Setters4life

I would agree with this statement too. The 7mm class of cartridges is a sound choice, thanks to a plethora of good bullet selections. A "small" 7MM (7mm-08 or 7x57) is still on my bucketlist for a future rifle. I had a 7mm Mag. many years ago when I was young and as I grew older felt it was too much gun for my needs so I sold it. I have also been hearing good things about the .260 Remington from a number of friends in Pennsylvania over the past couple of years. The jury is out though to see if it will ever become as popular as the 7mm-08.

I like the 6mm caliber, and it does suffice nicely as a "dual-purpose cartridge" if there really is such a thing, but don't count out the quarterbores (.250 Savage/.257 Roberts/.25-06). I think they are a nice caliber, won't beat up your shoulder and they are easily mastered to reload for and shoot accurately. I respect the merits of a larger bore for certain applications, but as I've gotten older I've sold my magnums and have an affection for the smaller calibers.

Just curious what brand of soft point you're using in the M1? I was thinking of trying some Speer Mag-Tips and Rem Cor-Lokt's I had laying around since they have less soft lead exposed at the nose. I noticed those pointy Hornady's I've been using get battered up a bit feeding. I've thought about taking my M1 out hunting as well. With 48/H4895 and a 150 gr. Hornady SP I am getting 1.8" groups at 100 yds. for 3-shot groups off a benchrest. And that's with those crude sights. Seated w/o a sling hold I can hold 5-shots to 4.5" @ 100 yds. with the peep sights. Not spectacular but I figure that's okay to hunt with.

That was one concern I had with the MG barrel. I realize the newer Ballard-style rifling and twist is geared to lead bullets but some info I picked up on the Marlin forums seemed to indicate otherwise, so I tried it. I haven't seen evidence of leading, and those velocities are pretty mild compared to what you could go to. The 700X load I tried was in the 1400fps range but accuracy was not good. I want to try Unique next as a powder alternative. These groups were shot off a sandbag rest, nothing too scientific either. It was 95 degrees the last time I was out and it wasn't the most comfortable time I had on the bench either. I tried my hunting loads that day as well and couldn't manage anything better than a 2" 3-shot group at 100 yards. Not my best outing, for I've done better in the past. My MG barrel has been shot a bit over the years so I am sure it's broken in and somewhat smoother than a factory new bore too.

This is but one reason why I like to handload. A month or so ago I went to the range with a goal to try and find some reduced lead bullet handloads that would shoot well in my old .444 Marlin w/ its MicroGroove barrel. Some posts on the Marlin Forums peaked my interest to make a light plinking lead load that would shoot. Two powders I tried initially were 700X and Blue Dot. I quickly determined that the 700X loads were not going to cut it for accuracy but the Blue Dot load of 11 grs. with a lead 240 gr. SWC showed promise at 25 yards. 25 yd. group So I settled on the 11.0 grs. of Blue Dot load with some 240 gr. Hornady SWC's I had laying around and CCI primers. This combination printed the tightest group at 25 yds. and seemed like a great plinking load. POI is woefully off from my standard hunting load of 46 grs. of 4198 with the Hornady 265 gr. FP. Sight adjustment to raise the point of impact was necessary to get these to print on the target. But these reduced loads are a lot more comfortable on my shoulder in the summer. Rifle wears a Leupold 1.75x5 variable for optics so it's not overweight by any means. Now I'll work on final zeroing of the scope to get these to print properly so practice is meaningful. When handloading so little powder in a big case I used a bit of polyester filler over the powder in each case prior to seating the bullet and final crimp to keep the powder close to the primer's flash hole for consistent ignition. Last week I spent some more time at the range sighting in and managed some okay groups at longer distances with these reduced loads. Recoil is negligible compared to hunting handloads and this one is definitely a pleasurable round to shoot. Essentialy, what I'm shooting here is something in the power range of a .44 Special. It offers 742 ft.-lbs. of energy at the muzzle and still has 500+ ft.-lbs. of energy at 100 yards. Yet recoil energy is a little more than 4 ft.-lbs. compared to the 23 ft.-lbs. of my hunting load. What I accomplished was making myself a light plinking load tuned to the rifle, that's fairly accurate, and is cheap to shoot. Was it worth the time to tinker and test over the course of a few outings? My answer would be "yes!" 50 yd. group, maximum spread 1.654": 100 yd. group, maximum spread 2.855", MOA=2.7" (impact was off the paper due to drop but group shows potential)

That's some nice looking cover Steve

As others have noted, pick up a good reloading manual and read. There's tons of stuff on the 'net, some good, some convoluted. Here are a couple of links explaining the basics and terminology from Gun Tests magazine: http://home.earthlink.net/~driveabout/part1.htm http://home.earthlink.net/~driveabout/part2.htm

Nice looking dog.

My favorite time to hunt them is in a snowstorm. I find they hung the terrain closer. Even though I upland hunt I manage to set aside some days to hunt them and take a few each year.

As for information, PC's and the internet weren't available when I started, so manuals like Speer, Hornady and Lyman were what I read. New manuals are sometimes necessary to keep up with the new powders developed and available. Each powder manufacturer has a website today where you can search out starting loads. All (Alliant, Hodgdon, Winchester, DuPont, etc.) produce a small booklet that has a list of loads for each of the powders they produce applicable for a given cartridge. Reloading manuals are a little better at defining what is typically the best powder to use for a given caliber/bullet combination. A lot of books and articles I read when I was younger by the likes of Hagel, Petzal, Askins, O'Connor, Carmichael, Kieth, Milek, Page, Nonte, Jurras listed pet loads that I'd occassionally try too. Today a lot of forums on the internet offer sections with reloading data that are pretty useful too. Sharing of information is good. Some of the target forums are really good too. There is information overload out there today compared to a few decades ago, so I know why this can be dizzying. As you become more familiar you'll absorb everything. Some favorite forum sites: http://www.longrangehunting.com/forums/ http://www.accurateshooter.com/forum/index.php http://m14tfl.com/upload/ http://www.noslerreloading.com/phpBB2/index.php http://forums.handloads.com/login_user.asp?FID=0 http://www.6mmbr.com/index.html http://www.thecmp.org/forums/

Correction, I meant H4895, my favorite powder for the .30's for target shooting.

I have yet to use a digital scale. Haven't upscaled to one yet (no pun intended.) I'd like to try one someday though. They seem slick. Still use the my old RCBS 5-0-5 scale to individually weigh hunting & target loads. For volume shooting of high power target loads in .308 & .30-06 using IMR4895 powder, I've had good success using a powder thrower once it's set properly. Groups are impressive enough to tell me it works. Ball powders like W760 work beautifully in this thrower but I've never gotten a load to shoot well with this powder in my guns. As is always the dilemma for the reloader, I'm still experimenting.

Been reloading shotshells since the 60's. Started centerfire reloading in the 70's. It seems like it was just SOOOOO cheap back then to reload too. Prices of components have simply skyrocketed in the last ten years. I like the fact you can accurately tune most centerfire arms with the right handload. I haven't shot game with a factory load, so I guess I reload a lot.

Both are great dogs. I have hunted over both in my years. Both are Spaniel's and traditionally Spaniel's are flushing dogs. But I have hunted over Spinger's that were trained to point but most Springer's are true flushing dogs. You may not want that for grouse & woodcock. The Brittany's have been breed over the years to be pointing dogs as they are today and they make very good upland dogs with stylish points. I have hunted over a number of my friend's Brittany's and they are great dogs on grouse and woodcock. Springer's make a great pheasant dog though. They are rough and tumble dogs and work well on this type of bird. It's really what your tastes are and hunting style and game pursued. I know fellows who hunt grouse with Labs and do very well indeed. Good luck in your selection.

I just started working up some handloads for this rifle. Hopefully I'll have something dialed in by end of summer that I'll be happy with. Not exactly a gun for "mooching" through the woods but it's proving itself to be accurate with the right combination of bullet and powder. It might be a good rifle for stand hunting. My 1952 M70: Wears an early Weaver K4 scope with fine crosshair reticle: Classic caliber:

I remember the days when muzzleloaders were cheap and simple. There were also fewer choices. My caplock Renegade was a cheap investment for me almost thirty years ago and it has served me well over the years. And back when I got it I considered it "modern" by muzzleloader standards. http://huntingny.com/forums/index.php/topic,203.0.html The inlines and new powders have taken things to a different level today, and somehow seem to have gravitated away from what made these "primitive" weapons. But I welcome change and there is nothing wrong with them, they just elevate the game. Every now and then I see some good deals on used ML's. There's an awful lot of "used once or twice" ML's out there too.

Three years ago my son and I saw a bobcat cross a road in Rockland County. Certainly not the "wilds" if you think that's only where they should be. As if on queue, when we saw it we both turned to look at each other and said unbelieveably; "That's a bobcat!"

Any public lands where these can be found? I'm guessing the best places to hunt them would be on private farmland. That of course warrants permission.

Yes. All that was entailed was drilling and tapping one hole in the rear metal tang piece. It was obvious to me from the get-go that the rear square open sights were okay, but not for my eyes at ranges beyond 50 yards. Peeps are more precise and it's been on there for a long time now and served me well.

I have only one muzzleloader, a .54 cal. T/C Renegade which I purchased new back in 1981. It's the only one I've ever used and I've never seen a need for change. I think I paid $159 for it new. The only changes I made to it was remove the rear sight, added a T/C rear peep sight, and removed the square partridge front sight and replaced that with a T/C bead. I then took the T/C bead, drilled a tiny recess in the face, and added a spot of white paint for contrast. It's always proven to be accurate with one load, which I have never deviated from over the years. Here's an old target I saved that was shot from the bench using sandbags with my new peep sights at 100 yards.

I have a number of rifles, but this has been my "go to" rifle for the last twenty years. Not exactly laser-like trajectory, but for under 150 yards it's more than adequate. With handloaded 265 gr. FP's, it's accurate and efficient.

Grouse are one of the most elusive game birds. They are truly a challenge and a worthwhile trophy. Some grouse tails I've saved over the years. Displayed to denote the different color variations found (gray, brown, or sometimes referred to as red or a combination of both): Colorations and locales they were taken: Not that I think there are trophy grouse out there, but this was the largest grouse tail I've ever measured in forty years:

Yep, the thicker the cover the better for grouse. Although I've found pheasant in some pretty thick cover as well. Different food sources, different habitat. Not many "native" pheasants around these parts but there are still some native grouse around. And of course, woodcock are found in those wet, aldery, grassy areas where their number one food source are worms.

Anyone?

I've shot a 6MM Rem. in a M700 for a number of years now. Great dual-capability cartridge like the .243 Win. I reload and it's proven to be one accurate cartridge for me with bullet weights from 75 grs. to 105 grs. I've come to like the smaller bores so much I've picked up a couple of .257 Roberts over the last ten years to add to my collection of rifle calibers. The .257 Roberts is another great round. You realize the most potential if you reload for this cartridge too. If you like to shoot and practice a lot, the .24's and .25's are two nice calibers that are easy on the shoulder and easy on the pocketbook if you reload. I agree that the .243/6MM may be the minimum for deer, but in knowledgeable and capable hands, it's a good choice. You just need to be cognizant of its limitations. As for something else, I own nothing between the calibers of .25 to .30 that I'd recommend from personal experience until I get in the .30's. I've never gotten anything in between the .25's and the .30's yet, but always wanted a .270, a 7mm/08, a .260Rem., a 7x57, or 6.5x55; and have thought about one of these for years. (I had a 7mm Mag. but sold it. It was too expensive to pull the trigger at the range even though I was reloading for it some twenty years ago.) A .308 would make a good dual-purpose gun as well. I think all of these calibers could serve well as a dual-purpose gun. For me, I just haven't found the next right one in the right gun yet. But I'm looking. ;D