akbound

At the risk of offending someone and starting an argument I'll throw my two cents into this.

I will unequivocally state that it is a rare "medium or big game" hunt that cannot be brought to a satisfactory conclusion with any rifle capable of 1 1/2" to 2" groups at 100 yards. Is better accuracy nice? Heck yes, but is it necessary.....seldom. (I know, I'm going to get about umpteen responses that "illustrate" how only a rifle capable of shooting 500 yards into less the 1 MOA and less than 10" of drop would have worked. And I'm prepared to hear it!)

But the truth of the matter is......we do not normally need "benchrest" accuracy, or even "tactical sniper" accuracy to successfully complete probably better than 90% of all hunts! And another truth is this.....any action type can be used successfully.....if the person using it knows both the rifle's limitations.....and the "shooter's limitations". And then the shooter has both the maturity and discipline....to stay within those limits. (And the preponderance of my rifles are bolt action....so please.....don't try to "convert" me to "something more accurate".

The BAR is a fine hunting rifle. And no one need apologize for using one!

Dave

stubblejumper

It would be hard to state that better and even harder to dispute it.The unfortunate part is that many shooters do not know or are not honest with themselves about either reguardless of the type of action used.

akbound

Hi stubblejumper,

We are indeed in agreement on that!

Dave

cybersniper

The reason for concentrating on bechrest accuracy is to know what ammo and conditions your firearm is suited for. We all know that in the fiels the condistions are different and every error is magnified. That is the reason that you practice and try to get as tight as a group as possible at the range. If you start out with the "2 inch at 100 is close enough" you are setting yourself up for failure because when you add stress, increased heart rate, no rest, etc.. Your two inches error will be increased to four, six, or eight inches at 100. Now we are getting into some proplem areas. Especially with the hunter who "unloads" on a deer running across a field. Sometimes semi autos cause us to "spray and pray". Some of the best shots are taken from the guys shooting muzzle loaders and single shots because they know they have to make that one shot count.
So to make the long story short I disagree and think that if you want to make quick humane kills you do need the best accuracy possible.
Even though I think big guy is on the right track with logging his info, so he knows what works best in his particular firearm.

akbound

Hi cybersniper,

We both know....and acknowledge.....that there are people in the woods that probably don't belong there. Now allowing for that, and also allowing that these same people may have any type of firearm, let's concentrate the balance of the discussion on "hunter's with some ethics....and the maturity to exercise it properly".

A person that walks into the woods with a rifle capable of putting all of its shots into say 2" at 100 yards is not necessarily setting themselves up for failure. When, for instance, they know that in over thirty years of deer hunting the longest "rifle shot" they have taken on any whitetail is 95 yards. (Especially when they can't see over 100 yards from their stand.) Now, if that same hunter, using that same rifle positioned themselves on the edge of a field....with shots of over 300 yards a possibility. I'd agree with your premise wholeheartedly. But for us to presume to know the circumstances of each hunter, each hunt, throughout the entire range of possibilities, is speculative at best.

Before you beat me up verbally let me expound. In over thiry years of whitetail hunting, with dozens upon dozens of tagged animals, the longest "rifle shot" whitetail I've ever taken was at 95 yards. (With a .356 Winchester, 200 grain factory load, while on stand in a wooded area.) My actual longest shot on whitetail was a little over 115 yards on a buck with BRI Sabot Slug in a 12 gauge while in a portable tree stand. (Both by the way were successful.) So under these circumstances....a 2" at 100 yard rifle.....is more than adequate.

Let me also say, I like an accurate rifle. And I've entered the woods with many rifles accurate of better than 1" at 100 yards over the years. I've spent many years of woodchuck hunting shooting at ranges over 400 yards frequently. And I've harvasted other species of big game at over 300 yards, (my actual longest shot on a live, previously unwounded, animal). So I am not arguing "against accuracy". I am only stating that for many hunters.....bench rest accuracy is not only not obtainable....but absolutely not necessary. (But the best accuracy you can wring out of your rifle is what you should strive for. It instills confidence, provides practice, familiarity, and allows for the possibility of a long shot if circumstances require.) I only said that each hunter, guided by their circumstances and experience, can decide if they can indeed get by with a 2" group at 100 yards.....or if more accuracy is necessary.

I don't think we disagree on the merits of accuracy. Only maybe on the degree required by individual hunters.....and their circumstances.

Dave

elkaddict

I've shot a number of a-bolts and bars. I've liked them all. If I had to summarize, I'd guess that on average, the BAR shot atleast as well as the a-bolts using factory fodder. I do think the a-bolts benefit from handloads. In the last two years, I've spent quite a bit of time with a bar in 7 mag, 30-06 and a 300 win mag. The 7 mag shot nearly every factory ammo tried into 11/2" at 100 yds, and half the loads would shoot 3 shot groups of 1". The 30-06 was very comparable. With the 300 win, I bought 6 different boxes of factory ammo in 180 grain weight. (I choose not to reload for autos). Hornady heavy magnum grouped about 3/4" and chronographed at 2985 (this was notably slower than the averaged velocity). Winchester ballistic silvertips regularly shoot 1" groups with velocity of 3050. I have a 2.5 X 8 variX III on this rifle. The gun was purchased for mule deer hunting in oaks and quakies where shots can be both short and quite long. It has also been used sucessfully on both elk and antelope out past 300 yds. Although the gun primarily is used as a backup to a 300 wby for deer hunting, in thick brushy country where jumping a big buck on the run is a likelihood, the semi auto action gets the nod(although I must add the gun heavier than I like). My goal with the gun was to have something for brush hunting that still had the accuracy and power to shoot across canyons 400+ yards. I've also used it for an odd elk and antelope hunt just to see how it and the loads performed. It has performed very well-with absolutely no malfunctions. It shoots notably more accurately and reliably than a remington 742 I chased whitetails with back east as a kid (although I have shot a cousin's 7400 that shoots very well). If I were limited to one gun (a terrifying thought), I probably would stick with a bolt action 300 or 340 wby. If most of my hunting was back east chasing whitetails, I'd still opt for the 300 or 7 mm for the odd long shot and the comfort knowing you had enough gun to shoot a once in a lifetime animal from any angle (this assumes you are using fairly heavy premium bullets). Browning rifles are well made--I don't think you can go wrong with either choice.

nc_bowhunter

How did you come to the conclusion that the BAR is more prone to malfunction? I know guys who bought them when the first came out and have still had no problems. They may require more cleaning, but as long as you keep them clean they will function flawlessly.....
As far as accuracy goes I don't think me and Big Guy01 are the only ones that get good accuracy from our BAR's. At 100 yds. I consistently get .75" groups and under.

.358

Cheta, if you want a BAR get one. It is a fine huting rifle,I haven't seen a malfunction in mine since 1969 and it is plenty accurate for deer shooting to 350 yds which is a long way out there. Pick the rifle that is most comfortable for you and fits your hunting conditions. I've shot a lot of a-bolts and they are just fine. It's simply what you like. I would not limit my self to one rifle. When hunting in the wide open of South Dakota I use my .270 , in most places north, East or south of Missouri I use the Bar. or my BLR .358 for bear, moose elk etc. and of course a bolt rifle for varmits.

Stubble jumper I don't think you understood what I was saying. I was simple trying to say use the best too for the job. As to shooting ability I whole heartly agree with you about pratice but the best pratice is to get off the bench, after sighting in, and shoot in all field positions. I was a little offended at first about your reference to me as a bad shot. I'm not. I shoot every day and have a lot of field experience in all kinds of conditions. I shot my first deer 50 yrs ago in the Ozark hills with a boltaction 30-30.

stubblejumper

.358-My statement was that if your brother in law missed three shots before getting his deer on the fourth shot he needs more shooting practise.I still stand behind that statement.
You also said that you watched several deer run away in the timber without having a chance.You did not specify if you managed to get off shots at the deer or not hence my two part response.I replied that if you couldn't get a single shot off with a bolt action a semi auto would not have helped you.On the other hand if you had been regularly getting off shots but missing you only have your shooting to blame.Again I stand behind that statement.As I stated in my post everyone including myself misses game from time to time ,but when the misses become common you should work at improving your shooting accuracy instead of attempting to make up for misses by shooting more shots instead of shooting more accurate shots.As to a persons shooting ability-neither the amount of years that he has hunted or the number of animals that he has killed are reliable indications of his shooting skills.

cybersniper

nc_bowhunter, No one "came to the conclusion" Its a fact. There are less parts to malfunction. This doesn't mean that a auto will malfunction or is not accurate, it's just a fact that there is a greater possibility for malfunction and bolt rifles are in most cases more accurate. This is not a topic to debate, it's a fact. Ask any gunsmith out there.

We are talking about hunting rifles here and as I said in my earlier posts, the BAR is an awesome rifle for this purpose. I would buy one in a heart beat if it would be just for hunting. I am an accuracy freak because shooting high powered rifles is what I do for a living. In my line of work you will never see a military or LE sniper shooting a automatic rifle. That is just me, we are talking hunting here and absolute accuracy is desired but not required.

Cyber