Jump to content

Alsone

Members
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Content Count

    2,133

  • Joined

  • Last visited

 Content Type 

Everything posted by Alsone

  1. Alsone
    Ron Spomper Outdoors in the US got their hands on a Savage B Mag rifle and posted a video of the effects of .22 vs .17 HMR vs .17 WSM all vs water filled bottles. Nothing spectacular, but you can clearly see the difference in effects of HMR vs WSM. Also sounds very quiet: It's also interesting as you can hear the .22 ricochet.
  2. Alsone
    I had a RAV4. Never got stuck in winter anywhere. Have been off road but not much. Found it fine off road but I didn't go anywhere overly muddy. I'd have said its better built than the Vitara but as others have said, doesn't have the low ration gearbox. As important as the car is your tyres. I laways used to fit mine with Town and Country. If you're planning on going off road a lot in bad conditions then either a 2nd set of wheels or if you can' be bothered to change them, look on tyre review sites for something onroad but with a deep tread and high mud rating. Full off road ty
  3. Alsone
    Which would that be? Sorry should have said Sako. It was one of these: http://www.sako.fi/oldmodels.php?hunterff Sako Finnfire Varmint Unsure of the moderator but if you blow out hard through you lips, that's literally how loud it was! My precharged air rifle was probably 5 x as loud even though it too was silenced! I was once down range (that's when the richoet nearly got me), I was in a field off to the right of where my friend was when he shot a rabbit on a path that ran parallel to the field. I was about 40 yards from where he was and I never heard the gun at all ju
  4. Alsone
    If thats in reference to what I said, tbh that's not what I was doing, just observing that head shots are usually more effective and to my mind it makes you a better shot if you have to be more precise. I'd personally buy a HMR over a .22 any day so don't take my post as anti-hmr. If you want the real truth, I'm holding out to see what the .17 wsm finally brings to the table before deciding to go for an FAC as it promises much greater power, more silence, less recoil, little wind drift and more accuracy. ....and there is that wonderful cop out Usually Everyone does what th
  5. Alsone
    If thats in reference to what I said, tbh that's not what I was doing, just observing that head shots are usually more effective and to my mind it makes you a better shot if you have to be more precise. I'd personally buy a HMR over a .22 any day so don't take my post as anti-hmr. If you want the real truth, I'm holding out to see what the .17 wsm finally brings to the table before deciding to go for an FAC as it promises much greater power, more silence, less recoil, little wind drift and more accuracy.
  6. Alsone
    TBH I'd always use headshots anyway. Despite the damage HMR does, I've seen far too many rabbits on videos on youtube jumping and writhing around for far longer than you'd expect from nerves alone. I'm sorry but I just don't subscribe to the notion that an animal is dead and not in pain when it writhes around for 10+ seconds. Polaxed on the floor shaking its dead and its nerves. Writhing around up and down the field for a long period, its wounded in my book. I'm a great believer in head shots. Personally I'd rather miss than wound and if nothing else shooting for a small area like the
  7. Alsone
    No it won't have WSM yet as WSM isn't yet released. Latest estimates suggest July. Performance is around that of a .22 Hornet CF so provided they make the data available, it will be suitable for that. Fact that so much .22LR and .17HMR data is available though definately shows it was intended for rimfire use. Its just a pity they don't make a rimfire suitable version of the Eliminator III as the reticule and way it works is sublime, it tells you not only range and indicates a new aiming point witht he illuminated dot, but it also tells you the windage solution as well next to the r
  8. Alsone
    Looks like a great scope. Can't see any reason why you wouldn't want it on rimfire. Be ideal as well for .17 hmr or .17 wsm (assuming they do the ballistics for the latter when it finally comes out). Not sure many people shoot at less than 50 yards unless shooting at night or on ground with a lot of cover. If you do it might not be ideal but otherwsie, where's the problem? In fact just looked, Eliminator 2 has a long list of ammo coefficients for both .22LR and .17 HMR: http://www.burrisoptics.com/Cartridge%20List-Eliminator-I_II.pdf
  9. Alsone
    Really nice gun. That's what I personally would buy. It's all a matter of balance. I find Browning very neutral, Beretta are I think less neutrally weighted, but it's as I said its down to preference. Both Browning and Beretta are quality guns that will last you years if looked after. One thing you could do if you're not so good with looking after guns is buy a cheap branded gun for in the field and keep the good one for clays. Either way, my advice is try out a few different guns and find what feels right for you. You should probably be looking for a 28" or 30" sporter unless
  10. Alsone
    It's the glass quality I'd be worried about at that price given what you get for the money, there's got to be some savings somewhere. Watching with interest.
  11. Alsone
    Can't beat going along to a clay shoot and seeing if some members will let you have a go with their guns. Depending on how much you want to spend, Beretta and Browning are the ones you really want to try as each manufacturer has a different balance. I find Browning really neutral and nice but Beretta not as nice, but others will tell you they prefer Beretta. It's all down to preference. If your budget doesn't stretch as far as Beretta or Browning, then you need to consider trying some of the brands within your budget.
  12. Alsone
    According to this New Zealand web site, stock is expected from August 2013 onwards: http://www.yukonoptics.co.nz/yukon_photon.html Now whether that's because NZ gets it stock later or whether its because thats the revised release date, I don't know.
  13. Alsone
    I must admit I only shot a semi the oncewhen clay shooting, but I remember it being less recoil than the O/U. Something I believe was to do with the fact that some of the gases are recycled to the ejector. I loved it because of that. The downside was you could get the occassional cartridge that bounced off the cage upon ejection. Maybe the recoil depends on the semi brand - never shot Baikal. I think the semi I shot was Browning or Beretta but can't remember as it was some years ago. I do remember though thinking that I wanted to go out and buy one instead of an O/U. If the OP finds the se
  14. Alsone
    Must admit I like semis. But I think with any shotgun its more down to the balance of the gun than the type. There's a lot of bias against semis on safety grounds although I've never seen any evidence of anyone being less safe with one than a break barrel. Especially if you have a chamber flag: http://www.bushwear.com/nostyles.php?ProductID=302105&ClassID=195 I'd say use what ever you're comfortable with. I personally use Browning and wouldn't touch Beretta as I think Browning are much more neutrally balanced. However, you'll find people who say the exact opposite.
  15. Alsone
    That's what I read and understood to be the case as well.
  16. Alsone
    No offence meant Geoff. Was just pointing out the folly of having a zero which is 1.5 inches astray. Not everyone who reads the forum necesarily understands this.
  17. Alsone
    It sounds as though the quality isn't great on the ammo. A HP should expamd to 1.5 - 2 x calibre so the exit and entry holes shouldn't be the same size. I agree with Decker throughout this thread. Something with the power of .223 should stop any fox stone dead. If it isn't doing then there's something seriously wrong with the ammo and placement. I also concur that you don't have a zero if you're 1.5 inches high! Zero means just that zero drop, elevation or latitude. If Zero'ed you should be hitting dead centre + / - usual grouping allowances. I really can't understand why you'd want to
  18. Alsone
    NIce evening. I've found no problems with No:3 or above. My usual choice of cartridge always was Gamebore Mammoth High Bird - a high speed, heavy load wildfowling cartridge. I'm sure they used to make them in 2" 3/4 but looking now it seems 3" Magnum is the smallest cartridge. Great fox cartrdige though if you have a gun chambered for 3" magnum. Gamebore claim it will kill geese at 90 yards. I certainly never failed to stop a fox with the 2" 3/4 version. The Gamebore Buffalo 42 gram No: 3 seems to be the nearest cartridge now.
  19. Alsone
    Yeah I found this a while ago on youtube. Just look how the tracer rounds ping off the steel targets at all sort of angles. Ok nothing back at the shooter but when the camera angle is reversed and you see the shots from the target end, then you can really see the ricochets off left, right and vertically. In fact the worst ricochets are from the ground alone at a shallow angle (as I mentioned earlier). That was how I nearly copped one from my friend, he shot a rabbit with a sub, it passed straight through, hit a stone on the path and ricocheted and passed over my right shoulder at an es
  20. Alsone
    Yeah I agree, it doesn't necessarily matter so long as you shoot downwards ie from standing not prone, so the land itself forms the backstop. Danger is increased though from calibres prone to ricochet but here the field size can also help and shooting towards the centre rather than the sides. The shallower the angle, the greater the risk of ricochet so closer target selection. How come they had an issue with the usage? How many had you used?If you get a shooter that only hunts deer on pay as you go stalking id imagine they may only use a hand full of rounds each season.so between renewal
  21. Alsone
    Removed my post as it went ignored. Like I said it wsa not my intention to hijack - original question had been answered. Sorry if offended anyone.
  22. Alsone
    Removed as it went ignored. Like I said not intention to hijack - original question had been answered. Sorry if offended anyone.
  23. Alsone
    Well I guess its going to depend on whether you want to reload or not. Those who've shot the new .17WSM on press days report 1/2 MOA groupings, 1/2 the bullet drop or wind drift of .22 Hornet and in practical usage, very good results against Coyotes. With almost the same energy, its a very even call on choice. It's going to be horses for courses but its unfair to write something off before its even been released. If the OP doesn't want to wait or prefers Hornet, then fair enough, its his choice but give .17 WSM a chance as it could be a game changer if it lives up to its pre-release re
  24. Alsone
    Or wait and see what .17 WSM does when its released. It outperforms .22 Hornet on both drop and windage by a factor of 2X and has only 13 ft lbs less energy at 250 yards (150ft lbs @ 250 yds!) according to preliminary ballistic tables released before release. It's also fast at 3,000fps! That's 400fps faster than .22 Hornet at the muzzle and its nearly 600fps faster at 250 yards! Being rimfire its also stated to be about 2/3 rds cheaper on ammo cost. I understand the release has been pushed back to June / July. So question of if you can wait and see and view real world repor
  25. Alsone
    I wonder what the glass quality will be like? One good thing about the NV system is it just uses your existing scope so if you have good glass, then you retain that clarity. On the other hand the Yukon has a few nice features so if it can be used night and day it could be a good scope. I especially like the video out port as its ideal for recording those shooting videos. I'd be tempted to use video out permamently to cover my back in case of any accusations or alleged stray shots as it makes an excellent witness. So the only question comes down to optical quality. I see no mention of HD gl
×
×
  • Create New...