.270 gun manufacturer

This thing shoots MOA (doesn't everything these days?)


Seems like it sometimes. 30 years ago groups under 1 inch might get carried around in a proud shooters wallet. Now he might go home and pull the barrel off.

For me, the average accuracy of new rifles has been considerably higher than the used guns I've bought. I seldom by a used rifle if it isn't priced low enough to include a Gaillard barrel.

A new shooter is better of starting new than sorting through someones elses problem used gun.
 
. . .

A new shooter is better of starting new than sorting through someones elses problem used gun.

That worked out well for your Supergrade '06 didn't it!!:p

We got lucky though, no issues with the .270 Ruger, and it was in out of the box new condition when it arrived, which although thats what was advertised I didn't really believe. But no scratches, sharp checkering, and no wear marks on the bolt. Then to top it off it came with a 3.5-10X50 Leupold in quite good after market extension rings.
 
That worked out well for your Supergrade '06 didn't it!!

Depends on how you look at it. It wasn't a shooter, but the fix was to walk into the same gun store and say "Its not a shooter" and instantly get my money back.

The Cooper 30-06 that replaced it is easy to get along with, except maybe today when I was useing 3 minutes of wind at my 500 yard gong and only 1 1/2 with a .300. That may not seem like a lot, but the end result is haveing to do something right, or still being able to do nothing. Long before we got out to 800 the 30-06 was hideing in the grass sobbing quietly.:(


*6-12 mph wind swinging from 10 to 1 O'Clock, we usually sent the shot from half force left.

*2 Maybe should have put this in the 30-06 -300 thread.
 
Another newbie!

I hadn't even thought of the scope yet? Thats something I know little about, anything to stay away from? A good beginner piece?

Not that I am trying to give advice in anyway as I am in the same boat as you.

I've decided on the weatherby vanguard series 2 .270 $550 Ib blue or $650 in stainless. I'm going stainless. Then for a scope I've decided on the red field revolution for 184 from prophet river. Seems to be a great entry level scope in 3x9 40mm.

I spent more on the gun than the scope as I will replace the scope as my accuracy improves!

Good luck!
 
Last edited:
I've had my share of inexpensive scopes, and many of them have been satisfactory, only a few have been a waste of money. Most of the scopes manufactured today are pretty clear, and clarity tends to be comparable with many mid priced scopes. The quality of the scope should be considered based on how it will be used. Clearly a scope that can be purchased new for $150-$200 is not going to measure up to an expensive scope on a heavy recoiling rifle like a .378 Weatherby, it should not be counted on to stand up to rough handling in extreme climatic conditions over a long period of time, and it will be prone to failure if windage and elevation adjustment are frequently made, particularly if a lot of shooting is done at or near the limit of the adjustments. Conversely an inexpensive scope that is mounted on a rifle that produces mild recoil, that is not exposed to dramatic temperature changes or to temperature or humidity extremes, and is only infrequently adjusted after its initial zeroing, can provide reliable service almost indefinitely. I would be surprised if the combination of a .270 Vanguard topped with a 3-9X40 Redfield doesn't provide years of trouble free service, even in the miserable weather typical of the late fall in Canada.

The scopes to avoid are the ones that come as packages with inexpensive rifles. In such cases the rifle, the scope, and the mounts that hold the scope on the rifle are destined to let you down, even when used under favorable conditions. These things might not hold a zero, the turret adjustments might be hit and miss, anytime you take the scope outdoors on a cool humid day, it will fog up, they tend to have a short critical eye relief, particularly when set at high power which increases the likelihood of getting hit. The reticle might break under even with gentle handling, which is an unreasonable expectation for a big game scope in this country. If your rifle is going to be carried on a quad, a snowmobile, on horseback, in a boat, bounce around in a truck, taken on wilderness trips that exceed a day, or if the scope is mounted on a rifle that kicks harder than a .223, these things will fail.

As an aside, a fixed power scope can be a less expensive more robust scope compared to a variable. There are less moving parts in a fixed power, it needs fewer seals, and is usually smaller. A shorter eye piece can make mounting the fixed power scope with the correct eye relief easier than a variable which has a longer eyepiece, and variable eye relief across its power range. Keep in mid that the advantage of the scope is not its magnification, if it were we would all have 40X scopes on our hunting rifles. The advantage of the scope is that it places the aiming point and the target on the same focal plane, where iron sights and the target appear at 3 different distances, each requiring its own focus as the eye can only focus on one distance at a time. The purpose of magnification is to see the target. Big game is mostly easy to see, so there is little need for big magnification over normal hunting ranges.
 
Seems like it sometimes. 30 years ago groups under 1 inch might get carried around in a proud shooters wallet. Now he might go home and pull the barrel off.

For me, the average accuracy of new rifles has been considerably higher than the used guns I've bought. I seldom by a used rifle if it isn't priced low enough to include a Gaillard barrel.

A new shooter is better of starting new than sorting through someones elses problem used gun.

However, there are 50+ year-old rifles that are more than adequate for hunting. Here's a group shot with one a few days ago. :)

145Speer.jpg


First load I tried, Leupold 2-7 at 7 power. Just luck, I guess. ;)

Ted
 
Back
Top Bottom