|
|
Post by Bullshop on Oct 6, 2023 7:48:34 GMT -7
Call me weird if you will but there is just something about taking the first coyote of the season that every year for decades now brings a special feeling of satisfaction and not just that but as an announcement that the heat and bugs and hay fever of summer is over and now its time for the hunter to come out of hibernation. This week me and Diesel hunting together had that day the first coyote of the new season .
Late afternoon of that day we drove up on top of the ridge behind our house and stopped just short of cresting the ridge. We left the truck there and walked over the top and a few hundred yards on the other side out of view of the truck. We found a good spot on a connecting ridge with a small patch of sage slightly taller that everything around it so sitting in it gave good cover and not only that but from the high ridge gave a huge panoramic field of view.
We sat there for a while and Diesel snuggled up against me in his usual fashion . I didn't want to start calling right away so we just sat and observed for awhile and glassed the area with my now going on about 43 year old Swarofski binoculars. After about fifteen minutes Diesel was getting antsy to start calling. He has done this enough to know how it goes and he knew I wasn't getting it right and he was letting me know about it by shoving himself into my side as if to say "" hey common your not doing it right"" So with his impatience to just sit and take it in I pulled one of the calls hanging from a lanyard around my neck up from out of my shirt and gave just a few short squeals on the call. We then just sat again for maybe twenty minutes or so but this time Diesel was focused scanning back and fourth watching for movement. Since he always spots them sooner than I do at this point I just watch him and can usually tell when he sees something..
So some time went by maybe another twenty minutes or so and we hadn't seen anything so just to let Diesel know I was still with him in the game I gave just a couple more short squeals on the hand call. This didn't have any immediate effect again but after about another twenty minutes when I looked at Diesel he was locked onto something and when I turned to look in that direction there was a big male coyote not a pup as usual in the early season but a seasoned old veteran trotting toward us right in the open with zero cover around him. At about 70 yards he stopped for a look around but by then I had shifted the cross sticks and had him in the old K-10 Weaver. When the cross hairs were on a spot just behind the shoulder I touched the shot and he crumpled in his tracks. I decided that day to use a rifle I had never hunted with a custom build on an FN Supreme in 22-250 Ackley. The load is sending a 52 grain Hornady V-Max out the muzzle right at 4000 fps. I had correctly assumed that with solid hits even to a couple hundred yards this load would not shoot through a coyote so the hides wouldn't have any large holes that needed stitching when put on a stretcher.
So with that successful shot just of habit we didnt move for another fifteen minutes or so but continued to just watch for more movement which we did not detect. Diesel kind of lurched forward a little bit at the shot but it was more like a twitch but even though I know he wanted to run down there an give a little victory bite he didnt but held tough by my side until the all clear signal and we went down and gathered up our prize. Diesel gets a little mushy at that point dancing around and licking me on the face. So anyway we put our coyote strap on the front and rear feet and carried him like a suit case the short distance to the truck.
We had some daylight left but rather than try to make another stand I decided to head home where hanging him for skinning would be easier and better than lashing one of his hind feet to a fence post for skinning. Even though we only made one stand and got one coyote it was still a very pleasantly rewarding afternoon to make the declaration that the new season has begun.
|
|
|
|
Post by todddoyka on Oct 6, 2023 10:04:32 GMT -7
good job Diesel!!!! give the human a treat for me.
|
|
|
|
Post by grasshopper on Oct 8, 2023 19:03:17 GMT -7
That rifle you described sure sounds like perfect coyote medicine! Congratulations Pard! Great way to start a new season!!
|
|
|
|
Post by Bullshop on Oct 9, 2023 7:34:32 GMT -7
Tod, Diesel knows its an equal partnership in which each of us plays a critical role and without both the system cant work. As a younger man I hunted alone but now I dont see as good as I once did. He also detects scent something I could never do alone. Its cool to watch when he catches a scent he puts his nose straight up and holds it there sniffing. Once he has a scent he knows where to look for the visual conformation. Once he has that he makes a short little huffing sound to get my attention and then my role kicks in.
Rob your right about that though not the best for in close calling. It has a 28" Pak-Nor barrel with 14" twist and it does shoot fast but not the best for fast handling with such a long barrel. It is super accurate too shooting in the .4's with preferred loads. With the 14" twist it is limited to about 55gn bullets but for long range I prefer a little more bullet weight. The reason I have previously never hunted with this rifle is that I have another in the same chambering but with a 9" twist. In that rifle with faster twist I shoot a 75 gn bullet with a rebated boat tail base. These bullets I swage using a Sierra J-4 jacket. I have made some with 22 RF jackets but they are too unpredictable in performance so I gave up on those for coyotes.
The reason I have two rifles in the same 22-250 Ackley chambering is that for the one with the 9" twist I ordered the barrel first. It is for a Savage action so easily changeable. After I ordered the barrel but before I received it while at a gun show I saw this other rifle on the FN action with Pak-Nor barrel. It was a part of a large estate was priced very reasonable and also had a set of loading dies which I did not yet have. So that is the story and I still have both.
The FN rifle as I said is shoots fast and sighted 2" high at 100 yards is still on a coyote with a center hold out to about 320 yards. The other rifle with fast twist and heavy bullet will not shoot as flat at the shorter ranges but comes into its own for shots past 500 yards where the ballistic advantage of the higher BC bullet pays off in reduced wind drift and flattened trajectory. The latter is the better gun for later season when the winter snow has settled in limiting available cover and improving visibility for both hunter and hunted so on average making shots longer.
|
|
|
|
Post by grasshopper on Oct 9, 2023 19:31:32 GMT -7
I can certainly see why you would prefer the ability to shoot the heavier bullet especially at the long ranges some of those coyotes will present. I am curious about if you have an opinion about the realitve accuracy between an FN type controlled feed action and the quote “push feed” type action of the Savage. Do you feel one type is generally more accurate than the other? Or is it more of a situation that the action is just a part of a rifles overall accuracy?
|
|
|
|
Post by Bullshop on Oct 10, 2023 7:20:03 GMT -7
From an accuracy stand point I don't think there is much difference. The controlled round feed has little to do with accuracy. Once the standing bolt is cammed into place the Mauser type claw extractor has no function. Removing the extractor would have no effect on accuracy. With a push feed that does not use a standing ejector there is or can be an issue of chamber alignment of the cartridge especially when shooting factory ammo that is small base sized . The issue is that the bolt mounted ejector is set to one side of the bolt face and is under very heavy spring pressure which in effect it constantly pushing the chambered cartridge out of alignment with the bore. For best accuracy the cartridge has to be aligned with the center of the bore. With this type of ejector system I always remove the spring and plunger so there is no ejection on retracting the bolt only extraction. At that point of extraction I either pick the empty out with my fingers and put it in my pocket or if in more of a hurry just tip the rifle to the side and shake it and the empty will most often fall free.
With the bolt mounted plunger type ejector from an accuracy stand point case sizing becomes more critical favoring partial sizing or just neck sizing over full length or small base sizing. The reason I just explained is cartridge to chamber alignment.
With a controlled round feed none of these things are an issue because neither the extractor or ejector have any effect on the chambered cartridge. I suppose then in unmodified form the controlled feed may be potentially more accurate but to be fair there are some push feed target actions that use a receiver mounted ejector that eliminates the issue but I dare say that all of the regular commercially available big name rifles with push feed actions us the bolt mounted ejector mounted in the bolt face. No simple answer I guess.
|
|
|
|
Post by grasshopper on Oct 10, 2023 9:33:03 GMT -7
Great explanation! I was just curious about your thoughts between the two types of feeding. It seems like I have forever heard that if you really wanted the best accuracy you needed to be using a push feed. In my limited experience I always quietly disagreed with that idea. I’m not telling you anything but you know as well as I do as you explained there are many variables when it comes to accuracy. It always confused me that the military uses Remington type push feed bolts on all of the sniper systems I saw except for the M21(M14), the M82 50cal and the M25 308 AR platform. I always thought a controlled round type bolt would have been a better choice if only because of the adverse conditions you might face in combat such as limited maintenance, dirt, sand etc. I would think the controlled type action would hold up better than the push feed type action. Thank you once again for dumbing it down for me my friend! As always you did a fantastic job!!
|
|
|
|
Post by Bullshop on Oct 10, 2023 13:12:54 GMT -7
I agree that for dependability sake a controlled feed is the better choice and would be especially true under battle conditions. Extraction in the push feed is the week link. I have had many failures to extract from a push feed but never from a Mauser claw extractor. The massive hold on the case head with the Mauser claw extractor is as positive as it gets. The tiny little spring loaded extractor of the Remington to me is pathetically inadequate. Even when the stock Remington is converted to Saeco type extractor it still only has about 30% of the surface contact of the Mauser claw .
|
|
|
|
Post by missionary on Oct 11, 2023 1:56:55 GMT -7
Popping yotes is a fine way to wear out a barrel and great public service.
Having that second option in the same caliber for very far targets would be a kind blessing from God. The wonderful joy of be blessed with the proper tools to sort out the yote population !
So do you segregate brass to those rifles ?
Extractors... Years back (when .22's were sold in any corner store) I never gave it a thought until I read Finn Aagaard and his preference for the 98 Mauser. He sure had a fine way of putting words together.
Then one day I had a piece of brass stick in our Rem 788 .243 rifle. That little hook ripped off the case lip with my first upward palm slap. And I have never been a very large person. But when it ripped off I remembered what Mr. Aagaard wrote about trusting my life to an extractor that was inferior to a 98 Claw.
That case was easily removed with a wood rod and a few taps of a mallet.
But due to the fact I have never been attacked by a yote, ground hog, racoon or other unremembered critter that 788 is well able.
But I do not doubt a 98 claw would have jerked that offending piece of brass out and flung it to it's final resting place.
So I also thank you Dan for another fun page in your upcoming book.
|
|
|
|
Post by Bullshop on Oct 11, 2023 7:58:07 GMT -7
For most people the Remington extractor will never give any trouble. The problem shows with the handloaders that push the chamber pressure limits to coax the last few possible fps from their ammo of which I will be found guilty. For the guy whose loads loosen primer pockets in three or four loads of a piece of brass the Remington extractor may be found lacking. I consider the Savage and Saeco as about equal better than the Remington but still not nearly as dependable as the Mauser.
I found it interesting that after WW-1 uncle same was successfully sued by the Mauser brothers for patent infringements of the 1903 Springfield using the Mauser design. Still to this day to my knowledge a more dependable design has not been developed for a bolt action rifle.
|
|
|
|
Post by missionary on Oct 11, 2023 11:55:44 GMT -7
It turned out with my little "test" on the extractor that my issue was the feller who decided to reform 308 brass to .243 missed one of the cases when he (me) was reaming off the excess case material on the neck.
Never did figure out how I did miss that one piece. Happily no damage and rifle soldiers on after many more rounds.
|
|
|
|
Post by Bullshop on Oct 11, 2023 12:24:50 GMT -7
Over length cases can have the same affect too. Some case designs like the 220 Swift were notorious for that. I think maybe a lot of the bad press for the 220 Swift was due to cases that had stretched and too long for the chamber causing excessively high chamber pressures. The long excessively tapered case design like in the swift and hornet is conducive to case stretching at normal pressures then if case length is left unattended spikes in chamber pressures can occur even with proven loads that were worked up in proper length brass.
That is where the beauty of the Ackley case design shines not so much in the greater potential velocity but in the fact that his improved design on many factory cartridges nearly eliminated case stretch even at higher than normal chamber pressures. The Ackley improved designs greatly reduce back thrust to the bolt face. One negative effect of this is that primer appearance can no longer be relied upon as an indicator of chamber pressures when developing loads.
I recall reading in Parkers book for reloaders that in testing the 30-30 Ackley improved in a model 94 Winchester that he completely removed the rear locking lugs from the action but due to the case design clinging to the chamber walls as intended the back thrust to the bolt was eliminated and the rifle fired normally even though the bolt was not locked closed by the locking lugs. The Ackley design gave three distinct benefits one being potentially higher velocity one being that it arrested forward case flow so better controlled the need to trim cases and as stated greatly reduced back thrust to the breach face also contributing to reduced case stretch. I am a big fan of Parkers improved design and have several rifles chambered for them. A definite negative to the improved design is feeding. Never have I seen an improved chamber design feed more reliably than a standard case design and some improved chambers on certain actions will not feed with any sort of dependability. They do shine brightly in performance in a strong single shot.
|
|
|
|
Post by grasshopper on Oct 11, 2023 12:30:34 GMT -7
Super interesting to read everyone’s take on push feed vs controlled or Mauser (claw) feed. I’m in agreement with the bullet meister that both are more than capable of really good accuracy but many more factors than the type of feeding system the bolt provides go into having a really accurate rifle. I suppose the last thing I would have to say on this subject is if I was hunting dangerous game I would really want the Mauser type action only because like we have mentioned here it’s a controlled feed and once that claw grabs that cartridge it’s not going anywhere, that’s always been my experience anyway.
|
|
|
|
Post by Junior on Oct 15, 2023 2:47:44 GMT -7
I would tend to think that lock time would be much more important than extractor type in regards to accuracy.
There is a reason that we don’t see many bench rest rifles build on 03 springfields with the slow lock time of that design.
2 of the most accurate rifles I have owned used the bolt mounted ejector, A Remington 788, and Tikka T3x
|
|
|
|
Post by Bullshop on Oct 15, 2023 7:00:27 GMT -7
No doubt lock time is a major component of an accurate rifle. The 788 Rem has a very fast lock time. When the 788 first came out it was the cheaper economy model Remington but because of the fast lock time there were some built into BR rifles. I think the rear locking bolt with multiple locking lugs kind of countered the benefits of the fast lock time so the practice was short lived. The Mauser/Springfield system has a comparatively long firing pin travel that increases lock time.
Accuracy though is relative to the situation/shooter and their needs and expectations. I remember once selling a 22-250 that was pretty well worn in the throat and would no longer give the accuracy level I needed or expected. I sold the rifle to a deer hunter and sometime later asked him how he liked it. He said he loved it and could hit a beer can every time at 100 yards and that was great for him. He didn't know that at its peak accuracy the rifle was able to consistently hit any letter on that can at the same distance so we see that perceived accuracy is relative to our expectations. For a competitive BR shooter they must take advantage of every possible means of improving accuracy which means only modern action purpose driven designs.
In the old days though at the relative birth of BR shooting mil-surp actions were used but the level of accuracy expected was no where near what it is now. They did though address lock time on those actions in several ways to try to improve it. I have a depression era BR rifle built on a 1917 Oberndorf Mauser that for my expectations is very accurate but is in no way capable of competing in BR today. Oh BTW that rifle is chambered for the top competative cartridge of that time the 250/3000 Savage.
|
|
