The SP Addiction Continues....

twa

Encore .30-06, this one needs a little TLC.....probably re-do the stocks and now I have to find me another scope, unless I put one of my Nikon rifle scopes on....:uhm: The price was right, had to do it.

http://www.gunbroker.com/Auction/ViewItem.aspx?Item=507802423

Ernie Bishop

Congrats!

twa

Ernie Bishop wrote: »

Congrats!

Thanks Ernie, I may just have to plan a trip to see my buddy and attend your shoot next year, I ought to have a few more by then. :jester:

Ernie Bishop

Would love to have ya come to WY-SHOT.

twa wrote: »

Thanks Ernie, I may just have to plan a trip to see my buddy and attend your shoot next year, I ought to have a few more by then. :jester:

Zee

Great price! It'll take some work to clean up. But, as long as the bore is good............

Tom Mix

I do not see why a man has the want to shoot a big magnum cartridge with one hand.


Is it fun?

What is the purpose?

Do they make one in .50 BMG?

Zee

Tom Mix wrote: »

I do not see why a man has the want to shoot a big magnum cartridge with one hand.

It's not a Magnum cartridge. It's a .30-06 Springfield.

Is it fun?

Yes. Yes it is.

What is the purpose?

Hunting. Target. Because we can.

Do they make one in .50 BMG?

I'm sure some Joker has tried.

.

toymachine

I have an uncle that works for a small ammo manufacturer/FFL. We were out there visiting last year, he gives us a tour of the shop, and shows us a rifle they had ordered for a customer. An ArmaLite AR50. In order to get it to fit in their locking display case, they removed the buttstock (couple bolts, apparently) making it look just like one of these custom pistols. No word on whether anyone tried to shoot it like that, they seem brighter than that but you never know.

Tom Mix

Zee wrote: »

It's not a Magnum cartridge. It's a .30-06 Springfield.

I myself have always considered it a magnum cartridge since at the time of its invention the only American cartridge that would have been in its category was maybe the 30-30 hence why I consider it a magnum cartridge. Just because it does not have the name magnum in the title does not mean it is not a magnum.

Is the .357 magnum really a magnum compared to a .460 or .500 or even a .454 Casual?

Just my opinion and not fact and I bet most will not even agree with me but I do know the argument was argued years ago in G&A magazine and I believe in the end they did decide it was a magnum round in most opinions.

Zee

Tom Mix wrote: »

I myself have always considered it a magnum cartridge since at the time of its invention the only American cartridge that would have been in its category was maybe the 30-30 hence why I consider it a magnum cartridge. Just because it does not have the name magnum in the title does not mean it is not a magnum.

Is the .357 magnum really a magnum compared to a .460 or .500 or even a .454 Casual?

Just my opinion and not fact and I bet most will not even agree with me but I do know the argument was argued years ago in G&A magazine and I believe in the end they did decide it was a magnum round in most opinions.

Interesting concept.

toymachine

cpj wrote: »

What makes you think it would be shot one handed?

Well, the ATF says...

shush

cpj wrote: »

What makes you think it would be shot one handed?

It’s only got one ‘andle?

Ernie Bishop

I never really thought about the 06 case capacity as being that big to begin with, even in a SP.
I shoot most of my SP's most of the time with one hand.
All kinds of fun.
I hunt big game and varmints with mine.
I compete in both BR and in field shooting courses with mine.
Someone did make a 50 cal SP, but it it was more of, it can be done kind of a thing (Nothing wrong with that either).
Two biggest cartridges I have owned in a SP, is a 338 Lapua Improved and 375 Chey-Tac Improved.

snake284

Tom Mix wrote: »

I myself have always considered it a magnum cartridge since at the time of its invention the only American cartridge that would have been in its category was maybe the 30-30 hence why I consider it a magnum cartridge. Just because it does not have the name magnum in the title does not mean it is not a magnum.

Is the .357 magnum really a magnum compared to a .460 or .500 or even a .454 Casual?

Just my opinion and not fact and I bet most will not even agree with me but I do know the argument was argued years ago in G&A magazine and I believe in the end they did decide it was a magnum round in most opinions.

No No No Man, the first Magnum version of it was the .300 H&H. And it betters it by at least 200-300 FPS. That's a magnum. The 30-06 is relatively mild mannered. Not a magnum at all. I guess if you're old enough to think of a .30-30 as status quo, yeah it would seem like a magnum. But the truth is, even though it's still a viable deer cartridge, the 30-30 is a 19th century cartridge that has been left behind by the crowd.

Also, your analogy of the .357 Magnum is off too. The .357 is a true magnum. It can compete with many cartridges of .40 and bigger. Sure, it's no 44 mag, but the 44 doesn't leave it in the dust such as the .357 leaves a lot of em, including a 44 special. For a .357 diameter it is truly a magnum. One more thing, there were several cartridges competing with the .30-06 in its day. Did you forget about the .30-40 Krag? And the .303 British? They were both a cut above the .30-30. Do you consider them magnums also?

With that sort of reasoning I guess a 45 ACP is a magnum when compared to a 45 cal. Muzzle Loader.

toymachine

Tenth century? "King Arthur fired his thirty-thirty and slew the mighty dragon."

snake284

toymachine wrote: »

Tenth century? "King Arthur fired his thirty-thirty and slew the mighty dragon."

Hehehehe Misprint. I guess I got in a hurry, but I found it a few minutes ago and corrected it to 19th century. Yeah, the Chinese hadn't even invented gun powder yet. That was by most accounts around the end of the 12th centure or beginning of the 13th.

Gene L

Tom Mix wrote: »

I myself have always considered it a magnum cartridge since at the time of its invention the only American cartridge that would have been in its category was maybe the 30-30 hence why I consider it a magnum cartridge. Just because it does not have the name magnum in the title does not mean it is not a magnum.

Is the .357 magnum really a magnum compared to a .460 or .500 or even a .454 Casual?

Just my opinion and not fact and I bet most will not even agree with me but I do know the argument was argued years ago in G&A magazine and I believe in the end they did decide it was a magnum round in most opinions.

I think you're inventing your own definitions, Tom. The 30-06 is not a Magnum, it's a 30-06 and the magnums of that time were way stouter than the 06.

The .357 Mag won't compare to the .460 or the .500, but it was a magnum at the time it was invented, 1935 in comparison to the .38 Special, and in it's caliber, it's a step up and a true Magnum.. In fact, it's the title of the cartridge and no other handgun round out performed it until 1955 and the .44 Magnum. The .460, the .454 and the .500 are late-comers to the game. At any rate, you couldn't go back and change the Magnum title because another completely different caliber and more powerful round superceded it.

Tom Mix

I have always been taught that a magnum is something that is longer than the original such as a .38 made longer into a .357 mag. A .44 special turned into a .44 mag. But then how did the .41 get the magnum name? It was just given to it to sell product so is it really a magnum since there was no .41 special?

The 30-06 is a longer version of the 30-40 Krag but nobody was using the name magnum at the time so it became the 30-06.

Can we call the 10mm a magnum since it was invented first, no because it was not made after a shorter cartridge or is the .40s&w just a 10mm short?

Sorry for steeling this thread, I need to start a new thread.

A .22 magnum is not as powerful as a 38 special but yet it is still a magnum because it is a longer .22lr (and a little wider I believe).

Jermanator

Stop. You are thinking too hard...

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wine_bottle#Sizes

I want to shoot a .454 Midas!

twa

Tom Mix wrote: »

I do not see why a man has the want to shoot a big magnum cartridge with one hand.


Is it fun?

What is the purpose?

Do they make one in .50 BMG?

Why would a man want to "shoot a big magnum cartridge with one hand".....Just in case you aren't aware, you can use a two hand grip when you shoot a pistol..... You have come up with some strange questions and scenarios in the short time you have been here. Just sit back and relax, this place CAN BE pretty enjoyable and CAN ALSO be pretty entertaining, I think you are going to fit right for some it if you stick around. :roll:

twa

cpj wrote: »

You stole that.

Yeah, I wasn't going to let it walk for that price.

twa

Zee wrote: »

Great price! It'll take some work to clean up. But, as long as the bore is good............

Hopefully a little bit of scrubbing, and maybe just some new stocks.....and I should be good to go. (keeping my fingers crossed on the bore) Are all of your Encore's wood gripped or do you have any synthetic for yours, if so which do you prefer, especially in the larger calibers? Thinking maybe a synthetic may be more comfortable to shoot??

Zee

twa wrote: »

Hopefully a little bit of scrubbing, and maybe just some new stocks.....and I should be good to go. (keeping my fingers crossed on the bore) Are all of your Encore's wood gripped or do you have any synthetic for yours, if so which do you prefer, especially in the larger calibers? Thinking maybe a synthetic may be more comfortable to shoot??

I have wood and synthetic for my Contender. Just wood for my Encore pistols. I've found the wood perfectly comfortable.