Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Hunting Rifles The Hierarchy of Creed Nation

Appears that everyone making them has the twist correct and the available ammo looks top notch. So based on my vast experience of reading on the Internet and never shooting one, here's my guess on how they rank:

Barrett Fieldcraft
Kimber Montana
Tikka T3
Savage
Howa
Ruger RAR


Fill in the blanks. No, I ain't buying one.

16B,

Remington 700

I believe it's an 8-twist. It'd actually be at the top of my list, although the Barrett is tempting for lightweight. Not sure about anyone else's.

Jason

Jason,
Serious question here - in a remington vs barrett comparison - outside of price, where do you see the remington having the advantage?

Where is the Christiansen Mesa?

I have the R700 4th at best, and at least behind the Barrett, Kimber and Howa.

The 700’s greatest asset is universality of after market options.

15 years ago I would have rated Remington first, now I rate them last

Would put Tikka 1st, Howa 2nd.. then all the American models.

For what purpose?

All different guns are. Built and excel at different things. And each manufacturer listed has multiple models that fill diffferent roles.

It's a genuine shame Barrett stranded their Creedmoor with a 21" buggy whip barrel, instead of the nearly perfect contour they put on the long action Fieldcraft... I'd have been an owner at a 22-24" no.2 contour.

Only Creemoor that I've had any experience with is the Howa. It's as accurate a rifle as I'd ever want. I'm not going to buy a boatload of rifles in the 6.5 just so I can have them, but if I do buy another, it will probably be a Remington.

Keep g

Predictable drivel from a Socialist, Anti- American reactionary twit.

They are light, compact, and ridiculously accurate in the factory config. How would making it heavier and longer help the situation?

It wouldn't.

And Brad's justified bias towards muzzle heavy rifles aside, the only thing a No 2 weight tube would accomplish on a Barrett SA would be folks NOT buying them because they were not a light as a Kimber Montana.

I think in terms of basic specs, Barrett got their Fieldcrafts spot on.

Sako should be in there

Hey.. take a look at the "quality" being produced by American companies these days. Its S*it.. maybe Kimber is up there, if that particular rifle is well made. Kimberroulette anyone?

While Tikka has made the T3 model, for FIFTEEN YEARS, using CNC machines (not that CNC is anything special) but they have produced a consistent superior product to anything American manufacturers has done for nearly 20 years. If they spent 10min "polishing everything pretty" it would sell for twice what its sells for now.

I won´t even look at a Rem 700 unless its 30+ years old. Savage.. well its savage.

Sauer 100 XT. Very well-built rifle and amazingly accurate with every load I've tried.

700's still have a lot going for them. Parts, easy to smith/rebarrel, simple, available, etc For a sporter or heavy rifle they still have all the basic stuff going for them but Barrett and Kimber (and Forbes) have made it hard for me to go with a 700 on a hunting rifle.

I'd go with 16b's list with the 700 somewhere mid-way through it.

Barrett's Fieldcraft did a lot of things right from the start and is going to be tough to beat, especially the 3" mag box. I've been shooting a 21" Fieldcraft 6.5 and really like the little rifle. Like Brad, I prefer a 22" sporter contour the same as their long action but that's just my preference.....if lightweight is the main goal, it's hard not to use a thin contour to satisfy the majority of customers. For offhand shots I like the extra couple of oz's balancing slightly forward.

I'm wondering how many of these manufacturer's will adopt the 6.5 prc and if it will become as popular as the creedmore!

I'm with Brad on that. We're talking oz's not lb's.....

Not that big of a deal either way and it seems Barret would still be miles ahead if they did.

A little more forward heft won't help? Maybe shooting deer out of a treestand it wouldn't. I guess those armed forces issuing sniper rifles should use 21" no.0 contour barrels because being able to punch small three shot groups at the bench is all that matters...

I have a variety of Kimber MT's. My lightest is a 7-08, scoped with sling and rounds is 6lb's 6oz's. I have a 270 that is 6lb's 11oz's. The difference in the way that 5oz's helps to settle the rifle down in field positions is noticeable in rifle's that light.

Two days ago I was at a little over 9,000' climbing in knee deep snow searching for a bull. Despite being in great shape, it's exhausting all day. Were I to suddenly get an opportunity at 2, 3, 400 yards I would gladly trade 4 or 8 oz's extra rifle weight to help make that rifle settle down better in field positions with an elevated pulse.

Light is all fine and good to a point, but it can be too much of a good thing. Having been at this for a while, I've found something around 6lbs 10 oz's to no more than 7 lbs all-up weight (scope, sling, rounds) with a bit more weight forward is a nice compromise for a backpack rifle. Light enough to pack, heavy enough to settle down. A no.2-ish barrel like on the long action Fieldcraft hits that sweet spot, though I'd cut it to 22-23". The SA Fieldcraft does not hit that sweet spot.

I do plan on building a 6.5 Creedmoor on a MT action and will specify the barrel finish around .610" at 22". I wish all the MT's had been issued with no.2 contours.