Pygmy

I agree...I have heard plenty of foxes while hunting coon and foxes at night.. Members of the weasel family (fishers included) are not very vocal..Red and grey foxes, on the other hand, are sometimes VERY vocal, as are other canines, such as coyotes and wolves. The term fisher cat is misleading...Fishers are not even remotely related to cats, other than the fact that they are carniverous predators.

Thank you... I did serve during the Vietnam War, although I never was in a combat zone. Did 2 years active duty on a Navy Destroyer. My Dad served on a Destroyer in the South Pacific in WWII. His ship saw LOTS of action and suffered some casualties. My uncle served in Korea. Several of my high school classmates, including one of my best friends, made the ultimate sacrifice in Vietnam..

Never heard of such a thing, but then I have never shot a deer after dark in a light, either. I do know quite a few guys who have shot deer under a light ( crop damage permits) and none of them ever mentioned it..

Congrats, Eagle, my friend... Great shooting..Can't wait to see the pictures. Did you bring the meat home or donate it ? The meat from the 4x4 that I shot in Colorado in 2000 ( my one and only mule deer) was some of the best venison I have ever eaten.

Nice buck, Dave...Cody, eh..?? Hope you had time to take in the Buffalo Bill Museum... Pretty awesome.. Actually, the terminology of 4 x4 , etc. is pretty recent.. Used to be , a 4 x 4 was called a 4 point, a 3x3 a 3 point, etc. Only if the point count didn't match was it called a 3 x 4 , or whatever. It's only been the last 30 or 40 years that we have heard the expression 4 x 4, yada, yada. WOOOPS.. I just remembered that a lot of you folks weren't even HUNTING 30 or 40 years ago...!... My bad...I think it's my bedtime... MAUDIE..!! Have you seen my bottle of stool softener..??..

The muzzle cover is a good idea.

Geeze, why don't the Weatherby mags come to mind when I think of a cartridge for Joe Average to shoot with factory loads ...??... Must be senility..Early onset of Alshiemer's, I think. Is it time for my nap yet..?...

Yeah, I made it out of the rack one more morning. , Larry.. Now if I can only locate my walker, I'll see if I can make it to the bathroom. Damn trick knee has been giving trouble ever since I wallowed around in the muskeg up in Newfoundland. At my age if you wake up in the morning and don't HURT somewhere, it means you're dead.

You are having WAY too much fun here.... Dinsdale, GO TO YOUR ROOM ! It's way past my bedtime anyway. Maudie...Fetch me my GERITOL.....It's right over between my dentures and my glass eye..

Why Dinsdale...You ARE a RASCAL....!!.....hehehehehe.... You got a PROMISE tonite, or what ? And all this time I thought you were sort of a mild mannered, reserved type of fellow... Kinda like Clark Kent.....

I'm happy just to get a clean sure kill shot within 40 yards with my 3" mag 12. However,the sport is what you make it and if you have the patience to wait for a sure kill shot within .410 bore range, more power to you. I have a friend who kills 3 or 4 gobblers every year in Florida and Georgia with his recurve bow..Most of his kills are within 15 yards... I assume that you have patterned your .410 ..What is your max distance ? I'm guessing perhaps 20 yards, or maybe 25 if your shotgun patterns extra tight.

I hear ya, Culver.... I'm trying to condense my thoughts, not to proove a point, only to let you know how I feel... As far as how the scope affects the handling of the rifle, small and light is GOOD..Large and heavier is BAD... Under hunting conditions when taking shots as they come in any position the field, LONGER field of view is BETTER. QUALITY of manufacture and lenses is PARAMOUNT. It definitely trumps high magnification or the ability to increase magnification. Objectives larger than 33MM to 36MM do not have a significant advantage over smaller objectives with good optics during legal shooting hours. 4X and 6X is sufficient magnification for big game applications at normal ranges. Hehehehe..I think that's it....<<grin>>...

Only thing wrong with the 7MM Rem mag is that it is not as versatile as the 30-06 regarding bullet weights and it burns more powder to get similar velocities with equal bullet weights. Nothing WRONG with the 7MM Rem mag, but it can't perform as well with heavier bullet weights, in the 180-220 grains.. That's why most grizzly/brown bear guides will allow a 30-06 with heavy bullets, but most don't want a 7MM mag in camp. I'm not trashing the 7MMRem mag. It is a useful and very popular loading. I simply prefer more efficient loadings like the .280 Rem, which comes close to 7mm Mag ballistics with less powder and recoil.

Pansy, pansy, PANSY !!! LOL..A .243..What a WUSS...<<grin>>... Actually, Dinsdale's suggestion of the 6.5 Swede sounds pretty sexy to me also... I have always liked difference stuff, like .280 Rem and 9.3 x 62, and 7 x 57... The onliest 30-06 I ever have owned is my Garand, but that chambering is always the one that comes to mind when someone wants ONE rifle to be used for everything, epecially with factory loads...

If you can't engage the safety when the rifle is loaded, there is something wrong with the rifle. I know nothing about Savage 99s, but that is only common sense.. I would say that a trip to your local gunsmith is a good idea.

Culver, my Friend... That would be mostly ME that you talking about... <<grin>>.. First and foremost, let me stress that some of my bias against large, high magnification scopes is based purely on my personal taste... I think they are YEW- GLEE, especially when placed on an other wise attractive hunting rifle. They ruin the nice, smooth lines of a nice looking rifle. I admit that is only my opinion, and beauty is in the eyes of the beholder. Some guys don't care WHAT thier rifle looks like, as long as it performs well. I personally CARE about how my rifle looks like..Life is too short to hunt with an ugly gun. Some guys might like to go to dinner in pink leisure suits, but that is not my taste. Much more important, however, are the physical qualities... Large, high mag scopes are overly bulky and heavy. They ruin the ergonomics of a slick hunting rifle. Ounces count here. I am talking a sporter, here, not a heavy barrel bench or beanfield type gun. They adversely affect the balance. In general, they have less eye relief, especially in the higher powers. Unless they are top end optics, they are generally INFERIOR optically to high quality fixed power scopes. The large objective requires higher scope rings, which adversely affects the handling of the rifle. Also, again unless you buy top end optics, there are many more things that can go wrong with variables. Many times I get sympathetic looks from other hunters when they see my lowly 4x and 6x Leupolds. They wonder why I use such an antiquated optic rather than buying good high power variable, like thier 4-16 Simmons or Barska...<< Sorry..I'm having too much FUN with this>>...hehehehehe... Oh yeah.. I almost forgot... Speaking of 50 MM objectives.. Sure, they let in more light, but I'm not sure that the larger objective on the Simmons (or whatever) would make up for the superior optics on the Leupold. I do know that they don't make any difference in anywhere NEAR legal shooting light. Have you ever looked through a 4X Leupold a half hour before or after legal shooting time ? You might be surprised at how well you can see.. If you are hunting varmints in full darkness, I would have to concede. I have seldom looked through a scope in full darkness .Most of my after dark hunting was for coons and foxes, and there was a spotlight on the critter when I shot it. Besides, the high magnification is NOT NECESSARY in the real world of hunting. If you like it, fine, but don't tell me that having a 12 power scope rather than a 4 or 6 power scope is a big advantage for shooting animals the size of deer or larger at normal ranges ( out to 400 yards) is a big advantage, because I KNOW BETTER. In any case, it doesn't matter to me. Someone asked my opinion and I gave it. I'll try to be a somewhat LESS crotchety old fart in the future...LOL...

As Lawdwaz said, it is kind of boring for some of us gun nuts to have just ONE rifle. However, many hunters have just one and use them to good effect. I have a good friend who likes to hunt, but really has no interest in ballistics or whatever. Years ago, he bought a Rem 700 BDL in .270, with the idea that it would his one hunting rifle. He has used it for years, from PA to Alaska and killed big game from moose to pronghorns with no problems.. He uses Federal Premium 150 grain Noslers for the big stuff and Remington Green 130 grain Corelokts for stuff like antelope and deer. He seldom misses and the only game animal that I can remember that he shot at and did not kill was a wolverine in Alaska that was carrying the mail when he shot at it.

The 30-06 is never a bad choice for a one gun hunter. There are lots of different factory loads and ammo is available anywhere in the world.

A 30-06 WILL smoke a hog with a good hit.. The hog must have been hit in a non vital area not to have been recovered. Did you notice how much Chris FLINCHED when he dropped the hammer on an empty chamber...?.. That was the cause of the loss. I am not criticizing, because I have done the same thing. It's just that it was a case of poor shot placement, rather than hogs being overly tough or the 30-06 being inadequate. In my experience, hogs aren't hard to kill, at least no more so than deer. They fold up pretty quick with good shot placement. If you break a leg, gut shoot them or get a hit on only muscle tissue, they'll go quite a distance, and considering the dense cover in most places that hogs exist, there is a good chance you won't recover them. After studying the video a couple more, I think that the shot may have broken the hog's jaw. It could go a LONG way with a wound like that.

Good Job WNY...... That's the kind of blood trail I like... Short, wide and with a DEAD DEER at the end of it.. Congrats , my Friend...

So are you gonna send us pictures of your deer or the hooker ? <<grin>>.. Good luck on your hunt, Eagle !

littlebird 13...Please forgive me if I sounded a little severe... Keep in mind that I am an opininated old fart. However, for some reason, there seems to be the opinion that the HIGHER the magnification is on a riflescope, the BETTER it is. That is absolutely false as far as big game hunting goes. I cannot imagine needing a magnification above 9 power for any big game hunting inside 400 yards. I have killed big game at ranges from point blank to 400 yards with fixed power 4X and 6X scopes (Leopolds). My BIG scope is a Burris 2x7. I think most hunters would be better served with a QUALITY scope in lower magnifications, than low or medium end variable with higher magnification. If you are shooting small critters, like woodhucks, the higher mag is a definite advantage. For shooting stuff the size of whitetails or even pronghorns, it is not necessary.

<<SIGH>> What possible advantage is there to have such a HIGH MAG variable scope on a hunting rifle.. A 30-06...?? Do you intend to shoot prairie dogs and ground squirrels at long range with it ? 16 power..?? 18 power ??? Good grief, Kid...You would be much better served with a good quality fixed power 4X scope than some of the cheap, over powered, oversized monstronsities that you listed. If you feel you MUST have a variable, get a Burris, Leupold or Nixon in 2 x 7 or 3 x 9.. You'll have a much better hunting rig. I am assuming that are shooting deer and possibly larger critters. A quality 4X like the Leupold M8 gives plenty of magnification for precision shots out to 300 yards ++. How far do you intend to shoot ??

I have no experience with factory loads. I've had my .280 ( Win M70 lightweight) for 25 years and have never fired a factory load through it. I am a huge fan of the caliber, however. It approaches 7MM mag performance while burning considerably less powder , resulting in less recoil and muzzle blast. My rifle has killed game ranging in size from woodchucks to an Alaska bull moose, mostly with 140 grain bullets, although I did use 160 grain Nosler partitions on the moose. I suspect your 140 Corelokts are close to perfect for deer sized game. That Federal Premium load that Lawdwaz posted should be a winner, also, especially if you ever decide to take your .280 elk hunting. Although most of the game I shot with my .280 was taken standard cup and core bullets( mostly Nosler ballistic tips) I just this summer worked up a load featuring the Barnes 140 TTSX, which looks very similar to Federal's load.

I have been browsing around for info on the Amax 168 grain bullet. It is basically a hollow point with a plastic tip to prevent deformation. Some posts I have read say that it is a very effective hunting bullet, although Hornady markets it as a match bullet. I would expect that at the moderate velocities of the 30-06 with Garand friendly powder charges, it might be an excellent deer load. They ain't CHEAP, but how many are you going to shoot while hunting deer.? If you want to hunt deer with your Garand, I think it is a good option, unless you are a handloader, in which case there are much less expensive options.