Hey /k/, I'm new to bolt-actions, why does everyone hate

File: RemingtonQC.jpg (41KB, 572x428px) Image search: [Google]

41KB, 572x428px

MIM parts sintered on shoddily and cracking off.

>>33421847
Their quality control is abysmal. Their designs are fine.

The m24 is built by hand and doesn't suffer any of the problems of their production guns.

File: rem700-QC-cast handle is brazed on (silver soldered).jpg (51KB, 600x450px) Image search: [Google]

51KB, 600x450px

Brazed bolt falling off.

File: remingtonQC-1373113258674.jpg (32KB, 640x480px) Image search: [Google]

32KB, 640x480px

Lugs chipping off.

File: rem770-fail.jpg (237KB, 1200x800px) Image search: [Google]

237KB, 1200x800px

Floor plates falling off when firing the rifle.

>>33421847
The military has their own custom shops. The remington actions they use have been trued. For you to buy one and have that done you could buy a custom action.

File: 1481134758193.jpg (9KB, 256x259px) Image search: [Google]

9KB, 256x259px

>>33421847
>If our military uses pic related, it can't be total shit, can it?

Are you 7?

File: Remington_700_SPS__308_3_by_ZenMastaT.jpg (2MB, 2272x1704px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 2272x1704px

Freefloated stocks that stop being freefloated as soon as you rest it on a bipod.

And the list goes on & on. It's fucking sad.

>>33421847
Receiver diameters out of spec.
I dont want the bolt to crash into my skull.

>>33421930
Nobody buying that gun keeps the factory stock, they are that price for a reason.

>>33421847

>Just cause the military uses it, it must mean it's good.

You're a retard.

File: Remington_700_SPS__308_1_by_ZenMastaT.jpg (2MB, 2272x1704px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 2272x1704px

>>33421939

And are you implying that that is somehow a good thing?

>>33421877
>>33421889
>>33421893
>>33421902
>>33421915
>>33421919
>>33421926
>>33421930
>>33421933
>>33421939
>>33421946
>>33421998
>not a single recommendation on what I should get instead
/k/omrades, I require advice

>>33422105
>/k/omrades, I require advice

If you're a cheapskate: Savage, CZ, Howa.
If you want to invest a bit more: Ruger RPR or Tikka T3.

Above that, it gets difficult. So many good choices.

>>33422105
There's lots of other reputable manufacturers out there. It depends on what caliber you want as well.

Sako, Tikka, Savage make quality stuff. The price for their bolt actions are decreasing in that order.

Savage apparently makes some stupidly high quality and durable guns for the price they want.

There's Browning, and more.

Remember to spend more on your glass than your rifle. Tikka/Savage will shoot 1 MOA out of the box but it will mean nothing if you skimp on a scope.

>>33422136
>Ruger RPR
>"a bit more"
nigga I can get a Savage for like $300, the RPR is like $2k

>>33422146
I want something in .308

>>33422161
What's your budget?

A cheapo Savage Axis will run like $300 and you can get a $300 scope and you can easily do tight groups at 100+ yards as a beginner.

You can step up, I have a Tikka T3X, that's like $500-600. My only complaint is that it's TOO light and the recoil can be a bitch. Put on a Vortex HS-T 4-16 and I enjoy it as a range toy.

If you have a LGS go there and fingerfuck some guns, try to get a feel for something you like with a smooth bolt action and trigger.

Sako, Browning, etc are like $800+.

You should always spend as much on the scope if not more than the rifle. I'd rather take a $200 Savage Axis out with a $1000 scope than a $1000 Sako with a $200 scope.

>>33422161
>nigga I can get a Savage for like $300, the RPR is like $2k

You realize that the price scale of precision rifles goes something like:
Trash: <500
Cheap: <1000
Decent: <2000
Good: <3000
Great: <4500
Orgasmic: >4500

That's without scopes, ofc.

>>33422190
If the OP is new to bolt actions he/she probably won't want want to drop $5000 on a single rifle just to plink at 50 yards.

A Savage Axis will do just fine for a beginner. Past a certain point the rifle doesn't matter nearly as much as the shooter and the scope.

>>33422190
I bet you're the same type of faggot who buys a $5000 AR or a $3000 1911

The gunman matters way more than the gun

>>33422228
>I bet you're the same type of faggot who buys a $5000 AR or a $3000 1911

My first full caliber bolt gun which wasn't a surplus rifle was an Accuracy International, so quite so.

But 5k on an AR is just a waste.

>The gunman matters way more than the gun

Of course, but "buy once, cry once" comes into play. If you have the means, it makes sense. A good rifle with a good scope will last you more than a life time if you change a few barrels along the way. It ends up being cheaper than wasting money on incremental upgrades.

Spend like $400 on a Savage Axis II in .308 then drop a grand on a really good scope. BOOM all set.

>>33422215

This. The quality-price-ratio of Savage rifles is hard to beat. The plastic shafts are cheap but okay.
The Axis is a fine rifle, if you want to spend a bit more go for a model 11.

>>33422190
price is determined by supply and demand, not quality or production cost. if you dont undestand this you should not be giving people advice on the internet.

>>33422254

You do realize exactly how simple and accurate even a basic bolt action can be right? It is literally a 4140 or 4150 steel barrel with a bolt attached to a stock and a trigger.

What EXACTLY do you imaging you are going to get by spending more than 1k on a base rifle for a novice shooter? and be specific here.

>make a defective rifle that isn't drop safe
>deny it for years

>>33422269
>>33422266
>>33422215
>>33422189
I noticed Savage makes bundles that come with a scope out of the box, are those any good for babby's first? I could always sell the scope later and buy a better one if I don't like it.

>>33422270
>price is determined by supply and demand, not quality or production cost.

I'm sure a carbon fibre McLaren is as cheap to produce as a Pinto. Thanks for your input. It's been very valuable.

>if you dont undestand this you should not be giving people advice on the internet.

If there is a concept which you should be arguing, it is the law of diminishing returns. For every additional money spent on improving something, the return of that will slowly fall off.

Pulling stats out of my ass, but an AI AXMC is say 25% better than a Ruger RPR, but multiple times the cost for it to be so.

>>33422292
>You do realize exactly how simple and accurate even a basic bolt action can be right? It is literally a 4140 or 4150 steel barrel with a bolt attached to a stock and a trigger.

Ah, another guy that thinks a barrel from the junk heap is the same quality as a Lothar Walther.
You pay for quality control, durability, finish, tighter tolerances and more extensive testing, amongst other things.

>What EXACTLY do you imaging you are going to get by spending more than 1k on a base rifle for a novice shooter? and be specific here.

Buying a RPR or a Tikka is likely to allow him to keep using the same gun for over a decade. If he buys a low tier Savage, he's likely to buy a more expensive gun far sooner if he gets into serious shooting.

>>33422319
So sad too, I wanted to buy a Remington shotgun, but I have been hearing that they already have rust on them when they hit the shelves.

Sad to see a once iconic American company dying.

>>33422333
>same anon
I've also been eyeing the Mossberg MVP, the attractive feature is the fact that it takes AR-10/M1A mags, is that any good for the price? I've heard mixed things.

>>33421847
https://www.reddit.com/r/canadaguns/comments/2uxtgw/precision_rifle_on_a_budget/

>>33422338
you can always find an older used one, those are still good. The new Mossberg shotguns are a good choice too.

>>33422105
savage is cheap, relative quality and very accurate for the price. Last i checked their barrels are praised up and down for their quality.

>>33422190

Good thing I didn't know that before shooting cans hundreds of yards away all across my farm with my Savage 12. Gonna throw it away tomorrow since it cost me 1250$. Thanks a lot!

>>33422335
>I'm sure a carbon fibre McLaren is as cheap to produce as a Pinto. Thanks for your input. It's been very valuable.

Yes, because it is made out of carbon fiber. Also your spelling of "fibre" Also just outed yourself as Commonwealth and therefor noguns. Barrels are made from 4140 or 4150 steel 99.9% of the time, the cheapest Savage has the same steel as the most expensive Steyr.

>You pay for quality control, durability, finish, tighter tolerances and more extensive testing, amongst other things.

And given that I have never seen a Savage rifle recalled, and that they already shoot sub-moa out of the box, either this is the one company that magically gets it right every time, or they have fairly impressive quality control of their own.

>>33422335
Wow I didn't know there was the same demand for decade old econo-Fords as there are for brand new McLarens! I'm not explaining supply and demand to you. You clearly do not understand it.

Read a book.

>>33422343
MVP has feeding issues depending on the individual rifle, magazine or a combination of both. The feeding issues aren't too bad and won't disrupt target shooting or a hunting trip, but if you're trying to be a 1337 work da bolt operator then look elsewhere.

>>33422333
I'm personally not quite sure since I haven't seen the specifications for the scopes, but I wouldn't use those scopes. Even if they are good scopes, with scopes, you tend to want to shop around for something you personally like, rather than something automatically put on by someone else.

Will it hold a zero?
Is the picture clear at the magnification you want?
How far will you be shooting? 50, 100, 300, 500, 1000 yards?
Will it have a clear picture at higher magnifications?
Does it have adjustable eye relief, parallax, etc? Is it appropriate for the distances you'll be shooting at?

The rifle is the easy part, it's shopping for the scope that's the hard part.

>>33422333
yes although the scopes will limit you past a certain point. just think about investing in a different piece of glass in the future. A savage in .308/30-06 out of the box will reliably put lead on target to 600 if your a pretty good shot. but anything past that your going to need some custom stock work and maybe a different barrel. mileage may vary.

p.s. Im not trying to shill for savage its just one of the few really good rifles ive owned in the past so its kinda all i know.

>>33422335
I like this post.
>>33422355
I dont like this post.
>>33422343
I personally bought an MVP and have been using it actively with a 1-6x on it. It's not bad. But that's about all I can say about it. I love the magazine adaptation but the wobbly bolt and mismatched stock to 'free-floated' barrel is total bullshit and makes me feel like I'm cycling two tin cans. I have the 5.56 model short barrel model so I can't confirm for other calibers. Slap a scope and bipod on it and you've got comfy shooting out to 300m on a dish sized target out of the box.
Nothing impressive, nothing bad either though.

>>33421847
>babby's first bolt gun
Savage, Tikka, or old used Remington if you know how to inspect the bore.

>>33422403
>The rifle is the easy part, it's shopping for the scope that's the hard part.

what this anon says is 100% any rifle worth its salt nowadays will outshoot the shooter easily. its finding a good scope that is the hard part.

>>33422400
I just posted but I'm glad someone brought this up. I have the mvp in 5.56 and that's the one that has supposed feeding issues. Out of the reviews I've seen maybe 10% have this issue which leads me to believe it's user error caused by not cycling the bolt in a fluid action. If I try to go super slow sneaky deer hunting shit it will hitch, but at that point I assume you'd be loading only a round or two at a time.
With a 30 round ar magazine in it the spring tension is more than enough to force the round into the push loader.

So in short I have never had this issue unless I was trying to load rounds at a snail pace.

>>33422380
>Good thing I didn't know that before shooting cans hundreds of yards away all across my farm with my Savage 12. Gonna throw it away tomorrow since it cost me 1250$. Thanks a lot!

Do you not understand the meaning of the words I listed? I never fucking said a Savage was a bad buy, hell I even fucking listed it in my list of preferred buys if you're strapped for funds? Why is /k/inder always so fucking touchy about money. Grow the fuck up.

>>33422382
>Also your spelling of "fibre" Also just outed yourself as Commonwealth and therefor noguns.

Oh, that meme again. Wow, you hurt my feelings so bad. I'm going to cry in a corner now, hugging my imaginary guns.

>Barrels are made from 4140 or 4150 steel 99.9% of the time, the cheapest Savage has the same steel as the most expensive Steyr.

Ah yes, button rifling and cold hammer forging are the same. Stainless, chroming & nitride are all equal.

>>33422392
>Wow I didn't know there was the same demand for decade old econo-Fords as there are for brand new McLarens! I'm not explaining supply and demand to you. You clearly do not understand it.

Ah yes, so now, if there's the same demand for a SR-71 Blackbird as there is for a Ford Fiesta, they'll magically have the same price.

I quite understand the laws of supply and demand, as well as economies of scale, but you clearly don't.

>>33422400
>>33422438
I'm specifically wondering about the .308 variant

>>33422270
>price is determined by supply and demand
Yes, and the supply of very accurate, hand built rifles is very low.
>not quality or production cost
You're right, paying an individual gunsmith to hand build and accurize a rifle from scratch is way less expensive than shitting a stock Rem 700 out on a production line.

Why is /k/ filled with such low caliber people?

>>33422438
Makes sense I guess. My issues is that it doesn't pick up a round occasionally. Maybe I'm not going far enough back, but it happens pretty consistently with with a couple rando GI's I have. Lancer magazines seem to work 100%.
To clarify it's not the rounds misfeeding, it's that the bolt won't pick up a new round for me consistently. It just might be the GI magazines are worn down at this point

If I was to buy a mid range rifle such as the tikka t3, some sako, or a high end savage/howa, what glass would you recommend? Would a ~1k vortex do well? Or should I stick with something like Leupold? I feel like I'm kind of paying for the name with a lot of the Cadillac type scopes.

File: DSC_2035_tonemapped.jpg (3MB, 4928x3264px) Image search: [Google]

3MB, 4928x3264px

Never had a problem with Remington. Used Savage all my life until Savage started failing on me left and right. Bought a 700P and never went back. Just picked this thing up not too long ago and all I did was swap the trigger and paint the ugly colored stock.

>>33422629
>Would a ~1k vortex do well?

Which one? What usage? What ranges?

>Or should I stick with something like Leupold?

Leupold tends to be either shitty on the low end or overpriced on the high end.

>>33422629
As far as glass goes it's impossible to give a good recommendation since the more you spend, the better quality you'll get, but every scope has differences tailored to your needs.

Go to a LGS or a Cabela's and look at their scopes. Find one you like with a magnification range you like.

Vortex is kind of a mid-range scope. Leupolds are higher end.

What kind of reticle do you want? How far are you shooting?

>>33421847
the remingtons the military uses are so customized that the normal production gun you buy in a store is nothing like it

>>33422629
>Would a ~1k vortex do well?
Yes, the Viper PST line is a great optic. I honestly don't know how it compares to the high end brands like Nightforce, but the glass on a Vortex will be clear, the turrets will track well, and it will hold up well. They also have a great warranty.

Obv Nightforce or US Optics will be better scopes, but that's way overkill for a $1k rifle.

>>33422667
>>33422668
For the Vortex I was thinking of one of the higher end Vipers or maybe saving more and getting the $2k razor hd on sale.
I want to wiggle my way into a private club around me that has a range that goes up to 600yd. I really don't know dick about precision shooting but I think it could be fun.

>>33421847
> spontaneous firing without pulling trigger

>>33422718
Yeah, distance shooting is pretty fun. I've only gone up to 100 so far.

I couldn't give a recommendation for 600 yards, since you'd want a much higher quality scope than I would know about.

In any case before you drop $1000 on a scope you would want to check it out in a LGS if you can.

>>33421847
I hear the military is getting pissed off with them too though because of their terrible QC issues.

I love their guns too honestly. The m24 is a beauty that I have a great fondness for. But it's getting to the point of ridiculousness.

>>33422736
>Yeah, distance shooting is pretty fun. I've only gone up to 100 so far.
Alright thanks man. The range I'm at now has up to 180yds but I can't hit tight groups with my AR and 3-9x Nikon, hence wanting to get a better gun and scope. Good glass is expensive but I learned clarity of glass is so important with my shitty Nikon.

>>33422723
Yeah, I lost faith in remington really quick when I was zeroing my 700 and I closed the bolt on the 3rd round and it fired without me touching the trigger. Scared the shit out of me while my spotter just looked at me like, "What the fuck did you do that for?"

>>33422718
My recommendation for you is whatever scope you get, get the a first focal plane. It's a little more money, and it's kind of an extraneous feature but it makes long range shooting so much more enjoyable when you can range at any magnification. Nothing kills a fun mood faster than missing 5 shots only to realize you ranged the target on the wrong magnification so your data is all fucked up and you have to set it correctly and range it again.

>>33422146
How is 1 MOA compared to mil-spec?
Can these fudd machines begin to compare to a standard m24 or m40a5?

>>33422751
If you're in Texas I was probably at the range with you a few days ago

I was next to some guy with an AR and a Nikon scope who couldn't even hit the paper at 100 yards

>>33422775
According to the manual I have from the 90s the max dispersion equates to roughly 2 MOA for the M24. I'm sure the rifle shoots much better than that, but the mil-spec for a sniper rifle isn't especially demanding.

>>33422136
>A Tikka T3 is """a bit more"""
>A CZ is for """cheapskates"""

Wut

>>33422784
Good to know.
>>33422189
Would it be possible just to get the standard last gen t3 with a wood stock to eliminate that problem?

>>33422773
>My recommendation for you is whatever scope you get, get the a first focal plane.

Just throwing this in: If he only shoots known distances, a second focal could be fine though.

Also make damn sure your turrets match your reticle (MOA/MOA, MIL/MIL). For some fucked up reason some manufacturers mix & match on some of their scopes.

Also, Bushnell long range hunter & tactical scopes are actually quite decent for the money.

Is CZ well regarded? I am looking into the 550 maybe 6.5 swede.

>>33422776
Nah I live in Michigan, changed the Nikon out for an Aimpoint PRO because I figure an AR isn't a precision weapon anyways. That's funny though. Highly regret wasting money on the Nikon but it'll be fine for squirrels on my 10/22.

>>33422800
>Just throwing this in: If he only shoots known distances, a second focal could be fine though.
Very true, but known distance gets so boring after a while that everyone eventually goes to unknown distance. So that's why I said that.
>Also make damn sure your turrets match your reticle (MOA/MOA, MIL/MIL). For some fucked up reason some manufacturers mix & match on some of their scopes.
Very much this. I fucked up in not mentioning it in my post.

File: Ruger-Precision-Rifle-AR1.jpg (67KB, 848x477px) Image search: [Google]

67KB, 848x477px

>>33421847
I have a 20in 700sps in .308, it was my first long range gun...I like it just fine and haven't had any issues really. Though when you factor in all the costs of getting it to not suck, I think there are better options.

NiB 700 -$600
Aftermarket stock- $300
Bedding the action to the stock - materials and labor
New Trigger - $150

So right out of the gate you are at $1000+ before optics and doing something about the tiny bolt knob. If I was going to do it all over I would probably go another route. I think there are better options in that price range, alot of guys like the tikka t3 and t3x...I have really been liking the Ruger precision rifle personally.

>>33422821
>>33422800
Lotta good info here. Thanks guys. Where do you guys shoot at?
It seems if I want to get out past 600yds and do the unknown distances stuff I'll need to either buy my own property (at least an hour away) or drive 2.5 hours. LOTS of fudds in Michigan.

>>33422805
>Is CZ well regarded? I am looking into the 550 maybe 6.5 swede.

They're OK. And quite good with a set trigger if that's your thing.

But the barrels tend to be fairly light and heat up fast. Their more expensive thicker barreled tacticool models tend to be in a higher price range in which they are no longer the best choice.

>>33422852
>Where do you guys shoot at?

I'm the europeon "without guns", as the poster above put it. ;)

Downside is that I can't really shoot past 400m in my own country and have to go abroad for longer distances.

>>33422825
>I think there are better options in that price range, alot of guys like the tikka t3 and t3x...I have really been liking the Ruger precision rifle personally.

Both are very solid choices. The Tikkas are more conventional, while the RPR cater more to people that tend to like AR15 ergonomics and accessories.

>>33422852
I used to shoot at a club when I lived in Oregon that had a known distance range to 600 yards and if I wanted further then I'd have to go out onto BLM land. Right now in Washington I have nowhere because my local range you need to suck the board of directors dicks to get access to the 600 range, and all the empty land around here is farms or dry sage grass that will catch on fire if you look at it wrong.

A good way to get unknown distance experience is to do competitions like PRS. It's expensive though, match fees are over $100 for small time unaffiliated matches, sometimes as much as $300.

>If our military uses pic related, it can't be total shit, can it?
Militaries choose almost entirely for political reasons. Don't use them as a standard. They US military in particular has a history of lowering its standards drastically in order to accept a subpar option of American make over anything foreign.

>>33422926
True.
If the SCAR was American made we would have adopted that shit in its prototype phase

>>33422935
>If the SCAR was American made we would have adopted that shit in its prototype phase
It is made in America, at least the ones that are made for the US military because it was in fact adopted. It has an NSN and any unit can order them.

>>33422935
The SCAR used by the military is made in US

>>33422951
>It is made in America, at least the ones that are made for the US military because it was in fact adopted. It has an NSN and any unit can order them.

He means designed, I guess.

Though only initial design was done in Belgium, the final year(s) of fine tuning were largely done by american designers.

>>33422955
>>33422951
...well I guess FN didn't pay them off enough I guess.

>>33422459
ok now you're ignoring supply...

How can you not have learned this?

>>33423139

Your trolling is getting pretty fucking weaksauce, bro.

>>33423139
>American education
Is the only answer. Seriously. Economics is not a subject in school, at all.

RPR in 6.5 creedmoor. With good glass you can't beat it for sub $2k unless you wanna play "army man" and are trying to do some sort of scout build.

What about weatherby rifles?

>>33422333
The scope the axis comes with is a cheap $30-$40 3-9 power. Its so bubba can buy a gun and a box of ammo for $350 so he can hunt once a year.

>>33421847
OP, while I can't give you a clear answer, I'd like to point out that the military buys from whoever offers the lowest price. The lowest bidder makes our shit, buddy. "Military grade" isn't something to look for on a sales pitch.

>>33423243
They buy from whoever makes the thing to their specifications for the lowest price. The military isnt going to just pick a manufacturer that says they can build a rifle for $12 and be done with it. They arent that stupid.

File: sar_k98k_sportmatch0[1].jpg (198KB, 865x274px) Image search: [Google]

198KB, 865x274px

Any thoughts on those rifles?
http://www.schwabenarmsgmbh.de/katalog/sar_k98k.pdf

>selected prewar wehrmacht actions
>cold hammer forged lother walther match barrels
>new laminate or walnut stocks

Can those play in the same league as K31s and swedes?

>>33421847
Savage Axis, Ruger American, Mossberg Patriot, Savage Model 10, Tikka T3, etc. Budget bolt guns are pretty much all the same and will shoot straight.

Since you didn't set a price range I'm giving you a list of entry level, solid shooting bolt guns.

>>33421847
>If our military uses
The military uses .308 and 300 win mag.

The military doesn't know shit, it's run by fudds and retards.

>>33422105

buy savage. savage makes damn accurate rifles at a solid price. Every savage rifle I've owned (7 so far) has been 1.2 MOA or better. Make sure to buy a model with the 'accutrigger' because it is fucking AWESOME.

pretty much all of their rifles come with aluminum block bedding too. their barrels and rifling are high quality and their QC seems to be spot on. I don't know about their customer service though, because I've never had an issue with any of their rifles where contacting them was needed.

seriously, check out savage rifles. they're not pretty IMO but get the job done, and done well for pretty cheap.

also, I fucking love my .308 hog hunter. Light weight, accurate as fuck, accutrigger, back up irons, a perfect scout rifle. when mounting a scope (if you go with hog hunter) just remember it's best set up for a "scout scope". meaning a scope with long eye relief and mounted forward of the action.

Is 30-06 a meme? There seem to be a lot of cheap bolt actions that use it, is it worth it?

>>33424543
It's a great round and an American icon, you can find it every where and it is reasonably priced. It is old though, and there are much better rounds with better ballistics today. .308 replaced 30 06 and .308 has been surpassed by several newer rounds since. That being said I would gladly use 30 06 just don't expect to win any competitions against the newer stuff with it.

>>33421998
That's a pretty slick setup.

Get a 700 police and get a decent rifle. Get a 500$ bargain 700, get a piece of shit with a horrible trigger and stock.

>>33426151
I don't recommend Savage, because I got a lemon and I'm mad, I should add. It shot one type of ammo well, but wouldn't chamber that type of ammo reliably, and had burs in the raceway that caught the bolt as well as a bent stock.

I would absolutely love to recommend Tikka, but their US market is extremely small. Every time I find a model I want it's not imported. The tactical is expensive for what it is, the CTR is too short for me, and the varmint doesn't come in a caliber I like.

>>33424543
Since you said cheap bolt actions I'm assuming this is a hunting rifle for you. It's a great round for that. It's not something that'll win competitive shooting competitions at 1000m, but no rifle under $1000 will be competitive in that category regardless of caliber

Didn't want to make a new thread for my question, but I'm thinking of getting a cz 455 with both .22LR/17 barrels. Is it a good gun? My only concern is it seems like you'd have a looser gun trying to fit it for two different barrels and swapping them out fairly often.

>>33422335
Do you realize, even understand what it takes to accurize a bolt action?

For fucks sake, if you fucking fell for the AI meme, probably not.

All it comes down to is if the barrel is good and if it's free floated. Literally nothing else matters.

Hell, most of the time, companies like AI don't even make the barrels, they just buy the blanks and turn them. So all you get is fucking surface finish. Tolerances? Fucking get real, computers do it all now in minutes. Lockup? Produces jack and shit for accuracy. Finishing is something that literally any company can do, and do well as long as they're not literal monkeys and now what brake cleaner is. And all machining is done with CNC now a days because it's easier to work with and removes human error.

So when you spend more than fucking 1500 on a full length bolt action, you're not buying quality, you're buying roll mark.

Not until you enter Barret and Cheytak territory where you're paying for military licensed contract steel, and an absurd amount of it.

>>33422514
They have qc issues where the mag catch placement varies. Sometimes its too high and the bolt shaves brass off the next round, sometimes its too low and some mags wont strip reliably. Theres a reason 3 different companies make CNCd aftermarket magwells for it now.

>>33422790
Both are around $550 for a base model, which is in line with a 700 sps or Savage 11.

>>33423216
Theyre rebranded Howa 1500s, they're good but you're paying an extra $150 for Roy Weatherbys signature.

>>33422382
I see that you have no idea what youre talking about

>>33422686
idk man the rem 5r is a pretty good buy used to be sub $1k then it started getting really popular shit man out of the box with a good scope and youll be hitting 800yd easy

>>33422806
>ar not a precision weapon

what do you mean? my AR hits .3 at a 100 no problem
but then again mine is about as high end as it gets but even then the AR is pretty good with accuracy senpai

>>33421847
>Recommend me babby's first bolt gun
Cz-550/537

>>33422335
>>33430869
>>33422459
>>33422495
>Why is /k/ filled with such low caliber people?
your samefagging doesn't help.

>>33422775
when talking accuracy, those fudd machines would raep a m24 in the showers and make her like it.

>>33424543
.30-06 is great for killing Nazis and hunting every living thing on the North American continent. It really is a wonderful cartridge, but the recoil is distracting after a long range day, and it hasn't been used as a match caliber in decades so there is no support for it. for instance, no one makes good match ammunition for it any more.

>giving the jews your hard earned shekels

Question:
I want to put a holo or some other non-scope optic on my bolt action.

What are my options?

>>33422105
Get a Savage 10 FCP or 110 FCP, depending on caliber. 10 is the short action, 110 long action. I think its the best bang for your buck when looking for out of the box accuracy, good Q/C, and a fair price.

File: cheaprifle.png (292KB, 1211x954px) Image search: [Google]

292KB, 1211x954px

>>33422105

As far as savage goes, for a hunting rifle am I getting anything more than better fit and finish with a model higher than the Axis?

>>33434676
Yes.

>>33430917
Post .3" groups please. Time stamp/ rifle/ and load.

>>33421847
Remington is owned by a corporate conglomeration called Freedom Group.

Freedom Group is cancer incarnate.

Remington's guns now suffer from QC issues so extreme that they are pending a class-action lawsuit over 700s firing without the trigger being pulled.

This is all the info you should need.

Sort of related, I'm picking up a Savage Axis in .223 and I was looking at optics for it. It'll be the first gun I buy a scope for. I've seen good reviews about the Nikon P-223 3x9. Anyone have any experience with it?

File: tmp_31981-1422173719104298804407.png (68KB, 1500x1242px) Image search: [Google]

68KB, 1500x1242px

>>33437131
I see.

How are FNs bolt guns?

File: 20170327_131637.jpg (3MB, 4032x2268px) Image search: [Google]

3MB, 4032x2268px

>>33422382
Dude I'm not the anon your are beefing with but I am from the commonwealth and am posting to assure you that we are allowed to own firearms.

Bump, interesting reading thread.

File: 20160430_132616.jpg (635KB, 2048x1152px) Image search: [Google]

635KB, 2048x1152px

>>33428684
Yeah nah there's a shitload more to it than that.
>is the receiver square?
>is the recoil lug square?
>is the recoil lug square to the receiver?
>are the threads on both the barrel shank and receiver true and straight?
>is the headspacing minimal?
>is the receiver properly bedded (be it skim bed in a chassis, pillar bed, or full action bed. And yes, with some stocks a full barrel bed too, freefloat isn't always the best option)?
>is the chamber cut to minimum dimensions?
>are the throat and leade cut correctly for not just the caliber, but the preferred load and bullet?
Now granted, most of that makes small differences. You can take an off-the-shelf rifle of good quality and bed the action and get a 3/4 minute gun. But if you're shooting for group competitively it matters.

Pic related is a 5-shot group done at 100 yards with my 6mm PPC benchrest rifle. It's not a "railgun" (total rifle with scope is 11.0lbs even), I compete in light varmint. It was done at a local shoot of around 60 people and I didn't even make top 10. The winning target for my division was sub 0.20" CTC and the best overall came from the railgun class with a sub-0.10" CTC. THIS is the kind of competition the autistic levels of accurizing are for.

>>33430878
Unless you get a lemon. Because Remington puts out a LOT of lemons.

Like my Sendero SFII, which was at best a 5 MOA rifle out of the box despite its 5r barrel.

File: 20160522_223545.jpg (605KB, 2048x1152px) Image search: [Google]

605KB, 2048x1152px

>>33437154
Different guy but I can pull groups like this all day erry day with my AR. Yeah they're not 0.3" groups but they're really fucking good for pretty much any rifle.

>>33437200
Ehh...you're half right.

Remington is owned by Cerberus, which is a corporate conglomeration. Cerberus is owned by Freedom Group, which is a second corporate conglomeration.

>>33440999
those are nice groups and trips. i know folks can shoot but people need to post .3" groups if they claim they can do it.

because they shot themselves
fuck remington. american as fuck but i don't support a company who doesn't take actions for shitty product.
any variations of the 1500 rifle will smash and shit and rape any shitty rem 700

>>33440980
you're a faggot, a rifle with decent ammo should and will shoot good. fuck all your garbage info. if you suck you will suck. gun and ammo isn't everything, shooter is most of any shooting problems or
issues

>>33441243
... Chill? The guy was simply stating that if you autistic levels of accuracy as most in this thread claim they can do it takes a fuck tone of work. Besides what is your definition of " shoot good" 1" or better?

Yes any faggot with a rifle and halfway decent ammo can hold a 2" group at 100 and that's decent.

>>33441243
lel. Lemme guess, your only experience with boltguns is a mosin, right?

>>33421847
If you're looking to get into bolt actions, I recommend getting a Ruger American. I own one in .270 Win. and despite costing about about $550 after getting the scope, they're super nice rifles. Only downsides to them is they're a little bit too light, so the recoil is going to be an issue and they don't come with iron sights so you're kind of forced to get a scope. All in all, though, I recommend these guns to pretty much everybody.

>>33441243
>I dont know what accurizing a rifle entails
This board is fantastic.

>>33421847
Work at a gun store and here's my 2 cents
I'd avoid any scope rifle combo unless the rifle you want is the combo, then ditch that scope and get a decent one. Usually the scopes on those rifles are trash.
Remingtons are okay, not great and not God awful. That being said their QC has gone down significantly over a decade ago. I'd still recommend it for a first time user but if change a lot of their stuff like bolt and stock. Their 5R barrels are decent
Very basic level of say savage axis and maybe ruger American in .308
Best option is Tikka t3, such a great rifle for the price and it's 1 MOA out of the box

But, just as your choice of rifle is important, your glass is just as important if not more. I'd much rather have a 1000 dollar scope on a 100 dollar rifle than the other way around. Some good brands are Vortex and Leopold, vortex for the price and quality. Diamondback is a good series but Viper is even better. I spend at least half on glass than my rifle

Also take into consideration other costs and things like ammo, scope rings, mount, possibly a bipod. Also don't be that dildo that spends 1000 on their setup to only use fucking Tula .308 ammo. You don't have to buy match but just don't buy fucking steel case and complain to me why your group sucks

File: 20170222_231016.jpg (594KB, 2048x1152px) Image search: [Google]

594KB, 2048x1152px

>>33442235
Fucking all of this except
>Leopold
Nigger it's LEUPOLD. With a U. If you work there at least spell the damn brand right.

And as to why to NOT shoot Tula/Wolf: Their bullets are way undersized and all over the place on weight. Pic related was pulled from an old lot of Wolf-rebranded Tula (Wolf WPA 55gr FMJ "5.56"). Supposed to be .224", came out .208".

File: 20170222_231046.jpg (564KB, 2048x1152px) Image search: [Google]

564KB, 2048x1152px

>>33442829
And their "55" grain bullet...isn't.

>>33442829
>>33442836
your mics are fucked to shit and im sure your scale is calibrated

>>33442857
yeah nah it's accurate. Tested with known-good bullets (Sierra and Nosler) immediately after, both mic'd .224", and checked the scale with a check weight, it's accurate to at least 0.1gr.

File: PrecisionBullshit.jpg (609KB, 1920x1080px) Image search: [Google]

609KB, 1920x1080px

>>33442868
>china mics
>china scale
>accurate
top fucking kek m8

>>33422335
Cost of production =/= price to the consumer
You could hire a master craftsman to spend 1000 houts polishing a turd amd charge $100,000 for it, which may be its cost to produce, but nobody will buy it because nobody thinks a polished turd is worth $100k.

>>33421847
OP if your still listening. . .

I'd honestly start off with a CZ 455 .22lr. I know I know sounds dumb but if you really want to get into long range shooting starting on a .22 and getting all the basics down is the best way to do that.

>Get a 455
>Get a good ffp mildot scope
>Learn fundamentals of using the reticule and judging dope
>Perfect trigger squeeze, control breathing, aim small miss small all that
>Wow your friends by nailing 12ga hulls at 200yds with a dam .22lr

This is how you git gud without blowing huge wads of cash. Also way easier to get the fundamentals down on a .22 imo

>>33422105
Howa 1500 is breddy good for the price, quite a few aftermarket stocks n shit for them too now, so you can make them to your liking.

>>33442900
>Mitutuyo mic
>chinkshit
tippity toppest m8 go troll elsewhere

File: image.jpg (2MB, 4032x3024px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 4032x3024px

>>33442900
Hey bud, unrelated to this whole thread but I was wondering, when you shoot with your 19 with the TLR on, do you clean the soot off the top of your light by the muzzle? Or do you just leave it dirty? I always wipe my lense but I never really get into the top chrome ring

>pic related

Now thread related: how much is .308 vs .338 vs 30-06 rounds

Here's a good example: how much would 1000 rounds of just firing those types of ammo be in comparison?

>>33443049
At the cheap end?
>.308: Around $600
>.30-06: Around $600
>.338 (assuming LM): Around $4200
At the high end?
>.308: Around $1250
>.30-06: Around $1250
>.338 (assuming LM): Around $15,000

>>33443061
Jesus, .338 really is an ass raping

What about 300 blackout? Are those rounds even used in bolt action rifles?

>>33443068
Yes, Remington chambers both the R700 and model 7 in it. CZ is supposed to be offering the 527 in it at some point, and Howa offers both the 1500 and micro 1500 in it. There may be others.

Your cheapest new-production factory .300blk is around 60cpr, reman with 147gr M80 pulls is around 45cpr. At the high end you're looking at $1.50-2.00 a round, just like everyone else's match and specialty hunting ammo.

.338 is expensive because it's a big fucking cartridge in a niche role, so it's got both significant material cost and doesn't benefit from economy of scale. Also literally nobody makes just plain old plinking/blasting ammo for it, everything available is either match or high-end hunting ammo.

>>33443068
You never heard the "I wasn't aware my rifle was chambered in $5 bills" joke before?

>>33442992
>admitting to buying knockoff Mitutuyo
wew lad

>>33443040
i leave it dirty

>>33425303
The dimensions of the round look fine though. With proper materials I think it could be a perfect shooter

>>33426426
CZ 455 evo in .22lr is very good out of the box, even with shit glass.
Just put mine into a MDT chassis and gave it a leupold for a laugh, shoots great and looks tidy too.

File: IMG_0177.jpg (924KB, 3264x2448px) Image search: [Google]

924KB, 3264x2448px

>>33422436
>>33422403
>>33422333

Okay, so this train of though raises the question of how should people unfamiliar with scope shopping be looking at scopes? What's worth noting and considering? How would one know when a scope feels right?

>>33422105
Personally I always liked the Ruger m77 series and the tikka t3s. Both are in about the $700 range. Get it in .270 and put a nice vortex or primary arms scope on it (also go watch Brent0331's video on the ACSS reticle)

>>33422146
>>33422161
Judging from your indignation towards the RPR's price (worth it for a rifle that can shoot 1/2 to 1/4 MOA out of the box), I'm going to assume Steiner and Schmidt and Bender are out of your price range. In that case a Vortex Viper or Crossfire will work well enough for you (Viper is $400-$600 Crossfire is $150-$300), if you want to try out the memetastic ACSS reticle a PA has a 4-14x44mm scope with the ACSS reticle for about $300. Remember your optic is the lynchpin to long range accuracy. Don't be cheap with it.

>>33422136
My first BA is a Howa 1500, absolutely love this rifle. Very good quality, a couple pounds heavier, but feels way more solid than the Savage and R.e.m. models (of similar pricing)

>>33422190
you're a fucktard and cancer to this board please kys
yeah let's recommend someone dropping a shit ton in their first rifle, fuck that, buy a $500 gun and spend a few hundred on range time and ammo. A $1-2k rifle won't help you shoot better if you suck

>>33422333
>>33422343
>Same anon
This is one of the instances you can use a trip and we won't judge you op. As far as your question goes get the savage, buy a nice scope (don't cheap out on this), and enjoy plinking 1-1.5MOA groups

>>33422369
This. I love Mossberg but remington's extractors work much better for extracting cheap bird/skeet loads that balloon up after you shoot them. I've been out doing trap/dove hunting with my buddy and his 500 and we had to use my Leatherman to pull stuck cases out of his bore multiple times where as my 870 ran totally fine.

>>33443068
>What about 300 blackout? Are those rounds even used in bolt action rifles?

It rainbows substantially, so that makes it harder to shoot unknown varying distances.

>>33443713
>you're a fucktard and cancer to this board please kys

Cheap doesn't mean junk, you fucking faggot.
To each according to his means.

>>33422161
>the RPR is like $2k
nigga wut. I'm finding them all over for like $900.

>>33442829
Sorry nigga, was typing on my phone

>>33421877
>MIM is bad
No.

>>33444617
>No

Ofc not, but badly made MIM is cancer on guns. From Rem700 bolt handles to fucking SPS safety levers that snap.

>>33421847
another +1 for a .270 rifle. You could always get an old Mauser action or even a "hand picked" R700 action and just build a base-up rifle with parts. Gives you insight as to how the rifle itself works and more selection over everything (stock color/shape, barrel length/profile, etc). I prefer .270 myself because I shoot 6.8SPC in my 3 gun AR and .277WLV in my PDW AR pistol. All three rounds use the same size projectiles so it makes reloading hella ez. Not sure if you are in that stage of gun ownership, but if you are making the step to an expensive rifle i'd suggest trying to match calibers at least somewhat to your other firearms.

That being said, .270 has kick ass stopping power, and a slightly flatter trajectory than .308, making it a bit easier than .308 for a first time shooter. You can usually find boxes at wally world and other places as it's not a commonly purchased round, but is commonly stocked, versus .308 that has a much higher tendency to be sold out at places like this. Usually I can't go to a gun show without seeing a few guys who have a whole table of just different .270 boxes they're trying to sell because they just have too much lol.

I've built all my firearms from parts except my P250 so I'm kind of biased towards building vs buying as I love the DIY aspect and the part selection aspect. Allows you to progress with your budget.

That being said, if you're gonna spend the money on a Leupold, look into Swarovski. They make pretty bracelets and shit for your girlfriend but also make really awesome glass.

>>33444891
>that being said
holy fuck im cringey. need to proofread my posts

>>33444891
>>33444900
>that being said

I see no problem

>>33422655
Holy fuck that picture is ugly as hell.

/p/ would fucking destroy you.

File: Auburn Hills PD.jpg (377KB, 1037x774px) Image search: [Google]

377KB, 1037x774px

>>33422338
870's can be good. You just gotta find an older one or a police trade-in like mine.

>>33421847
tikka, kricko, mauser, blaser, sig sauer, husqvarna/carl gustaf. try to find some of these should work

>>33442235
Also don't be afraid to start with okay-ish stuff to start out with. My first bolt was a R700 in .30-06 with a dinky Nikko Sterling scope. After looking at something better scope wise I upgraded, realized I liked the magpul stocks, and got a better barrel. It's better to start from cramp and learn as you go than drop 3k as a beginner. I have the same philosophy when I teach kids how to play guitar. Most will start off with a Squier or some Fender knockoff and learn to appreciate a good guitar. Then there's little shits with daddy's credit card that get a Les Paul and can't play shit after two years of lessons

>>33445888
>A bunch of near-sighted, skinny jeans wearing, pale skinned, autistic humanities majors will destroy you.

File: 1488732643026.jpg (48KB, 420x309px) Image search: [Google]

48KB, 420x309px

>>33441243

>>33444070
>lying on the internet

They're going for about $1300-1500 if you can find them.

>>33441306
not even.
go try to be a faggot elsewhere.

>>33442985
I second this. Great budget rifle.
It's made in Japan, fantastic build quality for the price.

>>33443582
Read reviews from people who don't sell the optics, or read forums like snipers hide and such.

A lot of it is small things you won't notice until you know what to look for. What are some of the things you're wanting from your optic?

List them, and then for ever "feature" add 75$ and that might give you a good idea of what it'll cost.

>>33448184
You're right, mah bad, was looking at used ones.