Author Topic: Small caliber rifle suggestions wanted (Read 2749 times)

Atomic Chicken · « **on:** May 27, 2004, 10:23:29 PM »

Greetings!

This is my first post on this message board, I am VERY impressed with the topics and informative users here! Great board!

I am interested in purchasing a new bolt action rifle, in a small caliber to compliment my large caliber rifles. Here's what I'm looking for - I have 2 main requirements:

#1 - Small caliber - one of these four: .223 Remington, .22-250, .243 Winchester, or 7mm-08. I am leaning toward one of the 2 middle calibers, and I'm almost hesitant to list the .223 among the options because I consider it to be possibly a little too small for my needs.

#2 - Stainless barrel, synthetic stock, lightest weight possible.

My purpose for this gun is an all-weather varminter that is also capable of taking down deer at a max. range of 200 to maybe 300 yards. I want the rifle to be as light weight as possible, and with as flat a trajectory and as high a level of accuracy as possible. I will be carrying it LONG distances occasionally, so weight is second only to weatherproofness in importance.

Are there any production rifles in the $300-$700 price range that fit these requirements? Please feel free to make ANY suggestions, even different calibers I might not be considering. Please DON'T suggest .30 caliber or larger calibers, I already have several rifles chambered in that range. I am interested in small calibers only (7mm at the LARGEST - and that might even be too large) for this rifle. Thanks in advance - you all have a great board here!

Best wishes,
Bawko

Atomic Chicken · « **Reply #1 on:** May 28, 2004, 12:30:51 AM »

Greetings again!

I have been reading this forum for the last few hours, and I am rapidly coming to the conclusion that perhaps the .243 Win is the cartridge that fits my needs the best. I could still be persuaded toward either the .22-250 or 7mm-08, but the argument would have to be pretty good.

I have also found 2 rifle models that may fit my weatherproof/lightweight requirement based on reading this forum, either a Tikka T3 Lite Stainless/Synthetic or a Remington Model 7 Stainless/Synthetic. If I were to choose the .22-250 cartridge, the new Remington 700 LV/SF model also looks promising.

Any suggestions to help persuade me in any direction regards to the caliber or rifle choice?

Thanks in advance - I really look forward to hearing some feedback!

Best wishes,
Bawko

Mauser · « **Reply #2 on:** May 28, 2004, 01:52:10 AM »

I think you're about to make the right decision. One of my recurring arguments at the deer camp I go to annually, is that 22 caliber centerfires should never be used on deer regardless of range. Its not that they can't kill one if pressed but that they aren't reliable killers, often even with decently placed shots. The fact is that the overwhelming majority of .22 bullets are varmint bullets that blow up on small deer bones or even hides.

We owe it to the game and to pastime to use cartridges that are at the top of our personal recoil/muzzle blast tolerance so that we can humanely kill the animals. My opinion is that the .243 is the absolute minimum for deer and only with good 100 grain bullets.

Mikey · « **Reply #3 on:** May 28, 2004, 02:32:29 AM »

Atomic Chicken: I'll go with Mauser on his views. He's right. If you are looking for something in the range of 243-7mm/08, find yourself a midway point with the 6.5 Swede - it can't be beat. It makes a fine varmit round with the lighter weight bullets and will take deer, moose, elk and hog, not to mention small to medium bear. And all in a easy to shoot package. HTH and JMHO. Mikey.

Atomic Chicken · « **Reply #4 on:** May 28, 2004, 02:48:14 AM »

Mikey,

Thanks for the 6.5 Swede suggestion. What is its accuracy like? The reason I have been considering both .243 Win. and 7mm-08 is that they are both considered to be "inherently accurate" cartridges based on the .308 case. Does the 6.5 Swede have this sort of reputation as well? How does the 6.5 Swede compare to the 260 Remington (which uses the same diameter bullet, but with the .308 case) in terms of accuracy?

Best wishes,
Bawko

savageT · « **Reply #5 on:** May 28, 2004, 03:34:47 AM »

Atomic Chicken,
I'll jump in here and say that the 6.5x55mm Swede cartridge is inherently accurate Period!....... as compared to any .308 based cartridge today. If you care to do a search for the 6.5mm Swede forums out there on the net you will see that this cartridge and the original Swedish Mausers that use this caliber were considered to be one of the most accurate/best designed for accuracy, knock-down and lack of recoil.

Jim

Zachary · « **Reply #6 on:** May 28, 2004, 04:32:57 AM »

Atomic Chicken,

As moderator of this forum, let me first start off my saying WELCOME ABOARD!

My main concern with the Swede is factory ammo is not readily available. The closest cousin to the Swede is the .260 Remington, and it is every bit as accurate, all else being equal, to the Swede.

On that same note, my choices for you would be either the .243, the .260, and the 7mm-08. I own all three cartridges and my favorite is the 7mm-08. Is it as flat as the .243 or .260? No, but it's certainly flat enough for shots out to 200 or 300 yards. Plus, it has excellent accuracy and more power at the longer distances.

As for rifles, as was mentioned, the Tikka T3 has a stainless synthetic version and it an excellent choice because is lighter than most full-sized rifles.

Another choice would be the Remington M7 Stainless Synthetic. It is smaller, but also lighter. The only drawback here, as I see it, is that it only has a 20" barrel, and I like barrels of at least 22" on non-magnum cartridges.

If you are willing to spend some extra money, look at the Kimber. It is one of the lightest guns out there, and it's quality is also very high.

Zachary

sherpa · « **Reply #7 on:** May 28, 2004, 05:40:59 AM »

243 will do it all

longwinters · « **Reply #8 on:** May 28, 2004, 05:55:12 AM »

Your predicament that you have 2 extremes with one being for varmint and the other being deer size game. But owning both the 243 and 7m-08 I would go with the 7m-08. I would rather be a little heavy for varmints than a little light for deer. Plus the 243 can only go up to 107 gns (if you reload) but the 7m-08 can come down to 100 gn. Another factor is the shooting distance you are considering. Out to 300 yds I think the 243 is too light IMHO for deer . . . period. In your price range you can pick from Tikka, Savage, Remington, Thompson Encore and several others. All can be excellent shooters. Heck, a couple of weeks ago I saw Weatherby blems for under $600.00. If I had the money one of the three 7m-08's would have come home with me. Or buy used and move up a notch in manufacture.

Oh, and A.C, Welcome to Graybeard. Thoe forum of endless possibilities in the shooting sports.

Long

flintlock · « **Reply #9 on:** May 28, 2004, 07:19:13 AM »

Atomic..I own one centerfire rifle.243 Ruger 77...I bought new in 1980...
I grew up in eastern NC....we still own farms there...but have lived in both VA and GA...with this gun I have killed about 125 deer...never had one get away...I have also used for beavers, groundhogs, foxes, crows and wild dogs....I have a farmer friend that has killed 3 black bears with,
while they were digging up his peanuts....his bullet....Federal Premium...
85gr BTHP....he says one went about 350lbs...shot it behind the shoulder...
didn't go 20 yards....it was perfectly legal, as they were destroying his crops...he was amazed....I'm not suggesting .243 is the perfect bear gun...but it stays behind his truck seat for deer....I too used to think the 100gr bullets were the "stuff" ...used them over 15 years...switched to the Federal Premium 85 gr about 3 years ago...it works...you can see my posts on this bullet in Deer Hunting area....
I have buddies/brothers/nephews that use other calibers (.260...270...7mm-08...30-06...280) and have seen deer hit with 7mm Mags and 300 Mags...a deer IS NOT THAT HARD TO KILL...just hit them in the neck or shoulder blade and they will drop with any of the above calibers....double lung shots...they may run 25-100 yards....
YOU WILL SEE MORE DIFFERENCE IN THE MAKEUP OF THE BULLET IN A CERTAIN CALIBER THAN USING DIFFERENT CALIBERS....they all kill....there is no magical caliber...where you can gut shoot a deer and have it drop...maybe when we start shooting lasers, this will happen...
I've seen several guys who can't shoot...because they flinch...but they sure won't admit it....some of these guys keep getting bigger guns...they think that's the answer...Sorry...I'll get off my soapbox....
BTW...have you considered a 25-06??? I'm currently trying to talk a buddy into one of them...If you think .243 is too small..that's another option...
Good Luck....flintlock

Zachary · « **Reply #10 on:** May 28, 2004, 08:02:21 AM »

Flintlock,

While a .243 is capable of shooting, and killing, deer, it has that capability within boundries. Specifically, while many deer can be killed effeciently within 100 yards, I don't consider the .243 to be a 300 yard deer gun. Accordingly, out of the 125 deer that you have killed with your .243, I would safely assume that the average was well under 300 yards, and probably closer in the 100 yard range. Is this correct?

As for shooting a 350 pound bear with an 85 grain non-bonded bullet, although it can be done, there are just too many margins for error, which is probably why even you yourself don't advocate the .243 as a bear gun. Of course I certainly understand that you were probably bringing up that point to say that, if you can kill a bear, then you can easily kill a deer, but even then I would not advocate such an 85 grain bullet in a .243 for deer, especially at longer distances.

Granted, bullet design, weight, and placement are pretty much everything when it comes to killing humanely and effectively. But even then, at longer distances, I believe that you simply need a little bit more punch to drop 'em.

I remember I had my uncle shoot at a beautiful 10 point buck at about 200 yards with a 100 grain Nosler partition out of his Sako. This was about 15 years ago, but the deer was shot in the neck and dropped on the spot. The Partition is an excellent bullet, and the shot placement was equally great. Still, even though he is a great shot, the deer could have moved his neck the second he pulled the trigger, and who knows what would have happened. The margin of error is just a little too high for a .243 at shots close to 300 yards.

Zachary

stork · « **Reply #11 on:** May 28, 2004, 08:35:27 AM »

I think you should really consider the 25-06 it is bigger and faster than a 243, so those occasional 300 yard shots can be taken with confidence. A 25-06 may not be as inheritly accurate, but I really believe the gun makes a much bigger difference that the cartridge.

Big Paulie · « **Reply #12 on:** May 28, 2004, 08:57:30 AM »

Dear Atomic,

Welcome to the boards. You had a pretty easy "scope" of description for the uses of your light rifle, until you said that you would use it for deer for 200 "to maybe 300" yards. There is an enormous difference between these two poles, which causes the entire equation to shift in choosing your rifle.

If you had said 200 to 225, then the .243 would have been within a reasonable recommendation, although many very experienced deer hunters have found it to be too light for reliably breaking through a shoulder bone of a large deer at long distances. (A good lung shot, yes. A shoulder bone shot at a large deer at considerable distance, no. You are in "iffy" territory and are looking for a wound.)

Because you said 300 yards, then the only current common factory "combo" type cartridge that fits your description is the 25-06, or maybe its new twin called the 25 WSSM. By the way, even the experts agree that the 25-06 is very loud.

The 6.5 Swede and the 7mm-08 are also fantastic cartridges, very accurate. But in truth, they aren't really flat shooting enough (in factory ammo) to be taking 300 yard shots. Also, in order to use these as true "combo" cartridges for deer and varmints, you would have to handload, because I believe that in factory loads, you will only find them in bullet weights of 140 grains or heavier.

In truth, I believe that you should reconsider your concept that you would be taking 300 yard shots. I have been deer hunting for over 35 years, and never found it necessary to shoot over 200 yards, and I considered that a long shot.

My friendly advice: Don't end up with a heavier and more powerful rifle than you really want, just because you think that someday someway you might take a 300 yard shot on a deer. If this is really within your realm of expectation, then you need to be looking at the .270 Remington and up.

Just my thoughts. No gospel.

Big Paulie

blewis · « **Reply #13 on:** May 28, 2004, 10:03:27 AM »

Don't overlook the 25-06. It would fill this gap nicely!

Atomic Chicken · « **Reply #14 on:** May 28, 2004, 11:05:56 AM »

Quote from: Big Paulie

Dear Atomic,

Welcome to the boards. You had a pretty easy "scope" of description for the uses of your light rifle, until you said that you would use it for deer for 200 "to maybe 300" yards. There is an enormous difference between these two poles, which causes the entire equation to shift in choosing your rifle.

If you had said 200 to 225, then the .243 would have been within a reasonable recommendation, although many very experienced deer hunters have found it to be too light for reliably breaking through a shoulder bone of a large deer at long distances. (A good lung shot, yes. A shoulder bone shot at a large deer at considerable distance, no. You are in "iffy" territory and are looking for a wound.)

Because you said 300 yards, then the only current common factory "combo" type cartridge that fits your description is the 25-06, or maybe its new twin called the 25 WSSM. By the way, even the experts agree that the 25-06 is very loud.

The 6.5 Swede and the 7mm-08 are also fantastic cartridges, very accurate. But in truth, they aren't really flat shooting enough (in factory ammo) to be taking 300 yard shots. Also, in order to use these as true "combo" cartridges for deer and varmints, you would have to handload, because I believe that in factory loads, you will only find them in bullet weights of 140 grains or heavier.

In truth, I believe that you should reconsider your concept that you would be taking 300 yard shots. I have been deer hunting for over 35 years, and never found it necessary to shoot over 200 yards, and I considered that a long shot.

My friendly advice: Don't end up with a heavier and more powerful rifle than you really want, just because you think that someday someway you might take a 300 yard shot on a deer. If this is really within your realm of expectation, then you need to be looking at the .270 Remington and up.

Just my thoughts. No gospel.

Big Paulie

Big Paulie,

The only reason I put in the "maybe 300" yards part was ONLY in the event that I choose a larger caliber approaching 7mm. I would not expect this kind of performance from a .243. I am a realistic person, I don't expect a small caliber gun to be a "do everything" and "kill everything" gun. I have a very limited set of requirements for this rifle, and long range on big game is NOT one of those. Long range on rabbit? Maybe... but for deer I would expect a 200 yard maximum, and ONLY under ideal conditions with the right handloads.

My main objectives here are (a) weatherproofness, (b) lightweight for long term carry, and if possible considering the other two - (c) high accuracy. This is NOT intended to be a big game rifle, it will be used on deer at the upper end of game size.

Thanks for all of your great input, and thanks to everyone else on this board for the other suggestions Keep em' coming - I still have a week or two to decide on this rifle, and I want to make the right decision!

Best wishes,
Bawko

Dave in WV · « **Reply #15 on:** May 28, 2004, 11:14:20 AM »

Welcome Atomic Chicken. The suggestion of a 25-06 is a sound one. Since you want a dual purpose rifle and the distance is out to 300 yards a 25-06 is good advice. I understand your desire for a light rifle but keep in mind "varminting" accuracy in the field and light weight are not usually found together for most hunters. By light weight I mean overall weight below 7.5-8 lbs total weight.

flintlock · « **Reply #16 on:** May 28, 2004, 11:15:26 AM »

Actually on our 3 farms in eastern NC the average field shots range from 125 to about 175 yards....the land is flat...can see for several hundred yards...longest shot I have made to date with the 85gr is 225 yards...quartering away....hit between the two last ribs....bullet angled through the body and through the offside shouder blade...ended up under the skin in the opposite side....I have the bullet here on my desk...perfect mushroom....perfect performance....if you will look at my first post on this bullet in Deer Hunting...you will see that foxcaller and others have also used this bullet....foxcaller dropped a doe at 316 yards with...and a Cous deer (smaller than whitetail) at 425 yards....at 300yds...using the Federal Loads...the Sierra 85gr is still going 2600fps....the Partition 2300....more velocity....flatter shooting (easier to hit with at long range)....and the bullet will upset more (softer bullet, more velocity) I sight my rifle in 2 1/2 inches high at 100 yards...only 2 1/2 inches low at 300.....Partition will not do that....the Sierra 85gr BTHP was designed as a long range deer/antelope bullet....that it is...
That your uncle held on the neck of a buck...and hit him there at 200 yards obviously shows his confidance in his ability and his rifle's ability...
because the .243 is such a delight to shoot...most users are able to shoot year-round...and enjoy shooting...If your uncle had hit that deer a little farther back (shoulder shot)....the results would have been the same...deer would have dropped...If the deer would have moved his neck...he would have missed...even if shot with a 300 Mag....
Once you start to get past 250 yards....you start to enter the area that you really need to wonder if the shot should be taken....many hunters are not qualified to take those shots....especially here in the east....with swamps/cutovers etc. just a few bounds away....One of the most important aspects of long range shooting...that seldom gets discussed is how to properly set up for those shots....all my tree stands are equipped with rests...and I practice out of those stands in the off season....
While the Partition is a great bullet....at ranges over 200 yards...the Federal Premium 85gr BTHP is a better choice.....As I have stated...over the past few years I have killed 11 deer, and a buddy 6 with this bullet...all but three dropped at the shot...they were lung shot, to see if the bullet would exit....it did...and left a good blood trail....what more could a deer hunter want???

Atomic Chicken · « **Reply #17 on:** May 28, 2004, 11:46:31 AM »

OK folks....

Thanks for all the great answers so far.

I think I have narrowed my caliber choice down even further, dropping the 7mm-08 from the list. The reason for this is that I don't see any real advantage between it and the .308 Win. - which I already have a Remington 700 VS chambered for. I am now mainly considering either:

(a) .243 Winchester
(b) .260 Remington

I am not really interested in the .25-06 at this point, as it requires a long action and ammunition will weigh more. It also is not recognized as an inherently accurate cartridge like the .243 - or apparently the 6.5 cartridges from what I'm gathering on this forum.

I haven't heard anything particularly good/bad about the .22-250, but again I am thinking it is too small for my purposes - and most forum replies so far have further given me the impression that it is inadequate for deer at any range.

Any further thoughts on these 2 calibers? I like the idea of a 6.5mm bullet, they have great ballistics - I'm just not certain I would want to give up the .243's great muzzle velocity and flat trajectory (not to mention great availability of off-the-shelf ammo!).

Keep the ideas coming - I really appreciate the great feedback!

Best wishes,
Bawko

jvs · « **Reply #18 on:** May 28, 2004, 01:04:02 PM »

Why don't you just buy one of each. Then you can tell us.

Nobody should resrtict themselves to just one small caliber rifle.

What kind of world would that be?

Varmint Hunter · « **Reply #19 on:** May 28, 2004, 01:46:46 PM »

Put the 7mm-08 back on the list. Actually, I'd put it on the top of the list. Use any quality 140gr bullet for whitetails and a 120gr V-Max for smaller critters,

http://members.tripod.com/sed88/rem7/

Check out this site.

vernonp · « **Reply #20 on:** May 28, 2004, 02:07:31 PM »

The Kimber 8400 rifle fills your bill in every way but price. It is the lightest weight, and probably more accurate than anything you can buy. The quality of this rifle is outstanding in every way. I am buying one, probably in 243, it is also available in 260. I am getting the wood stock and I have seen the weight listed at 5.5 lbs. and 5.10 lbs. I am paying 799. for mine. The synthetic stock I belive is a little higher. Check this rifle out before you buy, you may be like me and decide you can't live without it. Anyway good luck in your selection. vernonp

flintlock · « **Reply #21 on:** May 28, 2004, 04:43:00 PM »

Atomic....Buy the rifle in .243....(you knew I would sat that....LOL)....
if you don't like it have it rebarreled to .260....LOL....
Actually I have two hunting buddies that own .260s...one in Remington
Model 7...and one in a Browning (I think Stalker) both reload....At the price they charge for a box of .260 ammo...they need to....The Model 7 just does not like 140gr bullets....so he has to buy or reload 120s or 125s...the Browning has a Boss...no problems...(except the muzzle blast from Boss)...
My brother owns a Model 7 in 7mm-08....I would buy the 7mm-08 over a .260....its been around since I believe 1980...and has a good following....
Easier to find ammo for ....and more selection than .260....I guess.....I'm saying....don't buy a .260 (I know this will get me a lot of hate mail....)
Buy the .243....we don't even know if factory ammo will be available in 5 years for a .260.....I will say... I like knowing that I can walk in a store in a small town and buy a box of Core Lokts.....Just in case....And I'm the type guy that keeps 12 - 15 boxes of ammo for my rifle on hand...at all times....Its my "Code Yellow" insurance....LOL

You said from the outset...that you had several larger calibers....sounds like you just want a gun that is a pleasure to shoot....and that you can have some nice groups to show to your buddies...as well as get the job done in the field....a .243 will fill this niche.

I hate to even bring this up.....when I was 17...I bought a used Model 700...in 22-250.....I used it to help control the deer population...during the summer...on our farms....this was in the mid '70s....and NC had certain counties that "centerfires over .22 caliber" were outlawed....as you may know, peanuts grow fairly close to the ground....so I would sit by the field and drop the first doe that came out....the 22-250 will kill deer....and now there are deer bullets loaded in this caliber....I never really liked that gun...it shot great....used it to shoot through the pop-top hole on Pepsi cans...at 100 yards....but it was loud....and even then...after I killed a few deer with it during hunting season....looking at the wound channel....I knew that the bullets weren't getting the penetration that I needed....
That law....is one of the worst ever passed...in NC...we call it the .22 law...
Even though its not a law anymore.....we still have a lot of hunters who use .223s and 22-250s for deer....many of these have no problems....they limit their ranges...and their shot placement....but in my opinion...a 22-250 is just too loud ....for what you get....that happens to be the only gun I ever sold...."Just never had much use for it".....

I guess what I'm saying is you gain much more in the way of a deer caliber when you move from a 22-250 to a .243.....than you do when you go from a .243 to a .260....and still have very little recoil....so its still fun to shoot a couple of boxes of shells through at one session....flintlock

Atomic Chicken · « **Reply #22 on:** May 28, 2004, 07:19:16 PM »

Greetings!

Another update on my quest....
I stopped by a local sporting goods store today, and handled all the rifles I have been considering, and a few I had not. The first thing I found out is that the .260 Remington is rarer than hens teeth in this area, NONE of the rifle models I looked at were in stock in .260. This was somewhat of a disappointment, as I have been looking hard at this as an "intermediary" cartridge between the .243 and 7mm-08. I also realized that this is almost DEFINITELY a handload only cartridge, as the availability of factory ammunition for it locally was next to nothing, and almost twice as expensive as equivalent .243 cartridges. At this point, I am almost ready to scratch the .260 Remington off the list as well - leaving only the .243 Win. I was half expecting that anyway, the .260 seemed almost too good to be true - I figured there probably was a catch of some sort.

OK... Now on to the rifle report.

I handled everything available from Remington, from the Mountain rifle to the 700 VS models to the Model 7 models. The 700's were all too heavy (except for the mountain rifle, which for various reasons was not to my liking. I was FAR from impressed with the Model 7's that were available, they just seemed so "mass produced" and utilitarian - nothing graceful or really aesthetic about them at all. I hope I don't get a lot of hate replies because of stating this - they just seemed sort of "blah" to me. Maybe owning a Model 700 in .308 has already biased me a bit - it's a hell of a shooter but maybe I'm looking for something new and different. In any case - I liked other options better.

The Tikka T3 in stainless and synthetic seemed almost TOO perfect - something about the plastic bolt end, plastic magazine, and overall profile kind of made me feel it wasn't the right fit for my intended purpose. My impression of these guns is that they are nicely styled, they just LOOK accurate and the action feels OH so silky smooth.... This is the kind of gun I would buy for range shooting on nice days when I want to impress my buddies with the "new rifle" and how sweet it shoots. This strikes me as a European gentlemans hunting rifle - not the "redneck special" I am looking for. The Tikka is NOT, based on what I have seen so far, the kind of "beat it up, abuse it, get it wet and muddy, throw it in the back of the pickup, hike 10 miles with it through the forest, and forget to clean it when you get home for a few days" kind of gun I'm after. Yes - this probably qualifies as abuse of a fine firearm, but it's what I want in this gun and I have plenty of NICE guns to give TLC to - this isn't intended to be one of those.

The Ruger 77 MK2 in Stainless/Synthetic: I think I might be in love. The trigger pull is pure $#!T, but I've been assured that this can be taken care of and reduced to a reasonable 2-1/2lb-3lb range. Everything else about this rifle just screams out "smack me, beat me, leave me in the truck in the hot sun, and give me a nice mud bath afterwards!". If there ever was a bolt action that is looking for some good-ol-country-boy fun in the sticks, the Ruger looks like it might be it!

Any thoughts from any of you regarding these observations? I'm curious about what you all think.... and I hope you don't get too upset with me about the "kick it around" comments

Best wishes,
Bawko

Coyote Hunter · « **Reply #23 on:** May 28, 2004, 08:39:30 PM »

Atomic Chicken -

There is a lot of good advice posted above, but I'll throw in my 2 cents worth...

First, unless the deer are dog-sized, I also consider any .22 centerfire too small - even though I freely acknowledge many whitetail and mulies have been cleanly taken with them. But they make for great varmint rounds.

Second, if trimming every ounce of weight is really that important and you can live with stainless/black laminate or stainless/walnut instead of a stainless/synthetic, check out the Ruger Compacts at under 6 pounds. Available in .223, .243, 260, 7mm-08 and .308. While I find these rifles "interesting" and often pick one up to shoulder it at the gun shows, the 16-1/2" barrels are too short for my purposes.

As to cartridges...

I have a 7mm Rem Mag for antelope through elk and heavy-barrel .22-250 for prairie dogs and coyotes. Both work superbly for their intended purposes, but recently I had the opportunity to rebarrel or trade an older, shot-out .22-250 for anything I wanted. I was somewhat undecided and was looking at both something to "fill the gap" between the .22-250 and 7mm Mag, and something to hunt moose with like a .338 or .375. To "fill the gap" I was considering the .243 and .25-06. What I ended up with was a really sweet Ruger with a 22" barrel in .257 Roberts.

Using 50,000 CUP handloads (.257 Roberts +P), the .257 Roberts is pushing a 75g Hornady VMAX to just over 3600fps with H4895. This load is devastating on prairie dogs and coyotes and recoil is light enought that I can shoot it all day. A 115g Barnes TSX does just over 3000fps with H4350, and these loads will put 3 of 4 in under an inch at 200 yards. A couple weeks ago my brother and I were shooting clay pigeons at 300 yards with this rifle. I wouldn't hesitate to take a deer at 300 yards with this rifle (down less than 4" and over 1400fpe), but factory ammo is limited enough that I can only recommend this cartridge to handloaders.

By contrast, using a longer 24" barrel, Nosler shows the .260 will push a 100g bullet to around 3365fps, a 120g to about 3034fps, and a 140g to 2830fps. There doesn't appear to be a large selection of factory ammo for this cartridge, either.

If I were a non-handloader and had to choose between the .243, .257, .25-06 and .260, the .25-06 would get the nod. The .243 and .25-06 have the largest variety of factory ammo available, and from 75g up through 120g bullets the .25-06 has the best ballistics. The .260's biggest advantage is its ability to use 140g bullets, but if you're thinking of going that route you can just slip a 150g into your .308.

For a rifle I would choose the 7-pound walnut-stocked/blue Ruger. Immediately after getting it I would float the barrel and reseal the channel. A little wax and oil would turn it into an all-weather gun.

Coyote Hunter · « **Reply #24 on:** May 28, 2004, 08:53:57 PM »

Quote from: Atomic Chicken

...The Ruger 77 MK2 in Stainless/Synthetic: I think I might be in love. The trigger pull is pure $#!T, but I've been assured that this can be taken care of and reduced to a reasonable 2-1/2lb-3lb range. Everything else about this rifle just screams out "smack me, beat me, leave me in the truck in the hot sun, and give me a nice mud bath afterwards!". If there ever was a bolt action that is looking for some good-ol-country-boy fun in the sticks, the Ruger looks like it might be it!
...

Atomic Chicken -

I will admit to being an unabashed Ruger fan (bolt rifle and revolver), but not without reason. There are currently 3 Ruger rifles in my safe. Both the 7mm Rem Mag and .257 got free-floated right after I got them, and I gave the .257 Roberts a trigger job. The heavy-barrel .22-250 came free-floated with a target trigger, so no work was necessary. All three are excellent shooters. I prefer walnut or laminate stocks, but if you like the synthetic, go for it - you won't regret it.

Doghunter · « **Reply #25 on:** May 29, 2004, 03:58:39 PM »

I've got a tika t-3 243 ss syn. stock lite and it will take all the abuse you want to give it (with in reason as with any rifle) and still out shoot most any rifle out there. The trigger is one of the best -easy to adjust to your liking-- without a gun smith. The rifle with a weaver grand slam scope and sling is lite enough to carry all day (a tad under 8 lbs ready to hunt)It shoots most loads under 1 moa. The nice thing about this rifle is that it is ready to go , no trip to the gun shop for the trigger, freefloat the barrel ect. just sight it in and away you go. Just my 2 cents good luck on what ever you decide. Dan

Atomic Chicken · « **Reply #26 on:** May 30, 2004, 12:55:27 AM »

OK......

Here are my current thoughts - based on this last week of research and all the great replies from everyone on this forum (for which I'm very thankful!).

I am thinking that as attractive as the 6.5mm cartridges are, I would probably do better by selecting the .243 Win. as the cartridge for my "backwoods thrasher" gun. The more I read and the more I study the ballistics, the more convinced I am that this is the caliber that meets my needs the best. Flat trajectory, good for deer up to 200 yds., small caliber that is known to be inherently accurate, widely available ammunition in a wide variety of styles, and with 55 grain moly loads from Hornady it should be lightning-hot-death for smaller varmints. Loaded with a 107 grain HPBT from Sierra at 2,900 FPS, it surpasses .308 Win. ballistics and energy around the 400-500 yard mark. What's NOT to like? :grin:

Caliber selected: .243 Winchester. I don't think I'll regret this decision.

Now for the rifle. Only two to really choose from at this point, having viewed other options at local gun stores and rejecting them. My preference at this point is the Ruger 77 MK2 in Stainless/Synthetic - but I haven't totally dismissed the Tikka T3 yet. The Ruger holds the edge in my mind simply because the construction appears to be rock solid reliable and rugged, with very little plastic (other than the stock). While I'm sure the Tikka is probably in the same class, I'm just a bit uneasy about it's extensive use of plastic components and overall fragile appearance.

Any further input on these 2 rifles would be greatly appreciated.

Final part of the equation: The scope. I am currently considering a fixed power scope of 8X or 10X power. I like the idea of a fixed power scope because of the rapid nature of deployment (no power setting to screw with when you are forced to raise the gun quickly acquire a nervous or already moving target) and the reliability of fewer moving parts. I may be wrong, but I am also thinking a fixed power scope might be slighly lighter as well, without the adjustment mechanism and associated optics. Any thoughts on this one? My current favorite scope possibility after viewing several dozen that might fit my needs is the Bushnell Elite 3200 fixed power 10X with mil-dot reticle (which I know how to use, and have always liked). I have heard that this scope is rugged, solid, bright, and the rainguard coating probably isn't a bad idea considering my intended use for this rifle! Do any of you have an opinion on this scope or want to suggest others I should be looking at?

Thanks again in advance, I REALLY appreciate all the great input so far!

Best wishes,
Bawko

azshooter · « **Reply #27 on:** May 30, 2004, 03:52:36 AM »

The Ruger is a great rifle however you will probably have to fix the trigger if you don't get the HB varmit model. Of the two I would go Ruger just because your $$$ goes to a US company.

Coyote Hunter · « **Reply #28 on:** May 30, 2004, 04:33:40 AM »

Atomic Chicken -

Since your rifle will be used for both varminting and deer, I would suggest a variable power scope - or at least something less than 10x. A 10x magnification makes target acquisition unnecessarily difficult, as it offers a much narrower field of view than lower magnifications. Further, such magnification is really not needed at or under your self-imposed 200-yard limit for deer. You can always crank a variable for varminting but you can't crank a fixed down for big game.

My .257 Roberts has a fixed-power Leupold M8 4x mounted and I find it quite adequate for busting clay pigeons out to 300 yards. Deer and antelope, look out!

M7 7mm Rem Mag has a variable - a Simmons Aetec in 2.8-10x. This scope spends most of its life set at 4.5x. Only on rare occasion do I change it, and that is usually at the range when firing for accuracy. A couple years back I took a running coyote at 125 yards with this combination, and had the scope been set at 10x I probably never would have acquired the coyote in the glass.

Atomic Chicken · « **Reply #29 on:** May 30, 2004, 05:26:58 AM »

Quote from: Coyote Hunter

Atomic Chicken -

Since your rifle will be used for both varminting and deer, I would suggest a variable power scope - or at least something less than 10x. A 10x magnification makes target acquisition unnecessarily difficult, as it offers a much narrower field of view than lower magnifications. Further, such magnification is really not needed at or under your self-imposed 200-yard limit for deer. You can always crank a variable for varminting but you can't crank a fixed down for big game.

My .257 Roberts has a fixed-power Leupold M8 4x mounted and I find it quite adequate for busting clay pigeons out to 300 yards. Deer and antelope, look out!

M7 7mm Rem Mag has a variable - a Simmons Aetec in 2.8-10x. This scope spends most of its life set at 4.5x. Only on rare occasion do I change it, and that is usually at the range when firing for accuracy. A couple years back I took a running coyote at 125 yards with this combination, and had the scope been set at 10x I probably never would have acquired the coyote in the glass.

Coyote Hunter,

Thanks for the scope input! I have considered most of the issues have brought up previously, with these conclusions:

First off, my .308 Win. Model 700 VS has a Leupold Vari-X III 3.5-10 power scope with mil-dot. The entire time I have had the scope and rifle (a little over 5 years at this point), I think I have adjusted the power maybe 4 or 5 times TOTAL - and that was when initially starting to work with the scope/rifle and learn it's characteristics. In day to day use, I keep the scope set at 10X. I find that I have no trouble at all acquiring targets even as close as 50-75 yards, I know the rifle well enough to fairly rapidly move it into position before I look through the scope and 90% of the time I don't have to "hunt" for the target once the rifle is pointed. Of course, with running game it is a different story.

I have also considered mounting a Leupold fixed power 6X scope on this rifle, but it is not available with Mil-Dot reticle which, as I said before, I know how to use and REALLY like. I could probably be convinced to give up this feature if I really would get a more flexible rifle, but as I see it having mil-dot is almost as good as having a laser range-finding scope, but without the hastle of batteries or electronics to fail. The only reason I can think of that these types of scopes are not more popular is that most people don't bother to learn the proper calculation for Mil-Dot rangefinding, and consequently don't get the value out of it that they could. In any case, I digress.

Do you think that I am on the wrong track in considering a fixed power scope for reasons of reliability? Perhaps I'm going overboard here in trying to construct the most rugged (yet also lightweight) rifle possible... maybe the rifle would be just as reliable with a variable power scope? I look forward to more feedback - I've never tried to build a rifle for this purpose and everyone's input has been VERY appreciated so far!

Best wishes,
Bawko