3, 2, 1....... Snark!!

Status
Not open for further replies.
So THAT's where WW is!
nice pix from your slasher weekend, btw. :D
 
Anybody have any experience with the 7mm-08? I'm especially curious about it in relation to youth deer hunting. My .30-06 is a bit more than I want put my young shooters on.
 
good round - necked down .308: lighter recoil, flatter shooting.
recoil is similar to that of a .270, better stability & penetration than a .243.
 
I actually prefer the 6.5x55, but it's tough to find a rifle chambered in that caliber other than the occasional mil-surp piece.
oh, yeah - 7-08 is good for thin skinned game - prairie dog, song-dog, deer, and antelope - but not any of the big bears or moose.
 
DunkEm said:
Anybody have any experience with the 7mm-08? I'm especially curious about it in relation to youth deer hunting. My .30-06 is a bit more than I want put my young shooters on.
Click to expand...

I have no experience with it, but researched it a bit awhile back, and it seems to be a real sweet spot.
Of course you could just go .30-30 too, but that won't get you a ton of range. Style points, tho. :D
 
30-30 is my go to deer slayer. Seldom have a shot over 50-60 yards. What with trees, brush, cedars etc.
 
[video=youtube_share;r4QMsClo2Rw]http://youtu.be/r4QMsClo2Rw[/video]

Yeah, I'm a geek but THIS was awesome to watch!
 
DunkEm said:
Anybody have any experience with the 7mm-08? I'm especially curious about it in relation to youth deer hunting. My .30-06 is a bit more than I want put my young shooters on.
Click to expand...

good round - necked down .308: lighter recoil, flatter shooting.
recoil is similar to that of a .270, better stability & penetration than a .243.
Click to expand...

No personal experience but I do know that it's a necked down .308 like 1066 said. Seemed to be fairly popular a while ago but doesn't seem to be as popular these days. Should be good for what you want it for.
 
daizee said:
I have no experience with it, but researched it a bit awhile back, and it seems to be a real sweet spot.
Of course you could just go .30-30 too, but that won't get you a ton of range. Style points, tho. :D
Click to expand...

zzyzzogeton said:
30-30 is my go to deer slayer. Seldom have a shot over 50-60 yards. What with trees, brush, cedars etc.
Click to expand...

I love my .30-30. It is great for East Texas piney woods, short, quick shots. And everyone knows I'm all about the style points. LOL! But I do love the lever actions. I'm wanting something with that shoots a bit flatter over distance for the boys. (And maybe my own occasional use.)

bigghoss said:
No personal experience but I do know that it's a necked down .308 like 1066 said. Seemed to be fairly popular a while ago but doesn't seem to be as popular these days. Should be good for what you want it for.
Click to expand...

1066vik said:
I actually prefer the 6.5x55, but it's tough to find a rifle chambered in that caliber other than the occasional mil-surp piece.
oh, yeah - 7-08 is good for thin skinned game - prairie dog, song-dog, deer, and antelope - but not any of the big bears or moose.
Click to expand...

I'll have to look around at availability. I want something fairly easy to buy bullets for, and I'll take the .30-06 or something entirely different should I end up in big bear or moose land - or stay indoors - especially around bears.
 
710 said:
Haha so all those ice bucket challenges in CA... Not helping drought.. http://nationalreport.net/ice-bucket-challenge-contributing-california-drought/#sthash.ir3Skc6V.gbpl
Click to expand...

I call BS on that article. Is that "news site" just another one like The Onion, or what?

"Thirty three million gallons of water are wasted on the Ice Bucket Challenge daily in California alone." Really? Do the math... assuming a full 5 gallons of water per challenger... They expect us to believe 6.6 million people are doing the Ice Bucket Challenge every single day just in CA? Gimme a break. :rolleyes:

Just another example of pure nonsense and the worst kind of junk science... it's like saying X-number of babies were born since the recent spread of Ebola, so therefore babies cause Ebola.
 
Last edited:
james terrio said:
Just another example of pure nonsense and the worst kind of junk science... it's like saying X-number of babies were born since the recent spread of Ebola, so therefore babies cause Ebola.
Click to expand...

And ice cream causes shark attacks! :D

Correlation does not imply causation. :thumbup:
 
TBL said:
Sorry about that, let me pull my pants back up :D next time tell me you're not a doctor first! SNARK
Click to expand...

Even if i WAS a doctor, handing me lube after pulling your pants down would still be inappropriate. :D
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top