Thread: Going ‘old school’

Mine are in a paper bag in an old nail box full of bolts and stuff, everytime I go to find a bolt i end up digging them out and wondering about screwing them back on ...but modern boots dont have a leather last to wedge them into.
I dont think I would be fit enough to go the places the Triconi's took me.
In the south island I would have them front and rear, they were a bugger for rock hoping though.
In the north island i would move them to the instep, awesome for getting over logs and crap in close bush.

hobnails with triconies were awesome for skinning possums.

Before telescopic sights thousands of deer were shot with .303's fitted with open sights. From what I've read they could shoot animals at reasonably long distances. I suspect these guys were very good shots because of the amount of shooting they were doing day after day

A little bit old school. I bought this with the scope already attached and the irons intact. Got to thinking, at least if scope stuffs up while out wandering, I could just whip the scope off and go proper old school. Realised after I sighted scope in that I hadn,t sighted in the open sights. It,s just a cheap scope but very clear and sure brightens things up in low light. First scope I have ever owned. I get a bit confused with all the new high tech gear on sale these days. Started out as a kid hunting with single shot .22s and grew from there for a few years. Then many years of no hunting, so when I decided to start again all the goals had been moved and t was like Rip Van Winkle waking up. Seems to much to all re-learn at my age but I have looked into some of the new age stuff. If we had this gear when I was young I am certain I would have been using some of it. I am not agreeable to this long range shooting though. The longer the shot the more room for error, and if an animal is not killed cleanly then it could be dying a painful death miles away by the time you get to where you had first shot at it. I personally think long range belongs on a long range with an inanimate target at one end. For me it is about getting as close and personal as I can. That's what gets my adrenalin moving anyway.

Originally Posted by inozz

A little bit old school. I bought this with the scope already attached and the irons intact. Got to thinking, at least if scope stuffs up while out wandering, I could just whip the scope off and go proper old school. Realised after I sighted scope in that I hadn,t sighted in the open sights. It,s just a cheap scope but very clear and sure brightens things up in low light. First scope I have ever owned. I get a bit confused with all the new high tech gear on sale these days. Started out as a kid hunting with single shot .22s and grew from there for a few years. Then many years of no hunting, so when I decided to start again all the goals had been moved and t was like Rip Van Winkle waking up. Seems to much to all re-learn at my age but I have looked into some of the new age stuff. If we had this gear when I was young I am certain I would have been using some of it. I am not agreeable to this long range shooting though. The longer the shot the more room for error, and if an animal is not killed cleanly then it could be dying a painful death miles away by the time you get to where you had first shot at it. I personally think long range belongs on a long range with an inanimate target at one end. For me it is about getting as close and personal as I can. That's what gets my adrenalin moving anyway. Attachment 118152

U got it right mate !!! I notice many more balanced and resposible comments here on this forum now about the realities involved with LR hunting. I suspect some 'woke up' ?

Originally Posted by inozz

The longer the shot the more room for error, and if an animal is not killed cleanly then it could be dying a painful death miles away by the time you get to where you had first shot at it. I personally think long range belongs on a long range with an inanimate target at one end. For me it is about getting as close and personal as I can. That's what gets my adrenalin moving anyway. Attachment 118152

And the same old opinions roll out, exaggerated with comments like " miles away" and generally from those with no genuine experience in long range hunting.
IMHO Havning spent plenty of time doing both there is just as much chance wounding an animal with an unsupported snap shot at close range than a considered and calculated long shot from a stable rest. As i stated in an earlier post the only animal Iv wounded and lost in the last 15 years last was a 20yd shot in the bush.
As a rule, long glory shots pulled off by cullers in days gone by with no suitable gear are heralded but use todays tech which makes it far more accurate and therefore more ethical and there is criticism. Its a funny old world

Https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GSRhQK9KoMY

There is no difference in the marksmanship between a steel gong, a sheet of paper and a deer. I'm pretty vague as to why you need the deer. Do people find it that hard to find deer they need to "hunt" like this?

I never got it. I always heard people go "shot a deer at 700m" as a big story and I wonder why you fired at a deer at 700m in the first place. My brother shot a plover with a .22LR at around 400m, but it was a flock of about 30, he held over the top of the flock by about 30m and he hit one at the bottom. That plover had no luck to speak of. Not an achievement, but a good story.

Originally Posted by Tussock

There is no difference in the marksmanship between a steel gong, a sheet of paper and a deer. I'm pretty vague as to why you need the deer. Do people find it that hard to find deer they need to "hunt" like this?

I never got it. I always heard people go "shot a deer at 700m" as a big story and I wonder why you fired at a deer at 700m in the first place. My brother shot a plover with a .22LR at around 400m, but it was a flock of about 30, he held over the top of the flock by about 30m and he hit one at the bottom. That plover had no luck to speak of. Not an achievement, but a good story.

The same argument can be applied to to any distance. You can hang a gong in tree and shoot it off hand so why shoot a deer? Why go bashing through the scrub? cant you find a deer in the open?

Theses are all stupid arguments.

A wild hail Mary pot shot is also stupid, even if it is at a plover, and has nothing to do with LR hunting.

Originally Posted by sneeze

The same argument can be applied to to any distance. You can hang a gong in tree and shoot it off hand so why shoot a deer? Why go bashing through the scrub? cant you find a deer in the open?

Theses are all stupid arguments.

A wild hail Mary pot shot is also stupid, even if it is at a plover, and has nothing to do with LR hunting.

The word "hunting" is only added for the sake of the ego of the "hunter". Shooting a deer that will never react to you because it is so far away is shooting. If you are at a "long range" the animal is going to have a hard time ever knowing you are there. You can call this hunting if you need to, but I'm not about to.

Why do you just absolutely desperately need the word "hunting" put on long range hunting? For status, otherwise you would not care on way or the other. You want people to think you have skill.

If the skill is shooting, then yes, you obviously have lots. But if the skill is "hunting" then I fail to see how you don't avoid every possible challenge hunting throws at you, but shooting from a really long way away.

You are there to enjoy it. I enjoy the challenge of hunting and I enjoy the challenge of shooting. I can shoot LR. I really genuinely feel ZERO sensation of hunting when I'm sniping things from miles away. If I'm bashing through the bush, that is very hard.

Glassing a clearing and shooting an animal miles away is very very easy. I really have no idea how you can sell it as hard. It is harvesting an animal and there is nothing wrong with that.

This "long range hunting" thing remains a bit embarrassing.

As long as the LR part is not stupidly far out there where luck really begins to play a part, all good I say. No its NOT about ethics because you can fuck up the shot at any range.
But I notice even the gun mags are writing total BS about some group sizes !! Even serious LR benchrest guns wont group like some factory rifles ya see reviewed !
So when some inexperieced shooter finds thier rifle only does MOA they think it's crook, or they haven't found the right load or .......
Just keep it real.

Originally Posted by LRP

As long as the LR part is not stupidly far out there where luck really begins to play a part, all good I say. No its NOT about ethics because you can fuck up the shot at any range.
But I notice even the gun mags are writing total BS about some group sizes !! Even serious LR benchrest guns wont group like some factory rifles ya see reviewed !
So when some inexperieced shooter finds thier rifle only does MOA they think it's crook, or they haven't found the right load or .......
Just keep it real.

Liking your input LRP. Well said.

Sales reps are out there selling the hell out of a lot of very gimmicky LR gear. I had some pitched to me recently. They basically claim Joe Bloggs can buy a rifle/ballistic app combo and shoot to silly ranges on game.

If it works the way they say it does, Joe Bloggs will be out shooting the best in the practical LR game.

I regret dredging up this ancient argument.

On topic, I am not the proud owner of a TOZ 17, complete with elevation adjustable rear site. For the uninitiated, the TOZ 17 is a Russian made .22 with a very rare magazine that can't take a scope. What they do have is a real rear elevation site that goes all the way out to 250 (meters or yards is not stated). So far the 20m and 50m marks have been bang on, using subs. I assumed Russian .22 ammo was loaded down a bit.

I'm going to calibrate the elevation adjustments all the way out to the maximum, and then it is going to be a LR gong shooting rifle, for small gongs. Should be most entertaining.

Im not asking you to use any label on anything,Im happy for you to call it whatever you like. I call it LR hunting because its easier to say than "gathering deer at some distance that's to great to be hunting". There's also this problem of just exactly were hunting stops and turns into just shooting, if it was a thing, so I find it easier to lump all the different distances into one little basket and call it hunting. Pretty sure its not an ego thing.
I mean imagine how the story would go .
I went hunting... no wait.... was I inside or outside the the Hunting zone, the deer saw me and moved off so it was hunting but then it stopped and I got the range finder out so maybe it was shooting? but it got my scent and went over the ridge so yes definitely hunting but then I found it in the next basin and it was a fair distance so it was shooting.. I think .. maybe ?

Its just more stupid.

Originally Posted by sneeze

Im not asking you to use any label on anything,Im happy for you to call it whatever you like. I call it LR hunting because its easier to say than "gathering deer at some distance that's to great to be hunting". There's also this problem of just exactly were hunting stops and turns into just shooting, if it was a thing, so I find it easier to lump all the different distances into one little basket and call it hunting. Pretty sure its not an ego thing.
I mean imagine how the story would go .
I went hunting... no wait.... was I inside or outside the the Hunting zone, the deer saw me and moved off so it was hunting but then it stopped and I got the range finder out so maybe it was shooting? but it got my scent and went over the ridge so yes definitely hunting but then I found it in the next basin and it was a fair distance so it was shooting.. I think .. maybe ?

Its just more stupid.

We are agreed then and in your case, clearly not an ego thing. There are some who's collars get hot and it is an industry these days.

I agree with you.

Since I got back into hunting a lot of guys I hunted with as kids and even some old dudes have basically said some version of "I hate walking, if you are not blowing over animals it is boring".

I just wonder if this is not creeping in a bit and we will not be up trees like Americans shortly, and whether some sort of line in the sand needs to be drawn to preserve the rare Kiwi hunting ability. Then again, who cares.