Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Is the 458 Socom very popular?

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Catch It
    replied
    Originally posted by mike h View Post
    Helicopter hunting for hogs!

    Don't know what to say about that.
    I do.........Yes Please!

    Leave a comment:


  • mike h
    replied
    Helicopter hunting for hogs!

    Don't know what to say about that.

    Leave a comment:


  • limon32
    replied
    Originally posted by Mobius View Post
    Many of the comments about the AR for hunting seem to be about the capacity. IE, like rbuck351 saying "One of my biggest complaints is the many of folks that use them seem to think that volume of fire will make up for poor shooting ability." I'm not attacking anyone, so I hope this doesn't come across that way.

    The assumption here is that people can only hunt with 30 round magazines or whatever. This is the assumption that anti-gun dingleberries use to attack standard capacity magazines for all guns. It's gets under my skin more than anything. Why make that assumption to begin with? It's just as easy to go hunting with a 5 round magazine in an AR style rifle. Having an AR doesn't necessitate that it's because the shooter needs more rounds. The flexibility is that you can use a 5 round or a 30 round depending on the job at hand. Helicopter hunting for hogs I'd be willing to bet you want as many rounds as you can jam into a magazine. Silent stalking big game through rough terrain you may only need 1 or 2 shots. But the nice thing is, you have the choice. Hunters who use capacity to replace accuracy exist whether they have an AR or a 10/22 or even a BA rifle. The idea that people only choose MSR's because they "need a lot of bullets" is false. Why do we keep propagating it?

    Weight is also a misconception. It's funny, I read the "how heavy is too heavy" thread and see the weights bandied about in there and think, well an AR isn't much different. It's not like they weigh 25 lbs. and up. The lightest AR I've ever seen weighs in at 4.9 lbs only missing the scope. I guess the old fashioned iron block AR is still stuck in the mindset. Sure some weigh more, some weigh less. To me it's all about ergonomics. A lot of people rightfully don't like the ergonomics of the AR style rifles. No beef there. But, a lot of people put thumb hole stocks and cheek risers on BA rifles and end up with the same ergonomics in the end...
    Yup...

    I predator hunt with a 10 round magazine and I don't have to carry ammo in something in my pack, I've never fired more than 3 rounds at a single animal.

    My AR weighs 6lbs. with a loaded 10 round mag and a 2-7 Leupold, prints just over 1 MOA with cheap factory ammo, cost me about $700 to build, how many custom mountain rifles come in under 6 lbs. for that kind of money, heck how many factory rifles come in at 6lbs. scoped? My new "mountain" bolt gun is 7.5, granted it was only $420.

    Leave a comment:


  • Daveinthebush
    replied
    If you reload and do not need to buy ammunition anywhere outside of Anchorage or Fairbanks then if you want one....go for it. Out side in the bush villages, stores usually only stock the ammunition of the people that frequent the store, the Natives. If you were on a hunt and forgot your ammunition you would be SOL in the bush. Even rounds that are "somewhat" popular in the cities will not be there unless someone in the village has one too. Might be a good round but until it is as popular as the 45/70, 30/30, 30/06 or such it just be a fun gun to have.

    Leave a comment:


  • Mobius
    replied
    Many of the comments about the AR for hunting seem to be about the capacity. IE, like rbuck351 saying "One of my biggest complaints is the many of folks that use them seem to think that volume of fire will make up for poor shooting ability." I'm not attacking anyone, so I hope this doesn't come across that way.

    The assumption here is that people can only hunt with 30 round magazines or whatever. This is the assumption that anti-gun dingleberries use to attack standard capacity magazines for all guns. It's gets under my skin more than anything. Why make that assumption to begin with? It's just as easy to go hunting with a 5 round magazine in an AR style rifle. Having an AR doesn't necessitate that it's because the shooter needs more rounds. The flexibility is that you can use a 5 round or a 30 round depending on the job at hand. Helicopter hunting for hogs I'd be willing to bet you want as many rounds as you can jam into a magazine. Silent stalking big game through rough terrain you may only need 1 or 2 shots. But the nice thing is, you have the choice. Hunters who use capacity to replace accuracy exist whether they have an AR or a 10/22 or even a BA rifle. The idea that people only choose MSR's because they "need a lot of bullets" is false. Why do we keep propagating it?

    Weight is also a misconception. It's funny, I read the "how heavy is too heavy" thread and see the weights bandied about in there and think, well an AR isn't much different. It's not like they weigh 25 lbs. and up. The lightest AR I've ever seen weighs in at 4.9 lbs only missing the scope. I guess the old fashioned iron block AR is still stuck in the mindset. Sure some weigh more, some weigh less. To me it's all about ergonomics. A lot of people rightfully don't like the ergonomics of the AR style rifles. No beef there. But, a lot of people put thumb hole stocks and cheek risers on BA rifles and end up with the same ergonomics in the end...

    Leave a comment:


  • Smitty of the North
    replied
    Originally posted by rbuck351 View Post
    To start with, no, the 458 Socom is not very popular in AK. For me, the practical uses for it are limited to hunting a few different critters at relatively close range. As far as the AR goes, you can have my share as I don't see a use for them that something else wouldn't work better, even combat. Also there are a few things about the ARs that I don't like. The barrels are shorter than I like, most older versions sprayed powder residue into the action, the stocks have no drop making cheek weld difficult, lots of moving parts, pistol grips, they are heavy, they have lots of sticky out things that remove the clean lines of a normal hunting rifle, mag and grip hang way out the bottom, safety is in a goofy spot, they don't come chambered in many of my favorite rounds like 22H or 25/20, 300H&H and the list goes on. Yeah some of this list can be changed at an additional cost to an already expensive rifle. One of my biggest complaints is the many of folks that use them seem to think that volume of fire will make up for poor shooting ability. Anyway I can get along nicely without one.
    I agree. I perceive this is why, they call them "platforms". The term "rifle" just doesn't seem to fit.

    In deference I refer them simply as ARs.

    SOTN

    Leave a comment:


  • rbuck351
    replied
    I use a Rossi 92 in 454 Casull for my close work heavy hitter. 10 rounds of 317gr cast at 2000 fps is pretty much the same as the 458 Socom only in a much lighter handier rifle. No, it won't rapid fire like an AR but it may bring to bear and get the first round off quicker. I even use single shot rifles quite a bit as rapid follow up shots are not common in hunting situations. The weight and balance of a good single shot rifle is hard to beat and it tends to make me a better hunter. I have used the Ars just enough to know I don't care for them too much. To each his own. That being said the 223 is probably one of the most popular hunting rounds in AK and the 458 Socom is got to be one of the least popular.

    Leave a comment:


  • Grayling Slayer
    replied
    Is the 458 Socom very popular?

    It's ballistics are nearly identical to the 45/70 which is an extremely popular round in Alaska by any measure.

    I see the same arguments supporting 5rd capacity mags in the L48. I don't have to shoot all 10 and can use any 5rd. mag if I want to. One shot is all it takes, but I like the option of having 10. Think thick brush in bear country with meat on the ground. Compared to 5.56 the 458 SOCOM is way more practical for hunting in AK.

    It's definitely not for everyone but in the few years it's been out its popularity is steadily increasing.

    Leave a comment:


  • Catch It
    replied
    Originally posted by rbuck351 View Post
    One of my biggest complaints is the many of folks that use them seem to think that volume of fire will make up for poor shooting ability. Anyway I can get along nicely without one.
    Agreed, I can't imagine that having ten rounds wouldn't be 5 more than I have time to even get off in any situation. When folks talk about it as a hog gun perhaps there are lots of targets and obviously no tags or harvest limits in most areas and perhaps that would lend itself to it being advantageous but largely I find the AR's (like many on here) to not being a comfortable or light option for hunting. I don't say don't use it but I don't agree that they are the greatest thing since sliced bread either. Like any firearm it has its uses and place within yardage etc as one could say about any slower big bore rifle and at that point it's six in one, half dozen in the other and use what you like.

    Leave a comment:


  • rbuck351
    replied
    To start with, no, the 458 Socom is not very popular in AK. For me, the practical uses for it are limited to hunting a few different critters at relatively close range. As far as the AR goes, you can have my share as I don't see a use for them that something else wouldn't work better, even combat. Also there are a few things about the ARs that I don't like. The barrels are shorter than I like, most older versions sprayed powder residue into the action, the stocks have no drop making cheek weld difficult, lots of moving parts, pistol grips, they are heavy, they have lots of sticky out things that remove the clean lines of a normal hunting rifle, mag and grip hang way out the bottom, safety is in a goofy spot, they don't come chambered in many of my favorite rounds like 22H or 25/20, 300H&H and the list goes on. Yeah some of this list can be changed at an additional cost to an already expensive rifle. One of my biggest complaints is the many of folks that use them seem to think that volume of fire will make up for poor shooting ability. Anyway I can get along nicely without one.

    Leave a comment:


  • Grayling Slayer
    replied
    I built one and I love it. It is basically a 45/70 in an AR chassis. Nothing like having 10rds of semi-auto in a tactical configured rifle in bear country. I bought 200 pieces of brass and can reload the same bullets that I use in my 45/70. Reloading cast lead bullets is very economical and recoil is cut down considerably.

    The magazines and all lower receiver parts are the same as my 5.56 rifle. I plan on using it for bear this spring and have no doubt that it will perform well.

    Leave a comment:


  • theONE73
    replied
    I just bought my first AR...Colt LE 6920. Either the 6.5 Grendel or 458 Socom will be my next upper. I am leaning towards the 458 though as I am a 45-70 shooter already. The Socom and 300gr TTSX look like a pretty effective combination in an AR platform.

    Leave a comment:


  • ADfields
    replied
    Originally posted by Mobius View Post
    I'm no expert, but I wonder if the reason some AR fans feel "victimized" is evidenced in the bold below.



    Define inappropriate. See to me, appropriateness for a task is strictly the realm of a caliber and has little to do with the action. In the sense that it would be inappropriate to hunt large game such as bull moose with a .22 short. The action of a firearm and the shape and style of it have nothing to do with it being appropriate for a task. Modern sporting rifles are simply the next step along the path of hunting firearms. Some people choose to use msr's to hunt, some people choose to not use them. There is no appropriateness involved. Choosing the appropriate caliber/round to humanely take game is the realm of "appropriate." Don't get me wrong, I understand the point of the post. It's the little side dig that I think raises the red flag of "victim" to some. For me, it doesn't matter. I don't honestly care one rat's patootie what some one else thinks of my choices to hunt with. If the round I choose will do the job and people don't like the shape of the rifle, tough cookies.

    As to the .458 SOCOM, well it's purely my opinion that rounds like that are used when someone wants a new challenge. Some people are happy spending their entire lives shooting the same round out of the same gun using the same formula. That's awesome. Some people get tired of the same thing over and over and want something different. So enter the "boutique" rounds. Ones that aren't mainstream but offer something different. I know a guy who built a .300 blackout for hunting caribou. He's "done it all" and wanted something different for a change. He's also building a .458 SOCOM to hunt Moose for the same reason. It's less about the gun itself or even the caliber. It's about the challenge of tinkering and making something you out together work.

    Well, that's my opinions anyway. Which I know are about as valuable as a used newspaper.
    I'd say you nailed it, anything beyond that is just an emotional response to comedic external appearance . . . dare I say prejudice? Yea I too have been black gun prejudice in the past but . . . "can't we all just get along?"

    Leave a comment:


  • Mobius
    replied
    Originally posted by iofthetaiga View Post
    That the reader takes that comment as a "side dig", I think is more reflective of the readers mindset than the writers intent.**

    IMHO, aesthetics aside, the AR is not especially well suited to the environment and conditions in which I live and hunt. I prefer a differently engineered weapon with fewer moving parts. To each his own.

    **(If I had wished to take a dig, I might have said that a "platform" is something upon which one pitches a tent; not something with which one hunts).
    While you may not have intended to make a side dig, the absence of "in my usage" or "for my purposes" attached to the comment of AR's being inappropriate leaves the reader with no other information and therefore implies the comment is general and applies to all cases. It may not have been your intent, but the open ended nature of the comment is the point of my response. Phrases like that are dropped in conversation frequently and while it may not be intentional, they leave the audience with no other choice but to assume you mean in effect that AR's are inappropriate for all hunting activities, world without end. (That last part was sarcastic humor.)

    On the other hand, you mention of AR's not being suited to your needs makes perfect sense. And I wouldn't argue with that at all, how could I?

    I'm not "tacticool". I don't use words like "platform" unless I'm talking about a place that allows someone access to a valve or a machine of some sort. But I would use an AR style rifle to hunt. It's literally a shape we're talking about here. Nothing else. The end result is always the same. A small metallic object is propelled really fast out the end of a tube. The other end of the tube isn't worth arguing about.

    Leave a comment:


  • iofthetaiga
    replied
    Originally posted by Mobius View Post
    Don't get me wrong, I understand the point of the post. It's the little side dig that I think raises the red flag of "victim" to some.
    That the reader takes that comment as a "side dig", I think is more reflective of the readers mindset than the writers intent.**

    IMHO, aesthetics aside, the AR is not especially well suited to the environment and conditions in which I live and hunt. I prefer a differently engineered weapon with fewer moving parts. To each his own.

    **(If I had wished to take a dig, I might have said that a "platform" is something upon which one pitches a tent; not something with which one hunts).

    Leave a comment:

Footer Adsense

Collapse
Working...
X