Advice for new precision rifle shooters

Tomochan

CGN Ultra frequent flyer
Rating - 100%
341   0   0
Location
The Cariboo, BC
As this is my 1000th post I thought I'd write something that may be of a bit of use to new shooters or shooters new to precision rifle shooting. While I'm far from an expert, I do know more now than I did a few years ago when I got into this. It is fair to say that my knowledge has been hard earned - making buying mistakes because I didn't know what I wanted or needed cost me a pretty penny ! If the following saves a new shooter a few bucks it will have been worth typing.

I'll put my comments into a Q+A format:

Q - I want to get into Precision Rifle shooting what do I need to get started ?

A - Firstly decide what you mean by Precision Rifle. Does that mean benchrest shooting into the .1's or .2's; F-Class where sub-half MOA is more the norm; or tactical precision shooting where accuracy may be less precise but making hits on pop-up and moving targets under time pressure is essential. Knowing what you want to do will help you decide what to buy.

Also determine what is the usual distance you will likely be shooting at - if you only have access to a 100m range then much of the gear necessary for 1000m shooting - while nice to have - can be put off and the money saved can be used for other things.

A fully custom 'Tactical' precision rifle built on a Stiller action and a quality factory rifle - the 20" SAKO TRG. Both these rifles are excellent choices for tactical precision. The Stiller wears a Sightron Siii 8-32x56 LRMOA while the SAKO wears a NF NXS 5.5-22x50

IMG_0456.jpg


A fully custom rifle for F/TR built on a Swing action - this is the kind of rifle best for F Class. It is wearing a NF BR 12-42x56

IMG_0458.jpg



Q - How much money should I spend ?

A - The best answer I can offer is that while precision shooting doesn't have to be super-expensive, it will cost more than plinking tin cans with an SKS. You should probably buy the best rifle and glass combination you can reasonably afford for the game you want to play. A factory offering from a major manufacturer that is good enough for a deer hunt will likely not cut it for precision work. At a minimum invest in a heavy barrel rifle designed for making hits on small targets a ways away. Seek advice from knowledgeable people at your range who are themselves good shooters and try to use a variety of rifles before buying. If you have to make economies make the economies on the rifle NOT the glass - good glass is essential and I've wasted more money on cheap glass than I care to recall. "Buy once hurt once" is good advice.

Q - What calibre should I get ?

A - There isn't a simple answer to this. It is easier to say what you shouldn't get as a new shooter. Avoid the temptation to get the latest super-boomer etc etc..... Rifles chambered in .338 Lapua or .300 Win Mag are great fun to shoot and can be outstandingly accurate - I know, I have one in each calibre - but they are not the rifle to learn precision shooting on ! Both generate recoil that can be uncomfortable or distracting and both are relatively expensive to feed - recoil and a high price per round don't make for long practice sessions and practice, more than anything, will improve your shooting.

A .338 Lapua -a great rifle but not the ideal first choice !

IMG_0457.jpg


Another not-so-good choice for starting out with - a .300 Win Mag in AICS 1.5

IMG_0460.jpg


I would recommend either of a .223 or .308 to someone starting out in precision rifle shooting. Both are easily available in factory loads and for the reloader the components are easy to find and priced reasonably. There is a lot of load data available and both are easy to load for. A .223 will allow for longer practice sessions and is cheaper to feed but the .308 is also a very viable choice.

Q - So, should I reload ?

A - Absolutely ! Not only is reloading a very rewarding hobby on its own but it allows you to shoot cheaper and, more importantly, to tailor a round for your particular rifle.

A good choice of brass, bullets and powder - easily available for .308, .223 and other calibres.

IMG_0454.jpg


Q - What magnification scope should I use ?

A - Much will depend on what distance you plan on shooting and lots of people will give advice that you should use a 3-9 variable because that is what they use for hunting etc. In my view, you need more magnification than this. I usually recommend a scope in the 6-24 or, better yet, the 8-32 range. Remember - get the best glass you can afford !

EDIT

On the advice of SteveB - a much more experienced shooter - I incorporate his comments verbatim as follows:

One suggestion about the scopes and their issues. Might I suggest that you break up the shooting disapplines. For example, F-class shooting use scopes that are at the high range of power. I routinely use my scopes at 55 to 60 power on good days and long distances, 40 power for normal days and then back off to 24 power for real bad mirage conditions. I understand for tactical shooting a 6 x 24 or 8 x 32 is ideal, and benchrest can use upwards of 36 or 45 power.

FFP is not used in F-class shooting because we shoot known distances. Also target scopes built like this have only become widely available in recent years and are still somewhat of a fad. In hunting scopes, FFP was only available in expensive european scopes in years past and was considered a liability. Match scope pricing seems to fall within these three general price ranges. Sightron/Vortex/Bushnell are at about the $1100 level, Nightforce is at the $2100 level and S&B/March are at the $3500 level. Different options and power vary the pricing somewhat but these will give a good price estimate for the new shooter. Optic quality doesn't seem to be much different between the Sightron and Nightforce levels however the Nightforce are built much tougher. S&B/March levels are another whole ballgame. Steve



Q - What accuracy should I expect ?

A - Well, a lot of people will have you believe that they can shoot 1/4 MOA but, in reality, that is exceptionally hard to do. Half-MOA isn't easy either but is a realistic goal to aim for if you have a quality rifle with quality glass and quality ammo. I am fond of saying that "5 inside a dime" is proof that those three things are in place and that the driver is doing his job. But don't expect to do that on day one !

The following picture shows what "5 inside a dime" looks like - the top two were shot with a Remington SPS/AICS 2.0 in .223 using handloads and the bottom two were shot with a pair of Sako TRG's in .308 - again using handloads.

IMG_0455.jpg



Incidentally the cheapest rifle pictured in this post is my custom F/TR. It is also the most accurate of all the rifles but is a specialized tool for the job and for that job it is hard to beat :D

Hopefully this will help answer so FAQ's and I'm sure other, more experienced people, will chime in with their advice and ideas.

Enjoy precision rifle shooting !
 
Last edited:
Good read. Wish I read this a few years ago... Wouldn't have bought so many cruddy scopes and blamed the great rifle... I have sold rifles on a whim that they were lemons, only to later find that the junk scope was the culprit the entire time... SOLID ADVICE :)there is no better investment than your glass for LR shooting IMO.
 
Great post and will likely help lots of beginners. I think the complicated part apart giving/receiving advice on a forum like this is that lots of beginners do not actually know what they want to do when they start. I am pretty new at only 3 years into reloading and paper shooting. I'm still learning what what I want from a rifle set up.

Some people need to buy the best custom setup and compete from day one. Some people have the idea they can do it on the cheap and end up spending just as much money but taking 5 times as long to get there. I fit into the latter category. :redface::D

There is something to be said about getting into it and making the mistakes but the main thing is you have to enjoy the experience. Improving accuracy can be very frustrating sometimes, especially if your not achieving your own personal expectations and everyone around you is making it look easy.

Tomochan, thanks for another great thread. Looking forward to your scope review.
 
if we all agree glass is the most important consideration for LR shooting ....

What r ur thoughts on front plane reticle vs rear ?
 
What r ur thoughts on front plane reticle vs rear ?

A lot of people prefer FFP ( first focal plane ) as it allows for easier ranging at all magnifications. Personally I prefer second focal plane because I do not like the reticle to change size on me and also always shoot at known distances. If I do need to range a lazer range finder would be, for me, faster than FFP anyway.
 
A lot of people prefer FFP ( first focal plane ) as it allows for easier ranging at all magnifications. Personally I prefer second focal plane because I do not like the reticle to change size on me and also always shoot at known distances. If I do need to range a lazer range finder would be, for me, faster than FFP anyway.

A lot of people prefer FFP becasue the can use it to range targets at any power. I would wager that few actually use them for that. The guys that are true practitioners or LR shooting use a LRF to determine the actual distance without involving slide rulers and mental math. There is an inherent innaccuracy to using the reticle to judge distance that is compounded through each estimation. How many inches/feet/yards is that item you want to range in real life? How many MIL/MOA does it actually subtend? Then doing the math either in your head or using a slide ruler.

The worst things about FFP reticles are also their best qualities. The reticle gets bigger and smaller which allows you to range on any power but can be difficult to use at low power (hard to accurately read the subtention) or covers too much target at max power (impossible to see a small target).

In short, FFP reticles are an affectation, like a tattoo or a moustache. You might like the way they look and people might think that you're cool, but they serve little real purpose.
 
Glass

Good post BOB,
i am glad you put a lot of emphisis on buying good glass as you know we see shooters at our range on a regular basis with a great rifle only to find they have a weaver 4 power on it useing factory ammo and shooting 3" groups , and they are miffed and blame it on the rifle , when i show them my nightforce and let them know what it costs they just look at me like i am from another planet:confused: I was at Mission yesterday and there was a fellow there with a brand new Sako TRG in .308 , if you can believe it he put a brand new 3x9 redfeild on it with a standard cross hair:eek: He was shooting all over the paper at 100 yds , the cross hair pretty much blocked out the bull at 100 yds, He blamed the bad groups on poor factory ammo , He is going to shoot in FTR next spring , when i suggested a better scope and handloads would go a long way to improveing his shooting i got the Alien start again H:S:
 
A lot of people prefer FFP ( first focal plane ) as it allows for easier ranging at all magnifications. Personally I prefer second focal plane because I do not like the reticle to change size on me and also always shoot at known distances. If I do need to range a lazer range finder would be, for me, faster than FFP anyway.

When someone brings up ranging at all magnifications with FFP as it's main usefulness, that is the first indication that they don't understand how that type of scope is used, or how to use it effectively.
 
Very good post for beginners indeed ... I am one of them. I couldn't agree more on the glass. I took that advise and bought a 6-24 Sightron before I even settled on a rifle and I don't think I will need to change the optics for years to come, regardless of what I ended up building for a rifle.

I think a lot of beginners are too eager to get shooting to be patient, they run to a gun shop or see a picture online of something they like, buy it and go shoot it. This is where some of my pennies may go to waste. I bought a model 12 Savage and so far have replaced the stock, bought a mag that allows single shot feeding, and have sent off the stok and action for a new barrel and professional bedding. One day I may consider starting over with a custom action. All this to say, if I had taken the very good advise in some of these posts, I would have bought a Stevens, a barrel and a stock and have saved myself 500$ which could have gone to a good trigger. Food for thought I guess.
 
When someone brings up ranging at all magnifications with FFP as it's main usefulness, that is the first indication that they don't understand how that type of scope is used, or how to use it effectively.

My comment was typed without dwelling much on the question but you are correct - my understanding of the benefits of FFP is limited. While I still won't like the fact that the reticle changes size and am therefore unlikely to be persuaded, perhaps when you have more time you can share, in some detail, your thoughts on the pro's and con's of FFP vs SFP so that the group can benefit from your knowledge in such matters?
 
I've explained it a few times, there really ought to be a sticky for it. What it can give you is extremely fast target acquisition without the need to touch your magnification or turret adjustments. Not an issue when your shooting at canned distances and have all the time in world to make your adjustments. But, for situation where precious seconds count, FFP is a much more powerful system (when combined with the proper reticle). This is one of the threads where I went into detail a bit:

http://www.canadiangunnutz.com/forum/showthread.php?t=645397&page=2
 
Nice write up ...... can you elaborate a little on your FT/R build ? You said it is very accurate, what is done to the rifle and loads that do the deal. Any more pix?
 
A lot of people prefer FFP becasue the can use it to range targets at any power. I would wager that few actually use them for that. The guys that are true practitioners or LR shooting use a LRF to determine the actual distance without involving slide rulers and mental math. There is an inherent innaccuracy to using the reticle to judge distance that is compounded through each estimation. How many inches/feet/yards is that item you want to range in real life? How many MIL/MOA does it actually subtend? Then doing the math either in your head or using a slide ruler.

The worst things about FFP reticles are also their best qualities. The reticle gets bigger and smaller which allows you to range on any power but can be difficult to use at low power (hard to accurately read the subtention) or covers too much target at max power (impossible to see a small target).

In short, FFP reticles are an affectation, like a tattoo or a moustache. You might like the way they look and people might think that you're cool, but they serve little real purpose.

Couldn't agree with you LESS!........at least your last paragraph.

The best scope's in the industry are pretty much all First Focal plane optics.

For bench rest or extreme distance paper punching at known distances a 2nd focal plane scope would probably be the better option due to the ability to maintain a constant(read finer) reticle that obstructs less of the target at distance. However for the guys who engage targets of opportunity at various distances(known and unknown) a FFP scope really comes into it's own.

The ability to use the scope for ranging at any magnification isn't so important to the average shooter as the ability to have your correction values match your reticle and remain relevant at any magnification. The ability to "send" a round down range spot your miss, measure the distance you were off target with your reticle and then make the correction using turret graduations that match your reticle and do so at any magnification you choose is the beauty of the FFP system. Yes you can do this with a 2nd focal plane scope but only on one magnification setting which almost negates the benfit of having variable manification.

Once you spend some time behind a FFP optic under field conditions the benefit becomes readily apparent. What also becomes clear is how pointless a Mil-dot reticle with MOA adjustments is! Especially in the 2nd image plane!
Maybe manufacturers offer these scopes because (how'd that go again?....)consumers think they're cool though they serve little real purpose :D
 
Thanks - most helpful.:cheers:

That doesn't even scratch the surface... a small book could be written on effective use of FFP. Take moving targets for example, and assume a speed of say 1.5 MPH (NSCC PR 400 yard/meter mover speed). If you're using an SPF scope, you will figure out the lead you need to hit the target (it's about a foot at 400). That's fine because it's a canned distance. But, what if we change the distance, or make it random. What lead do you apply then? That's something most SPF shooters would have to look up or try in order to figure out, and something they will have to remember for each distance and interpolate for intermediate distances. It's very easy for FFP shooters though. Look at the following ballistics chart:

lead.jpg


Note that the lead is more-or-less constant in terms of mils, regardless of distance? Use a 1.0 mil lead all the way out to 700 yards (+/-0.1 will still give you a hit). You can do that because your mil marks are always true, at any distance, at any magnification.
 
Back
Top Bottom