Practical Rifle?

When someone refers to someone else as "Dude" your argument goes right out the window. Even if your argument is a good one with many well founded points to support your point of view. When you call someone "dude" my first, and last question is "how old are you"? Are you a 20 year old kid?

Whoa! Easy does it there, ah, dude. ;)

It was intended as an alternative form of address (hence the use of the disjunctive 'or'), not as an insult.

I've never met the said Mr. 44 AMP. He might well be a distinguished older gentleman, in which case "sir " applies. Or, he might be a young 20- or 30-something buckeroo-ski, in which case "dude" applies. It is a modern and totally appropriate term of address which is used everyday among younger men and always without the slightest offense taken by the recipient.

In fact I heard the term referenced just this weekend at our Trap & Skeet Club. Two well-dressed young men (late '30s) shooting clays. First dude cleaned two birds on a quick swing, and then cleaned a second pair without breaking form.

Second dude exclaims: "Dude! That was awesome!" First dude is all smiles. :) Certainly no one appeared insulted.

Needless to say I never read your post.

Sadly, your loss, for you would've benefitted immensely. :rolleyes:
 
I deleted my post because I decided I was wrong and out of line for taking Agtman to task. Bottom line is he is just as intitled to his opinion as I am. So live and let live.
 
Last edited:
Hell I would love to be 50 again.

when I was 50, I could still see to shoot well, didn't have as much brick dust in my eyes...:rolleyes:

I don't take personal offense at "dude", though I might remind our younger "dudes" that it didn't always mean "bro, buddy, pal..etc. Once upon a time, still in living memory for some of us, "Dude" meant you didn't know what you were doing. Think "dude ranch" for city slickers, who didn't know how to ride, etc...

I'm a curmudgeon, not denying it. And I do get a bit peckish about terminology. What I'm seeing with the requirements for a "practical rifle for civilians" seems more to be a practical rifle for military use, instead.

Since I haven't read the book you mention, it wouldn't be just talking to a wall, it would be talking to a blank wall.:rolleyes:

I am, however familiar with a lot of what Cooper wrote discussing his Scout rifle concept. Some of the features he thought useful have been derided by critics, mostly because the military doesn't operate in a way where they would be useful, TODAY.

Cooper built at least one of his prototype Scout rifles using a Remington 600 action. I have several 600s, and while not perfect they are very good and close to Coopers concept in several important aspects.


Do like the SMLE!

And certainly in the 'practical bolt gun' category, it's a great choice if you can readily source .303 Brit ammo or the components.

Despite the "antiquated" rimmed case it uses, the SMLE is, arguably, the best combat bolt action ever fielded. Hell on case life, though. :D

If you are talking civilians, not tied into any resupply net, then all the ammo you have is all the ammo you have. You are the supply net, and so, any caliber and cartridge you stock pile is just as "practical".

Choosing something you might be able to get from someone else would make resupply simpler, or give you more options, but how likely is that to be something needed, IF it does actually occur?

I guess the biggest problem I have with calling this or that "practical" is that it implies that anything not in that group is impractical. Reality is that what is practical or impractical can vary hugely with the situation.

Most folks hunting elephant wouldn't consider a 5.56mm AR to be practical for that use. Most people don't shoot prairie dogs with a .458 Win mag, either. (though it is a fun challenge with the right handloads! :D)

Make a game (call it training if you like) with what ever rules you like. Be clear about the rules, and call it anything you like, its yours. But don't confuse game practical with real world practical, because while there is overlap, there are also distinct differences, at least as I see it.
 
Here’s my “practical rifle”.
Nothing it can’t drop at 1,000 yards (including Volvo’s downrange)

dSRoOHA.jpg

Low recoil that any 12 year old can shoot with a little training.
 
Last edited:
I don't have what I consider to be a 'practical' rifle. "Practical" for what?

I do have a rifle I think of as my 'anything' rifle. I am confident it will perform any task for which need it in the contiguous forty-eight states. I am a bit less confident of it with large dangerous bears, but I'm not around them much and I think it would do with proper bullet placement.

It is a M1894 Swede carbine in 6.5x55mm Swede. The action and barrel are fairly original with a forwarded mounted low power scope ala the Scout rifle concept. The stock was 'sporterized' by a prior owner, but it fits me very well. It shoots reliably within the trajectory range out to two hundred yards or so - about as far as I see a problem. With 160 grain projectiles, it has excellent penetration power.

Additionally, it is fair innocuous looking and fits in small spaces. Like the trunk of my car.
 
M1894 Swede carbine in 6.5x55mm Swede

Good rifle. My truck gun is an FR-8 like this one. Even have the bayonet. It is accurate, packs a punch, light, and I do not care if it gets banged up in the truck.

vqoepw.jpg


pic is representative...not my rifle.
 
FR-8

David, I had one. The ability to put it under the seat in the pickup is a great feature. It worked well, but I liked the Swede (Ole is the name) better.

I have nothing really bad to say about it, other than I prefer the Swede. Good shooting to you
 
David, I had one. The ability to put it under the seat in the pickup is a great feature. It worked well, but I liked the Swede (Ole is the name) better.

I have nothing really bad to say about it, other than I prefer the Swede. Good shooting to you
Ole would be norweigan

Olle is Swedish
 
I think a "practical" rifle needs to be further qualified by 'for who' and 'for what'.


During the past year or so we've been considering relocating to several different places, as well as full-time RV'ing. With that in mind and wanting only one rifle, I went looking for a "Do it all" rifle for the lower 48. What I ended up with is a Ruger model 77 Hawkeye chambered in .300 RCM. Of course it's going to be too much for some things and only borderline if I win Murphy's lottery and end up facing off with a northwestern brown bear. Overall though, for me, a compact .30cal short-action rifle approximating .300 Win Mag ballistics is the most "practical" rifle I could find.
 
I think a "practical" rifle needs to be further qualified by 'for who' and 'for what'.

Not quite ... Some folks in this thread got too hung up on the word "practical," apparently unable to understand it in terms of synonyms like, "all-around," "do-it-all," "do-everything," "multi-purpose/multi-use," etc.

Whether bolt or semi, it's a rifle that's handy - being of reasonable size and weight - and obtainable in a reasonably common chambering. It's suitable for many tasks and can do pretty them well even if it's not the "best" at any one thing or niche use, like sniping gophers or p-dogs at 400yds or being competitive in hyper-accurate bench rests competitions.

Necessarily, not everyone's choice of what weapon makes for their "practical rifle" will be the same, nor even the same chambering within reason. If you understand "practical rifle" in that sense, then the 'for who' and 'for what' questions answer themselves.

During the past year or so we've been considering relocating to several different places, as well as full-time RV'ing. With that in mind and wanting only one rifle, I went looking for a "Do it all" rifle for the lower 48. What I ended up with is a Ruger model 77 Hawkeye chambered in .300 RCM. Of course it's going to be too much for some things and only borderline if I win Murphy's lottery and end up facing off with a northwestern brown bear. Overall though, for me, a compact .30cal short-action rifle approximating .300 Win Mag ballistics is the most "practical" rifle I could find.

Like the choice of envelope, but the chambering isn't, ah, ... very practical. ;)
 
Last edited:
That's kind of what I meant. Seems like folks were trying to debate what one single rifle was most practical for everything, instead of what was most practical for the shooting they did.

Even choosing the most practical rifle for my range of needs wasn't easy. Caliber was definitely the fly-in-the-ointment with my choice. If I didn't reload it would have been a deal breaker. The .300rcm is a fine cartridge IMO, but it's pretty unlikely that ammo will ever be as easily found as the more popular rifle chamberings.
 
ANyone mine if I stick with a..

30/30! [336 /94/ Savage 340??]

Practical due to ammo being readily available.
 
Back
Top