Ruger/Savage Scout models' velocity difference; 5-8 hundred yard groups


PDA






peacebutready
December 22, 2011, 12:15 AM
Good Day All,

I'm comparing the Savage Scout to the new Ruger Scout to decide what to purchase. I asked a couple of questions in my last thread about them. One of the gentlemen mentioned the SHOT show this January and thought it would be a good idea to wait some more time before purchasing. I just read that today (I probably had my e-mail notification set incorrectly). I've since come up with a couple of questions.

The Savage Scout's barrel is 20.5 inches and the Ruger's is 16.5 inches. My chosen caliber will be .308/7.62mm. Most likely I'll be shooting 150gr ammo the most at inanimate targets unless I get a really good deal on other weight ammo. Does anyone know or have a good idea of the muzzle velocity difference between the Savage and Ruger?

If I'm not mistaken, both rifles can take a regular non-extended eye relief scope. The idea a person can go back and forth with 2 different scope set-ups is appealing. Right now I've only shot skeet/trap and pistol. I remember reading a claim that a .308 can shoot 1000 yards, I guess with an expensive rifle. Any idea how many inch groups (or MOA) the Savage and Ruger Scouts may shoot at 500 to 800 yards with a good conventional scope? Or how much of a difference there would be between the 2 models?

Thanks and Happy Holidays.

Update: The Savage Scout has a barrel twist of 1:10, which seems good or decent for up to 175gr through a 20.5" barrel. The 16.5"/1:10 twist barrel Ruger is apparently being used with up to 175gr as well. Please feel free to comment on any or all weights of bullets.

jpwilly: Thanks for the info about heavier weight bullets.

If you enjoyed reading about "Ruger/Savage Scout models' velocity difference; 5-8 hundred yard groups" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!
chaser_2332
December 22, 2011, 12:34 AM
Scout rifle and long range don't go together

jpwilly
December 22, 2011, 01:00 AM
150gr ammo isn't really that good for long range and the 20" barrel would be much better for that purpose too. Plus it would have a lower muzzle blast. You need some FPS and high BC bullets i.e. 168gr or 175gr bullets to get out to 800yrds accurately/consistantly.

Tedzilla
December 22, 2011, 01:43 AM
The true scout rifle as originally conceived by Jeff Cooper was for use out to 400 meters. If you are one of the very rare people who can actually make a 400+ meter shot you already know this...

peacebutready
December 22, 2011, 01:54 AM
The true scout rifle as originally conceived by Jeff Cooper was for use out to 400 meters. If you are one of the very rare people who can actually make a 400+ meter shot you already know this...
I thought 400 meters was for 1000lb. wildlife, rather than stationary targets.

Thanks for posting.

Jim Watson
December 22, 2011, 02:10 AM
There is a lot of bragging being done about the range capabilities of .308s with barrels of 18-20 inches. Some of it is even true. Bear in mind that a 20" AR 15 will hammer the target at 600 yards.

I'd worry about a 16 inch, though.

Actual group size on target depends on the individual barrel and ammo.
As said, a 150 grain bullet is not the best for extended ranges. Even the 155 grain Palma Match bullets depend on high velocity as obtained free from a 30 inch barrel.

Something else to think about, muzzle blast that close to your head might not be noticed when shooting at a bear or a Slav (The Steyr Scout was pictured in the field in the Balkan Unpleasantness.) but for a nice afternoon at the range, it will get old.

BikerRN
December 22, 2011, 02:14 AM
I agree.

Personally I won't use a Scout for further than 200 yards or so on live game after my expiriences with one, and the reduced muzzle velocity, this past deer season.

I've given the Scout concept an honest year of learning and trying but find it sorely lacking for what I do in regards to hunting. If that changes, and I hunt more closed in and wooded areas, then the Scout concept would be a viable option.

Biker

35 Whelen
December 22, 2011, 03:13 AM
I don't quite understand the current rage over 16.5" barrels. A .308 loaded with ball powder and fired from a barrel this short is going to have a horrendous muzzle flash not to mention velocity loss. I like the Ruger Scout rifle as a concept, but I'd never consider of rifle in .308 with such a short barrel.

I remember reading a claim that a .308 can shoot 1000 yards

This is true. The .308 is used in some F-Class competition, but to remain accurate at that range, the bullet must remain supersonic out to 1000 yds. This requires a muzzle velocity that won't be possible out of a 16.5" barrel I feel sure.


Personally I won't use a Scout for further than 200 yards or so on live game after my expiriences with one, and the reduced muzzle velocity, this past deer season.



I'm curious about your experiences, reduced MV's, etc. I ask because the load I use with my Scout runs a 150 gr. bullet a tad over 2700 fps (18 1/2" bbl.). The way I sight it in, it's only about 9" low at 300. I could easily get more MV, but 30 or so years of deer hunting have taught me that this is plenty for any deer on this planet at any reasonable range. Heck, the 300 Savage only does about 2600 with a 150 gr. bullet and it's easily a 250 yd. cartridge.

For a while after I built my Scout, I used a load that ran a 165 gr. Remington a little over 2700 fps. At the time, I shot at a range that had targets out to 350 yds. Even with the 2.75X scope, hitting the gongs (oxygen & acetylene cylinders with the bottoms cut out of them) was no big deal.

35W

jmr40
December 22, 2011, 07:22 AM
Here is a good article on 308 and short,16" barrels

http://www.tacticaloperations.com/SWATbarrel/

They do better than most guys think. My personal preference is for 20" at a minimum because of muzzle blast. A 20" gun is more fun to shoot than a 16". But in this case I think the Ruger is the much better gun. I owned one of the Savage Scout rifles a few years ago and it did not impress me.

MikePaiN
December 22, 2011, 07:50 AM
.308win/7.62 nato is one of the least effected rounds in terms of velocity loss by barrel length, measuring only in the 10's of fps/per inch down.
I highly doubt there would be and noticeable performance difference between the Ruger and Savage Scouts. As with any rifle, I'm sure each will have its "preferred" ammo. With the holidays here, time and money are tight I haven't been able to test my GSR. So far I've only shot WWB 147g at 100-200yrds and it does well enough. By spring I'm going to take a day and test as many different loadings as I can find.

peacebutready
December 22, 2011, 10:28 PM
JMR40: Thanks for the article. Unless I misread, the barrel they were referring to is 18" rather than 16". The Ruger is 16.5", I don't know whether that 1.5 inches makes a large difference or not because on one hand it is a small amount, but on the other hand it could be bad due to some dynamic that doesn't exist when going from 20" to 18". The article mentions suppressors, but that decreases velocity as well...If you owned the previous Savage Scout, the current one was updated.

35 Whelen: Above may interest you.

Freedom_fighter_in_IL
December 22, 2011, 10:44 PM
peacebutready, The 16.5 inch barrel would be fine for someone that reloads their own ammunition. Reloading allows you to tailor loads with faster/slower powders to get maximum burns out of your barrel. The problem with the short barrels is that, with 99.9% of factory ammo, you will not get a full burn therefore the loss of velocity as well as the bullet not being under pressure a bit longer. All that being said, the design of the .308 cartridge lends to better efficiency of burn rates so they do better than a lot of other cartridges do with shorter barrel lengths. But 16.5 inch barrels are just a bit on the short side for any truly efficient burn.

The Ruger scout rifle would be a great little rifle for heavy cover hunting because of it's compact size and low weight. But a long range rifle is not what it is intended for and would not be something I, or any hunter, would advise for shooting past 250 yards.

peacebutready
December 27, 2011, 11:35 PM
Thanks all.

We'll see what SHOT brings us in January. I wonder how long it takes to purchase a model exhibited in the show. One fellow thinks Ruger will make available the 18" barrel model that they are exporting.

I'm not a hunter but rather a current pistol target shooter that wants to try high-power rifle target shooting.

I like the Savage Scout because of its versatility, relative accuracy, iron sights, cheap bulk ammo (compared to other center-bores), IER scopes for a few hundred yards, and an option for a regular scope for longer distances-that's why I inquired about 5-8 hundred yard groups. I should have noted using regular scopes as well in the beginning.

Hope all are having a good holiday season.

peacebutready
December 27, 2011, 11:38 PM
I did mention regular scopes in the beginning.

Any other estimates for 5 to 8 hundred yard groups with a conventional scope for those 2 models?

helotaxi
December 28, 2011, 09:03 AM
peacebutready, The 16.5 inch barrel would be fine for someone that reloads their own ammunition. Reloading allows you to tailor loads with faster/slower powders to get maximum burns out of your barrel. The problem with the short barrels is that, with 99.9% of factory ammo, you will not get a full burn therefore the loss of velocity as well as the bullet not being under pressure a bit longer. All that being said, the design of the .308 cartridge lends to better efficiency of burn rates so they do better than a lot of other cartridges do with shorter barrel lengths. But 16.5 inch barrels are just a bit on the short side for any truly efficient burn.
It just doesn't work that way. Regardless of how "complete" the burn is, you still lose velocity with a shorter barrel length. You also can't get extra velocity from a faster powder. Playing with Quickload a bit:

168gn SMK Ramshot TAC 44.5gn
20" barrel: 58,510 PSI, 2638fps MV, 99.4% burn
16.5" barrel 58,510 psi, 2524fps MV, 98.6% burn

168 SMK IMR 4895 44.5gn (compressed)
20" bbl: 58161psi, 2675fps MV, 99.6% burn
16.5" bbl: 58161psi, 2560fps MV, 98.7% burn

168 SMK IMR 3031 42.6gn (compressed)
20" bbl: 58157psi, 2665fps MV, 100% burn
16.5" bbl: 58157 psi, 2555fps MV, 100% burn

168 SMK Varget 45.3gn (compressed)
20" bbl: 59,519psi, 2637fps MV, 98% burn
16.5"bbl: 59,519psi, 2523fps MV, 96.8% burn

The above powders pretty much span the range of suitable powders for a .308 with a 168gn bullet. All the above loads run about the same pressure and are pressure limited. IMR 3031 burned 100% in both barrel lengths and was did not return a significantly higher MV than Varget which had the lowest burn percentage. The important thing to note is that all loads were limited by peak pressure and the pressure is not dependent on barrel length. Also of note is that every load lost between 110 and 115 fps of MV going to the shorter barrel, regardless of burn rate.

helotaxi
December 28, 2011, 09:15 AM
Any other estimates for 5 to 8 hundred yard groups with a conventional scope for those 2 models?The Savage has the greater potential. The Ruger has not demonstrated itself to be a particularly accurate rifle. Of course at that kind of range, either rifle is going to be limited by your ability to read the wind. With a 168 AMax, you're looking at 60" of drift for a 10mph x-wind at 800yds and that drift varies proportionally for the amount that you mis-read it. You call it 5 and it's 10, you miss by 30". Even being off by 1mph is 6" at that range.

MV matters a great deal at that range as well. With that same AMax, 50fps of MV is almost 2" of drift in a 10mph x-wind. The longer barrel of the Savage will give it more MV and every little bit helps.

35 Whelen
December 28, 2011, 10:25 AM
Of course at that kind of range, either rifle is going to be limited by your ability to read the wind.


Very, very true. This is the one factor I think potential (new) long range shooters don't understand. I built a 600 yd. range here at the house and the first time I shot it (Swiss K-31, GP-11 amunition), I was stunned at what an effect the wind had, especically that day because it was variable.
Later, just for gits and shiggles, I shot 600 with some cast bullets out of one of my 1903A3's. At a little less than 2000 fps MV, a 5 mph change or misjudgement in the wind would blow the bullet completely off the 36" target.

35W

TwoWheelFiend
December 28, 2011, 11:27 AM
Why would you buy a scout rifle.......put a conventional scope on it...... then try to punch holes in paper 500+ yards away? That seems to entirely defeat the purpose of the scout in the first place. If you want to shoot paper that far away there are far better rifles for the job.
Pick up a copy of "To ride, shoot straight and speak the truth" by Jeff Cooper. Read it. Then buy a scout rifle.

Sam1911
December 28, 2011, 11:43 AM
Pick up a copy of "To ride, shoot straight and speak the truth" by Jeff Cooper. Read it. Then buy a scout rifle.

...if the Scout rifle concept still seems to fit the purpose to which you're intending to put your rifle.

Think how silly you'd feel if you bought a rifle that wasn't really very good at your intended task just because it sounded cool in the advertisements!

(Yeah, like that never happens...)

TwoWheelFiend
December 28, 2011, 11:55 AM
It seems as if the OP does not really know what his intended task is. Clearly the GSR is not going to be a sub MOA rifle out to 800yds. But that was not what it was designed for.

jungle
December 28, 2011, 12:11 PM
Any Scout Rifle is going to be a handicap at 500-800 yards. That isn't the design intent.

If you want something for use at 500-800 yards, look elsewhere, and your skill is always going to be the determining factor, not the rifle-or at least any reasonable rifle and optic combination.

Fullboar1
December 28, 2011, 12:51 PM
Thanks all.

We'll see what SHOT brings us in January. I wonder how long it takes to purchase a model exhibited in the show. One fellow thinks Ruger will make available the 18" barrel model that they are exporting.

Yes here in Australia the Ruger Gunsite Scout comes in stainless with an 18" barrel (no flash hider) . I would call Ruger and see if it is available in the USA.
http://huntandshoot.com.au/general/advertisements/advertisement-the-ruger-gunsite-scout-rifle/

peacebutready
December 28, 2011, 06:50 PM
Yes here in Australia the Ruger Gunsite Scout comes in stainless with an 18" barrel (no flash hider) . I would call Ruger and see if it is available in the USA.
http://huntandshoot.com.au/general/advertisements/advertisement-the-ruger-gunsite-scout-rifle/
I think the States needs to wait until the SHOT show in January.

Must be getting some nice weather now or soon in the Land Down Under. Wish I was there.

peacebutready
December 28, 2011, 06:52 PM
It just doesn't work that way. Regardless of how "complete" the burn is, you still lose velocity with a shorter barrel length. You also can't get extra velocity from a faster powder. Playing with Quickload a bit:

168gn SMK Ramshot TAC 44.5gn
20" barrel: 58,510 PSI, 2638fps MV, 99.4% burn
16.5" barrel 58,510 psi, 2524fps MV, 98.6% burn

168 SMK IMR 4895 44.5gn (compressed)
20" bbl: 58161psi, 2675fps MV, 99.6% burn
16.5" bbl: 58161psi, 2560fps MV, 98.7% burn

168 SMK IMR 3031 42.6gn (compressed)
20" bbl: 58157psi, 2665fps MV, 100% burn
16.5" bbl: 58157 psi, 2555fps MV, 100% burn

168 SMK Varget 45.3gn (compressed)
20" bbl: 59,519psi, 2637fps MV, 98% burn
16.5"bbl: 59,519psi, 2523fps MV, 96.8% burn

The above powders pretty much span the range of suitable powders for a .308 with a 168gn bullet. All the above loads run about the same pressure and are pressure limited. IMR 3031 burned 100% in both barrel lengths and was did not return a significantly higher MV than Varget which had the lowest burn percentage. The important thing to note is that all loads were limited by peak pressure and the pressure is not dependent on barrel length. Also of note is that every load lost between 110 and 115 fps of MV going to the shorter barrel, regardless of burn rate.
I guess even more MV loss with 175 or 200 grains.

peacebutready
December 28, 2011, 06:55 PM
The Savage has the greater potential. The Ruger has not demonstrated itself to be a particularly accurate rifle. Of course at that kind of range, either rifle is going to be limited by your ability to read the wind. With a 168 AMax, you're looking at 60" of drift for a 10mph x-wind at 800yds and that drift varies proportionally for the amount that you mis-read it. You call it 5 and it's 10, you miss by 30". Even being off by 1mph is 6" at that range.

MV matters a great deal at that range as well. With that same AMax, 50fps of MV is almost 2" of drift in a 10mph x-wind. The longer barrel of the Savage will give it more MV and every little bit helps.
Learning factors like the wind and then putting that knowledge into practice is one of the things that interests me.

peacebutready
December 28, 2011, 07:02 PM
Why would you buy a scout rifle.......put a conventional scope on it...... then try to punch holes in paper 500+ yards away? That seems to entirely defeat the purpose of the scout in the first place. If you want to shoot paper that far away there are far better rifles for the job.
Pick up a copy of "To ride, shoot straight and speak the truth" by Jeff Cooper. Read it. Then buy a scout rifle.
I like the idea of handiness, having iron sights, having both scout and regular scopes to put on at will, and long range accuracy FOR a non-dedicated tactical rifle.

peacebutready
December 28, 2011, 07:08 PM
Any Scout Rifle is going to be a handicap at 500-800 yards. That isn't the design intent.

If you want something for use at 500-800 yards, look elsewhere, and your skill is always going to be the determining factor, not the rifle-or at least any reasonable rifle and optic combination.
Right now and in the near/intermediate future skill will be my determining factor. I can always trade in and/or buy a long heavy barrel model in the future.

helotaxi
December 29, 2011, 01:19 AM
Learning factors like the wind and then putting that knowledge into practice is one of the things that interests me.I would suggest something cheaper to shoot while you learn. The .223 is great for that.

PedalBiker
December 29, 2011, 01:28 AM
The Hodgdon manual has pistol data for loads of rifle cartridges in 14" Contender barrels.

Mostly, the powders that give best velocity in 24" barrels give the best velocity in the short handgun barrels.

The data is quite interesting. Putting a .30-06 into a 14" barrel pretty much gives you a really loud, but handy 300 Savage.

I cut back a .260 barrel to 19". It did make a handy carbine. Overall, I think it was a compromise not worth making. I put the 22" 243 barrel back on, and it may be there a while. Even for short range shots where the velocity doesn't matter the extra barrel length makes for easier offhand shots and less muzzle blast.

helotaxi
December 29, 2011, 02:16 PM
Mostly, the powders that give best velocity in 24" barrels give the best velocity in the short handgun barrels.

And the reason for this is outlined in one of my previous posts. Powder charge and suitability is determined by peak pressure which occurs before the bullet has traveled more than 2-3" down the barrel regardless of powder used within the suitable range.

Welding Rod
December 29, 2011, 02:33 PM
The above powders pretty much span the range of suitable powders for a .308 with a 168gn bullet. All the above loads run about the same pressure and are pressure limited. IMR 3031 burned 100% in both barrel lengths and was did not return a significantly higher MV than Varget which had the lowest burn percentage. The important thing to note is that all loads were limited by peak pressure and the pressure is not dependent on barrel length. Also of note is that every load lost between 110 and 115 fps of MV going to the shorter barrel, regardless of burn rate.

Helotaxi - That was an awesome post, thanks.

BTW - The basic concepts you are talking about were also explained to me by a tech at Hodgdon a while back when I was asking for powder recommendations for different guns (barrel lengths), bullet weights, and cartridges.

helotaxi
December 29, 2011, 04:11 PM
Glad I could help.

JustsayMo
December 29, 2011, 04:18 PM
Here is some actual chronograph results from my Ruger Gunsite Scout;

165 grain Hornady Interlock JSP

The Hodgdon Published Data MAX for IMR 3031 averages 2573 fps. (Fed brass, Winchester Primers) This is the most accurate jacketed bullet load in my GSR. My best 100 yard group with it is 13/16"

The Hodgdon Published Data Max for Varget averages 2510 fps.

The Hodgdon Published Data Max for IMR 4064 averages 2508 fps.

Both the Varget and 4064 loads produce excellent accuracy.

IMR 4350 which is excellent in all of my 30-06s was only OK in the GSR. The max velocity achieved was 2442 fps with this powder (too slow for the short barrel)

I haven't tested W748 yet but know of other GSR owners getting excellent results with. The same is true of IMR 4895.

WRB posted in another forum (but I think he is a member here too) about his success in the silhouette game with his GSR. The rams are set at 500 Meters and he has no problem reaching them or knocking them down with a 147 grain recycled bullet over IMR4895 going 2780 fps (chronographed). Earlier this month he came within on target of winning the match against guys with rifles specifically set up for the game. Factory Federal ammo gets 2710 fps out of his.

Comparatively the most accurate loads in my other 308 rifles for 165 grain bullets are all in that 2550-2600 fps range. Though capable of higher velocities, they the accuracy degrades rapidly beyond that.

One other advantage I've found with the Ruger is that I don't have let the barrel cool down between shots to get good groups. My Remingtons and CZ rifles are all capable of great accuracy if the barrels are allowed to cool between shots.

Hummer70
December 29, 2011, 10:04 PM
I had a Savage Scout in 7/08 and it could be extremely accurate with a bipod installed using 150 gr. Sierra MKs. I have 600 yard range on my place and I was amazed that the pencil thin barrel did not start to walk when barrel got hot. It had a good trigger as well.

With my rifle it was absolutely critical that no external force be applied to the stock with the bipod in place. In short I had to sandbag the rear and have the cross hairs directly on the target at 600. Then reach up and grip it very gently and squeeze the round off and it would be there every time. If I tried to man handle it in the slightest it would give a wild shot. Bottom line if you treat it well it will treat you well. My buddy wanted it badly and it went to New York state with him.

The Ruger GSR could be capable of shooting well at 600. I had a All Weather 77MKII in 260 a couple years ago and it shot horizontal groups at 300 yards. The plastic stock was flimsy so I changed it to a wood stock and bedded it and it did much better.

I checked the locking lugs and only bottom lug was contacting so I lapped the bottom lug till the top contacted and it then started shooting round groups. The trigger pull was not that great and it was cured with a Timney adjustable trigger from Brownell's and was then decent. I had another friend who wanted it after I got it shooting well and it now has a new home.

The GSR has a laminated stock so chances are excellent it will be much better. I would go ahead and get a Timney trigger for it though. It has adjustable buttstock as well which gives it a big plus in my book as I like 12" stocks.

Get Uncle Mikes MILSPEC sling swivels and a M1 cotton sling and you are good to go. clean it often like every 12 rounds while barrel is warm and you should get maybe 5000 rounds on it with 150 to 155 gr. Match bullets. Add a Harris 6-9" tilting bipod and you should be good to go to long range. The problem will be getting a scope that will give you that much elevation as you don't want to crank a lot of elevation on a internally adjustable scopes.

Get Burris Signature Zee Rings with spacer kit. With the scope set in the middle of its adjustment range change the Zee Rings spacers so that you hit about 8" high at 50 yards. This should give you on paper at 600 and you will have enough elevation to dial up to 800 and down to 300. For the longer ranges if you can find an intermediate eye relief scope in like 2-7X you might consider it as at the longer ranges the ability to magnify the target will be beneficial.

If you crank scope down to 300 for POA/POI you can hold 4" low at 100, 6" low at 200 and 12" high at 400 and get hits. Make sure to get a scope with a lifetime warranty as the internal adjustments can give problems. It would also be beneficial to get target knobs on it.

I would probably use VV N140 or VV N150 and Wolf primers for long range work.

helotaxi
December 29, 2011, 10:10 PM
IMR 4350 which is excellent in all of my 30-06s was only OK in the GSR. The max velocity achieved was 2442 fps with this powder (too slow for the short barrel)
No, the powder is too slow for the .308. The short barrel is irrelevant to the powder selection. Read my previous posts.

JustsayMo
December 29, 2011, 11:11 PM
Either way, we came to the same conclusion. There are better powders for 308.

helotaxi
December 30, 2011, 09:25 AM
The problem will be getting a scope that will give you that much elevation as you don't want to crank a lot of elevation on a internally adjustable scopes.

Get Burris Signature Zee Rings with spacer kit. With the scope set in the middle of its adjustment range change the Zee Rings spacers so that you hit about 8" high at 50 yards. This should give you on paper at 600 and you will have enough elevation to dial up to 800 and down to 300. For the longer ranges if you can find an intermediate eye relief scope in like 2-7X you might consider it as at the longer ranges the ability to magnify the target will be beneficial.

If you crank scope down to 300 for POA/POI you can hold 4" low at 100, 6" low at 200 and 12" high at 400 and get hits. Make sure to get a scope with a lifetime warranty as the internal adjustments can give problems. It would also be beneficial to get target knobs on it.
With a quality scope made for dialing elevation, this is a total non issue. From a 100yd zero, you only need 25MOA of elevation to get a 155gn AMax to 800 yds. Most any decent long range scope will have that. If the scope has quality internals, dialing back and forth won't hurt it at all. Tactical shooters do it all the time and many of them have scopes that are years old and have been dialed back and forth hundreds if not thousands of times.

Agent1209
December 30, 2011, 09:36 AM
The velocity difference between a 20 inch and a 16.5 inch is going to roughly be 100 fps difference wether at the muzzle or at 400 yards, a deer will not be able to tell the difference. Most will never make a 400 yard shot on game, and if they do they should probably hone their hunting skills, and attempt to get closer to the game, most my deer and other game is killed at 30 yards or less, stick and string is just way more sporting!

helotaxi
December 30, 2011, 10:38 AM
^^^Depending on where and what you're hunting it isn't always that simple.

TwoWheelFiend
December 30, 2011, 12:14 PM
I've been loading Sierra 150gr sp with IMR3031 behind it. Seems to be a good mix so far.

peacebutready
February 18, 2012, 01:37 AM
Thank you all for commenting.

I'm sorry I took so long to acknowledge.

If you enjoyed reading about "Ruger/Savage Scout models' velocity difference; 5-8 hundred yard groups" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!