What's your brush gun

[Buckmaster7600]

Time and a place for everything.  I don't see how you can get on target faster with a scope than with open sights.  I can tell you that the M16/M4 with open sights is awfully good for target aquisition and accurate too.  
As for deer hunting, I happen to agree with you.  Because of my hunting style I only carry a scoped rifle.  I do think there are guys that could outdraw you in the brush with an open sighted 30-30 or a slug gun, pardner.  

I was involved in the Marine Corps testing when they were going from Iron sights to optics and target engagement time and accuracy improved substantially when going to a 4X optic over the standard iron sights on a M16/M4. It's been proven other places as well. Even on handguns the Trend is to use optics because target engagement is faster.

The only time irons have an edge over an optic in the brush is in snow and rain because flipping caps open takes too long even if you practice it.

A low power optic has everything over irons in the brush, the biggest advantage is field of view. Irons cover too much of the target on a running deer when you're trying to pick your hole, peeps are better but still cover way more than an optic.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Buckmaster7600]

How about an 80gr bullet?
Now I'll say that this is the only Barnes bullet I've ever recovered as all others have exited.  This is (and I apologize to those that have seen these pics from me before) a Barnes TTSX 6mm bullet shot from my .243  Muzzle velocity approx 3300fps.
The shot was 235 yards head on at a mature Pennsylvania doe.  It hit her square in the chest and flipped her over like a burger on a grill.  Being as PA shooting hours are 30 minutes past sunset I didn't get down to her until it was pretty dark.  I dressed her off but noted that there didn't appear to be an exit wound.  I butchered her like all other deer I shoot but save a one roast from the hindquarter, you know, the one that looks like a football??  Well that winter I was slicing up that roast as we were going to make some stew and it needed to be in chunks.  As I sliced away I felt a slight "dragging" on the knife.  I pulled it open and found this bullet......stem to stern on an adult (maybe 100lbs dressed) doe. 
It still weighs what it started at, 80 grains. 
If I'd have used a 140 grain TTSX in my 7mm-08 it might still be going or at the very least ended up in West Virginia.



 

I also shoot Barnes and You've been doing this long enough and had enough success to know what you like and what works for you but different styles of hunting requires different things. Recovering a perfectly expanded Barnes from a 120lb "just an average" is a lot different from the 180+ lb ADK bucks I target. Not only that but I would assume that you were hunting from a stand or a blind where you had time to wait for the shot you wanted. As a tracker I don't have that ability I have to be able to take what shot I'm "offered" often these are not your ideal broadside shots.

The only Barnes I have recovered from my whelen was a 225gn that went in the white spot and out the brown spot of a 205lb buck that was laying in his bed and the bullet was laying about 15ft behind him on top of the dusting of now. That bullet traveled through over 50" of deer. To me that is about as perfect as you can ask for from a bullet.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Hunter007]

6 minutes ago, Buckmaster7600 said:

I also shoot Barnes and You've been doing this long enough and had enough success to know what you like and what works for you but different styles of hunting requires different things. Recovering a perfectly expanded Barnes from a 120lb "just an average" is a lot different from the 180+ lb ADK bucks I target. Not only that but I would assume that you were hunting from a stand or a blind where you had time to wait for the shot you wanted. As a tracker I don't have that ability I have to be able to take what shot I'm "offered" often these are not your ideal broadside shots.

The only Barnes I have recovered from my whelen was a 225gn that went in the white spot and out the brown spot of a 205lb buck that was laying in his bed and the bullet was laying about 15ft behind him on top of the dusting of now. That bullet traveled through over 50" of deer. To me that is about as perfect as you can ask for from a bullet.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

This another gun I am thinking about getting

The New  Auto-Ordnance M1 Carbine 

Is something I really like and if I can get a 5 round mag for it 

I would consider deer  hunting  with  it .

At under 75 yards should work good don't you think .

 

[Buckmaster7600]

Yea I have that on 2 rifles  of mine 

See thru scope mounts are like having a wife and a girl friend. Neither are ever happy and it don't work out the way you wanted it to.

It's one of the other. If your comb on your stock allows proper cheek weld for rifle sights then your face is floating when attempting to look through the scope and if you have a raised comb "Monte Carlo" stock with see throughs it's way too hard to burry your face low enough to use the irons.



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Buckmaster7600]

This another gun I am thinking about getting
The New  Auto-Ordnance M1 Carbine 
Is something I really like and if I can get a 5 round mag for it 
I would consider deer  hunting  with  it .
At under 75 yards should work good don't you think .
 

5 round mag would still hang out the bottom making carrying 1 handed a pain. If you want a short light semi in a short range cartridge find an old Ruger 44mag carbine.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Lawdwaz]

16 minutes ago, Buckmaster7600 said:

I also shoot Barnes and You've been doing this long enough and had enough success to know what you like and what works for you but different styles of hunting requires different things. Recovering a perfectly expanded Barnes from a 120lb "just an average" is a lot different from the 180+ lb ADK bucks I target. Not only that but I would assume that you were hunting from a stand or a blind where you had time to wait for the shot you wanted. As a tracker I don't have that ability I have to be able to take what shot I'm "offered" often these are not your ideal broadside shots.

The only Barnes I have recovered from my whelen was a 225gn that went in the white spot and out the brown spot of a 205lb buck that was laying in his bed and the bullet was laying about 15ft behind him on top of the dusting of now. That bullet traveled through over 50" of deer. To me that is about as perfect as you can ask for from a bullet.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

And I wouldn't hesitate to shoot that same 205lb buck with the 80gr TTSX in any position he presented me.

Edited January 11, 2018 by Lawdwaz

[Hunter007]

8 minutes ago, Buckmaster7600 said:

5 round mag would still hang out the bottom making carrying 1 handed a pain. If you want a short light semi in a short range cartridge find an old Ruger 44mag carbine.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

What do you think of the Ruger MINI-THIRTY  7.62X39

Pretty light as well 

I like the ruger 44 mag  but Buying used  gun can be a crap shot dont no what you  got until you use it .

[steve863]

23 minutes ago, Buckmaster7600 said:

See thru scope mounts are like having a wife and a girl friend. Neither are ever happy and it don't work out the way you wanted it to.

It's one of the other. If your comb on your stock allows proper cheek weld for rifle sights then your face is floating when attempting to look through the scope and if you have a raised comb "Monte Carlo" stock with see throughs it's way too hard to burry your face low enough to use the irons.



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

i wouldn't be caught dead with see thru mounts. The worst part is that most are of poor quality.  Typically made of cheap quality aluminum.  For a big game rifle if mounts are not made of solid steel, i don't want them.  

[Buckmaster7600]

What do you think of the Ruger MINI-THIRTY  7.62X39
Pretty light as well 
I like the ruger 44 mag  but Buying used  gun can be a crap shot dont no what you  got until you use it .

I don't like 7.62x39 too light of bullets traveling too slow for my taste.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[stubborn1VT]

8 hours ago, Buckmaster7600 said:

I was involved in the Marine Corps testing when they were going from Iron sights to optics and target engagement time and accuracy improved substantially when going to a 4X optic over the standard iron sights on a M16/M4. It's been proven other places as well. Even on handguns the Trend is to use optics because target engagement is faster.
 

Of course you were!  I'm not doubting you, but you must have been using a different 4X than I ever have.  I don't see how that's possible at any kind of magnification.  Whatever.  I'm going to be wrong no matter what I write in your presence.  Carry on.

[Daveboone]

I think brush gun is kind of defined by where you live. Most all my deer hunting is in northern woodland, where a true 100yard shot through the woods is an exception, 50 yards frequently stretching it. I used to hunt southern tier hedgerows a lot, where deer frequently could be seen at 25 yards or less, but very thick brush, goldenrod, etc. covered most of them. We used to brag up our slug guns for down south, but now that we can use rifles with scopes and pick our shots better, we have much better success. No substitute for picking your clear shot. That said, I prefer my .308 savage lever for most any conditions. I will not be shooting through brush to make a shot.

[Hunter007]

2 hours ago, stubborn1VT said:

Of course you were!  I'm not doubting you, but you must have been using a different 4X than I ever have.  I don't see how that's possible at any kind of magnification.  Whatever.  I'm going to be wrong no matter what I write in your presence.  Carry on.

Maybe because the younger generation grow up  playing video games and they always make the optics seem to work the fastest in those games  maybe a simple red dot could be faster nothing with magnification. 

Maybe I'm wrong but for me i like  iron sites if I want  fast shooting .

[Culvercreek hunt club]

2 hours ago, stubborn1VT said:

Of course you were!  I'm not doubting you, but you must have been using a different 4X than I ever have.  I don't see how that's possible at any kind of magnification.  Whatever.  I'm going to be wrong no matter what I write in your presence.  Carry on.

I think that a lot of guys that don't like the scopes in these situations and don't want to use them just haven't had enough experience with them. I see more guys shoulder the gun,  fidget to get a clear view of the scope and then try to acquire the target looking through the scope.  Properly set up, if you shoulder the gun with your eyes closed, then open your eyes the full scope view should be there. If not it isn't set up right for you. The other mistake I see people make is trying to find the target through the scope. Properly set up if you keep your eyes on the target and shoulder the gun with a low mag scope you will be on target even if it is moving. You are bringing the scope into your line of sight not hunting for the target. IMO

Edited January 11, 2018 by Culvercreek hunt club

[wolc123]

On 1/9/2018 at 10:45 PM, Lawdwaz said:

Lens caps might set you back $24

I’ve never killed a deer with any open sighted shotgun or rifle because I’ve never carried one.  Also, rest assured rain or snow has never kept me in camp or at home. 

Any thought that open sights are an advantage is silly.  

If your looking for a challenge or need to scratch a nostalgic itch, open sights are for you.  You’ll kill more deer with a scope....easily. 

The advantage of the open sights in the rain/snow comes in the time it takes to get those lens covers off or opened.   I have also killed a lot more with a scope, but I am much more comfortable spending $ 500 on a compact, open-sight brush gun, than I am with throwing away $ 24 on lens caps (or a scale).   It is a lot easier to get close to a deer in the brush, when the wind is blowing hard and it is raining or snowing or the brush is covered with snow.  Getting shot(s) off fast, at close range, in those conditions, should be easier with open sights.   Especially if you have practiced thousands of shots in the off-season (gotta love those Daisy red-ryders).   

That said though, I am still using a scoped rifle in fair to moderate weather conditions for the reasons you say.   I have not heard from anyone else who has perfectly executed a Texas Heart shot, but I know I would not have had a prayer with open sights on that one.    Don't jump on me there, until you go back and edit out where you said you would "fire an 80 grain bullet at a deer from ANY angle".  I used 150 grains from 50 yards there with a variable power scope set at 3X.    Happy Hunting    

[Lawdwaz]

3 hours ago, wolc123 said:

 

 

3 hours ago, wolc123 said:

The advantage of the open sights in the rain/snow comes in the time it takes to get those lens covers off or opened.   I have also killed a lot more with a scope, but I am much more comfortable spending $ 500 on a compact, open-sight brush gun, than I am with throwing away $ 24 on lens caps (or a scale).   It is a lot easier to get close to a deer in the brush, when the wind is blowing hard and it is raining or snowing or the brush is covered with snow.  Getting shot(s) off fast, at close range, in those conditions, should be easier with open sights.   Especially if you have practiced thousands of shots in the off-season (gotta love those Daisy red-ryders).   

That said though, I am still using a scoped rifle in fair to moderate weather conditions for the reasons you say.   I have not heard from anyone else who has perfectly executed a Texas Heart shot, but I know I would not have had a prayer with open sights on that one.    Don't jump on me there, until you go back and edit out where you said you would "fire an 80 grain bullet at a deer from ANY angle".  I used 150 grains from 50 yards there with a variable power scope set at 3X.    Happy Hunting    

I won't even bother to retort your 1st paragraph as it's too crazy.......

As to the 2nd paragraph, you'll need to head back up to my comment and properly quote it.  The 80gr bullet would be a Barnes TTSX, not just any 80gr bullet. 

Do you have any experience with Barnes bullets?

 

Edited January 12, 2018 by Lawdwaz

[Hunter007]

On 1/11/2018 at 9:32 PM, Lawdwaz said:

 

I won't even bother to retort your 1st paragraph as it's too crazy.......

As to the 2nd paragraph, you'll need to head back up to my comment and properly quote it.  The 80gr bullet would be a Barnes TTSX, not just any 80gr bullet. 

Do you have any experience with Barnes bullets?

 

For me it depends on the range i will be hunting at  and what im huntng and what gun i am using . Some of my guns are set up for only a scope .

And as for scope caps I keep losing them  lol  do you guys use glue or something

I am not going to debate which is better because it obvouse in good conditions scope is. 

As far as speed goes probably depends on which one you have more practice at  and how close and if it's moving or not . Would you duck hunt with a scope for example when you know you will be trying to hit moving targets ?

Btw just read a article about how the Marines are changing all there guns to have optics on them but there still going to have flip up iron sites for back up .

The thing with that is you don't know  if  they did that because it is that much better or because some military contractor wanted to sell them a  high priced scope. So they could  rip off the US tax payer just a little more . In the same article they said the new rifles would be 2 pounds lighter .

Having both on a gun probably is the best of both worlds .

 

 

Edited January 13, 2018 by Storm914