.270

anybody have a pistol scope they don't want anymore? looking for one for my 44 mag that i don't hafta pay an arm and a leg for. i can go a part of an arm or leg. i saved the pieces they cut outta my shoulder and knee. something like a 4x with a good long eye relief. Lark.

send me a pm. sounds like just what i'm looking for. what kinda eye releif does it have? i have real long arms. but most folks do that are 10 feet tall.

the old style 700 trigger has been suspect since inception in the 40's. same with the 721 and 725 and all the other variation of the 700 they made. sometimes a really small amount of dust can make em go off. sometimes they are just screwed up and there ain't no fixing em. if i ever have one do it, it's getting a new trigger. if you have a 700 with the old trigger, you really need to be aware of the problems that some of them have. it is a real deal that does happen way to often. the 700 has a sort of a canned trigger that can be kinda hard to clean too. Lark.

any model 700 with the original style trigger has the potential to do this. remington started putting new triggers, similar to a jewell, in the 700's a few years ago. never had one o' mine do it, but i've seen em right outta the box do the same thing. i had a 180 gr '06 bullet hit between my feet when a friend's rifle did this. it is a problem in the old model 600 also. Lark.

this happened years before janet the lumberjack was gov. Lark.

i hafta disagree a little with you. the azgfd gets a pile o' money every year to help administer this program. they have mulitple folks assigned to this program and they get $$$ from the feds to that work. they pay their wages, buy their fuel, trucks, equipment, everything for the program with fed money. they have a real interest in it. and i have never read or heard one word, officially or unofficially, from the azgfd that they are against this program. but on the contrary i have only read, heard and been told, officially and unofficially, that they are on the side of the wolves. i know a lot of folks who have been impacted a h e l l of a lot more than all of us combined by this program, who have to deal with the azgfd and their enthusiastic support for this program. my cousin had a meeting at his home on eagle creek with every involved agency. at his kitchen table. the azgfd, usfw, usfs, blm, wolf lovers, they all had multiple offical reps there. it was an official meeting. the only agency that showed "ANY" support for his concerns was the district ranger for the usfs and shortly after that they made him retire. the azgfd gave him no support what so ever. if the game and fish doesn't like the program they had the same opportunity to provide input that everyone else. except their words would have carried real weight and could have had a what sportsmen could consider as a positive impact. but instead they were all for it. with no concern for the sportsmen, ranchers, campers, anglers, hikers, etc that are negatively impacted by this program. you may be right. they may not want to increase the wolf numbers but until they make an official statement saying that, i won't belive it. and if they do, i'll have a hard time believing it. and the fact remains that they went along in lock step with the initial program and have supported it at every turn. if the azgfd wants to impress me, then take a stand and take a stand that is on the side of the sportsmen and get the h e l l off the fence. it also is upsetting that now that the crown jewel of deer hunting is in danger of being impacted by this, all the sudden it is a tragedy that has to be avoided. the country that is already impacted by it pretty neat too. where was all the concern then? there are more politics involved in this crap that can be written here. dig into it. why didn't they realease them in the southeast part of the state, where they thrived? too much private land, that's why. instead they release them up on the blue and surrounding areas where they ain't a lot and they can pretty much have free rein. that's just one little coincidence. and the fact remains that they didn't have one d a m n wolf to start with. everyone of these animals are part dog and they are inbred to the point they are retarded. wonder how long it is gonna be before hip displacia crops up and we have to pay for a buncha hip replacement on wolf/dog crosses. if you turned any kinda crossbred dog there is loose they would have wild, self sufficient packs by now. but not these things. they will never be more than pen raised, inbreds. this whole thing should have been avoided and if enough folks would have been willing to put up a mean, hard hitting fight, things may be a lot different and if the azgfd woulda been on our side to start with it would have made a big difference. Lark.

where everyone screwed up was in even negotiating with the dang terrorists. and nobody would get together and unite. the deer hunters had one agenda, the elk hunters had another, the bow hunters another, rifle hunters too etc, etc, etc. and everyone was against the ranchers. the hunters and the huggers. if everyone would have closed ranks and fought a loud, screaming, mean and focused fight i honestly think it could have been won. but no, everyone negotiated what they thought was best for them and not what was best for everyone. nobody could look past a couple years and couldn't see the big picture. at least as far as the hunting guys. the agriculture folks knew what was up because they had seen it all in one form or another for decades and knew if it ever got started it would snowball and knew they were an easy target and easy to villify. you can't have more than 2 sides in something like this and if you ain't all the way on the right side then you're aiding the enemy. where the fight needs to be now is to get the azgfd to tell the usfw to go to heck, like they did in new mexico, and walk away from it. if we could one of the integral parts of the equation out of it, it would be a big help. the entire program basically relys on the azgfd for enforcement and from what i can tell they do most of the real work. trying to turn the feds is a waste of time at this point. but i honestly think the azgfd is looking for a way out as it is. a pointed, concentrated, mean, dirty effort needs to hammered into them hard. the usfw and wolf people just go around and pat each other on the back, like all burrocrats, and never do anything constructive. they are master liars and manipulators of evidence and hiders of truth, but they don't know much else. in order to win, everyone has to be on one side or the other. folks need to decide which side they are on and get on it. if you like wolves, get the heck on that side of the fence, completely. quit thinking you can be a sportsman and still be in favor of this program. get on one side 100% and consider the other side the enemy. decide what brand you're gonna ride for and don't even think of ridin' the fence. Lark.

the problem is the aren't educated. they're indoctronated. intelligence has nothing to do with this, it is all about control and it goes deeper than just these stupid wolves. it's a concerted effort to control everything. i don't agree with the shoot and shovel stuff. if it happens, it happens i guess, but broadcasting it all the time just gives em ammo to use. this should have been fought a lot harder from the get go and folks should have spent more time getting deep into what the real reasons for this are. Lark.

i'm sick of sayin' it, but i told ya so. from it's inception, anyone with any intelligence could tell that this @%$#$&*(!in' wolf program has nothing to to with wolves and everything to do with closing off public land to the public and taking away any private land that may be impacted by it. where was all this outrage when they started this thing? i remember a little bit of protest but everyone figured they would sacrifice the little bit they wanted for the extinct wolves and they'd leave the rest of everyone's honeyholes alone. don't seem like it's gonna work out that way does it? oh yeah, and besides, a lot of the land they wanted was in new mex anyway, and who cares about new mex? as disgusted as i am with the usfw and the huggers, it is nothing compared to the utter disdain i have for the azgfd for jumping on the wagon because they new it would mean a lotta money for them, and the usfs and blm for just sitting around like dumbasses like they always do and for a lot of hunters who think it is a cool thing to have these d a m n curs, and for token protest by all the different so called sportsmen groups. if anyone would have read the initial info that was available, like i did, and did a little arithemtic, like i did, they could see that there aren't enough elk and deer in the units in the intial plan to support the number of wolves they want. much less have any leftover to hunt. all you guys that just came off the archery elk hunt. did ya maybe sorta have a hard time calling anything in? seems like i read about 100 different posts on this site alone about how crummy of a season it was. ya know a big reason why it was that way? because wolves hear elk whistle and it's a dinner bell for em. the elk ain't as dumb as ya think and they learn that every time they whistle a buncha wolves attack em so they shut up a bunch. that ain't the only reason, but it had an impact, i guarantee you. my cousin can't even use his dogs if he has wolves anywhere close because they hear his dogs and come in and kill them. if this thing goes unchecked hunting is over. everywhere. look at the restrictions they are trying to install north of the colorado now bacuse of the california buzzards. at least they are real animals and not some crossbreed like these so called wolves, but i guarantee you they are getting the lead in their diet from something other than bullets left in gut piles. anyone involved in the endangered species recovery is a d a m n liar. they have to agree to go along with what they know as lies from the get go and still say they agree with it when they really know better. it's a rotten deal and we're the ones who hafta pay. well, us and all the deer and elk and other animals that get ate up by em. Lark.

i hafta agree with the federal sales tax and no income tax. then everyone has to pay income taxes and the more you by the more you pay. this commie wealth redistribution that obama has dreamed up is BS. if you have anything, you have too much and he wants to take it and give it to somebody that might vote for him. i haven't investigated the 999 deal yet. but even if it ain't the best deal, at least he has some kind of a plan. obams's only plan is more taxes. he can't stand it that he ain't got it accomplished yet. but cain, romney, paul and perry all have some interesting ideas. don't know if they will work but it is refreshing to see some ideas with detail and thought. instead of "i have a plan but i don't know what it is yet". Lark.

my ol' man is a diehard rockhound. has tons of em he has packed home over the years. my middle boy always comes home with pockets full. alls i ever find is sex stones and leaverite. Lark.

it were a lotta fun. on the way up you see goats everywhere from wagon moung new mex north and everbody gets all jacked up by it. we saw a gigantic funnel cloud on the way home, east of trinidad, curling up over the mountain. couldn't see if it hit the ground anywhere because of the mountain. Bridger and Forest had never seen one before. Lark.

got back from colorady. 3 good goats. one nice one, one really good one and one exceptional. Bernie, Grayghost85 and F-bomb did a fine job. i sent a story and photos to Amanda and she'll post soon i'm sure. the one F-bomb got has, in the words of my oldest son, "stupid long" prongs. real impressive for sure. later, Lark.

dang, i'm sorry Bill. i won't be so hard on u of a after this. well, maybe. Lark.

i was in a house with a fireplace made outta petrified logs the other day and one of em had Bill Q whittled in the bark, when the tree was still alive. you sure about that 75 deal? Lark p.s. shot the .25/35 friday. shot great. ready for deer season.

don't get caught up too much in velocity. i used to shoot everything as fast as i could possibly make it go. i was always trying to flatten out the arc and make things as flat shooting as possible in order hit things better at all ranges. burned up a few barrels doing it too. after 500 yards, everything drops like a rock. most rifles really do it around 400. when you start shooting 600 to 700 you have to be 10 or 20 feet high. accuracy and knowing what your rifle does at different ranges is the trick. with a range finder and some simple balistic knowledge, with an accurate rifle, you can hit anything at about any range. i shoot stuff at ranges i never thought possible 10 years ago with a range finder and knowing where my rifle hits. shot a goat at almost 500 a few weeks ago. drove over a thousand miles round trip, shot once and came home. either rifle will work. depends on which one is more accurate and how well you shoot it. my dad has shot more coues with a 30/30, .348 and a .270 than anybody on this sight with any rifle. that deer doesn't know how fast the bullet is going or what caliber it is. Lark.

bore diameter. 7mm is a considerably smaller bore than 30 cal. the 30 cal bullet has a lot less bullet in the lands. the 165 gr 30 cal bullet is a lot shorter than a 168 gr 7mm bullet. the long 7mm bullet will make a lot more pressure than a 30 cal bullet so you have to trim the loads to keep from getting excessive pressure. there is a lot less bullet "in the lands" with the 30 cal and it has the potential to shoot faster. i don't know what kind of load the '06 has and that velocity seems to be pretty quick but it isn't really surprising. if you want high velocity out of a 7mm you need to shoot 140's or maybe 154's. the long skinny bullets have a better bc but they ain't made for speed. a good example of what i'm trying to explain is the .270 and '06. both have the exact same case but with identical weight bullets the '06 is capable of a couple hundred fps more than the .270 because there is less bullet in the lands and you can load it hotter before it reaches overload pressures. jump up to a 180 in the '06 and it starts to turn into a slug, but up to 165, it's a pretty swift round. and the animals don't have a clue how fast the bullet is going. Lark.

i have used the exact same load in my .270 for a looooooooooong time. a lot of my brass is resized '06. one time i reloaded a buncha resized military '06 brass with the same load i'd been using. i perferated primers, blew primers out, flattened them so bad they actually smeared outta the primer pocket a little, split cases, jammed the action, you name it, i did it. and with only about 10 rounds. couldn't figure out what the heck was goin' on. another guy that knew a little more than me told me it was the military brass. relatively, it is a lot thicker than any of the factory brass making the capacity less and increasing the pressure. i shoot a load that is probably a little across the line as far as max anyway and when i stuffed it in the smaller capacity military brass the pressure went way up. i pulled all the bullets and saved the powder and have reloaded only factory brass since then in my .270. i have a buncha military match brass i shoot in .243's and it works fine, other than being real stiff to resize. but i don't load .243's very hot either. i have never noticed a lot of difference in factory brass, but i'm not a diehard paper shooter. like Bill says, minute of deer is what i worry about. i have some very accurate rifles that are capable of shooting better than i can, but i don't worry a lot about different brands of brass. usually use either winchester or remington. i've never found that federal brass has any bad qualities and have a lot of it loaded in 22/250 and 30/30. i have a lot of nickel .300 brass it seems ok, but i haven't done any testing with it. i bought some nosler brass and loaded it for my son's .300 ultra the other day and wasn't real impressed with it. about the half the primers wouldn't seat flush. they didn't stick out far enough to keep them from working, but for $71 for 50 empties, i expected better. but i don't use military brass in my .270 anymore, that's for dang sure. Lark.

with our electoral college (which is one of the most brilliant things our forefathers thought of) a vote for a 3rd party presidential candidate can be a vote for obama. that is exactly what happened when perot did his little trick. folks voted for him and we ended up with clinton twice with less than 50% of the vote. anyway, i never listen to any media folks. i read and listen to the candidates and do a lotta research into their history. i was really impressed when perry got in the race but after his "heartless" comment, i ain't gonna vote for him unless he wins the GOP nomination. i won't support him in the primary. i think romney has some possibility, especially with his financial background, but i still think there are a lotta folks who won't vote for him strictly because he's a mormon. but i also thought when folks actually got in the voting booth that enough of them wouldn't vote for a black guy to keep obama out, too. i was wrong there. there are a lot more stupid folks than even i thought there is. herman cain is really interesting. so far he hasn't said anything stupid. he doesn't have anything around his neck like romney and perry do like religion, romneycare and the heartless deal. and he seems to be genuine in his conservative nature and feels that folks should work for what they have. but he will be called uncle tom and all the other names that liberals like to call black guys that aren't liberal and there might be enough conservatives that won't vote for a black guy to keep him out. but he is real interesting. but i don't think ron paul is the answer. i don't see him ever getting enough traction to put up a legitimate fight and i really disagree with his isolationist ideas. but any of the 3 guys that seem to be leading the conservative side, cain, perry and romney, can get the support they need if conservatives can look past any stupid bias they have for things like religion and race and vote for the man and not his religion or color. Lark.

can i get one that says "CW.com Ron White"? Lark.

i just saw this. happy birthday Bill. how old are you in human years, ya ol' dog. Lark.

one thing about it, that's a good place for a rockslide. Lark.

i also will vote for him if he wins the GOP nomination. but i don't think he will and i hope one of about 3 other guys do. he ain't a bad guy, i just don't think he is "the" guy. and as far as being isolationists, like he wants, it won't and can't happen. i think we should be a lot more critical of the folks we give me money to, but we are still the caretaker of the rest of the world. and hopefully we always will be, because when we aren't, somebody else will be, namely russia with their middle east cronies. and we'll have a real tough row to hoe if that ever happens. Lark.

i am glad al-awlaki is dead. one of the few things that obama has done is kept after terrorists. could do a lot more for sure, but at least they kill one every now and then. i don't care one iota if he got due process. he was crap and the world is a better place without him. he crossed the line you can't come back across and needed killed and kept up his crap until he did get killed. same with osama and all the other guys they greased. the world is better without them and there is no sin in killing them. i agree with probably 85% of what ron paul says, but the other stuff is too far out there for me. the thing that needs to happen is to get obama and his commie buddies outta DC and ron paul ain't the guy that's gonna get it done. there are several pretty good candidates that can beat obama and maybe get the wheels back on this wreck. i don't think ron paul can ever win a nationwide election. even if he is the answer, he doesn't have what it takes to unseat a sitting president. i hated john mcain and still do but i voted for him because he wasn't obama. ya gotta look at the big picture. and right now the the biggest thing in the big picture is obama and he needs to retire. Lark.

where guys like Jobs make a difference is they make everyone else be better in order to compete. when the best there is mediocre it doesn't take much to keep up. when the best there is better than you ever thought it could be, you hafta really be creative to keep up. ibm and microsoft both stoled technology, spied on, and tried all kindsa dirty tricks to keep up. one thing about it tho, i'm pretty sure he surrounded himself with some great folks who will keep up the inovation. Lark.