Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Hunting Rifles If you can only have one bolt action rifle...

This is a nice rifle that I wouldn't mind owning. Thinkin it's a Annie. I guess if the range was close enough it would be fine for coyotes and small meat deer, and definitely up to the task of perforating paper out to a couple hundred yards.

Following this lead, move up the next step in range to a Sako Vixen in .222.

Then, a little more range and versatility. Slumming a bit, but another super short action length with a 1:8 twist X-Bolt in 223

I'd skip over the fast 22's, but I'm sure a case could be made for them.

I have a Steyr Scout in .308.

Depending on how it is scoped, one can do almost anything with this rifle. Great trigger right out of the box and very accurate as well.

If I successfully sell one of my pistols this coming Wednesday, I will be looking into rifles soon.
I probably should have grabbed that pre-64 model 70 with zeiss scope for $2000 bucks... lol

When I was seriously considering a 223, my friends believe my Ar15 can do anything a bolt action rifle can do in my case. the struggling is real.

I am guessing 4x scope is normal for the scout but my eyesight is not so good, I need 9x for 100 yards.

Savage 340 in 30-30...good griz/long range gun fo' sho

Winchester model 70 featherweight in 280rem

Kinda late to the party. Lots of good suggestions for rifles and cartridges have been posted and, a few "unbiased" opinions. Nahh...we all have our favorites or at least opinions on what is best for our use and certainly what we like best.

I think I'd ask a couple questions first. From an inveterate handloader the first is, do you handload and if so how seriously do you handload? Second is how much money do you want to spend? The third I'm guessing isn't as important to the OP as it is to me. Do you prefer "new and shiny" or "old and classic"? For grins and giggles a fourth might be how romantically inclined are you?

Most rifles made in the last 50 years are capable of what you mention and, especially if you're a fairly serious handloader and gun crank. If not, probably a newer rifle in a commonly available, popular cartridge is more suitable. I don't believe anyone would doubt there's been a LOT more development put into the 6.5 Creedmoor than the 6.5 Swede, at least in this country.

New(er) vs. classic. That has to be a matter of taste. I'd take a Mauser sporter from pre-WWI onward to the beginning of WWII or, a Mannlicher/Schoenauer from 1903 or any of the successive models over anything post-WWII from any country. Virtually any of the cartridges chambered in any those rifles would be adequate for my purposes.

It seems to me that today so many rifles are exceptionally accurate as compared to 50 years ago that one doesn't have to spend a ton of money to get an accurate rifle. One or the other might require a few tweaks, from what I read, but nothing like what might needed to have been done 30-50 years ago. As happily stuck in the old days as I am only a fool would deny that accuracy has improved immensely. Soo...how much money needs to be spent seems to depend on how nice a rifle you want. Commenting purely from what I read, (I haven't bought a "new" rifle in.....I don't remember for certain, 20-30 years at least), it appears for around $1000 a fella can get an accurate rifle and are pretty darn good scope chambered in a popular, common cartridge for which accurate factory ammo is available. For some classic rifles, that same $1000 will get you in the door to browse....although there is some classic rifle "buys" if a fella is patient and checks sources frequently.

The OP's comments and question are pretty open to interpretation and, that's understandable. If a fella doesn't know or hasn't made up his mind about something.....where else would he be? I know when I'm rifle shopping most of the time I'm casting about for something that catches my eye or I find interesting. My advice is find and buy the one that puts the biggest smile on your face....and everything else can go hang.

Yup.

This thread frightens me every time I see it!!!

Hell yes! If only one I would have to answer a military 98 with the military trigger.

The very idea is stupid!!!!! When I started hunting 60 years ago I had more than one bolt action,,

My recomendation would be...
Pre 64 mod 70 fW....standard weight is just too heavy....chambered in 30-06. Does it all pretty well
A close second would be an L61 R Sako....in again 30-06

I will modify my above post.

For NA - M98 in .30-06

Going worldwide, M98 in .375 H&H

Will the .375 H&H work for the OP's desire to have a rifle that is capable of long range pursuits?



Trystan

Well after rereading the original post as Brad suggested I would modify my recommendation of a model 70 Feather Weight in 30-06 to the same rifle in 6.5x55, 260 Remington, or 257 Roberts. Now that's for the new model Feather Weight, like them better than the pre 64, but, that's another discussion and opinion.
So Brad I just combined the Title of and the post.

If I were limited to one rifle for all North American big game hunting, it'd be of recent manufacture comprised of best components. I'd want it to be the product of computer aided manufacturing thus removing human error. It'd be chambered in .280 Rem, '06, .308 Win, or .270 Win.

Having only one rifle means no back-up. Hence, it has to be 100% reliable. It'd have to be extremely accurate.

There are many rifles that would fill my requirements. I'd probably begin with Sako. It advertises MOA with a 5-shot group. I've yet to read negatives about Sako. Montana Rifle Company would deserve a look.

I think that control round feed is more marketing than utility. I know others have differing opinions.

I guess I have only one more requirement. Blue steel and wood stocks.

I'd go for a Sako, too. A .270, .25-06 or .280 would do.
Bob

Ruger 77 RL 270 tang safety

I like your style.

Me too: blued steel & real wood.