Building a precision rifle

[avboiler11]

I'm a Savage guy...both of my bolt-action precision rifles (223AI and 260) are built on Savages with McMillan A5 stocks.

That said, one of those Remington 700 ADL Varmint rifles in 308 that Dick's Sporting Goods is going to have for $350 after rebate on Black Friday would be a REAL good place to start. Get a 20MOA base, a quality optic and a good set of rings along with many boxes of Federal/Black Hills/Southwest/Copper Creek 175gr ammo and go shoot!

Otherwise, a Remington 700 Tactical or AAC-SD, or a Savage 10FP-SR (or even the 11 Hog Hunter) in either 223 or 308 would be fine choices for getting into the precision rifle game. Depending on your budget (a HUGE factor in this), going with the Savage 10FCP-McMillan is a great choice!

As for caliber...308 is the "standard" because "that's what military snipers use"...even though there are dozens of other chamberings that flat spank a 308 in terms of drop, drift and energy at long ranges. That being said, lemme expand on the option of starting your precision rifle learnin' with a 223.

Lots of folks poo-poo the 223 at anything beyond 300m, probably because they're used to AR-length barrels and 55gr ammo. The 1:9 twist that the 700 Tactical or any Savage comes with will shoot 75/77gr ammo well with PLENTY of pep to punch holes in paper or ring still to 1000yd, let alone 600...and will do so 1. with less recoil and report, and 2. at a lower per-round cost, which means more practice, which means improving your skills faster.

Hornady 75gr Steel Match ammunition is a FANTASTIC choice for a "budget precision" rifle in 223...it runs <$25 per box of 50 and has shot MOA or better for me in a Savage 12FV bolt gun and a 1:8 18" AR15.

 

[Yeah]

Feel free to discontinue whatever you like.

I await a physics treatise putting a 0.308" anything above its necked down bretheren. As always, I'm at ease dealing in facts and take comfort in the reliability of simple realities.

 

[Yeah]

Hornady 75gr Steel Match ammunition is a FANTASTIC choice

It is even better than that.

 

[atalon]

Feel free to discontinue whatever you like.

I await a physics treatise putting a 0.308" anything above its necked down bretheren. As always, I'm at ease dealing in facts and take comfort in the reliability of simple realities.

The problem is your coming across like a troll. You are not stating it as personal experience, sighting any real data, arguing with everyone that has a different opinion, and thinking making simple statements should be taken as facts while effectively demanding others provide proof to the contrary. Everything you have said may be all true but your method of presenting it leaves much to be desired and any and all facts you think you have dealt are lost in a cloud of troll poo.

 

[Yeah]

Color me surprised that a chart needs to be 'sighted' to show that a 308 Win case's ballistic performance when launching a 0.475 BC 168 AMax is inferior to performance from that same case necked down to 0.284" launching a 0.625 BC 162 AMax. Or that same case at 0.243" pushing an 0.505 BC 105 AMax. It is neither close nor fair to pretend it is close.

Even if a person has never seen the subject projectiles in the flesh and doesn't know the relevance of bearing surface, it should be within his capability. But it never is...

 

[atalon]

lol

 

[Yeah]

If I was in over my head I'd probably punt too. Quite the sight.

 

[DRob]

Didn't stay at the Holiday Inn Express.......

but I think the first thing you need to do is decide how long you want to go and how much you want to spend to get there. For example: I'm not a competitive long range shooter. I'm an old prairie dogger who just spent a couple of days in TN shooting with a guy who has a nice LONG range on his farm. I didn't shoot anything beyond 800 yards with my Savage LRPV .223, Bushnell 4200 6-24. I managed 50% hits on a wood chuck sized steel target at 800. At 600 yards, my LRPV and my wife's Savage 10 FCP-K (also a 1:9 .223) were clanging a 12" steel plate with every shot. Great fun but nothing compared to our host's Stiller Diamondback 6 Dasher with a March 8-80 scope. That's right, 8-80. (March rifle scopes Australia & New Zealand Tactical 8-80 x 56 rifle scope). With that gun, 800 yards was easy. He and two other shooters then shot 1500 yards and all had hits on the woodchuck. Bottom line, I'll take 50% hits at 800 yards for 20% (estimated) of the investment even though trying to shoot much farther would have been futile with my gun. I don't know what he paid for his rifle but his scope alone cost $1K more than I have in both our guns combined. So I ask, how long do you want to go?

 

[downzero]

Color me surprised that a chart needs to be 'sighted' to show that a 308 Win case's ballistic performance when launching a 0.475 BC 168 AMax is inferior to performance from that same case necked down to 0.284" launching a 0.625 BC 162 AMax. Or that same case at 0.243" pushing an 0.505 BC 105 AMax. It is neither close nor fair to pretend it is close.

Even if a person has never seen the subject projectiles in the flesh and doesn't know the relevance of bearing surface, it should be within his capability. But it never is...

And a .30 caliber 240 grain SMK has a BC of over .700. Put that in your 300 win mag or 300 rum and smoke it.

Of course a smaller, sleeker bullet will drop less and buck the wind better, if it's pushed by the same powder capacity.

6/6.5/7mm can do everything .30 can, with less recoil, IF shot from the right case. That said, a .30 with its big bullets will pass all of them, but you'll need more case capacity.

After all, they all operate on the same principle.

 

[sloughfoot]

I really don't want to respond to all these off topic responses except to say that the .308 is a viable 1,000 yard cartridge. It is the ONLY legal cartridge for International Palma matches. These matches are fired at 800, 900, and 1,000 yards.

I also use the .308 with 155's out of my long range rifle, based on a Remington 40X action with a 30 inch Kreiger Palma contour barrel. 1X13 twist. I get about 3000 fps with this combination.

There is no magical combination of bullet or cartridge that will get you a center hit at long range unless the shooter learns to correct for conditions.

Learning to correct for conditions is far more important than caliber. This is fact....

 

[hvacrguy]

I currently have a Rem 700 LTR in 223 and 308, the 308 is in a Manners T4 the barrel is 20 inches and if I do my part with Black Hills 175 match I can hit 920yds. At the schools I go to the lengths are between 20 and 23 inches and the twist rates are usually 1-11.25. I am working on a 16inch 308 for my new truck gun.

 

[Yeah]

And a .30 caliber 240 grain SMK has a BC of over .700. Put that in your 300 win mag or 300 rum and smoke it.

Performances falling shy of those same cases necked to a 162 AMax. The astute detected a pattern some posts ago.

But with the length advantages afforded by most mag or short mag rifles why not top those cases off with a 7mm 190 Matrix, taking advantage of its 0.810 BC to really blow the smoke from eyes.

I've shot every combination of case and bullet listed so far and then some, with eyes wide open, so I have reserve.

 

[Yeah]

I like that OP has now moved from F Class to Palma, if only to reiterate the point that 0.308"s only win when it's just 0.308"s in the race.

Someone should invent a match for 45/70s at 1000 yards to prove their viability as an LR chambering via their ability to lob lead that far. A bullet launched to slip conditions is the entire point.

 

[ROLEXrifleman]

Just get one of these and call it a day. Spend more time shooting, honing skill instead of comparing specs.

Just bring your wallet

 

[avboiler11]

Its not that a 308 isn't capable of reaching 1000yd, or accurate at that range...there's a well-known video of Lowlight from Sniper'sHide making 1000yd hits with an 18.5" 308 on Youtube. Its just that a 6/6.5/7mm bullet in the same case does long range "better", ie. less drop, drift, and many times more energy despite being lighter. Not a huge deal when you're allowed sighters on a paper target at a known range, but a HUGE factor shooting UKD and/or in a tactical/hunting situation.

Modern bullets like the Lapua 155gr Scenar, Hornady 178gr HPBT and the Berger 168gr Hybrid have narrowed the 308's performance handicap, but the bottom line is it still exists.

At 650yd, which is the maximum I have available to shoot, my 260 load (140gr Amax 2 2810fps) will be 29.4" flatter and drift 11.4" less in a 10mph crosswind than a 308 shooting a 175gr SMK @ 2600fps.

Load a 155gr Scenar @ 2900fps in that 308, and the 260's advantage is 1.6" drop and 6.7" drift at 650yd.

Obviously at 1000yd the differences between the two calibers will be amplified, but there is no free lunch. The tradeoff for superior ballistic performance is diminished local availability of components and ammo, increased price for loaded ammunition, and decreased barrel life. A buddy toasted the barrel on a Remington 700 VLS .243 in just 600 rounds shooting 105s @ 3050fps.

I still say get a Savage 223 and a case or three of 75gr Steel Match ammo. Shoot at 300yd, then 600yd. Learn how to read the wind, as well as trigger & breathing control with minimal recoil and per-round cost. Then, if you decide you like precision shooting, either swap on a new bolt head and barrel in caliber of your choice to your Savage or sell it to finance a higher end rifle like a GAP, AI, whatever.

 

[downzero]

Performances falling shy of those same cases necked to a 162 AMax. The astute detected a pattern some posts ago.

Wrong. The 7mm 162 Amax has a .625 BC. The 240 grain, .30 cal SMK is over .700, as previously posted.

Again, I'm with you on this but you need to get your facts straight. Sleeker, smaller diameter bullets are obviously ideal, but the position you're taking seems to suggest that a larger diameter bullet is simply incapable of matching or exceeding the performance of a smaller one, and that is just absolutely wrong. A larger diameter, heavier projectile with a higher BC will provide better performance and even longer range at the expense of recoil, but it needs to have sufficient powder capacity to push it.

With your logic, we should all be necking massive cases to .17 caliber and trying to shoot targets at a mile away. The reality is that even if the target is only paper--and so the energy is mostly irrelevant--a larger bullet can exceed the performance of a smaller one, if it is long and sleek enough.

I've never yet met a person who was so hard to agree with, but no matter what you say, I'm not necking a 300 win mag to .17.

One can always argue that there is a better caliber out there, but we don't always need a barrel burning caliber to hit a target a few hundred yards away. If there's one place that .308 has a huge advantage, it's barrel life.

 

[avboiler11]

...I believe his point is that a 7mm 162gr A-Max from a 308 case will grossly outperform any 30cal 200-240gr bullet from a 308 case...

 

[Yeah]

Wrong. The 7mm 162 Amax has a .625 BC. The 240 grain, .30 cal SMK is over .700, as previously posted.

If you could have seen my face upon finding you don't know velocity's role in the equation, even you would've recognized the look as one of expectation fulfilled.

 

[Yeah]

Modern bullets like the Lapua 155gr Scenar

The 155 Scenar is worth building a rifle around, if backed into that corner. It does very good things relative to its peers.

 

[downzero]

...I believe his point is that a 7mm 162gr A-Max from a 308 case will grossly outperform any 30cal 200-240gr bullet from a 308 case...

Yes, and that's a stupid point, because .308 doesn't have sufficient powder capacity to use a 240 grain bullet. By the same argument, a .223 will shoot its own 80 grain SMK better than it'll shoot a 6 or 6.5mm projectile. If the powder capacity isn't sufficient for the mass of the projectile, of course smaller is better. That is just common sense.

It does not follow, however, that larger capacity cases cannot surpass the performance of 7mm loadings at the expense of recoil. Brian Litz has even said as much in his book.

I wholeheartedly agree that within the relevant ranges we're shooting, 6, 6.5, and 7mm bullets provide better performance with less recoil than comparable .30 caliber cartridges. It does not follow that .30 cartridges have no use in the year 2012, because EVERY cartridge is a compromise, and we can always make the case longer, pack more powder in it, and push the bullet faster and get better performance. Granted this is a forum and caliber wars are king, but pretending as if there's no compromise in choosing a caliber for which the barrel doesn't last as long, factory ammo is more expensive, brass is more expensive, etc., is ridiculous. I'd put money on it that the OP, even if he doesn't know what he wants, wants a .308 because he knows that the caliber is very popular, and that ammunition and/or components are available everywhere.

I, myself, would love to have a 7WSM or similar for long range, but until I move to where I get to shoot at distances where it'd make a difference to have a more efficient cartridge at the expense of more expensive brass, I'm going to stick to shooting my .308 until there's no rifling left, and when that day comes, convert it to an Ackleyized .243 or .260. I suspect that it's going to take a while for that day to come, and until then, I, like the OP, am learning plenty about shooting with what I've got.