What's the best bolt action in .300win mag


PDA






hunterman247
January 26, 2011, 08:40 PM
My dad and I are planning an elk hunt in 2 years to Colorado. We're both needing to get rifles yet. I've been doing a lot of reading and getting some peoples opinions as well, and I think I have my search focused on the .300 win mag bolt action. What I'm trying to find out now is if there're any recommendations as to what brand of gun and piggybacking that then what model to get. I know some are known to not have very smooth slide action in the bolt, wood stock vs synthetic, things like that. Any opinions/advice would be welcome.

If you enjoyed reading about "What's the best bolt action in .300win mag" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!
groundhog34
January 26, 2011, 08:50 PM
Try a used weatherby mark V in 300 weatherby mag. 300 weatherby is a hair more powerful than a 300 win mag. weatherbys are very accurate. they are on gunbroker for about $1000

WYcoyote
January 26, 2011, 08:57 PM
The original, of course. The Rifleman's Rifle. That's the one I chose.

Winchester Model 70

homers
January 26, 2011, 09:00 PM
Tikka T3
Ruger M77
Weatherby Vanguard synthetic
Savage 111 or 116

ontarget
January 26, 2011, 09:06 PM
Remington 700 for me every time.

Liberty1776
January 26, 2011, 09:09 PM
My Remington 700 synthetic. You can spend a lot more - even with Remington - but you won't get a better gun. JMHO>

9X23WIN
January 26, 2011, 09:18 PM
The original, of course. The Rifleman's Rifle. That's the one I chose.

Winchester Model 70

Agreed!

GJgo
January 26, 2011, 11:06 PM
While it doesn't *really* matter with any good modern rifle, I'd consider a) reasonably lightweight b) weatherproof c) I'd spend more of the budget on a really good low light 3-9-ish scope.

I have a 300 WM & a 300 WSM. FWIW, the WSM is lighter, has the same ballistics in Elk loads, and kicks quite a bit less...

Gromky
January 27, 2011, 12:20 AM
M1903 Springfield.

Oh, you mean chambered for it in the factory! From the little I know, I would probably just go for a Remington 700 if I were to have to buy new.

Remember that when people say "reasonably lightweight" they mean "moderately heavy." With a 9 pound rifle (including scope), 3-4 boxes of .300 ammo over a day or two off a bench starts to get uncomfortable for me personally. That will obviously be influenced by stock design as well. I don't think any of the rifles mentioned will be under 7 pounds scoped and loaded.

stownsend
January 27, 2011, 08:29 AM
Another vote for Winchester Model 70. That's what I have and love it.

Abel
January 27, 2011, 08:55 AM
Go pick up some rifles and get a feel for what you like.

I could narrow it down to two. The Browning X-Bolt & The Winchester M70 Featherweight,

28lx
January 27, 2011, 09:29 AM
The good thing about the 300 Winchester is its popular. Just about anybody who makes a bolt gun chambers it for this round. Cant go wrong with a Winchester M-70 Remington 700 ,Sako, Savage,Ruger,T/C Icon ect. Buy the rifle that feels good to you. As far as stock material thats personal preference I like blued steel and wood but I also own a few stainless synthetics. Keep in mind that for one helluva long time all rifles had wood stocks and performed fine. Seal it good with wax and you wont have a problem in any weather. As far as recoil it is determined mostly by rifle weight bullet weight and powder charge weight. If a 300WSM fees like it kicks less than a 300WM with say for example 180 grain bullets its most likely the stock fits you better on the 300WSM. Recoil between the two cartridges is near identical.

Remmy700
January 27, 2011, 12:14 PM
If weight is not a big deal to you then get a Remington sendero or 5R 300 win mag if you can find one for a good price. If weight is an option I would get a browning Abolt or winchester M70 300 wsm

hunterman247
January 27, 2011, 12:54 PM
thanks guys for the input. I just went today and saw a Winchester M70 Extreme. Synthetic stock. I liked the feel of it and the bolt moved nicely. Here's a question about some of the brands listed. I've heard like the Rem 770 is one to stay away from but the 700 is good. Are there any in Savage, Browning, Ruger, etc. to stay away from or any of you would recommend
. Thanks again, as of yet, I don't think I can get to much input on this!

Geno
January 27, 2011, 01:05 PM
What I like about my Weatherby Mark V in .300 Win Mag is fast follow-up shots if needed. To my understanding, the Mark V action remains the strongest bolt made for shoulder-fired rifles. What I like about the M70, is the controlled round feed. Although, none of my Weatherby rifles ever has failed me in any way. The world is your oyster...which make and model rifle fits you best, is the best for you.

Geno

SwampWolf
January 27, 2011, 02:20 PM
My choice would be a Ruger MKII. I've used Ruger Model 77s (I currently own four of them but none chambered in .300 Magnum) for decades and have never experienced a moment's worth of trouble with any of them. Accurate, reliable, tough, affordable and well-made. The only criticism I've ever had with them is that some of the older ones were cursed with "lawyer" triggers. I hear that the triggers on more recent MKIIs are much improved.

Durty
January 27, 2011, 04:48 PM
You opened a can of worms for sure. Any of the well known brands will be fine. I like the idea of getting the one that fits you. Remington, Winchester, Ruger, Savage, Tikka, and a lot of others have their own following. They are solid, reliable rifles. I personally own a Rem 700 chambered in 300 win mag and its the t*ts. Love it. But Remingtons fit me very well in general. To each his own, I say. But without question, invest at least 300 bucks on glass. Don't go real cheap- especially since you have time. Also, the more animals you kill with it before you go, the more confident you'll be in your gun and yourself. I have killed a lot of random stuff with my 300. Lol. Birds, squirrels, whitetail, some black cat that was crossing our field, a jackrabbit, 2 hogs, and I think that's about it. Oh and several axis does. And 1 axis buck actually. (not a big one)

WYcoyote
January 27, 2011, 05:33 PM
Models I would avoid:
Mossberg 4x4
Rem 770
And all rifles even resembling these.

Daniel Boone
January 27, 2011, 05:40 PM
My first choice would be a original pre 64 Model 70 Winchester.

My second choice would be a pre 1980 Remington model 700

I would not have any problems using a older model 110 Savage or it's likeness

I wouldn't even have any problems using a Ruger.

I would not buy any new Remington, I would be hesitant of buying a new Winchester - but if I did - it would have a wood stock and not a piece of plastic. I would not be ashamed of owning a new Ruger or a new Savage as long as it was not a piece of junk.

If it is cheap - it is junk in my honest opinion.
I would stay away from the Steven's brand also.
You get what you pay for.

Too many people puts their trust in the caliber of the rifle and less in the actual brand or model. They figure that as long as it is chambered in their favorite caliber that they are all the same.
Would be like trying to compare a Corvette and a Chevette - they were both made by Chevrolet - but I would only want to take one of the above - past 100 mph.

langenc
January 27, 2011, 05:47 PM
As GJgo said--300 WSM in a Tikka T3 with 3x9 or 2x7 scope.

Shoot it 3 or 4 boxes of ammo before the hunt on several range trips. Get some kind of bipod and practice with that extensively.

critter
January 27, 2011, 06:40 PM
I have a Win M70 in .300 Mag that works very well for me. I would have no problem with a Rem 700, a Ruger 77. Not that the others are less of a gun, but I just don't have experience with them.

Big7
January 27, 2011, 11:29 PM
Ruger!

courtgreene
January 28, 2011, 12:12 AM
I never thought I would use this sentence, not having a time machine, but: I disagree with daniel boone. I agree with most of those who said just shoulder a few of them and see what feels right, but not all budget rifles were created equally. The stevens model 200 proves the truth in that statement using mr. boone's own words. On one hand he said that older savages are fine. On the other he said not the stevens. Problem: a stevens IS an older savage. The only difference is the name on the bolt. Feel free to research how the stevens line came to be, but it really is just a renaming of the older savages that are marketed along side of the newer designs. If you buy one and replace the stock, you have a great rifle for a great price. Mine out shoots my rem700, and the 700's pretty stinking good. Trigger jobs help the stevens when done right.

pikid89
January 28, 2011, 12:17 AM
i will go against what the others are saying to a degree
I agree on the bolt action, just about any modern bolt action will do you fine, barring a few select (or unselect lol) models like the rem 770 etc...
if it were me i would go with a ruger m77 all weather ( i have one in 270 i love)
the part i dont agree on is caliber.

you should be just fine with a 308, 30-06, or a 270 (with the right bullets). countless elk have been killed with those and in the end you will have a much more versatile and easier to shoot rifle than a .300 win mag, not to mention far cheaper factory ammo

don
January 28, 2011, 01:11 AM
WYcoyote, what is wrong or bad about the Mossberg 4x4? I was thinking of getting one. I would appreciate your input.

Coal Dragger
January 28, 2011, 08:08 AM
Why on earth does everyone think they need a .300 magnum or a .338 magnum of some description to kill an elk? To hear some a hunter/shooter might think the North American Elk is some sort of thick skinned, heavily boned dangerous game animal that is super tough and hard to kill. Yeah..... they're just big deer, plenty of hunters kill them with standard calibers just fine. In fact those that hunt them most often are probably least likely to bother taking any kind of magnum rifle along to harvest one.

WYcoyote
January 28, 2011, 08:28 PM
Coal Dragger,
I have taken 27 elk personally and seen many more by others.
About 8 in 10 drop nicely with the calibers you are talking about.
The other 2 will absolutely astound you with their will to live.
There are different scenarios also.
The spikes, raghorns, and cows feeding at 150yds in a meadow are one thing, but the rutting herd bull at dusk 350yds away on the rim of a nasty timbered canyon at a less than perfect angle is quite another.
This is not the same as a deer.
And having a wounded animal as regal and majestic as a trophy bull get away after miles of tracking is a bitter pill to swallow. And it will happen, no matter how ethical and skilled a hunter you think you are.
This is why I prefer a caliber with a little more horsepower than the standard deer gun.
It's the difference between adequate and ideal.

Geno
January 28, 2011, 09:16 PM
pikid89:

The reason for the .300 Win Mag versus a .308 Win or even a .30-06 Sprg is for the heavier projectile and retained energy at long distances. The .300 Win Mag, when loaded to 3,100 FPS with a 200 grain spire point, boattail is brutal far past 500 yards. The penetration, even in an angling shot is, is complete on most big game animals. Too, when loaded with a 200 grain projectile, and sporting a Williams Answer Muzzle Break, the recoil is that of a .243 Win firing a 100 grain projectile. The sole reason I have kept my .300 Win Mag is per the outside chance I may some day draw a tag for a large bear hunt out west, or moose, elk or the like. It is far, far more power than I will need for whitetail deer here in Michigan, even at 500 yards. For these surroundings, my .308 Win, or .30-06 Sprg will do just dandy. As a point of comparison, the .300 Win Mag will launch a 200 grain projectile at the same velocity as a .30-06 Sprg can max-out with a 165 grain projectile. All things begin equal, weight and sectional-density will win-out for the .300 Win Mag in the long shots, especially quartering.

Geno

WYcoyote
January 28, 2011, 10:09 PM
don,
A link from Longrangehunting on the Mossberg.

http://www.longrangehunting.com/forums/f19/mossberg-4x4-25-06-a-52241/

Gromky
January 29, 2011, 01:47 AM
Why on earth does everyone think they need a .300 magnum or a .338 magnum of some description to kill an elk?

Because if I screw up and hit the shoulder with a .308 at 200 yards the elk has a good chance of hobbling off and I'll have to track. With the .300, it's probably not moving far. When hunting in steep terrain where the animal can drop 1,000 feet of elevation within seconds any movement is a bad thing.

They're certainly not needed. Shot placement is the biggest factor. But they aren't a mistake either. The only big downside is the recoil fear and flinching...if a shot is properly placed, short range, it doesn't matter whether it's .300 Savage or .300 Win Mag. But when you don't get a perfect shot, or have some range, adding some energy can be a huge benefit.

ekgandj
January 29, 2011, 02:08 AM
I agree with the others that you absolutely need to stay away from the 770's they are so bad that Bass Pro Shops even stopped selling them around here because of the defects.

My vote would be a savage or Tikka, Tikka first.

As far as a cheaper rifle is not any good as stated ealier, I think Savage has proved that wrong. Everyone blasted how crappy of rifles they were until their buddies started out shooting them with one. Just my 2c.

Good luck on your hunt, sounds like a lot of fun.

Coal Dragger
January 29, 2011, 02:12 AM
For those that can actually shoot a magnum well they are no doubt a good choice. From what I have observed about 95% of hunters can't shoot worth a crap with a .22LR from a realistic field position much less shoot a hard kicking magnum well enough to even attempt a shot at an animal of any size 200 yards away.

A .30-06 with a good bullet or a .280 with a good bullet should give plenty of penetration. I doubt rather seriously that the animal could tell the difference in impact velocity of 100-150fps.

carnaby
January 29, 2011, 03:11 AM
Sako 85. I have two of these in .300 wsm and have been very pleased. If you don't want to spend that kind of money, then Savage would get my nod. I sold my Savage .300 win mag to a buddy. Very accurate rifle with an excellent trigger.

trultemor
January 29, 2011, 04:43 AM
Since you asked for the best.
How about a new Sauer or Mauser or Blaser if you like a straight pull?

Gromky
January 29, 2011, 04:55 AM
For those that can actually shoot a magnum well they are no doubt a good choice. From what I have observed about 95% of hunters can't shoot worth a crap with a .22LR from a realistic field position much less shoot a hard kicking magnum well enough to even attempt a shot at an animal of any size 200 yards away.

I will absolutely agree that anyone who is uncomfortable with the recoil of the rifle shouldn't be hunting with it. It doesn't matter the caliber. The biggest thing I had to get over wasn't recoil, but muzzle flash...nothing about the recoil bothered me (I'm a reasonably sized man), but the muzzle flash caused flinches for me.

And it's not 100-150 fps from .30-06 to .300 Win Mag. It's more like 300.

451 Detonics
January 29, 2011, 05:54 AM
If I were to buy a bolt gun for serious hunting of large game I would look very hard at the Blaser R-8 Professional. It's inline bolt action (straight pull) makes it very fast and not having to clear the scope allows optics to be mounted as low as possible. Quick detach scope mounts and good iron sights add to it's versatility. And as an added bonus by changing the barrel and bolt head you can add as many caliber as you desire.

http://i188.photobucket.com/albums/z271/reloader1959/rifles/blaser.jpg

CaliCoastie
January 29, 2011, 08:25 AM
check out the sako a7, bolt is so smooth i check at the range to make sure i chambered a round, great trigger. if you feel the need for 300wm then by all means, but the 7mm mag is very close balisticly with a little less recoil. the 30-06, and 270 would work well also, best of luck.

SwampWolf
January 29, 2011, 07:34 PM
From what I have observed about 95% of hunters can't shoot worth a crap with a .22LR from a realistic field position much less shoot a hard kicking magnum well enough to even attempt a shot at an animal of any size 200 yards away.
A .30-06 with a good bullet or a .280 with a good bullet should give plenty of penetration.

From what I have observed, way more than half of American hunters can shoot competently with a .22LR. If, as you claim, 95% can't, then they have no business hunting with either a 30-06 or a .280, let alone a 300 Magnum. Nobody that I know would ever argue that shot placement isn't the most important factor in shooting a game animal. But I think Gromkky summarized it best when he answered the following question:

Why on earth does everyone think they need a .300 magnum or a .338 magnum of some description to kill an elk?

"Because if I screw up and hit the shoulder with a .308 at 200 yards the elk has a good chance of hobbling off and I'll have to track. With the .300, it's probably not moving far. When hunting in steep terrain where the animal can drop 1,000 feet of elevation within seconds any movement is a bad thing.

"They're certainly not needed. Shot placement is the biggest factor. But they aren't a mistake either. The only big downside is the recoil fear and flinching...if a shot is properly placed, short range, it doesn't matter whether it's .300 Savage or .300 Win Mag. But when you don't get a perfect shot, or have some range, adding some energy can be a huge benefit."

BIGR
January 29, 2011, 07:56 PM
My 300 WIN MAG. is a stainless Model 70 with the claw. Bolt works back and forth like butter.

22brguy
January 29, 2011, 08:07 PM
A question maybe....Which factory action do most top custom rifles prefer for strength, reliability, resale etc.?? Also which factory action do the Marine snipers rely on with their life? To answer these questions might help in your quest......Best Wishes

Flatbush Harry
January 29, 2011, 08:22 PM
To Daniel Boone:

I've noted a few of your posts. They come with strong opinions that are, apparently, not based on facts or useful experience. In this thread, you've knocked recent Remingtons; my REAL LIFE experience with two recent ones (2008 SPS SS in .308Win and 2010 .25-06 Rem XHR) is that both shoot to less than 0.75" at 100 yards and are fully reliable, as in no malfunctions in more than 500 rounds each. My best handloads in the SPS SS are 0.375" 3-shot groups at 100 yds with 42.0 gr of RL 15 under a 168gr SMK using CCI BR2 primers and I average 0.75" with 52.1 gr of IMR 4831 under a 100gr SMK, or 53.1gr IMR 4831 under a 90gr Sierra BTHP in my .25-06, with the same primers. I get comparable results with 168gr Hornady A-MAX bullets out of the SPS SS.

I note you make authoritative statements, but cite no data or experience to back them up. I either have owned, or currently own Rem 700s, Savage 11s and 116s, a recent Win M70 and various military rifles (M1 Garands, M1As and a Colt AR15A2) and have been shooting fort just the last 57 years. I have yet to find a rifle that can't shoot as well as me...I'm sure they're out there but I haven't found one yet. You must be getting all of the duds. Sorry to hear it. Perhaps we should call you Job instead of Dan'l Boone.

FH

SwampWolf
January 29, 2011, 08:32 PM
Perhaps we should call you Job instead of Dan'l Boone.


Or Sad Sack. Or Charlie Brown. Or Woe Is Me. :D

Coal Dragger
January 30, 2011, 12:44 AM
It seems that Cooper is now in the business of making magnum hunting rifles, so I suppose the new Model 56 could qualify as "best" or near it.

Can't figure out why the M56 costs about $1100.00 more than an M52 though, seems a bit much and I own a Cooper. The Model 52 is a deal considering what it delivers and the quality of parts, fit and finish, and accuracy. The Model 56 starting at nearly $2600.00 ...... not so much.

trultemor
February 1, 2011, 04:02 AM
http://www.operatorchan.org/k/src/k256370_Sauer%20S202%20Stutzen%20LH.jpg

28lx
February 1, 2011, 12:46 PM
WYcoyote, what is wrong or bad about the Mossberg 4x4? I was thinking of getting one. I would appreciate your input.
Don I biggest hangup with the 4X4 would be its looks. That is one ugly stock on that rifle. If I was going to by a Mossberg I would say forget the drop magazine on the 4X4 and buy the 100 ATR much better looking rifle IMO if they have it in a caliber you desire.

If you enjoyed reading about "What's the best bolt action in .300win mag" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!