@ 01:21 pm (GMT)
Simon CrowtherI'll explain why I started the thread.
Some years ago, I met a guy out in the bush, he was great at finding deer but couldn't shoot to save his life. At 100 to 150 yards, he kept gut shooting deer, his solution was to trade his rifle in for a Magnum, 270 WSM I think and top it of with a very cheap scope, that looked like it had come from Savebarn. Did this solve his problem: hell no!
At a range one time, I met a guy that was new to hunting, he kept spraying lead down range with a Browning Automatic Rifle. The only place there wasn't any bullet holes was in the target: he looked at me and said: "I must be able to hit an animal with all those bullets."
Apart from the safety aspects of inexperienced hunters spraying bullets all over public land, can you imagine the amount of horribly maimed animals that techniques like these must produce.
Similarly, if the 6.5 Creedmore is marketed to people like the above as an out of the box long range hunting solution (which it is not), can you imagine the carnage and misery in maimed animals that will be the result. This is irresponsible marketing!
So again, I don't have a problem with the Creedmore itself, I'm sure that those of you here that use it are very competent with it, it's just the claims that are being made for it.
Better to learn to shoot!
PS, before anyone jumps down my throat, I don't have anything against semi-automatic weapons either.