Anschutz Accuracy expectations?

.22LRGUY

.22LRGUY

CGN Ultra frequent flyer
Rating - 100%
176   0   1
Location
Ontario
Hey guys~I've been feeling the urge to (finally) get an Anschutz bolt action rifle for casual target shooting, some varmint work...as my go-to 22 rifle to have fun with. No competition or anything athletic involving skis...I assure you! :) Anyhow, my only hands-on Anschutz experience is with the first firearm I ever bought about 26 years ago, a model 1450. Dandy little rifle, it's on the "no sell" list permanently. Anyhow, looking on Nordic' site....there are various model 1416 options that are attractive (ie, short barrel) but at about 2x the price sits the model 1710. Either gun would be the finest 22 in the cabinet at home, but can anyone here tell me what the differences are between the 1416/1710....what accuracy one could expect from both....whether or not the short-barrel 1416s would be as accurate as the long barrel, or if the 1710 would blow the 1416 away? (better trigger? better action?) I realize "accuracy" is a relative term, as I have no desire to feed the gun high-cost target ammo. I might (at first) to see what it's capable of, then work on finding out what less expensive ammo it might like to eat. The gun needs to be a shooter if it's costing me 2x-3.5x more than my CZ452 Varmint~which prints impressively (to me) small groups @ 50 yards using ammo that is $4 a box. If the 1416 is comparable (quality/accuracy) to a CZ452~I'd appreciate knowing that too.

I appreciate any/all input, and do realize there have been a few Anschutz threads on here lately. I'm looking to maybe buy around the end of August to mid-September time frame.

Thanks guys!
 
I have a 1416 with a 14" barrel At 50 meters OFF BAGS with COSTLY ammo , they all go into the same hole . With bargain ammo 1/2 to 1 " groups are the norm .
Honestly got the same accuracy with the same ammo , off the same bags , with CZ 455 . AND they do cost half the price . Love mine and it's a keeper . They are however expensive and quirky . Ejection issues do exist , spare mags are costly , rings and mounts are expensive as well . Overall it's a cult following in my opinion .

NOW if you are a competitive shooter , serious off the bench guy , the 54 action ( 1710 series etc) is the better choice . Apparently they shoot better for longer periods of time and use.
For "normal " use in the Sporter line you will not be able to see or measure the difference in accuracy between the two ( 64 or 54 action ) and you will never wear out either one .
I have owned many over the years , they were all excellent and reliable . With superior ammo they are superior and they do hold their value .

Same argument as with scopes : do the ones that cost 5X as much work better , sure , work 5X better ? NO .
Pride of ownership ,outclassing the neighbors , all have a value . My scope is a Nightforce on my Anschutz . Only DRAWBACK : you can't blame the equipment anymore when you mess up!

MY SUV is a Mercedes , Ford or KIA would also have worked just as well for what I do with it . but the envy in my neighbors eyes is worth the extra. Same at the range , everybody has a Rem or Ruger , some have a CZ I have an Anschutz .

Get one ! You only go around once I'm told !
 
I resently picked up a 64 mpr annie. in limited testing it handily outshot my cz varmint. try as I might I have never been able to consistanly shoot sub .5 inch groups at fifty. I get some .3 or .4's then follow up with some much larger groups. I assumed it to be a shooter error. first time out with annie, random ammo and I was bettering my cz by apox 30%. with select ammo i'm thinking 50% reduction is possible. it took a few groups just to get used to the two stage trigger. I will be testing more ammo types in the future in my quest to be a better shooter. you will be handy capping an new annie with cheap bulk. it will never shoot to its full potential. mid priced 22 ammo is still cheap vrs centrefire.
 
The 1416 will shoot the same as a 452. Been on the fence, seriously looking at the 1710 series. The expectation would be higher but feeding it cheap ammo might make the results the same as the CZ. I have come to like my 452 Lux over the 310 Cil/Anschutz. Really comes down to one's ability to utilize the higher quality.
 
Thanks for the input guys~greatly appreciated. I don't think I'm opposed to feeding the Anschutz some caviar-grade ammo...but it would need to hold it's own somewhat with mid-range stuff. (no bulk-pack.. I'm thinking CCI SV, SK Standard, etc.) Sounds as though CZ-grade accuracy can be expected from the 1416...but it might beat the CZ with top-shelf ammo..?

The 1710 might be worth saving some more $ for. Only wish there was a dealer closer where I could take a look at one.

As for bragging rights~I've bought a few guns over the years with that in the back of my mind but to be honest..I don't belong to a range and almost none of my friends care what gun they use as long as it goes "bang" when they pull the trigger. lol (very true) Most of my shooting I do on my own...so these days, a gun needs to only impress me. If I over-spend on one, the expectations grow exponentially...so that's where some hesitation with the 1710 comes into play.
 
metalbender said:
The 1416 will shoot the same as a 452. Been on the fence, seriously looking at the 1710 series. The expectation would be higher but feeding it cheap ammo might make the results the same as the CZ. I have come to like my 452 Lux over the 310 Cil/Anschutz. Really comes down to one's ability to utilize the higher quality.
Click to expand...

Thanks for the input MB. I spent about 10 hours shooting gophers with an old BRNO #2 last week, open sights. Fell in love with that rifle. Owning a CZ that isn't nearly as well broken-in is a different experience though. Part of what's fueling the Anschutz plan.
 
Very few mortals consistently shoot one-hole groups at 50 yards with a 1416 64 action Anschutz rifle -- even with primo ammo. (Most mortals can't do that with any rifle.)

The OP asks many questions. The length of the barrel won't make a difference when the rifle is scoped (when not scoped a longer barrel provides a longer sight radius); so if you really want a shorter-barreled Anschutz, don't let that stop you. The 1416 has a single stage trigger that needs to be lightened for serious target shooting. It is available in a beavertail stock, which would be better than the standard stock's forearm off the bench. Rifles such as the MPR and MS R (the latter being the Silhouette rifle) both have two stage triggers that are very bench-friendly. They are heavier rifles that suit the bench better than the field.

The 1710 rifle is the better 54 action rifle and that's why it is more costly. The 1710 models have a single stage trigger, which needs to be made lighter for best results off the bench. (It can be modified with a swap of springs, which can be purchased from places like J&P.) The 1710 D HB heavy barrel model is heavier and preferable over the sporter barrel D KL model. The 1712 Silhouette rifle has a two stage trigger.

As always, the scope that is used is very important. It's never a good idea to use a cheap scope on an expensive rifle. And for target shooting at 50 or 100 yards, the more magnification you have the better. You should be able to clearly see the bullet holes in your target.

Edit: don't use CCI SV if you want the good results from an Anschutz; use at least entry level match ammo such as SK Standard Plus.

I have found my Anschutz rifles are better shooters than any of my CZ's.
 
Last edited:
For hunting and some target work the the 1416 beavertail would be up to the job.They have been on sale from Nordic and PR for right around $999 lately.Of course your going to have to invest in some good target ammo to get the best out of it.Resale on the Anschutz is also very good.
 
grauhanen said:
Edit: don't use CCI SV if you want the good results from an Anschutz; use at least entry level match ammo such as SK Standard Plus.
.
Click to expand...

Not wanting to be argumentative, but if the brand and grade of ammo works in a particular rifle then use it. Over the last 15-20 years of silhouette and precision RF shooting several batches of CCI SV have shown to be the equal of SK Std+ and even Rifle Match. You will probably acknowledge that it depends on the ammo/rifle compatability.
I concede there may be greater variability in the performance of CCI SV batch to batch. I recall after CCI retooled their RF machines the ammo performance took a noticeable jump as did Eley's not long ago after their rebuild.
 
Last edited:
dryfire said:
Not wanting to be argumentative, but if the brand and grade of ammo works in a particular rifle then use it. Over the last 15-20 years of silhouette and precision RF shooting several batches of CCI SV have shown to be the equal of SK Std+ and even Rifle Match. You will probably acknowledge that it depends on the ammo/rifle compatability.
I concede there may be greater variability in the performance of CCI SV batch to batch. I recall after CCI retooled their RF machines the ammo performance took a noticeable jump as did Eley's not long ago after their rebuild.
Click to expand...
Here we will have to agree to disagree. More shooters use CCI SV than SK varieties simply because it is more readily available. CCI SV is very often found at Canadian Tire, for example. But most shooters report that it is not as reliable in terms of accuracy as SK Standard Plus. That is the consensus that is found on RFC, where a great number of .22 LR shooters post. That is my experience also. But it is well worth noting that CCI SV is much better than any bulk ammo.
 
grauhanen said:
Edit: don't use CCI SV if you want the good results from an Anschutz; use at least entry level match ammo such as SK Standard Plus.
Click to expand...

Merely pointing that your comment is an absolute and absolutes ,especially in the rimfire world, rarely happen. I've seen a lot of off the cuff comments but I haven't seen any consensus established here. I think generally the comments on here are more about what is readily available than what can be found from less mainstream suppliers.
 
Last edited:
dryfire said:
Merely pointing that your comment is an absolute and absolutes ,especially in the rimfire world, rarely happen. I've seen a lot of off the cuff comments but I haven't seen any consensus established here. I think generally the comments on here are more about what is readily available than what can be found from less mainstream suppliers.
Click to expand...

Indeed. The consensus I'm referring to is to be found elsewhere, not here. It is hardly a bone of contention that SK Standard Plus delivers better results much more often than CCI SV.
 
I have had terrible accuracy with CCI sv in my match 64.The CCI fits very tight in the match chamber as well, almost have to force it in.SK st plus works much better. I also find the CCI to fit tight in my mossberg 146ba chamber .
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom