.270

i took a dump in bullwidgeon's truck. took him a week to find it. he thought he did it. as far as pissin' on the ground, the azgfd has been doin' that on our backs and sayin' it was rainin' now for a long time. i don't really even know what this thread is about, but it's interesting. Lark.

it doesnt' matter how crazy these guys are or how stupid we think they are, if outdoorsmen are gonna fight with each other and not concentrate on the real enemy, they're gonna win. i've been preachin' for years that while hunters, anglers, ranchers, loggers, farmers, sheepherders, etc. are arguing with each other about who has more right to the land, these anti's are sneakin' up with a big ol' bag o' $h!t to hit us all with while we ain't lookin' at em. anyone who uses the land needs to gang up, close quarters and fight the common enemy. not each other. differences in joint use opinions have to be either set aside or negotiated to an acceptable deal and the bad guys need whupped up on. too much pride will lose the fight. Lark.

like John Wayne said,"life is hard, it's even harder when you're stupid". this guy is in for a hard life. Lark.

it's about time they turnt somethin' loose that makes a little sense. a 4 foot tall turkey is pretty cool. now bullwidgeon can look one eye to eye................Lark.

my thoughts zakly. i'm thinkin' he's another hugger like the last commissioner this guy we have for a governor appointed. Lark.

i see we have a new commissioner. can't say i'm sorry to see golightly go. never saw where he did us much good. don't know what to think of this new guy. sounds sorta huggerish to me. with the way this guy we have for governor thinks, i have reservations. Lark. http://www.azcentral.com/news/articles/021...ish0212-ON.html

one thing about a .270 is that any weight bullet will shoot fine out of it. i shoot 140's. don't recomend anything heavier than that, because they are a slow sucker. if you need a bigger bullet, get a bigger gun. 100's, 110's and 130's shoot fine also. if you're only going to hunt deer and goats with it, 100's and 110's are great. shoot real fast and are very accurate. i've seen elk dropped in their tracks with the small bullets too, but i'd use bigger bullet for animals bigger than deer, 130's or 140's. i also hate all copper bullets. bullets are too long, build up too much pressure and i could never get any velocity out of em. plus they won't cause lead poisoning in condors. my gun is 3 inches high at 100 yards and it is right on at 300 and a little low at 400. 2 things to remember when reloading a .270: overall cartridge length and overall cartridge length. my old model 70 has a real long throat. most of the newer rifles have a real short throat. ammo i load for my rifle will jam the bolt on most other .270's, because the short throat causes a big pressure build up. figure out where the throat is on your rifle and load your ammo accordingly. i like the bullet to touch the rifles, but if you're within .0010" or so short of that, you'll do ok. there are a lot of powders that work ok. some are better. i use h4350, loaded real hot. i won't ever give someone a powder charge, because of the differences in throats, so you'll have to figure out what your gun will handle. make sure to keep your cases trimmed and watch the primers closely. .270's can be real sensitive when you approach max loads and a grain or so can take you from a good load to a primer blower. i've killed everything the west has to offer with mine. folks that thing they need a bigger gun are the same guys that need jacked up monster trucks. they're makin' up for a lack somewhere else. Lark.

no, you gotta have at least a g.e.d. to get in there. i think this is more a public land and public animal sorta deal. i really don't think it is a bowhunter/rifle hunter deal. rifle hunters can improve the heck outta their already better odds by using the same tactics. if the truth was known, i'd bet that it's a bowhunter/bowhunter deal. if it's on private land, no big deal. folks can do what they want. if baiting is unchecked, it will become a real problem. it seems we have a case where a small group has taken a legal thing to the extreme and it has upset others, maybe not even other hunters, and it has caused some hard feelings. even now, there are guys using other guys set ups, stealing cameras and stands. etc. it's just a matter of time before there is some sort of really unfortunate situation over things like this. plus it is turning truly wild animals on public land into animals that are semi dependent on the bait. the best thing about Az. is the abundance of public land that can be joint used by everyone. but i can see where there has to be a line somewhere. my dad killed several coues bucks in the 50's and 60's with a recurve. no camo, no bait, just his bow and cedar arrows fletched with chicken feathers. and he hated bowhunting. he did it because then you could get 2 deer a year, if one was with a bow. he was just sneaky and knew how to hunt. and he knew how to call em in with a varmint call. there wasn't the competition then that there is now and you didn't have to worry about other hunters at all during archery season. but a guy can still shoot a buck without bait. it's just harder. from what i can gather, if it was just individuals using salt and feed just for themselves and in only a place or 2, this would be a nonissue. but it appears that there has been some really large scale opertations that have shot up a flare for everyone to see and now we have this situation. Lark.

i like the way scoutm thinks. poor fatfootdoc is just wrong. poor, poor guy, just don't see the err of his ways. this is my take on mcain. he ain't hillary or obama. and in this race, that's good enough for me. Lark.

yup, that's the san simon longhorn school fight song. they'd always sing it before baskyball games. we'd still whup em, but they'd sing it anyway. Lark.

sorry, not funny. try a differnt on'e. i think he was shootin' a 7mm/08 anyway. Lark.

i'm still a little nuetral on this. but i'll put my 2 cents in anyway. back when compound bows became popular, recurve and longbow purists looked down their noses at them. to them, it took away from the hunt. and it does, to some extent. when was the last time you saw someone with a recurve in the field? and why? because they aren't nearly as effective and have a very short range. about half what a compound has. but a compound is still a lot less than even a .22. but i was a guy that shot a nice muley at 82 yards not long ago with his compound. drilled him in the heart. i've shot a lotta bucks closer than that with a rifle. killed a few with a bow, but they were real close. i love to shoot long ranges and see what i can hit. but not particularly when i'm hunting. i'll take a long shot when i can't get any closer. i shot a buck at over 500 yards this past november. no range finder or anything, just kentucky windage and know how. ranged it the next day just to see how far it was. i watched my son shoot a bull elk last december that was 804 yards away. he had the equipment to do it and it wasn't that big o' deal. i don't even feel like walking 804 yards to an animal after it's shot. just gettin' to the buck i shot and draggin' it out about killed me. here's my drift, everything we do that stretches the range we can shoot or shortens the range we have to shoot, i.e. bait, takes away from the actual hunting experience. it requires less actual hunting skill to shoot extreme ranges or to bait in animals. still takes a lotta work. maybe even more, if you factor in all the practice and load development and equipment cost for long range shooting and if you factor in all the work and expense of baiting. and it is baiting, it isn't feeding starving animals. you're just making it easier and more convenient for the animal to eat. sorta like domesticating them. but it is all legal, therefore, in my eyes, it is ethical. remember, legal=ethical. you can't legislate ethics. but i can see where the azgfd might be concerned here. (somebody kick me, i'm sorta agreein' with the game and fish) they have a situation that has been brought to their attention, that maybe someone is (maybe) turning a small group of public owned deer, on public land, into texas style, feeder dependent, semi domesticated animals. apparantly there has been a lot of discussion about this situation somewhere, or this wouldn't even be mentioned. the only way they can legislate anything like is, is to shotgun it. they can't limit specific people or specific situations, so they have to either ignore it, or outlaw it, or put more restrctions on it. looks like there is a pretty fare chance they're going to outlaw it. and they're going to do it because maybe a few folks, no idea who they are, have taken the privilage, to what sounds like the extreme, and some other folks have complained about it. look at what the azgfd has done in the past decade or so: lined up with anti's to outlaw trapping, tucked tail on the lion problem in sabino canyon, (and there was a real problem there), ignored their own bought and paid for studies that show the predator population of this state is out of control so they don't offend anti's, allowed non-native species like asiatic doves and crayfish to thrive and have put limits and restrictions on how you can take them, lined up with huggers on stuff like wolves and condors, tried to outlaw predator calling contests because of screaming anti's, appointed do nothing, glad handing politicians and closet anti hunters to the commission, kid glove treated illegal hunters, let the uso lawsuit get so out of hand it's a literal miracle we can even get a tag, etc, etc. and you guys are suprised by this little deal? when i said keep the big picture in sight, that's what i mean. the big picture meaning we are allowed to hunt. hunters need to decide what is ok with them, as a whole, not as fractured little groups within the set, and work toward it. the main thing is that we can get out in the country and hunt. and hunting is the goal. not numbers or scores. not body counts. hunting. being able to enjoy wild places with folks you like to be with. see how close you can get. learn how to outsmart mr buck. hunters need to decide what it is they want, as a body, and draw a line, close ranks, and defend it. and defend everyone. not a bunch of little splinter groups fighting each other and defending their own specific interests. all the time we spend fighting each other and the azgfd and anybody we decide is "unethical" or against us, is time the anti's have to sneak in a little closer. for years it was against the law to bait in anything except bears. now it's just the opposite. i don't know the answer, but we best find the answer for ourselves, or someone will find one for us. i've put out salt. i've never shot one thing on it. my kids do it and have had some success with it. and they'll cuss heck outta me for what i just wrote. but we ain't doin' it in order to guide a buncha folks. but personally, i can live without it. won't be even a speck of a loss to me. but how much is it going to hurt or help the big picture? that's the question that needs answered. Lark.

i saw a cartoon about an old guy telling some new members of the hunting club about a lion hunt. the old guy said "i was sitting by a tree and lion jumped outta the brush and went "ROOAARR!!" and i just $@!# my pants". one of the young guys said, "i would $@# my pants too if a lion jumped outta the brush at me like that". the old guy said, "no, just now when i went ROOARR!, i $#!@ my pants". was your lion hunt like that bill? Lark.

i believe ever one o' them. them'r all democrat and disco song quotes. makes sense to me they'd use .257s. you sure you didn't change some 7mm/08 stuff to fit? Lark.

san simon? no wonder they call ya redneck. babies are borned with rednecks there. Lark.

if .270's ain't the best then why have so many famous folks advocated em? "give me a .270 or give me death" "i shot down the cherry tree with my .270" "i have not yet begun to use my .270" "four score and two seventy ago..." "speak softly and carry a .270" "remember the .270" "we're gonna need a .270" "this is a .270, the most powerful gun in the world, do you feel lucky? well, do ya punk?" "i'll be back, with my .270" "it's a trick, they have a .270" "E=MC.270" "we know saddam has a .270" "run custer, they have a .270" Lark.

prarie dog reintroduction. wonder where this one will take us. http://www.azgfd.gov/artman/uploads/draftb...tablishment.pdf

i used to be in favor of closing all the roads. the older i get, the more i like a road or 2. problem i have with like the forest circus is when they close a road, they always leave a way around it and folks go around the closure and tear up more country, but they don't seem to do anything to the guys that go around it. and then they go and make a scar for 15 miles like that stupid trail that goes from just south of mexican hay lake to big lake. what the heck is that all about? they need a good idea of what roads to close and what roads to leave alone first. seems like they always want to close the ones that actually help out some. Lark.

you don't believe the rocket? ya buncha commies. remember, a guy is innocent until you can finally get him to admit it. Lark.

you act like that's a bad thing? i always lie, until they get me cornered. then i really lie. Lark.

yeah, but you left out the good part, as in, "LARK WAS RIGHT". seems like at one time i assumed the same thing, until got learned different. barrel twist can be real critical, and .30 cal is about the worst one, as far being twist sensitive. a friend used to shoot 150's from an old 721 remington all the time. he loaded some 110's to shoot jackrabbits with and couldn't hit anything. figured it would just be a little high. took it to the range and it was about 4 inches low and 3 inches to the left and not a very tight group. shot some 150's and tore up the bullseye. you'd assume the 110's would at least be high. most of the time you can shoot several different weights from a given barrel and be ok, with .30 caliber, you might not be able to. .264 is another one that is real twist sensitive. you can usually do ok up to 130 gr, go any heavier, and you may have a hard time getting a group. most .264's are 1 in 9. but a 1 in 8 works a lot better for the heavier bullets. just one more reason that the .270 is the best. Lark.

why not? Lark.

that stomps his dorky little brother. and makes him wear dresses. Lark.

i've shot several over the years, but never owned one. everyone i know that has one really likes it. i've never heard of having to clean it often. i can see where that may be the case. years ago there were several different variations of .17 based on the .222, .223 and even the .222 mag. seems like the remington is necked down .223. they will drift a little on a windy day, but so does everything else. one guy i know that has one shot a bull elk with it. some guy told him it wouldn't work, he got drawn and proved him wrong. one in the ear did the trick. it is a really good varmint round. Lark.

dangit pepe, it ain't gonna. don't drink the koolaid. Lark.