# High powered rifles are here!



## buckeye dan (Jan 31, 2012)

You can't deer hunt with a high powered rifle using a breech loaded brass container in Ohio. You can however hunt with a high powered rifle that loads from the front.

So which muzzle loader is the best?
Gunwerks claims 2200FPS
Big Dawg claims 3200FPS
Bad Bull claims 3100FPS

Gunwerks has a 715 yard antelope shot on film





*Note* The video is a Gunwerks rifle and not a Big Dawg.


----------



## Lundy (Apr 5, 2004)

I think everyone should run down to Walmart and get one.......except they can't

Statistically nonexistent.


----------



## buckeye dan (Jan 31, 2012)

Lundy said:


> I think everyone should run down to Walmart and get one.......except they can't
> 
> Statistically nonexistent.


No they can't. These are $4000-$4500 custom works. As I understand it Lundy you shoot a smokeless production model which from what I've read around the net is very popular. The Savage 10ML-II. Depending on the source I have read those will do 2100-2600fps.

Buds has them at a very reasonable $617.00. What I can't find much of is long range shots. There isn't much about them after 200 yards. Is that pretty much their range?


----------



## Lundy (Apr 5, 2004)

The Savage ML 11 is no longer in production.

With the Savage factory recommended loads they are similar to a modern 12 ga. sabot slug. These loads might stretch 200 a little but not much.


----------



## buckeye dan (Jan 31, 2012)

Lundy said:


> The Savage ML 11 is no longer in production.
> 
> With the Savage factory recommended loads they are similar to a modern 12 ga. sabot slug. These loads might stretch 200 a little but not much.


Savage made an announcement December of last year that they would be continuing production on the 10ML-II. Popular demand!
http://randywakeman.com/SavageArmsAnnounces2012_10ML-IIMuzzleloaderProduction.htm.

Bad Bull is using Shilen barrels on common actions. Shilen also does drop in barrel replacements for Savage. It stands to reason that you could order a Shilen barrel for the 10ML-II and upgrade it to the Bad Bull loading specs. 

The other Savage Shilen barrels go for about $450.00. That would mean anyone could be shooting 3000+ FPS for less than $1200.00. I think I am going to call Shilen on Monday and see if that assessment is true.


----------



## sherman51 (Apr 12, 2011)

i have one of the savage smokeless m/l and i dont like it that much. i have had more misfires with it than i ever had with my black powder guns. maby it was the powder i tried. they only recommend about 3 types of smokeless powders to shoot in it. i only tried one. but i now use my tc encore. mine seemed to shoot about equal to any m/l with a magnum load.

im sure the one in the video is alot different than the savage m/l.
sherman


----------



## leupy (Feb 12, 2007)

I have and love my Savage ML10, without a doubt the most accurate Mussle loader I have ever shot. Everyone in my shooting group has them, that amounts to about three hundred years of experience.


----------



## buckeye dan (Jan 31, 2012)

My thinking was flawed. I just checked with someone who knows more about what they are doing to upgrade. You could replace your Savage barrel with a Shilen barrel but you would gain nothing in load. By design the primer chamber is limited to what the Savage is already capable of. You would turn your priming chamber/breech area into a grenade.

Big Dawg will do the conversion to an existing non ML rifle like the Remington 700 for roughly $2400.00. The locking bolts/lugs are required to contain the pressures of the rifle primer carrier. That is almost half the price of the whole gun and a lot less turn around time too at about 6 weeks.

The question becomes how much is someone willing to spend to hunt with a single shot high powered rifle in Ohio?


----------



## Lundy (Apr 5, 2004)

buckeye dan said:


> Savage made an announcement December of last year that they would be continuing production on the 10ML-II. Popular demand!
> http://randywakeman.com/SavageArmsAnnounces2012_10ML-IIMuzzleloaderProduction.htm.


That is no longer true. They may return again at some point but for now they are done making them. All production capacity is being devoted to their centerfire rifle production.


I have custom barrels on two of my Savages.


----------



## buckeye dan (Jan 31, 2012)

Lundy said:


> That is no longer true. They may return again at some point but for now they are done making them. All production capacity is being devoted to their centerfire rifle production.
> 
> 
> I have custom barrels on two of my Savages.


Maybe they did a run of them earlier in the year? I say that because a quick search turned up 17 stores with them in stock. One of which was Woodbury Outdoors in Coshocton. They have 6 of them. I seem to recall a couple of them on the shelves at Buckeye Outdoors too. I know a while back they were very hard to find so they must have made more of them since the December announcement. No?


----------



## Lundy (Apr 5, 2004)

Yes, they made one last (supposedly) run, blue only no Stainless

August 2012- This from Bill Ball, son of Henry Ball original patent holder for savage MZ.

_Just got word from Brian Herrick, of Savage Arms, that they are not going to produce any more 10ML-II's after currect production run is complete ad current orders on hand are filled. 2012 will be the last year the 10ML-II will be produced. 

There is too great of a demand for their centerfire rifle line and they are running 3 shifts 6 days a week, and cannot meet demand. Bottomline is, they need the production time that is allocated for the 10ML-II to build centerfire rifles, which is their bread and butter, to be honest. 

They did leave the door open for future production, but who knows if and when that will happen. _


----------



## buckeye dan (Jan 31, 2012)

With at least a half dozen custom manufacturers using the Savage action to make the ultra magnum and smokeless muzzleloaders that shoot 500-1000 yards it seems like it would be a good idea for Savage to throw a production model out there. Ohio would definitely be a prime market for that.

I wonder how the ODNR would react to the idea of everyone being able to afford one?


----------



## Lundy (Apr 5, 2004)

buckeye dan said:


> With at least a half dozen custom manufacturers using the Savage action to make the ultra magnum and smokeless muzzleloaders that shoot 500-1000 yards



Somewhat of an exaggeration there with the yardages. Those are by far the minute exception not the rule with custom smokeless

I am very familar with the custom smokeless MZ market, what is made by who and the reported performances. 


Are you discussing smokeless MZ'S to try and raise support for the legalization of rifles for deer hunting in Ohio?


----------



## buckeye dan (Jan 31, 2012)

Lundy said:


> Somewhat of an exaggeration there with the yardages. Those are by far the minute exception not the rule with custom smokeless
> 
> I am very familar with the custom smokeless MZ market, what is made by who and the reported performances.
> 
> ...


It may be marketing hype to claim 500-1000 yards but they all do it. All their pages are littered with customers claiming it too. Catch phrases like "put em in a pile at a quarter mile", "1000 yards out of the box" etc etc. Gunwerks is shipping an entire shooting system complete with tuned BDC turret scopes ready to go at 500 yards.

Youtube is also littered with amazing long range shots from several manufacturers. Some hunting and some target.

I am not discussing long range muzzle loaders for any specific purpose other than to discuss them. Not every post I make has to be about some other agenda. Since I am into ML's I find that what they are evolving into fascinating. 

We already met with the ODNR and discussed many of these rifles but since then I am seeing more and more springing up. Big Dawg is only about a year old. It would be an interesting turn of events if some manufacturer goes production line with this technology and suddenly everyone could afford them.

The only limit to where these muzzle loaders can go is how heavy of a piece of piece of pipe you want to carry around. I think it will put the ODNR in a predicament they didn't want. I would say it's already too late to put the toothpaste back into the tube.

They could ban them but that would create a crap storm especially among the folks that spent $4k+ to get into one.
They could break them out into their own season.
They could ignore them altogether and allow us to desensitize ourselves as we saturate the woods with them. (Assuming an affordable production model happens, it wouldn't take long)

It's not going to leave a lot of room to defend against the brass/necked cartridges. People may start looking across the river and realize what they are missing? I am not sure if this helps the PCR cause though. I think this ML technology is headed to where no one will care if there is a brass cartridge or not. Why bother trying to change anything when you could just pick up one of these instead?

With all the cool developments and technological options that are coming, plus the ones we have now, I could see the 100+ year old rifles and cartridges being swept under the rug and forgotten. People are still using trad-bows and flintlocks however so who knows? All I can hope for is people don't start turning up their noses at the old rifles before they get a chance to be used.

I don't think the upcoming hunter generation is going to give a squat about a 3 shot lever action rifle designed in 1894 when they can shoot 3 times farther with a magnum muzzle loader or use a comparable semi automatic handgun with no capacity limitations.

What you have seen over the last couple of days Lundy is not my advancement of my PCR agenda. It's me thinking out loud in these threads. I am considering throwing my towel into the ring on the whole idea. Doing the if you can't beat em join em, when in Rome thing. 7 years we've been pushing for the PCR's. It's been 4 for me personally. Why buy the PCR when I can put an upper on my AR pistol for almost the same price? Why limit myself to a couple hundred yards? If I need to shoot accurately farther I can buy something now that does that.

I honestly can't say where I am at right now. The effort is quickly deteriorating any nostalgia that was making it worth while. I said once before that maybe when we are all using star trek weapons we may be able to use these old rifles. I am slowly coming to the realization that we don't need star trek weapons for that to happen. It is already happening and we didn't need to wait for star trek weapons before the old stuff is forgotten and discarded. Leaving them with a following that is on par with trad bows and flintlocks.


----------



## ezbite (May 25, 2006)

They should be illegal, just like a centerfire rifle is.


----------



## buckeye dan (Jan 31, 2012)

ezbite said:


> They should be illegal, just like a centerfire rifle is.


Way to support your fellow hunters! I am sure whatever you do when hunting does not agree with others. Where would we all be if we banned each others stuff?


----------



## ezbite (May 25, 2006)

Since you can't (or won't) accept MY opinion and feel the need to personally attack me because MY opinion is different than yours or even worst yet, question HOW I HUNT.. You dont even know me... So, lets get personal... MY opinion I posted "they should be illegal" Has nothing to do with MY support of "fellow hunters" it has everything to do with where i hunt, I hunt public land in Ohio, I don't own 100s of acres of private property over populated with deer. I hunt hard, long and kill several deer every year. I've seen some crazy stuff with the yeehaa's with shotguns. I can just imagine if rifles are allowed in Ohio, muzzle loading or not. I'm willing to bet you've never been leaning on a tree in the dark on opening morning beside a field, thinking it's just about time to load up, then all of a sudden all hell breaks loose.. Shots all around you and you hear one busting thru the Upper limbs of the tree you are now hiding behind.. Well mr double facepalm, I HAVE.. I'm thankful those were only slugs going 1000fps and not rifle bullets going 2800fps. You want to use a rifle or rifle velocity ML's go to a state that allows them and don't try to play this off like there's no hidden agenda in this thread.. All you need to do is read between the lines.... Now, go find some insulting photo to post in your next reply... Is that personal enough for you??


----------



## ezbite (May 25, 2006)

buckeye dan said:


> Way to support your fellow hunters! I am sure whatever you do when hunting does not agree with others. Where would we all be if we banned each others stuff?


I just wanted to save this little tidbit so it's not edited..


----------



## postalhunter1 (Jun 5, 2010)

I think it's worth noting that a lot of western states are adding rules that prohibit the use of "muzzleloaders that use smokeless powder". You may find that this will be the norm with most states soon. As soon as these rifles catch on and more people start using them, they will change the rules in Ohio also.


God, Family, Work, Hunting.....


----------



## Lundy (Apr 5, 2004)

postalhunter1 said:


> I think it's worth noting that a lot of western states are adding rules that prohibit the use of "muzzleloaders that use smokeless powder". You may find that this will be the norm with most states soon. As soon as these rifles catch on and more people start using them, they will change the rules in Ohio also.
> 
> 
> God, Family, Work, Hunting.....


These states you mention are not changing the rules, they have always been the rules from the beginning.

There are some states that have revised the rules to permit smokeless MZ's

You still dump powder down the barrel and push home a bullet. A little silly to compare these to cartridge rifles.

The single biggest advantage with "smokeless" is that you do not need to clean the gun every time you shoot it. You do know, I'm sure, that T7 and Pyrodex are smokeless powders with additives to make them smoke?


----------



## buckeye dan (Jan 31, 2012)

ezbite said:


> Since you can't (or won't) accept MY opinion and feel the need to personally attack me because MY opinion is different than yours or even worst yet, question HOW I HUNT.. You dont even know me... So, lets get personal... MY opinion I posted "they should be illegal" Has nothing to do with MY support of "fellow hunters" it has everything to do with where i hunt, I hunt public land in Ohio, I don't own 100s of acres of private property over populated with deer. I hunt hard, long and kill several deer every year. I've seen some crazy stuff with the yeehaa's with shotguns. I can just imagine if rifles are allowed in Ohio, muzzle loading or not. I'm willing to bet you've never been leaning on a tree in the dark on opening morning beside a field, thinking it's just about time to load up, then all of a sudden all hell breaks loose.. Shots all around you and you hear one busting thru the Upper limbs of the tree you are now hiding behind.. Well mr double facepalm, I HAVE.. I'm thankful those were only slugs going 1000fps and not rifle bullets going 2800fps. You want to use a rifle or rifle velocity ML's go to a state that allows them and don't try to play this off like there's no hidden agenda in this thread.. All you need to do is read between the lines.... Now, go find some insulting photo to post in your next reply... Is that personal enough for you??


The face palm is not a personal attack. The gesture is a display of frustration, disappointment, embarrassment, dismay, shock or surprise. Now if it was a particular finger, that would be personal.

When hunters make blanket statements declaring something should be illegal we all suffer for it. I respond to that accordingly hence the face palm.

There are no safe firearms in the absolute sense. They are operated by people therefore the potential for error will always be there until the people are altered and even then ricochets, over penetration and other unpredictable/uncontrollable chaotic things will occur.

I think the most logical way to address what you described is to legalize high velocity rifles. It is a scientific fact that the hunting projectiles we use in high velocity rifles, upon striking almost any obstacle, change shape and travel direction and rapidly lose kinetic energy. They have a tendency to disintegrate at hyper velocity speeds.

Had a high velocity rifle been used you would not have had tiny cannon balls hurling their way through the tree branches overhead. A high velocity rifle bullet would have been rendered harmless after the first couple of obstacles. Depending on speed and bullet weight it would have taken just a few twigs to render the projectile harmless.

At this point you are not debating a point or opinion with me. You have an emotional response to a particular situation. If you dismiss physics because of the way you feel then nothing anyone can say will change your attitude. 

The real solution to your problem is to change bullet composition and velocity until even a few blades of grass cause the bullets to disintegrate. Not ban an entire weapons platform and force people to use slower and heavier bullets. Unobstructed line of sight would still be an issue but that is the fault of the hunter and not the gun. It will always be the fault of the hunter regardless of the projectile. It may as well be an arrow at that point.

Bullets that derive their kinetic energy solely from velocity rather than from weight are the safer bullet where there is any chance of an obstruction. Especially small closely knit obstructions like brush and tree limbs. We can't deny physics.

None of this has anything to do with pistol caliber rifles either. Their velocities are on par with everything else we have been using for years. They are just smaller cannon balls is all. The lighter mass makes them safer than a shotgun slug too because it takes less resistance to slow them down.

Ignore me. Ignore your 8th grade physics teacher. Line up some targets in the back yard and shoot them yourself. 1 ounce of lead traveling 1600 FPS is a lot more devastating than a 240 grain pistol bullet traveling the same speed. At a certain point surface friction kicks in where penetration is concerned but the bullet with the less mass is still easier to stop. It's that object in motion stuff most of us slept through in class.

From Chuck Hawks:


> Some jurisdictions in the U.S. forbid the use of rifles and mandate the use of shotgun slugs for deer hunting, allegedly for "safety" in crowded hunting areas. I am sure that this is what keeps rifled slugs viable as a sporting proposition. (They are also used in police "riot" guns, of course.)
> 
> This is actually kind of funny in an ironic way, as the one thing slugs do really well is penetrate brush. Rifled slugs are probably the most dangerous type of ammunition to use in a wooded area crowded with hunters and other humans, as they plow through visually impenetrable brush, leaves, and small tree limbs with aplomb. A high velocity rifle with a frangible bullet would be far safer in such an environment. I have, for instance, seen .22 varmint bullets fired at very high velocity turn into a puff of blue smoke on a blade of grass!
> 
> ...


Source: http://www.chuckhawks.com/shotgun_slugs.htm


----------



## ezbite (May 25, 2006)

buckeye dan said:


> The face palm is not a personal attack. The gesture is a display of frustration, disappointment, embarrassment, dismay, shock or surprise. Now if it was a particular finger, that would be personal.
> 
> When hunters make blanket statements declaring something should be illegal we all suffer for it. I respond to that accordingly hence the face palm.
> 
> ...



you forgot your photo....

and just to clairify, i am not against hunting with muzzle loaders, i own 3 and some years do go out in jan looking for an exter deer. i just dont see the need for high powered rifles or high powered muzzle loaders in ohio.


----------



## Bassbme (Mar 11, 2012)

buckeye dan
When hunters make blanket statements declaring something should be illegal we all suffer for it. I respond to that accordingly hence the face palm.
There are no safe firearms in the absolute sense. They are operated by people therefore the potential for error will always be there until the people are altered and even then ricochets said:


> Speaking of the need for a face palm. Did you realize you were saying this when you wrote it? Bullets from hunting rifles have a tendency to disintegrate at hyper velocities? Bullets designed for big game hunting are designed for penetration, and controlled expansion. Rounds designed for varmint hunting disintegrate, not rounds designed for big game.
> 
> You also make a case against your own stance when you mention ricochets, and over penetration. Which is ..... and I don't want to speak for EZbite.... but I am betting those two reasons are EXACTLY some of the things he has in mind when he says that it shouldn't be legal to use high powered rifles in Ohio. I hope you're not saying that a 12 gauge slug has a better chance of over penetrating than say a 7 mm Remington Magnum or .300 Winchester Magnum does? Also, you mention ricochets...... you yourself said that a smaller projectile ricochets more easily than a larger one does. Ricochets is one of the reasons people are against high powered rifle hunting in Ohio. It's a safety factor that your statements give cause to. You....... a hunter....... giving the "political s" ammunition for their argument. Tsk, tsk, tsk..... bad hunter...... bad.
> 
> ...


----------



## buckeye dan (Jan 31, 2012)

Bassbme,

A hyper velocity needle can displace as much tissue upon it's disintegration as a .45 caliber bullet traveling 1000 FPS. It all depends on what you believe about the studies regarding hydrostatic shock or more accurately hydraulic shock.

Most of our understanding and bullet applications come from wars and the ability to kill humans. With the FBI and the military it's all about penetration and bullet weight retention and rightfully so.

Humans don't typically present themselves as a naked target. We wear varying layers of clothes, use body armor, hide behind hard targets, wear equipment and carry any number of objects in our pockets. Most of whatever you think you know based on the research for self defense rounds and military rounds can be thrown out.

With a more reliable constant (a naked deer) like fur, bone, tissue and none of the other stuff we are quite capable of using hyper velocity rounds that would not only drop an animal where it stands but never exit the other side. We can do that without sacrificing range too. Effectively turning most of what is in the bullet path into a giant wave of force leaving behind some goo. The only variable that would interfere much is distance to target.

Since the structural integrity of the round needs to be maintained in flight for accuracy different compositions are required for different speeds. You also don't want the bullet to disintegrate before it transfers all of it's energy where you want it to like a chest cavity. It must maintain some complete mass immediately after the impact. Liken it to frangible rounds. They are designed to break into smaller pieces that don't have the mass to maintain their velocity.

If I shoot a frangible round through a piece of wood, none of the fragments would be likely to harm you much several feet away from the wood on the other side. However if you placed the same piece of wood inches from your chest and took the same hit you would be severely messed up if not dead. Excluding the wood shrapnel of course.

Every rifle hunting ammunition manufacturer is producing and developing ammunition based on this exact principle. That is why the military and law enforcement doesn't use them. They have more to contend with than naked deer. Keep in mind I am referring to specialized hunting ammo and not the multi role stuff.

I think you will find the bottom third or so of this entry enlightening:
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hydrostatic_shock

If a bullet fragments when it hits something there isn't much left to ricochet.


----------



## buckeye dan (Jan 31, 2012)

ezbite said:


> you forgot your photo....
> 
> and just to clairify, i am not against hunting with muzzle loaders, i own 3 and some years do go out in jan looking for an exter deer. i just dont see the need for high powered rifles or high powered muzzle loaders in ohio.


"Need" is a relative term. Technically no one needs a firearm at all if the desired effect is killing a deer. Archery equipment will kill a deer. With enough skill and luck it may be possible to ambush a deer with a pointed stick without ever throwing it. We don't "need" missile weapons at all when we could all learn to lance them.

Firearms are more efficient however. Since we have harvest goals that require a certain amount of dead deer we "need" other tools. More effective tools.

In my hunting environment anything heavy with 100 yard ranges will work. I have dense cover in recovering clear cut to contend with. That would be useless to someone in the flat land watching deer across a bean field 400 yards out. Thanks to technology with rifled barrels, sabots and modern inlines, that hunter now has at least some options. Very poor options in comparison to a center fire rifle but people will always make do with whatever we allow them.

So when we allow someone a single shot loaded from the muzzle does it really surprise anyone when someone creates a gun that shoots as far as they "want" it to? When we limit one type of gun to 3 rounds and not all of them, does it really surprise anyone when someone who "wants" more capacity figures out how to make a handgun shoot as well as a rifle? When we make shotguns the most effective tool allowed for decades does it really surprise anyone when someone "wants" a rifle that they would figure out how to turn a shotgun into one?

We are already using everything they told us we could not use in the name of "safety". We can either come to terms with that or we can all hide in our bunkers until the shooting stops.

What the ODNR does will be the interesting part. I don't think this is as much about safety as people would believe. There are studies that indicate a deer may have a longer lifespan in a shotgun state than in a rifle state. Limited ranges mean less presented shots which means deer get older and bigger thus more trophies.

That might suggest they would do nothing about the ultra magnum muzzle loaders because there will always be those hunters who refuse to give up capacity for range. They'll just hunt a little harder and carry the 3 round guns anyway. For now they are self limiting in price too.

I enjoy muzzle loader hunting and handgun hunting but 3 round sluggers works for me too. I don't have a need to shoot 400 yards with a $4000 gun. I wouldn't fault the bean field hunter one bit for using it though. Similarly the bean field hunter probably has little use for a handgun but I would hope they would not fault me for using one.


----------



## littleking (Jun 25, 2005)

legalize the cartridge, not the barrel length or action type.


----------



## sherman51 (Apr 12, 2011)

i really dont know what my opinion is on the long range ml. i know many states that allow high powered rifles. do they have that many more people shot from these high powerd guns over the states that limit us to shotguns and ml,s. i would like to see some data that shows them to be that much more dangerous than the guns we already use.

i have always believed in supporting other hunters right to use weapons that i dont use myself. even if i thought they were not for me. even tho i dont use a crossbow i think it is a good thing that they added them to our regular bow season. but there is and always will be those that dissagree with my opinion.

what i think it really boils down to, is untill there is some way to make the hunters safer out there then it doesnt matter what gun they shoot.

we were hunting some public land where you had to check in and out to hunt. this one friend moved from the middle of one line to the back of another line so he could hunt a different section, and motioned us over. he said you dont want to hunt around that guy. he just heard him tell his friend he got some good sound shots the day before. he seen 2 deer go in the thicket he was hunting next to. then when he heard them braking brush he opened up and emptied his gun in that direction. but he went and looked and didnt find blood.

i dont think safety is about what gun we use but the people behind them. so is these long range single shot ml,s really more dangerous that some idiot making sound shots into the brush?? i really dont think so. i just hope the people that want to take these long range shots make sure of there targets.

when i was in the marine corps i shot 20 rounds at a target the size of a man from the waist up. i shot 10 shots on thurs which was pre quail day. i hit all 10 rounds in the bulls eye. on fri on quailify day i shot another 10 rounds with 9 confirmed bulls eye hits. they gave me 1 miss, but i think i hit another hole and didnt get credit for the hit. but thats 19 bulls eyes out of 20 shots at 500 meters with open sights. now i shoot a ml with a scope, and the gun can make 200+ yrd shots. but i find 99.9% of the time my shots are less than 100 yrds. and 50% or better are under 50 yrds. so here in indiana and ohio and other states thats so populated why would anyone want a gun that would shoot 1000 yrds?? but if they are legal then who am i to say no. these are just my thoughts and i dont even know the answer myself. i guess only time will tell.
sherman


----------



## Drake3 (May 13, 2012)

I hunt in West Virginia with a high powered rifle. Terrane not all that different than where i hunt in Ohio. the cartridge doesnt make hunting dangerous, the hunters make it dangerous.. I have more accuracy with my rifles than my shotgun and muzzleloaders, however, i am not taking 300 yard shots nor do I feel the need to take such shots or blind shots.


----------



## buckeye dan (Jan 31, 2012)

Drake3 said:


> I hunt in West Virginia with a high powered rifle. Terrane not all that different than where i hunt in Ohio. the cartridge doesnt make hunting dangerous, the hunters make it dangerous.. I have more accuracy with my rifles than my shotgun and muzzleloaders, however, i am not taking 300 yard shots nor do I feel the need to take such shots or blind shots.


Drake,
Every state that borders us hunts with rifles. The imaginary line through the river or across open terrain that defines Ohio's borders is where the problem lies.

Ohio cannot be compared to anything across that line. The deer and the humans on this side are just different. Learn to accept that or learn to adapt, improvise and overcome against our limitations with technology we CAN use.

The more powerful you go the more expensive it becomes but we can do everything legally that we were not supposed to be able to do in the name of safety.


----------



## Drake3 (May 13, 2012)

Dan,

Look I'm not opposed to using rifles in Ohio. I've been in more dangerous situations with shotguns/muzzleloaders/handguns. What I was trying to convey was the fact that most Ohio hunters on Public land i've came across have been dangerous. The lack of the appropriate hunter orange, using to many rounds in shot guns, being upset because you were in a public hunting area, shooting into an area because they heard a noise, etc etc etc... Maybe It's the " UCLA" guys coming into Tuscarawas County..


----------



## buckeye dan (Jan 31, 2012)

Drake3 said:


> Dan,
> 
> Look I'm not opposed to using rifles in Ohio. I've been in more dangerous situations with shotguns/muzzleloaders/handguns. What I was trying to convey was the fact that most Ohio hunters on Public land i've came across have been dangerous. The lack of the appropriate hunter orange, using to many rounds in shot guns, being upset because you were in a public hunting area, shooting into an area because they heard a noise, etc etc etc... Maybe It's the " UCLA" guys coming into Tuscarawas County..


My prior comments were not personal. They are more of an observation in response to your post.

I don't exactly need to take 300 yard shots either. I certainly would not deny those that hunt in an area where 300 yard shots safely prevent themselves from doing so however. 

Safety is a human problem and not the fault of the gun. That I agree with 100%. What we can do is report the violations we see to 1-800-POACHER.


----------



## Minnowhead (Jan 12, 2011)

Ohio has a great deer herd thanks to the biologists at the ODNR. We have trophy bucks and huge corn fed whitetails. It is and can be very rewarding to take one of these animals with a shotgun or very accurate muzzleloader. Add the fact that we have a great archery season that is open the entire length of the fall and into winter. We can use high tech bows and extremely lethal crossbows to harvest an animal. Remember most states wouldn't allow crossbows not so long ago. If I wanted to hunt with a rifle I would go to a neighboring state and shoot a smaller deer with a scrubby rack and realize they doin't hold a lick to our Monster Buck population. PA, West Virginia and Kentucky can't compare to our herd. I am glad we have what we have. I say don't mess with it. My 2 cents.


----------



## buckeye dan (Jan 31, 2012)

Minnowhead said:


> Ohio has a great deer herd thanks to the biologists at the ODNR. We have trophy bucks and huge corn fed whitetails. It is and can be very rewarding to take one of these animals with a shotgun or very accurate muzzleloader. Add the fact that we have a great archery season that is open the entire length of the fall and into winter. We can use high tech bows and extremely lethal crossbows to harvest an animal. Remember most states wouldn't allow crossbows not so long ago. If I wanted to hunt with a rifle I would go to a neighboring state and shoot a smaller deer with a scrubby rack and realize they doin't hold a lick to our Monster Buck population. PA, West Virginia and Kentucky can't compare to our herd. I am glad we have what we have. I say don't mess with it. My 2 cents.


Is that because of the habitat, the management, the regulations or the weapons? Maybe a combination?


----------

