Western Hunt- Which Gun/Scope Combo?

Young man I took on a mulie hunt here in Colorado shot a fairly big buck at maybe 150 yards. He was using 300 Win Mag. I nailed a big fat mulie in Nebraska at about the same range. Long shots are usually, as Frankenmauser so ably stated, are pretty unusual. The 7mm-08AI would be plenty of gun.
 
Yeah, I'm a little grumpy today. I'm getting on up there, being born during the Truman administration. So I ask the forums indulgence, while I go on a mild rant.

What have we come to, when the advice is, buy a new rifle to save one pound of weight? I don't know if anyone asked the OP how fit he was.

I have hunted and hiked in the Beartooth-Absorka wilderness. If anyone is interested, this contains the largest plateau over 10,000 ft. in North America, and is truly God's country. I know how tough it can get.

Look at our fathers and grandfathers generations. I know some of them were grateful to even have a rifle or shotgun to hunt with. I could tell stories here, but this is a mild rant, so I will get to the point.

Do I need to take two midols and change my pad, or doe's anyone else think it preposterous to buy a new rifle to save a pound of weight.

I don't hunt anymore, but when I did I carried a 300WBY, and they are heavy, because that's what I had. None of my excursions killed me, although halfway through the haul out, I may have wished I was dead instead.

Ok, I have my coffee now. Rant over.
 
Last edited:
In my younger days, I carried milsurp rifles in the order of 10-11 lbs. Mostly an '03 and a 98k cause that's all I had. 55 years later, I don't think I could climb the hills so I don't worry about it any more....well, I never worried about it in the first place. I just did it. So, I wouldn't buy a new rifle just to save a pound. I would buy a new (to me) rifle either because it was a good deal or I wanted it, but to save a pound was never a reason.
 
handlerer2 said:
Yeah, I'm a little grumpy today. I'm getting on up there, being born during the Truman administration. So I ask the forums indulgence, while I go on a mild rant.

What have we come to, when the advice is, buy a new rifle to save one pound of weight. I don't know if anyone asked the OP how fit he was.

I have hunted and hiked in the Beartooth-Aborka wilderness. If anyone is interested, this contains the largest plateau over 10,000 ft. in North America, and is truly God's country. I know how tough it can get.

Look at our fathers and grandfathers generations. I know some of them were grateful to even have a rifle or shotgun to hunt with. I could tell stories here, but this is a mild rant, so I will get to the point.

Do I need to take two midols and change my pad, or doe's anyone else think it preposterous to buy a new rifle to save a pound of weight.

I don't hunt anymore, but when I did I carried a 300WBY, and they are heavy, because that's what I had. None of my excursions killed me, although halfway through the haul out, I may have wished I was dead instead.

Ok, I have my coffee now. Rant over.
Click to expand...
I pretty much agree. Worry about 1 lb of rifle weight. What you going to do with several hundred lbs of meat? Feed the wolves?
 
handlerer2, here is the issue I have with comparing to what others had "back in the day". Being a resident hunter in CO for nearly 40 years, as well as an infantry soldier. I can tell you heavy hunting gear slows you down and doesn't allow you to hunt as well. The more you carry even in the best shape will wear you down faster than carrying fewer pounds. The crux is finding the right balance, as the lighter it gets the more stuff you'll want to carry and then it doesn't help you to have lighter gear.
 
"Do I need to take two midols and change my pad, or doe's anyone else think it preposterous to buy a new rifle to save a pound of weight."

I just have to answer that one. Any excuse to buy a new rifle is a good one. ;)

Paul B.
 
Well I've hunted in the west life. Did my first deer hunt when I was 11 years old. The year was 1948, Labor Day weekend. Shot my deer with my Great grandfather's old 30-30 at all of 20 feet, give or take. Most of my hunting early on was in coastal California and it wasn't until around 1962 that I hunted in another state. Nevada to be exact and used a butchered up 1903 Springfield 30-06 with the old El Paso Weaver 4X scope. I used that rifle until 1973 when I decided it was too damned heavy when hunting up at the 9,000-9500 foot MSL level. FWIW, I was living in Nevada but never shot a deer past 150-175 yards. In 1973 I bought a Remington 660 in .308 and frankly was concerned about its effectiveness at potentially longer ranges. First hunt with it, my hunting partner wounded a roughly 225-250 pound Mule Deer that was running off. He was way out yonder but I took him with the first shot, down and out. He came over to where I was and we paced it off at 426 paces, call it at least 400 yards. Scope for that rifle was an other 4X Weaver. Fast forward to the the mid 1980's, area1 in the White Mountain of Arizona. Shots it that area can come at extremely long range so I carried a .300 Win. Mag. I had a cow tag and the shot came at a lasered 530 yards. One shot, down and out. When I checked the 3x9 Leupold it was still set at 3X. The only other fairly long shot was a cow elk at 350 yards with a .35 Whelen. All the other deer and elk I've taken from 1973 to today with the exception of those mentioned have been at 200 yards or less, most less.
Of the choices the OP posted I'd go with the 7-08 and the lightest scope he owns, or he does have a legitimate excuse to but a new rifle. ;):p
Paul B.
 
It's funny--a guy I heard about this past season went on a western muley hunt-- he spent thousands on a Gunwerks rifle and another chunk on a Nightforce, and he and the guy he went with both ended up shooting their bucks at 100 yards.

One thing that could be nice with the high magnification is thIat I can use it as a spotting scope since I don't have a spotting scope
Click to expand...

It's funny, your first time out west you think you need a rig for 300+ yard shots.

I've killed more antelope under 100 than I have over 300. Hell, I've killed antelope at 25 yards. Shorter eastern shots present themselves more often you think.
 
I have only killed one Elk. 740 yards lazer ranged. 7 Rum. No wind. Dialed up 750 and hit where it was supposed to. Shot prone and built the perfect rest out of a coat and hard packed snow.
 
Not going to say much about the gun itself; that always seems to be more of a personal choice than anything. I would basically choose the lightest gun that would do the job on a mule deer out to 400 yards and call it a day.

As for optics, I see no reason for a 5x25 or whatever to shoot a muley at 400 yards. I'd be looking at a 3x9-3x12 at the most. I personally have a 2.5x10 that I would consider more than adequate for 400 yd shots at such a large animal. Any Vortex Diamondback scope (or similar) would fill the bill, IMO.
 
Well Franklin, if I was you I would use what I had. That would be the 7-08 with the Swarovski scope. You don't need to be able to dial up with the reticle on the Swarovski. It has calibrated marks on it for the distances you will likely need. Sight in dead on the cross hairs at 100 yards. The marks below the main cross hairs will be very close to perfect at 200, 300, 400 and 500 yards. Practice with it and go hunting.

The only time I have let weight be the determining factor was when I was buying a new gun. I have hunted in Idaho and Washington since 1987. The longest shot I have had available when I had a tag in my pocket was about 500 yards. I didn't shoot because the rifle had iron sights. Since then I haven't shot an animal that was more than 125 yards away. This year my deer was at 33 yards with a bow. My elk was about 30 yards with a rifle. You are more likely to be able to get close enough to use the 7-08. If you practice enough, and the gun and ammo are up to the task, 500 yards is not unreasonable. But I would bet your rifle, that you can get to within 200 yards.
 
Thanks for all of your responses. I always appreciate a thread that sticks to the topic and gives it's opinion without heated debate.
 
I live in West Texas, not Colorado, Wyoming or Arizona. Though it's is rough country, true mountains are few and far between. You'll most likely be below 4,000' but there could be a lot of hiking up and down, especially while hunting Aoudad. Antelope will be principally in the Panhandle and it's pretty flat up there. Most of the mule deer hunting will be riding around in a truck or 4 wheeler till you spot one and then it's a short stalk.

I hunt with a Browning X-Bolt.308 topped with an older Leupold 3-9x40, 7 1/2 pounds, and it's plenty good enough for anything here. Use the 7-08; you'll be fine.
 
From your list the 7 mag out of your closet would be my choice, it’s really too much, but it’s nice for long range. Your glass choices are a bit strong for my taste, I grew up on 3x9, moved to 4x12, and my favs are 4.5x14. I’ve nightforces too, and some 6x32 scopes, but for hunting, really they are a bit much. Here in the west it’s not uncommon to hike. A lot. Those big scopes are heavy. And there is a lot of mirage to contend with over 14x
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top