Inherently accurate (and inaccurate) bolt action hunting rifles, what are they?
- Thread starter Home3
- Start date
- Location
- WMU247 near Edmonton
Ruger M77.... That is one rifle that I had to sight in cold bore. It would not group, different ammo, different scope, nothing would get that rifle to shoot.
and so it had a 10 year time out in the back of the gun locker.
finally I got around to looking at it again, and the final solution was a cheap ramline plastic stock, now it works.
and so it had a 10 year time out in the back of the gun locker.
finally I got around to looking at it again, and the final solution was a cheap ramline plastic stock, now it works.
Northman999
CGN Ultra frequent flyer
- Location
- Southern Yukon
My experience with a handful of Savage/Stevens is they shoot better than most users, often grouping under the size of a quarter.
And since this is the hunting arms forum, I must point out that 30-40 years ago, pretty much everybody "knew" that 2-3 MOA was just fine for hunting and nothing worth complaining about at all.
After shooting and/or owning many dozens of rifles, from 100+ year old milsurps to modern offerings, I've only had one rifle (an N.I.B, $900 Mini 14) that could not meet such a practical standard. Some required a little experimenting with ammo, or a basic accurizing that many rifleman are capable of, but nothing more than that.
There are a great many things that a hunter should concern themself with that are more imporant than the absolute accuracy of their firearm...
And since this is the hunting arms forum, I must point out that 30-40 years ago, pretty much everybody "knew" that 2-3 MOA was just fine for hunting and nothing worth complaining about at all.
After shooting and/or owning many dozens of rifles, from 100+ year old milsurps to modern offerings, I've only had one rifle (an N.I.B, $900 Mini 14) that could not meet such a practical standard. Some required a little experimenting with ammo, or a basic accurizing that many rifleman are capable of, but nothing more than that.
There are a great many things that a hunter should concern themself with that are more imporant than the absolute accuracy of their firearm...
Last edited:
Ardent
CGN Ultra frequent flyer
Very good rundown on what an "MOA" rifle means. Folks post a single 3/4" group and suddenly that's what the rifle is capable of. It happens a lot with M14s as well, we have a fun battle rifle match we run, and guess what, not a single MOA battle rifle has competed yet over the course in several years. These include scoped bolt actions in the "sniper" class. To me, an MOA rifle is one that will always beat that threshold, and at the outside open up to 1" at 100. Those are exceedingly rare when we're talking say fifty rounds fired into groups, but nowhere near as rare as the shooters who can consistently plot sub-MOA groups without pulled shots and called fliers. I also don't believe folks are lying, they actually think they can do it and their rifles are that good, then you remind them they would win every match they entered with shooting like that. Reminds me of a fellow hear who was adamant that 1.5" off hand groups at 100 yards were average performance. I do believe he thought he shot better than that too, reality is a shock when placed under supervised match conditions.
All modern hunting rifles are pretty good, and very comparable, truthfully.
Modern, centerfire, bolt action hunting rifles? None that I've owned. Free float barrel plus modern machining methods has made the formula for accuracy simple.
Rimfire? Savage B.Mag. I can't get the F*ing thing to group better than 2-3" at 100 yards.
Rimfire? Savage B.Mag. I can't get the F*ing thing to group better than 2-3" at 100 yards.
One wishes that was the case. But that vs. aggressive cost cutting policies of the hedge-fund owned manufacturers nowadays,...I don't see that. Few exceptions of course.
Besides, some of the "improvements" you mentioned are not considered improvements at all in the eyes of some gun experts. A while ago, I posted an article by Chuck Hawks who flamed some manufactures for advertising (and consumers for believing it) that a free floating barrel is an improvement. In his eyes, this is a gimmick to short cut a "proper bedding job" that is more labor intensive, requires skilled workers and therefore, is more expensive.
Modern rifle quality is greatly exaggerated due to millions of youtube videos ("I bought this rifle yesterday for $300 with a scope I think it is great, look at me cycle it in my room!") and very limited actual use. In general there are more rifles sold while they are on average used less and less by their owners.
Rifles used to be good to go from the factory. Now most of the "modern hunting cheap but great" rifles require gunsmithing right out of the box. Just look at the amount of threads and guides on bedding, trigger jobs, this and that, replace stock right away, polish bolt, aftermarket extractor shmactor. It amazes me to be honest. If a rifle needs a new stock, new trigger, bolt job, bedding and tune up it is no longer quality production rifle. It is a half backed junk. Walmart "great value" proposition. Can you even imagine they will have a lifespan of Lee Enfilds and Mausers of old days of "crude manufacturing"?
Yes, in a 100 even in last 50 years our manufacturing technologies leaped forward, however we are not getting even near the level of advancement in mass production rifles. PR, marketing and advertisement on the other hand are leading the way.
On top of that an average skill of a shooter goes down compared to old days so most people won't see the difference anyway - "all rifles shoot better than me". Today no one would ever dreamed of inventing Palma and hope anyone would follow these outrages rules. And they didn't even have these 10 ton benchrest machines with gazillion of zoom in optics and electronically measured powder charges. They would take practically bare stock mass produced military/hunting rifle of the day. Can you do that with that $300 packaged deal plastic junk we have now?
Rifles used to be good to go from the factory. Now most of the "modern hunting cheap but great" rifles require gunsmithing right out of the box. Just look at the amount of threads and guides on bedding, trigger jobs, this and that, replace stock right away, polish bolt, aftermarket extractor shmactor. It amazes me to be honest. If a rifle needs a new stock, new trigger, bolt job, bedding and tune up it is no longer quality production rifle. It is a half backed junk. Walmart "great value" proposition. Can you even imagine they will have a lifespan of Lee Enfilds and Mausers of old days of "crude manufacturing"?
Yes, in a 100 even in last 50 years our manufacturing technologies leaped forward, however we are not getting even near the level of advancement in mass production rifles. PR, marketing and advertisement on the other hand are leading the way.
On top of that an average skill of a shooter goes down compared to old days so most people won't see the difference anyway - "all rifles shoot better than me". Today no one would ever dreamed of inventing Palma and hope anyone would follow these outrages rules. And they didn't even have these 10 ton benchrest machines with gazillion of zoom in optics and electronically measured powder charges. They would take practically bare stock mass produced military/hunting rifle of the day. Can you do that with that $300 packaged deal plastic junk we have now?
Finally someone agrees with me! Yep, rifles these days from the big manufacturers are complete crap.
Rifle locked in a Hi-Score rest. Rest clamped to the table. Pneumatic trigger. I'm not involved at all. Rifle shoots 1/2" groups. I now know what the rifle can do. Now it's my turn.
Granted I shoot lots of gophers all spring and summer. Like someone else stated, I never shot from a bench as a kid, but I had an old Cooey with a bent front sight that I just knew how to hold it. I never missed much with that.
No matter what people choose to believe, my tags get filled every year. I have a 5" pipe cap that I use for a 300 yd target. I need to hit it 4 out of 5 times from each hunting position I use (never off-hand) or it becomes a 100 yd rifle. I hang clays on the target frame at 200 yds, don't miss more than one in five, consistently. Gophers at 125 yds equals big game at 400 yds, but you gotta get the trigger time in or you can't be confident of the shot.
Granted I shoot lots of gophers all spring and summer. Like someone else stated, I never shot from a bench as a kid, but I had an old Cooey with a bent front sight that I just knew how to hold it. I never missed much with that.
No matter what people choose to believe, my tags get filled every year. I have a 5" pipe cap that I use for a 300 yd target. I need to hit it 4 out of 5 times from each hunting position I use (never off-hand) or it becomes a 100 yd rifle. I hang clays on the target frame at 200 yds, don't miss more than one in five, consistently. Gophers at 125 yds equals big game at 400 yds, but you gotta get the trigger time in or you can't be confident of the shot.
Remington 700's have always been good to me. I'm also partial to Tikkas and Sakos. I've gotten most consistent accuracy out of those. Bear in mind, I have not shot one of everything, so that's just been my experience.
X3
(for hunting ... a Rem 7600 I have has this quality and if I am going hunting and wont have time or opportunity to confirm zero ... I take the 7600! .. I have also noticed that the first M305 I bought is very consistent to POI with the first rounds as well - probably have many others but these are the ones that stand out in my memory as surprisingly -- they give no surprises!)
- Location
- Steel Town
I view most "modern" rifles and shotguns, with a few exceptions, as nothing more than landfill!
The few that have surprized me are the Canadian-made Savage rimfires (at least those made up to 3 years ago), the plastic fantastic Tikka T3's, and most of the Sako model 85 variants. Ruger has been hit or miss with me, and don't get me going on the "others".
Just as an aside, high price doesn't always equal better!! I can't tell you how much expensive ($2-3K) JUNK I've purchased over the years!! If you're going to spend that money, I can tell you about a smith that can build you one that is 10x the quality!
If you want to spend even more, yeah then you start to see some attention to detail, etc... but rarely better than a well done custom.
The few that have surprized me are the Canadian-made Savage rimfires (at least those made up to 3 years ago), the plastic fantastic Tikka T3's, and most of the Sako model 85 variants. Ruger has been hit or miss with me, and don't get me going on the "others".
Just as an aside, high price doesn't always equal better!! I can't tell you how much expensive ($2-3K) JUNK I've purchased over the years!! If you're going to spend that money, I can tell you about a smith that can build you one that is 10x the quality!
If you want to spend even more, yeah then you start to see some attention to detail, etc... but rarely better than a well done custom.
