The oldest shooting arguements

In my life, I have traveled around most of the planet. Fortunately, some electronics or aerospace company was paying for my travels. I worked hard, but I always tried to build in enough free time to check out the local firearms attractions and a few really nice golf courses. We'll leave the golf tales for another blog. I've visited gun stores all over the US and in several European countries as well. It doesn't matter where you go, someone is always debating which cartridge is best suited for a particular task. Whether the application is target shooting, hunting, military, LE, or "tactical", there are usually at least two camps for every issue. I'll use my favorite as an example.

30'06 vs 270 Winchester. Most gun stores in rural America resemble a beer commercial the day before deer season. One side of the room tauts the 30'06 as the ultimate deer killer while the other side cheers on the 270 Winchester. "Great Taste, Less Filling". The 30'06 supporters think the 270 Win is too small to ensure a clean kill. The 270 crowd claims it shoots flatter than the 30'06 and guarantees more accuracy and therefore more kills. Of course, the 30'06 came first and the 270 was originally a wildcat cartridge based on the 30'06. However, since the 270 Win became so popular, ammunition manufacturers have introduced many additional loadings for the 30'06. Currently, I can easily find loadings for the 30'06 with bullet weights ranging from 123 grains to 200 grains. The 270 Win has commercial loads ranging from 100 grains to 150 grains. By comparing equal weight bullets using ballistic data for rifles zeroed at 200 yards, it is easy to see exactly which bullets drop the most, or shoot the flattest. At 400 yards, using 150 grain spitzer bullets, the 30'06 drops 19.2 inches while the 270 Win drops 21.6 inches.

How can this be true? It is simple physics. I can also find loadings for the 270 Win with the same bullet that only drop 19.4 inches. The type of powder used and the size of the charge will affect the trajectory of the bullet. In the years immediately after its conception, the 270 shot lighter bullets than any available 30'06 ammunition and it tended to drop less than the 30'06. Time has passed. The great thing about the 30'06 is its ability to be loaded with such a wide range of bullets. One can carry one rifle with loads that are tailored to take coyotes, deer, elk or even bear. The trajectory will be differ across the changes in bullet weights, but the changes can be accounted for with any decent scope. Yes, the scope is the key. Back when the 270 Win was first conceived hunters still used iron sights. It is much tougher to account for bullet drop with iron sights compared to modern scopes. A round that drops less makes the hunter's job much easier with iron sights.

The truth is, more dear have been taken with iron sighted lever action guns chambered in the much slower 30-30 Win than an other caliber. In America, we tend to strive for accuracy. Taking shots at over 400 yards is rare in most parts of the country. Rare, not always, but rare. The list of calibers that can be zeroed at 200 yards and still hit a 10 inch circle at 400+ yards is very long indeed. I tend to put more emphasis on the weight of the bullet as velocity becomes less of a factor down range. I'd be happy to shoot 270 Win at most game that roams in my neck of the woods. The thing I find most interesting is how profoundly attached some shooters become to a particular cartridge without really understanding its true performance characteristics. I often quiz the 270 fans on how much flatter it shoots than a 30'06. I get answers ranging from 2" to 12" without any mention of a particular range. It's really just a quirk of an industry and sport that I love very dearly. I don't contend that anyone is right or wrong, just opinionated. I still maintain that the 22 LR is the most accurate round ever created, but I have seen strong evidence that the 17 HMR is actually more inheritly accurate. We all have our hang ups and opinions. I find pleasure in listening and analyzing these traits. There are so many, maybe I'll opine about more of them in the future. For now, I'll keep shooting 30-30 and 30'06. Whatever it is that each shooter believes in is what they should stick with. As long as it works for them, we should all support our fellow shooters. They are the best defense for protecting our gun rights. We should refrain from accusing other shooters as "stupid" because they have a different opinion. Yes, I routinely run into people who tell me that some "expert" on the Internet or in a gun store has told them they are stupid for failing to agree on such things as the 270 vs 30'06 argument or whether or not a 308 Win makes a better "sniper" rifle than a 300 Win Mag, etc. It's mostly food for thought. As long as shooters keep buying guns and keep putting rounds down range and help to prevent deer and varmint over population, I'm pretty happy. We are all on the same side, in the end. Live free or die.

Target Shooting

I see this way too often. Shooters want to have all of the great gear that has been developed for Law Enforcement and Military applications. The US military currently fields some of the best gear in the world. Barrett, Trijicon, Aimpoint, Elcan, FN, Colt, Sabre Defense and so many other top notch manufactures offer the same high tech gear to US civilians that Militaries around the world either field, or wish they could field. I've seen shooters read about how accurate a rifle & optics package can be at ranges out to 2000 yards, and mortgage their homes to duplicate the setup on their dining room table. These same shooters are extremely disappointed when they shoot this high end gear on their local 100-300 yard range just to find that gear is shooting 3 or 4 inch groups. This brings us to a defining moment when a shooter realizes the difference between shooting at a bullseye target vs shooting at a person or a piece of equipment. Typically, the larger the caliber, the less accurate it is. Its a point of contention these days because of the accuracy of the 17 HMR, but for more than a century, the 22 LR was considered the most accurate round on the planet. Competitors routinely shoot 22 LR competitions in which the center bullseye is .223 in diameter. Anything that isn't a perfect center hit scores a 9. I've competed in these matches during my time in ROTC at the University of Missouri, and I've seen several shooters put 10 rounds through 10 different bullseyes to score a perfect 100. That's real accuracy. Those rifles and their applications don't have a place on a battlefield or LE situation, beyond training. Similarly, shooting 338 Lapua or 50 BMG's at bullseye targets at known ranges doesn't translate into the experience the shooter is often expecting. Don't get me wrong, I'm all for these rifles being in civilian hands and there are some great long range competitions that have been developed around this gear. However, if you are investing in gear that is touted as the greatest gear because the military uses it, I suggest you take a look at your application. Matching the proper gear to the proper shooting situation will guarantee a satisfying shooting experience without spending a lot of money for equipment you don't need. I can't tell you how many Barrett M99's I've taken on trade that were never fired by their original owner. The Internet advertising world and the real shooting world are vastly different.

The Beginning

I suppose the first installment on this blog should contain some information as to why it exists and what the readers can expect to see here in the future. I'm a life long shooting and firearms enthusiast. My brother and I own our own firearms business, Live To Shoot, and most of our family has always been concerned with the state of the firearms industry and the security of our freedom to own and use firearms. I named our company Live To Shoot based on a personal philosophy that the family that shoots together, stays together. I also believe that we cannot adequately protect our Second Amendment rights simply by owning firearms. As US citizens, we have a duty to continue the shooting heritage in this country by going to the range, to the hunt, or just in the backyard to shoot, shoot, shoot. I have a collection of valuable firearms, but almost all of them get shot. That's what they are for.

I've been told I'm long winded and a terrible speller. I welcome any comments regarding my words here. Hopefully, with a little constructive criticism, this blog will evolve into a source of good information in a tolerable format.

Installments to come will focus on firearms and their applications, shooting. I'll discuss ballistics, equipment and reality. I hope to dispel some of the myths that surround firearms and what they can and cannot do. If it has a firing pin, I've shot it, thousands of times. I might stray into areas that I don't have a lot of expertise, but simply an opinion. I reserve the right to speak my mind on my own blog.

I've been told that I am a good source of information for the new shooter whether they are completely new to shooting or just trying to get into a new shooting application like IPSC, IDPA, Cowboy Action Shooting or some sort of hunting. I've also been told that I should try to write for the gun magazines. Let me be clear, I love reading the gun magazines and watching the programs on the Outdoor Channel as much as anyone else. However, I tend to do something those journalist simply can't do, I'll tell you the negative side of the products and tactics of the day. Gun magazines are just like car magazines, they can't afford to tell the honest truth about a product that is produced by one of their advertisers. Usually, if there is a product out there and it doesn't appear in an article in a major publication, chances are the product isn't very good. Not writing articles about a product is really their only option. I'll tell it to you straight. I've known too many shooters who have abandoned the sport because they wasted hard earned money on a firearm that wouldn't run or hit what they pointed it at. I always try to prevent that.

More to come...