nmcowboy
PROFILE BLOGS GUESTBOOK FRIENDS FAVORITES HOME


RSS
Brush Rifle: Fact or Myth
Posted On: 10/07/2008 20:36:03

For many years the debate has raged about which caliber is best in the brush. Equally debated is if any caliber is good in the brush. When most writers refer to the brush, generally they refer to Northern Tier states and whitetail deer. Brush, however covers a good deal of the Country. Brush is defined as bushes and young trees densely packed in a particular geographic area. For this topic, I am going to stick with Northern states, as their topography is covered with more brushy areas, on average.

 

In the past couple of decades, gun and ammo folk have tried to develop the quintessential brush rifle test. While some had a basis of merit, most have been dismal inconclusive events. The problem is staging a test where all calibers pass through the exact same amount of brush enroute to a target. Then what is the correct distance from the brush to the target? Distances as much as 20 yards from the brush have been used. Arguably, to more equate to our brush situations, the target should be , if not in the brush,  directly beside the brush. What we face is a whitetail standing up in a patch of juniper or prickly ash at a distance of less than fifty yards. Here is the real test.

 

As for the staged tests, probably one of the better was conducted by the late Jack O’Connor in 1962. Having hunted the brushy draws of the Southwest and evergreen mazes in Maine, he was uniquely qualified to do the test, although he mentioned the inequality in the amount of brush encountered by various rounds. After all the rounds were fired, a characteristic of a brush-penetrating rifle became prominent. Heavy blunt bullets deflect less. Odd to me that all of the various experts did not arrive at that realization without the shallow tests that were run, except then they would noit have gotten to shoot up all that ammo…hmmm. Yes, the 12 gauge was the overall winner in the majority of tests done with the 45/70 (405 Govt) and 35 Remington (200 Grain) finishing at the top of rifles.

 

Basic physics tells us that a cone-shaped object traveling at a rapid rate will deflect in the opposite direction from whatever part of the cone contacts an obstruction. While a round or blunt object will exert more energy into moving the obstruction out of the way. See, all us rural, agricultural, earthy folks already realized that. Had we been able to afford fancy weapons, we would have still reached for the Savage 99, Winchester 94 or Marlin 336 (yeah I know there some Winchester 88’s there, too) in 30/30, 35 Remington, 32 Special, 38-55, and 32-40. We did that because these calibers have filled larders for 150 years.

 

Now for the Ron Spomers out there that claim no bullet is any better than any other in the brush…I understand somebody has declared him an expert. Opinionated yes…expert is up for debate. The same guy that says a fixed 6 power scope is the ideal heavy cover optic says pointed bullets enjoy as much success going through brush as any other bullet. According to Spomer it is a matter of luck in getting past brush. O’Connor would have a field day with him. O’Connor, the proponent of very light magnification scopes with wide fields-of-views, came up with a new round to be chambered in a quick handling lever or pump action rifle. He proposed taking the 8X57 and necking it up to 338 cal. Loaded with 225 or 250 grain round nose bullets. Writer Jim Carmichael, O’Connor’s long time friend and colleague, dubbed the round the 338X57 O’Connor. If only someone had built it. The round would have tooted along at 2500FPS and destroyed anything in its way.

 

We have a version of what O’Connor envisioned in the 338 Federal, although not widely chambered yet. The round is too fast for O’Connor’s taste, causing more recoil than necessary, but does it produce! If a good pump or Marlin lever gets chambered in 338 Federal I will be at the front of the line.

 

When you head outside – take a youngster with you and pass it forward. God Bless.

Tags: Lever Action Pump Action WInchester O'Conor Carmichael



Bookmark:



Viewing 1 - 15 out of 20 Comments


Page:  1 | 2 | Next >  Last >>

10/12/2008 18:51:32

tguyett wrote:

.338 levergun is comin....sooner than some may think

Put me at the front of the list!



10/12/2008 09:09:07

.338 levergun is comin....sooner than some may think



10/09/2008 14:25:07

TrackerTroy wrote:

I HAVE A CLOSE RELATIONSHIP WITH HORNADY. I HAVE FIELD TESTED MOST CARTRIDGES OFFERED IN LEVEREVOLUTION. I have to say the whole concept is a better mouse trap. Its one of those things that makes you wonder why didn't I think of that. The one cartridge I would like to see Steve ad to the lineup is the 7x30 waters. I have hunted with a 7 x 30 for years, and in certain situations its still my caliber of choice.

Hornady developed the 450 bushmaster a couple of years ago and tested the pre-production prototype at my place hunting hogs. The 450 proved to be a good performer in heavy cover. I would not choose it over the 45-70 or 444, but if you are going to shoot a semi-auto rifle the 450 is the caliber for cover. Not to mention the fact that the AR-platform outfitted with a red dot scope is hard to beat for second shot acquisition. The practicality of the AR in the hunting sector may be limited but if you are looking for a semi-auto rifle to use in heavy cover, its as good as any. I'll opt for my lever action just the same,thank you. Now praise God and pass the bullets.

Well said



10/09/2008 14:23:07


customgunsocks wrote:
Brush?? For years I used my 30-30 Marlin-170 grain bullet, it never let me down. As a matter of fact Im going back to my old 30-30 this year and putting the .308 Savage away.

Tough to beat...the old 32 Special that I gave to Tyler has put several tons of venison away since it was made in 1949.



10/09/2008 10:25:49

I HAVE A CLOSE RELATIONSHIP WITH HORNADY. I HAVE FIELD TESTED MOST CARTRIDGES OFFERED IN LEVEREVOLUTION. I have to say the whole concept is a better mouse trap. Its one of those things that makes you wonder why didn't I think of that. The one cartridge I would like to see Steve ad to the lineup is the 7x30 waters. I have hunted with a 7 x 30 for years, and in certain situations its still my caliber of choice.

Hornady developed the 450 bushmaster a couple of years ago and tested the pre-production prototype at my place hunting hogs. The 450 proved to be a good performer in heavy cover. I would not choose it over the 45-70 or 444, but if you are going to shoot a semi-auto rifle the 450 is the caliber for cover. Not to mention the fact that the AR-platform outfitted with a red dot scope is hard to beat for second shot acquisition. The practicality of the AR in the hunting sector may be limited but if you are looking for a semi-auto rifle to use in heavy cover, its as good as any. I'll opt for my lever action just the same,thank you. Now praise God and pass the bullets.



10/09/2008 01:41:45
Brush?? For years I used my 30-30 Marlin-170 grain bullet, it never let me down. As a matter of fact Im going back to my old 30-30 this year and putting the .308 Savage away.


10/08/2008 22:50:58


leupy wrote:



trackertroy, I would take the 243 in case I had a long shot, Ohio has a lot of farm land and most of the state you are hunting woods near fields.  The 243 is a bean field gun when using light bullets, (I use 68gr. watsons hp's).  I will check out your profile and Imight have more afterward.

I have used both 6MM and 243 and currently am building a 6MM. For deer I use 100 or 105 grain round nose, just because it provides an edge in thick stuff (over lighter bullets) but will still be lethal out to 400 yards. But, if the cover was really thick, my comfort level would be less than it would with a 30/30, 32 Special or 35 Remington. Now having said that: the proviso here is that in those rounds I would have 170 or 200 grain round nose. The Hornady Leverevolution are the cat's whiskers for improving velocity and trajectory in a handful of brush rifle calibers the load is made for. However, being a pointed bullet, even a flexible tip pointed bullet, it will be more susceptible to glancing off an object instead of ploughing  through.



10/08/2008 22:19:30



trackertroy, I would take the 243 in case I had a long shot, Ohio has a lot of farm land and most of the state you are hunting woods near fields.  The 243 is a bean field gun when using light bullets, (I use 68gr. watsons hp's).  I will check out your profile and Imight have more afterward.


10/08/2008 19:42:24

Quick_Draw wrote:

Interesting article but up here in Gods country I've always heard it was the 243 cal.

I know guys that use the 243 for elk, moose, black bear and that's fine. But up here, God carries a Marlin



10/08/2008 19:33:15

Interesting article but up here in Gods country I've always heard it was the 243 cal.



10/08/2008 08:48:17


mrjbigfoot wrote:
I've always liked the 444 Marlin. Nice gun, nice & accurate inside 150 yards and a big blunt nosed bullet. With that said, living in Ohio, where rifles aren't allowed, every gun season deer I've taken was with a 12 gauge & 3" mag rifled slugs. Obviously the 12 gauge slug does an awesome job of knocking deer down inside of 100 yards. But considering we have a 4 month bow season & only 10 days of gun season, I've taken most of my deer with a bow.

 

The 444 Marlin is a definite brush buster

  

 

The 444 Marlin is a definite brush buster. Is all of Ohio slug country? Do carbon arrows work better or do aluminum arrows fly better out of your shotgun?



10/08/2008 08:43:52
I've always liked the 444 Marlin. Nice gun, nice & accurate inside 150 yards and a big blunt nosed bullet. With that said, living in Ohio, where rifles aren't allowed, every gun season deer I've taken was with a 12 gauge & 3" mag rifled slugs. Obviously the 12 gauge slug does an awesome job of knocking deer down inside of 100 yards. But considering we have a 4 month bow season & only 10 days of gun season, I've taken most of my deer with a bow.
 
  


10/08/2008 00:04:05
Leupy, I will gladly light one off for you. I hunt hogs in heavy cover in the south east. Shooting a boar thats moving in thick cover (at close range) is common for a hog hunter to do. I have done this countless times with a marlin 45-70. Yes, I would prefer an unobstructed line of fire to a stationary target, but you don't find that in the swamp and you don't find boar hogs on the hill. My recovery rate on this kind of shot is as good as any from a stand. I know, I have guided clients to over 1000 200lb. plus boar kills.

This is not the only difference in opinion  we have. What, I must ask, is your logic in leaving a slug gun at home in Ohio, and selecting a 243 as a better choice for hunting in heavy cover? That, in my opinion makes absolutely no since at all, but I'm listening, enlighten me.


10/07/2008 23:30:36


leupy wrote:
I think what you descibe as a brush gun, is what I would call a chance gun.  I would never take a shot that I did not believe would be unobstructed, the brush gun would give you a chance if you screwed up.  This is an interesting topic but not one I would base A rifle choice on.  I would choose my rifle on recoil and how well I could shoot it at the distances that I expect to get a shot.  In Ohio where I hunt a shot gun or smoke pole works just fine.  If I went to a rifle state even in the brush I would propably take my .243 or 6ppc. (yes I know they both shoot the same bullet)  Choosing a rifle or any gun that you think will shoot through brush in my opinion is a step toward carelessness.  I will not shoot at anything running in the woods because I don't think I can keep track of my backstop which could change in an instint.  That is the reason I will not hunt with handgunners (for the most part) to many shells fired to fast with the chance they could hit something vital.  Yes I have shot handguns extensively (retired PO) that is why I know even the people who shoot often when under stress do not shoot very well.  I include a moving deer while shooting offhand walking through the woods as stress.  In my opinion handgunners should be restricted to above the ground stands.  I would guess this blog will get some heated feedback from my post, mostly from those that have been successful  and safe while hunting in ways I would not be around them, so let the fireworks begin.

I also am a retired Police Officer. The topic of shooting through brush is very ambiguous. I know of folks that tried to shoot a deer through five foot high juniper bushes. No, they didn't hit it. But if I have a good close shot and the only thing in my way is some light branches, twigs or the like. I will pick the least obstructed path and fire. I have owned 243 and 6MM. I have a friend in NM that uses a 243 for elk very successfully. I am building a 6MM (got a Remington 660 barreled action real right) for some longer range stuff like varmints and pronghorn. Would I feel comfortable in the thicker areas I hunt with it, not a chance. Most whitetail are shot at less than a hundred yards. Many times they are found in the thick stuff, especially once the shots start flying. I love my 32 Special (actually I have passed it on to my son who is in Iraq, right now). But many of the places I hunt would be very favorable for a shotgun. I am bidding on a 54 cal. black powder for the very same reason...400 grains of punch. But that is why there 7 gazillion calibers out there. I guess the important part to all this is that we, thankfully, are out there in the woods every year.



10/07/2008 23:17:06
I think what you descibe as a brush gun, is what I would call a chance gun.  I would never take a shot that I did not believe would be unobstructed, the brush gun would give you a chance if you screwed up.  This is an interesting topic but not one I would base A rifle choice on.  I would choose my rifle on recoil and how well I could shoot it at the distances that I expect to get a shot.  In Ohio where I hunt a shot gun or smoke pole works just fine.  If I went to a rifle state even in the brush I would propably take my .243 or 6ppc. (yes I know they both shoot the same bullet)  Choosing a rifle or any gun that you think will shoot through brush in my opinion is a step toward carelessness.  I will not shoot at anything running in the woods because I don't think I can keep track of my backstop which could change in an instint.  That is the reason I will not hunt with handgunners (for the most part) to many shells fired to fast with the chance they could hit something vital.  Yes I have shot handguns extensively (retired PO) that is why I know even the people who shoot often when under stress do not shoot very well.  I include a moving deer while shooting offhand walking through the woods as stress.  In my opinion handgunners should be restricted to above the ground stands.  I would guess this blog will get some heated feedback from my post, mostly from those that have been successful  and safe while hunting in ways I would not be around them, so let the fireworks begin.



Page:  1 | 2 | Next >  Last >>