UL with a gun?

I’m a fan of Martin/Howatt traditional bows. The Stick Longbow and a couple of carbon arrows may weigh around a pound. Note… longbows typically shoot heavier arrows better, though. Also, the required skill needed to hunt ethically/efficiently with a traditional bow vs. a gun is much greater.

http://www.shopatron.com/products/productdetail/Stick+Longbow/part_number=ML9/189.0.1.1.2466.0.0.0.0?

A light weight long bow or recurve bow is going to weigh at least a pound with out arrows. Recurves from the 50s and 60s with a draw weight of 40#s or less are going to keep you closer to the one pound mark though. Long bows usually weigh more.

Yeah, I don't posses the skills needed to bow hunt. I would be better off with a slingshot and rocks.

Brady,

I would stick with your original idea of the .22 pistol.

Bow Thoughts

I thought about the idea of a bow while hiking but they are not a quick thing to get ready in case you jump an animal and they take alot of time and practice to get good with.

I have been bow hunting for 4 years now and I like to think I am a really good shot, but all of these have been in controlled enivronments where the game has walked in on me (using a compound bow with sites)

I would not rely on my abilities using a bow while trying to cover mileage during the day.

For those familiar with .22LR pistols for hunting small game, what are some models I should consider? Has anyone tried the North American Arms mini revolver? At 4.5 oz it's quite light and reasonably cheap compared to the S&W 317. But I do want to be able to hit something at a reasonable distance, maybe 10 – 20 yards.

"But I do want to be able to hit something at a reasonable distance, maybe 10 – 20 yards."

I've shot the mini master with 4 inch barrel and bigger grips, at 10oz I was impressed with what I could do with it. I'd say you could be good with it at 10-20 yards. On the other hand, I felt the 4.5oz version with 1.625" barrel and smaller grips was much harder to shoot, and had a more limited range. But I'm pretty sure with some practice one could get pretty good with it, out to about 15 yrds. Not too many other pistols come to mind.

First, I'm really impressed that Josh would even mention these pistols, given he's the guy making the Pak-Rifle. Kudos! I haven't shot any of these, but it seems that if you wanted the most reliability at range, the rifle would be a better choice. The rifle's 6-ounces heavier than the 10-oz pistol… pretty darn light…

I tried to post on the review forum comments, but that section is closed to posting.

The one question in particular I have about the rifle might be pretty stupid, but is the durability of the action. Obviously firearms of wide-ranging quality exist, and shotguns are exposed to a lot more "shock" forces (for lack of a better term), but I've handled a number of break-opens with sloppy actions. Now, I know parts of the Pak-Rifle are cromoly and stainless, and I know that the .22 round won't have as much impact on the rifle system as a whole. And this obviously isn't a workhorse rifle… but the aluminum housing? Josh has been making variations of these for years and has settled on this, so I'm guessing it's plenty durable? My guess is that you'd have to shoot thousands of rounds before you noticed anything? Any feedback? Seems like something that would be perfectly fine on a multi-month trip?

Thanks for the comments Josh. I like the pak rifle idea. And no doubt a rifle will have significantly better accuracy then any pistol. The price tag is my problem. Given I've never hunted and don't now if I'll like it, $500 is a steep buy in. I don't suppose you have a loaner you'd like to send me? :)

Edit: The price of the pak rifle is actually $425. Josh, kindly corrected me below.

The pistol I have right now is a Hi-Standard Duramatic, without a case and with a full clip it weighs 32 oz on my scale. I am definitely interested in looking at lighter guns but would need to target practice before taking them on the trip. The duramatic I've shot and am quite accurate with.

Josh, Have you shot the CCI shotshells through your rifles?

"First, I'm really impressed that Josh would even mention these pistols, given he's the guy making the Pak-Rifle. Kudos!" Thanks. The NAAs and the S&Ws are certainly worth mentioning given the discussion.

The Aluminum reciever of the Pak-Rifle is very durable. There are allot of firearms these days that use plastic extensively, and my old Remington Nylon is still shooting. I have worked a few recievers into the next run that will be made from Plastic(Acetal) and have no worries about how they will hold up.

Thanks, Josh. Yup, I was being brain-dead. My .45 has a lot of plastic and it's been a great firearm. I guess I was thinking that the slide (of the .45) absorbs most of the force, which wouldn't happen with a break-open… but the reality probably is that it just doesn't matter.

I have shot allot of the shot shells, and dont really have much use for them. The first problem is range, about 15-20 feet is max for small critters(small birds, small rodents). Part of the range problem is caused by the riflings opening up the pattern too fast. The second problem is that you wont want to eat small birds or rodents that you have shot, because they will be full of this very small shot, #12 I believe.

Nia

$500? ouch! MSRP is $425 and you can get them from impactguns.com for $409 I believe. Yeah, still not cheap, I hear ya.

Sorry Josh, didn't mean to misquote the price. Thanks for the correction.

Not a problem, just having some fun.

Just looking at prices/advantages, the S&W 317 has a sub-2" barrel for 10.5oz and $750+. The NAA mini-master has a 4" barrel for ~11oz and $314 w/adjustable sights. Sounds better. The Pak-Rifle has a (~16"?) barrel for 16oz and $415. Add a foot or more of barrel, accuracy and "forgiveness" for about 5oz and go toward the lower end in price of these models… sounds like a winning combo!

"Add a foot or more of barrel, accuracy and "forgiveness" for about 5oz and go toward the lower end in price of these models… sounds like a winning combo!"

Brad, this makes sense. The other option I'm considering is the NAA mini with a 1 1/8" barrel, at 4.5 oz and about $200. This still loses on the barrel length per dollar calculation, but a 12 oz and $200 savings is significant.

But is the mini with that short of a barrel still a usable tool. From Josh's answer, it may be. I got awful close to a lot of grouse this fall. Close enough that I tried getting a few by throwing large rocks at them. It's possible that the NAA mini would be accurate enough in these circumstances.

I would say that the S&W is a better quality firearm, that is easier to shoot because of its larger frame.

For close targets, like grouse, a 4.5oz pistol is hard to beat. You would have to put one of these little things in your hand to fully understand the shootability issue though.

I enjoy the longbow enough to carry it into the backcountry without worrying about the weight but a pistol or lightweight rifle would definately keep you fed better. The longbow or recurve would not be the ultimate lightweight weapon option, but it would be fun and rewarding to have along. I became interested in backpacking light when I was searching for a way to hunt further away from the crowds without carrying too much weight. I would have to carry a fairly heavy compound bow if I wanted to increase my odds on big game.(This would be another option for me)

Nia

I can't reply to Ryan's thread on the rifle.

http://www.sausa.com/product.php?id=2&category=16

Is the one I carry. I don't use it for game…just to entertain myself mostly. I plan to order the sight as a Xmas gift to myself.

daryl

I have tried and tried but I cannot figure out the difference between a fishing pole and a Pak-Rifle in terms of their designed purpose. One is used for the purposes of killing fish. One is used for the purpose of killing small game. Where is all the hue and cry when fly-rods are evaluated?

Dave, jump in here and enlighten me.

It also just occurred to me if one wanted to hunt AND fish, you could leave the fishing tackle at home and just try and shoot the fish too :)

Thanks Daryl. Do you have the weight of the slingshot?

DW, I too sometimes have issues with comments, but the great thing about living in the US is freedom of speech. Ryan and the moderators do an outstanding job of allowing us to express our opinions in a respectful and on topic way.

I'm not surprised by your views, given the very restrictive firearms regulations in Austraila. Nothing personal meant by this, it is just a cultural difference.

<1. fire-arms are illegal in most national parks around
the world. For example, you cannot take them into Australia's national parks and I understand that is also the situation in the US. You certainly can't carry a weapon in most parts of Europe. So why did BPL review something you cannot take bushwalking in most parts of the world? >

Things are different in the US. The people have a constitutionally protected right (not privilege) to own firearms. Firearms will be legal in the National Parks in February 2010, as they once were in the past.

<2. the review notes that the presence of fire-arms may disturb or concern other trail users and cites the fact that the rifle can be packed small as one of its advantages – given this admission that the carrying of weapons, even where legal, is likely to upset other trail users, why advocate their use?>

Campers with radios, large groups, loud conversations, and a host of other backcountry activities can affect other vistors. Fact is, it is public use land, and we need to find ways to share and enjoy.

<3. this is (supposedly) a UL bushwalking website – in what way is carrying a weapon a part of the UL ethos? I see hunting as quite a different thing to bushwalking – if this site is to become a UL hunting website then let me know and I will quit. The claim that this rifle could help you walk UL by shooting meat as you go would founder on impractability – walking along a trail is not hunting and hunting is not walking: they are different activities. Unless you had the gun at point the whole time, you would waste a lot of time stalking, and that presumes you're in an area with game and that game can be legally taken.>

The history of the United States indicates something quite different than your assertion. All of the explorers, long hunters, and frontiersman hunted for meat as they traveled.

<4. given Ryan Jordan's concern about pro-gun/anti-gun debates it's clear that BPL recognises that a significant number of its – paying – members do not approve of fire-arms. So why post a review that is guaranteed to legitimately upset a large number of its members? >

How do you know this? Often, the most vocal group is the minority. Don't assume we all think alike. I applaud Ryan for taking a survey to get a factual assessment on this issue.

Renewable resouces provide for the environment very nicely. Additionally, I would like to point out that the current populations of wildlife, wildlife habitat, and the existance of many species in the US are funded by taxes and fees on hunters.

"It also just occurred to me if one wanted to hunt AND fish, you could leave the fishing tackle at home and just try and shoot the fish too :)"

Right before I fell asleep last night, this was the same thought I had. I'm wondering if it is legal. I can understand if they don't want you firing lead into the streams (that's why steelshot is required in waterfowl hunting) but what about steel 22lr bullet.