[jjas]

Jeager106,

I switched to the sabot/rifled barrel deal years ago. It was new, it had to be better! As the years have past, I've found that sabots/rifled bores can be very accurate (especially @ ranges past 75 yards or so), but I've also dealt with the "flyers" that seem to plague saboted ammo @ times.

I know finding "smooth bore" slug barrels is getting harder, but I still contend that @ most woods ranges, the smooth bore barrel can be a great option for many hunters (and as you pointed out, it costs a hell of a lot less to shoot them, too!)

Thanks for the post Jeager,

Jim

 

[jjas]

ob·so·lete (ŏb'sə-lēt', ŏb'sə-lēt')

Outmoded in design, style, or construction:

The smoothbore shotgun for use in deer hunting is by definition obsolete...there is no debating that.

The only question is...does the cost savings associated with shooting smoothbore guns at the range justify using them while hunting...?

The obvious answer is...it all depends on what is more important to a person, saving less than a few hundred dollars a year...or increasing their odds of ethically harvesting an animal... :wink:

JC

JC,

I think it all depends on what you are looking for in a slug gun and how/where it will be used.

If you hunt in places that are typically thick and your shots are less than 75 yards, I don't see what you lose using a 12 gauge smoothbore and fosters or brennekes if your slug/gun combo can shoot tight groups @ 50 yards. I don't think it's "ethically" wrong to do this @ all. I would agree that slinging fosters @ long range is probably not the most ethical thing to do, but I'm talking about fairly close shots here.

Personally, I would rather a guy shoot @ closer ranges with his smoothie/foster combo that he's comfortable with (because he can afford to target shoot more often) than a guy who skimps on practice with sabots because of the cost and slings them @ 150 yards because the box says he can.

Jim

 

[jjas]

Besides with Brennekke slugs at $2.95 a box, Hastings 100-150 yard sabots at $8.95, and some of the "modern" fast-fast, light-light sabots upwards of $17.95 for 5 shots, those old smoothies look like pretty good general purpose meat grinders to me..........

Cost is becoming a huge factor with many of my friends and fellow shooters @ my gun club. $3.00-$4.00 per round is just too expensive for much target shooting. I know of a few guys who are buying "tactical" shotguns and using fosters or brennekes through them for hunting.

A few of the other guys are pulling their old smoothies out and using them this year instead of paying for high dollar saboted ammo. Still others have abandoned their slug guns altogether and are using either Pistol cartridge carbines (they are legal in Indiana this year) or their muzzleloaders.

For many, coughing up big bucks for saboted ammo isn't working for them anymore. Not when there are cost effective substitutes.
Jim

 

[jjas]

Seaark1660 wrote:

From what I see, even with a rifled gun shooting high-velocity sabots, the average joe-blow deer hunter does not have the skill to use it much past 100yds anyway. The biggest advantage is they don't require any hold-over at 100yds and under and they should group tighter than a smoothbore on average.

Glad to see that someone else agrees with a point I've been trying to make for months on this board.

This constant back and forth over 200 yard slugs is ridiculous for the average shooter. Most of us will never use the capability and because we don't practice enough (whether it's time, money or a combination of the two) couldn't use it anyway.

Even with my rifled guns, I'm not going to take a shot much further than 100yds anyway. That is within my comfort zone for being able to put the first slug in into a deer's boiler room with frozen fingers and my heart pounding the equipment I have.

EXACTLY!!!!! See my point about the 200 yard slug above.

In most cases the average deer hunter will rarely shoot past 75 yards in most woods situations. A good smoothbore will do EVERYTHING a saboted slug/rifled gun will do @ these ranges for a hell of a lot less money.

The reason I shoot a rifled bore/saboted combo is because I do want the "ability" to shoot farther if an opportunity presents itself. In all the years I've been hunting deer the opportunity to use the extra "ability" has NEVER presented itself. But I feel I'm prepared (albeit a bit expensively prepared, but prepared nonetheless). :roll:

I know there are guys on this forum who can make longer shots, who practice with their equipment @ longer ranges and really take advantage of today's technology. I just contend most can't, don't and won't. :shock:

Truthfully, I feel like what I've gotten out of the whole rifled barrel/saboted ammo combo is a lighter wallet.

Jim

 

[jjas]

JC,

Sorry to break the flow of the posts, but I have a question to ask.

What the hell does "fugazzi picasso" mean? :?

I even tried looking it up and can't figure out what it means. :w

Care to clarify?

Jim

 

[jjas]

Smoothbores are the future. They just need an ammo update.

For proof look at the M1a3 abrams 120mm smoothbore canon and the accuracy it's capable of at range.

In all seriousness, with the fed truball and the "rackmaster" and reduced recoil law enforcement slug from Remington, I wonder what kind of accuracy a person could get from a smoothie with a pinned barrel and good optics and recoil reduction?

Might be a good winter project.

 

[jjas]

JC,

I saw that Field and Stream said the TarHunt (that you shot the groups pictured with) has been named one of the 50 best shotguns ever.

I'm sure Randy Fritz appreciates the free publicity.

Good luck hunting this weekend,

Jim

 

[jjas]

JC,

I saw that Field and Stream said the TarHunt (that you shot the groups pictured with) has been named one of the 50 best shotguns ever.

I'm sure Randy Fritz appreciates the free publicity.

Good luck hunting this weekend,

Jim

No edit function. I should have written the 20 gauge groups were shot with a Tarhunt 20 gauge slug gun.

Jim