Bolt Action vs Semi Auto

I have both. When I really want to work on my accuracy skills I use bolt. It requires more time and concentration. Those same skills transfer over to my very accurate semi. I also reload my ammo to (best I can) comparable to match grade or better ammo. The bolt guns also range time from minutes to hours. With my semis I never get to the fatigued state that affects my shooting. With the bolt guns I get much more of a workout. With a box of 50 reloads the bolt gun can manage a couple of hours at the range. The semis can burn that amount in half the time or less. My greatest skill advances come from the bolt guns, not the semis. That skill transfers to the semis though. I showed this once with my Ar hitting 10 head shots in a row at 500 yards with what I call slow rapid fire. I find it harder to advance my skills on a semi than transfer them to the semi from the bolt.
 
M1's and M14's have put 24 shots inside 12 inches at 600 yards in 50 seconds shot from prone.

Don't know of any bolt gun doing that.
Click to expand...

Most shooters are not capable of that. Most shooters have no need to do that. Pick the right tool for the job.
 
I don't think cartridge choice has been mentioned yet.
You can find a bolt action in just about any cartridge ever made.

The autos require a LOT of work to add new calibers and possibly even more to add Old calibers. Any .40-60 auto-loaders out there? .32-20?
Yes there are other cartridges that may have similar performance but not the same cartridges.
 
For example, in 2012 two NYPD officers shot and killed an armed murderer in front of the Empire State building. The two rapidly fired a total of 16 rounds; 7 hit the perpetrator, but 9 bystanders were also hit with bullets or fragments. Now there is no doubt that they did the right thing, what they were sworn to do. But in this case one has to wonder if the "rate of fire" was a factor in the civilian injuries, which fortunately did not result in deaths.
Click to expand...

while it would possibly have been worse had they police had high capacity RIFLES, I believe that the police in that 2012 incident used their service pistols.

Had the police in that incident been armed with revolvers, they probably would have only fired 12 rounds. Had they been armed with 5 shot bolt actions, then they probably would have only fired 10....:rolleyes::eek:

Reports of the shooting state that the bad guy raised his gun, but did not fire, so its possible he chose "suicide by cop". Even if true, the really sad thing is other than the bad guy, 3 people were directly shot by the police (and 6 more wounded due to ricochets or fragments from objects bullets struck).

Spray and pray does sometimes work, but the collateral damage makes it a very VERY bad idea for anyone who doesn't have a major city administration's deep pockets...

and even then, its still a VERY bad idea....
 
Back in the day bolt guns were more accurate than semis, they were also available in any caliber you wanted. For a hunting rifle(big game) a rapid rate of fire usually isn't needed(big game hunters in Africa chose a double barrel in a lot of cases tho when hunting dangerous game) . Old guys like me (76 next birthday) still use a bolt gun for deer hunting. I have never needed the rapid fire capability of a semi. In my limited match shooting(22 LR) I prefer the semi over the bolt gun because you mount the gun, no extra movement between shots. Mount the gun sent 5 rounds down range, this is easier for me. Most likely the AR rifles win the service rifle matches, too old to try this now, too poor back in the day. My 2 cents.
 
For a hunting rifle(big game) a rapid rate of fire usually isn't needed(big game hunters in Africa chose a double barrel in a lot of cases tho when hunting dangerous game) .
Click to expand...

PH's in Africa have been choosing double rifles not for the rapidity of a second shot but for the certainty of having that second shot available at need. The double rifle for dangerous game isn't just two barrels on the same action, it is two separate actions (lockworks) in a single housing. Those guys were literally betting their lives, and they felt that having a complete second rifle "built in" meant is was less likely that both would fail at the same time.

Capstick once wrote something like "the most frightening sound in the world is not the roar of a bomb or the crash of a shell, but the sound of a click when you expect bang!"

Double rifles do offer a fast second shot (but only one), they were, and still are chosen when possible, for having that second shot available (without working the action) by pulling the second trigger, and were felt to be more reliable to deliver that shot than any other rifle mechanism on earth.

A "properly built" bolt gun runs a close second, and economics has made them the dominant choice of the modern era. Semi auto rifles aren't even considered for dangerous game even in those rare areas where they are allowed.
 
Some years ago, I watched a military show, a segment of which was about the M-14 7.62. They were brought out of stockade for reliability in Iraq and Afghanistan dense sand conditions that were wreaking havoc on issued M4s. A soldier demonstrated operation of the M-14. It was extremely accurate for battlefield condition to 600 yards. I've watched Vietnam War documentaries of US soldiers killing enemy soldiers with M-14s at a thousand and more yards distant with open sights. That is one accurate rife.

The Vietnam fiasco began with soldiers using the M-14. It was reliable in the most harsh jungle conditions. And when NVA and Cong were hit with a 7.62 round, it was all over.

The M-14 was replaced with the initially not always reliable M-16. Many US soldiers wanted their M-14s back.

The M-14s only negatives were weight and number of ammo that could be carried.

A modified M-14 might make an excellent North American big game rifle. There's no question of what the .308 Win will do because it's done it all. Accuracy ain't an issue. The M-14 is probably more accurate than most bolts. The issue for me would be weight.

Wisdom acquired from harsh experience has taught me that a reliable and accurate big game rifle with a weight of no more than 7 pounds scope included would be ideal for Rocky Mountain big game hunting.

I would consider the M-14 as one of the best battle rifles ever designed, even better than the divine Garand which was one extremely accurate rifle. It's rub was it was clip fed.
 
Hi 44AMP,

Your post makes perfect sense.

However, modern bolt actions such as Sako and Sauer are extremely reliable.

Some 10 years ago, I talked with an extremely polite and obviously extremely wealthy gentleman at a So Cal range. He was shooting a 10k+ (probably a lot more) JP Sauer and Sohn bolt chambered for .404 Jeffery. He was an African hunter. .404 Jeffery rounds dwarfed my 7MM Rem Mag rounds. Based upon my very very limited exposure to his shooting, his rifle was competition quality accurate and 100% reliable. He did put minutes between shots. I assumed it was to recover from recoil although he told me that it was a heavy rifle. I very politely turned down his offer to put rounds down range . .404 Jeffery cartridges looked like they could have stopped a Soviet tank.
 
However, modern bolt actions such as Sako and Sauer are extremely reliable.
Click to expand...

I'm sure they are. My Remingtons have been extremely reliable, so have my pushfeed Win 70 and others. But popularity, particularly with DGR rifles involves perception as well as actual performance.

And, still to this day, many folks believe the controlled round feed (Mauser claw) system is more reliable under extreme conditions. So people want, and buy those over others.
 
I believe ‘back in the day’ most dangerous game hunters on safari also had guides with an extra double barrel rifle for a quick hand off if necessary plus the guide usually carried some sort of bolt action rifle as a final bit of insurance.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top