana a few years ago. One had a .300 Remington Ultramag....empty case looked like a small soda bottle! He couldn't hit a 4x8' sheet of plywood at 100 yards with that gun! He finally managed to gut shoot a small buck and they found it the next day. The meat was useless, but he got to go home with a small set of antlers.:rolleyes: His buddy was shooting a 7mm Rem. mag....he made a nice neck shot on a buck at about 70 yards. Unfortunately, he admitted that he was shooting at the chest!:eek:

Same thing is going on with ammunition nowadays......now you have to pay top dollar for ammo that is loaded with polymer ballistic tip boat tail bullets and 'special' powder, otherwise you can't kill a whitetail.....good thing the deer in my freezer can't read the advertisements, otherwise they wouldn't know that they were kilt with a regular old flat based, soft pointed bullet!;):D

And I don't know why ammo companies are reinventing the wheel. Case in point: the .260 Remington. My 6.5 Swede will do everything that the .260 will, so why not invest your time & efforts in promoting a cartridge that is already available, instead of bringing out a new one that most likely will fall in the obsolete rack in a few years?

Bottom line? Stick with what has been proven......

[Larryjk]

jplonghunter, You are correct! The 30-06 is 63mm. There is another reason for all of the new cartridges. Someone thinks they can make the old bullet go a little faster with a new case of a different shape or higher pressure (which does work). A friend used to give me heck for all of the old cartridges I lked to try. He said "why do you try all of those old cartridges when we found out long ago these new ones were better". I told him I didn't get a chance to find out for myself.

[jplonghunter]

I believe that everything could be done with 6.5 x 55, 7 x 57, 8 x 57, 7 x 64, and 9.3 x 62. All 100 yr old cartridges. However, it would eliminate an awful lot of conversation.

jplonghunter

[buckhunter]

I'm waiting for the new bunch of Ruger, Hornady and Federal to go away. Only one that interest me is the 338 Federal but doubt it will survive either.

Just a little longer and the only WSM you will find will be the 300.

[bigbrother]

While I can agree with just about everyone's comments, we all have to keep tinkering and experimenting and creating to advance. I don't have a use for most of the new calibers either but I built a 6.5x284 before they were the "in" thing. (and I love it I might add lol) And most of you own or shoot regularly calibers that may be "standard" today but when they first arrived most people didn't think they needed them or that they would die out. Your 270, 25-06, 22-250, 243, and lots of others were wildcats and extremely experimental at one time. My favorites were all actually billed as either "too much" or "not needed" but now pale in comparison to what we can acheive with brass, bullet, and powder.

Am I going to rush out and buy the next new caliber....heck no! But the future improvements and innovations in our sport lie in those who stretch the envelopes and spend the money to determine if a 35deg shoulder shoots better than a 37deg.

Keep shooting!

[Catfish]

There is really no reason for any new cartridges as what we have now will due anything we need to do. Infact there is so much over lap in rounds that we have several that are so close any 1 of them would interchange with many other. A difference 0f 100 fps is a difference of 5 yrds in max. point blank range, apx. 500 fps would only be 25 yrds., and the target will not be able to tell the difference in valocity, :rolleyes: so why do we have they all???? Because it is easy to prove that 1 has so definate advantages on paper, it just becomes imposible in the field. AND, even though I know and understand this well I am still an aviod wildcatter. I at present have a .17 AH as my smallest and a .411 Hawk as my largest wildcats. At present I have wildcats in .17, .22, 6mm, .25 and .411 cals. It`s just human nature to want something no one else has.

[Jack]

Wildcattting, like the desire for a new rifle in a new caliber, is an "I want" rather than an "I need".
And that's coming from someone who slakes the "I want" fairly often. :)

[Larryjk]

The "I want" for a wildcat and the final price after dies, etc., can become quite a bit more than a comparable "off the shelf" firearm. But I understand the "I want". About 5 years before the .204 Ruger came out I had to have a .20 caliber rifle. I had Dave Manson make me a reamer for a .20/223 Ackley Improved. I was going to use the 222 Magnum, but it was hard to find brass. So I went with the .223 because there was only 1 1/2 grains difference between that and andd the 222 Mag. It is a deadly accurate rifle I call the Death Ray. But I was going to set the barrel back and rechamber to the ..204 Ruger when I built one for my son. He asked me to leave my rifle as a wildcat.
At the time this one didn't have a commercial double. But I understand and have a .22 K-Hornet, a 25-06 Ackley Imp. and a .280 Ackley Imp. I "needed" them. I know if I ever want to dispose of them I have to find a reloader who "needs" them and sell them with the dies.

[skeet]

I've been kinda stayin outta this one.. But have to say..I'm not of the opinion that there is going to be anything new and improved that will actually be as touted. None of the new breed of cats here has shown themselves to be any better than existing cartridges. Yep I have a couple 'cats but none of the new super duper unbelievable rifle calibers that are or were supposed to be sooo much better than those that came before..Some actually do gain as much as 100 ft a second over some of the older calibers. But that is supposing that you use the 26 in bbl that they use and load to the same incredible pressures. What will we do when those same rifles are 80 yrs old..and suspect because of the materials they were made of and their ages.. The same reasons pressures have supposedly been reduced in such suspect calibers as the 30-06..270..257 Robts etc etc.. I guess it's always nice to see and have something new..but to have new calibers just so they can sell more new guns is ridiculous.. I for one refuse to buy them..they really show me nothing over the older calibers..Good riddance to their passing...Ain't I a stick in the mud??? hehehe

[GoodOlBoy]

My problem isn't that I want wildcats, it is that I want sabertooth tigers. . . . IE I like OLD cowboy rounds. I still want a 32-20, 44-40, 44 special (and/or a 44 russian), 38 long colt, 38-40, 25-35, 32-40, 38-55, 41 long colt, etc. I just don't have the coin to lay on the counter and get them these days.

If I had to narrow my choices from the above I would still maim somebody to get a good 32-20 and a 44-40.

GoodOlBoy

[popplecop]

Boy as one who swears that my 45-70s will do it all for me, I'm really out of the loop or really old. Probably the latter.

[skeet]

Oh PC..you're just an ol stick in the mud...like me! Ya know..watch TV commercials stuff to kill germs..laws..bicycle helmets for kids seat belt laws( a real money maker ya know)..then all the new calibers. I mean how did we as kids live into adulthood without dying from oooey gooey stuff on our hands?? How did we ever lay a deer low with a paltry 30-30?? or kill a duck with a tiny little 2 3/4 inch 20 ga shotgun?? Gotta have a 315 Super duper Tyrannosaurus Rex round or the 3 1/2 inch 10 ga to shoot teal Sheesh

[fabsroman]

While I can agree with just about everyone's comments, we all have to keep tinkering and experimenting and creating to advance. I don't have a use for most of the new calibers either but I built a 6.5x284 before they were the "in" thing. (and I love it I might add lol) And most of you own or shoot regularly calibers that may be "standard" today but when they first arrived most people didn't think they needed them or that they would die out. Your 270, 25-06, 22-250, 243, and lots of others were wildcats and extremely experimental at one time. My favorites were all actually billed as either "too much" or "not needed" but now pale in comparison to what we can acheive with brass, bullet, and powder.

Am I going to rush out and buy the next new caliber....heck no! But the future improvements and innovations in our sport lie in those who stretch the envelopes and spend the money to determine if a 35deg shoulder shoots better than a 37deg.

Keep shooting!

I agree completely. It is the new stuff that creates advancements in technology. Look at that Remington varmint gun that used an electronic ignition. Is it still around? I ask because I don't really know.

The same thing happens in cycling. They make new equipment that is super expensive that pushes the envelope. Do weekend cyclists really need carbon fiber frames, carbon fiber wheels, and carbon fiber components so their bike will weight less than 13 pounds (i.e., my bike) and that cost about $8,000 for the bike? NOPE However, we still buy them and ride them around. That is what makes technology advance. My bike from 25 years ago weighs 22 pounds and has 12 gear combinations and it was a top of the line bike back then. My bike from 2008 weighs 13 pounds, has 22 gear combinations, and is a heck of a lot more aerodynamic. Thing is, each little advancement only gave riders a very slight advantage, but over the decades they have amounted to a significant advantage. Shimano just came out with electronic shifting that does not require cables. It is really expensive and I am not a Shimano fan, but people out there are trying it out. Whether it sticks around will depend.

The same can be said for the firearm industry. Each little advancement will add up over decades. Some of these short ultra mags are being used in AR's, etc. Granted, I am glad I didn't buy an AR upper in one of the cartridges that are going to be discontinued, and I am now a little leary about buying an AR upper in .260 Rem.

Like my bicycle technology, I like to let other be the guinea pigs for the new stuff. When something has been around for a while and proven itself, then I buy it. I'm not much for being the first guy on the block to try something new out.

[fabsroman]

Oh PC..you're just an ol stick in the mud...like me! Ya know..watch TV commercials stuff to kill germs..laws..bicycle helmets for kids seat belt laws( a real money maker ya know)..then all the new calibers. I mean how did we as kids live into adulthood without dying from oooey gooey stuff on our hands?? How did we ever lay a deer low with a paltry 30-30?? or kill a duck with a tiny little 2 3/4 inch 20 ga shotgun?? Gotta have a 315 Super duper Tyrannosaurus Rex round or the 3 1/2 inch 10 ga to shoot teal Sheesh

Skeet,

Things were a lot different 100 years ago when you and Popplecop were born. LOL Back in the days, there were no laws about non-toxic shot, there were a lot less cars on the roads and 40,000+ people a year didn't die in auto accidents, they didn't even make bicycle helmets back then, car seats for kids were pretty much non-existent, and plastic had yet to be invented.

A .30-30 is still a great rifle for those closer shots and hunting in the brush, but it does not cut it when hunting over a wide open bean field.

Now, a 10 gauge, or a 3 1/2" 12 gauge is way too much to shoot teal with. I tend to use 2 3/4", maybe 3" if that is all I have, for shooting teal.

[skeet]

Skeet,

Things were a lot different 100 years ago when you and Popplecop were born. LOL Back in the days, there were no laws about non-toxic shot, there were a lot less cars on the roads and 40,000+ people a year didn't die in auto accidents, they didn't even make bicycle helmets back then, car seats for kids were pretty much non-existent, and plastic had yet to be invented.

A .30-30 is still a great rifle for those closer shots and hunting in the brush, but it does not cut it when hunting over a wide open bean field.



You know Fabs..way back when I was a kid 40,000 people died from auto accidents a year..or thereabouts..Nontoxic shot was out there..It was tested way back in 1957. The testing done to promulgate nontoxic was flawed when it was done and created a flawed "need" for same.. Oh and plastic was around..Remember the AA shell??1963 car seates were in use and seat belts for cars was mandatory in 1967 or before..Available clear back as far as the 40's in fact. The only thing that made them mandatory was blithering idiots who created a "need" for the common good. Yep..kids got hurt on bicycles..in cars or even (horrors) in the back of pickups.. People are usually hurt because of stupidity and a seat belt bicycle helmet or airbag just won't necessarily save their lives....There have been too many laws passed to protect us from ourselves. Remember he old saw..Here..hold my beer..watch this!!

As far as the new calibers..new rifles new shotguns....Fabs..we as a group of hunters really don't NEED a Super Duper 3 1/2 inch 12 ga..Most ducks doves geese quail etc etc will be dispatched just as well with the ol 2 3/4 inch 1 1/4 oz or less loads that were standard for scores of years. The 30-30 is just fine for 95% of deer hunting in the US. Hunting isn't necessarily bean field shooting...in fact really isn't hunting..it is waitng to have a deer come out so it can be dispatched..No I ain't a tree hugger..but most of the "hunting" now days isn't really hunting as per the actual meaning of the word. I have done it that way too...but I really liked sneakin through the woods on as equal terms with the deer as possible. As far as technology..you answered your own query..the technology of shooting has gone avbout as far as possible with the use of hundred year old designs of firearms..cartidge containers and pressures that can be handled safely..as you said..even in bikes..how much faarther can you go. The law of diminishing returns rears it's ugly maw..again. Look at the new compound bows.. Have nothing against 'em but they really aren't BOWS in the common term..To be really honest..about half the people who are fairly sucessful hunters with compounds probably wouldn't be half as succesful with a real recurve or longbow. Technology shouldn't take the place of the skill needed to hunt

[fabsroman]

You know Fabs..way back when I was a kid 40,000 people died from auto accidents a year..or thereabouts..Nontoxic shot was out there..It was tested way back in 1957. The testing done to promulgate nontoxic was flawed when it was done and created a flawed "need" for same.. Oh and plastic was around..Remember the AA shell??1963 car seates were in use and seat belts for cars was mandatory in 1967 or before..Available clear back as far as the 40's in fact. The only thing that made them mandatory was blithering idiots who created a "need" for the common good. Yep..kids got hurt on bicycles..in cars or even (horrors) in the back of pickups.. People are usually hurt because of stupidity and a seat belt bicycle helmet or airbag just won't necessarily save their lives....There have been too many laws passed to protect us from ourselves. Remember he old saw..Here..hold my beer..watch this!!

As far as the new calibers..new rifles new shotguns....Fabs..we as a group of hunters really don't NEED a Super Duper 3 1/2 inch 12 ga..Most ducks doves geese quail etc etc will be dispatched just as well with the ol 2 3/4 inch 1 1/4 oz or less loads that were standard for scores of years. The 30-30 is just fine for 95% of deer hunting in the US. Hunting isn't necessarily bean field shooting...in fact really isn't hunting..it is waitng to have a deer come out so it can be dispatched..No I ain't a tree hugger..but most of the "hunting" now days isn't really hunting as per the actual meaning of the word. I have done it that way too...but I really liked sneakin through the woods on as equal terms with the deer as possible. As far as technology..you answered your own query..the technology of shooting has gone avbout as far as possible with the use of hundred year old designs of firearms..cartidge containers and pressures that can be handled safely..as you said..even in bikes..how much faarther can you go. The law of diminishing returns rears it's ugly maw..again. Look at the new compound bows.. Have nothing against 'em but they really aren't BOWS in the common term..To be really honest..about half the people who are fairly sucessful hunters with compounds probably wouldn't be half as succesful with a real recurve or longbow. Technology shouldn't take the place of the skill needed to hunt

It is called evolution my man. Technology will continue on. I'm willing to bet you use plastic decoys that weren't around 100 years ago. Those plastic shells weren't around 100 years ago. The powders we have nowadays weren't around 100 years ago. Plastic stocks weren't around 100 years ago. The hunting clothing you use nowadays to allow you to stay out in the field longer weren't around 100 years ago. The list goes on and on. Yeah, some of the "technology" is BS, and some of it just gives a very slight advantage compared to what it replaces. However, for those willing to spend a ton of money on this technology, it opens the way for newer technology. Over time, what is a small advancement here and a small advancement there ends up being a large advancement over time. The same goes for bikes, cars, cell phones, etc.

If you told me 10 years ago that I could hold a cell phone in my hand that would allow me to receive e-mail, send texts, take pretty decent pics, send pics to others on cell phones, chat in groups with family members and others, etc., I would have told you you were out of your mind. Heck, 10 years ago I didn't even own a cell phone and was completely against them. Now, I don't leave the house without my Blackberry.

Again, some "technology" isn't needed, and that usually dies a terrible death. Now, look at Dow Corning. It invented a very strong type of glass back in 1963 and there was no use for it. However, today it is being used in cell phone touch screens and LCD TV's. It is supposedly going to make the company billions of dollars.

Do I really need a 3 1/2" 12 gauge for waterfowling, probably not, but that elongated shot string allows for more error and the possibility fo hitting doubles with a single shot. Now, the 10 gauge 3 1/2" has a little more firepower in it, but I still don't own one. Both of them give me enough of a back ache and headache that I would only use them on big geese.

The mandatory seatbelt law didn't come into effect until the mid 80's or later. Car seat laws are there because the poor child shouldn't be punished for the stupid parents' mistakes. There are plenty of laws on the books for our own safety, but how many people really even know they are out there. I bet half the people in Montgomery County have no idea that any child under 12 years of age is required, by law, to wear a helmet while riding a bike. Had about 5 kids riding their bike in the neighborhood today without helmets on. I have seen plenty of bike wrecks and destroyed helmets to know that they work.

Imagine what the freeway would be like without laws in place.

When areas were less populated and the pace of life was a lot slower, it was a lot easier to live with fewer laws. Now, that isn't the case. I'm pretty sure it would be really bad news if I and others were allowed to kill the deer outside my townhouse in the early morning and late afternoon. Any yahoo could go out there and start firing like crazy with a rifle while my daughter and son are out playing.

Yeah, I don't mind having some of the laws in place. When you live on the Eastern Shore or Wyoming, you don't need quite as many because things are different.

[skeet]

Fabs like most of the younger generation you have the idea that if it wasn't invented in the last few years it isn't very usable.
I lived in the outdoors summer and winter..I didn't have any of these new wowsie fabrics. ya ever hear of down..or wool? ..My guns had stocks...Walnut..didn't need plastic.. Had paper shells..worked fine.. the new technology of hunting for the most part is unnecessary. People made out just fine. Without all this new technology we would as hunters be fine. Like most "new" things like the great cell phones..they create their own problems..from kids having them at age 7 in schools..not such a hot idea to people driving the beltways in your area at 75 MPH talkin on the phone and fixing their eye shadow..sheesh. . We made out fine for a few centuries without 'em. The bad thing is that if we had a breakdown in the technology today..so many people would be lost in space it isn't funny. Half the people in the Washington Metro area would go wild with out the technology we have..And Fabs..as far as the statement about people shooting the deer in your neighborhood...C'mon man, use some common sense. Even if it were legal and you were the hunter the police would be in the area in minutes. Would you worry about someone else's kids..Of course not because you know you are a safe person. You presuppose all your neighbors are not. One of the reasons I moved from the ES was my new (ex-Baltimore) neighbor called the cops when she heard gunfire in the area. I was shooting blackbirds on the farm. I didn't call the police when they were shooting off fireworks(not legal in Md) at 0 dark 30. I was perfectly legal but dealing with the police is NOT my favorite thing to do. Social engineering is not the cause for better things through big government. It is what causes so much loss of personal rights in the name of.... For the Common Good. It's usually not for any kind of good....just another form of control. It used to be legal to hunt in your area...Is it now? If it is...are you against it..in the name of safety? Are you a safe hunter? Why isn't someone else?? Just because of where I live..doesn't change the need for common sense and some of the laws in place. That was a ridiculous statement Fabs. I don't mind some of the laws we have either..but the need for common sense is even greater than the need for so many laws.. And making people responsible for their actions would be a big change for the better.

[fabsroman]

Fabs like most of the younger generation you have the idea that if it wasn't invented in the last few years it isn't very usable.
I lived in the outdoors summer and winter..I didn't have any of these new wowsie fabrics. ya ever hear of down..or wool? ..My guns had stocks...Walnut..didn't need plastic.. Had paper shells..worked fine.. the new technology of hunting for the most part is unnecessary. People made out just fine. Without all this new technology we would as hunters be fine. Like most "new" things like the great cell phones..they create their own problems..from kids having them at age 7 in schools..not such a hot idea to people driving the beltways in your area at 75 MPH talkin on the phone and fixing their eye shadow..sheesh. . We made out fine for a few centuries without 'em. The bad thing is that if we had a breakdown in the technology today..so many people would be lost in space it isn't funny. Half the people in the Washington Metro area would go wild with out the technology we have..And Fabs..as far as the statement about people shooting the deer in your neighborhood...C'mon man, use some common sense. Even if it were legal and you were the hunter the police would be in the area in minutes. Would you worry about someone else's kids..Of course not because you know you are a safe person. You presuppose all your neighbors are not. One of the reasons I moved from the ES was my new (ex-Baltimore) neighbor called the cops when she heard gunfire in the area. I was shooting blackbirds on the farm. I didn't call the police when they were shooting off fireworks(not legal in Md) at 0 dark 30. I was perfectly legal but dealing with the police is NOT my favorite thing to do. Social engineering is not the cause for better things through big government. It is what causes so much loss of personal rights in the name of.... For the Common Good. It's usually not for any kind of good....just another form of control. It used to be legal to hunt in your area...Is it now? If it is...are you against it..in the name of safety? Are you a safe hunter? Why isn't someone else?? Just because of where I live..doesn't change the need for common sense and some of the laws in place. That was a ridiculous statement Fabs. I don't mind some of the laws we have either..but the need for common sense is even greater than the need for so many laws.. And making people responsible for their actions would be a big change for the better.

So, after the jackass across the way with no common sense fires a bullet through my house and kills my daughter, it would be just fine to hold him accountable. Question is, would that bring back my daughter. Would he even have the money to compensate my wife and I and my son for the loss of our daughter/sister? Same goes for the drunk driver driving down the road. Should it not be illegal to drive drunk? Should we not have a speed limit?

Thing is, some of the people that do stupid stuff have absolutely nothing to lose. We cyclists talk about this all the time. It isn't the rich guy driving the $100,000 Mercedes that we have to worry about, but the poor SOB with nothing but $20,000/$40,000 auto insurance, if that, and not a pot to piss in that we have to worry about running us over. They have hardly anything to lose. Same goes for the moron across the way trying to shoot at deer in the little 5 acre wetland area we have.

Do I think it is a bad thing that shooting firearms is not allowed in this area. Nope. I live directly across the street from a shopping center and the wetland area is surrounded by condos, townhouses, and single family homes. I don't really want idiots shooting ducks, doves, geese, groundhogs, or deer out there. My dad was shot while out dove hunting on a farm in Howard County. It left red welts on his hand. Don't need that sort of thing happening with high powered rifles around here.

Do you think it would be alright for people to stroll out into the streets in Manhattan and start firing at the pigeons? I'm sure there are plenty of people in that area that would find a pigeon to be a great meal. Plus, 250 years ago there was probably plenty of hunting, and great hunting at that, in that area (ignore the fact that Manhattan was built up to what it is nowadays).

Times change Skeet. You need to realize that and move on. I'm not for big government and high taxes, but there needs to be a lot more regulation and laws in place versus what there was 100 years ago. 100 years ago there were hardly any cars on the road, we did not have the interstate system, there was no such thing as social security and medicare (both of which I am willing to bet you collect or will collect), no computers, hardly any telephones much less cell phones, no TV, no computers, barely any movies, no video games, nowhere near the population there is today.

In 1910 there were 92 million people in the US.

Today, there are 309 million people in the US.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demographics_of_the_United_States

The population has more than tripled in 100 years. You lived on the Eastern Shore and now in Wyoming. Try coming over to Montgomery County and living here without many laws currently in place. Heck, cyclists and motorists cannot get along and there are even laws on the books regulating how both are supposed to conduct themselves. Imagine if there were no laws whatsoever regarding it.

Times aren't what they used to be back when the Indians and settlors were out hunting for food. Times aren't the same as they used to be when people took responsibility for what they did. Times have changed. Problem is, you want things to be like they were 50 years ago.

Yeah, I will agree that most people wouldn't have any clue what to do if technology were taken away from them. If this country went through some hell, 95% of the population would be screwed. However, that doesn't mean that there shouldn't be any laws in place before the country goes to hell.

[skeet]

Quoting Thing is, some of the people that do stupid stuff have absolutely nothing to lose. We cyclists talk about this all the time. It isn't the rich guy driving the $100,000 Mercedes that we have to worry about, but the poor SOB with nothing but $20,000/$40,000 auto insurance, if that, and not a pot to piss in that we have to worry about running us over. They have hardly anything to lose. Same goes for the moron across the way trying to shoot at deer in the little 5 acre wetland area we have.

I really hate to say this Fabs..but what an elitist attitude.. Someone without the means to carry a million dollar insurance policy? Are you saying that the poor SOB shouldn't be able to drive? It is surely apparent you feel he really isn't up to your status.The poor ?SOB? is the the one you have to worry about? What?? They aren't good enough? They don't have anything to lose? WOW! The ones I really worry about are the illegals that are driving uninsured. One.Killed a "friend" back in Centreville last year.. and for the most part almost every illegal that drives has no insurance..no tags and no conscience. And you want to fine 'em and let 'em stay.. What's gonna make 'em do the right thing. Illegal?? Just because you earn a good income gives you the right to drive because you can carry what YOU consider an adequate amount of insurance? You may not really feel that way..but that is what you imply. Times do change Fabs.. I don't know what your area is like now..but I do know not so long ago it wasn't as it is now. Hate to break this news to you..but if there is a jackass around that shoots through your house...a law isn't gonna stop him..remember..illegal is JUST a word..ask the 15 or 20 million illegal aliens we have in the US now. Also my friend..you say you aren't for BIG Government..but your words tell a different story. More laws equate to bigger government. And you do realize I am sure..some of those poor schmuck SOBs probably pay part of your earnings. They helped to pay for mine. Not only that..I've been one of 'em in the past. Seems as though you may have missed something. Monetary compensation will never pay for injuries lost earnings and certainly not a child. A real friend was in the hospital recently. They screwed up and gave him a drug he(and they) knew he was allergic to. Darn near died.. Is he gonna sue? Nope..he realizes things do happen..accident is a real word. If he sued..he'd ruin more than one life..And he doesn't want to do that. What a stand up kind of guy. Glad he's a friend...and alive.

Yep times do change and so do people. I'm going to bed..I actually have to get up in the morning...and GO SHOOT..yippee..You need to take a bit of time off and go practice..I don't wanna have to make you look REAL bad when we go to Pintail Point. LOL...Speakin of change..I used to guide goose hunters on that farm. One of the best shots I ever took was on that farm. SHE was just great with a shotgun. I hope your father can go too. He's a nice man

[fabsroman]

Quoting Thing is, some of the people that do stupid stuff have absolutely nothing to lose. We cyclists talk about this all the time. It isn't the rich guy driving the $100,000 Mercedes that we have to worry about, but the poor SOB with nothing but $20,000/$40,000 auto insurance, if that, and not a pot to piss in that we have to worry about running us over. They have hardly anything to lose. Same goes for the moron across the way trying to shoot at deer in the little 5 acre wetland area we have.

I really hate to say this Fabs..but what an elitist attitude.. Someone without the means to carry a million dollar insurance policy? Are you saying that the poor SOB shouldn't be able to drive? It is surely apparent you feel he really isn't up to your status.The poor ?SOB? is the the one you have to worry about? What?? They aren't good enough? They don't have anything to lose? WOW! The ones I really worry about are the illegals that are driving uninsured. One.Killed a "friend" back in Centreville last year.. and for the most part almost every illegal that drives has no insurance..no tags and no conscience. And you want to fine 'em and let 'em stay.. What's gonna make 'em do the right thing. Illegal?? Just because you earn a good income gives you the right to drive because you can carry what YOU consider an adequate amount of insurance? You may not really feel that way..but that is what you imply. Times do change Fabs.. I don't know what your area is like now..but I do know not so long ago it wasn't as it is now. Hate to break this news to you..but if there is a jackass around that shoots through your house...a law isn't gonna stop him..remember..illegal is JUST a word..ask the 15 or 20 million illegal aliens we have in the US now. Also my friend..you say you aren't for BIG Government..but your words tell a different story. More laws equate to bigger government. And you do realize I am sure..some of those poor schmuck SOBs probably pay part of your earnings. They helped to pay for mine. Not only that..I've been one of 'em in the past. Seems as though you may have missed something. Monetary compensation will never pay for injuries lost earnings and certainly not a child. A real friend was in the hospital recently. They screwed up and gave him a drug he(and they) knew he was allergic to. Darn near died.. Is he gonna sue? Nope..he realizes things do happen..accident is a real word. If he sued..he'd ruin more than one life..And he doesn't want to do that. What a stand up kind of guy. Glad he's a friend...and alive.

Yep times do change and so do people. I'm going to bed..I actually have to get up in the morning...and GO SHOOT..yippee..You need to take a bit of time off and go practice..I don't wanna have to make you look REAL bad when we go to Pintail Point. LOL...Speakin of change..I used to guide goose hunters on that farm. One of the best shots I ever took was on that farm. SHE was just great with a shotgun. I hope your father can go too. He's a nice man

Hey Skeet, how about trying not to twist my words. What I said was a poor SOB with no assets and most likely no insurance, doesn't have as much to lose as a person that has worked 20 or 30 years and accumulated some wealth. I never said they shouldn't be able to drive. Please quote where I said they shouldn't be able to drive!!!!!!!!!!

Illegals have no conscience. Yeah, that one is rich. Why don't you just hang out the HATE sign for the illegals. I know plenty of them, and I can assure you that most of them have a conscience. How this debate got to illegals I have no idea.

Suing is your friends perogative. Had he died, I wonder if his estate would have been so kind. I wonder if he was out of work long enough to suffer some serious monetary setbacks if he would be so kind (i.e., foreclosure on his house, tons of credit card debt). Were the doctors so kind that they waived the medical charges? I doubt it.

I think you went off on enough tangents that I am going to call it a day. Look forward to shooting with you when you come back.

[popplecop]

Teal are best hunted with a SxS in 20 ga. useing 2.75 bismuth or 3" steel. In fact most of my duck hunting is over decoys and very seldom use a 12 anymore and when I do it's with 2.75" shells. I've spent a lot of time om the patterning boards, boards and have been shooting steel since the mid 70s. Now mostly shoot bismuth and the tungston matrix loads. So Fabs I'm comeing out of the tar pits in some ways.

[skeet]

PC hunting teal is best done with almost anything. Love to shoot the little buggers. One of the few ducks I used steel on. I once loaded some steel 6s specifically for teal. killed them cleanly but ranges were sometimes measured in feet... Otherwise I will never use steel. Now bismuth and the TM is pretty good for waterfowl. I bought a whole bunch of Federal type of TM before they discontinued it. Otherwise I shoot the really hard heavy stuff such as hevi shot. Can't shoot it in the old guns but I shoot a jam-amatic at ducks anyway. I did shoot some teal with my 28 ga M-12 with Bismuth and it worked just fine. It ain't cheap though...even if ya reload it LOL

[skeet]

Hey Skeet, how about trying not to twist my words. What I said was a poor SOB with no assets and most likely no insurance, doesn't have as much to lose as a person that has worked 20 or 30 years and accumulated some wealth. I never said they shouldn't be able to drive. Please quote where I said they shouldn't be able to drive!!!!!!!!!!

Illegals have no conscience. Yeah, that one is rich. Why don't you just hang out the HATE sign for the illegals. I know plenty of them, and I can assure you that most of them have a conscience. How this debate got to illegals I have no idea..

Fabs, I twisted nothing. Your words are below. No you didn't say they shouldn't drive..but they worry you more than the rich guy.. Wow. By saying what you did you imply that the poor guy has nothing to lose if he runs into or over you. He must not care cause he only carries that much insurance. Sheesh man.. how can you feel that way?.. Talk about hate..They won't have enough money to PAY for their accident.

How it got into illegals was I stated that they concerned me much more than the guy with insurance minimums. They usually have none. Most I have dealt with had no license..no insurance and no legal tags on their cars. Yep I dealt with illegals after the fact..the fact that they ran into someone while having no insurance..no license no tags and no remorse. Did I say that quite a few were laughing about the accident? They knew nothing was gonna happen to them..except MAYBE get deported. I dealt with them on a more base level than you do. I don't hate the illegals..I just think we should get 'em all out of the country and give some the chance to come here legally..and while we're at it, let's make English the official language and a requirement for citizenship. One Law I could live with. Please don't say you'd be against that too. Read what you said..in the context it is written in..not the way you want to think you said...Why would you worry about the poor guy and not the rich one? Comes down to money I guess! Who would be able to pay!

Quoting you:
"We cyclists talk about this all the time. It isn't the rich guy driving the $100,000 Mercedes that we have to worry about, but the poor SOB with nothing but $20,000/$40,000 auto insurance, if that, and not a pot to piss in that we have to worry about running us over. They have hardly anything to lose."

As I said..I did not twist your words. If you are that worried about them..don't go on the road with a bicycle... or a car.

We have an awful lot of bicyclists(and motorcyclists) on the road here. Especially foreigners..They go buy a bicycle and spend their vacation bicycling through Yellowstone or Holy Cow..going over the Bighorn Mountains. An 8-9% grade for 15-20 miles?? Going up..then there is the going down. Might be worse because of the hairpin turns..:confused: When they get ready to go home they usually give the bikes to the police depts locally..they give 'em out to needy kids..or use 'em themselves patrolling around town. Nice gesture in my opinion..so even bicyclists have some good things going for them even if they do block the road hahaha :D LOL