joel/AK
good analogy. Actully Indiana hunters use a really big bore, 12 gaege. Rifles were allowed for the first time this year and chambers for handgun cartriges only the max case lingth can only be 1&3/4 inch long. I use a handgun when I hunt in IN much more effective than anything else and no cartridge restristions you can hunt with a .308 handgun but not rifle.
This dose show that stateside hunters are indeed less expirianced with rifles of any kind.

quote:

Originally posted by M70Nut:
Damn, talk about overkill.......

..................................It,s not overkill...not for huntin deer @ False Island .A 338 is a nice rifle .........The point of that story , wuich is true by the way ,.,.is that even a lady can shoot the 338 well if someone doesn,t tell her it will tear her a new you know what hole .......on that shot I would not have let her shoot if she had a littler caliber ...........she was about a 160 lb woman and did fine ..........I mean heck look at Connie Brooks ....7 lb 375 H&H and what does she weigh 115 lbs ??..338 win mag is a pretty popular deer round in places like Sitka .....

Deviating from the original stock thread to suitable calibers, the biggest problem isn't what people shoot, it's how they shoot. Whenever someone muffs it with a small bore, the small bore is made to blame, when it really was a shooter that couldn't shoot. When a medium or big bore is used and the shot is muffed, recoil is to blame.

Shoot the biggest gun you shoot well, and shoot it well. Honestly I'd say the majority of those that shoot enough to shoot a small bore well can handle a 338 just as well. And those that can't shoot need to put in the time to practice, not get a .338 to make up for their lack of shooting skills.

From what I've seen at the public range, most hunters are abysmal shots and don't put enough time to be taking shots at game.

Thanks for the input guys. Good points and perspective from all of you. I will probably look for a .338 or a .375 with a wooden stock but that has an aftermarket synthetic. I am a little worried that a .375 is overkill for sheep, but if we are hunting sheep and bears in 2 different areas I may bring 2 guns. Thanks again

I should add I don't just blast away hoping to hit the animal. I only take shots I'm comfortable with . Like Mel Gibson says in the Patriot, "Aim small miss small."

stormsGSP
There has been alot of good input here. I do think some of the points have been convoluted when you consider that after all you will be hunting sheep.

The fact is I have hunted sheep with a .375. Back in the 70's the first really nice rifle I ever bought was a .375 and I hunted everything with it. I shot sheep goats deer bear etc all with my .375. The one thing I learned was that if I was going to put all of my eggs in one basket and hunt everything with one rifle (and thank God thats not the case)it woulden't be a .375.
All of the argument here has been about putting down a big costal brown bear at close range in the brush. Nothing about hunting sheep and inland grizzleys. Your .300 is so perfect for that you will do yourself an injustice by going out and spending all that money on a heavier rifle just because that might be the thing to have if you were hunting costal bears a couple hundred miles away.
Interior grizzlys are so much smaller and easier to kill than a costal brown that you really can do it with just about anything.
One conclution I've come to after hunting my first four continants is that if there is one rifle caliber that will work just fine 98% time it is a .300 mag. Keep in mind that the old first generation of global hunters like Elgin Gates and C.J. Macelroy did almost all of it with a .300 Weatherby.
Personally I like the .300 Win mag. I have taken small stuff like Pronghorn and roebuck right up to moose and brown bear with them. So far I haven't lost one and I'm still alive.

When the day comes that your climbing up that mountain you'll have a heavy backpack on. You'll also question why you've spent an extra $1000.00 + for the privlege of carrying a couple extra pounds of rifle if you choose to go that route.
For most big game hunting the only reason we have for using a small light rifle is for the weight that will be carried while hunting. There is almost no hunting situation that you will find where the weight of your rifle is nearly so relavent than on a sheep hunt.

I loved 458s article in Successful Hunter on wood stocks...Apparantly some friends of his got stranded and used the stocks for a fire and it saved their life!!

I like wood, and its a bit more trouble to maintain in that kind of weather, but I have never had any problem with wood....

If I lived in alaska and was out in the stuff every day then I would probably opt for a SS and glass stocked rifle..

As to glass bedding making a gun heavy, I just don't understand that, it does not weigh anymore than wood...

quote:

Originally posted by StormsGSP:
Thanks for the input guys. Good points and perspective from all of you. I will probably look for a .338 or a .375 with a wooden stock but that has an aftermarket synthetic. I am a little worried that a .375 is overkill for sheep, but if we are hunting sheep and bears in 2 different areas I may bring 2 guns. Thanks again

................................................ ..................Could someone ,,.,.,@#$%^&*()_@#$%^&*()(*&^%$#@! .$#@!^%&^*(#@$%^&*( PLEASE explane just what the F--K ,..OVERKILL is ......PLEASE .........................@#$%^&*()(*&^%$#@!@!#$%$#@!(*&^%$#@!@@##$%%^^^^%%$#@!...........Does this look like [ OVERKILL]. ...... ..........Or this ..............Or this ,, .........The top two were shot with.416 , 350 gr bullets @ 2600-2700 fps..The bottom photo is an odd ity as a 350 gr Speer .458 bullet traveling @ around 2200 fps made that hole ...The bullet clipped the spine and I only lost 2 chops from the back strap and half a tenderloin.. A 338 with a 225 gr TSX usually makes about a 3 " hole thru a deer and a 375 does also .....usually a 270 win . will destroy sometimes 15 lbs of meat ...a 338 , 375 , 416 , 458 , usually 2 - 5 lbs ......Yes the 416 did take a leg off the coyote but a 22 -250 would have taken alot more off on the same shot ...........

quote:

Originally posted by Akshooter:
stormsGSP
There has been alot of good input here. I do think some of the points have been convoluted when you consider that after all you will be hunting sheep.


When the day comes that your climbing up that mountain you'll have a heavy backpack on. You'll also question why you've spent an extra $1000.00 + for the privlege of carrying a couple extra pounds of rifle if you choose to go that route.
For most big game hunting the only reason we have for using a small light rifle is for the weight that will be carried while hunting. There is almost no hunting situation that you will find where the weight of your rifle is nearly so relavent than on a sheep hunt.

............The 375 Ruger Alaskan is , short , light , all weather , shoots very flat with say a hand load of 250 gr TSX , 260 gr AccuBonds Ect ....Recoil isn,t so different than a 300 ...You get better balistics with a 20 " barrel than a 300 .........If by some chance something goes haywire it,s a better round than the 300 ..........................Sorry , this is a bone I just can,t stop chewing on ...

I love blue and wood rifles-- but i put the action in a tupperwear when hunting rough country or in bad weather. Just to keep them pretty the rest of the time!

I agree the .375 Ruger seems to be a really neat new round. Very applicable to many big game hunting situations.
The better ballistics for the Ruger come from the African vertion with the 24" barrel and it is 1/4 pound lighter than the Alaskan and the same weight as my .300's.

At the muzzel the Ruger cartridge gives 4835 foot pounds energy with a 270 gr.factory Hornady load compared to 4235 that I get from my best load that I've developed for ether of my .300 wins.

Thats pritty good performance on the part of the Ruger for a rifle of the same weight I wish I had one.

At 400 yards the Ruger retains 2283 foot pounds and has a drop of 23.7" with a 200 yard zero.

At 400 yards the .300 has 2850 foot pounds and drops 13.1" with a 200 yard zero

We can make whatever we want out of these numbers I really don't care. My point here is that StormsGSP already has the .300 and he likes and shoots it well I would guess that the RUM with factory loads will equall my hand loads for the win mag.

Synthetics warp too. Ask any good stock maker. One of my favorite rifles is Saeed's 375/404 in a beat up synthetic stock. Now that gun has sole.

Hey my man, I have seen synthetic stocks warp all to hell, just leave in the hot sun in Texas or close to a stove or put a light bulb too close to one because you want to hurry up the drying process of your glass job..You would be surprised how man can screw up an anvil with a powder puff.

I've seen real problems with lamenates falling apart.

Just thought I'd add that to the mix

..............Akshooter ;;;;Which ones had problems .,., I have been considering putting one on my 458 ...But it needs to be dependable ......?????

I have had very poor results from laminated stocks. They tend to split along the glue lines. I would place them as much weaker than synthetic or even plain old wood.

quote:

Originally posted by Paul H:
Deviating from the original stock thread to suitable calibers, the biggest problem isn't what people shoot, it's how they shoot. Whenever someone muffs it with a small bore, the small bore is made to blame, when it really was a shooter that couldn't shoot. When a medium or big bore is used and the shot is muffed, recoil is to blame.

Shoot the biggest gun you shoot well, and shoot it well. Honestly I'd say the majority of those that shoot enough to shoot a small bore well can handle a 338 just as well. And those that can't shoot need to put in the time to practice, not get a .338 to make up for their lack of shooting skills.

From what I've seen at the public range, most hunters are abysmal shots and don't put enough time to be taking shots at game.

Very well put Paul..bout sums it up for me.

quote:

Originally posted by Thebear_78:
I have had very poor results from laminated stocks. They tend to split along the glue lines. I would place them as much weaker than synthetic or even plain old wood.

........................So far the only laminated stock I ,ve had for a while is the one on my wife,s 308 Ruger 77 compact ....It takes a beating better than regular walnut does but I haven,t seen it swell ect yet ,.,., I have a Boyds Laminate on my 9.3x64 . and my gunsmith sealed it very well and full length glass bedded it ... I sure hope it doesn,t separate ......One thing I am sure of is the wrist being stronger in a side ways direction ...I have broke regular walnut stocks in the wrist from falling while carrying them in my hand and catching myself with them ............Any constructive input will be appreciated ,,,Thanks.................I really agree with you Paul , but think they should get a 338 and practice with it ..

gumboot458
Two of the assistant guides that work with/for me have stainless laminate Ruger .338's. Both of these rifles delaminated at the tip of the forarm. Both of these rifles I will say took a lot of abuse before they got to that point and my lecturing about basic firearm maintainance fell on deaf ears.
I also have a compact Ruger like your wife except mine is a .223. I have never had a problem with it at all but mine rides around on my snow machine and dosn't get the weather exposure that the bear rifles do. Be sure that if it did mine would be taken care of and I really doubt that there would be a problem.

StormsGSP,
Get a good synthetic stock, stainless 338 WM and you can hunt any thing up here with one rifle.
I have one but never use it. My son and my best friend have one and never carry anything else (sheep, bear moose or anything). I have over 50 rifles in two gun safes, all but 3 are wood, yet other than special reasons I'm always seen with either a 300WM or 375 H&H both SS Synthetics.

Alaska Hunter
It would be hard not to agree with your above comment except that I do still contend that StormsGSP already has the RUM so why push him into spending the mony on another rifle.

Having said that I do love my .338 all three of them. I also really like both of my .300's and both of my .375's.

From one of your earlier post I think it my have been you I met at Rabbit creek last spring. I was there with N.E.450#2 shooting my .338 Franz Sodia double rifle. Dose that ring any bells?

Gumboot458 I really like my .458 also. I've only used it in Africa but maybe I'll try it on my next bear hunt.

quote:

Originally posted by Atkinson:
Hey my man, I have seen synthetic stocks warp all to hell, just leave in the hot sun in Texas or close to a stove or put a light bulb too close to one because you want to hurry up the drying process of your glass job..You would be surprised how man can screw up an anvil with a powder puff.

I would think the more one costs the less problems you would have with it. A good McMillan, especially with Edge technolog, should not do a lot of warping - neither should the Kimber Montana stocks. The injection molded, tupperware stocks are really just junk and the Hogue overmolded are heavier than wood and very bendy.

.......Redlander .,., In some ways the inexpensive injection molded stocks like the Rugers and Ramline may be superior to the McMillan , MPI ,Borden ect .........If you take a good fall on a Ramline or Ruger stock .,.most of the time it,s just an OH WELL .,., I have seen a couple McMillans that were broke pretty good ....I have smashed out the action area of an MPI that wasn,t built according to my specifications by the gunsmith that built it for me ..He didn,t put a 2nd recoil lug under the barrel and bed it in ......At about round 400 I noticed things moveing rearward and when I took it apart it was all busted up .....A friend with a Rem Custom Shop 416 Rem had the McMillan stock on his rifle break out in the action area from recoil ........The canoe paddle stock on my 458 has endured a couple thousand rounds and still works perfact .....It has been thru some trying times ...as has a Ramline that I put on a 416 and 375 .......I made the longest shot of my life with that stock while a 375 , and it has been on a backup guides rifle since and has dumped 3 big bears last I heard ...when I saw it this winter it didn,t look any uglier than when I had it ..................These stocks have been used to pry heavy welded aluminum skiffs off of rocks , and they still shoot great ......

Akshooter,
No sorry doesn't ring a bell. My primary residence is in Fairbanks. I do have a place in Anchorage that I'm at every other week for work.

I have to apolgize to StormsGSP, your 300 with the proper (200 gr) bullet will work fine. As you can see for my post I own way too many guns, yet hunt with two. I haven't seen a reason I didn't like when it comes to the purchase another one. In fact I don't seem have a Savage .223 (I do have other .223s), I think that might be reason enough to pick one up.
StormsGSP, forgive me for trying to lead you down the "lets go by another gun path".

Alaska Hunter
I can't speak for StormGsp but if he is like the rest of us it dosn't take much of an excuse to buy another rifle. As far as .223's go I have seven of them.

First off, I appreciate ALL the replies.

I don't really need another reason to buy a gun, I love doing it, but I my taste leans towards older double bbl shotguns. Secondly, I am still in college, I save up a lot before I buy anything.
This has been a very informative thread. I am going to keep my eyes open for a synthetic 375. I am 6'4" 220 lbs, I am not too worried about recoil. I am worried about my endurance and the altitude. I work out a lot, but I should probably focus more on running and endurance.

quote:

Originally posted by StormsGSP:
First off, I appreciate ALL the replies.
This has been a very informative thread. I am going to keep my eyes open for a synthetic 375. I am 6'4" 220 lbs, I am not too worried about recoil. I am worried about my endurance and the altitude. I work out a lot, but I should probably focus more on running and endurance.

...................If you have any hills or mountains in your area ,,,,,, put on a day pack , put 40 lbs in it , put on your boots and go climb a hill thru the timber ,not on trails ,., If you can carry a long gun , , if not carry a Peavey handle that is weighted to weigh 7 or 8 lbs .....Walking up hill over rough ground is about the most useful exercise you can get ............If you can do iut with a 375 Ruger Alaskan , so much the better

.........What do you guys do with all the 223s?? ...I need one , and mayby one for my wife ..... And a 17 , like the 17 VelociRaptor ,or 17 K Hornet , Mayby enen a 17 Fireball ..........I could use another 10 rifles from 9.3 up to .510 .......Akshooter, how accurate is your 223 Ruger Compact ??

Gumboot458
The compact Ruger out of the box with factory loads would'nt work for me. Good news is neather of us need to worry about that. after a little tweaking and load development I got it down to 3/4's. The rugers have a 1/12 twist so they like 55gr bullet wich is my choice for the .223.
My AR's have heavy 1/9 twist barrels and they work fine with the 55's also but will handle the heavyweights well. My custom mini 14 has one in 8 and likes 70 gr. speers but won't shoot the 55's as well as the others.
I love carrying the .223's all winter for fur hunting.

2-2-3 goes well with fur.
I just picked up a Ruger Ranch Target rifle. It's heavy and not fun to carry around but what a blast at the range.
I've just been buying cheap by the gross at Sp-ware and just ticking them off at 300 yds.
Oh yea the stock is laminate, jsut to keep on topic.

........AK Shooter or Alaska Hunter ,.,Have either of you tried the 45 , 50, 53 gr X bullets in the 223 .....If so how well did they work .,., ...I was thinking that if they don,t tear a huge hole in the fur that one of them , probably the 45 gr would make a great around the homestead rig .....The 308 is really good as it is so 4 wheeler friendly but it sure makes a mess of a pelt ........It is so ignorant that Remington quit selling Accelerators .........Tho my wifes laminated stock is not too pretty anymore it hasn,t showed sighns or coming apart .............I,ll have the same finish put on it this summer that my 9.3 and .416 have on them ................

Gumboot
Ihaven't used the X bullets in the .223's. I use 55 gr. V max and 55 gr. Hornady fmj's in most. In the custom mini 14 I use 70 gr speer soft points and 69 gr sierra match kings I use the same 55's in my hornet. Never had a problem with pelt damage yet, even though the A max are thin jacketed.I shoot the 50 gr. X bullets in my swift but I haven't shot anything with it yet so I can't help you out there. I found that the X bllets are the only bullet that can handle 3900 f.p.s. in the swift.

If its a nice piece of wood to start with after Alaska it will show its scars.I go with Kevelar and fiberglass and stainless.I about ruined my wood blued gun on my first hunt.The 338 with 250 gr bullets is the swmallest gun I will hunt with in Alaska.I use a 416 rem mag as my tent and woods gun.You can never kill anything too dead but you can get your butt eaten or torn to pieces by a wounded bear.You will never forget your first grizzly.My best friend had to shoot one with a 338 with 200 gr bullets 6 times up close.He switched to 250 gr and didnt have that problem again.I would not trust a 30-06 on grizzley.I know eskimos have shot polar bears with 223 and 22s .I bet alot have disapeared doing so too.A friend of mine just got a buffalo he poped it with his 338 win mag up close he said it was like shooting a tank.Grizzleys are way tougher than buffalo.

FWIW, I killed one blacktail with a 53gr X from my .223 Ruger MkII. I was hounddoggin' it in some fresh snow and when I got close, it's head and neck appeared above me, wondering just what in the hell was following it. I aimed for the white throat patch and hit a little high. The bullet took out the row of left upper molars to traverse into his atlas vertebra where it made it just past the spinal cord to lodge in the offside of the vertebra. Folded him right up.

Must say I was impressed with the tenacity of that little slug, going through all those teeth. I've shot a few more with that rifle but mostly with 64gr Winchester PowerPoints at 2800FPS. It's still a .22 and still a stunt IMO but works if you're out fooling around after the bears have denned up.

That Ruger was my winter play rifle in Prince William Sound. Many days would find it over my shoulder, me in a Mustang suit under Grundens, pounding along in the rain and spray, running traps. I would literally take a shower with the rifle and finish up by rinsing the rifle under the hottest from the tap. Then it was down stairs for dosing of WD40, an air hosing, and it was good until the next go around.

ABSOLUTELY NO WAY would I expect any kind of wooden stock to put up with that kind of punishment.

PWS
I agree 100%. As much as I love wood stocks and allmost all of my rifles have them I recently bought my first synthetic bolt acion because I do a lot of skiff hunting on Kodiak.
I don't think all Alaskan huntng requires a bomb proof rifle but there is really something to be said about how harsh skiff hunting is with all the pounding swell and saltwater spray.

The nice thing here for Stormsgsp is that he is hunting sheep and gizzly wich is about the farthest thing there is from skiff hunting.

Wood and steel worked for over 100 years in Alaska and elsewhere. It continues to work.

A quarter of a century ago composit and stainless steel became available to gun owners. This also works, just better.

Carry guns in Alaska are going to take their bumps, scratches and dousings. I'd rather do that with a SS and composit, due to the fact those materials will be less likey to be affected by the extreme conditions.

What is the opinion concerning wood laminates and their suitability for Alaskan conditions?

I am thinking here about the Richards Microfit - Rutland Plywood through to Serengetti wood laminatees.

I have both two rifles with McMillan fibreglass stocks and a rifle with Serengetti walnut laminate. The only problem I find with the fibreglass is it can be a little cold / wet and slippery to the face / cheek. Otherwise, it does what it says on the tin etc.

I don't have a lot of experience with laminates, but the reports sound like they would function better then traditional wood stocks.

Akshooter,

Good point, I'd lost sight of the fact that Stormgsp's inquiry was directed more toward an interior hunt than the coast. Even though I think the coast requires "marine grade" tools, I could see, how wood and blue could serve a long and useful life in the interior.

And, I certainly wouldn't recommend someone getting a new rifle for a sheep/grizz hunt just to have a synthetic stock when they have a wood stock rifle they're familiar with. May as well put those funds into more shooting.

If Stormgsp was headed to Yakutat for a fall bear hunt, I'd certainly recommend leaving the blued, wood rifle home though!

I can't add much to the discussion of laminated stocks regarding thier long term stability. Seems like the finish Remington puts on theirs is pretty hard but the two Boyd's stocks I've been around are soft and take dents and dings pretty easily. Perhaps a good, soaked in finish of fiberglass boat resin would solve that?