|
|
Joined: Jul 2009
Posts: 8,923
Campfire Outfitter
|
Campfire Outfitter
Joined: Jul 2009
Posts: 8,923 |
Any way you can ditch the sniper mentality? We're talking hunting rifles here.
So am I. My first response was to people that I are claiming near bench rest gun accuracy from 7lb magnum Kimbers. Reality isn't for everybody. I understand your point but I suspect most who claim benchrest accuracy are referring to less than 1 MOA or even 1/2 MOA with hunting rifles and groups, rather than "x's".
Dave
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Apr 2008
Posts: 3,831
Campfire Tracker
|
|
Campfire Tracker
Joined: Apr 2008
Posts: 3,831 |
I am easier to please than most in what I expect out of my rifles. I just wanted the lightest gun I could buy for around $1K that was stainless and could shoot 1.5" groups at 100 yards. Kimber was easily the best option and haven't been bit yet. Yup it will never likely be shooting .5" groups ever (both due to the rifle and me). But for the ranges I shoot from on my hunts heck even a 2 MOA rifle at 300 yards is only 3" off center and still in the kill zone so I am more than good with my 1-1.5" groups. Sure I'll get a fluke group that is between .5"-.75" but that isn't every time and don't need it to be. I just wanted the lightest gun to haul up the mountain that I could afford and still get it done simple as that. If you are looking for extreme accuracy then my first advice would to not start with a rifle that starts out at 5 pounds or less.  Not saying you can't get it at all, just saying I don't need extreme accuracy to shoot basketballs at 300 yards....
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Dec 2008
Posts: 21,167
Campfire Ranger
|
|
Campfire Ranger
Joined: Dec 2008
Posts: 21,167 |
Anyone ever check out a 6 lugger ultra lightweight? 5 3/4lbs just might be the answer, and from my experience you d on t have to phuqe with e m....
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2007
Posts: 20,808
Campfire Ranger
|
|
Campfire Ranger
Joined: Jan 2007
Posts: 20,808 |
I am easier to please than most in what I expect out of my rifles. I just wanted the lightest gun I could buy for around $1K that was stainless and could shoot 1.5" groups at 100 yards. Kimber was easily the best option and haven't been bit yet. Yup it will never likely be shooting .5" groups ever (both due to the rifle and me). But for the ranges I shoot from on my hunts heck even a 2 MOA rifle at 300 yards is only 3" off center and still in the kill zone so I am more than good with my 1-1.5" groups. Sure I'll get a fluke group that is between .5"-.75" but that isn't every time and don't need it to be. I just wanted the lightest gun to haul up the mountain that I could afford and still get it done simple as that. If you are looking for extreme accuracy then my first advice would to not start with a rifle that starts out at 5 pounds or less. Not saying you can't get it at all, just saying I don't need extreme accuracy to shoot basketballs at 300 yards.... Real world perfect. Kimbers are not BR rifles, but carry around rifles. Those that think they are other than a good in the hand rifle and expect them to consistently shoot 0.5 or better are missing the role they play. Melvin Forbes Nula's are extremely accurate for their weight, but he has mentioned their primary function is to be shot in the hand and in the field. They are hunting rifles first.
Last edited by battue; 07/26/15.
laissez les bons temps rouler
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jul 2013
Posts: 3,327
Campfire Tracker
|
|
Campfire Tracker
Joined: Jul 2013
Posts: 3,327 |
I am easier to please than most in what I expect out of my rifles. I just wanted the lightest gun I could buy for around $1K that was stainless and could shoot 1.5" groups at 100 yards. Kimber was easily the best option and haven't been bit yet. Yup it will never likely be shooting .5" groups ever (both due to the rifle and me). But for the ranges I shoot from on my hunts heck even a 2 MOA rifle at 300 yards is only 3" off center and still in the kill zone so I am more than good with my 1-1.5" groups. Sure I'll get a fluke group that is between .5"-.75" but that isn't every time and don't need it to be. I just wanted the lightest gun to haul up the mountain that I could afford and still get it done simple as that. If you are looking for extreme accuracy then my first advice would to not start with a rifle that starts out at 5 pounds or less. Not saying you can't get it at all, just saying I don't need extreme accuracy to shoot basketballs at 300 yards.... Real world perfect. Kimbers are not BR rifles, but carry around rifles. Those that think they are or try and hold them to the same standards-consistently 0.5 or better-are missing the role they play. Melvin Forbes Nula's are extremely accurate for their weight, but he has mentioned their primary function is to be shot in the hand and in the field. They are hunting rifles first. Very well stated. Those who think they shoud shoot along with their BR guns or the favorite PD poppers are missing the intent of the rifles. All of mine shoot very well for hunting rifles but I don't take any of them with me when its PD season around here. Same same if I want to impress my frieds with BR accuracy targets on the internet. That said, they get the job done very well for their intended purpose which is being LW hunting rifles.
It's official. I missed the selfie deadline so I'm Maser's sock puppet because rene and the Polish half of the fubar twins have decided that I am.
ΜOΛΩΝ ΛΑΒΕ μολὼν λαβέ
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Dec 2010
Posts: 360
Campfire Member
|
|
OP
Campfire Member
Joined: Dec 2010
Posts: 360 |
So what I have concluded from all your replies is I have a 50 - 50 chance of getting a bad rifle....
I am Canadian.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2007
Posts: 20,808
Campfire Ranger
|
|
Campfire Ranger
Joined: Jan 2007
Posts: 20,808 |
I'm two for two on good ones.
One was a .338fed that kicked too much to enjoy shooting it all that much, and it bounced too much off the bench for me to shoot consistent MOA. However, off the bench it rang steel out to 300 and I had more than a little confidence in it when hunting.
laissez les bons temps rouler
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jul 2013
Posts: 3,327
Campfire Tracker
|
|
Campfire Tracker
Joined: Jul 2013
Posts: 3,327 |
So what I have concluded from all your replies is I have a 50 - 50 chance of getting a bad rifle.... I'm 7 for 7 with being happy with my Kimber results in the past roughly 8 years. I'll let you do the math for me. To some extent, Kimbers are like Remington 700's. You generally only hear about the bad ones, which all makers do turn out occasionally. They are factory rifles and not custom rifles, but I'll buy another one when the right one comes along, and I won't worry all the way home wondering if I spent my money wisely. If it doesn't shoot 0.5 MOA "all day long if I do my part", I won't worry about it because it will likely shoot more than adequately for a LW hunting rifle with little or no tweeking.
It's official. I missed the selfie deadline so I'm Maser's sock puppet because rene and the Polish half of the fubar twins have decided that I am.
ΜOΛΩΝ ΛΑΒΕ μολὼν λαβέ
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2007
Posts: 2,252
Campfire Regular
|
|
Campfire Regular
Joined: Jan 2007
Posts: 2,252 |
I am easier to please than most in what I expect out of my rifles. I just wanted the lightest gun I could buy for around $1K that was stainless and could shoot 1.5" groups at 100 yards. Kimber was easily the best option and haven't been bit yet. Yup it will never likely be shooting .5" groups ever (both due to the rifle and me). But for the ranges I shoot from on my hunts heck even a 2 MOA rifle at 300 yards is only 3" off center and still in the kill zone so I am more than good with my 1-1.5" groups. Sure I'll get a fluke group that is between .5"-.75" but that isn't every time and don't need it to be. I just wanted the lightest gun to haul up the mountain that I could afford and still get it done simple as that. If you are looking for extreme accuracy then my first advice would to not start with a rifle that starts out at 5 pounds or less. Not saying you can't get it at all, just saying I don't need extreme accuracy to shoot basketballs at 300 yards.... My sentiment as well. Genius really. 
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Apr 2013
Posts: 795
Campfire Regular
|
|
Campfire Regular
Joined: Apr 2013
Posts: 795 |
My brand new .223 is shooting sub moa at 250 off a pack with fire form 50vmax and new brass. Relieved magbox in stock, adjusted trigger. Maybe I got a dud...
I’m not an organ donor. I don’t believe in an afterlife, but I’d rather cover my bases in case there is and I need everything. You just never know.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Dec 2009
Posts: 3,395
Campfire Tracker
|
|
Campfire Tracker
Joined: Dec 2009
Posts: 3,395 |
I don't particularly have an issue with a true 2moa rifle for big game out to 500 or even pushing 600 yards. But My version of sub MOA, must be vastly different than most. I have used and seen quite a few really shot and have not seen a true sub MOA factory Montana bigger than 6mm. Even guys who swore that theirs was, right up until it came tme to shoot. Then there is all manner of excuses as to why it's not.
Have seen some that were 1-1.5 MOA and a bunch that were 1.5-2moa which is fine.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Apr 2013
Posts: 795
Campfire Regular
|
|
Campfire Regular
Joined: Apr 2013
Posts: 795 |
I’m not an organ donor. I don’t believe in an afterlife, but I’d rather cover my bases in case there is and I need everything. You just never know.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2003
Posts: 14,807
Campfire Outfitter
|
|
Campfire Outfitter
Joined: Sep 2003
Posts: 14,807 |
I don't particularly have an issue with a true 2moa rifle for big game out to 500 or even pushing 600 yards. But My version of sub MOA, must be vastly different than most. I have used and seen quite a few really shot and have not seen a true sub MOA factory Montana bigger than 6mm. Even guys who swore that theirs was, right up until it came tme to shoot. Then there is all manner of excuses as to why it's not.
Have seen some that were 1-1.5 MOA and a bunch that were 1.5-2moa which is fine. Just a 'group' is not enough. One to 1.5 moa is not my only requirement for an effective big game hunting rifle. My first shot gets it done. The first shot at big game is by far the most important. That the rifle stay sighted in is most important. Follow up shots want to be on as well but 'groups' are less important than hitting the game and not missing it with a 'group'! I keep records that my hunting rifles stay sighted in. The Kimbers do very very well
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2007
Posts: 2,252
Campfire Regular
|
|
Campfire Regular
Joined: Jan 2007
Posts: 2,252 |
I don't particularly have an issue with a true 2moa rifle for big game out to 500 or even pushing 600 yards. But My version of sub MOA, must be vastly different than most. I have used and seen quite a few really shot and have not seen a true sub MOA factory Montana bigger than 6mm. Even guys who swore that theirs was, right up until it came tme to shoot. Then there is all manner of excuses as to why it's not.
Have seen some that were 1-1.5 MOA and a bunch that were 1.5-2moa which is fine. Just a 'group' is not enough. One to 1.5 moa is not enough for an accurate big game hunting rifle. My first shot gets it done. The first shot at big game is by far the most important. That the rifle stay sighted in is most important. Follow up shots want to be on as well but 'groups' are less important than hitting the game and not missing it with a 'group'! I keep records that my hunting rifles stay sighted in. The Kimbers do very very well You say some weird schit. The accuracy of the rifle is different from the staying zeroed ability of the optic......
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2003
Posts: 14,807
Campfire Outfitter
|
|
Campfire Outfitter
Joined: Sep 2003
Posts: 14,807 |
Yes hunting rifles differ from target rifles.
My target rifles get sighter shots when the match starts.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Aug 2005
Posts: 15,647
Campfire Ranger
|
|
Campfire Ranger
Joined: Aug 2005
Posts: 15,647 |
Yeah - he hasn't had a clue in a while....
- Greg
Success is found at the intersection of planning, hard work, and stubbornness.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2007
Posts: 2,252
Campfire Regular
|
|
Campfire Regular
Joined: Jan 2007
Posts: 2,252 |
[/quote]
I keep records that my hunting rifles stay sighted in. The Kimbers do very very well [/quote]
Shouldn't you be giving praise to whatever optic you have mounted on the rifle instead of the rifle when referring to how well they stay sighted in???
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2007
Posts: 2,252
Campfire Regular
|
|
Campfire Regular
Joined: Jan 2007
Posts: 2,252 |
Yeah - he hasn't had a clue in a while.... Ha! Pretty funny.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2007
Posts: 20,808
Campfire Ranger
|
|
Campfire Ranger
Joined: Jan 2007
Posts: 20,808 |
My Nula's are notorious for staying sighted in. Model 70's also and just recently a MRC rifle. Kimbers also.
And for more than one shot. Cousin had a Rem 760 pump that pretty much did the same. Hmmmmm
laissez les bons temps rouler
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2001
Posts: 1,697
Campfire Regular
|
|
Campfire Regular
Joined: Jan 2001
Posts: 1,697 |
Isn't accuracy the rifle's ability to duplicate the last shot(all things being equal) and marksmanship the ability of the shooter to place shots? I would rather have a larger group around the 'X' than a tiny group a ways off the 'X'.
'Often mistaken, never in doubt'
'Ignorance more frequently begets confidence than does knowledge' Darwin
|
|
|
|
|
592 members (10ring1, 160user, 17CalFan, 007FJ, 1lessdog, 10Glocks, 65 invisible),
2,129
guests, and
1,145
robots. |
|
Key:
Admin,
Global Mod,
Mod
|
|
|
Forums81
Topics1,191,098
Posts18,464,148
Members73,923
| |
Most Online11,491
Jul 7th, 2023
|
|
|
|
