quote:

Originally posted by cold zero:
surestrike;

ideas for ak. calibers....338w.m., .300w.m., .30-06

Yes, yes and yes. All good choices for AK.

quote:

Originally posted by cold zero:
surestrike;

i was not sure whether you were saying i don't know what i am talking about or if it was a difference in terms. we are on the same page again.

i think we both agree that a pre 64 action, stainless/synthetic/classic if you will, is a fine set up for ak.

ideas for ak. calibers....338w.m., .300w.m., .30-06

Mine is a stainless/synthetic Ruger M77, topped with a matte Leupold Vary-X III 2.5-8x. I replaced the "boat paddle" stock with a Hogue Rubber-Overmolded (pillar bedded).

A .375 H&H would be nice, but my .338 is lighter and a more of an all around rifle, and perhaps as popular as the .30-06 up here.

Thanks again guys i have decided on the .375 H&H and i will be looking for a classic stainless as i dont beleive any of the shadow elites were manufactured , this is something i am still trying to find out. I am waiting for a call back from a shop owner who sold a classic stainless to a customer who went out and shot a grizzly with it and he beleives he is looking to sell it. As far as scopes a leupold 1.5x5 or 1.75x6 is a thought i also heard that the zeiss conquest line was coming out with some low vbarible scopes. Well thanks again and wish me luck on my search. Later Tanoose

ray;

yes, the boat paddle , the cheap injection molded stocks that remington, winchester, savage, ruger, etc use, are heavy and can weigh 3 lbs. the money you pay for a rifle is not spent on the stock.

if you bought a lightweight rifle from a conventional manufacturer of your choice and replaced the wood or cheap synthetic stock with a quality kevlar/composite stock in the 11-16 oz. range you would cut 1.5-2 lbs. off the weight of the factory gun. it would then weigh "about" as much as a custom shop mtn.
rifle.

hmmmm.

tanoose;

the classic stainless is a fine choice. .375 is not necessary. if the shope owner says it is a .338, grap it. .338 is more versatile anyway.

the 1.75-6x is a good choice for most hunting up there. 2.5-8x is another good one. if you can wait and see if the conquest comes out with that same power range the zeiss glass is superior to leupold. i have the 3.5-10x zeiss and have been very happy with it. a good value for the money.

ray;

the 2.5-8x by 36mm leupold is a fine choice. i have one on my .340 and have been happy with it. it is a good power range for most everything. however, for sheep and goat i like a little more power, read 3.5-10x by 40-44mm.

quote:

Originally posted by Paul H:
Again, if you haven't hunted maritime Alaska, you don't know what it means for a gun to rust up before your eyes, and that goes for some "stainless" guns as well as the blued ones. Actions and triggers can be rusted to the state that they are inoperable in a days time. You can sit in the cabbin and rub your gun with oil, or you can go out and hunt.

As far as wood stocks, most wood stocks aren't properly sealed. If you have a stock that is completely sealed in epoxy before applying a finish, it will be weather stable. But if you're not going to build your own and properly seal it, a good synthetic stock is the way to go.

+1

scr83jp;

why would you come to the alaska board and tell guys who do or will hunt there what type of firearm set up they should use when you have never even been to the state and have no experience there to base your advice on?

that makes no sense to me at all.

Well thanks again to all for your replies i have decided on looking for a model 70 classic stainless in late fall and have decided on the .375 H&H i figure this is the best choice for brown bear and i can take it to Africa in the future. But now that i have decided on the .375 H&H i see there is a new caliber coming in 2007 its called the .375 Ruger. Do you guys thinbk i should wait and see how this cartridge developes or would you go ahead and buy the time proven H&H

If you want a classic stainless in 375, right now wouldn't be too soon to start looking.It took me over a year to find mine. I was able to locate one about a month before they announced they were being discontinued.

The advantage of the 375 H&H is good factory ammo is available the world over. The downside is that with the current demise of the Win M70, there aren't any stainless 375's I'd be interested in. If you can find a decent used M70 ss or new in box, grab it.

Personally I think the ruger all weather is one of the toughest and most economical rough duty rifles out there. They do need a trigger job, but asside from that, are a great tough rifle. I've long recomended the 338 win mag Ruger all weather as the best tough duty gun for the money.

Now that they are coming out with a 375 cartridge is good news. The donwside is that you are going to have to handload for it, because it is doubtful the factory fodder will be readily available. That said all you need is a good 270 gr bullet and enough RL15 or Varget to drive it 2700 fps, and you have an outstanding Alaskan big game rifle.

The issue is, what is a proper rifle for an indivitual? That is what ever you buy and use! That fact, however, does not make all choices the best that one could make!

The only one rifle toss-up in chambering is basicly between the 338 Win Mag, and the 375 H&H, for all round Alaska rifle! The toss-up for rifle action type is CRF, or PUSH FEED! The stock is either wood, of several kinds, or synthetic, and the steel is a toss-up between carbon steel, and stainless.

With those things in mind, I have read someone reccomending every one of these things as best. The probability of them all being right, or even half right is almost nill! With that in mind I'll not reccomend any of them, but simply tell you what I've been useing in Alaska for 25 years, without a rifle failier,or failier to kill what I shot, or jam of any kind since my first trip to Alaska, and the same rifle has been to Africa, as my back-up rifle, 15 times as well! On that first trip to Alaska, when I was told by an old hand in Alaska, to throw away the walnut stock, and get a synthetic one, a piece of advice I didn't heed, I might add! I paid dearly for that lack of judgement! My rifle had been on at 200 yds like the mail man, same place every day every year in all climates in the lower 48, including the dead of winter in Colorado, and the humidity of Florida, and South America! In six days of hunting in the Mulchatna drainage, in September's rain, my rifle went from zero at 200 yds, to six feet to the right, and 4 feet low at 200 yds! with the cross hair dead on the Caribou's eye,at 200 yds, the bullet broke both hind legs just above the hocks!

The rifle was carbon steel, and blued. That was,fine because I wipped the rifle down, and oiled it every night, and carried it every day with tape over the muzzle to keep water out of the bore.

The rifle I hunt Alaska with is a Whitworth African Express, 375 H&H. It is fitted with quality iron sights, and a 1.5 -5x 20mm scope, with a German post, and cross hair reticle, housed in Warne QD rings and bases. The rifle is basiclly a FN Mauser CRF rifle, with three down, and one in the tube. I use 300 gr Nosler Partitions, or Swift A-frames for standard bullets, and always have a few rounds loaded with North Fork cup points in case I have to go into the alders to sort out a brownie. As sure strike says, this rifle is legal in Africa as well, and the more you shoot a rifle the better you get with that rifle.

CRF in a rifle is not needed, untill you "NEED" it! The QD rings, and bases are not needed till you "NEED" them! If you hunt in Alaska's rain you NEED a synthetic stock! The extra weight of the 300 gr bullet, and the extra power of the 375 H&H over the 338 WM, is not needed till you "NEED " it, but when you do need it.....................,

You see, none of these things are needed untill you screw up, or the rifle screws up, or the scope is in the way, and you need to get it off quickly, to use the iron sights. These needs are most desirable, when the animal you have just punched a hole in, but didn't kill, takes offence to your shooting him, and wants to do something about it. At that point every hedge you can get in your favor, is worth every penny you spent to get, in your rifle! When the adrenelin is up, in that Brown Bear, or Cape Buffalo, a little thing like being in a hurry to get off the next shot, causeing a jam that wouldn't have happened, with CRF, or the extra weight, and power of the 375H&H over the 338 WM, or the rifles shooting where you aim it because of the synthetic stock, will be worth what ever you will make, at your job, for the rest of your life. My opinion is, it costs little more, or requires little more work, to hedge your bet, against Mr. Murphy, so why not?

For 3 years ago i took a bear tracker course, and the shooting was done in snapshooting with reloading at the shoulder, i used a FN Mauser in 8x57IS and it worked superb, during the course i shot nearly 300 rounds and the rifle didnt fai me once. We had ranges from 8-80 meters standing laying,sitting,moving from one spot to another and.

Shooting on moving target,approaching target, shooting on upwards angle and downwards angle. Every time it was two shots in four seconds ,and tha CRF realyy helped me there. We used scopes that was variable but a Aimpoint or QD mount wouldnt have out of that way there. Still it learnt me what a big game rifle should look like and be like.

1: a CRF

2: a good scope

3:a caliber you can handle and shoot fast,sure and feel safe with

4: A stock that is fitted you and feels like a balanced shotgun when you put up the rifle to your cheek.

5: Put a good bullet in the rifle when its needed and put it where it`s supposed to go

Mr. Rigby, those training sessions are a real nice thing, and I wish there were more of them available here in the USA! These tests are required in Germany, as well, to get a hunting license, and might not be a bad Idea in Alaska, before getting a Brown Bear tag!
Your rifle was set up perfectly,but the 8x57IS, you used in that test,would be fine for black bear, however, wouldn't be quite enough, IMO, for Bears that go from 800, to 1500 pounds, and the test should be taken with a little more formidable cartridge for our bear! I think you would find it a little harder to get off those second shots, on target, with a 375H&H rifle that weighs 10-11 pounds loaded, and produces the recoil it does! The 8x57IS is one of my all time favorite cartridges,and is fine for shooting brown bear from a distance. I don't think, however, I'd want to go into the Alders with a wounded one,with it, if I had a choice. At real close range a 375H&H, with some of these brown bear on the coast of Alaska, feels like a BB gun in your hands!

there is guys who has used both semi -autos and lever rifles on those courses. But a double in 9,3x74 could be fine there. but the .375 is also used ,but hammering down almost 300 rounds means just one thing :fatigue, tiredness,still it would give you an edge with that caliber ,and in Africa or other DG hunt how to operate a rifle is a must.

We have a mandatory shooting test here, at least 30 rounds before you can take the test which includes 5 shot on a reindeer target at 100 meters. but i shoot mostly of the training round and many more on the running moose target,last year i used the 300 win mag, and this year i`m gonna try the ruger .450 NE, that can be fun ! 5 quick shots will definetly learn me how to use the rifle for good effect.

Great choice in rifle and caliber Tanoose!

Tanoose,

You run around AK with a SS M70 .375 and a low powered Leupy up and you'll fit right in with a whole bunch of bushrats - ESPECIALLY if you're backpacking here on the coast where the driest thing for miles around is often your sweaty, stinking underwear.

I'll also second the comments on the Rem700 trigger group seizing up in foul weather. I prefer big stainless parts for the whole rifle, including the trigger and safety, like a Ruger or Winchester.

i don't understand why there is so much fuss about the use of the 375 on grizzly and brown bear, ofcourse people shot them with 30-06 en less, but considering that in many countries the 375 is minimum for lion and knowing these alaska bears are twice and sometimes three times the body weight of a lion, and bears are way worse in caracter.

quote:

Originally posted by cold zero:

quote:

Originally posted by Paul H:
Again, if you haven't hunted maritime Alaska, you don't know what it means for a gun to rust up before your eyes, and that goes for some "stainless" guns as well as the blued ones. Actions and triggers can be rusted to the state that they are inoperable in a days time. You can sit in the cabbin and rub your gun with oil, or you can go out and hunt.

As far as wood stocks, most wood stocks aren't properly sealed. If you have a stock that is completely sealed in epoxy before applying a finish, it will be weather stable. But if you're not going to build your own and properly seal it, a good synthetic stock is the way to go.

+1

scr83jp;

why would you come to the alaska board and tell guys who do or will hunt there what type of firearm set up they should use when you have never even been to the state and have no experience there to base your advice on?

that makes no sense to me at all.

How would you know if I've never been to AK or what my training is,I've been to AK,I'm a grad wildlife mgt biol, been shooting and hunting since my usaf days in the 50's,instructor,ret from LE,etc.probably older and wiser than you!

quote:

Originally posted by scr83jp:
I get tired of reading all of the crap about large bore rifles needed to hunt in Alaska or Canada. IMO.

[/QUOTE]I hunted CO for 16yrs and N. Cal for 33 yrs. I've never had a desire to head to AK .[/QUOTE]

i know that you have not hunted ak. because you said it. see the above quote.

didn't they teach you in school that reading is not the same as doing? you may be older than i, but when it comes to hunting in ak. and the number of quality animals taken there, you have not even been there! what gives you the right to come on here and dish out advice to guys who do hunt there, when you have never even been there? will you give brain surgery advice next?

Cold Zero, MBA

quote:

Originally posted by cold zero:

quote:

Originally posted by scr83jp:

all weapons were blued or parkerized steel and the stocks were wood in all of the wars in every type of climate and they survived,the M2 carbine assigned to me in 1952 in the service was WW2 vintage no metal pitting very operable with a selector switch.I have an early 1940's Springfield Parkerized M1 Garand that was used in battle & it's still intact.

hmmm, last time i checked all u.s. mil' issue stocks including u.s. military sniper rifles have synthetic stocks, because they go into battle in every type of climate. weapons are no longer parkerized they are phoshated.

i have a parkerized remington 11-87 that is rusted and pitted from my first ak. trip. in a maritime environment almost anything will rust if given the chance , regardless of coating. personally, i would rather carry a little gun oil than a can of tree wax.[/QUOTE]Well sonny you do your thing I'll do mine,oil ruins wood while wax preserves it and waterproofs it I was in the service in 1952 and sniper rifles were 1903 Springfields and M1 Garands with walnut stocks guess this was a bit before your arrival on the planet.I saw lots of rifles used in the Tongess NF that were blued with walnut stocks come into my custom gunsmiths shop for cleaning they weren't rusted and their stocks weren't warped.My gunsmith was an exceptionally qualified individual who really knew work working and how to seal walnut stocks made by bishop and fajen.Obviously this was before your time.

quote:

Originally posted by cold zero:

quote:

Originally posted by scr83jp:
I get tired of reading all of the crap about large bore rifles needed to hunt in Alaska or Canada. IMO.

I hunted CO for 16yrs and N. Cal for 33 yrs. I've never had a desire to head to AK .[/QUOTE]

i know that you have not hunted ak. because you said it. see the above quote.

didn't they teach you in school that reading is not the same as doing? you may be older than i, but when it comes to hunting in ak. and the number of quality animals taken there, you have not even been there! what gives you the right to come on here and dish out advice to guys who do hunt there, when you have never even been there? will you give brain surgery advice next?

Cold Zero, MBA[/QUOTE]Freedom of expression I served so you can exercise free speech,enough said!

what get caught in a lie so you toss up your civil service as an excuse???pretty lame!

One thing my daddy always said "if your going to be a lier then you better have a good memory."

quote:

Originally posted by Cuigniez:
i don't understand why there is so much fuss about the use of the 375 on grizzly and brown bear, ofcourse people shot them with 30-06 en less, but considering that in many countries the 375 is minimum for lion and knowing these alaska bears are twice and sometimes three times the body weight of a lion, and bears are way worse in caracter.

The first time you get in the weeds with a big male African lion, that has been punched with a hot bullet, but not killed, I want to hear that statement again! That is, if you survive!

I haven't been to Africa, but would contend that the cats scare me more than bears.

That said, I figure heading into the alders after a wounded bear is just as puckering an experience.

There is something to be said for using something that'll have more than enough power to take out the running gear, when after dangerous game.

quote:

Originally posted by cold zero:
[QUOTE]Originally posted by surestrike:
My AK or anywhere else go to rig is a stainless M-70 .375H&H. Somebody mentioned a pre-64 M-70 all stainless. Sorry there is no such thing.

surestrike;

the pre 64 or mauser action was reintroduced by winchester in 1995. this is not push feed, but controlled round feed with claw extractor. winchester refers to this as the "classic". I bought one of the first to roll off the line in 1995. pre 64 classic synthetic stainless in .30-06 with boss system. the stock is injection molded, the boss although accurate and a muzzle break at the same time, was later dropped as they were not selling enough of them. so the boss, the classic synthetic stainless and of course winchester are all no more.

i still have the gun, it shoots 3 shots with fatcory ammo at 5/8". very robust and well put together and has served well after a trigger job and bedding. it does exist.

nice pig b.t.w.

Cold ZeroThe pre 64 designation only applies to Winchester model 70s made before 1964, period!
The so-called re-introduced "CLASSIC" is not the same as the pre-64 Mod 70, and may be better designed, but it is not a pre-64 Mod 70 rifle! The CRF of the old pre-64 was re-designed
because of popular demand, to get rid of the cheap assed push feed system they went to in 1964, nothing more! YOUR RIFLE IS NOT A STAINLESS PRE-64 MOD 70! It is a post 1995 Stainless Mod 70 CLASSIC!

If you have the luxury of a little time, wait for the new 375 Ruger. It will be available in African and Alaskan models. With the highly inflated prices Winchester S/S 375s are bringing this might be a good option for you. There is a lengthy post about this caliber in big bores.

mac;

are you saying that in sept of 1995 i bought a new rifle that had been sitting on the gun store shelf for over 30 years?

are you saying that i bought a gun manufactured pre 1964 that had the boss accuracy system and a synthetic stock on it , both of which did not even exist in 1964?

i ordered this rifle in sept 95 and it came in that same month, as the classic was not even out yet.

if i did not make the whole pre 64 clear, surestrike in his excellent post of 20 july even correctly explained what changes were made to the bolt before reintroduction. did you miss that?

you are wrong that pre 64 refers to the rifle. it can, but not the way winchester marketed the product. winchester used the "pre 64" to refer to the type of action, not the date of manufacture. if you have a problem with that, then take it up with winchester, instead of busting my shoes. oh yeah, you can't, they are out of business. do you think that i don't know what i bought?

p.m. me your fax # and i will send you the hang tags off the rifle that clearly state:

30-06 spfld
model 70 classic stainless/with boss
pre 64 type action

or the other tag that just states;

model 70
pre-64

i think winchester was expecting that consumers would understand that they were not selling 30+ year old rifles in 1995. at least most people understood it. i certainly did.

when the phrase "classic" is used and then pre 64 that should tell you that it is a post 1995 gun with the mauser action/C.R.F. as opposed to the push feed action that was still available at that time.

i think you are twisting my words or misunderstood something because you did not read the whole thread. or maybe you just got up on the wrong side of the bed today ...

Its really simple guys pre 64 means any rifle made BEFORE 1964 any crf made after 1964 has a pre64 TYPE action.