Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Ask The Gunwriters Less expensive woodchuck rifle

My father, from whom age and time has taken a lot of his mental faculties, donated my Remington ADL 243 that I had a 4-12X VX-I on, glass bedded and trigger job, all doped for woodchucks.
Well, she seems disinclined to let me have it back, so I find myself in the market for a rifle when I was not expecting to be.

I don't and won't have any cheap guns, but I will take an inexpensive one that chambers and shoots well. Unfortunately, this will deviate from my Blued and Walnut preference. I'm looking at Tikka T3, Winchester XPR, Ruger American and Savage some model.

First, need I look further than these?
And being as I have none of them, your reflections please.
Oh, i'm getting it in 243 again.

Thanks
Syl

Eurooptic had blued wood Tikka T3's in 222 for $499. Doesnt get much better for chucks than that.

How about an all forged-steel Howa from Whittaker for $329? Hinged floorplate instead of cheap plastic magazine protruding from the bottom. Uses same two-piece bases as a 700.

That

If you are talking cheap pappy is on the mark. You might also consider one of the marlins at cdnn

This is as good as it gets for the dollar value.

Although if it is going to be strictly a woodchuck rifle consider either a 223 or 22/250. The 223 is an easy 300 yd rifle and the 22/250 will get you out to 400- 450 comfortably, all without the recoil and extra "boom and bellow" of the 243.

drover

For under $500 you could pick any of these options:

Buy the Howa 1500 and replace the stock with a Boyds.

Or, you could buy a Vanguard 2.

Or, you could buy a 700 ADL package gun at Wal-Mart.

Or, you could buy an RAR-Predator and replace the stock with a Boyds.

I have no idea where you are geographically located, but it seems to me that a dedicated 'chuck rifle chambered in 204, 223, or 22-250 would be more practical than a 243.

If I was going to buy a dedicated 'chuck rifle for shooting them in the northeast, New England, NY, or PA, I'd take a serious look at an RAR-P in 204 with a Boyds laminated Heritage or Prairie Hunter style stock.

I know this wasn't one of your choices, but you may be money ahead in the long run.

https://grabagun.com/remington-84670-700adl-bolt-action-rifle-walnut-stk-fleur-de-lis.html

Actually from my groundhog days it's really tuff to beat a good 243 loaded with light bullets and today they are even more lightweight choices. Wood chucks are not like prairie dogs so recoil isn't an issue and the report I found if someone complains about a 243 they will complain about a 22 hornet. The howa with say a 3-9 or a 3-12 scope would work pretty well and could even serve as a backup or loaner for deer.

I do a lot of my hunting without a spotter and with the 223 and 22/250 I can generally see my hits/misses, something that can't be done with a 243.

I use primarily Nosler Ballistic Tips, the plastic tipped bullets have made the 22 caliber bullets a real game-changer, the ballistic coefficient is much improved over the spitzer and hollow-point bullets.

The only difference in a hit on a chuck using 22/250 with a 50 gr @ 3800 fps or a 243 using a 243 with a 55 gr @ 3800 fps is that the 243 is burning 5 to 10 grs more powder resulting in more recoil to achieve the same results. Which explains my fondness for the 223 and 22/250 for chuck hunting.

drover

drover is spot on!

All good advice above, but my vote goes to the 243. Much more power at longer distances. I bought my Tikka Model 558 243 sporter in 1995 and have shot a bunch of woodchucks with it over the years. I use 75 grain VMAX bullets which are more effective than any 22 caliber bullet at longer ranges. I am very fond of my Cooper 22-250, but the 243 has more power.

Decide for yourself what kind of hunting you will be doing, then pick the caliber and type of rifle - sporter or varmint weight. My first woodchuck rifle was a 25-06.

I know they are a little pricier but I really like the Ruger 77 target or whatever they call it now. Have one in a Swift and a 243. Both with polished barrel and blue receiver. Sure the new ones are as good or better. Both are used for pd's and are highly accurate. Very good rifles, just a thought.

They don't make the blued varmint models anymore. There's the Hawkeye Predator and the Varmint Target, both lammy SS modeks with two-stage triggers. Nothing cheap about them either. I paid over $750 for a Predator three years ago. Worth it, too.

Not on your list but I have found these to be accurate little rifles.

MARLIN XS7 243 SYNTHETIC on sale for $249

https://www.cdnnsports.com/marlin-xs7-243-synthetic.html?___SID=U

I'd take a look at the Remington Model 7 Predator. They have slashed the price on them, and the one I have is one of most accurate rifles. They come in 223, 22-250, and 243.

Love the carnage of the 243 provides on woodchucks.
I would go with the Tikka of your choices.
Smooth action. Pretty much guaranteed to shoot tiny clusters. Really nice trigger.
By far the best of the tupperware stocks.

that was a smokin' deal for a Tikka 222.......

My 243 AI shoots a 55 grain BT at just a hair above 4000 feet a second,rivaling a 220 swift with a 40. It will hit a standing prairie dog from 0-300 yards with a center hold when zeroed at 260. 243 gets my vote for a chuck rifle. If I may ask, who was your rifle donated to?

I bought one a couple of months ago. My first Tikka and despite all the plastic I'm impressed.

I checked Eorooptic's site the other day and they appear to be sold out.

Too bad because that may well have been the deal of the century.