Seriously wanting a brush gun!

[Gunplummer]

Quite a variation of opinions. I guess if you had to go by the original post, the single shot break open rifle would win. The design of the receiver just makes it shorter. If I hunt in a shotgun slug only area, I use an old H&R 12 Gage I chopped and put a scope on. I have used it successfully for years and would not trade it (I did try that) for a pump or bolt action shotgun. What ever works well for you in the area you hunt.

 

[A pause for the COZ]

Since most of my hunting is brush hunting, I have a few.

Marlin 1936 in 32 win special
Marlin 336 in 30-30
Rossi M92 in 357 mag
AR15 in 300 Black out.
SKS
My newest one is a Mosin Nagant 91-30 that I had converted to a brush gun.

Before:

After:

Here it is with a scope mount and a red dot:

Have a couple nice cast hunting loads worked up and can also take some small game with a 32 mag adapter. Much more accurate than I thought it would be.

 

[kilimanjaro]

I miss my Ruger 44 carbine.

 

[davem]

Well, like a lot of folks I've thought about the "Ideal" brush gun. I like lever actions and pumps but nothing is faster than a semi-auto for follow up shots. The semi-auto also lets you keep the sights/scope on the fleeing deer rather than do that and operate a lever or pump, so....semi auto has to be on top.
Then it should be small and easy to tote through under brush. So a long bolt action wouldn't be tops.
You'll have to drag out the deer. I've done that one handed while trying to hold on to a lever action. Having a sling is good. You can keep the sling in a pack so it doesn't snag on underbrush and then put it on when dragging a deer.
A cartridge suitable for deer, mid sized bears and hogs.
All in all, the Ruger 44 mag carbine seems a top choice. A Remington semi auto with short barrel a close second. A Remington in 308. Maybe add a detachable low power scope in case you see a deer at a distance. The "distance deer"- you'll often have some time so pack the scope and put it on in such a situation.

 

[jmr40]

Just because you never plan to shoot past 50-100 yards is no reason to handicap yourself with a rifle and load that won't do better. This is my brush gun. Bought new it cost less than a Marlin 30-30 used. It weighs exactly the same even with the scope as a Marlin 30-30 naked, and is the same length. It puts 3 shots into one ragged hole at 100 yards. Felt recoil is about the same as 30-30.

The trajectory between 50-150 yards is never more than 3/4" above or below my line of sight and it still has enough power to take a deer at 400 yards if needed. The scope allows me to see game well past being too dark to see with irons and the flat trajectory along with optics allow me to shoot through tiny openings in brush not possible with traditional brush gun chamberings

 

[FrankenMauser]

Just because you never plan to shoot past 50-100 yards is no reason to handicap yourself with a rifle and load that won't do better. This is my brush gun. Bought new it cost less than a Marlin 30-30 used. It weighs exactly the same even with the scope as a Marlin 30-30 naked, and is the same length. It puts 3 shots into one ragged hole at 100 yards. Felt recoil is about the same as 30-30.

.30 WCF is not an 'inherently inaccurate' cartridge. Nor is the Marlin 336 (or 36) an 'inherently inaccurate' rifle. I know you did not say that, but it seems to be what you're getting at.

Like any other rifle, they're always held back by the shooter's skill. If the shooter sucks with iron sights (which most do), you shouldn't blame the rifle.
And the cartridge has more than enough 'poop' to it. People seem to think that .300 Blackout is more than enough for the job, even though it pales in comparison to .30 WCF and is only marginally better than .30 Carbine.

The trajectory between 50-150 yards is never more than 3/4" above or below my line of sight and it still has enough power to take a deer at 400 yards if needed. The scope allows me to see game well past being too dark to see with irons and the flat trajectory along with optics allow me to shoot through tiny openings in brush not possible with traditional brush gun chamberings

In 2012, I bagged a Bull Elk with one of my .444 Marlins mentioned earlier in this thread. I used a 275 gr soft point bullet, using a .40 S&W case as a jacket, and launched at 2,332 fps (10 ft from muzzle).
The first shot went through a tree, and was fatal.
The second shot, just to 'anchor' the bull and make sure he didn't run into even nastier terrain, went through another tree.

Bullet number two was recovered, had perfect expansion, and still weighed 182 grains (66% weight retention). Under no circumstances would I trust .243 Win to provide the same results ... not to mention the fact, that the .243 would be starting out with a bullet that weighed half as much as the .444 bullet ended up at after passing through a tree, thick hide, muscle, 8 inches of bone, more muscle, and some more hide.

I completely understand that my situation is not the same as guys whose hunting generally maxes out at whitetail sized game. But, for people like me, in terrain like where I shot that bull, .243 Win is barely a step up from a pellet rifle. And a scope, unless it's a 1x or 1.5x, is a major hindrance and the most common factor in missed shot opportunities (people can't get the scope on target quick enough).

About as light as I've ever gone, even with some self-enforced limitations, was .30 WCF. Generally, I'm looking at 7.62x54R or .270 Win at the bottom end for 'brush gun' duty (and both of the .30 WCFs are .444s now, anyway).