Not really. the longer the barrel is at a given diameter the more it whips during firing. Shorter barrels, being stiffer, whip less.
New Kel Tec RFB Hunter
- Thread starter sf750
- Start date
Not really. the longer the barrel is at a given diameter the more it whips during firing. Shorter barrels, being stiffer, whip less.
Why would anyone put a 1-4 power on a 308 then even think about shooting it and talking about accuracy? I have a 4-12 on mine and when I'm at the range I wish I had more.
Unless kel-tec put a higher quality barrel on the 24" I don't see any reason to get one. As mentioned earlier length does not translate into increased accuracy. The best thing about the RFB is how short it is.
I found out yesterday that a sandbag under the forend and a monopod on the rail under the butt is so far the most stable shooting I've done with it. Going to use that setup for the rest of my load testing.
Unless kel-tec put a higher quality barrel on the 24" I don't see any reason to get one. As mentioned earlier length does not translate into increased accuracy. The best thing about the RFB is how short it is.
I found out yesterday that a sandbag under the forend and a monopod on the rail under the butt is so far the most stable shooting I've done with it. Going to use that setup for the rest of my load testing.
Fail...
I have several precison rigs and several more customized by Rick from ATRS. My RFB will be used for hunting. With that in mind, such a compact & practical sized bush gun used for intermediate hunting range use should not be overburdened or have it's useful advantage of being a bullpup undermined by installing a 14-16" highpower scope with a 50mm objective. If that were the case just as well get a full size rifle.
It boils down to what your SPECIFIC use for the rifle is going to be and whether you actually want to take advantage of the compact size. I never purchased it to be a precision rig as there are much more precise out of the box guns for the same money. I bought it as a fun black rifle that is non-restricted and compact without loosing its usefulness by having too short a barrel for the intermidiate hunting round it uses.
It doesn't need to be a large scope to get magnification, this is a 2-12 power with a 35mm tube
What do your several precision rigs have to do with the RFB? Do you have a 1-4 on your 300mag and shoot it out to 500yds?
I'm not saying it needs a huge target scope for field use but it bothers me when people put a 1-4 on something then can't figure out why they can't get a decent group out of a rifle. Then they end up on here complaining about it and saying that it can't shoot and no one should buy one (not that this is happening from any of the posters in this thread yet)
I agree with you that for hunting and general bush bashing a quality 1-4 or 2-7 is fine but mine wears a 4-12x44 and I had a 2.5-16x42 on it originally (robbed for my Swiss Arms), neither was huge or cumbersome and when I was at the range I wished for more magnification.
My point was that if you want to get decent groups you need a decent scope with a reasonable amount of magnification. A 1-4 is going to give most people a group of about 3-4" at 100yds even with a rifle capable of sub moa (which the RFB typically is not). With the 4-12 on mine I can ring the gong at 300yds all day long which is plenty for Deer.
I don't see the point of the 24" barrel unless Kel-Tec increased the quality of it as it would lose the compactness you mentioned and probably won't make any better groups. I don't notice the muzzle blast as being harsh at all from the short barrel so don't think there is a point to the 24". Just forget about threading it for a muzzle device and you have a perfect hunting rig that can be fired without hearing protection if required (not recommended of course but it won't blow your ear drums), the recoil is also gentle if the gas system is set well so it really doesn't need a brake either.
I hope to see a 24" out at the range one of these days so I can compare and see if the groups are tighter.
mudgunner49
CGN Ultra frequent flyer
1. oh well - obsess less. Maybe they just can't shoot...;
2. based on what?? I can shoot 1.25-2" all day with irons and a 1-4x is going to be worse than that?? Don't take your personal limitations for the given standard;
3. And I can hit a steel 18"x18" all day (once again) with iron sights - if you need more magnification fine, just realize that everyone doesn't have your limitations. At a certain point, especially in field conditions, there is a point of diminishing returns with optical magnification (mirage, excessive movement, etc);
4. agree completely, 110%;
5. I've taken lots of shots in the field with all manner of firearms and never once wore ear protection, not sure I kow anyone who does, been caught off-guard a few times on the gun-line also and after 32 years in the field artillery I still have above average hearing. Big difference from shooting off the bench, possibly in an enclosed space, for 20 rounds or so and the odd shot in the field;
6. given comparable optics and a competent shooter I doubt there would be a difference at all...
blake
2. Based on what I've seen at the range most people can't shoot at all with irons and a 1-4 does not typically provide enough precision for giving a rifle a fair chance to prove what it is capable of doing.
3. Which is also why I said MOST people.
I also know a couple guys that have exceptional eye sight and can do great things with irons but that isn't typical. I find that most shooters these days have never even looked through irons and don't even know how to line up because they have only ever used red dots and magnified scopes.
Getting off topic.
Point is, Don't throw a 1-4 scope on a rifle then go to the range and expect to evaluate the rifles accuracy potential, especially if you aren't setting it up on a solid rest front and back.
The 1-4 is fine for the field but lacks at the range when distances are extended. The RFB is very capable out to 300yds even with cheap ammo but is far from a sniper rifle and until I hear something about the quality of barrel they put in the 24" model I don't see the point in losing the compactness in exchange for a few more inches of the same barrel.
I would like to state that I believe hearing protection is a good idea when firing high powered rifles, particularly magnums,,, My hearing was permanently damaged at the age of 19 by forgetting to wear my ear protection while firing only one shot from a ,308 Norma Magnum (caused painful ringing and complete deafness for over 30 minutes),,, To this day, decades later it still register's on every medical hearing test I have ever taken,,, One person should not deem that what is the standard for them is the standard for all people, so I say this only as a warning to others,,,
mudgunner49
CGN Ultra frequent flyer
I agree completely - my example was anecdotal only and not an indication of what others should do...
mudgunner49
CGN Ultra frequent flyer
1. I will agree with the first part, but a 1-4x does give adequate magnification to evaluate at the field accuracy level - an optic does not help you shoot better, it just allows you to see better;
2. exceptional eyesight is not required to shoot irons well but you do need an understanding of the fundamentals of marksmanship and how iron sights work;
3. and they are missing a vital piece in the shooting fundamentals. Folks who don't understand this don't fully understand shooting and need to be aware that there is a whole other world out there as it relates to shooting (well) and at long range. We spent many years shooting the FNC1 at 600m with irons and hitting very consistently - I guess that's an impossibility now;
4. the rifle/optic combination will do much farther than that if "you will do". The limitation is the shooter not the optic.
I'd be interested to know the basis of your statements (speaking of shooting knowledge) as it pertains to your opinion (because everyone, skilled/knowledgeable or not has one of those), and not just "I've watched guys at my club"...
Yes, let's move on shall we.
Just got a reply from Kel-Tec, Barrel is exactly the same in the C and the Hunter model other than 6 more inches. Newer ones are salt bath nitride while older ones are chrome lined. He wouldn't say if there was a serial number cutoff or a date of manufacture where they completely switched over. Sounds like it happened around when the bolt got the Titanium nitride coating. He was fairly vague.
Hopefully someone gets one to a range soon and does some testing on the 24 inch model.
So far with mine the best I've gotten is 1.5 inch at 100yds with my handloads. I have a couple different loads that will do it but can't seem to get the groups any smaller yet. One load is with 110gr V-max and the other is with 150SST's (pretty sure it was the 150's). Have more to test but have shifted focus to developing for my 308 bolt action and 338 Lapua for now.
Just got a reply from Kel-Tec, Barrel is exactly the same in the C and the Hunter model other than 6 more inches. Newer ones are salt bath nitride while older ones are chrome lined. He wouldn't say if there was a serial number cutoff or a date of manufacture where they completely switched over. Sounds like it happened around when the bolt got the Titanium nitride coating. He was fairly vague.
Hopefully someone gets one to a range soon and does some testing on the 24 inch model.
So far with mine the best I've gotten is 1.5 inch at 100yds with my handloads. I have a couple different loads that will do it but can't seem to get the groups any smaller yet. One load is with 110gr V-max and the other is with 150SST's (pretty sure it was the 150's). Have more to test but have shifted focus to developing for my 308 bolt action and 338 Lapua for now.
