Baby's first precision gat

>>33693515
>4-500m
something in .308

File: tmp_11013_1450824054173_1879844552.gif (1014KB, 406x273px) Image search: [Google]

1014KB, 406x273px

Bump

Also, how is .243 for this kind of precision shooting?

>>33694238
at those ranges just get a .308 to train yourself on
its going to be cheaper this way and by the time YOU're accurate enough for the caliber to matter you'll have saved enough money on ammo to buy the new rifle

>>33694227
>>33694235
Oops accidental bump.

Anyway, is 308 accurate for those longer ranges or is it just autists shitting on it for their snowflake calibers?

>>33694251
500m is FINE for a 308

File: 1470188755361.jpg (38KB, 960x750px) Image search: [Google]

38KB, 960x750px

>>33694262
Ok, thanks for the advice. Is semi automatic (AR10) inherently inaccurate for this type of stuff or would a bolt action perform better?

>>33694235
It seems like you're discounting the importance of optics. To shoot 500m you need to see 500m. Consider budgeting high for the glass. The sad refrain about buying and crying once.

Yes, you will want to reload. Just the knowledge you gain from the process is worth it. Also, if you are in for 'practice practice practice' saving a few dollars on ammo is good.

Once you get a rifle you like and glass you love, you will want to dial in your ammo. Knowing the inner workings of all 3 pieces makes it possible to self-diagnose inaccuracy.

>>33694279
bolts are more accurate for cheaper
its possible for a semi to be as accurate but it will always be more expensive per level of accuracy by a significant margin

It is very possible to hit at 500m with a semi 308, but it would not be precision shooting most of the time

If you want a 6.5 why not? The difference between the 2 calibers at that distance is minimal, but the 6.5 will fight the wind better and probably have better trajectory depending on the load. With this being said the .308 will have absolutely no issues reaching out to 500 yards. Another thing to consider is that the .308 RPR has a 20" barrel and the 6.5 has a 24" barrel. I have one in 6.5 and haven't messed with it too much yet, but so far so good from what I've shot of it I have grown to like the 6.5 caliber quite a bit and the ammo price difference is non-existant really; especially for a reloader.

>>33693515
Howa 1500 barrelled action (.308 w/ 24" varmint barrel) with a Bell and Carlson stock.
That'd be under $1000 potentially.
Then get an EGW 20MOA rail and a good scope/rings.

Don't let the low price of Howa 1500's fool you. They're great rifles with a smooth action and one piece bolt.

>>33695231
>>33694314
Also 6.5 creedmoor is an option.
But if you're shooting sub 1000m, just go .308 for extended barrel life and cheaper/more available ammo.

ALSO:
Legacy Sports are releasing a 26" varmint barrel in .308 and 6.5 creedmoor soon if you're interested (granted I think that's a bit overkill for a non-magnum barrel).

If you are only doing 400-500 you may want to look at 223. RPR, Tikka, Savage 10,howa 1500 should all work. Primary arms 4-14 FFp mil dot will work good as well and only $230

Outback 69gr smk if you don't want to reload.

>>33693515
Already posted but I really don't like the idea of a pistol grip on a bolt action rifle.
It just means you need to unwrap your thumb to action the bolt, and wrap it back around again to get into a firing position.

>>33693515

Question to people who know what theyre doing, is 30 nosler really worth getting over 300wm if I'm just trying to hit an 8 inch circle at 800 yards? It's a lot harder to come by and I'd have to buy new reloading shit for my snowflake caliber

>>33695399
>It's a lot harder to come by and I'd have to buy new reloading shit for my snowflake caliber
Probably not man. I don't even know much about it but it just sounds like a dumb idea.
With the money you'd spend on 30 nosler compared to 300wm, you could just buy more 300wm rounds and practice more, to shoot better groups.

>>33693515
http://www.eurooptic.com/JRTXC316S-Tikka-Tikka-T3x-CTR-308-Win-S-S-200--barrel-MPN-JR.aspx

sub 1200 and this gun will shoot out to 500 super easy. it comes with a factory threaded bbl so you can purchase a suppressor for it or use a brake.

>>33694251

Iirc @ 700ish yards 308s go subsonic and start dropping off faster.

I would avoid 6.5 Creedmoor due to burning barrels out quickly unless you're paid to shoot.

>>33693515

look at - ruger precision rifle

6m has longer barrel life

do internet search for reviews

RPR or Tikka T3 in .308Win (or 6.5CM) would be great.

>>33694238
>Also, how is .243 for this kind of precision shooting?

It's a nice flat shooting cartridge which means you have to make less adjustment at unknown distances. But it burns barrels a lot faster than the options above.

It's great, but as a first training rifle I wouldn't suggest it unless you're willing to pay for the barrel changes.

>>33695267
>If you are only doing 400-500 you may want to look at 223.

Too wind sensitive for real 500m shooting. You'd be giving yourself a serious handicap.

>>33693515
>I want to get into precision shooting.
How well do you shoot with a 500 dollar gun at that range?

If you can't shoot well with a shit gun, you won't shoot much better with a precision gun.

It's like initial d. The car isn't the monster. The driver is.

Troll the fuck out of all the tacticool chassis users and use a levergun. The Henry Long Ranger and Browning BLR will both ring steel reliably at 500. Bonus points for competing in full cowboy getup with a single-action revolver at your hip.

>>33696453
>repeating this stale meme

Hey noguns. You're going to spend like $3k on ammo before you shoot out a 6.5 CM barrel. And even then your accuracy won't be completely fucked just less precise than it was.

You should post less.

Learn on a .22lr, will teach you many lessons about wind drift, position etc. If you shoot it well your skills will translate to a centerfire. High quality .22lr ammo costs nothing compared to centerfire, get a bolt gun and find out what stock, trigger, bipod, etc you like. I also recommend SWFA SS for your first glass, basically a Leupold mk4 10x but for $300.

>>33696474

The 6mm Creedmoor by all accounts has a shorter barrel life than the 6.5

It's definitely a killer round though. My 6 reliably shoots 5 shot groups at 500 yards that are under 2.5"

>>33698317
>ringing steel
>precision

>>33693515
I'd just go with the memes and get an RPR.

Mine is just insanely accurate and fun to shoot. Right within your budget and the popularity of the gun guarantees plenty of upgrade options in the future.

>>33698392
The Long Ranger can do ~1MOA. I haven't seen any hard data on the BLR.

>>33698507
That's impressive for a lever gun but borderline shit for a guy who wants a gun specifically for precision shooting.

A stock Savage Axis will easily out shoot that for 1/3rd the price.

>>33698362

>precision shooting
>3k in ammo will make it less accurate
>implying accuracy isnt the most important part of precision shooting.
>implying $3k in ammo is a lot of shooting.

So like I said, 6.5 Creedmoor will burn out barrels quickly, so I would avoid 6.5.

How fucking retarded are you?

>>33698591
>willing to spend thousands on ammo
>won't spend $500 on a new barrel

Yet I'm the retard? The noguns posters are insane lately.

>So like I said, 6.5 Creedmoor will burn out barrels quickly, so I would avoid 6.5.

Again this fucking burn meme. Serious competitors shoot enough to burn out MAYBE a single barrel in a whole year. The most hardcore shooters go through 2 a year at most and these guys are shooting insane amounts.

I can pretty much guarantee that OP will be like 99% of shooters and NEVER burn out a barrel.

He should definitely look at the Creedmoors for a really fun and really accurate round- especially since he wants to buy factory ammo.

>>33693515
>what caliber should I get?
Either 6.5CM or .308. Factory match ammo costs about the same for both, barrel life is similar, 6.5CM shoots flatter and is softer recoiling.
>do I really have to handload for accuracy?
Yes, absolutely yes.
>what's a good starting rifle?
Ruger RPR

>>33694238
Match ammo isn't readily available in factory loads, but with handloads it's fucking excellent all the way out to 1000m.

>>33695233
When comparing heavy match ammo (140gr 6.5 vs. 168 or 175gr .308) the barrel life is pretty much identical.

6.5CM can burn barrels when loaded as a varmint or hunting caliber with 90-120gr bullets though.

>>33695399
.30 Nosler is basically a refresh of the .300wby. It's quite a bit more powerful than .300wm, with the price tag and recoil to match.

>>33696447
you do not recall correctly unless you're referring to m80 ball through a sub-20" barrel.

>>33698591
From a true precision standpoint 120gr+ 6.5CM has a usable barrel life equivalent to a .308 at between 6000 and 10000 rounds depending on whether stainless or CMV barrel and how long you let the barrel cool between shots. It also has an ammo price equivalent to a .308 if maybe even a bit less, and reloads for a good bit cheaper since the bullets cost less and it uses ~15gr less powder.

>>33700191
>>do I really have to handload for accuracy?
>Yes, absolutely yes.

My RPR in 6mm CM is shooting 3/8" groups at 100 yards and 2.5" groups at 500 yards with Hornady 108gr ELD factory loads.

The accuracy difference between handloads and factory loads isn't what it used to be. It's still there but it's growing smaller every year IMO.

>>33695267
>>33696878

I think a .223 shooting the heavy 75gr and even 80gr pills would be perfect for out to 500.

They buck wind surprisingly well.

>>33700370
That's abnormally good. Most factory match ammo in most guns won't be even 3/4MOA, and occasionally won't be 1 MOA. You should feel lucky.

Just for the sake of fighting anecdotes with anecdotes, a guy I compete with has a Sako TRG22. He was shooting FGMM 168gr, which is what the manual for it recommends and states what it was tested with, and couldn't get it to shoot under 1" 5 shot groups at 100 yards. Everyone clowned on him and told him he just couldn't shoot, so he passed it around. Out of 10 people the best 5-shot group was a 0.8something inch group.

So I gave him a box of my handloads (168gr SMK in Lapua Palma brass) and his very first group was a 0.290" 5-shot. He asked for the load data, bought a cheapo press and good dies, took about a month of being coached through tuning loads to HIS rifle, and has been very happy with his quarter-minute rifle since. Best part is, even replacing the relatively expensive brass every 3 loads (the TRG22 has a kinda sloppy chamber for a precision rifle and he didn't want to learn how to anneal), the handloads are significantly cheaper than FGMM.

>>33700370
Depending on which precision discipline OP wants to shoot that would literally get you laughed off the range.

I shoot 100yd and 300yd bullseye. The guys in the railgun classes shoot AT WORST .200" 10-shot groups at 100, and if you're not in the .13-.14" range you have basically zero chance of winning.
>tfw someone turned in a .381" 10-shot group at 300yd last match

I compete in the varmint category (gun+optic no heavier than 11lb, optic no higher than 9x magnification) and haven't even placed despite normally shooting in the .35" range.

>>33696878
My buddy has been making hits out to 700yds fairly easily with the 77SMK's and in a .223 RPR where you can do 90gr's you can hit 1000yds.

The difference in ammo cost (even w/ reloading) will allow you to shoot more and probably be better than less with a better cartridge.

>>33700045

Why not just get a 30-06 then?

>inb4 it kicks too hard.

>>33700252

Thats where that came from, thanks I was racking my brain trying to put together where that was true, kek.

How do you know when to change a barrel?

>>33703167
Groups start opening up beyond what you deem acceptable. It occurs through erosion of the lands of the rifling in the throat and is typically correlated with how "over bore" a cartridge is.

>>33693515
Call me crazy, but I'd recommend a high-quality bolt gun from WW2 like a K31 or M39. With handloads or match ammo, you can easily shoot out to 300 yards with irons and practice, and 500 yards with irons and a lot of effort/practice.

Unsupported, you're looking more at 200-300 yards reliably from the sitting position. This is all with a LOT of practice of course.


I don't recommend learning to shoot at <400 yards with a scope, simply because a scope is effective for most high centerfire calibers at much farther distances. So you're sort of spoiling yourself now by wasting money on glass and not ammo/range-time/cleaning supplies to improve skill.