Tactical rifle thoughts


Know anyone who ever fired one of those? My old range instructor (tough as nails, buys and shoots the ehck out of every new magnum hand gun and long gun) says it was VERY tough to handle in hotter loads.
The co-pilot, however, is a great firearm in reasonable loads, and handles even some of the bigger boys (don't know about the .50 Alaskan, never fired it) in a close approximation to comfort. Wouldn't mind having one in bear country, or behind the seat of the truck next to the BOB.
 
Know anyone who ever fired one of those? My old range instructor (tough as nails, buys and shoots the ehck out of every new magnum hand gun and long gun) says it was VERY tough to handle in hotter loads.
The co-pilot, however, is a great firearm in reasonable loads, and handles even some of the bigger boys (don't know about the .50 Alaskan, never fired it) in a close approximation to comfort. Wouldn't mind having one in bear country, or behind the seat of the truck next to the BOB.


You do realize that you have now entered the NFA Class 3 firearm realm, requiring back-ground checks, fingerprinting and a $200 tax stamp. Not to mention the LLCs creation or local LEO sign-off you'll be required to have, the sign-off which can be difficult or impossible to get for large areas of the US depending on where your located, as nowdays less and less will do the sign-off.

Seems like an awful lot of paperwork and cost to jump thru for something that any 41 or 44 magnum Ruger handgun could duplicate.
 
You do realize that you have now entered the NFA Class 3 firearm realm, requiring back-ground checks, fingerprinting and a $200 tax stamp. Not to mention the LLCs creation or local LEO sign-off you'll be required to have, the sign-off which can be difficult or impossible to get for large areas of the US depending on where your located, as nowdays less and less will do the sign-off.

Seems like an awful lot of paperwork and cost to jump thru for something that any 41 or 44 magnum Ruger handgun could duplicate.


For the co-pilot? I thought that the bushwhacker was the only class 3? I don't own either, but I know he was Class 3 licensed.
 
Gee, Mr. Wilson, but is it Tact Ti Cool??
munk


YMMV, while cool they may be, IHMO they do not in any fix form or fashion represent precision and or tactical rifles within the general parameters expressed by the thread author.

Far be it for me to judge; but I think this thread has been hijacked, possibly by the use of the word "tactical" in his original post, which has opened up the thread to far too many other rifles than was originally intended.
 
hijacked threads are common as corn flakes around here. I've already spoken what I think of the word 'tactical'.

it doesn't really hurt us much, but it's awful silly how often it is used both in conversation and in ads.
Anything converted or used as a weapon by knowledge becomes tactical, imho.


munk
 
Mike,
Sorry for the adventure in discussion but it does illustrate how a general term, without parameters, can be misconstrued. There are plenty of formats that can bridge more common uses such as hunting and pleasure shooting with a rifle that can be relied on to produce good precision under adverse conditions.
A good platform is the 700 VS in 308,HS stock is good quality, shorten the barrel(20 or 22") to move balance back between the hands and improve portability for hunting, bed action, trigger adjusted to suit, quality mounts for scope(Talley, Seekins, Warne), quality variable with repeatable adjustments(either a ranging reticle or LRF). Then it is on to a school to imiprove the shooters abilities and produce a good dope card. .308 match and hunting ammo are widely available and reasonable in cost- cartridge is suitable for most big game in N.A. I doubt there are many of us that need more, that we choose to go further is a priviledge.
Thinking about my LVSF in 7mm-08, were it to be found in .308- I think it might do for 90% of my shooting.
Bill
 
I've fired the Co-Pilot (Non class-3) with some of the willy whup a$$ Buffalo Bore ammo. It wasn't something to curl up to at the bench all day, but I've fired alot worse.

Never fired the Bushwhacker, and I wouldn't want to without the full stock. I've no doubt it'll be a little more uncomfortable, but I wouldn't want it for Benchwork, I'd want it for general use woodsloafing, canoeing, etc.

Granted, it is a bit silly in the pistol chamberings, but I can see alot of good in the .457 that can also chamber 45/70 as well as .410 shotgun shells. The 350 grain bullet at 2200 fps seems pretty noteworthy.

a class 3 is a bit of a PITA, but it's still just paperwork, $200 and a little bit of waiting. (State Troopers are very gracious about signing them in my area)
well worth it if you truly like a particular firearm.

My thoughts are quite similar to Munks' in that "tactical" means nothing to me. I don't believe in tactical guns, knives, flashlights,coffee cups, fishbowls, or anything else with that name. "Tactical" is nothing more than a term intended to manipulate the ignorant masses.

My rifles have earned thier keep. They've been carried for countless miles,in rain, snow, wind, dropped in mud and rivers, thrown in canoes, light aircraft, and still fired every time with lethality. they are good rifles for moose, bear, and caribou, though they remain distinctly unattractive. I don't think I'd feel foolish relying on them to protect my family. I'd still rather not have them referred to as "tactical" though.
 
I'm not sure the Bushwacker is silly in pistol chamberings. If it had a full stock, yes, definately silly. But used as a short arm, almost a pistol in size, you get fast repeat shots with handgun ammo. If you had rifle stuff in there, it would not hold at all, flip up all over the place with recoil. So in a stubbed rifle form, the hottest pistol rounds do make sense.

I'm not interested enough to do it, though. A Ruger in 480 calibre has everything a outdoors defense gun should have; it fires a large diameter, heavy slug at a high handgun velocity, but is not so over powered as to make repeat shots difficult. The 480 shoots well.

I was saying to a fellow firearms fanatic the other day; "Why doesn't someone take the Winchester short mag case, neck it up to 375 or 416, and put it in a semi auto carbine?" Instant classic woods rifle and self defense arm.


munk
 
You bring up a darn good point, Munk. My first deer Rifle was a Marlin 1894 in .357 Mag. I remember it having a velocity right around 2000 FPS with most 125 grain bullets, and it had very negligible recoil. Something like that with the Bushwacker mods would probably suit my wife extremely well. (she has severe medical problems in her hands and shoulders that prevent her firing most any kind of serious weapons.) Of course, bigger bore is better, especially if you can download them. (.44 Mag/.44 Special, .45 Colt/.454 Cassull, etc)
There's alot to say for controllability, hence the reason I've never carried a handgun chambered for much more than a .45 Colt or auto.

Still not impressed with the idea of not having a stock, but I've always been that way about shotguns and rifles.:o
 
Runs With Scissors:
And you are right: attempts to crossbreed rifles and handguns usually result in a weapon not as quick as a handgun and not as stable as a rifle.
I like single shot pistols, or bolt action pistols, and have hunted with them. But if I wanted a regular carry defense tool, I'd either opt for a real carbine, or a real handgun. And the handgun must be usable, and quick. The SW 500 weighs 72 ounces empty. You shoot it with two hands. At 4.5 lbs unloaded it's ungainly. Add a pound and get a carbine, as long as both hands are occupied, a longer sight radius and more power if neccesary. Actually, the 500 makes sense as a carbine round more than a handgun round.

I like the idea of a 416 Winchester short mag. The 375 might be even better, and able to obtain a real deer hunting trajectory.

The firearms market has proved it likes fresh ideas. Where are they now?


munk
 
Back
Top