Budget Semi-Auto Deer Gun?

Status
Not open for further replies.
Remington model 11 shotgun with rifled slugs?

Hi-point carbine in 45 acp?

Sks at j and g sales?
 
My state has no restrictions in terms of calibers for use in hunting. Gun laws here are as loose as the gas prices are low in Michigan, just my luck that I live in the one town in the entire state that's full of gun-hating self-acclaimed hipsters.
 
If you want to target shoot with it too get an AR15 in .300 Blackout. None of the other "hunting" semi-autos (like the Remingtons) are intended for high-volume shooting. That will be capable of taking deer cleanly but won't be quite as capable as something like .30-06 (essentially, your useful range will be a lot lower).

Though personally, I just don't see the point in a semi-auto at all for hunting. Hunting (at least done right) usually doesn't involve lots of fast shots and a good bolt gun will nearly always be dollar-for-dollar WAY more accurate than a semi.
 
Or save up another $250 to $350 and start looking for a Browning BAR in the caliber of your choice.
 
mgmorden said:
Though personally, I just don't see the point in a semi-auto at all for hunting. Hunting (at least done right) usually doesn't involve lots of fast shots
Click to expand...

Unfortunately we don't live in a perfect world of DRT or even a fatal wound being a given no matter how optimal the shot appears, hence there's actual real-world value in effortless and fast follow-up shots. That's the ethical thing to do whenever a wounded animal takes off; the less hassle chambering another round the better and that's where semiautos really shine.

They're nothing more or nothing less than the next step in evolution from classic double rifles, without the need to practise the fine art of holding two spare cartridges between your fingers, cracking the action open and inserting them as quickly as humanly possible. A common practise among big game hunters since metal cartridge was first invented in 19th century and the principle of being able to take another shot or two whenever the previous one have failed to produce the desired effect hasn't changed a bit. Semiauto is just a mechanical solution to a known problem, much like a crane at construction site instead of having to carry bricks to umpteenth floor manually in backpacks.
 
I don't buy into the fact that you even need a repeater at all. I've killed many of my deer with a TC encore.

The only time I've shot an animal twice was a very close range buck with an ar15. And I only did it then because he jumped straight up into the air and landed right into my sight picture for a second time.

DRT

Wouldn't have happened with anything other than an autoloader as it all took place within a second or two.


Another benefit to the Ar over more traditional platforms is due to materials and construction you can build a semiauto rifle that's lighter and more accurate than a bolt action. A sub 5lb ar is completely possible
 
hq said:
Unfortunately we don't live in a perfect world of DRT or even a fatal wound being a given no matter how optimal the shot appears, hence there's actual real-world value in effortless and fast follow-up shots. That's the ethical thing to do whenever a wounded animal takes off; the less hassle chambering another round the better and that's where semiautos really shine.
Click to expand...

Sorry, but I just can't agree with this mindset. 99% of hunters these days are hunting using a scope. Getting an accurate hit on a running deer with a rifle is darned hard as it is - doing it with a scoped rifle is even moreso - PARTICULARLY trying to actually hit any specific spot (ie, a killzone).

So you're either shooting an animal that is running (bad) or an animal that has stopped (in which case you've had time to cycle the action). Not to mention if the hit was good if the animal runs or not it WILL fall in due time - track it. You don't want to sit there unloading onto a deer because it ran 20 yards after your first shot.

Now I'm not in favor of any regulations against hunting with semi-autos or anything (heck my dad hunted with a Remington 742 for decades) - but for whitetail unless you're looking to spray and pray they don't have any advantage over a bolt gun.
 
It's certainly going to be easier to get back on target with the right gun vs the wrong gun and it certainly doesn't hurt to have a quick follow up shot.

I know I personally have had instances where my first shot hit a twig and deflected and the second shot did as was intended and I had a deer I would not have if it weren't for a fast recycle time. So, I say... Why not...
 
While 742's and 7400's are more accurate than a AK or SKS, they are a poor target rifle due to round count limitations especially the 742. Also they don't like hot loads. AK type rifles are fun and cheap to shoot but very poor accuracy. Better if you get a Saiga, but prices have really gone up. For about the same price as a AK or SKS you can buy an AR that is more accurate, great for target shooting and very effective on even large deer providing good shot placement. Also I would consider a BAR.
 
The original poster pretty clearly stated:

Budget Semi-Auto Deer Gun?
Anyone know a good semi-automatic deer rifle under $400 (Including guns that are used)?
Click to expand...

Seems pretty specific to me. Semi-automatic is pretty self explanatory. There was no mention of distance but "deer rifle" would imply a semi-automatic rifle capable of taking deer sized game. Not of course to be confused with a dear rifle which is a rifle that is very dear to the owner or end user.

You want to start a fight? Just start a conversation about deer rifles and state emphatically that your opinion on which caliber and which make is the best and other hunters will willingly oblige you.
Click to expand...

The original poster and some of those posting may want to give this a read, it shows up under the definition of deer rifle. Which is a pretty generic term really. There are no shortage of rifles out there that will kill a deer, it's really a matter of using a rifle that suite the hunter for the conditions they will be hunting in. I believe in for example Pennsylvania hunting deer with a semi-automatic rifle will get the rifle confiscated and the hunter a fine. Then as mentioned. but does not apply, some states prohibit the use of a .224 diameter or smaller bullet to hunt deer. Finally, some states limit magazine capacity when hunting deer and other game.

Ron
 
R.W.Dale said:
I don't buy into the fact that you even need a repeater at all.
Click to expand...

Nor do I buy into the fact that you need a firearm or a bow at all, providing that you're proficient enough in sharpening sticks and you can run, for that matter. That's what it all eventually boils down to when we bring the word "need" into the conversation, instead of what's smart, ethical and takes the ever-present uncertainty into account.

Now, please excuse me while I go and claw my way through the 14 inches of ice on the creek with my fingernails and go handfishing.
 
hq said:
Nor do I buy into the fact that you need a firearm or a bow at all, providing that you're proficient enough in sharpening sticks and you can run, for that matter. That's what it all eventually boils down to when we bring the word "need" into the conversation, instead of what's smart, ethical and takes the ever-present uncertainty into account.
Click to expand...

Yes but we're trying to work within a set of parameters. I don't care if people hunt with a semi-auto. It's usually not going to end up any WORSE - it's just that I don't see a great benefit.

Generally, with that in mind, I would say "have at it". The issue here though is that the original poster stated he had a budget of $400. That's a huge constraint when it comes to getting an accurate and capable *semi-auto* hunting rifle. A BAR is out of his price range. An AR15 is also beyond a $400 budget.

You MIGHT be able to get an old Remington but those every durability issues (as I said earlier in the thread my dad hunted with a 742 for decades - but he's NOW hunting with a Ruger Model 77 because that 742 doesn't function correctly anymore). You could potentially find an SKS within that price range but they're heavy and scope mounting options are very limited.

On the other hand you can get a VERY capable bolt action hunting rifle for $300 or less.

With that in mind you're going to have to make a compromise - either go with a bad design, up the budget, or drop the semi-auto requirement.

My position is that the latter of those is simply the best option because I don't think semi-auto's bring that much to the table for this purpose. Doesn't mean I think that you should be hurling sticks and stones at deer or even that you shouldn't be hunting them with semi-autos.
 
mgmorden said:
Sorry, but I just can't agree with this mindset. 99% of hunters these days are hunting using a scope. Getting an accurate hit on a running deer with a rifle is darned hard as it is - doing it with a scoped rifle is even moreso - PARTICULARLY trying to actually hit any specific spot (ie, a killzone).

So you're either shooting an animal that is running (bad)
Click to expand...

Of my last 100 medium and big game kills, approximately 70 have been running, half of which at absolutely full speed in driven hunts and every single one of them with either a scope at 1.8-2.0 magnification or a holographic red dot. Approximately every third has required a follow-up shot and every fifth more than one.

In short, welcome to Europe. Before they changed the big game hunter's licensing a few years ago the mandatory shooting test consisted of putting three consecutive bullets in a quick succession in the 8-ring of a fast-moving moose silhouette target. And that was just a baseline for novice hunters, before they could participate in big game hunts as a shooter.

Even in treestand I prefer semiauto over manually operated repeaters and single shots. DRT-ratio is much higher, of course, but if the animal takes off, I most definitely follow up with another shot and sometimes even a third to make sure it won't run far. Once you've taken the first shot and drawn blood, it's your responsibility as a hunter to make sure there won't be any prolonged suffering. The principle of truly respecting the game you hunt. You do your absolute best to kill with the first shot but if that doesn't happen - and in spite of the all too common one-shot-one-kill -talk heard around campfires everywhere there's always a chance it doesn't - you're prepared the best you can to finish the job swiftly and efficiently.

There's nothing more to it.
 
mgmorden said:
Yes but we're trying to work within a set of parameters. I don't care if people hunt with a semi-auto. It's usually not going to end up any WORSE - it's just that I don't see a great benefit.

Generally, with that in mind, I would say "have at it". The issue here though is that the original poster stated he had a budget of $400. That's a huge constraint when it comes to getting an accurate and capable *semi-auto* hunting rifle.
Click to expand...

The needs and wants are debatable, but there most certainly isn't a downside of a hunter who already has shot once being able to shoot more rounds at his discretion, with as little unnecessary distraction as possible.

The budget is admittedly tight for anything decent. I'd probably look at Remington 7400 that's already been mentioned, or its economy version the 74. Staying away from 740 and 742 is a good idea, my gunsmith tried to give me one for free last Christmas and I politely declined. Once the rail is dented they're that bad. Mini 30 might fit in that budget even though its range is a bit limited compared to full power rifle cartridges. SKS has the same limitation. I'm not sure what .308 Saigas go for these days, I bought mine new for $290 a few years ago but the prices have probably gone up. Remington model 81? I know nothing about them, except for seeing one for sale at LGS and remembering that I liked its vintage looks.

At $400 budget I'd take my time, keep my eyes open and look for an exceptional deal for a rifle that normally sells for $600-700. They're out there and all it takes is patience. Which one may or may not have, depending on when the season starts.
 
Deer hunting is one thing, target shooting is another. I have seen AR kits minus bare lower reciever for just under 400 on sales at few sites. Lower recievers can be as low as $50.
Otherwise I saw some Winchester Sxr for just under $500.
Realistically there isn't much outside a well used SKS or Remington preferably a 7400 at current prices if that 400 mark is firm. Or you search ads and gun stores and hope for a great deal on something.
I think the OP should not be criticized for his choices. As others mentioned it does depend on what is legal in the OP's state.
 
A 300 blk barrel is only a $125 dollar proposal. It's not 2004 anymore, when you say AR15 people don't even automatically assume 5.56 these days
Click to expand...


Plus a reloading setup.
 
I picked up a 189-series Mini 30 in mint condition with a nice scope, magazines and accessories for $320 (from a gun shop, delivered) a few weeks ago so while cheap ones aren't common, they're out there. It's just a matter of keeping your eyes open.
 
hq said:
I picked up a 189-series Mini 30 in mint condition with a nice scope, magazines and accessories for $320 (from a gun shop, delivered) a few weeks ago so while cheap ones aren't common, they're out there. It's just a matter of keeping your eyes open.
Click to expand...
How wide are the groupings you get with it? I've heard bad things about Mini-30s.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

S
  • Locked
Semi-Auto 308 for Deer Hunting?
2
Replies
27
Views
7K
gaven
G
T
  • Locked
HELP looking for most accurate semi auto .308- with scope mount
2
Replies
30
Views
2K
barnbwt
barnbwt
B
  • Locked
Why use a Semi-Auto for Deer?
2 3
Replies
63
Views
2K
Sam1911
S
J
  • Locked
Semi Auto Rifle with Cheap Ammo
2
Replies
30
Views
1K
rocinante
R
E
  • Locked
ruger 44 semi auto
Replies
3
Views
447
TheGrimReaper
T
Back
Top