| shinz |
| (.300 member) |
| 22/09/08 05:57 PM |
Re: Why not a double rifle in 7.62x54R?
|
Quote:
There is no doubt it would work, its just a matter of taste. The 'enemy at the gates' associations of your round would make it unattractive unless, perhaps in a Baikal. The advantages of a zillion different available projectiles are less attractive, when you have to pursue regulation for each bullet you try. On the other hand, a Baikal in this calibre would be pretty neat. - Imagine perhaps a Siberian hunt?
I would much rather have a .303 double - because doubles for me are about the glamour of past times in India and Africa, and the .303 is a heritage item here.
Herein lies one of the great imponderables of firearms, form vs function. I fall on the function side of the line & while I don't like fugly firearms, sometimes beauty is as beauty does. There are obviously plenty who fall the other way, & revel in firearms with glorious engraving & fancy checkering. For me, I'm happy to skip the engraving & checkering is to hang onto. Not quite true but by way of illustration I think the Heym PH doubles & probably the forhcoming Searcy basic doubles would be all I'd ever want. & yes, a Baikal double in 7.62x54 regulated for 180 or 200 gr bullets would be an excellent working double, do everthing I wanted it too in NZ (well maybe struggle on Tahr & Chamois), & certainly cut the mustard on an African plains game hunt other than for uber long shots but I might just have to work a bit harder to shrink the ranges, so aesthetics aside, it'd work for me just fine.
Steve