Spear gun and pole spear as a self defense weapon?

[Wayward Son]

if a woodchuck could chuck FOOM!!!

 

[Storker]

the extra size is now a negative, kind of like driving a 1970' muscle car. Is it a cool toy, hell yes. A great feeling of nostalgia, fun to work with and it will get the job down. Not so practical nor efficient.

Ya think?

I'll grant you that it's not very well suited for 'modern' spray&pray battle tactics. OTOH, the 'extra' case size (i.e. powder capacity) makes the '06 a lot better able to handle heavier .30 cal bullets like 180- and 200-grainers than the .308 is. That means it's a better round for large game like European moose, red deer buck or brown bear. It's also better than the .308 if you want to jazz up a nice .5 BC bullet like Sierra's 155-grainer to close to 900 m/s (that's about 3000fps for you metrically challenged), so it's also better than the .308 for punching holes in paper at fun distances.

The .223, in the standard 1:12" twist barrel can be expected to stabilize up to 55gr bullets (62 if you're lucky), and those little midgets are blown way off target by a minor breeze, and the speed makes them expand rather explosively. Fine for varmint shooting at moderate distances, but not much else. Now if you get it in a 1:8" twist barrel, you can start feeding it 75-80 grain bullets and get outer ballistics approaching the .308, but it won't be quite there. That makes it a nice low-recoil alternative for small game and paper punching at decent distances, but it's not particularly optimal if there's much of a crosswind.

You see, there's the difference between a bleedin' heart librul Euro view on guns and the red-blooded 'murrican view: we don't automatically think about killing people, we see guns as tools for hunting and target shooting. And with that perspective, there's nothing obsolete with the century-plus old cartridge constuctions like the .30-06 or the 6.5x55 8)


--
Sent from my Android phone
Typos are a feature, not a bug

 

[GrumpyOldGuy]

You see, there's the difference between a bleedin' heart librul Euro view on guns and the red-blooded 'murrican view: we don't automatically think about killing people, we see guns as tools for hunting and target shooting. And with that perspective, there's nothing obsolete with the century-plus old cartridge constuctions like the .30-06 or the 6.5x55 8)

The size of the casing needed in turn of the 20th century powders and bullets was larger than today. Smaller cartridges with better powder and bullets fill the same need. Thus the overall down-sizing of ammo for the same need in the military and even most hunting. No question the 30.06 will get the job done, but the smaller, faster calibers will generally have less drop over distance and less effect from the wind (rather important where I live on the plains). These guns are also easier for the casual shooter (most of us) to handle.

 

[Wayward Son]

It's funny. I've been shooting a 30-06 -not just a 30-06, but the same 30-06- for 39 years now. many, many thousands of rounds through it, barrels worn out and replaced. It's my pet rifle, what I reach for first when something needs to be done with a rifle.

I hand load my own ammo for it & have since the mid 80's. I'm quite intimately familiar with the round.

But lately I've been focused on working with 2 rifles, developing custom hunting loads for them. A Colt AR15 in 223 and a custom AR in 6.5 Grendel. Both are midget cases in comparison & when I'm at the range & spot some 06 brass on the ground it just looks HUGE now LOL

 

[Storker]

The size of the casing needed in turn of the 20th century powders and bullets was larger than today. Smaller cartridges with better powder and bullets fill the same need. Thus the overall down-sizing of ammo for the same need in the military and even most hunting. No question the 30.06 will get the job done, but the smaller, faster calibers will generally have less drop over distance and less effect from the wind (rather important where I live on the plains). These guns are also easier for the casual shooter (most of us) to handle.

You keep repeating the "modern rifle powders" mantra. I guess the .300WM with its even larger case capacity is even more obsolete than the .30-06, then? Uh, wait. That cartridge is younger than the .308Win, and the US Army's M24 and M2010 are chambered for it. Hm.

The .30-06 lies comfortably about mid-way between the .308Win and the .300WM in terms of case capacity, speed and recoil. You were worried about recoil, weren't you? Then you'd better not touch the .300WM with a 3.048 meter pole.

If you live on the plains and really are a shooter, you should know that speed isn't everything for hitting your target. In fact, if you consider wind drift, speed is definitely secondary to BC. If I'm worried about wind drift, I'd much rather have a .5 BC bullet (.30 cal Sierra 155gr) in 3000fps than a .25 BC bullet (.22 cal Sierra 52gr) in 3200fps. In fact, I'd chuck both of those loads for a .6 BC bullet (.264 cal Sierra 142gr) in 2800fps. Oh, wait, that load is for the 6.5x55 cartridge, which is even older - and I guess even more obsolete - than the .30-06. Rank those three loads in terms of wind drift, and it's bleedin' obvious to any shooter worth his powder that the highest BC wins, and the lowest BC loses.

Yeah, the .223 in 3200+ fps shoots flat. The .22-250 shoots even flatter. But the "flat shooting" argument loses if you want to hit a target at some distance. It's a lot easier to estimate distance than wind. In fact, if I have problems guesstimating distance I can buy a laser rangefinder that can give me the distance to the nearest meter (or yard, if you're of that persuasion). There's no instrument that can give me the crosswinds from my stance all the way out to my target with any kind of accuracy, estimating crosswinds is still WAGs and experience. Elevation is a piece of cake, windage is what separates the shooters from the dilettantes.

So, what about the recoil you're worried about? Well, I've shot quite a few rounds with .30-06 and also quite a few with .308Win, and frankly, the difference is negligible. You get a lot more effect on recoil from stock design, rifle weight and barrel length. Try a short-barreled lightweight .308 with a hogs-back or MC stock and a normal-barreled normal weight .30-06 with a "modern classic" straight stock, and you'll prefer the .30-06 over the .308. Now, if I wanted a round with noticeably lower recoil and excellent wind drift resistance, I'd go for the 6.5x55. Oh, wait, that round is even older than the .30-06, so I guess it's even more obsolete.

The reason that your armed forces abandoned the .30-06 for the 7.62 NATO, and the 7.62 NATO for the 5.56 NATO was logistics and full auto fire. A short cartridge gives a shorter bolt throw than a long cartridge, so it's better suited for SAWs when you need suppressing fire. And each round takes up less space, weighs less and uses less resources in production. As long as the cartridge is adequate, those are very good reasons for adopting a shorter, smaller, lighter round (however, the Afghanistan theater clearly showed that the 5.56 NATO is not adequate in quite a few situations). But that the shorter cartridge is adequate doesn't mean the shorter cartridge can duplicate the performance of the longer cartridge, because the longer cartridge also benefits from the modern powders you're so obsessed with. If you want a shorter bolt throw and choose the .308Win, or if you're worried about the recoil of a .30 cal gun and wants the cute little .223, by all means. They're very good cartridges and delivers more than adequate performance when used for the right purpose. But there's no way they can match the performance of a larger, longer cartridge when you start trying to get the maximum out of your round.

 

[K3rato]

Does anyone else keep their pole spear or spear gun handy for a second use as a weapon for home defense?

I always keep my spear gun next to my bed as well as a sharp pole spear as a home protection measure.
I don't have the spear gun loaded, but I can do it very quickly if I had to. I always maintain the tip on it very sharp.
My pole spear is a 5 foot jbl also has a very sharp tip on it, and it would probably be my first choice because it is longer and just as lethal.

Its seems perfectly good to have this instead of a loaded gun in your bed room, as long as the spear gun is not loaded.

Would you or do you do this? If not, I would like to know why would it be a bad idea.

Ever considered moving!

 

[GrumpyOldGuy]

You keep repeating the "modern rifle powders" mantra. I guess the .300WM with its even larger case capacity is even more obsolete than the .30-06, then? Uh, wait. That cartridge is younger than the .308Win, and the US Army's M24 and M2010 are chambered for it. Hm. ....

If I was worried about recoil, I would not shoot my favorite long distance rifle which a a 7MM Rem Mag that kicks like a mule.

The military abandoned the .30-06 because it no longer was the best cartridge for the mission. The .308 is essentially the same bullet, the cartridge is ~.6 inches shorter because they did not need the larger volume case which also required a longer action rifle, which increases weight of rifle and ammo. When you have the same performance in a smaller, lighter package, the larger one is normally considered obsolete.

The jump down to 5.56 is another issue. They traded the ability to hit hard at distance for a light weight, easy to handle rifle with double the rounds in a field load. That is a trade off pure and simple, works pretty good at normal shooting distances (100-300 yards) and not so good when you hit long distances. That comes down to matching your tool for the mission and avoiding the pitfall of thinking one size fits all.

 

[danvolker]

How about Home Invasion Hand Grenades.....more limited blast area, and with a shrapnel alternative that is designed for home invaders

 

[agilis]

You keep repeating the "modern rifle powders" mantra. I guess the .300WM with its even larger case capacity is even more obsolete than the .30-06, then? Uh, wait. That cartridge is younger than the .308Win, and the US Army's M24 and M2010 are chambered for it. Hm.

The .30-06 lies comfortably about mid-way between the .308Win and the .300WM in terms of case capacity, speed and recoil. You were worried about recoil, weren't you? Then you'd better not touch the .300WM with a 3.048 meter pole.

If you live on the plains and really are a shooter, you should know that speed isn't everything for hitting your target. In fact, if you consider wind drift, speed is definitely secondary to BC. If I'm worried about wind drift, I'd much rather have a .5 BC bullet (.30 cal Sierra 155gr) in 3000fps than a .25 BC bullet (.22 cal Sierra 52gr) in 3200fps. In fact, I'd chuck both of those loads for a .6 BC bullet (.264 cal Sierra 142gr) in 2800fps. Oh, wait, that load is for the 6.5x55 cartridge, which is even older - and I guess even more obsolete - than the .30-06. Rank those three loads in terms of wind drift, and it's bleedin' obvious to any shooter worth his powder that the highest BC wins, and the lowest BC loses.

Yeah, the .223 in 3200+ fps shoots flat. The .22-250 shoots even flatter. But the "flat shooting" argument loses if you want to hit a target at some distance. It's a lot easier to estimate distance than wind. In fact, if I have problems guesstimating distance I can buy a laser rangefinder that can give me the distance to the nearest meter (or yard, if you're of that persuasion). There's no instrument that can give me the crosswinds from my stance all the way out to my target with any kind of accuracy, estimating crosswinds is still WAGs and experience. Elevation is a piece of cake, windage is what separates the shooters from the dilettantes.

So, what about the recoil you're worried about? Well, I've shot quite a few rounds with .30-06 and also quite a few with .308Win, and frankly, the difference is negligible. You get a lot more effect on recoil from stock design, rifle weight and barrel length. Try a short-barreled lightweight .308 with a hogs-back or MC stock and a normal-barreled normal weight .30-06 with a "modern classic" straight stock, and you'll prefer the .30-06 over the .308. Now, if I wanted a round with noticeably lower recoil and excellent wind drift resistance, I'd go for the 6.5x55. Oh, wait, that round is even older than the .30-06, so I guess it's even more obsolete.

The reason that your armed forces abandoned the .30-06 for the 7.62 NATO, and the 7.62 NATO for the 5.56 NATO was logistics and full auto fire. A short cartridge gives a shorter bolt throw than a long cartridge, so it's better suited for SAWs when you need suppressing fire. And each round takes up less space, weighs less and uses less resources in production. As long as the cartridge is adequate, those are very good reasons for adopting a shorter, smaller, lighter round (however, the Afghanistan theater clearly showed that the 5.56 NATO is not adequate in quite a few situations). But that the shorter cartridge is adequate doesn't mean the shorter cartridge can duplicate the performance of the longer cartridge, because the longer cartridge also benefits from the modern powders you're so obsessed with. If you want a shorter bolt throw and choose the .308Win, or if you're worried about the recoil of a .30 cal gun and wants the cute little .223, by all means. They're very good cartridges and delivers more than adequate performance when used for the right purpose. But there's no way they can match the performance of a larger, longer cartridge when you start trying to get the maximum out of your round.

My favorite hunting rifle for most purposes is a 7x57 Mauser, the smooth action a century old. The cartridge's combination of range, trajectory, power and moderate recoil is often overlooked. The 7X57 is a superb performer; not a magnum, but more than adequate without unnecessary sturm und drang. It does the job in an understated manner, with style and class.

 

[Z Gear]

Ever considered moving!

Sure as soon as I win the loto, I'll buy a mansion and move even closer to the beach, immediately !