|
Post by jimstc on May 22, 2015 17:51:03 GMT -5
INhuntin, thanks for the pictures. A very precise shot. Congrats on your accuracy. Don't underestimate a fully rifled 12 gauge with sabot slugs. They can reach out much farther than 30 or 40 yards and their effect is devastating. Several loads recommend zero at 90 yards+. Confirmed kills at 150 yards +. Nonetheless, I am already putting together my 300 BLK pistol build. Will really appreciate a PM with your build specs.
|
|
|
Post by Jamie Brooks 1John5:13 on May 22, 2015 20:33:07 GMT -5
I appreciate your input and knowledge swilk. The bullet did go through the middle of this branch. So, are you thinking then that the bullets that are designed to give greater penetration don't splinter as quickly or easily? Are you thinking that this type of bullet isn't the best choice for deer? That is a great choice for hunting deer.(Sorry for the graphic deer hunting photos) I hunted with that very round (Hornady .300 Whisper 110gr V-max)last season with an AR pistol & took a doe 75 yds out with one shot. It was a perfect shot she stumbled about another ten ft. then dropped. A very small .30 cal hole entry wound. The exit wound is a lot larger almost the size of a hard ball. When I say perfect shot I mean perfect, it took the bottom off of the heart & passed through both lungs she went fast. If you only take deer out to about 30 or 40 yds you would be better off using a shotgun. But out farther the bullet has time to slow down & causes more damage. I like the .300 blackout or Whisper because of the low recoil & amazing accuracy. I can keep a soft ball sized pattern out past 100yds easily from my 9.5" barreled pistol. Thanks for the photos and explanation. I'd say that was a perfect shot! I don't see how she made it 10'. I'd like to see this type of impact on deer hunting with the passing of the HPR bill ...quick clean kills. On opening day, I heard 5 shots seemingly to be from the same shotgun. I can't imagine the need for this. To me it was someone taking a bad first shot or shooting at a moving target. This mentality will be in the woods regardless of HPR or not. INhuntin', I really like the 300 blackout, but I like a lot of things. I was thinking that the velocity was too great when I hit this branch. Hopefully some day I'll get to hunt with it.
|
|
|
Post by firstwd on May 27, 2015 19:53:21 GMT -5
I had a thought about possible restrictions.
Hunter orange is not required on blinds placed 4 feet or higher above the ground.
Could an elevation restriction be the answer to full inclusion across all terrains in the state?
Fear and studies about bullet travel distance seem to be based on firing level to the ground. If use was restricted to someone elevated 5 feet or above, that would theoretically make all rounds traveling toward a backstop made of the ground.
Yes, I know there are exceptions to every thing, but we all know places where that 4 foot high blind could be below most all the surrounding terrain.
|
|
|
Post by Jamie Brooks 1John5:13 on May 27, 2015 19:58:34 GMT -5
I had a thought about possible restrictions. Hunter orange is not required on blinds placed 4 feet or higher above the ground. Could an elevation restriction be the answer to full inclusion across all terrains in the state? Fear and studies about bullet travel distance seem to be based on firing level to the ground. If use was restricted to someone elevated 5 feet or above, that would theoretically make all rounds traveling toward a backstop made of the ground. Yes, I know there are exceptions to every thing, but we all know places where that 4 foot high blind could be below most all the surrounding terrain. I don't know much, but I think shooting from an elevated position would make me feel better about it, but of course, the same pistol gets to shoot from level ground now.
|
|
|
Post by Jamie Brooks 1John5:13 on May 27, 2015 19:58:57 GMT -5
Heck, just pass it and then we'll find out what's in it!
|
|
|
Post by js2397 on May 27, 2015 20:07:44 GMT -5
They won't pass an elevated stand restriction, since almost all hunting injuries are falls from treestands.
|
|
|
Post by mrfixit on May 27, 2015 20:14:22 GMT -5
I hope the proposals return in a year or two but with a few added limitations such as magazine limits etc. It's ridiculous we can't use traditional deer hunting rounds such as the 45/70, 30/30 or the .35 Remington.
|
|
|
Post by greghopper on May 27, 2015 21:38:25 GMT -5
I had a thought about possible restrictions. Hunter orange is not required on blinds placed 4 feet or higher above the ground. Could an elevation restriction be the answer to full inclusion across all terrains in the state? Fear and studies about bullet travel distance seem to be based on firing level to the ground. If use was restricted to someone elevated 5 feet or above, that would theoretically make all rounds traveling toward a backstop made of the ground. Yes, I know there are exceptions to every thing, but we all know places where that 4 foot high blind could be below most all the surrounding terrain. Why do you think Hunter Orange is required at all times when in a stand? Even though the blinds is not required to have orange, if your in it you got to have it on at all times!
|
|
|
Post by drs on May 28, 2015 4:31:22 GMT -5
I hope the proposals return in a year or two but with a few added limitations such as magazine limits etc. It's ridiculous we can't use traditional deer hunting rounds such as the 45/70, 30/30 or the .35 Remington. I agree!!! One can now use "Straight-walled" cartridges like the .45-70 or .444 Marlin in the State of Ohio. They don't have a min./max. on cartridge length, like Indiana has.
|
|
|
Post by dbd870 on May 28, 2015 8:18:48 GMT -5
While I would be fine with the addition of straight walled cases I'm to the point of either open it up or leave it alone. No more games
|
|
|
Post by thecommissioner on Jun 9, 2015 8:05:50 GMT -5
I'm betting Indiana watches the Ohio straight-walled case experience and uses that as justification to do the same.
|
|
|
Post by swilk on Jun 9, 2015 8:24:27 GMT -5
Doubt it. Be hard to justify changing language to make what is already legal, and clearly spelled out as legal from the beginning, illegal.
Not sure why this myth that Indiana somehow messed up and they "really" meant straight walled cartridges all along keeps hanging around. The expectant use of wildcats is clearly spelled out .... they knew it. They expected it. They welcomed it.
|
|
|
Post by Woody Williams on Jun 9, 2015 13:16:10 GMT -5
Swilk,
I was there on the original PCR proposal and it was "straight walled". Before it got going good somehow it was changed. Contrary to some beliefs the folks at the DNR aren't stupid. They knew that the final language opened the door big time.. I still say they want high powered rifles but got cold feet at the end.
It will be back...in a different form.
|
|
|
Post by swilk on Jun 9, 2015 13:36:22 GMT -5
The original proposal did not make it into law .... but many folks seem to believe it was somehow an goof and not intentional. Point out the language in the rules to show they specifically mention wildcats and those same folks seem to become blind and deaf and can only mutter "PCR. Straight walled. PCR. Straight walled."
The door isnt opened at all ... the rule is actually one of the more well written I have seen. Its pretty much a go, no go. It either fits or it dont. No grey area.
|
|
|
Post by Woody Williams on Jun 9, 2015 14:05:19 GMT -5
My mention of "opening the door big time" meant a huge change from straight wall PCRs to wildcats... Not necessarily opening the door to full Monty centerfires..but that is coming some day.. For some reason this DZnR likes to piece meal stuff in..
|
|
|
Post by swilk on Jun 9, 2015 14:14:00 GMT -5
I know what you meant ... what I meant was that PCR and straight wall were never law. The law does not leave any doors open. The law is not a goof by those that made it.
|
|
|
Post by drs on Jun 10, 2015 4:45:55 GMT -5
What your I.D.N.R. should have done: 1. Base legal "rifle" or "pistol" cartridges on other factors besides caliber and length & type of the case. 2. Currently there are a few of these legal-for-hunting Deer in Indiana that are bottle necked like the .44/.357 B&D, .38-40, .44-40, plus a few wildcats that are now legal. However, the I.D.N.R. still insists on basing what is legal or illegal by the caliber and length of its case. This is a poor way of defining which cartridges(s) are legal for Deer Hunting.
3. The I.D.N.R. should concentrate on "ballistics" of various cartridges, instead of what is stated above as being legal.
4. Currently wildcat cartridges like the .358 Hoosier are legal and are bottle necked. This cartridge produces ballistics very close to the .35 Remington. So why not allow the .35 Remington for Deer Hunting (?)
5. There are a number of wildcat cartridge, which will never become factory loads, that produce ballistics similar to such cartridges as: your .30-30, .308, etc. One thing your available Deer cartridge don't have, allowing them to become legal, is their bullet diameter < .357" and a case length > 1.8". If you want H.P.R. to become legal then you need to persuade the I.D.N.R. and other law makers to change the cartridge requirements.
|
|
|
Post by swilk on Jun 10, 2015 7:56:32 GMT -5
Considering the ballistics of a particular cartridge can be manipulated, intentionally or not, by bullet / case / powder / primer / barrel and chamber I wouldnt want that to be the determining factor.
Static measurements are the gold standard when it comes to determining what is legal and what is not. Most states have a minimum bullet diameter as the only benchmark .... we happen to have a minimum bullet diameter as well as minimum and maximum case lengths.
Is Ohio currently the only state with "straight wall" in their regulation wording? Likely done for political reasons .....
|
|
|
Post by greghopper on Jun 10, 2015 8:03:57 GMT -5
From Ohio Web page....
The council also approved straight-walled cartridge rifles for deer hunting. The rifles are the same caliber and use the same straight-walled cartridges that are currently legal for use in handguns. The new regulation is designed to allow additional opportunities for hunters that own these guns or want to hunt with these guns. These rifles have reduced recoil compared to larger shotguns, and the rifles are more accurate than the same caliber handgun.
Legal deer hunting rifles are chambered for the following calibers: .357 Magnum, .357 Maximum, .38 Special, .375 Super Magnum, .375 Winchester, .38-55, .41 Long Colt, .41 Magnum, .44 Special, .44 Magnum, .444 Marlin, .45 ACP, .45 Colt, .45 Long Colt, .45 Winchester Magnum, .45 Smith & Wesson, .454 Casull, .460 Smith & Wesson, .45-70, .45-90, .45-110, .475 Linebaugh, .50-70, .50-90, .50-100, .50-110 and .500 Smith & Wesson.
A new regulation states shotguns and straight-walled cartridge rifles used for deer hunting be loaded with no more than three shells in the magazine and chamber combined. The current hunting regulation states a shotgun must be plugged if it is capable of holding more than three shells.
Interesting......
|
|
|
Post by oldhoyt on Jun 10, 2015 8:12:36 GMT -5
Doubt it. Be hard to justify changing language to make what is already legal, and clearly spelled out as legal from the beginning, illegal. Not sure why this myth that Indiana somehow messed up and they "really" meant straight walled cartridges all along keeps hanging around. The expectant use of wildcats is clearly spelled out .... they knew it. They expected it. They welcomed it. There's no reason to change any existing language. DNR could simply add to what's already there to include a grouping of "traditional" deer cartridges or cartridges in the "medium" power range. A simple listing of allowed cartridges, in addition to those already legal, is all it would take.
|
|