Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Long Range Hunting Think I'll give it a go! Advice needed

I respectfully request advice!

My thoughts are I'd like to setup an antelope rifle that will reach out to 600 yds or thereabouts. I believe there are enouph accurate shelf rifles out there nowadays I shouldn't need a custom nor do I really want a custom. I would also prefer to keep a setup under 8.5 lbs and less than $1200. If 600 yds is not considered long range I apologize for posting in the wrong section

PS, I do reload my own as this may influence advice. Thanks for any advice



Trystan

Ruger American AW in .243 with 105 Horn HPBT bullets and SWFA SS 10x scope. EGW 20MOA rail and Horn XTR Sig rings. Spend the rest on reloading components, and go pop some primers.

Steyr Pro Hunter in a 7mm-08 or 308 win? Put on some decent glass and have at it.

This

Yep. I might go 6x MQ though.

Not bad. I would go with 95 gr. Bergers though.
And maybe the SWFA rings......

I have a RAR .243 and this sounds like a great setup for a guy like me to get acquainted with SWFA SS, mils, etc. Any load data for the 105's, or a 95 VLD maybe?

Great thread right here. The 243 is a wonderful platform to use for LR shooting/hunting. Lots of bullets to choose from, good brass, and can shoot all day.

Just confirmed today that the SWFA 10x will clear the barrel on a RAR predator with the Talley extra lows.

Thanks a bunch for the advice fellas. I was actually thinking RAR in 243 so I'm glad to hear I was at least headed in the right direction. I researched the SWFA scopes and if the scope works as well as reviews rave it's a great bargain for the $300 price. Are any of you fellas using this scope that can validate? I have a FX3 6X42 Leopold that I was considering sending off to have an M1 turret installed. They charge $100 so maybe better to just spend $200 more and get the SWFA? Sounds like the SWFA is very durable according to reviews? Leopold would be lighter but I have no idea how well they hold up with a M1 turret?


Thank you kindly for the advice once again and it is much appreciated.



Trystan

Lapua brass, Fed 210, 105 HPBT at the lands, work up to 41-41.5gr IMR4350. I bet it shoots

Grab the SWFA SS and either sell the FX3, or keep it for a dedicated PBR lightweight setup.

My all time favorite .243 bullets (for hunting) are, in no order:

95 Berger VLD
105 Amax
87 Vmax
100 Sierra GK

The Vmax is a wonderful LR coyote bomb. I think I have convinced nearly everyone to switch from the 75 to the 87 and none heve been disappointed. 4064 is the go to powder here.

The 100 SGK I feel is one the best, and most under rated 243 bullets out there. Quite simply, Sierra nailed it with this one. It is tougher and has a thicker jacket than most realize. It holds together remarkably well even on close shots on deer. It has produced some of the fastest deer kills I have ever seen. And it has plenty of BC to take out to 600 yds and still expand reliably. It has never been finicky, in anything. And I am talking a dozen 243s. 42.3 gr. IMR 4350 has been magical in multiple rifles.

Now we come to 2 bullets I have used extensively for target shooting. But we are talking strictly from a hunting perspecrtive here. Either will take deer sized game without any trouble. The 105 Amax and 95 Berger. What I have found is that due to magazine constrictions, I prefer the Berger. It is slightly shorter and has slightly less BC. BUT you can also seat it out further and get more powder under it. Being lighter, and with a higher charge, pretty much negates the BC advantage of the 105 in a hunting rifle. Simply put, you can push it faster. It also stabilizes better in some factory barrels. And it is probably a better game bullet as well. I usually run 4350 with these bullets as well.

Lots of powders will work, and I have far too much powder on hand to try every new one that comes out. So admittedly, I have kinda been stuck in my ways as far as the 243 goes. Anything 75-90 gr. gets 4064. Anything over 90gr. gets 4350. That is really all you need to know, and will get you far.

As much as I really like all of said bullets, if I had to run one for all hunting of coyote and deer sized critters, I just may pick the 95 VLD. it is tougher than the 2 Hornady bullets and less messy, and has a better BC than the SGK, and you can get a little more speed out of it.

My current SS is a 12X with MOA quad. I prefer MOA to mil because I am, again, stuck in my ways. Have been doing the MOA thing way too long to switch now. I would suggest the 10X MOA quad here.

It is too bad Weaver has yet to make their 20 MOA rails for the American. I like their cross slot design better than the EGW, but mostly like them because they sit a good bit lower than EGWs do. I also prefer the flat tops of the SWFA rings to the rounded Burris ring tops........

Jordan, have you tried the 105 scenars on game?

I have three of the SWFAs and they are the best bargain out there in a long range capable scope. I recommend you start with the 10x. I have a 16x, but while the mechanics are superb, the eye box is very critical and the glare very bad as the sun gets lower on the horizon. The 6x, 3-9, and 10x are absolute winners. Start there. As mentioned, flip the Leupold or keep it for a non-dialing gun. Even we're it to track correctly, the reticle would leave a lot of capability on the table in terms of making corrections, etc. SWFA rings are another of those best kept secrets.

John

For those of you who prefer the 95 VLD over the 105 VLD, care to share the reason(s)? Assume because it fits the mag box confines better? (I've got a box of 500 of the 105 VLD hunting I'm planing on using)

I'd agree with a lot of that, but differ on a few points.

The 87AM is certainly a wicked pill on short-medium range coyotes and the like, and the 105AM/HPBT are awesome longer range bullets that kill deer and bigger game with aplomb. It's tough to beat the 105AM as an all-around target/varmint/BG bullet in the .243, though. The HPBT leans more toward targets and BG than varmints. Leaving the muzzle at 3050 fps from a SAAMI .243 and 3150 fps from an AI, it's tough to beat. I've got my throat cut for a COAL of 2.813" with the AM and a bit less with the HPBT, which easily fits in most mag boxes. The 95 can't keep up in those conditions. IMR4350 has been pure magic with 100+ gr bullets of all sorts.

I'll differ on MOA vs. Mil. Mil is simply much more intuitive. As a long-time user of MOA turrets and Mil reticles for many years, the mass exodus to Mil/Mil was a smooth transition with very little effort involved. Just very intuitive. The numbers are a bit easier to manage in shooting scenarios with a bit less math to worry about in the heat of the moment.

What do you use the flat tops of the SWFA rings for? The Burris XTR Sigs can't be beat for getting as much usable erector range out of those SS scopes as possible...

No, sir. Never had a reason to move away from the Horn AM/HPBT. They both shoot with wicked precision, cut atmospherics like a knife, and hammer game. Oh, and they're still pretty cheap to purchase in bulk. Nothing not to like

Mag box constraints would be the only reason, in my book.

Trystan - SWFA has a trade-in program that will give you a good price on your Leupold. You can probably get into an SS for less than the price of upgrading to an M1. Check out their site for details.

Thanks Jordan! Now that Indiana will allow a center fire rifle for deer hunting, I'm setting up a dedicated 243 and going to use either the VLD or AMax.

Do yourself a favor and sell it on your own and then buy the SS, assuming you are going to get rid of it. I'ld keep it myself. I've never tried to trade in a scope with SWFA. Since they are in business to make money, they won't give you what it's worth. That's not a slam against them. Like I said, they are in business to make money. They won't make money by giving you $275 to $300 in trade for a scope that you can sell for $275 any day of the week and twice on Sunday. This is not a slam against cast10K as he too is trying to help. Trade ins are good for one thing and one thing only whether it comes to vehicles, rifles, scopes, ad infinitum. That one thing is to forgo whatever hassle one perceives in selling on their own.

Whoa. Back the truck up Jordan. We were talking non-custom, factory rifle at a given price point, to 600 yards. Were we not? Because that is what my answer was based upon.

So I have no idea why you are mentioning AI chambers, custom cut throats, or milking the most out of a set of rings for 600 yd. shooting. All are irrelevant to the conversation at hand......

From the ogive forward they are the same, so seating depths will be identical in regards to OAL and relationship to the lands, with any minor differences due to lot number variations.

For about $100 I can have my factory Rem 700 Varmint barrel in .243 reamed to AI with whatever throat length I ask for by the local smith...

Why milk the most out of the scope's erector assy? Simply because there is no downside, and his self-imposed limit of 600 yards on antelope does not mean he'll never decide he wants to reach passed that on steel. Doesn't hurt to have more "up" on tap.

Still wondering what you use the flat top on the SWFA rings for. Serious question.

I know you are aware of this already, but if working with a long enough mag box to seat the 105's so the bottom of the bullet shank is just above the neck/shoulder junction on the case, a guy can have the chamber throated for a minimal fee in order to seat the bullets accordingly. If there is no room in the mag box, he's stuck with the 95's and doesn't need as much throat length to hit the lands.

It is great that you can have a throat cut or AI a rifle for $100. It just isn't what we were talking about. That's all. I gave an an answer based on what we WERE talking.

So when you say things like "the 95 can't keep up under those conditions" you are referring to a whole different set of conditions. Under said conditions, I will take the 95 Berger over the match bullet for on game performance. And flight differences will be negligible.

Not sure why you keep dwelling on the rings. I recommended the SWFA rings mostly with budget in mind. And because they will do all he needs and more to 600 yds. I also like looks of flat top rings better, and they come in handy as a leveling aid at times as a last resort on some guns.

As for the Burris rings, I have yet to figure out why they are so popular with some or why so many seem to have "issues" to fix with them. I have never found the need with 100s of rifles and scopes. What I can tell you, is that I have never seen any serious LR competitor use them. Ever. So if you wanna go and tell us they are all that and a bag of chips, that's fine. Maybe some will listen. And for said OPs rifle they would be fine. But no better than the SWFAs at less than half the price.

Here is a list of popular scope rings with real shooters behind them. The top 50 shooters. IME I would say it is a pretty accurate assessment:

http://precisionrifleblog.com/2014/10/28/scope-mounts-what-the-pros-use/

Not a Burris on the list, which is not surprising in the least. And one more thing they ALL have in common, every last one of them has a flat top ring.

So if you know something of rings the whole rest of the LR shooting world doesn't, we are all ears.....

Thanks!

Jordan,

Though I didn't mention shooting steel at 1000 yds I certainly was thinking exactly that. In my mind if I can connect steel at 1000 pretty regular I'll be far better prepared for real life stuff at 600. I appreciate your patients to give me the extra advice.

Thanks also to others that have contributed as I've learned from each post and do appreciate any and all advice.




Trystan

Dude, you need to join a debate club, or something. Seems like you're going around looking to argue about anything and everything lately. I'm not sure what your hangup is with me mentioning the .243AI. The OP said he didn't want a custom rifle. That's a far cry from having an AI reamer run into a factory barrel. Either way, I also mentioned the SAAMI .243 pushing a 105 at 3050 fps, which also beats a 95 in the wind and in retained velocity. The only time I'd run a 95 is if I didn't have the mag latitude to feed 105's. I certainly can't fault the 105's when they hit flesh, so going to the 95 for some supposed advantage there is meaningless to me.

I asked about the SWFA rings because you brought up the fact that they have a flat on top. I legitimately wondered what you liked about the flat top, and if it's just for looks that's fine. But it doesn't offer any real advantage over any other ring design. Notice that the SWFA rings don't show up in your hero list, either, so I'm not sure where you're going with that. I don't really care what the Top 50 use for rings. I've got enough tens of thousands of rounds under my belt to know what rings I like, and more importantly, why. The Burris XTR Sigs don't mar the scope finish, they eliminate any concentricity/lapping concerns, they grip like a vice, they add scope adjustment bias so the scope can be zero'd toward the top of the erector range, and finally, they're relatively affordable.

Anyway, carry on using whatever you like. I simply gave the OP a few suggestions. I didn't say that those options were the only ones that would work.

Regarding the OP's question:

"or those of you who prefer the 95 VLD over the 105 VLD, care to share the reason(s)? Assume because it fits the mag box confines better?"


Another reason:

The 105 Bergers won't stabilize properly with less than a 1 in 8 twist. The Ruger American in 243 is a 1 in 9 twist.

Use this calculator to determine what will properly stabilize in a factory twist barrel:

http://www.bergerbullets.com/twist-rate-calculator/

The 9" twist is why I suggested the Horn HPBT or AM- they'll stabilize fine.

My 243 has an 8 twist barrel. 105's should work dandy

I need to join a debate club? Lol.

I believe it was you who quoted me, and then felt the need to, and I quote, "differ on a few points". Which is fine.

Only difference was I kept it to the topic at hand/given parameters and you ventured off into left field with AI chambers, cut throats and milking the most out of a scope that already has 120 moa and is only running to 600 yds. OP specifically stated he wanted a factory rifle to shoot 600 yds.

And I realize the SWFA rings aren't all that. But will do fine for said application at a fraction of the cost. Never had a problem with them, but don't have them on my real expensive rifles either.

It's all good. Lighten up. I have no problem with ya. But don't try to turn it around on me.

And yeah, I do like to debate rifles. Thought you did also. As long as nobody cries, or gets butt hurt I enjoy it. It has never been hard to decipher who actually shoots around here, and who just likes to play rifleman on the internet. I am affording you the benefit of the doubt. But sometimes you need to remember that there are some here who have been playing this game a whole lot longer than you have. And you may just wanna afford them the same luxury.

As for the bullets, like I said, the 95 can be pushed faster. The BC isn't that much less. At 600 yds it is negligible due to the velocity gain. Have ran both, plenty of times, in multiple 243s. It is shorter, better suited to mag contraints, and will stabilize in more different factory twists. I do also believe the Berger to be a better game bullet, especially at higher velocities, though either will work on deer sized critters just fine. Both of my current 1-9.125 twist 243s shoot the 95 Berger more accurately than either of the Hornady 105 offerings. Which I also took into consideration. Although I would say all 3 are accurate enough for most hunting.

JMO.

GFY

Just a few things I think I should mention.

I don't consider running a reamer to lengthen the throat nor to AI a chamber a "custom rifle". I've shot both Hornady and Berger bullets a lot. Hornady almost always has been easier to get to shoot for me and there is little doubt in my mind the Hornady is what I'll try first. I specified I want a rifle set up to take game at 600 yds. I never implied in any way I didn't want to shoot at paper or steel farther than 600 yds. I didn't think I needed to mention that I intend to practice further than 600 at paper or steel because it's a given. Everyone who shoots game at 600 yds practices further if there smart. I've used Burris Signature rings and there my favorite rings to date. Yes they cost a little more but you get what you pay for. I also know the reasons why I want Sig rings. Thanks again Jordan for providing a lot of extra information as I find it very useful. I hope you never limit your replies nor hold back from expounding on your experiences. 😃



Trystan

Nothing I suggested is limiting you to 600 yds. for the record. Nor is it keeping you from practicing further. Not sure why you would imply otherwise.

And while going AI may not make the rifle itself custom in your mind, it is a custom chambering, as is cutting the throat to a certain to a dimension. Because it does not come that way from the factory. So when you clearly stated you did not want or need a custom, I assumed you planned on leaving it factory. Silly me....

Yeah, it may help you vent off some of your pent up aggression It's not just me, I noticed you jumped on BobinNH for something silly, too. But at the end of the day I like to cuss and discuss this stuff as much as the next guy, and as long as you don't accuse me of stuff I haven't done, I'm happy.

Nobody ventured into left field. We're talking setting up a factory rifle for LR shooting, and the OP has even mentioned that 600 isn't the furthest he'll shoot. He said he'll shoot antelope to 600, which says nothing about limiting how far he'll shoot targets with said rifle, and he has since clarified that 1000 is completely possible. Having a chamber or throat touched up and setting up a scope so he can actually use the erector range that comes included with the scope at no extra charge, is completely within the parameters of what he's asking. He may think he'll shoot to 1000 right now, but I'm betting once he does that he'll be wanting more distance. When that happens he won't have to tear the rig apart and swap parts- he'll already be good to go.



Can't really fault any of this. I'd agree with you here, and would return you the same courtesy you extended me. Especially the GFY

EDIT: Just noticed the OP posted above me saying a lot of the same stuff. You'll have to deal with the duplicate comments *grin*

I totally missed his post on maybe going to 1000

And if you were referring to teasing Bob about putting his bipod on backwards, he is well aware that I was just funnin' with him.

And now that I have been told to GFY, I feel much better about things here.

I gotta go finish installing a Timney 510 in a buds 5R. You know, those triggers you don't like

Actually, they are just okay IMO. I think he bought the cheapest aftermarket trigger he could find. I told him to try a Trigger Tech.

Later......

Nailed it.

Someone want to point us in the direction of Horn XTR Sig rings?

Huh? I thought I said I appreciated all the advice including yours? I don't recall implying anything other than that I also appreciated the additional information that Jordan supplied?

I'm not sure what angle your coming from?




Trystan

SWFA may have some.

Give your bud my condolences. He could have ended up with a TT or Shilen, but has to suffer Timney instead

I actually don't hate Timney's. They pretty decent, I just much prefer the other two triggers I mentioned before.

So why a 10x and not 3-9x SS?

Actually, this Timney ain't too bad. Feels just like a tuned old school 700 trigger just slightly wider.

It was exactly 3 lbs. out of the package. I took it down to 1.5. Then realized he has never owned a custom trigger and doesn't know what a nice pull feels like. My rifles are the only ones he has ever felt with such low pulls. So I put it at 2 lbs and left it. It has zero creep and only the slightest overtravel. I think he will be well pleased with it.....

Unless I'm totally off base, I think Jordan meant Burris Sig XTR rings. SWFA has them, but opticzone has them cheaper.

10x is half the cost... and functions just as well.

2MG.... you shoulda told your buddy to buy a CTR rather than that POS 5R. It'd have shot better, and wouldn't have needed a Timney.... laffin

Half the price and a great scope to start on. Perfect for medium to long distance shooting.

Oops! Yup, friggin' Stick always calling them Horn rings tripped me up!

To the OP... I'll be a bit of the dissenting opinion here....

I love the .243... and basically none of the advise you've received here has been off base. .243 RAR, SS, and trigger time will go a looooong way in terms of learning to hit schitt for a far piece.

But.... when you throw 600 yard shots at deer in the equation, I'd way rather have a 6.5 Creed or a .260. The RAR Predator in 6.5 Creed or .260, outfitted with a SS 10x is a more than capable rig for both 1000 yard steel and 600 yard hunts. The 123 Amax is easily the equal of the 6mm/105... and can be shot just as fast. AND, you have the option of stepping up to 140s with .600+ BCs. You don't pay much more in recoil... but you can deliver 30% more energy on the target. The RAR-P doesn't weigh much more than the standard RAR.... it comes with a threaded pipe and a rail that'll accept most "tac" style rings. Hell, they make it .243 too.

.243/105s is a very capable long range steel ringing and hunting combo.... the 6.5/123&140 is a little better all-around. Either way... a well know Alaskaloompa once said "spent primers are the ultimate tutorial".... that's sage advice.

RAR-P in .260 with 12x SS atop....



RAR-P in 6.5 Creed with 12x SS atop...



Both rifles shot many sub-MOA groups out past 600 yards... both were easy to load for and shot the 123s and 140s well.

Dog, how would you compare the 123 Amax to the 123 scenar for a deer/antelope bullet?

5Rs shoot quite well. Extremely well, actually.

Should I act like a CTR owner and post group pics to try to prove it

No need.... my CTR has bitch slapped multiple 5Rs...



Dunno... never shot a deer/lope with a 123 Scenar. I've shot a couple coyotes with both.... and one deer with the Amax. The Amax is definitely more violent that the Scenar... I can say that for certain. I'd have no issues running a 123 at a deer or 'lope. I shot a doe antelope at a little over 500 yards with a 130 Berger outta the x47 a couple years back... she went down hard to a solid lung shot. Em's CTR .260 is stoked with 139 Scenars for this deer/elk/lope season. I didn't have any 123s lying around so I went with the 139s I had on the bench. The kids will shoot it too... so there'll be plenty of dead stuff from which to draw a conclusion on that bullet.

Dog, what about the mil-quad reticles on the 10x as compared to the 3-9x....are they the same?

If we were to throw 600 yard elk or bear into the equation I would have gone 6.5 Creed or .260 right out the gate. But for deer and lopes to 600 plus steel out further- that's what the .243 is made for. I've slapped a bunch of deer-sized game way out yonder with the .243/AI, and 105's have never left me wanting for more. My 7Mags got relegated to bigger critters once I started to see what the .243 does to deer with the right bullet. Mag constraints on the RAR mags also favour the .243 and 105's versus larger-caliber, longer pills.

Though it's hard to go wrong with any of those options!

I think the Mil-Quad on the 10x is a bit more pronounced and easier to see.... but that's just me. I've had 3-9s in both the Mil-Quad and Mil-Dot incarnations.... and personally I prefer the Mil-Dot in that scope... especially when the power is turned down below about 6x. Frankly, I rarely had the 3-9 off of 9x... so I figured I might as well just be running a fixed 10x for half the cost. I'll buy another one for the .300 WSM Kimber one of these days... but for now it'll just keep wearing the 3-9 Leupold with Mil-Dot and 1/2 MOA turrets.

The 3-9 SS does have better "glass" than the fixed 6x, 10x, 12x, etc... for what that's worth, and it's a more scent package that the fixed power scopes. For a guy who thinks he needs a variable, and wants to twist turrets.... the 3-9 and 3-15 Super Snipers are about the only move available for under $1000 or so.

The 10x has a finer reticle to my eye, and has hollow diamonds, as where the 3-9x has solid diamonds and is a little bolder IMO. I'm one of the guys who doesn't see a lot of difference between the glass quality in both. The 3-9x has fixed parallax, where the 10x has rear AP.

I don't doubt it Jordan... and you boys have some big deer up your way. I just feel a little better with the added 30% in bullet weight... especially since it costs essentially nothing in terms of components or recoil. A guy really can't go wrong with either set-up...

If Ruger decides to bring out the RAR compact stainless in 6.5 Creed.... I'll be first in line to snatch one up.

Forgot about the open vs. closed diamonds... but it's been a while, and a lot of scopes, since my 3-9 SS days.

I have 55 yr old eyes, and they're not getting any better, hence the reticle question. You guys 10x rec makes perfect sense, and I like it, assuming the reticle is easy to see and use. Appreciate the help.

I had my mom and a couple of her friends out shooting a while back... they're all in their 60s. They had no trouble using the 10x Mil-Quad to hold wind and make hits out to 600+. It was a ball watching the ladies think they were "super snipers".

Hell, if you buy one and don't like it, they sell pretty quick here in the classifieds... and you'll probably only take a $30-$40 hit on it. Worth that just to see if it'll work for you.

Agreed Dog. Thanks

I have both the 10x and the 3-9. The 3-9 reticle is .07 mils thick vs. .05 for the 10x. The 3-9 is a little easier to see as the light fades. The wife doesn't hunt yet so the 10x resides on her .223 Montana since low light is not an issue with it. The 3-9 went on my primary hunting rig. If they would put the .07 thick reticle in the 10x, that's probably all I would use. Oh, and for what it's worth, the glass is better on the 3-9, comparing favorably with the LRHS.

John

Yeah, cuz long actions and plastic socks are so much stiffer than short actions housed in fiberglass. MUST be more conducive to accuracy.

Laffin'. Sounds like operator error to me.....

Laffin... sounds like another case of your biased theory trumping reality...

I personally know two guys who dumped their 5Rs and bought CTRs... their operating improved instantly.... weird....

That must be why so many match shooters run tupperware with short action cartridges housed in long actions. It's all making sense now........

Wow, either I've got a couple of bum SS 3-9's, or a fantastic LRHS, cuz to my eyes the glass in the LRHS is noticeably better. The glass in the 3-9 is much more comparable to the glass in the SS 6x and 10x IMO.

Could be I've got an exceptional 3-9 or maybe just tired, old eyes.

John

The OP is looking in the right direction,to connect dots. Happiness can ONLY be arranged with throat/twist/COAL harmony and boolits always matter wayyyyy more than headstamps.

1200 Clams leaves lotsa options on the table. The RAR's get alotta schit right,regarding the Trifecta above and dumping same in a Plywood Boyd's,seals the deal. Nice thing about plywood,is they are easy to sculpt for ergo's and they are far more stable than Living Wood and Light Years ahead of Milk Jugs. Lose the trigger lever and re-spring to under 2lbs. Hint.




The alotted budget will easily source a S/S RAR 243Win in plywood,wearing a Fixed Fhuqker 6X MQ and leave loot for more 105 Hornie HPBT's. No thang to push their .530 BC at 3050fps and that pile driving ass and minimal recoil/expense,will only connect more dots. One could slum a .547 BC at like speeds,but Booger High Birds are far from warm/fuzzy on Critters and the Hornie HPBT assuredly is of superior mettle. Pun be intended.


With the "lowly" 105 Hornie HPBT at said speed and a 250yd zero from sealevel along The Milford,the reticle alone will "only" getcha to the 1150yd line. The 95 cain't hang in either terminal affects nor flight characteristics,let alone gettin' the goody outta the reticle. Hint.

Neither the Creed' nor 260 can push the 123 as fast as a Vanilla 243Win can scoot a 105. Toss the 130JLK in the fray,add some COAL latitude and some nice thangs can happen in 6.5,but certainly not at Vanilla 243Win 105 Loot. I LOVE my 20" Montucky 6BR and 105's wayyyyyyyy past the 600yd line,despite gunning numerous 243's,243AI's,6-284's and a Montucky 1-8" Twat-Six. Hell...I LOVE the 18" Montucky BABY 270 and 105's at 600yds++. Re-hint.

I shoot 'em all. The 6mmRem and 6mmRem AI being the schittiest chamberings of the lot,no matter the action length or twist rate. Easy for me to say,if only because I shoot it all. Hint.

L-R: BR,270,XC,243SALAMI,243AI,6mmRem,6mmRemAI,6-284,Twat-Six



Now as the erector goes,'Horn's go without sayin'...just sayin'. All are in a fhuqking hurry to forget that everything below zero is 100% absofhuqkinglutely USELESS. Hint. Read that again. Now one more time. Re-hint.



Variables fhuqking suck and I don't give a schit who makes them. Hint.

The 6X MQ has no equal for Utility,nor is anything even fhuqking close. It connects the most dots,with the least concessions. 6X MQ for Utility,10X MQ for Giggles.

Conjoin 'Horn rings with the 6X MQ and it's easy to reach the 2000yd line(36 Mils from the above zero and atmosphere) and in order to do so,no "weight" or concessions are added to the equation and most cain't begin to savvy the ease in which such things are arranged. Just ask a Texan and 'Raider in particular. Laughing!

I'd be happy to use 2pc 1913 happy rings,shim the rear and rock the 40MOA inherent 'Horn's,in order to coax all the goody outta the equation.

I can only lead folks to water.

Hint......................

Seems you neglected to stuff a Dasher in the pic.......grin....

Stick,

When you say montucky are you referring to a Kimber Montana? I've been looking at the Boyd's and if I go RAR will be getting one to compliment the rifle. I'm leaning toward the fixed 6 utility!



Trystan

Yeah, Montucky, Horn rings, etc. You'll get used to it

The Boyd's ain't a bad call.

Keep in mind the intended use of the rifle. If you're going to be stomping in the woods with the rifle, as well as shooting long, then the versatility/utility of the 6x would be desirable. If you're going to mostly hunt open country and shoot targets, the 10x is awesome.

Yes that's Alaskabilly. If you don't speak it you will learn.

I just ran some numbers to recheck what I already knew. Not that it matters at this point, because your mind seems made up, and it's not a bad way to fly, nor close.

The 95 Berger I run is about 100 fps faster than the 105s I ran. It is indeed a touch flatter @ 600, and even at 1000. But the difference is so small, it really don't matter. It's basically a wash. I would base it on which bullet you and the rifle like best. But the Bergers at least rate a range session IMO. Only reason I say this is because accuracy in factory tubes has been superb thus far.

I have really had a hankerin' to mess with a RAR lately, but sure as he11 don't need another rifle.....

I do hope Boyds inletting is better these days. I have seen some $hit from them that someone should be shot for calling it "drop in".

Truth is, I hate laminates anyway. But if it was the only option vs. tupperware I would happily take it....

You know this already, but when talking anything beyond PBR, "flatness" is largely irrelevant, though impact velocity and wind drift certainly are not...

Drop in or not doesn't matter to me as I'll touch it up and bed it regardless.

I'm surprised you don't care for laminate as often as you quote bench rest shooting. Laminate is among the most stable of platforms one can bed a barreled action into.

If your running advertised numbers on the Berger vs the Hornady real world performance will likely leave you a bit disappointed! When I tested Berger's a little over 11 years ago they were plum full of schit on there BC numbers.



Trystan

I've had four 6 Dashers, two ran the 95's, and two the 105's, and I found 120 FPS average difference between them, which was basically a wash in performance.

I killed quite a few coyotes with the 95's, and they worked well w/o tearing the hides all the chit.

Berger BC's are not "inflated".......that's Nosler's job....

Performance aside, I usually default to the Horn 105 AM or BTHP for high-volume rifles because they're a bunch cheaper than Bergers around here, and that means more shooting for the $. They've always given stellar accuracy and terminal performance, too.

LOL, that's true!

I am talking about what I actually saw them do. POI being nearly identical. I did check some numbers, and they came out exactly as expected.

Truth is, it's a moot point and not really worth arguing over. Either one will whack an antelope from pretty far away. I would go with whichever one shot best out if the rifle. Which is why I recommended the Berger to begin with. Mine like 'em.

I much prefer a quality fiberglass stock to anything laminate. IMO they are both lighter weight and stronger.

I wish I could describe what had to be done to a couple of Boyds offerings as "touch ups". But that was years ago, and they mave have gotten it together since then. Are they the only options on the RAR right now?

Exactly. On both counts.

I would run 'em both, let the rifle decide.....

MDT makes the LSS chassis for 'em....

I can like that.....

Dog,

I've got an old Rem 788 in 6mm but have been considering a RAR in 243. Whittakers has both the 243 stainless compact and the 243 stainless standard on sale. Is there any particular reason to get one over the other apart from handiness? I was thinkin' maybe the 22" barrel to get the better velocity. Is that sufficient reason to get the 22" over the 18". For the purposes stated by the OP, my impression is that the longer tube and higher velocity would be preferable.

What prompted this q is your statement ref jumping on a RAR compact stainless in 6.5 Creed if Ruger offered one.

Don't know what you'll lose in the .243 going from 22" to 18"...

But a pard of mine just bought a Tikka in .260 and had it chopped to 16.5" for use with a suppressor. Using loads that clocked 2830 with the 140 VLD out of his 20" Tikka CTR... the 16.5" gun ran 2785. He lost only 45 fps from 20" to 16.5".

My .300 WSM lost about 150 fps going from 24" to 17".

I guess it's up to you if the 50-100fps you might lose is an issue. 22" is the longest barrel in my stable anymore... and ironically it's on the smallest gun, a .223.

I decided to pull the trigger and this is what I came up with.

Tikkas T3 6.5X55 Swede out the door for $480 discounted at the local sporting goods store.

Black Friday sale is coming up and I'm thinking I'll get a fixed 10 SS


Trystan

I read this thread and it got me motivated, so tonight I got a heads-up on an RAR ss lefty in .243 with 22” tube and ordered same for $299. Figure to throw an EGW 20 moa base on it, get some Horn’s, throw a 10x milquad on it, and find a load for the Hornady 100 hpbt and play some.

I hated to spend the money just before Christmas, but that price was pretty sweet and sealed the deal.

10x is not exactly a hunting-friendly level of magnification.

For sniping, sure; for target work, from an F-class bipod; well, it ain't ideal, but will work... Thing is shooting antelope is fairly dynamic. The early longrange shooters would set up portable benchrigs and shoot cross canyon, or perch behind a tall tripod mounted rifle along game movement tracks and shoot from 1000yds. Guess you can shoot antelope in similar way, but try some running shots at 10x; just not enough field of view unless quarry is doing a slow walk.

I got a Tikka T3, and have owned 6.5x55. The .260rem or .260AI will do all the swede does, and you can buy (iirc) a Tikka Varmint heavy barrel in .260; or for real solution to longrange precision, there's the Tikka Master Sporter with match barrel and laminated stock. Basically it's a Sako TRG-22 but w/o the polymer stock. About half the price, but more than you've budgeted.

You want the heavier barrel and tactical or match stock.

Your Leupold 6x will serve just fine. Get the Sierra 142gr matchking bullets and use their accuracy load data. The Nosler 140bthp is a good value, but not the highest BC on the block...

Has anyone else noticed that nowhere in the discussion of 'long range hunting' has kinetic energy at distance been discussed?
In short, who gives d*mn whether cartridge X will shoot MOA or sub-MOA at a gazillion yards. If the projectile doesn't have enough kinetic energy to quickly dispatch the target animal, then what good is it? If you're just bangin' steel or paper at long range, then it's 'long range SHOOTING'. Long range hunting involves ethics as well as accuracy.

JMHO

Kinetic energy is not a wounding mechanism and in no way tells you anything about tissue destruction.

Neither does a X MOA group at X yards. Do you have another term you'd like to use to measure the potential for tissue damage and an ethic kill?

My point was that regardless of the accuracy at any given range, it in no way means that the projectile will have enough energy, force, or azz to destroy tissue and quickly and cleanly dispatch the creature on the receiving end.

There are other differences between long range hunting and long range shooting that I'll wait to bring until my nomex suit gets here and I can fight back the flames that will no doubt come with that discussion.

+1000

Impact velocity sufficient to expand the bullet is what destroys tissue, while kinetic energy is a distorted metric that is not necessarily proportional with tissue destruction. As long as a bullet has the structural integrity and momentum to penetrate whatever barrier it hits, whether hide/ribs, shoulder knuckle, etc, impact velocity is what gets the bullet expanded and the job done.