Rifle question for XL and others...

[TwoRivers]

(I can't say I'm wild about little "c clip" extractors, either! I once had a 721 Remington in .300 H&H, and with hot loads, the extractor wasn't very reliable. Sometimes, 2 or 3 attempts were needed for it to function. But, at least, I never had to resort to a rod down the barrel!)

Your rifle must have made it to Namibia. One of my PHs told me he had a Remington 721 in .300 H&H, a "very mediocre rifle". It would fail to extract by the second round, the third at the latest. I had a M721 in .270 WCF, it would leave the case in the chamber after about five rounds. The last iteration of that extractor seems to be better, I haven't heard about extraction problems with the 700. Still don't trust them for a rifle I have to rely on, though. Bolt handles apparently stay on the bolt, too.

[Baljit]

Timmy

Everybody give you a really good info. about the rifles.I like to make a point here that do not underestimate any caliber. Every caliber do the job done if you put the bullet in right place.It not make a any different if that's 243 or 308.
If you asking my choice then i am going to pick 270 over any other caliber for young shooters.Its flat shooing caliber over 308 and i'll do the job done very well.

Baljit

[Grumpy]

[quote="TwoRivers"]
"I am a firm believer in a single-shot for a beginner, cultivates good habits, and is as safe as it can get."

I couldn`t agree more. Using a single shot teaches one to be careful in shot placement ...... and whether a shot should be taken or not. If you have to make one shot count you`re much more likely to make sure of that one shot. I`ve used a lot of different single shots - mostly old BSA Martini, Anschutz Match 54 and Walther target rifles in calibres including .22 lr, .22 WMR, .22 Hornet and .222 Rem ..... and my Rossi .44 mag ( a near clone of the NEF ) .... and a couple of Baikal IZH-18MHs - and wouldn`t worry if all my rifles were single shots. I find that I can eject and load a Martini or falling block almost as fast as I can rack the bolt on a magazine fed bolt action anyway and all of them were/are as accurate as heck.
I remember reading about the 7-30 Waters years ago and pretty much remember the specs - it was supposed to be an improvement on the parent 30-30. Similar performance but with a flatter trajectory and better BC.

[Mark]

Timmy,

You may not want to hear this, but if I had to do it over again I'm pretty sure I'd have gotten my kids TC contenders (or encores) as first rifles.

Not that I'd expect them to have only one rifle forever, but it will give them a "first gun" that can grow with them and do a bit until (or if) they get enough experience to decide on something more specific in the future.

I am in 100% agreement with TwoRivers that a single shot is the perfect first gun. This way you can set him up with a caliber and if it is too much caliber right now, then you can just drop back down to a 25-35 or 243 or a zillion other choices. Of course the down side is that some TC barrels can cost almost as much as a cheaper gun, but they will have proportionally more value as the years pass as well. As they say, when you buy quality you only cry once!

At any rate, that's my 2 cents worth.


Mark

[TwoRivers]

Another entry level bolt action would be the Marlin X7, available in stainless as well as blued. Unlike the Ruger's detachable rotary mag, it has an integral mag like the Savage Axis. The new Remington M783 I haven't seen yet; but it seems a vast improvement over the M770, though they had to weird the trigger guard bow. Looks as if it were based around the Marlin's bolt.

Well, you gets to pay your money, and make your choice.

[timmy]

Gentlemen, I'm in agreement on the concept of single shots for starting out (and own a #1, myself), but I do have to say this: I've never been turned on by TC Contenders. Besides looking unappealing, when I look at them, with the break action and investment casting, I always wondered what it was about them that justified what I considered to be a premium price for what one got. A Ruger #1 is a premium gun in my eyes (Bill always put nice wood on them, for one thing), but I can't see those "extras" on the Contenders I've looked at.

I will admit, I have looked at them for a 45-70 I'd like to get back to, bot the H&R seemed so much more reasonable. I really would rather have a Martini, though...

@Baljit: I'm totally with you on 270! I've always been keen on mine. It may be a consideration here, but I do think they lean toward short actions.

@Walt: Yes, I've looked at those, as well. In my last email to them, I put them in this order:

1. Ruger American
2. Marlin X7
3. Savage Axis
4. Mossberg
5. Remington 770

I told them to stick with the top three and forget the others. I agreed with you all on the 7mm-08.

For a scope, I suggested one of those Leupold Rifleman versions. They can be had for around $200 in 3x-9x or 2x-7x (which would be my preference).

Anyway, this is an ongoing thing and I expect that they will be going over a lot before they've finalized anything. So it's not over by a long shot, but I really appreciate all of everyone's input so far!

[Grumpy]

I agree with you re the TC Contenders/Encores ( there`s a lot of agreement here isn`t there ? ) as I`ve never been able to understand the premium price either. They`re little different to the H&Rs but considerably more expensive.
Strange isn`t it - if we were talking about the UK things would be a good deal more expensive and I`d be recommending a Browning `X`Bolt in 6.5x55 or 7x57 ...... or 7x64. Actually I`d be recommending a used ( and discontinued ) `A` Bolt ....... If ever a rifle didn`t need `improving` the `A` Bolt is it.

[timmy]

I agree with you re the TC Contenders/Encores ( there`s a lot of agreement here isn`t there ? ) as I`ve never been able to understand the premium price either. They`re little different to the H&Rs but considerably more expensive.
Strange isn`t it - if we were talking about the UK things would be a good deal more expensive and I`d be recommending a Browning `X`Bolt in 6.5x55 or 7x57 ...... or 7x64. Actually I`d be recommending a used ( and discontinued ) `A` Bolt ....... If ever a rifle didn`t need `improving` the `A` Bolt is it.

Yes, John, the pivot pin isn't even pressed in, it's held by the fore end (at least, in the ones I've seen) and the receiver seems like a simple investment casting. The hammers of the ones I've seen can be switched to fire rimfire or centerfire. Nothing complex, as far as I can tell. They look alright, but they've always been so expensive!

I think that, with the guns I looked at, they can be set up with a nice gun and scope for $550, complete. But you have given me an idea: checking out new models that have been superseded might be an idea, as well!

[TwoRivers]

Yes, odd looks and premium price kept me from getting cozy with the Contender as well. Until finally the ability to get so many different barrels for it got the better of me, and when one of my daughters showed interest in hunting, I got her a Contender in 7-30 for a starter. Still not so sure that I like it, but it gives the option of using the same gun with different barrels, centerfire, rimfire, and small shotgun. Must admit, though, that I can't hit a thing with it as a shotgun.
The initial version had a strange interlock, so you couldn't open the action with the hammer cocked, a strange "safety" feature. So if you didn't get a shot, you had to let the hammer down before you could open the gun to unload.

As to the Mossberg, it was the "Raptor", a very crude rifle, before Mossberg bought them out and dropped their own R7, which in my opinion wasn't a bad design, except that they went too cheap on the rotary magazine. Mossberg has a history of entering the rifle market, and then quickly dropping the product again without apparent reason. The last one seems to be a success, though the "why" evades me. Must be their distinctive gimmicky stock design. Sometimes you have to wonder what goes on in the board room. Remington's M788, designed to be the economy line, and getting great reviews, supposedly got dropped again because it cost more to make than the M700. If that's true, Remington must have lost several hundred dollars on every M788 they sold; and the M700 be vastly overpriced.

Tim, I think you have the options in the right sequence. I'd stay away from the Mossberg or the Remington M770. Though both would do the job.

[TwoRivers]

[quote="xl_target"]T

He talks a little too much but he makes some good points about the rifles. Though he talks about a "hammer forged barrel, button rifled". Huhn?
/quote]

Ruger barrels are hammer-forged, not button rifled. Most of the big boys in the game have gone to hammer-forging, often doing rifling, profiling, and chamber in one process.

[TwoRivers]

I dont qualify to give anyone advice, but how about a 7x57?
A wonderful calibre with a great MPBR, good penetration with solids, good downrange energy.
Shouldnt it be plentiful for the animals he wants?

There are several reasons that mitigate agains that choice. For one, he isn't going after pachyderms, "good penetration with solids", illegal for big game in many of the states, isn't going to be a player. Not even available. Also, the 7x57 is underloaded in the US and only available in one choice of bullet weight. For someone who handloads a good choice, but so are half a dozens others, and more readily available. Not that he should pass up a decent used Ruger M77 in that caliber. No production rifle is chambering it in the US anymore.

[timmy]

My understanding is that the military wanted a shorter round than the 30-06, but with the same performance, in order to have lighter, more compact automatic weapons. The 308 is about 1/2" or 12-13mm shorter than the .30-06, and was supposed to depend on the then-new ball powders to make up the effect of smaller case capacity.

The German military 8x57 achieved about the same performance with a cartridge about 1/4" inch shorter, as did the ancient Russian 7.62x54r (albeit with a fatter case).

308-based cartridges can use what's often called the "short action," as opposed to the "medium action" used by 30-06 length rounds. There were "Mexican Mausers" years ago, 1/4" shorter in action length and sought after for building lightweight rifles, but the even shorter 308 (which is more akin to the 300 Savage) allows a savings in weight that is really useful. That's why, when Young Ben asked about a suitable rifle, my thoughts turned to 308 right away.

Regarding solids, the use for those that I've encountered is for pelt hunters -- I had a 03 Springfield target rifle once that I loaned to a friend one winter, and it kept him in beans from coyote pelts, shooting military ball. No nasty holes, just a little poke in and out. I remember him getting a "wounded jackrabbit call" tape as his method of hunting. That tape sounded hideous!

[herb]

Can't go wrong with a .308 or .270, the availability of a wide range of factory ammo makes it easier to find a load that shoots well in a particular rifle without resorting to handloads. Overall length of a .308 will be shorter than a .270 because of the short action.

If you are set on a bolt rifle then all the bolt actions mentioned are good choices, Axis is a little on the lighter side and recoil may be concern, wouldn't want a youngster to develop any bad habits like flinching. Ruger is a nice choice.

Have you looked at the Stevens 200 ? Heard some good things about it, same weight as the Axis.

Herb

[TwoRivers]

Have you looked at the Stevens 200 ? Heard some good things about it, same weight as the Axis.

Herb

Two peas in a pod. Stevens=Savage.

[dr.jayakumar]

Timmy i don't believe you are a grand dad???
regards
dr.jk