| Schauckis |
| (.300 member) |
| 05/11/09 01:25 AM |
Re: 8mm bullets for heavy game
|
Quote:
Fabulous job on the rebuild!!!
I have a thing for personal touches on hunting rifles, and really enjoy seeing others' ideas on what works and then seeing them actually going out and putting those ideas into wood and steel. VERY nice.
Thank you very much, indeed!
The price tag was hefty, but as the 'smith said: When you have a rifle built according to your ideas, one that is made for you, then the cost matters less.
Quote:
And yes, the 8,2. {Wasn't it created due to a circa 1930's hunting law that banned 7.62 and smaller rounds for hirvi?}
By the way, what dies are you using for handloading the 8,2x53R?
The round was to my understanding created in the 50's (although it may be an earlier development) due to the then-gun laws prohibiting the use of military caliber by civilians, i.e. the 7,62x53R, and also requiring a minimum of 8mm for moose.
I don't reload myself, my friend does it for me. He uses Dillon's 500 series equipment and as far as I know also Dillon's dies.
Also Sako's factory ammo is readily available still.
Quote:
For a long time I've kicked around the idea of buying a cheap Mosin-Nagant and going to town on it...with a 9,3x53R the result. You are making it pretty hard to avoid...I do believe you have one or more of them, too?
Ahem; actually, no... The Mosin-Nagant was never one of my favorites to be honest.
They're still seen not too seldom in fact, but I have yet to actually see one in 9,3x53R. The 8,2mm conversion seems to have been more popular.
Quote:
Edit: for testing media, you might try adding something to stress the bullets a bit. Say, set up your wet paper with a sheet of plywood inside about 10 to 15 cm deep, followed by more paper.
That's how they went about doing the test in Vapentidningen, in fact. The motivation being the same as yours: it makes the test more realistic, especially simulating a (shoulder) bone hit and then measuring if the bullet still would have hit the lungs of the animal.
Tests are tests, for sure, and shouldn't be taken at face value. However, if the results are repeatable and several tests point in the same direction, they're hard to argue against.
- Lars