| T.R | Title | User | Personal
Name | Date | Lines |
|---|
| 577.1 | | COMET::ALBERTUS | hang on, Sloopy, Sloopy hang on | Wed Dec 13 1989 23:18 | 30 |
| > decided on the caliber, .223 Rem., with the .243 or 6mm
> Rem. a second choice.
Nothing wrong with a .223 (or .22/250 or ... ) but the
6MMs (.243, 6mm, 25/06 ... ) will buck the wind a bit
better. It may be a factor in your choice if you live
in a windy area.
For a strictly varmit gun a heavy barrel may be prefered.
Sometimes you get to carry your gun a long ways over
somewhat difficult terrain ... a heavy barrel is, well,
heavy. A sling helps.
Tailored handloads will invariably give you the best accuracy
for your firearm because they are custom made for that weapon
only.
I can't comment on synthetic stocks or factory bedding, etc.
Properly glassbedding a wood stocked rifle adds to its
consistancy - shot to shot. Free floating should be
done at the same time. Do all the stock work, etc. before
seriously working up a handload as otherwise you change the
rifle's characteristics and get to do it again.
A good scope is better than a bad scope. 20X is fun.
More technical advise can be found in LOSER::FIREARMS
AA
|
| 577.2 | define your needs closely | SPMFG1::CHARBONND | Mail SPMFG1::CHARBONND | Thu Dec 14 1989 09:52 | 19 |
| First, I agree with the suggestion to ask in Firearms.
Second, I recommend defining your needs as closely as
possible. eg. varmints *only*, varmints and coyote,
varmints & deer. What maximum range do you anticipate ?
200 yds ? 300 ? 400 ?
How much money $$$ do you intend to spend for the gun & scope
combo ? $600 ? $1000 ? Unlimited ?
How much shooting will you do in a session ? 10 shots ? 100 ?
(It makes a difference, some of the super rounds will destroy
a barrel from overheating.)
Do you handload, or will you be shooting factory only ?
Dana
PS there are lots of good guns out there, both moderately
priced (eg, Savage 110-V) or expensive (eg. Sako 22PPC).
|
| 577.3 | .22-.250? | MAIL::HENSON | | Thu Dec 14 1989 10:51 | 6 |
| Just curious about your caliber selection. Have you considered
a .22-.250? From everything I hear, they're super varmint
cartridges, and several manufacturers offer this caliber with
a bull barrel.
Jerry
|
| 577.4 | .223 for crows - must be BIG ones... | POLAR::PERCY | | Thu Dec 14 1989 12:16 | 16 |
| RE .0
> for shooting crows, woodchucks, and other varmints in the summer
> in N.H.. I have more
> or less decided on the caliber, .223 Rem., with the .243 or 6mm
one question - why would you want a high power cartridge for birds,
with an effective killing distance of >1 mile, when
a shot gun (even with slugs) would be considerably
safer ?
Just curious,
Tom
|
| 577.5 | | SIMCAD::LAFOSSE | | Thu Dec 14 1989 14:08 | 21 |
| If it's strictly small varmints i'd say go with a .22-250, .223, .220
Swift.... if your planning on a little heavier game; coyote, fox...
i'd say go with the .243/6mm, 25-06... these can serve double duty
on deer also...
As for glassbedding... a freefloating barrel isn't necessarily the way
to go... for one rifle it may be perfect, for another it may not...
bedding the action and the 1st 3-4 inches of the barrel are a
necessity... freefloating isn't...
My .270 started out with a freefloating barrel but ended up shooting
better with a full glass bedded barrel. Remington beds just the last
inch of the barrel, like a hump... rifles are like women, no 2 alike.
Theres a very good article in this months Guns and Ammo magazine about
glass bedding/accuracy... check it out...
as for a good glass... 4-12 leupold is hard to beat, especially with a
post/crosshair...
good luck, Fra
|
| 577.6 | Scopes and such | MAIL::HENSON | | Thu Dec 14 1989 15:48 | 11 |
| If we're going to talk scope reticles, I have to cast a
vote for the duplex, or dual x, reticle. They work well in
both good and poor light, and, if you know what you're doing,
serve double duty as a range finder.
As far as variable power scopes vs. fixed power scopes, I
opt for the variable. The only real advantage of fixed power
scope that I can think of is weight. If you're considering
a bull barrel, I don't think that weight is a major consideration.
Jerry
|
| 577.7 | | SAC::PHILPOTT_I | Col I F 'Tsingtao Dhum' Philpott | Fri Dec 15 1989 08:59 | 11 |
| How about a Valmet 412S in 12-gauge over 243?
(ie it is a double, comes with interchangeable barrel sets, either both rifle
(such as 30-06 for deer, or 9.3x74R for Elk), or various over-under 12 gauge
combos, or one 12 gauge over a rifle tube (.243, or 308, or ...))
Not cheap, but you could start with the combo for your present needs and add
a double rifle for New England deer, and a double shotgun for waterfowl, later
- it is possibly cheaper than three seperate field grade guns.
/. Ian .\
|
| 577.8 | be careful | ISLNDS::ROBERTS | The NRA defends our Heritage! | Fri Dec 15 1989 14:35 | 10 |
|
Re .0
If you use it for crows, I take it to
mean when they are on the ground and you are
sure of your backstop.
.22 cals fly far beyond a crows mass.
Gary
|
| 577.9 | definitions, please | CSCOA3::HUFFSTETLER | | Fri Dec 15 1989 15:06 | 9 |
| Can you guys give some definitions to a novice? What's
glassbedding, freefloating etc.?
All I know is when I put the crosshairs of my .35 Marlin on
something I drop it ;^).
Thanks,
Scott
|
| 577.10 | fyi | LESNET::JUCH | | Thu Dec 21 1989 18:46 | 14 |
| re: .4
It would be foolish to shoot any rifle at a crow in the air or in
a tree with a bullet or a slug. Besides, calling them in flying
and shooting them with a shotgun is FUN.
The ones I'd shoot at are the ones you see feeding in a field on
the GROUND.
*****
Advice so far is good! Thanks!
wm.
|
| 577.11 | couldn't spell "rick-o-shay" for the life o' me | COMET::ALBERTUS | hang on, Sloopy, Sloopy hang on | Sat Dec 23 1989 11:23 | 13 |
| re .4 ...
> a shot gun (even with slugs) would be considerably
> safer ?
No flames but I don't think a slug would be safer at all. Slugs
would tend to bounce around while a properly constructed high
velocity rifle bullet should just about detonate on impact.
I agree that shooting at _anything_ without a proper backstop
is irresponsible.
AA
|